Vaccinurile de **orice** fel sunt deosebit de periculoase!!!

[mszavai]

Va pun la dispozitie aceste informatii primite de la un prieten drag. Se pare ca vaccinurile sunt sursa autismului si a bolilor autoimune (in care organismul nu-si mai recunoaste propriile celule si le ataca).

Ne miram ca suntem bolnavi, ca organismele noastre nu reusesc sa se vindece... si asta cand Illuminati au tinut sa ne injecteze cu atatea substante inca de la nastere. Stie cineva cate vaccinuri a primit pe tot parcursul vietii? Eu una nu stiu, dar am o multime de cicatrici... asta cat se vede la suprafata...

---

Mai multe despre vaccinuri FABRICA DE SCLAVI

[mszavai]

In articolul de mai jos se spune ca, atunci cand s-a descoperit ca mercurul din vaccinuri este posibila cauza a miilor de copii autisti, guvernul s-a grabit sa musamalizeze toate dovezile, astfel incat parintii sa nu dea in judecata companiile producatoare de medicamente responsabile de aceasta epidemie.



Deadly Immunity

When a study revealed that mercury in childhood vaccines may have caused autism in thousands of kids, the government rushed to conceal the data -- and to prevent parents from suing drug companies for their role in the epidemic.

by Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

In June 2000, a group of top government scientists and health officials gathered for a meeting at the isolated Simpsonwood conference center in Norcross, Ga. Convened by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the meeting was held at this Methodist retreat center, nestled in wooded farmland next to the Chattahoochee River, to ensure complete secrecy. The agency had issued no public announcement of the session -- only private invitations to 52 attendees. There were high-level officials from the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration, the top vaccine specialist from the World Health Organization in Geneva, and representatives of every major vaccine manufacturer, including GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Wyeth and Aventis Pasteur. All of the scientific data under discussion, CDC officials repeatedly reminded the participants, was strictly "embargoed." There would be no making photocopies of documents, no taking papers with them when they left.

The federal officials and industry representatives had assembled to discuss a disturbing new study that raised alarming questions about the safety of a host of common childhood vaccines administered to infants and young children. According to a CDC epidemiologist named Tom Verstraeten, who had analyzed the agency's massive database containing the medical records of 100,000 children, a mercury-based preservative in the vaccines -- thimerosal -- appeared to be responsible for a dramatic increase in autism and a host of other neurological disorders among children. "I was actually stunned by what I saw," Verstraeten told those assembled at Simpsonwood, citing the staggering number of earlier studies that indicate a link between thimerosal and speech delays, attention-deficit disorder, hyperactivity and autism. Since 1991, when the CDC and the FDA had recommended that three additional vaccines laced with the preservative be given to extremely young infants -- in one case, within hours of birth -- the estimated number of cases of autism had increased fifteenfold, from one in every 2,500 children to one in 166 children.

Even for scientists and doctors accustomed to confronting issues of life and death, the findings were frightening. "You can play with this all you want," Dr. Bill Weil, a consultant for the American Academy of Pediatrics, told the group. The results "are statistically significant." Dr. Richard Johnston, an immunologist and pediatrician from the University of Colorado whose grandson had been born early on the morning of the meeting's first day, was even more alarmed. "My gut feeling?" he said. "Forgive this personal comment -- I do not want my grandson to get a thimerosal-containing vaccine until we know better what is going on."

But instead of taking immediate steps to alert the public and rid the vaccine supply of thimerosal, the officials and executives at Simpsonwood spent most of the next two days discussing how to cover up the damaging data. According to transcripts obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, many at the meeting were concerned about how the damaging revelations about thimerosal would affect the vaccine industry's bottom line.

"We are in a bad position from the standpoint of defending any lawsuits," said Dr. Robert Brent, a pediatrician at the Alfred I. duPont Hospital for Children in Delaware. "This will be a resource to our very busy plaintiff attorneys in this country." Dr. Bob Chen, head of vaccine safety for the CDC, expressed relief that "given the sensitivity of the information, we have been able to keep it out of the hands of, let's say, less responsible hands." Dr. John Clements, vaccines advisor at the World Health Organization, declared flatly that the study "should not have been done at all" and warned that the results "will be taken by others and will be used in ways beyond the control of this group. The research results have to be handled."

In fact, the government has proved to be far more adept at handling the damage than at protecting children's health. The CDC paid the Institute of Medicine to conduct a new study to whitewash the risks of thimerosal, ordering researchers to "rule out" the chemical's link to autism. It withheld Verstraeten's findings, even though they had been slated for immediate publication, and told other scientists that his original data had been "lost" and could not be replicated. And to thwart the Freedom of Information Act, it handed its giant database of vaccine records over to a private company, declaring it off-limits to researchers. By the time Verstraeten finally published his study in 2003, he had gone to work for GlaxoSmithKline and reworked his data to bury the link between thimerosal and autism.

Vaccine manufacturers had already begun to phase thimerosal out of injections given to American infants -- but they continued to sell off their mercury-based supplies of vaccines until last year. The CDC and FDA gave them a hand, buying up the tainted vaccines for export to developing countries and allowing drug companies to continue using the preservative in some American vaccines -- including several pediatric flu shots as well as tetanus boosters routinely given to 11-year-olds.

The drug companies are also getting help from powerful lawmakers in Washington. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, who has received $873,000 in contributions from the pharmaceutical industry, has been working to immunize vaccine makers from liability in 4,200 lawsuits that have been filed by the parents of injured children. On five separate occasions, Frist has tried to seal all of the government's vaccine-related documents -- including the Simpsonwood transcripts -- and shield Eli Lilly, the developer of thimerosal, from subpoenas. In 2002, the day after Frist quietly slipped a rider known as the "Eli Lilly Protection Act" into a homeland security bill, the company contributed $10,000 to his campaign and bought 5,000 copies of his book on bioterrorism. Congress repealed the measure in 2003 -- but earlier this year, Frist slipped another provision into an anti-terrorism bill that would deny compensation to children suffering from vaccine-related brain disorders. "The lawsuits are of such magnitude that they could put vaccine producers out of business and limit our capacity to deal with a biological attack by terrorists," says Andy Olsen, a legislative assistant to Frist.

Even many conservatives are shocked by the government's effort to cover up the dangers of thimerosal. Rep. Dan Burton, a Republican from Indiana, oversaw a three-year investigation of thimerosal after his grandson was diagnosed with autism. "Thimerosal used as a preservative in vaccines is directly related to the autism epidemic," his House Government Reform Committee concluded in its final report. "This epidemic in all probability may have been prevented or curtailed had the FDA not been asleep at the switch regarding a lack of safety data regarding injected thimerosal, a known neurotoxin." The FDA and other public-health agencies failed to act, the committee added, out of "institutional malfeasance for self protection" and "misplaced protectionism of the pharmaceutical industry."

The story of how government health agencies colluded with Big Pharma to hide the risks of thimerosal from the public is a chilling case study of institutional arrogance, power and greed. I was drawn into the controversy only reluctantly. As an attorney and environmentalist who has spent years working on issues of mercury toxicity, I frequently met mothers of autistic children who were absolutely convinced that their kids had been injured by vaccines. Privately, I was skeptical. I doubted that autism could be blamed on a single source, and I certainly understood the government's need to reassure parents that vaccinations are safe; the eradication of deadly childhood diseases depends on it. I tended to agree with skeptics like Rep. Henry Waxman, a Democrat from California, who criticized his colleagues on the House Government Reform Committee for leaping to conclusions about autism and vaccinations. "Why should we scare people about immunization," Waxman pointed out at one hearing, "until we know the facts?"

It was only after reading the Simpsonwood transcripts, studying the leading scientific research and talking with many of the nation's preeminent authorities on mercury that I became convinced that the link between thimerosal and the epidemic of childhood neurological disorders is real. Five of my own children are members of the Thimerosal Generation -- those born between 1989 and 2003 -- who received heavy doses of mercury from vaccines. "The elementary grades are overwhelmed with children who have symptoms of neurological or immune-system damage," Patti White, a school nurse, told the House Government Reform Committee in 1999. "Vaccines are supposed to be making us healthier; however, in 25 years of nursing I have never seen so many damaged, sick kids. Something very, very wrong is happening to our children." More than 500,000 kids currently suffer from autism, and pediatricians diagnose more than 40,000 new cases every year. The disease was unknown until 1943, when it was identified and diagnosed among 11 children born in the months after thimerosal was first added to baby vaccines in 1931.

Some skeptics dispute that the rise in autism is caused by thimerosal-tainted vaccinations. They argue that the increase is a result of better diagnosis -- a theory that seems questionable at best, given that most of the new cases of autism are clustered within a single generation of children. "If the epidemic is truly an artifact of poor diagnosis," scoffs Dr. Boyd Haley, one of the world's authorities on mercury toxicity, "then where are all the 20-year-old autistics?" Other researchers point out that Americans are exposed to a greater cumulative "load" of mercury than ever before, from contaminated fish to dental fillings, and suggest that thimerosal in vaccines may be only part of a much larger problem. It's a concern that certainly deserves far more attention than it has received -- but it overlooks the fact that the mercury concentrations in vaccines dwarf other sources of exposure to our children.

What is most striking is the lengths to which many of the leading detectives have gone to ignore -- and cover up -- the evidence against thimerosal. From the very beginning, the scientific case against the mercury additive has been overwhelming. The preservative, which is used to stem fungi and bacterial growth in vaccines, contains ethylmercury, a potent neurotoxin. Truckloads of studies have shown that mercury tends to accumulate in the brains of primates and other animals after they are injected with vaccines -- and that the developing brains of infants are particularly susceptible. In 1977, a Russian study found that adults exposed to much lower concentrations of ethylmercury than those given to American children still suffered brain damage years later. Russia banned thimerosal from children's vaccines 20 years ago, and Denmark, Austria, Japan, Great Britain and all the Scandinavian countries have since followed suit.

"You couldn't even construct a study that shows thimerosal is safe," says Haley, who heads the chemistry department at the University of Kentucky. "It's just too darn toxic. If you inject thimerosal into an animal, its brain will sicken. If you apply it to living tissue, the cells die. If you put it in a petri dish, the culture dies. Knowing these things, it would be shocking if one could inject it into an infant without causing damage."

Internal documents reveal that Eli Lilly, which first developed thimerosal, knew from the start that its product could cause damage -- and even death -- in both animals and humans. In 1930, the company tested thimerosal by administering it to 22 patients with terminal meningitis, all of whom died within weeks of being injected -- a fact Lilly didn't bother to report in its study declaring thimerosal safe. In 1935, researchers at another vaccine manufacturer, Pittman-Moore, warned Lilly that its claims about thimerosal's safety "did not check with ours." Half the dogs Pittman injected with thimerosal-based vaccines became sick, leading researchers there to declare the preservative "unsatisfactory as a serum intended for use on dogs."

In the decades that followed, the evidence against thimerosal continued to mount. During the Second World War, when the Department of Defense used the preservative in vaccines on soldiers, it required Lilly to label it "poison." In 1967, a study in Applied Microbiology found that thimerosal killed mice when added to injected vaccines. Four years later, Lilly's own studies discerned that thimerosal was "toxic to tissue cells" in concentrations as low as one part per million -- 100 times weaker than the concentration in a typical vaccine. Even so, the company continued to promote thimerosal as "nontoxic" and also incorporated it into topical disinfectants. In 1977, 10 babies at a Toronto hospital died when an antiseptic preserved with thimerosal was dabbed onto their umbilical cords.

In 1982, the FDA proposed a ban on over-the-counter products that contained thimerosal, and in 1991 the agency considered banning it from animal vaccines. But tragically, that same year, the CDC recommended that infants be injected with a series of mercury-laced vaccines. Newborns would be vaccinated for hepatitis B within 24 hours of birth, and 2-month-old infants would be immunized for haemophilus influenzae B and diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis.

The drug industry knew the additional vaccines posed a danger. The same year that the CDC approved the new vaccines, Dr. Maurice Hilleman, one of the fathers of Merck's vaccine programs, warned the company that 6-month-olds who were administered the shots would suffer dangerous exposure to mercury. He recommended that thimerosal be discontinued, "especially when used on infants and children," noting that the industry knew of nontoxic alternatives. "The best way to go," he added, "is to switch to dispensing the actual vaccines without adding preservatives."

For Merck and other drug companies, however, the obstacle was money. Thimerosal enables the pharmaceutical industry to package vaccines in vials that contain multiple doses, which require additional protection because they are more easily contaminated by multiple needle entries. The larger vials cost half as much to produce as smaller, single-dose vials, making it cheaper for international agencies to distribute them to impoverished regions at risk of epidemics. Faced with this "cost consideration," Merck ignored Hilleman's warnings, and government officials continued to push more and more thimerosal-based vaccines for children. Before 1989, American preschoolers received only three vaccinations -- for polio, diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis and measles-mumps-rubella. A decade later, thanks to federal recommendations, children were receiving a total of 22 immunizations by the time they reached first grade.

As the number of vaccines increased, the rate of autism among children exploded. During the 1990s, 40 million children were injected with thimerosal-based vaccines, receiving unprecedented levels of mercury during a period critical for brain development. Despite the well-documented dangers of thimerosal, it appears that no one bothered to add up the cumulative dose of mercury that children would receive from the mandated vaccines. "What took the FDA so long to do the calculations?" Peter Patriarca, director of viral products for the agency, asked in an e-mail to the CDC in 1999. "Why didn't CDC and the advisory bodies do these calculations when they rapidly expanded the childhood immunization schedule?"

But by that time, the damage was done. Infants who received all their vaccines, plus boosters, by the age of 6 months were being injected with levels of ethylmercury 187 times greater than the EPA's limit for daily exposure to methylmercury, a related neurotoxin. Although the vaccine industry insists that ethylmercury poses little danger because it breaks down rapidly and is removed by the body, several studies -- including one published in April by the National Institutes of Health -- suggest that ethylmercury is actually more toxic to developing brains and stays in the brain longer than methylmercury.

Officials responsible for childhood immunizations insist that the additional vaccines were necessary to protect infants from disease and that thimerosal is still essential in developing nations, which, they often claim, cannot afford the single-dose vials that don't require a preservative. Dr. Paul Offit, one of CDC's top vaccine advisors, told me, "I think if we really have an influenza pandemic -- and certainly we will in the next 20 years, because we always do -- there's no way on God's earth that we immunize 280 million people with single-dose vials. There has to be multidose vials."

But while public-health officials may have been well-intentioned, many of those on the CDC advisory committee who backed the additional vaccines had close ties to the industry. Dr. Sam Katz, the committee's chair, was a paid consultant for most of the major vaccine makers and shares a patent on a measles vaccine with Merck, which also manufactures the hepatitis B vaccine. Dr. Neal Halsey, another committee member, worked as a researcher for the vaccine companies and received honoraria from Abbott Labs for his research on the hepatitis B vaccine.

Indeed, in the tight circle of scientists who work on vaccines, such conflicts of interest are common. Rep. Burton says that the CDC "routinely allows scientists with blatant conflicts of interest to serve on intellectual advisory committees that make recommendations on new vaccines," even though they have "interests in the products and companies for which they are supposed to be providing unbiased oversight." The House Government Reform Committee discovered that four of the eight CDC advisors who approved guidelines for a rotavirus vaccine laced with thimerosal "had financial ties to the pharmaceutical companies that were developing different versions of the vaccine."

Offit, who shares a patent on the vaccine, acknowledged to me that he "would make money" if his vote to approve it eventually leads to a marketable product. But he dismissed my suggestion that a scientist's direct financial stake in CDC approval might bias his judgment. "It provides no conflict for me," he insists. "I have simply been informed by the process, not corrupted by it. When I sat around that table, my sole intent was trying to make recommendations that best benefited the children in this country. It's offensive to say that physicians and public-health people are in the pocket of industry and thus are making decisions that they know are unsafe for children. It's just not the way it works."

Other vaccine scientists and regulators gave me similar assurances. Like Offit, they view themselves as enlightened guardians of children's health, proud of their "partnerships" with pharmaceutical companies, immune to the seductions of personal profit, besieged by irrational activists whose anti-vaccine campaigns are endangering children's health. They are often resentful of questioning. "Science," says Offit, "is best left to scientists."

Still, some government officials were alarmed by the apparent conflicts of interest. In his e-mail to CDC administrators in 1999, Paul Patriarca of the FDA blasted federal regulators for failing to adequately scrutinize the danger posed by the added baby vaccines. "I'm not sure there will be an easy way out of the potential perception that the FDA, CDC and immunization-policy bodies may have been asleep at the switch re: thimerosal until now," Patriarca wrote. The close ties between regulatory officials and the pharmaceutical industry, he added, "will also raise questions about various advisory bodies regarding aggressive recommendations for use" of thimerosal in child vaccines.

If federal regulators and government scientists failed to grasp the potential risks of thimerosal over the years, no one could claim ignorance after the secret meeting at Simpsonwood. But rather than conduct more studies to test the link to autism and other forms of brain damage, the CDC placed politics over science. The agency turned its database on childhood vaccines -- which had been developed largely at taxpayer expense -- over to a private agency, America's Health Insurance Plans, ensuring that it could not be used for additional research. It also instructed the Institute of Medicine, an advisory organization that is part of the National Academy of Sciences, to produce a study debunking the link between thimerosal and brain disorders. The CDC "wants us to declare, well, that these things are pretty safe," Dr. Marie McCormick, who chaired the IOM's Immunization Safety Review Committee, told her fellow researchers when they first met in January 2001. "We are not ever going to come down that [autism] is a true side effect" of thimerosal exposure. According to transcripts of the meeting, the committee's chief staffer, Kathleen Stratton, predicted that the IOM would conclude that the evidence was "inadequate to accept or reject a causal relation" between thimerosal and autism. That, she added, was the result "Walt wants" -- a reference to Dr. Walter Orenstein, director of the National Immunization Program for the CDC.

For those who had devoted their lives to promoting vaccination, the revelations about thimerosal threatened to undermine everything they had worked for. "We've got a dragon by the tail here," said Dr. Michael Kaback, another committee member. "The more negative that [our] presentation is, the less likely people are to use vaccination, immunization -- and we know what the results of that will be. We are kind of caught in a trap. How we work our way out of the trap, I think is the charge."

Even in public, federal officials made it clear that their primary goal in studying thimerosal was to dispel doubts about vaccines. "Four current studies are taking place to rule out the proposed link between autism and thimerosal," Dr. Gordon Douglas, then-director of strategic planning for vaccine research at the National Institutes of Health, assured a Princeton University gathering in May 2001. "In order to undo the harmful effects of research claiming to link the [measles] vaccine to an elevated risk of autism, we need to conduct and publicize additional studies to assure parents of safety." Douglas formerly served as president of vaccinations for Merck, where he ignored warnings about thimerosal's risks.

In May of last year, the Institute of Medicine issued its final report. Its conclusion: There is no proven link between autism and thimerosal in vaccines. Rather than reviewing the large body of literature describing the toxicity of thimerosal, the report relied on four disastrously flawed epidemiological studies examining European countries, where children received much smaller doses of thimerosal than American kids. It also cited a new version of the Verstraeten study, published in the journal Pediatrics, that had been reworked to reduce the link between thimerosal and autism. The new study included children too young to have been diagnosed with autism and overlooked others who showed signs of the disease. The IOM declared the case closed and -- in a startling position for a scientific body -- recommended that no further research be conducted.

The report may have satisfied the CDC, but it convinced no one. Rep. David Weldon, a Republican physician from Florida who serves on the House Government Reform Committee, attacked the Institute of Medicine, saying it relied on a handful of studies that were "fatally flawed" by "poor design" and failed to represent "all the available scientific and medical research." CDC officials are not interested in an honest search for the truth, Weldon told me, because "an association between vaccines and autism would force them to admit that their policies irreparably damaged thousands of children. Who would want to make that conclusion about themselves?"

Under pressure from Congress, parents and a few of its own panel members, the Institute of Medicine reluctantly convened a second panel to review the findings of the first. In February, the new panel, composed of different scientists, criticized the earlier panel for its lack of transparency and urged the CDC to make its vaccine database available to the public.

So far, though, only two scientists have managed to gain access. Dr. Mark Geier, president of the Genetics Center of America, and his son, David, spent a year battling to obtain the medical records from the CDC. Since August 2002, when members of Congress pressured the agency to turn over the data, the Geiers have completed six studies that demonstrate a powerful correlation between thimerosal and neurological damage in children. One study, which compares the cumulative dose of mercury received by children born between 1981 and 1985 with those born between 1990 and 1996, found a "very significant relationship" between autism and vaccines. Another study of educational performance found that kids who received higher doses of thimerosal in vaccines were nearly three times as likely to be diagnosed with autism and more than three times as likely to suffer from speech disorders and mental retardation. Another soon-to-be-published study shows that autism rates are in decline following the recent elimination of thimerosal from most vaccines.

As the federal government worked to prevent scientists from studying vaccines, others have stepped in to study the link to autism. In April, reporter Dan Olmsted of UPI undertook one of the more interesting studies himself. Searching for children who had not been exposed to mercury in vaccines -- the kind of population that scientists typically use as a "control" in experiments -- Olmsted scoured the Amish of Lancaster County, Penn., who refuse to immunize their infants. Given the national rate of autism, Olmsted calculated that there should be 130 autistics among the Amish. He found only four. One had been exposed to high levels of mercury from a power plant. The other three -- including one child adopted from outside the Amish community -- had received their vaccines.

At the state level, many officials have also conducted in-depth reviews of thimerosal. While the Institute of Medicine was busy whitewashing the risks, the Iowa Legislature was carefully combing through all of the available scientific and biological data. "After three years of review, I became convinced there was sufficient credible research to show a link between mercury and the increased incidences in autism," says state Sen. Ken Veenstra, a Republican who oversaw the investigation. "The fact that Iowa's 700 percent increase in autism began in the 1990s, right after more and more vaccines were added to the children's vaccine schedules, is solid evidence alone." Last year, Iowa became the first state to ban mercury in vaccines, followed by California. Similar bans are now under consideration in 32 other states.

But instead of following suit, the FDA continues to allow manufacturers to include thimerosal in scores of over-the-counter medications as well as steroids and injected collagen. Even more alarming, the government continues to ship vaccines preserved with thimerosal to developing countries -- some of which are now experiencing a sudden explosion in autism rates. In China, where the disease was virtually unknown prior to the introduction of thimerosal by U.S. drug manufacturers in 1999, news reports indicate that there are now more than 1.8 million autistics. Although reliable numbers are hard to come by, autistic disorders also appear to be soaring in India, Argentina, Nicaragua and other developing countries that are now using thimerosal-laced vaccines. The World Health Organization continues to insist thimerosal is safe, but it promises to keep the possibility that it is linked to neurological disorders "under review."

I devoted time to study this issue because I believe that this is a moral crisis that must be addressed. If, as the evidence suggests, our public-health authorities knowingly allowed the pharmaceutical industry to poison an entire generation of American children, their actions arguably constitute one of the biggest scandals in the annals of American medicine. "The CDC is guilty of incompetence and gross negligence," says Mark Blaxill, vice president of Safe Minds, a nonprofit organization concerned about the role of mercury in medicines. "The damage caused by vaccine exposure is massive. It's bigger than asbestos, bigger than tobacco, bigger than anything you've ever seen." It's hard to calculate the damage to our country -- and to the international efforts to eradicate epidemic diseases -- if Third World nations come to believe that America's most heralded foreign-aid initiative is poisoning their children. It's not difficult to predict how this scenario will be interpreted by America's enemies abroad. The scientists and researchers -- many of them sincere, even idealistic -- who are participating in efforts to hide the science on thimerosal claim that they are trying to advance the lofty goal of protecting children in developing nations from disease pandemics. They are badly misguided. Their failure to come clean on thimerosal will come back horribly to haunt our country and the world's poorest populations.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, chief prosecuting attorney for Riverkeeper and president of Waterkeeper Alliance. He is the co-author of "The Riverkeepers."


Sursa: http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0616-31.htm

[mszavai]

INFECTAREA CRIMINALĂ INTENȚIONATĂ CU SIDA ÎN ROMÂNIA

---

Mai mult de jumătate din copiii bolnavi de SIDA de pe întreg globul sunt români!

Cum este posibil aşa ceva în condiţiile în care rata răspândirii acestei boli în România la adulţi este mult mai redusă?

În ceea ce priveşte situaţia din România există unele dovezi tulburătoare în privinţa infectării premeditate cu virusul HIV a copiilor. Acest lucru a fost realizat în timpul campaniilor de vaccinări împotriva hepatitei de tip B. Este, de altfel profund semnificativ faptul că deşi vaccinul împotriva hepatitei de tip B nu a fost suficient testat şi cu toate că, de fapt, campania de vaccinări costă enorm (motiv pentru care Ministerul Sănătăţii din Franţa a refuzat aceste campanii de vaccinări) totuşi Ministerul Sănătăţii din România cu implicarea directă a fostului ministru Iulian Mincu sponsorizat de Rotary Club (care este un satelit al francmasoneriei mondiale) a impus vaccinarea gratuită şi obligatorie a copiilor din România (repetăm, în condiţiile în care vaccinul nu a fost suficient testat).

În Decretul Guvernamental numărul 41.566 din 22 august 1995 privind vaccinarea copiilor împotriva hepatitei B realizat în cadrul Programului naţional de imunizări se menţionează: "În România infecţia cu HVB este prevalentă începând cu primul an de viaţă. Rata portajului de Ag HBs fiind estimată la 4,9% la copiii în vârstă de 6-11 luni. Organizaţia Mondială a Sănătăţii recomandă integrarea vaccinării universale a nou-născuţilor în programele naţionale de vaccinare până în anul 1995 în ţările unde rata portajului de VHB este de cel puţin 8% şi în toate ţările, până în anul 1997 (…) Vaccinarea împotriva hepatitei B este gratuită şi obligatorie pentru toţi copiii născuţi începând cu data de 01-10-1995".

Constatăm că în România deşi rata portajului de Ag Hbs este de doar 4,9% la copiii în vârstă de 6-11 luni, Ministerul Sănătăţii din România în frunte cu fostul ministru al sănătăţii Iulian Mincu s-a grăbit să realizeze aceste atât de controversate vaccinări. Ne punem firesc întrebarea oare de ce?

Ceea ce au plănuit anumiţi lideri francmasoni în "Protocoalele secrete ale maeştrilor francmasoni" se realizează în zilele noastre

Un reputat ziarist italian susţine că are dovezi ce probează infectarea intenţionată cu HIV a unor copii români. Ştirea publicată de "Evenimentul Zilei", potrivit căreia în România mulţi copii au fost infectaţi cu virusul HIV, care provoacă SIDA, a făcut vâlvă în Italia. Ziaristul italian Mino Damato a declarat că are dovezi certe despre cel puţin şase cazuri de copii infectaţi în acest mod cu HIV. Damato, care în Italia are o reputaţie foarte bună ca ziarist de televiziune serios şi independent, a fost de multe ori în România după 1989. El a strâns un milion de dolari pentru copiii bolnavi de SIDA, fond gestionat de fundaţia pe care o conduce, "Bambini in emergenza".

"Atunci când am vorbit cu fostul ministru al sănătăţii Iulian Mincu, acesta m-a asigurat că toate cazurile au fost provocate prin transmiterea virusului de la mamă la făt", a declarat Damato agenţiei italiene de presă AGI. "Eu, în schimb, mi-am format o altă convingere. În cel puţin şase cazuri, infecţia a fost rezultatul unui act voluntar şi am constatat acest adevăr vizitând spitalele din România, unde acţionează fundaţia mea". De menţionat că din banii strânşi de asociaţia italiană s-a construit un nou pavilion pentru copiii bolnavi de SIDA, la spitalul "Victor Babeş" din Bucureşti. "Sunt informaţii înfiorătoare, dar susţinute de medii ştiinţifice", a adăugat Damato. Ziaristul a trimis un apel guvernului de la Bucureşti, cerând să se facă lumină asupra acestei tragedii, să fie identificaţi şi pedepsiţi cei responsabili pentru aceste crime. (Paolo Gianfelici, Evenimentul Zilei - 25.02.1997)

O nouă confirmare cutremurătoare că în România contaminarea copiilor cu virusul HIV a fost făcută intenţionat

Descoperire surprinzătoare a specialiştilor ieşeni: SIDA a fost transmisă intenţionat, în leagănele de copii din România, dintr-o sursă unică. Se confirmă astfel ipoteza infectării orfanilor în scopuri de cercetare.

Specialiştii ieşeni ai Laboratorului de Virusologie de pe lângă Universitatea de Medicină şi Farmacie "Grigore T. Popa", din Iaşi, în colaborare cu specialiştii Institutului "Pasteur", din Paris, au reuşit să centralizeze după 5 ani de cercetări, rezultatele privind cazurile de HIV-SIDA înregistrate la copiii din România. Autorul cercetării este dr. Cristian Apetrei, doctorand la Institutul "Pasteur" şi cadru didactic la UMF Iaşi. Rezultatele au confirmat, în premieră, faptul că virusul HIV, cu care au fost infectaţi copiii din leagăne, provine dintr-o sursă unică. Ipoteza infectării voite cu HIV a copiilor români din leagăne pentru a se putea efectua cercetări şi a se căuta antidotul bolii se confirmă prin cercetări ştiinţifice.

Virusul HIV nu provine din infecţii intraspitaliceşti

Lucrarea referitoare la structura ramurii virusului HIV cu care a fost infectată populaţia de copii din leagăne a fost publicată în ultimul număr al Revistei Medico-Chirurgicale a Societăţii de Medici şi Naturişti din Iaşi. Din datele pur tehnice menţionate în articolul doctorului Cristian Apetrei a rezultat o concluzie fără echivoc: "Studiul nostru confirmă responsabilitatea subtipului F în producerea epidemiei de infecţie HIV 1 la copiii din România. Izolarea unui unic subtip din toate provinciile istorice al ţării permite demonstrarea caracterului unitar al epidemiei şi confirmă descrierea grupului de risc al copiilor din unităţile de îngrijire. Similitudinile structurate între diferitele tulpini izolate sugerează posibilitatea evoluţiei epidemiei dintr-o unică sursă"

Sângele infectat a fost distribuit intenţionat în zonele în care s-a produs infecţia

Descoperirea medicilor ieşeni şi francezi este de cea mai mare importanţă. Ea probează faptul că infectarea din aceeaşi sursă nu s-a produs prin transfuzie, deoarece atât donatorii cât şi structurile de alimentare cu sânge ale sistemului sanitar nu sunt şi nu erau centralizate, nici înainte de 1989. "Această sursă continuă să rămână obscură, dacă ţinem seama că sistemul de asistenţă pediatrică este organizat la nivel regional, iar sângele pentru transfuzii nu este distribuit din aceeaşi sursă în întreaga ţară", mai menţionează articolul semnat de Cristian Apetrei.

Sistemul sanitar românesc este absolvit de vina infectării copiilor din leagăne

Cercetările mai sunt susţinute şi de datele statistice ale cazurilor de HIV înregistrate în România. În ţara noastră există, potrivit datelor Organizaţiei Mondiale a Sănătăţii, peste 50% din copiii infectaţi cu HIV din lume. Totodată, infecţiile cu HIV la copii reprezintă în România 85% din total. În plus, materialul mai subliniază că tipurile de virus întâlnite la maturi, care sunt, fapt vizibil, infectaţi din surse multiple, sunt cu totul altele decât tipurile înregistrate la copiii din leagăne. Studiul sugerează degrevarea sistemului sanitar românesc de vina infecţiilor cu HIV din leagănele de copii, singura responsabilitate virtuală fiind în cazul copiilor din familiile care s-au dovedit a fi seropozitive. În cazul de faţă, în România, infecţia la copiii internaţi în leagăne este cu atât mai "ciudată" cu cât, nici în ţările vecine, care au avut sisteme de îngrijire medicală similare, nici la copiii din familie, nici la maturi, incidenţa epidemiei nu a fost comparabilă numeric.

O ipoteză terifiantă: copiii cobai

Datele la zi privind infectarea cu HIV în România, în februarie 1997, sunt următoarele: 2975 persoane cu HIV, din care 85% copii şi 4446 persoane bolnave de SIDA, din care 4005 copii. Datele oficiale şi recentele descoperiri confirmă ipoteza susţinută de unele declaraţii ale unor medici, sub rezerva anonimatului. Potrivit acestora, a existat în ţara noastră un program dirijat de infectare cu HIV a copiilor din leagăne, în scopul studierii bolii SIDA şi al găsirii remediului. Acest program ar fi fost lansat în anii 1987-1988 şi ar fi implicat o serie de cercetători în imunologie.


(Iulian Chifu, Evenimentul Zilei - 20.02.1997)

[Luci]

Hmm...este trist. SA FIE FOARTE CLAR, ASEMENEA PRACTICI NU SUNT PERMISE! CUM INDRAZNESTE CINEVA SA ADUCA ATINGERE INOCENTEI NOASTRE DIVINE?

Pe la noi este o vorba: "No, stiti ceva, PANA AICI!"

Lucia

[mszavai]

VACCINURILE PENTRU ANIMALUTELE DE CASA SUNT LA FEL DE PERICULOASE!

---

Vaccines - Are They Safe for Your Dog?

Written by: Dee Blanco who is a holistic veterinarian practicing in Santa Fe, New Mexico. She is listed under Altvetmed.

The questions surrounding the issue of veterinary vaccinations are many. My intent is to open other doors of thought that might help you make your decisions align with your animals well being, your lifestyle, your left and right brain and most importantly - your heart. ... Because I cannot completely separate from this topic, you will clearly hear my bias, my emotions as well as my perspective from my years practicing allopathy and subsequently homeopathy. I will make recommendations based both on this study of many years and on the way I hope to be of help in the world.

I strongly recommend for you to let this info simmer a bit ... please make sure to do more research. And always listen to your inner voice. You are your own authority, you are your animal's primary health care practitioner, on call, 24 hours a day. You may decide some of this info is useful, and some you will let go by. Please make sure you do not allow fear to run your decisions.

I have spent a good amount of time in the last 12 of my 19 years as a vet, studying the issue of vaccinations. During this time, in my holistic vet practice, I have been able to see the clinical manifestations and harmful effects of the use and abuse of vaccinations. I have also been able to see improvements of many common maladies in our domestic animals using holistic medicines, in particular homeopathy. It is from this clinical standpoint as well as my own study of the available info on vaccinations that I present my info. I am continually compiling more info in my 'database', so if you would like to add anything you might have, please feel free to send me your info.

The History of Vaccinations

The birth of vaccinations came when the English doctor Edward Jenner discovered that the people who worked closely with cows seemed to be less susceptible to smallpox. He injected small amounts of the smallpox crusts into healthy individuals (including his own son) and found these people to also be less susceptible to smallpox. Unfortunately, this process may have fatally weakened his son and his son's friends, because he died at the early age of 21 of tuberculosis.

Then, during the American Civil War, Louis Pasteur, an accomplished microbiologist, was able to change the vaccines he was using enough that some of the harmful effects were diminished. He was famous for his work in cattle where he was able to prove that vaccines could protect against the deadly disease, anthrax. Thus, he started the new field of medicine called immunology. Pasteur also became famous for his concept of the 'germ theory'. This is still the theory modern medicine uses to explain all illness. Thus we have created a 'war on bugs' that we seem to be losing. It's interesting to note that on his deathbed Pasteur recanted his prior work of blaming the microorganism. His last words were "seed is nothing, soil is everything". In Chinese medicine we say "it's not the agent, but the terrain". Both are saying the same thing - the germ is nothing, but the host's resistance is everything. These concepts lay the foundation for all forms of holistic medicine.

How Vaccines Work

The primary intention of the vaccine is to produce a stimulation to the cellular immune system, via the production of antibodies. Antibodies attach onto the virus and render it inactive and harmless. It is through this stimulation and resultant production of antibodies that the body is now prepared for a possible 'attack' by 'foreign invaders' later down the line. These invaders are typically known as bacteria or viruses. This immunity will later provide protection without having to go through the disease itself. It's a bit like the vigilant minute-men always on guard for a possible attack. There are problems with this way of thinking which we will discuss later.

Why Vaccines Cause Problems

Typically, the vaccines are injected into the body; subcutaneously (under the skin) or intramuscularly (in the muscle). These vaccines usually have numerous viruses as well as other ingredients in them. Exceptions to this include the rabies, corona, and bordatella vaccines. Herein lies the second and third problem with the vaccination process.

The process of injecting numerous viruses at one time into the body does not mimic in any way what we would see in the natural world. There would never be such an enormous exposure to that many microorganisms at one time. ... These diseases have never, in the real world, occurred at one time, never. The purpose for which mother nature uses and continues to use acute illness is to thin out the population, whereby the fittest survive. Everything in nature has a rhythm, everything. The rhythm of distemper, of polio, of measles, of influenza, of parvo, of rabies are all on a schedule. This schedule, much to the chagrin of the vet profession, is not determined by the vet profession!

Neil Miller, a father of two, in his desire to understand the issues around vaccinations for his children, decided to explore the issue extensively. He studied the rise and fall and the death rate of the childhood diseases of polio, measles, and whooping cough in both the US and the UK. He compared the death rates and the point at which vaccinations were introduced. Much to his surprise, in all three of these diseases, he saw that the death rates starting in the early 1900s were markedly decreasing by the time the vaccines were introduced. In the case of polio there was actually a bit of an increase after the vaccines. The increased numbers of deaths after polio vaccines were covered up by reclassifying them as aseptic meningitis. Therefore the deaths didn't show up in the records, but it is quite clear that vaccinations did not really have a beneficial impact on the already declining health rate. The reason the diseases were declining had more to do with the increased natural resistance and better understanding about prevention through hygiene.

Thirdly, the process of injecting viruses into the body is a very unnatural method of introducing viruses, with the exception of Rabies virus. Most other forms of exposure are through the mucous membranes - the nose, throat/mouth, even the eyes. This creates another huge insult to the immune system. First we gather a whole bunch of viruses and other 'stuff', then we inject them into the body at one time! I have to ask myself if this could be the start of massive confusion and havoc causing the body to attack itself? In other words, could this be why we are seeing so much autoimmune disease?

Fourth, when these viruses are injected into the body, they find their way into the small capillaries, then into the larger vessels and are filtered by the lymph nodes. This sounds fine except that usually these viruses are first introduced into the mouth and nose, where the humoral immune system is stimulated. It produces the powerful immunoglobulins (IgA, IgG, IgM) which provide the first line of defense.

When this primary defense mechanism of the humoral immune system is bypassed, you are dependent on the cellular immune system only; this is the branch that produces antibodies. Producing antibodies is a fine thing, but when the natural pathways are bypassed it creates an extra load on the system. Having the natural stimulation of both wings of the immune system is a more balanced approach and isn't what happens with injected vaccines.

Last, but certainly not least, are the other substances that are in the vaccine vials that are potentially problematic. This discussion follows.

What Is In A Vaccine?

The two forms of vaccines available are the modified-live (MLV) and the killed vaccine. For obvious reasons, the Rabies vaccine is a killed product ... the MLVs are the viruses that were once alive and now have been chemically attenuated (altered) so that they are still recognized by the body but are, theoretically, not able to cause the full blown clinical disease. Typically, the chemical agent used to alter the virus is formalin or formaldehyde, a known carcinogen. Attenuating the virus so that it cannot attach to a cell wall and infect that cell is a good idea, but not all the virus particles may be altered. Some may escape attenuation and are free to cause disease. This may be part of the reason that we see 'breaks' in vaccinated animals. There has also been much speculation that these MLVs have shed into the environment, exposing other animals, including wild animals, to these diseases.

Additional components of the vaccines are the preservatives that do what preservatives do. These ingredients are also known in current medicine to be carcinogenic agents, including a compound called thymersol, a mercury derivative and aluminum, used to attenuate the viruses. We all know the possible effects of aluminum.

Even the cells these viruses are grown on can produce allergic reactions in the body. Some of the tissue lines used are from ducks, monkeys, pigs, and the like. These could be creating much of the constant itching, inflamed bowel, and eczematous ears that are so prevalent.

There are additional ingredients called adjuvants. These are foreig proteins that are added to give a generic, non-specific immune response. These proteins are proprietary (secret) info and are not given out to anyone. It's much like the ingredients on a bottle of BBQ sauce where they list 'herbs and spices' generically. No one really knows what 'herbs and spices' really means. These preservatives and adjuvants are what are believed to be the major cause of the surging incidence of fibrosarcomas in cats. Studies at Colorado State U. by one of my professors, Dr. Dennis Macy, are showing this strong correlation.

It is felt by the biologics companies that if the body doesn't respond to the numerous viruses that are in each vial of vaccine, than surely the body will respond to other foreign proteins. One rep from a major biologics company, at a meeting on vaccines in 1997 I attended, said quite embarrassed, 'We know how to turn the immune system on, but we don't know how to turn it off". This is the fundamental problem with vaccines: they are generically stimulating to the body, usually creating illness where there once was none.

How Do You Tell If a Vaccine Is Working?

The easiest way to determine if a vaccine is working is to take a blood sample and send it to a lab to determine if there are still circulating antibodies against that virus. This is called an antibody titer. This is a simple test, but there has been some controversy as to what titer level will provide protection from the clinical disease, and what level tells you there has been exposure to the disease.

The next way is to believe the biologics companies. This is not my ideal choice since I believed them many years ago when I would vaccinate animals and they would break out with the disease. Perfectly healthy animals coming down with the diseases they were being vaccinated against! It was embarrassing and horrifying that I caused these illnesses. The biologics companies told me their vaccines could never have caused the illness. They justified this by saying that the animals must have been incubating the illness and it coincidentally came out at the time of the vaccine. This never made sense to me but as a young, brain-washed vet, I passed this info on to the clients. I still to this day find it interesting that we are a self-serving profession creating the illnesses that return later through our doors to be treated again. What could be more self-serving? I believe this is one of the reasons the vet profession turns its back on the issue of vaccinations. It would mean we would have to take a good hard look at what we are doing. It would mean we would have to take responsibility. Enough of my soap box, for now.

One way to determine how long a vaccine is capable of lasting in the body is by duration of immunity studies. These are studies that the biologics companies conduct to determine whether vaccinated animals can withstand a challenge from a live virus contact. The problem here is that there are inadequate duration of immunity studies at this time. These are difficult and expensive test and there has not been enough pressure on these companies to do these tests. One of the reasons is because the profession has assumed that vaccines are harmless and giving repeated doses or annual vaccinations is 'good medicine'.

Because of inadequate studies, the biologics companies are not willing at this point in time to change the recommended protocols. Much info available from numerous sources verifies that the MLVs, if given after 14 wks of age (after maternal antibodies have decreased), are effective for a lifetime. Most rabies titers at this time are showing effective protection at 5 to 6 years after vaccination. I believe the rabies duration of immunity studies would help us change the ludicrous yearly vaccination requirements in many states. Many animals I test are showing protection to parvo and distemper after 10 years or more. The real question here is: how did these recommendations for yearly vaccinations start?

Why Are We Vaccinating Yearly?

This is a really good question, isn't it? The first massive vaccination program began in the 1940s and the 50s for distemper and adenovirus. These early vaccines showed that one third of the puppies did not maintain protective titers to distempter for one year after the initial vaccination. By the way, we have yet to talk about susceptibility, which these researchers did not take into account. This led to the recommendation in 1959 that dogs should be vaccinated annually, as a safety measure. Distemper was a horrible, life threatening disease and was capable of going through a population of puppies very quickly. Usually it caused gastrointestinal symptoms such as bloody diarrhea (much like Parvo), or respiratory symptoms, and in the most severe state would cause neurological symptoms which were rarely successfully treated.

In 1961, recommendations that a serum analysis of the blood was the best way to determine immunological protection. Since clients would need to pay for that, plus an exam, and possibly the re-vaccination fee, it would be easier and cheaper, based on the local incidence of distempter, the history of the animal, and the potential risk, that annual vaccinations be given. Thus start the annual standard of practice. There was no science here! Unfortunately, there were few people willing to push for the serum analysis, or to really look at the exposure of each animal, or to look at any other factors influencing susceptibility.

Dr. Ron Schultz and the U. of Wisconsin-Madison, a veterinary immunologist, questions the lack of scientific evidence to support our current practices. In his article in the 1992 edition of Current Veterinary Therapy, Dr Schultz and his co-author, Dr. Phillips, discuss the issue. Their words follow: "A practice that was started many years ago and that lacks scientific validity or verification is annual vaccinations. Almost without exception there is no immunologic requirement for annual revaccination. Immunity to viruses persists for years or for the life of the animal. Successful vaccination to most bacterial pathogens produces an immunologic memory that remains for years, allowing an animal to develop a protective anamnestic (secondary) response when exposed to virulent organisms. Only the immune response to toxins requires boosters (e.g. tetanus toxin booster, in humans, is recommended once every 7-10 years) and no toxin vaccines are currently used for dogs and cats. Furthermore, revaccination with most viral vaccines fails to stimulate an anamnestic response as a result of interference by existing antibodies (similar to maternal antibody interference). The practice of annual vaccination in our opinion should be considered of questionable efficacy unless it is used as a mechanism to provide an annual physical exam or is required by law (i.e. certain states require annual revaccination for rabies)."

Whew! The summary of his statement is this: yearly boosters are unnecessary and the current antibody protection in the body will actually interfere with other new vaccines. Therefore, they are not useful and certainly don't provide more protection if given annually. This report also emphasizes that yearly reminders get people into the clinic to give yearly vaccines and put little to no emphasis on a wellness exam. This is a backward approach, isn't it? Shouldn't we remind our clients to come in for a yearly wellness check and if necessary then suggest the vaccinations? Have we become so complacent and dependent on these little vaccine vials and their financial power? Are there not other methods of preventative medicine? If you choose these yearly vaccines will your animals be protected against all the harmful diseases known to animals?

Who Is Susceptible? And To What?

There is a questions as to who is susceptible and to what diseases, which really distills down to: at what age are the animals most and least susceptible, and what diseases are species specific or regionally specific? It is odd to me that the topic of age susceptibility is rarely if ever spoken about and yet it seems to be such an important consideration in the decision about the need for vaccinations.

We are not talking about breed susceptibility, we are talking about the ages at which certain illnesses are more likely to manifest. For example, measles and chicken pox are a childhood disease that if allowed to be expressed while young are relatively benign. As the child grows older, the susceptibility to these illnesses decreases. This is the same with many of the animal vaccines. As a clinician it is very, very uncommon to see distemper, parvo, parainfluenza, adenovirus, panleukopenia, calicivirus, herpesvirus, and others in adult animals. These seem to be most dangerous when the animal is young and their immune system is not fully developed. When I see an adult with parvo or distemper, it is frequently a purebred or has other immune dysfunction or is likely poorly cared for. I do see a predominance of parvo and distemper in young animals less than 6-8 months old, and less frequently as they get closer to 1 year old.

My question is this: why are we vaccinating animals that have passed the point of great susceptibility? Would it not be similar to humans being vaccinated every year of our lives with chicken pox, measles, diphtheria, whooping cough, hepatitis, tetanus, etc.?

The other question concerns the vaccination of diseases that are not seen at all in a particular region, or that vaccines are not effective against because the viruses have many different serovariants. For example, leptospirosis. This is a vaccine that does not provide long-lasting protection and will not provide cross-protection for all the different strains of lepto. Then why are we using this? Coronavirus is another vaccine enigma. Corona in dogs produces a mild, transient diarrhea and it is known that the vaccine does not provide protection against an infection with corona. Hardly worth the vaccine, isn't it?

Lepto is not seen in my area, so why are we vaccinating? I have seen this practice with Lyme, Corona, Feline Leukemia, Feline Infectious Peritonitis, and many equine vaccines. This seems to be an issue of convenience since the manufacturers supply all over the country/world. It also seems to fall into the category that the practice of injecting viruses into a healthy body, or an unhealthy one for that matter, is a benign process.

What Are the Adverse Reactions, If Any?

Unfortunately, adverse reactions to vaccines have been considered to be the immediate hypersensitivity reactions of anaphylaxis. This severely limits the types of reactions that are ever even considered to be related to vaccines. Other problems surface which make accurate tallying of adverse reactions difficult. At present time there are no easy or effective reporting systems; many vets are reluctant to report even those where an animal dies, and the cause-effect relationship is not always clear. Even to those who believe that many of the illnesses we see, both acute and chronic, are directly related to over-vaccination, it is still at times difficult to show how this works. There are many situations where the perfectly healthy puppy is taken at 6 weeks for his first vaccines. Maybe he has a slight fever or lack of appetite and energy for a day or so. Then he is returned 2 to 3 weeks later for more vaccines. Maybe he will show another fever or maybe a day of diarrhea. Then he is returned in 2 or 3 weeks for more vaccines. Maybe he starts to itch a bit. Often by the time the pup is 6 months old he has several problems going on. He often has loose stools and he itches, but there are no fleas. Thus begins the first stages of chronic illness brought on by the vaccines.

When a perfectly healthy individual is given viruses that cause illness, the animal is going to manifest illness-related symptoms. This healthy individual is asked to maintain a low-level stimulation of a state of distemper, a low level state of parvo, a low level state of rabies, and so on. As long as you are in a low level state of illness you are not in a high level state of health. Therefore, the vaccines provide protection by keeping the body in a diseased state of health. Often the animal will not manifest the illness it is vaccinated for, at least not in its acute form, but it will manifest in other conditions. Usually these conditions are inherited weaknesses.

Chronic symptoms look very much like the acute illnesses but they are often not life-threatening unless allowed to continue for years and years.

For distemper we often see:

Watery fluid dripping from the nose
Conjunctivitis, eye discharge, entropion
Chronic gastritis, hepatitis, pancreatitis, appetite disorders
Recurrent diarrhea
Sensitivity to food with resultant diarrhea
Epilepsy, rear leg paralysis, spondylitis
Lip fold dermatitis
Excessive licking of feet, eruptions between the toes, allergies
Kennel cough, chronic bronchitis
Chronic skin eruptions, especially lower half of body
Failure to thrive, abnormally thin

For rabies we often see:

Restless nature, suspicion of others, aggression to animals and people
Changes in behavior: aloofness, unaffectionate, desire to roam, OR clingy, separation anxiety, 'velcro dog'
Restraining can lead to violent behavior and self-injury
Self-mutilation, tail chewing
Voice changes, hoarseness, excessive barking
Chronic poor appetite, very finicky
Paralysis of throat or tongue, sloppy eaters, drooling
Dry eye, loss of sight, cataract
Eating wood, stones, earth, stool
Destructive behavior, shredding bedding
Seizures, epilepsy, twitching
Increased sexual desire, sexual aggression
Irregular pulse, heart failure
Reverse sneezing

Some of the illnesses you are familiar with include any auto-immune disease such as lupus, red cell aplasia, auto-immune hemolytic anemia cardiomyopathies; neoplasias such as fibrosarcomas, mast cell tumors, thyroid tumors, etc.; inflammatory bowel disease, eczematous ears, any dermatological condition, warts, lipomas, poor hair coats, stomatitis, periodontal disease, thyroid disease, and the list goes on and on.

Now you could be wondering why I am so bold to 'blame' all these and more on vaccines. The reason is simple: I have an empirical, call it experimental lab where I visit daily and watch the animals, year after year. In the short years of my career I have seen the incredible increase in all these illnesses, some we never even learned in vet school. In fact, my vet school is now primarily an oncology treatment center! This was not the case a short 20 years ago. I have also spoken with many vets who have practiced longer than I and their response is the same. They did not see the level of chronic illness, nor the resistant and concretized type of illnesses that we see today.

Because I am able to use homeopathic remedies to help resolve these effects of the vaccines I am able to see first hand the cause-effect relationship. I have also looked at the info of those who have come before me to help in this process. One such person was J. Compton Burnett, a British physician of the late 1800s and early 1900s. Burnett was a proponent of the smallpox vaccine until he started noticing that the vaccines given to young people in the prime of their lives were causing many 'other' health problems. He coined the term 'vaccinosis' to describe the illnesses caused by vaccines, separate from the illnesses they were protecting against. Much of what Burnett saw closely resembles what we see today in our animals. This is interesting how this human model is actually teaching us about what happens with animals.
Burnett further verified his hypothesis by giving the homeopathic remedy, Thuja, to many of these vaccinated individuals, as was described by Hahnneman. He was able to reverse many of these harmful effects. This is still a widely used remedy for the effects of vaccines.

Alternatives

Remember, the body has incredible capacity to provide protection against all sorts of invaders. So, if our approach to protection is from the standpoint of supporting the body in doing its job, which it already knows how to do, we are working at a more fundamental level. If we support the energy and physical systems of the body we will support the immune system, not overload it. Clean hygiene, good nutrition, clean water, plenty of exercise, constitutional treatments (preferably homeopathic), good breeding practices, and homeopathic nosodes, where needed. This all sounds very simplistic and, in fact, it is!

Should you decide to use nosodes they must be used under the guidance of a qualified vet, just as with any medication. Nosodes are homeopathic remedies made from the diseased products of whatever disease you are wanting to protect against. For distemper, nasal discharge is used. For parvo, fecal material is used. These are subsequently filtered, and sterilized, diluted and succussed as any homeopathic remedy and are administered orally. I use them starting at 7-9 weeks and continue for the first year of life only. They cannot be used for rabies licensing.

Nosodes provide protection by stimulating a non-specific immunological response. They fill the susceptibility the animal has to the disease without actually producing antibodies. If that susceptibility is filled, much like a cup of coffee to the brim, then nothing else can come in and fill it up. You can't be over-susceptible. In my practice nosodes are very effective with the exception of animals with chronic illness and poor breeding practices. The primary nosodes I use are for the life threatening diseases such as parvo, distemper, and panleukopenia. I will also use bordatella for animals in kennel situations.

If You Do Vaccinate

If you choose to vaccinate, please be careful. My recommendations are as follows: wait until 14 weeks for puppies and kittens, until the maternal antibodies are no longer present. If you must use something before 14 weeks, use nosodes; after 14 weeks, give one MLV parvo/distemper combination for dogs; for cats, give one panleukopenia, and one rabies vaccine at least two weeks after the above.
OR:
One distemper at 12 weeks, followed by one parvo at 14 weeks (these are the single vaccines and are the best, but often difficult to find). All other vaccines, except rabies, I cannot recommend, period.

Other Issues

We have yet to discuss the topic of rights, animal rights, and guardian rights. This is one you can play with on your own.

Additionally, we have yet to talk about the laws that mandate rabies requirements that don't reflect the current science. I hope to see these laws changed as there is more info form the duration of immunity studies. It will be up to the grassroots movement to initiate this as most vet associations will not support a law that will hurt the pocketbooks of the vets.

So, you can see there is quite a bit of info to assimilate, and there is more! With this, I believe there is enough to shed some light on a topic that even confuses most vets.


Sursa: http://www.angelfire.com/biz/frogholler ... lanco.html

---

Vaccines Damage Your Pet's Health

"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"
~ Bronwyn Hancock

The doctor of the future will give no medicine,
But will interest his patients in the care of the human frame,
In diet, and in the cause and prevention of disease.
~ Thomas Edison

Doctors give drugs of which they know little,
into bodies, of which they know less,
for diseases of which they know nothing at all.
~ Voltaire

Never, no never does Nature say one thing and wisdom another.
~ Johann Christolph Frederick von Schuller

"All drug doctors are quacks."
~ Benjamin Franklin


Dr. Dee Blanco, D.V.M - "You take healthy animals and often very quickly after you vaccinate, you can see simple things like itching of the skin or excessive licking of the paws, sometimes even with no eruptions and licking of the air. We see a lot of epilepsy/seizure, often after a rabies vaccination. Or dogs or cats can become aggressive for several days. Frequently, you'll see urinary tract infections in cats, often within three months after their [annual] vaccination. If you step back, open your mind and heart, you'll start to see patterns of illness post-vaccination."

The Truth is Out There!

People who have chosen to feed their pets a raw diet are already open minded. As we become more aware of how the atrocious quality of highly processed commercial pet food negatively affects our pet's health, this often naturally leads us to reconsider the conventional wisdom behind other widely accepted practices involving our pets; case in point being the highly profitable business of vaccination.

In order to begin to understand more clearly the concept of vaccinosis and comprehend the astonishing level of damage being done to many of our pets' health due to the administration of so very many vaccines, we have to be willing to open our minds and look beyond our ingrained beliefs.

Depending on how ready you are to break through the boundaries of conditioning to which we have all been subjected, it's possible that the information on this page may shock, surprise or perhaps even anger you.

But regardless of your response to this information, it’s hoped that what's presented here will compel you to do your own research on this subject, so that you can learn for yourself the real truth about the multi-billion dollar vaccine industry, and the outrageous untold damage that vaccinations are having not only on domestic pets, but upon virtually the entire population of the human race as well.

There is a growing amount of information on this subject available on the internet that is well worth taking the time to explore. If you're interested in learning more, a good place to start is by checking out the links section of this website.

Conditioned Thinking

Just as most of us have grown up and lived in a society which has conditioned us to believe that it’s perfectly acceptable to feed our pets commercial pet food, so do the majority of people in the western world consider vaccination to be a perfectly acceptable, safe, and effective means of preventing the spread of infectious disease. Most all of us have been vaccinated ourselves at some point in our lives, and most all of the pets we have owned have most likely been vaccinated as well. Many people consider that making sure their pets “get their shots” is the absolute right thing to do – or rather - not just that it’s the right thing to do, but that NOT doing it is actually tantamount to negligence!

What is Known About Vaccinosis?

There's an umbrella term that has been coined to describe the myriad damage that vaccines have the potential to inflict. This term is vaccinosis. You are encouraged to do an internet search on this term to learn more about it and further explore its ramifications. But please consider that when it comes to the damage that has been, is being, and potentially will be done to both domestic animals and humans alike as a result of the use of vaccines, what is known thus far only amounts to just the tip of the iceberg.

A Healthy Immune System Confers the Ultimate Immunity - Naturally

As was mentioned on the introductory page - and it bears repeating - the most potent, effective and natural mechanism for ensuring good health, longevity and resistance to infections, parasites and disease, exists right within the internal terrain of the body. A well balanced internal terrain makes for a robust, healthy, fully operational immune system.

In other words, effective immunity is created within the body by virtue of the strength of the body’s own properly functioning immune system. Contrary to popular belief, the truth is that although the injection of vaccines may stimulate the production of antibodies, this does not mean that they create immunity. Vaccines, in and of themselves, do not create immunity from disease. Only the immune system can do that. And the way the immune system works naturally to create immunity is the same, whether it be in an animal like a cat or dog, or in a human being.

How a Properly Functioning Immune System Works

Put very simply, the way it works is this: when contagions, whether in the form of germs, bacteria or viruses, enter the body, the way they generally pass from the outside to the inside is via a bodily orifice. The body’s major first lines of defence lie in the form of mucus and the mucous membranes, primarily those of the eyes, nose, mouth, pulmonary passages and GI tract. When the body is exposed to pathogens entering into the body in this way, as long as the immune system is healthy and functioning properly, it will often automatically create an immediate immunity to that potential threat, thereby protecting the body from infection and fending off disease. If by chance for some reason the pathogen does manage to take hold to the point where it’s able to actually cause an acute form of illness, the body will react with certain symptoms, perhaps with such purging responses as fever, sweating or vomiting, inflammation, or an increase in mucus production etc. These sorts of symptoms are the body’s way of naturally ridding itself of the potentially harmful pathogen and restoring itself to good health.

Nature’s means of creating immunity sometimes means that a disease is contracted. This can have a twofold purpose. One purpose, although it may sound harsh, is that those animals that are not strong and healthy enough to either resist or survive such illness may perish, thus ensuring that the weak will not live to reproduce. The other purpose is that if one survives an illness, permanent immunity from that disease is generally conferred, and as a result of fighting off the disease the animal may well end up being stronger for having lived through the ordeal.

Vaccines Bypass the Body's Natural Immune Response


Now let's explore what happens when Nature’s way is not allowed to unfold on its own because a pathogen, such as a virus, bacteria or heavy metal, is forcibly and unnaturally introduced into the body subcutaneously - directly into the bloodstream or musculature - thereby completely bypassing the body’s natural, innate defence mechanisms. This is the scenario every time a vaccine is injected via hypodermic needle into the body. The result is that the body’s natural immune processes are overridden, and in effect, short circuited. When this occurs, the body’s immune system is deprived of the opportunity to defend against that artificially introduced pathogen the way nature intended for it to.

Because of this short circuiting and the denied opportunity for the body to defend itself naturally, the way it was designed to, the potential outcome in some cases is that these artificially introduced pathogens can end up causing a kind of low grade, chronic form of disease – one against which the body cannot properly defend. In such cases the body is unable to effectively eradicate the bug and cure itself, because its natural ability to defend itself via the immune system’s conventional means has not been stimulated and activated via the proper introductory channels. In other words the body is effectively prevented from ever experiencing a full blown, acute case of the disease with the accompanying purgative symptoms.

Because the immune system’s natural defence mechanisms have been bypassed, short circuited and effectively overridden, in some cases the body becomes unable to properly rid itself of the pathogen and so the illness.

Looking at it from this perspective, it becomes clearer why multiple vaccines can, and often do, have the effect of dramatically impairing the body's natural ability to either maintain good health or heal itself.

An Epidemic of Chronic Degenerative Illness in Pets

Imagine the many different possible malfunctions that might transpire in the body and immune system of a small animal that receives multiple vaccines at one sitting. Then multiply that by the number of injections that may be given in the form of yearly “boosters’ over the life of that animal, and you may begin to see the scope of potential immune dysfunction that can, and no doubt is, occurring within virtually the entirety of today’s vaccinated domestic pet population. Just as with the toxic commercial pet food industry, there is no doubt whatsoever that there is a massive fortune being made by the mega-pharmaceutical corporations that are marketing vaccines the world over, both for animal as well as human use.

When you consider the chronic malnourishment from which many of these animals are already suffering as a result the utter junk most of them are being fed throughout the course of their lives, compounded with the additional affront of being repeatedly injected with numerous vaccinations, is it any wonder that what we’re seeing today in our pets in terms of chronic degenerative, as well as auto immune diseases, may well be amounting to nothing less than an all out epidemic?

Vaccines - A Toxic Brew

If the unnatural mechanism of introducing various viruses and bacteria into the body via vaccine injections weren’t enough of a deterrent in and of itself, there are yet more reasons to avoid having your pets jabbed.

Besides bacteria and viruses, many of the other sorts of ingredients that are found in vaccines should certainly make people think twice about using them.

Here’s just a very short list of some of the toxic and potentially damaging substances that are commonly used as components in vaccines:

Thimerosal - an organic compound containing the heavy metal mercury, which has been widely used as a preservative in vaccines. Mercury is a powerful neurotoxin. It is one of the most potent poisons known to man and has been shown to impair the function of many internal systems, chief among them being the brain, the central nervous system, the endocrine system, and the kidneys, as well as other organs.

Aluminum - another heavy metal used in vaccines as an adjuvant. Adjuvants are often added to vaccines containing killed viruses in order to enhance, or boost the vaccine’s effectiveness. Aluminum is a known neurotoxin.

Formaldehyde - classified by the EPA as a probable carcinogen, is used as a tissue fixative in some vaccines.

Ethanol - can affect the function of the brain and nervous system, and is commonly used as a preservative in vaccines.

Phenol - a highly poisonous, caustic substance derived from coal tar and used in the production of disinfectants, dyes, pharmaceuticals, plastics, germicides, and preservatives

Animal organ tissue – cells from things like monkey kidneys, cow hearts and rabbit brains, as well as blood from sheep and pigs, are used in vaccines to culture viruses.

Vaccines and Vivisection

Up until 1983 when ingredients lists were still declared, this was the accepted method for creating rabies vaccine. There's no information on how it is currently made; it is assumed this is still the practice:

A live rabbit, dog or goat is strapped and its head held.
With no anaesthetic, a cut is made through the skin on top of the head and the skin is separated from the skull.
A circular saw removes some bone.
A piece of the brain of an apparently rabid dog is inserted and the skin sewn up and the animal is put in a cage to die.
Death occurs between 13 and 27 days from inflammation of the brain.
The brain and spinal cord are removed, dried and mashed in a distilled water and salt solution with either carbolic acid or chloroform added.
After straining it is ready for animal or human use.
So efficacy of vaccines aside, cultivating vaccines on living creatures is yet another reason to look for alternatives. Unless of course, such practices are seen as being "for the greater good" and therefore somehow bizarrely more acceptable?

So, why are our vets injecting such things into our dogs?? Two reasons:

1) MONEY!! … Some sources purport as much as 60% profit in a Veterinary practice is derived from vaccines not to mention the revenue made by the vaccine manufacturers

2) BIASED EDUCATION - with pharmaceutical companies sponsoring veterinary lectures, misleading information is supplied to vets. Pet owners need to be warned that many veterinarians are not proficient in companion animal vaccination ‘best practice’. For instance, the World Small Animal Veterinary Association’s Vaccination Guidelines Group has warned that “there is an urgent requirement for education of practicing veterinarians in this area”.(1)

Professor Ronald Schultz, a member of the WSAVA Vaccination Guidelines Group, says:

“Our new grads don’t know a heck of a lot more about vaccines than our older grads. And I’ve figured out why this is. They know a lot more about basic immunology, but they don’t know about vaccinology and the two are not the same…Also, they’re taught by people generally that know nothing about vaccinology. Now, when do they get their vaccine training? During their fourth year. And who’s giving that? The veterinarians that know how to give vaccines, that still don’t know about vaccinology. So we haven’t gone very far from where we were ten years ago or twenty years ago with regard to training veterinarians about vaccines”.(2)

This is hardly comforting news for all those pet owners who are currently placing their trust in the backward ‘knowledge’ of many practicing veterinarians…

It’s way past time that both the veterinary profession and vaccine manufacturers were brought to account for unnecessary, and possibly harmful, vaccination of pets.

Food For Thought

Aside from the shocking list of ingredients used in creating vaccines, here are a few more reasons why we should all very seriously be reconsidering the wisdom of their use:

Vaccines do not necessarily confer immunity! A certain percentage of those who are vaccinated will invariably contract the very disease the vaccine they were given was intended to prevent.

Because the adjuvants contained in vaccines remain in the body indefinitely, they can continually stimulate immune-activating cells. Under normal circumstances, when pathogens are introduced into the body via natural routes, this stimulation happens quickly to overcome the infection, and once the infection is under control, the effect diminishes just as rapidly. But this chronic stimulation caused by the continual presence of vaccine adjuvants can cause the body to release a perpetual supply of free radicals, which are looking to kill a disease that is not present, and those free radicals have the potential to do perpetual damage on a cellular level.

Attenuated viruses, which are the live viruses used in some vaccines that have been weakened to the point where they are not supposed to be able to cause disease, also remain in the body indefinitely. As a result of the presence of free radicals in cells and organs, these viruses can mutate into virulent, disease causing organisms.

Think Twice About Vaccines

Find out what, if any vaccines are actually required by law for your pet where you live.
Seriously reconsider vaccinating young animals whose immature immune systems are still forming and not yet fully functional.
Never allow a sick pet to be vaccinated
Never allow pets to be vaccinated right before or after surgery, including spay and neuter procedures.
Avoid having your pet injected with multiple vaccines all at once.
Avoid "boosters" which are potentially very harmful to your pet and are marketed heavily because they're such big money makers for drug companies and vets alike.
The bottom line...

Do your homework.

Educate yourself about the harmful cocktail of ingredients used in vaccines.
Become informed about the potential risks and dangers before vaccinating your pets.
Check out the links page which lists many excellent resources where you can learn more.
References:

1. Refer to the WSAVA Vaccination Guidelines Group page on the WSAVA website for the quote re education of vets: http://www.wsava.org/VGG1.htm
2. The quote from Ronald Schultz was transcribed from the Safer Pet Vaccination Benefit Seminar DVD which includes footage of the 2009 US NJ Rabies Challenge Fund Benefit Seminar: http://www.dogs4dogs.com/saferpet


More Articles on the Truth About Vaccines:

How Vaccines Affect Both Socialization and Behavior in Dogs by Patricia Jordan, DVM, VND
How do vaccines affect animals? by Chrissie Mason B.R.C.P., Ph.D
The Parvo Hysteria by Mogens Eliasen Ph.D
Rabies - The Big Scam by Dr. John Fudens D.V.M.
Science of Vaccine Damage by Catherine O' Driscoll, Canine Health Concern
Do vaccines protect against diseases at all? by Bronwyn Hancock B.Sc., Cert. Nutr


Sursa: http://www.rawfeddogs.org/

[mszavai]

Aici i se face mare reclama la TV acestui vaccin. La postul local de televiziune a fost insa anuntat ca 21 de fete si-au pierdut viata in urma injectarii cu acest "vaccin". Chiar va surprinde lucrul acesta? Mai ales cand la sfarsitul reclamei se spunea ca nu este garantat ca vaccinul previne cancerul de col uterin.

---

Prin vaccinul Gardasil se urmareste sterilizarea fetelor din Romania?
19 Sep, 2008 medicamente nocive


La Bucuresti, Madeleine Albright fosta Secretar de Stat SUA, a presat pe Primul Ministru Tariceanu, sa adopte vaccinul Gardasil, pentru "prevenirea cancerului de col uterin".
http://www.ziua.ro

Adevarul despre Gardasil este cu totul altul:

In SUA unde s-a incercat deja administrarea "obligatorie" a vaccinului Gardasil, de catre politicieni vanduti cartelului farmaceutic, initiativa a fost deja invinsa, in toate statele in care-a fost propusa.

Cetatenii si-au dat seama ca un vaccin netestat pe termen lung si cu efecte secundare nestiute, sau stiute si deliberat ascunse, nu este sigur si nici necesar, mai ales injectat fetelor de doar 9 ani.

Efectele observate imediat, au fost dezvoltarea artritei in 9 femei, din cele peste 11.000 care au participat intr-un studiu clinic de scurta durata.

Chiar si pentru o femeie activa dpv sexual, vaccinul reprezinta un risc imens pe termen lung. Infectia cu HPV este prevenibila prin alte mijloace ca si monogamia, testarea, etc. Daca femeia a contractat totusi HPV, acesta este detectabil cu un simplu test Pap, iar abnormalitatile cervicale pot fi prevenite inainte de-a se transforma in tumori maligne. In plus, in peste 90% din cazuri, virusul este eliminat complet din organism, la nastere, fara ca si copilul sa fie afectat.

Cand cineva ca si Madeleine Albright, cea care cand era Secretar de Stat al SUA, a facut afirmatia ca pretul platit prin moartea a jumatate de milion de copii Irakieni, "a meritat", incearca sa influenteze primul ministru al Romaniei in scopul "obligativizarii" acestui vaccin, orice om cu cap, trebuie sa-si puna intrebari, asupra adevaratelor motive pentru promovarea vaccinului Gardasil.

Cuvantul "obligatoriu" nu este in ghilimele degeaba: NIMENI nu va poate forta sa va injectati Dvs. sau copiii Dvs. impotriva propriei vointe. Si in Romania , ca si in SUA, se poate alege exceptia pe baza religioasa de la vaccinari, lucru facut deja de multe grupuri si indivizi cu toate vaccinurile.
Nu degeaba rata autismului la copii, in acele populatii este zero.
Mai multe informatii atat despre Gardasil, cat si despre alte vaccinuri, gasiti aici:

Sursa: http://www.urbaniulian.ro/


Mihaela Miroiu
Professor of Political Science, Political Science Faculty
National School of Political Studies and Public Administration,
Bucharest

[mszavai]

Vaccinul anti-gripal ajută la răspândirea gripei

Este chiar ironic faptul că vaccinul anti-gripal dă o mana de ajutor în răspândirea epidemiei de gripă. În ultimii ani se pare că epidemiile de gripă au fost atent programate în societate. La sfârşitul lunii octombrie, dintro dată apare o foarte activă epidemie de gripă. Nu este deloc o coincidenţă faptul că exact în această perioada oamenii sunt vaccinaţi anti-gripal. Oficialii din sănătate ne fac să credem că tocmai de aceea ar trebui să ne vaccinăm cu toţii.

O altă imensă păcăleală perpetuată de cartelul farmaceutic este ideea că vaccinul conţine virus gripal inactiv sau mort. Imensă prostie! Dacă virusul ar fi mort, atunci vaccinarea nu ar duce la stimularea unui răspuns de imunizare. Oficial, se spune că vaccinul conţine un virus cu activitate “atenuată”. În cartea “Sfinţenia sângelui uman: vaccinarea nu este imunizare”, Tim O’Shea, o mare autoritate în domeniul pericolelor vaccinurilor, explică ce înseamnă de fapt virus “atenuat”: “Atenuat înseamnă mort pe jumătate. Virusul este slăbit într-atât încat capacitatea lui de a declanşa un răspuns inflamator în corpul uman se afla imediat sub limita valabila în cazul a 99 % dintre oameni. Prin acceptarea inocularii unui virus sau a unei bacterii cu acţiune atenuată facem ceea ce natura nu a permis niciodată. Pur şi simplu violăm integritatea fluxului sanguin uman. Am păcălit sistemul imunitar pentru a nu declanşa un răspuns de apărare la invazia agentului patogen. Dacă virusul nu ar fi atenuat, sistemul imunitar ar declanşa imediat o acţiune eficientă de anihilare şi eliminare a invadatorului”.

Aceasta dovedeşte că cei care primesc vaccinul sunt întro stare contagioasă timp de câteva săptămâni, timp în care nu fac decât să răspândească public virusul. Vaccinul nu numai că manipulează sistemul imunitar, dar mai conţine şi microorganisme străine de corpul uman care se pot înmulţi foarte uşor în interiorul nostru. Autorităţile afirmă în mod ridicol că aceşti germeni nu sunt contagioşi. Există mulţi experţi renumiţi care atrag atenţia că numărul de oameni care contactează gripa ar fi cu mult mai mic dacă nu s-ar administra vaccinurile. Cea mai sigură metodă de a nu face gripă este să nu fii în preajma celor care au făcut vaccinul.

Vaccinul nu garantează imunitatea

Medicii şi companiile farmaceutice ignoră statisticile care arată că chiar şi cei care se vaccinează fac gripă. În schimb, suntem bombardaţi cu o propagandă penibilă despre cât de mult ne ajută vaccinarea. De exemplu, în 2004 oamenii au aflat de la ştiri că vaccinurile administrate în 2003 nu au avut niciun efect de protecţie pentru sezonul gripal anual. La fel este în fiecare an.

Un exemplu relevant s-a petrecut în Canada în 2003. O casă de îngrijire a trimis un ordin intern ca întreg personalul medical să fie vaccinat anti-gripal, iar cei care nu acceptau erau trecuţi absenţi şi riscau desfacerea contractului de muncă. O asistentă medicală a refuzat însă să fie vaccinată, deşi întreaga ei echipă o făcuse. Spre surprinderea ei, toată lumea a făcut gripă în acel sezon, în afară de ea. Această poveste nu este deloc singulară, însă mass-media nu e deloc interesată de aceste aspecte, mulţumindu-se să încaseze banii din publicitatea făcută la vaccinurile anti-gripale.

Încercând să prezică ce tip de gripă va apare în sezonul curent, specialiştii nu fac decât să o ia pe ghicite, devenind penibili. În plus, vaccinul nu protejează deloc împotriva întregului spectru de agenţi patogeni care afectează aparatul respirator. Ceea ce nu se spune este că aceste vaccinuri slăbesc sistemul imunitar, pe termen lung.

Nu se ştie ce efecte negative au mercurul, aluminiul, formaldehida sau alţi “adjuvanţi” asupra sistemului imunitar. Se ştie însă că unii dintre aceşti agenţi chimici afectează activitatea ADN-ului. Şi atunci, de unde ştim că ADN-ul nu va acţiona greşit, odată modificat de aceşti componenţi chimici? În plus, chiar dacă nu ai făcut gripă fiind vaccinat, corpul tau este mult mai susceptibil să nu poată lupta împotriva altor viruşi şi agenţi patogeni. Oare merită riscul? Asta e decizia pe care trebuie să o iei.

Datorită faptului că articolele AIM sunt adesea copiate pe diverse forumuri şi apoi preluate de alte reviste şi site-uri, fără a specifica originea lor, vă informăm că adresa acestui articol este http://active.info.ms/?a=301 şi este publicat la Active Information Media.

Tim O’Shea mai scrie în cartea sa: “Un vaccin conţine o versiune a agentului patogen, întro formă slăbită. În ceea ce priveşte gripa, din momentul în care virusul a fost izolat şi multiplicat pentru a fi apoi distribuit în doze de vaccinare, virusul a avut suficient timp pentru a se transforma devenind o varietate atât de diferită de cea existentă în vaccin, încât eficienţa acestuia este foarte mică”.

Chiar Michael Decker, de la Aventis (companie producătoare de vaccinuri), recunoaşte că în momentul în care se descoperă tulpina (varietatea de virus) corectă, e deja prea târziu. Vaccinul nici nu ia în considerare faptul că virusul are o formă diferită pentru fiecare persoană, deci nu se justifică deviza “un vaccin pentru toţi”. Dacă chiar ar fi util, nu ar mai fi nevoie ca în anul următor să faci un nou vaccin, pentru că imunitatea natural dobândită ţine o viaţă.

Aţi observat că cei care se vaccinează anti-gripal se tot îmbolnăvesc mai mereu? Oare pentru că nu-i lasă răgaz corpului să înveţe să lupte singur împotriva gripei?

Nu poţi să te aştepţi la o întărire a sistemului imunitar dacă injectezi direct în sânge o mulţime de agenţi ce contaminează sângele, viruşi, bacterii, neurotoxine, conservanţi şi disruptori de ADN. Vaccinurile sar peste posibilităţile naturale de apărare oferite de ficat, rinichi, colon, sistemul limfatic şi sistemul imunitar, deversând substanţe toxice direct în corp. Corpul tău nu ştie cum să procedeze atunci când mercurul, aluminiul, formaldehida şi diverse microorganisme sunt lansate împotriva lui întocmai ca o bombă. Unii oameni ajung chiar întro stare de şoc. Alţii mor sau sunt foarte afectaţi iremediabil imediat după ce au fost vaccinaţi.


Iata rezumatul:

Producătorii de vaccinuri, ajutaţi de corpul medical, care a acceptat aproape fără nici un fel de rezervă sau comentarii principiul vaccinării, au atins adevărate culmi în ce priveşte dezinformarea şi minciuna. Un fapt de neimaginat în istoria umanităţii: să faci oamenii să creadă în eficacitatea şi lipsa de efecte secundare negative a acestui principiuinventat de Jenner şi însuşit de Pasteur, deşi nu are nici un fundament ştiinţific serios.

Imunologia modernă demonstrează, din contra, căactul vaccinal constituie o lezare gravă a integrităţii sistemului imunitar a persoanelor vaccinate, făcând din acestea veritabile rezervoare de viruşi.

Viruşi şi retroviruşi deveniţi pasivi de-a lungul evoluţiei, se găsesc în stare latentă în toate organismele animale şi umane, pierzându-şi o parte din capitalul lor genetic sau enzimatic.

Introducerea în organism (prin vaccinare) a viruşilor vii sau atenuaţi, îi pot permite acestuia să reconstituie acest capital şi să dobândească deci o virulenţă nouă sau să creeze din bucăţi un virus sau un retrovirus hibrid. Aceasta se numeşterecombinare genetică. (HIV - ul este fără îndoială fructul unei astfel de recombinări).

Deşi accidentele provocate de vaccinuri sunt nenumărate, ele sunt trecute sub tăcere.

Se ştie astăzi, la 100 de ani după moartea sa, că Pasteur a fost un geniu al trişării, al plagiatului, al trucării statisticilor, al traficului de influenţă, al publicităţii bine regizate, iar diversele sale experienţe vaccinale erau trucate, după cum aumărturisit chiar colaboratorii săi.

Această carte stabileşte adevărul despre acest personaj şi demonstrează, prin studiul principalelor vaccinări, inutilitatea şi chiar pericolul lor.

În sfârşit, cititorul va afla despre cârdăşia farmaco-medico-politică care dezinformează publicul şi predică vaccinarea doar pentru a profita financiar. De asemenea, va afla de ce vaccinarea a devenit un fel de act de credinţă într-o religie ale cărei dogme sunt false şi ale cărei mari preoţi sunt producătorii de vaccinuri şi corpul medical.


Sursa: http://nuvaccinurilor.blogspot.com

[mszavai]

Articolul care urmeaza ii apartine in exclusivitate celebrului doctor Leonard Horowitz.


In aprilie 2003, maladia SARS (sindromul acut respirator sever) sau asa-zisa pneumonie atipica, sosita zice-se din Asia, a lovit lumea. Despre SARS s-a spus la aceea vreme ca e cea mai recenta boala dintr-o serie de maladii noi care au fost provocate de o serie de misteriosi "super germeni" mutanti. Un studiu stiintific atent al caracteristicilor medico-sociologice ale acestei epidemii a revelat unele lucruri care erau ascunse la prima vedere. Pneumonia atipica prezinta de fapt toate caracteristicile unui nou experiment criminal care a fost realizat de catre "bioteroristii" in halate albe. Cei care au dat ordin din umbra ca acest experiment criminal sa fie implementat sunt fara indoiala francmasonii.

Era astfel evident ca aceasta manipulare umana fara precedent a fost totodata destinata sa indoctrineze in masa populatia si sa o manipuleze din umbra. Toate aceste aspecte arata planurile sinistre care au fost urmarite de catre francmasoneria mondiala. Este semnificativ faptul ca de-a lungul epidemiei de "pneumonie atipica" mass-media nu a incetat sa vorbeasca de "agentii bacteorologici" noi care ar fi putut cauza disparitia a jumatate din populatia mondiala. Studiind in profunzime subiectul controlului populatiei, inclusiv obiectivele actuale ale principalelor corporatii industriale multinationale, am observat ca aceste asa-zise "preziceri" corespund indeaproape cu cateva obiective oficiale secrete in materie de reducere a populatiei mondiale cu peste cinci miliarde de oameni, care a fost hotarata cu catva timp in urma de catre francmasoneria mondiala. Ceea ce nu stiu decat foarte putini oameni de stiinta care au fost angrenati in aceste proiecte este faptul ca virusul SARS a fost creat in prealabil in laborator pentru a servi acestor scopuri. Francmasonii au hotarat ca este necesar sa inventeze si alti virusi, atunci cand au ajuns la concluzia ca SIDA ucide mult prea lent. Planurile lor criminale sunt evidente in aceasta directie.

In anul 2003, pentru prima data in istoria Canadei, lupta impotriva unei epidemii - maladia SARS (ai carei virusi au fost in prealabil realizati in laborator) - in aceasta tara a fost dirijata direct de catre ONU si Organizatia Mondiala a Sanatatii. Intre diferitele organizatii ce au fost implicate in actiunile de combatere a epidemiilor exista puternice legaturi pe plan administrativ si financiar. De exemplu, am constatat ca familia Rockfeller (care conduce la varf francmasoneria mondiala si care a finantat in secret producerea in laborator prin manipulare genetica a acestor virusi asa cum anterior a facut cu SIDA), Fundatia Carnegie si principalii conducatori ai industriei farmaceutice mondiale au controlat atat cercetarile canadiene cat si lupta impotriva SARS in Canada. In felul acesta ne putem da seama ca de fapt nici o pandemie sau o epidemie de talie mondiala nu a putut fi niciodata separata de contextul sau economic sau politic. Aceasta arata interesele sinistre pe care le are in secret in vedere francmasoneria mondiala.

Este semnificativ faptul ca unii „experti" au prezis sosirea unei maladii de acest gen de decenii. Putini stiu insa ca in realitate conducatorii francmasoneriei mondiale au hotarat in urma cu cateva decenii reducerea drastica a populatiei acestei planete prin contaminarea criminala a oamenilor cu anumiti virusi care urmau sa fie creati in laborator. Ceea ce mi-a trezit imediat suspiciunile in ce priveste pneumonia atipica, a fost momentul in care a survenit. SARS a aparut deloc intamplator in acelasi timp cu lansarea „razboiului impotriva terorismului" si cu razboiul anglo-american impotriva Irakului. Acest aspect dezvaluie modul de a actiona din umbra al francmasonilor. Totodata aceasta maladie (care a fost creata in laborator la ordinul francmasonilor) a fost o ocazie perfecta pentru a distrage atentia opiniei publice de la faptul ca administratia Bush l-a acuzat pe Saddam Hussein ca ar detine un arsenal impresionant de arme biologice, printre care antraxul si virusul care produce febra de Nil.

Epidemia de pneumonie atipica avea deja toate caracteristicile pe care le-am prezentat anterior intr-una dintre cartile mele, care a fost publicata inainte de atentatele de la 11 septembrie. Titlul acestei lucrari era: „Moartea in aer: Globalism, Terorism si Razboiul chimic." Ideea esentiala a acestei carti este aceea ca o anume forma de "bioterorism" institiutionalizat este totodata perfect compatibila cu un razboi biologic sponsorizat in secret de catre francmasoni intr-un stat anume (iar acest stat a fost SUA), asa cum eu am explicat detaliat in lucrarea respectiva.

Pentru mine este foarte clar la ora actuala ca atat pneumonia atipica, cat si gripa aviara care a fost lansata de curand, sunt produse cu anumite intentii criminale nu numai cu consimtamantul, ci si cu ajutorul grupului industriilor medicale, farmaceutice, petrochimice si militare, prin intermediul unor actiuni ilegale care sunt finantate si dirijate din „culise" de catre conducatorii francmasoneriei mondiale, printre acestia aflindu-se fara indoiala si multimiliardarul francmason Rockfeller.

Atunci cand am avut ocazia sa depun marturie despre aceste actiuni criminale ale francmasonilor in fata Congresului American, am putut sa realizez direct in ce mod ii influenteaza si ii controleaza pe reprezentatii nostri economici si politici industria farmaceutica. Epidemiile artificiale care sunt comandate din „culise" de catre francmasoni completeaza totodata efectul razboiului politic impotriva terorismului. Un astfel de program criminal secret are doua obiective esentiale: obtinerea unor profituri imense si reducerea populatiei mondiale cu peste cinci miliarde de oameni. Acest genocid planetar a fost pus la cale de francmasoni in urma cu cateva decenii.

O realitate politica uluitoare contra miturilor care sunt vehiculate de mass-media

Nebunia crescanda a lumii care ne inconjoara corespunde in intregime cu recomandarile secrete ale conducatorilor francmasoneriei mondiale, cat si cu acelea ale fondatorilor Noii Ordini Moniale, care au hotarat ca trebuie sa fie favorizate (in secret) anumite "dezastre fara razboi". Sa vedem acum despre ce este vorba, de fapt?

La sfarsitul anilor 60, in principalele cercuri industriale din SUA s-a inceput (la ordinele care au fost date in cel mai deplin secret de catre conducatorii francmasoneriei mondiale) cautarea unor asa-zisi "inlocuitori economici ai razboiului clasic" care aveau drept scop principal reducerea populatiei globului. In comparatie cu efectele primului si ale celui de-al doilea razboi mondial, distrugerile masive care ar putea fi provocate de catre anumite dezastre naturale cum ar fi: uraganele, epidemiile sau razboaiele bacteorologice si genetice, sunt privite din punct de vedere politic si economic ca fiind foarte "rentabile". Aceasta viziune criminala a francmasonilor este naucitoare. Conflictele care sunt declansate de genocidul pe care francmasonii il implementeaza fara razboi, cum ar fi "lupta impotriva SIDA", "lupta impotriva drogurilor", "lupta impotriva terorismului", "lupta impotriva cancerului" si acum "lupta impotriva gripei aviare", se folosesc de anumite programe sofisticate de propaganda prin care totodata este infricosata opinia publica. In finalul acestor campanii de manipulare care sunt declansate la nivel planetar (din umbra, de catre francmasoni) oamenii sunt astfel pacaliti si ulterior ei accepta docili anumite legi noi prin care se incalca intr-un mod flagrant unele libertati ale populatiei. Aceasta oculta "revolutie militara" care este declansata de catre conducatorii francmasoneriei mondiale urmareste printre altele generalizarea unor noi forme de sclavagism uman, fara ca populatia lumii sa isi poata da seama ca este supusa sclaviei.

Exista un exemplu clasic in aceasta directie, acela al pesticidelor extrem de toxice si cancerigene care adeseori au fost utilizate pe scara larga mai ales in zonele locuite, sub pretextul ca ele extermina tantarii care raspandesc "Febra de Nil". Aceste produse secrete, extrem de toxice, care in termeni militari sunt considerate ca nu sunt mortale, provoaca totusi in timp moartea lenta a celor infestati. In felul acesta sunt omorati in secret o multime de oameni. Astfel societatile farmaceutice criminale isi ingrasa in acelasi timp conturile cu banii murdari care sunt obtinuti din vanzarea medicamentelor (care in realitate sunt aproape ineficiente) ce lupta impotriva bolilor care sunt provocate de aceste pesticide. Victimele nevinovate ale acestei campanii de exterminare a tantarilor au murit dupa aceea lent de diverse afectiuni cronice. Printre toate aceste maladii noi, care sunt provocate in mod artificial, figureaza un numar foarte mare de boli care ataca sistemul imunitar, precum si diferite tipuri de cancer care erau practic necunoscute in urma cu 50 de ani.

Gripa aviara, o epidemie care a fost creata la ordinul francmasonilor, fiind totodata conceputa ca un substantial profit

Este oare epidemia recenta de gripa aviara (ai carei virusi au fost creati in laborator in mod artificial la ordinul francmasonilor) cu adevarat atat de mortala, atat de contagioasa si atat de dificil de tratat pe cat am fost facuti sa credem? Numarul deceselor care au fost provocate de acest virus (ce a fost creat in laborator prin anumite manipulari genetice criminale) este relativ mic (bilantul Organizatiei Mondiale a Sanatatii vorbeste despre numai 92 de decese pana la data de 20 februarie 2006). Analizind insa in mod comparativ, descoperim ca de fapt formele obisnuite de gripa omoara in jur de 40.000 de americani in fiecare an.

Important este ca pana in prezent virusul H5N1 n-a suferit inca mutatii astfel incat sa se poata transmite usor de la om la om. Cu toate acestea importante sume de bani au fost vehiculate in legatura cu subiectul gripei aviare. "Senatul American a votat un buget de 3,9 miliarde de dolari pentru achizitionarea vaccinului antigripal si a medicamentelor care sunt necesare, iar la ora actuala Guvernul pregateste o suplimentare uriasa de fonduri care va ajunge la 6-10 miliarde de dolari", anunta un raport al revistei "Bussiness week".

Chiar exista o forma inteligenta de viata pe planeta noastra?! Raspunsul la aceasta intrebare ironica poate permite explicarea faptului ca opinia publica a putut sa accepte atat de usor atatea minciuni! Pana si ziarul "USA Today" afirma ca "la ora actuala nu exista un vaccin sigur impotriva gripei aviare." Cum se face atunci ca Senatul American cheltuie atat de multe miliarde pentru a cumpara un vaccin care deocamdata nu exista impotriva gripei aviare?

Totusi, dincolo de minciunile care se vehiculeaza este necesar sa ne dam seama ca un vaccin cu adevarat eficace nu ar fi putut fi preparat decat prin realizarea mutatiei genetice a acestui virus, implinindu-se astfel cea mai mare frica a intregii lumi. Dati-mi voie sa explic... Pentru a realiza cu adevarat un vaccin uman specific pentru virusul H5N1 mutant, (care a fost realizat in secret in laborator) trebuie sa se porneasca de la acest virus mutant, care insa nu exista, cu exceptia laboratoarelor biomedicale-farmaceutico-militare in care el (virusul respectiv) este produs in secret la ordinul francmasonilor. De fapt, pot sa afirm ca in urma informatiilor pe care le detin am descoperit astfel ca este vorba de exact ceea ce se prepara in mod secret. Pentru a produce un virus transmisibil la om, este inainte de toate necesara cultivarea virusului gripei aviare indeajuns de mult timp, amestecandu-l cu culturi de celule umane. Acesta trebuie injectat mai apoi maimutelor, apoi fiintelor umane, pentru a verifica daca aceste subiecte vor prelua acest virus fabricat in laborator.

Astfel, acest nou virus de care toata lumea se teme atat de mult, fie este in curs de fabricare in unele laboratoare secrete care au fost si sunt finantate in secret de catre francmasoni si de catre anumiti industriasi care sunt puternic motivati sa lase ca acest virus sa se raspandeasca „intr-un mod care in aparenta este accidental", fie el a fost deja fabricat in mod ilegal in aceste laboratoare secrete, de unde urmeaza sa fie apoi raspandit pentru a se profita totodata de panica mondiala actuala. Aceste planuri diabolice care au fost puse la cale de francmasoni prevad profiturile financiare enorme ce vor apare pentru unii dintre francmasoni prin asa-zisa lupta impotriva acestui virus (care in prealabil a fost creat in laborator la ordinul francmasonilor). Trebuie stiut inca de pe acum ca pentru a fi cu adevarat eficace impotriva unui virus, un vaccin eficient trebuie sa fie specific. Noile virusuri care au fost fabricate de om fiind create in laborator, asemenea acelora care sunt fabricate la ora actuala pentru prepararea unui vaccin, sunt cel mai adesea mult mai instabile decat cele care au evoluat in mod natural de-a lungul miilor de ani. Tocmai din acest motiv, toate eforturile actuale care se vor realiza pentru prepararea unui asa-zis vaccin nu sunt in realitate altceva decat praf aruncat in ochii celor naivi sau ignoranti. Dincolo de toate acestea, motivatiile reale ale planurilor diabolice ale francmasonilor raman ascunse.

De asemenea este necesar sa stim ca eficacitatea unui vaccin necesita ani de cercetari precum si mai multe luni de controale atente si de verificari care se fac in mijlocul populatiei vizate. Toate informatiile referitoare la efectele secundare sau accidentele terapeutice care sunt in unele situatii provocate de acest vaccin trebuie sa fie apoi adunate cu multa grija. Credeti ca intr-adevar guvernul francmason al SUA sau industria farmaceutica vor putea strange dupa aceea laolalta toate aceste informatii necesare, in contextul isteriei ce va fi provocata de aceasta „pandemie" (epidemie generala) care in realitate va fi declansata de aceia care au creat acest virus in laborator?

Vorbesc aici despre un dezastru sigur care va fi provocat in felul acesta de francmasoni, pentru ca au mai existat anterior unele precedente. Este lunga lista vaccinurilor care au fost produse in fuga, si care, de indata ce au inceput sa fie comercializate au avut o multime de consecinte oribile asupra oamenilor. Putem aminti aici primul vaccin impotriva pestei (ciumei) porcine, vaccinurile contra poliomelitei, vaccinurile contra variolei, vaccinurile contra antraxului, vaccinurile contra hepatitei B si cel mai recent, vaccinul impotriva maladiei Lyme, care a provocat invaliditate la aproape 750.000 de persoane in cateva luni, pana sa fie scos de pe piata de catre autoritati. In realitate toate aceste actiunii criminale care s-au incheiat cu milioane de morti urmaresc punerea in aplicare a sinistrelor planuri diabolice ale francmasonilor. Toate acestea vizeaza reducerea populatiei acestei planete cu peste cinci miliarde de oameni.

Majoritatea oamenilor sunt suficient de naivi si ei ignora faptul ca toate vaccinurile contin o multime de ingrediente secrete (care sunt intentionat incluse in ele pentru a provoca moartea) care pot fi foarte nocive pentru sanatate si chiar mortale. Putem aminti printre aceste ingrediente (care sunt in mod intentionat introduse in ele) unele produse chimice foarte toxice cum ar fi mercurul, aluminiul, formaldehida si formolul (care sunt folosite pentru conservarea cadavrelor). Astfel de vaccinuri mortale contin in secret unele produse de natura genetica ce ii sunt straine omului, unele proteine cu un mare grad de risc care provin de la anumite specii de bacterii, de la unii virusi sau de la unele animale despre care cercetatorii stiintifici corecti si cinstiti afirma ca ele pot conduce la declansarea anumitor afectiuni grave ale sistemului imunitar sau pot provoca aparitia anumitor forme de cancer. Este evident ca astfel de accidente mortale sunt in avantajul planului diabolic al francmasonilor de a reduce populatia planetei cu peste cinci miliarde de oameni.

Dispunem la ora actuala de tot mai multe probe stiintifice indubitabile care demonstreaza ca adeseori vaccinurile duc la declansarea si manifestarea multor boli grave, cum ar fi autismul, oboseala cronica, fibromialgia, lupus-ul, scleroza in placi, artrita reumatoida, astmul, raceala plamanilor, felurite infectii cronice ale urechii, diabetul de tip 1 si multe alte boli.

Revista Business Week este de parere ca achizitionarea masiva de catre guvernele care sunt penetrate in intregime de francmasoni a vaccinurilor nu face altceva decat sa aduca profituri fabuloase feluritelor societati farmaceutice (care sunt controlate de francmasoni), cum ar fi Sanofi-Pasteur, Sanofi-Aventis sau Chiron. S-a declarat in mod repetat ca Tamiflu, un asa-zis medicament antiviral care este produs de societatea farmaceutica La Roche, ar fi eficace contra gripei aviare. Totusi revista Business Week, care este si ea controlata de francmasoni, a trecut sub tacere faptul ca nici eficacitatea si nici caracterul benign ale medicamentului Tamiflu nu au fost pana in prezent dovedite. Trebuie mentionat de asemenea ca acest medicament despre care nu se stie cat este de eficient provoaca totodata multe efecte secundare printre care amintim: greata, varsaturi, diaree, bronsita, dureri gastrice, ameteli, dureri de cap, etc.

In anul 1999, s-a descoperit ca laboratoarele La Roche, (Hoffman-LaRoche) erau vinovate de inselatorii in ceea ce priveste furnizarea de vitamine pe piata mondiala. Este de asemenea semnificativ faptul ca firma La Roche (care este controlata de francmasoni) apartine unei societati petrochimice si farmaceutice care provine din firma I.G. Farben, care a fost unul dintre pilonii industriali ai Germaniei naziste, ea fiind unul dintre partenerii industriali ai lui Sanofi-Aventis si ai Societatii Merck. Aceasta intreprindere a preluat cea mai mare parte din ramasitele economiei naziste, la sfarsitul celui de-al doilea razboi mondial. Cifra de afaceri a Societatii Merck a scazut puternic anul trecut, cand ea a fost nevoita sa-si retraga de pe piata unul dintre medicamentele sale impotriva artritei, care s-a dovedit extrem de nociv, numit VIOXX, care a avut efecte devastatoare asupra acelora care si l-au administrat. Firma farmaceutica Merck este de asemenea „celebra", intr-un mod trist, mai ales din cauza producerii primului vaccin contra hepatitei B, care ulterior s-a descoperit ca este responsabil de declansarea unei mari epidemii SIDA. Acest aspect cutremurator este conform cu rapoartele stiintifice pe care deja le-am publicat intr-una dintre cartile mele.

In cursul lunilor ce au urmat atacului de la 11 septembrie in Statele Unite, am reusit in final sa demonstrez ca scrisorile care contineau virusul anthraxului proveneau de fapt de la intreprinderile care produc arme bacteriologice, care incheiasera contracte cu CIA si care aveau de asemenea anumite legaturi cu serviciile secrete engleze, cat si cu aceeasi societate farmaceutica anglo-americana care a fost deja amintita de noi anterior. Acele scrisori care contineau in ele virusul anthraxului au provocat in intreaga America o imensa stare de groaza fata de terorismul bacteriologic, spre mai marele profit al fabricantilor de vaccinuri si de produse farmaceutice, aceiasi care sunt asociate astazi tuturor celor care profita cu o imensa nerusinare de pe urma epidemiei de gripa aviara.

Confruntati cu astfel de stari de teroare care le sunt induse in mod artificial (prin intermediul campaniilor de presa si televiziune) pentru a fi manipulati, majoritatea oamenilor nu ezita sa renunte la drepturile lor civile si la libertatile lor proprii. In America, votarea scandaloasei legi referitoare la asa-zisa securitate nationala (Home Security Act) cat si a unei legi similare in Canada, sunt exemple clasice ale acestei stari de deriva sociale si ale acestei manipulari care este realizata in secret de francmasoni la scara mare pentru a conduce la o legislatie fortata…


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Despre autor:

Dr. Leonard Horowitz este un faimos expert international in materie de sanatate publica, stiinte ale comportamentului, noi maladii si terorism bacteriologic. Licentiat la Harvard, el este membru al echipei de cercetatori ai acestei Universitati.

El este cunoscut pentru mai multe carti, dintre care una este deja best-seller. Titlul ei este: „Virusuri emergente, SIDA si Ebola – boli accidentale sau intentionate?". Aceasta carte a permis deschiderea unei anchete oficiale in Statele Unite pentru verificarea adevarurilor zguduitoare pe care ea le contine. Lucrarile sale referitoare la riscurile grave care sunt asociate vaccinarilor au determinat deja cel putin trei state din Lumea a Treia sa-si modifice politicile in ceea ce priveste vaccinarea. El a avut ocazia sa depuna o marturie memorabila in fata Senatului Statelor Unite cu privire la crearea virusului SIDA in laborator la ordinele francmasoneriei mondiale.

[mszavai]

MEMORIUL DOCTORULUI HOROWITZ

Evoluţie naturală, accidentală sau premeditare? Cum poate fi interpretată apariţia simultană şi atât de subită a infectării cu virusul SIDA, în urma campaniilor de vaccinare a unor populaţii atât de bine identificate, în zone geografice şi culturale atât de diferite ca în SUA (vaccinarea împotriva hepatitei la homosexuali) sau Zair şi Haiti (campania împotriva variolei)?

În revista de circulaţie internaţională Medicines Nouvelle se consemnează: “O carte publicată în SUA de către un înalt demnitar în serviciile de sănătate publică face în ultimă vreme mare vâlvă în mediile ştiinţifice. Lucrarea lui Dr. Horowitz "Viruşi emergenţi" avansează o ipoteză monstruoasă: virusul maladiei SIDA a fost fabricat cu premeditare în laboratoarele americane, plecând de la experimentele asupra virusului cancerului, la sfârşitul anilor ‘60. Maimuţe africane au fost inoculate cu gene provenind de la alte specii animale, pentru a permite punerea la punct a fabricării vaccinurilor.

În aceeaşi perioadă, cercetători ai Institutului Naţional al Cancerului, în strânsă colaborare cu savanţi ai armatei americane, au cercetat şi produs viruşi capabili să provoace cancere. Era vorba de un program ultrasecret de cercetare în domeniul armelor biologice, dotat cu un buget foarte important (Special virus cancer programm). Analizând documentele "clasate" şi contractele semnate de NCI, Dr. Horowitz este convins că epidemia are la origine încercări de vaccinare împotriva poliomelitei şi hepatitei.

O scurtă prezentare a cărtii lui Dr. Horowitz "Viruşi emergenţi”

Această carte pune în culpă cele mai mari instituţii medicale americane şi cei mai mari cercetători care au pus la punct aceşti agenţi biologici capabili să distrugă sistemul imunitar, la cererea Ministerului Apărării şi a CNI, la sfârşitul anilor ‘60.

Două treimi din negrii americani cred că epidemia de SIDA poate fi un genocid. În mod evident, informaţia şi cercetarea în domeniul SIDA au fost împiedicate de frauda stiintifică, de certurile politice şi de prejudecăţi oarbe.

Originea viruşilor mortali cei mai periculoşi şi mai înspăimântători din lume a fost înconjurată de mister. Cartea Dr. Horowitz asupra apariţiei viruşilor este prima explorare profundă despre viruşii HIV şi EBOLA.

Ipotezele, conform cărora aceşti viruşi emergenţi ar fi evoluat în mod natural, trecând de la maimuţă la om, se conturează tot mai clar ca o manipulare grosolană, în lumina informaţiilor şocante reunite în această carte extraordinară. Este studiată aici ipoteza dupa care aceşti germeni stranii sunt creaţii ale laboratoarelor, transmise accidental sau intenţionat în SUA şi Africa prin intermediul vaccinurilor contaminate pretins destinate să combată hepatita sau variola, aşa cum au afirmat numeroase autorităţi.

Această carte trece în revistă numeroasele studii referitoare la vaccinurile de origine virală, studii efectuate simultan la New York şi în Africa Centrală şi de Est, în cadrul unei reţele de virusologi, care lucrează pentru principalii parteneri ai complexului militaro-medical aflat sub auspiciile Institutului Naţional al Cancerului şi al Organizaţiei Mondiale a Sănătăţii (OMS). Este dovedit clar că Dr. Robert Gallo, celebru pentru descoperirea virusului SIDA, face parte din această reţea. Acest text prezintă fapte stranii şi terifiante asupra cursei armelor biologice din anii ‘60 şi începutul anilor ‘70.

În această perioadă, cercetătorii au dezvoltat într-un mod nebunesc viruşi capabili să facă ravagii în sistemul imunitar şi au efectuat experienţe plecând de la o gamă de vaccinuri care erau pretinse remedii pentru prevenirea şi combaterea cancerului. Teoriile maladiilor induse chiar pe cale medicală şi cele ale genocidului prin SIDA sunt meticulos examinate în contextul social şi politic al acestei perioade tulburate de ştiinţa militară americană.

Această carte examinează activităţile CIA şi iniţiativele politicii externe americane în Africa Centrală, reacţii la pretinse ameninţări pe care le constituie populaţiile lumii a treia, naţionalismul negru şi comunismul.

Este luat în considerare şi rolul important jucat de anumiţi lideri politici: Dr. Henry Kissinger, consilier pentru securitatea naţională, Frank Carlucci junior şi Joseph Califano, secretari ai Departamentului Sănătăţii Publice, al Educaţiei şi al Protecţiei Sociale. Nu sunt trecuţi cu vederea nici preşedinţii Richard Nixon şi Gérald Ford şi personalităţile lumii economice: Nelson şi Laurence Rockefeller. Acest text disecă în mod sistematic intenţiile ascunse şi mecanismele administrative care susţin convingerea că viruşii HIV şi EBOLA puteau fi în mod deliberat răspândiţi şi că epidemia de SIDA este pe cale să realizeze pas cu pas un plan prestabilit.

Câteva personalităţi ale lumii medicale depun mărturie

"Trebuie să fim în mod deosebit recunoscători lui Dr. Horowitz pentru prezentarea unei cercetări riguroase asupra unor fapte puţin cunoscute şi extrem de şocante, care trebuiesc depuse ca piese esenţiale în dosarul istoriei, referitor la apariţia noilor viruşi" (Dr. John Martin, fost director al Departamentului Biologic din Food and Drug Administration)

"Fie că suntem simpli cetăţeni sau profesionişti în domeniul sănătăţii, nu putem să nu remarcăm caracterul exploziv al cărtii lui Dr. Horowitz şi al tezei sale majore: nu mai poate fi menţinut secret faptul că programele armelor biologice au fost dezvoltate şi testate în situaţii concrete, plecând de la agenţi virali care distrug sistemul imunitar" (Dr. Garth L. Nicolson, profesor şi conferenţiar la Universitatea din Texas şi la "Centrul Anderson pentru cercetarea cancerului")

"Horowitz a reuşit miracolul de a rezuma un secol de istorie prezentată drept coerentă, în realitate construită însă din intrigi, fraude şi manipulări. Suntem conduşi în laboratoarele ticăloase în care se produc vaccinuri contaminate, la responsabilii care acţionează în numele traficanţilor de arme biologice ... Această carte se citeşte cu sufletul la gură, fiind poate cea mai plină de suspans din ultimul mileniu". (Dr. Eva Snead, autoarea cărtii "Unii o numesc SIDA, eu o numesc crimă")

Cine este Dr. Horowitz?

Doctorul Leonard G. Horowitz este un cercetător licenţiat la Harvard şi o autoritate recunoscută pe plan internaţional în domeniul sănătăţii publice şi al informaţiei despre SIDA. El a condus un centru de sănătate pluridisciplinară timp de mai mult de 10 ani şi a dezvoltat programe educative pentru sute de organizaţii şi instituţii. Autor a 10 cărţi şi mai mult de 80 de articole ştiinţifice şi publicaţii pentru marele public, Dr. Horowitz a fost deseori invitatul emisiunilor radio şi televizate din America de Nord.

Cum a ajuns dr. Horowitz să se intereseze de originea SIDA? In 1990, 6 pacienţi ai unui dentist din Florida sunt atinşi de SIDA. La analiză, ei nu fac parte din populaţiile supuse riscului. În schimb, dentistul este cunoscut ca purtător al maladiei. Institutul Naţional pentru Sănătate (NIH) şi Centrul de Epidemiologie (Centre of Disease Control) din Atlanta concluzionează că este "un caz de transmitere misterioasă".

Dr. Horowitz, care este un specialist al sănătăţii publice şi care reprezintă o autoritate în materie de igiena şi asepsie a personalului medical tocmai pentru măsurile de prevedere anti-SIDA, refuză să admită concluziile autorităţilor oficiale. El reconstituie cu meticulozitate elementele unei anchete, în vederea înţelegerii faptelor legate de această aşa-zisa "contaminare misterioasă". El descoperă cu această ocazie că Dr. Acer şi-a infectat în deplină cunoştinţă de cauză pacienţii. De ce?

În contradicţie cu tezele NIH şi CDC, Dr. Horowitz demonstrează că Dr. Acer a acţionat pentru a se răzbuna că este o victimă a maladiei SIDA. Printre documentele care au aparţinut acestui dentist, el descoperă o copie a dării de seamă a unei reuniuni ţinute în Senatul american în 1969. La această reuniune, participanţii identificaţi au evaluat preţul punerii la punct a unei arme biologice destinate să mineze sistemul imunitar al indivizilor. Acest document a fost difuzat în mediile homosexuale, pentru ca aceştia să-şi explice originea SIDA, ţinând seama că au fost folosiţi ca o comunitate de "ţapi ispăşitori".

După ce a regăsit originalul acestui document, având acoperirea dată de "Freedom Information Act", lege fundamentală a SUA, Dr. Horowitz a cercetat care au fost bugetele militare şi civile ce au servit la finanţarea cercetărilor medicale ale anilor ‘70 şi modul în care aceste bugete, sub pretextul programului naţional de luptă împotriva cancerului, au fost utilizate de laboratoarele farmaceutice pentru cercetările legate de noii viruşi.

Extras din cartea
SIDA şi Francmasoneria,
Cum a fost cerut, creat şi răspândit virusul HIV de către anumiţi lideri masoni internaţionali (planetari) pentru instaurarea în viitorul apropiat a Noii Ordini Mondiale
autori Viorel Roşu, Camelia Roşu, Editura Ananda


Sursa: http://www.yogaesoteric.net/content.asp ... 35&lang=RO

[mszavai]

Newsletter David Icke



Care sunt motivele pentru care acesti oameni profund dezechilibrati prefera sa moara in masa decat sa fie vindecati prin metode alternative, de ce au fost create miturile numite “colesterol” si “teama de soare” - pentru a imbolnavi corpul si inima -


Obsesia pentru dietele sarace in grasimi sau fara cholesterol a fost proiectata in mod deliberat de catre cei din umbra, tocmai pentru a produce aceste efecte si altele. Colesterolul este un component essential in dezvoltarea celulelor si dupa cum spune Mike Lambert, este essential pentru…

Corp, par, piele, cresterea unghiilor; functionarea sistemului imunitar; reglarea hormonala, inclusiv a hormonilor masculini si feminini; absorbtia nutrientilor si eliminarea toxinelor; refacerea musculaturii, inclusiv a inimii.

Totodata, nivelul scazut de colesterol impiedica dezvoltarea si refacerea celulelor. Un procent ridicat de persoane cu depresie si ganduri suicidale au fost gasite avand un nivel scazut de colesterol.

Cat de ironic este faptul ca un element esential in refacerea musculaturii cardiace este redus tocmai pentru a opri imbolnavirile de inima, chiar si in cazul celor cu probleme ale musculaturii cardiace?

Stiati ca aproximativ 75% din cei care fac atac de cord au nivel normal al colesterolului?

Aceasta este o tema pe care o veti intalni in mod repetat daca veti cerceta conspiratia globala suficient de mult. Lucrurile care sunt esentiale pentru bunastarea umana, pentru sanatatea fizica, mentala si emotionala, sunt denigrate de catre sistem pentru a ne produce teama - inclusiv de Soare.