Iceland Says Herd Immunity Must be Reached Through Transmission

Iceland’s chief epidemiologist recently said herd immunity could not be achieved through vaccination. Despite vaccinating 71% of the population Iceland is seeing a spike in cases.

They are seeing a lower hospitalization rate than previous spikes, and have not seen any deaths in their current spike.

Iceland does plan to offer a third booster dose to high-risk/elderly groups.

In a public radio interview, the chief epidemiologist says herd immunity must be achieved through transmission, not vaccination.

He later walked back these comments saying curbing infections is the goal.

Some countries like Isreal are seeing the vaccine wear off after 6-8 months, Iceland, however, vaccinated recently, is still seeing a spike in cases.

Related: How To Detoxify and Heal From Vaccinations – For Adults and Children
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RoBz8a14h2I



Several studies see Evidence of Lasting COVID-19 Immunity

Researchers tracking immune responses to COVID-19 say they’re seeing the signs of lasting immunity months after coronavirus infections have resolved. T cells and B cells capable of recognizing the virus and virus-fighting antibodies are present in people exposed to COVID-19, even in people who experienced mild infections. These studies provide hope that the second wave of coronavirus cases will be met with a natural immune response.

This is exactly what you would hope for…All the pieces are there to have a totally protective immune response.”

Marion Pepper, University of Washington

Related: Coronavirus Supplement Review

Scientists have not yet found definitive proof that individuals who have experienced the virus will have immunity against reinfection. On the other hand, there has been no unambiguous evidence that reinfection is happening. Much of the research and media coverage has focused on the presence of antibodies, but immune responses also include B cells and T cells. In addition to that, low levels of antibodies remain in the blood months after COVID-19 recovery.

The antibodies decline, but they settle in what looks like a stable nadir…The response looks perfectly durable.”

Deepta Bhattacharya, University of Arizona

Recommended: How to Eliminate IBS, IBD, Leaky Gut

Studies out of Sweden could have the potential to further this research and the public’s understanding of COVID-19 and herd immunity. The country famously did not impose lockdown or mask restrictions, instead asking citizens to voluntarily socially distance. Healthcare officials in the country have indicated that they hope widespread exposure to the virus will lead to herd immunity in the country.




Harvard Immunologist: Unvaccinated Children Pose Zero Risk

An open letter written by Tetyana Obukhanych, a Harvard immunologist, has has been circulating around the internet again. We thought it worth republishing. She wrote the letter back in 2015 in response to vaccine legislation. She makes a strong case for unvaccinated children not endangering the rest of the public.

Recommended Reading: Gluten, Candida, Leaky Gut Syndrome, and Autoimmune Diseases

Dear Legislator:

My name is Tetyana Obukhanych. I hold a PhD in Immunology. I am writing this letter in the hope that it will correct several common misperceptions about vaccines in order to help you formulate a fair and balanced understanding that is supported by accepted vaccine theory and new scientific findings.

Do unvaccinated children pose a higher threat to the public than the vaccinated?

It is often stated that those who choose not to vaccinate their children for reasons of conscience endanger the rest of the public, and this is the rationale behind most of the legislation to end vaccine exemptions currently being considered by federal and state legislators country-wide. You should be aware that the nature of protection afforded by many modern vaccines – and that includes most of the vaccines recommended by the CDC for children – is not consistent with such a statement. I have outlined below the recommended vaccines that cannot prevent transmission of disease either because they are not designed to prevent the transmission of infection (rather, they are intended to prevent disease symptoms), or because they are for non-communicable diseases. People who have not received the vaccines mentioned below pose no higher threat to the general public than those who have, implying that discrimination against non-immunized children in a public school setting may not be warranted.

  1. IPV (inactivated poliovirus vaccine) cannot prevent transmission of poliovirus. Wild poliovirus has been non-existent in the USA for at least two decades. Even if wild poliovirus were to be re-imported by travel, vaccinating for polio with IPV cannot affect the safety of public spaces. Please note that wild poliovirus eradication is attributed to the use of a different vaccine, OPV or oral poliovirus vaccine. Despite being capable of preventing wild poliovirus transmission, use of OPV was phased out long ago in the USA and replaced with IPV due to safety concerns.
  2. Tetanus is not a contagious disease, but rather acquired from deep-puncture wounds contaminated with C. tetani spores. Vaccinating for tetanus (via the DTaP combination vaccine) cannot alter the safety of public spaces; it is intended to render personal protection only.
  3. While intended to prevent the disease-causing effects of the diphtheria toxin, the diphtheria toxoid vaccine (also contained in the DTaP vaccine) is not designed to prevent colonization and transmission of C. diphtheriae. Vaccinating for diphtheria cannot alter the safety of public spaces; it is likewise intended for personal protection only.
  4. The acellular pertussis (aP) vaccine (the final element of the DTaP combined vaccine), now in use in the USA, replaced the whole cell pertussis vaccine in the late 1990s, which was followed by an unprecedented resurgence of whooping cough. An experiment with deliberate pertussis infection in primates revealed that the aP vaccine is not capable of preventing colonization and transmission of B. pertussis. The FDA has issued a warning regarding this crucial finding.Furthermore, the 2013 meeting of the Board of Scientific Counselors at the CDC revealed additional alarming data that pertussis variants (PRN-negative strains) currently circulating in the USA acquired a selective advantage to infect those who are up-to-date for their DTaP boosters, meaning that people who are up-to-date are more likely to be infected, and thus contagious, than people who are not vaccinated.
  5. Among numerous types of H. influenzae, the Hib vaccine covers only type b. Despite its sole intention to reduce symptomatic and asymptomatic (disease-less) Hib carriage, the introduction of the Hib vaccine has inadvertently shifted strain dominance towards other types of H. influenzae (types a through f).These types have been causing invasive disease of high severity and increasing incidence in adults in the era of Hib vaccination of children. The general population is more vulnerable to the invasive disease now than it was prior to the start of the Hib vaccination campaign. Discriminating against children who are not vaccinated for Hib does not make any scientific sense in the era of non-type b H. influenzae disease.
  6. Hepatitis B is a blood-borne virus. It does not spread in a community setting, especially among children who are unlikely to engage in high-risk behaviors, such as needle sharing or sex. Vaccinating children for hepatitis B cannot significantly alter the safety of public spaces. Further, school admission is not prohibited for children who are chronic hepatitis B carriers. To prohibit school admission for those who are simply unvaccinated – and do not even carry hepatitis B – would constitute unreasonable and illogical discrimination.

In summary, a person who is not vaccinated with IPV, DTaP, HepB, and Hib vaccines due to reasons of conscience poses no extra danger to the public than a person who is. No discrimination is warranted.

How often do serious vaccine adverse events happen?

It is often stated that vaccination rarely leads to serious adverse events. Unfortunately, this statement is not supported by science. A recent study done in Ontario, Canada, established that vaccination actually leads to an emergency room visit for 1 in 168 children following their 12-month vaccination appointment and for 1 in 730 children following their 18-month vaccination appointment.

When the risk of an adverse event requiring an ER visit after well-baby vaccinations is demonstrably so high, vaccination must remain a choice for parents, who may understandably be unwilling to assume this immediate risk in order to protect their children from diseases that are generally considered mild or that their children may never be exposed to.

Can discrimination against families who oppose vaccines for reasons of conscience prevent future disease outbreaks of communicable viral diseases, such as measles?

Measles research scientists have for a long time been aware of the “measles paradox.” I quote from the article by Poland & Jacobson (1994) “Failure to Reach the Goal of Measles Elimination: Apparent Paradox of Measles Infections in Immunized Persons.” Arch Intern Med 154:1815-1820:

“The apparent paradox is that as measles immunization rates rise to high levels in a population, measles becomes a disease of immunized persons.”

Further research determined that behind the “measles paradox” is a fraction of the population called low vaccine responders. Low-responders are those who respond poorly to the first dose of the measles vaccine. These individuals then mount a weak immune response to subsequent RE-vaccination and quickly return to the pool of “susceptibles’’ within 2-5 years, despite being fully vaccinated.

Re-vaccination cannot correct low-responsiveness: it appears to be an immuno-genetic trait. The proportion of low-responders among children was estimated to be 4.7% in the USA.

Studies of measles outbreaks in Quebec, Canada, and China attest that outbreaks of measles still happen, even when vaccination compliance is in the highest bracket (95-97% or even 99%). This is because even in high vaccine responders, vaccine-induced antibodies wane over time. Vaccine immunity does not equal life-long immunity acquired after natural exposure.

It has been documented that vaccinated persons who develop breakthrough measles are contagious. In fact, two major measles outbreaks in 2011 (in Quebec, Canada, and in New York, NY) were re-imported by previously vaccinated individuals.

Taken together, these data make it apparent that elimination of vaccine exemptions, currently only utilized by a small percentage of families anyway, will neither solve the problem of disease resurgence nor prevent re-importation and outbreaks of previously eliminated diseases.

Is discrimination against conscientious vaccine objectors the only practical solution?

The majority of measles cases in recent US outbreaks (including the recent Disneyland outbreak) are adults and very young babies, whereas in the pre-vaccination era, measles occurred mainly between the ages 1 and 15. Natural exposure to measles was followed by lifelong immunity from re-infection, whereas vaccine immunity wanes over time, leaving adults unprotected by their childhood shots. Measles is more dangerous for infants and for adults than for school-aged children.

Despite high chances of exposure in the pre-vaccination era, measles practically never happened in babies much younger than one year of age due to the robust maternal immunity transfer mechanism. The vulnerability of very young babies to measles today is the direct outcome of the prolonged mass vaccination campaign of the past, during which their mothers, themselves vaccinated in their childhood, were not able to experience measles naturally at a safe school age and establish the lifelong immunity that would also be transferred to their babies and protect them from measles for the first year of life.

Luckily, a therapeutic backup exists to mimic now-eroded maternal immunity. Infants as well as other vulnerable or immunocompromised individuals, are eligible to receive immunoglobulin, a potentially life-saving measure that supplies antibodies directed against the virus to prevent or ameliorate disease upon exposure.

In summary: 1) due to the properties of modern vaccines, non-vaccinated individuals pose no greater risk of transmission of polio, diphtheria, pertussis, and numerous non-type b H. influenzae strains than vaccinated individuals do, non-vaccinated individuals pose virtually no danger of transmission of hepatitis B in a school setting, and tetanus is not transmissible at all; 2) there is a significantly elevated risk of emergency room visits after childhood vaccination appointments attesting that vaccination is not risk-free; 3) outbreaks of measles cannot be entirely prevented even if we had nearly perfect vaccination compliance; and 4) an effective method of preventing measles and other viral diseases in vaccine-ineligible infants and the immunocompromised, immunoglobulin, is available for those who may be exposed to these diseases.

Taken together, these four facts make it clear that discrimination in a public school setting against children who are not vaccinated for reasons of conscience is completely unwarranted as the vaccine status of conscientious objectors poses no undue public health risk.

Sincerely Yours,

~ Tetyana Obukhanych, PhD

Tetyana Obukhanych, PhD, is the author of the book Vaccine Illusion.  She has studied immunology in some of the world’s most prestigious medical institutions. She earned her PhD in Immunology at the Rockefeller University in New York and did postdoctoral training at Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA and Stanford University in California.

Recommended:
Sources:



Vaccination Mindset – Terrified of Germs, Trusting of Toxins

“A people without knowledge of their past, origin and culture is like a tree without roots.”-Marcus Garvey

All over the world, parents are reacting out of fear. They are terrified of germs, yet they trust toxic injections. Why does the Western world adopt a culture of vaccination? Because we fear microbes. We have been trained to believe that communicable diseases are life threatening and that we are powerless to fight them without vaccinations. After all, it is reasoned, people used to die from diseases like the measles, didn’t they?

Although this is true, we don’t look at the evidence in perspective. In the past, we didn’t have access to clean water and nutritious food. Under conditions like these, many mild illnesses posed a serious threat and were more likely to prove fatal.

Research is Time Consuming; Besides, Isn’t That What Regulators Are For?

In America, and much of the Western world, we are busy and overworked. Understandably, we want to be able to trust the expert opinions of public servants in their respective fields. Some would call this the height of naiveté, but it’s understandable. No one has the time to be an expert on everything. But when we outsource responsibility for our health, the outcome is uncertain at best. Many Americans look to the CDC for guidance, but are they really the best source of unbiased information?

Four scathing federal studies, including two by Congress, one by the US Senate, and one by the HHS Inspector General, paint CDC as a cesspool of corruption, mismanagement, and dysfunction with alarming conflicts of interest suborning its research, regulatory, and policymaking functions. CDC rules allow vaccine industry profiteers like Dr. Offit to serve on advisory boards that add new vaccines to the schedule. In a typical example, Offit in 1999 sat on the CDC’s vaccine advisory committee and voted to add the rotavirus vaccine to CDC’s schedule, paving the way for him to make a fortune on his own rotavirus vaccine. Offit and his business partners sold the royalties to his rotavirus vaccine patent to Merck in 2006 for $182 million.-Robert Kennedy 

Big business is driving vaccine mandates, and they are using regulatory agencies as the vehicle.

Those Who Do Not Know The Past Will Believe Anything

It suits pharmaceutical industry interests to give credit where none is due and to revise history, giving credit to vaccines for eradicating disease. In medical school, doctors are taught that vaccines eradicated all manner of diseases when, in fact, improved sanitation is responsible. When doctors tell you vaccines eradicated disease, this shows a profound ignorance of history and the pharmaceutically biased indoctrination that they have mistaken for a medical education.

Any college freshman can tell you that correlation does not equal causation. Just because something correlates, that doesn’t mean that the cause is easy to determine. Vaccines were introduced well after diseases were already on the decline. Vaccine manufacturers and government regulators tell us that vaccines made the difference. While they try so hard to turn this correlation into causation, they paradoxically try to ignore the rapid rise of autism, asthma, allergies, ADHD and other neurological disorders that tightly correlate with today’s dirty vaccines and the overblown vaccine schedule. A few graphs are worth a thousand words. Here are some visuals of our forgotten history (click on the image below for more charts):

England and Wales whooping cough mortality rate from 1838 to 1978.

Pro-industry propaganda has permeated so deeply into Western consciousness, vaccines are seen as a panacea for diseases everywhere, both here and abroad. Foreign aid often comes in the form of a syringe, even when people don’t have access to the most basic of necessities, such as healthy food, or clean water.

We May Not Like To Admit It, but All Cultures Do This

When faced with an unknown, people often resort to rituals and other superstitions. Germs are intimidating because they can bring down the young and the old. They are invisible and are usually untraceable. Communicable diseases are frightening, powerful forces of nature. When people feel powerless, they often resort to magical thinking.

You can see this kind of behavior in sports fanatics. As fans, they have little influence over the outcome of sporting events. To grant team supporters an illusion of control, they often wear their lucky jersey in order to “help their team win.” The belief that their actions can have a direct effect on their teams’ outcome is widespread. According to one ESPN poll which showed no statistically significant differences between race, education, or gender, as many as 1 in 5 fans try to improve the luck of their favorite team in a variety of different ways. Some fans never purchase or own things that are the colors of their rival teams. Other fans believe that they are the bad luck, so they refuse to watch their favorite teams play. Some of the most die-hard fans don’t watch the seasons’ most crucial games due to the belief that watching those games will “jinx” their team. This behavior is very ironic, as it is actually the opposite of supporting one’s team.

Westerners are just as superstitious as everyone else. We just show it in different ways. We make connections where none exist. We see correlations where none exist.

Ritualistic behavior is common to all cultures. When people die (death is another aspect of life with which we have little to no control) a series of rituals, such as a wake, a viewing, burial/cremation, and so on take place as a means of mitigating the loss and showing respect for the deceased. These rituals help to give a sense of control over death. Even though we can not stop death, we can organize our activities around it.

When faced with microbes and the threat of disease, something we believe to be out of our control, many of us subject ourselves or our children to the ritual of vaccination. We are attempting to control the invisible.

The Ritual of Vaccination

Even though they seldom work in a lab, doctors wear lab coats, which lends an air of authority, and an illusory scientific presence. They tell their patients vaccines are safe and effective without discussing the risks. Unfortunately, most doctors are not fully aware of the risks. They cannot tell you what the shots contain or why many of the ingredients are included. They are however, usually aware that they and the pharmaceutical companies are safe from harm should your child die or become disabled due to the vaccinations they recommend.

Vaccination is a form of ritualistic practice that is filled with make-believe. Why are vaccines injected? Infants and children often cry when injected, and this pain engenders a renewed commitment from the parents. The injury of injection, however small, doubles their commitment. After a brief surge of guilt, parents become more entrenched in the idea that vaccines must be necessary, because of the belief that no one, even pharmaceutical industry employees, would put a child through pain if it wasn’t necessary.

Despite the fact that there has never been a study proving all of the vaccines in the schedule are cumulatively safe, and the growing concern among scientists and doctors about their synergistic toxicity, parents all over the world are sacrificing their children to the superstition of vaccination. With reassuring voices, they tell their children the shots are necessary, even when they know nothing about them.

The information age has begun to change this entrenched belief. It is difficult, if not impossible, to silence tens of thousands of parents, holistic health care practitioners, and vaccine injured people connected to the Internet. The truth is being disseminated all over the web. Vaccines can and often do cause the exact diseases they are intended to prevent. Also, death is a known risk of immunization, as is paralysis, brain damage, neurological disorders, and auto-immune disease.

If We Are To Believe the CDC, Formaldehyde is Unsafe in Construction, Yet Perfectly Safe When Injected

Ever since the CDC released a report on the dangers of formaldehyde found in laminate flooring, people have been in an uproar over the health risks. News stories abound warning people to avoid laminate flooring or advising them to limit their exposure. The CDC even recently revised their report, showing that the dangers are in fact worse than they originally stated.

Formaldehyde in laminate flooring can contribute to respiratory problems and irritation in the general population, not just to those in at-risk groups. The lifetime cancer risk was raised from a range of 2 to 9 per 100,000 extra cases of cancer to 6 to 30 extra cases per 100,000 due to exposure from the fumes of formaldehyde additives in flooring. With all this concern over the risks to people’s health from breathing in minute particles of formaldehyde dust from flooring, it stands to reason that more people should be concerned with the fact that formaldehyde is commonly found in vaccines.

Formaldehyde is injected directly into the bloodstream via vaccination. But under the auspices of vaccination, anything goes due to enculturation. People of a culture believe that their way is the correct way to do things, and other cultural practices are backward or flat out wrong.

Health Doesn’t Come From a Bottle, and It Doesn’t Come From a Syringe

With clean hands and dirty injections, doctors spread disease to all those who heed their advice. Using a syringe heightens the sense of urgency because injections are commonly used with trauma victims and those who are unconscious. If more vaccines came in another form, they would be less popular. They would seem less urgently needed, and the connection between failed pharmaceuticals (like the countless medications taken off the market because they weren’t safe) and vaccines would be better formed in the minds of the public. Vaccines are, in fact, pharmaceuticals. They are made by the same corrupt companies that are regularly caught breaking laws and fined for putting profits before public safety. Health doesn’t come from pharmaceuticals. It comes from good sanitation, proper nutrition, and low exposure to toxins.

Conclusion

For a culture to be functioning, people must believe that their way is the right and proper way to do things. Most Westerners, especially Americans, believe that culture is something other far away people have and that we live by the scientific method. When it comes to the health of our children, we live by the untested method.

When Andrew Wakefield first recommended that the MMR vaccine be split up into separate vaccinations, he was vilified, labeled a quack, and stripped of his medical license. He dared to research the dangers of vaccination. He challenged the Western cultural paradigm. He was seen as a traitor to our way of life. Yet, when an entire country, Japan, refused the MMR vaccine and chose to use 3 separate vaccines, they were not vilified because they belong to a different culture.

The Japanese do not begin vaccines until two years of age, and their schedule has less than half of the immunizations than the U.S. schedule. As a result, their SIDS rate has plummeted to nearly nothing, and their autism rates are a tiny fraction of America’s. As vaccinations have been added to the CDC schedule, autism rates have been rising. The vaccine injured are all around us, so many now that they have become the new normal.

We are told that vaccines are keeping diseases from making a comeback and that herd immunity is propping up our health like the Greek Titan Atlas holding up the world. These are myths. Vaccine mythologies run deep, and many people are beholden to these beliefs. Improved sanitation eradicated disease. If we are fortunate enough to open our eyes to this basic historic fact, then we must open the eyes of others as well. Many of us are under the cultural delusion that to vaccinate is to do something, and not to vaccinate is to do nothing. In truth, there is much that we can do to build up our immune systems. Only the truth can set us free and pull back our cultural blinders.

Recommended Reading:
Sources: