Two huge vaccine scandals the press is ignoring

Original here: https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2018/05/15/two-huge-vaccine-scandals-the-press-is-ignoring/

by Jon Rappoport, May 15, 2018

Some lies are so big, many people can’t accept the fact that they’re lies. Their minds are boggled. “No,” they say, “that couldn’t be.” But yes, that could be, and is.

Two giant vaccine scandals are in progress at the moment.

The mainstream press is mentioning them, here and there, but without any intent to raise alarms, dig in, investigate, and get down to the core of the problem.

So I’ll get to the core.

The first scandal revolves around the flu vaccine for the current year. The CDC and other “experts” have admitted the vaccine has a very low effectiveness rate.

Why is it a dud?

Because the vaccine is produced using chicken eggs, and in that medium, the flu virus—which is intentionally placed in the eggs—mutates. Therefore, it isn’t the same virus which is causing flu this year. Therefore, no protection against the flu.

FiercePharma reports: “Based on data from Australia, which already had its flu season, scientists warn that this season’s flu shot might be only 10% effective. And the reason for such a low level of protection might lie in the method by which the majority of flu vaccines are made: in eggs.”

Ten percent effectiveness. Now that’s ridiculous. And it’s assuming you accept the whole model of how vaccines work—that they actually do protect (safely) against disease, rather than, at best, repressing the visible symptoms of the disease.

Amidst their spotty coverage of this scandal, here is what the press is failing to mention: the problem with the flu vaccine isn’t just a 2017-2018 flaw.

It would be the same problem ever since chicken eggs have been used to manufacture the vaccine.

Are you ready?

Healthline.com: “The majority of flu vaccines are grown in chicken eggs, a method of vaccine development that’s been used for 70 years.”

CONTINUES HERE: https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2018/05/15/two-huge-vaccine-scandals-the-press-is-ignoring/

Advertisements

Tell President Trump That You Want Vaccination Choice Included in the Proposed Rule Protecting Statutory Conscience Rights in Health Care

See also: Upholding Religious and Conscience-Based Vaccine Exemptions
https://worldmercuryproject.org/news/upholding-religious-and-conscience-based-vaccine-exemptions/

Tell President Trump That You Want Vaccination Choice Included in the Proposed Rule Protecting Statutory Conscience Rights in Health Care

Original here: http://www.ageofautism.com/2018/03/tell-president-trump-that-you-want-vaccination-choice-included-in-the-proposed-rule-protecting-statu.html

Note:  Below is an excerpt from the Federal Register on President Trump’s Proposed Rule Protecting Statutory Conscience Rights in Health Care; Delegations  of Authority. You have an opportunity to comment on the need to include conscience rights for vaccination choice. The vaccine pipeline is chock full of new opportunities to compel Americans to uptake a product through shaming, job loss and denial of a free an appropriate education – a product that carries known risk of injury and/or death and yet whose manufacturers bear no liability. Like guns, vaccines have been designated by SCOTUS as “unavoidably unsafe.”   This simply means that by their very design and nature, they can harm you with use. Obvious in the case of guns. And obvious to most of us here at AofA when it comes to vaccines as well.

Even if you currently choose some, few or every vaccine available for yourself and/or your children, if you would like the have the OPTION of saying “NO” to a vaccine in the future, you should consider leaving a comment as a vote for your personal medical rights.

Please click this link and leave your comment on the site. And then copy and paste it to our comments, if  you’d like to share it with us.  Thank you.

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/01/26/2018-01226/protecting-statutory-conscience-rights-in-health-care-delegations-of-authority#open-comment

###

A Proposed Rule by the Health and Human Services Department on 01/26/2018

SUMMARY:

In the regulation of health care, the United States has a long history of providing conscience-based protections for individuals and entities with objections to certain activities based on religious belief and moral convictions. Multiple such statutory protections apply to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS, or the Department) and the programs or activities it funds or administers. The Department proposes to revise regulations previously promulgated to ensure that persons or entities are not subjected to certain practices or policies that violate conscience, coerce, or discriminate, in violation of such Federal laws. Through this rulemaking, the Department proposes to grant overall responsibility to its Office for Civil Rights (OCR) for ensuring that the Department, its components, HHS programs and activities, and those who participate in HHS programs or activities comply with Federal laws protecting the rights of conscience and prohibiting associated discriminatory policies and practices in such programs and activities. In addition to conducting outreach and providing technical assistance, OCR will have the authority to initiate compliance reviews, conduct investigations, supervise and coordinate compliance by the Department and its components, and use enforcement tools otherwise available in civil rights law to address violations and resolve complaints. In order to ensure that recipients of Federal financial assistance and other Department funds comply with their legal obligations, the Department will require certain recipients to maintain records; cooperate with OCR’s investigations, reviews, or other enforcement actions; submit written assurances and certifications of compliance to the Department; and provide notice to individuals and entities about their conscience and associated anti-discrimination rights, as applicable.

With this proposed regulation, the Department seeks to more effectively and comprehensively enforce Federal health care conscience and associated anti-discrimination laws. Specifically, the Department proposes to grant its Office for Civil Rights (OCR) overall responsibility for ensuring that the Department, its components, HHS programs and activities, and those who participate in HHS programs or activities comply with these Federal laws. In addition to conducting outreach and providing technical assistance, OCR will have the authority to initiate compliance reviews, conduct investigations, supervise and coordinate compliance by the Department and its component(s), and use enforcement tools comparable to those available under other civil rights laws to more effectively address violations and resolve complaints. In order to ensure that recipients of Department funds comply with their legal obligations, as it does with other civil rights laws within its purview, the Department will require certain funding recipients to maintain records; cooperate with OCR’s investigations, reviews, or enforcement actions; submit written assurances and certifications of compliance to the Department; and provide notice to individuals and entities about conscience and associated anti-discrimination rights (as applicable).

New Séralini Study: Untested Glyphosate Formulations Highly Toxic, Loaded With Heavy Metals

EXCERPT:

In light of Séralini’s recent findings, two further studies should be noted. First, on September 2016, the national grassroots coalition Moms Across America issued a press release detailing the findings of glyphosate contamination in five vaccines tested by Microbe Inotech Laboratories, Inc. of St. Louis, Missouri. Second, a 2016 study conducted by Italian researchers found all 43 human vaccines tested were contaminated with heavy metal nanoparticles.

New Séralini Study: Untested Glyphosate Formulations Highly Toxic, Loaded With Heavy Metals

By Jefferey Jaxen

Full article here: http://www.jeffereyjaxen.com/blog/new-seralini-study-untested-glyphosate-formulations-highly-toxic-loaded-with-heavy-metals

Safety of Childhood Vaccination Schedule Still Unproven

Original here: http://www.thevaccinereaction.org/2018/01/safety-of-childhood-vaccination-schedule-still-unproven/

By by Marco Cáceres

“Key elements of the immunization schedule—for example, the number, frequency, timing, order, and age at the time of administration of vaccines—have not been systematically examined in research studies.” — Institute of Medicine

Recently, an article by Joanna Nix was published in Mother Jones magazine titled “There is a Whole Cottage Industry of Doctors Helping Parents Skip Their Kids’ Vaccines”.1 The aim of the piece appears to be to attack and try to discredit physicians who exercise professional judgment and provide medical vaccine exemptions for children they conclude may be at increased risk for harm if they are vaccinated according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) childhood vaccination schedule.

Nix is uncomfortable with doctors who, according to her, seem “eager” to “flout the recommendations” of the CDC in the name of “parent choice.”1 The implication here is two-fold. First, that such doctors are somehow irresponsible for exercising independent professional judgment when it comes to their patients and vaccination. And second, that the informed consent rights of parents to make important decisions for their children that involve medical risk taking are less important than strictly adhering to the CDC’s one-size-fits-all vaccination schedule.

Nix pointed out that pediatrician Bob Sears, MD is a co-founder of the Physicians for Informed Consent (PIC), which she described as a “coalition of about 200 doctors, scientists, and attorneys who vehemently oppose mandatory vaccine laws.” She went on to note, “PIC’s membership is confidential, but its list of founding members and board members is public.”1 Her description seems intent on conveying the sense of a secretive and irresponsible physician organization—as if there were something wrong with doctors defending the informed consent ethic and wanting to work collaboratively and respectfully with their patients.

Dr. Sears has frequently stated publicly that he commonly administers vaccines in his practice. What appears to bother Nix is that Sears is willing to work with parents on how and when to vaccinate their children and to provide medical care to children regardless of their vaccination history. I wrote an opinion piece about Sears in 2016 and stated, “He also provides care to unvaccinated children and he is careful to screen for vulnerable children, who have already experienced reactions to previous vaccinations that could make them more susceptible to serious harm if more vaccines are given.”2 

CONTINUES HERE: http://www.thevaccinereaction.org/2018/01/safety-of-childhood-vaccination-schedule-still-unproven/