Australian Government Will Tax Parents Who Reject Vaccines for Their Children $10.50 PER WEEK as a Penalty

Australia: A weekly $10.50 charge will be withheld from parents’ family tax benefit payments if they reject vaccinations for their children.  The penalty is expected to extract millions.  Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull’s “No Jab, No Play” policy prohibits kids who haven’t been vaccinated from going to preschool.  Many parents will be glad to part with $546 per year to protect their children form the risk of vaccine injury. –GEG

If you live in Australia and want to exercise your right not to vaccinate your kids, you’d better be prepared to pay for that privilege. The new federal budget will see parents who don’t vaccinate losing AUD$14 per week, which equates to around USD$10.49 at today’s rate, from their family tax benefit payments. The measure will be set in motion starting July 2018, and it is expected to raise millions of dollars while punishing those who don’t want to vaccinate their kids.

Health Minister Greg Hunt and Social Services Minister Christian Porter have said that taking this approach rather than withholding a supplement at the end of the year would be a good way to constantly remind parents that they need to vaccinate their kids. It will also apply to families who do not get their four-year-olds a health check, which presumably is yet another way to try to push vaccines on kids.

Families who want to catch up on their vaccines will be able to do so for free under a $14 million program. The government will also spend $5 million to promote the benefits of vaccination in areas that have lower immunization rates, such as the far north coast of New South Wales.

Australia is a hostile place for anti-vaxxers

Most countries take a dim view of those who oppose vaccines, but Australia is a particularly unfriendly place for them. Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull’s “No Jab, No Play” policy excludes kids who haven’t been vaccinated from going to preschool or childcare unless they have an official medical exemption. “Vaccine objection” would not be considered a valid reason to skip the shots under the proposal. Laws that prevent unvaccinated children from going to school already exist in some parts of Australia, including Queensland, Victoria and New South Wales.

Meanwhile, the recently updated vaccination standards of The Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia urged members of the public to report any midwives and nurses who are sharing beliefs that could be construed as opposing vaccination.

In addition, some Australian children are being denied medical treatment because their immunizations are not up to date. A poll of more than 2,000 parents found that one out of every six children who were not current on their vaccinations had been refused care. According to that study, 95 percent of the country’s children were fully vaccinated despite the fact that a third of parents had concerns and one-tenth of parents felt vaccines could be behind autism.

Read full article here…




‘America’s Lawyer’ Mike Papantonio Accuses Monsanto Of Lying and Creating False Studies on the Safety of It’s Roundup-Ready Pesticide

Mike Papantonio, known as America’s lawyer on the Ring of Fire radio show, will join 700 other litigants suing Monsanto for the cancer hazard created by its pesticide product, Roundup Ready.  Papantonio says the company falsified data and attempted to discredit legitimate research on the dangers of Roundup Ready’s active ingredient, glyphosate. Newly unsealed documents show that Monsanto invented ‘research’ that was attributed to legitimate scientists.  Two years ago, the World Health Organization reported a link between glyphosate and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, and it said the weed killer was a “probable carcinogen.” In March, the US Department of Agriculture quietly dropped plans to test food for the presence of glyphosate. –GEG

Click here for more information…

 




Bill Nye, the Former Science Guy, Is Pushing Sexuality ‘Education’ To Reduce Human Population

Bill Nye, who once hosted a children’s program called The Science Guy, has a new show that is beyond crass in its treatment of human sexuality. It promotes homosexuality and hypersexuality as the norm and advocates the compulsory indoctrination of children to accept this ethic. The admitted goal is to encourage sexual relationships that lead to reduced population. This strategy was originally developed at the bequest of the Rockefeller’s Population Council by Frederick Jaffe, a Vice President of Planned Parenthood. –GEG

Link here to the depopulation document referenced in the video, written by Frederick Jaffe, a Vice President of Planned Parenthood:

 

 




Monsanto Accused of Hiring Trolls to Silence Internet Opposition to GMO Foods

Biotech giant, Monsanto, is accused of hiring, through third parties, an ‘army’ of Internet trolls to counter negative online comments, while citing positive ‘ghost-written’ pseudo-scientific reports that downplay the risks of GMO foods and Roundup Ready pesticide. In San Francisco, fifty lawsuits have been filed against Monsanto. –GEG

Biotech giant Monsanto is being accused of hiring, through third parties, an army of Internet trolls to counter negative comments, while citing positive “ghost-written” pseudo-scientific reports which downplay the potential risks of their products.

The documents emerged during pre-trials on 50 lawsuits against Monsanto which were pending in the US District Court in San Francisco. The plaintiffs allege that exposure to the biotech giant’s flagship product, the herbicide Roundup, caused them or their relatives to develop non-Hodgkin lymphoma, while Monsanto concealed the potential risks.

In March, a judge ruled, despite Monsanto’s objections, that the documents obtained by the plaintiffs could be released. The court papers are being gathered at the website of food-safety whistleblower organization US Right to Know.

The plaintiffs alleged that Monsanto targeted all online materials and even social media comments that indicate potential dangers of its products, according to one document released late in April.

“Monsanto even started the aptly-named ‘Let Nothing Go’ program to leave nothing, not even Facebook comments, unanswered; through a series of third parties, it employs individuals who appear to have no connection to the industry, who in turn post positive comments on news articles and Facebook posts, defending Monsanto, its chemicals, and GMOs,” the document reads.

On a larger scale, Monsanto allegedly “quietly funnels money to ‘think tanks’ such as the ‘Genetic Literacy Project’ and the ‘American Council on Science and Health”– organizations intended to shame scientists and highlight information helpful to Monsanto and other chemical producers,” according to the plaintiffs.

The accusations are backed by a batch of emails, used in court as evidence, which were written by some Monsanto executives, instructing the staff to “ghost-write” articles and then have some “independent scientists” just sign their names under the “study” in order to reduce costs.

“A less expensive/more palatable approach might be to involve experts only for the areas of contention, epidemiology and possibly MOA (depending on what comes out of the IARC meeting), and we ghost-write the Exposure Tox & Genetox sections,” the letter’s excerpt reads. “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, however, dismissed such allegations, claiming that the plaintiffs’ attorneys took a “single comment in a single email out of context.” The new accusations appear to be better-founded than earlier ones, which were largely based on the words of one of Monsanto’s top executives, Dr. William Moar, who reportedly said at a conference in January 2015 that the company had an “an entire department,” dedicated to “debunking” science which disagreed with the agrochemical giant’s own research.

One of Monsanto’s most well-known attempts to silence “bad” science was related to a report issued by the World Health Organization’s (WHO) International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in March 2015. Monsanto promptly labelled the report as “biased,” and demanded it be retracted. The report said Roundup’s key ingredient glyphosate was “probably carcinogenic.”

“We question the quality of the assessment,” Monsanto’s vice president of global regulatory affairs, Philip Miller, said. “The WHO has something to explain.”

Read full article here…

 




Mike Adams Reports the Boston Herald to the FBI for Recommending That Those who Oppose Vaccines Should Be Executed by Hanging

Mike Adams, the owner of the Natural News website, is filing a complaint with the Boston FBI against the Boston Herald for publishing a violence-inciting editorial attributed to the Boston Herald. The editorial claims that vaccines don’t cause autism and that it ought to be a “hanging offense” for anyone who opposes this conventional theory, which they characterized as lying.  Mike Adams alleges that the Boston Herald staff engaged in criminal intimidation by calling for deadly violence against vaccine critics, including naturopaths, scientists, chiropractors and journalists. 

Mike Adams, the owner of the Natural News website, is filing a complaint with the Boston FBI against the Boston Herald for publishing a violence-inciting editorial attributed to the Boston Herald. The editorial claims that vaccines don’t cause autism and that it ought to be a “hanging offense” for anyone who opposes this conventional theory, which they characterized as lying.  Mike Adams alleges that the Boston Herald staff engaged in criminal intimidation by calling for deadly violence against vaccine critics, including naturopaths, scientists, chiropractors and journalists.

The editorial was in reaction to the recent outbreak of 51 cases of measles in Minnesota, primarily among the Somali immigrant population.  The Somali population in Minnesota has about half the vaccination rate of the general population. This is because they have backed away from inoculating their children due to previous high autism rates, triple the number of the general population, discovered in 2008.  The CDC currently reports the autism rate at 1 in 68 children.  The mainstream media has failed to inform the public that the autism rate for Somali children living in Minnesota was 1 in 32 in 2010, with more severe disabilities reported than in other populations.  Some Somali parents credit their freedom from autism to the fact that they grew up in Somalia without vaccines.

Anti-vaccine groups are being blamed for the measles outbreak, because Dr. Andrew Wakefield and anti-vaccine groups informed the Somali community about the dangers of vaccines and their legal rights regarding vaccine exemptions.

Investigative reporter, Jefferey Jackson, has traced the authorship of the “hit piece” back to Rachelle Cohen and gives her contact information, as well as the Boston Herald’s contact information in this link.

Here is what Cohen wrote in the Boston Herald:

“…Skepticism about vaccines within Minnesota’s Somali community goes back a decade, the Post reported, after parents raised concern about possible higher rates of autism among their children (research later indicated that wasn’t the case).

“But it seems that was all the truthers needed to hear. When Somali parents sought answers to explain autism, anti-vaccine activists were delighted to fill in the information gap. The disgraced British doctor who once reported a link between vaccines and autism — which was deemed fraudulent and cost him his medical license — has met with families, the Post reported. Even amid this latest outbreak, anti-vaccine groups have fanned the flames, making it hard for public health officials and doctors to be heard above the noise.

“These are the facts: Vaccines don’t cause autism. Measles can kill. And lying to vulnerable people about the health and safety of their children ought to be a hanging offense.”

Contrary to what Cohen wrote, it is important to point out that measles outbreaks in the US are not serious or deadly, according to the CDC:

  • From January 1 to April 22, 2017, 61 people from 10 states (California, Florida, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Utah, and Washington) were reported to have measles.
  • In 2016, 70 people from 16 states were reported to have measles.
  • In 2015, 188 people from 24 states and the District of Columbia were reported to have measles.
  • In 2014, the United States experienced a record number of measles cases, with 667 cases from 27 states reported to CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases (NCIRD); this is the greatest number of cases since measles elimination was documented in the U.S. in 2000.

Measles are temporary, but autism is forever.

Sources:
Mike Adams gives contact information for the FBI, Boston Police and the Boston Herald to take action in his article:
http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-05-11-boston-herald-calls-for-government-run-execution-squads-mass-murder-scientists-journalists.html
Link to the Boston Herald opinion, ‘Editorial: Preying on parents’ fear’:
http://www.bostonherald.com/opinion/editorials/2017/05/editorial_preying_on_parents_fear
http://www.healthnutnews.com/boston-herald-staffer-suggests-people-should-be-hung-to-death-for-being-anti-vaccine/
https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2016/p0331-children-autism.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/minnesota-measles-outbreak_us_591224dfe4b05e1ca202a154
Sent from ProtonMail, encrypted email based in Switzerland.



In The Last Eight Months, The ‘Vaccine Court’ Confirmed 377 Tragic Vaccine Injuries to Children And Awarded $142 Million in Damages

The Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, a special court for vaccine injuries paid $142 million in 377 vaccine-injury claims since October 1st, 2016.  These judgments disprove the claim that vaccines are safe.  The CDC rejects any adverse-reaction report unless it is files electronically. Adverse reactions are under-reported by an estimated 90%. –GEG  

Yet another shocking blow has been delivered to people who still ardently claim that vaccines are “safe and effective,” and that the only complications they can cause are “mild.” The US government department for Health Resources and Services Administration has recently released the running tally of the just-past-half-way-complete US Fiscal Year (FY) of 2017 for compensable vaccine injuries. It currently stands at over $142 million dollars. You read that right. That covers the 377 cases that were thus far successful in obtaining compensation in fiscal year 2017 through the heavily biased (to put it politely) system allegedly in place to redress damage done by vaccines in the USA.

At the rate things are going, we might expect the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program to pay out around $220 million or more by the close of FY 2017. To clarify, US Fiscal Year 2017 runs from October 1st, 2016 to September 30th, 2017 – there’s still over four months remaining to rack up more carnage.

The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 was created to “reduce liability and respond to public health concerns.” It granted immunity to pharmaceutical companies and prevented parents from suing vaccine makers for vaccine injuries or death. What other industry has such exceptional standards applied to it? Why the special privilege a.k.a. license to injure and kill with impunity?

According to the CDC’s website, there are “limitations in our knowledge of the risks associated with vaccines” and vaccinations have “the following problems”:

  1. Limited understanding of biological processes that underlie adverse events
  2. Incomplete and inconsistent information from individual reports
  3. Poorly constructed research studies (not enough people enrolled for the period of time)
  4. Inadequate systems to track vaccine side effects
  5. Few experimental studies were published in the medical literature.”1 (emphasis added)

The above very revealing admissions from the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) completely undercut the pathological overconfidence exhibited in the extreme portions of the community pushing for mandatory vaccination.

Similarly, the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program compensation numbers are, not only not reassuring, but, frankly astonishing, and should give not just all parents, but all people in general, serious pause. If vaccines are “safe and effective” as our medical practitioners and politicians constantly tell us via mainstream media outlets, then why are there already over 370 compensated cases in fiscal year 2017? Why is there a running payout total from 1988 up to now of “around $3.6 billion,” according to the US Health Resources and Services Administration?

Read full article here…




Tunnel collapsed at the Hanford Nuclear Storage Facility Causing Emergency Evacuation of Workers

Washington State: A portion of a tunnel that contains nuclear materials collapsed at the Hanford Nuclear Facility, a former nuclear-weapons manufacturing site that now stores leftover material, and the US Department of Energy activated its emergency-evacuation protocol.  Officials say there has been no indication of contamination release. –GEG  

Hundreds of workers at the Department of Energy’s Hanford nuclear site in Washington state had to “take cover” Tuesday morning after the collapse of 20-foot-long portion of a tunnel used to store contaminated radioactive materials.

The Energy Department said it activated its emergency operations protocol after reports of a “cave-in” at the 200 East Area in Hanford, a sprawling complex about 200 miles from Seattle where the government has been working to clean up radioactive materials left over from the country’s nuclear weapons program.

The agency said in a statement that the 20-foot section is part of a tunnel that is hundreds of feet long and is “used to store contaminated materials.” The tunnel is one of two that run into the Plutonium Uranium Extraction Facility, also known as PUREX.  The section that collapsed was “in an area where the two tunnels join together,” the department said.

The PUREX facility, once used to extract plutonium from spent nuclear fuel, has been idle for years but remains “highly contaminated,” the agency said.

Read Full Article Here…




Adult Victims of Vaccine Damage Can Sue Manufacturers in the US

Merck, the manufacturer of Zostavax, a vaccine for shingles, is being sued for injuries from the jab that include: contracting shingles, blindness in one eye, partial paralysis, brain damage, and death. There is a federal law that bars people from suing vaccine manufacturers, however, it applies only to vaccines recommended for children and pregnant women. The shingles vaccine is for adults.  Merck has asked for a change of venue in a search for a friendly court to throw out the cases. -GEG

Victims of vaccine damage can sue manufacturers in the US

Victims of vaccine damage can sue manufacturers in the US

It’s happening now…

Major media aren’t giving this story the coverage it deserves. I certainly am.

Short question: Can a person sue a US vaccine manufacturer?

Short answer: Under certain conditions, yes.

Note: I’m not framing this article as professional legal advice. I’m reporting what I’ve been able to dig up on a very explosive issue so far. I’ve communicated with two lawyers and a law professor. I’ve been pointed to an important passage on a federal web page.

Right now, lawyers and their clients are suing Merck, the manufacturer, for injuries incurred from Merck’s shingles vaccine, Zostavax.

Among the claimed injuries: contracting shingles; blindness in one eye; partial paralysis; brain damage; death.

One of the plaintiffs’ attorneys told me he has already filed two cases in California. Each case has 50 plaintiffs. He states he has 5000 clients waiting in the wings. There are other attorneys with other plaintiffs.

But wait. Isn’t there a federal law that bars people from suing vaccine manufacturers?

Isn’t that law the 1986 Childhood Vaccine Injury Act? Doesn’t it demand that people go to a special federal “vaccine tribunal/court” and plead for compensation from the government?

Aren’t vaccine manufacturers shielded from liability for causing injury?

Well, it turns out there are exceptions to the rule.

Adult vaccines are not part of the 1986 federal law.

The law shielding vaccine companies only applies to childhood vaccines.

The Merck shingles vaccine is only for adults.

The special federal “vaccine tribunal/court” is established as part of the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP). This is where parents who claim their children were injured by vaccines must go, to ask for compensation from the government—not from vaccine manufacturers.

But on a web page of the US Dept. of Health and Human Services, under “Health Resources and Services Administration,” we see “Frequently Asked Questions.” And we read this rather opaque statement:

“In order for a category of vaccines to be covered, the category of vaccines must be recommended for routine administration to children by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention…” [Note: On this clumsy FAQ web page, you have to click on “View Answer” under the following question to see it: “If a new vaccine product is licensed, what needs to occur before the vaccine will be covered by the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP)?”]

What does “covered” mean? It means “covered exclusively by the federal compensation program.” It means a parent who believes her child has been injured by a vaccine goes to the special federal “court.” The vaccine must be FOR CHILDREN. However, an adult seeking compensation for vaccine injury, FROM AN ADULT VACCCINE, would, with a lawyer, argue his case in ordinary state or federal court. That adult would sue the vaccine manufacturer.

This message from the federal government is clear. The ban against suing vaccine manufacturers only applies to vaccines recommended for children (and pregnant women). The ban does not apply to adult vaccines.

Read Full Article Here…




First-Ever Peer-Reviewed Study of Vaccinated vs Unvaccinated Children Shows Vaccinated Kids Have a Higher Rate of Sickness, 470% Increase in Autism

The first-ever, peer-review study has been published comparing total-health in vaccinated and unvaccinated children. Dr. Anthony Mawson led a research team that investigated the relationship between vaccination exposures and acute or chronic illnesses in home-schooled children. The vaccinated children had a much higher rate of autism and ADHD, at a rate of 470% higher than those who received no shots.  Vaccinated children were also more vulnerable to allergies and eczema. Unvaccinated children contract mild childhood diseases more frequently, but their vaccinated counterparts suffer pneumonia and ear infections more frequently. The finding that vaccination introduces a significant risk for autism is devastating to the vaccine industry and, therefore, will be vigorously attacked. –GEG

Pilot Comparative Study on the Health of Vaccinated and Unvaccinated 6-12 Year Old US Children

In a development that autism parents have long anticipated, the first-ever, peer-reviewed study comparing total health outcomes in vaccinated and unvaccinated children was released on line yesterday. According to sources close to the project, the study had been reviewed and accepted by two different journals, both of which pulled back on their approval once the political implications of the findings became clear. That’s largely because, as parents have long expected, the rate of autism is significantly higher in the vaccinated group, a finding that could shake vaccine safety claims just as the first president who has ever stated a belief in a link between vaccines and autism has taken office.

Working in partnership with the National Home Education Research Institute (NHERI), Dr. Anthony Mawson led a research team that investigated the relationship between vaccination exposures and a range of over 40 acute and chronic illnesses in home schooled children, a population chosen for its high proportion of unvaccinated children. Surveying families in four states–Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi and Oregon—the study (officially titled Vaccination and Health Outcomes: A Survey of 6- to 12-year-old Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Children based on Mothers’ Reports), reported a number of startling findings.

Vaccinated children were significantly more likely than the unvaccinated to have been diagnosed with a neurodevelopmental disorder: most notably, the risk of being affected by an Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) was 4.7 fold higher in vaccinated children; as well, ADHD risk was 4.7 fold higher and learning disability risk was 3.7 fold higher. Overall, the vaccinated children in the study were 3.7 times more likely to have been diagnosed with some kind of neurodevelopmental disorder.

Vaccinated children were also significantly more likely to be diagnosed with an immune-related disorder. The risk of allergic rhinitis (commonly known as hay fever) was over 30 times higher in vaccinated children, while the risk of other allergies was increased 3.9 fold and the eczema risk was increased 2.4 fold.

With respect to acute illness and infectious disease the outcomes were in some respects surprising.  As might be expected, unvaccinated children were significantly (4-10 times) more likely to have come down with chicken pox, rubella or pertussis. Perhaps unexpectedly, the unvaccinated children were less likely to suffer from otitis media and pneumonia: vaccinated children had 3.8 times greater odds of a middle ear infection and 5.9 times greater odds of a bout with pneumonia.

The study was based on a survey with participants recruited in a process led by NHERI and coordinated through 84 state and local homeschool groups. The survey itself was, according to the authors, “nonbiased and neutrally worded.”

These findings in a study population of 666 children, 261 of whom (39%) were unvaccinated, are sure to stir controversy, in part because it is the first of its kind. The scientific literature on the long-term effects of the vaccination program is virtually silent. Most studies on the safety of vaccines only consider immediate or short-term effects. There was no obvious explanation for the differences in health outcomes observed between the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups of children other than vaccination itself.

The finding that vaccination is a significant risk for autism is the most explosive finding in the paper. For well over a decade, parents concerned that vaccines were involved in autism’s sharp rise have been calling for what has long been labelled the “vax/unvax” study. Public health officials such as Paul Offit have resisted these calls with claims that a comparative study of autism risk and other health outcomes in unvaccinated and vaccinated children would be retrospectively impossible and prospectively unethical.

Despite opposition from those like Offit, attempts to launch a formal vax/unvax study have been made for many years. In 2006, Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney (D, NY) authored what is now called Vaccine Safety Study Act. Said Maloney to the opponents, “Maybe someone in the medical establishment will show me why this study is a bad idea, but they haven’t done it yet.” In 2007, Generation Rescue (one of the Mawson study’s sponsors) retained a market research firm to undertake a similar survey (it is available on line and had similar findings but was never published in a scientific journal).

Less formal surveys focused on whether or not autism was present in the unvaccinated have also been undertaken in unusual populations, including the Amish and the patients of alternative health practitioners. Age of Autism founder Dan Olmsted investigated autism in the Amish, who vaccinate less frequently. Autism is rare among the Amish and the only autistic Amish children we discovered were also vaccinated. (Others reported cases in Amish children with birth defects, but not “idiopathic autism,” the kind that occurs in otherwise typical children who are the heart of the current epidemic). The late Mayer Eisenstein reported in his HomeFirst practice in Chicago that he delivered more than 15,000 babies at home, and thousands of them were never vaccinated. Of these unvaccinated children, none had autism.

The link between autism and vaccination became a hot topic in this year’s presidential election. Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton once tweeted ““The science is clear: The earth is round, the sky is blue, and #vaccineswork. Let’s protect all our kids. #GrandmothersKnowBest.” In contrast, President Donald Trump has long been outspoken about the likely connection between vaccines and autism. As early as 2007, Trump remarked, “When I was growing up, autism wasn’t really a factor. And now all of a sudden, it’s an epidemic. Everybody has their theory, and my theory is the shots. They’re getting these massive injections at one time. I think it’s the vaccinations.”

Read Full Article Here…




Republican Replacement for ObamaCare Passes the House. Rand Paul Objects to $300 Billion In Insurance Company Profits Guaranteed by Taxpayers

Senator Rand Paul objects to the Republican version of ObamaCare, because federal money will be used to guarantee at least $300 billion for insurance-company profit. He also wants to stop the “refundable tax credit”, which is a subsidy by another name.  He says it boggles his mind how these became a Republican idea.  He says the programs will be there ‘forever’ [meaning until America collapses in economic ruin]. -GEG

President Donald Trump and House Republican leaders just finished their victory lap over the House passing a sweeping health care bill, but they might want to hold their horses until the legislation passes the Senate.

On “Your World” today, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) acknowledged that the House Freedom Caucus made the bill “less bad” before it was passed, but he said it has a ways to go.

He explained that this will be the first time Republicans have put their “stamp of approval” on a program where taxpayer money will be paid to insurance companies.

“I really frankly am not too excited about subsidizing the profit of insurance companies,” Paul said, noting that their profits already went from $6 billion to $15 billion annually under ObamaCare.

“There’s about $300 or $400 billion in this bill for insurance company profit,” Paul said. “It boggles my mind how that became a Republican idea.”

Neil Cavuto remarked that it sounds like Paul would be a “no” vote right now.

Read Full Article Here…

 




Harvard Researcher Debunks Claim That Unvaccinated Children Spread More Disease Than Vaccinated Children

Dr. Tetyana Obukhanych, a scientist with a Ph.D. in Immunology, says that unvaccinated children do not pose a higher threat of spreading disease than vaccinated children.  The following vaccines cannot prevent transmission of disease either because they are not designed to do so or because they are used for non-communicable diseases: IPV (inactivated polio vaccine), Tetanus, DTaP diphtheria, DTap pertussis, flu shots, and Hepatitis B.  Discrimination in schools against non-immunized children is without scientific basis. –GEG

Do unvaccinated children pose a higher threat to the public than the vaccinated?

It is often stated that those who choose not to vaccinate their children for reasons of conscience endanger the rest of the public, and this is the rationale behind most of the legislation to end vaccine exemptions currently being considered by federal and state legislators country-wide.  You should be aware that the nature of protection afforded by many modern vaccines – and that includes most of the vaccines recommended by the CDC for children – is not consistent with such a statement.  I have outlined below the recommended vaccines that cannot prevent transmission of disease either because they are not designed to prevent the transmission of infection (rather, they are intended to prevent disease symptoms), or because they are for non-communicable diseases.  People who have not received the vaccines mentioned below pose no higher threat to the general public than those who have, implying that discrimination against non-immunized children in a public school setting may not be warranted.

  1. IPV (inactivated poliovirus vaccine) cannot prevent transmission of poliovirus. Wild poliovirus has been non-existent in the USA for at least two decades. Even if wild poliovirus were to be re-imported by travel, vaccinating for polio with IPV cannot affect the safety of public spaces.  Please note that wild poliovirus eradication is attributed to the use of a different vaccine, OPV or oral poliovirus vaccine.  Despite being capable of preventing wild poliovirus transmission, use of OPV was phased out long ago in the USA and replaced with IPV due to safety concerns.
  2. Tetanus is not a contagious disease, but rather acquired from deep-puncture wounds contaminated with C. tetani spores. Vaccinating for tetanus (via the DTaP combination vaccine) cannot alter the safety of public spaces; it is intended to render personal protection only.
  3. While intended to prevent the disease-causing effects of the diphtheria toxin, the diphtheria toxoid vaccine (also contained in the DTaP vaccine) is not designed to prevent colonization and transmission of C. diphtheriae. Vaccinating for diphtheria cannot alter the safety of public spaces; it is likewise intended for personal protection only.
  4. The acellular pertussis (aP) vaccine (the final element of the DTaP combined vaccine), now in use in the USA, replaced the whole cell pertussis vaccine in the late 1990s, which was followed by an unprecedented resurgence of whooping cough. An experiment with deliberate pertussis infection in primates revealed that the aP vaccine is not capable of preventing colonization and transmission of B. pertussis. The FDA has issued a warning regarding this crucial finding.
    Furthermore, the 2013 meeting of the Board of Scientific Counselors at the CDC revealed additional alarming data that pertussis variants (PRN-negative strains) currently circulating in the USA acquired a selective advantage to infect those who are up-to-date for their DTaP boosters, meaning that people who are up-to-date are more likely to be infected, and thus contagious, than people who are not vaccinated.
  5. Among numerous types of H. influenzae, the Hib vaccine covers only type b. Despite its sole intention to reduce symptomatic and asymptomatic (disease-less) Hib carriage, the introduction of the Hib vaccine has inadvertently shifted strain dominance towards other types of H. influenzae (types a through f).These types have been causing invasive disease of high severity and increasing incidence in adults in the era of Hib vaccination of children.  The general population is more vulnerable to the invasive disease now than it was prior to the start of the Hib vaccination campaign.  Discriminating against children who are not vaccinated for Hib does not make any scientific sense in the era of non-type b H. influenzae disease.
  6. Hepatitis B is a blood-borne virus. It does not spread in a community setting, especially among children who are unlikely to engage in high-risk behaviors, such as needle sharing or sex. Vaccinating children for hepatitis B cannot significantly alter the safety of public spaces.  Further, school admission is not prohibited for children who are chronic hepatitis B carriers.  To prohibit school admission for those who are simply unvaccinated – and do not even carry hepatitis B – would constitute unreasonable and illogical discrimination.

In summary, a person who is not vaccinated with IPV, DTaP, HepB, and Hib vaccines due to reasons of conscience poses no extra danger to the public than a person who is.  No discrimination is warranted.

Read Full Article Here…




New Research Shows That Low Levels of Nitric Oxide In Transfusions Can Cause Heart Attacks and Strokes In Those Receiving Blood

Scientist discovers that respiration is a three-gas system involving, not just oxygen and carbon dioxide, but also nitric oxide, which controls the ability of blood vessels to expand, when needed, to increase blood flow. Without this ability to expand blood vessels on demand, such as during physical exertion or emotional stress, the delivery of oxygen will be inadequate and can lead to heart failure or stroke. This is of particular importance to patients receiving transfusions, because blood in blood banks can be deficient in nitric oxide. In that case, even though the oxygen-bearing red cells are normal, the lack of nitric oxide can be fatal. –GEG  [Learn about the nitric-oxide booster that Mr. Griffin says probably saved his life.]

Professor Jonathan Stamler’s latest findings regarding nitric oxide have the potential to reshape fundamentally the way we think about the respiratory system—and offer new avenues to save lives. It may be time to rewrite the textbooks.

Scientific dogma has the respiration process involving only two elements—oxygen and carbon dioxide. Specifically, the delivery of oxygen from lungs to tissues, and the removal of the waste product, carbon dioxide, through exhaling.

Recently published online in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), Stamler and colleagues demonstrate that nitric oxide is essential for the delivery of oxygen to the cells and tissues that need it.

Stamler, a professor of medicine at Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine and cardiologist at University Hospitals Case Medical Center, led a team that showed that nitric oxide must accompany hemoglobin to enable blood vessels to open and then supply oxygen to tissues.

Doctors have long known that a major disconnect exists between the amount of oxygen carried in the blood and the amount of oxygen delivered to the tissues. Until now, they had no way to explain the discrepancy. The new findings show that nitric oxide within the red blood cell itself is the gatekeeper to the respiratory cycle—nitric oxide makes the cycle run.

“The bottom line is that we have discovered the molecular basis of blood flow control in the respiratory cycle loop,” Stamler said. “It’s in the hemoglobin protein itself, which has the ability to deliver the nitric oxide together with oxygen. The simplified textbook view of two gases carried by hemoglobin is missing an essential element—nitric oxide—because blood flow to tissues is actually more important in most circumstances than how much oxygen is carried by hemoglobin. So the respiratory cycle is actually a three-gas system.”

Stamler’s previous research had revealed that the respiratory cycle was more than an oxygen and carbon dioxide exchange proposition. Stamler and colleagues also had shown that red blood cells carry and release nitric oxide, but had not yet explained the exact physiologic ramifications of nitric oxide release.

In this most recent research, investigators uncovered the key role of nitric oxide in controlling the blood flow in small vessels within tissues responsible for delivering oxygen (known as “blood flow autoregulation”)—a process whose molecular basis had been a longstanding mystery in medicine. Investigators specifically examined the respiratory cycle in mice lacking the one amino acid site that carries nitric oxide in their red blood cells. Low and behold, blood flow autoregulation was eliminated entirely—the animals could not oxygenate tissues.

Initially, investigators found low oxygen levels in the animals’ muscles at baseline, despite the animals’ red blood cells carrying a full load of oxygen. When the mice were then stressed to bring on slight oxygen deprivation (hypoxia), the blood flow to their organs dropped precipitously. The lack of oxygen should have prompted a spike in blood flow to send more oxygenated blood to tissues and cells. Instead, the reduced blood flow and ensuing oxygen shortfall triggered heart attacks and heart failure in these nitric oxide-deficient animals.

The experiment demonstrated that the nitric oxide-release mechanism regulates oxygen delivery. When nitric oxide flows from the cysteine-binding site in hemoglobin, blood vessels dilate (stretch) and allow oxygen-carrying red blood cells access to tissues.

“These mice had red blood cells that by all traditional measures are completely normal in carrying oxygen and releasing it and then in picking up carbon dioxide, yet these animals cannot oxygenate their tissues,” said Stamler, director of Case Western Reserve’s Institute for Transformative Molecular Medicine. “Lacking nitric oxide in red cells, oxygen deficiency could not induce vasodilation, which is essential for sustaining life as we know it.”

Historically, the control of blood flow has been thought to be the purview of blood vessels and their endothelial linings, while the role of the red blood cell went unappreciated. Blood flow deficits that cause heart attacks and strokes were thought not to be linked to red blood cells.

“Within the tissues, the tiny vessels and the red blood cells together make up the critical entity controlling blood flow,” Stamler said. “Red blood cell dysfunction is likely a hidden contributor to diseases of the heart, lung and blood such as heart attack, heart failure, stroke and ischemic injury to kidneys.”

Read Full Article…