Vaccine Researcher Whistleblower Spills The Beans- This Is Horrific
1 2018-10-15 by T3Baron
This interview was posted by Jon Rappoport in early January 2002. You will discover by reading it that the very issues we now face of forced vaccination of a laboratory-created vaccine to “protect” us against a laboratory-created “disease” (Swine Flu, Bird flu, etc.) was set into motion a long time ago.
The vaccine researcher quoted here flat out says that the World Homicide Organization, WHO, is driven by a depopulation agenda, and that many African leaders know full well that the explosive spread of HIV and AIDS in Africa was caused by WHO-sponsored vaccinations of the 1970s.
This former pharmaceutical insider also debunks the widespread ASSUMPTIONS of vaccine “safety” promoted by orthodox medicine, the CDC, the National Institute of Health, state health departments, and their compliant media propagandists who are all parroting superstitions, rather than facts.—Ken Adachi
Retired Vaccine Researcher to Jon Rappoport: “If I had a child now, the last thing I would allow is vaccination.” (Aug. 6, 2009)
Understand that under our constitutional government, the federal pirates known to us as the US Federal government have no legal right to force us to vaccinate. The fact that they do this proves we have no constitutional law in this country.
Jon Rappoport (Q) Interviews a Retired Vaccine Researcher (A) (given the pseudonym of “Dr. Mark Randall”)
Q: You were once certain that vaccines were the hallmark of good medicine.
A: Yes I was. I helped develop a few vaccines. I won’t say which ones.
Q: Why not?
A: I want to preserve my privacy.
Q: So you think you could have problems if you came out into the open?
A: I believe I could lose my pension.
Q: On what grounds?
A: The grounds don’t matter. These people have ways of causing you problems, when you were once part of the Club. I know one or two people who were put under surveillance, who were harassed.
Q: Harassed by whom?
A: The FBI.
Q: Really?
A: Sure. The FBI used other pretexts. And the IRS can come calling too.
Q: So much for free speech.
A: I was “part of the inner circle”. If now I began to name names and make specific accusations against researchers, I could be in a world of trouble.
Q: What is at the bottom of these efforts at harassment?
A: Vaccines are the last defense of modern medicine. Vaccines are the ultimate justification for the overall “brilliance” of modern medicine.
Q: Do you believe that people should be allowed to choose whether they should get vaccines?
A: On a political level, yes. On a scientific level, people need information, so that they can choose well. It’s one thing to say choice is good. But if the atmosphere is full of lies, how can you choose? Also, if the FDA were run by honorable people, these vaccines would not be granted licenses. They would be investigated to within an inch of their lives.
Q: There are medical historians who state that the overall decline of illnesses was not due to vaccines.
A: I know. For a long time, I ignored their work.
Q: Why?
A: Because I was afraid of what I would find out. I was in the business of developing vaccines. My livelihood depended on continuing that work.
Q: And then?
A: I did my own investigation.
Q: What conclusions did you come to?
A: The decline of disease is due to improved living conditions.
Q: What conditions?
A: Cleaner water. Advanced sewage systems. Nutrition. Fresher food. A decrease in poverty. Germs may be everywhere, but when you are healthy, you don’t contract the diseases as easily.
Q: What did you feel when you completed your own investigation?
A: Despair. I realized I was working a sector based on a collection of lies.
Q: Are some vaccines more dangerous than others?
A: Yes. The DPT shot, for example. The MMR. But some lots of a vaccine are more dangerous than other lots of the same vaccine. As far as I’m concerned, all vaccines are dangerous.
Q: Why?
A: Several reasons. They involve the human immune system in a process that tends to compromise immunity. They can actually cause the disease they are supposed to prevent. They can cause other diseases than the ones they are supposed to prevent.
Q: Why are we quoted statistics which seem to prove that vaccines have been tremendously successful at wiping out diseases?
A: Why? To give the illusion that these vaccines are useful. If a vaccine suppresses visible symptoms of a disease like measles, everyone assumes that the vaccine is a success. But, under the surface, the vaccine can harm the immune system itself. And if it causes other diseases—say, meningitis—that fact is masked, because no one believes that the vaccine can do that. The connection is overlooked.
Q: It is said that the smallpox vaccine wiped out smallpox in England.
A: Yes. But when you study the available statistics, you get another picture.
Q: Which is?
A: There were cities in England where people who were not vaccinated did not get smallpox. There were places where people who were vaccinated experienced smallpox epidemics. And smallpox was already on the decline before the vaccine was introduced.
Q: So you’re saying that we have been treated to a false history.
A: Yes. That’s exactly what I’m saying. This is a history that has been cooked up to convince people that vaccines are invariably safe and effective.
Q: Now, you worked in labs. Where purity was an issue.
A: The public believes that these labs, these manufacturing facilities are the cleanest places in the world. That is not true. Contamination occurs all the time. You get all sorts of debris introduced into vaccines.
Q: For example, the SV40 monkey virus slips into the polio vaccine.
A: Well yes, that happened. But that’s not what I mean. The SV40 got into the polio vaccine because the vaccine was made by using monkey kidneys. But I’m talking about something else. The actual lab conditions. The mistakes. The careless errors. which you don’t know are in those kidneys.
Q: Okay, but let’s ignore that distinction between different types of contaminants for a moment. What contaminants did you find in your many years of work with vaccines?
A: All right. I’ll give you some of what I came across, and I’ll also give you what colleagues of mine found. Here’s a partial list. In the Rimavex measles vaccine, we found various chicken viruses. In polio vaccine, we found acanthamoeba, which is a so-called “brain-eating” amoeba.
Simian cytomegalovirus in polio vaccine. Simian foamy virus in the rotavirus vaccine. Bird-cancer viruses in the MMR vaccine. Various micro-organisms in the anthrax vaccine. I’ve found potentially dangerous enzyme inhibitors in several vaccines. Duck, dog, and rabbit viruses in the rubella vaccine. Avian leucosis virus in the flu vaccine. Pestivirus in the MMR vaccine.
Q: Let me get this straight. These are all contaminants which don’t belong in the vaccines.
A: That’s right. And if you try to calculate what damage these contaminants can cause, well, we don’t really know, because no testing has been done, or very little testing. It’s a game of roulette. You take your chances. Also, most people don’t know that some polio vaccines, adenovirus vaccines, rubella and hep A and measles vaccines have been made with aborted human fetal tissue. I have found what I believed were bacterial fragments and poliovirus in these vaccines from time to time—which may have come from that fetal tissue. When you look for contaminants in vaccines, you can come up with material that IS puzzling. You know it shouldn’t be there, but you don’t know exactly what you’ve got. I have found what I believed was a very small “fragment” of human hair and also human mucus. I have found what can only be called “foreign protein”, which could mean almost anything. It could mean protein from viruses.
Q: Alarm bells are ringing all over the place.
A: How do you think I felt? Remember, this material is going into the bloodstream without passing through some of the ordinary immune defenses.
Q: How were your findings received?
A: Basically, it was, don’t worry, this can’t be helped. In making vaccines, you use various animals’ tissue, and that’s where this kind of contamination enters in. Of course, I’m not even mentioning the standard chemicals like formaldehyde, mercury, and aluminum which are purposely put into vaccines.
Q: This information is pretty staggering.
A: Yes. And I’m just mentioning some of the biological contaminants. Who knows how many others there are? Others we don’t find because we don’t think to look for them. If tissue from, say, a bird is used to make a vaccine, how many possible germs can be in that tissue? We have no idea. We have no idea what they might be, or what effects they could have on humans.
Q: And beyond the purity issue?
A: You are dealing with the basic faulty premise about vaccines. That they intricately stimulate the immune system to create the conditions for immunity from disease. That is the bad premise. It doesn’t work that way. A vaccine is supposed to “create” antibodies which, indirectly, offer protection against disease. However, the immune system is much larger and more involved than antibodies and their related “killer cells”.
Q: The immune system is?
A: The entire body, really. Plus the mind. It’s all immune system, you might say. That is why you can have, in the middle of an epidemic, those individuals who remain healthy.
Q: So the level of general health is important.
A: More than important. Vital.
Q: How are vaccine statistics falsely presented?
A: There are many ways. For example, suppose that 25 people who have received the hepatitis B vaccine come down with hepatitis. Well, hep B is a liver disease. But you can call liver disease many things. You can change the diagnosis. Then, you’ve concealed the root cause of the problem.
Q: And that happens?
A: All the time. It HAS to happen, if the doctors automatically assume that people who get vaccines DO NOT come down with the diseases they are now supposed to be protected from. And that is exactly what doctors assume. You see, it’s circular reasoning. It’s a closed system. It admits no fault. No possible fault. If a person who gets a vaccine against hepatitis gets hepatitis, or gets some other disease, the automatic assumption is, this had nothing to do with the disease.
Q: In your years working in the vaccine establishment, how many doctors did you encounter who admitted that vaccines were a problem?
A: None. There were a few who privately questioned what they were doing. But they would never go public, even within their companies.
Q: What was the turning point for you?
A: I had a friend whose baby died after a DPT shot.
Q: Did you investigate?
A: Yes, informally. I found that this baby was completely healthy before the vaccination. There was no reason for his death, except the vaccine. That started my doubts. Of course, I wanted to believe that the baby had gotten a bad shot from a bad lot. But as I looked into this further, I found that was not the case in this instance. I was being drawn into a spiral of doubt that increased over time. I continued to investigate. I found that, contrary to what I thought, vaccines are not tested in a scientific way.
Q: What do you mean?
A: For example, no long-term studies are done on any vaccines. Long-term follow-up is not done in any careful way. Why? Because, again, the assumption is made that vaccines do not cause problems. So why should anyone check? On top of that, a vaccine reaction is defined so that all bad reactions are said to occur very soon after the shot is given. But that does not make sense.
Q: Why doesn’t it make sense?
A: Because the vaccine obviously acts in the body for a long period of time after it is given. A reaction can be gradual. Deterioration can be gradual. Neurological problems can develop over time. They do in various conditions, even according to a conventional analysis. So why couldn’t that be the case with vaccines? If chemical poisoning can occur gradually, why couldn’t that be the case with a vaccine which contains mercury?
Q: And that is what you found?
A: Yes. You are dealing with correlations most of the time. Correlations are not perfect. But if you get 500 parents whose children have suffered neurological damage during a one-year period after having a vaccine, this should be sufficient to spark off an intense investigation.
Q: Has it been enough?
A: No. Never. This tells you something right away.
Q: Which is?
A: The people doing the investigation are not really interested in looking at the facts. They assume that the vaccines are safe. So, when they do investigate, they invariably come up with exonerations of the vaccines. They say, “This vaccine is safe.” But what do they base those judgments on? They base them on definitions and ideas which automatically rule out a condemnation of the vaccine.
Q: There are numerous cases where a vaccine campaign has failed. Where people have come down with the disease against which they were vaccinated.
A: Yes, there are many such instances. And there the evidence is simply ignored. It’s discounted. The experts say, if they say anything at all that this is just an isolated situation, but overall the vaccine has been shown to be safe. But if you add up all the vaccine campaigns where damage and disease have occurred, you realize that these are NOT isolated situations.
Q: Did you ever discuss what we are talking about here with colleagues, when you were still working in the vaccine establishment?
A: Yes I did.
Q: What happened?
A: Several times I was told to keep quiet. It was made clear that I should go back to work and forget my misgivings. On a few occasions, I encountered fear. Colleagues tried to avoid me. They felt they could be labeled with “guilt by association”. All in all, though, I behaved myself. I made sure I didn’t create problems for myself.
Q: If vaccines actually do harm, why are they given?
A: First of all, there is no “if”. They do harm. It becomes a more difficult question to decide whether they do harm in those people who seem to show no harm. Then you are dealing with the kind of research which should be done, but isn’t. Researchers should be probing to discover a kind of map, or flow chart, which shows exactly what vaccines do in the body from the moment they enter. This research has not been done. As to why they are given, we could sit here for two days and discuss all the reasons. As you’ve said many times, at different layers of the system people have their motives. Money, fear of losing a job, the desire to win brownie points, prestige, awards, promotion, misguided idealism, unthinking habit, and so on. But, at the highest levels of the medical cartel, vaccines are a top priority because they cause a weakening of the immune system. I know that may be hard to accept, but it’s true. The medical cartel, at the highest level, is not out to help people, it is out to harm them, to weaken them. To kill them. At one point in my career, I had a long conversation with a man who occupied a high government position in an African nation. He told me that he was well aware of this. He told me that WHO is a front for these depopulation interests. There is an underground, shall we say, in Africa, made up of various officials who are earnestly trying to change the lot of the poor. This network of people knows what is going on. They know that vaccines have been used, and are being used, to destroy their countries, to make them ripe for takeover by globalist powers. I have had the opportunity to speak with several of these people from this network.
Q: Is Thabo Mbeki, the president of South Africa, aware of the situation?
A: I would say he is partially aware. Perhaps he is not utterly convinced, but he is on the way to realizing the whole truth. He already knows that HIV is a hoax. He knows that the AIDS drugs are poisons which destroy the immune system. He also knows that if he speaks out, in any way, about the vaccine issue, he will be branded a lunatic. He has enough trouble after his stand on the AIDS issue.
Q: This network you speak of.
A: It has accumulated a huge amount of information about vaccines. The question is, how is a successful strategy going to be mounted? For these people, that is a difficult issue.
Q: And in the industrialized nations?
A: The medical cartel has a stranglehold, but it is diminishing. Mainly because people have the freedom to question medicines. However, if the choice issue [the right to take or reject any medicine] does not gather steam, these coming mandates about vaccines against biowarfare germs are going to win out. This is an important time.
Q: The furor over the hepatitis B vaccine seems one good avenue.
A: I think so, yes. To say that babies must have the vaccine-and then in the next breath, admitting that a person gets hep B from sexual contacts and shared needles—is a ridiculous juxtaposition. Medical authorities try to cover themselves by saying that 20,000 or so children in the US get hep B every year from “unknown causes”, and that’s why every baby must have the vaccine. I dispute that 20,000 figure and the so-called studies that back it up.
Q: Andrew Wakefield, the British MD who uncovered the link between the MMR vaccine and autism, has just been fired from his job in a London hospital.
A: Yes. Wakefield performed a great service. His correlations between the vaccine and autism are stunning. Perhaps you know that Tony Blair’s wife is involved with alternative health. There is the possibility that their child has not been given the MMR. Blair recently side-stepped the question in press interviews, and made it seem that he was simply objecting to invasive questioning of his “personal and family life”. In any event, I believe his wife has been muzzled. I think, if given the chance, she would at least say she is sympathetic to all the families who have come forward and stated that their children were severely damaged by the MMR.
Q: British reporters should try to get through to her.
A: They have been trying. But I think she has made a deal with her husband to keep quiet, no matter what. She could do a great deal of good if she breaks her promise. I have been told she is under pressure, and not just from her husband. At the level she occupies, MI6 and British health authorities get into the act. It is thought of as a matter of national security.
Q: Well, it is national security, once you understand the medical cartel.
A: It is global security. The cartel operates in every nation. It zealously guards the sanctity of vaccines. Questioning these vaccines is on the same level as a Vatican bishop questioning the sanctity of the sacrament of the Eucharist in the Catholic Church.
Q: I know that a Hollywood celebrity stating publicly that he will not take a vaccine is committing career suicide.
A: Hollywood is linked very powerfully to the medical cartel. There are several reasons, but one of them is simply that an actor who is famous can draw a huge amount of publicity if he says ANYTHING. In 1992, I was present at your demonstration against the FDA in downtown Los Angeles. One or two actors spoke against the FDA. Since that time, you would spoke against the FDA. Since that time, you would be hard pressed to find an actor who has spoken out in any way against the medical cartel.
Q: Within the National Institutes of Health, what is the mood, what is the basic frame of mind?
A: People are competing for research monies. The last thing they think about is challenging the status quo. They are already in an intramural war for that money. They don’t need more trouble. This is a very insulated system. It depends on the idea that, by and large, modern medicine is very successful on every frontier. To admit systemic problems in any area is to cast doubt on the whole enterprise. You might therefore think that NIH is the last place one should think about holding demonstrations. But just the reverse is true. If five thousand people showed up there demanding an accounting of the actual benefits of that research system, demanding to know what real health benefits have been conferred on the public from the billions of wasted dollars funneled to that facility, something might start. A spark might go off. You might get, with further demonstrations, all sorts of fall-out. Researchers—a few—might start leaking information.
Q: A good idea.
A: People in suits standing as close to the buildings as the police will allow. People in business suits, in jogging suits, mothers and babies. Well-off people. Poor people. All sorts of people.
Q: What about the combined destructive power of a number of vaccines given to babies these days?
A: It is a travesty and a crime. There are no real studies of any depth which have been done on that. Again, the assumption is made that vaccines are safe, and therefore any number of vaccines given together are safe as well. But the truth is, vaccines are not safe. Therefore the potential damage increases when you give many of them in a short time period.
Q: Then we have the fall flu season.
A: Yes. As if only in the autumn do these germs float in to the US from Asia. The public swallows that premise. If it happens in April, it is a bad cold. If it happens in October, it is the flu.
Q: Do you regret having worked all those years in the vaccine field?
A: Yes. But after this interview, I’ll regret it a little less. And I work in other ways. I give out information to certain people, when I think they will use it well.
Q: What is one thing you want the public to understand?
A: That the burden of proof in establishing the safety and efficacy of vaccines is on the people who manufacture and license them for public use. Just that. The burden of proof is not on you or me. And for proof you need well-designed long-term studies. You need extensive follow-up. You need to interview mothers and pay attention to what mothers say about their babies and what happens to them after vaccination. You need all these things. The things that are not there.
Q: The things that are not there.
A: Yes.
Q: To avoid any confusion, I’d like you to review, once more, the disease problems that vaccines can cause. Which diseases, how that happens.
A: We are basically talking about two potential harmful outcomes. One, the person gets the disease from the vaccine. He gets the disease which the vaccine is supposed to protect him from. Because, some version of the disease is in the vaccine to begin with. Or two, he doesn’t get THAT disease, but at some later time, maybe right away, maybe not, he develops another condition which is caused by the vaccine. That condition could be autism, what’s called autism, or it could be some other disease like meningitis. He could become mentally disabled.
Q: Is there any way to compare the relative frequency of these different outcomes?
A: No. Because the follow-up is poor. We can only guess. If you ask, out of a population of a hundred thousand children who get a measles vaccine, how many get the measles, and how many develop other problems from the vaccine, there is a no reliable answer. That is what I’m saying. Vaccines are superstitions. And with superstitions, you don’t get facts you can use. You only get stories, most of which are designed to enforce the superstition. But, from many vaccine campaigns, we can piece together a narrative that does reveal some very disturbing things. People have been harmed. The harm is real, and it can be deep and it can mean death. The harm is NOT limited to a few cases, as we have been led to believe. In the US, there are groups of mothers who are testifying about autism and childhood vaccines. They are coming forward and standing up at meetings. They are essentially trying to fill in the gap that has been created by the researchers and doctors who turn their backs on the whole thing.
Q: Let me ask you this. If you took a child in, say, Boston and you raised that child with good nutritious food and he exercised every day and he was loved by his parents, and he didn’t get the measles vaccine, what would be his health status compared with the average child in Boston who eats poorly and watches five hours of TV a day and gets the measles vaccine?
A: Of course there are many factors involved, but I would bet on the better health status for the first child. If he gets measles, if he gets it when he is nine, the chances are it will be much lighter than the measles the second child might get. I would bet on the first child every time.
Q: How long did you work with vaccines?
A: A long time. Longer than ten years.
Q: Looking back now, can you recall any good reason to say that vaccines are successful?
A: No, I can’t. If I had a child now, the last thing I would allow is vaccination. I would move out of the state if I had to. I would change the family name. I would disappear. With my family. I’m not saying it would come to that. There are ways to sidestep the system with grace, if you know how to act. There are exemptions you can declare, in every state, based on religious and/or philosophic views. But if push came to shove, I would go on the move.
Q: And yet there are children everywhere who do get vaccines and appear to be healthy.
A: The operative word is “appear”. What about all the children who can’t focus on their studies? What about the children who have tantrums from time to time? What about the children who are not quite in possession of all their mental faculties? I know there are many causes for these things, but vaccines are one cause. I would not take the chance. I see no reason to take the chance. And frankly, I see no reason to allow the government to have the last word. Government medicine is, from my experience, often a contradiction in terms. You get one or the other, but not both.
Q: So we come to the level playing field.
A: Yes. Allow those who want the vaccines to take them. Allow the dissidents to decline to take them. But, as I said earlier, there is no level playing field if the field is strewn with lies. And when babies are involved, you have parents making all the decisions. Those parents need a heavy dose of truth. What about the child I spoke of who died from the DPT shot? What information did his parents act on? I can tell you it was heavily weighted. It was not real information.
Q: Medical PR people, in concert with the press, scare the hell out of parents with dire scenarios about what will happen if their kids don’t get shots.
A: They make it seem a crime to refuse the vaccine. They equate it with bad parenting. You fight that with better information. It is always a challenge to buck the authorities. And only you can decide whether to do it. It is every person’s responsibility to make up his mind. The medical cartel likes that bet. It is betting that the fear will win.
****\*
Dr. Mark Randall is the pseudonym of a vaccine researcher who worked for many years in the labs of major pharmaceutical houses and the US government’s National Institutes of Health. Mark has been retired for some time now. He says he was “disgusted with what he discovered about vaccines”.
Believe nothing, believe everything.
Stay mad!
​
142 comments
1 bitgoblin10k 2018-10-15
You need a submission statement or else your post will be memory-holed.
1 imcraiggy 2018-10-15
this needs to be stickied.
1 Based_Luke_Skywalker 2018-10-15
lol
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
Good call!
1 ItsWorthReading 2018-10-15
Hell yeah. The industry puppets have come out hard against this post.
1 SweetButtsHellaBab 2018-10-15
Jesus Christ, not everyone who disagrees with you has some ulterior motive, they probably just know more than you do. I'm a development chemist by profession, but my job security doesn't depend in the slightest on vaccination rates, so with authority I can say this guy is a quack and no-one's paying me to say it.
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
It is very easy for the regulars to spot astroturfers, they stick out like sore thumbs and give themselfs silly upvotes for ‘official story’ posts
1 pretty-boy- 2018-10-15
How do we know he is who he says he is? Most, if not all, of his answers sound like someone who is anti-vaccine but doesn’t know much about them. I mean really? One of his answers concerning Hep. B is just “the 20,000 number is a coverup, I dispute this number.”
1 uNhoLeee 2018-10-15
you dont. like you also dont know if you have a brain eating amoeba from a contaminated vaccine.
1 ntschaef 2018-10-15
I would like to see the stats on the "publications" made by antivaxers compared to the amount of negative side effects of the vaccines as well as the "positive" effects of the vaccines compared to a baseline. Something tells me that "disputing this number" is not based on actual data.
1 T3Baron 2018-10-15
"They" will never disclose this data.
1 ntschaef 2018-10-15
There is no "they" in this case. It is public knowledge that is there for acquisition with a bit of time and effort, but I'm too lazy. Mostly because I'm fairly certain what I'll find and I'm not too worried about convincing the delusional.
1 EnoughNoLibsSpam 2018-10-15
So basically, you are lazy, your mind is already made up without any research, and anyone who disagrees with your un-informed opinion is delusional?
Did I miss anything?
1 ntschaef 2018-10-15
Except that I haven't done research, yeah. I've enough evidence that "anyone that disagrees with me" better use substantial evidence. Actual evidence. Not just theories.
1 sigismund1880 2018-10-15
https://i.redd.it/gwfixq1pl0k11.jpg
1 ntschaef 2018-10-15
Not very damning since the chaos of the human body will have a stronger impact on long term health than vaccines. The question being asked is the equivalent of "will the pill have any long term effects on future generations of offspring reproductive cycles?". It's not a fair question because getting this answer assumes you know the baseline condition before you start testing... And you can't. Statistical observation is a good indicator of how the population is effected but that is also competing with food trends and environmental changes. Fact is you would be better off blaming God for your child's illness than any specific cause.
1 sigismund1880 2018-10-15
long-term = years not several generations
of course you can, this has been done and the results weren't pretty.
​
1 ntschaef 2018-10-15
long term = anything that is not short term. They stated the response well saying it was a bad question to ask. If you are set on finding a potential problem with ANYTHING you can play this game. Is breathing air bad? Well everyone who breaths eventually dies. You do the math. It is a dishonest line of reasoning.
Sorry, I should restate this:. You shouldn't assume future health. As I said before, everyone dies. Everyone will get sick. The question is do vaccines reduce the cases in which this happens, and the answer is undeniably "yes".
Final thought before I leave this bit of entertaining rhetoric: we should continue to do studies (as they said) to identify key factors that cause illness, and if those factors have a direct correlation to vaccines then we should rethink our healthcare. But as of right now the quality of our water and food is doing more harm than flu shots. And not getting them is endangering vaunerable people.
1 pretty-boy- 2018-10-15
So you agree with me that this interview is most likely not from an actual whistleblower. Good.
1 ItsWorthReading 2018-10-15
You just hope this isn't from an actual whistleblower. Oh, boy... if only your hopes were reality.
1 Zabzacon 2018-10-15
You just hope this is from an actual whistleblowder. Oh, boy... if only your hopes were reality.
1 sinedup4thiscomment 2018-10-15
I agree that the anonymous nature of this interview, and the lack of corroborating evidence, suggests that this interview may be entirely faked.
1 xm855 2018-10-15
Really? Sounded like he knew quite a bit.
I’ve read Wakefield’s book, watched Vaxxed, listened to dozen of interviews and consider myself somewhat informed. And even I hadn’t considered the Additional contamination like he discusses in the beginning.
The fact is vaccines are not 100% safe. And to Wakefield’s credit, because of sloppy record keeping especially in regards to SIDS, we have no idea what the actual safety percentage is. Throw in complications from anaphylaxis and I believe the risk numbers would be incredibly alarming.
It sucks. We all want a disease-free world. But give us legit data! The coverup, to some extent, is absolutely real.
1 lonely_tribble 2018-10-15
Almost nothing on earth is 100% safe.
1 xm855 2018-10-15
Agreed. Drinking too much water can kill you.
People die on a cross in regards to vaccines though.
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
We would need vaccines to be safer than the viruses they are meant to protect from, until vaccines can be made with that level of safety people will keep avoiding them
1 Pumpdawg88 2018-10-15
Raise your hands if you heard the story about how vaccinations were developed from ground up macaw testicles and hiv is a labratory product of siv(also from monkeys). I mean...if AIDS had been around for more than 100 years then we'd all be dead right now, right? Like...just doing the math...if AIDS has been around since 0AD then a lot more people would have died from it?
1 ntschaef 2018-10-15
One could argue that it has been around and has been wiping out local populations, but it only took off when globalism brought a contaminated person into the general population. So no, we wouldn't necessarily all be dead if it was in a state of natural quarantine.
This is not accounting for people who are "carriers" of the virus that are not effected by it but can infect others... but this is more addressing the issue of "why aren't we all immune yet?" which leads to the answer above. If one wanted to argue that.
1 delusionallogic66 2018-10-15
Unbridled trust in Governments and their policies, programs and agenda is unwise. How many times have the American people been test subjects without their consent or knowledge over the past 70 years. Check these facts for yourself. They have contaminants over cities. Kansas City and Minneapolis are two. The population control agenda is scary. I believe they want to repopulate the earth by any means possible, wars, disease and maybe weakened immune systems. Disease will attack a compromised immune system, cancers is one. I was vaccinated with the Sauk polio vaccine in the 50's and my mother told my brother and I both has nervous system issues that we both have to this day. Hand tremors, slight shaking. I refused and have not recieved any vaccinations for the last 60 years and I am in very good health for 68 years old. I take no medications of any kind, no flu shots, no pain killers. Had high blood sugar at a check up 191. Doctor wanted me to get on medication and I decided to control it myself. With diet, exercise and weight loss 20 lbs my blood sugar the last 5 month has been high of 115 and low of 82 avg about 97. Normal. Do research on your and don't blindly follow our leaders. Think and make your own decisions for your family and yourself.
1 ObserverOfTruth 2018-10-15
Can you tell me what diet you've used? I have family members who could benefit. I've seen suggestions for high-fat low-carb and I've also seen suggestions for no-fat vegan.
1 lordbeansly 2018-10-15
No hard evidence here. All 3rd hand sources that can't be proved because either everyone you mentioned is dead now or doesn't have a name.
The only evidence this "insider has" are literal shots in the dark. "Kids can't focus or pay attention"-must be the vaccines. He never actually says how they are bad! He says they cause negative things but doesn't provide evidence or even say why or how.
His arguments are no better than me saying: "I blame my anxiety and depression on bananas because after I ate a banana i felt like shit. It must be the banana industry taking advantage of me."
"Dr Mark Randall" is a psudomym if a vaccine researcher who worked many years in the industry." He claims vaccines are dangerous and a global cabal conspiracy to depopulate the Earth.
Dr. Banana String is a pseudonym for a retired plantation manager who worked many years in the banana industry. He says bananas are genetically engineered to cause depression in people. The banana and the depression pharmaceutical drugs industry are working together to undermine people around the globe and keep them depressed.
These are no different. Without a witness or actual evidence, both are should be assumed false.
I'm not going to "believe nothing, believe everything," (which god I have to say makes no fucking sense). I'm going to believe what can be proved. And vaccines are proven to reduce death due to various diseases, as seen by the decrease in mortality rates from measles, small pox, polio, etc. https://medium.com/@visualvaccines/graphic-proof-that-vaccines-work-with-sources-61c199429c8c https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(99)05190-9/fulltext
Here's actual people putting their actual names out their.
I like Conspiracy theories, but these types of posts don't carry with them a conversation. It's just "hey look, one unproven article says vaccines are bad! Don't try to change my mind!"
1 dmthirdeye 2018-10-15
So what you're saying is you work in the medical industry and your career depends on it?
1 heej 2018-10-15
The "whistleblower" also clearly stated that they need some type of flow chart to diagram what happens when a vaccine enters the body, and that they have nothing of the sort right now. So obviously if you approach it from that POV he wouldn't have any specific answer as to the mechanisms behind the damage being caused, because the medical community operates under the assumption that they're perfectly safe and thus would have no reason to analyze more in-depth how it works.
I also like how you conveniently ignored the detailed lists of contaminants and the actual reasons for how these contaminants come to be in vaccines. Your one off line about "liking" conspiracy theories seems more like a throw away statement to deceive people into thinking you're looking at the contents of this interview objectively as opposed to already having a preconceived opinion that you're arguing for.
By my estimation, your rebuttal seems painfully shallow and purposely ignores some of the statements made in this interview. From the looks of it you're either a regular old joe who's a vaccine zealot or actually a paid astroturfer/forum slider. I don't like the term "shill" so I'll just say you seem to fall in the latter category
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
Spot on!
1 FauxMoGuy 2018-10-15
damn man what exactly is wrong with skepticism of an “interview” that reads like an r/con fanfic. The guy does not provide any answers outside of the realm of common knowledge of anyone with an entry level health sciences job and when pointed out, you double down that it’s ok that he provides no evidence or mechanisms for his claims, especially for someone who claims to have been a part of “the inner circle” (like come on it was relatively obvious by this point). but since it’s bias confirming we’ll ignore it and go with the “it’s against the rules to directly call you a shill so i’m just going to say you sound like one” routine
1 heej 2018-10-15
I understand your reasoning for skepticism, but I don't believe the fact that he doesn't detail the mechanisms makes the whole thing invalid. especially when it's a specific criticism he has of the community at large, which as you said he was supposedly part of the inner circle in.
The analogy I can put it as is this guy worked on a hack for our immune system. And the whole medical establishment decided this hack is the bee's knees because it totally works so who cares about decoding the hack further let's just get as much money as we can working with it. And now you guys are saying because he can't explain the hack (which is something he's never been paid to do) that the while thing is invalid
There's plenty of other reasons to think that, not the least of which you should just be plain skeptical in the first place. But shoddy reasoning is shoddy reasoning, I don't need any kind of "bias confirming" to point it out. You're literally ignoring the frame of reference of the interview by trying to use this as a reason
1 expletivdeleted 2018-10-15
The talk of "breakaway civilizations" in our modern day seems to assume its groups of rich people going to aggregate their resources and GTFO.
Maybe it should be normal, decent folks that should just up and breakaway. Or sit down and quit working until the a-holes at the top of society's food chain go somewhere else.
1 ChipChippersonsSoul 2018-10-15
....and this is why people are not vaccinating their kids. Also why polio is being seen again after being eradicated. Bravo
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
Polio comes from the vaccine
1 ChipChippersonsSoul 2018-10-15
If you think polio is caused by vaccines you’re the problem not the solution
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
You could do with spending more time researching this. In 1977, Dr. Jonas Salk (inventor of the Salk polio vaccine) testified along with other scientists that most (87%) of the polio cases which have occurred in the U.S. since the early 1970's were the by-product of the polio vaccine itself.
1 ChipChippersonsSoul 2018-10-15
You antivaxxers say the darndest things!
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
Facts
1 ChipChippersonsSoul 2018-10-15
It’s not a fact without a source or proof which you can’t provide. I mean I am kinda jealous you got to meet Jenny McCarthy how are her tits?
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
Washington Post, September 24, 1976
1 ChipChippersonsSoul 2018-10-15
Ok I don’t know how else to say PROOOOOOOOOOF
LA Times, October 19th 2001
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
CDC "The oral polio vaccine (OPV) is used in many countries to protect against polio disease and has been essential to the eradication effort. People who receive OPV may shed the virus and can infect others"
https://www.cdc.gov/phpr/polioviruscontainment/diseaseandvirus.htm
1 ChipChippersonsSoul 2018-10-15
You are making less sense as you go on. I’m gonna take away my troll food
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
You've already lost this one by the way.
1 ChipChippersonsSoul 2018-10-15
Haha ok 👌
1 ChipChippersonsSoul 2018-10-15
There is no winning with people who think vaccines are bad
1 William_Harzia 2018-10-15
Um, this is from the CDC:
He's got you dead to rights on this one.
1 ChipChippersonsSoul 2018-10-15
Except we don’t use the oral vaccine... so no he doesn’t
1 ChipChippersonsSoul 2018-10-15
The USA hasn’t used an oral polio vaccine for almost 20 years
1 William_Harzia 2018-10-15
You're pretty good at missing the point aren't you? I bet 30 minutes ago you didn't know that there was a thing called vaccine-derived polioviruses. Now you do.
1 ItsWorthReading 2018-10-15
Nah, that guy doesn't want to actually learn anything. That would interfere with his delusion that he already knows everything!
1 William_Harzia 2018-10-15
Ha. I bet he's been furiously googling vaccine derived poliovirus for the last hour trying to come up with some kind of meaningful retort.
1 ChipChippersonsSoul 2018-10-15
Except the other person could give me any support....
1 ChipChippersonsSoul 2018-10-15
Also there’s no source or link just you typing out words which are not accounted for.
Here look:
Dr. Abraham Lincoln created the antivirus to allow unidentified spider cows to become resistant to hiv.
1 Tsuikaya 2018-10-15
http://www.thinktwice.com/Polio.pdf
1 robotchristwork 2018-10-15
LOL man if you are talking about the CDC why the fuck do you not check the CDC source https://www.cdc.gov/polio/us/ according to them, there has been not a single case of polio in the US since the 79, just from people carrying the disease from another country, last time that happened was in the 93.
​
If you're not a troll or a bot or just some blind antivaxxer, I urge you to reconsider the way that you gather your information, because you're clearly wrong. And the empirical evidence is out there man, when was the last time you saw someone with paralized because of polio? there was quarter of a million people paralized with polio living the 70's
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
What we think of as polio outbreaks was in fact DDT poisoning, DDT got banned, ‘polio’ disappeared
1 robotchristwork 2018-10-15
While this is just not true and can be easily debunked by a simple 10 minutes investigation (DDT is still used in Africa and Asia to fight the Malaria carrying mosquitoes, Polio has been errdicated in those countries too), what I find interesting on your comment is the kind of mental gymnastics needed to this kind of comment to exist, did you invent that lie? did you read in some "investigation" like this interview? is part of the regular anti-vaxxer propaganda?
​
Please respond, I find this very interesting.
1 sigismund1880 2018-10-15
https://i.redd.it/6i0x0l9f19g11.jpg
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
Polio is a long story, and the official story is a lie.
Polio does exist, but most people who catch it will get no symptoms. DDT poisoning gives the same symptoms as rare cases of Polio. Polio is a disease of poor sanitation so not relevant to the first world. The oral polio vaccine spreads polio and leaves many thousands paralysed.
1 lonely_tribble 2018-10-15
On a side note, if you keep chickens and eat their eggs or meat, get your soil tested for DDT. Wouldn't be a problem short term but if you eat those eggs for twenty years it might be.
1 ChipChippersonsSoul 2018-10-15
Ahhh all I had to do is look at your post history. You’re anti vaccines. I hope you don’t ever have kids
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
I'm pro-science, and hence against the current vaccines which are lacking in good science.
Yes, as you've just discovered, you will always lose if you debate me on this as I've been involved for many many years and know the topic inside out.
1 mrozzzy 2018-10-15
Speaking as a new parent, the thought of shoving all sorts of concoctions into my child during the first year is terrifying. That being said, what's a good start to research both the pros and cons of the current vaccination schedule here in the United States (sorry, I'm not sure where you're from).
I tried speaking to one of the Physician's Assistants at my pediatrician's office about doing the delayed or "stretched out" vaccination schedule and was promptly told that this is not a good idea because the long-term affects haven't been studied for the delayed schedule. Instead, she recommended that my little one gets pricked up to 4x during vaccination scheduling to give him the massive dose of vaccines that they recommend.
Something in me isn't sitting right with this, but I'm not sure where to turn to get the answer to do/not do this. Any suggestions?
Thanks.
1 martini-meow 2018-10-15
Ask for documentation on the long term effects that have been studied for the current schedule, if she says the delayed schedule hasn't been studiedn then surely the aggressive schedule has been... (expect a hostile response)
1 WindCanBlowMe 2018-10-15
Spoiler: neither have
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
I will get some info to you, the main point is that vaccines aren’t studies properly and pharma refuse to do so. I can give you loads hopefully tomorrow
1 mrozzzy 2018-10-15
Thank you so much for all the information!
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
You are very welcome!
1 ChipChippersonsSoul 2018-10-15
Please don’t put your kid in school without vaccines
1 mrozzzy 2018-10-15
We'll, my kid can't actually attend public school without a litany of vaccines, so that'll stop us right there.
1 Tsuikaya 2018-10-15
That may be untrue with the exception of certain areas. Most places only require proof of vaccines, this is misleading and does not require you to be vaccinated but that they have record of history of vaccination, whether vaxxed or not.
Its wrong and parents are fighting it here in Canada, it makes parents believe they have to get vaccines for their kids when they actually dont.
1 mrozzzy 2018-10-15
So, I could get a 'record' of vaccination for my child without actually giving them the vaccine(s)?
Would this require the doctor to forge the 'documentation' of their vaccinations though?
1 Tsuikaya 2018-10-15
No, it's just a record that you did not vaccinate, like I said, it's very misleading and almost illegal, many parents in Ontario actually fought the health boards because of it.
You're supposed to sign a document stating that you understand vaccines are safe and effective and you are risking your child's health base on your own assumptions. Parents refused to sign that, refused to give declaration of their child's medical records, and won, though they are extremely intimidating, I don't know where you live so contact anyone local who might know the laws there better.
They tried repeat suspending multiple kids in my area, the parents fought it and almost all of them won, some just gave in and signed but didn't vaccinate. Basically they say "You need to vaccinate and sign these documents that give us access to medical records and such!" the medical board tried suspending the students but they are not allowed, they try getting you into a conference call where they have like 8 lawyers and 12 people form the health department all talking to you like you're going to be sentenced to death.
The "record" of vaccination is not a record that you got vaccinated, it's a record of your child's current vaccines, basically a note for them to know if they have gotten Polio vaccine or not, it's like a form saying yes/no to which vaccines are up to date. Do not let them tell you that you have to vaccinate or your kid will be suspended/terminated, they cannot do this, it is actually illegal in most areas.
1 mrozzzy 2018-10-15
Oh wow, thanks for that info. I'm currently in Ohio, so I'm not sure what the laws/rules are here -- I'll have to look into them.
(Un)Luckily, my kid is only 3 weeks old, so I've got some time before pre/elementary school comes calling!
1 mrozzzy 2018-10-15
Also, what specifically would they be at risk for in school?
Which diseases could reasonably be communicable at school, and how could my kid get it?
Are the other children who are vaccinated also immune from something that my kid(s) could get? Or are they just carriers now that can pass it on to my kid(s)?
Thanks.
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
Here's some info I've put together.
The first confusion which a lot of people have with the so-called anti-vaccine movement is that they have been wrongly labelled, the majority of them are not against vaccines, but they want to see a major improvement in the quality of the science used to back vaccines up. It is more accurate to say they want better vaccines with less side effects, ideally without the toxic ingredients used as preservatives and adjuvants.
They are unhappy with the industry refusing to fund the necessary studies to find out if vaccines are bringing a net benefit overall, the industry doesn't want to find the harm their products cause as it can mean loss of confidence, sales and also huge compensation payouts. Anti-vaccine people do not agree with it when industry whitewashes their products, plays games with data and uses statistics to lie or misrepresent.
I will provide some examples below of the things they are concerned about:-
A recent study found that the Tetanus vaccine was actually reducing life expectancy rather than increasing, yes, the vaccine was making people more likely to die.
The Introduction of Diphtheria-Tetanus-Pertussis and Oral Polio Vaccine Among Young Infants in an Urban African Community: A Natural Experiment
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5360569/
Conclusion
DTP was associated with increased mortality
The honest experts are so sick of Big Pharma for not funding any proper studies into the safety of injecting Aluminum, that now they are crowdfunding for over $600,000 to perform the trials.
Private forces to raise funds for research into aluminum in vaccines
https://patientdanmark.dk/private-forces-to-raise-funds-research-into-aluminium-in-vaccines/
Here are some sources to get people started
For those from a scientific background I'd strongly recommend the presentations given at the Vaccine Safety Conference
The rest is a general starter pack for people who want to learn more:-
Dr Peter Gøtzsche exposes big pharma as organized crime
Birth dose of hepatitis B vaccine may not be necessary: Study
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/news/science/birth-dose-of-hepatitis-b-vaccine-may-not-be-necessary-study/article10033134.ece
Professor Gordon T. Stewart, Emeritus Professor of Public Health, Glasgow University, explains exactly the dangers of the Whopping Cough vaccine from a Emeritus Professor of Public Health
http://www.vaccinationinformationnetwork.com/the-dangers-of-whooping-cough-vaccination-prof-gordon-stewart/
"the marginal advantages of the vaccine in children over one year of age have to be offset against adverse effects of the vaccine itself, which are very common indeed and may be followed occasionally by irreversible brain damage, paralysis and mental deficiency. Because of this danger, or for fear of it, many parents and doctors are reluctant to vaccinate their children."
Dr. Suzanne Humphries Lecture on vaccines and health
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFQQOv-Oi6U
Dr Tenpenny, What the CDC documents say about vaccines
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1VwVBmx0Ng
Here a professor explains his findings regarding the dangers of injecting Aluminum, which is contained in most vaccines
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCzdliixnmI
Here's the study itself:-
Aluminum adjuvant linked to Gulf War illness induces motor neuron death in mice
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17114826/
Experts complain of the 'witch hunt' which takes place after any scientist reports on vaccine dangers
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/articles/28882443/
Association between type 1 diabetes and Hib vaccine Causal relation is likely
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1116914/
Infant mortality rates regressed against number of vaccine doses routinely given
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3170075/
The Polio vaccines are causing problems worse than Polio
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22591873
"Furthermore, while India has been polio-free for a year, there has been a huge increase in non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP). In 2011, there were an extra 47,500 new cases of NPAFP. Clinically indistinguishable from polio paralysis but twice as deadly, the incidence of NPAFP was directly proportional to doses of oral polio received. Though this data was collected within the polio surveillance system, it was not investigated. The principle of primum-non-nocere was violated."
Recordings from the CDC whistleblower exposing lies, corruption, manipulation of data and destruction of evidence
http://fearlessparent.org/cdc-data-stranglehold-blocks-autism-vaccine-research-recording-2/
Follow the money!! (see below)
How Much US Pediatricians Make From Vaccines
"So how much money do doctors really make from vaccines? The average American pediatrician has 1546 patients, though some pediatricians see many more. The vast majority of those patients are very young, perhaps because children transition to a family physician or stop visiting the doctor at all as they grow up. As they table above explains, Blue Cross Blue Shield pays pediatricians $400 per fully vaccinated child. If your pediatrician has just 100 fully-vaccinated patients turning 2 this year, that’s $40,000. Yes, Blue Cross Blue Shield pays your doctor a $40,000 bonus for fully vaccinating 100 patients under the age of 2. If your doctor manages to fully vaccinate 200 patients, that bonus jumps to $80,000. V But here’s the catch: Under Blue Cross Blue Shield’s rules, pediatricians lose the whole bonus unless at least 63% of patients are fully vaccinated, and that includes the flu vaccine. So it’s not just $400 on your child’s head–it could be the whole bonus. To your doctor, your decision to vaccinate your child might be worth $40,000, or much more, depending on the size of his or her practice.
If your pediatrician recommends that your child under the age of 2 receive the flu vaccine–even though the flu vaccine has never been studied in very young children and evidence suggests that the flu vaccine actually weakens a person’s immune system over the long term–ask yourself: Is my doctor more concerned with selling me vaccines to keep my child healthy or to send his child to private school?"
https://wellnessandequality.com/2016/06/20/how-much-money-do-pediatricians-really-make-from-vaccines/
Screenshot Page 5
2016 Performance Recognition Program PDF
Harvard doctor admits he's too scared to speak truth on vaccines as Big Pharma are watching, implies there will be consequences
Human papilloma virus vaccine and primary ovarian failure: another facet of the autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23902317
Smoke, Mirrors and the "Disappearance" of Polio
In the Senate Big Pharma getting told off for putting substances in vaccines without first performing the necessary safety studies
This study found that it is the vaccines made using aborted fetal cells which are causing Autism
Impact of environmental factors on the prevalence of autistic disorder after 1979
http://www.academicjournals.org/journal/JPHE/article-abstract/C98151247042
Under Freedom of Information we see that CDC experts privately admit the dangers of vaccines, they admit that vaccines are causing neurological problems, speech delays and they warn the information must be embargoed.
http://www.aapsonline.org/vaccines/cdcfdaexperts.htm
Key quotes below:-
Dr. Johnston, pg. 14-15 & 19-20: "The data on its toxicity (shows) it can cause neurologic and renal toxicity, including death.”
Dr. Weil, pg. 24: "There are just a host of neurodevelopmental data that would suggest that we’ve got a serious problem." .... "the potential for aluminum and central nervous system toxicity was established by dialysis data. To think there isn’t some possible problem here is unreal.”
Dr. Verstraeten, pg. 31: "we have found statistically significant relationships between the exposure and outcomes for these different exposures and outcomes."
Dr. Verstraeten, pg. 44: "Now for speech delays, which is the largest single disorder in this category of neurologic delays. The results are a suggestion of a trend with a small dip. The overall test for trend is highly statistically significant above one.”
Dr. Bernier, pg. 113: "So we are asking people who have a great job protecting this information up until now, to continue to do that until the time of the ACIP meeting. So to basically consider this embargoed information."
Dr. Johnson, pg. 198: "This association leads me to favor a recommendation that infants up to two years old not be immunized with Thimerosal containing vaccines if suitable alternative preparations are available.” ... "I do not want that grandson to get a Thimerosal containing vaccine until we know better what is going on."
Dr. Weil, pg. 207: "The number of dose related relationships are linear and statistically significant. You can play with this all you want. They are linear. They are statistically significant.
Dr. Brent, pg. 229 "we are in a bad position from the standpoint of defending any lawsuits"
Dr. Clements, pg 247- 249: "that I am very concerned that this has gotten this far, and that having got this far, how you present in a concerted voice the information to the ACIP in a way they will be able to handle it and not get exposed"
Dr. Bernier, pg. 256: "just consider this embargoed information, if I can use that term, and very highly protected information"
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
Here are some recommended resources:-
National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) https://www.nvic.org/
Physicians For Informed Consent (PIC) https://physiciansforinformedconsent.org/measles/
Childrens Health Defense https://childrenshealthdefense.org/
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
To understand what is going on, we have to first realize that the fox is guarding the hen house. The industry is regulating itself, they have captured the regulators. It is not in their interest to find problems with their own products, so they never setup studies which are designed to find real problems, meaning vaccines are not based on actual science but purely on biased assumption.
The next problem we have is that the system is setup to allow companies to profit us when we are sick, so the goal posts are in the wrong place, if a vaccine makes a child sick for life by inducing autoimmune disease or allergy, pharma get a new customer for life, so there is no incentive to clean up the vaccines.
What you will find is that the longer you go on researching vaccines, the more you will be against them, even ever so many years researching I still find new problems every week. If the real science was ever allowed to get out, all vaccines would be banned immediately and many powerful people would go direct to jail.
If there is anyone you know who is on the fence and hard to convince out of vaccinating, one thing you can do to help them is encourage them to reduce the risk. To reduce the risk of vaccinating limit vaccines to one per sitting, never receiving more. Never vaccinate under age 2 to remove the risk of SIDS. Never give Tylenol/Paracetamol around the time of vaccination. Never vaccinate a child who has recently received a course of antibiotics. Never vaccinate a sick child. All of these tips help to reduce the risk, but unfortunately the risk of the vaccine will still outweigh any theoretical benefit.
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
Here's an independent Vaxxed Vs Unvaxxed study, one of the most worrying trends is that the Vaxxed are full of neurodevelopmental diseases (NDD)
http://info.cmsri.org/the-driven-researcher-blog/vaccinated-vs.-unvaccinated-guess-who-is-sicker
1 ItsWorthReading 2018-10-15
Fucking hilarious! You cry because there is no link and you're too lazy to educate yourself. Someone provides you a link, you ignore it and attack their post history.
Your insistence on remaining wilfully ignorant is extremely entertaining!
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
It always amazes me, they pretend not to know how to use Google, depending on a link, then either they learn how to use Google and only head to shill sites, or they start with ad hominems
1 LEGALinSCCCA 2018-10-15
Forced vaccinations scare the hell out of me. And it should you. They'll put anything in there
1 sinedup4thiscomment 2018-10-15
Agreed!
1 sedimentaryisle 2018-10-15
my friend is a school teacher of 25 years.. who refused vaccines for their own two children after seeing "the wave of autistic children coming through the school system"
1 t0pgun- 2018-10-15
The whole anti bad thing is nonsense. There is science for proving this kind of stuff. Disease kill people and vaccination creates immunity. Talk to people who had been at risk of polio.
Smallpox is pretty common when I was growing up. Getting smallpox actually creates immunity from further infection. Why get smalllpox when you can get vaccinated.
Anti vax is up there with flat earth.
1 ElectricTieRackMotor 2018-10-15
dude you should probably read a little more on the subject. That polio story they give you when you're a kid to get you all excited about vaccines is based on bullshit.
1 VonsFavoriteChicken 2018-10-15
Share your sources pls. His search may not turn up what you're referencing.
1 t0pgun- 2018-10-15
Proof, I have seen people with polio. We were vaccinated in school.
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
It was DDT poisoning not polio
1 sinedup4thiscomment 2018-10-15
I can understand being skeptical about vaccines, especially if you are only concerned about specific vaccines, and the precedent of compulsory vaccination.
That said, there's lots of data supporting the effectiveness of vaccines in principle.
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
The problem being that vaccines are causing more harm than theoretical benefit
1 sinedup4thiscomment 2018-10-15
I will happily concede that if you can link me to a scientific study that shows this to be the case. Otherwise I will assume it is speculation.
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
If you check my post history you will find lots of useful studies
The industry simply tries to avoid any well designed studies into vaccine safety, leaving vaccines as a cult based on assumption. They are not confident in vaccines, otherwise they would setup the necessary studies to prove they bring a net benefit, but such studies are their worst fear.
1 sinedup4thiscomment 2018-10-15
False, all though it does sound sexy, I'll give you that.
This is misleading. They attempt to do this with every single vaccine that receives licensing. It's standard practice to formulate the best estimate possible for a vaccine's effectiveness.
What studies?
1 orangearbuds 2018-10-15
Not who you're replying to but I'll elaborate on this.
Vaccine safety trials are flawed in a few ways. First of all, they don't use a saline placebo. The control for the hep b vaccine was the polio vaccine. The control for the hpv shot was a shot of aluminum. The control for the prevnar vaccine was the meningitis vaccine. Kids in both group will have adverse reactions, but they'll deem it safe because the "placebo" also had adverse reactions, and the placebo is already presumed safe.
Next, they don't do long term health follow-ups. The hep b vaccine... follow up in 4 days. The other safety trial for it...5 days.
Lastly, the CDC does tons of epidemiological studies but they're flawed in design. They've never looked at fully vaccinated vs fully unvaccinated kids. Instead they look at vaxxed vs LESS vaxxed kids, which creates something called "healthy user bias".
I'll come back and edit with links.
1 sinedup4thiscomment 2018-10-15
Yes, sources would be appreciated. Thank you.
1 robotchristwork 2018-10-15
WTF is happening in this sub? It used to have some really cool investigations with a ton of links to good sources and interesting conversation going on, now there's an interview with a nobody talking about shit you hear from your uneducated aunts on facebook, not a single source, not a single concrete fact and a million of "supossitions", from someone who claims there's children lifes at stake but "he's worried he may lose his pension" if he gives a name, and somehow this gets upvoted, and also the comments are getting downvoted.
​
C'mon mods, if this doesn't get removed I'm pretty sure I won't be the only one to completely get the fuck out of this place.
1 ItsWorthReading 2018-10-15
*Slow Clap
Wow, that was dramatic! Nice Concern Troll spin on that!
1 robotchristwork 2018-10-15
Concern troll is someone that deviates the discussion from the topic at hand to benefit their interests, I'm talking about the topic at hand: there's not a single well educated fact spilled on this post, not even a source.
​
What you're doing is an Ad Hominem fallacy to try to deviate from my commentary.
1 ItsWorthReading 2018-10-15
Cookie-cutter Commentary from the Mainstream Perspective... just what people come to read on r/conspiracy!
Thank you very much for your valuable contribution!
1 hiimsubclavian 2018-10-15
I'm sure there's a happy medium between mainstream and pants-on-head retarded.
1 Entropick 2018-10-15
No shit and amen brother
1 robotchristwork 2018-10-15
Man, if you need to attack a person that is stating something different than what you think to defend your arguments, your arguments are indefensible, hope you can think about that.
1 ItsWorthReading 2018-10-15
Is your search engine broken? Your mind would be blown if you took just an hour and searched up some of the keywords that are offered here.
Have you never heard of the cancer-causing simian virus, SV-40, which was injected into millions of people as a contaminant of the polio vaccine? Have you ever looked at information which contradicts your assumption of reality, or do you just ignore anything which doesn't agree with it?
1 UrhoKalevaKekkonen 2018-10-15
“If I had a child now, the last thing I would allow is vaccination.”
Even if there were bad ethics in some pharmaceutical companies' research programs (using the innocent and unaware ppl as guinea pigs or countries as their laboratories) above like statements are still overblown.
It's like prohibiting water or wine only because throughout the history there have been malicious actors dropping venom into goblets and poisoning the innocent...
One thing people don't understand with vaccination programs is population level risk benefit ratio. It's clinical evidence calculation based on large numbers - not per one individual. Biiiig data. Yes, some individuals suffer side effects, severe damage even loss of life.
Of course situation is different in every country. But my honest opinion is that mostly ppl are against vaccination only because they don't know, they are uneducated regarding the subject matter and simply instead of getting good data and information they are influenced with anti-vaccination propaganda. Denial is easier option than trying to understand the science behind the vaccination programs. And scientist may have done poor job in explaining it.
I also want to question the claim that "- - -WHO, is driven by a depopulation agenda". Why it is so widely seen that vaccination programs are a murderous conspiracy? Why it can not be exactly the other way around i.e. anti-vaccination movement is the murderous conspiracy making ppl to believe it and then a simple flu, insect or bat shit contamination wipes them out and off the Earth?
There are some conspiracy theories not much worth to keep alive. Yet, at the same time I thank them who reveal proved wrongdoings of medical industry.
Global warming - believe it or not - will bring new microbiological threats to areas that used to be free of them - believe it or not. Denial of this and the efficiency of the vaccination programs is well... what can I say? Good luck with that then...
Just an article I found quite interesting, though not quite connected to what I wrote:
https://www.scidev.net/global/health/news/anti-vaccine-attitudes-go-deeper-than-education.html
and another:
https://www.newsweek.com/india-shameful-failure-vaccinate-its-children-506928
1 Lives_With_His_Mom 2018-10-15
Who are you again?
Conspiracy. Theory.
We are Theorists, and we have to make some assumptions, it's not like this post goes against the 100% clean record on vaccines.
Like most conspiracy theories, it gives just enough to make you go "Hmm.." about the "Official Story".
Much of what we talk about have to lean on some assumptions to get to the conclusion, but we work at finding out the truth, or getting as close to it as possible.
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
Nice artifical upvotes!
If you read the regular updates from Jon Rappoport since this interview it becomes clear he is one of the most informed people on vaccines, and is always way ahead of the curve
1 greenbeltstomper 2018-10-15
The issue with autism and vaccination would be less of an problem if people would simply wait until there was a modicum of natural brain development before pumping a cocktail of diseases into a baby's bloodstream.
1 Tsuikaya 2018-10-15
I don't know how others plan to raise their kids, but my day 1 old baby doesn't need STD prevention vaccines
1 WageSlav3 2018-10-15
Precisely, the reason they don't research mmr and brain damage is that it's to early to do the research. Dr Wakefield says wait till 3 years old before considering MMR.
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
The longer you hold off the more the risk is reduced, but some 5yo's have still regressed into autism after MMR.
Here's some data from honest doctors about the MMR vaccine
https://physiciansforinformedconsent.org/measles/vrs/
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
Here's a vaxxed vs unvaccinated study which found that the vaccinated are far more likely to have neurodevelopmental diseases.
http://info.cmsri.org/the-driven-researcher-blog/vaccinated-vs.-unvaccinated-guess-who-is-sicker
*Vaccinated children were over four-fold more likely to be diagnosed on the Autism Spectrum (OR 4.3)
*Vaccinated children were 30-fold more likely to be diagnosed with allergic rhinitis (hay fever) than non-vaccinated children
*Vaccinated children were over five-fold more likely to be diagnosed with a learning disability than unvaccinated children (OR 5.2)
*Vaccinated children were 340 percent more likely to be diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder than unvaccinated children (OR 4.3)
*Vaccinated children were 3.8-fold more likely to be diagnosed with middle ear infection (otitis media) than unvaccinated children (OR 3.8)
*Vaccinated children were 700 percent more likely to have had surgery to insert ear drainage tubes than unvaccinated children (OR 8.1)
1 DonJonathan97 2018-10-15
I want sources. I want proof. Your whole wall of text doesn’t mean anything to me unless we have concrete evidence.
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
Since this interview Jon Rappoport has wrote many articles showing that he understands vaccine science and is way ahead of the curve.
You seem like you are in the wrong sub
1 DonJonathan97 2018-10-15
Oh yeah obviously his research and articles have impacted in such a big way in the vaccine community.
1 WageSlav3 2018-10-15
I want a more money than i need to worry about. Life's a bitch!
1 DonJonathan97 2018-10-15
What
1 Entropick 2018-10-15
Just for the record, no meaning whatsoever; I am not having kids, period, due in partial part to the unpredictability of the situation but also just how assholeish it makes the conformists act.
1 EatingTurkey 2018-10-15
I have a friend who's been on an HIV cocktail since 99. Both he and his partner have. I would hardly call this a hoax that compromises his immune system. Those two guys are among the healthiest people I know and without their meds would definitely have compromised immune systems, assuming they were still alive now.
Odd interview.
1 forest_trollio 2018-10-15
lol at provax retards hanging in conspiracy
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
They think they are wearing camouflage
1 Day911 2018-10-15
I've never understood depopulation. Why would the rulers want depopulation, when a dead person is no value to them? A living person as a slave brings them money.
1 new_old_trash 2018-10-15
I love Jon, but just FYI, he sells a lot of material on developing one's imagination, and one of the exercises is to create imaginary dialogues with people. At some point I put 2 and 2 together that "Dr. Jack True", his supposed mentor in the area of hypnosis, never existed and is just a literary creation of his.
So it's hard to take any of his other interviews seriously without some kind of audio or video evidence. Just a bunch of a text? Could very well be one of his personal imagination exercises.
I do believe Jon does his homework, but one can't discount the possibility that he fictionalizes his own research in the form of these anonymous leakers, to bump his exposure a little bit.
1 Sovietjero 2018-10-15
It's just about finding the balance.
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
Bank balance
1 The_Frag_Man 2018-10-15
Follow the money
1 T3Baron 2018-10-15
After reading all the comments, I am compelled to ask of the antagonists.
Prove they are safe.
Prove to us that the federal government is working in our best interest.
They have fucked us at every corner. Why not here?
This is as real as it gets.
What? You can't copy and paste?
We unwittingly live in an unconstitutional nation. We are constantly screwed over by these pharma outfits controlled by Rothschild and Rockefeller.
I'm fucking sick of it.
1 delusionallogic66 2018-10-15
The number one thing is exercise which does not need to be strenuous. Walking at least a mile a day, yard work, house cleaning... keep moving each day. As for the diet, eat vegetables, meat preferably non processed. Hamburger, steak, chicken, pork etc. Salads are best or frozen ok. Check all labels for sugar content. Buy no higher than 2% sugar. There is many sugar free products. Salad dressing, cookies, jelly or jam. I use stevia and heavy whipping cream in my coffee. Do searches on diabetic diet online and compare the info. Very important to exercise and loose some weight..at least 20 lbs. Weight will come down at sugar and carbs are removed from your diet. The sugar in your body coats the fat cells and needs to be removed. I would have days of very low energy, as the sugar was being removed. This happens early in the process, first month. That eventually goes away. Diet soda ok. No proccessed fruit juice, no honey, some peanut butter and real butter. Wheat or multi grain bread... no white bread. Again check online... and try to exercise to get some weight off. Good luck. There is plenty of food out there, sugar is not one of them.
1 metal-4-life 2018-10-15
why put all this random shit into vaccines? would'nt it be cheaper to make if they had less ingredients?
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
The industry profits from making is sick
1 orangearbuds 2018-10-15
Excellent post! How do we know it's a real interview though? I haven't read through the comments so forgive me if you've already answered this.
1 ChipChippersonsSoul 2018-10-15
If you think polio is caused by vaccines you’re the problem not the solution
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
CDC "The oral polio vaccine (OPV) is used in many countries to protect against polio disease and has been essential to the eradication effort. People who receive OPV may shed the virus and can infect others"
https://www.cdc.gov/phpr/polioviruscontainment/diseaseandvirus.htm
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
Spot on!
1 FauxMoGuy 2018-10-15
damn man what exactly is wrong with skepticism of an “interview” that reads like an r/con fanfic. The guy does not provide any answers outside of the realm of common knowledge of anyone with an entry level health sciences job and when pointed out, you double down that it’s ok that he provides no evidence or mechanisms for his claims, especially for someone who claims to have been a part of “the inner circle” (like come on it was relatively obvious by this point). but since it’s bias confirming we’ll ignore it and go with the “it’s against the rules to directly call you a shill so i’m just going to say you sound like one” routine
1 ItsWorthReading 2018-10-15
Nah, that guy doesn't want to actually learn anything. That would interfere with his delusion that he already knows everything!
1 Tsuikaya 2018-10-15
I don't know how others plan to raise their kids, but my day 1 old baby doesn't need STD prevention vaccines
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
It is very easy for the regulars to spot astroturfers, they stick out like sore thumbs and give themselfs silly upvotes for ‘official story’ posts
1 ChipChippersonsSoul 2018-10-15
Except the other person could give me any support....
1 WageSlav3 2018-10-15
Precisely, the reason they don't research mmr and brain damage is that it's to early to do the research. Dr Wakefield says wait till 3 years old before considering MMR.
1 EnoughNoLibsSpam 2018-10-15
So basically, you are lazy, your mind is already made up without any research, and anyone who disagrees with your un-informed opinion is delusional?
Did I miss anything?
1 ObserverOfTruth 2018-10-15
Can you tell me what diet you've used? I have family members who could benefit. I've seen suggestions for high-fat low-carb and I've also seen suggestions for no-fat vegan.
1 liverpoolwin 2018-10-15
Here's a vaxxed vs unvaccinated study which found that the vaccinated are far more likely to have neurodevelopmental diseases.
http://info.cmsri.org/the-driven-researcher-blog/vaccinated-vs.-unvaccinated-guess-who-is-sicker
*Vaccinated children were over four-fold more likely to be diagnosed on the Autism Spectrum (OR 4.3)
*Vaccinated children were 30-fold more likely to be diagnosed with allergic rhinitis (hay fever) than non-vaccinated children
*Vaccinated children were over five-fold more likely to be diagnosed with a learning disability than unvaccinated children (OR 5.2)
*Vaccinated children were 340 percent more likely to be diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder than unvaccinated children (OR 4.3)
*Vaccinated children were 3.8-fold more likely to be diagnosed with middle ear infection (otitis media) than unvaccinated children (OR 3.8)
*Vaccinated children were 700 percent more likely to have had surgery to insert ear drainage tubes than unvaccinated children (OR 8.1)
1 sigismund1880 2018-10-15
long-term = years not several generations
of course you can, this has been done and the results weren't pretty.
​