Bits n pieces (from Shawn Siegel a Vaccine Research Expert) Its an issue of trust. Question. Research. Educate. The vaccine industry is expert at two techniques: provision of misinformation, and suppression of information critical to vaccine decisions. Misinformation: In an article on the website of the Childrens Hospital of Philadelphia last spring - CHOP being one of the leading medical proponents of vaccination in the U.S. - the hospital urged all parents to give their kids the chicken pox vaccine. They mentioned that there might be some nausea, or swelling at the injection site - seemingly minor reactions - but that the vaccine was perfectly safe. However, one look at the manufacturers insert said otherwise. During the clinical trial itself they recorded both upper and lower respiratory tract infections, which, if youve researched, you know are much more threatening than chicken pox, which is hardly threatening at all. But the meat of the matter was the list of adverse reactions reported post-marketing: transverse myelitis, Guillain-Barré, pneumonia, anaphylactic shock, shingles, encephalitis, and a dozen other serious, potentially catastrophic reactions. This is key: the insert was careful to mention, as are public health and medical officials, constantly, that the reactions are not necessarily related to the vaccine. What they always fail to mention is that, not only are the reported reactions not necessarily *not* related to the vaccines, but that the nature of such a correlation insists that there be adequate proof in each individual case of no causal relationship before it can be assumed there is none. That is, while obviously there will be some reported reactions ultimately proved unrelated to the vaccine, the correlation implies causation. Its exactly the same as the correlation of smoking to lung cancer; not everyone who gets lung cancer smokes, and not everyone who smokes gets lung cancer, but yes, smoking causes lung cancer. Whether once given the information you would consent to the vaccine, is a personal decision; whether you would choose to vaccinate after having been told that the vaccine could brain damage your child, is your choice. The denial of that information to parents, however, is in no way a personal decision - in the case of those public officials and medical authorities, its an abuse of the bully pulpit attendant their positions. Their information is misleading, and potentially catastrophically so. The same type of obfuscation of truth attends every vaccine. Suppression of information: the CDC in the U.S. discovered in their own in-house study in 1999 a direct correlation between the mercury in vaccines and the rising incidence of speech and learning disorders and autism, but never warned the American people. Every parent can recognize that there is no excuse for their behavior. Ultimately - several years later - the study data had been reformatted twice, and the Institute of Medicine announced that no link had been found, so none existed. The validity of that announcement aside for the moment, it was nevertheless the absolute responsibility of the CDC to alert parents the moment it was discovered that there was a distinct possibility that vaccinations were damaging our kids neurologically. As to the validity of the announcement, David Kirby chronicled the entire episode thoroughly in his book, Evidence of Harm. You must not take my word on Facebook - or anyone elses. Read; for the sake of your kids, read. There are many books on the vaccine paradigm, written by award-winning, well credentialed investigative journalists, whove spent years researching the subject. What they unearth you will never see in the mainstream.
Posted on: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 17:45:31 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015