Even More Doctors Against Vaccines

Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are even incapable of forming such opinions. – Albert Einstein

You might be surprised at the number of doctors who are against vaccines. It is not due to their medical training that some physicians refute the safety and efficacy of vaccines, but rather in spite of it. The practice of medicine is, after all, a business and the objective for most physicians is to make money. Thankfully, not every doctor is solely motivated by financial gain. Some doctors take the time to do the research, those who are more interested in healing than turning a profit.

See part 1: Doctors Against Vaccines – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research or part 2: More Doctor’s Against Vaccines.

Kelly Brogan, M.D.

Dr. Kelly Brogan received an MA in Brain and Cognitive Science/Systems Neuroscience before attending the medical school at Cornell University. She is board certified in Psychiatry, Psychosomatic Medicine/Consultation Psychology, and Integrative Holistic Medicine. Her research has focused on holistic women’s health with an emphasis on psychiatric care.

The information is OUT THERE, brilliant scientists, physicians, and researchers without financial ties and agendas have weighed in and presented their concerns about vaccine safety and efficacy, however, the average citizen resists and clings to a hyper-simplified, seemingly “safe” stance.

“Well, I’m not against vaccines, I mean, they’ve done a lot. I’m sure there are some risks, but they’re extremely rare.” 

I understand, now, that, my collection of PubMed articles substantiating concerns about inefficacy, neurological, autoimmune, and fatal risks of these poorly conceived and anachronistically relevant immune modulators is not meaningful to someone who is not interested. The questions raised by this information are not provocative to someone who needs, above all, to believe that the government, the CDC, and doctors mean well, are doing their due diligence, and that they are holding themselves to a basic standard of ethical delivery of healthcare. They are not meaningful to someone who needs to outsource their power.

 …The CDC can report, as they do, that brain inflammation and death are known side effects of every vaccine, but most do not appreciate what brain inflammation looks like. That this can look like ADHD, autism, learning delay, and that autoimmune disorders can take years to manifest. Tracing the thread back to the vaccine exposure can only be done with studies that assess vaccinated versus unvaccinated populations. These have not been done.

…I’m sure you don’t know a single person who has died of the flu, and if you think you do, I can almost guarantee you that the diagnosis was not confirmed in a way that ruled out the 150-200 infectious pathogens that cause flu-like syndromes, none of which would be “covered” by the vaccine. Despite the astronomical figures the CDC flashes before us of “flu deaths”, there were 18 (yes, 1-8) confirmed in 2001, for example. Access to these figures is suspiciously concealed, but in the end, forget the stats, and use some common sense to see the fear mongering and sales marketing for what it is.

…Even the former Chief Vaccine Officer at the FDA states: “there is no evidence that any influenza vaccine thus far developed is effective in preventing or mitigating any attack of influenza.” Liking the idea of being protected from the flu does not equate to being protected from the flu. That’s essentially what your vaccine-promoting doctor (or pharmacist) is engaging in – promoting an idea.

Dr. Richard Moskowitz, M.D.

Dr. Richard Moskowitz received his B.A. from Harvard Cum Laude, then finished medical school at New York University School of Medicine. He obtained medical licensure in Colorado where he opened a private general family medicine practice. He emphasizes homeopathic methods and he has done research in homeopathy.

Consider the process of falling ill with and recovering from a typical acute disease, such as the measles, in contrast with what we can observe following administration of the measles vaccine.

We all know that measles is primarily a virus of the upper respiratory tract, both because it is acquired by susceptible persons through inhalation of infected droplets in the air and because these droplets are produced by the coughing and sneezing of a patient with the disease. Once inhaled by a susceptible individual, the virus undergoes a prolonged period of silent multiplication, first in the tonsils, adenoids, and accessory lymphoid aggregations of the nasopharynx; later in the regional lymph nodes of the head and neck; and eventually, several days later, it passes into the blood and enters the spleen, the liver, the thymus, and the bone marrow, the “visceral” organs of the immune system. Throughout this “incubation” period, which lasts from 10 to 14 days, the patient typically feels quite well and experiences few or no symptoms of any kind.

By the time that the first symptoms of measles appear, circulating antibodies are already detectable in the blood, and the height of the symptomatology coincides with the peak of the antibody response. In other words, the “illness” that we call the measles is simply the definitive effort of the immune system to clear this virus from the blood. Notice also that this expulsion is accomplished by sneezing and coughing, i. e., via the same route through which it entered in the first place. It is abundantly clear from the above that the process of mounting and recovering from an acute illness like the measles involves a general mobilization of the immune system as a whole, including inflammation of the previously sensitized tissues at the portal(s) of entry, activation of leukocytes, macrophages, and the serum complement system, and a host of other mechanisms, of which the production of circulating antibodies is only one, and by no means the most important.

…By contrast, the live but artificially attenuated measles-virus vaccine is injected directly into the blood, by-passing the normal port of entry, and sets up at most a brief inflammatory reaction at the injection site, or perhaps in the regional lymph nodes, with no local sensitization at the normal portal of entry, no “incubation period,” no generalized inflammatory response, and no generalized outpouring. By “tricking” the body in this fashion, we have accomplished precisely what the entire immune system seems to have evolved to prevent: we have placed the virus directly into the blood and given it free and immediate access to the major immune organs and tissues, without any obvious mechanism or route for getting rid of it.

…Far from producing a genuine immunity, then, my suspicion and my fear is that vaccines act by interfering with and even suppressing the immune response as a whole, in much the same way that radiation, chemotherapy, corticosteroids, and other anti-inflammatory drugs do. Artificial immunization focuses on antibody production, a single aspect of the immune process, disarticulates it, and allows it to stand for the whole, in much the same way as chemical suppression of an elevated blood pressure is accepted as a valid substitute for genuine healing or cure of the patient whose blood pressure has risen. It is the frosting on the cake, without the cake. The worst part of this counterfeiting is that it becomes more difficult, if not impossible, for vaccinated children to mount a normally acute and vigorous response to infection, by substituting for it a much weaker, essentially chronic response, with little or no tendency to heal itself spontaneously.

 Dr. Robert Rowen

Dr. Robert Rowen attended John Hopkins University before completing medical school at the University of California in San Francisco. He was board certified and recertified in Emergency Medicine and Family Practice. Dr. Rowen served in Alaska on the Alaska State Medical Board and is known for helping to push through a law in Alaska that protects alternative medicine. He is a pioneer in the field of oxidation therapy.

If vaccines were the cat’s meow, why would the American government have granted vaccine makers total immunity from liability if the vaccine harms your child or you?

…Measles has been quite stubborn to be wiped out. In China, in one province, 99% of children are vaccinated but measles runs strong. You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to figure that one out. Clearly measles vaccine doesn’t work as advertised. In fact, in our own country, outbreak after outbreak has occurred in what has been called a fully vaccinated population.

…Vaccines give you plastic immunity. They build up only one line of your immune system, the antibody system, and put the main immune system (cellular immunity) to sleep. You need both for fully developed immunity.

…Plastic immunity can be seen in the fact that vaccine immunity wanes with time. I had wild measles. You don’t see people like me getting measles but many, many vaccinated people do get measles after the “plastic immunity” wears off.

…Why do we need “cellular immunity’? Just look at an AIDS patient. He has no “cellular” immunity. He is a walking bag of antibodies, which is what vaccines promote – antibody resistance, not cellular resistance.

…We have a generation of immune cripples amongst our youth. Asthma, eczema, and other immune diseases are rampant. Autism has exploded. These conditions are reaching crisis.

…Natural Killer T cells come from the thymus. They regulate your immune system. Natural infection keeps up these cells. Vaccination might wipe them out. The depletion of thymocytes might wipe out whole lines of cells that could provide key immunity for you.

Many people have focused on autism, and totally neglected the horrors that vaccines are wreaking on the rest of the body, particularly this frightening story about the thymus gland, and how derangement might lead to future hypersensitivity, like found in asthma and eczema.

…I don’t agree with the forced vaccine program. Herd immunity is now shown to be a failure. Plastic vaccine immunity wanes with time, rendering possibly a whole generation of vaccine-abused people vulnerable to diseases their bodies might have difficulty handling as adults, while deranging their immune systems for life. Please look to vaccine failure BEFORE condemning moms who rightfully don’t want to place their precious children in harm’s way with Pharma’s now discredited potions.

Dr. David Ayoub, M.D.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXWBxxVk_h0

Dr. David Ayoub received his medical degree from the University of Illinois College of Medicine and specializes as a radiologist.  Vaccines are his current research interest.

[When] I got started my interest initially was similar to everyone else’s. We were very concerned about thimerosal or mercury in vaccines.

…First of all, and I think what doctors should remember is that, you always listen to the patients first. And I had been in the community a few years and had made several friends, parents of autistic children. And what the parents were saying over and over again is that we look at our children’s heavy metal toxicity profiles, typically hair analysis or post provocative urine heavy metal profiles; that they were seeing a lot of aluminum and they wanted to know what it meant.

…Since the mid-20s aluminum was used to try to boost the host immune response to the antigen that’s injected into the child

…Based on the periodic table [aluminum] it’s just shy of a heavy metal, so it’s called a light metal. But nonetheless, it is in the metal grouping, and it’s a common compound and one of the things you hear by so-called experts to try to allay people’s fears about aluminum. “Well, you know aluminum makes up 8% of our Earth’s crust. It’s in the air. It’s in the soil. It’s in the water.” and so forth. And that may very well be true. It is a very common substance outside of the body, but it has absolutely no biological role in the body. It is not necessary or essential for any biological function of any animal, or plant for that matter. So it probably belongs outside of the body if there’s no role for it physiologically, biochemically. But the things that we’ve known about the basics of aluminum going back probably two centuries now is that it is a poison.

Dr. Rashid A. Buttar, DO, FAAPM, FACAM, FAAIM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zJrkPJXAh0&list=PLF071080672F9E532&index=1

Dr. Rashid Buttar is an osteopathic doctor who graduated from the University of Osteopathic Medicine and Health Sciences. He has trained in Emergency Medicine as well as General Surgery. He is board certified in Preventive Medicine and Clinical Metal Toxicology as well as board eligible in Emergency Medicine. Previously, he served as a Brigade Surgeon and Director of Emergency Medicine in the U.S. Army before opening up a private practice. His research is in metal toxicology.

It’s a toxicity issue. That’s it. It’s not a hard thing; it’s not a complicated thing. It’s not a multifactorial thing. It’s very simply toxicity. The problem is that a particular toxin causes an entire sequence of events to take place that results in food allergies, viral loads, parasitic infestation, the fungal problems, the allergies, the gut dysbiosis, the hepatic issues. All these things, these are all fires, but there’s one common spark –  just one, and that’s the toxicity spark. The biggest component to that is mercury. Now there’s other metals that play into this, but mercury itself is the second most toxic metal known to man. This is widely known information; there’s no secret about this. EPA has already said it, that mercury in itself being the second most toxic metal that’s in its inorganic form. When you attach it to an organic compound like methyl or ethyl, it becomes even more destructive.

…Depending on who you talk to, it’s about a thousand times more destructive than inorganic mercury. If you have a closed environment say like a human body, relatively closed obviously it’s dynamic because you have things going in and out. But you have a closed environment, you put in a poison, you are going to get the poisoning of the whole system. If you can just take that poison out, theoretically that whole system should come back online.

Take a wrench you throw it in an engine, everything gets all screwed up, right? That’s what mercury does: it causes the metabolic processes to shut down. It causes the hormonal cascades to drop off.  It causes depletion of certain other minerals by competitive inhibition. It causes a dysregulation of every physiological system that you can imagine.

Conclusion

Most of us have heard the old adage that doctors make the worst patients. They are the “worst” simply because they understand the nature of the relationship. Doctors know that practicing medicine is ultimately about the bottom line. A doctor also understands the patient-doctor relationship. It is the physician who works for the patient, not the other way around. They are, after all, in the business of medicine.

When their health is on the line, most physicians ask a lot of questions, research their maladies, and refuse medical treatments when the risks seem to outweigh the benefits. Doctors are not so naïve as to blindly trust their doctor. Why should you?

Check out part 1 of this series, Doctors Against Vaccines – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research. If you’ve been vaccinated, check out How To Detoxify and Heal From Vaccinations – For Adults and Children.

Further Reading:
Sources:


Corruption and Pork – Agricultural Boards Behaving Badly

Pork. The other white meat. The incredible, edible egg. Beef. It’s what’s for dinner.

The majority of Americans are probably familiar with these slogans. But have you ever heard, “Pork: Be Inspired?” Probably not, despite the three million dollar licensing fee that the slogan has incurred each year from 2011 on.

What is the point of the slogan, and who has that kind of money to burn? The United States Department of Agriculture Research and Promotion (R and P) programs.

What Are They and Should I Care?

The pork industry is not the only agricultural industry to have its own board formed as part of the R and P. There are more than 20 agricultural products that have been classified by the USDA as research and promotion programs under the Agricultural Marketing Services department, from expected products like soybeans, dairy, beef, and eggs to potential head scratchers like sorghum and mangos. These R and P programs are set up and funded by the farmers in the industries they represent through set charges on specific amounts of units sold. An initial look at the programs shows their benefit in creating a demand and building a brand for a specific commodity, but there have been increasing concerns about a growing lack of transparency and the potential promotion of the interests of large producers at the expense of smaller farmers. There is also a concern about how close these organizations are to the taxpayer-funded USDA. Are our taxes promoting industries that are causing many of our health and environmental problems?

Questionable Decisions

If you’ve paid attention to the world of mayonnaise lately (and let’s face it, who hasn’t), you might have heard of a small startup called Hampton Creek being sued for misleading the public by Unilever, the maker of Hellmann’s mayonaise. While Unilever dropped the lawsuit, the FDA pursued the matter, claiming they were following up a complaint and that Hampton Creek’s product, Just Mayo, cannot be labeled as mayonnaise because the product doesn’t contain eggs.  A little investigation revealed emails from the National Egg Board executives that were targeting the company in ways both benign and malicious, from jokes about having “old buddies from Brooklyn” paying the Hampton Creek CEO a visit to a program promoting real eggs and contacting Whole Foods in an attempt to have the product removed from shelves. There is also the fact that Unilever reached out to the Egg Board for support during their lawsuit, leading to speculation that the Egg Board used its influence to convince the FDA to focus on Hampton Creek and Just Mayo.

While much of this seems to be within the guidelines of the R and P programs stated promotion goals, specifically calling retailers to get a competing product off the shelves has raised some eyebrows. It is troubling when an association linked to the USDA feels comfortable blocking the free market, proving that America capitalist preachings come hand in hand with rampant corruption. When the agency managed by the USDA spurs the FDA into action at the behest of an international corporation determined to eliminate a small startup, what chance does anyone else have when government is for the few?

A Mismanagement of Funds

The majority of people want to get their money’s worth when they pay for goods or services. The National Pork Board is not in this majority. Originally, they were licensing their previous popular slogan, “Pork. The other white meat.” from the National Pork Producers Council for a dollar a year. That cost increased to 818,000 in 2004 and then jumped to an incredible 20 year, 60 million dollar contract despite the lack of competition for the slogan and an actual market value of under 400,000 dollars. Though the Pork Board has retired the slogan, they continue to pay a yearly 3 million dollar fee to the NPPC. For farmers required to pay 40 cents for every 100 dollars they make to the Pork Board, that particular expense must sting quite a bit.

But even more interesting is who the money is going to and how it’s pushing out small farmers. The National Pork Producers Council is responsible for licensing the slogan and receives the yearly fees from the National Pork Board. The NPPC is a lobby group dedicated to lobbying political candidates on behalf of large-scale pig operations with environmentally detrimental policies. Despite trying to eliminate the program in the early 2000s, small farmers are still stuck with a government system that ignores their needs and lacks the necessary oversight to correct itself.

Can You Actually Do Anything?

Government shouldn’t actively work against the people who pay for it. The idea behind the USDA’s Research and Promotion Programs is sound, but the lack of actual transparency and oversight make it an easy target for corporate corruption. The transparency issue also makes it difficult for consumers to understand what’s going on and to sort through myriad information, studies, and advertisements that serve to forward the agendas of Big Agriculture. Knowing about the dirty business taking place immediately beyond the public’s eye makes it even more important to support small farmers and to know where your food is coming from. You can make a difference by choosing products from small farms committed to animal welfare, the environment, and health.

Recommended Reading:
Sources:


Why Are We Accepting Less Healthy, Lower Quality Options From Food Companies?

Living a healthy lifestyle is all about making the healthiest choices. But what if the best choice (or the information needed to make the best choice) wasn’t available to you because the people tasked with looking out for you and your interests don’t have the same high standards and the corporations don’t deliver the same high-quality products in the United States as they do in Europe?

Whether it’s an American corporation introducing organic products in Europe but not in the U.S., the fact that we are denied the opportunity to know what’s in our food or where it came from, or the disproportionate amount of refined sugar and chemicals in our everyday products, it’s disheartening to realize that companies are more than happy to take advantage of corporate friendly, health-indifferent attitudes in the United States. For every company claiming that a safer, healthier way of producing food isn’t “cost-effective,” it is interesting to see what they’re doing in other countries. It’s becoming increasingly clear that cost is not the only reason they’re giving consumers in the U.S. less than their best.

Organic Fast Food is Finally an Option – But Not For Everyone

Let’s look at McDonald’s, one of the largest fast food chains and a worldwide symbol of the United States. They’ve been experiencing a decline in sales numbers as consumers make better lifestyle choices and become more health-conscious. The United States is now the largest organic market in the world, and McDonald’s corporate attempt to grab a piece of that pie is their new pledge to use only cage-free eggs by 2025. They’re also introducing a hamburger made entirely of organic meat.

McDonald’s promised the European Union they would only use cage-free eggs by 2011. Now they make the same promise to U.S. citizens with a 10-year target date? And yes, they will be offering an organic burger – but only in Germany, the second-largest organic market.

McDonald’s also sells organic milk at their U.K. locations. Many consumers in the United States are not aware that McDonald’s can and does make more animal welfare friendly and environmentally sustainable choices in other countries even though we are the largest organic market in the world.

Three Little Letters

Countless activists in the United States are fighting for the right to mandate labeling genetically modified foods. Opponents claim labeling all of these products will raise the cost of food, a cost they will be forced to pass on to the consumer. But this argument ignores the fact that the European Union, Japan, Brazil, Australia, and China are among the 64 countries that currently require GMO labeling. If so many countries already require labeling, why not simply extend that consideration to the United States? Obviously, corporations are aware of the rising numbers of health-conscious Americans that will choose a more environmentally conscious and healthy option.

A Little Something Extra

When looking at the way food corporations treat consumers in the United States, it’s also interesting to note the unhealthy things they add to our food. The FDA seems content to let corporations treat us like guinea pigs, sitting back and claiming there is a lack of concrete evidence to remove ingredients until something forces their hand.

For example, the majority of pigs in the United States are still raised using the muscle drug ractopomine, which is banned in the European Union, China, and Russia. The U.S. has been claiming there is no evidence for this ban in science, while China, the largest consumer of pork worldwide, sees it as a threat to food safety. It seems odd that the pork companies in the U.S. argue that there is no science supporting concern when other nations have clearly found evidence to the contrary.

This isn’t the only time products in the United States have added a little something extra that can compromise our health. Companies in the U.S. can sell “bromated bread” which contains potassium bromate. Since the 1980s, that additive has been considered carcinogenic, but the FDA only asks that it be eliminated on a voluntary basis. Unfortunately, this is not the only potentially dangerous food additive that the FDA is unwilling to take a stand on, leaving U.S. consumers at the whims of companies trying to make the most profit possible.

Consumer Action

You’re a consumer in the United States who has done the research, and you’ve decided that you want to lead a healthier, more sustainable, eco-friendly life. It’s hard enough to change old habits and learn to appreciate healthy choices without having to sift through misinformation. As you become more informed and discover the extent to which you need to protect your own health, you may become furious with the American food system. You’d have every right to be. More and more companies show they are willing to accommodate stricter international standards while taking full advantage of lax regulations in the United States.

Let’s face it, corporations run America. Despite the fact that 90% of Americans want GMOs labeled, The DARK Act has passed Congress. Our crops and our soil are poisoned with glyphosate. And it’s not just our food industry that is corrupt. Our personal care products are filled with ingredients that are banned overseas. Our water is contaminated with fluoride. Until we face the fact that our government officials are bought and owned by corporate interests, and we make real change in the electoral process and how we protect consumers, we will have to provide our own due diligence to protect our health.

Recommended Reading:
Sources: