Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: VACCINE BOMBSHELL as U.N. health experts admit toxic vaccine ingredients are harming children

  1. #1

    Exclamation VACCINE BOMBSHELL as U.N. health experts admit toxic vaccine ingredients are harming children

    VACCINE BOMBSHELL as U.N. health experts admit toxic vaccine ingredients are harming children worldwide – see video, transcript

    Monday, January 13, 2020 by: Mike Adams


    A Dec. 2, 2019 World Health Organization “Global Vaccine Safety Summit” video has been found and leaked to the world, revealing shocking admissions of the health hazards posed by vaccines and their toxic ingredients.

    A first-wave compilation of some of the more damning quotes was created by Del Bigtree’s “Highwire” organization, which posted the video to YouTube. Knowing that video would quickly be banned, we posted it to Brighteon.com, where “Highwire” is expected to launch a channel very soon.

    You can watch the full video at this link on Brighteon. For a related article that covers this, see this link at TheHighWire.com.

    A full transcript of this video compilation is offered below. Watch the video here, via Brighteon:


    Some of the highlights:

    An admission that vaccine adjuvants increase cell death and damage to vaccine recipients. For this paragraph, the term “reactogenicity” means vaccine adverse reactions and side effects, including those that are known to be extremely harmful and cause long-term damage or even death:

    Dr. Stephen Evans, Professor of Pharmacoepidemiology – It seems to me that adjuvants multiply the immunogenicity of the antigens that they are added to, and that is their intention. It seems to me they multiply the reactogenicity in many instances, and therefore it seems to me that it is not unexpected if they multiply the incidence of adverse reactions that are associated with the antigen…

    Warnings about long-term effects from vaccine adjuvants:

    Dr. Martin Howell Friede – You are correct. As we add adjuvants, especially some of the more recent adjuvants, such as the ASO1, saponin-derived adjuvants , we do see increased local reactogenicity… The major health concern which we are seeing are accusations of long term, long term effects.

    An admission that the W.H.O. is panicking over the fact that many doctors and nurses are finally starting to question the safety and vaccines and are becoming aware of the coordinated cover-up of vaccine injuries:

    Prof. Heidi Larson, PhD, Director of the Vaccine Confidence Project – We have a very wobbly health professional front line that is starting to question vaccines and the safety of vaccines. When the front line professionals are starting to question or they don’t feel like they have enough confidence about the safety to stand up to it to the person asking them the questions. I mean most medical school curriculums, even nursing curriculums, I mean in medical school you’re lucky if you have a half-day on vaccines. Never mind keeping up to date with all this.

    Also from Prof. Heidi Larson, PhD – You can’t repurpose the same old science to make it sound better if you don’t have the science that’s relevant to the new problem. So we need much more investment in safety science.

    An admission that vaccine clinical trials are insufficient and that vaccines are approved without adequate safety data. Also admits that vaccines damage children far more than they damage elderly adults:

    Dr. Marion Gruber – Director, Office of Vaccines Research and Review Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. FDA – And again as you mentioned pre-licensure clinical trials may not be powered enough. It’s also the subject population that you administer the adjuvant to because we’ve seen data presented to us where an adjuvant, a particular adjuvant added to a vaccine antigen did really nothing when administered to a certain population and usually the elderly, you know, compared to administering the same formulation to younger age strata.

    A warning about the lack of vaccine safety monitoring systems around the world:

    Dr. Soumya Swaminathan, M.D., Chief Scientist, W.H.O., Pediatrician – I think we cannot overemphasize the fact that we really don’t havevery good safety monitoring systems in many countries, and this adds to the miscommunication and the misapprehensions because we’re not able to give clear-cut answers when people ask questions about the deaths that have occurred due to a particular vaccine…

    Here’s an admission that viral fragments don’t work as promised by immunization theory and that it’s the adjuvants which are responsible for the inflammatory response to vaccines. In other words, vaccine science as described by the vaccine establishment, is quackery:

    Dr. Martin Howell Friede, Coordinator, Initiative for Vaccine Research, W.H.O. – Without adjuvants, we are not going to have the next generation of vaccines. And many of the vaccines that we do have, ranging from tetanus through to HPV require adjuvants in order for them to work. We do not add adjuvants to vaccines because we want to do so.

    An admission that vaccine safety tracking systems don’t even exist and that efforts to build such systems are only just beginning:

    Dr. Robert Chen, M.D. – Scientific Director, Brighton Collaboration – [W]e’re really only in the beginning of the era of large data sets where hopefully you could start to kind of harmonize the databases for multiple studies. And there’s actually an initiative underway… Helen there may want to comment on it to try to get more national vaccine safety database linked together so we could start to answer these types of questions that you just raised.

    Full transcript of what’s on this video – there’s a lot more yet to come
    CAUGHT ON CAMERA: W.H.O Scientists Question Safety Of Vaccines

    Prof. Heidi Larson, PhD, Anthropologist, Director of the Vaccine Confidence Project
    There’s a lot of safety science that’s needed, and without the good science, we can’t have good communication. Although I’m talking about all these other contextual issues, and communication issues it absolutely needs the science as the backbone. You can’t repurpose the same old science to make it sound better if you don’t have the science that’s relevant to the new problem. So we need much more investment in safety science.

    Dr. Soumya Swaminathan, M.D., Chief Scientist, W.H.O., Pediatrician
    I think we cannot overemphasize the fact that we really don’t have very good safety monitoring systems in many countries, and this adds to the miscommunication and the misapprehensions because we’re not able to give clear-cut answers when people ask questions about the deaths that have occurred due to a particular vaccine, and this always gets blown up in the media. One should be able to give a very factual account of what exactly has happened and what the cause of the deaths are, but in most cases there is some obfuscation at that level and therefore, there’s less and less trust then in the system.

    Dr. Martin Howell Friede, Coordinator, Initiative for Vaccine Research, W.H.O.
    Every time that there is an association, be it temporal or not temporal, the first accusation is it is the adjuvant. And yet, without adjuvants, we are not going to have the next generation of vaccines. And many of the vaccines that we do have, ranging from tetanus through to HPV require adjuvants in order for them to work. So the challenge that we have in front of us is: How do we build confidence in this? And the confidence first of all comes from the regulatory agencies (I look to Marion). When we add an adjuvant it’s because it is essential. We do not add adjuvants to vaccines because we want to do so. But when we add them, it adds to the complexity. I give courses every year on “How do you develop vaccines?”, “How do you make vaccines?” And the first lesson is, while you’re making your vaccine, if you can avoid using an adjuvant, please do so. Lesson two is, if you’re going to use an adjuvant, use one that has a history of safety. And lesson three is, if you’re not going to do that, think very carefully.

    Dr. Stephen Evans, Professor of Pharmacoepidemiology
    It seems to me that adjuvants multiply the immunogenicity of the antigens that they are added to, and that is their intention. It seems to me they multiply the reactogenicity in many instances, and therefore it seems to me that it is not unexpected if they multiply the incidence of adverse reactions that are associated with the antigen, but may not have been detected through lack of statistical power in the original studies.

    Dr. Martin Howell Friede
    You are correct. As we add adjuvants, especially some of the more recent adjuvants, such as the ASO1, saponin-derived adjuvants , we do see increased local reactogenicity. The primary concern, though, usually is systemic adverse events rather than local adverse events. And we tend to get in the Phase II and the Phase III studies quite good data on the local reactogenicity. Those of us in this room that are beyond the age of 50 who have had the pleasure of having the recent shingles vaccine, will know that this does have quite significant local reactogenicity. If you got the vaccine, you know that you got the vaccine. But this is not the major health concern. The major health concern which we are seeing are accusations of long term, long term effects. So to come back to this, I’m going to once again point to the regulators. It comes down to ensuring that we conduct Phase II and the Phase III studies with adequate size and with the appropriate measurement.

    Dr. David Kaslow, M.D. – V.P., Essential Medicines, Drug Development program PATH Center for Vaccine Innovation and Access (CVIA)
    So in our clinical trials, we are actually using relatively small sample sizes, and when we do that we’re at risk of tyranny of small numbers, which is, you just need a single case of Wegener’s Granulomatosis, and your vaccine has to, solve Walt’s, How do you prove a null Hypothesis? …And it takes years and years to try to figure that out. It’s a real conundrum, right? Getting the right size, dealing with the tyranny of small numbers, making sure that you can really do it. And so I think one of the things that we really need to invest in are kind of better biomarkers, better mechanistic understanding of how these things work so we can better understand adverse events as they come up.

    Dr. Marion Gruber – Director, Office of Vaccines Research and Review Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. FDA
    One of the additional issues that complicates safety evaluation is that if you look at, and you struggle with the length of follow-up that should be adequate in a, let’s say a pre-licensure or even post-marketing study if that’s even possible. And again as you mentioned pre-licensure clinical trials may not be powered enough. It’s also the subject population that you administer the adjuvant to because we’ve seen data presented to us where an adjuvant, a particular adjuvant added to a vaccine antigen did really nothing when administered to a certain population and usually the elderly, you know, compared to administering the same formulation to younger age strata. So these are things which need to be considered as well and further complicate safety and effectiveness evaluation of adjuvants combined with vaccine antigens.

    Dr. Bassey Okposen – Program Manager, National Emergency Routine Immunization Coordination Centre (NERICC). Abuja, Nigeria
    I cast back my mind to our situation in Nigeria where at six weeks, ten weeks, fourteen weeks, a child is being given different antigens from different companies, and these vaccines have different adjuvants and different preservatives and so on. Something crosses my mind… is there possibility of these adjuvants, preservatives, cross-reacting amongst themselves? Have there ever been a study on the possibility of cross-reactions on from the past that you can share the experience with us?

    Dr. Robert Chen, M.D. – Scientific Director, Brighton Collaboration
    Now the only way to tease that out is if you have a large population database like the vaccine safety datalink as well as some of the other national databases that are coming to being worthy. Actual vaccine exposure is trapped down to that level of specificity of who is the manufacturer? What is the lot number? Etc..etc. And there’s an initiative to try to make the vaccine label information bar-coded so that it includes that level of information. So that in the future when we do these type of studies, we are able to tease that out. And in order to be – each time you subdivide them, the sample size gets becoming more and more challenging and that’s what I said earlier today about that we’re really only in the beginning of the era of large data sets where hopefully you could start to kind of harmonize the databases for multiple studies. And there’s actually an initiative underway… Helen there may want to comment on it to try to get more national vaccine safety database linked together so we could start to answer these types of questions that you just raised.

    Prof. Heidi Larson, PhD
    The other thing that’s a trend and an issue is not just confidence in providers but confidence of health care providers. We have a very wobbly health professional front line that is starting to question vaccines and the safety of vaccines. When the front line professionals are starting to question or they don’t feel like they have enough confidence about the safety to stand up to it to the person asking them the questions. I mean most medical school curriculums, even nursing curriculums, I mean in medical school you’re lucky if you have a half-day on vaccines. Never mind keeping up to date with all this.

    Watch the full video at Brighteon.com:

    https://www.brighteon.com/3dec332d-f...f-55b702bd9262
    https://www.naturalnews.com/2020-01-...ndex.com&dbr=1
    My website: https://www.theherbsofthefield.com/

    "No one is useless in this world who lightens the burdens of another.” ~ Charles Dickens



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Couple quick things for now. First, the adjuvant discussed is not used in any vaccines in the US.

    Definition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactogenicity

    In clinical trials, the term reactogenicity refers to the property of a vaccine of being able to produce common, "expected" adverse reactions, especially excessive immunological responses and associated signs and symptoms—fever, sore arm at injection site, etc. (Much less frequently, the term has also been applied to therapeutic drug trials.) Other manifestations of reactogenicity typically assessed in such trials include bruising, redness, induration, and swelling.

  4. #3


    My website: https://www.theherbsofthefield.com/

    "No one is useless in this world who lightens the burdens of another.” ~ Charles Dickens

  5. #4
    My website: https://www.theherbsofthefield.com/

    "No one is useless in this world who lightens the burdens of another.” ~ Charles Dickens

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by donnay View Post


    Ignore the response, move to an entirely different (bull$#@!) topic #1

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by donnay View Post
    Ignore the response, move to an entirely different (absolute utter bull$#@!) topic #2.

  8. #7
    You accuse me of ignoring questions, when the WHO is out there, in close door meetings, asking the questions many parents have been asking for years that seem to NEVER get answered. That's rich!
    My website: https://www.theherbsofthefield.com/

    "No one is useless in this world who lightens the burdens of another.” ~ Charles Dickens

  9. #8





    Last edited by donnay; 01-16-2020 at 09:44 AM.
    My website: https://www.theherbsofthefield.com/

    "No one is useless in this world who lightens the burdens of another.” ~ Charles Dickens



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Just make sure to get your annual flu vaccine.

  12. #10
    That some children are harmed by vaccines is not even a fact in dispute. The only debatable point is how many?

    The narrative that "the science is settled" and that ALL vaccines are safe and effective ALL the time for ALL people, by force if necessary, is starting to fall apart as people wake up and realize this is a snow job.

    Look at what happened in NJ last week. Senator Sweeney got caught lying about fetal tissue used in vaccine development, and it became a hot topic on local talk radio, and the bill to remove religious exemptions was defeated.

    Uncensored Health Freedom News:
    http://healthimpactnews.com/

    Yes, I believe the science of vaccines is settled - Zippyjuan Team
    Don't care even a little bit about where the CDC gets money. - Krugminator2

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Created4 View Post
    That some children are harmed by vaccines is not even a fact in dispute. The only debatable point is how many?

    The narrative that "the science is settled" and that ALL vaccines are safe and effective ALL the time for ALL people, by force if necessary, is starting to fall apart as people wake up and realize this is a snow job.
    Nothing is safe for every person at all times for all people. Even eating an apple can be fatal for some people. Should we tell people to avoid apples? But serious side effects from vaccines are extremely rare. Most common side effect is temporary soreness or some redness at the vaccine site.

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Created4 View Post
    That some children are harmed by vaccines is not even a fact in dispute. The only debatable point is how many?]
    That's not the only debatable point. Another is ''How seriously?'' and yet another is ''Compared to what?''

    It's far better to get a ''harmful'' small red mark that vanishes after a couple days than it is to die from measles.

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by angelatc View Post

    It's far better to get a ''harmful'' small red mark that vanishes after a couple days than it is to die from measles.
    Nobody in the U.S. is dying from measles. But people ARE dying from the MMR vaccine.

    Uncensored Health Freedom News:
    http://healthimpactnews.com/

    Yes, I believe the science of vaccines is settled - Zippyjuan Team
    Don't care even a little bit about where the CDC gets money. - Krugminator2

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by angelatc View Post
    That's not the only debatable point. Another is ''How seriously?'' and yet another is ''Compared to what?''

    It's far better to get a ''harmful'' small red mark that vanishes after a couple days than it is to die from measles.
    When did they conduct the safety studies on the MMR vaccine? That's where the debate needs to start.

    Wild caught measles gives a child immunity for life. Big pHARMa doesn't like that--there's no money in natural immunity.

    Also another thing, most children/adults who are prone to catch the measles are known to have vitamin A deficiency.
    My website: https://www.theherbsofthefield.com/

    "No one is useless in this world who lightens the burdens of another.” ~ Charles Dickens

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Nothing is safe for every person at all times for all people.
    Thank you for agreeing with me and disagreeing with the corporate media and U.S. Government and world-wide health organizations regarding vaccines.


    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    But serious side effects from vaccines are extremely rare.
    Your argument, not mine. Mine is simple: People are harmed by vaccines. People die from vaccines. These simple facts are either denied outright, or covered up.

    I hereby anoint Zippy as the KING OF THE STRAWMAN ARGUMENT.

    If you cannot debate the facts because they don't support your BELIEF, you simply choose your own presuppositions to create your own argument, then refute it, thereby essentially (as I have pointed out numerous times over the years) arguing with yourself and making sure you "win."
    Uncensored Health Freedom News:
    http://healthimpactnews.com/

    Yes, I believe the science of vaccines is settled - Zippyjuan Team
    Don't care even a little bit about where the CDC gets money. - Krugminator2

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Created4 View Post
    Thank you for agreeing with me and disagreeing with the corporate media and U.S. Government and world-wide health organizations regarding vaccines.




    Your argument, not mine. Mine is simple: People are harmed by vaccines. People die from vaccines. These simple facts are either denied outright, or covered up.

    I hereby anoint Zippy as the KING OF THE STRAWMAN ARGUMENT.

    If you cannot debate the facts because they don't support your BELIEF, you simply choose your own presuppositions to create your own argument, then refute it, thereby essentially (as I have pointed out numerous times over the years) arguing with yourself and making sure you "win."
    Let's see your facts on how many people are harmed by vaccines. Data. What percent of people vaccinated suffer from what effects? Demonstrate the level of harm you are trying to claim. let me get you started.

    https://vaccine-safety-training.org/...reactions.html

    Expected rates of AEFIs following some childhood vaccines

    Vaccine Estimated rate of severe reactions

    OPV (oral polio vaccine) 1 in 2–3 million doses (or 1 in 750 000 doses for the first dose)

    Measles 1 in 1 million doses

    DTP 1 in 750 000 doses
    Last edited by Zippyjuan; 01-16-2020 at 03:26 PM.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    how many people are harmed by vaccines.
    Again, as I have repeated here HUNDREDS of times, this is YOUR argument, not mine. People are harmed by vaccines. That is my argument, and you agree.

    As to the "data" on vaccine injuries, you don't have that data. Neither do I.

    Published study funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS):

    Adverse events from drugs and vaccines are common, but underreported. Although 25% of
    ambulatory patients experience an adverse drug event, less than 0.3% of all adverse drug events
    and 1-13% of serious events are reported to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
    Likewise, fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported. Low reporting rates preclude or
    slow the identification of “problem” drugs and vaccines that endanger public health.
    Last edited by Created4; 01-16-2020 at 06:04 PM.
    Uncensored Health Freedom News:
    http://healthimpactnews.com/

    Yes, I believe the science of vaccines is settled - Zippyjuan Team
    Don't care even a little bit about where the CDC gets money. - Krugminator2

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Created4 View Post
    Again, as I have repeated here HUNDREDS of times, this is YOUR argument, not mine. People are harmed by vaccines. That is my argument, and you agree.

    As to the "data" on vaccine injuries, you don't have that data. Neither do I.

    Published study funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS):
    I see. You do not have any facts to support your claim or to show how much harm is actually caused. But believe that harm must be occurring.

    If you cannot debate the facts because they don't support your BELIEF, you simply choose your own presuppositions to create your own argument, then refute it, thereby essentially (as I have pointed out numerous times over the years) arguing with yourself and making sure you "win."
    Last edited by Zippyjuan; 01-16-2020 at 04:03 PM.

  22. #19
    JANUARY 16, 2020
    Look WHO’s Talking! Vaccine Scientists Confirm Major Safety Problems



    By the Children’s Health Defense Team



    Rarely does the general public get to hear what vaccine scientists and public health officials really think about vaccines. Instead, the simplistic (and propagandistic) mantra aired ad infinitum for public consumption is that vaccines are “safe and effective”—full stop. As the transcripts from the secret Simpsonwood meeting revealed two decades ago, however, when the experts are among themselves, they tell a different story—and, as a new behind-closed-doors video powerfully reveals, they are still far from convinced of their own safety message.

    The bombshell video footage, published by Del Bigtree’s The Highwire, captures a series of statements—profoundly unsettling in their matter-of-factness—made by professionals who, in early December, attended the World Health Organization’s (WHO’s) two-day Global Vaccine Safety Summit. The summit’s aims were to “take stock of [the] accomplishments” of WHO’s Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety (GACVS) and work toward finalizing the agency’s Global Vaccine Safety Blueprint 2.0 strategy 2021-2030. Attendees included GACVS members (past and present), vaccine program managers, regulatory authorities, drug safety staff, “and representatives of UN agencies, academic institutions, umbrella organizations of pharmaceutical companies, technical partners, industry representatives and funding agencies.”

    What did this crème de la crème of the vaccine establishment say during their two-day powwow? Among other discussion points, attendees admitted that:

    Vaccines can be fatal.
    The design of safety studies makes it difficult to spot problems.
    Safety monitoring is inadequate.
    Vaccine adjuvants increase risk.
    Every single one of these revelations—startling mostly because of who was caught on camera saying it— referred to problems that Children’s Health Defense and other vaccine-risk-aware organizations and individuals have been reporting on for years.

    [W]e’re not able to give clear-cut answers when people ask questions about the deaths that have occurred due to a particular vaccine …
    Fatal vaccines
    Not quite a year ago, Indian pediatrician Dr. Soumya Swaminathan stepped into the newly created and prominent position of WHO Chief Scientist, moving up from a stint as WHO Deputy Director-General of Programs. At the December vaccine summit, she admitted:

    [W]e’re not able to give clear-cut answers when people ask questions about the deaths that have occurred due to a particular vaccine, and this always gets blown up in the media.

    Dr. Swaminathan acknowledged that the vaccine community ought to be prepared to provide “a very factual account of what exactly has happened and what the cause of the deaths are”; astoundingly, however, she conceded that “in most cases there is some obfuscation”—with the result that “there’s less and less trust . . . in the system.” Indian physicians have furnished examples of just such “obfuscation,” showing, for example, how a national committee attributed 96% of deaths in Indian infants who had just received pentavalent vaccines as either coincidental or unclassifiable.

    What earned Dr. Swaminathan a place at the WHO vaccine table, when she is primarily known for her research and programmatic work on tuberculosis? It turns out that she has been an enthusiastic cheerleader for expanding human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination in India. In early 2018, the Indian government decided against including the HPV vaccine in India’s Universal Immunization Program, swayed by feedback from India’s medical community (which is “split over the vaccine’s use”) and by the concerns of the influential Hindu organization RSS, which argued that adding the HPV vaccine would “divert scarce resources from more worthwhile health initiatives diverting it to this vaccine of doubtful utility and that its adverse effects will erode confidence in the national immunisation programme.” Ignoring these concerns as well as HPV vaccines’ disastrous global track record, Swaminathan—speaking on behalf of WHO—promptly urged India to reconsider. In late 2019, she joined other authors in a Lancet Oncology article that made light of “a few deaths” in HPV vaccine demonstration projects in two Indian states while praising the “successful introduction” and safety of HPV vaccination in two other states.

    … agreed that vaccine pre-licensure clinical trials may not be powered enough (meaning they are too small to detect statistically significant effects) and that the generally inadequate follow-up of trial participants complicates safety evaluation.
    Flawed safety studies
    Several WHO summit speakers described the lack of “good science” and the inability of vaccine clinical trials to provide meaningful information about safety and risk. Describing the “tyranny of small numbers” and the “relatively small sample sizes” typical of vaccine clinical trials, for example, Dr. David Kaslow characterized these features as “a real conundrum” but offered no suggestions for solving it. This, despite being Director of the Center for Vaccine Innovation and Access at PATH (a Seattle-based global health organization), holding over a dozen vaccine-related patents and having a quarter-century of experience in vaccine research and development at PATH, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Merck and the National Institutes of Health.

    Dr. Marion Gruber, Director of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) Office of Vaccines Research and Review, with “over 20 years of experience in the regulatory review and approval of . . . vaccines and related biologics,” unblushingly agreed that vaccine pre-licensure clinical trials “may not be powered enough” (meaning they are too small to detect statistically significant effects) and that the generally inadequate follow-up of trial participants “complicates safety evaluation.” Presumably, Gruber could spearhead the design of more useful pre-licensure studies in her capacity as the senior official responsible for research “pertaining to the development, manufacturing and testing of vaccines”—but, like Kaslow, she apparently had no solutions to propose. The FDA’s squalid history of approving vaccines tested without placebos and often with only a few days of follow-up—and its encouragement of off-license use of vaccines in pregnant women—cast doubts on Gruber’s sincerity in raising these issues.

    Inadequate safety monitoring
    Dr. Robert Chen is a 30-year veteran of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and currently directs the Task Force for Global Health’s Brighton Collaboration. Chen’s webpage credits him with decades-long efforts to “create the vaccine safety infrastructure needed to meet the ‘post-modern’ challenges of mature immunization programs where adverse events are more prominent than the nearly eliminated” vaccine-preventable diseases—yet at the WHO summit, he declared that safety monitoring databases remain incapable of “teasing out” vital information such as details about manufacturers and lot numbers. Dr. Swaminathan chimed in that “we really don’t have very good safety monitoring systems in many countries.”

    …the first lesson is, while you’re making your vaccine, if you can avoid using an adjuvant, please do so.
    Risky adjuvants
    WHO summit attendees had numerous comments about vaccine adjuvants—none of them reassuring. For example, the Coordinator of the WHO’s Initiative for Vaccine Research (Dr. Martin Howell Friede) remarked, “We do not add adjuvants to vaccines because we want to do so” but because vaccines will not “work” without them. Friede, who held “several senior management positions in the vaccine industry” prior to moving to WHO, added:

    I give courses every year on “How do you develop vaccines?” “How do you make vaccines?” And the first lesson is, while you’re making your vaccine, if you can avoid using an adjuvant, please do so. Lesson two is, if you’re going to use an adjuvant, use one that has a history of safety. And lesson three is, if you’re not going to do that, think very carefully.

    Friede also noted that the “primary concern” with vaccine adjuvants is systemic adverse events: “The major health concern which we are seeing are accusations of long term . . . effects.” Friede then passed the baton back to regulators such as the FDA’s Gruber, who characterized “safety and effectiveness evaluation of adjuvants combined with vaccine antigens” as “complicated.”

    Nor have the domestic or international vaccine communities ever been forthright about the lack of research on key elements of the entire [childhood vaccine] schedule—the number, frequency, timing, order, and age at administration of vaccines.
    Vote of no confidence—for good reason
    One of the few attendees to articulate vaccine safety issues from the child’s standpoint was Dr. Bassey Okposen, a Program Manager for Nigeria’s vaccine program. Okposen had celebrated Nigeria’s “high immunisation coverage” in 2018, but at the 2019 WHO meeting, he ventured to ask whether vaccines containing “different antigens from different companies” and “different adjuvants and different preservatives and so on” could be “cross-reacting amongst themselves”—wondering aloud whether “the possibility of cross-reactions” had ever been studied. In fact, toxicologists are keenly aware that individual toxins have synergistic effects when combined, but vaccine researchers seem uninterested. Nor have the domestic or international vaccine communities ever been forthright about the lack of research on “key elements of the entire [childhood vaccine] schedule—the number, frequency, timing, order, and age at administration of vaccines.”

    The WHO may wish to draw attention to and scapegoat those who exhibit “vaccine hesitancy,” but the global cadre of vaccine experts has only itself to blame. As Professor Heidi Larson stated to her peers at the WHO summit, the crisis of confidence is now extending to “a very wobbly health professional front line that is [also] starting to question vaccines and the safety of vaccines.” Larson directs a slick program designed to restore vaccine confidence, but she was the first to acknowledge that “You can’t repurpose the same old science to make it sound better if you don’t have the science that’s relevant to the new problem.” We might add that the “same old science” never was terribly good to begin with.

    [Note: The WHO appears to have removed its web page listing “vaccine hesitancy” as a top global health threat for 2019. Up until January 14, 2020, the list of global health threats was available at https://www.who.int/emergencies/ten-...alth-in-2019.]
    https://childrenshealthdefense.org/n...fety-problems/
    My website: https://www.theherbsofthefield.com/

    "No one is useless in this world who lightens the burdens of another.” ~ Charles Dickens

  23. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    I see. You do not have any facts to support your claim
    My claim is not in dispute, and even you agree with it. Vaccines harm people.

    I don't make a claim as to "how many." You do. But you lack data to even support that claim, as you argue with yourself....
    Last edited by Created4; 01-16-2020 at 05:58 PM.
    Uncensored Health Freedom News:
    http://healthimpactnews.com/

    Yes, I believe the science of vaccines is settled - Zippyjuan Team
    Don't care even a little bit about where the CDC gets money. - Krugminator2

  24. #21
    And, of course, if whole vaccines including aluminium adjuvants had been show to be safe using a true placebo, such as saline, we probably might not even be having this conversation today. Probably, because they would no longer be even used. Because, more than 90% of safety trials for vaccines with aluminium adjuvants have not used a true placebo...
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSgk5m3tds0&t=2m50s



Similar Threads

  1. Vaccine Injuries and Deaths Continue to Increase in Federal Vaccine Court
    By Created4 in forum Personal Health & Well-Being
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 06-04-2015, 02:14 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-28-2014, 07:23 PM
  3. Replies: 17
    Last Post: 11-19-2013, 04:25 PM
  4. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-30-2013, 08:59 AM
  5. Experts Admit Swine Flu Vaccine 'May Cause' Deadly Nerve Disease
    By FrankRep in forum Personal Health & Well-Being
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 10-21-2010, 01:05 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •