Flu vaccines don’t work for elderly, says latest science

Flu vaccines don’t work for elderly people, says the latest science.   Tracey Watson reported on Sept. 19, 2017 that there has been a total media blackout over this news.  One can only wonder why.  Don’t the elderly deserve to know this information?  There has also been a near total  blackout on the troubling shingles vaccine that fails 98-99% of the elderly.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC),  decides the national vaccination schedule “recommended” for children.  The CDC notes that those most at risk of complications from the flu virus are children younger than 5, and especially those under 2; pregnant women; people in nursing homes; and adults over 65.  The elderly are therefore among the most vulnerable members of society to influenza. The problem is that the flu shot last year was again determined to be ineffective for the elderly.

Public Health England (PHE) released a recent report that says, even though the flu shot seems to have been slightly more effective at preventing influenza among children than in the past, last year’s flu shot was totally ineffective for the elderly.

Flu Vaccine fails to thwart most common Strain

Vaccine “experts” believe the shot was ineffective because it failed to protect against the H3 strain, the most common circulating flu strain.  The flu shot is at best a game of chance each year.  “Experts” must attempt to predict which of three strains of the flu virus will be in circulation the next winter.  Even in a good year, their strike rate is a woeful 50 percent.

But that doesn’t mean CDC officials ever admit when a vaccine is ineffective or even useless.  In the case of the elderly, vaccine health professionals blame the elderly themselves.  A representative of PHE told BBC News: “As people age, their immune systems are often weaker and therefore their bodies may not respond as well to a vaccine as younger people’s bodies.”

Doubling Down on a Failed Flu Vaccine
Instead of admitting defeat, then, and encouraging seniors to pursue proven natural flu prevention paths, health officials just continue to push the flu shot.  Yes, despite the flu vaccine’s failure to help the elderly, vaccine “experts” still recommend older people take the flu jab again and again.

Mr. Watson points out that this is like saying, “The flu shot is useless for you and we know it, but you need to have it anyway.”  The so-called medical “experts” have even decided to double down on the insanity.  They have introduced “high-dose jabs that work to boost the body’s immune response to receiving the vaccine.”

Doubly Useless Flu Shots for Elderly
It’s hard to follow the logic, because there’s no logic to follow.  This is like saying, “The flu jab is useless for you and we know it, so we’re going to make it twice as useless.  Just keep quiet and take the jab.”  Meanwhile, thanks in part to the levels of mercury and/or aluminum and other “adjuvants” in flu shots, one’s risk of suffering from Alzheimer’s tends to rise with the number of flu shots one has taken over the years.

Flu vaccines don’t work for elderly, says latest science

Tracy Watson does offer some helpful news, “at least four easy, natural and effective ways to work with your body to build up your immune system and prevent the flu”: 1.) sunlight (Vitamin D3); 2.) Astragalus (a staple of ancient Ayurvedic and Chinese medicine); 3.) Echinacea and golden seal (powerful immune boosters); 4.) lifestyle and dietary changes (exercise, clean water, good sleep, controlled stress, fresh, organic fruits and vegetables).



20 Vaccine Documentaries that show the Big Picture

Scientists, doctors, researchers, writers and parents have produced at least 20 vaccine documentaries that show the big picture of this troubling controversy.  More and more parents are starting to figure out the anomalies and the contradictions and the outright lies of vaccination promoters as they watch their vaccinated children descend into chronic sickness. Recent studies show unvaccinated children are healthier than vaccinated ones; but you won’t find that story in mainstream “news.”

Related:  Vaccine Lottery:  Sacrifice the Children

More and more people who take the time to study the issue are figuring out that the CDC has lied to them. They have figured out that many of their doctors have unwittingly lied to them, mostly because their doctors don’t know anything about the history of vaccination or what is actually contained IN the vaccinations.  Talking television heads have lied to them.  Local newscasters have lied to them.

Vaccines are not the panacea they’ve been painted to be in the mainstream press controlled by drug company profits. The only way anyone can find the truth about vaccines is to see the injuries in their own children, which thousands and thousands of parents have done.  Or else they can research the web, study the history of vaccination, and look to see if anyone has ever done a legitimate double-blind study that proves the safety and effectiveness of even one single vaccine.

Related:  Shingles Vaccine Lawsuit

The vaccination blitz may not have begun as a cash cow making test monkeys out of most of its citizens.  The initial putsch for vaccination seems to have started with good intentions.  But do good intentions translate to positive results?  If only it were so!

“Most of the evil in this world is done by people with good intentions.” ― T.S. Eliot

Drug company executives extorted Congress back in the 1980s to give vaccine makers immunity from criminal prosecution or civil liability when they make vaccines that injure or kill children. Congress blinked and gave the vaccine profiteers virtual blanket immunity from liability, passing the so-called 1986 National Childhood Immunization Act.  Like the infamous “Citizen’s United,” or the notorious “Clean Skies” initiative, or “Operation Iraqi Freedom” (changed from the too-coy “Operation Iraqi Liberation” or OIL), the nomenclature is a duplicitous shield hiding a more troubling agenda.

Related:  Five Most Dangerous Vaccines

The so-called National Childhood Immunization Act shields drug companies from liability when their vaccines injure or kill children forced to take vaccines.  One dollar of profit from every vaccine goes into a fund, supposedly to help the children injured by vaccines.  This already creates an immediate problem for vaccine pushers an profiteers like Paul Offit, who endlessy tell us vaccines are completely safe and that autism is not caused by vaccines.  This big lie obtains today despite the fact that more than $3 billion has been paid from this fund to vaccine-injured children and their families.  Sadly, the fund recompenses only a tiny percentage of  parents and children injured or killed by vaccines.  The government realized early on that the fund didn’t collect enough money to compensate all the vaccine victims ; so it quickly moved to disallow Legal Discovery in vaccine cases and to simply deny some 80% of the claims in the secret and demonstrably undemocratic “Vaccine Court.”

Vaccine injuries are wiping out more and more families, crippling them emotionally and financially by autism and other vaccine-related injuries.  But those unfortunates do have one advantage over many.  They have seen the light.  They KNOW what caused their children’s injuries. Their eyes have been opened to how the world works (or doesn’t).  The rest of us need to open our own eyes before it’s too late for us and for our children, or our neighbor’s children.  We will all continue to pay as the rate of autism and vaccine injuries increases exponentially every year, in direct proportion to CDC mandates that require more and more childhood vaccinations be forced into our pin-cushion kids.  Rather than work as a watchdog for taxpayers, the CDC works as a partner with vaccine makers to promote vaccine policy and continue to raise the number of vaccines it requires children to take.

At least 20 must-see vaccine documentaries have been noted by Natural News, a web site that  Google and Facebook are trying to silence as Fake News.  Wise people will decide for themselves what fake news is, instead of getting censored search engine results.

20 Vaccine Documentaries that show the Big Picture

Please watch these documentaries and decide for yourself.

1. Vaccination – The Silent Epidemic

2. The Greater Good

3. Shots In The Dark

4. Vaccination The Hidden Truth

5. Vaccine Nation

6. Vaccination – The Truth About Vaccines

7. Lethal Injection

8. Bought

9. Deadly Immunity – Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

10. Autism – Made in the USA

11. Beyond Treason

12. Trace Amounts

13. Why We Don’t Vaccinate

14. Autism Yesterday

15. Denmark Documentary on HPV Vaccine

16. Vaxxed

17. Man Made Epidemic

18. 50 Cents A Dose

19. Direct Orders

20. Dtap – Vaccine Roulette

21. Truthstream News: About All Those Vaccines



Cook IVC Filter Lawyers can depose ex-Cook President, says Judge

Cook IVC filterCook Blood Clot Filter Lawsuits lawyers can depose an ex-Cook president, a judge ruled on September 13, 2017.  Cook defense lawyers had moved to block the deposition.  Attorney David Matthews of Matthews & Associates Law Firm will handle the deposition for the plaintiff in the case.  Mr. Matthews represents the plaintiff in the first Cook IVC filter case scheduled for trial this fall.

U.S. District Judge Richard L. Young issued an order that overruled Cook’s appeal from the denial of a Motion for Protective Order Barring Proposed Deposition of former Cook Group, Inc. president Kem Hawkins.  The Court ordered that Cook must produce its former executive for a deposition by September 27, 2017.

In early 2017, Matthews & Associates requested the deposition of Kem Hawkins to question him over IVC filter documents that included emails from his personal email account.  Plaintiffs contend those documents reveal Mr. Hawkins was intimately involved in the decision-making process and strategy regarding critical issues in the case.  The issues included decisions regarding the testing, design, marketing, and production of the Gunther Tulip and Celect IVC filters.

Defendants had filed a Motion April 27, 2017 for a Protective Order to prevent the Plaintiffs from deposing Mr. Hawkins.  However, on June 30, 2017, the Magistrate Judge denied Cook’s request. He stated: “Hawkins was involved in the decision-making process and strategy regarding the testing, design, marketing, and production of the [Gunther Tulip and Celect] filters.”

The judge rejected Cook’s attempt to thwart potentially damaging discovery:
“… Hawkins is the better source for information related to this litigation because he was the president of Cook during the time the Gunther Tulip and Celect IVC filters were manufactured and sold in the United States. Moreover, Hawkins regularly communicated on a personal email account, which Plaintiffs suspect the Cook Defendants did not search when producing responsive documents to their discovery requests. This all suggests that Hawkins has relevant knowledge that is not already available to Plaintiffs.”

The District judge agreed, adding that a review of the sealed documents shows Mr. Hawkins was involved in “strategic decisions regarding the enhancement of the Tulip filter and the development of the Celect filter to increase market share. He was aware of the timetable for the Celect clinical trials and sought to speed up the process to get Celect on the market. Most importantly, the documents reflect that he was aware of the risk that both IVC filters could perforate the wall of the vena cava.”

Cook IVC Filter Lawyers can depose ex-Cook President, says Judge
The Cook Defendants in the case must produce Mr. Hawkins for deposition within two weeks of the Court’s September 13, 2017 Order.  The ruling means Plaintiffs are entitled to seek relevant documents from Mr. Hawkins and ask him questions about his personal email account.

The first Cook IVC Filter trial is scheduled for an Indiana courtroom in November, 2017.



Chemical Farming Kills Earth, Animals, People

Chemical based farming kills earth, animals, and people – are we leaving anything out? Oh, yes, it also kills the beauty that mother nature developed over thousands of years before man came along and thought he could steamroll her into submission.

What kind of an animal thinks it can poison its own food supply and remain healthy? How can something be sprayed on plants to kill weeds and bugs without harming everything else around it? What kind of an animal would even believe such a thing possible?

Related:  Roundup non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma

Probably one enamored of technology.  Probably one convinced he is special, somehow outside the bounds of plant and animal life, of nature. Probably an animal capable of superstitious “reasoning,” or what psychologists call “magical thinking,” at least where his own pocketbook is concerned. Probably an animal who thinks he’s not an animal, but some sort of superior being. Probably some animal who read in the bible that he has dominion over the other animals, and he takes that to mean that he can kill them or use them or torture them or whatever he likes without any consequences.

Silent Spring
Silent Spring author Rachel Carson, whose famous book launched the environmental movement, noted that in 1947 “DDT is good for me” was a little piece pushed by TIME magazine. “Public health” announcements ran film of children being sprayed with the carcinogenic neurotoxin while they ate and swam and played. Doctors for decades hawked cigarettes, declaring them good for us, maybe even a great way to help relax (and not think about what could be silently killing us). It was propaganda, plain and simple, just like Monsanto’s declarations today – its false advertising – about how wonderful Roundup is, about how safe glyphosate is.

Chemical Farming Kills Earth, People, Animals
Ms. Carson spoke presciently about our chemical-based farming methods.  The corporate model of farming – which tortures animals and poisons so many of us today, while denying us needed nutrients – didn’t gain a foothold until after WWII.  That’s when chemical companies that made killing weapons (and killings in sales) realized they could also make a “killing” in farming, in killing pests in the mass production of food.  The problem, of course, is that farming based on toxic chemicals kills indiscriminately, just like Roundup today.  Rachel Carson was an early critic of this chemical model of farming.

Balance of Nature Unbalanced by Monsanto
Ms. Carson said: “Now to these people, apparently, the balance of nature was something that was replaced as soon as man came on the scene. You might as well assume you could repeal the law of gravity. The balance of nature is built on a series of inter-relationships between living things and their environment. You can’t just step in with some brute force and change one thing without changing many others.”

You’re Headed for Disaster
Ms. Carson added, “That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to tilt the balance of nature in our favor; but unless we do bring these chemicals under better control, you’re certainly headed for disaster.”

GMOs Poisoning Most of Us Most the Time
GMO foods are now poisoning most of us most the time.  Some 80 percent of our food supply is genetically modified.  There’s a clear parallel between our increasing use of glyphosate and rising increases in infertility, thyroid disease, liver disease, kidney problems, and other life-threatening maladies.

Inadequate Regulatory System
The problem is that we have an inadequate regulatory system, says Claire Robinson, editor of GM Watch.  That system doesn’t explore all the risks of GMO foods, leaving that task mostly for the same companies like Monsanto that profit from GMO proliferation. The pesticide lobby is very strong.  Monsanto, Syngenta and others steadily push to weaken pesticide regulation at the same time that they are profiting more and more from the sale of GMO seeds, which are made to be sold with their pesticides.

Low Dose Glyphosate damages Kidney, Liver Function
The regulation is overrun by Monsanto sycophants and government shills like Michael Taylor, as well as EPA officials both past and present.  Some EPA officials were recently unmasked in a Monsanto lawsuit. They can be seen in emails colluding with Monsanto to help the company push the phony claim that glyphosate is safe.  Glyphosate is decidedly NOT safe.  In fact, ultra-low doses of glyphosate, thousands of times below what regulators says is completely safe, have been shown to cause increased incidents of liver and kidney damage over the long term. That is the way glyphosate is working on virtually all of us – long term.  A study led by London, UK geneticist, Dr. Michael Antoniou has shown this long-term, low-dose effect.  Given that most people in the U.S. have been found to be contaminated with glyphosate, even those of us trying to eat organic foods and avoid all the poisoned Monsanto food that we can, are at risk.

Buy Organic, Buy Local
The best answer is to buy organic, which is the food most likely not to be contaminated with glyphosate.  Buy from local producers when you can. Get to you know your food producers. Then join an action group.  Since our regulators are captured by Monsanto and other industry giants, and our politicians are captured or gutless, we are largely on our own to start citizen movements to save ourselves, our children, and our planet earth for future generations.


•  Pesticide Action Network, North America

•  Moms Across America

•  Moms advocating Sustainability

•  Environmental Working Group

•  Slow Food USA

•  US Right to Know

•  GMWatch

•  The Detox Project

•  Independent Science News

•  Dr. Joseph Mercola

•  Center for Food Safety

•  www.AllergyKids.com

•  American Nutrition Association

•  www.organicconsumersassociation.org

•  www.HealthAndEnvironment.org

•  www.ResponsibleTechnology.org


•  GMO Myths and Truths

•  Altered Genes, Twisted Truth


Stanford Academic unmasked as Monsanto Shill

Take a good look at this picture of Stanford Academic, Henry I. Miller.  Would you trust this man to serve you honest advice about healthy food?  Look closer. Would you be more or less likely to take that advice if you learned that he was being paid by Monsanto to promote it?  This Stanford academic has been unmasked as a Monsanto shill.

A longtime ally of large agricultural companies (as well as the tobacco industry), Stanford’s Henry I. Miller has been unmasked as a Monsanto shill.

Forbes Magazine Op-Ed Fraud
According to documents recently released in a Monsanto lawsuit that charges a man’s lymphoma was caused by Roundup, Mr. Miller – a prominent Stanford University academic – allowed Monsanto to write an op-ed for Forbes magazine in his name.

Mr. Miller is a Robert Wesson Fellow in Scientific Philosophy and Public Policy at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. Monsanto called him into service after the world began to notice Roundup is linked with lymphoma and other cancers, as well as liver and kidney damage.

Carcinogen Maker Monsanto 

In 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a branch of the World Health Organization (WHO), ruled that glyphosate used in Roundup and other Monsanto poisons, was a “probable carcinogen.” Monsanto promptly sent an email to Mr. Miller through Eric Sachs, a Science, Technology & Outreach Lead at Monsanto. The company invited Miller to write about the decision.

Eric Sachs wrote:

Are you interested in writing more on the topic of the IARC panel, its process, and controversial decision? I have background and can provide information if needed. The outcome is embargoed but will be communicated as early as next week.

This brief email proves Miller and Sachs knew each other well, and that Monsanto directly asked Miller to help fight the IARC pronouncement.  Miller’s response shows his complicity and willingness to let Monsanto control him, for a price.  He wrote back to Monsanto :

“I would be if I could start from a high-quality draft,” he responded, adding a bloated note that he was “inundated with projects.” (The poor man wasn’t just busy like most people; he was ‘inundated.’)

Sachs then greased the skids for Miller’s easy slide into prostitution: “We have a draft nearly done and will send to you by tomorrow,” Sachs wrote.  Then just hours later, Sachs sent Miller a draft with a patronizing note to further help Miller slide down: “Here is our draft…It’s still quite rough… but a good start for your magic…” .

Miller later passed this draft on to Forbes magazine without disclosing that Monsanto had written most of it. When Forbes learned of Miller’s 2015 arrangement in the summer of 2017, Forbes removed the piece from its web site, though CBS preserved and published most of it in a PDF.

Miller attacks IARC for Monsanto
In his Monsanto-ghostwritten article, Milller cautioned against trusting any U.N. agency. He argued that the EPA and ECHA (European Chemical Agency) had not previously found the active ingredients to be likely carcinogens. Miller never noted agrochemical have strongly undermined and influenced these agencies. Miller also failed to note U.S. EPA used Monsanto’s own research to approve glyphosate products.

Miller echoes unsubstantiated Monsanto Claims
After comparing “hazard” and “harm,” Miller dutifully repeated unsubstantiated the Monsanto claim: “[T]he reality is that glyphosate is not a human health risk even at levels of exposure that are even 100 times higher than the human exposures that occur under conditions consistent with the product’s labeling.”

More and more research disputes this Monsanto claim, as do plaintiffs in several Roundup cancer lawsuits.

The Case of Henry I. Miller
The case of Henry I. Miller is emblematic of just how Monsanto works with writers to both massage and manipulate public opinion for profit and also protect itself from liability. It is hardly the first time Monsanto has tried to manipulate media and control spin on scientific research.

Monsanto Works to Spin IARC Decision
According to other Monsanto emails about a month before the 2015 IARC decision, Monsanto Product Safety Assessment Strategy Lead William Heydens promoted ghost-writing research for academics to sign as their own. Mr. Heydens wrote in an email to toxicologist Donna Farmer titled “IARC planning”:

“An option would be to add Greim and Kier or Kirkland to have their names on the publication, but we would be keeping the cost down by us doing the writing and they would just edit & sign their names so to speak. Recall that is how we handled Williams Kroes & Munro, 2000.”

Monsanto Lies in Plain Sight as Evidence Mounts
Monsanto has repeatedly denied that this email proves they ghost-wrote the Williams, Kroes, and Munro article. Monsanto claims that any evidence which shows Monsanto collusion with writers or EPA officials has been taken out of context.

Stanford Academic unmasked as Monsanto Shill

The problem for Monsanto is that email is far from the only evidence that Monsanto attempted to control controversy surrounding its poison products. Meanwhile, Monsanto continues to spin and obfuscate as its own company emails show it to be a manipulator trying to save itself from what any half wit can see is the truth. Faced with the truth over anything, Monsanto lies and denies what the whole world can see, and then attacks anyone and any agency that attempts to shine the clean light of truth.




Fake Vaccine News, Fake Studies, Fake Advocates

Fake vaccine news, fake studies, fake advocates dominate so-called real news.  First and most pointedly, in California.  The golden state is ground zero for the mandatory (Read: forced) vaccination of schoolchildren.  The state was the first to kill informed consent for parents and their children.  Led by Merck Pharmaceutical darling Senator Richard Pan, the state decided to do away with the first rule of medicine.  This is more than a little ironic, seeing as how Mr. Pan is also a medical doctor.  Unless one can afford to home school one’s children in California, they are, for all intents and purposes, forced to take a huge dose of vaccinations, of whatever type and dose the state – as directed by drug companies and the CDC – decide that they “need.”

Why is no adult discussion of vaccines allowed in the mainstream media?  What gives?

It is easy to spot pro-vaccine politicians and how they got that way.  All one needs do is look at their campaign contributions. Even in the insane age of Citizen’s United, one can still follow the money trail, most of the time.

Follow the Money Trail

It can be harder to follow the money for vaccine advocates working in academia.  Sometimes they  write such prolific trash supporting drug companies, it is almost impossible NOT to spot them.  When an academic like Dorit Reiss of UC Hastings College of Law and Kaiser Permanente, posts 1,000 (or so) blogs to attack parents of children injured by vaccines and promotes mass vaccination, it is not so difficult.  She repeats, ad nauseam, that thousands of vaccine safety studies have been done to prove vaccine safety and efficacy, and it simply is not true.  Who or what is paying Ms. Reiss to support industry and attack vaccine-injured children’s parents and other critical thinkers?  How does she possibly find the time if she has a real job?  In this case, one need look no further than her stated employers, and the money behind UC Hastings and Kaiser.

Why is no adult discussion of vaccines allowed in the mainstream media?  What gives?

Monsanto Money earns UW-Madison Seal of Approval

It is also instructive to learn just how industry captures some academic institutions in order to do its bidding.  The University of Wisconsin, for one example, fairly rolled over for Monsanto when the company “donated” a $10 million commercial biotech plant laboratory that helped develop genetically modified plants.  That “donation” has made UW-Madison “the hub of a new crop research center,” gushed the Wisconsin State Journal on Jan. 31, 2017.  Gee, I wonder if the UW will continue to support GMO foods as they have so dutifully in the past after receiving multi-milllon-dollar “gifts” from Monsanto.  Is the UW aware that hundreds of Roundup Lymphoma lawsuits are being filed against its great benefactor, Monsanto?  (Maybe all that dough will buy some helpful studies “proving” the safety of Roundup.)

The UW-Madison also got nicely behind Monsanto’s  awful bovine growth hormone (rBST) after Monsanto donated a couple million to the UW just as it also gifted the world with rBST.  Not to pick on the Badger state’s flagship school.  Most land-grand universities are hot for donations, and  will do almost anything to keep them coming.

Sometimes the payments for those supporting corporate profits at the expense of people are harder to spot, at least until one looks closer.

Professor Dorit Reiss of Hastings Law School in San Francisco seems to have gotten her start in the blogging business after Katie Couric had the temerity to question the safety of Merck’s Gardasil vaccine.  It seems several girls were dying after their Gardasil injections, or catching auto-immune diseases; so Ms. Couric investigated.  Ms. Reiss was then keen to demonstrate her loyalties to her state’s Draconian vaccination policy, and to her university and its Big Pharma backers.  She even had the gall to write in defense of the “advantages” of a school’s being captured by industry, or a regulatory agency’s working closely and “cooperatively” with industry.  (You can’t make this stuff up.)  The word “capture,” she wrote, has negative connotations, and therefore should not be used.  Put lipstick on a pig, she might have added, and it might look beautiful, at least to Ms. Reiss.

With Professor Reiss’ considerable help, Katie Couric was wildly attacked when she ran a nationally televised story covering Gardasil dangers.  Robert De Niro – the father of an autistic son whose Black mother says he was made that way by vaccination – was likewise savaged for questioning American children’s massive vaccination schedule.  Jim Carey (who said he was not anti vaccine) was also attacked, as was Jenny McCarthy, Rob Schneider, and anyone else who has had the temerity to question America’s increasingly heavy childhood vaccine schedule, and the forced vaccination of school children.

Why is no adult discussion of vaccines allowed in the mainstream media?  What gives?

Vaccine Comedy Dutifully Promotes Vaccination

Comedy Central’s John Oliver has devoted more and more of his time to savaging anyone who questions the “prevailing wisdom” of vaccination.  Mr. Oliver’s audience guffaws as dutifully as a laugh track as he pretends to have all the answers, to know that all vaccinations are safe and effective and necessary.  His dismissive views are oddly solidly backed by the likes of strange bedfellows, Republican stalwarts such as The Wall Street Journal and Forbes.   This is quite curious, considering that Mr. Oliver’s show is decidedly slanted to the liberal side of the aisle.  (One might be wise to pay special attention when the entire mainstream media is all behind something, or all uniformly against it.)

Why is no adult discussion about vaccines allowed in the mainstream media?  What gives?

The fact that President Donald Trump has questioned the prevailing wisdom of shooting as many vaccines into children as Merck and the CDC say they need is used to further marginalize vaccine skeptics.  The fact that Mr. Trump is (by many critical accounts from close observers) a sociopathic narcissist, is used by mandatory vaccine supporters as one more reason that ALL and ANY discussion of vaccination should not even be allowed.  What if Mr. Trump were right about something?  Is it possible?

Why is no adult discussion of vaccines allowed in the mainstream media?  What gives?

Fake Vaccine News, Fake Studies, Fake Advocates

Do those who so viciously attack “anti-vaxxers” really think or believe that every vaccine is safe and effective, and that every vaccine should be used any time Merck or the CDC say so?  What if they are wrong?  What if every vaccine is not safe and effective?  What if every vaccination batch needs a careful inventory of chemical components and a field trial?  What if they should all be monitored for safety and effectiveness?  What if that vaccine they want to put directly into your kid’s bloodstream, bypassing her immune system, is made in China, where the FDA is not allowed inside the plants to investigate?  What if the shingles vaccine has blinded several people and given them repeat cases of shingles?  Is that something you would like to know? What if the flu vaccine doesn’t work this year, or isn’t worth the risk?  What if more people died of the flu after taking the flu shot last year than unvaccinated people who got the flu?  Is that something you’d like to know? What if vaccine makers don’t lose sleep over safety issues because they know that the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act protects them from liability; so that they have very little incentive to make safe vaccines?  Why do vaccine makers or their shills – like Professor Dorit Reiss of Hastings Law School in San Francisco, or Comedy Central’s John Oliver, or vaccine-profiteer Paul Offit (aptly named) – think the 1986 Act was necessary if vaccine injuries don’t occur?

What gives? Why is no adult discussion of vaccines allowed in the mainstream media?

All one needs do is follow the money.



Monsanto Campaign to Retract Séralini Study Revealed

“Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!” thundered the Wizard of Oz when Toto pulled back the drape.  The little dog showed the world the Wizard was only a voice, and smoke and mirrors.  The same is true of the biotech bully from Missouri.  Its campaign to retract the now-famous Seralini study has revealed Monsanto to be the scoundrel that it is.

Monsanto Man behind the curtain

Monsanto employs hundreds of such men to thunder behind curtains that hide the truth.  Monsanto pays them all or their proxies to pass off the illusion that Monsanto is great and powerful, and somehow necessary.  Monsanto pretends to want to feed the world, and to make farming easier for farmers.  Only the last part may be partially true, with a giant caveat.*   Glyphosate sold to farmers under the guise of making their lives easier has been unmasked as a probable carcinogen.  Hundreds of farmers and homeowners exposed to Roundup have found themselves diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma, Multiple Myeloma, Hairy Cell Leukemia, or Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.

*Related:  Monsanto Lawsuit – Roundup Lymphoma

Monsanto’s money and the political and “scientific” juice that money buys may make the company appear to be as powerful as the Wizard of Oz.  But just tug on that curtain with Toto and you can see it is all bombast, subterfuge, balderdash.  The street word is bull****, and Monsanto is full of it.

Monsanto Money Buys Research, Researchers
When Monsanto is confronted by science that threatens to end the company’s poison gravy train, it hires not only “researchers,” writers and editors to defend itself and pitch its party line.  Monsanto also has editors fired, and replaced by those who better do the company’s bidding.

“If the company thinks, I think so, too,” is the famous line from How to Succeed in Business without really trying.  That is the way things work for Monsanto.  Recent documents uncovered in a lawsuit over the company’s Roundup – linked with lymphoma – give Monsanto’s whole cynical game away.  These documents follow the money.  They show exactly how Monsanto manipulates scientists, massages messages, and attacks anyone and any studies that threaten Monsanto’s poison profits.

Roundup Cancer Lawsuit Documents Released
Recently released documents in Roundup cancer lawsuits against Monsanto show its desperate attempts to suppress a study that showed Roundup’s adverse effects.  They also show that the editor of the journal that retracted the Séralini study had a contractual relationship with Monsanto.  The editor picked to replace him was also a former Monsanto employee.

Roundup Linked with Liver, Kidney Damage
Internal company documents show Monsanto launched a concerted campaign to force the retraction of a study by Giles Eric Seralini.  The study had revealed Roundup’s toxic effects.  The documents also show that the editor of the journal that first published the study entered into a contract with Monsanto shortly before it secretly launched a campaign to discredit and kill it.

Monsanto moves to Stifle Roundup Cancer Research
Led by Prof GE Séralini, the damaging study showed that very low doses of Monsanto’s Roundup had dramatically toxic effects on rats, including serious liver and kidney damage.  The research called for a larger-scale carcinogenicity test to further assess Roundup’s dangers.  Such a study could have blown Monsanto’s Roundup right off the map; consequently, the company jumped to retract and destroy it.  Monsanto needed to stifle any further research on its best-selling poison, because it knew then, and it knows now, that further research will only show the real, horrendous toxic effects of glyphosate.

The Heavy Hand of Monsanto
The newly released documents show that throughout Monsanto’s secret retraction campaign, company employees tried to cover Monsanto’s tracks to hide its heavy hand.  Nevertheless, Monsanto scientist David Saltmiras admitted to orchestrating a “third party expert” campaign.  He enlisted scientists – who were ostensibly independent of Monsanto – to letter bomb the editor-in-chief of the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology (FCT), A. Wallace Hayes.  Letters from the “scientists” demanded that Mr. Hayes retract the study.

Fake Third Party “Experts”
Using ostensibly independent “third party experts” is a classic public relations trick perfected by Big Tobacco, which used doctors, among other paid shills, to tout the safety and the wonders of cigarettes.  The idea is to pay “independent” experts to support industry products and attack their critics, in order to hide industry’s heavy hand.

GM Watch: Jonathan Matthews
“Back in 2012, GMWatch founder Jonathan Matthews exposed the pesticide industry links of the supposedly independent scientists who lobbied the journal editor to retract the Séralini paper. Now we have first-hand proof of Monsanto’s direct involvement.

In one document, Monsanto’s David Saltmiras trumpets his own achievements, boasting of how he “successfully facilitated numerous third party expert letters to the editor which were subsequently published, reflecting the numerous significant deficiencies, poor study design, biased reporting and selective statistics employed by Séralini.  In addition, coauthored the Monsanto letter to the editor with [Monsanto employees] Dan Goldstein and Bruce Hammond.”

Mr. Saltmiras further boasts: “Throughout the late 2012 Séralini rat cancer publication and media campaign, I leveraged my relationship [with] the Editor i[n] Chief of the publishing journal… and was the single point of contact between Monsanto and the Journal.”  Word on the street is that Mr. Saltmiras will be promoted at Monsanto, and he is favored to win the coveted  a****** of the year award from all those who care about eating nutritious, non-pesticided food.

Another Monsanto employee, Eric Sachs, writes in an email about how he manipulated another scientist, Bruce Chassy, into writing a letter to the journal editor to retract the study.  But Mr. Chassy – who runs the pro-GMO Academics review website – was not that hard to move, it turns out, seeing as how he was also paid by Monsanto.  Mr. Chassy had formerly earned his Monsanto keep by writing hit pieces against Dr. Seralini in Forbes, another fake news outlet committed to pro-GMO propaganda.  (Forbes tends to back any company that pays; it’s a pretty simple formula.)  In 2016, Mr. Chassey was exposed as a Monsanto shill who failed to disclose Monsanto had paid him more than $57,000 in less than two years.  Chassey was also the first to sign a petition to retract the damaging (to Monsanto) Seralini study.

Mr. Sachs gushes in one internal Monsanto email: “I talked to Bruce Chassy and he will send his letter to Wally Hayes directly and notify other scientists that have sent letters to do the same. He understands the urgency… I remain adamant that Monsanto must not be put in the position of providing the critical analysis that leads the editors to retract the paper.”

Mission Not Accomplished

For remaining so cutely “adamant” about the importance of hiding Monsanto’s heavy hand in back-stabbing science, the self-promoting Mr. Sachs has clearly failed in his mission, as his released emails hilariously and ironically prove.

In response to Monsanto’s request, Mr. Chassy urged Mr. Hayes to retract the GE Séralini paper: “My intent was to urge you to roll back the clock, retract the paper, and restart the review process.”

Mr. Hayes, of course, complied, as he was working for Monsanto, too.  (What a shock!  Not.  These Monsanto fellows are so delicate with one another, it would almost be touching, if it weren’t so nauseating.)

Mr. Chassy was also the first to sign a petition demanding the retraction of the Séralini study.  Never does Mr. Chassy declare any link with Monsanto.  In 2016, however, he was exposed as having taken more than $57,000 in less than two years from Monsanto.  Mr. Chassey traveled, wrote, and spoke about GMOs – always favorably, of course.

The Lying Editor A. Wallace Hayes

The editor of Food and Chemical Toxicology, A. Wallace Hayes, also lied about accepting money from Monsanto.  He entered into a “consulting agreement” with Monsanto just before helping retract the damaging (to Monsanto) Séralini study.  He lied to a New York Times reporter about the timing of his payments from Monsanto.  Mr. Hayes was paid $400 per hour for his “services” to Monsanto at the same time that he was pretending to be an unbiased editor.

It gets uglier and dumber for Monsanto. The editor brought in to replace Mr. Hayes was also found to be a former Monsanto employee.  Meanwhile, the company continues full throttle to poison scientific discourse, as well as most of America and much of the world.

Stop using Roundup, Stop Supporting Monsanto
Americans need to wise up and stop using Roundup, stop poisoning themselves, their food, their pets.   Many dogs have been reported to experience seizures and cancers after roaming in Roundup-sprayed fields.  But since those stories are “anecdotal,” Monsanto thinks it can just write them all off.  (Will you write them all off, too, or write yourself off?)  Monsanto doesn’t care about you or your dog.  The company only wants you to buy more and more pesticides and continue to poison the world.  Because you’re too lazy to figure out how to battle your weeds without Roundup.  Don’t be too lazy, or too stupid.  Just stop it.  Stop it now.  Farm clean.  Live clean.  Eat clean.  There are natural weed killers than can do everything Roundup can do without poisoning you, your dog, your kids, or your food.



New GMOs Series a Must Watch

A groundbreaking new video series called GMOs Revealed launched August 22, 2017.  One can register to view it at this link.  This new GMO series is a must watch for anyone who uses Monsanto’s cancer-causing Roundup or eats food poisoned by pesticides.

Glyphosate Poisoning Everywhere

Glypohosate poisoning is just one of the eye-opening topics of the video series, but the ubiquitousness of Monsanto’s most profitable poison may make it the most important subject covered.

Glyophosate has been found in Cheerios, Ben & Jerry’s ice cream, organic crackers, many processed snacks and popular foods, as well as in most rainwater in the U.S., in California wine, in orange juice, in vaccines, in nearly everything we all eat and drink or are forced to take.

Roundup linked with Diabetes, Obesity, Kidney Failure, Alzheimer’s, Autism

Dr. Stephanie Seneff, an MIT Senior Research Scientist, is one of many experts in her field who appear in the video series.  In one interview, Dr. Seneff says:

“Roundup usage on GMO corn and soy correlates very very strongly with the rise in diabetes, obesity, kidney failure, Alzheimer’s disease, Autism – all of these diseases including thyroid problems. . .”

The shocking documentary series delivers nine episodes of hard-hitting truths about not only glyphosate, but also GMOs, genetic pollution, Monsanto, seed monopolies, crop collapse, and much more.

Related:  Monsanto Roundup Lawsuit

GMOs Revealed was produced by Dr. Patrick Gentempo, Dr. Beau Pierce and Jeff Hays, a highly accomplished filmmaker who also produced “Bought” and “Doctored.”  Food experts interviewed for the film include David Wolfe, Sayer Ji, Dr. Joseph Mercola, Zen Honeycutt, Vani Hari, Stephanie Seneff, Mark Kastel and more than a dozen more people interested in healthy food and concerned with the poisons foisted on us all.

Watch the trailer to see for yourself how powerful this docu-series really is.  View all nine episodes for free at this link.

Monsanto Crimes, GMO Dangers Revealed

In case you haven’t seen the explosive, bombshell revelations over the last few weeks from the California court case, Monsanto’s lies are now being exposed daily. Monsanto was not only  caught ghostwriting “independent” reviews that falsely claimed its poisons were safe, but Monsanto was also caught colluding with government regulators to distort the science and hide the fact that its products are sickening and possibly killing people around the world.

At the same time, all the “negative PR” shills who spend millions of dollars smearing clean food advocates like Mike Adams, Doctor Oz, and the Food Babe, among others have been exposed as  Monsanto shills.  Even Monsanto’s criminal front group — the ACSH — has been exposed as being lead by a criminal felon who takes money to smear food scientists blowing the whistle on glyphosate dangers and GMOs.

Monsanto & Big Tobacco

Monsanto is now being exposed for its fake science and toxic products in the same way Big Tobacco was eventually exposed.  Scientists and research have been compromised by Monsanto money.  The truths are all coming out, and the more we all learn and share these truths, the more quickly we can save ourselves and Mother Earth from the biotech holocaust.

Life & Death Struggle

Make no mistake.  Our quest to eat clean food and drink clean water is a life and death struggle.  It is nothing less than life and death.  This “GMOs Revealed” docu-series is an absolute must-see. It’s not airing on Netflix or Amazon Prime, either. It’s not available on YouTube. It is only available through the GMOs Revealed website.

New GMOs Series a Must Watch

Episodes begin airing August 22, and a new episode airs each day.  Please watch it and join the fight.



Illinois Man files Bard IVC Filter Lawsuit

An Illinois man filed a Bard IVC filter lawsuit August 25, 2017, in the multi-district litigation (MDL) court set in Arizona.  The man was implanted with the Meridian® Inferior Vena Cava Filter (IVC Filter) made by C.R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular Inc.

Related:  Bard IVC Filter Lawsuit

Bard Meridian® IVC Filter
The IVC Filter was surgically implanted in the man on March 19, 2014 at an Illinois  hospital. The blood clot filter was supposed to prevent a pulmonary embolism (blood clot in the lungs), but instead caused the man severe side effects.

Bard Filter not FDA Approved

The Meridian IVC Filter is one of the newer IVC Filters on the U.S.  market.  It was not approved by the FDA through normal channels.  It was, rather, “cleared” by the agency in 2011 under the auspices of its controversial 510(k) process.  An accepted 510(k) application allows a medical device maker to put a product on the market if it is judged by FDA to be “substantially equivalent” to other, similar medical devices.  This market route, however, also leaves a given device maker vulnerable to potential civil litigation.  By contrast, devices approved under regular channels are given “pre-emption” (via the Draconian 1976 Medical Device Act), which allows a given device maker to injure people at will without fear of civil liability. (See Wyeth v. Levine)

Defective Medical Device
The Illinois man’s lawyers accuse C.R. Bard of selling a defective medical device and inadequately testing the Meridian IVC Filter for safety.

C.R. Bard faces 13 charges in the lawsuit:

1.  strict products liability – manufacturing defect
2.  strict products liability – information defect (failure to warn)
3.  strict products liability – design defect
4.  negligence – design
5.  negligence – manufacture
6.  negligence – failure to warn
7.  negligence per se
8.  breach of express warranty
9.  breach of implied warranty
10. fraudulent misrepresentation
11. fraudulent concealment
12. violations of applicable law prohibiting consumer fraud, unfair & deceptive trade practices
13. punitive damages

Illinois Man files Bard IVC Filter Lawsuit
The lawsuit was filed on August 25, 2017 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona — Case No. 2:17-cv-02875-DGC.

This lawsuit will be centralized with more than 2,200 other IVC filter lawsuits now pending against C.R. Bard in Multi-District Litigation (MDL No. 2641) – In Re: Bard IVC Filters Products Liability Litigation.




More Monsanto Fake News

More Monsanto fake news is hiding in plain sight. Reuters recently printed an article attacking the International Agency for Cancer Research.  In 2015, the IARC ruled that glyphosate – in Roundup and other Monsanto poisons – is a “probable carcinogen.”  The Reuters writer has been revealed to be a Monsanto shill funded by the company.

Ethan Huff reported August 28, 2017 that Reuters is now in bed with Monsanto.  Mr. Huff says Reuters is “committing journalistic fraud to cover up evidence of harm from toxic agricultural poisons.”

Related:  Monsanto Lawsuit

Monsanto Shill:  Congressman Trey Gowdy

Meanwhile, House Republicans are using the journalistic fraud to defend Monsanto.  The biotech bully from St. Louis is having a hard time maintaining any credibility in the public eye after the IARC, as well as several studies, have revealed glyphosate causes cancer in humans.

In an effort to turn the facts around, Monsanto has apparently co-opted the services of a Reuters journalist who recently published an article claiming Monsanto’s Roundup is safe.  House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy is now using the planted, slanted Reuters article as some sort of scientific fact.  It would all be laughable, except that glypohosate causes cancer, and the Reuters piece is simply regurgitated Monsanto PR.

Reports say Gowdy is demanding answers about “possibly withheld information” which he says “could change” the International Agency for Research on Cancer’s (IARC) landmark designation of glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen. Gowdy wrote a letter pointing to a June 14, 2017 Reuters article by Kate Kelland. Mr. Gowdy claims that Ms. Kelland shows glyphosate is not all that bad and should not be labeled carcinogenic.

Closer inspection shows Ms. Kelland’s article deeply flawed, loaded with unsubstantiated Monsanto talking points and PR spin.  Mr. Gowdy may have noticed if he wasn’t so quick to support Monsanto company profits. The wayward congressman has decided to promote Ms. Kelland’s article as if it were gospel evidence that Monsanto has somehow been treated unfairly. (Poor Monsanto!)

Stacy Malkan points out in a piece for AlterNet that Ms. Kelland has been writing all sorts of pro-Monsanto articles for quite a while. And Reuters has been publishing her Monsanto PR without question. This latest piece follows the same tired narrative that Monsanto has been pushing for its ongoing war on science, on independent researchers (like Dr. Gilles-Eric Seralini), on truth.

Reuters’ Kate Kelland’s ties to Industry PR Group Science Media Centre
Mr. Malkan’s rebuttal shows Ms. Kelland shrouding the truth about the IARC report. The IARC gathered and evaluated many years’ worth of published and peer-reviewed research on glyphosate before reaching its conclusion. Rebutting Ms. Kelland’s straw-man claims, the glyphosate research reached deeply into past studies. It wasn’t simply limited to Professor Gilles-Eric Seralini’s research paper, which was pulled from publication by an editor later found to be put in place by Monsanto, then re-published after scientists worldwide protested Monsanto’s blatant attack on science and truth.

Ms. Kelland’s so-called evidence backing glyphosate is also flawed on other grounds. As Mr. Malkan points out, nearly all of her Monsanto defense pieces are simply pro-industry propaganda. She cites papers by researchers who were obviously working in tandem with Monsanto, researchers further impugned by their abject failure to disclose their industry and financial connections. Much of what Ms. Kelland has presented is also cherry-picked and deliberately taken out of context.

Monsanto Writer with Obvious Ties to Industry
Ms. Kelland has undisclosed ties to the industry as well, ties that Mr. Malkan uncovered as centering around the Science Media Centre, a “nonprofit” public relations firm that connects industry scientists with reporters. The Science Media Centre is also funded by industry groups like Monsanto with an agenda to push.

Science Media Centre Subterfuge

The Science Media Centre was launched for the very purpose of rebutting news stories drawing attention to environmental and human health risks of poison chemical cocktails like Monsanto’s Roundup. By downplaying or attacking these stories, the Science Media Centre functions as the sneaky PR arm of Monsanto and other corporations trying to clean up their tarnished images.

Mr. Malkan writes: “Kelland’s bias in favor of SMC is evident; she appears in the PR agency’s promotional video and promotional report, regularly attends SMC briefings, speaks at SMC workshops and attended meetings in India to discuss setting up an SMC office there.”

SMC, we know what you are and who pays you to keep publishing your industry-promoting PR. And now the world knows. Time to figure out some sneakier way to try pulling the wool over the public’s eyes.

More Monsanto Fake News

Mr. Gowdy, the world is watching you, too, and figuring out where your loyalties lie. Black-box voting be damned, the people will vote you out anyway, you little corporate shill.