Study: DTP Increases Mortality in Infants 5 to 10 Fold Compared to Unvaccinated

For years public health advocates wanted the CDC and WHO to run studies on vaccinated vs. unvaccinated populations and compares health outcomes. A team of Native scientists have conducted such a study and the consequences are alarming. The study, financed in part by the Danish authorities and lead by Dr. Soren Wengel Mogensen, was published in January in EBioMedicine.

The data suggest that the DTP vaccine reduces infections from those 3 germs, but data also shows that children are more likley to die from other causes. Mogensen’s team discovered that DTP inoculated African Americans had 5-10 times higher mortality than their unvaccinated peers.

 Though protective against the target disease, DTP may increase susceptibility to unrelated infections… DTP was associated with 5-fold higher mortality than being unvaccinated.  No prospective study has shown beneficial survival effects of DTP.” – Vaxxed vs. Non-Vaxxed Study

Related: How Plumbing (Not Vaccines) Eradicated Disease

Mogensen and his colleagues hypothesize that the DTP vaccine weakens the immune system, which supports the conclusions of prior studies. An earlier study by Dr. Peter Aaby, on the introduction of DTP in rural Guinea-Bissau, indicated a 2-fold greater mortality among vaccinated kids. The Aaby report is just one of many studies that adopted kids and documented vaccination status. All of them suggested that DTP-vaccinated kids died at rates far exceeding mortality.

In the primary analysis, DTP-vaccinated infants experienced mortalities five times greater than DTP-unvaccinated infants.  Mortalities to vaccinated girls were 9.98 times those among females in the unvaccinated control group, while mortalities to vaccinated boys were 3.93 times the controls.  Oddly, the scientists found that children receiving the oral polio vaccine simultaneously with DTP fared much better than children who did not.  The OPV vaccine appeared to modify the negative effect of the DTP vaccine, reducing mortalities to 3.52 times those experienced among the control group.  Overall, mortalities among vaccinated children were 10 times the control group when children received only the DTP.” – Robert F Kennedy

Related: How To Detoxify and Heal From Vaccinations – For Adults and Children

Moreover, Mogensen and his colleagues observe that the research reviewed by SAGE probably exacerbated the deadly effect of the DTP vaccine due to unusually high mortality in the control groups,

Unvaccinated children in these studies have usually been frail children too sick or malnourished to get vaccinated and the studies may therefore have underestimated the negative effect of DTP”. The Mogensen study sought to avoid this pitfall by removing orphans and children from the control group and the research group and by utilizing controls. It included children who had been breastfed. All of the infants were healthy at the right time of vaccination. Nevertheless, the Mogensen authors went longer and point out that, even in their analysis, the unvaccinated kids had status. They conclude that, “The estimate from the natural experiment may therefore still be conservative.”

Recommended: Lyme Disease – Holistic Protocol to Completely Rebuild the Immune System

From the early 1980s, a cascade of lawsuits filed throughout the United States drove DTP manufacturers and threatening to shut down production of vaccines and the DTP shot. That threat led the U.S. Congress to bestow legal immunity on vaccine makers during the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Program from 1986, conducted in December, 1987, from the rollout of “Vaccine Court.” After the recommendation from the Institute of Medicine, thimerosal was removed by vaccine manufacturers from the American DTaP involving 2001-2003. But, multi-dose DTP vaccines given to thousands of children across the African continent carry on to contain huge doses of thimerosal (25mcg of ethylmercury per booth) that exceed the EPA’s maximum exposure levels by many times. Neither the CDC nor the WHO has ever published a vaccinated vs. unvaccinated study that will be necessary to determine the total health consequences of the potent toxin on African children. The Mogensen report is a call for such a research.

The authors close with a bracing rebuke to people health labs,

“It should be of concern that the effect of routine vaccinations on all-cause mortality was not tested in randomized trials.  All currently available evidence suggests that DTP vaccine may kill more children from other causes than it saves from diphtheria, tetanus or pertussis.  Though a vaccine protects children against the target disease it may simultaneously increase susceptibility to unrelated infections.”

https://youtu.be/cx1VDqvDXjE

Related Reading:
Source:


Sugar Industry Has Had Evidence Linking Sugar to Heart Disease for Nearly Half a Century

Project 259 is a study that linked sucrose, a common sugar product, to heart disease and bladder cancer and would have revolutionized the way we think about sugar in regards to our health. Or at least it would have…if the sugar industry hadn’t stopped funding it halfway through the project in 1971. The project was discovered by a team of researchers at the University of California San Francisco who have been in the news for other reports on the sugar industry’s unsavory practices.

Details of the Project

Project 259 was launched by the Sugar Research Foundation in 1968. The project was in two halves, and only one of them was completed. The finished portion of the project looked at rat’s gut bacteria after rats consumed sucrose compared to starch. Early results showed that the sucrose caused gut microbes to throw off those rodent metabolisms, increasing their levels of triglycerides. Elevated triglycerides clog arteries and increase a person’s predisposition for cardiovascular disease. Project 259 also found that in a comparison to high-starch diet, a high-sugar diet boosts the activity of beta-glucuronidase, an enzyme linked to bladder cancer, when compared to a starch diet.

These discoveries were reported to Sugar Research Foundation in 1970. The results accompanied a request for 12 additional weeks of funding to finish the second half of the project, which was outlined as a deeper look at the effects of starch. Within a month, the Vice President of the Sugar Research Foundation declared these findings as nil and the additional funding never materialized. Project 259 was abandoned in 1971.

Related: Healthy Sugar Alternatives and More

Who Tells The Story

The sugar industry does not see this as a story. According to Courtney Gaine, the president and CEO of the Sugar Association, “They never called us. We would have let them look at the archives. I would let them look tomorrow. The story we have in our archives is a lot better than the story they’ve been telling,” She asserts that this study was lost in a bureaucratic shuffle, and emphasizes the industry’s ongoing interest in negative claims.

The sugar industry has a vested interest in controlling the story of sugar and health’s relationship. More than anything, Project 259 disrupts a narrative that was already being put into place.  The same researchers who found this study also uncovered a letter in the Harvard library that revealed the truth of that. Two prominent and now deceased Harvard researchers, Harvard nutritionists, Dr. Fredrick Stare and Mark Hegsted, were responsible for disproving studies that implicated sugar and concluded that there was only one dietary modification — changing fat and cholesterol intake — that could prevent coronary heart disease. Their work was published in 1967 and didn’t require disclosure of industry funds, although these newly found records state that the sugar industry trade group initiated and paid for the studies, examined drafts, and laid out a clear objective to protect sugar’s reputation in the public eye. Yes, the sugar industry wants to know about negative studies but not to offer an informed choice.

Related: Candida, Gut Flora, Allergies, and Disease

Most Frustrating “What If” Ever?

Sugar (especially the way we process and refine it) is more detrimental to the human body than anyone had previously thought, but what would our quality of life look like if this study was published? What would our sweetener options even look like?

Rates of heart disease, the number one cause of death in the world, would be far less than they currently are, and the ripple effects from consuming less sugar would be huge. Would we be facing the same level of antibiotic-resistant bacteria crises? While the majority of the blame for that coming storm can be placed at the factory farming industry’s doorstep, sugar feeds infection like no other food. Would doctors and dentists need to prescribe antibiotics at the rate they currently do?

This is all speculation. Infuriating speculation, at that, as that potential future is gone.

Related: Start Eating Like That and Start Eating Like This – Your Guide to Homeostasis Through Diet

We Should Be Angry

Not everyone who has heart disease has a history of heart disease in their family, but through the over-consumption of sugar, we have bred that predisposition into millions of people’s genetics. Anger and outrage are a daily occurrence in the current news cycles though and making this another cause for anger doesn’t send a strong enough message.

What if you stopped and said no more to products with large quantities of added sugar? Chose a different salad dressing or committed to figuring out a quick and tomato sauce recipe that kept you from reaching for the sugar-laden, jarred version on the shelf? Instead of choosing foods that create problems while willfully ignoring them, dictate your own health and choose foods that heal.

Sources:


President Trump Has Nominated A Pro-Vaccine Exec to Secretary of the Health and Human Services

President Trump has just nominated Alex Azar, the former chief lobbyist and President of the US division of drug the company Eli Lilly, to be the next Secretary of the Health and Human Services (HHS). Alex Azar was deputy secretary for Health and Human Services in the George W. Bush administration. He is slated to replace Dr. Tom Price as head of the department.

Eli Lilly invented and manufactured thimerosal, the mercury-based preservative used in vaccines that have been repeatedly linked to autism and other neurological disorders.

In contrast to Mr. Price, an orthopedic surgeon and former Republican congressman, Mr. Azar is a lawyer and health care expert who allies predicted would use his deep knowledge of the federal bureaucracy to advance Mr. Trump’s agenda of undermining President Barack Obama’s health care law. Mr. Azar recently called the Affordable Care Act a “fundamentally broken system.” –NY Times

Related: How To Detoxify and Heal From Vaccinations – For Adults and Children

From Autism Action Network:

Prior to employment at Eli Lilly, under George W. Bush, Azar was general counsel and later deputy secretary of HHS at the time the decision was made to give an expedited efficacy and safety review to Gardasil, a vaccine for human papilloma virus produced by Merck that has enormous safety issues. As general counsel (head attorney) for HHS, Azar participated in the Autism Omnibus Proceeding that denied more than 5000 claims of vaccine injury, even though HHS settled one of the test cases that found that Hannah Poling’s autism was indeed caused by vaccine injury. Azar is exactly the wrong person to head HHS. Azar must be approved by the Senate, and the Autism Action Network will be working hard to stop his confirmation.

While the head of Eli Lily in the US, Azar was also on the board of directors of the Biotechnology Innovation Association, a trade and lobbying association for manufacturers of biological products including drugs, vaccines and GMOs. Azar’s career perfectly mirrors the “revolving door” door between regulatory agencies and the industries that they supposedly regulate in the public interest. The revolving door is one of the clearest indicators of government corruption. And Azar is only 50 years old, so we can probably expect several more trips through the revolving door before his career is done.

Azar has the wrong experience, the wrong track record, the wrong associations, and the wrong personal financial and career interests to head HHS. America has the most expensive healthcare and drugs in the world, yet our indicators of public health are among the lowest found in developed countries. A former lobbyist for one of America’s largest drug companies is not the person who will bring desperately needed reform. The head of HHS should be an advocate for allowing research to go wherever honest science leads, regulatory policy that puts the safety and health of the public before corporate and physician’s profits, transparency in all medical research and regulatory reviews, informed consent as the basis for all medical procedures, and aggressive policies to end the epidemics of autism, juvenile diabetes, Alzheimer’s, asthma, and on and on.

As a candidate, and in office, President Trump said he would “drain the swamp of government corruption.” In his tweet announcing the Azar’s nomination, Trump wrote, “He will be a star for better healthcare and lower drug prices!” But according to the Dow Jones Newswires, “during Alex Azar’s tenure Eli Lilly & Co. executive prices rose dramatically for some of the company’s top drugs.” The last person we need heading HHS is a drug company fox guarding the hen house. Alex Azar should not be confirmed as Secretary of HHS.
Please share this message with friends and family and please post to social networks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwRWckMKVC4

Related: How Plumbing (Not Vaccines) Eradicated Disease

If you’ve like to take action, click on Autism Action Network and scroll down, there’s an email form. You can also call the White House and politely express your opposition to Azar’s nomination at (202) 456-1111.

Recommended: Lyme Disease – Holistic Protocol to Completely Rebuild the Immune System

Other Trump News Regarding Health, Human Rights, Animal Rights, and Environment

The Keystone Pipeline Leaked 210K Gallons in South Dakota. President Donald Trump issued the federal permit for the Keystone XL project in March,  though it had been rejected by the previous administration due to environmental concerns, and many argue the pipeline addition is not even needed.

Trump also began to reverse the Obama administration’s ban on bringing heads of elephants killed in Zimbabwe and Zambia back to the U.S. Fortunately, the Don heard the uproar:

But he also, again, delayed the implementation of “Organic Animal Welfare Standards”.

Recommended:
Sources:


New Pill That Can be Digitally Tracked Raises Orwellian Concerns

How much would a chocolate company pay to know exactly when you or the lady in your life is experiencing PMS symptoms in an effort to more effectively target ads? If that level of corporate involvement in your medical records upsets you, you’re not going to like the new digital ingestion tracking system approved by the Food and Drug Administration.

This new tracking system is designed to address the issue of nonadherence, where patients do not follow through on prescribed medical treatments. The treatment, in this case, is called Abilify MyCite and it’s made by Japan-based Otsuka Pharmaceuticals. The actual medication portion of the Abilify MyCite system is brand-name aripiprazole, an antipsychotic drug used for treating schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and as an add-on treatment for depression in adults. “Being able to track ingestion of medications prescribed for mental illness may be useful for some patients,” said Mitchell Mathis, M.D., director of the Division of Psychiatry Products in the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. “The FDA supports the development and use of new technology in prescription drugs and is committed to working with companies to understand how technology might benefit patients and prescribers.”

How It Works

The pill part of the system is the simple part. Abilify MyCite comes with a web-based dashboard that allows a patient to track their actual drug ingestion, daily activity level and self-reported mood and sleep. The sensor that tracks that is roughly the size of a grain of sand and activates upon contact with fluid in the stomach. It detects and records the date and time the pill was taken and relays that to a patch worn by the patient. The patch then sends all of that to the patient’s smartphone. When the patient gives consent, caregivers or medical professionals are able to see all of this data, though the system does not register the ingestion in real time or emergencies. The patient is able to revoke those permissions at any time.

Is It Worth It?

The system itself does not actually increase drug compliance. Both Otsuka Pharmaceuticals and the FDA take care to note that the product does not fix nonadherence, and it remains to be seen if the patients with the first illnesses targeted by this medication will respond positively. While nonadherence is an expensive issue, schizophrenics and those with bipolar frequently skip medications because they don’t like the way they feel when on them or dislike the feeling of being controlled or manipulated. A pill that tracks their compliance is probably not going to change that.

Who Does This Product Work For?

Imagine a system where medical compliance is a condition of benefits without a way around it. Can a digital ingestion tracking system create a situation where your insurance charges you more for choosing not to take a prescription?

The more connected we become, the more difficult it is to keep information private. How secure will this data be? According to Kimberly Whitfield from Otsuka Pharmaceuticals public relations department, “the data is encrypted while it is stored in the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)-compliant cloud environment, and the cloud service provider does not have a decryption key.” While all of these makes this information much more secure than your average social media profile, information leaks happen across every sector.

The company is clearly taking precautions, but can the information be stopped once it’s out there?

Recommended Reading:
Sources:


Keystone Pipeline Has Leaked More Than 200K Gallons of Oil in South Dakota

Company and state regulators reported Thursday that TransCanada Corp.’s infamous Keystone pipeline has sprung a leak and been shut down. An estimated 210,000 gallons of oil in northeastern South Dakota, has escaped the pipeline. At this time it’s reported that the cause was being investigated.

https://twitter.com/TransCanada/status/931267209766277120

This is the largest Keystone oil spill to date in South Dakota…

Officials stated that the leak did not contaminate any water systems, said Brian Walsh, an environmental scientist manager at the South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources. He is also quoted as saying,

Ultimately, the cleanup responsibility lies with TransCanada, and they’ll have to clean it up in compliance with our state regulations.” – MSN News

The Keystone XL pipeline transports crude from Alberta, Canada, to Illinois and Oklahoma. The infostructure can handle nearly 23 million gallons a day.

The Keystone Pipeline is part of a 2,687-mile system that includes the proposed Keystone XL. This pipeline, which has faced persistent opposition from environmental groups, Native American tribes, and some farmers and other landowners.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fSAEeIkJ_ok

This is the largest Keystone oil spill to date in South Dakota, according to Brian Walsh, a spokesman for the state’s Department of Environment and Natural Resources. The leak comes just days before Nebraska officials announce a decision on whether the proposed Keystone XL Pipeline, a sister project, can move forward. President Donald Trump issued the federal permit for the Keystone XL project in March,  though it had been rejected by the previous administration due to environmental concerns, and many argue the pipeline addition is not even needed.

If you’d like to know more about the pipeline, check out this timeline by Yes Magazine.



Trump Is Lifting Ban on Importing Elephant Trophies from Africa

The Trump administration is reported to be reversing the Obama administration’s ban on bringing heads of elephants killed in Zimbabwe and Zambia back to the U.S.

Imports will be allowed for elephants killed between Jan. 21, 2016 and the end of 2018. The decision has been cheered by many hunting and gun rights organizations. The United States and international authorities say the African elephant is an endangered species, and the Obama administration argued that allowing trophy imports of the elephants would harm the animals by encouraging the killing and poaching of them.

Even though elephants are listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act, a provision in the act allows the government to give permits to import these trophies if there is evidence that the hunting actually benefits conservation for that species. The official said they have new information from officials in Zimbabwe and Zambia to support reversing the ban to allow trophy hunting permits.” – ABC News

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghr1oldTVJc

Legal, well-regulated sport hunting as part of a sound management program can benefit the conservation of certain species by providing incentives to local communities to conserve the species and by putting much-needed revenue back into conservation.” – FWS spokesman

Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr., Donald Trump’s sons, are known to be fans of large game hunting.

https://twitter.com/Weinsteinlaw/status/930959251312447489

Newsweek states that the elephant population has declined since 2001 in Zimbabwe and in some regions in Zambia.

Hunters often choose the healthiest or strongest members of animal populations, to have a more impressive trophy, but this can have negative effects on the species overall.

This 2015 poll showed that 86 percent of Americans are opposed to big-game hunting, and 60% of respondents said that it should be illegal.

Update!

Nice work everyone!



Sulfites Kill Beneficial Bacteria According to New Study

The first scientific study to test the effects of food preservatives on beneficial bacteria has been published, and the results do not bode well for our health. Researchers from the University of Hawai‘i Maui College have found that sulfites in food preservatives, generally recognized as safe for consumption at levels of 5000 ppm (parts per million) or less, killed or inhibited the growth of beneficial bacteria at levels of 3780 ppm or less. In the words of lead researcher Dr. Sally V. Irwin,

Studies show a significant increase over the past 40 years in food allergies, obesity, and metabolic disorders that have a direct correlation to disbiosis, or changes in the microbiome…In trying to understand what in our environment may be causing this change, the use of many food preservatives and their effects on beneficial bacteria came to mind.”

What They Found

Sulfites are a food preserver found in dried fruits, wine, beer, bottled lemon and lime juices, processed meats, canned goods, and occur naturally in sauerkraut and its brine. Common sulfites include sulfur dioxide, potassium bisulfite, sodium sulfite, and sodium bisulfite. They are frequently used to stop fermentation, which is why they are most commonly associated with fermented beverages like wine.

Related: The Gut-Brain Connection – How it Affects Your Life

For this study, researchers chose four known beneficial bacteria, Lactobacillus species casei, plantarum and rhamnosus, and Streptococcus thermophilus, and tested their reactions to two different preservatives, sodium sulfite and sodium bisulfite. The sulfites were in concentrations from 10 to 3780 ppm and exposed to the bacteria for six hours. After only two hours of exposure to sulfites concentrated at 250-500 ppm, all four types of bacteria tested showed no increase or a substantial decrease in cell numbers when compared to the sulfite-free control.

Related: Candida, Gut Flora, Allergies, and Disease

These results should not be surprising, as this is what sulfites are designed to do. They are added to stop fermentation, the development of bacteria. Many modern innovations do what they are designed to do, but there is often a resistance to believe that what they do could also be harmful. Antibiotic-resistant superbugs are on track to kill more people than cancer by 2050, a result of our indiscriminate love affair with antibiotics, that miracle of modern medicine.

The Implications

This is a preliminary study in that its subjects are lab-grown bacteria and were exposed to the sulfites for a fraction of the time that occurs during real-world digestion. Yet the damage to that beneficial bacteria was clear.

Related: Gluten, Candida, Leaky Gut Syndrome, and Autoimmune Diseases

We depend on our beneficial bacteria. Without it, we are more vulnerable to serious infections, autoimmune disease, obesity, and numerous other damaging health conditions. This study solidly links what is in our food with one of the most serious health issues we face – the decline of our gut microbe diversity. It’s also the only study directly dealing with the effect of food additives on beneficial bacteria.

But there used to be one guy talking about the damage antibiotics do. Now we have a wealth of information confirming just how much damage messing with the gut microbiome can do.

Sources: