Shingles Vaccine Risk Benefit Analysis

Are the advertised benefits of the shingles vaccine worth the risks? Merck’s own paid-for studies show those who receive the shingles vaccine may have, at best, a 50-50 chance of avoiding shingles. Therefore, whether the vaccine can help someone is a coin flip at best. (Please keep in mind that nobody is arguing that shingles is not a potential problem. Everyone agrees on that point.) Meanwhile, Merck’s Zostavax vaccine has caused thousands of people serious “side effects.”

Shingles Vaccine Side Effects
Problems from the shingles vaccine include shingles itself, with its debilitating nerve pain (postherpetic neuralgia) and eye damage that can involve potential blindness. Many shingles vaccine lawsuits have been filed for people who were vaccinated and then developed shingles a short time afterwards. Thousands of adverse events have been reported from people who have risked taking the vaccine.

Does Zostavax prevent shingles?
Not only does Merck’s shingles vaccine provide scant protection (if any) against one’s having a shingles outbreak, it may cause problems as bad or worse than shingles itself. More than 31,000 adverse effects from Zostavax have been reported to VAERS, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. It is a well accepted fact that just one to ten percent (1-10%) of adverse reactions are reported for bad drug reactions. Consequently, it is not a stretch to estimate that more than 310,000 people have likely suffered adverse events from the shingles vaccine.

300,000 Adverse Reactions to Shingles Vaccine
Anyone considering Zostavax should take some time to read a few of these horrific reactions to the shingles vaccine.

Costly Chances, Serious Adverse Events
Seniors are the primary target for the shingles vaccine. Those on Medicare expect Medicare Part D will pay for it. But if the deductible has not been met, Zostavax’ full cost plus the fee for it can range from $190 to more than$350. The patient may need to pay it all.

A review article on herpes zoster, published in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) generated a comment by Roy Fried, MD. MHS regarding the number of serious adverse events (AE) after the shingles vaccine:

For persons over 60, there is a 36% increase incidence of serious adverse events (AEs) within the first 42 days when data from and FDA safety study was combined with data from the Shingles Prevention Study.

For persons over 80, Zostavax’ ability to prevent shingles or postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) was no better than placebo AND these seniors had nearly double the rate of serious AEs in the first 42 days after their vaccination.

Vaccination fails to Lessen Pain of Outbreak
Big Pharma’s highly lucrative vaccine industry always assisted by the CDC frequently promotes the idea that even if a vaccine fails to keep one from getting sick, one will have a “less severe case.” A most dubious claim with every vaccination, it is a patently false claim with Zostavax. The FDA reported that shingles-vaccinated people who still developed shingles suffered severity of pain at the same level as that experienced by unvaccinated people who contracted shingles. In addition, the vaccinated group reported experiencing pain for just two days less than the pain reported by the unvaccinated (20 days vs. 22 days).

Shingles Shot Ingredients
The shingles shot was recently found contaminated with carcinogenic glyphosate, though that is not declared on the label. This makes one wonder what else is not declared in the ingredients. What is contained is alarming enough, including porcine gelatin, MSG, and aborted fetal cells.

The Shingles shot contains:

Viral Particles: At least 19,400 PFU (plaque forming units) – 14 times more viral particles than in the chickenpox vaccine.

Animal cells:
•  Pig: porcine gelatin – 15.58mg – known to cause anaphylaxis and food allergies
•  Cow: bovine serum – known to cause anaphylaxis and food allergies
•  Aborted Human cells: MRC-5 cells
•  Antibiotic: Neomycin
•  Chemical: sodium chloride (table salt) – 4.0 mg
•  Chemical: MSG, 0.62mg
•  Chemical: sodium phosphate dibasic, 0.57mg
•  Chemical: potassium phosphate monobasic, 0.10mg
•  Chemical: potassium chloride, 0.10 mg
•  Chemical: sucrose, 31.16 mg

RELATED

Share

Glyphosate Doubles Risk of Lymphoma

Scientists at the International Agency for Research on Cancer found in May 2014 what appeared to be a strong link between pesticide exposure and non-Hodgkin lymphoma, a blood cancer.  Their review of dozens of studies found glyphosate doubles the risk of lymphoma.

The 2014 study analyzed 44 individual research projects published since 1980. The scientists wrote their findings in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. They found that people exposed to the weed killer glyphosate, marketed by Monsanto under the brand name “Roundup,” doubled their risk of developing non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Most significantly, they based their ruling on public and peer-reviewed studies only. All the studies which have found glyphosate safe have been done by Monsanto or paid for by the company or its proxies. Or they can be traced to some person or university which has received some sort of generous financial “contribution” from Monsanto.

In 2015, the World Health Organization declared glyphosate to be a probable carcinogen. That declaration triggered an avalanche of Monsanto Roundup Cancer Lawsuits.

Twin Killers Dow & Monsanto
People exposed to 2,4-D, another potent weed killer made and marketed by Dow Chemical, were 40 percent more likely to develop non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma.

The authors were scientists who work in the IARC Section of Environment and Radiation in Lyon, France. They theorized that these pesticides cause genetic mutations in white blood cells and weaken the immune system and the ability to fight off disease. Earlier research has shown that farmers with exposure to 2,4-D have “experienced impaired” immune systems.

Extreme Levels of Glyphosate on Soybeans
Earlier in 2014, EWG reported that research by scientists at the Arctic University of Norway had detected “extreme levels” of glyphosate on genetically engineered soybeans.

The Glyphosate Death Cycle
Monsanto and other crop scientists have been performing experiments on food and people for years. With virtually no regulatory oversight whatsoever, they have genetically engineered soy, corn and other crops to survive the assaults of glyphosate. The theory (or dream) was that farmers could use glyphosate to kill weeds near crops without harming crops or animals or people. The problem has always been that the exactly same enzyme found in the weeds Monsanto targets with glyphosate is also found in animals and in us. Besides poisoning the population and the soil, this method has also spawned superweeds grown resistant to glyphosate and grown hardier. That, in turn, has only exacerbated the death cycle, as many farmers who bought into the Monsanto theory have resorted to spraying more of the pesticide in an overkill effort to kill the superweeds.

Questions for the Day

Should it be a surprise that more and more pesticide spraying does not make healthy food? Should anyone be surprised?  Can poisoned foods ever be healthier than non-poisoned (organic) foods?

Monsanto Doubles Pesticide Poisoning
The promise of genetic engineering has not only proven to be empty, but also incredibly harmful. The promise, the theory, was also that GMO crops would require less pesticide than other types of commercial farming. (Organic farming uses no pesticides.) The U.S. Department of Agriculture recently reported that herbicide use has doubled since Roundup was unleashed across our land. Herbicide (classified by EPA as a pesticide, so it’s the same thing) doubled from 62 million pounds in 1996 to 128 million pounds in 2012.

Monsanto Market Share
Glyphosate from Monsanto now holds more than 83 percent of the chemical pesticides used in the U.S. yearly, so Monsanto has done a fine job of nearly monopolizing the market as it poisons us all.

Glyphosate Doubles Risk of Lymphoma

The IARC study was published April 23, 2014, just as the U.S. DPA was considering approving Genetically Engineered (GE) seeds of corn and soybeans engineered to withstand 2,4-D, a suspected carcinogen. If the EPA approves the new GE seeds and if 2,4-D is used to kill weeds on some of the 170 million acres of corn and soybeans grown in the U.S. annually, the USDA estimates that 2,4-D use is likely to triple, dramatically increasing people’s exposure to a pesticide that has been shown to be a probable carcinogen.

Herbicides are Pesticides
All herbicides are pesticides as defined by the Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, aka FIFRA. Later amendments from the U.S. Department of Agriculture expanded the law to cover toxic chemicals now considered consumer products. The most dangerous pesticides (and herbicides) are restricted. They can only be purchased and applied by licensed Pest Control Operators, PCOs. Unfortunately, some PCOs do not follow the required rules when applying these especially toxic chemicals. Consequently it shows up as residues on or in food, and massive amounts of glyphosate have been dumped into our water supply through uncontrolled groundwater runoff.

RELATED
•  Monsanto Lawsuit

•  Roundup non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma Lawsuit

•  Roundup Cancer Lawsuit

•  Monsanto sued for False Advertising

•  Monsanto loses $47 Million Verdict

•  Monsanto EPA Collusion?

•  Glyphosate Doubles Risk of Lymphoma

Share

Vaccines All Contaminated with Cancer-Causing Toxins – New Study

Vaccines are all contaminated with cancer-causing, immune-system-wrecking toxins not disclosed on the labels. That is the finding of a new study released in May 2017.  No future discussion of vaccination – forced or otherwise – can be conducted without first addressing this alarming, glaring problem. How can vaccinations be “safe and effective” if they give you cancer or autoimmune disease? (One is reminded of the American Major who explained his methods in Vietnam: “We had to destroy the village in order to save it.”  Vaccine makers destroy the child in order to save it.)

Editor’s Note re: Fake Vaccine News
Drug companies that make vaccines spend $5 billion a year on advertising, so you won’t see this story in mainstream “news.” You will, of course, see nationwide coverage of the next measles “outbreak” to help sell vaccination. Those in the business of selling “news” call this “complementary copy.” News outlets create “news” that complements (helps sell) the advertiser’s products. Stories like this one that threaten product sales are strictly verboten, or banished to the back pages. Mainstream media would not be the moneymaker it is otherwise.

Vaccines All Contaminated with Cancer-Causing Toxins – New Study
The new study found that every human vaccine tested was contaminated with unsafe levels of metals and debris linked to cancer and autoimmune disease. It was published May 2017 in the International Journal of Vaccines and Vaccination. The research was led by Antonietta Gatti of the National Council of Research of Italy and the Scientific Director of Nanodiagnostics. Researchers examined 44 samples of 30 different vaccines. They found that all the human vaccines tested showed “the presence of micro- and nano-sized particulate matter composed of inorganic elements in vaccine samples” not declared in the vaccine’s ingredients’ lists. One vaccine for cats was the only one tested that was relatively clean.

Dangerous Contaminants Not Disclosed
Researchers found lead particles in a flu vaccine, in Gardasil and Cervarix (cervical cancer vaccines), and in a meningitis C vaccine.

An infant vaccine for diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, hepatitis B, poliomyelitis and haemophilus influenzae type B was found to contain undeclared stainless steel, tungsten, and a gold-zinc aggregate. Made by GlaxoSmithKline, the infant “vaccine” is called Infarix Hexa.

Metal Contaminants Undisclosed
Writer Celeste McGovern reported other metal contaminants included platinum, silver, bismuth, iron, chromium. She wrote that, “Chromium (alone or in alloy with iron and nickel) was found in 25 of the human vaccines from Italy and France. (If you think vaccines are “cleaner” in the U.S., think again. Many U.S. vaccines are made in China and elsewhere with little to no CDC oversight. Monsanto’s carcinogenic glyphosate has been found in vaccines here.)

Leukemia-Causing Vaccine?
GSK’s Fluarix vaccine for children three years and older contained 11 metals and aggregates of metals. Similar aggregates to those identified in the vaccines have been shown to be prevalent in cases of leukemia, the researchers noted.

Many of the vaccines contained iron and iron alloys which, the researchers wrote, “can corrode and the corrosion products exert a toxicity affecting the tissues.”

Undesirable Elements Impact Children
The study shows how these foreign contaminants injected into children may explain a litany of apparently unrelated adverse events associated with vaccination. These contaminants may explain everything from headaches and seizures to fatigue, muscle pain, paralysis and sudden infant death syndrome. More likely than not, the researchers surmise, vaccine contaminants will “have a more serious impact on very small organisms like those of children.”

The Dark History of Vaccination
The CDC has admitted to injecting a live cancer virus into 98 million Americans. That virus, SV40, was just one of 40 viruses identified in a polio vaccine that may have been a primary culprit in the epidemic of cancer that has exploded upon us since. Any adults considering the latest advertised vaccination for themselves – like the shingles vaccine – might first be wise to do some research regarding the dark history of vaccination. The life you save may be your own, or your child’s.

RELATED
•   Dirty Vaccines: New Study Reveals Contaminants
•   Shingles Vaccine Lawsuit
•   Vaccine Hysteria Reigns
•   Vaccines All Contaminated with Cancer-Causing Toxins – New Study

Share

Vaccine Injured Families receive Billions from Secret Court

Vaccine injured families have received billions of dollars from a Secret Court. The U.S. government has quietly paid, in the last 30 years, more than $3 billion to vaccine-injured children and their families. So far in 20017, the government has paid $142 million to 337 vaccine-injured families. All had filed claims with the so-called Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VCIP). Have you heard anything of these payments from the mainstream media?

Related: Shingles Vaccine Lawsuit

Pro-Vaxxers vs. Anti-Vaxxers
Why do we hear only stories of so-called measles “outbreaks” and the dangers of “anti-vaxxers”? Why are people attacked by their neighbors or “bloggers” (many hired by Big Pharma) who think they have the right to decide whether or not to subject themselves and their children to the wonders of vaccination? Why is there never any sort of balanced discussion in the mainstream media of the history, safety, and efficacy record of vaccination?

Parents vs. Parents
Why are loving parents pitted against loving parents? Why does our society seem incapable of rational discussion regarding vaccination? Is there some sort of plan to turn this subject into an emotional quagmire that leaves people unwilling to examine the real science of vaccination? Who would it benefit to turn parent against parent? Who does it benefit to enlist pro-vaxxer parents or professional bloggers to bully, intimidate or attack anti-vaxxer parents? Even if bullying and berating could work on others, how could that be good for the whole society? What’s wrong with this picture?

Secret Vaccine Court perverts Democracy, Free Choice
Meanwhile, the arcane, secret court which runs the VCIP is overseen by unaccountable, un-elected bureaucrats. The vaccine “court” does not allow families legal “Discovery.” That means they don’t get access to the vaccine makers’ hidden evidence, which constitutes the real story of a drug or device. Every drug and medical device case turns on Discovery. A solid case simply cannot be made without it. Yet even with this enormous, undemocratic, Draconian handicap of not being allowed Discovery, vaccine-injured families have been able to collect billions for their vaccine-injured children. The lack of Discovery, however, also means that a tiny fraction of those who are really injured by vaccination actually get the compensation they deserve. If Discovery were allowed, every bad vaccine batch could potentially be uncovered, vaccine makers in China and elsewhere could be held to account, thousands of children could be saved from vaccine injuries, billions more dollars could be awarded to vaccine-injured families who deserve compensation.

Vaccine Whistleblower Lawsuit
Because vaccine makers are vaccinated by Congress from liability, they have virtually no liability or incentive to make safe or effective vaccines. Merck’s MMR vaccine simply doesn’t work for mumps, yet the company continues to reap billions of dollars from our government, from us, for that vaccine. Merck now faces a whistleblower lawsuit from a former employee who has exposed that the company’s MMR vaccine raises the risk of autism for black boy babies. How come we don’t hear about that in the news? Autism is a catastrophic disease, yet we haven’t heard a peep in the mainstream media how it raises the risk of autism. What’s wrong with this picture.

Advertising Dollars Rule Vaccination Coverage
Retired neurosurgeon Dr. Russell Blaylock has noted that all major media figures are under enormous pressure from the billions of marketing dollars spent by Big Pharma. Anyone who works in media knows the story they are supposed to tell, and the stories they are not supposed to cover. It’s an open secret that pharmaceutical companies spend more on advertising than any other industry. Is it insane to suggest that all that money doesn’t buy some “friendly copy” for vaccination cheerleaders? Is that any different than suggesting politicians are corrupted by money into acting against the interests of citizens?

Follow the Money
Follow the money. Who benefits when mainstream media fail to report on vaccine injuries? Who benefits when mainstream media hysterically trumpets the latest measles “outbreak” and completely fails to tell the whole story of vaccination? Who benefits when Big Pharma-captured congressman like Richard Pan of California and other career politicians vote to remove informed consent from parents and force vaccination on schoolchildren?

The Science on Vaccination
Retired neurosurgeon Dr. Russell Blaylock has noted, “There’s compelling scientific evidence that vaccines are not as safe as they’re being proposed. In fact, there [can be] significant, serious problems, including death, seizures, encephalitis and severe brain damage. This is well documented in medical literature.”

Vaccine Injured Families receive Billions from Secret Court
Children up to 15 months old now receive 27 doses of 11 different vaccinations. All are approved and recommended by the Center for Disease Control (CDC). The CDC has proven itself to now be a partner with Big Pharma for promoting vaccination. Its policy has been to push more and more vaccinations and to cover up, downplay, or deny anything that does not coincide with that policy. These baby vaccines include Rotavirus (RV), Hepatitis B (for the sexually promiscuous baby?), Influenza, Measles, mumps, rubella (MMR), Tetanus, diphtheria & acellular pertussis (Tdap). All these vaccines that most pediatrician push introduce foreign and toxic substances into the new baby’s bloodstream. They often cause brain swelling and, in the long term, unknown damage. Vaccine ingredients are a cornucopia of toxic horrors that would land someone in jail if they were given by anyone but your doctor. What’s wrong with this picture?

RELATED

Share

Invokana Amputation Warning

An Invokana amputation warning will be added to the Invokana label. On May 16, 2017, the U.S. FDA confirmed that this black-box warning must be included in the Invokana label. The revised label will state that Invokana raises the risk of people needing to have their legs or feet amputated.  A black box warning is the strongest label warning in the FDA’s rusty tool box.(It habitually comes too late for many. How do dangerous drugs like this ever get FDA approval in the first place? Could the agency be compromised by the drug industry with which it works so closely?)

Related: Invokana Lawsuit

The FDA first sent out an alert May 18, 2016, which said patients in Invokana clinical trials were twice as likely to need amputations as those on a placebo. On May 16, 2017, the FDA issued the final results from those two clinical trials. Those dire results triggered the new warning label.

Invokana / Invokamet / Canagliflozin
Invokana, Invokamet and Invokamet XR are brand names for canagliflozin, which is used to treat Type 2 diabetes. Janssen Pharmaceuticals, a division of baby-powder-beleaguered Johnson & Johnson, makes and markets Invokana (Canagliflozin).

Invokana Clinical Trials show Double Risk of Amputations
In the first clinical trial – CANVAS – 5.9 of 1,000 patients on the drug needed an amputation in a year, vs. the placebo totals of 2.8 of 1,000. In the second trial – CANVAS-R – 7.5 of 1,000 patients needed amputation compared with 4.2 of 1,000 on the placebo.

Most of the amputations were of the foot or a toe, said FDA, while others lost legs. Some patients needed more than one amputation.

FDA Safety Communication
The FDA said in a safety communication: “Patients taking canagliflozin should notify your health care professionals right away if you develop new pain or tenderness, sores or ulcers, or infections in your legs or feet. Talk to your healthcare professional if you have questions or concerns.”

FDA also cautioned Invokana users not to stop taking the medication without first speaking with a “health care professional.”

Janssen Speaks
A Janssen spokesmodel, William Foster, said, “At Janssen, patient safety is our highest priority. (We) are working with FDA to include (this) in the prescribing information for canagliflozin and look forward to the presentation of the full CANVAS Program results at the American Diabetes Association Scientific Sessions in June.”

Invokana Amputation Warning

Invokana (canagliflozin) was approved despite concerns about cardiovascular health and bone safety. The FDA has since updated the drug’s labels to reflect risks of bone fractures, blood disorders, and urinary tract infections.

SGLT2 Inhibitors
Other drug makers and drugs in Invokana’s class of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (or SGLT2) inhibitors include:

•  AstraZeneca PLC – Farxiga and Xigduo XR

•  Boehringer Ingelheim – GmbH

•  Eli Lilly and Co. – Jardiance and Glyxambi

RELATED

 

Share

Taxotere Whistleblower Lawsuit Proceeds

A Taxotere whistleblower lawsuit will proceed,  a judge ruled in January 2017. The Taxotere whistleblower lawsuit accuses Sanofi-Aventis of marketing Taxotere “off-label.” The case will go forward because the judge refused the company’s petition to have it dismissed. The “off-label” marketing accusation says the company illegally marketed the drug to doctors and hospitals.

Illegal Kickbacks for Taxotere Sales

Reuters reported that a federal judge in Philadelphia ruled marketing claims in the case are not protected under the 1st Amendment’s free speech guarantees. Court records show a former Sanofi-Aventis employee filed the whistleblower complaint. The petition claims the company paid doctors illegal kickbacks to promote Taxotere for uses outside its FDA-approved indications.

Taxotere Whistleblower Lawsuit
The whistleblower lawsuit charges that Aventis’ fraudulent marketing scheme caused several health care providers to submit claims for reimbursement to governmental medical reimbursement systems. The petition says these claims would not have been paid “had the government reimbursement programs known of Aventis’ fraudulent marketing scheme” for Taxotere.

Sanofi-Aventis fails to have case dismissed
Sanofi-Aventis had sought dismissal of the whistleblower lawsuit on statute of limitations and 1st Amendment grounds. U.S. District Judge Lawrence F. Stengel of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania rejected those arguments. Judge Stengel ruled marketing claims are not protected speech if they are false and misleading. Whether or not Sanofi-Aventis used false and misleading marketing statements remains a question for a jury, the judge wrote.

The U.S. Department of Justice is supporting the Taxotere whistleblower lawsuit. If successful, the department would collect compensation on behalf of U.S. taxpayers.

What is Taxotere?
Taxotere is a drug used in conjunction with chemotherapy. It was approved by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration in 1996 to treat breast cancer. Taxotere is now indicated to treat other malignancies, including head and neck cancer, gastric cancer, prostate cancer and non-small cell lung cancer.

Taxotere Hair Loss Lawsuits

Sanofi-Aventis is also named as a defendant in some 1,000 Taxotere lawsuits filed for women who say they suffer permanent hair loss – or alopecia – related to Taxotere use. While chemotherapy drugs often cause hair loss, Taxotere used with chemotherapy often makes hair fall out and not grow back. Other chemo drugs cause only temporary hair loss. Plaintiffs pursuing Taxotere lawsuits claim Taxotere alopecia is much more likely to be permanent, compared with similar chemo drugs.

Europeans Warned, Americans Not Warned
Plaintiffs point out that Sanofi-Aventis has long provided information regarding the potential for permanent alopecia to individual patients and regulatory agencies overseas. Taxotere’s U.S. label, however, included only generic, vague, insufficient warnings that “hair generally grows back.” That is the crux of this case and most drug cases, that the manufacturer failed to adequately warn of the drug’s actual “side effects,” though it was legally bound to do so.

Federal Taxotere Lawsuits
Taxotere lawsuits filed in federal court have been centralized in multi-district litigation court in the U.S. District Court (MDL) in Eastern District of Louisiana.

RELATED

Share

Thousands sue over Shingles Vaccine Injuries

Thousands of people injured by the Zostavax vaccine for shingles are suing Merck in Shingles Vaccine Lawsuits. The company that makes Zostavax has caused worse complications than shingles itself. “Side effects” (actual effects!) from Merck’s singles vaccine include shingles, meningitis, encephalitis, stroke, palsy, eye injuries, and many others. These so-called side effects are all features of shingles.

Zostavax was approved by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) despite a dearth of convincing efficacy tests. The CDC has since recommended that only those 60 and older should take the vaccine. The FDA, by contrast, approved it for people 50 and older. The CDC has also warned that those aged 50 – 59 may lose the alleged protection benefits of the vaccine by the time they reach 60.

People in their 60s are at the greatest risk of getting shingles, which is why the CDC recommends it for that age group. Meanwhile, the vaccine’s labeling does not make clear how long an injection might last (if it works at all, which is an open question). The CDC recommends that people don’t get the shot until they are at least 60,  because that’s probably when they are going to need it the most.

Shingles Vaccine Efficacy Questionable
The CDC has stated – with Merck’s encouragement through short-term studies –  that the Zostovax vaccine reduces the risk of shingles by a mere 51 percent. That paltry number makes it difficult to discern whether it works at all for anyone. Two unconvincing studies by Merck provide flimsy cover for whether the vaccine works at all or is worth the risk.

Shingles Vaccine Injury Lawyer

Attorney David Matthews, whose law firm is handling shingles cases, said injuries from the Zostavax vaccine are many and varied. Shingles vaccine injuries can vary from a person’s contracting shingles to going blind in one eye, suffering brain damage or paralysis in the extremities, or even dying.

Mr. Matthews said, “Merck failed to warn about Zostavax’ serious side effects and the vaccine doesn’t do what Merck claims it does.” (Related: Shingles vaccine made with pig gelatin, MSG and residual components of human DNA from an aborted fetus. Why?)

Merck Comments

Responding to a Natural News story, a Merck spokesperson said, “Nothing is more important to Merck than the safety of our medicines and vaccines.”

If so, then why are thousands of people experiencing ailments associated with the disease the vaccine is supposed to cure? Part of the problem appears to be that the vaccine is made from a live shingles virus. Is Zostavax causing more harm than good? According to Shingles vaccine lawsuits, that is exactly what is happening.

Zostavax Background

•   Zostavax was approved by the FDA in 2006.
•   Zostavax pulled in $749 million in sales for Merck in 2016.
•   Zostavax is the only approved shingles vaccine in the United States.

Meanwhile, GlaxoSmithKline is working on a second shingles vaccine called Shingrix. GSK is still seeking FDA approval for its new vaccine.

RELATED

 

Share

To Vaccinate or Not To Vaccinate?

To vaccinate or not to vaccinate? That is the question. Is it nobler to follow your own doctor’s or pediatrician’s advice? Is it noble to believe the slings and arrows of media gatekeepers hyping measles or Zika hysteria to promote vaccination? Or is it nobler to study the science for one’s self, to think for one’s self, to decide for one’s self whether vaccination is a good thing or not?

We live in a world where it is possible to “phone it in,” to virtually phone in our lives. Many do two or three things at once, perhaps none of them well, at that clip, and this is precisely the point. If we read on the home computer, say, while talking to a friend on the phone, while petting the cat, we can’t be wholly engaged in any one activity. We can’t do one thing well or study it properly in a distracted way.

The problem with learning about vaccination is that we don’t have the luxury of phoning it in. Learning about vaccination is not something we can do while trying to do other things at the same time. It is a very complex subject, one rife with dark emotional arguments, knee-jerk name calling and, of course, fear. This is not an atmosphere that encourages the shining light of learning.

It’s All About FEAR
Every salesman knows that inspiring fear in the mark (or customer) is about short-circuiting Reason. Runaway fear derails Reason, stimulates the fight or flight response, and makes frightened people respond. This includes most of the population, probably most people in the history of the world. Wars, which usually make no sense except for anyone save arms merchants and politicians acting to pad their friends’ business coffers, are typically started in this manner. (Remember the “Weapons of Mass Deception.”) Throughout history, people have been triggered to act out of fear, and to demonize as the “other” all those who haven’t jumped aboard the fear train to drink the Kool-Aide.

Death & Disease Fears for Both Sides
It’s all about fear for those selling vaccination, but it’s also (at least partly) about fear for those opposed to it. The difference in the two sides is that the former rely primarily on fear. They typically try to shame and bully and use name calling fallacies (Anti vaxxer!) to undermine any real discussion of the facts. The latter (those damn ‘anti vaxxers’) use fear too, but they rely more on Reason and Science. The rubber hits the road right there. It’s always easier to get people to act on an emotional response rather than on a reasonable one, even to turn people against their own neighbors, friends, families, with an emotional argument. Even if that argument is completely unbacked by Logic or Reason.

Stubborn Facts
Vaccination facts are something else again, and they are not alternative facts. There are factual reasons that can tell us why it makes sense not to vaccinate, to avoid vaccination altogether. Dr. Suzanne Humphries gives you those facts in her book, “Dissolving Illusions.” But it’s a long book, full of history and science and boring old Reason, so many will likely not bother to read it. (You can’t read and engage with a good book while doing 2-3 other things.)

Sarah, the Healthy Home Economist

Sarah, the Healthy Home Economist, gives a more condensed version of the argument against vaccination. Her essay, “Six Reasons To Say NO to Vaccination,” lays out incontrovertible facts which show vaccination as a pretty insane choice.

Sarah’s Six Reasons to Just Say No

1. Pharmaceutical companies can’t be trusted
Remember HRT? Vioxx? How about 35 other FDA-approved drugs from Big Pharma pulled from the market in the last 30 years or so? Merck, maker of MMR vaccine, the Zostavax Shingles vaccine (which doesn’t work but could make you blind), Gardasil, and other dangerous vaccines, is embroiled in at least two whistleblower lawsuits. Former Merck scientists claim the company faked vaccine data in order to keep lucrative government contracts in the billions of dollars.

2. ALL vaccines are Loaded with Chemicals and Heavy Metals
MSG, antifreeze, phenol, formaldehyde (cancer causing), aluminum (Alzheimer’s, seizures, etc.), glycerin (toxic to kidney, liver, lungs, etc.), lead, cadmium, sulfates, antibiotics, acetone (nail polish remover), neomycin, streptomycin. And THIMERISOL, more toxic than mercury.

A January 2017 study found that ALL vaccines tested were contaminated with heavy metals NOT DECLARED ON THE INGREDIENTS. Any questions?

3. Vaccinated Children Unhealthiest, Most Chronically Sick
Surveys of 12,000 children in the U.S. and Europe revealed the truth of the vaccinated vs. unvaccinated children debate. The great vaxxed are more chronically ill than the great unvaxxed. The VAXXED have higher rates for autism, ear infections, ADHD, asthma, allergies (some 30% higher than unvaxxed) and other health problems.

Vaccination Linked with Mental Illness
Yale and Penn State research has demonstrated a strong link between vaccination and mental illness in children. Some 95,000 children analyzed by the Dept. of Public Health Services at Penn State University College of Medicine and Yale University showed the awful truth of vaccination injuries. Vaccinated children showed a strong association with development of brain-related autoimmune and inflammatory disorders: ADHD, OCD, depression, bipolar, anorexia, chronic tic disorder.

4. Other Countries Waking Up to Vaccine Dangers
No country vaccinates more children per capita than the U.S., which stands a woeful #33 in infant mortality rate. How is vaccination helping us again? Japan formerly also had a terrible infant mortality rate, but when it raised its minimum vax age to 2, Japan’s infant mortality rate jumped to No. 3 in the world. Sudden Infant Death Syndrome – SIDS – is most likely caused by vaccination, as poor parents who have experienced it already know. Australia suspended the flu vaccine for children under 5 in 2010 after a huge number were being raced to emergency rooms with febrile convulsions and other vaccine reactions within hours of the jab.

The shingles vaccine doesn’t work, which is likely why the UK continues to not offer it to children, and it triggers the risk of shingles epidemic for adults.

5. Many Troublesome Vaccines have already been removed from market
in 2002, GlaxoSmithKline removed the Lyme Disease vaccine from the market after several vaccinated victims reported symptoms worse than the disease itself. The Rotavirus was removed in 1999 due to life-threatening bowel obstruction or twisting of the bowl. (The label change warning came too late for many, in 2007)

Gardasil, another unnecessary vaccine for a problem that is seldom life-threatening, is a nightmare that has sadly killed or crippled hundreds of young people.

FACT: If these vaccines have problems, all of them likely have problems, as vaccine makers follow the same basic formula when they come up with each new witch’s brew of a shot.

6. You can Always get Vaccinated; You can Never Unvaccinate.
‘First, do no harm,’ is the golden rule for doctors. That’s not how the vaccination works for the thousands of people it has injured or killed. The whole idea of pumping toxins directly into the bloodstream is questionable at best; just plain absurd, or criminal, at worst, especially for children. To assault a newborn with these toxic chemicals is tantamount to insanity, to cruel and unusual punishment, like the absurd practice of circumcision, another dirty little secret, unnecessary and dangerous for defenseless babies, but profitable for their “professional” handlers.

RELATED

Share

Monsanto, Roundup Face New Safety Doubts

Monsanto’s Roundup (glyphosate) weed killer took a hit March 13, 2017. On that day, a federal court unsealed documents that raise questions not only about Roundup’s safety, but also about Monsanto’s research practices.

Roundup Poison Everywhere

Roundup is used around the world on everything from corporate farm crops to home gardens. Roundup is Monsanto’s flagship product, the cornerstone of its whole operation. Science funded by Monsanto and other Ag-industry corporations has found Roundup to be relatively safe. Independent science, by contrast, including the World Health Organization, has found glyphosate to be likely carcinogenic. Monsanto consequently faces Roundup cancer lawsuits across the country.

Roundup Lymphoma Link
Independent research reviews have found that Roundup exposure increases the risk of non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma (NHL), hairy cell leukemia (HCL),  multiple myeloma, and chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

Monsanto’s Damning Emails with Regulators
A federal case against Monsanto for Roundup has been filed in San Francisco. Court documents include Monsanto’s internal emails, as well as ethically troubling emails between Monsanto officials and federal regulators. The records suggest Monsanto had ghostwritten research later attributed to academics. A senior EPA official had worked to quash a review of Roundup’s main ingredient. A study on glyphosate was supposed to have been conducted by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. That study was never done. The documents also show internal E.P.A. disagreement over glyphosate safety assessments.

Judge Unseals Secret Monsanto Files
The files were unsealed by Judge Vince Chabria. He is presiding over a lawsuit brought by people who say they developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma from glyphosate exposure. The litigation stems from a determination made in 2015 that glyphosate was a probable carcinogen. The International Agency for Research on Cancer, a branch of the World Health Organization, cited research linking glyphosate to non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

Monsanto Insider with EPA
Court records show Monsanto was alerted to the damning determination months earlier by a deputy division director at the E.P.A., Jess Rowland. That EPA/Monsanto insider gave the biotech bully a head start to prepare a public relations assault on the finding before its publication. Monsanto executives’ internal emails said Mr. Rowland had promised to fight Department of Health and Human Services’ efforts to conduct independent review. He appears to have been successful.

EPA Official Works For Monsanto to Defend Glyphosate
Dan Jenkins, a Monsanto executive, wrote in a 2015 email that Mr. Rowland had told him, “If I can kill this [his agency’s review], I should get a medal.” Mr. Rowland should have gotten his Monsanto medal, because the review never happened. Mr. Jenkins noted in another email to a colleague that Mr. Rowland was planning to retire. The Monsanto man said Mr. Rowland “could be useful as we move forward with ongoing glyphosate defense.”

Glyphosate Unsafe on Any Plate
Glyphosate has never been proven safe by any objective review of the science. Several agencies, including the European Food Safety Agency and the E.P.A., have disagreed with the international cancer agency that plays down concerns of a cancer risk. Monsanto has always aggressively defended glyphosate through million-dollar PR campaigns, advertising money that also buys friendly copy, and political contributions. Monsanto has also leaned on its minions in the EPA (like Jess Rowland), the judiciary (like former Monsanto lawyer and Supreme Court Judge Clarence Thomas), in the White House (like former first lady and former lawyer for Monsanto, Hilary Clinton), and the House of Congress (2016 total to Democrats: $89,500; to Republicans: $267,000).

But the court records also reveal a level of debate within the E.P.A. The agency’s Office of Research and Development raised concerns about the robustness of an assessment carried out by the agency’s Office of Pesticide Programs. There, Jess Rowland was then a senior official. He had recommended in December 2015 that EPA take steps to “strengthen” its “human health assessment”on glyphosate.

Monsanto:  “Glyphosate is not a carcinogen”

Monsanto said in a statement: “Glyphosate is not a carcinogen.” The company added: “The allegation that glyphosate can cause cancer in humans is inconsistent with decades of comprehensive safety reviews by the leading regulatory authorities around the world. The plaintiffs have submitted isolated documents that are taken out of context.”

The New York Times reported that the E.P.A. had no immediate comment to the judge’s March 13 ruling. The paper said it could not immediately reach Mr. Rowland for comment.

Monsanto through Both Sides of Its Corporate Mouth
Monsanto also refuted suggestions that the disclosures the judge forced it to make highlighted concerns that the academic research it underwrites is compromised. The problem, of course, is that Monsanto always cites such vested-interest research to back up its Roundup pesticide-safety claims.

Monsanto Ghostwrites its own Research, Hides Authorship
In one email unsealed last month, Monsanto executive William Heydens told other Monsanto employees that they could ghostwrite research on glyphosate by hiring academics to put their names on papers that were actually written by Monsanto.

Mr. Heydens wrote: “We would be keeping the cost down by us doing the writing and they would just edit & sign their names so to speak.” He said the company had done so previously, citing a previous case.

When questioned about the exchange, Monsanto said in another statement that its “scientists did not ghostwrite the paper” referred to or previous work, adding that a paper that eventually appeared “underwent the journal’s rigorous peer review process before it was published.”

Roundup Cancer Link – Rat Study

We have also seen an instance where Monsanto hired its own friendly editor and then had him pull peer reviewed research paper pulled from publication, because it showed glyphosate as a probable carcinogen. That was the Giles Seralini rat study, in which rats developed hideous tumors that gave the lie to Monsanto’s proclamation of glyphosate safety.

Researcher denies Ghostwritten Work
David Kirkland, one of the scientists mentioned in the email, said in an interview, “I would not publish a document that had been written by someone else.” He added, “We had no interaction with Monsanto at all during the process of reviewing the data and writing the papers.”

Integrity of Academic Research Questioned
The disclosures are the latest to raise concerns about the integrity of academic research financed by agrochemical companies. A review by The New York Times in 2016 showed how the industry can manipulate academic research or misstate findings. Declarations of interest included in a Monsanto-financed paper on glyphosate that appeared in the journal Critical Reviews in Toxicology said panel members were recruited by a consulting firm. Email traffic made public shows Monsanto officials discussed and debated scientists who should be considered, and shaped the project.

Monsanto, Roundup Face New Safety Doubts

Most of Monsanto’s glyphosate research is highly questionable, given the many conflicts of interest that often come to light only after a lawsuit is filed,” said attorney David Matthews, whose law firm is handling Monsanto and Roundup cancer lawsuits.

Roundup Weedkiller Everywhere
In the last 20 years, Monsanto has genetically re-engineered corn, soybeans and cotton. Some 220 million pounds of glyphosate were used in 2015 in the United States.

RELATED

 

Share

Scientists say Glyphosate Needs Safety Review

Scientific experts say Monsanto’s  glyphosate weedkiller chemical needs an urgent safety review. New evidence suggests the safety standards for glyphosate (Roundup) may be failing to protect the public and environment. Health experts just published that conclusion in the Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health.

Monsanto’s out-of-date Science
Current standards that assess glyphosate dangers are based on out-of-date science, say the researchers. That old “science” (also performed only by those with vested interest in its outcomes) may not be able to address the full complement of health hazards associated with pesticide exposure. The experts call for an urgent review of these outdated “standards.”

Monsanto has Us Covered
Glyphosate use has increased rapidly in the U.S. over the past twenty years. Today it is the most widely used weed-killer in the nation and the world. Global estimates suggest that in 2014 enough glyphosate was used to spray nearly 0.5 kg on every hectare of farmable land across the entire earth.

Glyphosate is used to kill off weeds (and, incidentally, bees, insects, and birds) before crops are planted. Then it is further used to control weed growth. Then it is also used to speed up the natural drying of seeds before harvest. Pesticide residues have been found in soybeans, wheat, barley, and many other crops and foods, the researchers say.

Peer Review Science Absent
Most of the science used to support the safety standards applied in the US was carried out more than 30 years ago. Relatively little of it was subject to peer review. Since then, more than 1500 glyphosate studies have been published, hundreds in just the past decade, many in peer-reviewed journals that set the standard for law.

The experts say, “It is incongruous that safety assessments of the most widely-used herbicide on the planet rely largely on fewer than 300 unpublished, non-peer reviewed studies while excluding the vast modern literature on glyphosate effects.”

Despite the rapid increase in glyphosate being sprayed everywhere, there is no systematic monitoring system for tracking levels in human tissue. Few studies have researched potential harm to humans.

Glyphosate Damage to Liver, Kidney, Eye, Cardio Systems
Recent animal studies, however, have suggested glyphosate at doses lower than those used to assess risk, may be linked to heightened risks of liver, kidney, eye, and cardiovascular system damage.

Monsanto avoids Public Scrutiny
Weed-killers which combine glyphosate with other ‘so-called inert ingredients,’ may be even more potent, say the experts. The problem is like the voting machine owners hiding behind “proprietary interests” to keep us from counting our votes. Monsanto and other ag businesses hide behind their own corporate shield. Monsanto and others argue that these pesticide mixtures are “commercially sensitive” and therefore need to be made unavailable to the public.  (Editorial comment alert: So, you see, you can’t know what is in your food or how it is made – that is for corporate eyes only, because some other corporation could steal the secret of poisoning the world, killing off bees birds, animals, humans, and also profit from the devastation.)

The researchers are far from alone in claiming that glyphosate is associated with a heightened risk of cancer and has the potential to disrupt hormone function. Monsanto, of course, begs to differ.

The researchers call for several sensible measures:

  • improved surveillance of the levels of glyphosate and its metabolites in people
  • the latest state of the art tests and technology to be applied to risk assessments of these chemicals and other combination weed-killers
  • further research to track occupational exposures in agricultural workers, manufacturers, and other vulnerable groups, such as pregnant women and their children
  • evaluations of commercial combination weed-killers containing glyphosate.

Scientists say Glyphosate Needs Safety Review

The researchers wrote: “After a review of all evaluations, we conclude that the current safety standards are outdated and may fail to protect public health and the environment.” (BMJ)

Journal Reference:

Laura N Vandenberg, Bruce Blumberg, Michael N Antoniou, Charles M Benbrook, Lynn Carroll, Theo Colborn, Lorne G Everett, Michael Hansen, Philip J Landrigan, Bruce P Lanphear, Robin Mesnage, Frederick S vom Saal, Wade V Welshons, John Peterson Myers. Is it time to reassess current safety standards for glyphosate-based herbicides? Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 2017; jech-2016-208463 DOI: 10.1136/jech-2016-208463

BMJ. “Weedkiller chemical (glyphosate) safety standards need urgent review: Emerging evidence suggests they may be failing to protect public/environmental health.” ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 23 March 2017. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/03/170323125427.htm>.

Top Ten GMO Foods to Avoid

1. Corn – as much as 80% of the corn produced in the US is GMO.

2. Soy – Monsanto has about 90 percent of the soy market. In 2006, some 96.7 million pounds of glyphosate was sprayed on soybeans alone.

3. Sugar – According to NaturalNews, genetically-modified sugar beets were introduced to the U.S. market in 2009. Like others, they’ve been modified by Monsanto to resist herbicides.

4. Aspartame – Aspartame is a toxic additive used in numerous food products, and should be avoided for numerous reasons, including the fact that it is created with genetically modified bacteria.

5. Papayas – Bad surprise for tropical-fruit lovers. GMO papayas have been grown in Hawaii since 1999. They can’t be sold to countries in the European Union, but US regulators can’t wait for you to buy and eat them.

6. Canola – Canola is a great con. It is one of the most chemically altered foods in the U.S.

7. Cotton – More sprayed with pesticides than any other product in the U.S. Buy organic cotton if you can.

8. Dairy – Dairy products may contain growth hormones. As many as 20% of all dairy cows in the US are pumped with these harmful hormones. Monasnto’s health-hazardous rBGH has been banned in 27 countries, but US regulators give the company a free pass.

9. and 10. – Zucchini and Yellow Squash are often genetically modified.

The FDA simply gave Monsanto and other biotech bullies free reign to unleash these GMOs on us. Monsanto claims they’re safe. Independent labs and smart consumers beg to differ.

RELATED

Share