Scientists Expose Fraudulent Global Vaccination Policies

by Rosemarie Mathis
President SANE VAX
January 14, 2012

On January 12, 2011 the Annals of Medicine published a ground-breaking peer-reviewed paper titled, Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine policy and evidence-based medicine: Are they at odds?, 1written by renowned researchers Lucija Tomljenovic, Ph.D.,and Christopher Shaw, Ph.D., with the Neural Dynamics research Group, University of British Columbia, in Vancouver. 2.

The article points out to the medical community what most consumers now know about the fraudulent global health agency policies in combination with the pharmaceutical companies lack of science based evidence demonstrating the safety and efficacy of Gardasil and Cervarix before they were unleashed on unsuspecting parents of adolescents.

Clinical Trials on Healthy People vs. Mass Vaccination Campaigns

Tomljenovic and Shaw clearly state the obvious in their abstract by stating that vaccines represent ‘a special category of drugs generally given to healthy individuals and therefore a small level of risk for adverse reactions is acceptable.’

Merck’s clinical trials were flawed because they used an aluminum adjuvant as a ‘placebo’ and only used saline as a comparative for minor, non-serious adverse reactions. With serious adverse reactions, they pooled the results from the saline group and the aluminum ‘placebo’ group. By doing this, they concealed the true rate of serious reactions.

If FDA approved drugs and vaccines were as safe and effective as Pharma would like consumers to believe the risk level should be negligible to none. The FDA removal of drugs after they have been on the market and damaged desperate people looking for cures who then have to file lawsuits to recover damages is simply unacceptable.

Medical Ethics Questioned

The authors also point out the myth of informed consent – basically a waiver signed by medical consumers that they have been ‘educated’ about the risk vs. benefit ratio of the drug about to be administered. Tomljenovic and Shaw open their paper citing that ‘medical ethics demand that vaccination be carried out with the participant’s full and informed consent’ and not just the handing out of the HPV vaccine Patient Product Insert – prepared by none other than the vaccine’s manufacturer.

What the authors do not cover in this paper is what happens to informed consent when governments grant children the right to consent to medical procedures, such as California’s recent passage of AB 499 – basically granting parental rights of children ages 12 and older to the state for the treatment of STD’s. Is it really because the ‘state’ knows better – or is it because legislatures have been paid off by the pharmaceutical companies?

The authors go on to state:

“What is more disconcerting than the aggressive marketing strategies employed by the vaccine manufacturers is the practice by which the medical profession has presented partial information to the public, namely, in a way that generates fear, thus promoting vaccine uptake………It thus appears that to this date, medical and regulatory entities worldwide continue to provide inaccurate information regarding cervical cancer risk and the usefulness of HPV vaccines, thereby making informed consent regarding vaccination impossible to achieve.”

Money Talks – Nobody Walks – but the Vaccine Injured

According to Maplight California – a web site that reveals money’s influence on politics, contributions from interest groups to CA legislators who supported the bill were $2,174,648 – more than 28 times the $76,404 given to interest groups who opposed the bill.It is also interesting to note that republican based groups and pro-life groups were on the dissenting side vs. the overwhelming number of liberal and democratic groups supporting the bill.

Similar bills are now in front of South Carolina and Florida legislatures. We are now personal witnesses to the erosion of medical ethics encouraged by politicians abundantly rewarded with special interest contributions.

Tomljenovic and Shaw continue their message by reminding medical professionals that ‘contrary to claims that cervical cancer is the second most common cancer in women worldwide, existing data show that this only applies to developing countries. In the Western world cervical cancer is a rare disease with mortality rates that are several times lower than the rate of reported serious adverse reactions (including deaths) from HPV vaccination.’

The author’s state – what should become the mantra of all medical practitioners and consumers concerned about vaccine safety and efficacy:

Future vaccination policies should adhere more rigorously to evidence-based medicine and ethical guidelines for informed consent.

Tomljenovic and Shaw cite these key messages:

– To date, the efficacy of HPV vaccines in preventing cervical cancer has not been demonstrated, while vaccine risks remain to be fully evaluated.

– Current worldwide HPV immunization practices with either of the two HPV vaccines appear to be neither justified by long-term health benefits nor economically viable, nor is there any evidence that HPV vaccination (even if proven effective against cervical cancer) would reduce the rate of cervical cancer beyond what Pap screening has already achieved.

– Cumulatively, the list of serious adverse reactions related to HPV vaccination worldwide includes deaths, convulsions, paraesthesia, paralysis, Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS), transverse myelitis, facial palsy, chronic fatigue syndrome, anaphylaxis, autoimmune disorders, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolisms, and cervical cancers.

– Because the HPV vaccination programme has global coverage, the long-term health of many women may be at risk against still unknown vaccine benefits.

– Physicians should adopt a more rigorous evidence-based medicine approach, in order to provide a balanced and objective evaluation of vaccine risks and benefits to their patients.

– The almost exclusive reliance on manufacturers’ sponsored studies, often of questionable quality, as a basis for vaccine policy-making should be discontinued.

– Greater efforts should be made to minimize the undue commercial influences on academic institutions and medical research, as this influence may impede unbiased scientific inquiry into important questions about vaccine science and policies.

– Passive adverse event surveillance should be replaced by active surveillance to better understand the true risks associated with vaccines, particularly new vaccines.

The abstract of Tomljenovic and Shaw’s paper, Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine policy and evidence-based medicine: Are they at odds? is posted on the SANE Vax Inc. web site. The entire paper can be accessed via this link on or after January 12. Share the 12-page paper with your medical practitioner, school nurses, and boards of education considering enforcing state legislation, and parents or guardians considering HPV vaccination for their child. Should you have difficulty accessing the entire paper you may contact the corresponding author via email at lucijat77@gmail.com.

The entire paper can be accessed via this link on or after January 12. Share the 12-page paper with your medical practitioner, school nurses, and boards of education considering enforcing state legislation, and parents or guardians considering HPV vaccination for their child.

Medical consumers need to demand the healthcare industry stop focusing on ‘drug policies’ and direct efforts toward uncovering science-based evidence to identify those actually at risk for the disease. As Tomljenovic and Shaw readily point in their dissertation on the HPV vaccine, the risk of cervical cancer is relatively small to justify a mandatory mass vaccination program with vaccines of questionable safety.

SaneVax Inc. views the presentation of partial and/or non-factual information regarding cervical cancer risks and the usefulness of HPV vaccines, as cited above, to be neither scientific nor ethical. These practices do not serve public health interests, nor are they likely to reduce the levels of cervical cancer. Independent evaluation of HPV vaccine safety is urgently needed and should be a priority for government-sponsored research programs.

Sources:

1.Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine policy and evidence-based medicine: Are they at odds? Annals of Medicine.
http://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/ebm/record/22188159/full_citation/Human_papillomavirus__HPV__vaccine_policy_and_evidence_based_medicine:_Are_they_at_odds

2. Maplight California –AB 499 – An Act to Amend Section 6926 of the Family Code, Relating to Minors
http://maplight.org/california/bill/2011-ab-499/1007609/total-contributions

Story by Norma Erickson and Leslie Carol Botha of SANEVAX, INC. Original article as it appeared on NaturalNews.com

Philanthropic Journalism?

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation not only funds Genetically Modified Organisms and massive vaccination campaigns.  It also spends billions of dollars funding the media to help them spread its message.

By Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
February 23, 2011

As if the fact most of the main stream media is owned by a few corporations and bailed-out by the government were not bad enough, a new kind of media ownership has sprung to life.  According to a report from the Seattle Times, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation not only funds environmental polluters such as Monsanto, or inoculates thousands in the third world.  After all that money is spent, there are still billions left to devote to influencing media outlets.

In an article dated February 19, 2011, the Times informs the public about how the Gates Foundation effectively bankrolls many main stream media productions in powerhouses like ABC, PBS, The New York Times and the Guardian. The organization donates billions every year to fund advocacy and policy programs, and a lot of this monies end up as payments to main stream media companies.  The payments are rarely or never disclosed.

Although from the outside the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation appears to be a problem solving organization, the truth is that inside it works for the promotion of globalist programs such as vaccination campaigns, population reduction, production and development of genetically modified mosquitoes and the polarization of the society.

The Foundation’s supposed philanthropic objectives are masked with carefully chosen language that is then used in the disinformation pieces put put on the media.  It all ends being a nasty mixture of Gates’ dollars and biased journalism.  Many in the media environment are currently asking whether these payments are heavily influencing the media’s handling of  issues and how the Foundation’s interests are being advanced.

In addition to financing news reports, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is known for paying for the training of journalists to teach them how to present the organization’s interests to the public and many times how to advocate for its objectives.  Instead of presenting THE NEWS, reporters are financed to present carefully crafted talking points to the audiences.

“We’re not dealing with a lively discussion among players,” says Mark Miller, professor of media, culture and communications at New York University. “We’re dealing with one gigantic entity … that seems to be very skilled at promoting its agenda.”  On top of funding the media, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation recently purchased 500,000 shares of biotechnology giants like Monsanto, which is actively pursuing the creation and production of experimental vaccine nanotechnology, supporting the development of genetically modified mosquitoes.

“As big as the foundation is, there is no single area we work in where we can remotely succeed without other partners and actors,” said Mark Suzman, head of policy and advocacy for the foundation’s global-development programs. “Even if we were to satisfy ourselves that the Gates Foundation were utterly benign, it would still be worrisome that they wield such enormous propaganda power,” said Mark Crispin Miller, professor of media, culture and communications at New York University.

“We’re trying to do everything we can to make sure people understand not just the need, but the opportunity, to make a huge difference in the lives of millions of people around the world,” said Joe Cerrell, who oversees the foundation’s policy, advocacy and communications work in Europe. “For us, it’s about making sure that these stories get told.”  “It would be naive to believe big-money foundations don’t play the same game that corporations and other special interests do,” said Marc Cooper, assistant professor at the University of Southern California’s Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism. “I don’t find that inherently troubling.”

Among some of the latest beneficiaries of the Foundation’s cash are:

  • The International Center for Journalists, that got nearly $6 million for a program that pairs veteran journalists with news organizations in Africa.
  • At PBS’ NewsHour, Suarez said a $3.6 million Gates grant has allowed him to cover stories that would otherwise have been out of reach, such as river blindness in Tanzania and Mexican programs to improve nutrition among the poor.
  • Grants including $3.3 million to Public Radio International, $5 million to NPR and $1 million to Frontline. Grumbling among media observers peaked late last year when the foundation for the first time teamed up with major for-profit operations such as ABC and the Guardian.
  • ABC received $1.5 million to fund overseas travel for reports on global health and development.

The Seattle Times received a $15,000 Gates grant through Seattle University for a series of stories on homelessness in 2010.

China Awakens to Mass Vaccination Fraud

AP

China’s plans to vaccinate 100 million children and come a step closer to eradicating measles has set off a popular outcry that highlights widening public distrust of the authoritarian government after repeated health scandals.

Since the Health Ministry announced the World Health Organization-backed measles vaccination plan last week, authorities have been flooded with queries and Internet bulletin boards have been plastered with worried messages. Conspiracy theories saying the vaccines are dangerous have spread by cell phone text messages.

The public skepticism has even been covered by state-run media, which noted the lack of trust was about more than vaccines.

“Behind the public’s panic over the rumors is an expression of the citizens’ demands for security and a crisis in confidence,” a columnist wrote in the Chongqing Daily newspaper.

“The lack of trust toward our food and health products was not formed in one day,” said the Global Times newspaper. “Repairing the damage and building credibility will take a very long time. The public health departments need to take immediate action on all fronts.”

In recent years, government agencies have dragged their feet or withheld information about the spread of SARS, bird flu and, last month, an outbreak of cholera. China’s slow response to SARS, or severe acute respiratory syndrome, was widely blamed for causing the outbreak that swept the globe in 2003, and led to deep mistrust both internally and internationally.

Milk products contaminated with industrial chemicals are still found despite mass recalls and several criminal convictions, including executions, after tainted infant formula sickened 300,000 babies and killed at least six two years ago.

Feeding into worries about the measles vaccine were media reports in March that vaccines for encephalitis, hepatitis B and other diseases possibly killed four children and seriously sickened dozens in one province. The health ministry said an investigation showed those vaccines were improperly stored but subsequent illnesses were unrelated. Many remain unconvinced.

Meanwhile, two Chinese vaccine makers recently said they shut operations after rabies vaccines they produced were found to be substandard.

The ministry has tried to calm the public’s anxieties about the 10-day measles immunization drive, which started Saturday. It has busily issued statements, refuted rumors and held briefings to emphasize the need for the vaccine as well as its safety.

The campaign, likely the world’s largest, targets all children ages 8 months to 4 or 14 years, depending on locality, and is intended to include remote areas, migrant communities and other places where previous vaccination coverage has been spotty.

Yet the publicity is not likely to easily reassure a public increasingly skeptical of reassurances from a government often seen as opaque and unaccountable, especially where public health is involved.

“This time how could the public have no doubts? They are asking: ‘Is there an outbreak of the disease? Are previous vaccinations not working? Are the people in the government trying to make money from this?'” newspaper commentator Wei Yingjie said in an interview.

The public push-back marks a turnaround from the mass campaigns in the communist heyday under Mao Zedong and shows how prosperity and greater access to information are creating a more assertive populace.

“This campaign would have been no problem in the Mao era, but today we know with globalization, the Internet, the information explosion, this increasingly assertive civil society, they want to participate in the public policy process,” said Yanzhong Huang, senior fellow for global health at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York.

Measles is a highly contagious viral disease that can develop into blindness, pneumonia and encephalitis and lead to death, and health experts say China needs an effective vaccination program.

Despite previous vaccination drives, China recorded 52,000 measles cases last year, including 39 deaths. The infection rates mean China is far from meeting its national pledge from 2005 to eradicate measles by 2012.

Mass drives in other parts of the world have either virtually eliminated measles or significantly reduced the number of infections. The disease has been nearly nonexistent in the Americas since 2002 and cases in seven countries in southern Africa fell from 60,000 in 1996 to 117 by 2000, according to the WHO. Dr. Lisa Cairns, head of immunization at WHO China, said many of those infected with measles in China are young children who were likely never vaccinated. “Because the disease is not as common as it used to be, it is easy to forget how serious it is,” she noted. China’s Health Ministry has repeatedly said that the measles vaccine is safe, with random samples tested from stores around the country, and has tried to assure the public that medical personnel are prepared for emergencies, including any adverse reactions. On Friday, a senior ministry official promised that no one would be forced to take the vaccination. “Vaccination will only proceed after parents sign an agreement,” the ministry’s deputy director for disease control Hao Yang said. “We heard that some places were linking vaccination with admission to kindergartens and schools. So yesterday we issued a notice that admission to school should never be used to force children to vaccination.” Health care professionals, however, have questioned the immunization drive’s broad scope, given that many children have previously been inoculated and thus would be vaccinated again. A blog posting by a prominent immunization expert, Wang Yuedan of Peking University, urged the government to focus on formerly underserved groups like the children of rural migrants now living in urban areas, instead of vaccinating some children again. By Friday, Wang withdrew his reservations and backed the campaign, saying he was convinced by the Health Ministry’s explanations. Still, Wang said in an interview that he winced at the thought of his 4-year-old daughter suffering a possible fever from the vaccine. “I’m a man and a father first, who has emotions and who can’t watch his child suffer pain blindly,” he said. ___ Associated Press researcher Xi Yue contributed to this report.