Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 10
 on: October 20, 2018, 11:38:18 pm 
Started by Luck - Last post by LeahxpeArl
Supreme Court Ruling: Parents Can’t Sue Vaccine Makers

 on: October 20, 2018, 11:37:43 pm 
Started by Luck - Last post by LeahxpeArl
BMJ on “vaccine nonprofits”

 on: October 20, 2018, 11:37:01 pm 
Started by Luck - Last post by LeahxpeArl
TDAP in Pregnancy: Relative Rick Reduction vs Absolute Risk Reduction

A great debate is raging about whether we should have mandatory vaccination to prevent childhood illnesses.  Mandatory vaccination would do away with a religious, ethical, or scientific disapproval of a vaccine.
A study from the University of North Carolina School of Medicine reported that the Tdap vaccination during pregnancy reduced the occurrence of infantile pertussis. (1) (2)
This study is a perfect example of why we need informed consent on the safety and efficacy of vaccines and why we should not have government mandates about vaccines.
The study was published in the June, 2018 edition of the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.  Keep in mind that in 2013, the CDC started recommending that all women receive the Tdap vaccine during pregnancy in order to pass passive pertussis immunity to their newborn.
Pertussis is a very serious illness for the newborn.  It results in a persistent cough and can result in death of the very young.
I have been very critical about mandates that recommend vaccinating pregnant women when the proper studies have not been done. One way to conduct a proper vaccine study is to compare vaccinated with the unvaccinated.
The UNC study did compare vaccinated with the unvaccinated.
The researchers reviewed more than 675,000 pregnancies from 2010-2014 and analyzed insurance claims data to identify receipt of Tdap during pregnancy.  Then, the scientists looked at hospitalizations and outpatient visits for pertussis in the infants through 18 months of age.  In the news release describing the success of the Tdap vaccine, the authors stated,
“The clinical outcomes show that the immunity passed from mother to fetus during pregnancy protected the infant during the first six months of life, before the infant completes the full course of the pertussis vaccine themselves.”
Furthermore, they stated,
“The study found that in the first six months of life for infants whose mothers were immunized during pregnancy, there was a 75 percent reduction of pertussis hospitalizations and a 46 percent reduction of any pertussis cases.”
The lead author of the study said,
“This just adds more fuel to the fire for encouraging women to get Tdap during pregnancy,” said Becker-Dreps. “A lot of women are concerned about vaccines in general, but you really might be harming your baby by not getting this vaccine.”
Let’s look at the data that lead to those conclusions.
Conclusion 1
The study found that in the first six months of life for infants whose mothers were immunized during pregnancy, there was a 75 percent reduction of pertussis hospitalizations…
The researchers looked at infants admitted to the hospital with pertussis and compared two groups of pregnant women:  one group who received the Tdap and the other group that did not.
In the group that received the Tdap vaccine, there were 7 cases of pertussis out of 90,445 newborns.  That comes out to a rate of 0.01% (7/90,445).  The other group who did not receive the Tdap had 151 cases of pertussis out of 542,380 studied.  That equates to a rate of 0.03% (151/542,380).
The authors stated that ”…there was a 75% reduction of pertussis hospitalizations,” in those that received the vaccine.  That is true if you are going to use relative risk values.
Relative risk analysis is a statistical method used by Big Pharma to make a poorly performing drug or therapy appear much better than it actually is.  Whenever I lecture to medical students or physicians, I spend time teaching them about statistics as nearly all health care professionals know little about statistics.
I emphasize that clinical decisions about whether to use a particular drug or therapy should never be made on relative risk values.  The authors simply calculated the relative risk by using the following formula:  0.01%/0.03%. (Note:  The numbers are slightly rounded here.)
A more accurate way to assess the effectiveness of vaccinating pregnant women with Tdap to prevent hospitalization from pertussis is to look at the absolute difference in risk.
The absolute difference in risk between vaccinated and unvaccinated in this study is:  0.03% – 0.01% = 0.02%.  That means the absolute difference in risk between the two groups is 0.02% or 0.0002.
Once the absolute risk difference is calculated, I can calculate the number of pregnant women that need to be vaccinated with Tdap to prevent one case of hospitalized pertussis.
That number is 5,000 (1/0.0002).  Therefore, according to this study, 5,000 pregnant women need to be vaccinated with Tdap to prevent one case of hospitalized pertussis.
A more accurate conclusion the authors should have stated is this:
“This study showed that the Tdap vaccine is 0.02% effective at preventing hospitalization from pertussis. In other words, the vaccine will not benefit 99.98% who take it.”
Conclusion 2
The study found that in the first six months of life for infants whose mothers were immunized during pregnancy, there was a…46 percent reduction of any pertussis cases.
Of course, the 46% reduction cited is the relative risk reduction—remember, relative risk values are used by Big Pharma to make a poorly performing drug or therapy appear better than it actually is.
Let’s calculate the absolute risk difference here.  In the group of children who had pertussis where the mother did not have a Tdap vaccination, there were 403 cases out of 542,380 which is 0.07%.
In the other group where the mother did have the vaccination there were 32 cases out of 90,445 or 0.04%.  The absolute risk difference between the two groups is:  0.03%.
That means that 3,333 women need to be vaccinated during pregnancy to prevent one case of pertussis in the newborn (according to this study).
In other words, this vaccine helps 0.03% who receive it or stated another way, 99.7% who take the vaccine receive no benefit.
The Tdap vaccine contains a known neurotoxin (aluminum) and carcinogen (formadehyde).  There are ZERO safety studies shown that it is safe to inject either substance into a human much less a pregnant human.
There are other problems with this study such as the authors having conflicts of interest with vaccine manufacturers and the way they classified infants with pertussis, but I will leave that alone for now.
Still think we don’t need accurate disclosures on the safety and effectiveness of vaccines? Do you still want government to dictate what goes in our bodies?
When I was trained, I was taught to be very careful when prescribing any therapy for a pregnant woman.  I was always taught to err on the side of caution.
I think that was sage advice.
Tdap for pregnant women?  Give women the appropriate information and let them decide.
 link to original study missing but discussion is important to preserve.

 on: October 20, 2018, 11:35:15 pm 
Started by Luck - Last post by LeahxpeArl
Sanofi charged with bribing governments to procure more sales and prescriptions


Class action lawsuit filed in columbia

New concerns about HPV vaccine

HPV Gardasil Injury Scandals Worldwide Why is US media Silent

Japan schemes for managing symptoms after gardasil...including CHRONIC GENERALIZED PAIN

Retracted Paper Linking Vaccine to Behavioral Issues Republished After Revisions

".. Women in the study who received the Gardasil vaccine were, indeed, less likely to be infected with the four strains of the virus included the vaccine: About 11 percent of vaccinated women were infected with HPV 6, 11, 16 or 18, compared with nearly 20 percent of unvaccinated women.
However, the women who received the vaccine were more likely to be infected with other high-risk HPV strains not included in the vaccine. About 61 percent of the women who received the vaccine were infected with another type of high-risk HPV, compared with 40 percent of women who did not receive the vaccine. (HPV strains are considered "high risk" if they can cause cellular changes that can eventually lead to cancer.)
After the researchers took into account factors that could affect a person's risk of HPV infection (including his or her number of sexual partners), the women who received the original HPV vaccine still had about a 40 percent greater risk of being infected with a high-risk HPV strain not included in the vaccine. [10 Do's and Don'ts to Reduce Your Risk of Cancer]
It's unclear why the vaccinated women were more likely to be infected with other high-risk strains, the researchers said..."

Why would anyone risk this when safe sex can prevent it?

Concerns from American of College of Pediatricians
Japan pulled it from the schedule
2009 Spain halts batch of Merck's Gardasil
213 Women who took Gardasil Suffered Permanent Disability 2012
“The only thing different about that day was that shot:” Did a trip to the doctor kill a healthy 12-year-old girl?”
Lead Developer Of HPV Vaccines Comes Clean, Warns Parents & Young Girls It’s All A Giant Deadly Scam (Dr Diane Harper)
Gardasil Researcher Speaks Out (Dr Diane Harper) by Sharyl Attkisson
US court pays $6 million to Gardasil victims
Gardasil and cervarix vaccine adverse reports:

Gardsil researcher speaks out

Medscape, June 13, 2013: Japan Withdraws HPV Vaccine Recommendation for Girls.

Disturbing video footage of school girls' adverse reactions to vaccination.

Disturbing video footage of school girls' adverse reactions to vaccination.

Irish HPV vaccine program national disgrace

Cochrane review flawed

Some of the above links are not working d/t facebook changing them but the titles are there and if anyone is up to finding the actual articles, they are out there.

 on: October 20, 2018, 11:33:28 pm 
Started by Luck - Last post by LeahxpeArl

pertussis reports from 2010 (because these are (2016/17). Here is what I came up with after 3 hours of researching numbers from CDC, U.S. census and Dept. Of Health.
Kids ages 1-4 = 16,070,697
84.6% are FULLY vaxxed (3+ shots).
0.5% are fully UNvaxxed (no shots)
14.9% are undervaxxed (1-2 shots)
(As a side note, 94.7% of kids aged 5 were fully vaxxed in 2017 for pertussis)

In 2010, there were approximately 1,345 cases of pertussis in children ages 1-4 years. There was 27,550 reported cases of pertussis in ALL age groups.

Using percentage averages in above picture, 44% of kids were fully vaxxed, 11% were unvaxxed, 5% were under vaxxed and 40% are unknown.
If we take the unknowns, and subtract what we know, we can assume this to mean that as a whole, in kids who got pertussis, out of 1,345
1,047 were fully vaxxed
123 were under vaxxed
175 were NOT vaxxed

Meaning in all groups, you have less than a 1% chance of getting pertussis; however, receving at least 1 TdaP shot seemed to reduce that chance over all.
0.0077% of vaxxed kids get pertussis
0.0073% of under vaxxed kids get pertussis
0.0217% of UNvaxxed kids get pertussis

So while this DOES show that you are significantly less likely to get pertussis if you have received even 1 shot, we have to keep in mind that out of the reported cases, 20 people out of 27,550 died of pertussis itself. Approximately 3 of those deaths were in children under the age of 5; HOWEVER, an average of 100+ people die of the pertussis VACCINE annually and approximately
673 report adverse reactions according to VAERS.

So considering all this, YES vaccines may reduce your chances of getting pertussis; but, you'll increase your chances of dying or being injured.

We also don't know how many of these infections were caused by the vaccine, shedding or wild strains.

 on: October 20, 2018, 11:32:13 pm 
Started by Luck - Last post by LeahxpeArl
Did you know that parents getting vaccinated against whooping cough had no impact on the incidence of whooping cough in their babies?

In an assessment of the impact of vaccinating parents with a pertussis-containing vaccine during a pertussis epidemic it was found that, “There was no difference in the incidence of pertussis among infants whose parents were both vaccinated postpartum compared to those with unvaccinated parents (1.9 vs 2.2 infections per 1000 infants; adjusted HR 0.91; 95%CI 0.55–1.53)...the final cohort contained 53,149 children, 118 of whom developed pertussis...In our setting, vaccinating parents with dTpa during the four weeks following delivery did not reduce pertussis diagnoses in infants.”

Did you know that fully vaccinated siblings are a major pertussis (whooping cough) source of infection for infants 6 months of age and younger? During the peak epidemic period “siblings were the most important sources of pertussis in infants 6 months and younger, particularly fully vaccinated children aged 2 and 3 years…Even if cocooning programs could achieve full vaccination coverage of parents and ensure all siblings were fully vaccinated according to national schedules, waning immunity in siblings could provide a means for ongoing transmission to infants.”

Did you know that whooping cough vaccination has likely driven selection of more dangerous strains of the bacteria that causes pertussis? “Pertussis resurgence was associated with a mutation in the gene coding for fimbrial proteins, although the functional role of that mutation remains unclear. Based on the above observations, it has been proposed that vaccination has resulted in selection of more virulent strains that are more efficiently transmitted by previously primed hosts."

Did you know that there’s disagreement around how to protect against whooping cough?

Regarding Bordetella pertussis the author considered that, “we are far from a full understanding of the organism, the disease, the correlates of protection…immunity after vaccination is more or less transient. Therefore, it is not surprising that control of pertussis is relatively poor…The result is the continued circulation of the bacterium in family contacts, regardless of their vaccination history, resulting in exposure of vulnerable newborns.”

Our unvaccinated and under-vaccinated population did not appear to contribute significantly to the increased rate of clinical pertussis. Surprisingly, the highest incidence of disease was among previously vaccinated children in the eight to twelve year age group.”

"After the fifth dose of DTaP, the odds of acquiring pertussis increased by an average of 42% per year."

This study shows that efficacy of the DTaP falls rapidly. At 2 years post-vaccination, it's just 75%. By 5 years, it's down to 11.9%.

Pertussis 53 - 64% effective in adolescents and adults:

“16.7% spontaneous abortion”

“Routine Tdap did not prevent pertussis outbreaks. Among adolescents who have only received DTaP vaccines in childhood, Tdap provided moderate protection against pertussis during the first year and then waned rapidly so that little protection remained 2-3 years after vaccination.”

Did you know that the whooping cough vaccine is not able to prevent outbreaks?

"Our data suggests that the current schedule of acellular pertussis vaccine doses is insufficient to prevent outbreaks of pertussis. We noted a markedly increased rate of disease from ages 8-12 years, proportionate to the interval since the last scheduled vaccine...The possibility of earlier or more numerous booster doses of acellular pertussis vaccine either as part of routine immunization or for outbreak control should be entertained."

The dtap causes asthma and other respiratory diseases.

 on: October 20, 2018, 11:31:06 pm 
Started by Luck - Last post by LeahxpeArl
Vaccines and Autoimmune Disease

Adjuvent Induced Thyroid Disease

No Signal for Autoimmune Disease following HPV4 Vaccination- conflicts of interest Merck funding

Autoantibodies Present one month following HepA Vaccination in Children

No Signal for Autoimmune Disease Vaccine Datalink study- more conflict of interest

Subacute Thyroiditis Following Flu Vaccine- Case Study

Defective Regulation of Autoimmune Response to Tetanus Toxoid in Hashimoto’s

Effects of Immunization of Functional State of Thyroid Gland and Thyroid Binding In Rats

Adjuvent- Induced Autoimmune Inflammatory Syndrome

 on: October 20, 2018, 11:30:43 pm 
Started by Luck - Last post by LeahxpeArl
AAP admits vaccines has nothing to do with 90% decline in infectious disease in the first half of the 20th century

Flu shots increase the incidence of non-influenza acute respiratory infections in recipients by 340% in the 9 months following vaccination. (

You know how pro-vax people always want to blame us "anti-vaxxers" for wanting to bring back polio?
Put on your critical thinking caps...
Have you heard about the "mysterious polio-like illness" that is causing paralysis in children? The same thing happened in 2014. There were 120 cases of Acute Flaccid Myelitis (AFM) in children in the United States. The 'mysterious illness' coincided with a large outbreak of Enterovirus D68, which is a respiratory virus. EV-D68 affected more than 1,100 people between August and December in 2014. Fourteen people died. Many doctors thought the AFM cases were related to EV-D68. Of those children who were tested, at least 20% of the AFM cases tested positive for EV-D68.
Oh, yeah... and the average age of the affected children?
Ages 4-6 years - Booster shot time.
For some reason, the CDC has been instructing physicians NOT to test for EV-D68 in cases of AFM unless it is strongly suspected.
That seems strange, doesn't it?
With fourteen deaths in 2014, you'd think the CDC would be pulling out all the stops to try and figure out what's going on with this "mysterious polio-like" infection.
But what if?
What if the CDC already knows what's causing it?
Let's break this down...
Enterovirus D68 is a respiratory virus.
Flu shots increase the incidence of non-influenza acute respiratory infections in recipients by 340% in the 9 months following vaccination. (
EV-D68 may be present in a child who presents with mild symptoms of illness, such as sniffling and low-grade fever (like the common cold).
Doctors used to use common sense and not vaccinate children with any symptoms of illness. They can't do that anymore because since the vast expansion of the vaccine schedule, vaccinated children are now constantly sick with upper respiratory infections, ear infections, etc... One mother, who recently told the story of the death of her son from vaccine-induced seizures recalled the conversation she had with the pediatrician when she wanted to delay the DTaP vaccine because her son had a cold. The doctor told her, "If we delayed vaccinating children who have mild cold-like symptoms, we would never vaccinate anyone."
So... more children are receiving flu vaccines and more children are having more frequent respiratory infections as a result.
Because more children are constantly sick and therefore this is "the new normal" for doctors, more children are being vaccinated while they already have a virus.
Now read this...
From Immunologist, Dr. Tetyana Obukhanych:
" 'Provocation polio' has been reproduced in experiments with mice, where the animals were infected with poliovirus and then their muscle was punctured to exacerbate the severity of disease. This is a recipe for any enterovirus (not just polio) to become neuro-invasive when someone has their muscle punctured with a needle (cough, cough) at the time when they are having an enteroviral infection that would otherwise go mild. This is why it is a good rule to never receive intramuscular vaccines (such as Tdap or flu shot) when one is already showing the symptoms of common cold."
Hey, pro-vax folks?
Who is it that's bringing back polio???

Transverse myelitis and vaccines

Polio Vaccines Tainted

Japan Vaccine Schedule History

Cochrane member expelled for criticizing big pharma

Repeat vaccination safe for most children with mild or moderate adverse reactions- authors accepted financial incentives from Glaxo Smith Klein and Pfizer (conflict of interest, bogus study)

The Truth About Vaccines

 on: October 20, 2018, 11:26:10 pm 
Started by Luck - Last post by LeahxpeArl
A recent Yale study has called into question the safety of vaccines and could lend fuel to anti-vaccine advocates like Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has already written a piece covering the study on the news site EcoWatch.
The study, published last month in the journal Frontiers in Psychiatry, reports that patients diagnosed with neuropsychiatric disorders like obsessive-compulsive disorder and anorexia nervosa were more likely to have received vaccinations three months prior to their diagnoses. Though the collaboration between researchers at Pennsylvania State University and the Yale Child Study Center yielded results that seem to dispute the safety of vaccines, the authors asserted that the study needs replication on a larger scale and does not establish a causal relationship between vaccines and neuropsychiatric disorders.…/fpsyt.2017.00003/full
“There’s a fair amount of interest in the vaccine safety question, so let’s try to be critical and do further studies that will help examine this issue in a more thorough way,” said James Leckman, professor of pediatrics and one of the study’s five authors.
"VACCINES had been given to over 20 percent of children later diagnosed with anorexia. Higher numbers of vaccinated children were also found among those who were diagnosed with OCD, anxiety disorder and ADHD as soon as three months after their vaccinations.
The researchers found correlations for one vaccine in particular: the influenza vaccine, which was associated with higher rates of OCD, anorexia, anxiety disorder and tic disorder.
A biological explanation for these correlations has not been found, but a potential mechanism could lie in the body’s immune response to vaccines, the study suggested.
Vaccines work by prodding the immune system to produce antibodies against viruses and bacteria, thus priming the body against these pathogens before they enter it. Some antibodies, however, can react against not only the intended pathogen proteins, but also against human proteins — a phenomenon called cross-reactivity. A 2015 study published in Science Translational Medicine discovered that antibodies elicited by the Pandemrix influenza vaccine cross-reacted with a human brain protein — hypocretin receptor 2.
Autoimmunity, in which antibodies attack human proteins, is also known to play a critical role in normal brain development, Leckman noted. According to Leckman, if children were experiencing inflammation — a process that promotes autoimmunity — at the time of vaccination, the combination of inflammation and vaccination could have deleterious effects on brain development. Such data on vaccination timing was not included in the database on which the study was based.

4000% increase in miscarriage data from VAERS

4250% increase in fetal deaths through flu season 2009-2010

2 flu vaccines cause synergistic increase in fetal deaths in 2009/2010

Fetal Deaths during 2008-2010 flu season

Link between flu vaccines and fetal deaths and still births

Mercury from thimerosal found in breast fed baby's hair Indicating acute exposure to thimerosal in vaccines

Influenza Vaccine Causes Immune Suppression

FluMist Package Insert
Influenza Outbreak in vaccinated population

“Trivalent influenza virus vaccination elicits a measurable inflammatory response among pregnant women.” – Vaccine, 2011

“The 1.8-fold increase in female AEs (Adverse Events) reports to VAERS following administration of pandemic A-H1N1 vaccine relative to seasonal TIV in the 2009/2010 influenza season is too small of a Weber-like increased reporting effect to account for the more than 40-fold increase in fetal-loss reports. Thus, the concomitant administration of the seasonal influenza and pandemic A-H1N1 vaccines during 2009/2010 suggests a synergistic toxicity and a statistically significant higher rate of fetal loss reporting relative to the single-dose seasons.” –  Human & Experimental Toxicology, 2013

 2014-15 flu season - vaccine only 13% effective

Risk of Flu Mist vaccine

Is the Flu Mist really a safe alternative to flu shots?

Influenza A Viruses Grow in Human Pancreatic Cells and Cause Pancreatitis and Diabetes in an Animal Model

Shedding of Ann Arbor strain love attenuated influenza vaccine virus in children 6-59 months age

Stop the Lies- 30,000 people are NOT dying from the flu in the US each year!

Increased risk of non-influenza respiratory virus infections associated with receipt of inactivated influenza vaccine

Impact of Repeated Vaccination on Vaccine Effectiveness Against Influenza A(H3N2) and B During 8 Seasons

 on: October 20, 2018, 11:25:07 pm 
Started by Luck - Last post by LeahxpeArl
Pneumococcal vaccine boosting superbug development

Thimerosol and trace amounts in vaccines

Aluminum in brain tissue of autistic children

We describe a case of vaccine-associated measles in a two-year-old patient from British Columbia, Canada, in October 2013, who received her first dose of measles-containing vaccine just prior to onset of prodromal symptoms. Identification of this delayed vaccine-associated case occurred in the context of an outbreak investigation of a measles cluster.
Virus genotype was determined by the National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg, Canada as vaccine strain, genotype A, MVs/British Columbia/39.13 [A] (VAC)

Morfin F, Beguin A, Lina B, Thouvenot D.
Detection of measles vaccine in the throat of a vaccinated child. Vaccine. 2002;20(11-12):1541-3.

Rota PA, Khan AS, Durigon E, Yuran T, Villamarzo YS, Bellini WJ. Detection of measles virus RNA in urine specimens from vaccine recipients.
J Clin Microbiol. 1995;33(9):2485-8. PMid:7494055. PMCid:PMC228449.
Monafo WJ, Haslam DB, Roberts RL, Zaki SR, Bellini WJ, Cofin CM.

Disseminated measles infection after vaccination in a child with a congenital immunodeficiency.
J Pediatr. 1994;124(2):273-6.

Millson D. Brother-to-sister transmission of measles after measles, mumps, and rubella immunisation.
Lancet. 1989; 1(8632):271.
Kaic B, Gjenero-Margan I, Aleraj B, Vilibić-Čavlek T, Santak M, Cvitković A, et al. Spotlight on measles 2010:

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 10