BMJ Papers Spotlights Questionable Funding and Industry Ties of CDC and ‘Independent’ Vaccine Advocacy GroupsPosted on: Thursday, November 9th 2017 at 3:30 pmWritten By: Jefferey JaxenThis article is copyrighted by GreenMedInfo LLC, 2017
A major paper was just published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) titled The unofficial vaccine educators: are CDC funded non-profits sufficiently independent? As more prominent vaccine advocacy organizations are pushing for greater mandatory vaccination laws the BMJ article asks if these groups are really providing the public with independent information.
Over the last year both Italy and France have aggressively moved to mandate certain vaccines for school entry against massive public protests. The UK, whose public health leaders have long resisted mandatory vaccination, is also making a renewed push in attempting to force vaccines upon its population. The recent BMJ paper explored two prominent vaccine advocacy organizations: Every Child By Two (ECBT) and Immunization Action Coalition (IAC). The paper also focused on the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
The BMJ paper states right out front on the first page that the IAC, ECBT, and the AAP all receive funding from both vaccine manufacturers and the CDC. The paper goes on to write about the organizations, “…in their advocacy for compulsory vaccination, they all have in common a goal that pushes beyond official governmental policy and, in the case of influenza vaccines, the evidence.” Both the ECBT and the IAC are publicly non-transparent with the amount of money they receive from vaccine manufacturers. The ECBT and the IAC receive $800M and $1.3M respectively from “non-governmental sources.” The ECBT refused to answer the BMJ’s queries about how much it receives from vaccine manufacturers. While the IAC website lists five major vaccine manufacturers among its supporters, however it too did not list contribution amounts.
The CDC’s influence, mixed with vaccine manufacturer funding, continues to be a common theme that enters into the vaccine advocacy organization’s space. During the run-up to California’s Senate Bill 277 in 2015, the CDC’s top vaccine official sat on ECBT’s board of directors. In addition, a recent investigation from the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) writes,
A non-profit organization, ECBT actively lobbies in state legislatures and in Congress to promote mandatory vaccination and the elimination of vaccine exemptions, as well to secure increased funding for the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and other government agencies developing, licensing, making policy for and promoting universal use of federally recommended vaccines.
NVIC also commented on the following regarding IAC’s conflict of interest:
The California Immunization Coalition is a network member of the non-profit Immunization Action Coalition (IAC), which is funded by Astra Zeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Pfizer, Sanofi Pasteur and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). Among members of IAC’s Advisory Board are vaccine developers and current or former CDC officials and mandatory vaccination proponents, including developers of Merck’s rubella and rotavirus vaccines, Stanley Plotkin, MD, PhD and Paul Offit, MD.
Under Section 317 of the Public Service Act, the CDC receives federal funding. The BMJ paper points out that in 2006 the IAC and ECBT formed the ‘317 Coalition’ which, according to its website engages in “grass roots advocacy” and is solely focused on “advocating for increased 317 funding.” The 317 Coalition is represented by the Washington, DC based government relations and lobbying firm Cornerstone Government Affairs. The BMJ paper writes:
Over the years, with money from GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Wyeth, MedImmune, Pfizer, Novartis, and Sanofi Pasteur, Cornerstone Government Affairs has grown the coalition and achieved substantial increases in CDC’s Section 317 funding.
The BMJ calculated that the CDC granted over $2.5M to five members of the 317 Coalition.
Quoted in the BMP paper is journalist Gary Schwitzer who heads HealthNewsReviews.org who makes the point that the IAC, ECBT, and AAP are “…not financially independent. And it would appear they are also not philosophically and intellectually independent, which is just as important – if not more so – in this discussion.”
Outside of the various conflicts of interests chronicled in the BMJ paper, the entire US vaccine program as a whole shows a major lack of scientific evidence to justify the CDC’s recommended vaccine schedule, has not done proper pre-licensure vaccine safety studies, and has lacked sufficient oversight and monitoring. In fact, a recent legal notice was served to the Acting Secretary of the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Eric Hargan alleging failure to perform the duty of vaccine safety and oversight of the US vaccine program.
How long will silence be allowed from vaccine advocacy organizations, oversight agencies, and leaders with conflicts of interests when the BMJ, NVIC, over 55 organizations whose members exceed 4 million signed onto the HHS legal notice and a large growing sector of the American public continue to ask vital questions about the failures of the entire vaccine paradigm.
CAUGHT: WHO’s Anti-fertility Vaccination Program Chronicled In New PaperPosted on: Thursday, November 9th 2017 at 3:00 pmWritten By: Jefferey Jaxen
Has the World Health Organization (WHO) been purposely misleading women in developing countries into thinking they are protecting them and their future children from tetanus while in fact robbing women of their fertility and the very children they wanted to protect?
A highly concerning new paper has been published in The Open Access Library Journal titled, “HCG Found in WHO Tetanus Vaccine in Kenya Raises Concern in the Developing World.” The implications of the information contained within this paper, if true, have the potential to shift paradigms and threaten the hegemony of global organizations who are ostensibly concerned about the health and welfare of the world’s populations. What findings can threaten to do such a thing?
To understand the full breadth of the findings, it is first important to know some key historical facts. The World Health Organization was established in 1945 and immediately embraced the tenet of family planning, which was later referred to as “planned parenthood as a necessity for world health.”
Around 1972, the WHO research program for developing a birth-control vaccine commenced. The WHO birth-control vaccine involved linking the tetanus toxoid (TT) with the beta portion of the human pregnancy hormone chorionic gonadotropin (hCG). This combination directs the immune system to produce antibodies not only against TT but also against hCG, causing miscarriages in already pregnant recipients and infertility in those not yet pregnant. The results were announced and celebrated by WHO researchers as the first “anti-fertility” vaccine in 1976 during a meeting of the US National Academy of Sciences.
Around the same time, the US National Security Study Memorandum 200, also known as the Kissinger Report, became official US policy in 1975, calling for reducing the population grown in “less developed countries” to near zero by means of “reducing fertility.”
Fast forward to 2010 when Bill Gates, whose father headed up Planned Parenthood after WWII, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation officially announced they would be committing $10 billion to help accomplish the WHO population reduction goals in part with “new vaccines.” One month later, Gates appeared in his now infamous Innovating to Zero TED talk where he made the statement:
“The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s headed up to about 9 billion. Now, if we do a really great job on new vaccines, healthcare, reproductive health services, we could lower that by, perhaps, 10 or 15 percent.”
Fast forward again to 2014 when the Kenya Conference of Bishops (KCCB) issued a press release that made mainstream news, alleging that the WHO was secretly using its birth-control vaccine during its anti-tetanus vaccination campaign in Kenya from 2013 to 2015. Was there proof, beyond the long history of questionable policies, statements, and actions by the WHO and its financier?
The new paper in The Open Access Library Journal by authors from the US, Canada, and Kenya lays out multiple smoking guns to back up the KCCB’s accusations from 2014.
The first of many smoking guns implicating the WHO in a mass sterilization program was found by conscientious health professionals working in conjunction with independent labs. The paper’s authors write:
“Three independent Nairobi accredited biochemistry laboratories tested samples from vials of the WHO tetanus vaccine being used in March 2014 and found hCG where not should be present. In October 2014, 6 additional vials were obtained by Catholic doctors and were tested in 6 accredited laboratories. Again, hCG was found in half the samples.”
Another smoking gun was that the Kenya Ministry of Health and officials speaking on behalf of the WHO were to “eliminate maternal and neonatal tetanus” only. No males were vaccinated within the WHO’s campaign, and the target was only females between the ages of 12 to 49 years. Yet there is no good reason to attempt to prevent tetanus only in females of childbearing age, because males and older females can also develop tetanus from contaminated puncture wounds. Furthermore, maternal and neonatal tetanus following childbirth can be prevented by hygienic obstetric practices.
Then the paper’s authors chronicle the third smoking gun: “Interestingly, the dosing schedule for the “tetanus” campaign in Kenya 2013-2015 was exactly the one set for the WHO birth-control conjugate containing TT/βhCG.” A typical vaccination schedule for neonatal tetanus prevention would have been different.
Whistleblowers associated with the Catholic Church and pro-life groups have raised multiple suspicions since at least the early 1990s that the WHO was conducting anti-fertility campaigns under the guise of their worldwide projects to “eliminate maternal and neonatal tetanus.” If all these previous suspicions are also true, has the WHO been committing the same fraud many times over? Has the WHO been purposely misleading women in developing countries into thinking they are protecting them and their future children from tetanus while in fact robbing women of their fertility and the very children they wanted to protect? And what will stop them from doing so in the future?
Read the entire study here: www.oalib.com/paper/pdf/5290033
© [November 9th 2017] GreenMedInfo LLC. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of GreenMedInfo LLC. Want to learn more from GreenMedInfo? Sign up for the newsletter here http://www.greenmedinfo.com/greenmed/newsletter.”
The CDC is also pursuing a covert sterilization campaign against american women. See:
I think this is the hack that resulted in the release of the following video: