- The Facts:
Jamie McGuire, a New York Times bestselling author with a large social media following, recently shared why she does not consent to any type of mandatory vaccination initiatives. She received both support and backlash.
- Reflect On:
Why are people with big followings who oppose vaccinations and mandatory vaccine initiatives afraid to share their opinions? Why are vaccine awareness groups always attacked with ridicule and character assassination instead of with rebuttals?
It’s not often that people with a large following speak out ‘against’ vaccinations, despite the fact that many of them may feel a certain way. Sharing thoughts as to why one may not support vaccinations, especially if they are in the public eye, can lead to instant ridicule and character assassination. As a result, not many people are brave enough to speak out, but with more and more information emerging every single day about vaccinations and how they’re not as safe as they are marketed to be by their manufacturers (big pharma), speaking out against vaccinations using facts can no longer be countered or addressed with opposing evidence. There are several clear causes for concern when it comes to vaccinations, which render the idea of forced vaccinations as something extremely wrong and unethical.
The latest example comes from Jamie McGuire, a popular New York Times bestselling author.
On March 8th, she wrote the following post on her Facebook page:
Until you can prove vaccines do not cause DNA mutations, I do not consent. Until you can prove vaccines do not carry cancer causing retroviruses, I do not consent. Until you can prove vaccines do not impair fertility, I do not consent. Until you can prove vaccines are safe using the gold standard in medicine with an inert placebo, I do not consent. Until you can prove it’s safe and effective to inject 8 different viruses at one time, I do not consent. Until you can prove it’s safe to inject 18 times the “safe” limit of Aluminum into day 1 old babies, I do not consent.Until you can prove none of the 16 vaccines and their components do not cause autism, I do not consent. Until you can prove vaccines are not permanently harming the immune system and creating an epidemic of autoimmune diseases, I do not consent. Until you can prove vaccines do not contribute to SIDS, I do not consent. Until you can prove vaccinated individuals are healthier, live longer or thrive more so than their non vaccinated counterparts, I do not consent. Unless you carried, loved and cared for MY child, I do not consent.
We are proud of Jamie for saying what she () stated, and all of her points are extremely valid. This isn’t an ‘anti-vax’ post, but rather a post about information regarding vaccines. Using terms like ‘anti-vax’ and ‘pro-vax is really counterproductive, as both sides are concerned about the same thing, the safety of children and adults. Information that suggests vaccines need to be looked at deeper and raise concerns about them are not ‘anti-vax,’ it’s simply just important information. The mainstream likes to use these labels to pit two sides against each-other in a non peaceful way.
The work of Dr. Judy Mikovits came to mind when she mentioned retroviruses. She has a well-established history of working for the National Cancer Institute as a cancer researcher, and Dr. Mikovits worked with human retroviruses like HIV. Specifically, her work focused on immunotherapy research. In 2009, she was working on autism and related neurological diseases. She found that many of the study subjects had cancer, motor-neuron disorders, and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). She believed a virus may have been responsible for these symptoms, and through her research, she isolated the viruses that turned out to have come from mice. From 2006 to 2011, Dr. Mikovits was the research director of the Whittemore Peterson Institute (WPI), a chronic fatigue syndrome research organization and clinic in Reno, Nevada in the United States. Her and her team published a paper in one of the best scientific journals in the world, Science, on October 8th, 2009. The study was retracted two years later after going through the rigorous peer-reviewed process, when another study was published. You can view the 2009 study here.
In 2011, another AIDS researcher in a journal called Frontiers in Microbiology wrote a paper that cost her a lot, because it stated that the most likely way that murine leukemia virus-related viruses entered humans was through vaccines. You can read that study here.
The details explaining how retroviruses in today’s biological therapeutics including vaccines are contributing to autoimmune, neuroimmune disease and cancer are complex. Although I’ve spent my adult lifetime studying how retroviruses contribute to these diseases, paring down the complexities into basics is a daunting task. We now appreciate that it is the use of xenograft technologies in the development of vaccines and biological drugs and genetically modified organisms (GMOs) that have accelerated the spread of animal retroviruses into humans, a process known as zoonosis, whereby an animal retrovirus jumps species, learning to evade immune mechanisms of humans and thereby causing disease.
Dr. Mikovits wrote a detailed article for Robert F. Kennedy Jr’s “Children’s Health Defence” organization, going into more detail about the vaccine/retrovirus issue and the information stated above. You can read that entire article HERE. You can also watch a short video clip of her explaining what happened to her as a result of all these findings HERE. This is just one example, as there have been a multitude of other studies published outlining the concerns of retrovirus within vaccines.
She goes on to mention vaccine ingredients. Let’s look at aluminum as an example.
Another fairly recent study from 2015 points out:
Evidence that aluminum-coated particles phagocytozed in the injected muscle and its draining lymph nodes can disseminate within phagocytes throughout the body and slowly accumulate in the brain further suggested that alum safety should be evaluated in the long term. (source)
This is one of multiple studies that has outlined how, despite the fact that aluminum has been used inside of vaccines as the adjuvant (to trigger an immune response, the more toxic the adjuvant the greater the immune response) for more than one hundred years, it’s one of multiple vaccine ingredients that has never gone through any safety testing. How can so many publications stress that we don’t know the details regarding the bioaccumulation of vaccine ingredients, yet our federal health regulatory agencies like the CDC continue to claim that vaccines go through rigorous safety testing?
Another quote from another study:
Aluminum is an experimentally demonstrated neurotoxin and the most commonly used vaccine adjuvant. Despite almost 90 years of widespread use of aluminum adjuvants, medical science’s understanding about their mechanisms of action is still remarkably poor. There is also a concerning scarcity of data on toxicology and pharmacokinetics of these compounds. In spite of this, the notion that aluminum in vaccines is safe appears to be widely accepted. Experimental research, however, clearly shows that aluminum adjuvants have a potential to induce serious immunological disorders in humans.
The quote above comes from a study published in 2011. It’s 2019 now and we’ve come a long way in our understanding of vaccines. We are starting to see even more research confirming the statement above.
The point is that injected aluminum doesn’t exit the body, it’s designed to stick around because it’s the adjuvant. The vaccine doesn’t really work without it. This automatically implicates vaccines in the causation of multiple diseases from autism to Alzheimer’s disease later on in life. In 2018, scientists opened the brains of multiple deceased autistic people and found some of the highest brain aluminum content ever measured in brain tissue. You can access that study here.
Again, there are multiple vaccine ingredients like formaldehyde, gelatin, mercury, and animal cells that haven’t been studied for safety. A recent meta-analysis published in the journal Bio Med Research International with regards to mercury outlines that 75+ years of research has:
Consistently found thimerosal to be harmful. As mentioned in the Introduction section, many studies conducted by independent investigators have found Thimerosal to be associated with neurodevelopmental disorders. Considering that there are many studies conducted by independent researchers which show a relationship between Thimerosal and neurodevelopmental disorders, the results of the six studies examined in this review, particularly those showing the protective effects of Thimerosal, should bring into question the validity of the methodology used in the studies.
There are countless dangers associated with vaccines, many of which have been swept under the rug because the pharmaceutical companies manufacturing these vaccines influence both the CDC and the scientific studies associated with vaccine safety. As previously mentioned, they do not examine each ingredient to determine what it’s doing inside the human body, and they don’t look for other adverse reactions.
I’d like to use the DTP vaccine as an example. A team of Scandinavian scientists conducted a study examining this vaccine and the results were alarming. That study, funded in part by the Danish government and lead by Dr. Soren Wengel Mogensen, was published in January in EBioMedicine. Mogensen and his team of scientists found that African children inoculated with the DTP (diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis) vaccine during the early 1980s had a 5-10 times greater mortality risk than their unvaccinated peers.
It should be of concern that the effect of routine vaccinations on all-cause mortality was not tested in randomized trials. All currently available evidence suggests that DTP vaccine may kill more children from other causes than it saves from diphtheria, tetanus or pertussis. Though a vaccine protects children against the target disease it may simultaneously increase susceptibility to unrelated infections.
Let’s not forget about The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) that went into effect in 1988 stipulated that vaccine manufacturers cannot be held liable for injuries or deaths that occur from the use of their vaccines, which are recommended to every child in America by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP) or “vaccine court” created with this Act is not a court at all, but rather a consumer-funded government claims program that uses special masters, or employees of Health and Human Services (HHS), rather than judges to make decisions on compensating victims.
They’ve now paid approximately four billions dollars to families of vaccine injured children. This amount does not cover the cost of the program itself, nor for the HHS and DOJ employees who defend the vaccine products. As astronomical as the monetary awards are, they’re even more alarming considering HHS claims that only an estimated 1% of vaccine injuries are even reported to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). If the numbers from VAERS and HHS are correct – only 1% of vaccine injuries are reported and only 1/3 of the petitions are compensated – then up to 99% of vaccine injuries go unreported and the families of the vast majority of people injured by vaccines are picking up the costs, once again, for vaccine makers’ flawed products.
Let’s Not Forget About Corruption
The corruption is never-ending when it comes to the link between corporations and government agencies. In fact, only a few years ago, more than a dozen scientists from within the CDC put out an anonymous public statement detailing the influence corporations have on government policies. They were referred to as the Spider Papers.
We are a group of scientists at CDC that are very concerned about the current state of ethics at our agency. It appears that our mission is being influenced and shaped by outside parties and rogue interests. It seems that our mission and Congressional intent for our agency is being circumvented by some of our leaders. What concerns us most, is that it is becoming the norm and not the rare exception. Some senior management officials at CDC are clearly aware and even condone these behaviors. Others see it and turn the other way. Some staff are intimidated and pressed to do things they know are not right. We have representatives from across the agency that witness this unacceptable behavior. It occurs at all levels and in all of our respective units. These questionable and unethical practices threaten to undermine our credibility and reputation as a trusted leader in public health. (source)
Dr. William Thompson is a longtime CDC scientist who has published some of the most commonly cited pro-vaccine studies, some of which claim that there is absolutely no link between the MMR vaccine and autism. He pointed to a specific study that he co-authored in 2004 for the CDC, which claimed that “the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine does not cause autism or any particular subtypes of autism spectrum disorder.” This study is often cited when trying to justify the use of this vaccine, despite the fact that he later stated they deleted important findings from that study. He said that “it’s the lowest point in my career that I went along with that paper and uh, I went along with this, we didn’t report significant findings… I’m completely ashamed of what I did, I have great shame now that I was complicit and went along with this. I have been a part of the problem.” (source)
Anxious to get this information out, Thompson sent various documents to Congressman Bill Posey, who addressed the congress, reading a statement that he had received from Dr. Thompson:
Sometime soon after the meeting, we decided to exclude reporting any race effects, the [CDC] co-authors scheduled a meeting to destroy documents related to the [MMR vaccine] study. The remaining four co-authors all met and brought a big garbage can into the meeting room and reviewed and went through all the hard copy documents that we had thought we should discard and put them in a huge garbage can. (source)
The list goes on, these are simply a few examples.
The facts presented within this article only provide a few examples of why Jamie McGuire and countless other parents have the right not to vaccinate their children. The idea that non-vaccinated children are a risk to others is also open to debate, though it has been debunked by many. The facts presented in this article are only a few of many, and using them alone can easily make one understand how it is borderline criminal to enforce mandatory vaccinations on anybody.
At this point, anybody with a big following like McGuire, who has any sort of influence, should feel completely comfortable and justified in sharing their opinion as to why they do not support mandatory vaccinations.
Photo Credit: Hillary Spillane