Geert Vanden Bossche, PhD, DVM, is an internationally recognized vaccine research expert and developer. He has a long list of companies and organizations he’s worked with on vaccine discovery and preclinical research, including the head of the Vaccine Development Office at the German Centre for Infection Research, GSK, Novartis, Solvay Biologicals, and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Dr Vanden Bossche also coordinated the Ebola vaccine program at GAVI (Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization) and contributed to the implementation of an integrated vaccine work plan in collaboration with Global Health Partners (WHO, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, CDC, UNICEF), regulators (FDA) and vaccine manufacturers to enable timely deployment or stockpiling of Ebola vaccine candidates.
He is board-certified in Virology and Microbiology, the author of over 30 publications, and inventor of a patent application for universal vaccines. He currently works as an independent vaccine research consultant. In this following video, he shares his perspective on mass vaccination of SARS-CoV2, and highlights the principle of using a prophylactic vaccine in the midst of a pandemic, which is likely to create more viral variants in the process.
Bossche states that the multiple emerging, “much more infectious” viral variants, are already examples of “immune escape” from our ‘innate immunity’, and were most-likely created by the government interventions themselves; the so-called Non-Pharmacological Interventions (NPIs) – i.e. lockdowns and cloth facial coverings. Unofficially, but also more aptly known as the Non-Scientific Interventions.
He believes that:
He states that to “fully escape”, the highly mutable virus, “only needs to add another few mutations in its receptor-binding domain”.
Below is his open letter to the WHO, issued March 6th, 2021.
Open Letter to the World Health Organization
Geert Vanden Bossche, DMV, PhD, independent virologist and vaccine expert, formerly employed at GAVI and The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
To all authorities, scientists and experts around the world, to whom this concerns: the entire world population.
I am all but an antivaxxer. As a scientist I do not usually appeal to any platform of this kind to make a stand on vaccine-related topics. As a dedicated virologist and vaccine expert I only make an exception when health authorities allow vaccines to be administered in ways that threaten public health, most certainly when scientific evidence is being ignored. The present extremely critical situation forces me to spread this emergency call. As the unprecedented extent of human intervention in the Covid-19- pandemic is now at risk of resulting in a global catastrophe without equal, this call cannot sound loudly and strongly enough.
As stated, I am not against vaccination. On the contrary, I can assure you that each of the current vaccines have been designed, developed and manufactured by brilliant and competent scientists. However, this type of prophylactic vaccines are completely inappropriate, and even highly dangerous, when used in mass vaccination campaigns during a viral pandemic. Vaccinologists, scientists and clinicians are blinded by the positive short-term effects in individual patents, but don’t seem to bother about the disastrous consequences for global health. Unless I am scientifically proven wrong, it is difficult to understand how current human interventions will prevent circulating variants from turning into a wild monster.
Racing against the clock, I am completing my scientific manuscript, the publication of which is, unfortunately, likely to come too late given the ever increasing threat from rapidly spreading, highly infectious variants. This is why I decided to already post a summary of my findings as well as my keynote speech at the recent Vaccine Summit in Ohio on LinkedIn. Last Monday, I provided international health organizations, including the WHO, with my analysis of the current pandemic as based on scientifically informed insights in the immune biology of Covid-19. Given the level of emergency, I urged them to consider my concerns and to initiate a debate on the detrimental consequences of further ‘viral immune escape’. For those who are no experts in this field, I am attaching below a more accessible and comprehensible version of the science behind this insidious phenomenon.
While there is no time to spare, I have not received any feedback thus far. Experts and politicians have remained silent while obviously still eager to talk about relaxing infection prevention rules and 'springtime freedom'. My statements are based on nothing else but science. They shall only be contradicted by science. While one can barely make any incorrect scientific statements without being criticized by peers, it seems like the elite of scientists who are currently advising our world leaders prefer to stay silent. Sufficient scientific evidence has been brought to the table. Unfortunately, it remains untouched by those who have the power to act. How long can one ignore the problem when there is at present massive evidence that viral immune escape is now threatening humanity? We can hardly say we didn't know - or were not warned.
In this agonizing letter I put all of my reputation and credibility at stake. I expect from you, guardians of mankind, at least the same. It is of utmost urgency. Do open the debate. By all means: turn the tide!
PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY OF INTERNATIONAL CONCERN
Why mass vaccination amidst a pandemic creates an irrepressible monster
THE key question is: why does nobody seem to bother about viral immune escape? Let me try to explain this by means of a more easily understood phenomenon: Antimicrobial resistance. One can easily extrapolate this scourge to resistance to our self-made ‘antiviral antibiotics’. Indeed, antibodies (Abs) produced by our own immune system can be considered self-made antiviral antibiotics, regardless of whether they are part of our innate immune system (so-called ‘natural’ Abs’) or elicited in response to specific pathogens (resulting in so-called ‘acquired’ Abs). Natural Abs are not germ-specific whereas acquired Abs are specifically directed at the invading pathogen. At birth, our innate immune system is ‘unexperienced’ but well-established. It protects us from a multitude of pathogens, thereby preventing these pathogens from causing disease. As the innate immune system cannot remember the pathogens it encountered (innate immunity has no so-called ‘immunological memory’), we can only continue to rely on it provided we keep it ‘trained’ well enough. Training is achieved by regular exposure to a myriad of environmental agents, including pathogens. However, as we age, we will increasingly face situations where our innate immunity (often called ‘the first line of immune defense’) is not strong enough to halt the pathogen at the portal of entry (mostly mucosal barriers like respiratory or intestinal epithelia). When this happens, the immune system has to rely on more specialized effectors of our immune system (i.e., antigen-specific Abs and T cells) to fight the pathogen. So, as we grow up, we increasingly mount pathogen-specific immunity, including highly specific Abs. As those have stronger affinity for the pathogen (e.g., virus) and can reach high concentrations, they can quite easily outcompete our natural Abs for binding to the pathogen/virus. It is precisely this type of highly specific, high affinity Abs that current Covid-19 vaccines are inducing. Of course, the noble purpose of these Abs is to protect us against Covid-19. So, why then should there be a major concern using these vaccines to fight Covid-19?
Well, similar to the rules applying to classical antimicrobial antibiotics, it is paramount that our self-made ‘antiviral antibiotics’ are made available in sufficient concentration and are tailored at the specific features of our enemy. This is why in case of bacterial disease it is critical to not only chose the right type of antibiotic (based on the results from an antibiogram) but to also take the antibiotic for long enough (according to the prescription). Failure to comply with these requirements is at risk of granting microbes a chance to survive and hence, may cause the disease to fare up. A very similar mechanism may also apply to viruses, especially to viruses that can easily and rapidly mutate (which is, for example, the case with Coronaviruses); when the pressure exerted by the army’s (read: population’s) immune defense starts to threaten viral replication and transmission, the virus will take on another coat so that it can no longer be easily recognized and, therefore, attacked by the host immune system. The virus is now able to escape immunity (so-called: ‘immune escape’). However, the virus can only rely on this strategy provided it still has room enough to replicate. Viruses, in contrast to the majority of bacteria, must rely on living host cells to replicate. This is why the occurrence of ‘escape mutants’ isn’t too worrisome as long as the likelihood for these variants to rapidly find another host is quite remote. However, that’s not particularly the case during a viral pandemic! During a pandemic, the virus is spreading all over the globe with many subjects shedding and transmitting the virus (even including asymptomatic ‘carriers’). The higher the viral load, the higher the likelihood for the virus to bump into subjects who haven’t been infected yet or who were infected but didn’t develop symptoms. Unless they are sufficiently protected by their innate immune defense (through natural Abs), they will catch Covid-19 disease as they cannot rely on other, i.e., acquired Abs. It has been extensively reported, indeed, that the increase in S (spike)-specific Abs in asymptomatically infected people is rather limited and only short-lived. Furthermore, these Abs have not achieved full maturity. The combination of viral infection on a background of suboptimal Ab maturity and concentration enables the virus to select mutations allowing it to escape the immune pressure. The selection of those mutations preferably occurs in the S protein as this is the viral protein that is responsible for viral infectiousness. As the selected mutations endow the virus with increased infectious capacity, it now becomes much easier for the virus to cause severe disease in infected subjects. The more people develop symptomatic disease, the better the virus can secure its propagation and perpetuation (people who get severe disease will shed more virus and for a longer period of time than asymptomatically infected subjects do). Unfortunately enough, the short-lived rise in S-specific Abs does, however, suffice to bypass people’s innate/natural Ab. Those are put out of business as their affinity for S is lower than the affinity of S-specific Abs. This is to say that with an increasing rate of infection in the population, the number of subjects who get infected while experiencing a momentary increase in Specific Abs will steadily increase. Consequently, the number of subjects who get infected while experiencing a momentary decrease in their innate immunity will increase. As a result, a steadily increasing number of subjects will become more susceptible to getting severe disease instead of showing only mild symptoms (i.e., limited to the upper respiratory tract) or no symptoms at all. During a pandemic, especially youngsters will be affected by this evolution as their natural Abs are not yet largely suppressed by a panoply of ‘acquired’, antigen-specific Abs. Natural Abs, and natural immunity in general, play a critical role in protecting us from pathogens as they constitute our first line of immune defense. In contrast to acquired immunity, innate immune responses protect against a large spectrum of pathogens (so don’t compromise or sacrifice your innate immune defense!). Because natural Abs and innate immune cells recognize a diversified spectrum of foreign (i.e., non-self) agents (only some of which have pathogenic potential), it’s important, indeed, to keep it sufficiently exposed to environmental challenges. By keeping the innate immune system (which, unfortunately, has no memory!) TRAINED, we can much more easily resist germs which have real pathogenic potential. It has, for example, been reported and scientifically proven that exposure to other, quite harmless Coronaviruses causing a ‘common cold ’ can provide protection, although short-lived, against Covid-19 and its loyal henchmen (i.e., the more infectious variants).
Suppression of innate immunity, especially in the younger age groups, can, therefore, become very problematic. There can be no doubt that lack of exposure due to stringent containment measures implemented as of the beginning of the pandemic has not been beneficial to keeping people’s innate immune system well trained. As if this was not already heavily compromising innate immune defense in this population segment, there comes yet another force into play that will dramatically enhance morbidity and mortality rates in the younger age groups: MASS VACCINATION of the ELDERLY. The more extensively the later age group will be vaccinated and hence, protected, the more the virus is forced to continue causing disease in younger age groups. This is only going to be possible provided it escapes to the S-specific Abs that are momentarily raised in previously asymptomatically infected subjects. If the virus manages to do so, it can benefit from the (momentarily) suppressed innate immunity, thereby causing disease in an increasing number of these subjects and ensuring its own propagation. Selecting targeted mutations in the S protein is, therefore, the way to go in order for the virus to enhance its infectiousness in candidates that are prone to getting the disease because of a transient weakness of their innate immune defense.
But in the meantime, we’re also facing a huge problem in vaccinated people as they’re now more and more confronted with infectious variants displaying a type of S protein that is increasingly different from Author: Geert Vanden Bossche, DVM, PhD (March 6, 2021) – https://www.linkedin.com/in/geertvandenbossche/ the S edition comprised with the vaccine (the later edition originates from the original, much less infectious strain at the beginning of the pandemic). The more variants become infectious (i.e., as a result of blocking access of the virus to the vaccinated segment of the population), the less vaccinal Abs will protect. Already now, lack of protection is leading to viral shedding and transmission in vaccine recipients who are exposed to these more infectious strains (which, by the way, increasingly dominate the field). This is how we are currently turning vaccines into asymptomatic carriers shedding infectious variants.
At some point, in a likely very near future, it’s going to become more profitable (in term of ‘return on selection investment’) for the virus to just add another few mutations (maybe just one or two) to the S protein of viral variants (already endowed with multiple mutations enhancing infectiousness) in an attempt to further strengthen its binding to the receptor (ACE-2) expressed on the surface of permissive epithelial cells. This will now allow the new variant to outcompete vaccinal Abs for binding to the ACE receptor. This is to say that at this stage, it would only take very few additional targeted mutations within the viral receptor-binding domain to fully resist specific anti-Covid-19 Abs, regardless whether the later are elicited by the vaccine or by natural infection. At that stage, the virus will, indeed, have managed to gain access to a huge reservoir of subjects who have now become highly susceptible to disease as their S-specific Abs have now become useless in terms of protection but still manage to provide for long-lived suppression of their innate immunity (i.e., natural infection, and especially vaccination, elicit relatively long-lived specific Ab titers). The susceptible reservoir comprises both, vaccinated people and those who’re left with sufficient S-specific Abs due to previous Covid-19 disease). So, MISSION ACCOMPLISHED for Covid-19 but a DISASTROUS SITUATION for all vaccinated subjects and Covid-19 seropositive people as they’ve now lost both, their acquired and innate immune defense against Covid-19 (while highly infectious strains are circulating!). That’s ‘one small step for the virus, one giant catastrophe for mankind’, which is to say that we’ll have whipped up the virus in the younger population up to a level that it now takes little effort for Covid-19 to transform into a highly infectious virus that completely ignores both the innate arm of our immune system as well as the adaptive/acquired one (regardless of whether the acquired Abs resulted from vaccination or natural infection). The effort for the virus is now becoming even more negligible given that many vaccine recipients are now exposed to highly infectious viral variants while having received only a single shot of the vaccine. Hence, they are endowed with Abs that have not yet acquired optimal functionality. There is no need to explain that this is just going to further enhance immune escape. Basically, we’ll very soon be confronted with a super-infectious virus that completely resists our most precious defense mechanism: The human immune system. From all of the above, it’s becoming increasingly difficult to imagine how the consequences of the extensive and erroneous human intervention in this pandemic are not going to wipe out large parts of our human population. One could only think of very few other strategies to achieve the same level of efficiency in turning a relatively harmless virus into a bioweapon of mass destruction. It’s certainly also worth mentioning that mutations in the S protein (i.e., exactly the same protein that is subject to selection of escape mutations) are known to enable Coronaviruses to cross species barriers. This is to say that the risk that vaccine-mediated immune escape could allow the virus to jump to other animal species, especially industrial livestock (e.g., pig and poultry farms), is not negligible. These species are already known to host several different Coronaviruses and are usually housed in farms with high stocking density. Similar to the situation with influenza virus, these species could than serve as an additional reservoir for SARS-COVID-2 virus.
As pathogens have co-evolved with the host immune system, natural pandemics of acute self-limiting viral infections have been shaped such as to take a toll on human lives that is not higher than strictly required. Due to human intervention, the course of this pandemic has been thoroughly disturbed as of the very beginning. Widespread and stringent infection prevention measures combined with mass vaccination campaigns using inadequate vaccines will undoubtedly lead to a situation where the pandemic is getting increasingly ‘out of control’.
Paradoxically, the only intervention that could offer a perspective to end this pandemic (other than to let it run its disastrous course) is …VACCINATION. Of course, the type of vaccines to be used would be completely different of conventional vaccines in that they’re not inducing the usual suspects, i.e., B and T cells, but NK cells. There is, indeed, compelling scientific evidence that these cells play a key role in facilitating complete elimination of Covid-19 at an early stage of infection in symptomatically infected subjects. NK cells are part of the cellular arm of our innate immune system and, alike natural Abs, they are capable of recognizing and attacking a broad and diversified spectrum of pathogenic agents. There is a sound scientific rationale to assume that it is possible to ‘prime’ NK cells in ways for them to recognize and kill Coronaviruses at large (include all their variants) at an early stage of infection. NK cells have increasingly been described to be endowed with the capacity to acquire immunological memory. By educating these cells in ways that enable them to durably recognize and target Coronavirus-infected cells, our immune system could be perfectly armed for a targeted attack to the universe of Coronaviruses prior to exposure. As NK cell-based immune defense provides sterilizing immunity and allows for broadspectrum and fast protection, it is reasonable to assume that harnessing our innate immune cells is going to be the only type of human intervention left to halt the dangerous spread of highly infectious Covid-19 variants.
If we, human beings, are committed to perpetuating our species, we have no choice left but to eradicate these highly infectious viral variants. This will, indeed, require large vaccination campaigns. However, NK cell-based vaccines will primarily enable our natural immunity to be better prepared (memory!) and to induce herd immunity (which is exactly the opposite of what current Covid-19 vaccines do as those increasingly turn vaccine recipients into asymptomatic carriers who are shedding virus). So, there is not one second left for gears to be switched and to replace the current killer vaccines by life-saving vaccines.
I am appealing to the WHO and all stakeholders involved, no mater their conviction, to immediately declare such acton as THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY OF INTERNATIONAL CONCERN.
CDC Spin on New Mask Data; Celebrity Catches Fauci Lying!; Expert Warns of Coming Covid Vaccine Disaster; Hell in the Holy Land
Dr. David Martin, founder and chairman of M-CAM Inc, challenges our presuppositions about the new mRNA Covid-19 vaccines. Quoting the pharmaceutical companies themselves, David suggests that these are not vaccines, but, in actuality, gene therapy. He explains what the vaccines may do to us, what they are promising they can do for us, and how to distinguish the difference.
AFLDS founder Simone Gold, MD, JD, FABEM, “the doctor who went viral,” is a board-certified emergency physician and author of the best-selling book “I Do Not Consent: My Fight Against Medical Cancel Culture.” She graduated from Chicago Medical School before attending Stanford University Law School to earn her Juris Doctorate degree. Dr. Gold worked in Washington, D.C. for the Surgeon General, as well as for the Chairman of the U.S. Senate Labor and Human Resources Committee.
Dr. Gold is a frequent guest on media outlets across the country. She has appeared in USA Today, the Associated Press, the Guardian (UK), New York Times, and many other publications. She has been featured on such nationally syndicated programs as The Tucker Carlson Show, The Ingraham Angle, The Glenn Beck Show, The Charlie Kirk Show, The Dennis Prager Show, Day Star Television, and others. In July 2020, she organized the first-ever America’s Frontline Doctors White Coat Summit in Washington, D.C., which drew 20 million views online. Dr. Gold is America’s leading voice of common sense and scientific clarity in the fight against COVID-19.
Zach Bush MD is a physician specializing in internal medicine, endocrinology and hospice care. He is an internationally recognized educator and thought leader on the microbiome as it relates to health, disease, and food systems. Dr Zach founded Seraphic Group and the nonprofit Farmer’s Footprint to develop root-cause solutions for human and ecological health. His passion for education reaches across many disciplines, including topics such as the role of soil and water ecosystems in human genomics, immunity, and gut/brain health. His education has highlighted the need for a radical departure from chemical farming and pharmacy, and his ongoing efforts are providing a path for consumers, farmers, and mega-industries to work together for a healthy future for people and planet.
In this conversation, Dr. Tom Cowan and Sally Fallon Morrell discuss The Contagion Myth.
The official explanation for today’s COVID-19 pandemic is a “dangerous, infectious virus.” This is the rationale for isolating a large portion of the world’s population in their homes so as to curb its spread. From face masks to social distancing, from antivirals to vaccines, these measures are predicated on the assumption that tiny viruses can cause serious illness and that such illness is transmissible person-to-person.
It was Louis Pasteur who convinced a skeptical medical community that contagious germs cause disease; his “germ theory” now serves as the official explanation for most illness. However, in his private diaries, he states unequivocally that in his entire career he was not once able to transfer disease with a pure culture of bacteria (he obviously wasn’t able to purify viruses at that time). He admitted that the whole effort to prove contagion was a failure, leading to his famous death bed confession that “the germ is nothing, the terrain is everything.”
While the incidence and death statistics for COVID-19 may not be reliable, there is no question that many people have taken sick with a strange new disease—with odd symptoms like gasping for air and “fizzing” feelings—and hundreds of thousands have died. Many suspect that the cause is not viral but a kind of pollution unique to the modern age—electromagnetic pollution. Today we are surrounded by a jangle of overlapping and jarring frequencies—from power lines to the fridge to the cell phone. It started with the telegraph and progressed to worldwide electricity, then radar, then satellites that disrupt the ionosphere, then ubiquitous Wi-Fi. The most recent addition to this disturbing racket is fifth-generation wireless—5G. In The Contagion Myth: Why Viruses (including Coronavirus) are Not the Cause of Disease, bestselling authors Thomas S. Cowan, MD, and Sally Fallon Morell tackle the true causes of COVID-19.
On September 26, 2019, 5G wireless was turned on in Wuhan, China (and officially launched November 1) with a grid of about ten thousand antennas—more antennas than exist in the whole United States, all concentrated in one city. A spike in cases occurred on February 13, the same week that Wuhan turned on its 5G network for monitoring traffic. Illness has subsequently followed 5G installation in all the major cities in America.
Since the dawn of the human race, medicine men and physicians have wondered about the cause of disease, especially what we call “contagions,” numerous people ill with similar symptoms, all at the same time. Does humankind suffer these outbreaks at the hands of an angry god or evil spirit? A disturbance in the atmosphere, a miasma? Do we catch the illness from others or from some outside influence?
As the restriction of our freedoms continues, more and more people are wondering whether this is true. Could a packet of RNA fragments, which cannot even be defined as a living organism, cause such havoc? Perhaps something else is involved—something that has upset the balance of nature and made us more susceptible to disease? Perhaps there is no “coronavirus” at all; perhaps, as Pasteur said, “the germ is nothing, the terrain is everything.”
Now, we have a thing called a messenger RNA vaccine (mRNA). RNA is, effectively, a single strand of DNA – the double helix that sits within our cells and makes up our genetic code. Many viruses are made up of a single strand of RNA, surrounded by a protein sphere.
They enter the cell, take over the replication systems, make thousands of copies of themselves, then exit the cell. Sometimes killing the cell as they do so, sometimes exiting more gently. Covid19 (Sars-Cov2) is an RNA virus.
Knowing this, rather than attempting to create a weakened virus, which can take years, or break the virus into bits, the vaccine researchers decided to use Sars-Cov2’s RNA against itself. To do this, they isolated the section of RNA which codes for the ‘spike’ protein – which is the thing the virus uses as a ‘key’ to enter cells.
They then worked out how to insert this small section of RNA, messenger RNA, into the cell, where it takes over a part of the protein replication mechanisms that sit inside all cells. They turn the mechanism into a 3D printer, churning out copies of the spike protein.
These spike proteins then leave the cell – somehow or other, this bit is unclear. The immune system comes across them, recognises them as ‘alien’ and attacks. In doing so, antibodies are created, and the immune memory system kicks into action. If, later on, a Sars-Cov2 virus gets into the body, the immune system fires up and attacks the remembered spike protein. Hopefully killing the entire virus.
This is all, certainly very clever stuff. What, as they say, could possibly go wrong?
The first thing to say is that, with something this new, we don’t really know. It could be that it is absolutely 100 percent safe. We are told that none of the mRNA can get into the nucleus of the cell, where it could become incorporated into the DNA. I hope so. Could it trigger an immune cascade? I hope not.
I know that the researchers will be looking very, very, closely at the novel safety issues that could emerge. If they are not, they damned well should be. However, the timelines here are very short. It normally takes many years to create safe and effective vaccines. Here is it happening in, effectively, weeks.
Dr. Palevsky is a NYS licensed pediatrician, who utilizes a holistic approach to children’s wellness and illness. Dr. Palevsky received his medical degree from the NYU School of Medicine in 1987, completed a three-year pediatric residency at The Mount Sinai Hospital in NYC in 1990, and served as a pediatric fellow in the ambulatory care out-patient department at Bellevue Hospital, NYC, from 1990-1991. Since 1991, his clinical experience includes working in pediatric emergency and intensive care medicine, in-patient, and out-patient pediatric medicine, neonatal intensive care medicine, newborn and delivery room medicine, and conventional, holistic and integrative pediatric private practice. Dr. Palevsky is a diplomate of the American Board of Integrative Holistic Medicine, and Past–President of the American Holistic Medical Association. He received his pediatric board certification in 1990, and passed his pediatric board recertification exams in 1997, 2004, and 2011.
In his current pediatric practice, Dr. Palevsky offers well-child examinations, consultations and educational programs to families and practitioners in the areas of preventive and holistic health; childhood development; lifestyle changes; nutrition for adults, infants and children; safe, alternative treatments for common and difficult to treat acute and chronic pediatric and adult conditions; vaccination controversies; mindful parenting; and rethinking the medical paradigm. Additionally, he teaches holistic integrative pediatric & adolescent medicine to parents, and medical and allied health professionals, both nationally & internationally, and is available for speaking engagements worldwide.
"Welcome for everybody. Boy this is a great group. What a great day to be doing something like this. I mean it's raining, right? Okay, so you can't be out in your garden. You can't be doing anything else like that.
So how many of you guys have come to one of these events before? Alright, good. So you know that it's a lot of fun and we're gonna be doing a lot of good things. How many have ever heard me speak before? None of you? Wow! Oh a couple down in the front, okay.
So if that's the case, then let me tell you a little bit about who I am and what I do. So my name is Dr. Sherry Tenpenny. I am the probably known as the international expert on vaccine injuries and problems associated with vaccines. I've been involved with this for 17 years and about 30,000 hours of my life, in terms of research and speaking and traveling around the world giving talks like this. My first career was as a board-certified emergency physician. I was the director of an ER for 12 years, then I moved to Cleveland, Ohio in 1996 and I opened an integrative medicine practice for which I'm always proud to say we've had people from all 50 states in about 17 foreign countries to come to our clinic to get well and get off their pharmaceutical drugs.
So I got involved with this serendipitously, like a lot of things do. I got a notification in the mail in September of 2000 from the National Vaccine Information Center meeting in Washington DC and it was supposed to be in September of that year and it was really inconvenient for me to go. And I actually went so far as to call them and say, "When is your next meeting? Because I don't think I can come this time." And they said, "Well, we're a small nonprofit. We're not sure we're gonna have another one."
Okay so every time I went to throw that brochure away off my kitchen counter, it just kind of made its way back onto the kitchen counter. So I was single at the time and I thought oh I know, this is it Lord, this is where I'm supposed to be to meet the guy.
So I made it a reservation. I went down to the meeting and it wasn't about the guy. It was about the topic and I sat through four days of non-stop lectures, which I think it was the only conference I've ever been to in my entire life that I sat through all of the lectures and took copious notes and heard researchers and PhDs and doctors and parents talk about vaccines and vaccine injuries. There was about 700 people in that conference. A lot of people that were there with their vaccine injured children in wheelchairs and and I all I could think of as while I was there was, "How did I miss this as part of my education as a physician?"
You know, I've been in medicine at that this at that time for 15 years. I was the director of an ER. I gave out tetanus shots like they were some special kind of candy. I was I you know I've had my integrative medicine practice now for almost five years. I grew up in a chiropractic family - three generations of chiropractors. I wasn't vaccinated as a kid. None of my cousins or any of their kids were vaccinated, so it was never on my radar because I had age-appropriate measles mumps rubella, chickenpox and I had pertussis twice, and I'm 59 and here to talk about it. Nobody died.
We get so terrorized into these infections, that we need to change the language about that because we call them diseases. And everybody gets all weirded out and scared like somebody's gonna die over these normal childhood infections, that were supposed to come at age appropriate levels, somewhere mostly between the ages of six and nine that left you with a lifetime of immunity. Not only so that you could be healthy as you were went into your 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s and
80s but that you could pass that health on to your children. So that's how I got involved with this.
And after that meeting I went home and I started saying "Well, where do you start? Where do I start looking at this? I know! I'll start with the CDC." So I started going to the CDC documents and read the general recommendations of vaccinations - the 1998 version of that, which was such
a poorly written paper and such poor documentation. It was a 42 page paper. I still have it by the way.
And I thought, this this can't be what this entire industry is built on. This really can't be it. So from there I started reading all of the mainstream medical literature. The Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal, Vaccine, JAMA, New England Journal of Medicine, and it's all in there. The problems associated with vaccines are in the mainstream medical journals. Physicians just choose to flip right by it because it isn't anything they're interested in reading.
So that's how I kind of came to this and and each thing that I read it became almost like an addiction because I kept thinking, "I must be missing something. What am I missing? Why can't I find why this is so important?" And the deeper down the rabbit hole I went and the more information that I found, the more shocking it was to me. And I went back to Kathy Williams, who's one of the cofounders of the National Vaccine Information Center, and said, "Surely if people just knew how vile that stuff was that's coming through the vial, they would like stop and run the opposite direction so fast it, they would look like the roadrunner and be gone. We would implode this industry in like a nanosecond." Once people understood that there were cells from aborted fetal tissue, and aluminum, and mercury, and formaldehyde, and stray viruses that can cause cancer in these things they're given to their children. Surely as soon as they know that it will stop.
Well, you know, 17 years later we have more vaccines than ever. We have mandates breathing down our neck. We want everybody in the government to take away our rights. So that's why I do
this. And that's why, you know, when Patrick heard me talk and I spoke at his meeting last year he said he wanted me to come up and give this information to all of you on this lecture on vaccines 101, because we want to try to boil it down into bite-sized pieces (which by the way they're going to be passing around a clipboard for you guys, if you want to be part of my email list and the information we sent out. Please just put your name and your email in a way that I can actually read it, because it doesn't do any good to write it down if I put an R and it's supposed to be an S into my database.)
We're pretty active. My Facebook page has two hundred and seventeen thousand people. We just started a course called mastering vaccine info foundational course and online training. We've got almost a hundred people enrolled in that. It will reopen for enrollment in March if you want to be on the waiting list for that. Just let me know because it goes through everything in a way that's bite-sized pieces about twenty minutes of content, and then the Thursday night Facebook live discussion group to teach you how to take the language in those modules to become a confident parent, an intelligent leader (in your home in your community), and an articulate activist. And that's what we're trying to train everybody to do.
So let's get started with this. There are some basic assumptions behind the entire industry of vaccination. In fact, when I got started with this in September of 2000... (the) You know, if you think about the the pharmaceutical industry is like a big pie diagram, and a piece of the pie is like cancer drugs, hypertension drugs. You know all these different drugs that they do which is all their book of business - their lines of things that they market and sell. At that point in time, the little teeny tiny pie diagram of the vaccine industry was about a five billion dollar a year industry. Now they're approaching fifty four billion.
And why is that so important to know? If you vaccinate a hundred people, at least fifty percent of them are going to have a serious side effect. Then you get taken to all of these doctors and all of these tests to find out that was it the vaccine. Probably not, it was because you had this underlying pathology that was just going to automatically pop up just exactly when you got the vaccine. And then they've got this entire trillion dollar book a business to sell you all these drugs to manage the side effects that you just got from the vaccines. So the vaccines are actually the economical pharmaceutical industries loss leader.
How many of you guys in here have businesses? Or your husband does? Or you know whatever, you have businesses. So you know what a loss leader is, right? A loss leader is like I'm gonna give away a t-shirt for free. It says on the door, I'm there on the sign on your door: free t-shirt, come inside. So you get people to come in for the free t-shirt. So while they're in your store, you can sell them the thousand dollar Armani suit.
Well the vaccines are the economic loss leader. Do it for free, mandate it, get your flu shot at every Walgreens, Walmart, every grocery store. I got a thing the other day and somebody there, they took a picture of it. It said if you get your flu shot today at Giant Eagle we'll give you 10% off your
groceries. So everywhere they're pounding people with these vaccines. It's their economic loss leader. It doesn't cost them anything, it costs them pennies, and then they've got a trillion dollar book of business to sell you once you start having side effects: asthma, allergies, eczema, ADD, ADHD, ear infections in kids, insulin-dependent diabetes, [and many other] autoimmune diseases.
They have an entire textbook now on vaccines and autoimmune diseases. All of those things start happening. So now we can drive. It's the driver of the entire industry and these are some of the assumptions that vaccines are safe. We're gonna go through that in a little more detail. That vaccines are effective, meaning they protect you and keep you from getting sick. That we as physicians and you as a consumer, when you hear the word effective automatically goes into your head you think, "oh that keeps me from getting sick." That's not what effective means in the vaccine industry. Vaccines have very few side effects except for the fact of the vaccine injury compensation program, that went into effect in 1986 and the vaccine adverse event reporting system has year-to-date been paid out over $3.2 billion and vaccine injury claims through the government program and they estimate that's less than 10% of people have actually been injured. $3.2 billion in vaccine injuries.
They are and every time you read any sort of a paper you hear anybody on the pro-vaccine advocate side, or you hear anybody in the government talk about vaccines, this is what they always say: that there's no significant public health advances of the 21st century. After all we saved the world from smallpox and polio, didn't we?
We go into that great detail in my course because actually we didn't and we've spent billions of dollars for nothing on this polio eradication but that's another talk for another day.
So what about our vaccine safe? And what is the meaning of a safe vaccine? Well it's not really what you think. The Webster's dictionary of safe says, "giving protection (which is what we think it should be, you know if you have a security system in your house that keeps you safe) involving no risk." Hmm no risk. Every bet package insert on every vaccine talks about the risk of vaccination.
They are trustworthy and unable to cause trouble or damage. Well we've already said that vaccine injury compensation program is as paid out $3.2 billion and all of these vaccine injuries that compound one upon each other creates the business driver for the pharmaceutical industry so we know that they caused damage. So by definition they break the definition of what safe is supposed to be.
So the real problem then comes become with vaccine safety studies. How do they come to the
conclusion that they can put in a package insert, which is specifically designed for information for your doctor that your doctor is supposed to know? How do they design these studies and come to
the conclusion that they are safe?
Well there's four specific problems and problem number one is that safety studies do not use a true placebo group. And if you take anything away from this talk today I want you to remember this because in conventional medicine the double-blind placebo-controlled study is the gold standard for safety.
If they're bringing to market say a new medication for say hypertension they would give you guys over here the real drug and you guys over here the sugar pill. And they would want to see a the real drug compared to the sugar pill what were the levels of side-effects, what kind of reactions did people have, did it really bring down your blood pressure as compared to this group over here that just got the sugar pill. And when they double-blind it, what that actually means is that the person that you come in to see to participate in the study when I give you a pill or I give you a pill, I don't know whether I'm giving you the real drug or if I'm giving you the sugar pill - I'm just giving you a pill. And then keeping track of your symptoms so that's a double-blind study I don't know which one which. Which of you are getting what. And placebo means it's compared to something that's totally inert.
In vaccine studies they never use a true placebo. And that started all the way back with the polio trials back in 1954 when they did this mass vaccination of the Salk injectable polio vaccine and
they said it was really unethical to give these people a vaccine and to give you nothing if we have to give a shot. So one of the two arms of the trial actually gave the placebo as a tetanus shot.
So it started way back when that if you're gonna get a shot you ought to have something of value. And so then we get the side effects of the polio vaccine compared to the side effects of the tetanus shot. If this has the same amount of side effects as this then we say it has the same amount of side effects and reactions as the placebo, which was another vaccine, that's not a placebo. And now when the package inserts, they don't even call it a even try to get away with calling it a placebo anymore. What they call this tetanus shot, this other one that they give you, they call it a "comparator."
We're going to compare the side-effects of the new vaccine compared to the side-effects of a vaccine that we already know what those side effects are supposed to be and if the new vaccine has the same amount of side effects as one that we know is supposed to be there then we say this new one is safe.
There's no true placebo ever. And when I go to talk to doctors and nurses that are in the hospital and they don't have any of this information when I drop that little factoid of saying that there is no true placebo used when they just define safety and a safety trial - I would see it's kind of like a cartoon it's like their head cracks like an eggshell - like what do you mean that's the gold standard for all investigational medicine. Not in the vaccine world, it's not. What they use instead they consider because they consider it unethical to give a vaccine to one group and hold from another group. Therefore the placebo should have some benefit - it should be a vaccine.
So can you see already where the whole idea that vaccines are safe starts to fall apart from the implementation of the safety studies. It just they've never really had a safety study.
Problem number two is that studies don't use inert substances as a placebo - like a sugar pill should be, is inert. Well if we're going to compare one vaccine to another vaccine is this vaccine over here inert? No. because it has its own its own side-effect profile. So the placebo use is often another vaccine like I said with a known safety product profile. If the experimental vaccine has the same number and types of effects as the placebo vaccine, than the experimental vaccine is said to be safe as the placebo.
And you see that in all the package inserts you see that in the published medical literature, in the Pediatric Infectious-Disease Journal, or in JAMA, in the New England Journal, they'll say it was safe as placebo. Then you dig through the study to try to find out what the placebo was, sometimes they list it and sometimes they don't. Sometimes you have to go to the FDA and look at the original trials to find out what the placebo was, but most of the time it was another vaccine.
Another example, is that in the Gardasil trials that they actually used an injection of aluminum as the placebo. Gardasil has, well it used I used to say has the highest amount of aluminum of any vaccine, but the there's new vaccines that have come out that have larger amounts of aluminum. The Gardasil 4 that came out in 2006 had 250 micrograms of aluminum. Now Gardasil 9 that came out a couple of years ago and because it's become the one that they give everyone around the world has 500 micrograms of aluminum. And we're going to see in a few minutes that the new meningitis B vaccine has 1500 micrograms of aluminum, which is a big deal.
So this is where in Gardasil.. You know what Gardasil is? Gardasil is the vaccine that they want to give all the girls, to say "one less girl." Yeah when they say one less girl I always what goes in my mind is one less girl able to have children in the future is what the rest of that sentence should be because Gardasil hasn't been shown to cause testicular atrophy in male mice and stop periods and atrophy of the uterus and female mice. So Gardasil is this vaccine that they that was only tested on 12,000 girls before they started administering it to 9 to 12 year old girls of age back in 2006. Most vaccine clinical trials on an international basis have tens of thousands of people this one was only tested on 12,000. They were followed for only six months, when in vaccine trials they usually find them for a follow things for about four years. And in medication trials they follow em for longer than that. The observation for adverse events was 15 days.
How long does it take for an autoimmune reaction to form? Months! They only followed this because all they were looking for was acute allergic reactions, swollen arm, sick to their stomach, headache. They only followed it for 15 days. The average age for developing cervical cancer is somewhere between 38 and 42, and the placebo that was used was a shot of aluminum, and Gardasil has aluminum in it.
So each Gardasil dose has 225 micrograms of aluminum and when about 25% experienced the injection and pain after the Gardasil and about 16% had pain after the shot of aluminum, the conclusion was Gardasil was declared to be as safe as the placebo. Which is pretty common.
I mean this is just one example that I could give you of the 56 vaccines that are currently approved in the US market and there are almost 310 in the developmental pipeline. Now some of the vaccines in the developmental pipeline are specific indicators. A lot of them are in the cancer segment because what they're trying to do is come with DNA vaccines, to manipulate your DNA and genetics. Nothing could go wrong with that, right? Nothing could possibly go wrong with a DNA vaccine to change your genetics permanently and then pass that on to your children.
But all of the vaccines and then they are coming up with specific indicator vaccines like there's a vaccine under development for cocaine addiction, one for hypertension, one for periodontal disease. Hmm so they're trying to eliminate dentists? I mean I don't know, but these are the sorts of things that are in development down the way. And so this was the vaccine that came to market that currently there are seven countries around the world that are about to ban the use of Gardisil and the international equivalent which is called Cervarix, because of all the deaths and chronic long-term disability that's being caused by this vaccine.
So if you've got kids that are coming up teenagers, please get educated about this vaccine. And if there were any of them that you were gonna refuse - I mean in my opinion you should refuse all of them - but if you were going to refuse any absolutely do not allow your kids to get this vaccine.
Because they're giving it to boys now too. They started that about five years ago. Primarily because they wanted to double their market share they felt like they were missing out on half the population. And because we know that those dirty little nine-year-old boys are going to be having sex with those promiscuous nine-year-old girls, and they're going to be sharing their HPV viruses back and forth. Because that's the age group that you have to give this because if you give it after you've had intercourse it doesn't work.
100% of the female population.. Well let me say that again. They estimate somewhere between around 98% of the entire female population has an HPV infection sometime in their life. I mean the cervix is an external organ, right? It's like your nose, it's an external organ. And about 98% of people actually have that infection sometime in their life and somewhere close to 97.5% of people who have the infection, clear in two years or less. So we're actually giving a vaccine because less than two percent of all humanity gets this vaccine and it doesn't or gets the virus and it doesn't go away within two years and maybe, maybe not causes cancer. But we're going to vaccinate the entire global population and destroy the lives of hundreds, if not thousands of teenagers, for really something that can be prevented with a pap smear.
This is all the different concentrations of aluminum now, and we know that aluminum causes Alzheimer's. We're pretty sure that Alzheimer that aluminum contributes to other types of neurological conditions. Aluminum is once it's injected it stays in the muscle for an extended period of time and it's really not cleared from the body. So poison for poison in the last decade many studies and animal models have repeatedly demonstrated that aluminum can inflict immune-mediated diseases, autoimmune, neurological, and skin disorders. But yet we've got all of those vaccines that have a have aluminum in them including the hepatitis B vaccine that's given at birth.
So if you get a vitamin K shot and a hepatitis B vaccine at birth, you get 330 micrograms of aluminum injected into your baby before they're two days old. And so then if they have problems down the road, how do you know? Because now the doctors will say, "Well, they were just born that way." Were they? Or was it all that gunk that you injected into them as soon as they landed on the planet.
So, now what about some fewer problems with safety studies. So, so far we've said what there's no placebo, they don't use an inert substance. Problem number three, vaccine trials usually include three injections to create an antibody response. So they give the first one, they say that Prime's the pump. The second one locks in immunity, and the third one we want to take those antibodies to the moon. We want to make them sure that we make them as high as we possibly can because they all degrade and go away with time because it's false fake immunity. It's not even immunity it's a vaccination it's not giving your kids are you an immune response. It's injecting foreign matter into your body to create an antibody that we somehow think is going to protect you which it doesn't.
So the vaccine trials the babies experience the side effects after the first dose he or she has dropped out from the trial and the data is analyzed on those that are remaining in the trial at the end. And the negative consequences of side-effects are left out. So what's let's boil that down into some really simple terms. Let's say that there were a thousand babies in this clinical trial and after the first vaccine a hundred of them dropped out because of side effects, and after the second vaccine another hundred dropped out because of side effects, and after the third vaccine another hundred of them dropped out because of side effects. When they look at the results and they look at the safety of the of this particular vaccine, they do the analysis on the 700 that were left. They don't even talk about the other 300 that dropped out, except to say a study investigators feel that none of the side effects were attributable to the vaccines. None of the side effects were attributable to the vaccines. For any of those 300 that dropped out.
And so with a stroke of a pen in any vaccine safety or efficacy study they just wipe it out. Gone. Deleted. Hit the cutting room floor. Does not apply. And then they look at the with the rest of the analysis and say well it was the safest placebo.
So now we go to claim stage for clinical trials. Stage one is bringing it to market. Stage two is small trials. Stage three is those thousand people (babies) we talked about. Now we just release it on humanity, that's stage four clinical trials. And they call it post marketing surveillance, to see how many people die or have serious consequences once we've unleashed it on humanity. And then everybody that reports a side effect or a problem, they go well we don't know if we can trust that report, it was just spontaneously reported, and maybe they were lying, maybe it had nothing to do with the vaccine. So it's all negated. Anything that is not just safe and effective is just one way or another deleted from the entire industry.
So what was problem number three? They only analyzed the you know when people drop out side effects they aren't taken into consideration.
And problem number four which i think is also a really serious complication, is when they when they set up a clinical trial, they only enroll healthy children or healthy and adults. I mean if you are a child and you have asthma, allergies, seizure disorders, autoimmune problems, you're not allowed into the vaccine study. You're not allowed in there. Same thing as if you're an adult. So you have to be like a healthy adult, and no medications, no underlying conditions that we know of.
So now we'll do the studies on you so children with chronic illnesses are excluded even though those are the children who are most advocated to receive the vaccine after it comes to market. Or the adult that's most advocated to receive it. So if you if your children have say asthma and they were excluded completely from this new vaccine, say a new flu shot, once that new flu shot gets approved, your pediatrician will hammer you over the head to give your kid with asthma this new shot because oh my god you can't let them get sick. And so if you get this vaccine it's going to keep them from getting sick and they are the most susceptible because they do have an underlying condition, even though the clinical trials never included any of those kids to begin with.
So this is just one example this was Prevnar 7, they now have Prevnar 13. So if you get a Prevnar 13 shot, that's like getting 13 vaccines in one needle. And you get five of those, at two, four, six months, one year, and they sometimes give a booster at five years of age.
And this is what it says right from the study, right? Healthy infants were randomized one-to-one meaning you had 800 healthy kids and you've divided them into two groups to receive either Prevnar 7 or a meningitis C vaccine. Huh there's that comparator of another vaccine. To get it at two, four, six months, and somewhere between twelve and fifteen months of age. Children with sickle cell, known immunodeficiency, and any serious chronic progressive disease, a history of seizures, a history of either of either type of pneumococcal or meningococcal meningitis were excluded. But when Prevnar came to market the number one target were kids with those conditions: chronic ear infections, immunodeficiencies, sickle-cell, so kids that don't have a spleen, they were the ones who were absolutely advocated to get this vaccine, even though they were never tested in any of the clinical trials against kids who were chronically ill.
I love this, this is my favorite quote. Figures don't lie, but Liars do figure. So they can take any statistic they want, and twist it around and manipulate it, cut out the kids that have side effects, you know don't take don't include kids that were sick, you know never use a true placebo. Use something like a shot of aluminum, that's good enough. So they can really figure it around whatever they want.
So what are those takeaways? Safety studies don't prove safety. In fact, the US Supreme Court has actually ruled that vaccinations are unavoidably unsafe. Unavoidably unsafe by the US Supreme Court. The one size fits all vaccination schedule is dangerous and it's unproven and I think it's a fraud. Every vaccine is different, every combination in that vaccine is a little bit different, and every time it gets injected into you or your children.. I mean there's like 300 people in here how many different sets of genes do we think we have in here? 300, right? Because you're all came.. Even if you have twins, the genetics can be a little bit different. And if you've got two or three kids well think about how they behave at dinner. Do they all behave the same? No. do you think their genetics are exactly the same? They are not. So every vaccine is different with animal cells, DNA albumin, everything that's injected. So every vaccine, remember this, every vaccine is a true experiment. It's experimenting with you, what's happening inside of you, and what's happening to your children. Every human being is ejected with a different genetic constitution. So the takeaway from that section, really no placebo, distorted data, and every vaccine is a true experiment.
Isnt this happy? I'm just celebrating now. Are you learning something new? Yes good, okay.
Are vaccines effective? Well let me see, is that really not what we think. Webster's dictionary defines effective as, "adequate to accomplish a purpose producing an intended or expected result." Makes sense doesn't it? Something is going to be effective and fulfilling a specified function. Well how does that apply to vaccines?
Okay because are vaccines effective? Well by that definition yeah they really are. Because what is happening when they research vaccinations, is they are injecting foreign matter into the body, into the muscle, and at some point in time in the future, weeks, sometimes months later, they take a blood test to see if that foreign matter caused your body to generate an antibody. And if it did then it fulfilled a specified function. It did what it was supposed to do, it created an antibody. So yes vaccines are effective from that perspective, but the presence of an antibody is doesn't guarantee you from getting an illness. So effective is not a synonym for protective or protection. Remember that. Every time you hear safe and effective. That sounds like a robot. To me safe and effective, safe and effective, it's never been proven to be safe and effective, means that foreign matter was injected into a body and it created an antibody. It doesn't mean it's going to keep you from getting sick. So all this massive push about flu shots, then we're going to talk about this afternoon this whole thing about flu shots, of how it protects you less, if you believe that it works, protects you, it works it works less than 14% of the time. And we're going to go into that in detail this afternoon. So remember this this is an important takeaway effective does not mean protection.
Farron: Joining me now to talk a little bit more about this is attorney Troy Bouk. Troy, thanks for joining me today.
Troy: You’re welcome, Farron. Good to be here.
Farron: With this Zostavax vaccine for the shingles, tell us a little bit about what Zostavax actually is. What is it supposed to do? How does it work? Who makes it?
Troy: Zostavax is made by Merck and it’s supposed to prevent shingles. It’s been around since about 2006. It uses a live strain of virus to make the vaccine. Some vaccines use live strains. Others don’t. The problem is when you use a live strain of virus in a vaccine, it has a possibility of that live strain causing what you’re trying to prevent, and in this case shingles.
Farron: Shingles, a lot of people think of this mostly as a painful, irritating skin condition, but there’s actually a lot more to what shingles does to the body than just the outward I guess rashes or condition, isn’t there?
The Awareness domain contains research, news, information, observations, and ideas at the level of self in an effort to intellectualize health concepts.
The Lifestyle domain builds off intellectual concepts and offers practical applications.
Taking care of yourself is at the core of the other domains because the others depend on your health and wellness.