Quality of Beef – Nothing But Drugs and More Drugs

March 8, 2013              

Does your beef taste a little bland these days? We’ve discovered why. And yet another reason why you should ALWAYS go organic.

Back in October we uncovered what cattle owners were really feeding their cows.1 A diet any four-year-old would drool over…one full of candy and junk food.

The use of hormones and antibiotics is no secret. Cattle owners give growth hormones such as rBGH to two-thirds of all beef cattle in the U.S. to rush growth and get them to slaughter faster.2 And they also give 22 percent of dairy cows hormones to increase milk production.

The European Union conducted a study and found that those hormone residues remain in the meat. The very meat you’re buying and eating.

It’s cancer on a plate. However, the U.S. doesn’t seem to agree. Japan, Canada, Australia, and the European Union have all banned the use of hormones.

But why doesn’t the U.S. do the same?

It all comes down to money and a new business partner in the cattle industry…

Big Pharma. But this time it’s Big Pharma disguised as professors, scientists, and universities.3

The cattle industry is now giving livestock an actual pharmaceutical drug called Zilmax. The drug industry used to call it Zilpaterol.4 It was supposed to treat asthma. But it was completely useless. Then the World Doping Industry had it banned. They discovered it produced muscle, similar to anabolic steroids.

The cattle industry saw this as a perfect opportunity. Merck re-branded the drug.5 They named it Zilmax, labeled it as a “growth stimulant,” and feedlots bought it up. Especially after the severe drought last year that forced farmers to start feeding their herds anything from sprinkles to Fruit Loops to fatten them up.

At first, ranchers were skeptical of the drug. But Big Pharma knew how to persuade them. Intervet, a subsidiary of Merck, hired West Texas A&M professor Ty Lawrence to sell their drug. Lawrence grew up in Texas; he was raised on a cattle ranch and has a drawl. Ranchers could relate to him. He was one of them after all. What they didn’t know was that Intervet was providing significant financial support for Lawrence’s lab and the university.

Bad news for us.

Studies reveal that Zilmax increased heart rate and caused tremors in people. One expert says that on hot days it can cause cattle to become heat stressed and go lame. So then why does the industry continue to use it?

They trust Lawrence. “We want to make better beef,” he said, “make more of it, and make it more efficiently.”

Zilmax makes the cows produce more muscle and less fat. That means more pounds. And the more pounds of beef to sell, the more money to make.

But there’s a problem with having the cows gain just muscle. Without fat, the cows don’t get the marbling that gives the meat all its juicy flavors. The beef becomes tasteless and bland.

“We’re not getting the beef we’re asking for,” said Paul Heinrich, an executive of the global food distributor Sysco.

Intervet once again called upon a university scientist to keep people quiet and calm. Brad Johnson received a $33,000 grant to find a way to enhance marbling and tenderization by using…chemicals! That’s right…more drugs to cancel out the effects of other drugs.

But what happens when the drugs used to stop the side effects of Zilmax start to have side effects? Are they just going to continue to keep adding more and more drugs?

It’s reported that major meat companies including Tyson Foods, JBS SA, Cargill, and National Beef Packing Co. all use Zilmax. They account for 84 percent of the meat market. Cargill, which refused to use the drug for years, once said Zilmax had taken the process to far. But last year they apparently jumped on the bandwagon.

If the FDA and researchers aren’t going to watch out for your health then you need to.

If you can, buy your meat directly from a farmer or rancher. That way you know exactly what you are getting. But most of all…always buy grass-fed and organic meat. Your health may just depend on it.

References:

1 http://inhresearch.com/2012/10/a-halloween-treat-you-didnt-know-you-were-getting/
2 http://animalrights.about.com/od/animalsusedforfood/f/AntibioticsrGBH.htm
3 http://chronicle.com/article/As-Beef-Cattle-Become/131480/
4 http://foodrenegade.com/zilmax-growth-promotant-for-cattle/
5 http://money.msn.com/now/post.aspx?post=9d72a9ef-a970-4f39-b4c3-63af5d82c2e4

Related Articles:

• A Halloween “Treat” You Didn’t Know You Were Getting
• Why Prescribed Blood Thinners Aren’t Working (and it’s Not the Side Effects)
• Doctors Find New Reason to Prescribe Antidepressants
• Burn Calories and Build Muscle Mass with This Fruit
• Is the Mainstream Finally Catching On?

Source:  http://institutefornaturalhealing.com/2013/03/quality-of-beef-nothing-but-drugs-and-more-drugs/

Collusion Between Pharmaceutical Industry and Government Deepens

August 02 2012 |184,209views

Story at-a-glance

• In January 2010, Julie Gerberding, former director of the CDC, became the President of Merck’s vaccine unit. Gerberding has admitted her “bullish” stance on vaccines, and has a long history of disregard for vaccine safety
• January 2011, Elias Zerhouni, former director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH)—one of the world’s foremost medical research centers, and an agency of the US Department of Health and Human Services—became the President of Sanofi-Aventis’ research labs. Under his lead, the NIH became embroiled in scandal when it became apparent that the agency allowed its employees to have conflicts of interest and financial ties to industry

By Dr. Mercola

There's no shortage of stories detailing conflicts of interest—so many in fact that you may be getting sick and tired of hearing of them. However, this is a truly important issue that must be tackled, and one of the ways of doing that is by exposing it to the harsh light of day. As long as people remain unaware, or turn a blind eye, it will continue unabated. 

The price we pay for not paying attention is the loss of health, as the information disseminated by grossly compromised health agencies is skewed in favor of various industries, with Big Pharma leading the pack as one of the most powerful political and governmental influences.

Here, I will review two important revolving-door cases, and while neither is recent news, many of you may still be unaware of them.

Former CDC Director Now President of Merck's Vaccine Unit

In the summer of 2011, Merck president Julie Gerberding said in a news interview¹ that she's "very bullish on vaccines," as she recounted the various ways she helps Merck sell its products. What she didn't divulge was her motivation for leaving her job as director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)—an agency charged with overseeing vaccines and drug companies—and join Merck in the first place, back in January 2010.

If you don't see the enormity of the influence her former high-level ties to the CDC can have, just consider the fact that Merck makes 14 of the 17 pediatric vaccines recommended by the CDC, and 9 of the 10 recommended for adults, and while vaccine safety advocates are trying to rein in the number of vaccines given to babies, safety concerns keep falling on deaf ears. The vaccine industry is booming, and it's become quite clear that profit potential is the driving factor behind it.

One of the reasons for this is because vaccine patents do not expire like drugs do, so each vaccine adopted for widespread use has the potential to make enormous, continuous profits for decades to come. Vaccine makers also enjoy a high degree of immunity against lawsuits—and in the case of pandemic vaccines, absolute immunity—so the financial liability when something goes wrong is very low, compared to drugs.

Gerberding has a Long History of Disregard for Vaccine Safety

Joining a parade of other high-ranking government officials who pass through the revolving doors between government and Big Pharma, Gerberding left a trail of controversy behind her when she left the CDC. While a 2009 article by the Institute for Southern Studies lists a number of them², I believe they left out the most important ones, namely her misinformation campaign about the pandemic swine flu vaccine, as well as her naive stance on vaccine safety issues in general. 

The CDC disseminated extremely exaggerated data on the 2009 H1N1 "pandemic" and urged almost everyone in the U.S. to take the new, untested vaccines. When questions arose, they blocked CBS's requests for samples of the swine flu cases and added obstacles to getting information. Despite the many dangers that have since been linked to the hastily developed vaccine—including the confirmed link to narcolepsy—the H1N1 vaccine is now part and parcel of the "regular" seasonal flu vaccine, although most people are completely unaware of this fact. And the CDC is now, for the first time ever, urging the seasonal flu vaccine on everyone in the country, from six months' of age until death.

Even more disturbing, the CDC withheld data on miscarriages from the H1N1 vaccines under Gerberding's lead, while insisting that pregnant women be put first in line to receive it. This was a dramatic reversal of its own recommendations. More than 3,500 post-vaccination miscarriages may have simply been ignored by the CDC.

One of Merck's potentially most dangerous vaccines right now is Gardasil; a vaccine that so far has been linked to thousands of adverse events and at least 49 unexplained deaths. It's a situation that the FDA and CDC have repeatedly denied, even as the adverse reports mount.

Gerberding's 2004 report to Congress, 'Prevention of Genital Human Papillomavirus Infection'³ likely played a significant role in getting the controversial vaccine approved in the first place. Needless to say, the approval of this questionable vaccine guaranteed her future employer billions of dollars-worth of profits. Gerberding has also been a staunch defender of thimerosal, the mercury-based preservative used in many vaccines, and has consistently denied any links between vaccines and autism.

All in all, Gerberding has repeatedly demonstrated that safety is nowhere on her list of priorities or concerns when it comes to vaccines. It's easy to see why Merck would want her to head up their vaccine unit. For the rest of us, however, her blatant disregard for proven vaccine safety is bad news indeed.

Former NIH Director Now Heads Sanofi Research Labs

Another former government official who's switched sides is Elias Zerhouni, former director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH)—one of the world's foremost medical research centers, and an agency of the US Department of Health and Human Services. Zerhouni is now head of Sanofi-Aventis' research labs⁴. He also is a professor at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine; a member of the Board of Trustees at the Mayo Clinic; and is a senior fellow for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation's Global Health Program⁵.
As pointed out in a recent article by Forbes Magazine⁶, Zerhouni is no stranger to controversies over conflicts-of-interest.

In the fall of 2003, the NIH with Zerhouni at its head faced grave accusations when it came to light that hundreds of its scientists had financial ties to the medical and pharmaceutical industries. According to a 2004 article in the NIH Record⁷, over 100 scientists did not get approval for their industry activities, even though the rules were so loose virtually all requests to conduct outside work were approved by the agency, without any limits on compensation or hours worked for outside entities.

In one case, an academic scientist was found to have a financial interest in a therapy that ended up killing a patient. The case served as a potent warning of how dangerous such conflicts of interest can be. While Zerhouni managed to emerge from the 2003 debacle looking like a good crisis manager, the following paragraphs from the NIH Record⁸ are quite telling. Essentially, Zerhouni dissuaded Congress from doing the right thing, which is ban all outside activities of those working for the NIH, limiting the restrictions for conflicts of interest to upper level management only:

"[Zerhouni] disclosed that "initially, Congress truly wanted to ban [all outside activities], and the members of the committee have been very public about that...I was fortunate to be able to make contact with legislators and to help them understand what happened, how it happened, and why [a draconian response] might not be the right thing to do."

Zerhouni said that over the course of long discussion, a good consensus emerged that formed the basis of NIH's approach to the issue: stewards of public funds should never be vulnerable even to the perception that their activities could result in private gain. The top concern, he said, is, "How do you keep a true firewall and separation between the public trust — the money the public has given us in trust — and the activities of those who manage that resource?"

He doesn't think it was well appreciated outside of NIH that the agency "has a dual nature — number one, we are a granting agency, but number two, we are also one of the most advanced, most capable biomedical research institutions in the world.

So we're both sort of an academic, scientific research place, and yet next to that we're also a government agency with its own rules and regulations...I said, look, we need to build a firewall around those who have fiduciary responsibility relative to the government, and those who do not. And that's where we came up with these much more stringent rules for directors, deputy directors, and people who have those authorities, versus those who do not."

Conflicts of Interest Affect Your Life and Well-Being...

When it comes to medicine, mere disclosure of conflict of interest is not nearly enough. Patients need unbiased advice when it comes to making decisions that can impact their very life, and physicians and scientists with financial ties to the drug industry should not be allowed to participate in broad policy and public-health recommendations in the first place. Likewise, while it's perfectly legal to engage the revolving door and switch jobs from government agencies to private industry and vice-versa, this practice has become so widespread it has undermined the entire system of checks and balances.

Conflict of interest is rampant not only within the field of medicine, but the revolving doors between government and industry has effectively led to a situation where it's now extremely difficult, if not impossible, to trust conventional health advice from the federal government—which is supposed to be independent due to this massive collusion between government and industry. Here are a few more examples of the many revolving doors between the pharmaceutical industry and the US government:

• The American Cancer Society has close financial ties to both makers of mammography equipment and cancer drugs. Other conflicts of interest include ties to, and financial support from, the pesticide, petrochemical, biotech, cosmetics, and junk food industries—the very industries whose products are the primary contributors to cancer
• Drug companies pay seven-figure amounts into FDA coffers to gain approval of their drugs. FDA staff knows that the cash means higher salaries and more perks in the agency budget. (Incidentally, the FDA's commissioner Margaret Hamburg came straight from the boardroom of America's largest seller of dental amalgam, Henry Schein, Inc.)
• Conflicts of interest are also rampant in a mass vaccination infrastructure that has the same people who are regulating and promoting vaccines also evaluating vaccine safety.
• The vaccine industry gives millions for conferences, grants, and medical education classes sponsored by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). The vaccine industry even helped build AAP's headquarters.
• President Obama's nominee at the Department of Homeland Security overseeing bioterrorism defense, Dr. Tara O'Toole, served as a key advisor for a lobbying group funded by a pharmaceutical company that asked the government to spend more money for anthrax vaccines and biodefense research⁹

There are countless others—so many, in fact, I'm sure you could fill an entire book with examples. These types of blatant conflicts should simply not be tolerated, but they most certainly are. For now the majority still does not understand the pharmaceutical industry's power and influence over government, and the field of conventional medicine itself, but the tide is beginning to turn, and will continue to do so as more and more people get informed.

What Can You do to Take Control of Your Health?

The good news is that increasing numbers of people are now waking up to these harsh realities, and you, being among those who are informed, can help share this knowledge with others. Remember that the definition of fascism is a government system that has complete power in regimenting all industry and forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism. What we have here is a hybrid—a sort of corporate fascism, where industry has powerful control over government, and forcefully suppresses anything that threatens their monopoly on profits.

Unfortunately, this can be extremely dangerous as it pertains to your health.

Virtually every measurable index indicates that despite the ever-increasing amounts of money invested, if you live in the United States your chance of achieving optimal health through the medical system is only getting worse. While the U.S. spends more than twice the amount on health care as other developed nations, we rank 49th in life expectancy worldwide—far lower than most other developed nations! The time is ripe for you to take control of your health, and this site is full of free comprehensive recommendations that can serve as an excellent, truly independent starting point.

When it comes to your health, you simply cannot accept claims at their face value ... you've got to dig below the surface and use all the resources available to you, including your own commonsense and reason, true independent experts' advice and other's experiences, to determine what medical treatment or advice will be best for you in any given situation. Ultimately, you must come to the realization that YOU are responsible for your, and your family's health -- not me, not your physician, and certainly not any researchers or government health agencies on a drug or vaccine manufacturer's payroll.
You've got to become an active participant in your care and make sure you are making decisions that correspond with your own best judgment, knowledge and experiences.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/08/02/merck-flu-vaccine-conflicts.aspx

Merck Accused of Lying about MMR Vaccine Effectiveness

July 10 2012 | 98,427 views

Story at-a-glance

• Two virologists have filed a federal lawsuit against Merck, their former employer, alleging the vaccine maker overstated the effectiveness of their mumps vaccine, which may have cost the US government hundreds of millions of dollars over the past decade. They claim they “witnessed firsthand the improper testing and data falsification in which Merck engaged to artificially inflate the vaccine's efficacy findings"
• Chatom Primary Care has also filed a federal antitrust class action lawsuit against Merck, alleging Merck went to great lengths to manipulate test procedures and falsifying results to prop up fraudulent efficacy claims, thereby maintaining its monopoly on the MMR vaccine
• These two lawsuits couldn’t come at a more precarious time for Merck, as the Italian Health Ministry recently conceded the MMR vaccine caused autism in a now nine-year old boy—albeit this news has been effectively censored in the US
• A recent review of the varicella (chickenpox) vaccination program in the U.S. concluded that the vaccine has not proven to be cost-effective; increased the incidence of shingles; failed to provide long-term protection from the disease it targets―chicken pox―and; is less effective than the natural immunity that existed in the general population before the vaccine. Vaccine efficacy was found to have declined well below 80 percent by of 2002.

Download Interview Transcript

Visit the Mercola Video Library

By Dr. Mercola

Things aren't going so well lately in the litigation department for Merck, which stands accused of lying according to not just one, but two class-action lawsuits.
In the first case, two former Merck virologists accuse their former employer of overstating the effectiveness of the mumps vaccine in Merck's combination MMR shot, which may have cost the US government hundreds of millions of dollars over the past decadeⁱ.

Merck's mumps vaccine was originally licensed 45 years ago. Since the 1970s, it's been part of the trivalent measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine, which is part of the recommended childhood vaccination schedule. The case, which was initially filed in 2010, was unsealed late last month. As reported by the Courthouse News Serviceⁱⁱ:

"... Stephen Krahling and Joan Wlochowski were Merck virologists who claim in their unsealed complaint that they "witnessed firsthand the improper testing and data falsification in which Merck engaged to artificially inflate the vaccine's efficacy findings."
... As the largest single purchaser of childhood vaccines (accounting for more than 50 percent of all vaccine purchases), the United States is by far the largest financial victim of Merck's fraud," according to the 2010 False Claims Act complaint."

According to Nasdaq.comⁱⁱⁱ:

"Merck--which stressed that none of these allegations relate to the safety of its product--said the lawsuit is "completely without merit", and that it plans to "vigorously defend itself."

It's quite interesting to note the chosen language in Merck's rebuttal. It in no way addresses the issue of the vaccine's effectiveness, which is the core issue of the lawsuit and the allegation by the two former Merck employees that the drug company purposefully used improper testing methods and falsified data to make the mumps vaccine appear highly effective when the opposite was true. Instead, Merck responds by saying that none of the lawsuit's allegations relate to the safety of its products. Such evasive maneuvering certainly gives the appearance of an admission of guilt.

Second Lawsuit Filed

A mere week after the first case was unsealed, a federal antitrust class action lawsuit was filed by Chatom Primary Care. According to Courthouse News Service^iv:

"Merck has known for a decade that its mumps vaccine is "far less effective" than it tells the government, and it falsified test results and sold millions of doses of "questionable efficacy," flooding and monopolizing the market, a primary caregiver claims in a federal antitrust class action.

... Chatom says in its antitrust complaint that Merck falsely claims its mumps vaccine is 95 percent effective. That claim "deterred and excluded competing manufacturers," who would enter the risky and expensive vaccine market only if they believed they could craft a better product...

Merck is the only manufacturer licensed by the FDA to sell the mumps vaccine in United States, and if it could not show that the vaccine was 95 percent effective, it risked losing its lucrative monopoly... That's why Merck found it critically important to keep claiming such a high efficacy rate, the complaint states. And, Chatom claims, that's why Merck went to great lengths, including "manipulating its test procedures and falsifying the test results," to prop up the bogus figure, though it knew that the attenuated virus from which it created the vaccine had been altered over the years during the manufacturing process, and that the quality of the vaccine had degraded as a result."

According to these two lawsuits, Merck began a sham testing program in the late 1990's to hide the declining efficacy of the vaccine. The objective of the fraudulent trials was to "report efficacy of 95 percent or higher regardless of the vaccine's true efficacy." This program was initially referred to as "Protocol 007," the Chatom claim states, and instead of testing the vaccine's efficacy against a wild mumps virus, as is the norm, Merck used its own attenuated strain of the virus—the identical strain with which the children were being vaccinated!

That's as brilliant as it is devious, and a perfect example of how medical research can be manipulated to achieve desired results. Suzanne Humphries recently wrote an excellent summary for GreenMedInfo.com, explaining in layman's terms how the tests were manipulated (see Sources). The two virologists bringing the lawsuit against Merck claim they witnessed firsthand this deception and were asked to directly participate in it.

As reported by the Courthouse News Service^v:

"That "subverted" the purpose of the testing regime, "which was to measure the vaccine's ability to provide protection against a disease-causing mumps virus that a child would actually face in real life. The end result of this deviation ... was that Merck's test overstated the vaccine's effectiveness," Chatom claims.

Merck also added animal antibodies to blood samples to achieve more favorable test results, though it knew that the human immune system would never produce such antibodies, and that the antibodies created a laboratory testing scenario that "did not in any way correspond to, correlate with, or represent real life ... virus neutralization in vaccinated people," according to the complaint.

Chatom claims that the falsification of test results occurred "with the knowledge, authority and approval of Merck's senior management."

Health versus Profits

Considering the extent of the allegations here, it is really shocking that the conventional media has not picked up on this story. About the only major media source reporting on it was Forbes Magazine^vi

Interestingly, Forbes stated that this case gives "vaccine foes" new ammunition for their argument that drug companies are more interested in money than protecting consumers' health. And rightfully so. While I do not advocate indiscriminately abstaining from all vaccines—I strongly advise and encourage exercising due diligence because vaccines can cause serious reactions that can have such devastating consequences. I believe in informed consent and the freedom to choose. There can be little doubt anymore that drug companies are in it for the profits, and virtually no price seems too high for them when it comes to protecting their profit-making.

I've written extensively about the many criminal and ethical wrongdoings of Big Pharma, and this is certainly not the first shocking allegation of pharmaceutical product manufacturing fraud that involves launching or keeping an inferior and/or dangerous product on the market.

While vaccine makers often claim there's not a lot of profit to be had in vaccines, you have to remember that vaccine patents do not expire like drugs do. Vaccines continue to make profits as long as they're in use, so risk of future losses due to competition is virtually nonexistent. So of course there's profit in vaccines—especially once it's placed on the childhood vaccination schedule because that guarantees the vaccine will have a stable, guaranteed annual market as a new cohort of babies are born every year. And of course vaccine makers will protect those huge profits—even, apparently, when it means putting children's health at risk.

There is also the issue of immunity from prosecution. Merck lost many billions when their drug, Vioxx, killed tens of thousands of people and was taken off the market in 2004. If any of their vaccines killed similar numbers, or even more, they would not be held liable in damages for a single cent because Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court have completely shielded big drug companies like Merck from civil liability for vaccine injuries and deaths.

Also you need to remember that IF a vaccine is indeed highly effective, and avoiding the disease in question is worth the risk of the potential side effects from the vaccine, then it could be said that the benefits outweigh the risks. However, if the vaccine is ineffective (and/or the disease doesn't pose a great threat to begin with), then the vaccine may pose an unacceptable risk... At the very least, an ineffective vaccine will certainly skew the benefit to risk ratio toward greater risk, unless the vaccine is guaranteed harmless, and this, I'm afraid, cannot be said for the MMR.

This, I believe, is one of the most important points to remember in this discussion.
It's not so much about determining whether or not the reduced effectiveness of this vaccine allowed the mumps outbreaks of 2006 and 2009 to occur, both of which occurred in highly vaccinated communities, but rather it's a question of: "Have millions of children taken an unnecessary health risk by being injected with an ineffective vaccine?"

"Nothing Matters More than Safety," Merck Says

"Nothing is more important to Merck than the safety and effectiveness of our vaccines and medicines and the people who use them," Forbes quotes a Merck spokesman^vii.

Really?

Then WHY did they heavily promote Vioxx and keep it on the market until it had killed more than 60,000 people? I warned my readers that this pain killer might be a real killer for some people, five years before Merck made its $30 billion recall! Five years they let it go, and they undoubtedly would have kept it on the market longer had the lethal dangers not become so shockingly obvious to other scientists.

After Vioxx came the HPV vaccine Gardasil—perhaps the most unnecessary vaccine ever created, and likely one of the most dangerous to boot. Merck claims their main concern is safety... They must be speaking about some parallel Universe, because ever since Gardasil's approval in 2006, reports of life-altering side effects and sudden deaths of otherwise healthy teenagers have stacked up into the thousands, yet Merck steadfastly refuses to acknowledge or address these health risks.

Gardasil appears to have one of the highest risk to benefit ratios of any vaccine on the market, and India even halted Merck's post-licensing trials of the vaccine after four young participants died, yet Merck has the gall to claim that nothing is more important to them than safety. Give me a break... Actions speak louder than words, and Merck has a long paper trail of litigation highlighting the company's questionable ethics.

Did Ineffective MMR Vaccine Promote Mumps Outbreaks?

In 2009, more than 1,000 people in New Jersey and New York came down with mumps. At the time, questions arose about the effectiveness of the vaccine as 77 percent of those sickened were vaccinated. No vaccine is ever 100 percent effective, of course, and according to the CDC, the MMR was estimated to be somewhere between 76-95 percent effective. In fact, the second MMR dose is necessary because up to 20 percent of individuals do not develop measles immunity after the first dose. The second dose is intended to provide a "second chance" for the vaccine to work, which is further evidence of this shot's ineffectiveness.

A similar scenario occurred in 2006, when mumps infected more than 6,500 people in the US. Most of those cases also occurred among the vaccinated population, primarily among college students who had received two doses of MMR vaccine. About the only people who were truly immune to mumps were older Americans who had recovered from mumps as children, and therefore had received natural, lifelong immunity.
But just how and why did these outbreaks occur?

Typically, vaccine promoters will stress the importance of compliance with the vaccine schedule that requires multiple doses of a vaccine in order to create and maintain vaccine induced "herd immunity," because a vaccine is never 100 percent effective. However, they never quite seem to be able to explain why the majority of outbreaks occur in areas that are thought to HAVE herd immunity status, i.e. where the majority of people are vaccinated and "should" therefore never get the disease.

What You Need to Know about "Herd Immunity"

The problem is that there is in fact such a thing as natural herd immunity. But what they've done is they've taken this natural phenomenon and assume that vaccines will work the same way. However, they do not, and the science clearly shows that there's a big difference between naturally arising herd immunity and vaccine-induced herd immunity. To learn more, I urge you to listen to the following video, in which Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder and president of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), discusses the concept of herd immunity.

Download Interview Transcript

Barbara explains:

"The original concept of herd immunity is that when a population experiences the natural disease… natural immunity would be achieved – a robust, qualitatively superior natural herd immunity within the population, which would then protect other people from getting the disease in other age groups. It's the way infectious diseases work…" Barbara explains. "But the vaccinologists have adopted this idea of vaccine induced herd immunity.

The problem with it is that all vaccines only confer temporary protection… Pertussis vaccine is one the best examples… Pertussis vaccines have been used for about 50 to 60 years, and the organism has started to evolve to become vaccine resistant. I think this is not something that's really understood generally by the public: Vaccines do not confer the same type of immunity that natural exposure to the disease does."

Vaccine professionals would like you to believe they are the same, but they're qualitatively two entirely different types of immune responses.

"In most cases natural exposure to disease would give you a longer lasting, more robust, qualitatively superior immunity because it gives you both cell mediated immunity and humoral immunity," Barbara explains. "Humoral is the antibody production. The way you measure vaccine-induced immunity is by how high the antibody titers are. (How many antibodies you have, basically.)

But the problem is, the cell mediated immunity is very important as well. Most vaccines evade cell mediated immunity and go straight for the antibodies, which is only one part of immunity. That's been the big problem with the production of vaccines."

Vaccines are designed to trick your body's immune system into producing the antibodies needed to resist any future infection. However, your body is smarter than that. The artificial stimulation of your immune system produced by an attenuated or dead virus simply is not the same as your body engaging with and overcoming the real live virus.
According to Barbara:

"The fact that manmade vaccines cannot replicate the body's natural experience with the disease is one of the key points of contention between those who insist that mankind cannot live without mass use of multiple vaccines and those who believe that mankind's biological integrity will be severely compromised by their continued use.

... [I]s it better to protect children against infectious disease early in life through temporary immunity from a vaccine, or are they better off contracting certain contagious infections in childhood and attaining permanent immunity? Do vaccine complications ultimately cause more chronic illness and death than infectious diseases do? These questions essentially pit trust in human intervention against trust in nature and the natural order, which existed long before vaccines were created by man."

More Censored News: MMR Vaccine Caused Autism, Italian Court Rules

These two lawsuits couldn't come at a more precarious time for Merck, as the Italian Health Ministry has conceded the MMR vaccine caused autism in a now nine-year old boy. As a result, a court in Rimini, Italy recently awarded the family a 15-year annuity totaling 174,000 Euros (just under $220,000), plus reimbursement for court costs, ruling that the boy "has been damaged by irreversible complications due to vaccination (prophylaxis trivalent MMR)."

According to The Daily Mail, a British paper^viii:

"Judge Lucio Ardigo, awarding compensation to the family... said it was 'conclusively established' that Valentino had suffered from an 'autistic disorder associated with medium cognitive delay' and his illness, as Dr Barboni stated, was linked to receiving the jab. Lawyer Mr Ventaloro explained yesterday: 'This is very significant for Britain which uses, and has used, an MMR vaccine with the same components as the one given to Valentino. 'It is wrong for governments and their health authorities to exert strong pressure on parents to take children for the MMR jab while ignoring that this vaccine can cause autism and linked conditions.'

Claudio Simion, a leading member of the lobby group Association for Freedom of Choice in Vaccination (Comilva), adds: 'The Rimini judgment is vitally important for children everywhere. The numbers with autism are growing. It is a terrible thing that the authorities turn a blind eye to the connection between the MMR vaccination and this illness.'"

The UK newspaper, The Independent^ix, also reported on this groundbreaking case, stating that about 100 similar cases are now being examined by Italian lawyers, and more may be brought to court.

"Luca Ventaloro the family lawyer, said yesterday: "This is very significant for Britain which uses, and has used, an MMR vaccine with the same components as the one given to Valentino. It is wrong for governments and their health authorities to exert strong pressure on parents to take children for the MMR jab while ignoring that this vaccine can cause autism and linked conditions." The number of autism cases has risen sharply since the 1970s, with one in 64 British children affected," The Independent reported.

One can speculate about the reason why this news story was not picked up by a single US media outlet when it happened, but if I was a gambling man, I'd place my bet on protecting the vaccination program—not because it's a marvelous panacea that promotes optimal health and longevity and can be defended with raw facts and first-class science, but because it's a major profit center, both for the vaccine makers and for those whose pockets are lined with Big Pharma greenbacks in return for promoting and protecting the industry's golden goose.

Even More Bad News: U.S. Varicella Vaccination Program a Total Flop

In related news, a recent review of the varicella (chickenpox) vaccination program in the U.S. concluded that the vaccine has:

• Not proven to be cost-effective
• Increased the incidence of shingles
• Failed to provide long-term protection from the disease it targets―chicken pox―and
• Is less effective than the natural immunity that existed in the general population before the vaccine

Here, vaccine efficacy was found to have declined well below 80 percent by of 2002. This damning news was published in May in the journal Vaccine^x.

The information was gathered from a review of chicken pox and shingles statistics in the years since the vaccine was introduced. The researchers point out that although statistics showed shingles rates increased after the vaccine, "CDC authorities still claimed" that no increase had occurred. The authors also state that the CDC not only ignored the natural boost in immunity to the community that occurred with wild chickenpox, as opposed to the vaccine, but also ignored the "rare serious events following varicella vaccination" as well as the increasing rates of shingles among adults:

"In the prelicensure era, 95% of adults experienced natural chickenpox (usually as children)—these cases were usually benign and resulted in long-term immunity. Varicella vaccination is less effective than the natural immunity that existed in prevaccine communities. Universal varicella vaccination has not proven to be cost-effective as increased herpes zoster [shingles] morbidity has disproportionately offset cost savings associated with reductions in varicella disease. Universal varicella vaccination has failed to provide long-term protection from VZV disease."

Get Informed Before You Vaccinate

Stories such as these underscore the importance to take control of your own health, and that of your children. It's simply not wise to blindly depend on the information coming directly from the vaccine makers' PR departments, or from federal health officials and agencies that are mired in conflicts of interest with industry...

No matter what vaccination choices you make for yourself or your family, there is a basic human right to be fully informed about all risks of medical interventions and pharmaceutical products, like vaccines, and have the freedom to refuse if you conclude the benefits do not outweigh the risks for you or your child.

Unfortunately, the business partnership between government health agencies and vaccine manufacturers is too close and is getting out of hand. There is a lot of discrimination against Americans, who want to be free to exercise their human right to informed consent when it comes to making voluntary decisions about which vaccines they and their children use.

We cannot allow that to continue.

It's vitally important to know and exercise your legal rights and to understand your options when it comes to using vaccines and prescription drugs. For example, your doctor is legally obligated to provide you with the CDC Vaccine Information Statement (VIS) sheet and discuss the potential symptoms of side effects of the vaccination(s) you or your child receive BEFORE vaccination takes place. If someone giving a vaccine does not do this, it is a violation of federal law. Furthermore, the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 also requires doctors and other vaccine providers to:

• Keep a permanent record of all vaccines given and the manufacturer's name and lot number
• Write down serious health problems, hospitalizations, injuries and deaths that occur after vaccination in the patient's permanent medical record
• File an official report of all serious health problems, hospitalizations, injuries and deaths following vaccination to the federal Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS)

If a vaccine provider fails to inform, record or report, it is a violation of federal law. It's important to get all the facts before making your decision about vaccination; and to understand that you have the legal right to opt out of using a vaccine that you do not want you or your child to receive. At present, all 50 states allow a medical exemption to vaccination (medical exemptions must be approved by an M.D. or D.O.); 48 states allow a religious exemption to vaccination; and 18 states allow a personal, philosophical or conscientious belief exemption to vaccination.

However, vaccine exemptions are under attack in a number of states, and it's in everyone's best interest to protect the right to make informed, voluntary vaccination decisions.

What You Can Do to Make a Difference

While it seems "old-fashioned," the only truly effective actions you can take to protect the right to informed consent to vaccination and expand your rights under the law to make voluntary vaccine choices, is to get personally involved with your state legislators and the leaders in your community.

THINK GLOBALLY, ACT LOCALLY.

Mass vaccination policies are made at the federal level but vaccine laws are made at the state level, and it is at the state level where your action to protect your vaccine choice rights will have the greatest impact.

Signing up to be a user of NVIC's free online Advocacy Portal at www.NVICAdvocacy.org gives you access to practical, useful information to help you become an effective vaccine choice advocate in your own community. You will get real-time Action Alerts about what you can do if there are threats to vaccine exemptions in your state. With the click of a mouse or one touch on a Smartphone screen you will be put in touch with YOUR elected representatives so you can let them know how you feel and what you want them to do. Plus, when national vaccine issues come up, you will have all the information you need to make sure your voice is heard. So please, as your first step, sign up for the NVIC Advocacy Portal.

Right now, in California, the personal belief exemption is under attack by Pharma-funded medical trade organizations and public health officials trying to get a bill (AB 2109) passed that would require parents to get a medical doctor's signature to file an exemption for personal religious and conscientious beliefs. Watch NVIC's 90-second public service message and learn more about what you can do if you are a California resident.

Internet Resources

To learn more about vaccines, I encourage you to visit the following web pages on the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) website at www.NVIC.org:

• NVIC Memorial for Vaccine Victims: View descriptions and photos of children and adults, who have suffered vaccine reactions, injuries and deaths. If you or your child experiences an adverse vaccine event, please consider posting and sharing your story here.
• If You Vaccinate, Ask 8 Questions: Learn how to recognize vaccine reaction symptoms and prevent vaccine injuries.
• Vaccine Freedom Wall: View or post descriptions of harassment by doctors or state officials for making independent vaccine choices.
• Vaccine Ingredient Calculator (VIC): Find out just how much aluminum, mercury and other ingredients are in the vaccines your doctor is recommending for you or your child.
• Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) on MedAlerts. Search the government's VAERS database to find out what kinds of vaccine reactions, injuries and deaths have been reported by patients and heath care workers giving vaccines.

Find a Doctor Who will Listen to Your Concerns

Last but not least, if your pediatrician or doctor refuses to provide medical care to you or your child unless you agree to get vaccines you don't want, I strongly encourage you to have the courage to find another doctor. Harassment, intimidation, and refusal of medical care is becoming the modus operandi of the medical establishment in an effort to punish those patients and parents, who become truly educated about health and vaccination and want to make vaccine choices instead of being forced to follow risky one-size-fits-all vaccine policies.

If you are treated with disrespect or are harassed in any way by a doctor (or government official), do not engage in an unproductive argument. You may want to contact an attorney, your elected state representatives or local media, if you or your child are threatened.

That said, there is hope.

At least 15 percent of young doctors recently polled admit that they're starting to adopt a more individualized approach to vaccinations in direct response to the vaccine safety concerns of parents. It is good news that there is a growing number of smart young doctors, who prefer to work as partners with parents in making personalized vaccine decisions for children, including delaying vaccinations or giving children fewer vaccines on the same day or continuing to provide medical care for those families, who decline use of one or more vaccines.

So take the time to locate and connect with a doctor who treats you with compassion and respect and is willing to work with you to do what is right for your child, and isn't just competing for government incentives designed to increase vaccination rates at any cost.

References:

---

• ⁱ See All References

Sources:

• Courthouse News Service June 27, 2012
• GreenMedInfo.com July 4, 2012

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/07/10/merck-lying-about-vaccine-effectiveness.aspx

Are We Being Set Up for Another Fabricated Pandemic Like the Swine Flu?

July 07 2012 | 201,939 views |

Story at-a-glance

• A review of the latest news in vaccines and potential pandemics, underscoring the need for more probing questions about vaccine safety and efficacy; vaccine trials; and the scientific evidence backing up current claims and recommendations. Financial motives behind the promotion of pandemics and the vaccines that go along with them also need to be carefully considered
• The bioterror germ lab at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta has had repeated problems with airflow systems designed to help prevent the release of infectious agents such as anthrax, dangerous strains of influenza, the SARS coronavirus, and monkeypox
• Earlier this year, a vaccine researcher at the Northern California Institute for Research died shortly after being infected with the Neisseria meningitides bacteria
• Renewed calls for fast-tracked pandemic bird flu vaccines are being put out in response to the publication of two studies detailing the successful mutation of the H5N1 virus into a more virulent, and airborne, strain
• A recent study brings the issue of highly questionable vaccine trial standards to the fore yet again. Last year, India halted HPV vaccine trials being conducted by PATH, a USA-based not for profit non-governmental organization funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, after four girls died and 120 suffered serious side effects. A study into the alleged ethics violations concluded that the studies should not have been undertaken, as it would be impossible to establish efficacy of the vaccine in the areas selected due to lack of registration and monitoring of cervical cancer cases in India

By Dr. Mercola

A number of articles underscoring problems within the vaccine industry have recently circulated in the news.

While the fear of a mutated virus turning into a pandemic is flouted virtually every year to some degree, perhaps a greater concern is the potential for an engineered bioweapon somehow escaping the confines of our top level bioterror labs—a possibility that seems increasingly credible, when you consider the astounding safety “snafus” that occur at these labs from time to time. 

The recent incident at the bioterror germ lab at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Atlanta is just the latest scare, and it highlights the fact that seemingly unbelievable errors can and do occur, despite all guarantees to the contrary.

Bio Lab Safety Questioned

According to The Federal Timesⁱ:

“A $214 million bioterror germ lab at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta has had repeated problems with airflow systems designed to help prevent the release of infectious agents, government documents and internal emails show.

While the agency says no one has been infected, a biosafety expert says the problems appear to be major violations of laboratory operating standards.

The area of the building with problems involves Biosafety Level 3 labs that can be used for experiments involving anthrax, dangerous strains of influenza, the SARS coronavirus, monkeypox and other microbes that have the potential to be used as bioweapons.” [Emphasis mine]

Apparently, air from a research lab in one of the Biosafety Level 3 buildings was being vented into a so-called “clean” area, where visitors are not required to wear protective gear, rather than being filtered and re-circulated. While it’s being reported as an isolated incident, CDC engineers appear to have raised questions about the design of the vented air flow as early as two years ago.

“According to the minutes, CDC safety manager William Howard said: “Bottom line is we can’t continue to operate the building the way it is … if (a bioterror lab inspector) finds out air is moving this direction they will shut this place down.”

The CDC refused to grant interviews or answer any questions submitted in writing about the problems inside the high-containment labs and animal-holding area of the agency’s 11-story Emerging Infectious Diseases Laboratory, also known as CDC Building 18,” The Federal Times reports.

...The records show that other CDC staff have expressed safety concerns. The CDC “will do anything... to hide the fact that we have serious problems with the airflow and containment in this whole building” wrote CDC animal resources biologist Kismet Scarborough in an April 9 e-mail to several agency officials, including CDC Director Thomas Frieden. Scarborough’s CDC voice-mail greeting describes her position as a high-containment lab manager for the agency’s Animal Resources Branch.”

Vaccine Lab Researcher Dead from Lethal Pathogen

According to a recent CNN reportⁱⁱ, a congressional investigation will be launched to investigate the safety breach at the Atlanta facility. But beware that despite assurances that chances of contaminant release is virtually non-existent, it certainly can occur, and you could just as easily chalk it up to pure luck that no lethal pathogens escaped at the CDC lab.

As you may recall, back in April, a reportedly well-trained lab researcher at the Northern California Institute for Research died shortly after being infected with the Neisseria meningitides bacteriaⁱⁱⁱ. He was working on a vaccine against the pathogen, and according to the site chief was following required precautions for working with the deadly pathogens.

While that sounds all well and good, it actually makes the situation all the MORE dire, as it obviously means there must be serious flaws in the system if he actually followed all precautions and still got infected.

The young man died a mere 17 hours after initially falling ill.

I mention these incidents because as the vaccine industry is getting more aggressive in their promotion of fast-tracked vaccines, incidents such as these, and many others, really highlight the dangers inherent in the system overall, and why you cannot blindly believe the official story that drugs and vaccines are somehow created under pristine conditions and that nothing can go wrong. Because they most certainly do...

Other Near Fatal BioSafety Level 3 Errors

We saw that when Baxter “accidentally” sent vaccines contaminated with LIVE deadly avian (bird) flu to a research facility in Europe, for example. That was February 2009, and the mistake originated in a Baxter plant that was also operating under Bio Safety Level 3 (BSL3) status -- meaning that high-level precautions are supposed to be in place to make sure an accident like this never happens. The company blamed the incident on human error, again demonstrating that apparently, it takes just one absent-minded dingbat to circumvent the highest level biosafety system currently in existence!
How is this acceptable?

Besides the fact that they nearly unleashed a potentially lethal pandemic under very suspect circumstances, Baxter has had over 40 Class I recalls since 2003. These are the types of recalls that, according to the FDA’s definition, is “a situation in which there is a reasonable probability” that the use of, or exposure to, the product in question “will cause serious adverse health consequences or death.”

Yet Baxter still received a contract to create and manufacture the 2009 pandemic swine flu vaccine, which ALSO turned out to be far more reactive and dangerous than any previous flu vaccine.

Bird Flu Pandemic in the News Again

While safety breaches at top level bioweapons labs are occurring, we’re also hearing renewed fears about the H5N1, aka “bird flu,” and its potential to cause widespread death and destruction, and the need to stock up on pandemic vaccines. Perhaps if they stopped having so many top level biolab “accidents” we wouldn’t have to fear such lab-created killers^iv... These renewed calls for fast-tracked pandemic bird flu vaccines are no doubt in response to the publication of two studies detailing the successful mutation of the H5N1 virus into a more virulent, and airborne, strain. Both studies were published in the June 22 issue of the journal Science^v, ^vi.

According to the USA Today^vii.

“Knowing that the H5N1 bird flu can mutate into a form that can be easily transmitted, researchers have redoubled efforts to quickly create a vaccine should a pandemic strain emerge. The good news is that there now exists technology that makes creating vaccines much faster than in the past, says Rino Rappuoli, global head of vaccines research for Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics, in Siena, Italy.

... Fast and increasingly inexpensive machines allow the genomes, or genetic blueprints, of newly evolved flu varieties to be quickly sequenced.
Instead of needing to ship live virus to vaccine manufacturers, today researchers only need to e-mail a computer file containing the genetic code.

Scientists can then simply buy short strands of genetic code from commercial DNA synthesis companies and stitch them together in the correct order to synthesize a copy, creating a virus "seed." This can quickly be grown in cell cultures to produce vaccines. It is a process that is much faster than the current one, which involves injecting the actual virus into chicken eggs to grow.
"The hurdle will be only to change the regulatory process," Rappuoli says.”

There are tremendous hazards inherent with fast-tracking vaccines, and US regulations already place ALL the risk on the public receiving the vaccine, regardless of whether the vaccine is mandated or voluntary. Vaccine makers can more or less create a deadly vaccine and get away scot free at this point; they’re that well protected against liability for adverse events of pandemic vaccines.

Questions Raised About Purpose of HPV Vaccine Trials in India

Most likely, you believe that each vaccine is carefully evaluated and tested for safety and efficacy before being brought to market, and that such trials are conducted under the highest professional standards and ethics. Sadly, there are so many scandals littering the landscape of vaccine trials, anyone who takes the time to review them will likely end up more jaded and distraught than reassured. 

A recent study published in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine^viii brings the issue of highly questionable vaccine trial standards to the fore yet again. It’s worth noting that the HPV vaccine was yet another fast-tracked vaccine, which has devastated the lives of thousands of young women and their families since its premature release in the US.

Back in April 2011, India called a halt to trials of the Hu­man Papilloma Virus (HPV) vac­cine Gardasil after four young girls died and 120 suffered serious adverse effects. The decision was the result of a civil society-led investigation that highlighted serious ethical violations. In India, civil society groups have long been voicing their concerns regarding the safety and efficacy of the two HPV vaccines, along with the aggressive promo­tion of the vaccines and the need to inves­tigate reported deaths and adverse events post-vaccination.

Ethics violations, such as enrolling unsuspecting patients into trials without their informed consent, seems to be more the rule than the exception when it comes to overseas drug- and vaccine trials. India in particular has seen an upsurge of clinical pharmaceutical studies, and the questionable practices employed are becoming increasingly apparent.

The halted trials were post-licensing observational studies undertaken by the Programme for Appropriate Technology in Health (PATH), a USA-based not for profit non-governmental organization funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. According to the study in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, the studies should never have been undertaken in the first place, as it would clearly be impossible to evaluate the vaccine’s safety or efficacy.

The authors write:

“Currently, PATH and the Indian government are investigating whether to implement a HPV vaccination program. PATH claims that ‘in raw numbers, India has the largest burden of cancer of the cervix of any country worldwide’ and that the two states were selected ‘based on cervical cancer disease burden […] and uptake of other vaccines being in the middle range for certain variables (e.g., immunization coverage)’.

The World Health Organization (WHO) advises that the epidemiology of the disease should be known and be of sufficient importance to justify its prioritization, and that surveillance systems should be capable of assessing the impact of a vaccine intervention following its introduction.”

The problem is, the surveillance, registration and monitoring of cancer in India is sorely lacking—especially in the two regions selected for the two trials—which means it would be impossible to deduce whether or not the vaccine can actually reduce the incidence of cervical cancer or not. So why do two trials, involving 23,000 young women, when you cannot even get any valuable—or shall we say accurate—data from it? Making matters worse, the cancer data that does exist, although spotty, shows that the incidence for cervical cancer in India is low, and has already dropped by nearly 50 percent between 1982/83 to 2004/05.

According to a report in the Medical Xpress^ix:

“[Lead researcher] Professor Pollock explained: "This trial has clearly raised serious concerns for the people and government of India. The aim of our study was to look at whether data on cervical cancer in the country justify the introduction of HPV vaccination.

"We found that current data on cervical cancer incidence do not support PATH's claim that India has a large burden of cervical cancer or its decision to roll out the vaccine program. The lack of information is important because it means that World Health Organization criteria for monitoring the effectiveness of the vaccine cannot be fulfilled. Neither the epidemiological evidence nor current cancer surveillance systems justify the general rollout of an HPV vaccination program in India or in the two states where PATH was conducting its research."

Professor Pollock continued: "It's important to compare the burden of cervical cancer in India to other major health concerns, such as primary care, malaria, maternal anemia and malnutrition, and consider best use of financial resources. HPV vaccine, which is among the most expensive vaccines on the market, is not justified as a health care priority for India."

Former Employees Sue Merck for Overstating Effectiveness of Mumps Vaccine

Rounding out the vaccine news, two former Merck virologists have filed a federal lawsuit against their former employer, alleging Merck overstated the effectiveness of their mumps vaccine, which may have cost the US government hundreds of millions of dollars over the past decade.

According to Nasdaq.com^x:

“Merck--which stressed that none of these allegations relate to the safety of its product--said the lawsuit is " completely without merit", and that it plans to "vigorously defend itself." The Whitehouse Station, N.J., drug maker also noted that the U.S. Department of Justice has thus far declined to participate in the case after its own two-year probe.”

Merck’s mumps vaccine was originally introduced 45 years ago. Since the 1970s, it’s been part of the trivalent measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine, which is part of the recommended childhood vaccination schedule. According to the lawsuit, Merck has defrauded the US government for more than a decade by hiding the fact the mumps vaccine had lost effectiveness and is not living up to its claims.

“The lawsuit seeks a judgment against Merck equal to three times the damages suffered by the U.S., plus the maximum allowable award for the former employees under federal whistleblower laws,” Nasdaq reports.

Final Thoughts

If the preceding information has any impact at all, I hope it is to make you aware of the fact that more, and certainly deeper, questions need to be asked when it comes to vaccine safety and efficacy; vaccine trials; and the scientific evidence backing up current claims and recommendations.

Remember that for the most part, most all of the conventional media portrays the entire vaccine process as something heroic and vital to the health of our culture, and they will be reluctant to ever promote any news that contradicts this belief.

I believe we also need to consider the financial motives behind the promotion of pandemics and the vaccines that go along with them. It is vital for you to carefully research ALL sides of the vaccine issue and not merely trust federal public health authorities, most physicians, and the media, as they are largely influenced by massive conflict of interest and collusion. Seek other independent and objective views like those at NVIC before you make any important decisions about deciding to vaccinate.

References:

---

ⁱ See All References

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/07/07/pandemic-swine-flu-vaccines.aspx

The Evolution of Bird Flu and the Race to Keep Up

July 09 2012 | 155,241 views

Story at-a-glance

• Renewed calls for fast-tracked pandemic bird flu vaccines are being put out in response to the publication of two studies detailing the successful mutation of the H5N1 virus into a more virulent, and airborne strain
• On May 27, a 10-year old girl in Cambodia died after being infected with the H5N1 virus. The World Health Organization suspects she was infected while preparing chicken for a meal
• According to a recent study in the Lancet, the 2009 swine flu outbreak was 15 times deadlier than initially reported. The study, which was led by a CDC researcher, came to this conclusion using statistical modeling. It appears to be little more than an attempt to justify past, present, and future pandemic responses, as the data so far has indicated the 2009 “pandemic" was in fact a very mild flu season
• In October 2009, CBS News conducted a three-month long investigation that revealed the vast majority of “swine flu cases” were not any type of flu at all, let alone H1N1, but rather other types of cold or upper respiratory infection. This makes it highly unlikely that the death toll from H1N1 infection was underestimated, as claimed by WHO

By Dr. Mercola

H5N1, aka the bird flu, doesn't spread easily among humans, but its capability to mutate has scientists worrying whether it could mutate enough to cause a human pandemic.  

According to the featured article in The New York Timesⁱ, a 10-year old Cambodian girl died on May 27 after being infected with the H5N1 a week earlier:

"The girl was the most recent documented victim of the influenza virus H5N1, a strain that has caused 606 known human cases and 357 deaths since it re-emerged in 2003 after a six-year absence.

H5N1 can race through bird populations, and the World Health Organization suspects the girl was infected while preparing chicken for a meal.

While humans are not ideal hosts for H5N1, bird flu viruses do sometimes manage to adapt for easy transmission from human to human, and the results can be devastating. In 1918, one such transformation led to the Spanish flu pandemic, a global outbreak that claimed an estimated 50 million people."

It's déjà vu all over again folks, and they're using the same tired old examples to hype the fear, namely the 1918 Spanish flu. This despite the fact researchers have since questioned the cause of that pandemic, suggesting its lethality may have had more to do with bacterial strep infections than the flu virus itself.

Déjà vu: One Profitable Flu Hoax After Another...

In recent years we've seen a number of hyped flu pandemics that never materialized. While it's prudent to be aware that a pandemic could occur, what we've repeatedly seen is that this slim possibility is massively over-sold, allowing drug companies to rake in billions of dollars for inadequately tested vaccines and other dangerous and/or ineffective anti-viral drugs.

Sadly, each time a greater number of people tend to end up being harmed by the drugs and vaccines than succumb to the alleged "pandemic" virus...

• The non-existent 1976 swine flu pandemic: In 1976 the U.S. acted out the first swine flu pandemic scare, devising a vaccine program in which FORTY FIVE MILLILON people were vaccinated for the swine flu that had already disappeared. The hastily contrived vaccination program resulted in hundreds of Guillain Barre Syndrome paralysis victims and 25 deaths for a flu pandemic that never actually materialized. Within a few months, claims totaling $1.3 billion had been filed by victims who were permanently disabled from the vaccine, and more people died from the vaccine than from the virus itself.
• The 2005 bird flu hoax: Headlines warned the U.S. was facing a cataclysmic extermination event, with a calculated two million Americans succumbing to the bird flu. The best case scenario called for the death of 200,000 Americans. Then, as now, constant references to the tragedy of 1918 heightened the fear factor to a fever pitch, despite the fact that the scientific data did not support any of these hyped claims. At that time, they mysteriously translated the minuscule number of deaths of bird handlers that had occurred worldwide into an impending extermination-level event from a virus that did not—and still does not—readily spread from birds to humans, nor between humans.
  Most of the people who acquire the infection were, and still are, bird handlers in continuous contact with sick birds. How anyone in their right mind could envision similar circumstances among the general population of the United States is a mystery, but it goes to show that it's unwise to throw common sense to the wind...
  
• Bird flu hoax repeats: In 2006, 2007, and again in 2008, hyped warnings over the bird flu were repeatedly exposed as little more than a cruel hoax, designed to instill fear and line the pocketbooks of industry and various vested individuals.
• The 2009 swine flu hoax: After four consecutive years of bird flu warnings that just refused to come to fruition, the H1N1 swine flu became front-page news again. This turned out to be yet another faux threat that cost tax payers billions, and in which hastily concocted vaccines wrought havoc across the world. The 2009 H1N1 vaccine was the most reactive flu vaccine ever created, and just like its 1976 predecessor, it harmed far more people than the virus itself.

Bird Flu Mutation Possible; Renewed Calls for Fast-Tracked Vaccines

In recent weeks, we've heard renewed fears about the potential of the H5N1 bird flu to cause widespread death and destruction, and the need to stock up on pandemic vaccines. 

The calls for fast-tracked pandemic bird flu vaccines are in response to the publication of two studies detailing the successful mutation of the H5N1 virus into a more virulent and airborne strain. Both studies were published in the June 22 issue of the journal Scienceⁱⁱ, ⁱⁱⁱ.
According to their findings, it only takes five mutations for the bird flu virus to become more easily transmittable. So here we go again...According to a recent article in USA Today^iv.

"Knowing that the H5N1 bird flu can mutate into a form that can be easily transmitted, researchers have redoubled efforts to quickly create a vaccine should a pandemic strain emerge.

The good news is that there now exists technology that makes creating vaccines much faster than in the past, says Rino Rappuoli, global head of vaccines research for Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics, in Siena, Italy... Fast and increasingly inexpensive machines allow the genomes, or genetic blueprints, of newly evolved flu varieties to be quickly sequenced. Instead of needing to ship live virus to vaccine manufacturers, today researchers only need to e-mail a computer file containing the genetic code.

Scientists can then simply buy short strands of genetic code from commercial DNA synthesis companies and stitch them together in the correct order to synthesize a copy, creating a virus "seed." This can quickly be grown in cell cultures to produce vaccines. It is a process that is much faster than the current one, which involves injecting the actual virus into chicken eggs to grow. "The hurdle will be only to change the regulatory process," Rappuoli says."

As I've discussed on numerous occasions, there are tremendous hazards inherent with fast-tracking vaccines. By their very definition, fast-tracked vaccines are those that have received very little safety testing prior to being used, and US regulations already place ALL the risk on the public receiving the vaccine, regardless of whether the vaccine is mandated or voluntary. Vaccine makers can more or less create a lethal vaccine and get away scot free at this point; they're that well protected against liability for adverse events of pandemic vaccines.

The Great Bird Flu Hoax

In 2006, I became so convinced by the evidence AGAINST the possibility of a bird flu pandemic that I wrote the book The Great Bird Flu Hoax, detailing the massive fraud involved. The book went on to become a New York Times bestseller. In it I explained how:

• Multi-national drug companies and food corporations pour billions into manipulating your perception of health and the daily news, just to increase their profits, and the health threats (and ethics breaches) they are really responsible for
• Scientists are bought by drug companies and other big business to report whatever "research findings" they have been paid to report
• Government is more than just complicit—it actively works with the drug companies and other stalwarts of the conventional healthcare paradigm, and are directly responsible for raising false alarms in order to draw your attention away from the real public health and safety issues they perpetuate

Right now, we're seeing these tactics in full swing again. On June 26, Reuters^v reported that the 2009 swine flu outbreak was 15 times deadlier than initially reported, according to a newly published study in the Lancet Infectious Diseases.^vi The study came to this conclusion using statistical modeling:

"The swine flu pandemic of 2009 killed an estimated 284,500 people, some 15 times the number confirmed by laboratory tests at the time, according to a new study by an international group of scientists. The study, published on Tuesday in the London-based journal Lancet Infectious Diseases, said the toll might have been even higher - as many as 579,000 people.

The original count, compiled by the World Health Organization, put the number at 18,500. Those were only the deaths confirmed by lab testing, which the WHO itself warned was a gross underestimate because the deaths of people without access to the health system go uncounted, and because the virus is not always detectable after a victim dies."

Please... Let me draw your attention back to an explosive CBS News investigation published in October 2009, which clearly showed that the vast majority of "swine flu cases" were not any type of flu at all, let alone H1N1! Rather, based on lab testing, the vast majority of people who reported flu-like symptoms had some other type of cold or upper respiratory infection. It's also worth noting that the lead researcher of this Lancet study, Dr. Fatimah Dawood, works for the CDC—an agency that has a very clear interest in justifying the actions taken in response to the alleged swine flu pandemic, as well as justifying any future actions to a perceived pandemic, such as the now hyped bird flu.

Sharyl Attkisson was the investigative reporter behind the groundbreaking CBS News study that found H1N1 flu cases were nowhere near as prevalent as feared. I interviewed her about this last year. If you missed it then, I highly recommend reviewing it now, to learn how the CDC managed to paint such a contrary picture of reality.

Major Fraud Alert

This latest Lancet study appears to be little more than abject fear mongering, designed to reinvent history and ignite concerns that maybe, just maybe, the 2009 swine flu debacle was a real event after all. Nothing could be further from the truth. There were deaths from the flu, yes. People die from complications of the flu every single year. But the 2009 H1N1 "pandemic" was actually one of the MILDEST flu seasons in recent years with the fewest number of reported deaths.

The only reason they managed to keep the pandemic charade going as long as it did was because the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) advised states to STOP testing for H1N1 flu, and they also stopped counting individual cases in late July 2009. Their rationale for this, according to CBS News, was that it was a waste of resources to test for H1N1 flu because it was already confirmed as an epidemic. So NO lab tests were done for anyone for the bulk of the "epidemic," and anyone with a viral illness like a simple cold was classified as having swine flu.

What this meant was that virtually every person who visited their physician with flu-like symptoms since late July 2009 was assumed to have H1N1. If anything, this will tell us that the numbers of infection and subsequent deaths will automatically be grossly overstated, not understated, as WHO claims. And this is exactly what the three-month-long investigation by CBS News revealed. After reviewing the actual lab results across all 50 US states performed prior to the CDC ending all testing, they discovered that:

" The vast majority of cases were negative for H1N1 as well as seasonal flu, despite the fact that many states were specifically testing patients deemed to be most likely to have H1N1 flu, based on symptoms and risk factors, such as travel to Mexico.... "If you've been diagnosed "probable" or "presumed" 2009 H1N1 or "swine flu" in recent months, you may be surprised to know this: odds are you didn't have H1N1 flu. In fact, you probably didn't have flu at all."

Again, to be clear, the Lancet study claiming the 2009 swine flu pandemic killed 15 times the number of laboratory-confirmed H1N1 cases came to this conclusion using statistical modeling, whereas the CBS investigation looked at the results of actual lab-testing conducted across the 50 states. If as little as one to two percent of all flu-like illnesses were due to H1N1, then it stands to reason that the death toll due to H1N1 was quite insignificant, and the risk of it having been "grossly underestimated" is slim...

This strategy is tobacco science at its finest. It's very effective, yet it continues to amaze me how this bastardization and perversion of the scientific process is not more carefully scrutinized. Especially in light of the massive collusion and revolving doors between federal regulatory agencies and the vaccine industry. For example, the former head of the CDC, Julie Gerberding, is now the president of Merck's vaccine unit, which is the largest producer of vaccines in the world^vii.

Vaccine Makers are Not Liable for Damage Resulting from Pandemic Vaccines

As calls for fast-tracked vaccines are escalating, it's important to remember that the U.S. government has granted vaccine makers total legal immunity from any lawsuits that result from any new fast-tracked pandemic vaccine. Drug manufacturers got a major boost in protection and were granted unprecedented powers to experiment on the population with the passing of the 2006 Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (the PREP Act). This law allows the Secretary of the US Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) to invoke almost complete immunity from liability for manufacturers of vaccines and drugs used to combat a declared public health emergency.

The PREP Act removes your right to a trial jury unless you can provide clear evidence of willful misconduct that resulted in death or serious physical injury. But that's not all. First you must apply for and be granted permission to sue by the DHHS Secretary.
The most problematic aspect of the PREP Act is that it removes all financial incentive to make a safe product.

In fact, vaccine makers now have a negative incentive to test it for safety, because if they are aware of problems, then they could potentially be held liable for willful misconduct! As long as they can prove they "didn't know" of any problem, they will not be liable for damages. Hence it's in their best interest to know as little as possible about the adverse reactions it might cause. It seems unimaginable, but you and your children are now being enlisted as an unpaid human trial subjects for experimental, fast-tracked vaccines like the swine flu vaccine, and any soon-to-come bird flu vaccine.

How to Protect Yourself Against the Flu Without Vaccination

While the media is sure to continue hyping the bird flu, I'd like to remind you that a healthy immune system is your best and primary defense against any viral threat. Following these simple guidelines will help you keep your immune system in optimal working order so that you're far less likely to acquire the infection to begin with.

• Optimize your vitamin D levels. As I've previously reported, optimizing your vitamin D levels is one of the absolute best strategies for avoiding infections of ALL kinds. This is probably the single most important and least expensive action you can take. I would STRONGLY urge you to have your vitamin D level monitored to confirm your levels are therapeutic at 50-70 ng/ml year-round. An inexpensive option to get your vitamin D levels checked on a regular basis is to join the GrassrootsHealth D*action Project.
  
• Avoid Sugar and Processed Foods. Sugar decreases the function of your immune system almost immediately. Be aware that sugar is present in foods you may not suspect, like ketchup and fruit juice.
• Get Enough Rest. Just like it becomes harder for you to get your daily tasks done if you're tired, if your body is overly fatigued it will be harder for it to fight the flu. Be sure to check out my article Guide to a Good Night's Sleep for some great tips to help you get quality rest.
• Have Effective Tools to Address Stress. We all face some stress every day, but if stress becomes overwhelming then your body will be less able to fight off the flu and other illness. If you feel that stress is taking a toll on your health, consider using an energy psychology tool such as the Emotional Freedom Technique, which is remarkably effective in relieving stress associated with all kinds of events, from work to family to trauma.
• Exercise. When you exercise, you increase your circulation and your blood flow throughout your body. The components of your immune system are also better circulated, which means your immune system has a better chance of finding an illness before it spreads.
• Take a Good Source of Animal-Based Omega-3 Fats. Increase your intake of healthy and essential fats like the omega-3 found in krill oil, which is crucial for maintaining health. It is also vitally important to avoid damaged omega-6 oils that are trans fats and in processed foods as it will seriously damage your immune response.
• Wash Your Hands. Washing your hands will decrease your likelihood of spreading a virus to your nose, mouth or other people. Be sure you don't use antibacterial soap for this -- antibacterial soaps are completely unnecessary, and they cause far more harm than good. Instead, identify a simple chemical-free soap that you can switch your family to.
• Use Natural Antibiotics. Examples include colloidal silver, oil of oregano, and garlic. These work like broad-spectrum antibiotics against bacteria, viruses, and protozoa in your body. And unlike pharmaceutical antibiotics, they do not appear to lead to resistance.
• Avoid Hospitals. I'd recommend avoiding hospitals unless you're having an emergency, as hospitals are prime breeding grounds for infections of all kinds and could be one of the likeliest places you could be exposed to any new bug. Also keep in mind that virtually all vaccinations will LOWER your immune system (this is the main job of the vaccine adjuvants), NOT make it stronger!

References:

---

• ⁱ See All References

Sources:

• The New York Times June 25, 2012
• Reuters June 26, 2012

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/07/09/pandemic-bird-flu-evolution.aspx