Multiple Industry-Saturated Collaborating Partners Set the Agenda for Vaccination Policies
Note from the World Mercury Project Team: This article concludes our seven-part serialization of Vera Sharav’s exposé on the complex and widespread corruption that exists in the vaccination program, the deceptive practices by officials of “authoritative” international public health institutions and further evidence of the callous disregard for the plight of thousands of children and young adults who suffer irreversible harm. As one reads all seven parts, it becomes abundantly clear that the revolving door between regulators (charged with protecting the health of citizens) and pharmaceutical companies should close. Links to previously published parts one through six are at the bottom of this segment.
European Commission boosts vaccine research with £30 Million projects: ADITEC
“Advanced Immunization Technologies will accelerate the development of novel and powerful immunization technologies for the next generation of human vaccines. €30 Million of European Commission co-funding will enable ADITEC to establish a strong platform for innovation in a key area for human health.
A consortium of scientists from 42 research and industry bodies in 13 countries will work together on the project, which will work on a wide range of crucial aspects of vaccination; from basic research and new technologies to clinical trials and public health. The support for this project underlines the importance of the vaccine sector in effective healthcare, and gives a boost in a key innovation area for the European health industry.” (News Alert: Brussels, September 2011)
Accelerated development of vaccine benefit-risk collaboration in Europe (ADVANCE) (2013)
“Vaccines are one of the most effective public health measures…Immunisation prevents two to three million deaths worldwide every year from diseases such as diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis (whooping cough) and measles. In Europe, one of the greatest barriers to the wider uptake of immunisation is distrust, among some sections of the public, of immunisation programmes. This is due largely to fears surrounding vaccine safety…resulting in outbreaks of vaccine-preventable infectious diseases that had almost disappeared.
ADVANCE brings together the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control and the European Medicines Agency, as well as national public health and regulatory bodies, vaccine manufacturers and academic experts, the ADVANCE project will develop and test methods and guidelines in order to pave the way for a framework capable of rapidly delivering reliable data on the benefits and risks of vaccines that are on the market.”
The UK Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) chaired by Professor Andrew Pollard, has recommended that the UK switch to hexavalent vaccines for babies. This recommendation disregards the risks for babies – including the risk of sudden infant deaths that have been linked to multi-valent vaccines, [see Appendix 8] Prof. Pollard is Director of the Oxford Vaccine Group, noted for its active role in vaccine development and testing on behalf of industry. He is also a Trustee of the Jenner Vaccine Foundation. Dr. Norman Begg, Vice-President and Chief Medical Officer of GSK Biologicals, the manufacturer of Infanrix Hexa, is also a Trustee of the Jenner Foundation.
The common thread and longstanding intertwined connections that bind vaccine stakeholders is demonstrable in the case of Dr. David Salisbury, former Director of Immunisation at the Department of Health, who was the chief architect of the UK children’s vaccination program from 1986 to 2013, was a leading promoter of Pluserix in 1988. In 2013, Dr. Salisbury chaired the panel that appointed Prof. Pollard to chair the JCVI.
He then left to become chair of the Jenner Vaccine Foundation on which he sits with Prof. Pollard and Dr. Norman Begg – GSK Chief, Scientific Affairs, and Public Health. He is President of the International Association of Immunization Managers (IAIM). (Read more: Not published in the British Medical Journal: the dangers and conflicts of Infanrix Hexa, 2017)
A Concerted Push For Compulsory Childhood Vaccination Is Fueled By Fear-Mongering
A headline in The Guardian (July 2017) announced a Small Decline In MMR Vaccination Rates Could Have Dramatic Effect, Experts Warn. It went on to declare: a 5% drop in measles, mumps and rubella vaccinations could cause a threefold increase of measles cases, costing the public sector millions, US study shows.” The article quotes Professor Andrew Pollard, Director of the Oxford Vaccine Group and Chair of the JCVI who stated:
“Immunisation is something that many people think of as personal, but it is actually part of being in a society.” A similar view was expressed by BMJ Editor-in-chief Dr. Fiona Godlee in a BBC interview (2017), when she invoked “the need for herding as opposed to individual choice.”
- The Supreme Court has ruled (2011) that vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe”
The US National Vaccine Injury Program has adjudicated 5,581 vaccine-caused injuries – including 1,234 claims for vaccine-related deaths from vaccines recommended by CDC’s Childhood Vaccination Schedule, and plaintiffs received compensation. [See Appendix 4]
- If, as the Supreme Court determined, that vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe”, it is morally abhorrent to coerce parents who are rightly concerned about exposing their babies and young children to possible serious adverse effects – including deaths.
The CDC vaccination schedule is particularly aggressive compared to all other national policies. The CDC 2017 schedule requires U.S. children – from birth to age 6 – to receive 50 doses of 14 vaccines. Infants in the US are exposed from birth to age 2, to 24 vaccine doses, combining 8-in-1 vaccines to be given to infants 2, 4, and 6 months in a single visit. Babies receive 36 vaccine doses before they are 18 months old. The schedule includes vaccines against diseases that rarely occur in developed nations.
Notwithstanding CDC assurances to doctors and the public that these combinations are perfectly safe, none of the combinations in the CDC childhood vaccination schedule have ever undergone proper safety studies — as was acknowledge by the Institute of Medicine Report (2013):
“key elements of the entire schedule—the number, frequency, timing, order, and age at administration of vaccines—have not been systematically examined in research studies… to consider whether and how to study the safety and health outcomes of the entire childhood immunization schedule, the field needs valid and accepted metrics of the entire schedule [sic] and clearer definitions of health outcomes linked to stakeholder concerns (the “outcomes”) in rigorous research that will ensure validity and generalizability. ” [Highlight added]
What’s more, a report by CDC and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Mixed Exposures Research Agenda (2014) acknowledges that:
“Mixed exposures may produce acute or chronic effects or a combination of acute and chronic effects, with or without latency. Other exposures in combination with certain stressors may produce increased or unexpected deleterious health effects… exposures to mixed stressors can produce health consequences that are additive, synergistic, antagonistic, or can potentiate the response expected from individual component exposures.”
If mixed environmental exposures to toxins pose serious risks to adults, how can CDC claim that the mixture of toxins injected into infants poses no risk?
The truth is that CDC’s childhood vaccination schedule was configured to promote industry’s financial interest in maximizing vaccination utilization. However, CDC recommendations violate medicine’s foremost precautionary principle “First, do no harm.” The evidence of infants being harmed following administration of multiple vaccines has been uncovered in CDC documents.
The following CDC acknowledgment of the possible lifelong debilitating brain damage following vaccination with the CDC-recommended DTaP (diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis) should give pause. It appears on CDC’s otherwise upbeat website assurances about the safety of all vaccines.
Any child who had a life-threatening allergic reaction after a dose of DTaP should not get another dose.
Any child who suffered a brain or nervous system disease within 7 days after a dose of DTaP should not get another dose.
Several severe problems have been reported after a child gets MMR vaccine, and might also happen after MMRV. These include severe allergic reactions and problems such as:
Long-term seizures, coma, or lowered consciousness
Permanent brain damage
However, public health, and medical “authorities” who pretend that no evidence of harm due to vaccines exists; they continue to deceive the public with reassuring propaganda. The media continues to disseminate “fake news” about the life-saving attributes and safety of all vaccines; promotional campaigns push the flu vaccine, the HPV vaccine, and the ever inflated CDC childhood vaccination schedule.IOM Report (2013): “…key elements of the entire schedule—the number, frequency, timing, order, and age at administration of vaccines—have not been systematically examined in research studies… to consider whether and how to study the safety and health outcomes of the entire childhood immunization schedule…”
National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program was created in 1988 because there were so many vaccine-related injuries and lawsuits against manufacturers. Congress absolved vaccine manufacturers from all liability and created the NVICP to compensate vaccine-injured children.
Since its inception, the NVICP received 1,234 claims for vaccine-related deaths; of these 696 deaths were linked to the DTP vaccine, 127 deaths to the flu vaccine, 81 deaths were attributed to the DTaP, and 61 deaths were linked to the MMR.
The Drumbeat Toward Mandatory Vaccination: A Most Sinister Public Policy Direction
It is especially troubling to note the sinister direction that our “democracies” are headed towards. The position of both Professor Pollard and Dr. Godlee are antithetical to the moral stand articulated by Dr. Hamish Meldrum, the chairman of the British Medical Association, who called proposals for compulsory vaccination “a Stalinist approach.” He stated (in 2008) that forcing parents to vaccinate their children, by eliminating free choice was “morally and ethically dubious.”
Currently, government regulators in Italy, France, Germany, Poland and Australia have embarked on an aggressive drive to eliminate parental choice by adopting mandatory vaccination policies. A case involving compulsory vaccination was filed with the European Court by the European Centre for Law & Justice.
It would appear that those in positions of influence in academia and journalism /media, and those in positions of authority in government, have learned nothing from 20th century history of coercive public health policies – forced sterilization, forced abortions – that were enacted across Europe and the US, ostensibly for “the greater good”.
Have we learned nothing about the debasement of medicine by the willing participation of medical doctors from elite universities, who formulated and implemented the medicalized mass murder of disabled children?
It was doctors who declared those children to be “unfit” to live.
“Aktion T4 could not have happened without the willing participation of German doctors”.
That history cannot be erased from memory or from the historical record.
(Read: The Nazis’ First Victims Were the Disabled, The New York Times, Sept. 13, 2017)If, as the Supreme Court determined, that vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe”, it is morally abhorrent to coerce parents who are rightly concerned about exposing their babies and young children to possible serious adverse effects – including deaths.
WMP NOTE: This concludes of our seven-part series of Vera Sharav’s exposé. Previously published articles: Sharav’s Introduction to the full article, L’affaire Wakefield: Shades of Dreyfus & BMJ’s Descent into Tabloid Science, outlines her well-researched and documented belief that, “Public health officials and the medical profession have abrogated their professional, public, and human responsibility, by failing to honestly examine the iatrogenic harm caused by expansive, indiscriminate, and increasingly aggressive vaccination policies.” Part One focuses on how the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the vaccine industry control vaccine safety assessments, control the science of vaccines and control the scientific and mass channels of information about vaccines. In Part Two Ms. Sharav interprets the complex web of internal CDC documents, revealing how key CDC studies and CDC-commissioned studies were shaped by use of illegitimate methods. Part Three takes a closer look at the Brighton Collaboration and the extraordinary influence these stakeholders have in the business of vaccines and their power to control the science and research and manipulate reports to further their own interests.Focusing on the HPV vaccine, in Part Four Ms. Sharav explores how a global network of government/academic and industry stakeholders can suppress information about genuine scientific findings and, when needed, engage in corrupt practices to thwart the airing of information about vaccine safety issues. CDC’s childhood vaccination policy rests on the denial of safety hazards posed by vaccines and CDC officials are intent on shielding the policy and vaccination schedule at any cost. Part Five examines documentation and internal correspondence that reveals how CDC used its influence and subsequently rejected scientific studies that contradicted the sacrosanct vaccine safety mantra. From major methodological flaws and inconsistencies, to outright fraud, in Part Six of this 7-part series, Vera Sharav reveals much about corrupted vaccine literature including journal editors who knowingly facilitated fraudulent research articles to influence vaccination policies that put thousands of children at risk, and depriving them of living normal lives.
More about the author: Vera Sharav is a Holocaust survivor and a fierce critic of the medical establishment. This article was originally published at www.ahrp.org. Stat news recently published an article about her and her work.