Edward Bernays, the father of Propaganda knew how to manipulate the masses. It’s a simple formula actually. First you provide the framework that is the lens through which everyone looks at the issue. In the vaccine world it is ‘Vaxxers vs Anti-Vaxxers’, never ‘We the People vs Big Pharma”.
Then you create seductive language to support the issue, such as ‘Safe and Effective’ and attack using trigger words such as ‘Anti-Vaxxer’ to further isolate the sides. You recruit ‘credible experts’ to be the spokespeople and finance ‘independent studies’ to claim the desired results. In today’s world, well paid lobbyists, a revolving door with regulators and a partnership with Big Media to repetitively blast out the message, are also part of the formula.
It takes no effort to be seduced by Propaganda. It has been designed to be the path of least resistance and the path with the most (although intentionally contrived) support. It is much harder to come to your own conclusions using research, logic and your own critical thinking, for this will predictably make yourself the target of attacks for challenging the propagandized status quo.
But that is exactly what thousands of vaccine safety activists in every state have willingly done. Maybe they were once supporters of vaccines but now have a vaccine injured child or maybe they want the right to choose their own body’s natural immunity rather than be forced to accept vaccine induced immunity. Regardless of the motivation, they have recognized glaring omissions in vaccine safety and have endured the onslaught of attacks to speak the truth. Now, finally, their concerns are shared by the members of The World Health Organization (WHO).
Whatever your position regarding vaccinations, this dialogue from the December 2019 Global Vaccine Safety Summit is of utmost importance for we all have a relationship with vaccines. Whether you are a parent or grandparent, pregnant mother, healthcare professional, politician, business offering free vaccines, non-profit offering low-income vaccines, this video is essential watching.
Pay attention, for it interesting dialogue. Here we have the top vaccine doctors in the world posing questions and concerns with studies, structures and basic understandings as if we were about to enter into a rigorous vaccine immunity program, not 25 years past the time to be asking these questions. It is almost as if they decided pre-conference that they must begin to talk about these issues.
It is also interesting the way they word their questions. They are certainly the not hard driving questions, you might expect from the top vaccine scientists in the world backed by hard facts. The questions are framed: “I have just been thinking…” “It just came to me…” Is the mere fact that they are asking the questions challenging Big Pharma an act of courage, or is this a sign that they recognize the vaccine house of cards is soon to be tumbling and want to be on record as one of those calling for action? Watch the footage and decide for yourself.
This 2 hour video is thanks to the tireless work of Del Bigtree, investigative journalist for The HighWire. (www.thehighwire.com). I found myself glued to my computer as I watched the full episode. And if you will do the same, stop right here and watch the video. It could be the most important two hours you spend this year.
But if you know you don’t have the 2 hours to watch this video, I have provided the Cliff Notes version below because what is being said is too important to miss:
IMPORTANT QUOTES FROM GLOBAL VACCINE SAFETY SUMMIT
One of the main concerns of vaccine safety advocates is that Big Pharma has unilaterally decided that vaccine induced immunity is the only way to maintain world health. This decision arrogantly subrogates the body’s innate and natural immunity and creates an environment where the vaccine induced immunity cannot be maintained.
“One of our biggest challenges … We are in a unique period in human history where we have shifted the human population to vaccine induced dependency immunity. And that is on the great assumption that populations would cooperate. And for many years people lined up. We have developed a world where people are dependent upon vaccinations. We don’t have a choice but to make that effort”.
Professor Heidi Larson, PhD
Professor of Anthropology,
Risk and Decision Scientist Director,
Vaccine Confidence Project
There are also major multiple concerns from vaccine safety advocates about the methodology, number of participants, length of time of the study as well the lack of follow up studies.
“There is a lot of safety science that is needed. Without good science we can’t have good communication. So although I’m talking about all these other contextual issues and communication issues, it absolutely needs science as the backbone. You can’t repurpose the same old science to make it sound better when you don’t have the science that is relevant to the new problem. We need much more investment in safety science.”
Professor Heidi Larson, Phd
Professor of Anthropology,
Risk and Decision Scientist Director,
Vaccine Confidence Project
“The risk management plan for each particular vaccine, will need to take into the consideration the pre-licensure safety database, potential safety signals that may have been identified during pre-licensure clinical safety trials, other perhaps even theoretical safety concerns and also need to take into consideration the disease to be prevented, the target population, the proposed indication in order to really inform risk management.”
Dr. Marion Gruber,
Director, Office of Vaccines Research and Review (OVRR),
Center for Biologics and Evaluation and Research Center (CBER),
Food and Drug Administration
One of the additional issues that complicates safety evaluation, … is the length of the follow up that should be required in any pre-licensure, or even post marketing study, that is even possible because one has to acknowledge, the longer you follow up, the more you see adverse events that have nothing to do with the adjuvant vaccine issue but could be other issues. But the problem is how do you deal with that data? And again, as you mentioned pre-licensure clinical trials may not be powered enough.
Dr. Marion Gruber,
Director, Office of Vaccines Research and Review (OVRR),
Center for Biologics and Evaluation and Research Center (CBER),
Food and Drug Administration
There is also the concern from vaccine safety advocates that every human body is different yet vaccines are marketed and implemented as one-size-fits all.
And it’s also the target population, we have seen data presented to us where the adjuvant in vaccination did nothing to the population, usually the elderly, compared to administering the same vaccine to a younger age strata. So these are things that need to be considered.
Dr. Marion Gruber,
Director, Office of Vaccines Research and Review (OVRR),
Center for Biologics and Evaluation and Research Center (CBER),
Food and Drug Administration
The toxicity of adjuvants is one of the biggest concerns for many vaccine safety advocates. (Not sure any vaccine safety advocates knew to be concerned that they don’t even know how they work!)
“I would like to say a few words about adjuvants. Adjuvants are added to vaccines for many reasons but primarily to make the vaccines work… When we add adjuvants it is because it is essential, we do not add adjuvants to vaccines because we want to do so. But when we add adjuvants it adds to the complexity… Doing surveillance is necessary, but understanding how these things work is also necessary so we can assess plausibility.
Dr. Martin Howell Friede, PhD
Coordinator, Initiative for Vaccine Research (IVR)
World Health Organization
So in our clinical trials where we are actually using relatively small sample sizes, and when we do that we are at risk of tyranny of small numbers… so I think one of the things we really need to invest in then are better bio markers, better mechanistic understanding of how these things work so we can better understand adverse events as they come up.
Dr. David Kaslow, MD
VP Essential Medicines,
Drug Development Program Path
Center for Vaccine Innovation and Access (CVIA)
Another important concern from vaccine safety advocates is, if the adjuvant ramps up the power of the antigen with the vaccine, what about other vaccines given at the same time? Of major concern is the significant increase in childhood disease as referenced by the 2011 study from the Department of Health and Human Services stating that prior to 1986 the incidence of chronic childhood disease was 12%; while in 2011 it skyrocketed to 54%.
“… As we add adjuvants especially some of the new adjuvants such as the AS01, derived, we do see increased local reactions, the primary concern though is usually systemic adverse events rather than local events. We tend to get very good data regarding the local events in the Phase II and Phase III studies but this is not the major health concern.
The major health concern is accusations of long term effects, so what we have to bear in mind is we don’t use adjuvants by themselves, adjuvant is used in combination with an antigen and it may cause different reactions with different antigens.
So one adjuvant that has been determined to be safe with one antigen has different response with another antigen, because of other things including impurities, point to the regulators ensuring we conduct Phase II and Phase III studies with adequate size and adequate and appropriate measurement.
Dr. Martin Howell Friede, PhD
Coordinator, Initiative for Vaccine Research (IVR)
World Health Organization
It has been a long standing practice for those concerned with vaccine safety, if they choose to take them, to spread out the administration of vaccines to avoid cross reactions. Dr. Bassey Okposen, Program Manager, National Emergency Routine Immunization Coordination Center, Abuja, Nigeria posed the following question at the conference.
Our situation in Nigeria, where at six weeks, ten weeks, fourteen weeks, a child is given different antigens from different companies and these vaccines have different adjuvants, different preservatives and so on… Something crosses my mind. Is it possible that these different antigens, from adjuvants cross reacting among each other? …Has there ever been a study of different antigens from different companies given to each other at the same time?
This long winded answer from Dr. Robert Chen didn’t even address the question about clinical studies but instead addressed the need for National and International databases to track after the fact.
This is a very important question, because in general the clinical trials with any particular new product are done just by itself and ultimately the regulators will ask if that vaccine could be added to the routine immunization program. So we go to trial with that vaccine in addition to that regular regiment, but your question is the next step because in real practice there are multiple vaccines from different manufacturers that may be received at different age schedules.
If you take a look at the immunization schedule over the last 15 or 20 years in the high income countries, as well low resource countries. The schedule has gotten more complex… the only way to tease that out is if you had a large population database like the Vaccine Safety Databank as well as some of the other national databases that are coming into being, where the actual vaccine exposure is tracked down to that level of specificity as to who is the manufacturer, what is the lot number?
The initiative to make the vaccine label bar coded so that it includes that level of information so in the future when we do those types of studies we are able to tease that out and in order and each time you sub-divide, the sample size gets more and more challenging and that is what I said earlier today is that we are only in the beginning era of large data sets where hopefully we can start to harmonize the databases from multiple studies there is an initiative on the way, to try to get more national vaccine safety databases linked together so that we can start to answer these types of questions that you just raised.
Dr. Robert Chen MD
Scientific Director
Brighton Collaboration
The Center for Disease Control had a shorter answer which addressed the minor issue of injection site problems rather than the systemic issue of complications, when asked the same question in February of 2018
“We have no data to make a recommendation one way or another. While pre-clinical trials were not done using these vaccines simultaneously, our general approach to vaccinations is that they can be given at the same time in different limbs”.
Amanda Cohn
Center for Disease Control
The lack of studies is confirmed by The Childhood Immunization Schedule and Safety Stakeholder, The Institution of Medicine
… studies designed to examine the long-term effects of the cumulative number of vaccines or other aspects of the immunization schedule have not been conducted.
…existing research has not been designed to test the entire immunization schedule.
.. No studies have compared the difference in health outcomes between entirely unimmunized populations of children and fully immunized children.
Vaccine safety advocates have been especially vocal about maternal immunizations with good cause. We already know that vaccines work differently in the elderly, differently in children, (even though they haven’t been studied) what about a fetus? The issue and recommendation is brought up at the WHO meeting by Dr David Kaslow, MD
Coming down the pike rather quickly, is a new target population, maternal immunization. Women who are pregnant and will have all kinds of adverse events associated with their pregnancy. Part of the problem is that we don’t have a strong enough baseline to know ‘is this an expected adverse event of pregnancy or is this related to the vaccine?’. So I think an investment in epidemiology baseline critically important if we don’t want to derail some of our maternal immunization vaccines as they go to low resource settings.
For additional relevant conversation, we need to go back to the ACIP meeting in October of 2017. The following are the comments made by Dr. Wellington Sun of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
“I just want to make a clarification on the use of vaccines in pregnancy. Unless there is a study of that vaccine in pregnant women, even though with that age indication, that it might fall into the age indication, it is still not considered, the use of vaccines with pregnant women should still be considered off-label.”
So essentially you have the FDA saying that vaccinations with pregnant women haven’t been studied and should be considered off label, but you have the Center for Disease Control aggressively marketing vaccinations to pregnant women. Who is in charge here?
Del Bigtree of The HighWire was at that ACIP meeting and walked away determined to sue the FDA for proof of clinical studies with pregnant women. So he and Robert F. Kennedy sued the FDA and here is what came back. …An acknowledgment that they had no records indicating clinical trials.
And then there is a Grand Finale, one I won’t even try to put in words because it needs to be seen to be fully experienced. Go to 1:57:50 in the video and watch the public service announcement from The World Health Organization as well as the follow up conversations.
While Bernays created the formula to begin the Big Lie, it is up to us to dismantle it. And what does the dismantling of the ‘Vaccine Safety Lie’ mean to all of us? Whether you have had a good or bad experience with vaccines, does it concern you that the top scientists in the vaccine world feel they are not being appropriately tested and monitored?
As citizens of this country, we all have a responsibility to hold our industries, government and regulators accountable. We all have a responsibility to question, investigate and speak our truth. It could be as simple as sharing this article, The HighWire video, talking about it with a friend, teacher or healthcare professional.
Or it could be as simple as sharing these important quotes with your state politician who will be most likely voting on the issue of religious exclusions for vaccines this year. Would knowledge of these safety concerns from top scientists, change their viewpoint on mandatory vaccinations? I hope it gives us all a strong reason to stop and question what we are doing. For it appears this lie is dismantling.
Seven Billion Rising 