Subscriptions, Current Issue & Back Issues

Current Issue | Annual Subscriptions | Back Issues

Tag: vaccine

NaturalNews Publishes Revealing Interview with Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, Author of “Saying No to Vaccines”

(NaturalNews) Dr. Sherry Tenpenny speaks out against the dangers of vaccines in an exclusive audio interview published today on NaturalNews.com. Author of the book Saying No to Vaccines (www.SayingNoToVaccines.com), Dr. Tenpenny is a well-informed, vocal opponent of mandatory vaccination policies and a well-respected educator on health freedom and vaccine exemption strategies for concerned parents.

For the rest of the article, go here.

The First Six Pages of the Judicial Watch Special Report Examining the FDA’s HPV Vaccine Records

Judicial Watch, the US-based public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, obtained information about Gardasil from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act.    The first 6 pages of  the  Judicial Watch Special Report Gardasil VaccineExamining the FDA’s HPV Vaccine Records are posted below.

At the end of page 4 and on page 5 is evidence which shows that the HPV vaccine has led to outbreaks in warts in some people, which was denied as occurring by Dr Nikki Turner of the NZ Immunization Advisory Center.

Furthermore, at the end of page 5 and at the top of page 6 is mention that Gardasil was found to enhance disease in  recipients who already had “relevant HPV types” by 44.6 percent.   In spite of this Helen Petousis-Harris of the NZ Immunisation Advisory Center stated in a letter to The Whangarei Report: “There is no evidence that Gardasil increases the risk of precancerous lesions.” It states on the Gardasil insert in section 14: “Infected women may already have CIN 2/3 or AIS at vaccination onset and some will develop CIN 2/3 or AIS during followup, either related to a vaccine…”

Judicial Watch findings are summarized in an article entitled Controversial HPV Vaccine Causing One Death Per Month: FDA Report by Peter J Smith and the Judicial Watch document cited is in full here. On the 27th of March, when one clicked on this link,  a web page appeared which dissuaded people from accessing this information, by claiming the site could damage your computer, which is why I posted these 6 pages on this website.  However, since writing this post, the warning page has been removed. If it is up again when you look and you are willing to take a risk, click on “Ignore this warning” at the bottom right-hand-side of the red panel.  I did repeatedly and nothing adverse appears to have occurred to my computer.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

A Judicial Watch Special Report
Examining the FDA’s
HPV Vaccine Records

Detailing the Approval Process, Side-Effects, Safety Concerns and Marketing Practices of a Large-Scale Public Health Experiment

June 30, 2008

Judicial Watch, Inc.  501 School Street, SW  Suite 500 Washington, DC 20024
Tel: 202-646-5172  Fax: 202-646-5199  www.JudicialWatch.org
Judicial Watch Special Report: Examining The FDA’s HPV Vaccine Records

Page 1 of 24
Introduction

This Judicial Watch Special Report is an analysis of records obtained from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) concerning a recent vaccine called Gardasil.
Gardasil helps protect against four types of human papillomavirus (HPV). The vaccine was approved in May 2006 and was created and marketed by Merck & Company Incorporated.
The records include Merck’s patent and drug information submitted to the FDA, transcripts and briefing material from approval meetings, and reports documenting health, safety, and efficacy test results, as well as Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) documents detailing 8,864 cases of adverse effects experienced by people after receiving the Gardasil vaccine. VAERS reports show that at least eighteen people have died after receiving Gardasil.1  Many health officials believe that adverse reactions to medications are widely underreported, therefore the actual number of adverse events occurring after vaccination with Gardasil is likely to be higher.
Judicial Watch obtained these records under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552. The request, asking for documents concerning Gardasil, was originally submitted to the FDA on May 9, 2007. The FDA produced documents on May 15, 2007; September 13, 2007; February 27, 2008, and June 10, 2008.

Judicial Watch uncovered thousands of pages of material pertaining to Gardasil, which is designed to prevent cervical cancer. The controversial vaccine was fast-tracked for approval by the FDA despite concerns about Gardasil’s safety and long-term effects. The vaccine is still in the testing stages (final report due September 30, 2009), but it is already being administered to thousands of young girls and women.2  Mandatory vaccination has been opposed by the American College of Pediatrics and The New England Journal of Medicine. Legislators in 41 states and Washington, DC have introduced legislation to require, fund or educate the public about the HPV vaccine and 17 states have enacted legislation. Michigan, Texas and Virginia took steps toward mandatory vaccination for sixth grade girls; however, all three states have postponed that required mandate. 3

Judicial Watch is concerned by the facts detailed in the FDA’s adverse event
reporting associated with Gardasil. Merck has waged an aggressive lobbying campaign with state governments to mandate this HPV vaccine for young girls. Given all the questions about Gardasil, the best public health policy would be to reevaluate its safety and to prohibit its distribution to minors. In the least, governments should rethink any efforts to mandate or promote this vaccine for children.
Thomas Fitton
President
Christopher J. Farrell Tegan N. Millspaw
Director of Investigations & Research Lead Researcher & Principal Author
Judicial Watch Special Report: Examining The FDA’s HPV Vaccine Records

Page 2 of 24

Executive Summary
In May 2007, Judicial Watch submitted a request to the FDA under the Freedom of Information Act for all records concerning Merck’s new anti-HPV vaccine, Gardasil.
After Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit in October 2007 to compel record production, the FDA finally released four sets of documents, the last in June 2008. These records detail the development and expedited approval of Gardasil. The documents include patent and licensing memoranda, test reports for the vaccine, and the final briefing document on Gardasil submitted to the FDA in April 2006, one month before the vaccine was
approved. The FDA also produced 8,864 VAERS reports. Judicial Watch uncovered a transcript of Merck’s May 18, 2006, meeting with the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC), at which the vaccine received a unanimous vote of approval.
Analysis of the records shows:
• Gardasil is a prophylactic, preventative vaccine and will not treat pre-existing HPV infection. It is not a cancer vaccine or cure.
• Gardasil is marketed as a vaccine that prevents cancer, but it “ . . . has not
been evaluated for the potential to cause carcinogenicity or genotoxicity.”
• Gardasil is not 100% effective against all HPVs. It is designed to protect
against only four strains of HPV, even though there are over thirty strains
including at least fifteen that can cause cancer.
• While Gardasil is the most expensive vaccine ever to be recommended by the FDA, its long-term effectiveness is unknown and could be as brief as only two to three years.
• During testing, an aluminium-containing placebo was used. Aluminium can cause permanent cell damage and is a reactive placebo, unlike most standard saline placebos. This means that tests of Gardasil may not have given an accurate picture of safety levels.
• Although some states are considering making it mandatory for young girls to get the Gardasil vaccine, it has only been tested with one other vaccine
commonly given to children. There are ten commonly administered
adolescent vaccines.
• Gardasil is still in the testing stages, and will not be fully evaluated for safety until September 2009.  VAERS reports show that as many as eighteen people have died after receiving Gardasil.
Read more

Flashback: Homeless people die after bird flu vaccine trial in Poland

A person is given an injection: Homeless people die after bid flu vaccine trial in Poland

21 people died after being given the vaccine

The medical staff, from the northern town of Grudziadz, are being investigated over medical trials on as many as 350 homeless and poor people last year, which prosecutors say involved an untried vaccine to the highly-contagious virus.

See the full article at the link above.

Related: k1033422

US controls bird flu vaccines over bioweapon fears

Alex  talks with Rebecca Carley, M.D., author of:
– An article entitled Inoculations
– The True Weapons Of Mass Destruction Causing VIDS (Vaccine Induced Diseases)
– Epidemic Of Genocide.

Rebecca Carley,M.D. on Alex Jones Tv:Don’t Vaccinate Me Bro! 1/3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0E6IUd1NN8

Rebecca Carley,M.D. on Alex Jones Tv:Don’t Vaccinate Me Bro! 2/3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qQWcU-Pt1I

Rebecca Carley,M.D. on Alex Jones Tv:Don’t Vaccinate Me Bro! 3/3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RbYCHL8cdg

Researchers Suggest Insufficient Evidence of Efficacy of HPV Vaccine

David Gutierrez
Natural NewsGardasil Vaccine
Wednesday, March 11, 2009

There is not enough evidence to confidently state that two popular vaccines against the human papillomavirus (HPV) will reliably prevent against the development of cervical cancer, according to two articles published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

“Despite great expectations and promising results of clinical trials, we still lack sufficient evidence of an effective vaccine against cervical cancer,” wrote Charlotte J. Haug, editor of The Journal of the Norwegian Medical Association, in the first article. “With so many essential questions still unanswered, there is good reason to be cautious.”

Haug noted that Merck’s Gardasil and GlaxoSmithKlein’s Cervarix have only been studied clinically for six and a half years at the most, and have only been on the market since 2006. This means that researchers still do not know if the vaccines are effective against HPV over the long term, or what cancer-related side effects they might have. For example, protecting the body from infection with certain HPV strains might have unforeseen immunological side effects, reducing the body’s resistance to other varieties.

Due to the newness of both vaccines, it is also not yet been possible to see whether they actually reduce cervical cancer rates. Normally, it takes years of HPV infection before cancer can develop – more time than either drug has been studied.

In the second article, a pair of Harvard researchers noted that HPV vaccination is not necessarily a cost-effective way to protect against cervical cancer. Current screening methods such as Pap smears have been very effective in reducing the death rate of cervical cancer already, but such tests must continue even after receiving an HPV vaccine. Even at their best, the vaccines do not protect against all cervical cancer strains that can cause cancer; a woman who has already been exposed to one of the strains in the vaccine will get no benefit from it.

“I believe the vaccine is a great advance,” said Philip Davies of the European Cervical Cancer Association, “but we have to implement it properly to get the benefits, and that hasn’t happened.”

Flashback: Merck’s Coverup of High Levels of Mercury in Vaccines Sends Them Into the Spotlight Again

Mercola.com February 23 2005 Mercury Vaccine

A memo from Merck & Co. showed that, nearly a decade before the first public disclosure, senior executives were concerned that infants were getting an elevated dose of mercury in vaccinations containing a widely used sterilizing agent.

Around the same time this memo was being prepared, U.S. authorities were also aggressively pursuing the expansion of their vaccination schedule to include an additional five shots for children in their first six months. The danger that these shots pose lies in its deadly ingredient: thimerosal, an antibacterial compound that is composed of nearly 50 percent ethyl mercury, a neurotoxin.

What the Memo Said

The memo, which was written back in 1991, disclosed that 6-month-old children who received their shots on schedule would be receiving a mercury dose nearly 87 times higher than guidelines for the maximum daily consumption of mercury from fish. In addition, it included the following recommendation: whenever possible, particularly among use in infants and young children, vaccines with mercury should be eliminated.

The memo also stated that unlike regulators in Sweden and some other countries, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration does not share the same concern regarding thimerosal.

Merck Tries to Keep its Head Above Vioxx Lawsuits and Vaccine Claims

The Vaccine Injury Compensation Program has received over 4,200 vaccine-related complaints by parents reporting their children experienced side effects such as autism or other neurodevelopmental disorders from the mercury in vaccines.

Meanwhile, Merck has been faced with fighting off legal battles over Vioxx, the popular painkiller that has caused hundreds of lawsuits after being linked to cardiac problems and Merck covering up the risks.

Undisclosed company documents show that the drug maker was in the process of beginning a major cardiovascular study of the drug in 2002, and suddenly dropped the project just before it was set to start. The trial was scheduled to produce data by March 2004 but may have provided answers about Vioxx’s risks even earlier if patients had shown ill effects.

It was not until September 2004 that Merck put a stop to a separate study when patients in that trial experienced heart attacks and strokes at twice the rate of those receiving a placebo. At the same time, Merck withdrew Vioxx from the market.

Small Steps Made to Address the Mercury in Vaccines

In recent years thimerosal had been taken out of pediatric vaccines in what health officials described as a precautionary measure but it still remains in most doses of the flu vaccine.

Also, government officials like Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger became proactive in the vaccine dilemma in September when he signed legislation that banned vaccines containing more than traces of thimerosal from being given to both babies and pregnant woman.

Related:

Merck Canceled an Early Study of Vioxx

Interview with a whistleblower who worked for Big Pharma

Give This To Your Doctor to Sign When You Go For A Vaccination: Doctor’s Warranty of Vaccine Safety

Doctor’s Warranty of Vaccine Safety

I (Doctor’s name, degree/s)_________________________, _____ am a medical practitioner licensed to practice medicine in New Zealand. My medical speciality is ________________________.

I have a thorough understanding of the risks and benefits of all the medications that I prescribe for or administer to my patients.  In the case of (Patient’s name) ___________________________, age _________, whom I have examined, I find that certain risk factors exist that justify the recommended vaccinations. The following is a list of said risk factors and the vaccinations that will protect against them:

Risk Factor ____________________________________________

Vaccination  ___________________________________________

Risk Factor ____________________________________________

Vaccination  ___________________________________________

Risk Factor ____________________________________________

Vaccination  ___________________________________________

Risk Factor ____________________________________________

Vaccination  ___________________________________________

Risk Factor ____________________________________________

Vaccination  ___________________________________________

Risk Factor ____________________________________________

Vaccination  ___________________________________________

I am aware that vaccines typically contain many of the following:

*         Aluminium hydroxide

*         Aluminium phosphate

*         Ammonium sulfate

*         Amphotericin B

*         Animal tissues: pig blood, horse blood, rabbit brain

*         Dog kidney, monkey kidney,

*        Calcium phosphate.

*        Chick embryo, chicken egg, duck egg

*        Calf (bovine) serum

*         Betapropiolactone

*         Fetal bovine serum

*         Formaldehyde

*         Formalin

*         Gelatin

*         Glycerol

*         Human diploid cells (originating from human aborted fetal tissue)

*         Hydrolized gelatin

*         Mercury (Thimerosal which is 49.6% mercury)

*         Monosodium glutamate (MSG)

*         Neomycin

*         Neomycin sulfate

*         Phenol red indicator

*         Phenoxyethanol (antifreeze)

*         Potassium diphosphate

*         Potassium monophosphate

*         Polymyxin B

*         Polysorbate 20

*         Polysorbate 80

*         Porcine (pig) pancreatic hydrolysate of casein

*         Residual MRC5 proteins

*         Sorbitol

*         Tri(n)butylphosphate,

*         VERO cells, a continuous line of monkey kidney cells, and

*         Washed sheep red blood cells

and hereby warrant that these ingredients are safe for injection into the body of my patient.  I have thoroughly researched reports to the contrary, such as the reports that Thimerosal causes severe neurological damage, autism and Alzheimer’s disease and that formalin, which is used in the manufacture of over half of all vaccines, causes chemical damage to vaccine proteins and creates reactive chemical groups called carbonyls which can mean that the immune system overreacts once infection occurs and attacks the body in a damaging way.   Although I am aware of these reports, I do not find any of them credible.

I am aware that Dr Maurice Hilleman of Merck stated that Merck knowingly distributed millions of vials of polio vaccine that were contaminated with Simian Virus 40 (SV40) [1] and that SV40 is causally linked by some researchers to non-Hodgkin”s lymphoma and mesotheliomas in humans as well as in experimental animals, [2]. I hereby warrant that the vaccines I employ in my practice do not contain SV40 or any other live viruses. (Alternately, I hereby warrant that said SV40 virus or other viruses pose no substantive risk to my patient).

Gardasil Vaccine

I am that the vaccine may lead to an INCREASE in precancerous lesions in women who already have relevant HPV types and  I am aware that Judicial Watch has uncovered FDA reports under the Freedom of Information Act which show that Gardasil led to an increase in the incidence of precancerous lesions by 44.6% in women who had relevant HPV types, [3].   I am aware that by October 2008, over 10,000 adverse reactions, including 27 deaths had been reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System about Gardasil.  I am aware that cervical cancer usually develops in the late 20s to mid 30s and the protection period of Gardasil is estimated to be 5 years, which means that if my patient gets a first set of shots when she is 10 years old, she will need at least 2-4 additional booster shots to make it through her 30s and in so doing expose herself to the potential side effects of Gardasil over and over again.

I have read the report from Merck which mentions Gardasil was shown to reduce pre-cancers by only 12.2% to 16.5% in the general population and know that my patient will still need to have regular smear tests after she has been vaccinated.   I have read information regarding Gardasil thoroughly and do not regard the reports that it causes harm as credible and deem it safe and worthwhile to administer it to my patient.

Flu Vaccine

I am aware that most flu shots contain mercury and I have thoroughly researched the reports which indicate mercury is  highly neurotoxic.   I am aware that Hugh Fudenberg, MD, an immunogeneticist with nearly 850 papers published in peer review journals, has reported that if an individual had 5 consecutive flu shots between 1970 and 1980 (the years studied), his/her chances of getting Alzheimer’s Disease is 10 times higher than if they had zero, one, or two shots, [4]. I am aware of the reports that flu vaccines were deliberately contaminated with the deadly avian flu virus and distributed to 18 countries by the American company Baxter and that this was believed to be part of a plan to provoke a pandemic, [5].  I am also aware that flu shots do not necessarily protect people against getting the flu, but regard it as worthwhile administering a mercury-containing form of this vaccine to my patient.

In order to protect my patient’s well being, I have taken the following steps to guarantee that the vaccines I will use will contain no damaging contaminants.

STEPS TAKEN: ___________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________

I have personally investigated the reports made to the VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) and state that it is my professional opinion that the vaccines I am recommending are safe for administration to a child under the age of 5 years.

The bases for my opinion are itemized on Exhibit A, attached hereto, — “Doctor’s Bases for Professional Opinion of Vaccine Safety.” (Please itemize each recommended vaccine separately along with the bases for arriving at the conclusion that the vaccine is safe for administration to a child under the age of 5 years.)

The professional journal articles I have relied upon in the issuance of this Doctor”s Warranty of Vaccine Safety are itemized on Exhibit B , attached hereto, — “Scientific Articles in Support of Doctor’s Warranty of Vaccine Safety.”

The professional journal articles that I have read which contain opinions adverse to my opinion are itemized on Exhibit C, attached hereto, — “Scientific Articles Contrary to Doctor’s Opinion of Vaccine Safety.”

The reasons for my determining that the articles in Exhibit C were invalid are delineated in Attachment D , attached hereto, — “Doctor’s Reasons for Determining the Invalidity of Adverse Scientific Opinions.”

Hepatitis B Vaccine

I understand that 60 percent of patients who are vaccinated for Hepatitis B will lose detectable antibodies to Hepatitis B within 12 years. I understand that in 1996 only 54 cases of Hepatitis B were reported to the CDC in the 0-1 year age group. I understand that in the VAERS, there were 1,080 total reports of adverse reactions from Hepatitis B vaccine in 1996 in the 0-1 year age group, with 47 deaths reported.

I understand that 50 percent of patients who contract Hepatitis B develop no symptoms after exposure. I understand that 30 percent will develop only flu-like symptoms and will have lifetime immunity. I understand that 20 percent will develop the symptoms of the disease, but that 95 percent will fully recover and have lifetime immunity.

I understand that 5 percent of the patients who are exposed to Hepatitis B will become chronic carriers of the disease. I understand that 75 percent of the chronic carriers will live with an asymptomatic infection and that only 25 percent of the chronic carriers will develop chronic liver disease or liver cancer, 10-30 years after the acute infection.

The following scientific studies have been performed to demonstrate the safety of the Hepatitis B vaccine in children under the age of 5 years.

___________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________

In addition to the recommended vaccinations as protections against the above cited risk factors, I have recommended other non-vaccine measures to protect the health of my patient and have enumerated said non-vaccine measures on Exhibit D, attached hereto, “Non-vaccine Measures to Protect Against Risk Factors.”

I am issuing this Doctor’s Warranty of Vaccine Safety in my professional capacity as the attending physician to (Patient’s name) ________________________________.

Regardless of the legal entity under which I normally practice medicine, I am issuing this statement in both my business and individual capacities and hereby waive any legal immunities from liability lawsuits in the instant case.

I issue this document of my own free will after consultation with competent legal counsel whose name is _____________________________.

__________________________________ (Name of Attending Doctor)

________________________________ (Signature of Attending Doctor)

Signed on this _______ day of ______________ A.D. ________

Witness: _______________________________  Date: _______

Notary Public: __________________________   Date: _______

References:

1.      Interview with Dr Maurice Hilleman of Merck at

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edikv0zbAlU

2.  SV40 is being found in human tumours.  See: SV40 Cancer Articles

https://www.sv40foundation.org/Articles.html

3.      Judicial Watch Report On the Gardasil Vaccine. See this first 6 pages here.  https://uncensored.co.nz/2009/03/27/a-judicial-watch-special-report-examining-the-fda%E2%80%99s-hpv-vaccine-records/

The full report is here: https://www.judicialwatch.org/documents/2008/JWReportFDAhpvVaccineRecords.pdf

4. Hugh Fudenberg, MD, is Founder and Director of Research, Neurolmmuno Therapeutic Research Foundation. Information from Dr. Hugh Fudenberg came from transcribed notes of Dr. Fudenberg’s speech at the NVIC International Vaccine Conference, Arlington, VA, US.  September, 1997. Quoted with permission.  https://www.advancedhealthplan.com/flushots.html

5. ‘Accidental’ Contamination of Vaccine with Live Avian Flu Virus Virtually Impossible https://www.prisonplanet.com/accidental-contamination-of-vaccine-with-live-avian-flu-virus-virtually-impossible.html

Rat Poison Chemical Found in Ingredient List For HPV Vaccine

Joanne Waldron
NaturalNews Friday, Nov 21, 2008

What do rat poison and the HPV vaccine have in common? The answer is a hazardous chemical known as sodium borate. Savvy readers may wonder what a toxin that is commonly used to kill rats is doing in the ingredient list for the HPV vaccine that is currently being pushed on girls as young as nine and is even being considered for men and boys. Unfortunately, the answer isn’t very comforting, especially for new U.S. residents for whom the HPV injection containing sodium borate is now mandated.

What is Sodium Borate?

Sodium borate, a boric acid salt also known as borax, has many common uses. In addition to its use as a rat poison, it is also used in laundry detergents, cosmetics, enamel glazes, flame retardants, and buffer solutions in chemistry. However, sodium borate also has antifungal properties, which means that its probable reason for being in the vaccine is to act as a preservative.

Sodium Borate Banned as Food Additive

Sodium borate is used as a food additive in some countries, but it is now outlawed in many places. For example, one Australian government recall site notes: “Product is Borax (sodium borate) which is a non permitted food additive and is harmful to health.” So, if it’s “harmful to health,” why is it being added to the HPV vaccine?

No Longer Used in Medical Preparations

The U.S. National Library of Medicine states in an article that boric acid is “no longer commonly used in medical preparations.” It’s a good thing, too, considering that the U.S. National Library of Medicine also reports that this substance used to be used to disinfect and treat wounds and that individuals “who received such treatment over and over again got sick, and some died.” In fact, the U.S. National Library of Medicine provides the number for Poison Control for people exposed to this chemical and notes that treatment for those exposed to it may include gastric lavage (stomach pumping), dialysis, and liquids by mouth or IV.

Sodium Borate Poisoning Symptoms Mimic Reactions to HPV Vaccine

Sadly, the information about sodium borate gets even scarier. Another government website article states that exposure to sodium borate can cause convulsions and other ill health effects. Interestingly enough, young girls who receive the HPV vaccine have reported similar symptoms to those that appear in cases of sodium borate poisoning. This particular government site provides the following warning regarding this chemical: “WARNING! HARMFUL IF SWALLOWED, INHALED OR ABSORBED THROUGH SKIN. CAUSES IRRITATION TO SKIN, EYES AND RESPIRATORY TRACT.” Given this information, is sodium borate really something that should be injected into humans? This is something the reader should carefully consider, along with the previously reported information, before choosing to receive the controversial HPV vaccine.