Friday, March 6, 2015

Mengele Medical Experimentation

Developing World – The WHO’s Private Vaccine Laboratory Posted on March 6, 2015 Written by healthimpactnews.com
It is a rec­og­nized fact that the devel­op­ing world has been used by the World Health Orga­ni­za­tion as a vac­cine lab­o­ra­tory for decades. This has been proven in data and vac­cine stud­ies dat­ing back as far as the 1970s.
With this in mind, we must ask our­selves, is it right to use these vul­ner­a­ble chil­dren in vac­cine exper­i­ments? I urge you to read the fol­low­ing exam­ples before you come to any conclusions.
Group A Strep­to­coc­cus (GAS) Unli­censed Vac­cine Tested In Africa and Asia
In a report writ­ten for the World Health Orga­ni­za­tion (WHO), titled Sta­tus of Vac­cine Research and Devel­op­ment of Vac­cines for Strep­to­coc­cus pyo­genes Pre­pared for WHO PD-VAC, the authors state:
Con­cerns regard­ing vac­cine safety are based upon a the­o­ret­i­cal risk of autoim­mune reac­tions in vac­ci­nees lead­ing to the devel­op­ment of ARF. One small study of a crude M pro­tein vac­cine sug­gested that there may be an increased risk of ARF in vac­cine recip­i­ents; how­ever, there are a num­ber of con­cerns about the design of this trial that make it dif­fi­cult to inter­pret, and autoim­mune reac­tions have not been observed in the other human GAS vac­cine tri­als involv­ing thou­sands of study subjects.
Under­stand­ing of human GAS immu­nity remains incom­plete. More infor­ma­tion is needed regard­ing immune pro­tec­tion against GAS skin infec­tion, the role of T-cell immu­nity and the rel­a­tive con­tri­bu­tions of non-M type-specific anti­gens (com­mon anti­gens) in induc­ing pro­tec­tive immu­nity. Bet­ter epi­demi­o­logic data are also required, for assess­ing bur­den of dis­ease to strengthen the case for GAS vac­cine devel­op­ment and for assess­ing vac­cine cov­er­age more sys­tem­at­i­cally with high qual­ity, stan­dard­ized mol­e­c­u­lar typ­ing stud­ies in more coun­tries, par­tic­u­larly in Africa and Asia.
They con­tin­ued:
A poten­tial strat­egy to improve under­stand­ing of GAS immunol­ogy and also to cre­ate a path­way for rel­a­tively rapid test­ing of new GAS vac­cine can­di­dates is through the devel­op­ment of human GAS (pha­ryn­geal) chal­lenge stud­ies. Pre­vi­ous stud­ies (in the 1970’s) in over 170 vol­un­teers have shown that this approach is fea­si­ble, and pro­pos­als are under con­sid­er­a­tion for fund­ing for a revival of this approach.
(Note: ARF = acute rheumatic fever)
(GAS Vac­cine = Vac­cine against Group A streptococcus )
Group A strep­to­coc­cus is a bac­terium often found in the throat and on the skin. Peo­ple may carry group A strep­to­cocci in the throat or on the skin and have no symp­toms of ill­ness. Most GAS infec­tions are rel­a­tively mild ill­nesses such as “strep throat,” or impetigo. On rare occa­sions, these bac­te­ria can cause other severe and even life-threatening dis­eases. See MedicineNet.com
In sec­tion II, the report con­tin­ued by con­firm­ing that the vac­cines being used were unlicensed:
Although there are no cur­rently licensed GAS vac­cines yet, the bio­log­i­cal fea­si­bil­ity for GAS vac­cine devel­op­ment is sup­ported by the fol­low­ing observations…….
It is clear from read­ing this paper in full that the WHO has been respon­si­ble for test­ing these vac­cines for many years and we now know that this is not the only vac­cine tested on these vul­ner­a­ble individuals.
Tetanus Vac­cines Laced With Hor­mones Known to Cause Miscarriage
In 1992, the WHO, the United Nations Devel­op­ment Pro­gram (UNDP), the United Nations Pop­u­la­tion Fund (UNFPA) and the World Bank met in Geneva, Switzer­land, to dis­cuss the then-current sta­tus for the devel­op­ment of “fer­til­ity reg­u­lat­ing vac­ci­na­tions.” The min­utes to that meet­ing were doc­u­mented in a paper enti­tled Fer­til­ity Reg­u­lat­ing Vac­cines.
At first glance, it appears that the WHO had been dis­cussing var­i­ous meth­ods of fam­ily plan­ning with a vari­ety of women’s health advo­cates and sci­en­tists from devel­op­ing coun­tries. On fur­ther read­ing, how­ever, some­thing far more wor­ry­ing emerged.
To find out what, I urge you to read my arti­cle on the sub­ject, titled WHO Caught Rec­om­mend­ing Vac­ci­na­tions Known to Ren­der Pri­mates Infer­tile.
In 1994, the WHO decided to put these vac­ci­na­tions to the test and gave women from devel­op­ing coun­tries aged between 15 and 45 a tetanus vac­cine con­tain­ing the hCG hormone.
How­ever, an orga­ni­za­tion known as the Comité Pro Vida de Mex­ico became sus­pi­cious of the pro­to­cols sur­round­ing the vac­cines and obtained sev­eral vials for test­ing. It was dis­cov­ered that some of the vials con­tained human chori­onic gonadotropin (hCG), the exact same hor­mone that the WHO, the UNDP, the UNFPA and the World Bank had been dis­cussing just two years earlier.
Deter­mined to Con­tinue Their Efforts, the WHO Did Not Stop There
Hav­ing been caught in their ear­lier attempts, in 2014, the WHO teamed up with the orga­ni­za­tion UNICEF and decided that they would attempt their antics yet again, only to have their efforts blighted a short time later by the Kenya Catholic Doc­tors Asso­ci­a­tion.
Out­raged by their dis­re­gard for human life, Dr. Wahome Ngare spoke out on behalf of the asso­ci­a­tion, mak­ing his feel­ings abun­dantly clear. Speak­ing to the Huff­in­g­ton Post, he said:
What is immoral and evil is that the tetanus laced with HCG was given as a fer­til­ity reg­u­lat­ing vac­cine with­out dis­clos­ing its con­tra­cep­tive effect to the girls and mothers.
Many peo­ple believe that he is absolutely cor­rect and are ask­ing whether or not the WHO has the right to play God and deter­mine who can and can­not have children.
Gates Foun­da­tion, PATH, WHO and UNICEF Test Menin­gi­tis A Vac­cines in Africa
In Decem­ber 2012, in the small vil­lage of Gouro, Chad, Africa, sit­u­ated on the edge of the Sahara Desert, five hun­dred chil­dren were locked into their school and threat­ened that if they did not agree to being force-vaccinated with a menin­gi­tis A vac­cine, they would receive no fur­ther education.
These chil­dren were vac­ci­nated with­out their par­ents’ knowl­edge. This vac­cine was an unli­censed prod­uct still going through the third and fourth phases of testing.
Within hours, one hun­dred and six chil­dren began to suf­fer from headaches, vom­it­ing, severe, uncon­trol­lable con­vul­sions and paral­y­sis. Forty chil­dren were finally trans­ferred to a hos­pi­tal in Faya and later taken to two hos­pi­tals in N’Djamena, the cap­i­tal city of Chad.
Vac­Truth holds copies of all the orig­i­nal reports, along with med­ical and gov­ern­ment doc­u­ments. The groups involved with this project were PATH, WHO, UNICEF, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
And the atroc­i­ties continue.
WHO and Gates Foun­da­tion are Taken to Court for Test­ing HPV Vac­cines in India
In a recent report writ­ten in August 2014, The Eco­nomic Times of India out­lined how, in 2009, the WHO teamed up with the Gates Foun­da­tion to test HPV vac­cines on thou­sands of tribal women in India. The Eco­nomic Times wrote:
In 2009, sev­eral schools for tribal chil­dren in Kham­mam dis­trict in Telan­gana — then a part of undi­vided Andhra Pradesh — became sites for obser­va­tion stud­ies for a cer­vi­cal can­cer vac­cine that was admin­is­tered to thou­sands of girls aged between nine and 15. The girls were admin­is­tered the Human Papil­loma Virus (HPV) vac­cine in three rounds that year under the super­vi­sion of state health depart­ment offi­cials. The vac­cine used was Gar­dasil, man­u­fac­tured by Merck. It was admin­is­tered to around 16,000 girls in the dis­trict, many of whom stayed in state government-run hos­tels meant for tribal students.
Months later, many girls started falling ill and by 2010 five of them died. Two more deaths were reported from Vado­dara, Gujarat, where an esti­mated 14,000 chil­dren study­ing in schools meant for tribal chil­dren were also vac­ci­nated with another brand of HPV vac­cine, Cer­varix, man­u­fac­tured by GSK. Ear­lier in the week, the Asso­ci­ated Press reported that scores of teenaged girls were hos­pi­talised in a small town in north­ern Colom­bia with symp­toms that par­ents sus­pect could be an adverse reac­tion to Gardasil.
A stand­ing com­mit­tee on health and fam­ily wel­fare that inves­ti­gated the irreg­u­lar­i­ties per­tain­ing to the obser­va­tion stud­ies in India tabled its report a year ago, on August 30.
The com­mit­tee found that con­sent for con­duct­ing these stud­ies, in many cases, was taken from the hos­tel war­dens, which was a fla­grant vio­la­tion of norms. In many other cases, thumbprint impres­sions of their poor and illit­er­ate par­ents were duly affixed onto the con­sent form. The chil­dren also had no idea about the nature of the dis­ease or the vac­cine. The author­i­ties con­cerned could not fur­nish req­ui­site con­sent forms for the vac­ci­nated chil­dren in a huge num­ber of cases.
Dr. Lucia Toml­jen­ovic and Pro­fes­sor Christo­pher Shaw, two pro­fes­sion­als sup­ported by the Children’s Med­ical Safety Research Insti­tute, an orga­ni­za­tion pro­vid­ing grants for an inves­ti­ga­tion into HPV vac­cine safety, dis­cussed how India’s med­ical author­i­ties were con­demned for their actions after Kalpana Mehta, Nalini Bhanot and Dr. Ruk­mini Rao filed a writ peti­tion with the Supreme Court of India. In their paper titled Human papil­lo­mavirus (HPV) vac­cine pol­icy and evidence-based med­i­cine: Are they at odds? Dr. Toml­jen­ovic and Pro­fes­sor Shaw wrote:
India’s med­ical author­i­ties have also been pub­licly con­demned after a civil society-led inves­ti­ga­tion revealed that tri­als for HPV vac­cines in the states of Andhra Pradesh and Gujarat vio­lated estab­lished national and inter­na­tional eth­i­cal guide­lines on clin­i­cal research as well as children’s rights. ! These events appar­ently occurred as a result of ‘aggres­sive ’ pro­mo­tional prac­tices of the drug com­pa­nies and their uncrit­i­cal endorse­ment by India’s med­ical associations.
Although pro­claimed as a post-licensure obser­va­tional study of HPV vac­ci­na­tion against cer­vi­cal can­cer, the project was in fact a clin­i­cal trial and, as such, should have adhered to pro­to­cols man­dated by the Drugs and Cos­met­ics Act (DCA) and the Indian Coun­cil for Med­ical Research (ICMR). Instead, the trial was found in seri­ous breach of both the DCA’s and the ICMR’s guide­lines for informed con­sent and was ter­mi­nated in April 2010, fol­low­ing six post-HPV vac­ci­na­tion deaths.
Now, let’s move on to my final example.
High Titre Measles Vac­cines Tested on Vul­ner­a­ble Babies in the 1980’s
In June 2014, Osman Sankoh et al pub­lished a paper in the Inter­na­tional Jour­nal of Epi­demi­ol­ogy, titled: The non-specific effects of vac­cines and other child­hood inter­ven­tions: the con­tri­bu­tion of INDEPTH Health and Demo­graphic Sur­veil­lance Sys­tems.
The researchers explained that the major­ity of vac­ci­na­tion stud­ies being pub­lished today attempt to jus­tify whether or not the vac­ci­na­tion in ques­tion has an over­all pos­i­tive effect on the pop­u­la­tion being vac­ci­nated. How­ever, the researchers pub­lish­ing this par­tic­u­lar study decided to inves­ti­gate whether or not the vac­ci­na­tions being given to chil­dren in high mor­tal­ity regions were caus­ing the chil­dren to die from unre­lated dis­eases being caused by the vaccines.
In other words, the researchers stud­ied not only whether the vac­cine pro­tected chil­dren from the dis­eases that they were being vac­ci­nated against, but also whether or not the vac­cines were caus­ing non-specific effects (NSEs) that were beneficial/detrimental to children’s health, depend­ing upon:
1.     The age of the child when vaccinated
2.     The com­bi­na­tion of the vac­cines given at the time.
The researchers stated that:
In many sit­u­a­tions, the population-based effects have been very dif­fer­ent from the antic­i­pated effects; for exam­ple, the measles-preventive high-titre measles vac­cine was asso­ci­ated with 2-fold increased female mor­tal­ity; BCG reduces neona­tal mor­tal­ity although chil­dren do not die of tuber­cu­lo­sis in the neona­tal period; vit­a­min A may be asso­ci­ated with increased or reduced child mor­tal­ity in dif­fer­ent sit­u­a­tions; effects of inter­ven­tions may dif­fer for boys and girls.
They also stated:
Each year, immu­niza­tion averts an esti­mated 2–3 mil­lion deaths from diph­the­ria, tetanus, per­tus­sis (whoop­ing cough) and measles. How­ever, there is now strong evi­dence that vac­cines have sub­stan­tial non-specific (het­erol­o­gous) effects in chil­dren in high-mortality regions, i.e. by chang­ing mor­tal­ity from infec­tions unre­lated to the vaccine-targeted infec­tions. As a con­se­quence. the World Health Organization’s (WHO’s) Strate­gic Advi­sory Group of Experts (SAGE) on Immu­niza­tion has recently ini­ti­ated a review of the non­spe­cific effects (NSEs) of BCG, diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTP) and measles (MV) vac­cines. (Note: High titer/titre vac­cine: A mod­i­fied live vac­cine that con­tains a higher num­ber of virus par­ti­cles than the ‘aver­age’ vaccine.)
By research­ing the var­i­ous vac­ci­na­tions, age that the vac­ci­na­tions were admin­is­tered and the var­i­ous com­bi­na­tions of vac­cines admin­is­tered, researchers dis­cov­ered a range of wor­ry­ing out­comes. See Table 1.
Results Are Extremely Worrying
If we study these results in detail, many are extremely wor­ry­ing. It is clear that a vari­ety of vac­ci­na­tions were being given to extremely vul­ner­a­ble babies, in mul­ti­ple com­bi­na­tions, from birth.
The results of their study clearly high­lighted areas of con­cern. One of the most alarm­ing was the fact that the study revealed a higher mor­tal­ity rate in those females vac­ci­nated with the high titre measles vac­cine. The researchers stated:
HTMV was tested in RCTs in the late 1980s, com­par­ing HTMV at 4–5 months of age with stan­dard MV at 9 months of age. The HTMV was pro­tec­tive against measles infec­tion and was rec­om­mended by WHO in 1989 for gen­eral use in low-income coun­tries with a high inci­dence of measles infection. A meta-analysis of stud­ies from Bis­sau, Gam­bia and Sene­gal showed that this vac­cine was asso­ci­ated with 33% increased mor­tal­ity rate between 4 and 60 months of age. The excess mor­tal­ity was among girls, whereas the new vac­cine com­pared with the tra­di­tional MV had no dif­fer­en­tial effect on sur­vival for boys. These results were sub­se­quently con­firmed in RCTs from Sudan and Haiti, and WHO with­drew the 1989 rec­om­men­da­tion for HTMV in 1992. These RCTs showed:
  • first, that a fully pro­tec­tive vac­cine can have neg­a­tive NSE
  • sec­ond, that these effects can be sex-differential and
  • third, that NSE can have major effects on child mor­tal­ity pat­terns; had the vac­cine not been with­drawn, a 33% excess mor­tal­ity rate between ages 4 and 60 months would at the time have meant at least an addi­tional half-million female deaths annu­ally, in Africa alone.
    How­ever, despite the WHO remov­ing the vac­ci­na­tion from the sched­ule in 1992, the high titre Edmonston-Zagreb measles vac­cine was once again used to test infants from low income coun­tries in 2004–2007. See a study pub­lished in the Jour­nal of Infec­tious Dis­eases.
    Con­clu­sion: WHO Needs to be Inves­ti­gated for Uneth­i­cal Research
    The WHO has engaged in activ­i­ties that fall far below the stan­dards of eth­i­cal, research and med­ical con­duct that have been estab­lished by our health orga­ni­za­tions to pro­tect human rights. They should there­fore be inves­ti­gated and pre­vented from these unchecked activ­i­ties in the future. If not, each and every one of us will be put at risk when this type of evil is done in the name of medicine.
    Related Posts
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)