The article quoted at the end of this post says:
“Admittedly, there is something very odd, and slightly disturbing, in the spectacle of a fight over who owns the DNA of a virus that could kill millions of people around the world. Should a country retain property rights to the strains of diseases that plague its citizens? There is also, as always, the niggling question of how the world is to fund the development of new vaccines if the few companies that are capable of producing the medicine aren’t compensated for their efforts. Finally, it would seem to me that there is a clear difference between a U.S. government agency owning a patent and a company such as GlaxoSmithKline staking the claim.”
DNA as property is a terrifying reality. When the US Supreme Court opined that genomes could be patented, the risk to the global biosphere was generally little recognized. Given the unstable and unpredictable consequences of biotechnology insertion of genes into host genomes, and the novel (and potentially harmful or lethal) molecules coded for by this process, the “ownership” of viral DNA sequences is even more ominous.
Weaponization of the avian flu has already taken place through
1. Combining the genome of “seasonal flu” viruses with the then-harmless H5N1 avian flu to find the combinations which yielded enhanced pathogenicity (NIH, 2006),
2. Reconstruction of the genome of the most successful bio weapon in history, the 1918 pandemic flu virus (NIH, Mt Sinai Med. Coll, 2000 – 2006)
3. Intentional combination of the H5N1 virus with the newly reconstructed 1918 pandemic flu genome (NIH, Mt. Sinai School of Medicine, 2006).
Vaccines allegedly protective against this novel virus are then developed and, like the Sanofi-Pasteur vaccine manufactured in China after approval in the absence of formal human trials, sold to governments for vast sums of money (e.g., 100M doses @$15 US per dose) for stock piling.
Indonesia now says that it owns its valuable resource, the supposedly deadly Avian Flu virus. The United Nations issued a special report on the thorny question of whether a virus that kills someone in a particular country “belongs” to that country.
Besides the absurdity of owning life, and creating a totally artificial geographic demarcation through which to exercise control of that organism, the impetus to commercialize pathogens for nation states and predatory companies will, I fear, prove irresistible. Now add organized crime and rogue states (large or small) into the mix and you have a recipe far, far more toxic than the supposed pandemic Avian Flu.
Greed and technology are a deadly mix. If you doubt that, look at the so called “Health Care” system in the West and consider that since it makes no money if you are well, its best interest is served by the weaponization of food (i.e., Codex Alimentarius – see my video “Nutricide” on our website, www.HealthFreedomUSA.org or www.YouTube.com/NaturalSolutions) and the demonization of natural prevention and treatment so ubiquitous in the West.
Ownership of life forms, pathogenic or otherwise is, in short, a massive error and a monstrous reality which must be reversed for everyone’s benefit.
On August 21, Andrew Leonard wrote an article called Biopiracy and Bird Flu. That article, which follows, discusses the consequences of the confluence of the US Supreme Court’s decision to allow ownership of organisms, the unbridled greed and lack of ethics of the pharmaceutical/illness care industry and the horrifying reality of the depopulation agenda which, thanks to blatant hubris and Freedom of Information Act suits, is no longer speculation but fact.
Prince Phillip yearning to “come back” as an Ebola virus so that he can help depopulate the planet and Henry Kissinger’s Memo 200, the Council on Foreign Relations documents, the Phillipine Supreme Court’s finding that WHO vaccines did, indeed, contain permanent sterility agents which sterilized some 3 million unsuspecting women (and the use of the same technology in Africa, South and Central America, South East Asia and elsewhere) followed by the tardy admission of the World Health Organization that they were using such agents mixed into vaccines are part of a patchwork of death and global supremacy which is horrifyingly plain to see, yet tragically, criminally, perhaps, overlooked by the MMD (Media of Mass Deception).
The worm, or perhaps the virus, is turning now, though. Those very countries which would first be the targets of these depopulation plans and programs (the developed world is in the plan, too – Kissinger stated that depopulation should be the US’s first foreign policy priority starting with the third world, remember) have noticed that at least short term gains, but very substantial ones, can come from controlling, weaponizing and commercializing those lethal viruses among themselves. After all, once exposed to deadly agents like dioxin, ordinary viruses can mutate into very profitable killers. The US obligingly contaminated large parts of South East Asia with dioxin and other deadly poisons.
Moreover, vaccinated birds, not outside flocks, develop avian flu through mutations since they are raised in toxic environments (the birds in their industrialized chicken coops and the viruses in their poison-rich test tubes and growth bottles) and induced to mutation by those toxic conditions.
Now nations like Indonesia, Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Viet Nam and a host of others are ready for the Big Time: ready to develop, sell or license their deadly dollar cargo to the even bigger boys: the US, WHO or Big Pharma. All of this falls apart, of course, if the Bigger Boys get their hands and microscopes and vats on these “resources” first.
As events would have it, the fears that they will be done out of their valuable resources is quite accurate. Indonesia is not going to like the fact that a WHO affiliate, the CDC, has applied for a patent on the genome of the Indonesian Avian Flu. Nor will it be happy with the fact that GlaxoSmithKlein is manufacturing a “preventive” Avian Flu vaccine using strains from Viet Nam and elsewhere. So these fears about loosing significant revenue are not unfounded.
Do you find something wrong with this picture? The Natural Solutions Foundation certainly finds the trend, and the mindset, beyond ominous.
Let’s say you’ve got a lab, a virus and a hereditary tribe your people have been warring with for a thousand years. Like the “Islamic Nuclear Bomb” (or the Capitalist Nuclear Bomb), or Depleted Uranium or any other weapon of mass destruction, the mutated, weaponized virus in your tanks could be used on your enemies with the ever present justification that people build for themselves in situations like this. Or, if vaccines were to actually work, you could imagine giving the vaccine to your people and unleashing the disease on the other tribe.
Or, if you are the US, you could stockpile untested, not particularly safe or effective vaccines which would cause widespread… what? Illness? Death? Cancer? Infertility? Adult Autism? Novel vulnerabilities or diseases? Remember, there is no liability in the US for whatever a previously approved drug or vaccine does to you or your child or your mother or your ….
Merchants of death, indeed. Is this the world we want to leave to our children? What are you ready to do about it?
Yours in health and freedom,
Dr. Rima
Rima E. Laibow, MD
Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation
www.HealthFreedomUSA.org
www.GlobalHealthFreedom.org
www.NaturalSolutionsFoundation.org
www.Organics4U.org
www.NaturalSolutionsMedia.tv
www.NaturalSolutionsMarketPlace.org
Become a supporter. Make a regular, recurring tax deductible donation here (http://drrimatruthreports.com/index.php?page_id=189) or contact Ralph Fucetola, J. D., ralph.fucetola@usa.net, to learn how to make other types of tax deductible gifts to the Natural Solutions Foundation.
Now, here is the Salon.com article referred to above:
In late 2006, Indonesia sparked a furor in the international public health community when the country announced it would no longer supply samples of the H5N1 strain of bird flu to the World Health Organization. It wasn’t fair, complained the developing nation, which is second only to Vietnam in recorded cases of human deaths from bird flu: Indonesia was providing crucial data for researchers working on vaccines, but prices for proprietary pharmaceutical products resulting from that data were too high for most Indonesians to afford. If you want to understand why citizens of developing nations get aggrieved about biopiracy, there’s a clue.
After a flurry of worldwide publicity, Indonesia relented, and in March announced it would resume sending samples to the W.H.O., provided that the samples were not made available to commercial organizations. The debate over how best to serve the interests of both developing nations and pharmaceutical companies was by no means resolved, and according to the New York Times, Indonesia received only a tepid promise from W.H.O. “not to pass their samples on to commercial manufacturers without consulting the health minister of the country that provided the sample,” but a clear point had been made.
Now in what appears to be something of a scoop, a freelancer writer and specialist in patents has revealed that even as Indonesia was threatening to withhold its samples, the United States government was applying for an international patent on a new vaccine that incorporates genetic code derived from Indonesian avian influenza samples.
Writes Edward Hammond, in the Aug. 15 issues of SUNS:
In a development that is likely to raise more pressing questions about reform of the WHO Global Influenza Surveillance Network (GISN), an international patent application has surfaced in which the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and U.S. National Institutes of Health claim ownership of Indonesian influenza genes.
A recent patent search has revealed that the CDC, which is a WHO collaborating centre, is applying for a patent for a new vaccine against influenza, particularly for bird flu (H5N1). The vaccine incorporates genes from a H5N1 strain isolated from an Indonesian human victim of bird flu in 2005.
The strain that contains the genes was transferred to the WHO GISN by Indonesia for characterization for public health purposes, but may wind up as the property of the US government.
Under U.S. law, the U.S. government agencies would offer licenses to the technology to pharmaceutical companies. The patent application indicates that the US government intends to pursue the claim in most countries of the world, including Indonesia itself, as well as neighboring countries.
One follower of intellectual property and public health at the blog IPMed found the patent application “troubling”:
The patent application raises specific questions about the US CDC, which is a WHO Collaborating Center for influenza virus studies. The WHO Collaborating Centers receive influenza viruses from donor countries for public health characterization purposes, and not for the purposes of making proprietary claims. The Global Influenza Surveillance Network’s effectiveness rests on the prompt sharing of and access to viruses from all donors. However, one wonders how many donor countries will wish to continue to share influenza viruses for research and vaccine development if it is that Governments who operate Collaborating Centers are minded to make proprietary claims over the materials which they have received as a result of the GISN system. Obviously this patent application built on the back of the GISN system of virus sharing will call into question the entire system and may very well undermine its effectiveness.
Admittedly, there is something very odd, and slightly disturbing, in the spectacle of a fight over who owns the DNA of a virus that could kill millions of people around the world. Should a country retain property rights to the strains of diseases that plague its citizens? There is also, as always, the niggling question of how the world is to fund the development of new vaccines if the few companies that are capable of producing the medicine aren’t compensated for their efforts. Finally, it would seem to me that there is a clear difference between a U.S. government agency owning a patent and a company such as GlaxoSmithKline staking the claim.
Unless, of course, the U.S. does end up licensing its patent to Big Pharma without requiring some developing nation equity, in return.
http://www.salon.com/tech/htww/2008/08/21/biopiracy_and_bird_flu/index.htm
http://darwiniana.com/blogzone/2008/08/31/who-owns-the-bird-flu-virus/#comment-251
Jon Rappaport recently interviewed a vaccine researcher who developed a conscience and quit his profession. Now he is willing to speak out. Read what he has to say and spread the word. While you’re spreading it, let folks know that they can sign up for the free Health Freedom eAlerts (http://drrimatruthreports.com/index.php?page_id=187) published by the Natural Solutions Foundation for this, and other helpful, potentially life saving, information and meaningful action steps.
The Natural Solutions Foundation works hard to keep you posted on all health freedom issues. There is no where else you can so for such wide ranging, objective and clear information on all of the health freedom assaults. When you make a recurring donation, you become eligible to join the Health Freedom Heroes Forum! Become part of the inner circle and help make strategic decisions on the focus and activities of health freedom at home and abroad.
Thanks for your support! Remember, disseminate, disseminate, disseminate!
Yours in health and freedom,
Dr. Rima
Rima E. Laibow, MD
www.HealthFreedomUSA.org
www.GlobalHealthFreedom.org
www.Organics4U.org
www.NaturalSolutionsMarketPlace.org
www.NaturalSolutionsFoundation.org
Jon Rappoport interview of ex vaccine researcher
Jon Rappoport Q: You were once certain that vaccines were the hallmark of good medicine.
Dr. Mark Randall A: Yes I was. I helped develop a few vaccines. I won’t say which ones.
Q: Why not?
A: I want to preserve my privacy.
Q: So you think you could have problems if you came out into the open?
A: I believe I could lose my pension.
Q: On what grounds?
A: The grounds don’t matter. These people have ways of causing you problems, when you were once part of the Club. I know one or two people who were put under surveillance, who were harassed.
Q: Harassed by whom?
A: The FBI.
Q: Really?
A: Sure. The FBI used other pretexts. And the IRS can come calling too.
Q: So much for free speech.
A: I was “part of the inner circle.” If now I began to name names and make specific accusations against researchers, I could be in a world of trouble.
Q: What is at the bottom of these efforts at harassment?
A: Vaccines are the last defense of modern medicine. Vaccines are the ultimate justification for the overall “brilliance” of modern medicine.
Q: Do you believe that people should be allowed to choose whether they should get vaccines?
A: On a political level, yes. On a scientific level, people need information, so that they can choose well. It’s one thing to say choice is good. But if the atmosphere is full of lies, how can you choose? Also, if the FDA were run by honorable people, these vaccines would not be granted licenses. They would be investigated to within an inch of their lives.
Q: There are medical historians who state that the overall decline of illnesses was not due to vaccines.
A: I know. For a long time, I ignored their work.
Q: Why?
A: Because I was afraid of what I would find out. I was in the business of developing vaccines. My livelihood depended on continuing that work.
Q: And then?
A: I did my own investigation.
Q: What conclusions did you come to?
A: The decline of disease is due to improved living conditions.
Q: What conditions?
A: Cleaner water. Advanced sewage systems. Nutrition. Fresher food. A decrease in poverty. Germs may be everywhere, but when you are healthy, you don’t contract the diseases as easily.
Q: What did you feel when you completed your own investigation?
A: Despair. I realized I was working a sector based on a collection of lies.
Q: Are some vaccines more dangerous than others?
A: Yes. The DPT shot, for example. The MMR. But some lots of a vaccine are more dangerous than other lots of the same vaccine. As far as I’m concerned, all vaccines are dangerous.
Q: Why?
A: Several reasons. They involve the human immune system in a process that tends to compromise immunity. They can actually cause the disease they are supposed to prevent. They can cause other diseases than the ones they are supposed to prevent.
Q: Why are we quoted statistics which seem to prove that vaccines have been tremendously successful at wiping out diseases?
A: Why? To give the illusion that these vaccines are useful. If a vaccine suppresses visible symptoms of a disease like measles, everyone assumes that the vaccine is a success. But, under the surface, the vaccine can harm the immune system itself. And if it causes other diseases – say, meningitis – that fact is masked, because no one believes that the vaccine can do that. The connection is overlooked.
Q: It is said that the smallpox vaccine wiped out smallpox in England.
A: Yes. But when you study the available statistics, you get another picture.
Q: Which is?
A: There were cities in England where people who were not vaccinated did not get smallpox. There were places where people who were vaccinated experienced smallpox epidemics. And smallpox was already on the decline before the vaccine was introduced.
Q: So you’re saying that we have been treated to a false history.
A: Yes. That’s exactly what I’m saying. This is a history that has been cooked up to convince people that vaccines are invariably safe and effective.
Q: Now, you worked in labs. Where purity was an issue.
A: The public believes that these labs, these manufacturing facilities are the cleanest places in the world. That is not true. Contamination occurs all the time. You get all sorts of debris introduced into vaccines.
Q: For example, the SV40 monkey virus slips into the polio vaccine.
A: Well yes, that happened. But that’s not what I mean. The SV40 got into the polio vaccine because the vaccine was made by using monkey kidneys. But I’m talking about something else. The actual lab conditions. The mistakes. The careless errors. SV40, which was later found in cancer tumors – that was what I would call a structural problem. It was an accepted part of the manufacturing process. If you use monkey kidneys, you open the door to germs which you don’t know are in those kidneys.
Q: Okay, but let’s ignore that distinction between different types of contaminants for a moment. What contaminants did you find in your many years of work with vaccines?
A: All right. I’ll give you some of what I came across, and I’ll also give you what colleagues of mine found. Here’s a partial list. In the Rimavex measles vaccine, we found various chicken viruses. In polio vaccine, we found acanthamoeba, which is a so-called “brain-eating” amoeba.
Simian cytomegalovirus in polio vaccine. Simian foamy virus in the rotavirus vaccine. Bird-cancer viruses in the MMR vaccine. Various micro-organisms in the anthrax vaccine. I’ve found potentially dangerous enzyme inhibitors in several vaccines. Duck, dog, and rabbit viruses in the rubella vaccine. Avian leucosis virus in the flu vaccine. Pestivirus in the MMR vaccine.
Q: Let me get this straight. These are all contaminants which don’t belong in the vaccines.
A: That’s right. And if you try to calculate what damage these contaminants can cause, well, we don’t really know, because no testing has been done, or very little testing. It’s a game of roulette. You take your chances. Also, most people don’t know that some polio vaccines, adenovirus vaccines, rubella and hep A and measles vaccines have been made with aborted human fetal tissue. I have found what I believed were bacterial fragments and poliovirus in these vaccines from time to time – which may have come from that fetal tissue. When you look for contaminants in vaccines, you can come up with material that IS puzzling. You know it shouldn’t be there, but you don’t know exactly what you’ve got. I have found what I believed was a very small “fragment” of human hair and also human mucus. I have found what can only be called “foreign protein,” which could mean almost anything. It could mean protein from viruses.
Q: Alarm bells are ringing all over the place.
A: How do you think I felt? Remember, this material is going into the bloodstream without passing through some of the ordinary immune defenses.
Q: How were your findings received?
A: Basically, it was, don’t worry, this can’t be helped. In making vaccines, you use various animals’ tissue, and that’s where this kind of contamination enters in. Of course, I’m not even mentioning the standard chemicals like formaldehyde, mercury, and aluminum which are purposely put into vaccines.
Q: This information is pretty staggering.
A: Yes. And I’m just mentioning some of the biological contaminants. Who knows how many others there are? Others we don’t find because we don’t think to look for them. If tissue from, say, a bird is used to make a vaccine, how many possible germs can be in that tissue? We have no idea. We have no idea what they might be, or what effects they could have on humans.
Q: And beyond the purity issue?
A: You are dealing with the basic faulty premise about vaccines. That they intricately stimulate the immune system to create the conditions for immunity from disease. That is the bad premise. It doesn’t work that way. A vaccine is supposed to “create” antibodies which, indirectly, offer protection against disease. However, the immune system is much larger and more involved than antibodies and their related “killer cells.”
Q: The immune system is?
A: The entire body, really. Plus the mind. It’s all immune system, you might say. That is why you can have, in the middle of an epidemic, those individuals who remain healthy.
Q: So the level of general health is important.
A: More than important. Vital.
Q: How are vaccine statistics falsely presented?
A: There are many ways. For example, suppose that 25 people who have received the hepatitis B vaccine come down with hepatitis. Well, hep B is a liver disease. But you can call liver disease many things. You can change the diagnosis. Then, you’ve concealed the root cause of the problem.
Q: And that happens?
A: All the time. It HAS to happen, if the doctors automatically assume that people who get vaccines DO NOT come down with the diseases they are now supposed to be protected from. And that is exactly what doctors assume. You see, it’s circular reasoning. It’s a closed system. It admits no fault. No possible fault. If a person who gets a vaccine against hepatitis gets hepatitis, or gets some other disease, the automatic assumption is, this had nothing to do with the vaccine.
Q: In your years working in the vaccine establishment, how many doctors did you encounter who admitted that vaccines were a problem?
A: None. There were a few who privately questioned what they were doing. But they would never go public, even within their companies.
Q: What was the turning point for you?
A: I had a friend whose baby died after a DPT shot.
Q: Did you investigate?
A: Yes, informally. I found that this baby was completely healthy before the vaccination. There was no reason for his death, except the vaccine. That started my doubts. Of course, I wanted to believe that the baby had gotten a bad shot from a bad lot. But as I looked into this further, I found that was not the case in this instance. I was being drawn into a spiral of doubt that increased over time. I continued to investigate. I found that, contrary to what I thought, vaccines are not tested in a scientific way.
Q: What do you mean?
A: For example, no long-term studies are done on any vaccines. Long-term follow-up is not done in any careful way. Why? Because, again, the assumption is made that vaccines do not cause problems. So why should anyone check? On top of that, a vaccine reaction is defined so that all bad reactions are said to occur very soon after the shot is given. But that does not make sense.
Q: Why doesn’t it make sense?
A: Because the vaccine obviously acts in the body for a long period of time after it is given. A reaction can be gradual. Deterioration can be gradual. Neurological problems can develop over time. They do in various conditions, even according to a conventional analysis. So why couldn’t that be the case with vaccines? If chemical poisoning can occur gradually, why couldn’t that be the case with a vaccine which contains mercury?
Q: And that is what you found?
A: Yes. You are dealing with correlations, most of the time. Correlations are not perfect. But if you get 500 parents whose children have suffered neurological damage during a one-year period after having a vaccine, this should be sufficient to spark off an intense investigation.
Q: Has it been enough?
A: No. Never. This tells you something right away.
Q: Which is?
A: The people doing the investigation are not really interested in looking at the facts. They assume that the vaccines are safe. So, when they do investigate, they invariably come up with exonerations of the vaccines. They say, “This vaccine is safe.” But what do they base those judgments on? They base them on definitions and ideas which automatically rule out a condemnation of the vaccine.
Q: There are numerous cases where a vaccine campaign has failed. Where people have come down with the disease against which they were vaccinated.
A: Yes, there are many such instances. And there the evidence is simply ignored. It’s discounted. The experts say, if they say anything at all, that this is just an isolated situation, but overall the vaccine has been shown to be safe. But if you add up all the vaccine campaigns where damage and disease have occurred, you realize that these are NOT isolated situations.
Q: Did you ever discuss what we are talking about here with colleagues, when you were still working in the vaccine establishment?
A: Yes I did.
Q: What happened?
A: Several times I was told to keep quiet. It was made clear that I should go back to work and forget my misgivings. On a few occasions, I encountered fear. Colleagues tried to avoid me. They felt they could be labeled with “guilt by association”. All in all, though, I behaved myself. I made sure I didn’t create problems for myself.
Q: If vaccines actually do harm, why are they given?
A: First of all, there is no “if”. They do harm. It becomes a more difficult question to decide whether they do harm in those people who seem to show no harm. Then you are dealing with the kind of research which should be done, but isn’t. Researchers should be probing to discover a kind of map, or flow chart, which shows exactly what vaccines do in the body from the moment they enter. This research has not been done. As to why they are given, we could sit here for two days and discuss all the reasons. As you’ve said many times, at different layers of the system people have their motives. Money, fear of losing a job, the desire to win brownie points, prestige, awards, promotion, misguided idealism, unthinking habit, and so on. But, at the highest levels of the medical cartel, vaccines are a top priority because they cause a weakening of the immune system. I know that may be hard to accept, but it’s true. The medical cartel, at the highest level, is not out to help people, it is out to harm them, to weaken them. To kill them. At one point in my career, I had a long conversation with a man who occupied a high government position in an African nation. He told me that he was well aware of this. He told me that WHO is a front for these depopulation interests. There is an underground, shall we say, in Africa, made up of various officials who are earnestly trying to change the lot of the poor. This network of people knows what is going on. They know that vaccines have been used, and are being used, to destroy their countries, to make them ripe for takeover by globalist powers I have had the opportunity to speak with several of these people from this network.
Q: Is Thabo Mbeki, the president of South Africa, aware of the situation?
A: I would say he is partially aware. Perhaps he is not utterly convinced, but he is on the way to realizing the whole truth. He already knows that HIV is a hoax. He knows that the AIDS drugs are poisons which destroy the immune system. He also knows that if he speaks out, in any way, about the vaccine issue, he will be branded a lunatic. He has enough trouble after his stand on the AIDS issue.
Q: This network you speak of.
A: It has accumulated a huge amount of information about vaccines. The question is, how is a successful strategy going to be mounted? For these people, that is a difficult issue.
Q: And in the industrialized nations?
A: The medical cartel has a stranglehold, but it is diminishing. Mainly because people have the freedom to question medicines. However, if the choice issue [the right to take or reject any medicine] does not gather steam, these coming mandates about vaccines against biowarefare germs are going to win out. This is an important time.
Q: The furor over the hepatits B vaccine seems one good avenue.
A: I think so, yes. To say that babies must have the vaccine-and then in the next breath, admitting that a person gets hep B from sexual contacts and shared needles – is a ridiculous juxtaposition. Medical authorities try to cover themselves by saying that 20,000 or so children in the US get hep B every year from “unknown causes,” and that’s why every baby must have the vaccine. I dispute that 20,000 figure and the so-called studies that back it up.
Q: Andrew Wakefield, the British MD who uncovered the link between the MMR vaccine and autism, has just been fired from his job in a London hospital.
A: Yes. Wakefield performed a great service. His correlations between the vaccine and autism are stunning. Perhaps you know that Tony Blair’s wife is involved with alternative health. There is the possibility that their child has not been given the MMR. Blair recently side-stepped the question in press interviews, and made it seem that he was simply objecting to invasive questioning of his “personal and family life.” In any event, I believe his wife has been muzzled. I think, if given the chance, she would at least say she is sympathetic to all the families who have come forward and stated that their children were severely damaged by the MMR.
Q: British reporters should try to get through to her.
A: They have been trying. But I think she has made a deal with her husband to keep quiet, no matter what. She could do a great deal of good if she breaks her promise. I have been told she is under pressure, and not just from her husband. At the level she occupies, MI6 and British health authorities get into the act. It is thought of as a matter of national security.
Q: Well, it is national security, once you understand the medical cartel.
A: It is global security. The cartel operates in every nation. It zealously guards the sanctity of vaccines. Questioning these vaccines is on the same level as a Vatican bishop questioning the sanctity of the sacrament of the Eucharist in the Catholic Church.
Q: I know that a Hollywood celebrity stating publicly that he will not take a vaccine is committing career suicide.
A: Hollywood is linked very powerfully to the medical cartel. There are several reasons, but one of them is simply that an actor who is famous can draw a huge amount of publicity if he says ANYTHING. In 1992, I was present at your demonstration against the FDA in downtown Los Angeles. One or two actors spoke against the FDA. Since that time, you would be hard pressed to find an actor who has spoken out in any way against the medical cartel.
Q: Within the National Institutes of Health, what is the mood, what is the basic frame of mind?
A: People are competing for research monies. The last thing they think about is challenging the status quo. They are already in an intramural war for that money. They don’t need more trouble. This is a very insulated system. It depends on the idea that, by and large, modern medicine is very successful on every frontier. To admit systemic problems in any area is to cast doubt on the whole enterprise. You might therefore think that NIH is the last place one should think about holding demonstrations. But just the reverse is true. If five thousand people showed up there demanding an accounting of the actual benefits of that research system, demanding to know what real health benefits have been conferred on the public from the billions of wasted dollars funneled to that facility, something might start. A spark might go off. You might get, with further demonstrations, all sorts of fall-out. Researchers – a few – might start leaking information.
Q: A good idea.
A: People in suits standing as close to the buildings as the police will allow. People in business suits, in jogging suits, mothers and babies. Well-off people. Poor people. All sorts of people.
Q: What about the combined destructive power of a number of vaccines given to babies these days?
A: It is a travesty and a crime. There are no real studies of any depth which have been done on that. Again, the assumption is made that vaccines are safe, and therefore any number of vaccines given together are safe as well. But the truth is, vaccines are not safe. Therefore the potential damage increases when you give many of them in a short time period.
Q: Then we have the fall flu season.
A: Yes. As if only in the autumn do these germs float in to the US from Asia. The public swallows that premise. If it happens in April, it is a bad cold. If it happens in October, it is the flu.
Q: Do you regret having worked all those years in the vaccine field?
A: Yes. But after this interview, I’ll regret it a little less. And I work in other ways. I give out information to certain people, when I think they will use it well.
Q: What is one thing you want the public to understand?
A: That the burden of proof in establishing the safety and efficacy of vaccines is on the people who manufacture and license them for public use. Just that. The burden of proof is not on you or me. And for proof you need well-designed long-term studies. You need extensive follow-up. You need to interview mothers and pay attention to what mothers say about their babies and what happens to them after vaccination. You need all these things. The things that are not there.
Q: The things that are not there.
A: Yes.
Q: To avoid any confusion, I’d like you to review, once more, the disease problems that vaccines can cause. Which diseases, how that happens.
A: We are basically talking about two potential harmful outcomes. One, the person gets the disease from the vaccine. He gets the disease which the vaccine is supposed to protect him from. Because, some version of the disease is in the vaccine to begin with. Or two, he doesn’t get THAT disease, but at some later time, maybe right away, maybe not, he develops another condition which is caused by the vaccine. That condition could be autism, what’s called autism, or it could be some other disease like meningitis. He could become mentally disabled.
Q: Is there any way to compare the relative frequency of these different outcomes?
A: No. Because the follow-up is poor. We can only guess. If you ask, out of a population of a hundred thousand children who get a measles vaccine, how many get the measles, and how many develop other problems from the vaccine, there is a no reliable answer. That is what I’m saying. Vaccines are superstitions. And with superstitions, you don’t get facts you can use. You only get stories, most of which are designed to enforce the superstition. But, from many vaccine campaigns, we can piece together a narrative that does reveal some very disturbing things. People have been harmed. The harm is real, and it can be deep and it can mean death. The harm is NOT limited to a few cases, as we have been led to believe. In the US, there are groups of mothers who are testifying about autism and childhood vaccines. They are coming forward and standing up at meetings. They are essentially trying to fill in the gap that has been created by the researchers and doctors who turn their backs on the whole thing.
Q: Let me ask you this. If you took a child in, say, Boston and you raised that child with good nutritious food and he exercised every day and he was loved by his parents, and he didn’t get the measles vaccine, what would be his health status compared with the average child in Boston who eats poorly and watches five hours of TV a day and gets the measles vaccine?
A: Of course there are many factors involved, but I would bet on the better health status for the first child. If he gets measles, if he gets it when he is nine, the chances are it will be much lighter than the measles the second child might get. I would bet on the first child every time.
Q: How long did you work with vaccines?
A: A long time. Longer than ten years.
Q: Looking back now, can you recall any good reason to say that vaccines are successful?
A: No, I can’t. If I had a child now, the last thing I would allow is vaccination. I would move out of the state if I had to. I would change the family name. I would disappear. With my family. I’m not saying it would come to that. There are ways to sidestep the system with grace, if you know how to act. There are exemptions you can declare, in every state, based on religious and/or philosophic views. But if push came to shove, I would go on the move.
Q: And yet there are children everywhere who do get vaccines and appear to be healthy.
A: The operative word is “appear”. What about all the children who can’t focus on their studies? What about the children who have tantrums from time to time? What about the children who are not quite in possession of all their mental faculties? I know there are many causes for these things, but vaccines are one cause. I would not take the chance. I see no reason to take the chance. And frankly, I see no reason to allow the government to have the last word. Government medicine is, from my experience, often a contradiction in terms. You get one or the other, but not both.
Q: So we come to the level playing field.
A: Yes. Allow those who want the vaccines to take them. Allow the dissidents to decline to take them. But, as I said earlier, there is no level playing field if the field is strewn with lies. And when babies are involved, you have parents making all the decisions. Those parents need a heavy dose of truth. What about the child I spoke of who died from the DPT shot? What information did his parents act on? I can tell you it was heavily weighted. It was not real information.
Q: Medical PR people, in concert with the press, scare the hell out of parents with dire scenarios about what will happen if their kids don’t get shots.
A: They make it seem a crime to refuse the vaccine. They equate it with bad parenting. You fight that with better information. It is always a challenge to buck the authorities. And only you can decide whether to do it. It is every person’s responsibility to make up his mind. The medical cartel likes that bet. It is betting that the fear will win.
_________________________________________________________________
Dr. Mark Randall is the pseudonym of a vaccine researcher who worked for many years in the labs of major pharmaceutical houses and the US government’s National Institutes of Health.
Mark retired during the last decade. He says he was “disgusted with what he discovered about vaccines.”
Natural Solutions Foundation
www.HealthFreedomUSA.org
Preserving YOUR Health Freedom Requires YOUR Action
Click on each of these action steps to keep Health Freedom Free.
Yours in health and freedom,
Dr. Rima
Rima E. Laibow, MD
Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation
www.HealthFreedomUSA.org
www.GlobalHealthFreedom.org
ACTION STEPS
Send NSF to Next Codex Meeting
http://tinyurl.com/2bgxuk
Watch No Spray Videos
http://tinyurl.com/yrp9e3
Help Fund Health Freedom Video Now
http://tinyurl.com/ysyjau
Join ‘Say NO! To GMO’ Forum
http://tinyurl.com/3ja45r
Join ‘No Forced Vaccine’ Forum
http://tinyurl.com/272qvv
Sign Tiburon Declaration: Help End Compulsory Vaccination
http://tinyurl.com/ywdsne
Tell Legislators to Protect US From Compulsory Vaccination
http://tinyurl.com/2nwmss
Compulsory Annual Flu Shots for All Kids: First NJ, then the Whole US: Say “NO”
http://tinyurl.com/2mknl3
Join “NSF-Panama’ Forum and Become Part of International Decade of Nutrition
http://tinyurl.com/549dw5
Keep Schools from Mandating Drugs: Support Child Medication Safety Act
http://tinyurl.com/3clh6a
Support Truthful Health Claims
http://tinyurl.com/yvm8tr
Donate Now: reedom Isn’t Free!
http://tinyurl.com/sw9xf
Don’t Have the Updated “Nutricide: the DVD” Yet? Order it Now
http://tinyurl.com/2ewxzz
How About the “Codex Two Step Process”? Order Codex eBook
http://tinyurl.com/3yy5zq
Sign FDA Citizens Petition
http://tinyurl.com/2tvs4c
Support Health and Health Freedom SHOP OUR ONLINE STORE
www.Organics4U.org
SIGN UP FOR HEALTH FREEDOM E-ALERT LIST!
http://tinyurl.com/29qb49
—————-
READ ABOUT OUR ACCOMPLISHMENTS
http://tinyurl.com/4dcn4c
READ ABOUT GETTING ORGANIZED LOCALLY
http://drrimatruthreports.com/?p=711
AND DON’T FORGET OUR SOCIAL NETWORKING SITES:
http://drrimatruthreports.com/?p=713
OR OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL:
http://youtube.com/naturalsolutions
The Natural Solutions Foundation, the leading Global Health Freedom organization, is proud to present this information to you. We protect your right to know about – and to use – natural ways to maintain and regain your health, no matter where in the world you live. Among your freedoms is the right to clean, unadulterated food free of genetic manipulation, pesticides, heavy metals or other contaminants and access to herbs, supplements, frequency devices and other means as therapies that may benefit or to protect your well-being without drugs and other dangerous interventions, if you choose.
For more information on our global programs, including the International Decade of Nutrition, and our US based ones, please visit us at www.HealthFreedomUSA.org and www.GlobalHealthFreedom.org and join the free email list for the Health Freedom eAlerts to keep you in the loop, informed and active defending your right to make your own decisions about your health and wellbeing!
Our activities are supported 100% by your tax deductible donations. Please give generously (http://drrimatruthreports.com/index.php?page_id=189) to the Natural Solutions Foundation. Thank you for your support.
Feel free to disseminate this information as widely as possible with full attribution.
Yours in health and freedom,
Dr. Rima
Rima E. Laibow, MD
Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation
www.HealthFreedomUSA.org
www.GlobalHealthFreedom.org
www.organics4U.org
Dr. Jon Polling is a Neurologist. he is also the father of the most famous autistic child in America right now, Hannah Poling. In a historic concession, US Assistant Attorney General Peter Keisler and other Justice Department officials conceded on November 9 that Hanna “had a pre-existing mitochondrial disorder that was ‘aggravated’ by her shots, and which ultimately resulted in an ASD diagnosis†or, more specifically, in a diagnosis of “regressive encephalopathy (brain disease) with features consistent with autistic spectrum disorder, following normal development.â€
While they did not go as far as saying that vaccination caused the neurological collapse of the previously healthy child, they did admit that for a child with a mitochondrial disorder, the shots could “aggrivate” a tendency toward autism. It is the first time that the US has come even this close to acknowledging the role of vaccines in any chronic neurological injury.
For the approximately 1000 cases behind this one, DR. JON POLING TO DR. STEVEN NOVELLA ON AGE OF AUTISM
PolingsBy Dr. Jon Poling, father of Hannah Poling.
OPEN LETTER TO DR. STEVEN NOVELLA
IN RESPONSE TO “Has the Government Conceded Vaccines Cause Autism?”
Dr. Novella,
Thank you for generating interesting discussion regarding my little girl,
Hannah Poling. I would like to give you additional information in order to
generate further productive discussions on this matter amongst the neurology
community. This information should assist you, Dr. DiMauro, and Dr.
Trevethan, who have also commented publicly, to formulate better theories as
to the significance of Hannah’s mitochondrial dysfunction in relation to her
autism.
1. Mito Dysfunction or Mito Disease? Chicken or Egg?
To begin with, I would like to point out that the spectrum of mitochondrial
dysfunction is probably considered more broad and complex than the spectrum
of neurobehavioral abnormalities seen with autism. Dysfunction of the
mitochondria, specifically dysfunction of the oxidative phosphorylation
pathway, most likely contributes, but may not be the cause of many
diseases—including Parkinson’s disease, Friedreich’s Ataxia, Alzheimer
disease, etc. Thus, it is probably incorrect to refer to mitochondrial
dysfunctional and mitochondrial disease interchangeably. Indeed, the role of
the dysfunctional mitochondrial are yet to be clarified in these diseases.
Thus, I will refer to Hannah’s metabolic condition as a mitochondrial
dysfunction, not a mitochondrial disease.
2. Mito Genetic Finding? Mito mtDNA ‘red herring’ ?
ADDITIONAL GENETIC TESTING NOT AVAILABLE IN THE J CHILD NEUROL CASE REPORT:
Dr. Shoffner performed genetic testing on both Hannah’s muscle and her
mother’s leukocytes subsequent to our case report. Hannah (muscle mtDNA) and
her mother (leukocyte mtDNA) were both found to be HOMOPLASMIC for the mtDNA
T2387C transition mutation.
Our analysis of this genetic finding in the mtDNA was significantly
different than those of other physicians that I’ve seen in scientific blogs
or commentary. I suspect it would have been fatal to both Hannah and her
mother if this homoplasmic mutation was pathogenic since (as I am sure you
are aware) the mutation is on the 16S ribosomal subunit which is highly
conserved. Thus, this mutation probably represents a benign polymorphism
rather than pathogenic mutation. It is unlikely, but possible, that the
mutation is significant to Hannah, but in such a case, it must work in
concert with other nuclear genes to cause her mitochondrial dysfunction. To
our knowledge, this point mutation has not been reported in cases similar to
Hannah’s.
3. Encephalitis? Metabolic Encephalopathy? Or “Regressive Encephalopathy
with Features of Autism Spectrum Disorderâ€
The other interesting term you used was encephalitis rather than
encephalopathy. We are not sure that she had an “-itis†but we did clearly
document a regressive encephalopathy based on not only our parental
reporting, but also based on the pediatrician’s documents, affidavits from
other family members, and the growth curve measurements (injury pattern).
Early on in the regression we did note back arching (opisthotonus), fever,
and disrupted sleep. Although fever occurred a lumbar puncture was not
performed.
An interesting developing story in autism research is the
immune/inflammatory connection. In her senior resident thesis, Dr. Anne
Comi, a former JHU colleague, along with Dr. Andy Zimmerman, reported, the
increased prevalence of autoimmune disease in families of autistic
offspring. Interesting, Hannah also has a maternal family history of
autoimmune disease. Dr. Carlos Pardo, another one of my former chief
residents, along with Andy and Dr. Vargas, published a beautiful study in
the Archives of Neurology, demonstrating neuroinflammation on autopsy of
brain samples and inflammation cytokine markers in the CSF of individuals
with Autism. The interesting thing was that inflammation was demonstrated in
autopsy specimens from adults as old as 44 years of age. The conclusion was
that further research would be required to determine if inflammation was a
primary disorder in autism or; alternatively, if inflammation and microglial
activation was secondary to neurodegeneration. Dr. Sudhir Gupta at UC Irvine
has a nice model of how the two pathways of neuroinflammation and mito
dysfunction may not be mutually exclusive. This remains to be seen; however,
study of mitochondrial dysfunction and neuroinflammation hold the promise of
treatment development. The two avenues of research deserve funding at the
highest levels.
4. How many Hannah Polings are out there?
The short answer is that nobody knows. However, there is emerging data to
suggest that she is not alone.
Dr. Shoffner will be presenting his experience with 37 patients with
combined autism and mitochondrial dysfunction at the AAN meeting in Chicago
this April. 65% of his referrals are positive for mitochondrial dysfunction.
Of course, his yield is subject to referral bias as a mito expert, so the
prevalence of mitochondrial dysfunction in Autism is surely less than 65%.
The best estimate to date of the prevalence of mitochondrial dysfunction in
autistic patients comes from Oliviera et al. in a population of 120, 5 of 69
(or 7.2%) showed mitochondrial dysfunction. If this is generalized to the US
estimate of 1 million patients with ASDs, then the number of kids like
Hannah could be 72,000! Isn’t this worth further study?
Dr. Shoffner furthermore advocates, along with us, that vaccination is
important even for kids with mitochondrial dysfunction. I would argue that
you should not give nine at one time and that none of them should contain
Thimerosal (mercury).
5. Thimerosal—On or Off the Table?
I don’t want to dwell on mercury, as this theory is not why HHS conceded
Hannah’s case (imo). Dr. DiContanzo just wrote an interesting blog about how
his opinion of mercury in vaccines has changed
(http://drugs.about.com/b/2008/03/08/mercury-in-vaccines-and-autism-the-burd
en-of-proof-may-shift.htm).
My opinion is that mercury is a potent neurotoxin. Therefore, don’t inject
it into kids! Interestingly, basic research studies have shown that
Thimerosal toxicity occurs through mitochondrial pathways. Officials point
to the large epidemiology studies as proof that there is no link between
thimerosal and autism. However, these studies are not powered to disprove
the null hypothesis when considering that the mitochondrial autistic
population may be just a small percent of the case totals. Remember that
while the CDC sponsored Verstraten study is hyped as a negative study, it
DID find a statistically significant increase in childhood tics in those
exposed to higher doses of thimerosal.
6. Hannah was destined to regress? Or was she?
Some experts have already stated that ‘mitochondrial disease’ is
degenerative so the vaccine reaction was just the start of an inevitable
decline. This was neither the opinion of Dr. Richard Kelley at KKI nor Dr.
John Shoffner. In fact, the markers that led us down the mitochondrial trail
(inc AST but not ALT, low serum bicarbonate, and slight increased CK,
increase in the alanine to lysine ratio on PAA) are no longer present.
Furthermore, in our pilot study (unpublished but mentioned in the J child
neurol paper), Dr. Frye (the statistician for our study and also a child
neurologist) found a non-significant trend that AST decreased toward normal
with increasing age. With further studies we hoped to examine the hypothesis
that this abnormality may be representative of a developing/immature
biochemical pathway present in some children.
7. Triple Hit Hypothesis—#1Underlying genetic susceptibility #2Insult must
occur during specific developmental period #3 A certain vaccination or
combination thereof is the environmental trigger (?vaccine component like
thimerosal ?direct immune stim/fever reaction ?live virus reaction?)
The implication is that Hannah’s type of autism requires a genetic
susceptibility and properly timed insult to manifest disease. We have not
subjected Hannah to another muscle biopsy or re-examined ox phos functional
assays that were published in the paper. I can inform your readers though
that the serum biochemical markers have resolved, growth resumed and
continues along a normal trajectory, and there have been no other episodes
of regression since 2000. We are however left with autism and later in 2006,
epilepsy.
It is recommended that studies be initiated immediately to screen siblings
of cases to identify biochemical markers so as to identify potential
screening tests.
I agree with the mainstream that my daughter’s case has raised many
intelligent discussions and questions. I’m very proud of her for starting
this discussion. Our hope is that further research into this case and others
like it, we will be also to find screening tests to prevent what happened to
my daughter from happening to anybody else.
(Dr. Poling acknowledges the editorial comments and insightful suggestions
of Dr. Richard E. Frye. He also would like to declare his conflicts of
interest. First of all, he is the father of Hannah Poling. Dr. Poling has
also accepted consultancy or speakers honoraria from Pfizer, Eisai,
Ortho-McNeil, Biogen, Teva, Immunex (now Amgen), and Allergan.)
PS While I thought it useful to clarify some of the neurological issues
raised by the government’s concession of my daughter’s case, please
understand that I will not be able to respond to individual comments posted.
Thank-you. Jon