I am a researcher. I have been researching vaccines and pharmaceutical interventions for years. I recently posted a link, (which has since been removed,) of which I regret. I rushed to judgement and did not thoroughly vet the post. That was irresponsible. There were parts of the link that were conjecture and not based on fact. Other parts of the link were based on fact. I should have not acted so hastily when I posted it.
This "Pandemic" has changed our world. What we hear and read in the media, usually only represents one side of the coin. We all need to be aware of other points of view; be critical thinkers.
Parkinson's is a horrible disease. From my understanding, it is mostly caused by toxins, and sometimes genetics. My husband was showered with agent orange a known toxin, in VietNam. If you put tainted gasoline or garbage in the engine of your car, will it run well? Is the same true for Parkinson's? If you put toxins in your Parkinson's body, will it run well?
We have been working on getting the toxic, chemical load out of my husband by chelating the toxins out of his body, as we believe that is the cause of his Parkinson's. We have lab results from Doctor's Data which show all the toxic loads of chemicals. And, this is after doing our best to get rid of those toxins, or chelate them. We believe more toxins and chemicals in the form of vaccines will add to an already toxic burden in his body. I believe the threads about vaccines are pertinent to those with Parkinson's as well as those with other chronic diseases. Are vaccines and additional chemicals a good choice for those with an already high toxic burden? I wish good health to all those with Parkinson's. Get educate. Learn.
Written by
bepo
To view profiles and participate in discussions please or .
I really recommend reading Ending Parkinson's by Doctors Bloem, Sherer, Dorsey and Okun. This has a clear discussion on environmental factors, and excellent guidance on lifestyle factors. This will address the questions Bepo raises above
I, for one, accept your apology, although I feel it is unnecessary because I wish the HU administrators were a little less eager to delete threads which does amount to censorship.
Everyone on this forum is an adult and are responsible for their own decisions, actions and what to believe.
If someone, such as yourself bepo, post something that I don't believe, I don't need HU administrators to save me. For example, when you post conspiracy theories, as you sometimes do, I noticed that you are pounced on by a majority, which serves the same purpose as deleting a thread only in more articulate, informative ways from which others on the forum can take their cues -- if they so choose.
This is a wonderful website and I fully appreciate the hard work and everything they do to allow as much freedom as they do.
I am just one who has my whole life been concerned with and critical of censorship because when you stop one person from talking, you stop (potentially) thousands from hearing. When you control what information people receive, you exercise some control of the decisions they make and true freedom means freedom to make our own decisions.
If some do not like bepo's posts, don't read them. Just skip right over her's and go on to the next one. How hard is that?
MBA publicising conspiracy theories legitimizes them. I do not believe that giving air time to them increases our understanding.
The worry about censorship seems to be particularly concerning to Americans. This is an international forum and it is very tolerant of difference and over the years very very few threads have been pulled. But it has to address concerns of all people including, but not exclusively, Americans.
Conspiracy theories have been closely linked to prejudice and racial violence. Historically and across the globe, conspiracy theories have played prominent roles in witch-hunts, revolutions, and genocide. At a time when social media of all types is beginning to realise the harm caused by ignoring fake news and giving it free reign, i am thankful HU takes its role seriously enough to monitor this.
And it might be that banning such positions gives them credibility. It might be that defeating and undermining those positions with opposing facts/positions is perhaps a more effective way to deal with them.
All things being equal, I'm against other people deciding what information I receive.
No, I don't mean that, but I see how you could imagine I do from my last comment.
Let's take this vaccination discussion as a perfect example.
bepo posted it as a conspiracy theory, which put myself and a lot of others off.
I invite you and everyone else on this forum to carefully read Silent Echo's story and then claim that the vaccination discussion is not legitimate and should not be on this website.
We need to separate the discussion of the viability of vaccinations from the circumstances of the anti-vaccination cohort believing it's a conspiracy.
Whether or not PWP should be eager to get the Covid vaccination is an extremely important and relevant discussion for this forum.
But it's got f___ all to do with Parkinson's Disease!
I read that thread. I witnessed your conversion.
Marc, that a distressed parent attributes their child's health challenges to vaccines is not evidence that vaccines caused those health challenges. Parents are about as poorly placed to judge these matters as anyone, since a) they are working with tiny sample sizes and b) they are overwhelmed with emotion, which crowds out reason.
If you really want to see what awful child health challenges look like, have a look at what their lives were like in the 1700s. Yknow, before vaccines.
Horace, you are talking past me. If you read what I've said, I agree with everything you said above.
You and I are engaging in a robust disagreement. I think there should be room for this discussion on this forum. Our current disagreement doesn't provide information to PWP about what they should and should not be doing about their PD, does it? Should it be banned?
Well said Horace99. I was in St. George Hospital in 1962. I watched a girl of 18 years named Shirley die in front of me from Polio, she was not vaccinated I was. Never ever tell me vaccines are bad.
In 2017, the World Health Organization (WHO) reluctantly admitted that the global explosion in polio is predominantly vaccine strain. The most frightening epidemics in Congo, Afghanistan, and the Philippines, are all linked to vaccines. In fact, by 2018, 70% of global polio cases were vaccine strain.
Hi, The oral vaccine worked by someone who had, had it being near someone who did not. That is person to person, this was in the 1950's. It was developed in the Western world so it would spread from person to person. What was not taken into consideration was, how would it spread in countries like Africa and India with millions of people who had not had the oral vaccine. So because it travelled to so many people it mutated and become a strain of Polio, not as virulent as the wild Polio but never the less it caused deaths the last one being in 2019. The oral vaccine which was a live virus was stopped. In it's place the injectable vaccine contained a dead virus which could not spread. So this meant that everyone needs to have the injection to eradicate the disease. No one is perfect, the scientists who work so hard to protect us are trying to do the best they can. They could not predict what hapened. They are under so much strain knowing something could go wrong which would result in death. Case in point Covid19. We take risks when we walk outside our door, but we still do it. I know there is a risk in every vaccine but I have had every one offered. I am 71 have traveled the world, had every vaccine I could. Do you know why? Because it is the best we have at the moment. They are learning every day, they are learning from mistakes. My Mother also has every vaccine offered she feels the same, she is 95 and the only pill she takes is the occassional panadol.
The vaccine conspiracy started in a small newspaper in S usa.....it was immediately retracted and debunked but the damage was done, vaccines do not give you autism for example. there is nothing but circumstantial evidence for this. without vaccines polio and MMR would ravage the world population. cheers.
i was here when it happened ....is this a vaccine website or PD. im not here to even express an opion on anything but pd and y'all talk about abortions to vaccines...not helpful......................snopes.com/news/2016/11/29/...
• in reply to
Study Alleging a Connection Between Vaccines and Autism ‘Unpublished’ By Journal
The study, published in a controversial journal, was removed after widespread criticism of its methods, motives, and overall validity.
• in reply to
WebMD Medical Reference Reviewed by Smitha Bhandari, MD on May 20, 2018
You might think differently if you watched the movie "Vaxxed". Thousands of children have been harmed. If you have trouble finding the video, it is available on bitchute. I am concerned about PD patients introducing more toxins and chemicals into their bodies, that's all.
pd is killing me .........im not reading up on FEMA camps and bio-warfare, im drowning due to rigid chest muscles at this rate i have maybe 3 more years. ill deal with the as yet unrealistic things as they come.
I am so sorry. That's a terrible thing to go through. Look at Dr. Frank Shallenberger, I posted his 3 prong approach to Parkinson's. If your pharmaceuticals are increasing your symptoms, his suggestions of supplements might help you.
thank you for the info! ive been using University Colorado Hospital neuro pulmonologist etc the trouble is is its dopamine responsive but off times i call waterboarding....hhhooooolllaayyyyyyy...cheers!
• in reply to
i have access to national Jewish hospital that of course are the repiratory therapists with the mostest..(chuckle)...and Haifa was the first to do MRI guided ablation. oi....power to the people...
Dr Schellenberger uses supplements i use regular food to get what im missing or need more of...........but thanks for the link! cheers! knowledge is power.
Supplements aren't expensive. My husband and I eat an organic, wheat free diet. We eat very little sugar, and only use avocado, coconut and olive oils. Our meat and chicken are pasture raised, pastured finished. Because of my husband's PD, he also takes the supplements used for Parkinson's. He also takes HD Vit. B1. We are still experimenting with the dose. When he takes all his supplements, his lip tremor goes away, and I think he is more mentally alert. The main symptom he has is a right hand tremor.
You might consider High Dose Vitamin B1. It has helped so many with PD, even those who are critically ill. Does PD destroy the B1 in your body? People can help you with the proper dose.
My husband has pd, mostly likely caused by exposure to agent orange in Vietnam. He has taken his flu, pneumonia vaccine, the 1st shingles vaccine (which likely minimized his light case of shingles last year) and the new improved shingles vaccines. He fortunately has very slow developing pd. We don't feel this has had any negative impact on him in the last 8 years he has had pd or it's slow progression. That is all any of us can say about vaccines and pd. It's what we think as there has not been anything to show it hurts or helps. Everyone must make their own choices.
Most people don't get shingles. Build up your immune. Maybe the shingles shot caused his shingles.
You're right. Everyone has to decide what is right for them. I have learned to search away from main media. They are subsidized by pharma. The CDC has stated they have never done the proper tests, and there are no safe vaccines.
“........ the presence of glyphosate in many popular vaccines including the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine, which we have verified here for the first time.” Glyphosate Contamination in Vaccines (Parts Per Billion)*
Merck ZOSTAVAX 0.62 Shingles ( it has a large amount of glyphosate that is dangerous to those with PD...... and, in fact, everyone.
Merck MMR-II 3.74 Measles, Mumps and Rubella Merck VARIVAX 0.56 Varicella, Chicken Pox MERCK PNEUMOVAX ND Pneumococcal 18 MERCK PROQUAD 0.66 Measles, Mumps, Rubella, Varicella GSK ENERGIX-B 0.34 Heptatitis B *A Samsel and S Seneff, Journal of Biological Physics and Chemistry 2017;17:8-32.Raymond Francis
* h)p://raymondfrancisauthor.com/immune-suppression-and-vaccines/ 3/26/18 9 "Influenza: marketing vaccine by marketing disease"* “Even the ideal influenza vaccine, matched perfectly to circulating strains of wild influenza and capable of stopping all influenza viruses, can only deal with a small part of the ‘flu’ problem … Every year, hundreds of thousands of respiratory specimens are tested across the US. Every year, hundreds of thousands of respiratory specimens are tested across the US. Of those tested, on average 16% are found to be influenza positive.“
neither is the internet. i followed up with snopes on this like 6 yrs ago and cross ref'd but dont have the energy to pile links on folks...im caring less and less about the corruption of quality info. im having trouble breathing........cheers!
Two studies have been cited by those claiming that the MMR vaccine causes autism. Both studies are critically flawed.
First study
In 1998, Andrew Wakefield and colleagues published a paper in the journal Lancet. Wakefield's hypothesis was that the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine caused a series of events that include intestinal inflammation, entrance into the bloodstream of proteins harmful to the brain, and consequent development of autism. In support of his hypothesis, Dr. Wakefield described 12 children with developmental delay — eight had autism. All of these children had intestinal complaints and developed autism within one month of receiving MMR.
The Wakefield paper published in 1998 was flawed for two reasons:
About 90% of children in England received MMR at the time this paper was written. Because MMR is administered at a time when many children are diagnosed with autism, it would be expected that most children with autism would have received an MMR vaccine, and that many would have received the vaccine recently. The observation that some children with autism recently received MMR is, therefore, expected. However, determination of whether MMR causes autism is best made by studying the incidence of autism in both vaccinated and unvaccinated children. This wasn't done.
Although the authors claim that autism is a consequence of intestinal inflammation, intestinal symptoms were observed after, not before, symptoms of autism in all eight cases.
This study was subsequently retracted; in scientific terms, this means that the paper is not part of the scientific record because it was found to be based on scientific misconduct. In this case, the studies were deemed fraudulent and data misrepresented.
You have a pattern of not responding to substantive material such as that posted by BrerTerrapin above. You often reply by saying so and so is a hero.
You've done that several times now. I replied to you a few days ago with similar material as provided by BrerTerrapin , which takes a fair amount of time to produce, and likewise you you did not respond to what I said, yet you admonished me for not reading what you say.
An hour-long video is an awful lot to ask of someone when you yourself are not observing the material they provide you.
When you decline to respond to the substance of what people offer, you signal to them they are wasting their time.
I am sorry. I work to respond to everyone. I get tons of messages, it takes a long time to go through them all. Sometimes I lose messages. I type a reply, and it is lost. It's very frustrating. I believe everyone's work is valuable.
So, you're saying you won't watch a video because I didn't respond to someone? Who ends up getting educated here?
No, I did not mean that. I meant, I would like for you to respond to the substance of the counterpoints BrerTerrapin offered, i.e., is the Wakefield study relied upon for your position and if so, reply to his critique of its flaws.
The MMR connection has been debunked over and over.
And, how do you account for a nonprofit autism organization's position that vaccinations do not cause autism?
Parents of autistic children are on the Board of Directors.
"No MMR Vaccine-Autism Link in Large Study"
Study of over 95,000 children included 15,000 unvaccinated 2 to 5 year olds and nearly 2,000 kids already considered at high risk for autism
This study on autism is not a well done study, or they never would have come up with that conclusion. The AMA was formed to be an advertising agent for the pharmaceuticals.
" The American Medical Association has been accepting money from the Rockefeller and Carnegie Foundations from as early as 1910. In The World Without Cancer G. Edward Griffin makes the argument that the Rockefeller and Carnegie Foundations began to support the AMA in an effort to control the medical schooling establishment and to gain power over this “large and vital sphere of American life.”
I am not just recently studying the connection with the MMR vaccines and autism , I've studied it for years. My nephew has autism, My son had ADHD.
Dr. Stephanie Seneff, MIT, has studied autism for years. She was working on AI, and then became curious why autism is on the rise. She sees a definite correlation with the MMR. She feels that in the not too distant future, 1 out of 2 boys will have autism.
bepo, I do not quite understand why posted you this article. It certainly portrays a lot of negatives and divisiveness re the organization Autism Speaks and illustrates that it is not respected by the mainstream autism community, i.e., autism organizations run and directed by people with autism who resent their funding research and studies that connect vaccinations to autism. Interesting article, though.
Why does the phamplet that is included with the vaccine, (How many read the list of side effects or dangers before they take a vaccine,) "may ccause autism", Vaccine manufacturers are not liable for the vaccines they produce. When there are injured parties, they have to go to a vaccine court, and the tax payers pay for any illnesses or deaths.
When there are references to any hospital, clinic, or sites such as WebMD, they all have the same message. There is nothing new. They back the pharmaceuticals, who, in part, pay their bills. No conpiracy here, just facts.
Mrozek-Budzyn D, Kieltyka A, Majewska R. (2009) Lack of association between measles-mumps-rubella vaccination and autism in children: a case-control study. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2009 Dec 1. [Epub ahead of print] PMID: 19952979External
Salmon DA, Haber M, Chen RT. (1999). Health consequences of religious and philosophical exemptions from immunization laws: individual and societal risks of measles. JAMA, 282(1), 47-53. PMID: 10404911External
Almost immediately afterward, epidemiological studies were conducted and published, refuting the posited link between MMR vaccination and autism.[3,4] The logic that the MMR vaccine may trigger autism was also questioned because a temporal link between the two is almost predestined: both events, by design (MMR vaccine) or definition (autism), occur in early childhood.
There is no link between vaccines and autism. Some people have had concerns that ASD might be linked to the vaccines children receive, but studies have shown that there is no link between receiving vaccines and developing ASD. In 2011, an Institute of Medicine (IOM) report.
If you "heard' what Silent Echos had to say, There are millions more who have been damaged by vaccines. It is a problem. Many of the kids who received these vaccines will never have a life, will never get married or have kids of their own, let alone jobs. They will have to be supervised for the rest of their lives.
There is another good movie out "The Truth About Vaccines" episode 9 2020, which has implications for Covid-19. Since I haven't heard anything from you about Vaxxed, I'm assuming you didn't follow your word and watch it. I expected a little honor there.
I believe every word Silent Echoes said. My heart goes out to her. A terrible tragedy.
We all understand that when the FDA pronounces a pharmaceutical safe, that does not mean it's safe for every single person. Nuplazid (sp?) has killed at least 900 PWP, yet it is (labeled) safe. It would not surprise me at all if some vaccinations caused autism in some people, yet is still (labelled) safe (for 99% of the population.)
I pointed out in Silent Echoe' new thread that the guy who invented DDT was given the Nobel prize for medicine. The history of pharmaceuticals is replete with these instances.
Thanks for that post. In 1986, Regan signed into law, the fact that the makers of vaccines could not be liable. The vaccine makers stated they could not make a vaccine safe. The vaccine makers, including Covid-19 vaccines, were not liable. If there were fatalities and disabilities caused by the vaccines, they couldn't be sued, unless they had not listed the side effects. The cases went to a Vaccine Court, subsidized by the tax payers. In 2011, The CDC stated that there were no safe vaccines.
I have said I will watch vaxxed on the condition that you read the material offered you and it is clear to me you're not doing that because you haven't yet responded to any of it.
I haven't responded to any of it??? Refresh my memory. Would you like me to go back and re-read all your posts? Or, are you referring to the posts of others? I am not understanding.
Is the Wakefield study credible? If so, what are the errors BrerTerrapin makes in his critique?
If not, what study is the basis of the claim?
What is your response to the content of a major autism organization which has the parents of autistic children on the Board of Directors saying vaccinations do not cause autism. I have since looked at several autism organizations and they all say the same thing.
Are these organizations with parents on the Board of Directors part of a conspiracy and if not, why do they all say the same thing? Are all of them wrong?
You do understand it is exactly the same as claiming all the Parkinson's organizations are wrong when their assertions all line up. These autism organizations are run by and/or have scientists on their staff, just like the Parkinson's organizations do.
When I read thru threads about Parkinson's that hold conflicting positions, I go to a few of the major Parkinson's organizations and seek out their position, and then accept their position if they all agree.
Years ago, I went to the MJF call in show. I gave them a question about natural treatments. They did not address it. Maybe they have changed, but I believe they support pharmaceuticals , and pharmaceuticals supports them.
Dr. Wakefield graduated from St. Mary’s Hospital Medical School of the University of London in 1981; he was one in the fourth generation of his family to study medicine at that teaching hospital. He pursued a career in gastrointestinal surgery with a specialty in inflammatory bowel disease. He became a Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons in 1985 and was accepted into the Royal College of Pathologists in 2001. He held academic positions at the Royal Free Hospital and has published over 140 original scientific articles, book chapters, and invited scientific commentaries.
In the early 1990s, Dr. Wakefield began to study a possible link between the measles virus and bowel disease. He published a 1993 study, “Evidence of persistent measles virus infection in Crohn’s disease”1 and coauthored a 1995 article published in The Lancet, “Is measles vaccine a risk factor for inflammatory bowel disease?”2 At roughly the same time, Dr. Wakefield wrote an unpublished 250-page manuscript reviewing available scientific literature on the safety of measles vaccines.3 He was rapidly emerging as one of the world’s experts on measles vaccination.
In 1996, an attorney, Solicitor Barr of the law firm Dawbarns, contacted Dr. Wakefield to ask if he would serve as an expert in a legal case on behalf of children injured by vaccines containing the measles virus. The lawyer was bringing the suit on behalf of parents who alleged that vaccines had caused their children’s disabilities, including autism. Six months before this, and independent of the litigation effort, parents of children with autism and severe gastrointestinal symptoms began contacting Dr. Wakefield because of his publications on the measles vaccine, asking for help for their children’s pain and suffering, which they believed was vaccine-induced. Dr. Wakefield made two major, but separate, decisions at about this time—to try to help the families dealing with autism and gastrointestinal problems, and to become an expert in the legal case regarding vaccines and autism.4
Barr asked Dr. Wakefield to study two questions:
(1) whether measles could persist after measles infection or the receipt of the MMR vaccine; and
(2) whether the measles virus could lead to complications, such as Crohn’s disease or autism.
Due to bureaucratic delays at his hospital, however, Dr. Wakefield did not begin this litigation-related study until October 1997.5 By July 1997, Dr. Wakefield and his colleague, Professor John Walker-Smith, had already examined the “Lancet 12”—twelve patients with autism and gastrointestinal symptoms that were the basis for the case study in the 1998 article published in The Lancet. Dr. Wakefield and others had recommended the referral of these patients to Prof. Walker-Smith, an eminent physician described by his peers as one of the world’s leading pediatric gastroenterologists.6
Prof. WalkerSmith had recently moved to St. Mary’s Hospital from a different institution and brought with him the same clinical privileges and ethical clearances that he enjoyed at his previous hospital. He, a colleague, Dr. Simon Murch, and a team of other physicians, did extensive clinical workups on these sick children that Prof. Walker-Smith deemed “clinically indicated,” while Dr. Wakefield coordinated a detailed research review of the tissues obtained at biopsy. The clinical tests included colonoscopies, MRI scans, and lumbar punctures to assess mitochondrial disorders. “Clinically indicated studies” did not require permissions from The Royal Free Hospital ethics committee because the tests were required for the benefit of the individual patients.7 Dr. Wakefield’s research was covered by an appropriate ethical approval.
In 1998, to announce the publication of The Lancet article coauthored by Dr. Wakefield and twelve other scientists, the dean of St. Mary’s Medical School called a press conference. While this was not standard practice, the dean presumably was seeking to enhance the school’s visibility in cutting edge research. The article was labeled in the medical journal as an “early report,” stating that it “did not prove an association between measles, mumps and rubella vaccine and the syndrome described. Virological studies are underway that may help to resolve this issue.”8
At the press conference, Dr. Wakefield was asked about the safety of the MMR vaccine. In 1992, two different combination MMR vaccines had been withdrawn from the U.K. marketplace because they were unsafe, so MMR vaccination was already a hot topic before The Lancet article was published. Dr. Wakefield responded that, given the paucity of combination MMR vaccine safety research, and until further safety studies were done, the vaccines should be separated into their component parts. He had previously informed his colleagues that this was his view and that he would express it if asked.9
The 1998 press conference set off a media firestorm, with large numbers of parents raising uncomfortable questions about the safety of the “triple jab” and requesting single measles, mumps, and rubella vaccines. In the midst of the controversy, in August 1998, the British government took an extraordinary step. It made separate measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine components unavailable,10 thereby forcing the hand of concerned parents. At that point, measles vaccination rates among children in the United Kingdom fell significantly. Measles disease outbreaks became more prevalent, and included a handful of cases of serious complications and deaths. Some sought to blame Dr. Wakefield for irresponsibly scaring parents and triggering a public health crisis.11 The British government had a big problem on its hands—one that would soon make its way to the United States.
The controversy surrounding Dr. Wakefield simmered. In February 2004, it reached a boiling point when Dr. Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet, held a news conference to declare that the 1998 article was “fatally flawed” because Dr. Wakefield had failed to disclose financial conflicts of interest with the litigation-related study he conducted. British reporter Brian Deer published the story in the Sunday Times, detailing alleged undisclosed conflicts of interest. Immediately following publication, Mr. Deer sent a detailed letter to the British General Medical Council (GMC), which regulates the practice of medicine.12 The GMC then initiated proceedings against Dr. Wakefield that culminated in Dr. Wakefield’s delicensure13 in May 2010 and the retraction of the 1998 article from The Lancet.14
The highly publicized, multi-year, multi-million dollar prosecution against Dr. Wakefield alleged that:
•Dr. Wakefield was paid 55,000 British pound sterling (about US $90,000) by litigators for the study published in The Lancet, and he failed to disclose this conflict of interest;
•He and his colleagues performed medically unnecessary tests on the children in the 1998 study and lacked appropriate ethical clearances;
•The children in the 1998 study were selected for litigation purposes (as described in the Sunday Times article) and not referred by local physicians; and
•He drew blood from children at his son’s birthday party for control samples in the 1998 study with callous disregard for the distress that this might cause children.15
Based on its findings, the GMC concluded that Dr. Wakefield had engaged in “serious professional misconduct,” and “dishonest,” “misleading,” and “irresponsible” behavior, warranting the sanction of his removal from the medical profession.16
Let’s examine the GMC’s charges and the evidence.
Failure to Disclose Payment from Litigators
Dr. Wakefield accepted 55,000 pounds to conduct a study for the class action suit regarding vaccines and autism. This was a research grant from which Dr. Wakefield personally received no compensation. Dr. Wakefield did not start this study until after the case series for the Lancet 12 had been submitted. Legal documents prove that Dr. Wakefield’s hospital knew about this study and knew about the amount of money he received, most of which went to pay the salary of a designated laboratory technician. Documents further demonstrate that Dr. Wakefield disclosed in a national newspaper over one year before publication of the 1998 article that he was working with the litigators.17 Dr. Horton, editor of The Lancet, had been informed and should have been well aware of Dr. Wakefield’s role in the vaccine-related litigation before the publication of the 1998 article.18
“Medical Necessity” and Ethical Clearances
The Lancet 12 were sick. Each child was administered tests with the intent to aid that child. The hospital administration was fully aware of the tests being conducted and made no objections. Because all of the tests were “clinically indicated” and not for research purposes, no ethical clearance beyond what Prof. Walker-Smith already possessed was required. Notably, no patient, parent, or guardian has ever made accusations against Dr. Wakefield or testified against him for ethical violations or medically unnecessary procedures. Dr. Wakefield and his colleagues reject the GMC’s ruling that the tests for the Lancet 12 were unnecessary.
The Lancet 12’s Referrals
The GMC charged that the children were referred through the litigation effort and not through ordinary medical channels. This is incorrect. Parents started contacting Dr. Wakefield long before the litigation started, and independently of it. Since the litigation study was not yet started by the time The Lancet study was completed and submitted to the journal, this finding is false. Dr. Wakefield and his colleagues reject that claim; the families contacted them directly because of their medical expertise.19
Control blood samples from a child’s birthday party
Dr. Wakefield arranged for control blood samples from healthy, typically developing children to be taken at his son’s birthday party. Most of the children’s parents were medical colleagues and friends. He did this with the children’s and parents’ fully informed consent and gave the children 5 pounds each for their trouble. The procedure was undertaken by an appropriately qualified doctor using a standard technique. The children were happy to be helpful and went on to enjoy the birthday party. While this is admittedly an unconventional method of collecting control blood samples, it hardly amounts to “serious professional misconduct” or an ethical breach warranting delicensure. The GMC’s description of this incident as an example of “callous disregard” for children’s distress seems to be a gross exaggeration.20 Indeed, the U.K. High Court of Justice exonerated Professor Walker-Smith in March 2012,21 and the Lancet journal has suggested that it is considering reversing its retraction.22
The GMC failed to prove its case against Dr. Wakefield. Using Brian Deer’s reporting as evidence, the GMC appears to have purposefully conflated the Lancet 12 study and the subsequent litigation study to create the appearance of a financial conflict of interest.23 Similarly, the GMC appears to have wrongfully applied ethical research standards to tests that were “clinically indicated” for severely ill children.24 Conflating treatment and research not only grievously harmed Dr. Wakefield and his colleagues, but set a threatening precedent for the practice of medicine. The government’s medical regulators (of uncertain expertise) second-guessed Prof. Walker-Smith, the world’s preeminent authority on pediatric gastroenterology, on his clinical judgment about what tests were necessary.25
o
Which medical decisions will regulators second-guess next? The press, and specifically reporter Brian Deer, tried Dr. Wakefield in the court of public opinion while the GMC was prosecuting him in its regulatory court. Deer alleged that Dr. Wakefield had a pending patent application for a separate measles vaccine and hoped to “cash in” by urging parents to forego the MMR for separate measles vaccines. The evidence proves that Dr. Wakefield was not a patent holder for a separate measles vaccine. St. Mary’s Hospital held a patent for a therapeutic single measles vaccine using the beneficial immune properties of transfer factor, intended for people already infected with the measles virus. This measles vaccine was not a preventive product for people unexposed to the virus; in other words, there was no possible financial competition between the MMR vaccine and the single measles vaccine for which the hospital, and not Dr. Wakefield, held a patent.26
In 2009, Deer made additional allegations that Dr. Wakefield fabricated data.27 The GMC never made this charge, but the media picked it up and, notably, the U.S. Department of Justice used it frequently in the Omnibus Autism Proceeding in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. In those proceedings to determine whether families could receive compensation for MMR-induced autism, the US Department of Justice went out of its way to depict Dr. Wakefield as a scientific fraud, although he was not directly relevant to the proceedings.28 In his 2010 book, Callous Disregard, Dr. Wakefield shows Deer’s allegations of fraud to be fabrications.29
CPR finds no evidence of Dr. Wakefield’s scientific fraud. On the contrary, many scientists and laboratories around the world have confirmed Dr. Wakefield’s findings regarding severe gastrointestinal inflammation and symptoms in a high percentage of children with autism.30 In its February 2, 2010 retraction, The Lancet did not allege fraud.31 Relying solely on the GMC proceeding, it retracted the article, asserting that the authors had not referred the patients as represented and the study team had not received the hospital’s ethics committee’s approval. The GMC’s conclusions and The Lancet’s reliance on them appear unfounded.
The Meaning of The Wakefield Prosecution
What, then, was this high-profile prosecution really about? If there was no scientific fraud, no undisclosed financial conflicts of interest, no ethical breaches in performing tests on sick children, and no complaints from patients or their families, then what was the big deal? Did the international scandal and multi-million dollar prosecution proceed merely to chastise a doctor for drawing blood from children at a birthday party, with their consent and their parents’ consent? Of course not.
Dr. Wakefield was, and remains, a dissident from medical orthodoxy. The medical establishment subjected him to a modern day medical show trial for his dissent.32 Dr. Wakefield’s research raised fundamental doubts about the safety of vaccines and the etiology of autism. Dr. Wakefield was punished for his temerity to caution the public about vaccine risks and to urge them to use their own judgment. Dr. Wakefield was punished for upholding vaccination choice.
The purpose of the proceeding, as in any show trial, was to communicate to other doctors and scientists, and to the public, the error of the perpetrator’s ways. A show trial offers a veneer of due process but, at its core, displays naked power. The apparent intent of the prosecution was to intimidate others from following Dr. Wakefield’s footsteps and to teach the lesson that anyone in the medical or scientific community who dares to publicly question the safety and efficacy of vaccines will be punished with utmost severity. The GMC appears to have decided that if the price of such a lesson was scientific ignorance about vaccine-autism links and the suffering of severely ill children, then so be it. Dr. Wakefield was made an example.
The GMC destroyed Dr. Wakefield’s professional reputation and livelihood, and The Lancet and other publications confiscated his professional accomplishment through retraction. The GMC colluded with The Lancet, the media, the British Department of Health, the pharmaceutical industry, and even with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. Department of Justice, to discredit Dr. Wakefield. The Center for Personal Rights is confident that the world will look back at the prosecution of Drs. Wakefield, Walker-Smith, and Murch with shame and remorse. Dr. Wakefield has joined in a long, honorable tradition of dissidents in science and human rights. The world has benefitted profoundly from other courageous dissidents in science—Galileo, who argued that the sun is the center of the universe; Semmelweis, who reasoned that doctors must wash their hands to prevent transmission of infection; Needleman, who proved that lead exposure causes neurological damage in developing children; and McBride, who demonstrated that thalidomide caused birth defects.33 As Thomas Kuhn explained, changing scientific paradigms is a revolutionary process, with the wrenching upheaval that revolution brings.34
In due course, the world has paid tribute to human rights dissidents, as well—Nelson Mandela moved from prison in South Africa under apartheid to become its most beloved President; Andrei Sakharov left Russia’s internal exile to become its moral beacon; Vaclav Havel left a Czech prison to become its first post-communist President; and Liu Xiabo, a Chinese human rights advocate, received the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize in absentia because he remains incarcerated. In time, China will embrace Mr. Liu and look to him to help create a better future. Before long, the world will likely recognize that it was Dr. Wakefield, not his detractors, who stood up for the practice of medicine and the pursuit of science. Dr. Wakefield remains an unbowed dissident in the face of a repressive medical and scientific establishment.
To learn more about his work and why it is controversial, see chapter 7, “An Urgent Call for More Research on Science,” chapter 30, “The Suppression of Science,” and chapter 29, “The Exoneration of Professor John Walker-Smith: A Great Wrong Partly Righted.”
This was presented in "Vaxxed". It was in a book called "Vaccine Epidemic, How Corporate Greed, Biased Science and Cooercive Governments Threaten Our Human Rights, Our Health and Our Children"
That might be the problem. Go to trusted sites that are not part of the main stream for Parkinson's. What about HDT? That certainly was not part of the mainstream. The problem with a lot of higher education in the medical field is they are all taught the same thing. Instead of Netflix, tonight, watch the movies I suggested. If you still have a problem, we'll talk about it. Otherwise, I consider you are 'stuck'.
If you really were moved by her story. Look at the millions of children who have been injured with vaccines. Many of them will never be able to function for the rest of their lives. Would you have realized that after watching Vaxxed? There is another film out called : The Truth About Vaccines episode 9, 2020, which is relevant to corona virus 19.
The CDC in 2011, finally admitted there are NO safe vaccines. That would include the covid-19 vaccine.
yup, I seem to remember there were burning at the stake and such like activities.
The World is flat ! You will fall off the edge. Defended by Kings and Popes for centuries.
I see there is a place for science based discussion on the merits of the data, even conjecture of what ifs.... but conspiracy theory gets one into , ie., ''Follow the Money" and the realization that there are people with ulterior motives.
Looking at the US and the present POTUS, from the outside, makes one wonder how he is still alive given the obvious lack of thought if he ever tried one of his hair-brained ideas like Lysol.
I believe that Moderating is a tough job if the choice is Deletion vs retention.
Adding a warning that the post may contain unsubstantiated content would keep readers a bit more vigilant and possibly skeptic of conclusions put forward.
Follow the money? Pharmaceuticals don't want people well. They want us sick. Having people who are well is their worst nightmare. If that were your corporation wouldn't you do ANYTHING to keep it going....including calling people conspiracy theorists even when they have the science and evidence to back up their claims?
Maybe the Americans, if your broad stroke stereotype is even accurate, are the ones who are realistic and others not. In case you tend to think in person-centered absolutes, all too common after all. See what happens to free speech in Iran, in China, in Phillipines, in Syria, in Florida, and simply factual speech in the Trump administration. But I'm sure those are just exaggerations. Ask Kashoggi. Ask ML King. Ask Salman Rushdie. Ask any Arab woman, ask any Afghani woman, ask any Pakistani woman. But perhaps they are just too sensitive, like Americans. Especially black Americans whenever there is a white cop around. Or doctors in China who speak out early about the virus, or clumsy doctors in Russia who are so goofy as a class that three of them manage to "fall" out of windows on the same day.
And God forbid anyone should mention wanting to get an immunization for something, or decide science is good, or decide science is bad for that matter too, and watch the rock throwing come out then!! Say anything that could be counter to, say, naturopaths or some such. Get that helmet on.
Me? I am offended and damaged whenever someone strategically gets offended for fun and profit and leverage, because being the first one to cry foul gets paid off so well controlling everyone else, and I want justice for my hurt feelings and damages! And Hikoi, since you target Americans, I am so hurt on behalf of them, it is all your fault, who can I complain to to have you consequated and properly punished, I want to know so I can get even for them. Huh!
"Everyone on this forum is an adult and are responsible for their own decisions, actions and what to believe.
If someone, such as yourself bepo, post something that I don't believe, I don't need HU administrators to save me. "
Good for you. What about PWP (which is the majority, at some point, and it will include you, probably) that are experiencing cognitive decline and whose BS meters are not quite what they were? Should those PWP be effectively excluded from this forum so you and others can enjoy a (completely unrelated to PD, usually) thread about things that are not in any way real but are vigorously promoted as unimpeachably true? When those people start to develop anti-reality ideas (pharma is bad so I'll stop taking the drugs I need to function; doctors are bad because they are paid by big pharma to lie to me so will stop listening to my doctor too; the media and government is lying to me so i wont take anyhing they say seriously) every_damn_day, are you going to be available to do the work to help unwind the damage that was done? What about when a PWP decides to start experimenting with arsenic becuase they read on HU that all chemical drugs made by big pharma are evil and part of the global conspiracy to keep us down, yet arsenic is natural and might "kill the PD infection"? Are you going to conclude that this was an unfortunate consequence of your inalienable right to have a bit of banter with another user about how evil big pharma is and how all natural things are amazing?
Why can't you go to a COVID forum if you want to argue about COVID conspiracy theories? Or a vaccine forum to argue about vaccines? Or dare I say it, a forum devoted to conspiracy theories? At least then the people visiting have made a conscious decision to be exposed to that kind of stuff. It's actually an almost universal requirement on web forums that threads be on-topic, and those that arent are moved elsehwere?
Tell me, since you think this place should be the wild west, are you ok with links to gay pornography being posted? What about links to videos of beheadings in the middle East? What about spammers trying to sell their new PD supplement? Deleting those things would be censorship, right? People can just ignore it, right? We are all adults so no harm done, right?
What about threads that wonder aloud whether the jews are at the top of this global health conspiracy and whether hey, maybe Hitler was on to something after all?
This is is a health forum. It's even in the name. A health forum devoted to a condition where many of the patients are slowly starting to mentally slip. It (the PM part of it) is linked to by the Cure Parkinson's Trust, and if they are going to promote it and moderate it, they need to ensure that it is on-topic and relatively factual.
My apology for irritating you, but I think our learning about how to protect ourselves from Covid is as relevant as all the other discussions here because they go directly to our health .
You raise the best reasons yet to ban conspiracy theories because racism is often embedded in them. In fact, many of them originate for the purpose of furthering racism.
One would have to define conspiracy theories. Are alternative ways of healing conspiracies? Should they be banned? Would pharmaceuticals like them to be banned.
Why are you addressing me when you indicate it's been said, 'doctors are bad and you should stop doing what they say.' I've never said that. And I don't feel that way.
For the record, I don't think anyone on this forum should do much of anything without their doctors involvement.
In fact, I've argued against the proposition that doctors are paid by big Pharma. I said just the other day that I don't believe big Pharma has any influence at all on various medical institutions
I would never encourage anyone to go off their Parkinson's meds. If people are having mental deterioration because of PD, that is such a sad situation. I have gone through that with two close friends. With what I know now, I would encourage them towards ozone therapy. It helps with chelation and supplies oxygen to the brain.
Once one has made the choice to use drugs to treat a particular disease, including Parkinson's, it is a difficult decision not to take them and to go in a more natural direction.
Horace, No sense trying to convince her. You open a door and she’ll walk through it trying to convince you every time! I agree with Marc, a little, it’s so bizarre it’s entertaining however, I do agree that Bepos continued banter does not reflect the purpose of this particular forum.
Education is always good, unless you already have all the answers. Did B1 come from your doctor? No, Thank God, Dr. Costantini discovered how to use that for PD. Could PD have been caused in some people from receiving the flu vaccines?
Well said. I have not been following your post about vaccines but I can tell you in our support group the only person doing well does not take Pharmaceuticals.
For decades doctors pushed medications that big Pharma paid them to push. Fact
We need opposing voices this is how problems are solved
I think vaccines are necessary for some diseases but is over used
They should be more careful how they give children vaccines. 4 shots at one time makes no sense
A doctor won a lawsuit over the death of his child for that very thing
I got the swine flu shot in my 20s and my immune system has never been the same. I almost died. There are exceptions. Discussion and awareness is important. Don't muzzle me
When I saw a conventional medical endocrinologist, she could only prescribe synthetic pharmaceutical levothyroxine. If I wanted natural thyroid hormone replacement I had to go to the functional medical clinic where the wait to get in was months. I found a md who was open to my request.
I waited 7 months for my appointment with a well liked functional medicine md. They are few and far between and their business is booming.
Does big pharma own conventional medicine? Absolutely yes! Doctors need to make quotas and in some pediatric practices it's been reported that families have been dismissed for not following the vaccine schedule. I would not patronize a business like this. That's right, medicine is a BUSINESS. They exist to help us buy pharmaceutical drugs, and at times they can be life saving.
We have to be informed consumers of these pharmaceutical interventions and often times we're not.
Rarely are safer natural alternatives promoted. Natural alternatives are not taught in medical school. Levothyroxine contains aluminum in the colorant and it causes cancer. I won't take it under any circumstances. I always look for a natural equivalent. The urologist wanted to put me on a pharmaceutical diuretic. Absolutely not, this drug put my father into kidney failure. You cannot be too careful.
I thoroughly research the drugs, very few pass muster. It's up to the individual on how they treat - or don't treat their illnesses. For me pharmaceuticals are a last resort, not a first choice.
Why are you addressing me when you indicate it's been said, 'doctors are bad and you should stop doing what they say.' I've never said that. And I don't feel that way.
For the record, I don't think anyone on this forum should do much of anything without their doctors involvement.
In fact, I've argued against the proposition that doctors are paid by big Pharma. I said just the other day that I don't believe big Pharma has any influence at all on various medical institutions
You're being unfair. If you reread my responses to bepo, you'll find that I'm the 1st to be critical of her conspiracy theories and have been pretty pointed about my feelings toward them.
I take issue with your position that the forum should be a free for all. I then took specific examples from Bepo' posting history to demonstrate how ridiculous and dangerous it is. The fact that you may argue against those positions is Irrelevant to me as I don't think those discussions should be here in the first place.
Is the day coming soon, where everyone is going to be required, around the world, to get a corona virus vaccine? Do you think that is relevant to those with PD?
I would've thought my arguing against those positions would garner your support, since you feel they don't belong here, but it's beginning to feel like there's not much room for disagreement here.
I would never suggest, as you seem to be doing, that some positions should not even be represented here.
If you disagree with someone, just say so. That's a big difference than advocating that there's no room for their position.
Frankly, I think there should be room here -- even for those positions most of us would disagree with.
I have already address your comments about how you think you are equipped to deal with the information. Others aren't so lucky, and this place should be safe for them too.
No, I'm not. I have used Bepo's posting history to demonstrate why most of what she has written should (and often is) be deleted. You think it is ok to have that stufd on the forum, i have attempted to explain why i disagree.
Marc doesn't care about her credentials so no one else should either. We should just name the forum after you.
Bepo brought up 'education', not me. If you are going to claim to be educated, then you are purporting to speak from a position of authority. Therefore, it's not unreasonable that she offer evidence of an actual education. She also claims to be a 'researcher', but I'm confident that means YouTube researcher and not someone that actually undertakes research.
I did not reverse my position. I said it gave me pause. It makes me think. It is not possible for a person to be more clear than I have been in my belief that vaccinations are safe. I have even said on this thread I think vaccinations are safe -- so are you disagreeing with me without reading what I'm saying?
What I initially stated to you was, "education is a wonderful thing." I did not say anything about my own education or lack of it. What I was hinting at, was you might consider looking at other points of view. That is what education is all about.
Resume? Who here has given a resume? What's yours? And by the way, how would you know its true anyway? I sign my work Abe Lincoln, it's hidden in the chicken scrawl.
You are constructing extreme positions, then attributing them to me and then arguing against them. It's a common technique, but none of your extreme positions have ever come out of my mouth.
Years ago I learned most women who had breast cancer were low in vitamin D. I have been taking vitamin D at 5,000 IU for years. You will need to have a lab check your levels. Years ago, I learned that most people have low levels of vitamin D. Now, that it is a proven therapy for Covid-19, I thought it was relevant.
: “At least 70 pharmaceutical drugs are on the market after passing clinical trials based on fraudulent data provided by a California doctor,” said Kurt Eichenwald, an investigative reporter for The New York Times…
Of course it was a joke. Of course Perlmutter, Grundy, and Mercola don't conspire with each other to hype supplements. They hype supplements perfectly well as individuals
Is that 5,000 IU daily, bepo? I only take 1,000 IU daily and I have severe osteoporosis...better increase the dose. I need to be here to help my husband. Thanks for that!
No!! She meant 5,000 IU not mg. (See her corrected post just above yours). I strongly recommend taking direction from your physician. High doses of D may be detrimental to your health.
Thanks, bepo, but I was thinking of increasing it to 2,000 IU daily until I had professional advice.
I appreciate you sharing what you take, as I appreciate everyone on this site who shares what they take, and it is up to the individual to do their own research after being given the tools.
We are all responsible for ourselves and it is a timely and relevant reminder as a proven therapy for Covid-19.
Well why then have you not corrected your post? I doubt any Dr would approve 30,000 mg of vit D. Jennyjenny2 might have taken this wrong advice. I think this is why you are receiving criticism. That was not a very responsible post. No need to respond to me.
Bepo, you can always correct or delete a post. Click at the bottom of your post on the word "more ^" and choose "edit", then make your corrections to the text and confirm the new correct text. So you will avoid that the protest of the other members of the forum on obvious errors of instructions or misprints will turn into intolerance.
You need to periodically test your serum vitamin D level if you keep taking such a high dosage. High Vitamin D supplementation doesn't go without consequence.
I have a gene, the VDR gene, I think it is, that doesn't allow me to absorb vitamin D3. When I was taking 5,000 iu's, it didn't register on the blood test.
Be cautious and be diligent monitoring your blood vitamin D level under a Dr care. Just because you need more than 5000 IU with an absorbency issue doesn't mean the dose isn't toxic to someone else in the long-run. The below article discusses a few of the harmful effects (not all) that could happen with vitamin D overdose. Although the article states the problem may be "rare" you'd be surprised how often the problem presents without Drs and people actually realizing the frequency and cause of the problem that affects your general well-being including sleep, vision, liver, and heart troubles . You definitely don't want excess calcium (and phosphorous) get misdirected and affect vital organs such as Kidney, and I speak from my personal experience that landed me to multiple hospital visits and I've never taken more than 5000 IU per day. Your body needs a balance of vitamin K, D, A, etc, and an excess of one affects another.
With all due respect, bepo, there is nothing you or anyone else on earth could say or show me that would cause me to believe Bill Gates is trying to control the world through vaccination.
If Bill Gates called me up and said that's exactly what he was trying to do, I would not believe him.
Why keep it private? Let's see the proof out in the open. C'mon Bepo. You want people to take you seriously? Let's see the proof you have about Bill Gates.
I read an article about how Gates got started. His mother was instrumental in encouraging his interests and funding his software projects. But they wanted him to be a lawyer. He dropped out of Harvard after 2 years to continue his software research. So you could say he was mostly "self educated" Some would say he's not qualified to push his technology let alone healthcare on the world
Did you see my earlier reply to MBAnderson. All of that is factual about Bill Gates. I am extremely distrustful of that man from the factual information I have read. He is a real threat to the freedoms that exist throughout the world.
Since Bill Gates is not a doctor I have to ask myself why is he even involved in this process at all. And why should he have any influence in our Healthcare. Because he's rich?
Because he has committed to giving his wealth to a foundation dedicated to healthcare and he's talked numerous other billionaires in the giving away their wealth to the foundation. He is recognized around the world as an authority on pandemics and epidemiology and far as I can tell has done as much or more than any other individual for healthcare in poor countries.
Before anyone forms an opinion about Bill Gates, I would hope they would take a few minutes to learn what he and his wife are doing.
By Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Chairman, Children’s Health Defense
Vaccines, for Bill Gates, are a strategic philanthropy that feed his many vaccine-related businesses (including Microsoft’s ambition to control a global vaccination ID enterprise) and give him dictatorial control of global health policy.
Gates’ obsession with vaccines seems to be fueled by a conviction to save the world with technology.
Promising his share of $450 million of $1.2 billion to eradicate polio, Gates took control of India’s National Technical Advisory Group on Immunization (NTAGI), which mandated up to 50 doses (Table 1) of polio vaccines through overlapping immunization programs to children before the age of five. Indian doctors blame the Gates campaign for a devastating non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP) epidemic that paralyzed 490,000 children beyond expected rates between 2000 and 2017. In 2017, the Indian government dialed back Gates’ vaccine regimen and asked Gates and his vaccine policies to leave India. NPAFP rates dropped precipitously.
The most frightening [polio] epidemics in Congo, Afghanistan, and the Philippines are all linked to vaccines.
In 2017, the World Health Organization (WHO) reluctantly admitted that the global explosion in polio is predominantly vaccine strain. The most frightening epidemics in Congo, Afghanistan, and the Philippines, are all linked to vaccines. In fact, by 2018, 70% of global polio cases were vaccine strain.
In 2009, the Gates Foundation funded tests of experimental HPV vaccines, developed by Glaxo Smith Kline (GSK) and Merck, on 23,000 young girls in remote Indian provinces. Approximately 1,200 suffered severe side effects, including autoimmune and fertility disorders. Seven died. Indian government investigations charged that Gates-funded researchers committed pervasive ethical violations: pressuring vulnerable village girls into the trial, bullying parents, forging consent forms, and refusing medical care to the injured girls. The case is now in the country’s Supreme Court.
South African newspapers complained, ‘We are guinea pigs for the drug makers.’
In 2010, the Gates Foundation funded a phase 3 trial of GSK’s experimental malaria vaccine, killing 151 African infants and causing serious adverse effects, including paralysis, seizure, and febrile convulsions, to 1,048 of the 5,949 children.
During Gates’ 2002 MenAfriVac campaign in Sub-Saharan Africa, Gates’ operatives forcibly vaccinated thousands of African children against meningitis. Approximately 50 of the 500 children vaccinated developed paralysis. South African newspapers complained, “We are guinea pigs for the drug makers.” Nelson Mandela’s former senior economist, Professor Patrick Bond, describes Gates’ philanthropic practices as “ruthless and immoral.”
In 2010, when Gates committed $10 billion to the WHO, he said “We must make this the decade of vaccines.” A month later, Gates said in a TED Talk that new vaccines “could reduce population.” And, four years later, in 2014, Kenya’s Catholic Doctors Association accused the WHO of chemically sterilizing millions of unwilling Kenyan women with a “tetanus” vaccine campaign. Independent labs found a sterility formula in every vaccine tested. After denying the charges, WHO finally admitted it had been developing the sterility vaccines for over a decade. Similar accusations came from Tanzania, Nicaragua, Mexico, and the Philippines.
A 2017 study (Morgenson et. al. 2017) showed that WHO’s popular DTP vaccine is killing more African children than the diseases it prevents. DTP-vaccinated girls suffered 10x the death rate of children who had not yet received the vaccine. WHO has refused to recall the lethal vaccine, which it forces upon tens of millions of African children annually.
[Global public health officials] say he has diverted agency resources to serve his personal philosophy that good health only comes in a syringe.
Global public health advocates around the world accuse Gates of steering WHO’s agenda away from the projects that are proven to curb infectious diseases: clean water, hygiene, nutrition, and economic development. The Gates Foundation spends only about $650 million of its $5 billion dollar budget on these areas. They say he has diverted agency resources to serve his personal philosophy that good health only comes in a syringe.
In addition to using his philanthropy to control WHO, UNICEF, GAVI, and PATH, Gates funds a private pharmaceutical company that manufactures vaccines and is donating $50 million to 12 pharmaceutical companies to speed up development of a coronavirus vaccine. In his recent media appearances, Gates appears confident that the Covid-19 crisis will now give him the opportunity to force his dictatorial vaccine programs on all American children – and adults.
Quoted, with proper references, from: Children's Defense League.
Bill Gates is the world’s largest vaccine producer and the single largest donor to the World Health Organization (WHO)—since President Trump halted U.S. support pending an investigation of WHO’s handling of the COVID-19 crisis—and the CDC Foundation. Those agencies are now marketing arms for his vaccine empire.
In January of 2019, Gates had WHO declare “vaccine hesitancy” a top “global health threat” (with Ebola, HIV, war, and drug-resistant pathogens among others), signaling a worldwide Pharma Gold Rush to mandate vaccines to all people.
Gates maxed-out in donations to Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff’s PAC.
In February of 2019, Schiff wrote to Facebook, Google, and Amazon, demanding they censor “vaccine misinformation,” a term meaning all skepticism toward government and industry pronouncements about vaccine safety or efficacy—whether true or not.
“Vaccines are both effective and safe,” Schiff wrote. “There is no evidence to suggest that vaccines cause life-threatening or disabling disease.”
This was misinformation. A year earlier, Schiff pushed a bill to hike the Vaccine Court admin budget to $11,200,000 to reduce vaccine injury backlogs. The court had already paid out $4 billion for vaccine deaths and disabilities.
Facebook and Pinterest said that they will rely on Gates’s WHO and CDC to say which online statements are “misinformation or hoaxes.”
Facebook and Google hired “FactChecker” (Politifact) to censor vaccine misinformation.
The Gates Foundation is “FactChecker’s” largest funder.
In his article, “Facebook “Fact-Checker” Misinforms Users about Vaccine Safety” investigative journalist Jeremy Hammond concludes, “Facebook is guilty of misinforming its users about vaccine safety. . . .They have no problem with lies about vaccine safety and effectiveness, as long as it’s intended to persuade parents to vaccinate their children.”
On May 4, 2017, FactChecker declared false Del Bigtree’s statement, “Vaccines include aluminum and mercury, which are neurotoxins, and vaccines cause encephalopathy.”
FactChecker explained, “Current data show vaccines are safe and do not cause toxicity or encephalopathy.”
Manufacturers’ inserts reveal that many vaccines contain aluminum and mercury, and cause encephalopathy.
Finally, massive gifts to NPR and PBS buy Gates biased vaccine coverage from public media.
His wealth has enabled him to become the world's doctor. He is the largest contributer to the WHO. The scary thing is he got the whole world, with the exception of a few nations, including Sweden, to shut down altogether. How did that happen? That's control. What is next? Mandantory vaccines? Will there be chips in the vaccines to help with tracing?
Bill Gates is a marketing expert not a computer science expert. His Win software contained or contains exploitable flaws numbering 200,000 - reported "holes/flaws" evidenced by their own "security updates"
He is still a flawed individual with a LOT of money - his irrationality has already killed people - do not accept him a anything but power mad insanity. Mikro-Soft proves my point second Tuesday of every month
If we do a Google search for Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, we find dozens and dozens of conspiracy theories about their work and we also find a lot of fact checkers that have debunked all of them.
So some of Microsoft's programs have security flaws. Since absolutely all software does, that's hardly a newsflash. That he is a flawed individual is also hardly a newsflash.
Why are we so so quick to harshly judge others? And just as quick to see the worst in people?
Seems to me like there's a lot of unfounded animosity and anger on this thread, if not on this forum? So much harshness.
Does Parkinson's do that?
I would've assumed that Parkinson's would make us all less judgmental.
How do you prove they are conspiracy theories? Is that because they go against the main stream? Google owns YouTube. They have stated they will delete any post that goes against pharmaceuticals and the WHO......that means Gates.
The constant denigration of "Americans" by a few members of this forum is getting old. They talk of shunning prejudice, racial divide, and unnecessary drama, but some really should be looking at themselves in the mirror.
That was a funny thread. We are all just mortals, dumb animals really, trying to make our way home . Maybe we should acknowledge our frailty and understand that much of what we have been taught and know as certain truth will someday be superseded by other truths if it has not been allready.
As knowledge levels go , we know next to nothing about Parkinsons. People have heard the theories stated so many times that they become fact , but they are still theory. How can anyone be so positive a particular pet theory is absolutely with out hesitation the truth. and the next best thing to a message from God.
Look at how many times what was said was misunderstood, insult taken and in the end every one held to their opinion.
But it was fun to read, but come on guys, TOLERANCE.
Just what PWP need to be doing, throwing shade and defending one's feelings on opinions. I for one won't be touching that bloody vaccine but I most certainly will never judge someone who disagrees or has other feelings on the matter.
But this tearing down can't go on, just dust your boots off and keep walking by
Agreed. I have just endeavored to present another point of view. People of course have to decide for themselves how to be in charge of their health. Every person has a right to decide how to take care of their own bodies and the bodies of their families.
Every one has a right to an opinion, a right to be wrong maybe . I believe that Bepo has made a statement that my investigation over many months has shown to be correct. I take 6 ,000 I.U. of Vitamin D3 daily and my doctor confirmed that is not a lot nor in any way dangerous. He suggested that I also take a one a day multi-vitamin as well because many reactions require a trace amount of minerals and other vitamins. (If over 1,000 I.U. is dangerous, why do they make and sell it in 5,000 and 10,000 I.U. capsules ?)
If and when I believe that I am showing signs that I have acquired the virus then I plan to take take 150, 000 I.U. every 3 hours for 5 or 6 doses. All the information that I found says this is an easily tolerable amount if only taken for a very short time , and that there is no record of any damage being done to anyone taking these amounts over that short period of time.
The information that I have found from older people in Italy clearly shows the benefit . It is said to stop the virus in its tracks and not allow it to enter cells. There have been several recent scientific studies that were conclusive. The one common factor between most of the patients that died were people who live in an environment that either did not offer them much sunshine or they were genetically short sunshine for the location they were in. Sunlight and ultra violet destroys the virus , why cant liquid sunshine do the same thing.
I am not a doctor, I am just telling you what I am doing. I live in Canada and have not seen the sun since thanksgiving and I started the daily dose in January and feel much better. Flu Virus season typically runs through the winter months , takes the summer off and then returns in November.
Dont take my word for it . Do your own investigation
"If over 1,000 I.U. is dangerous, why do they make and sell it in 5,000 and 10,000 I.U. capsules" - it's because some people have absorbency issue and need a much higher dose to correct the deficiency.
Vitamin D from sun easily above 20,000 IU is never harmful, but the same can't be said of supplementation.
I have nothing against short term Vitamin D Hammer protocol for an emergency. What you need to watch out for is long term overdose that affects your body's balance that could deteriorate your bones/organs. You must monitor your blood level to be safe. Investigation alone isn't enough.
I remember the day from when my GP said to me that all people Living North of the 49 TH Parallel (Canadians ) should all be taking at least 3,000 IUs a day as we do NOT get enough sunlight to supply our body's needs. .... 25 years ago!!!
And show to your doctor to be sure she's got a response.
Just to see what it says.
Of course the principals of professional associations are more conservative than the Eastern Orthodox Church. Their motto is "first do no harm...to my bottom line."
Of course the principals of professional associations are more conservative than the Eastern Orthodox Church. Their motto is "first do no harm...to my bottom line."
hahahahahahahahahaahahh
that's funny , I am sorry but I cant take you seriously
I think your just playing with people and refuting everything to stir it up.
Bepo. When Drs were baffled and could not fix my hormone imbalance. I saw a panel of Naturopathic/ Homeopathic Drs on CNN that pointed me in that direction. It was life changing. I found Dr John Lee Book,Canadian Dr that used bioidentical hormone treatments for 30 yrs. My PCP scoffed at it. My GYN told me secretly it was a good thing. I assume the AMA would take his license if they knew because he could not treat me he just let me know I was on the right path. Because I read, I know that had I continued on the synthetic hormones I would likely have cancer by now. We must have open minds and not fall lockstep to all we are told
Bioidentical hormones cause no problems. Years ago, when I was going through menopause, I told my OBGYN I didn't want to take artificial hormones. He convinced me that they stopped heart disease which was more dangerous than breast cancer, which the artificial hormones could cause. After taking them for a year, he told me to stop taking the hormones because they caused heart disease. What do you expect from artificial chemicals?
For those of you who try to find some legitimacy in positions opposing your own, allow me to add a caveat to my surrender to the 'conspiracy theories should be banned' cohort.
In a way it is like pornography, i.e., if everybody were forced to watch it, there would surely be a case for banning it, but in fact everyone here is perfectly free to skip over and otherwise ignore conspiracy theories. How hard is it, really, to not read something?
Reading conspiracy theories and then complaining about their existence is a little contradictory isn't it? Why not just don't read them (thereby allowing others to choose what information they receive?)
Bottom line, the majority want them banned and apparently feel strong about it -- so be it.
What about the silent majority? You need to describe conspiracy theories, please. You use that phrase a lot. Does that include any post that is contrary to your point of view? What if there were factual justification for the 'conspiracy theory'.
Here is a good definition of conspiracy theory from Wikipedia. I'll go by their definition.
I do not believe your discussion of vaccinations and isolation of "follow the money" and Bill Gates is a conspiracy theory, but your position on Bill Gates is absolutely a conspiracy theory -- and I do not mean this to be insulting, bepo, but to my way of thinking it's 1 of the more bizarre theories I've ever heard.
Why is it that you suppose Bill Gates is trying to control the world. To what end, what will he do once he gains control -- force everyone to buy Excel spreadsheet?
Bill Gates has been working on population control for years. I believe he started out with good intentions, but stated, "We can control population with vaccines."
Implicit in his comment is to control the health of populations. Again, I ask you, to what end does he want to control the populations of the world? Surely, the people who invented that claim have explained his motive.
bepo, you cannot possibly be postulating that Bill Gates is trying to address climate change by fostering lethal vaccinations on world population to reduce the population of the planet?? Say it ain't so, bepo. This is too far out, even for you if that's what you're implying.
Anyone defending the Bill Gates/WHO global vaccine program needs to explain this study: Mogensen et al 2017. Prior to 2017, neither HHS nor WHO ever performed the kind of vaccinated/unvaccinated (or placebo) study necessary to ascertain if the DTP vaccine actually yields beneficial health outcomes. The DTP vaccine was discontinued in the US and western nations in the 1990s following thousands of reports of death and brain damage.
… girls vaccinated with the DTP vaccine—the flagship of Bill Gates’s GAVI/WHO African vaccine program—died at 10 times the rate of unvaccinated kids.
But Bill Gates and his surrogates, GAVI and WHO, made DTP a priority for African babies. The Danish government and Novo Nordisk Foundation commissioned this study by a team of the world’s leading experts on African vaccination. The two most prominent names, Drs. Soren Mogensen and Peter Aaby, are both vocal vaccine supporters. They were shocked when they examined years of data from a so called “natural experiment” in Guinea Bissau where 50% of children die before age five. In that west African nation, half the children were vaccinated with the DTP vaccine at three months and the other half at six months. Dr. Mogenson and his team found that girls vaccinated with the DTP vaccine died at 10 times the rate of unvaccinated kids. While the vaccinated children were protected from Diphtheria, Tetanus and Pertussis, they were far more susceptible to other deadly diseases than unvaccinated peers. The vaccine apparently compromised their immune systems. Thanks to Gates, DTP is the world’s most popular vaccine.
The researchers suggested that the DTP vaccine is killing more children than the diseases it targets.
For African nations, GAVI and WHO use DTP vaccine uptake to gauge national compliance with vaccine recommendations. GAVI can financially punish nations that don’t fully comply. The researchers suggested that the DTP vaccine is killing more children than the diseases it targets. It’s possible that millions of children are adversely affected. Although the New York Times and other Gates boosters will accuse me of promoting “vaccine misinformation”, this is a peer reviewed publication in a respected journal by the world’s most authoritative vaccine scientists describing catastrophic outcomes.
Shouldn’t we be scrutinizing Bill Gates’ record in Africa before we let him dictate which medicines we need to take? By muzzling legitimate criticism as “anti-vax”, the media avoids honest debate on many damning studies like Mogensen.
I think that's a good choice not to drink. I have to be bossy around George. He worked in the wine industry for most of his life. He can only have one glass a night. He cheats, sometimes.
It appears as though majority on this form believe conspiracy theories should be deleted and they seem to hold very strong opinions about that.
To be clear, I understand the rationale and am fine with it, but allow me to offer a reason why they should be subject to scrutiny instead.
The reason is because there probably are some who do not know for sure and may think there is validity in the position that vaccinations cause autism.
If you believe that those people put their children at risk by not vaccinating them, then perhaps this rationale will resonate with you.
Instead of deleting the thread, we invite those who hold that position to produce the data that substantiates the claim. Then we produce what I believe is an overwhelming body of evidence that undermines and defeats that claim, point by point if necessary.
That gives the ambivalent and the undecided the data, the evidence, the proof, and therefore comfort in their decision to support vaccinating children and may well cause some children to be vaccinated who otherwise might not be.
In other words, there may be more good come from shining a bright light on unfounded, unsupported claims -- that is, educating the undecided -- than there is by simply deleting the thread.
Again, I recognize this is a minority position and I will not argue the point any further. I trust the HU administrators to delete only what are obvious conspiracy theories
This is unrelated to autism, but it's a good of discussion mainstream establishment feeding misinformation to the general population for decades & industry buying off nutrition scientists by Nina Teicholz
Content on HealthUnlocked does not replace the relationship between you and doctors or other healthcare professionals nor the advice you receive from them.
Never delay seeking advice or dialling emergency services because of something that you have read on HealthUnlocked.
After 12 Years of Parkinson's, Whats next? 2000 to 2012 Where next?
I'm going to test Dr. Bredesen's theories on myself. Anyone else interested? Here's a brief introduction:
