Archive for March 2013
Australian Government almost forcibly pushes the HPV vaccines on young boys as well as girls Part 7 (Final)
Australian Government almost forcibly pushes the HPV vaccines on young boys as well as girls Part 7(Final)
Are vaccines harming Australian children?
Are young Australians potentially being sterilized or made infertile
I have attempted to bring parents attention of the extremely serious risks associated with many vaccines but more importantly the current unproven HPV vaccine that was rushed into production and at the same time by-passed the normal screening protocol before being used on humans.
I think it is blatantly arrogant that our respective Leaders, Governments, Ministers for Health and Departments of Health stand behind and support such a massive vaccination programme without having to prove that this vaccine is effective in reducing cancer of the cervix or in reducing sexually transmitted diseases . It is also fair comment to include possible criminal negligence on their behalf in not being able to provide such evidence and at the same time ignore the concerns of some of the world top scientist in this area.
Is the Australian Government and many governments around the world guilty of criminal negligence?
You bet they are!!!
It is now clear to me that we have not only opened up a can of worms but may also have stirred up a hornets nest that could lead to mass class actions against those responsible for manufacturing such vaccines and the governments and authorities that have authorised its distribution knowing the possible consequences set against the lack of data to prove the validity of the product!!!
As I have previously revealed there is outstanding evidence to show that all the “Buffoon’s” that attended highly secretive meetings over a long period of time have themselves admitted to their lack of expertise in understand the toxic value of the vaccines when given to babies and children. It also became apparent that they also did not understand the value of multiple injections in regard to cumulative toxic value.
Here are three extracts that were leaked from one such meeting:
It is human nature to assume that this is yet another conspiracy theory by some “British Nutbrain” but hopefully by the time you have read all my article you may just take a different stance and start lobbying those that implemented these potentially harmful scam schemes.
Let’s now give you a list of some of those that attended these secretive meetings so that you not only fully understand the authenticity of the meeting but also of some of the scumbags that so openly admit to their lack of information or data to support such vaccines……….I guess one could call this a sort of Medical Bilderberg Conference:
Those attending the Simpsonwood meeting on mercury included:
1. Roger Bernier, Ph.D., CDC’s associate director for science
2. Robert Brent, M.D., Thomas Jefferson University and Dupont Hospital for Children, developmental biologist and pediatrician
3. Vito Caserta, M.D., Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Vaccine Injury Compensation Program’s chief medical officer
4. Bob Chen, M.D., CDC’s chief of Vaccine Safety and Development, National Immunization Program
5. Tom Clarkson, M.D., University of Rochester, New York, Mercury program
6. John Clements, World Health Organization (WHO) representing expanded program on immunization
7. Bob Davis, M.D., University of Washington, associate professor of pediatrics and epidemiology
8. Bill Egan, Ph.D., FDA’s Center for Biologics, Evaluation & Research
9. David Johnson, M.D., Michigan state public health officer, Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)
10. Dick Johnston, M.D., University of Colorado School of Medicine and National Jewish Center for Immunology and Respiratory Medicine, immunologist and pediatrician
11. Loren Koller, D.V.M., Oregon State University College of Veterinary Medicine, pathologist, immunotoxicologist
12. Martin Meyers, M.D., CDC’s acting director, National Immunization Program
13. Walter Orenstein, M.D. CDC’s director, National Immunization Program
14. Isabelle Rapin, M.D., Albert Einstein College of Medicine, neurologist for children
15. Tom Verstraeten, M.D., CDC’s National Immunization Program presently employeed by Glaxo-Welcome, vaccine company
16. Bill Weil, M.D., retired pediatrician, representing American Academy of Pediatrics’ (AAP)
Another meeting shows the following:
Those attending the Puerto Rico meeting on aluminum included:
1. Martin Myers: 2000 Acting Director of the National Vaccine Program Office (NVPO)
2. DR. Fred Vogel: Program platform leader at Aventis Pasteur
3. DR Robert Hunter: University of Texas
4. DR Carl Alving: Walter Reed Army Institute of Research
5. DR. Norman Bayler: Acting Deputy Director of the Office of Vaccine Research and Review and Associate Director for Biological Evaluation of Research at FDA
6. DR Lizzie Leininger: SmithKline Beecham
7. DR John Clements: WHO
8. DR Neal Halsey: John Hopkins University
9. DR Bruce Gellin
10. DR Romain Gherardi: Inserm, France
11. DR Michael Gerber: National Institutes of Medicine
12. DR Sam Keith: ATSDR
13. DR Nathalie Garcon-Johnson: SmithKline Beecham
14. DR John Clements: Medical Officer with the expanded program on immunizations for more then 14 years at WHO
15. DR Armand: ?
16. DR Francois Verdier: Aventis Pasteur
17. DR Bruce Fowler: University of Maryland School of Medicine and Graduate School, where he is the director of the program of toxicology
18. DR Ham HogonEsch: Professor of immunopathology at Purdue University of Utrecht, also is a diplomat of the College of Veterinary Pathologists
19. DR Paul Tchounwou: Jackson State University
20. DR Bob Chen: CDC
21. DR Grabenstein: United States Army
22. Dr Robert Pless: CDC
23. DR Stanley Music: Environmental epidemiologist in North Carolina, 28 years with the CDC in part of the small pox program, now with Merck Research
Laboratories on the Worldwide Safety and Epidemiology Program
24. Stan Hem: (Merck?)
25. DR Charles Tood: CDC
26. DR John Wheeler: Toxicologist in the division of toxicology at ATSDR, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, not CDC but sister agency of
CDC. Works in the office of the Assistant Director for Science
27. DR Richard Flarend: Penn State, Altoona
28. DR Miles Braun: FDA
29. DR Peggy Rennels, Professor of Pediatrics in Center for Vaccine Development at the University of Maryland, School of Medicine, Member of the American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Infectious Disease, AKA Red Book Committee, also a member of the CDC’s Advisory Committee for immunization Practices, the ACIP. She is also the only voting member of both parties.
30. DR Bernadette Hendrickx, SmithKline Beecham
31. DR Phil Pittman: fellowship at NIH, Current USAMRIID at Fort Dietrich, Senior
Medical Scientist, and Chief of the Division of Medicine, Emeritus
32. DR Ted Eickhoff: University of Colorado
33. DR Laura York: Wyeth Lederle
May 12, 2000 Meeting
All the same above named individuals attended including additions below.
34. DR Max Lum: CDC for 15 years in Health Education and Health Communication and Safety as well as the Health Communications Group, serves as Chairman of the Surgeon General’s Subcommittee on Risk of Communication and Education, Provided help to Department of Defense, and spoke at National Vaccine Advisory Committee
The following are extracts from such meetings that were made available via the public domain known as the Internet!!!
The following were quotes from the Simpsonwood Meeting – the secret CDC meeting attended by 51 persons during which that original report had been discussed – emphasis added in brackets by Jeanne A. Brohart as comments/OPINIONS] – note page numbers vary a little based on fact that report actually includes a few “duplicate” pages…
Dr. Verstraeten, pg. 40-41: “…we have found statistically significant relationships between the exposure and outcomes for these different exposures and outcomes. First, for two months of age, an unspecified developmental delay, which has its own specific ICD9 code. Exposure at three months of age, Tics. Exposure at six months of age, an attention deficit disorder. Exposure at one, three and six months of age, language and speech delays which are two separate ICD9 codes. Exposures at one, three and six months of age, the entire category of neurodevelopmental delays, which includes all of these plus a number of other disorders.” [I for one would certainly be interested in knowing what all those “other disorders” were… although I have a very good idea!!! Note that, at least in my opinion, although those attending the meeting varied greatly in their “concern”, the population sample used in this study, in my opinion, could only be described as very “white washed”. When you don’t want to see “a link”, as clearly stated in the Simpsonwood transcripts, the children you allow in your study will certainly impact the results!]
Dr. Bernier, pg. 113: “We have asked you to keep this information confidential. We do have a plan for discussing these data at the upcoming meeting of the Advisory Committee of Immunization Practices on June 21 and June 22. At that time CDC plans to make a public release of this information [THIS WAS SEVERAL YEARS AGO FOLKS!!!], so I think it would serve all of our interests best if we could continue to consider these data. The ACIP work group will be considering also. If we could consider these data in a certain protected environment. So we are asking people who have a great job protecting this information up until now, to continue to do that until the time of the ACIP meeting. So to basically consider this embargoed information.
Dr. Keller, pgs. 116 & 118: “…we know the developing neurologic system is more sensitive than one that is fully developed…”
Dr. Verstraeten, pg. 165: “Personally, I have three hypotheses. My first hypothesis is it is parental bias. The children that are more likely to be vaccinated are more likely to be picked and diagnosed. Second hypothesis, I don’t know. There is a bias that I have not recognized, and nobody has yet told me about it. Third hypothesis. It’s true, it’s Thimerosal. Those are my hypotheses.” [In other words, either the parents made it up and we really don’t have an issue – it is just a matter of “skewed data”, or, we made it up or it really IS thimerosal!!! Good luck proving the first two hypotheses… looks like that leaves only one!!!]
Dr. Verstraeten, pg. 166: “When I saw this, and I went back through the literature, I was actually stunned by what I saw because I thought it is plausible. First of all there is the Faeroe study, which I think people have dismissed too easily, and there is a new article in the same Journal that was presented here, the Journal of Pediatrics, where they have looked at PCB. They have looked at other contaminants in seafood and they have adjusted for that, and still mercury comes out. That is one point. Another point is that in many of the studies with animals, it turned out that there is quite a different result depending on the dose of mercury. Depending on the route of exposure and depending on the age at which the animals, it turned out that there is quite a different result depending on the dose of mercury. Depending on the route of exposure and depending on the age at which the animals were exposed. Now, I don’t know how much you can extrapolate that from animals to humans, but that tells me mercury at one month of age is not the same as mercury at three months, at 12 months, prenatal mercury, later mercury. There is a whole range of plausible outcomes from mercury. On top of that, I think that we cannot so easily compare the U.S. population to Faeroe or Seychelles populations. We have different mean levels of exposure. We are comparing high to high I the Seychelles, high to high in the Faeroe and low to low in the U.S., so I am not sure how easily you can transpose one finding to another one. So basically to me that leaves all the options open, and that means I can not exclude such a possible effect.”
[MY PERSONAL FAVORITE… NEXT…]
Dr. Johnson, pg. 198: “This association leads me to favor a recommendation that infants up to two years old not be immunized with Thimerosal containing vaccines if suitable alternative preparations are available. I do not believe the diagnoses justifies compensation in the Vaccine Compensation Program at this point. I deal with causality, it seems pretty clear to me that the data are not sufficient one way or the other. My gut feeling? It worries me enough. Forgive this personal comment, but I got called out a eight o’clock for an emergency call and my daughter-in-law delivered a son by C-section. Our first male in the line of the next generation, and I do not want that grandson to get a Thimerosal containing vaccine until we know better what is going on. It will probably take a long time. In the meantime, and I know there are probably implications for this internationally, but in the meantime I think I want that grandson to only be given Thimerosal-free vaccines.” [In other words, all of us at this meeting could make an informed decision for our loved ones, but, we’ll just keep all this to ourselves and let those “other kids” get these mercury-laced vaccines even though we knew there were some major and statistically significant concerns here!!!]
Dr. Weil, pg. 207 – the man representing the American Academy of Pediatrics [the very organization that helped to set guidelines for vaccine policy – the organization said to be “dedicated to the health of all children”]: “The number of dose related relationships are linear and statistically significant. You can play with this all you want. They are linear. They are statistically significant. The positive relationships are those that one might expect from the Faroe Islands studies. They are also related to those data we do have on experimental animal data and similar to the neurodevelopmental tox data on other substances, so that I think you can’t accept that this is out of the ordinary. It isn’t out of the ordinary.” [It certainly appeared to me that Dr. Weil – like me – also was seeing a group of people trying to play with the data to manipulate or change the outcome of the data.]
Dr. Weil, pg. 208: “The rise in the frequency of neurobehavioral disorders whether it is ascertainment or real, is not too bad. It is much too graphic. We don’t see that kind of genetic change in 30 years.” [More than any, this was the statement that told me that “genetics” were fairly stable over time – a very critical point as explained in “book 3”].
Dr. Caserta, pg. 234: “One of the things I learned at the Aluminum Conference in Puerto Rico that was tied into the metal lines in biology and medicine that I never really understood before, is the interactive effect of different metals when they are together in the same organism. It is not the same as when they are alone, and I think it would be foolish for us not to include aluminum as part of our thinking with this.” [Given aluminum was a KNOWN gene mutant, I would agree with that statement – especially since during the Aluminum Conference in Puerto Rico, participants were told that when you mix metals, the toxicities were generally “additive” … in other words, the effects were greater than you would expect from either metal alone! Note a quote from a completely separate article/paper talking about the effect of “mixing metals”:
“Another important factor with regard to mercury on the mind, which officials at the CDC, FDA and the professors in the IOM do not consider, is synergistic toxicity (refer to: http://www.talkinternational.com/health/report_on_mercury_toxicity_bh_050803.htm) – mercury’s enhanced effect when other poisons are present. A small dose of mercury that kills 1 in 100 rats and a dose of aluminum that will kill 1 in 100 rats, when combined have a striking effect: all the rats die. Doses of mercury that have a 1 percent mortality will have a 100 percent mortality rate if some aluminum is there. Vaccines contain aluminum. ” [Emphasis added – This quote taken from: Dr. Donald W. Miller, Jr., Mercury on the Mind, http://www.lewrockwell.com/miller/miller14.html, refer also to: J. Shubert, E. Riley & S. Tyler. Combined Effects in Toxicology–A Rapid Systemic Testing Procedure: Cadmium, Mercury and Lead. J.Toxicology and Environmental Health v4, p763, 1978]]
Now… back to quotes from the transcript on mercury in vaccines…
Dr. Clements, pg 247- 249: “I am really concerned that we have taken off like a boat going down one arm of the mangrove swamp at high speed, when in fact there was not enough discussion really early on about which was the boat should go at all. And I really want to risk offending everyone in the room by saying that perhaps this study should not have been done at all, because the outcome of it could have, to some extent, been predicted, and we have all reached this point now where we are left hanging, [In other words, we really don’t want these studies done because the public could be proven right] even though I hear the majority of consultants say to the Board that they are not convinced there is a causality direct link between Thimerosal and various neurological outcomes.”
” I know how we handle it from here is extremely problematic. The ACIP is going to depend on comments from this group in order to move forward into policy, and I have been advised that whatever I say should not move into the policy area because that is not the point of this meeting. But nonetheless, we know from many experiences in history that the pure scientist has done research because of pure science. But that pure science has resulted in splitting the atom or some other process which is completely beyond the power of the scientists who did the research to control it. And what we have here is people who have, for every best reason in the world, pursued a direction of research. But there is not the point at which the research results have to be handled, and even if this committee decides that there is no association and that information gets out, the work that has been done and through the freedom of information that will be taken by others and will be used in ways beyond the control of this group. And I am very concerned about that as I suspect it already too late to do anything regardless of any professional body and what they say.”
“My mandate as I sit here in this group is to make sure at the end of the day the 100,000,000 are immunized with DTP, Hepatitis B and if possible Hib, this year, next year and for many years to come, and that will have to be with Thimerosal containing vaccines unless a miracle occurs and an alternative is found quickly and is tried and found to be safe.” [You just have to love this typical “my objectives come first… after all… I get evaluated on that… so, let me proceed blindly even though there were obviously some major concerns here!!!]
“So I leave you with the challenge that I am very concerned that this has gotten this far, and that having got this far, how you present in a concerted voice the information to the ACIP in a way they will be able to handle it and not get exposed to the traps which are out there in public relations. My message would be that any other study, and I like the study that has just been described here very much. I think it makes a lot of sense, but it has to be thought through. What are the potential outcomes and how will you handle it? [In my opinion, looks like this was saying… be careful because this could come back to bite us…]. How will it be presented to a public and media that is hungry for selecting the information they want to use for whatever means they in store for them?”
“…but I wonder how on earth you are going to handle it from here.” [That was what we were all wondering now given parents were finally realizing they had been lied to by the CDC… The CDC obviously knew that immature neurologic systems were quite vulnerable… yet, clearly, they still refused to recall mercury-laced vaccines and continued to vaccinate thousands each day!!!]
… AND JUST WHERE EXACTLY WAS THAT PRESS RELEASE THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO SHARE THIS INFORMATION WITH THE PUBLIC SEVERAL YEARS AGO!!!
NOTE: There were certainly many, many comments stating that attendees felt the “relationship was weak” between exposure and outcome, but then again, there were many, many issues with the data itself – especially as it related to what I could only described as a very “white washed population sample”. In spite of those comments, however, there certainly did appear to be “reason for concern” and a definite need for “better data” and “more studies”.
Before closing this final article on the dangers of vaccines let me show you an extract as to how some of the world’s best can be got at or ridiculed:
Dr Mark Geier is a medical doctor who holds a PhD in genetics and is board-certified in medical genetics and forensic medicine. He was a researcher at the National Institutes of Health for 10 years and was previously a professor at Johns Hopkins University. He has studied vaccines for more than 30 years and has published over 50 peer-reviewed papers on vaccine safety, efficacy, contamination and policy.
He was instrumental in convincing officials to switch from the whole-cell Diphtheria-Tetanus-Pertussis (DTP) vaccine to the safer version (DTaP). In fact, he wrote the article, “The True Story of Pertussis Vaccination:
A Sordid Legacy?” which in 2002, won the first annual Stanley W. Jackson award for the best paper published in the Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences during the period of 2000 to 2002.
Dr Geier has made several presentations to the Institute of Medicine on the adverse effects of vaccines including one on thimerosal in 2004. He and his son, David Geier, are the only independent researchers who have ever been permitted to study the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) database of the CDC.
Dr Geier has testified before the US House of Representatives Committee on Government Reform Investigating Vaccines and the Autism Epidemic to critique the Hviid study, conducted in Denmark on autism and thimerosal exposure and he has also addressed the FDA Advisory Committee regarding vaccine safety.
Finally, Dr Geier has testified as an expert witness in about 100 cases before the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program in the US Court of Federal Claims.
In one such case, on November 25, 2003, the Special Master French issued an opinion in which he praised Geier’s credentials and vast experience and said in
Dr Geier “ranks high among those who have studied vaccine issues through the medical literature on vaccines, databases, studies, articles and information on vaccine safety and efficacy in vaccine policy.” …“The tenor of his testimony in this case addressed the importance of statistical databases in providing statistical reliability and validity in interpreting the epidemiology and issues relating to autism and various vaccines. . . . Dr Geier has recently proposed a data-sharing process that would improve the reliability of present statistical data that would include the present VAERS statistical database. It would be helpful in interpreting the epidemiology and issues relating to the autism controversy.”
Give me one good reason why this world renowned scientist would put his professional career on the line by lying under oath, not only in court 100 times, but also before a congressional committee?
The drug makers and government officials have waged an all out attack on this particular expert in attempt to discount his opinions because Dr Geier speaks in term most people understand. He has reported on the staggering statistical numbers showing the rise in brain-damaged kids who were vaccinated with thimerosal compared to the children who received very little mercury, or mercury-free vaccines, and were not injured. When he speaks, people “get it,” and the powers that be know it.
Then there is expert, Dr George Lucier, who in the year 2000, retired from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences where he was Director of the Environmental Toxicology Program and Associate Director of the National Toxicology Program. In that capacity, he was responsible for coordinating toxicological research and testing across federal agencies as well as conducting risk assessments for exposure to toxic substances including mercury. He has authored well over 200 scientific publications involving toxicology, pharmacology and risk assessment, including ten articles on mercury.
In 1998, Dr Lucier was appointed the Chair of the Organizing Committee for the White House Workshop on Scientific Issues Relevant to Assessment of Health Effects from Exposure to Methylmercury. He has presented his opinions on numerous occasions in various forums and for 28 years, he was the co-editor in chief of the prestigious scientific journal, Environmental Health Perspectives.
Why would this guy lie under oath?
Another renowned scientist expressing the same view on thimerosal, is Dr Boyd Haley, who is currently a Professor and Chairman of the Department of Chemistry with a joint appointment in the College of Pharmacy at the University of Kentucky.
He teaches a class on mercury toxicology and has published more than 110 articles in the peer-reviewed literature including the toxic effects of elemental mercury. Since 1989, his laboratory has been conducting research on the relationship between mercury and neurological diseases, and has performed experiments with thimerosal. In 2001, Dr Haley made a presentation on “In Vitro Studies of Thimerosal Toxicity,” to the IOM.
So why would this guy spend 25 year of his life conducting bogus studies, rendering fraudulent results and authoring a 100 dishonest articles?
Finally despite all the overwhelming forensic evidence that I have exposed in my articles and despite the fact that in Australia alone I have raised these issues with the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard – Leader of the Opposition, Tony Abbott – Minister for Health, Tanya Plibersek MP, Labour MP Kevin Rudd – Key MP’s in the Green Party, Premiers of other States etc and non of them have commented on this vital issue or taken any action to stop the HPV vaccination programme on all the girls and boys of high school age in Australia……..why?
Why have they refused to investigate a vaccine that not only can be potentially harmful (if not toxic to the body and mind) but also has side stepped the normal protocol in its rushed development and has no proven data as to its effectiveness in reducing cancer of the cervix or sexually transmitted diseases?
Why did the world top expert on HPV, Dr. Harper express her own concern and then was forced to retract it?
Why wasn’t the public advised that when these tests were carried out in female animals they became sterile?
Take a read of this article involving a young Australian girl:
Teenage Girl Becomes Infertile after Gardasil Vaccination
By Steven Mosher and Elizabeth Crnkovich
Gardasil has been controversial from the beginning. While other vaccines protect against diseases spread by casual contact, Gardasil was developed to protect against a sexually transmitted disease called Human Papilloma Virus or HPV. Merck & Co., the manufacturer, has been very effective at lobbying governments around the world to make the vaccine mandatory for school attendance. Despite the frequent objections of doctors and parents, it has been administered to tens of millions of 11- and 12-year-old young girls around the world.
Now comes the case of a 16-year-old Australian girl who suffered “premature ovarian failure” after receiving Gardasil. Her ovaries have shut down, her eggs have been destroyed, and she will never be able to have children.
Dr. Deirdre Little, the Australian physician who treated the girl, has published a complete account in the British Medical Journal. (BMJ Case Reports 2012; doi:10.1136/bcr-2012-006879) Her report explains that the girl’s menstrual cycles were regular until she received the Gardasil vaccination in the Fall of 2008. By January 2009, her cycle had become irregular. Over the course of the next two years, her menses became increasingly scant and irregular, until by 2011, she had ceased menstruating altogether.
Early menopause is highly unusual. In this case, the girl was in excellent health, and had no family or personal medical history that could explain this premature menopause. Her first effort to obtain medical assistance for her amenorrhoea resulted in the doctor advising her to take oral contraceptives. Had she agreed, such drugs would have masked the problem and most likely the possible cause as well. But she declined.
It should be noted that many young girls are told, as she was, to take oral contraceptives as an antidote to what is called in the medical field, oligomenorrhoea, which means infrequent or very light menstruation. Most probably take their physician’s advice, which means that there may be many more cases of “premature ovarian failure” than we now know, since the contraceptives mask the symptoms.
In the Australian case, after testing the levels of numerous hormones, and the function of various internal organs, the girl was diagnosed by Dr. Little as having “premature ovarian failure”, which is defined as “the presence of menopausal gonadotrophin levels in association with over 3 months of amenorrhoea or oligomenorrhoea before age 40 years.” Further testing confirmed that all of her eggs—every last one—were dead. She was and is totally and irrevocably infertile.
This case was reported to the local vaccine manufacturer in Australia, called the Therapeutic Goods Administration, to find out what they knew about the vaccine’s effect on a woman’s reproductive system. Very little, it turned out. The TGA had records of various tests on rat testes, but no records of the effect of the vaccine on rat ovaries.
It is very rare for a healthy 16-year-old girl to go through menopause. It is also a personal tragedy of the first order, one that will only grow in magnitude as she marries and yearns to start a family.
While Dr. Little could not confirm that Gardasil caused the destruction of the girl’s reproductive system, she was able to rule out all other possible causes. The circumstantial evidence implicating Gardasil is strong.
The world has just celebrated what the U.N. has designated as the “International Day of the Girl Child.” In the resolution announcing this day last December, the General Assembly stated that it “Invites all Member States, relevant organizations of the United Nations system and other international organizations, as well as civil society, to observe the International Day of the Girl Child, and to raise awareness of the situation of girls around the world.” (emphasis added) The resolution talks of empowering women, enabling them to make decisions, supporting them, recognizing their human rights, and ending discrimination.
Tens of millions of young girls have received the Gardasil vaccine since its approval by the FDA six years ago. If even a tiny fraction of them have experienced infertility as a result, then these “girl children” have been denied a very fundamental right, that is, the right to decide how many children they want to have.
In the case of the Australian girl the effect is irreversible. She has lost an integral part of her womanhood, while still but a child. Women deserve better.
So there you have it folks…….as a parent its your decision………think twice before allowing your child to have this vaccine or even some others and remember to ask for a list of the ingredients!!!
It now remains for me to show those that have been informed and to display their images in a sort of “Name and Shame” gallery:
Add to this list State Premiers and senior Greens etc…… the list is endless and all of them did nothing……..the Greens never even responded…….so much for the term “Civil Servants”……………it adds new meaning to the term “We are here to serve you”
I feel that one day this HPV scam will become a major class action in court and hopefully some of those above will be called to give evidence and to be asked why they did nothing………that my friends amounts to “Criminal Negligence.”
Shame on you all
Mummy will this harm me?………..Not according to Julia Gillard and her Minister for Health, Tanya Plibersek
Peter Eyre – 8/3/2013
Broadcaster – Investigative Journalist – Middle East Consultant – Political Analysis