BOMBSHELL: Study Proves Unvaccinated Children Are Healthier

[Travis]

When everything contains soy and nuts, of COURSE kids are going to be allergic to those things after these shots. SO OBVIOUS.

This is true, the fundamental dogma of vaccination states: any protein injected into the body causes an immune response.

If this were not the case, there would be no justification for vaccination to begin with.

The most obvious food protein in vaccines is probably egg albumin. Vaccinologists culture influenza in eggs directly:

And the MMR contains egg proteins.

Next is casein. Many different growth media contain casein such as:

•Mueller Hinton Agar
•Mueller-Miller Medium
•Latham Medium

And casein is found in a great number of vaccines. Some even declare casein directly on the label: Vaccine Ingredients and Manufacturer Information - Vaccines - ProCon.org

The fact that injected proteins produce anaphylactic sensitization was known since 1913, when Charles Richet gave his Nobel Prize Speech on this topic: Charles Richet - Nobel Lecture: Anaphylaxis

I have observed in this connection a remarkable fact: a period of one year between the initial ingestion and the subsequent parenteral injection. A dog ingested in June 1911 a strong dose of crepitin and survived. (Whatever the ose, it is not possible to poison dogs by ingesting crepitin.) After one year had passed, in June 1912, this dog had a harmless crepitin injection and died within an hour and a half as if struck by lightning. The death of a dog at this speed from anaphylactic shock is very rare indeed.

To these experiments, I must add the work of Gideon Wells and Thomas Osborne. In January 1911, they made a close study of the anaphylactizing and immunizing action of vegetable proteins.

Just a short passage to give you an idea. The entire article is worth reading.

Here is a Vinu Arumugham article on researchgate:
Evidence that Food Proteins in Vaccines Cause the Development of Food Allergies and Its Implications for Vaccine Policy

This is shorter than the Richet lecture and makes for a good primer. There can be little doubt that vaccines create egg and milk allergy.

One of the best theories of Autism is given by Vinu:
Autism Spectrum Disorders: A special case of vaccine-induced cow’s milk allergy?

 

[Travis]

Vaccine aluminum has been shown to travel to the brain:

•Biopersistence and brain translocation of aluminum adjuvants of vaccines
•Slow CCL2-dependent translocation of biopersistent particles from muscle to brain

The aluminum oxide hydroxide and aluminum phosphate in vaccines (there is also aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate in Gardasil™) is mostly insoluble.

The particle sizes follow a normal distribution curve with diameters ranging from about 400 nanometers to about 2 microns (notice logarithmic scale).

These particles don't dissolve on any reasonable time scale (which you can calculate yourself from the published solubility constants) and instead are engulfed my macrophages. Besides the two previously listed, there are many articles confirming that macrophages do engulf particles:

Article: Macrophage/particle interactions: effect of size, composition and surface area

These macrophages carry aluminum throughout the lymph and have been shown to translocate aluminum particles to the brain. The effects the redox balance and electrical properties. A well known effect of aluminum in the brain is it's ability to disrupt the redox status of heme iron:

XAS examination of Aβ aggregates containing both iron(III) and aluminium(III) led to the observation of a similar pure iron(II) phase, but formed over a shorter interaction time (48 h) than where aluminium was absent. This catalytic effect of aluminium upon Aβ iron reduction was confirmed by iron(II) quantification assay, with the addition of aluminium leading to higher levels of iron reduction. Both XAS and iron(II) quantification assays revealed evidence of iron redox cycling where aluminium(III) was added to Aβ/iron(III) incubations, whereas no evidence of redox cycling was seen in its absence. These results show aluminium to act as an effective catalyst for the interaction of iron with Aβ, enabling the redox cycling of iron over the time period examined. These findings are also consistent with the work of Khan et al. [36], who show Aβ to be capable of inducing the redox cycling of iron, with the presence of aluminium(III) appearing to potentiate the reduction of iron(III) to iron(II); and also recent investigations by Ruiperez et al. [47], who show aluminium to promote the Fenton reaction by aiding the reduction of iron(III) to iron(II) [47].

Ferrous iron formation following the co-aggregation of ferric iron and the Alzheimer's disease peptide β-amyloid (1–42)

 

[tca300]

Thank you very much for the posts!!! @charlie

 

[xiaohua]

As Ray wrote in one of his recent newsletters, people suffer from "trustanoia" that doctors have the patients' best interests at heart.

'Trustanoia' - love it!

 

[churchmouth]

I can see the value of putting weight to the case that vaccines in their current form are in fact harmful. However Isn't looking for safer vaccines more pertinent or is there an argument I'm missing that they don't benefit society as a whole? I see angst here, but the bigger picture (beyond the individual) doesn't seem to be considered.

My personal experience is most people are a bit nervous about vaccinating their children, but believe it is the responsible thing to do for building the "herd immunity" and preventing these diseases from breaking out. I don't think people will take this seriously until the bigger picture of contagious diseases is addressed.

 

[Queequeg]

It's way, way too late to have any kind of discussion about this in America, you're not even allowed to talk about certain things without being insulted.

America has to be one of the most toxic societies to ever exist, we're a nation of mentally and physically sick people being chained down by equally sick capitalists and politicians.

As hard as it is to believe, its much worse elsewhere. Try talking about the negative impacts of unrestricted Muslim refugees in Europe and you can get hit with a hate crime.

 

[angelina]

I have two sons with autism and a daughter suffering with gyno issues after Gardasil. I think people know there are ingredient concerns, but they think it can't happen to them. Most people are very comfortable blaming bad genes and this includes those affected by vaccine injury. It is easier to believe that you have crappy genetics than to believe mainstream med and the govt have sold you out. If you can't link autism, what chance do you have of linking allergies, gut issues....
My kids have healed with diet and lifestyle changes . My youngest is def no longer qualifies for diagnosis. It has costed us everything (sold house, bankruptcy) to get this far, and we're still in it. We've lost EVERY SINGLE "FRIEND" we had. Not vaxing anymore was a huge step forward in our kid's heath, but most people won't give up the idea that vax=health. Most will never study the true origins of the eradication of certain diseases like polio. This wasn't due to vaccines, but most people stand by this fiction no.matter.what. It is to the point that discussion of the matter is taboo. Vaccines aren't medical, they are a dominant, oppressive religion.

 

[luke gadget]

Hey it's your favorite gadfly here

Totally aside from the vaccine issue itself, this is a crap study. It's not even a study - it's a questionnaire, sent to a group (homeschoolers) predisposed to be anti-vax, and it's stated right at the beginning "we are studying vaccines...". It even adds false statements like "yet little is known about its long-term impact..." (in reality a LOT is known about long-term impact - people just prefer their own narratives on this topic). No randomness, no control, no nothing to make it relevant regarding its conclusions.

This is a useful document for people to confirm what they already believe - but it's not a valid or fact-based study and definitely not a "bombshell". It's a PR fluff piece.

Again - and I know from experience this will be ignored and dismissed here, probably along with a lot of personal attacks - I'm not addressing the pro or con of vaccines here, just pointing out that actual science and actual research is more useful than that nice warm and fuzzy feeling of being told what one already thinks.

That said, here's a bit of recent random (but actual) news on the topic, just for your amusement:
Anti-vaccine activists spark a state’s worst measles outbreak in decades

 

[Queequeg]

Hey it's your favorite gadfly here :)

Totally aside from the vaccine issue itself, this is a crap study. It's not even a study - it's a questionnaire, sent to a group (homeschoolers) predisposed to be anti-vax, and it's stated right at the beginning "we are studying vaccines...". It even adds false statements like "yet little is known about its long-term impact..." (in reality a LOT is known about long-term impact - people just prefer their own narratives on this topic). No randomness, no control, no nothing to make it relevant regarding its conclusions.

This is a useful document for people to confirm what they already believe - but it's not a valid or fact-based study and definitely not a "bombshell". It's a PR fluff piece.

Again - and I know from experience this will be ignored and dismissed here, probably along with a lot of personal attacks - I'm not addressing the pro or con of vaccines here, just pointing out that actual science and actual research is more useful than that nice warm and fuzzy feeling of being told what one already thinks.

That said, here's a bit of recent random (but actual) news on the topic, just for your amusement:
Anti-vaccine activists spark a state’s worst measles outbreak in decades

Talk about unscientific. That article makes a number of blatant lies and propagandistic exaggerations. Most importantly is that vaccines have not been conclusively proven to not cause autism. Many of the supposed studies that support that claim were so flawed it was beyond ridiculous. As just one example the control group in one study were also given shots with the same adjuvants as in the real vaccine. The only difference is that the actual virus was not given. This is not a control as it’s the adjuvants that causes the problems. The study that is referenced in the article does not look at all vaccines but only at the association between MMR vaccinated children vs non-MMR vaccinated children. The non-MMR vaccinated children however most likely had the rest of their shots done so what you have is a strawman research question. The study also suffers from whats called the “healthy vaccinee effect”. Basically healthy people get vaccines and sick people don’t. This article explains the defects in that particular study. MMR-autism studies suffer from healthy user bias.

The issue is not that vaccines don’t work at all but that they are so loaded with poisonous adjuvants that they greatly increase the risk for more serious problems. To think that injecting mercury, aluminum, formaldehyde and several other toxic substances into a newborn and not have any negative consequences is crazy. http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/Components-Excipients 14-0528.pdf.

Also most of the live virus vaccines are cultured in aborted human fetal tissue. It is as if the medical industry is competing on who can get more evil. This human tissue once injected into a newborn can often cause an autoimmune response to human tissue and voila a surge in autoimmune diseases which many people consider autism to be one of them. This site gets into that. The MMR Hoax | Paradigm Exposure Forum

The medical industry is giving parents the evil choice between an increased risk in common diseases vs an increased risk in all sorts of developmental disorders including autism. I would rather take the rare risk with my future kids getting measles or any of the other diseases, which are rarely deadly, than to greatly increase their risk of coming down with autism which is sometimes a fate worse than death.

 

[luke gadget]

Talk about unscientific. That article makes a number of blatant lies and propagandistic exaggerations. Most importantly is that vaccines have not been conclusively proven to not cause autism....

Well, I wasn't addressing that - I was just pointing out that the "bombshell" study is worthless. If you want to claim vaccines cause x, y or z then by all means, use the good studies for that result.

Now, my personal opinion is that you can't and won't find them. The link you posted just says "bad stuff is bad" which is indeed obvious as you say - but it doesn't say that vaccines cause problems. Sodium can kill people - where's the outrage over salt? Excess oxygen is toxic which means that water is going to kill us - etc etc. But what do I know.

Anyway, it's a pointless discussion since nobody actually looks at actual science around it, just share scare stories back and forth. So, let's skip all that and call it a day.


The news article was just a throwaway.

 

[Travis]

I looked at the science behind it.

Do you want information on thimerosal or aluminum?

 

[Queequeg]

Well, I wasn't addressing that - I was just pointing out that the "bombshell" study is worthless. If you want to claim vaccines cause x, y or z then by all means, use the good studies for that result.

Now, my personal opinion is that you can't and won't find them. The link you posted just says "bad stuff is bad" which is indeed obvious as you say - but it doesn't say that vaccines cause problems. Sodium can kill people - where's the outrage over salt? Excess oxygen is toxic which means that water is going to kill us - etc etc. But what do I know.

Anyway, it's a pointless discussion since nobody actually looks at actual science around it, just share scare stories back and forth. So, let's skip all that and call it a day.


The news article was just a throwaway.

I think its important to discuss these issues because the lame stream media certainly isn't. There is actually a lot of peer reviewed studies showing the dangers of vaccines. It is just kept hidden under the fake research done by the vaccine companies. Its no different than Harvard continually recommending that people cut saturated fat and use seed oils.
30 solid scientific studies that prove vaccines are linked with autism
https://avscientificsupportarsenal.wordpress.com/\

and most interestingly
https://www.hindawi.com/journals/bmri/2014/247218/
"Methodological Issues and Evidence of Malfeasance in Research Purporting to Show Thimerosal in Vaccines Is Safe"

as for the toxicological issues with oxygen and salt, I am sure you have heard the phrase that the dose makes the poison.

 

[Tarmander]

Until autism and the rise in allergies and auto immune disease is explained, vaccines will never shake these "correlations", which is why they want to force people to get them. Imagine a world where vaccine schedules are expanded, and <gasp> disease rates go down across the board.

"By God sir, we just keep giving more and more vaccines and people get healthier and healthier, is this working correctly?"

 

[burtlancast]

The issue is not that vaccines don’t work at all but that they are so loaded with poisonous adjuvants that they greatly increase the risk for more serious problems. To think that injecting mercury, aluminum, formaldehyde and several other toxic substances into a newborn and not have any negative consequences is crazy. http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/Components-Excipients 14-0528.pdf.

Exactly.
To say "vaccination never worked" is just another strawman by bogus vaccine opposition groups working at confusing the issues in the mind of everyday folks.

The fact is the vaccine industry can lace their vaccines with any toxic substance they see fit, poison as many people as they want, and they'll never be held accountable in a court of law.

The vaccine rationale per se works, as long as it's done honestly.
Vaccination has reduced efficiently zoonoses like anthrax, dog distemper, etc.

Even alternative medicine has used vaccines successfully to cure patients ( Krebiozen (Durovic) and Anablast (Naessens) were obtained from horses inoculated with germs; Virginia Livingstone used the patient's own blood germs to create custom individual vaccines).

The Muryama and the BCG vaccines have been used to kickstart the depressed immune systems of cancerous people.

 

[jaa]

Studies:

Preterm birth, vaccination and neurodevelopmental disorders: a cross-sectional study of 6- to 12-year-old vaccinated and unvaccinated children

Pilot comparative study on the health of vaccinated and unvaccinated 6- to 12- year old U.S. children

From the article

Mothers’ reports could not be validated by clinical records because the survey was designed to be anonymous. However, self-reports about significant events provide a valid proxy for official records when medical records and administrative data are unavailable [70]. Had mothers been asked to provide copies of their children’s medical records it would no longer have been an anonymous study and would have resulted in few completed questionnaires.

and

“A number of homeschool mothers volunteered to assist NHERI promote the study to their wide circles of homeschool contacts.”

So not only was the data self reported and not validated, it was reported by mothers who are aware of NHERI and the studies aims. Dollars to doughnuts these people skew towards anti-vaxxers.

This study was supported by grants from Generation Rescue, Inc., and the Children’s Medical Safety Research Institute, charitable organizations that support research on children’s health and safety. The funders had no role or influence on the design and conduct of the research or the preparation of reports.

This is Jenny McCarthy's non-profit.

If this was a study against fructose this forum would be (rightfully) tearing it to shreds. Instead, we have a pilot study, that hasn't been released, with extremely sketchy methodology and conflicts of interest being promoted as a bombshell. Promoting this does nothing but announce how blindly bias you're willing to be on this issue.

I'm not sure if this site's infographic is down, or if my computer is just messed up today, but it was a nice infographic of how sharply disease rates fell with the introduction of vaccines.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/04/heres-visual-proof-why-vaccines-do-more-good-harm

Bombshell!

 

[Queequeg]

From the article

and
So not only was the data self reported and not validated, it was reported by mothers who are aware of NHERI and the studies aims. Dollars to doughnuts these people skew towards anti-vaxxers.
This is Jenny McCarthy's non-profit.
If this was a study against fructose this forum would be (rightfully) tearing it to shreds. Instead, we have a pilot study, that hasn't been released, with extremely sketchy methodology and conflicts of interest being promoted as a bombshell. Promoting this does nothing but announce how blindly bias you're willing to be on this issue.
I'm not sure if this site's infographic is down, or if my computer is just messed up today, but it was a nice infographic of how sharply disease rates fell with the introduction of vaccines.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/04/heres-visual-proof-why-vaccines-do-more-good-harm
Bombshell!

Most research on vaccines is industry funded yet I dont hear very many pro-vaxxers bring that up even though they would have a much greater incentive to manipulate the data. What does Jenny McCarthy or the mothers get out of lying about their children's health. Also surveys are a well established scientific methodology. The fetish of only looking at multi-million dollar double blind studies is just a way of allowing big pharma to control the science.

Though I cant get your infographic to load I would suggest that you take a look at disease rates that go back to before we had clean sanitation in the cities. The vast majority of disease had already dropped off by 99% plus to very low levels by the time vaccines came along. For Science to arbitrarily begin the data set at 1945 and not showing the full picture is just one more example of how the medical mafia manipulates us with fake data.

 

[Travis]

Not to mention that many diseases, such as tuberculosis and scarlet fever, declined at roughly the same rate in the absence of a corresponding vaccine.

It's impossible to know what all the curves would look like had vaccines never been invented, but its reasonable to assume that there would be little difference between the actual mortality graphs and hypothetical ones.

Horses used to ***t in the streets, kids were chimney sweepers, and some people didn't eat much besides bread and tinned meat. Refrigeration was expensive or nonexistent and the water wasn't filtered or chlorinated.

When pro-vaccine fanatics extrapolate the number of deaths 'saved' by vaccines they often use the mortality numbers during the peak some 100 years ago. This is absurd since any non-biased person would expect lower incidence rates and mortality whether a vaccines were utilized or not simply based on the aforementioned improvements of civilization.

 

[jaa]

Most research on vaccines is industry funded yet I dont hear very many pro-vaxxers bring that up even though they would have a much greater incentive to manipulate the data. What does Jenny McCarthy or the mothers get out of lying about their children's health. Also surveys are a well established scientific methodology. The fetish of only looking at multi-million dollar double blind studies is just a way of allowing big pharma to control the science.

Though I cant get your infographic to load I would suggest that you take a look at disease rates that go back to before we had clean sanitation in the cities. The vast majority of disease had already dropped off by 99% plus to very low levels by the time vaccines came along. For Science to arbitrarily begin the data set at 1945 and not showing the full picture is just one more example of how the medical mafia manipulates us with fake data.

Ah, unfortunate that infographic doesn't load properly for you either. You'd see that contrary to your statement, disease rates for vaccines fell off after the vaccine for a particular disease was introduced (with the exception of one for reasons listed I cannot recall). Please feel free to post conflicting data.

As for the study, people do bash industry funded studies. And their methodology is much more robust than this. It matters who is funding it because of what they're looking for. People who follow this group are looking to draw conclusions that vaccines are harmful. The fact that is what was self reported is to be expected, and the fact the data isn't verified is like doing a survey of this forum that rates the harmful effects of sugar (or conversely, doing a survey of a Gary Taubes / Robert Lustig forum on the harms of sugar). The results aren't worth listening to.

 

[Travis]

Vaccines could:

(a) Actually work, or
(b) The doctor asks whether or not the child has been vaccinated. A 'yes' answer introduces a bias which results in the doctor being less likely to diagnose the child for that particular disease. Conversely, a 'no' answer introduces a reverse bias in which the doctor is more likely to diagnose the particular disease in question.

 

[Queequeg]

Ah, unfortunate that infographic doesn't load properly for you either. You'd see that contrary to your statement, disease rates for vaccines fell off after the vaccine for a particular disease was introduced (with the exception of one for reasons listed I cannot recall). Please feel free to post conflicting data.

As for the study, people do bash industry funded studies. And their methodology is much more robust than this. It matters who is funding it because of what they're looking for. People who follow this group are looking to draw conclusions that vaccines are harmful. The fact that is what was self reported is to be expected, and the fact the data isn't verified is like doing a survey of this forum that rates the harmful effects of sugar (or conversely, doing a survey of a Gary Taubes / Robert Lustig forum on the harms of sugar). The results aren't worth listening to.