A Seattle-based pharmaceutical group claims to have come up with a new vaccine formula that does away with the aborted human fetal tissue and other toxic contaminants used in the manufacture of traditional vaccines. The Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute (SCPI) is crowd-sourcing funds to eventually unveil a new "ethical" alternative vaccine to the MMRII (measles, mumps, and rubella) that it claims will be much safer for children.
The group hopes to reach six million moms, dads, grandparents, aunts and uncles with the new vaccine formula, which will allegedly protect children from the many side effects associated with Merck & Co.'s MMRII vaccine. These side effects include elevated risk of autism and associated neurological damage, as reported by CDC whistle blower Dr. William Thompson, and possible infection from live virus components added to the vaccine.
Merck's MMRII vaccine is also the subject of a pending lawsuit, which alleges that Merck faked clinical trial data to make the MMR vaccine appear safer and more effective than it actually is. Two former Merck scientists say the pharmaceutical and vaccine giant spiked blood samples to cover for the ineffectiveness of the mumps portion of the vaccine, which isn't "95% effective" as claimed by both the company and the federal government.
"With each vaccine, we are ... injecting our children with residual contaminants from the aborted fetal cell lines used in the manufacturing: fragments of DNA and a retrovirus," warns SCPI. "Autism and other childhood neurodevelopmental diseases such as childhood onset schizophrenia, childhood bipolar disorder and intellectual disability have been associated with hundreds of de novo (new) mutations, most likely caused by the presence of these fragments of fetal DNA and retrovirus in our children's vaccines."
But is there really such a thing as a "safe" or "ethical" vaccine? Is it actually possible to inject a child with attenuated live viruses and other substances, bypassing his innate immune system, while eliminating all risk of adverse events? The obvious and common-sense answer to the question would appear to be NO.
Vaccine adjuvants are what makes a vaccine a vaccine. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) explains on its website why nearly all vaccines contain added adjuvants: because weakened and/or modified viruses and bacteria added to vaccines are incapable of provoking a strong enough immune response on their own, so other materials have to be added to achieve the necessary response.
This means that a child either has to: 1) be exposed to the disease directly (which is how people gained lifelong immunity to certain infectious diseases prior to the advent ofvaccines), or 2) he must be injected with a chemical cocktail strong enough to promote an immune response, but weak enough not to trigger a deadly infection.
The implication here is that the only "natural" or "ethical" vaccine is natural exposure to infection without an actual injection. It remains to be seen what SCPI comes up with as a "safe" vaccine, and we're open to hearing what this group has to say. But it's this writer's conviction, anyway, that there simply isn't a 100% safe vaccine that comes with zero risk.
The group hopes to reach six million moms, dads, grandparents, aunts and uncles with the new vaccine formula, which will allegedly protect children from the many side effects associated with Merck & Co.'s MMRII vaccine. These side effects include elevated risk of autism and associated neurological damage, as reported by CDC whistle blower Dr. William Thompson, and possible infection from live virus components added to the vaccine.
Merck's MMRII vaccine is also the subject of a pending lawsuit, which alleges that Merck faked clinical trial data to make the MMR vaccine appear safer and more effective than it actually is. Two former Merck scientists say the pharmaceutical and vaccine giant spiked blood samples to cover for the ineffectiveness of the mumps portion of the vaccine, which isn't "95% effective" as claimed by both the company and the federal government.
"With each vaccine, we are ... injecting our children with residual contaminants from the aborted fetal cell lines used in the manufacturing: fragments of DNA and a retrovirus," warns SCPI. "Autism and other childhood neurodevelopmental diseases such as childhood onset schizophrenia, childhood bipolar disorder and intellectual disability have been associated with hundreds of de novo (new) mutations, most likely caused by the presence of these fragments of fetal DNA and retrovirus in our children's vaccines."
The idea of a 'safe' vaccine might just be an unrealistic pipe dream
Following its initial launch, SCPI is planning to unveil an entire line of vaccines that it claims will be "free of human fetal contaminants, free of adjuvants like mercury or aluminum, and safe for our children and our consciences." It all sounds great, and it's similar to what Moms Against Mercury has been trying to do for years with its crusade against this particularly well-known vaccine neurotoxin, which is still used in the manufacture of batch-administered flu shots for influenza.But is there really such a thing as a "safe" or "ethical" vaccine? Is it actually possible to inject a child with attenuated live viruses and other substances, bypassing his innate immune system, while eliminating all risk of adverse events? The obvious and common-sense answer to the question would appear to be NO.
Vaccine adjuvants are what makes a vaccine a vaccine. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) explains on its website why nearly all vaccines contain added adjuvants: because weakened and/or modified viruses and bacteria added to vaccines are incapable of provoking a strong enough immune response on their own, so other materials have to be added to achieve the necessary response.
This means that a child either has to: 1) be exposed to the disease directly (which is how people gained lifelong immunity to certain infectious diseases prior to the advent ofvaccines), or 2) he must be injected with a chemical cocktail strong enough to promote an immune response, but weak enough not to trigger a deadly infection.
The implication here is that the only "natural" or "ethical" vaccine is natural exposure to infection without an actual injection. It remains to be seen what SCPI comes up with as a "safe" vaccine, and we're open to hearing what this group has to say. But it's this writer's conviction, anyway, that there simply isn't a 100% safe vaccine that comes with zero risk.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment