These people reflexively claim to have all science-based medicine in support of their position, but are unaware of how deeply they have been programmed to parrot consensus reality. It may surprise many to learn (because lapdog media hasn’t informed them) that vaccines are an extremely divisive topic in current medicine and research, not just among the general public.
In case it needs to be iterated, ‘scientific’ is not synonymous with ‘true’. Carl Sagan warned us that those who control science and technology will control humanity. One needn’t become a conspiracy theorist to reach the conclusion that our systems and the institutions that support them are failing us, and have been continually failing us for a long time.
A scientist who balks at the official party line will have her funding cut, will likely be disparaged by her peers, and may even lose her job. In some cases of extreme human interest, scientists who’ve stepped outside the established paradigm with valuable (i.e. damning) information have lost their lives under questionable circumstance.
Vaccine safety studies are rigged and the safety of the preserving agents in vaccines is highly questionable. It is the manufacturer who funds testing after all. And yet this blatant and critical conflict of interest still passes, to the masses, for what we call science. Even the warnings from within the scientific community, such as the Institute of Medicine, are squelched.
The system that is interested in mandatory mass injections is actually not concerned with disease prevention. As difficult as this will be to swallow, vaccines are not scientifically sound methods of eradicating disease. In many cases, vaccines have caused outbreaks of the diseases they were supposed to prevent. The general population has erroneously assumed the science behind vaccines is concrete merely because vaccination has been implemented, officially supported, and in place as long as it has. The system which controls vaccines and their delivery relies on this assumption.
Here, in broad strokes, is what the proponents of vaccines are demanding: We need to blindly accept all science that promotes the use of vaccines and mindlessly reject all science that refutes it. We need to give up our right to choose to have vaccines or not to have them, and in doing so, we must indiscriminately trust both our governments and the pharmaceutical industry with unfettered access to our veins. We must accept that the known neurotoxins and the unknown compounds and untested agents, which include, but are not limited to formaldehyde, aluminum hydroxide, aluminum phosphate, thimerosal, and polysorbate 80, will enter our bloodstream and impact our central nervous system in ways we fully do not understand. Despite the fact that vaccines contain established carcinogenic, neurotoxic, immunotoxic and sterility agents, we must accept them without expecting or demanding informed details about the shady history of vaccine development and the pseudo-science behind the entire program; we have to trust that the impacts of the contents, or testing that has (or has not) been done on some of the chemical compounds and preserving agents, known otherwise to be highly toxic and to bioaccumulate with each successive injection, especially when attached to an organic compound, will somehow magically not be harmful to us or our children because the CDC or Health Canada says so, without having ever done any substantial testing of their own.
Even if vaccines are harmful, we must uncritically accept that the rewards of vaccines, despite their dubious success, outweigh the risks, notwithstanding existing evidence to the contrary. We do not have the right to question the motives of this mass-delivery system that knowingly contains neurotoxins, and we do not have, nor should we have, the right to refuse it.
Now, surely most people in 2017 must realize that we cannot trust mainstream media or mainstream science. The so-called ‘gold-standard’ in medicine, namely peer-reviewed journals, is not immune from corruption, bias, outside influence, and, in the interest of ongoing funding in various fields, extreme self-censorship. The money trails in science, medicine and media all lead back to the same place. Scores of scientists, celebrities, politicians, medical professionals and internet trolls, whether out of ignorance or some more sinister motive, jump to the defence of vaccines as if the very thought of questioning them is inhuman, ignorant, and even evil. The result: mass of public opinion intentionally shepherded to shame and vilify anyone and everyone who questions the validity of the ‘science’ backing vaccine use.
To understand the fundamentals of the arguments around vaccines, we must possess an informed understanding of denial, and how denial is used. The system in control of what passes for science, government, business, medicine, law, religion, and media is not, simply put, what it appears to be.
Denial is what keeps the official narrative—any official narrative—alive, in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, and in spite of our own gut feelings. There is a very good reason intuition is ridiculed as baseless and holding none of the ‘exacting’ standards of science, and this reason has nothing to do with the benefit of humanity, the other beings we share this space with, or the beleaguered Earth which supports and sustains us.
How it works: in the face of prolonged, relentless corruption and scandal, individuals in denial reduce each scenario to so many isolated incidents of bungling incompetence and basic human greed. Like lab rats habituated by electrical shocks, we’ve been acculturated through manufactured fear for generations. We have been hornswoggled by the very same system that purports to educate us, govern us, inform us, and entertain us. The ongoing epidemics of mental illnesses such as anxiety, depression, chronic fatigue and addiction on this planet are often the expressions of conditioned helplessness.
Anyone who chooses to step outside the stifling atmosphere of consensus reality are derided and scorned, and not even by the authors of this fallacious reality, but by fellow lab rats who react automatically to defend the status quo denying anything outside the official narrative with as much vitriol or sarcasm as they believe the occasion warrants.
The brilliance behind the vaccine narrative is the presupposition that my recommended injections (which are not synonymous with immunizations) are necessary to protect other people as well as myself. This is why, if I choose to not get myself or my children vaccinated, my fellow lab rats can’t just let me be in peace. I need to toe the line in order to keep the narrative intact, and all of us safely and cozily held in the miraculous arms of modern science.
The conditioning into denial has been ongoing for centuries, or longer, and presently nearly every professional and ‘elite’ in our society is infected with denial. So, not only do we perform the dirty work of hiding the truth, but we heap criticism and derision upon those who would bring the truth to us.
The so-called ‘science’ of vaccines has inauspicious beginnings. In the late 18th century, a British physician named Edward Jenner decided to test out local Berkely parish folklore that diary workers exposed to cowpox were immune to smallpox. Jenner’s scientific inquiry involved taking the cowpox strain from the fluid on an infected milkmaid’s hand and transmitting it to his poor gardener’s eight-year-old son James Phipps. Several months later, Jenner infected the boy with smallpox. James Phipps was resistant to smallpox. Jenner infected the boy twenty more times, to no effect. This, in a nutshell, comprises the specious and shaky foundations of the entire theory of vaccination.
What is not often mentioned is how deaths from smallpox increased dramatically directly after the introduction of the smallpox vaccine.
And, (let me interrupt while you attempt to bring up the so-called miracle of the polio vaccine) the ‘grand chapter’ in the vaccine narrative relates how virologist Jonas Salk was a national hero who not only saved countless lives with the polio vaccine but took the moral high ground by refusing to patent it.
“Would you patent the sun?” he famously told Edward R. Murrow—omitting to mention that the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis had already had its lawyers analyze the possibility of patenting the vaccine. It was determined that a patent would never be granted. Salk also conducted illegal and unethical medical experiments on patients who were senile and mentally incapacitated. And, incidentally, numerous sources have demonstrated that ‘polio elimination by vaccine’ story is actually a hoax, and that post-1955, the polio vaccine was actually SPREADING polio, a phenomenon which necessitated a massive cover-up, which included the renaming of vaccine-induced polio-type diseases, including aseptic meningitis. The fact that 200 people were paralyzed and 10 people died from Salk’s early administration of the vaccine never seems to make it into the literature, for some reason.
In 1955, just after the release of the Salk vaccine, the CDC radically changed the diagnostic parameters of polio, automatically eliminating 90% of subsequent diagnoses - 30,000 cases a year we were then told were prevented by the vaccine.
In 1999 the CDC conducted the Verstraeten study, which found a direct correlation between the mercury in vaccines and speech and learning disorders and autism, so they re-formatted the study five times over two years, each time watering down the statistical significance another inch or two, until they were able to announce to the devout American public that there was no connection.
In 2002 the CDC conducted a study that found a definite correlation between the MMR vaccine and autism. In response they re-designed the study, after the fact, eliminating the damning data, ultimately to publish the conclusion that no causal relation had been found.
There are specific reasons why a Corporatocracy might want to deliver high levels of aluminum to the pineal gland, but without even going into my theories on that, the now incontestable link between MMR and autism - something that was proven over a decade ago and then "debunked" by corporate-backed science—should be enough for anybody to be willing to ask hard questions of a "science" that has a lot of gaps. People still believe the "debunked" version (re: autism link) because it was fed to them like pablum, and it is likely too terrifying for many people to actually consider the implications of what more and more medical professionals (and yes, informed parents) are saying. To just look at the raw data from U.S. HRSA Vaccine Injury Compensation Court is enough for any educated individual to be deeply concerned.
It might be time to stop mocking those who are brave enough to bring us hard-fought bits of truth, and give ourselves some credit by being open enough to listen objectively. Nobody in 2017 should remain naive enough to believe that the Corporate Health Industry is interested in the health of the people. Vaccine history is doctored history engineered for corporate profit and population control. 'Herd Immunity' initially described the amount of population that had to be healthy in order to build resistance to disease, and was somewhere around 70%. This term was co-opted by the vaccine industry specifically to brainwash the public into believing that 95% of the population needs to be vaccinated for everyone to be safe. Fear is a tried and true motivator.
Our current predicament of denial is grim. Consider this: over 3000 Americans are currently imprisoned for allegedly shaking their babies to death. Deaths from shaken baby syndrome (SBS) are alarmingly similar to sudden infant death syndrome, or SIDS, the peak incidence which occurs between 2 and 4 months of age, or exactly when routine vaccinations are given. Auto-immune deficiencies and complications from toxicity, particularly with hot lot bad batches of vaccines are reportedly similar to the damage described by SBS.
How many parents have been imprisoned when the real culprit is the vaccines? This deserves a sincere and earnest independent inquiry, at the very least. To those who claim vaccines are safe, how is it that the American government has paid (it is conveniently illegal to sue the manufacturer of a vaccine in the USA) roughly 3 billion dollars in damages to families who have lost loved ones to toxic vaccines?
To ignore / poke fun at the hundreds of thousands of parents who have seen their children virtually disappear almost immediately after routine MMR injections is not good science - there is a serious lack of objective data to prove vaccines even do what we have been trained to believe they do, but the data that is available—including that which has been leaked from CDC—shows at minimum a horrifying toxicity issue. The process of how so many people who have diligently recorded and reported these experiences, presenting a very clear pattern, get vilified and discounted as hysterical is even a more interesting question to me than the issue of dangers of vaccines.
There is enough empirical evidence available from scientific research to soundly refute the mainstream position on vaccines, which is why millions—millions, friend—of intelligent and educated people are opting out. It is also quite curious how many believers of vaccines change their minds when they start their own research, but skeptics of the whole CDC-backed gambit do not generally start trusting their government again, ever.
There has been scandal after scandal associated with vaccines as well as with the official organizations that administer them, most commonly the World Health Organization and the Centre for Disease Control, who have acted in direct contradiction to their stated mandates. All of our beliefs and judgments need to be dismantled, quickly, so we can truly see our denials objectively.
Is it toxic to deliver high quantities of heavy metals, formaldehyde and other neurotoxins directly into the bloodstream, particularly for an infant? Does the pharmaceutical industry have the health and well-being of the people as a priority – not in its mandate given in a press release, but in its actions as demonstrated throughout its history?
Has the government, embodied by such organizations like Health Canada, the CDC, or the WHO, consistently demonstrated both a willingness and ability to protect the health and well-being of the citizens it is mandated to help?
I worked for the government for years, and I’ve seen firsthand how statistics are spun and manipulated to tell the public one thing, stakeholders another, and the politicians something else. What I see so often is that people decrying the dangers of ‘stupid people who refuse vaccines’ are quoting statistics and information that almost universally leads back to corrupt government “health” agencies that have knowingly been complicit in scandal related to vaccines.
The people who are mocking and vilifying the ones questioning the truth are complicit in repressing it. Because what is at stake here is a tremendous amount of liberty and freedom of choice. In the balance, we are blindly being asked to submit our bloodstreams and neural pathways to the chemical control of organizations like the CDC and Merck.
It’s a framing issue. Vaccines make all the sense in the world as long as you believe 1. Our immune systems are garbage and can’t evolve and 2. Our governments or large corporations are incapable of willfully poisoning large swaths of the population. If you are going to claim science is on your side, you need to consider all the science, even—or especially—the science that is buried. The stuff you have to dig for. Don’t just blindly swallow the swill that is shoved in your face.
Dear Friend: If you like the work I am doing and wish to support it, please consider leaving a tip.