Article by Robert F. Kennedy Jr- greater odds of miscarriage after influenza vaccine

Robert F Kennedy is a person that you can find speaking out against vaccine in various articles and videos, among them he was one of the participants in Ty Bollinger’s videos “The truth about vaccines”

CDC Study Shows Up to 7.7-fold Greater Odds of Miscarriage After Influenza Vaccine

By Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., World Mercury Project
November 10, 2017 11:54 am Last Updated: November 14, 2017 12:58 pm

The CDC has just published a seismic study  linking spontaneous abortions in women to flu vaccines. The study reviewed data for the 2010-11 and 2011-12 flu seasons.  Women vaccinated with the inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) in the 2010-2011 season were 3.7 times more likely to experience a spontaneous abortion within 28 days than women who had not received the vaccine.

Over the entire study period (2010 to 2012), the odds for a spontaneous abortion for vaccinated women were 2.0 times greater than for those women not receiving the flu vaccine.  Both figures showed a statistically significant increase in miscarriages when women received their flu shot. The median gestational age for spontaneous abortion was seven weeks in the affected pregnancies.

Most alarmingly, in women who received the H1N1 vaccine in the previous flu season, the odds of spontaneous abortion in the 28 days after receiving a flu vaccine were 7.7 times greater.  For every flu season, starting in 2010-2011, there has been an H1N1-type virus included in regular flu shots in the United States.  For the current 2017-18 flu season, the CDC still recommends that all flu vaccines contain H1N1.  This study raises concerns whether this particular strain of influenza antigen is safe during pregnancy.

The vast majority of these flu vaccines were multi-dose formulations, containing 25 micrograms of mercury via the preservative thimerosal.  In those years, out of approximately 150 million flu shots given in the U.S. annually, less than 50 million or 34 percent of those vaccines available for pregnant women were thimerosal-free.

For many years, health officials have warned pregnant women to avoid eating mercury-containing fish. And, even before this latest study, some government scientists were questioning the wisdom of pressuring women to receive mercury-laden flu shots in any trimester of pregnancy.

In the words of senior CDC epidemiologist, Dr. William Thompson, “I don’t know why they still give it [the flu shot] to pregnant women, like that’s the last person I would give mercury to.”

Vaccine manufacturers acknowledge that flu vaccines have never been shown to be safe for pregnant women.

CDC officially claims that thimerosal is the “safe” mercury because it is purportedly excreted quickly from the body.  CDC bases this claim solely on its misinterpretation of data from a poorly designed study conducted in the early 2000s by an industry insider, Dr. Michael Pichichero. Subsequent studieshave proven that the ethylmercury in thimerosal is actually far more persistent in organs than the methylmercury in fish. In flu shot package inserts, vaccine manufacturers acknowledge that flu vaccines have never been shown to be safe for pregnant women.

In fact, overwhelming science shows clearly that this preservative is neurotoxic and deadly and that it may be particularly dangerous to the fetus during pregnancy.  When given to pregnant women, mercury transports specifically to the placenta and into the fetus, which does not have any mechanism for detoxification.  In fact, it has been shown that mercury levels in cord blood are on average 70 percent higher than those in maternal blood.

The new study confirms the findings of a previous study  published in 2013. Using CDC’s VAERS database, the author showed a similar uptick in spontaneous abortions due to the flu shot, specifically during the time when pregnant women were receiving both the seasonal flu shot and the pandemic H1N1 flu shot.  In fact, the rate of miscarriages increased 11-fold in 2009 when the H1N1 vaccine was added to the recommended schedule. During this time period, pregnant women who received both shots were typically exposed to 50 micrograms of mercury via thimerosal.

The maternal flu shot, given specifically in the first trimester of pregnancy, has also been implicated in autism spectrum disorder(ASD) in a paper published this year from insurance giant Northern California Kaiser Permanente.  Kaiser’s data showed that those women who received the seasonal flu vaccine (between 2000 and 2010, when the majority of vaccines distributed contained thimerosal) were 25 percent more likely to give birth to a child who would later be diagnosed with ASD.  This result was also statistically significant.

See this interview from a mother describing her miscarriage immediately following a flu shot.  The aborted child’s twin was born with severe autism.

Thimerosal exposure has previously also been associated with birth defects, tics, speech and language delays (in more than one study),  among many other developmental disorders.  My book, Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak, details over 400 studies on the toxic effects of thimerosal. Given all of this evidence, it is now past time to completely protect our children and pregnant mothers from this potent neurotoxin.

Inflammation Risks

Accumulating research indicates that flu vaccines, perhaps even those without thimerosal, can when administered during pregnancy induce an inflammatory response in the mother and potentially cause harm to the fetal brain during critical windows of neurodevelopment, including harm associated with autism.

A  2014 study … found that elevations in CRP, the same marker of inflammation that increases after flu vaccination, are associated with a 43 percent greater risk of having a child with autism.
study in 2011 found an increase in two inflammatory markers, C reactive protein (CRP) and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-a) in pregnant women given a seasonal flu vaccine. Increases in these inflammatory compounds indicate a significant level of inflammation, which was identified during the first two days following vaccination. It is unclear from this study how many of these flu shots contained mercury, but there is good reason to be alarmed by these findings.
 A 2014 study of over 1.2 million pregnant women found that elevations in CRP, the same marker of inflammation that increases after flu vaccination, are associated with a 43 percent greater risk of having a child with autism.  An earlier study published in the journal Brain, Behavior, and Immunity, found that pregnant women suffering from depression developed a more marked inflammatory response to influenza vaccines than women who did not have symptoms of depression. Researchers found that depression during pregnancy has also been associated with an increased risk of autism.

The CDC’s current recommendation that all pregnant women receive flu shots is a dangerous proposition according to California Institute of Technology Professor Paul Patterson, a neuroscientist whose research has included immune activation during pregnancy. In his research,  Patterson reported that any immune activation during pregnancy, whether from an infection or a vaccine, can cause damage in the developing fetal brain.

In 2008, Scientific American Mind quoted Patterson criticizing the CDC’s policy of administering flu vaccines during pregnancy:

“I don’t think they have considered this risk. In fact, I know they have not considered this risk.” Patterson elaborated, “If you take it seriously and vaccinate everybody, then what is going to happen? Researchers cannot yet predict how often a prenatal immune response might lead to fetal brain damage, but even if it happens less than one percent of the time, vaccinating an entire population of pregnant women could affect thousands of children.”

In a study published in the British Medical Journal in 2014, the authors assessed maternal, fetal, and neonatal outcomes of women given the influenza A/H1N1 vaccine. The outcomes of over 86,000 pregnancies revealed that vaccinated women had significantly higher rates of gestational diabetes and eclampsia. Eclampsia is the development of seizures in a woman with severe toxemia, a condition characterized by high blood pressure and protein loss in the urine. Eclampsia is fatal in two percent of women affected and can result in long-term health problems in those who survive. Fetal complications, including neurological damage and death, are also common.

Both gestational diabetes and eclampsia are related to inflammation and immune dysregulation, making the connection to the immune stimulation of the flu vaccine very plausible. A 2016 study published in the journal Vaccine found a moderately elevated risk of birth defects among children born to mothers who received one flu vaccine during the 2010-2014 flu seasons.

Among the team of researchers who authored CDC’s earthshaking new flu study is Dr. Frank DeStefano, the Director of CDC’s Immunization Safety Office. Shortly before this  paper was published, the CDC issued a gag order forbidding any CDC employee from talking to the press or responding to inquiries without first getting permission from the communications office. This timing is most likely not coincidental.

At the end of the paper, CDC has also announced a follow-up study on the 2012-2015 influenza seasons but it will not report the results until next year.  Perhaps, the CDC should move things along faster, with four million babies at risk this flu season.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., chairman of the World Mercury Project (WMP) co-hosts “Ring of Fire” on Air America Radio, and has authored many books. His award-winning articles have appeared in America’s top newspapers. WMP’s vision is a world where mercury is no longer a threat to the health of our planet and people.

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.


Article: There is no science behind the annual flu vaccine (Dr Cammy Benton)

Health Impact News

The VAXXED team recently interviewed Dr. Cammy Benton from North Carolina who is board certified in both Family Medicine and Functional Medicine.

Dr. Benton related that through all of her years of medical training, including 4 years in residency, that the only thing she was taught in regards to vaccines was that they were “safe and effective.” She stated that they were told to discard the vaccine inserts, as they were all “lawyer jargon.”

She relates how doctors are taught to fear not giving vaccines, because they are taught to believe that their patients may die from some disease that is allegedly prevented by vaccines, so this puts tremendous pressure on doctors to get all of their patients vaccinated.

Dr. Benton no longer gives vaccinations. She states that it took her “a long time to wake up,” but she learned a lot through her three children. The first two were fully vaccinated, but she stopped after 4 months with her third child.

With her first child, Dr. Benton states that she waited two months after she was born to give the Hepatitis B shot. Most babies get it in the hospital the same day they are born. Benton explains how her first baby went from a very alert baby who made a lot of eye contact, to becoming less alert and fussy following the beginning of vaccines.

When she finally figured out that her children were being damaged by vaccines, she became very angry towards herself and her profession, for not investigating vaccines prior to believing what she had been told about them, and administering them without question.

Her own pediatrician had vaccinated her children with the flu vaccine behind her back, because she had stated she was against the flu vaccine.

During the interview, Dr. Benton relates how the flu vaccine became mandated during her medical practice. She began to ask questions about the science behind the flu shot, and even asked a senior CDC official about it at an event. But she found no credible studies backing up the science behind the flu shot.

When she called the CDC about it, she relates how the CDC admitted that they were not the ones mandating the flu vaccines (employers and public health officials are), and that she admitted there was no science confirming the effectiveness of the flu vaccine, it was simply “all we have” to combat the flu season.

Dr. Benton then asked why hospitals were not requiring ALL medical personnel to wear face masks during the flu season, since the CDC was admitting the flu vaccine was not effective.

At that point the person at the CDC hung up, and the next Monday Dr. Benton was presented with a four month severance pay. She states that this was the best “vacation” she could have received at that time, because she spent every day studying about vaccines.

She became obsessed with the topic, since it had already destroyed the health of her three children. She wanted to learn which vaccines were useful and which ones were not.

Dr. Benton finally came to the conclusion that the risks associated with the diseases that were being vaccinated against was not serious enough to risk the side effects of the vaccines.

Watch the entire interview:

Artiklar om Dr Andrew Wakefield (vaccin/autism)

Ytterligare en artikel om vaccin – den här gången om Dr Andrew Wakefield som var regissör för filmen Vaxxed, och också en av de som blev intervjuade i Ty Bollingers serie “The truth about vaccines”. Det finns också en video att se, om man klickar på länken här nedan.

Svensk dokumentär om dr Andrew Wakefield som fann en koppling mellan trippelvaccin och autism

PREMIÄR. Dr Andrew Wakefield intervjuas i ett samarbete med journalisten Celia Farber i New York. Syftet är att beskriva hur media, svensk public service och forskarsamhället i allmänhet behandlat upptäckten av kopplingen mellan trippelvaccin för barn, kroniska tarmproblem och autism.

Text: Torbjörn Sassersson | Premiär 29 aug 2014 | Se artiklar om Wakefield

Premiären av dokumentären med Wakefield kommer i samband med att forskaren dr William Thompson vid amerikanska myndigheten CDC den 25 augusti 2014 avslöjar att CDC under många år dolt information inför den medicinska världen och allmänheten att risken för barn att drabbas av autism ökar flerfaldigt vid trippelvaccinering. Särskilt drabbade är svarta barn.

Reaktionen inom etablissemanget, public service, myndighetsvärlden, medicinjournalistiken och skolmedicinen kan beskrivas med ett ord: vaccinriskförnekelse.

Smutskastningskampanj genom ”public service”

Den smutskastningskampanj som dr Andrew Wakefield utsatts för kan betecknas som en av de mest omfattande mot en enskild person i modern tid. Den har pågått i över 15 år och spänner över tidningar, webben, TV, radio och Wikipedia etc. Enorma ekonomiska intressen står på spel för läkemedelsindustrin som befarar att övertron mot vaccin ska ersättas av kunskap om riskerna med vaccin och hur ineffektiva de egentligen är. Myndigheter uttrycker mest en oro för en nedsatt så kallad ”vaccinationstäckning”. Denna oro är inte baserad på en fast vetenskaplig grund.

De svenska journalister inom gammelmedia som varit mest aggressiva mot Wakefield är Inger Atterstam på SvD och Karin Bojs på DN (sök bland artiklar på NewsVoice). I övrigt har SVT och Granskningsnämnden kraftigt bidragit till en orättvis behandling av och förvillande uppfattning om Wakefield och hans vetenskapliga fynd.

Produktion: NewsVoice, Sasser Media Lab
Intervju: Celia Farber
Kamera: Francesca Alesse, redaktör på Aljazeera America
Redigering och ljud: Pål Bergström
Produktions-team: Linda Karlström (, Marina Ahlm (, Marina Szöges (Dagens Homeopati), Ann-Charlotte Stewart, Torbjörn Sassersson (

Och en till artikel (och man hittar också en video genom att klicka på länken):

Mpr-vaccinet kan starta en autoimmun reaktion – Wakefields fynd om sambandet mellan tarmskador och autism bekräftat

16 februari, 2014 By 

År 1998 publicerade dr Andrew Wakefield och hans kollegor en studie som undersökte 12 barn med neurologisk fördröjning. Studien, ofta refererad till som Lancet 12, orsakade stor uppståndelse eftersom föräldrarna till barnen i studien påpekade att barnens problem uppstått i samband med mpr-vaccinationen. Wakefield upptäckte att barnen led av skador i tarmarna, vilket gjorde att proteiner som orsakar hjärnsjukdom kunde komma ut i blodomloppet. Hans fynd har nyligen bekräftats av en mycket stor studie som konstaterade att barn med autism hade förstoppning, diarré och en känslighet för olika livsmedel sex till åtta gånger oftare än barn som utvecklades normalt.

Text: Marina Ahlm    Bild: Studie gjord av Thompson och Wakefield år 1995

Wakefield upptäckte i samband med sin studie att mpr-vaccin kunde ha en möjlig koppling till barnens tarminflammation och förlust av tarmens barriärfunktion, vilket gjorde att encefalopatiska (orsakar hjärnsjukdom) proteiner kunde komma ut i blodomloppet. Detta var därmed en faktor i utvecklingen av neuropsykiatriska funktionshinder. Dr Wakefield beskrev 12 barn med neurologisk fördröjning varav 8 hade autism. Alla dessa barn hade magbesvär och hade utvecklat autism i samband med mpr-vaccinet, enligt föräldrarnas utsago.

Dr Wakefield hade redan innan studien varit kritisk mot kombinationsvaccinet mot mässling, påssjuka och röda hund. Han gjorde därför rekommendationen att återgå till att ge mässlingsvaccinet som singeldos. Anledningen till detta var att efter introduktionen av kombinationsvaccinet drabbades ovanligt många barn av allvarliga biverkningar som encefalit (hjärninflammation) och meningit (hjärnhinneinflammation). Vaccinet slutade användas år 1992 i Japan där man återgick till att använda singeldoser. I Kanada drog man också tillbaka en typ av mpr-vaccin och 1993 bytte man ut det befintliga vaccinet i Storbritannien mot ett annat. Wakefield var dock inte övertygad om att detta vaccin var säkrare än det föregående. Hans oro för detta har bekräftats av andra (1).

År 2002 publicerade Wakefield och hans medarbetare en studie som undersöker förhållandet mellan mässlingsvirus och autism. Författarna testade tarmbiopsiprover för förekomst av mässlingsvirus från barn med och utan autism.  75 av 90 barn med autism befanns ha virusgenom från mässling i tarmvävnad, jämfört med endast 5 av 70 kontrollpatienter.

Kritiken mot detta blev att eftersom mässlingsvaccinets virus är levande och försvagade så innebär det att vaccinviruset replikerar sig 15-20 gånger efter vaccinationen. Om man nu vet att virus muterar, även om de kommer från ett vaccin, hur kan man vara säker på att dessa muterade virus inte utgör någon sjukdomsrisk? Vaccinviruset lär alltså med all sannolikhet komma att tas upp av specifika celler som ansvarar för virusupptag, och färdas vidare i kroppen. Därmed kan de detekteras i intestinala (tarm-) vävnader. Kritikerna tyckte också att eftersom naturliga mässlingsvirus fortfarande cirkulerar i England, hade det varit viktigt att fastställa om mässlingsviruset var naturligt mässlingsvirus eller vaccinvirus (2).

Det är en intressant aspekt med tanke på att det vid olika utbrott av vaccinerbara sjukdomar sällan undersöks huruvida utbrottet härstammar från vaccinvirus eller vilt virus. I länder där det levande poliovaccinet används är det däremot allmänt känt att vaccinet i sig själv leder till att virus muterar och sprids i det vilda (3)(4). Kikhosta drabbar numera ofta välvaccinerade populationer och en studie har visat att bakterien muterat och blivit resistent mot vaccinet (5). Intressant är att en del forskare hävdar att viruset muterat redan för 20 år sedan, vilket skulle innebära att alla som vaccinerats under denna tid varit helt oskyddade mot den vilda formen av kikhostebakterien (6). Mellan 2009 och 2010 hade USA ett utbrott av påssjuka med 3 502 bekräftade fall. Av dessa studerade man 1 648 fall och fann att 89 procent av dessa hade fått två doser av vaccinet. Utbrottet spårades till en 11-årig pojke som dessutom var vaccinerad (7).  Att vacciner inte kan kontrollera virus är helt uppenbart.

År 2003 publicerades en studie som visade att virus-inducerad autoimmunitet kan spela en avgörande roll i autism. Forskarna fann antikroppar mot en antigen i mässlingsviruset, något som återfanns i 83 procent av autistiska barn men inte i normala barn eller syskon till autistiska barn. Slutsatsen blev att autistiska barn kan överreagera på mässlingsvirus vilket i avsaknad av en vild typ av mässlingsinfektion kan vara ett tecken på en onormal immunreaktion mot vaccinstammen eller virusreaktivering (8).

MINE – den nya degenerativa sjukdomen i vaccinerade barn

År 2004 publicerades en artikel i Journal of Pediatric Neurology vilken beskriver hur reduceringen av mässling i  USA visat sig ha en signifikant konsekvens i form av en ny neurodegenerativ sjukdom, MINE-syndrom (Measles-Induced Neuroautistic Encephalopathy). MINE har samma konstellation av symtom som autism. Det är en variant av SSPE (Subacute Sclerosing Panencephalitis) som är en allvarlig men ytterst sällsynt komplikation efter en mässlingsinfektion (har även uppkommit i vaccinerade). Orsaken till uppkomsten är inte helt klarlagd men av någon anledning klarar inte kroppen av att ta hand om viruset som då ligger kvar i kroppen och senare kan orsaka skada.

Innan införandet  av mässlingsvaccinet rapporterades det över 500 000 fall av mässling varje år i USA. Under samma tidpunkt uppkom det årligen 60 fall av SSPE och de senaste åren har det endast rapporterats runt 5 fall per år. I relation till detta har det sedan slutet av 1990-talet  varit över 2 000 barn som diagnosticerats med MINE och tusentals fler med autism. Gemensamt för dessa barn är att de alla fått mpr-vaccin. Inget barn uppvisade några symtom innan vaccinering. Vid blodprov uppvisade alla vaccinstammar från mässling. Alla autistiska symtom uppstod flera månader efter vaccinering (vilket är vanligt för ”långsamma virus” som mässlingsviruset) och alla har haft symtom som tytt på immunologiska problem, t ex allergier, eksem och upprepade infektioner (9). 

År 2009 skrev Vijendra K. Singh en undersökande artikel där han beskriver autoimmunitet som den största faktorn för utvecklandet av autism.  En stor sannolik faktor för utvecklandet av autoimmunitet är mässling, antingen från en latent infektion eller från mpr-vaccinet. På något sätt tar sig viruset förbi blod-hjärnbarriären och skadar hjärnans myelin genom att starta en autoimmun reaktion. Myelinet har en isolerande förmåga på nervcellerna vilket gör att en nervimpuls kan fortplanta sig snabbare. Efter att denna artikel publicerats skrev 152 familjer och berättade om sin upplevelse av autism. Cirka 52 procent menade att de autistiska symtomen började efter mpr-vaccinet, 33 procent efter dtp-vaccinet, 8 procent berättade att det fanns en koppling till vaccinering men de kunde inte säga vilken, och 7 procent sade att de inte märkt något samband med vaccinering.

Men för att återgå till Wakefields fynd så har en nyligen publicerad studie av forskare vid UC Davis MIND Institute, visat att Andrew Wakefield hade rätt vad gäller samband mellan neuropsykiatriska tillstånd, som autism, och gastrointestinala problem (GI). Studien heter ”Gastrointestinala problem hos barn med autism, försenad utveckling eller typisk utveckling” och publicerades i Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders.

I studien upptäcktes det att barn med autism hade förstoppning, diarré och en känslighet för olika livsmedel sex till åtta gånger oftare än hos barn som utvecklades normalt. Symtomen var relaterade till beteendeproblem, inklusive socialt tillbakadragande, irritabilitet och repetitivt beteende. Undersökningen som jämför GI-problem hos barn med autism, utvecklingsförsening och typisk (normal) utveckling är den hittills största som gjorts, med en stor etnisk spridning.

Föräldrar till barn med autism har länge sagt att deras barn har kraftiga GI-problem men lite anses känt om vad som orsakar vilket. GI-problem kan skapa beteendeproblem  och dessa beteendeproblem kan skapa eller förvärra GI-problem. Forskarna tog inte upp varför barnen med autism och utvecklingsförsening upplevt mer GI-problem . De noterade att deras resultat tyder på att ämnet förtjänar ytterligare utredning (11).


1. Pediatric MMR Vaccination Safety – Mark R. Geier, MD, PhD; David A Geier


3. Polio Surge In Nigeria After Vaccine Virus Mutates – Maria Cheng

4. Long-term circulation of vaccine-derived poliovirus that causes paralytic disease – J Virol. 2002 Jul;76(13):6791-9

5. U.S. health officials find potentially vaccine-resistant whopping cough – Vaccine News Daily

6. Concerns Raised Over Whopping Cough Vaccin’s Potency – ABC News

7.  Mumps Outbreak in Orthodox Jewish Communities in the United States – NEJM

8. Elevated levels of measles antibodies in children with autism – Pediatr Neurol. 2003 Apr;28(4):292-4

9. Some aspects about the clinical and pathogenetic characteristics of the presumed persistent measles infections: SSPE and MINE – Journal of Pediatric Neurology, Vol. 2, No. 3, July-Sept, 2004, pp. 121-124

10. A major subset of autism  – AnnAls of CliniCAl PsyChiAtry 2009;21(3):148-161 

11. Children who have autism far more likely to have tummy troubles – ScienceDaily

Läs mer

Link found between measles virus and gut abnormalities in children with developmental disorder – Journal of Clinical Pathology

Regressive behavioral disorder diagnosis – Wakefields patent US6534259 B1

Testimony before congressional oversight commitee on autism and immunisation – John J. O´Leary

The MMR question – Correnspondence The Lancet

New research links measles, autistic gut disorders – Autism research review international

Fourteen studies 

We support Dr. Andrew Wakefield

New Published Study Verifies Andrew Wakefield´s Research on Autism – Again (MMR Vaccine Causes Autism)

”That Paper” By Andrew Wakefield

The history of MMR´s safety

The following peer-reviewed papers support the findings of the original work by Wakefield and colleagues at the Royal Free Hospital in the UK


Fler exempel på vaccinationer som kan sprida smitta

A case of yellow fever vaccine-associated disease – The New Zealand Medical Journal

Rotavirus vaccines: viral shedding and risk for transmission – The Lancet

Chickenpox The Disease & The Vaccine Fact Sheet – NVIC


Article about the Salk polio vaccine tragedy

I have been following the discussion about vaccines for a while now, if you have a chance to watch Ty Bollingers videos “The truth about vaccines” I urge you to do it – really important information!
One of the (many) things they talked about was the polio vaccine – here’s an article about that…

History is a powerful thing. If you accurately tell the story of an event that occurred, you get one picture, one understanding of it. Leave one tiny little detail out, however, and the whole picture changes. You can get thousands of details right, but get one wrong, or simply omit telling it, and an historical event can become so distorted that it becomes a lie. Take the story of the Salk inactivated polio vaccine (IPV). During the first half of the 1950s, Jonas Salk, MD developed the first injectable vaccine against polio containing inactivated, or “killed”, strains of the poliovirus.

As a dead, rather than live, virus vaccine, Dr. Salk’s IPV supposedly carried no risk of giving recipients “vaccine-associated polio paralysis.”1 According to the World Health Organization (WHO), “IPV is produced from wild-type poliovirus strains of each serotype that have been inactivated (killed) with formalin.”2

Here’s that little detail, though. The poliovirus that Dr. Salk killed with formalin, or formaldehyde, were not always killed; they sometimes only appeared to be killed.

Live poliovirus, which was put in an injectable vaccine, would appear to be inactivated right after it was made, but sometimes it would ‘resurrect’ in the vial… In essence, the formaldehyde did not kill off all the polioviruses in these vaccines, which led to live polio viruses being injected. As a result, more people developed paralysis from the vaccine in 1955 than would have developed it from a wild, normal natural poliovirus.3


Field trials for the Salk vaccine were conducted on more than 1,800,000 children in the United States in 1954.4 Sponsored by the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis (NFIP), now known as the March of Dimes, “623,972 schoolchildren were injected with vaccine or placebo, and more than a million others participated as ‘observed’ controls.’5

On April 12, 1955, Thomas Francis Jr., MD, director of the Poliomyelitis Vaccine Evaluation Center at the University of Michigan School of Public Health, announced to the world that the Salk vaccine was “safe, effective, and potent,”—that it was “up to 90%” effective in preventing paralytic polio. Dr. Francis had been one of Dr. Salk’s professors at the University of Michigan’s School of Public Health Department of Epidemiology where Salk did his postgraduate training.4

During mid-April of 1955, about 400,000 people—mostly schoolchildren—in the U.S. were vaccinated with the Salk vaccine manufactured by Cutter Laboratories.6 It turns out that more than 200,000 of these children, living in five western and midwestern states (Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada and New Mexico7), were injected with vaccines “in which the process of inactivating the live virus proved to be defective.” The Cutter-produced vaccines ended up causing 40,000 cases of polio. It severely paralyzed 200 children and killed 10.8

The first of these cases to be reported was that of a young girl named Susan Pierce, who had received the vaccine on April 18, 1955.7

Five days later, she developed fever and neck stiffness. Six days later, her left arm was paralyzed. Seven days later, she was placed in an iron lung, and nine days later, she was dead.7

In his book The Cutter Incident: How America’s First Polio Vaccine Led to the Growing Vaccine Crisis, Paul Offit, MD writes, “Seventy-five percent of Cutter’s victims were paralyzed for the rest of their lives.” A team led by epidemiologisit Alexander Langmuir of the Communicable Diseases Center (now the CDC) in Atlanta, GA determined that “the disease caused by Cutter’s vaccine was worse than the disease caused by natural polio virus,” adds Dr. Offit.7

Children given Cutter’s vaccine were more likely to be paralyzed in their arms, more likely to suffer severe and permanent paralysis, more likely to require breathing assistance in iron lungs, and more likely to die than children naturally infected with polio.7

The so-called “Cutter Incident” led to the recall of the Cutter vaccine and the eventual replacement of the Salk IPV with the attenuated (weakened) live oral polio vaccine (OPV) developed by Albert Sabin, MD and introduced in 1963. (A modified inactivated Salk vaccine was re-introduced in the 1990s after the only cases of polio occurring in the U.S. were vaccine strain polio cases because live OPV can cause vaccine strain polio in the recipient or a close contact of a recently vaccinated person shedding live vaccine strain polio virus in body fluids.)8

But the fact that some improperly inactivated lots of the original polio vaccine paralyzed and killed American children was concealed from the public for a long time.

In their book Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and The Forgotten History, Suzanne Humphries, MD and Roman Bystrianyk write, “You may be wondering how this information was concealed from the public for nearly fifty years. Congressman Percy Priest ordered and chaired a full investigation of the vaccine controversy.”)9 According to them, Congressman Priest, who represented the 6th District of Tennessee, admitted in 1956 that,

… in the previous year (1955) many responsible persons had felt that the public should be spared the ordeal of ‘knowledge about controversy.’ If word ever got out that the Public Health Service had actually done something damaging to the health of the American people, the consequences would b terrible… We felt that no lasting good could come to science or the public if the Public Health Services were discredited.”9

Two key points to note here. First, the problem with the Cutter-produced vaccine should have come as a surprise to the scientists and public health officials who were familiar with the development of the Salk IPV. According to Dr. Humphries and Bystrianyk:

The Salk invention was an injectable, supposedly formaldehyde-inactivated version of poliovirus vaccine. There were serious problems with the viral inactivation process that were known by insiders from the outset of the vaccine’s development.9

Unfortunately, whenever scientists involved in the vaccine’s development raised concerns that poliovirus had not been fully killed, they were “rapidly subdued.”9

As a result of ignoring the warnings by highly qualified scientists who repeatedly and publicly explained why and how the inactivation process was flawed from the beginning, the vaccine virus needlessly infected, paralyzed, and killed children and their household contacts.9

Secondly, Cutter Laboratories was not the only manufacturer of the the Salk IPV. Wyeth Laboratories also produced a defective Salk vaccine that caused paralysis. Other pharmaceutical companies are believed to have done so, as well. But only Cutter’s vaccine was recalled. This means that, potentially, tens of millions of doses of improperly inactivated “live” Salk vaccine were sold and injected into children in the U.S. and around the world until the “inactivated” Salk vaccine was replaced by the live oral Sabin vaccine in the early-1960s.

This may help explain, at least partially, why the cases of polio in the U.S. increased by 50% from 1957 to 1958, and by 80% between 1958 and 1959.10 According to Bernard Greenberg, PhD, head of the Department of Biostatistics at the University of North Carolina School of Public Health:

In five New England states cases of polio roughly doubled after polio vaccine was introduced. Nevertheless in the midst of the polio panic of the 1950s, with pressure to find a magic bullet, statistics were manipulated by health authorities to give the quite the opposite impression.10

Keep in mind that these dramatic increases in polio following the introduction of the Salk IPV occurred shortly after the U.S. government had already significantly relaxed its guidelines for diagnosing polio. In 1954, the government redefined polio. I wrote about this other little detail of history that has been widely overlooked in my article “Polio Wasn’t Vanquished, It Was Redefined.”11 Dr. Greenberg explained this classic example of government sleight of hand…

In order to qualify for classification as paralytic poliomyelitis, the patient had to exhibit paralytic symptoms for at least 60 days after the onset of the disease. Prior to 1954, the patient had to exhibit paralytic symptoms for only 24 hours. Laboratory confirmation and the presence of residual paralysis were not required. After 1954, residual paralysis was determined 10 to 20 days and again 50 to 70 days after the onset of the disease. This change in definition meant that in 1955 we started reporting a new disease, namely, paralytic poliomyelitis with a longer lasting paralysis.12

We can only imagine how much worse the official number of polio cases would have been during the second half of the 1950s had the same diagnosis standard continued to be followed, rather than arbitrarily changed in midstream. By any measure, the early Salk polio vaccine campaigns cannot be termed an unqualified “success.” Yet, since the story has been so repeatedly, utterly inaccurately told, our understanding of the history of the polio vaccine “miracle” is that it is one of the greatest scientific achievements of all time. And, as we have seen with the Sabin live oral polio vaccine that continues to cause vaccine strain polio cases around the world, there are big questions about how high the price has been—and will continue to be—for using that polio vaccine as well.

History is indeed a powerful thing. If you teach it wrong for more than half a century, it is hard to unteach, because a particular version of a story can become so ingrained in the public’s collective memory that few can accept that what we’ve come to believe to be an unquestioned scientific truth is, in fact, a myth.

And if that sacred cow is an illusion, then what else may we have gotten wrong along the way? Suddenly, mainstream vaccine science doesn’t feel so certain, so… scientific.


1 Polio Global Eradication Initiative. Inactivated polio vaccine (IPV).
2 World Health Organization. Inactivated polio vaccine (IPV).
3 Mercola J. The Forgotten History of Vaccinations You Need to Be Aware Of. Jan. 18, 2015.
4 University of Michigan School of Public Health. 1955 Polio Vaccine Trial Announcement.
5 Meldrum M. “A calculated risk”: the Salk polio vaccine field trials of 1954BMJ Oct. 31, 1998; 317(7167): 1233–1236.
6 Nathanson N, Langmuir AD. The Cutter Incident: Poliomyelitis Following Formaldehyde-Inactivated Poliovirus Vaccination in the United States During the Spring of 1955Am J Epidemiol Mar. 12, 1963.
7 Offit P. The Cutter Incident: How America’s First Polio Vaccine Led to the Growing Vaccine Crisis. 2005, p 84.
8 Fitzpatrick M. The Cutter Incident: How America’s First Polio Vaccine Led to the Growing Vaccine CrisisJ R Soc Med March 2006; 99(3): 156.
9 Humphries S, Bystrianyk R. Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and The Forgotten History. July 27, 2013.
10 Chaitow L. Vaccination and Immunisation: Dangers, Delusions and Alternatives. 1998, p. 55.
11 Cáceres M. Polio Wasn’t Vanquished, It Was RedefinedThe Vaccine Reaction July 9, 2015.
12 James W. Immunization The Reality Behind the Myth. 1995, p. 36.

Perhaps the most egregious example of clever sleight of hand (… not to mention the outright, blatant rewriting of history) on the part of public health officials in the United States occurred in 1954 when the U.S. government changed the diagnostic criteria for polio.1 It was the year that medical researcher and virologist Jonas Salk produced his inactivated injectable polio vaccine ((IPV). The vaccine was licensed in 1955 and began to be used to inoculate millions of children against polio.

The Salk vaccine has been widely hailed as the vanquisher of polio, and it is commonly used as the shining example of how vaccines are the miracle drugs for combating infectious diseases… and now even against diseases that are not infectious. Pick any disease, illness or disorder you want. You got cancer, cholera, peanut allergies, stress, obesity… we’ll develop a vaccine for it.

What the apologists for the Salk vaccine regurgitate from a common script (… some might say scripture) is that before the vaccine was introduced and tested on one million children—the so-called “Polio Pioneers”—in 19542 more than 50,000 people in the U.S. were contracting polio each year, and that by the end of the 1950s the numbers were down to less than 10,000.3 Ergo, the Salk vaccine saved the U.S. from polio. Open and shut case.

Hmm, not so fast.

What is conveniently omitted from this heroic story is that the reason the number of polio cases in the U.S. dropped so precipitously following the mass introduction of the Salk vaccine in 1955 was not medical, but rather administrative. Yes it’s true, in 1952 there were 52,879 reported cases of polio in the U.S. And yes, in 1955 the number went down to 28,985, and by 1959 it had dropped to 8,425.3But first of all, it’s important to note that the numbers were already declining significantly prior to the initial use of the Salk vaccine. In 1953, there were 35,592 cases of polio in the U.S.3 So there were other things going on in the U.S. at the time totally unrelated to the Salk vaccine.

More importantly, though, in 1954 the U.S. government simply redefined polio. Yes, the government can do that. It does this kind of stuff occasionally in order to help it meet its public policy objectives when it is unable to actually achieve them. How often have you heard of Congress playing smoke and mirrors, gimmicks with the national budget deficit, or on the issue of the unemployment rate? Exactly.

When it comes to government and public policy, the truth is seldom absolute. That’s just the nature of the beast.

According to Dr. Bernard Greenberg, head of the Department of Biostatistics of the University of North Carolina School of Public Health:

In order to qualify for classification as paralytic poliomyelitis, the patient had to exhibit paralytic symptoms for at least 60 days after the onset of the disease. Prior to 1954, the patient had to exhibit paralytic symptoms for only 24 hours. Laboratory confirmation and the presence of residual paralysis were not required. After 1954, residual paralysis was determined 10 to 20 days and again 50 to 70 days after the onset of the disease. This change in definition meant that in 1955 we started reporting a new disease, namely, paralytic poliomyelitis with a longer lasting paralysis.1

As I wrote in my piece “The Salk ‘Miracle’ Myth“…

Under the new definition of polio, thousands of cases which would have previously been counted as polio would no longer be counted as polio. The change in the definition laid the groundwork for creating the impression that the Salk vaccine was effective.4

So as radio broadcaster Paul Harvey used to say for decades at the close of each of his charming commentaries, “And now you know… the rest of the story.”


1 James W. Immunization The Reality Behind the Myth. p. 36.
2 About Jonas Salk. The Salk Institute for Biological Studies N.d.
3 The College of Physicians of Philadelphia. U.S. Polio Cases 1952-1962. The History of Vaccines.
4 Cáceres M. The Salk ‘Miracle’ MythThe Vaccine Reaction June 2, 2015.

The World Health Organization (WHO) has confirmed two cases of vaccine-derived poliovirus type 1 (cVDPV1) in the Ukraine. The cases involved a four-year old child and a 10-month old child in the Zakarpatskaya region of southwestern Ukraine. The onset of paralysis occurred on June 30 and July 7, 2015.1 According to the WHO, the emergence of cVDPV1 was due to “inadequate vaccination coverage” in the Ukraine, as “only 50% of children [in the country] were fully immunized against polio and other vaccine-preventable diseases.”1

Interestingly, the cVDPV1, which is a rare, mutated form of the poliovirus, is caused by the oral polio vaccine itself. A recent article in The Washington Post by Ariana Eunjung Cha notes:

Oral polio vaccines contain a weakened form of the virus that activates an immune response in the body so that it builds up antibodies to protect itself. But it takes some time for this to happen, and meanwhile the virus replicates in the intestines and can be excreted by the person immunized and can spread to others in the community.2

So the take-away point here—or at least the one that logically might elicit the most concern—should be the fact that people vaccinated against the virus can actually excrete (or “shed”) the virus and infect other people. Of course, this is counter-intuitive, because that would mean that vaccinating people to prevent infectious diseases from spreading might actually have the opposite effect.

Sometimes the weakened vaccine strain live virus can mutate and regain virulence, including neurovirulence, which significantly raises risks of serious complications from vaccine strain virus infection. Healthy persons can suffer complications from vaccine strain viral infection but children and adults with immunodeficiency are more likely to develop complications after they receive live virus vaccines or come in close contact with a person who is shedding vaccine strain live virus.3

Just like people with viral infections can shed and transmit wild-type virus, people given live virus vaccines can shed and transmit vaccine strain live attenuated virus. Like wild-type virus, vaccine strain live virus can be shed in body fluids, such as saliva, nasal and throat secretions, breastmilk, urine and blood, stool, and skin lesions. Shedding after vaccination with live virus vaccines may continue for days, weeks or months, depending upon the vaccine and the health or other individual host factors of the vaccinated person.4

Now, there’s your newsworthy story.

Instead, the story is seemingly being manipulated in a way that attributes the paralysis of the two children, not on the vaccine which led to the cVDPV1, but to the idea that in under-vaccinated populations “the vaccine-virus can circulate for long time, 12 months or longer, and genetically change into a more virulent form that can paralyze.”2  This makes it easier for the WHO and other health authorities to make their case for increasingly higher levels of vaccination. The WHO stresses that the “emergence of cVDPV strains underscores the importance of maintaining high levels of routine vaccination coverage.”1

The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) has joined the WHO in calling for parents in the Ukraine to vaccinate following the confirmed polio outbreak.5  Remember now, we’re talking about twochildren. Two. An article by the United Nations News Centre references a press release by UNICEF…

‘The only effective way to protect children from polio is vaccination,’ stressed UNICEF’s representative in Ukraine, Giovanna Barberis, in a press release. ‘The available vaccines supplied by UNICEF should be used as soon as possible to ensure children are protected from polio in Ukraine.’5

The world’s major media sources are taking their cues directly from the WHO without even bothering to ask the painfully obvious question, “Isn’t it a serious problem when you have vaccines causing viruses to mutate and become more dangerous than the original viruses they were designed to protect against?” The second paragraph of the Reuters story by Tom Miles, for example, reads, “The WHO said Ukraine had been at particular risk of an outbreak because of inadequate vaccination coverage. In 2014, only 50 percent of children were fully immunized against polio and other preventable diseases, it said.”6

The second paragraph of the Associated Press (AP) story reads, “Health officials have warned for years that Ukraine was at risk of a polio epidemic because of low vaccination rates. The supply of vaccine has been spotty because of corruption and inefficiency, and many parents resist vaccinating their children because of fears about the procedure.” Another version goes, “Health officials had warned Ukraine was at high risk of a polio outbreak due to its low vaccination rates; only half of children were immunized against diseases like polio last year.”

So naturally many major newspapers simply reprint this and disseminate it to their audiences, stamping the piece with their own unique headline. There’s the Seattle Post-Intelligencer’s “Ukraine: sufficient vaccine coming to block polio outbreak.”7  There’s the Minneapolis Star Tribune’s “World Health Organization: 2 polio cases found in Ukraine, caused by mutated virus in vaccine.”8

Then there are those publications like Forbes that actually go to the trouble of writing their own story, using the material provided by the WHO and the AP. They not only repeat the party line within their article, but actually feature it in their headline: “Polio Outbreak In Ukraine Is Grim Reminder Of Need For Continued Vigilance.”9

Predictably, the second paragraph reads:

The outbreak in Ukraine arose from vaccinations in country, World Health Organization spokesman Oliver Rosenbauer explained by email, ‘This strain arose in Ukraine, due to significant vaccination coverage gaps in the country. As many as 50% of children are under- or unimmunized, so there are many susceptible children, and this increases the risk of polio re-emerging or being re-introduced. This further underscores the danger of polio until it is eradicated completely. The best thing countries can do to protect themselves is to maintain high vaccination coverage.’9

To his credit, Donald G. McNeil Jr. of The New York Times started his piece “Polio Paralyzes 2 Children in West Ukraine Outbreak” with a more substantive focus. The third and fourth paragraph go as follows:

The two children, an infant and a 4-year-old, were not paralyzed by the “wild-type virus” that is now known to be circulating only in Pakistan and Afghanistan, but by a strain derived from the oral polio vaccine itself.10

The oral vaccine contains three strains of weakened live virus, and very occasionally—the WHO estimates it as once in a million vaccinations—one mutates to become more virulent. Then, like wild virus, it can be shed in feces and spread to others in sewage.10

Ironically, despite the WHO’s confirmation, it’s not even clear yet that the two cases in the Ukraine are polio. A Russia Today (RT) report cites local authorities in the country as denying a “definitive diagnosis” of polio. According to RT:

[The polio diagnosis] ‘was not confirmed’ by medical trials in Kiev and Moscow. Regional officials told Ukrainian media the symptoms only ‘resembled’ polio, but it could in fact be acute flaccid paralysis (AFP), recorded in the region up to five times on a yearly basis.

Thus, it appears the WHO is both emphasizing the wrong point and may be jumping the gun a bit on this story. Meanwhile, the corporate media follows along passively.


1  World Health Organization. Circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus – Ukraine. WHO Sept. 1, 2015.
2  Cha AE. Outbreak of rare, mutated poliovirus that originated from vaccine in Ukraine leaves two children paralyzedThe Washington Post Sept. 2, 2015.
3  Fisher BL. The Emerging Risks of Live Virus & Virus Vectored Vaccines: Vaccine Strain Virus Infection, Shedding & Transmission (p. 12-13). National Vaccine Information Center November 2014.
4  Fisher BL. The Emerging Risks of Live Virus & Virus Vectored Vaccines: Vaccine Strain Virus Infection, Shedding & Transmission (p. 13). National Vaccine Information Center November 2014.
5  Ukraine: UN agencies call for urgent action to stop spread of polio virusUnited Nations News Centre Sept. 4, 2015.
6  Miles T. Ukraine outbreak brings polio back to Europe, WHO saysReuters Sept. 2, 2015.
7  APUkraine: sufficient vaccine coming to block polio outbreakSeattle Post-Intelligencer Sept. 3, 2015.
8  APWorld Health Organization: 2 polio cases found in Ukraine, caused by mutated virus in vaccineMinneapolis Star Tribune Sept. 2, 2015.
9  Thorpe D. Polio Outbreak In Ukraine Is Grim Reminder Of Need For Continued VigilanceForbes Sept. 4, 2015.
10  McNeil DG. Polio Paralyzes 2 Children in West Ukraine OutbreakThe New York Times Sept. 2, 2015.


Artikel av Margareta Lundström: DN sprider medicinmyter som Big Pharma vill att du ska gå på

Amina Manzoor skrev en artikel åt DN – “Nio medicinska myter du inte ska gå på”, jag kommer tyvärr inte åt artikeln, man måste betala för att komma åt den, men det finns en massa fel i artikeln, och det bemöttes av Margareta Lundström, den artikeln kan jag dela i alla fall, så man kan förstå vad AM har gjort för tankevurpor (förmodligen väldigt medvetna såna)…

DEBATT. Reaktionerna på Amina Manzoors artikel ”Nio medicinska myter du inte skall gå på” fortsätter att komma in efter semesterns slut.  Skribenten Margareta Lundström är en raden. Hon skickade ett brev till DN:s chefred Peter Wolodarski om DN i allmänhet och Manzoors artikel i synnerhet. NewsVoice publicerar brevet i debattartikelformat. 

Text och foto: Margareta Lundström | Originaladressen för DN:s artikel: ”Nio medicinska myter du inte ska gå på” | Samma artikel på Web Archive

Margareta LundströmI artikeln om nio påstådda medicinska myter pådyvlade Manzoor läsarna det som hon ansåg vara vanföreställningar, vilka hon sedan resolut tillbakavisade som myter. Texten är så enfaldig att jag tror att den enklaste veckotidning skulle ha hållit sig för god att publicera ett den, men Manzoor är säkert inte enfaldig. Hon vet vad hon gör.

Hon hade ett uppdrag för Läkemedelsindustrin på den förment neutrala nättidningen LäkemedelsVärlden och hon fullföljer tydligen det uppdraget på DN. Manzoor anställning på DN var en del av, men inte hela anledningen till att jag sade upp min prenumeration.

Artikeln är gratisreklam för en korrupt mångmiljardindustri och pretentiöst placerad under rubriken ”Vetenskap”.

Tyvärr är artikeln förenlig med DN:s förvandling till ett propagandaorgan för politiska och ekonomiska intressen. Då krävs det både desinformation och undanhållande av information.

Men underskatta inte läsarnas förståndsgåvor eller vår möjlighet att skaffa oss information på annat håll. Bli inte förvånade över att vi överger er.

Kopplingen vaccin och autism

Amina Manzoor påstår att hon vet att kombinationsvaccinet mot mässling, påssjuka och röda hund inte orsakar autism och att vår villfarelse om detta samband kan skyllas på den ”forskningsfuskande britten Andrew Wakefield”.

Amina Manzoor: Nio medicinska myter, DN

Som referenser anger Manzoor sin kollega på tidningen, Karin Bojs. Karin Bojs källa i sin tur tycks vara Rupert Murdochs tabloidpress. Så här skriver Karin Bojs 2011:

“Han (Wakefield) har ljugit, plågat barn, skrämt upp föräldrar, kanske bidragit till att ovaccinerade barn dör av mässling och själv tjänat miljoner.”

För att ytterligare stärka sitt påståenderefererar Manzoor till vaccinindustrins och medias absoluta favoritstudie som alltid framhålls som bevis för att samband mellan vaccin och autism saknas. En studie som även Karin Bojs helt okritiskt slukat med hull och hår.

Studien har beslagits med att presentera motsägelsefulla fakta och med att utesluta viktiga data. Manzoor underlåter att berätta att ansvarig för studien är bland andra den famöse dr Poul Thorsen. Thorsen är förvunnen med forskningspengar och efterlyst av polis.

Tre övriga i forskningsteamet är Mads Melbye MD, Anders Hviid, MSc och Jan Wohlfahrt M. Sc. , samtliga anställda på Statens Seruminstitut i Danmark och involverade i tillverkning och distribution av vaccin. I samma team ingick också Diana Schendel, Ph.D, som vid tiden för studien var anställd av Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, (CDC). Studien finansierades av CDC, som har ett ekonomiskt intresse av att öka användning av MPR-vaccin.

CDC, köper vaccinet från Merck och säljer det vidare till de enskilda delstaternas hälsomyndigheter. På samma sätt är vårt statliga Läkemedelsverk finansiellt beroende av läkemedelsindustrin.

Nyligen har 12 av de av media och myndigheter mest citerade studierna som fritar vaccinet från att orsaka autism granskats. Granskningen har gjorts av Brian Hooker, PhD, PE för Alliance for Natural Health (ANH-USA) De visar efter granskning att de inte bevisar någonting. Samtliga är finansierade av dem som har ett finansiellt intresse av ett resultat som avvisar samband.

Andrew Wakefield

Dr Andrew Wakefield är en högt meriterad gastroenterologist med många vetenskapliga studier bakom sig varav tre har utförts tillsammans med svenska forskare. Professor Anders Ekbom på Karolinska var en av dem som ingick i samma forskningsteam som Wakefield.

Studier av dr Wakefield och studier som stöder hans forskning

Dr Wakefield spåddes en lysande akademisk framtid. Men han blev ett hot mot en mångmiljardindustri genom att vid en liten fallstudie uppmärksamma ett tänkbart samband mellan tarmproblem, autism och ett vaccin. Men då slog läkemedelsindustrin och dess hantlangare media till.

NewsVoice dokumentärfilm om Andrew Wakefield (YouTube)

DN underlåter att berätta för läsarna att denne läkare som blivit fråntagen sin legitimation, fått löpa gatlopp i pressen och tvingats flytta från sitt hemland England, nu reser världen runt och hyllas som en hjälte. När han föreläser får han stående ovationer Hans samproducerade film VAXXED from Cover up to Catastrophe, drar som en prärieeld med fulla hus över USA. Kan streamas på nätet inom kort.

William ThompsonDN underlåter att delge läsarna att en högt uppsatt forskare på CDC dr William Thompson 2014 offentligt erkände att både Merck och CDC under 15 år känt till och dolt det faktum att vaccin mot mässling, påssjuka och röda hund orsakar autism framför allt hos afroamerikanska pojkar.

DN undanhåller oss också att ett antal av före detta anställda inom läkemedel-/vaccinsindustrin gått ut offentligt och tagit avstånd från vaccinindustrins verksamhet och deklarerar att de inte vaccinerar sina barn.

Vi vaccineras från vaggan till graven, ändå anser DN att frågor som detta inte är av allmänintresse och värda att ta upp.

Vaccin räddar liv – miljoner liv enligt Manzoor! Men statistiken och historien säger något helt annat om man orkar ta reda på det. Det verkar vara väldigt svårt för DN:s vetenskapsjournalister att ta reda på fakta själva. Det är naturligtvis enklare att upprepa vad andra säger och referera till den av den medicinindustriella kartellen styrda WHO.

Vacciner är säkra påstår Manzoor. Hur vet hon det? Säkerheten har ju aldrig har prövats? Vaccinindustrin medger själv att det finns risker med vaccin och var och en av oss kan ju läsa på vaccinets bipacksedel.

Vacciner är effektiva påstår hon. Hur förklarar hon återkommande mässlings- eller påssjukautbrott hos fullt vaccinerade personer?

Men faktum är att vi har en autismepidemi som och om trenden fortsätter då beräknas att vartannat barn är autistiskt i USA år 2025 . Faktum är också att amerikanska barn har fått 69 vaccinationsdoser innan det fyllt 18 år. Faktum är också att amerikanska barn är de mest drabbade av kroniska sjukdomar i världen. Faktum är också att spädbarnsdödligheten ligger på plats i USA jämfört med motsvarande utvecklade länder. Sverige ligger på andra plats efter Singapore. Tillfällighet? Samband? Har Manzoor funderat över detta?


Manzoor påstår också att det inte är insektsmedel som orsakar microcefali i Brasilien och att det råder vetenskaplig konsensus om att orsaken är zikaviruset.

När media använder begreppet vetenskaplig konsensus är det ett sätt att manipulera oss. Ingen vill ju göra sig dum och gå emot vetenskaplig konsensus. Så får man slut på diskussionen och kan driva sin tes utan inblandning av stolliga konspirationsteoretiker, som kanske skulle påstå att det är en ”man made” sjukdom.

Men hur förklarar den vetenskapliga konsensus att det inträffar 25 000 fall av microcefali årligen i USA? Eller att i epicentrum för tragedin i Brasilien hittar man bara zikavirus hos 10 % av de drabbade? Eller alla barn som föds med normala hjärnor av mödrar som bär på antikroppar mot zikaviruset?


Manzoor påstår också att det inte finns några kända risker för Aspartam.

NewsVoice svar sukralos DNFDA har vägrat godkänna Aspartam vid fyra ansökningstillfällen. Redan 1975 konstaterades att Asparatam var ett nervgift. Alla tänkbara knep togs till för att genomdriva ett godkännande. Oresonabla medlemmar i den granskande kommitteen byttes ut. Tillverkaren presenterade en studie (The Bresslel Report) som visade sig vara så manipulerad att det faktiskt ledde till åtal.

Men trägen vinner. När Ronald Reagan blev president var en av hans allierade miljardären Donald Rumpsfeld, som var VD för GD Searle Company som tillverkar Aspartam.

Det var så Aspartam blev ofarligt och utgör nu en jätteindustri tillsammans med tillverkare av liknande konstgjorda sötningsmedel.

”Man faller inte ner död efter en lightläsk, men det är det långsiktiga skadorna som är allvarliga”, säger professor emeritus Göran Petersson, Miljö Kemi på Chalmers.

Upptäckaren av en huskur så betecknar Manzoor Linus Pauling, tvåfaldig nobelpristagare. Ett rekord i understatement. Manzoor följer en tradition hos det medicinindustriella komplexet att förringa Linus Pauling och hans forskning på C-vitaminet.

Pauling var biokemist och han skulle enligt det medicinska skrået inte blanda sig i deras monopol med dess lönande kontakter med läkemedelsindustrin.

Dr Paulings huskur används i tysthet vid cancerbehandling för att förstärka effekten av cytostatika.

Kardiologen Thomas E. Levy var i Stockholm i våras och föreläste om C-vitaminets stora betydelse för hjärt- och kärlhälsa? Han är inte ensam om att föra Linus Paulings arv vidare. Var var då DN: medicinjournalist?

Manzoor har synpunkter på cancer och kost. Det är rätt som Manzoor skriver, att cancer är en mycket komplex sjukdom och har många orsaker. Just därför tycker jag att Manzoor skall avstå från att ta upp detta ångestladdade ämne i detta ytliga sammanhang.

Manzoor är proaktiv och bemötte redan i artikeln konspirationsteoretiker. Om jag har förmågan att se sammanhang utnyttja tidigare erfarenheter och se bakom det som synes ske. Kunna göra analogier och jämförelser och ställa frågan, vem tjänar? Då är jag stolt över att kallas konspirationsteoretiker.

Jag betraktar mig också som dissident i förhållande till DN:s världsbild.

Manzoor försvar för läkemedelsindustrin är generande naivt. En industri vars produkter är orsak till den tredje vanligaste dödsorsaken.

Så här skriver professor Peter C. Gøtzsche, chef för det oberoende Chochrane Institutet i Köpenhamn och författare till boken Dödliga mediciner och organiserad brottslighet, hur läkemedelsindustrin har korrumperat sjuk-och hälsovården. 

Hans bok fick första pris i kategorin ”Medicinska grundvalar” av British Medical Association Book Awards 2014.

Dödliga mediciner och organiserad brottslighet av Peter C Gøtzsche”År 2012 fick jag veta att de tio största läkemedelsföretagen i världen begår upprepade och allvarliga brott till en sådan grad att de uppfyller kriterierna för organiserad brottslighet enligt amerikansk lag. Jag hittade också hur stora konsekvenserna av dessa brott är. Detta innebär kolossala stölder av offentliga medel och de bidrar i hög grad till att våra läkemedel är den tredje vanligaste dödsorsaken efter hjärtsjukdomar och cancer.”

Dr Richard Horton som är chefredaktör för en av världens mest erkända medicinska tidskrifter, the Lancet, varnar för att hälften av alla medicinska studier baseras på pseudovetenskap. Konsekvensen blir att många vacciner och läkemedel är exempel på kvacksalveri.

Marcia Angell f.d., chefredaktör för New England Journal of Medicine”: skriver

Marcia Angell - Wikimedia“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of the New England Journal of Medicine”

Why Most Published Research Findings are False” är det mest nedladdade dokument genom tiderna på PLoS, Public Library of Medicines peer-reviewed, open access-tidskriftJohn P. A Ioannidis förklarar i detalj hur:

”Det kan bevisas att de flesta påstådda forskningsresultaten är falska.” Och att ”för många av dagens vetenskapliga områden och påstådda forskningsresultat handlar det helt enkelt oftast om att de exakt speglar rådande förställningar.”

Jag tycker i grunden att papperstidningen [DN] är en fantastisk produkt.

Jag har en enorm respekt för ärlig och god journalistik. Det går inte att nog betona vilken viktig uppgift journalistiken har – för att granska makten för att driva en debatt och förklara komplicerade sammanhang. Därför är det så sorgligt när man förfelar sitt uppdrag, stryper debatten och går maktens ärenden.

Dagligen upplever jag hur mainstream media förtiger viktiga nyheter och information och vi matas vi med nonsens och propaganda. 

Saknar jag DN? Ja! Jag saknar Richard Swartz och Nathan Shachar med sin bildning djup och bredd och respekt för läsarna. Jag saknar Bard och jag saknar korsorden och Kulturbilagan.

Text: Margareta Lundström



June 2018
« Apr