Natural Solutions Foundation
www.HealthFreedomUSA.org
www.GlobalHealthFreedom.org
Death By Vaccine
When you peruse just today’s top stories, you will, I believe, come to the same conclusion General Stubblebine and I have come to. That the people of the world are facing an engineered, media-powered “pandemic” panic leading to the mandating of a dangerous, untested, unproven, uninsurable (sic) “swine flu vaccine” — this blog entry is background information for our July 16, 2009 Health Freedom Action eAlert – see: http://drrimatruthreports.com/?p=3101
What can we do? We can push-back! See our online Vaccine Resources Portal: http://drrimatruthreports.com/?p=3085
And here is our URGENT WARNING: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swHUfACaRN8
The first few items are today’s information from the blogisphere, etc. Then just some illustrative headlines and, of course, last week’s CDC ‘Recommendations for State and Local Planning for a 2009 Novel H1N1 Influenza Vaccination Program.’
Let’s start…
1. Coming soon to a Police State Near You…
Times of London censuring criticism, skepticism of mass vaccination with vaccine approved in 5 days of “testing”!
“The London Times newspaper has apparently censored scores of comments on its own website that expressed vehement opposition to plans by the UK government to implement a mandatory vaccination program for swine flu.”
http://www.infowars.com/london-times-censors-mass-opposition-to-mandatory-swine-flu-vaccine/
2. Countries place vax orders, ready campaigns – by John Carroll
“Faced with their first pandemic in four decades, health officials around the globe are scrambling to line up big supplies of a new vaccine in what is shaping up as a multibillion-dollar windfall for the world’s biggest manufacturers.
“The French government has ordered 94 million doses of swine flu vaccine–enough to vaccinate three-quarters of the country’s population. The French inked contracts–which total $1.4 billion–with Sanofi-Aventis, GlaxoSmithKline and Novartis. Sanofi Pasteur is estimating that it will have the first supplies of a new swine flu vaccine ready for delivery in four to six months.
“And France is far from the only country to lay the foundation for a mass vaccination campaign as soon as supplies arrive. The UK is considering hiring private contractors to help doctors in the country’s national health service to administer the jab. Peter Holden, who represents the British Medical Association, says doctors and nurses need to be ready to administer vaccines to 30 to 40 people an hour.
“While far more mild than originally feared, swine flu has nevertheless roiled populations around the globe, with each new death raising fresh fears. Those fears in turn have spurred government agencies to come up with new vaccination campaigns as a new flu season in the northern hemisphere looms.
“Europe isn’t wasting any time on its pandemic-vaccine plans. Today, Germany announced a deal for 50 million doses of the still-in-development vaccine, enough for about one-third of its citizens, health authorities said. Meanwhile, the U.K. is prepping for a massive shot campaign, hoping to reach the entire population–all 60 million.
“The contrast between Germany’s order and Britain’s illuminates a debate over vaccine allocation. The WHO is criticizing countries that order vaccine supplies for every citizen; it says shots would then be apportioned unfairly among rich nations and poor nations. Germany chose to go with the WHO’s recommendations. U.K. plans to go its own way. Of course, Britain is ranked fourth in the world for its high number of swine flu cases, and Germany doesn’t make the top dozen.
“Which drugmakers will benefit from these latest orders? At press time, there was no word which companies got Germany’s business, but the U.K. selected GlaxoSmithKline and Baxter as its vaccine suppliers. U.K. is also aiming to boost its stock of antivirals, including GlaxoSmithKline’s Relenza and Roche’s Tamiflu, to treat 80 percent of the population. Its stockpile now covers about half.”
http://www.fiercepharma.com/story/germany-u-k-load-flu-vaccine/2009-07-15
3. Novartis readies trial as H1N1 orders pour in – by John Carroll
“Novartis says it’s using both a traditional egg-based as well as a cell-based approach in developing a new vaccine for swine flu. And the pharma giant says it expects to launch a clinical trial of a new jab before the end of the month as it racks up huge orders from countries around the globe…
“Right now no one in the U.S. government has laid out a clear plan for handling swine flu this fall. Vaccinations may initially be planned only for health care workers and other front-line emergency workers. Ultimately, some believe that the U.S. will order up to 600 million doses for the entire population to guard against a so-called second wave in the fall that could include a more lethal version of A/H1N1.”
4. Deals help Novavax pay off $22M in debts – by John Carroll
“Flush from a pair of newly inked collaborations, Novavax has paid off the last of its debt.
“Novavax began this year–one of the rockiest in biotech history–with $22 million in convertible debt. But the last $5 million was paid off earlier in the week as the developer cleared the books of debt…”
5. Some headlines and tidbits…
The Department of Health and Human Services will hand out $884 million in funding to buy more ingredients an antigen and an adjuvant for swine flu vaccines. This is in addition to the $1 billion HHS committed to fighting the disease in May.
MedImmune was awarded a new $61 million contract for a nasal spray vaccine that can be used against swine flu. Story
In the U.K., the number of calls to GPs over concerns related to swine flu has rocketed up 50 percent, to 40,000. Story
Three biotech companies in India have been given the green light to start on a swine flu vaccine. Report
Health officials in Wales are preparing for up to a million cases of swine flu.
Health officials in Italy are preparing to vaccinate 15 percent of the population.
Vaccine Market Analysts expect that Pfizer and Merck will both do well when they close a deal to sell their animal health divisions, which is being forced by their respective merger plans. In part that’s because their animal vaccines offer a reliable revenue stream and significantly lower risks than they face on the human side of drug development. Story
Antigenics has forged a distribution agreement for its therapeutic cancer vaccine Oncophage in Russia. Report
Wyeth says that it won its first regulatory approval for the new version of Prevnar-Prevnar 13–in Chile.
6. Vaccine Research & Researchers
An Israeli company has created a vaccine that researchers believe can save bees from colony collapse disorder.
New Science Czar, John Holdren: Overpopulation was an early concern and interest, and in 1969, writing with Paul R. Ehrlich, Holdren claimed that, “if the population control measures are not initiated immediately, and effectively, all the technology man can bring to bear will not fend off the misery to come.”[10] In 1973 Holdren encouraged a decline in fertility to well below replacement in the United States, because “210 million now is too many and 280 million in 2040 is likely to be much too many”[11]. Currently, the U.S. population is 306,916,000[12]. In 1977 he co-authored (with Paul R. Ehrlich and Anne H. Ehrlich) Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment,[13] which discussed the possible role of a wide range of solutions to overpopulation, from voluntary family planning at one extreme, to a “planetary regime” of enforced population control at the other extreme.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Holdren
To this day, Holdren lists the book on his CV. Among other things, Holdren and Ehrlich wrote in Ecosystems:
“Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.
“It would even be possible to require pregnant single women to marry or have abortions, perhaps as an alternative to placement for adoption, depending on the society.
Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods is a suggestion that seems to horrify people more than most proposals for involuntary fertility control. Indeed, this would pose some very difficult political, legal, and social questions, to say nothing of the technical problems. No such sterilant exists today, nor does one appear to be under development. To be acceptable, such a substance would have to meet some rather stiff requirements: it must be uniformly effective, despite widely varying doses received by individuals, and despite varying degrees of fertility and sensitivity among individuals; it must be free of dangerous or unpleasant side effects; and it must have no effect on members of the opposite sex, children, old people, pets, or livestock.
http://www.examiner.com/x-722-Conservative-Politics-Examiner~y2009m7d16-Science-Czar-John-P-Holdrens-disturbing-beliefs-about-America-capitalism-and-humanity
7. And a few days ago…
CDC Recommendations for State and Local Planning for a 2009 Novel H1N1 Influenza Vaccination Program – July 8, 2009, 4:30 PM ET
“The purpose of this document is to describe planning scenarios for state and local governments to target high-priority populations for vaccination in order to reduce the health and societal impact of the novel H1N1 influenza virus.
Background
“Data from U.S. and international sources suggests that it is appropriate to plan for a vaccination program to reduce the health and societal impacts of the novel H1N1 influenza virus. In order to increase the probability of success of such a program, planning scenarios should be provided to state and local health authorities promptly. Planning scenarios can facilitate readiness to implement specific plans within states and large cities, improving the chances that vaccine will reach target populations when recommendations are made, and that distribution, delivery, and communication efforts regarding vaccination will overcome local challenges and maximize capacities.
“Ongoing analysis through the summer of available data on the epidemiology and virologic characteristics of 2009-H1N1 virus and about vaccine efficacy will guide decisions about features of the program. These decisions will be made in collaboration with expert panels and with input from the public. For example, CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices will provide specific vaccination recommendations, including specific target populations and priorities for circumstances of limited or phased vaccine supply. In addition, the National Vaccine Advisory Committee will provide guidance on implementation and evaluation of vaccine safety. A public engagement effort will also seek input from citizens from several regions around the country about these matters. While additional data are collected and reviewed, state and local public health authorities need to accelerate their outreach to health care providers, the private sector, occupational groups, and others to put in place mechanisms and to develop vaccination venues appropriate to reach groups most likely to be included in a vaccination program against pandemic H1N1 influenza.
“Rationale Used in Developing the Planning Scenarios
“The particular configuration of the vaccination program in each state and local jurisdiction will be determined by the population groups for which vaccine is recommended, and vaccination planning needs to encompass the diverse venues where vaccine might be delivered. Identification of highly affected populations to date can highlight venues that need to be ready to administer vaccine to the various populations that might be included in the program, and provide the rationale for the planning scenarios. Populations included in planning scenarios are based on the best current data to facilitate state and local planning.
“Evidence to date suggests that population immunity to this virus is low, particularly among the young. In one small serologic study of samples collected during 2006-08, cross-reacting antibody were found among some older persons but not in any younger adults or children. Widespread susceptibility to this virus among young persons creates the potential for large numbers of cases with more hospitalizations and deaths among younger age groups than would be expected for a typical routine seasonal influenza virus. Importantly, severe disease and death caused by novel H1N1 thus far have affected younger adults, children, and pregnant women, in addition to persons of all ages with certain underlying medical conditions more than the elderly. The virus has also caused numerous outbreaks in schools and summer camps.
Planning Assumptions
“These planning scenarios are based on the following assumptions at the time vaccine becomes available and distribution begins:
1. severity of illness is unchanged from what has already been observed
2. risk groups affected by this virus do not change significantly
3. vaccine testing suggests safe and efficacious product
4. adequate supplies of vaccine can be produced
5. no major antigenic changes are evident that would signal the lack of likely efficacy of the vaccines being produced
“Planning Scenarios
“The following are best-case planning scenarios that would be recommended in a setting of limited initial vaccine availability.
“Target population: Students and staff (all ages) associated with schools (K-12th grade) and children (age ?6 months) and staff (all ages) in child care centers.
“Primary venues: schools and child care centers.
“Goals: Provide direct protection against illness among persons who have high attack rates of illness, reduce likelihood of outbreaks that may lead to disruptive school dismissals, reduce transmission from schools into homes and the community.
“Adherence to these guidelines will require state and local authorities to carry out extensive planning to reach school-aged populations either through venues such as school-associated mass vaccination efforts, or, where private capacity is sufficient, through local pediatric providers. Local pediatric care providers may play a particularly prominent role in vaccinating preschool-aged children who have a medical home. These planning efforts will reinforce longer-term immunization targets of strengthening vaccination efforts in these populations, and building links between health and education. The disruptive outbreaks prevalent in schools and some universities in the spring of 2009 may provide impetus for these planning steps to move forward actively. They will also permit strengthening capacity for seasonal influenza vaccination of school-aged children in future seasons.
Target population: Pregnant women, children 6 months – 4 years of age, new parents and household contacts of children <6 months of age.
"Primary venues: Provider offices, community clinics.
"Goal: Reduce complications of novel H1N1 influenza, such as excess hospitalizations and deaths among those vulnerable for serious complications of influenza, as evidenced by higher rates of hospitalization; protect the youngest (<6 months) who are not themselves able to be vaccinated through immunization of their household contacts.
"Sustaining a focus on pregnant women and young children is appropriate given their high rates of complications and hospitalizations to date, and is consistent with tier 1 prioritization for these groups in pre-pandemic planning.
"Target population: Non-elderly adults (age <65 years) with medical conditions that increase the risk of complications of influenza.
"Primary venues: Occupational settings, community clinics, pharmacies, providers’ offices. (Experience with seasonal influenza vaccine suggests that persons with underlying illness age 50 to 64 years may be more likely to receive vaccine from their provider, while younger persons may be more likely to be vaccinated elsewhere).
Goal: Reduce risk of hospitalizations and deaths among persons with higher rates of these complications than the general population, and focus vaccine where its impact can be most beneficial for direct protection.
"The planning requirement to offer vaccine to young adults with risk factors will permit state and local authorities to address a group that does not frequently seek health care and has relatively low rates of vaccination against seasonal influenza. Links with occupational clinics, adult providers, or contingency plans for community venues or pharmacies are all options that might address this important at-risk group.
Target population: Health care workers and emergency services sector personnel (regardless of age).
"Primary venue: Occupational settings, providers’ offices.
"Goal: Reduce risk of illness, sustain health system functioning, and reduce absenteeism among front-line providers; reduce transmission from emergency services personnel and health care workers to patients; provide additional worker protection in settings of increased exposure; reinforce importance of influenza vaccination among all health care workers.
"Note: Immunization of military (e.g., deployed forces) may be appropriate given the current circumstances; however, this memo focuses on vaccination of civilian populations under the authority of CDC and state and local health departments.
Vaccine Availability Considerations
"If vaccine is widely available, CDC would recommend offering vaccine at multiple venues to anyone who wants to be vaccinated. Although the benefits of vaccine may be greatest in the persons in groups at increased risk, and interest in being vaccinated may be lower among the general population, offering vaccine to everyone can reduce the risk of influenza for general population may reduce transmission to unvaccinated persons. At the same time, if vaccine supply is limited, it will be important to consider a balance between international needs for vaccine in relation to the vaccination of low risk individuals in the United States."
http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/vaccination/statelocal/planning.htm
8. And let’s not forget some of the other issues that concern us
http://www.biolsci.org/v05p0438.htm [Very important paper – REL]
“Chronic health effects are increasing in the world such as cancers, hormonal, reproductive, nervous, or immune diseases, even in young people. During regulatory toxicological subchronic tests to prevent these on mammalian health, prior commercialization of chemicals, including pesticides and drugs, or GMOs, some statistically significant findings may be revealed. This discussion is about the need to investigate the relevant criteria to consider those as biologically significant. The sex differences and the non linear dose or time related effects should be considered in contrast to the claims of a Monsanto-supported expert panel about a GMO, the MON 863 Bt maize, but also for pesticides or drugs, in particular to reveal hormone-dependent diseases and first signs of toxicities.”
“Some contaminations or pollutions by pesticides [1] and other chemical residues [2-4] affect human and animal health, together with biodiversity. Thus it is important to study potential mid and long-term toxicological effects during regulatory tests prior to commercialization of chemicals, and not to test only short-term or subchronic effects. This question has also been raised for GMOs [5], especially those containing pesticides, either because they tolerate (such as Roundup Ready soya) or produce (such as Bt maize) these molecules (99 % of commercially cultivated GMOs). This subject has been reviewed recently by Dronamraju [6].”
