The GOLDEN RULE

From ‘nsnbc‘ by Tony Cartalucci (LD).

RT’s article, “​Vaccines don’t cause autism, complications extremely rare – study,” states that:

There is no evidence that immunizing vaccinations cause autism while any complications arising from their administration to children are extremely rare, new analysis comprised of 67 research studies has discovered.

First, a few personal comments. [Post updated 6th July.]

Here we have a number of issues. all serious. They encompass public health, corporate greed, corporate lies, journalistic responsibility, professional organization integrity, public health ‘watchdog’ authority integrity, bribery and corruption and, the question of ulterior motives. Also important is the element of personal rights – the right of the patient or parent to choose.

No question that the well-being of the public is the dominating feature of this presentation, and should rightfully be so in all aspects of the vaccination “debate”. To vaccinate or not vaccinate, that is the question. Many separate factors apply just to this one, basic area. The answer is outside the scope of this article, but the question can be discussed.

It is clear that health risks do exist for both the vaccinated, from the actual vaccine and its constituent ingredients, and for the unvaccinated, from a higher risk of catching a disease.

The analysis, conclusions and reporting on these relative risks, however, are subject to a great deal of conjecture. Hence, the source article, this post and hundreds of other posts and scientific papers,  all driven by various incentives, usually conflicting in content and often in interest.

Undoubtedly,  some vaccinations are advisable some of the time. For example, a person travelling overseas into an area of known disease risk is a clear example of logical benefits of vaccinating. This still carries with it risks of health impairment and possible lack of effectiveness but it is easy to agree that the risks are substantially outweighed by the benefits. Possibly not always the case, but clearly the best justification for vaccinating is contained in this group.

At the other end of the scale, there are examples of the risk balance being almost certainly reversed, raising the valid question of the agenda and associated ramifications.

The vaccinating of a new-born baby against Hepatitis B is seriously questioned – “Hepatitis B is a primarily blood-transmitted disease associated with lifestyle choices such as unprotected sex with multiple partners and intravenous drug use involving sharing needles – it is NOT primarily a “children’s disease” or that of newborn babies!” (Warning to Parents: This Vaccine Linked to Sudden Infant Death…)

Similarly the application of the HPV vaccination applied extensively to young people, a practice so obviously suspect that several countries have banned its use.   “Dr. Dalbergue stated: “I predict that Gardasil will become the greatest medical scandal of all times because at some point in time, the evidence will add up to prove that this vaccine has absolutely no effect on cervical cancer and that all the very many adverse effects which destroy lives and even kill, serve no other purpose than to generate profit for the manufacturers.”” (Gardasil: Are you paying for your own bullet?).

In between, there are many ‘grey area’ cases where it is virtually impossible to resolve the conjecture but it is possible to highlight the important facts, reasons for doubt and failures to firmly justify conclusions.

We move on to ‘corporate greed and lies’.  Reference: “Top 5 Vaccine Companies by Revenue – 2012”

• Sanofi $5.54 billion
• Merck $5.27 billion
• GlaxoSmithKline $5.26 billion
• Pfizer $4.11 billion
• Novartis $1.38 billion

There are later figures but these give the picture. Big companies, huge running costs but nevertheless, huge profits. (This suggestion of huge profits does not go undisputed but is a reasonable assumption if we include government grants, purchases and protections). Huge potential for spending on marketing, evident in several ventures including “influencing” the consumer-watch and approval organizations, consumers, overseas governments and the medical practitioners. Huge incentive for maintaining the ‘status quo’ to further develop their business and attract and satisfy share-holders. Huge incentive for corruption if these profits are threatened. Huge incentive to place profit above public health in their priorities.

An example: “Documents Show Merck Paid This Popular Website $3.5 Million Dollars for Promoting Vaccines“

In any case, the facts speak for themselves – the unethical behaviour does exist, regardless of incentives.

Regarding the specific issue of autism and the industry denial of a causal link to vaccines, the offered “proof” of no link by producing questionable papers finding “no evidence” of a link, is really pushing credibility boundaries.

These ‘researchers’ choose to ignore many peer-reviewed papers that provide adequate evidence of the likelihood of a direct connection. This is supported by the exhibited, convenient neglect by the vaccine manufacturers to acknowledge that autism is closely related to encephalitis, encephalitis is an adverse reaction they do openly admit. (Ref. The Autism Epidemic – The Vaccine Link):

“Vaccines CAN CAUSE brain damage. This basic fact has never been in question. All doctors and scientists are in agreement that brain swelling leading to brain dysfunction can and does happen after vaccination. Over 2 billion dollars has been paid out in vaccine court to families of children whose bodies were damaged after receiving vaccines. Almost every vaccine insert includes both encephalopathy and encephalitis as possible side effects of immunization. Both are brain disorders as described below:

ENCEPHALOPATHY: a disease in which the functioning of the brain is adversely affected by some agent or condition.

ENCEPHALITIS: inflammation of the brain, caused by infection or a reaction to some toxin or agent crossing the blood brain barrier.”

Here is a vaccine info insert that may have since been retracted, (or in ‘new-speak’), redacted, that also proves the subject industry claims to simply be blatant lies. (Ref http://vactruth.com/2012/09/18/fda-vaccine-autism-sids/ )

There are many court cases awarding vaccine related damages. (Note, 1,322 families).

“CBS News has found that since 1988, the vaccine court has awarded money judgments, often in the millions of dollars, to thirteen hundred and twenty two families whose children suffered brain damage from vaccines. In many … cases, the government paid out awards following a judicial finding that vaccine injury lead to the child’s autism spectrum disorder.”

“In what many parents are referring to as Orwellian doublespeak, the government determined that the vaccines Hannah received triggered an undiagnosed mitochondrial disorder that didn’t “cause” the onset of autism but “resulted” in it. “These word games fool no one,” according to NAA board chair and parent Lori McIlwain. “It’s time for the government to admit that vaccines can and do cause autism in some children. We need to learn from children like Hannah Poling and develop strategies for the prevention of further needless injuries.”

It seems that a “few comments” is becoming something more than intended. It might be prudent to now go back to the post title subject and article. If readers wish to comment or dispute the other above-mentioned issues please do. Another post might develop from them. These aspects of integrity, corruption, funding, conflicts of interest and the possibility (probability) of an underlying agenda are convincingly dealt with in the source article which also says:

The report’s conclusions are hardly convincing. But what’s more troubling, is the immense conflict of interest from which the report itself was written. The authors include Margaret A. Maglione, Lopamudra Das, Laura Raaen, Alexandria Smith, Ramya Chari, Sydne Newberry, Roberta Shanman, Tanja Perry, and

and concludes:

“If commentators want to assign blame upon anyone for creating public distrust in vaccines, it should be upon big-pharma itself.”

And is linked here.

Even the funding by the US government is suspect because it is probably part of the alleged agenda scene.

Related Article: If you want to read some serious scientific damning claims which genuinely support the theme of this post check this link.

http://nsnbc.me/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/BSEM-2011.pdf#page=1&zoom=auto,-13,848