Natural Solutions Foundation
HPV Vaccines Plan a Colossal Clinical Trial: No Surprise There.
Now Let’s Include Infants and See What Happens!
The general belief in the US and elsewhere is that once a drug or vaccine is approved for general use, its “safety and efficacy” have been established beyond a reasonable doubt and that any special concerns are covered in the inserts which accompany the alleged medicine.
That appears to be a reasonable conclusion, but, alas, is an tragically incorrect one.
The truth of them matter is that, AT BEST, once a drug or vaccine hits the market (that is, can be used on YOU without informed consent or other special procedures), you are in Clinical Trial Phase IV – the one where, after a while, if there are TOO MANY deaths, seizures, or other short term adverse events, the product might, just might, be considered for removal from the market place. Or not.
Now when we are dealing with vaccines, the situation is much, much worse. First of all, the lap dog Fraud and Death Administration (FDA), followed quickly by the US Congress, has removed all financial liability from vaccine manufacturers, no matter what happens to vaccine recipients, as long as there is no evidence of willful intent to do harm. Vaccines are an uninsurable risk… even AIG won’t insure the drug companies against vaccine harm. Instead Congress set up a special tax that each buyer of a vaccine dose pays, and that fund in effect, guarantees the profitability of vaccines for the drug companies.
So long as there is no willful intent to do harm…
Um, excuse me. Injecting “adjuvants” and “preservatives” like lipids, modified lipids, aluminum hydroxide sulfide, mercury, aspartame, MSG, formaldehyde, foreign protein, leukemia viruses and a host of other compounds conclusively shown to be devastating to the animals that receive them in the lab, coupled with the fact that no vaccine on the planet has been shown to be effective, safe or, heaven help us, both safe AND effective, while propagandizing and lobbying for as wide-spread penetration as possible, is not willful intent to do harm?
I must be fairly simple minded, I suppose, not to understand that overloading the immature immune systems of newborns with toxins – and changing the prohibitions against injecting pregnant moms with toxic brews like Flu vaccine, Rhogram and a host of others to allow, indeed, endorse and recommend – in the absence of any scientific justification to do so – is not willful intent to do harm.
I guess there is something wrong with the way I process information when mercury-bearing pediatric vaccines are permitted to be used until the [valuable, expensive] stocks run out but vaccine manufacturers are permitted to claim that their products are “Thimerisol Free” because a small number of mercury reduced, NOT mercury free, vials of this vile stuff is being produced, to gradually replace the pediatric stock, in several years. Since the “new and improved” shots contain only a “trace” of mercury, the ingredient does not have to be revealed… even though that 1 to 3 mcg “trace” is enough to cause harm!
I failed to learn to think in medical totalitarianistic ways so I just do not understand how approving a vaccine for US and European children like Rotovac for rotovirus diarrhea, a disease from which US and European children do not die, makes any sense at all, other than from a corporate perspective – money-wise, that is. Or, consider HPb, the vaccine designed to “prevent” hepatitis B, a disease spread by intimate contact with contaminated blood or semen, or Gardasil, designed to “prevent” a disease which may or may not be related to the Human Papilloma Virus and is definitely related to sexual activity, for girls 9-26, and now FOR INFANTS and which is not proven to be effective in preventing cervical cancer, which is easily detected and cured early through non-chemotherapy means, is actually increased by the use of the vaccine and whose vaccine-induced antibodies have never been proven to be related to cancer prevention!
To make matters even more interesting, there is no evidence, that’s right, NONE, that the antibodies which are, in fact, produced, in response to the immune-degrading and immune-distorting HPV vaccines and their deadly ajuvants last more than 5 years.
So we give girls and women a shot, then a second shot, then a third shot, then a booster shot (that is 4+++ doses of the toxins in the vaccines, of course) and then, THEN, we get to see, according to the very important document below, IF the vaccine produces any adverse events of significance (for example, death, or the brand new disorder called “Juvenile ALS”, which has only been seen in girls who have received the Gradasil and Cervavax HPV vaccines, by the way) and IF the vaccines provide “protection” against cervical cancer and genital warts… in the next 40 years or so… conveniently well after all the authors of this atrocity are long into their well-paid retirement.
While we are waiting, of course, we can fill our time reading studies like the ones which show that Gardasil increases cervical cancer in women and girls who are already sexually active by 44.7% and the FDA documents dated from before the approval of Gardasil, that showed that there was no expectation that this evil brew would reduce cervical cancer because, despite the tobacco science (shall we change the name to “Pharma “science” ?) bought and paid for by Merck, the HPV strains covered by this vaccine have not been implicated in cervical cancer!!!!!
Now, for the two “best” pieces of HPV vaccine news: as the article below will show you, the idea is to include huge numbers of additional girls and infants, yes, infants, most of whom are not very sexually active, but, hey! a profit is a profit, take it where it falls!, in a gigantic clinical study to make lots of money for a few people while we continue to see the use of our children, and ourselves, as guinea pigs in experiments which are already failed the day they are put to paper, long before our bodies are damaged by the toxic drug and vaccine brews.
And now, for something completely different, the next market segment for marketing this vaccine is the other half of the sexually active crowd: baby boys, boy children and men. To help them protect an organ they do not have. To help them line the deep, deep, dirty pockets of the pharmaceutical industry. Your choice? Say “NO!” to those vaccines… click here:
Take this opportunity to resist because you have that right. But for the vaccines that you do not have the right to resist, the Pandemic vaccines, you must take action quickly. Support our best Health Freedom friend in Congress so that he can introduce a Self-Shielding bill immediately to give you the right to turn down either taking a Swine Flu vaccine (and do not think that there will not be more of these Pandemic Vaccines – new viruses are “emerging” all the time and the market is rich and ripe: new viruses, new vaccines, new pandemics, new population reductions – mmmm! Just what Dr. Mengele ordered!
So here is the important article which I urge you to read and disseminate. It will make your hair stand on end. No hair? Use Rogain. Give the drug companies some more money.
Or, instead, set up a recurring donation, large or small, to the Natural Solutions Foundation at:
Yours in health and freedom,
Rima E. Laibow, MD
Natural Solutions Foundation
Valley of the Moon(TM) Eco Demonstration Project
Girls used as Guinea Pigs in HPV Trials Admits GSK
July 05, 2009
We have always suspected it and now they admit it, GSK are using young girls (as young as 9 in some areas) as human Guinea Pigs in HPV vaccine Cervarix trials. This was only discovered after reading a document that was meant for ‘Scientific Background and Informational Purposes only’?
Cervarix GlaxoSmithKline’s Cervical Cancer Candidate Vaccine Mandate. Media Backgrounder makes very disturbing reading as it states exactly what trials are to be carried out, with one particular very interesting line?
“Phase III Trials Phase III studies are underway in 37 countries with more than 39,000 subjects planned.”
So this appears to prove that all our children are part of one big experiment to enable the drug companies to line their pockets whilst they sit back and watch what happens to our children.
Whilst trawling the Internet a fellow member of ICAP also came up with this gem of a document which also appears to prove that our children are part of trials.
The document is the Presentation of advisory report Vaccination against cervical cancer from the health Council of the Netherlands to the Minister of Health, Welfare and Sport
This is an official political document. It is called ‘Vaccination against Cervical Cancer’ and it was accompanied with a letter addressed to the Minister of Health, Welfare and Sport in the Netherlands, from the Health Council. Interestingly the report outlines some very alarming points. The report discusses the differences between the two HPV vaccinations Cervarix and Gardasil.
“Both vaccines are designed to provide immunity against HPV-16 and 18: the two types of the virus responsible for about 70 per cent of cervical cancer cases. Gardasil also provides protection against HPV-6 and 11, which together cause nearly all genital warts. Broader-spectrum vaccines capable of protecting against hrHPVs other than HPV-16 and 18 may become available in due course. The vaccines differ from one another in terms of the adjuvants (vaccine-aiding agents) they utilise. Gardasil uses the well-established adjuvant aluminium hydroxyphosphate sulphate, while Cervarix uses the equally widely employed aluminium hydroxide, but in combination with monophosphoryl lipid A, a chemically modified lipopolysaccharide, that influences the innate immune system. The latter complex is known as ASO4. Cervarix stimulates higher levels of antibody production, but the significance of this phenomenon for its protective effect is not known.”
The report states that there is no real knowledge to how long the vaccine lasts or if a booster will be needed or if in fact it does protect against cervical cancer.
Vaccination protects against persistent infection and the precursors of cervical cancer
The initial effect of vaccination is favourable: vaccination leads to the formation of antibodies against the target hrHPVs and thus to protection against infection by those hrHPVs. This in turn brings about a major short-term reduction in the incidence of the precursors of cervical cancer. It is known that the development of such precursors is a prerequisite for the subsequent development of the cancer. Vaccination against cervical cancer itself. However, whether vaccination does in fact protect against cervical cancer will not be known for many years to come.”
Lovely isn’t it? Then it states:-?
“It is not yet clear whether booster vaccinations will be needed
The duration of the protection afforded by vaccination has yet to be determined.It is known, however, that high antibody levels persist for at least five years and that immunological memory is created. Protection is required, however, for several decades. The possibility that re-vaccination will be needed in order to provide such prolonged protection cannot be excluded at the present time.”
It carries on
“Although the available data provide an incomplete picture of the effectiveness of HPV vaccination, they are sufficient to support the expectation of significant health benefit: vaccination leads to fewer infections and thus to a reduced incidence of the precursors of cervical cancer. We may therefore move on to the next criterion. Thus, this chapter of the report considers whether vaccination might have any adverse effects that offset the attainable health benefit.
Although the trials so far conducted have involved the administration of HPV vaccine to thousands of women (nearly 12,000 have been given Gardasil and more than 16,000 Cervarix), the numbers are small compared with those that would be involved in general vaccination. If vaccination were made available to all twelve-year-old girls in the Netherlands, that would mean treating roughly 100,000 young people a year. Certainty regarding the vaccine?s safety and insight into any rare side-effects that it might have are therefore very important.”
For me however, the hightlight of whole report and letter is in the Executive Summary at the beginning where it states quite clearly:-
“With regard to safety, the third assessment criterion, there is currently no reason to suppose that the vaccine has any adverse events that might preclude its inclusion in the NIP. Nevertheless, the possibility cannot be excluded that, if it were administered to large numbers of people, relatively uncommon adverse events might come to light in due course. This underlines the importance of careful monitoring following the introduction of this form of vaccination.”
I would particularly like to draw your attention to this phrase “relatively uncommon adverse events might come to light in due course” In other words the more they vaccinate the more likely it is that a serious adverse reaction will show up. That is really great news to all parents out there with children about to be vaccinated with Cervarix or Gardasil. Your children are part of a nationwide test but it is OK because if your child gets very bad reaction it will help determine the safety of the vaccine. I am sure that will be a great comfort to mothers of children like Ashleigh Cave who is still in hospital after a Cervarix vaccination. She has now been in hospital for 9 months, is just beginning to be able to put a very small amount of weight on her legs, cannot stand unaided and has recently lost bladder control at 13.
The news gets better for all you parents out there because Suzanne Garland who is the director of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases at the Royal Woman’s Hospital in Melbourne has decided she wants to include babies in the HPV vaccine trials. She is on the advisory boards for both rival companies Merck and Glaxo Smith Kline and has proposed to test cervical cancer vaccines in babies, with a view to adding the vaccine to the infant immunization program. This is according to The India Times in 2007
Suzanne Garland has a special interest in the management of herpes in the pregnant woman and the neonate. She is an adviser to World Health Organization in the area of sexually transmitted infection diagnosis and the prophylactic HPV vaccine Obs-Gyne Exhibition & Congress Speakers Tackle Cervical Cancer Vaccine Issues And Encourage Advocacy
So she has no real conflicts of interest there then, does she? Not only is she on both boards of advisers for Merck and GSK but she is an adviser to WHO! It appears that no matter who advises Governments on vaccinations whether it is WHO or the JCVI,the members have strong links and alliances to the pharmaceutical companies who manufacture the vaccines, therefore, how can the general public trust the people who tell us the vaccines are safe? As we have seen we are all just human Guinea Pigs to them, of course they are safe!