MMRV vaccine (Priorix Tetra) analyzed by independent lab, found to contain retroviruses associated with malignant tumors of the testes and prostate cancer (self.conspiracy)
submitted 1 month ago by geneticshill
Quick info/meme - https://i.imgur.com/OmI6iQl.png
Full story - Independent researchers in Italy have been analyzing a number of vaccines, looking to see if they contain the necessary antigens, while also checking for contamination. Big Pharma and their puppets aren't happy about this, as potentially there will be serious repercussions for them, depending on what is found in the vaccines.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-07464-0
The latest one they've looked into is the MMRV (Measles, Mumps, Rubella and Chicken Pox) vaccine (Priorix Tetra), in which they found 3 out of the 4 attenuated viruses, over 100 chemical contaminants, human fetal DNA, microbial contamination and last but not least retroviruses associated with malignant tumors of the testes and prostate cancer.
What did we find in the MMRV (Priorix Tetra) vaccine? https://www.corvelva.it/en/speciale-corvelva/vaccinegate-en/what-did-we-find-in-the-mmrv-priorix-tetra-vaccine.html
There are so many problems, and each lot of vaccines was different, some having more contamination than others. One particular disturbing find is the human endogenous retrovirus K (HERV-K) or Human teratocarcinoma-derived virus (HDTV), they a family of human endogenous retroviruses associated with malignant tumors of the testes and prostate cancer. (see studies below)
Detection of Human Endogenous Retrovirus K (HERV-K) Transcripts in Human Prostate Cancer Cell Lines https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3705622/
Demystified . . . Human endogenous retroviruses https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1187282/
So once again, as we have seen in the past, whether deliberate or accidental, vaccines are spreading viruses which cause cancer, sowing the seeds of disease, thereby sowing the seeds of future industry profit, as the pharmaceuticals make a fortune from every cancer patient. It's all along the same lines as what polio vaccine developer Salk admitted in his book, these people want to inject us all with cancer viruses so as to bring the population down and thereby reduce pollution, so vaccines are like the pesticide which gets used on humans, we are the pests. Many of you will be aware that Bill Gates admitted on camera that vaccines are to bring the population down to reduce climate change.
Worth noting also that the viruses they want to vaccinate us against, like mumps for example, if a female catches mumps it will leave her immune to ovarian cancer, essentially upgrading her immune system. (study below)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2951028/
So vaccines are not only spreading cancer-causing viruses, but also taking away the opportunity for our immune systems to learn how to prevent cancer. And all for such mild and normally harmless short-term childhood viruses which we are fear-mongered about daily. Pharma want us to trade them in for cancer, as cancer makes serious money compared to a mild virus which kills only 1 in 10,000. They want everyone injected with a cancer which will become active at some point in their life, likely when their immune system is suppressed.
It is clear why the industry doesn't like any kind of real research being performed on vaccines, we are told they should not be questioned as they are sacred, in the same way as we were told it is unpatriotic to question 9/11.
[–]geneticshill[S] 50 points 1 month ago*
SS - We are all fearmongered about mild viruses, but nobody is meant to fear the products we are being sold by a cut-throat industry and nobody is meant to check what's actually inside them; blind faith is expected of us apparently.
Fortunately a brave independent lab in Italy has decided to take a closer look and find out what's really inside the vaccines. Pharma have been throwing their toys out the pram about it, makes one wonder why they would be so concerned if they knew their products were so good for us?
Here's a link to an article with the disturbing findings from the lab on the contents of the MMRV vaccine.
What did we find in the MMRV (Priorix Tetra) vaccine?
[–]Fooomanchu 31 points 1 month ago
Great post. This is the real vaccine conspiracy. Nobody knows what's actually in them. They've been caught so many times "accidentally" putting all kinds of nasty harmful things in them, and yet there's barely any inspection by so-called regulators. Crazy that it takes independent firms to actually do the inspections.
[–]FidelHimself 9 points 1 month ago
Crazy that it takes independent firms to actually do the inspections.
Thinking government can be trusted to do them is crazy
[–]TalmudGod_Yaldabaoth 10 points 1 month ago
This so so fucked. As someone planning to have a kid this hear idk what to do about these poisons. Only thing I can think is to go to another country and get my child vaccinated there using single shots spread out over time
[–]xNovaz 7 points 1 month ago*
whatever vaccines you get make sure it doesn’t contain aluminum. CDC says it’s safe but I beg to differ.
http://vaccinepapers.org/debunking-aluminum-adjuvant-part-1/
http://vaccinepapers.org/vaccine-aluminum-travels-to-the-brain/
They’re finding aluminum in human brains at astronomical amounts.
[–]geneticshill[S] 5 points 1 month ago
I have heard Japan has some safer vaccines.
Personally I believe in staying unvaccinated. However like you say there are ways to reduce the risk, by delaying, spacing out and being very picky about vaccines. Check which company made them, always keep clear of Merck or GSK vaccines, terrible track record.
[–]orangearbuds 2 points 1 month ago
Who is this Corvelva independent lab? (I remember what they found the last time with the antigens thing.) How do we know these people are real? Can we interview them or something?
[–]geneticshill[S] 3 points 1 month ago*
Here’s a link on Nature discussing them https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-07464-0
I spoke to someone who went to meet them, all is completely legit, they are good folk.
Here are their contact details if you would like to get in touch.
https://www.corvelva.it/it/contatti.html
[–]chumpchange72 10 points 1 month ago
Corvelva are not an independent lab, they're an anti-vax group and their findings have never been peer-reviewed. You're being very misleading by omitting this.
[–][deleted] 8 points 1 month ago
Just doing a quick google search and all the results against it seems to be from pro-vax sites like Vaxopedia. Is there any "mainstream" info on this? I like to get both sides before I form an opinion.
[–]Tsuikaya 7 points 1 month ago
There is no mainstream info that will cover these sort of things without already having a bias towards pro-vax already. Pharma has already bought everything out and is the 5th largest lobby in america.
This is why you must read yourself, think yourself, and act yourself. Nobody is looking out for your health, the people you are trusting are only looking for the highest bidder. You are your own best source of information because it is up to you to learn to protect yourself because nobody else is as invested in your life as you are.
[–]geneticshill[S] 12 points 1 month ago
They are an independent vaccine safety research group. Pharma detest them as they are the ones who can get pharma in trouble by exposing problems. Hence why the pro vaccine propaganda sites smear them. The reality is that because industry doesn’t control them, they see them as a threat, hence why they label them antivax, when the reality is they are pro-science and pro-vaccine safety. Think of pharma as the car industry, and Corvelva are a group trying to encourage them to install seat belts to stop so many people dying unnecessarily.
[–]StrangeDare 4 points 1 month ago
Enrico Bucci, PhD in Biochemistry and adjunct professor in Biology of complex systems at Temple University analyzed Corvelva's 'study' and explained why it is badly done.
from the CORVELVA data presented so far, it is not possible to draw sufficient evidence to support his statements made to Nature or elsewhere. It is not observed either that the antigens are absent in the vaccine, or that the presumed contaminants correspond to what is identified; rather, there is a certain neglect of basic biochemistry notions about the effect of aluminum on serine proteases and a very little justified overinterpretation of some mass spectrometry signals, for which among other things no evidence is provided original or any detail sufficient to reconstruct the statistical treatment carried out.
That's polite science-speak for "it's bush-league baloney".
[–]geneticshill[S] 2 points 1 month ago
He had already been responded to, all of his points dealt with by Dr. Loretta Bolgan.
Technical reply of Dr. Bolgan to the criticisms made by Prof. Enrico Bucci
Translation https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&nv=1&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=auto&sp=nmt4&tl=en&u=https://www.informazionelibera.org/studi-e-informazioni-scientifiche/vaccinegate-replica-tecnica-alla-critica-del-dott-bucci.html&xid=17259,15700023,15700186,15700191,15700253,15700256,15700259&usg=ALkJrhi6MenPHh5qcbtWkZqfYCNKVMDd3g
[–]StrangeDare 5 points 1 month ago
all of his points dealt with by Dr. Loretta Bolgan.
None of his points were actually 'dealt with'.
"the data are not definitive and there may be inaccuracies in the reports.", "The purpose of our work is not to carry out an analysis but a preliminary screening", "we are waiting for the research to be published"
What?! Any scientist having done more than 10 minutes of research knows that's not how proper studies are conducted.
It's amateur hour, pure and simple.
In addition, here's Prof. Bucci catching corvelva's vaccine damage consultant Bolgan with "fabricating experimental data".
[–]bankobankroll 1 point 1 month ago
Try searching clinical trial frauds.
Also, I'm sure there was alternative news about Monsanto that came true. Dont quote me on that one
[–]geneticshill[S] 7 points 1 month ago
They are independent, and they are pro-science which means they will tell you what they find, whether it is good or bad, unlike pharma who coverup the bad stuff. These days the term anti-vax is used against anyone who has any doubt in the pro vaccine cult, it is a weaponized term to close down debate and suspend scientific progress.
[–]YouNeverLeft 5 points 1 month ago
their findings have never been peer-reviewed.
Yes! Their findings must be peer-reviewed! Their "peers", who do their best to cover up and hinder this type of investigation into vaccines, must agree with it or the findings magically didn't occur!
[–]Yourwrong_Imright 1 point 1 month ago
What's the name of that lab?
[–]geneticshill[S] 5 points 1 month ago
They are respected doctors trying to improve vaccine safety, what they are doing is career suicide by daring to investigate the products of a Trillion Dollar industry.
It is not their fault that Big Pharma will crush them if they can. If you had to trust either the psychopaths and charlatans of Big Pharma or this group of selfless altruistic doctors who are willing give up everything to make safer vaccines and thereby save lives, it is a no-brainer which of the two sides to trust.
[–]geneticshill[S] 3 points 1 month ago
It is unlikely they will disclose the lab, last time someone did they got raided and everything confiscated. Pharma use their powers and claim it is a threat to national security.
[–]dowodenum 7 points 1 month ago
Here's a good debate on the topic. Gets into a lot of the nitty-gritty. Miles better than any MSM debate (because typically if an equal platform is provided, the provax side denies the opportunity, claiming it would "legitimize" the "other side" so it becomes propaganda rather than debate).
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iQ6kqTuu4EI
[–]showmeurboobsplznthx 13 points 1 month ago
It is known that glyphosphate is in vaccines. That's enough to make ya wonder. Why don't they make vaccines locally without the additives and preservatives?
[–]dowodenum 12 points 1 month ago
The glyphosate is there because to make them they "boil down" (yes, oversimplification) chicken and cow and pig parts etc., and the animals eat roundup-ready crops which glyphosate is sprayed on. Brings to mind the old adage, don't shit where you eat? Or maybe, don't spray what you might later inject?
Fuck monocrops, fuck Big Ag, fuck capitalism.
[–]showmeurboobsplznthx 1 point 1 month ago
They have also begun to supplement glycine with glyphosphate. Pure glycine is more expensive to produce and keep clean. They have shit tons of glyphosphate as many countries have banned it. Rather than lose that money, they are adding it to medicine because it breaks the blood brain burrier.
[–]pathogenalpha 19 points 1 month ago
Good find; Thanks for posting.
So now we know: they are using the vaccines for social engineering now.
[–]Houghs 28 points 1 month ago
I’m so torn on this. I’m having my first son in 3 months and I’m terrified to get him vaccinated and I’m terrified of not getting him vaccinated. There is so much evidence that vaccines are dangerous but idk what to do, I’m so torn.
[–]deepfriedhotdog 12 points 1 month ago
I'm in the same boat. It really sucks and I hate that we have to be put in this position.
[–]32ndghost[🍰] 12 points 1 month ago
If you want to learn more about a good, safe vaccination schedule, I highly recommend Dr Paul Thomas's book The Vaccine-Friendly Plan
It's a lighter, more spaced out schedule than the CDC one.
There's also a 9 page pdf with a summary of the plan.
Anyone that advocates any vaccine schedule whatsoever is merely dabbling in fire and part of the problem, and will never entertain the real truth of reality, which is: No vaccines whatsoever are necessary, and in-fact all are dangerous substances that should be avoided at all costs.
[–]geneticshill[S] 7 points 1 month ago
Indeed, the immune system knows what it is doing. And waiting till age 4 to inject cancer viruses and/or injecting less cancer viruses per sitting, still leaves the body with cancer viruses inside.
Yes, it may be mildly 'safer' to inject at the age of 4, due to the fact that the nervous system is more fully developed, including the brain. But, injecting anything at any age is asking for trouble, and is akin to playing Russian roulette, especially when young. Many people do not consider the long-term accumulative effects of vaccine toxicity, and believe because they do not experience symptoms soon after, that they are safe—they're not. The point at which vaccines begin to show apparent damage is around 10 years, at which point the body begins to cleanse and renew itself, at which point these diseases may manifest. Vaccine toxins accumulate throughout every vaccine, and eventually manifest into a disease at a later stage in life. Some issues arise earlier in some than in others—it is entirely body dependent. When the body decides to cleanse areas that contain sedimentation of those toxic elements, such as heavy metals, the body has a hard time removing such substances from the body because of their nature, and in the process, can cause damage to the bodily system.
[–]Thor1noak 1 point 1 month ago
holy shit your people really exists...
[–]dalamir 4 points 1 month ago
I’m sure this will get downvoted to infinity, but have you ever met someone who can barely walk because they had Polio? Seen babies struggling to breathe because they have diphtheria? There are safety issues that need to be addressed, but vaccines are incredibly important.
Polio was naturally detoxifying from the human population directly before the vaccine was introduced, at which point the vaccine was given credit for the relative disappearance of polio. Statistics were manipulated to change the definition of polio. Yet, polio, and polio-like diseases still exists in many forms today, such as spinal meningitis and other similar neurological maladies. Polio increased dramatically after the vaccine was introduced, but mainly in people who received multiple polio vaccines.
[–]geneticshill[S] 23 points 1 month ago
You can vaccinate him, but you can never unvaccinate him
[–]Wlcome2theFuture2015 4 points 1 month ago
The most infuriating thing as a parent is knowing the real facts are being kept from you, and you are supposed to make this incredibly important life decision based on the companies that produce them saying "trust us, they are great!", while ignoring the billions of dollars of harm they have done to children. ANNND we only know about the ones where the parents were brave enough to persue a vaccine injury lawsuit, because that is social fucking suicide.
[–]geneticshill[S] 7 points 1 month ago*
Here is the info:-
How Much US Pediatricians Make From Vaccines
"So how much money do doctors really make from vaccines? The average American pediatrician has 1546 patients, though some pediatricians see many more. The vast majority of those patients are very young, perhaps because children transition to a family physician or stop visiting the doctor at all as they grow up. As they table above explains, Blue Cross Blue Shield pays pediatricians $400 per fully vaccinated child. If your pediatrician has just 100 fully-vaccinated patients turning 2 this year, that’s $40,000. Yes, Blue Cross Blue Shield pays your doctor a $40,000 bonus for fully vaccinating 100 patients under the age of 2. If your doctor manages to fully vaccinate 200 patients, that bonus jumps to $80,000. V But here’s the catch: Under Blue Cross Blue Shield’s rules, pediatricians lose the whole bonus unless at least 63% of patients are fully vaccinated, and that includes the flu vaccine. So it’s not just $400 on your child’s head–it could be the whole bonus. To your doctor, your decision to vaccinate your child might be worth $40,000, or much more, depending on the size of his or her practice."
Incentive plan PDF, see page 5
[–]Xboarder84 3 points 1 month ago
These programs are designed as PREVENTATIVE measures by doctors offices to ensure proper care of each patient attending. If a doctor is screen and doing what is needed. And this "bonus" for vaccinations only applies to children who turn 2 and have been under the doctor's practice all 2 years. It's a one time payment, and Blue Cross Blue Shield doesn't earn any money from vaccines. Also, this is program EXLUSIVELY for one incentive program in Michigan. It isn't applicable to other states: https://vaccinesworkblog.wordpress.com/2016/08/19/do-doctors-get-paid-to-vaccinate/
[–]Xboarder84 3 points 1 month ago
I replied below, but wanted to make sure you saw that the "proof" offered to you wasn't real: https://vaccinesworkblog.wordpress.com/2016/08/19/do-doctors-get-paid-to-vaccinate/
The claim is based on one cherry picked situation in Michigan, and its only if the doctor's office has enrolled in that special program. Otherwise there is not a payout like this to doctors.
[–]geneticshill[S] 15 points 1 month ago
I understand how it seems, keep in mind that the stuff in the mainstream media is all bought and paid for, propaganda, and that the independent experts are being silenced and censored. We are up against some of the most powerful people on the planet, they see your child's immune system as a problem, as it will give him free healthcare, that isn't good for pharma profits. To make money they have to either weaken the immune system or turn it against the person (autoimmune diseases and allergies), that way they'll be dependent on expensive pharma meds for the rest of their lives.
That's what vaccines are for, to sow the seeds of future profit.
Here are some good links for you:-
https://physiciansforinformedconsent.org/measles/vrs/
FREE Online Screening of Vaxxed during WHO World Immunization Week
Study finds vaccines are causing asthma and food allergies
"The temporal association between an apparent increase in severe food allergy and the replacement of whole cell with aP vaccine in Australia warrants further investigation. Food allergy is not only important in its own right, it is also associated with eczema and with asthma (fourfold increased risk) in later childhood"
https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/8/1/e020232
The Vaccine Safety Conference - Independent experts discuss serious problems with vaccines and the industry https://www.youtube.com/user/VaccineSafetyConf/videos
The Effect of Aluminum in Vaccines on Humans - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCzdliixnmI
A good place to keep up to date with all the latest is with the weekly show of Dell Bigtree, The Highwire https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCq6oOuhSx7ESreh6m9LGy6Q
[–]Rada_Ion 12 points 1 month ago
Make the doctors sign a liability statement (they will not sign it, but you can ask to have unsigned in your medical records). Then you will see how safe they think they are.
[–]gamefrk101 9 points 1 month ago
A doctor wouldn't sign a liability statement to give out aspirin or a cannabis perscription. That isn't a good measure of the safety or lack thereof.
I hope you will read all of this, at the very least, to help your child have a healthful life.
Don't set your child up to become harmed whatsoever by having the doctor sign anything, because that will not change any damage that occurs in the short or long term. Vaccine damage can have both immediate and accumulative effects. Especially in a child whose myelin around the brain has not yet fully developed, thus opening it up to damage. Vaccines are in their whole a deception and lie perpetrated by those that wish to keep you sick, docile, and dependent on them for sustenance. All vaccines are dangerous—all of them. There is no safe vaccine, and by their very nature, they are dangerous.
If you want to gamble with your child's health, then why not 'gamble' in the direction of not vaccinating? I say gamble, but it is not a gamble, because it will not negatively affect health. If you are torn between the two, then chose the safe option. Also remember, that diseases such as these are not contagious, for they occur depending upon the bodies toxicity level and what that body needs to grow, cleanse, and maintain itself.
Measles is a detoxification of the skin and lymph system. All such 'contagious' diseases have a cleansing function and purpose within the human body, and must not be interfered with, but instead, nourished and helped along so that it may complete its processes. Proper diet has a lot to do with the functions and the level in which these diseases may manifest. Some bodies require more extended periods of detoxification. But on a proper diet, very rarely is such a condition worrisome.
Conclusion: Vaccines of all forms are dangerous. To expect health to occur from injecting the body with foreign animal tissue, and chemical additives, is absurd and illogical. Vaccine accumulation can manifest disease in the body at a later point in life, causing various ailments. In the short-term, the body may react immediately, within hours, to the injection of foreign proteins that did not naturally occur within the human body. Remember: viruses injected into the body did not originate naturally as a normal virus manufactured by the body, and as such, the body does not know the time in which that virus will be active. The body must cleanse that tissue from the body immediately, and to do so, each cell manufactures viruses, and sends anti-bodies to the area to aid in cleansing it from the body. Viruses are solvents and are beneficial when manufactured cellularly by the body itself. However, the creation of anti-bodies in the response to vaccination become mutated (mutant), in part due to the aluminum adjuvant which artificially elevates the immune response to unnatural levels. This turns the immune response on for elevated periods of time, corroding the nervous system in the process. This process leads to a whole host of maladies such as neurological disorders (autism disorders) and various levels of paralysis.
My advice: Stay away from doctors. Do not inject yourself or your family with vaccinations, especially your child. Use your common sense in light of this information I have imparted.
[–]thisgamesucks1 3 points 1 month ago
Pick a side. They are either safe and beneficial or unsafe and detrimental. You already know which side you're leaning towards. My nephew has never been vaccinated and hes a perfectly healthy 7 year old.
[–]geneticshill[S] 11 points 1 month ago
Another good place to look is the interviews in the Vaxxed Tour Bus.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwZDSEpPvE398OLazdituKQ/videos
Many parents bring in their vaccinated and unvaccinated kids, you'll see the unvaccinated are full of life with no health issues. They also get in many experts who tell their stories as to why they turned against vaccines.
[–]Houghs 9 points 1 month ago
Thanks for the information, I’m going to keep researching and try to come to a conclusion. I’m honestly scared, I don’t want to harm my son.
[–]jimbizzob 7 points 1 month ago
A couple things I wish I knew when I had mine. Unless you plan on exposing your brand new baby to Hep B infected blood, that vax can wait. And don’t cut the cord immediately. This way you won’t need to give them Vitamin K, among other benefits .
Lastly, if you’re conspiratorial (as you probably are) you may want to keep the placenta and dispose of it yourself. Plant a tree or a garden with it. The hospital is selling them and umbilicals for stem cell research.
Did you give your child any vaccines? And what would I do? When the doctor asks me to cut the cord I just say, “not yet, I want to wait.” ? How do I approach that
[–]jimbizzob 6 points 1 month ago
I didn’t find out about the cord until after, which was upsetting. When you have your consult before the due date they’ll ask you about the Hep B, vitamin K, and placenta. Mention it there, they will ask again in the delivery room to reconfirm. For us they were passive pushy. “Are you sure? Really sure? Well okayyyy then... I mean if that’s what you want...” you’re going to be excited, scared, and second guessing yourself all the way. Stick to your guns whatever you decide.
Personally I’m very torn about vaccines, and it’s troubling that it’s getting harder to be selective. I want to believe they help, but I also KNOW that Pharma won’t make money if you don’t get sick and they’ve made it very clear they want to treat instead of cure. We do everything but the flu. We also do it that way because you can’t just pick 1 vax, they’re all combined with others.
I hope I’m doing what’s right, but I still feel sick because I could be wrong.
[–]Houghs 5 points 1 month ago
Honestly from the bottom of my hearth thank you for your information I will keep it near in the future. It’s been keeping me up at night thinking about the decision and the day is coming up very fast so me and my wife need to come to a conclusion.
[–]xNovaz 2 points 1 month ago*
I would sit down and watch some of Suzanne Humphries videos relating to vaccines. She’s amazing and her book is great too. Vitamin C is another area she discusses.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLgH2vCx5TOgWuQtnPkwtwgrn5D-2pjhgc
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCqmzJIoo52a7bqxCuuZSIw
[–]BewareHel 4 points 1 month ago
Always look at the source. Nearly all anti-vaxx "proofs" are a) extremely biased and b) not peer reviewed (like the Corvelva study above). Don't just trust everything you see. Only take advice from credible sources that are peer-reviewed and as unbiased as possible (nothing can ever truly be unbiased). Don't let propaganda terrify you. They have a habit of using big, scary, scientific words to create fear. As in life, don't take anything at face value.
I would suggest you gather the information you have seen that has made you wary of vaccinations and bring it to the pediatrician of your choosing. Sit down with them and go through the list, one by one. If it's a good doctor, they'll give you all the answers, articles, and studies you need. After that, it's your choice as a parent. But don't make any rash decisions (whether to vaccinate or not) without speaking to a professional. Doctors aren't out to get you, I promise.
[–]Wlcome2theFuture2015 3 points 1 month ago
https://www.hrsa.gov/vaccine-compensation/data/index.html
Billions are payed out to those injured by vaccines. BILLIONS.
[–]Thor1noak 2 points 1 month ago
From your link:
Being awarded compensation for a petition does not necessarily mean that the vaccine caused the alleged injury. In fact:
Almost 80% of all compensation awarded by the VICP comes as result of a negotiated settlement between the parties in which HHS has not concluded, based upon review of the evidence, that the alleged vaccine(s) caused the alleged injury.
[–]bankobankroll 1 point 1 month ago
Just the consistency
I'm sure Monsanto had clinical trials buried as well. Now look at them
[–]BewareHel 3 points 1 month ago
Oh, probably. Everybody knows Monsanto is a terrible company with awful practices and they've gotten away with it because of their amazing lawyers. Moral of the story, you haven't really shocked me with the Monsanto accusation. I really don't know what specific unethical studies you want me to see. You can't just say "look at them". I spent 10 months studying unethical research practices so if you could point me to a study I don't already know way too much about, I'll gladly do some digging into it.
[–]bankobankroll 1 point 1 month ago
I'm curious whats consistent with your findings. As in how the unethical practices occur. Tampered equipment, fake data etc
[–]BewareHel 2 points 1 month ago
With fraud it's usually a) tampering with the subjects b) tampering with the findings c) fabricating studies that never took place, or d) as you mentioned, tampering with the test device (whatever kind of test that may be) so they have "accurate" results. Unethical studies have been done in nearly every field of research, especially if we go back in time a bit.
[–]lancelot152 1 point 1 month ago
Doctors aren’t out to get you, perhaps, but most doctors just listen to whatever the authorities tell them to partly because by doing that they remain mostly unliable if anything goes wrong because that's what the guidelines said
Most doctors don't have the time to do the research until someone they love or are close to is personally affected by it. it'd be a full time job to look at the research, and I'm sure they're tired from 11 yrs+ of schooling and hundred k in debt that they want to do other things besides educate themselves in new subjects unless they’re mandated continuing ed credits. Ppl need to enjoy life and relax out of work, no? It’s the outliers that will take the time to speak out.
As far as peer review goes, we need to stop citing that like it means much. i would read some of the links here to be familiar with how its unproven and based on faith...how ironic that theres little science on what’s supposed to be a cornerstone of the scientific process https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=peer+review+problems The first article is from a former editor of the BMJ, Richard Smith. Essentially peer reviewers don't even catch many errors. Peer review stifles innovation. The reviewers are from the mainstream. They can't remain impartial when they see something that totally rocks their worldview. Do you think Galileo or Semmelweis would have passed peer review for their revolutionary claims. They would probably have to publish in some no name journal until hopefully another researcher decades later chooses to revisit and replicate their work. Same thing for the initial studies questioning the safety of tobacco and cigarette smoking. There’s too many examples of bad science passing peer review, it doesn’t mean much. Vioxx anybody
Tom Jefferson of Oxford, who regularly contributes to Cochrane reviews, summed it up in his analysis "Editorial peer review, although widely used, is largely untested and its effects are uncertain" and also "the practice of peer review is based on faith in its effects, rather than on facts" https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12038911/
[–]BewareHel 1 point 1 month ago
Regarding your comments on doctors, most of their learning after medical school is on the job. Medicine is an ever evolving beast, and doctors grow and learn with the times. It's not like they're stuck in the 1990s of whenever they went to college. Their knowledge is constantly updating. You would be shocked how many doctors know a lot about currently running studies and the results of recently finished studies.
I'm definitely not denying that the peer-review process could improve. It's not what it was meant to be. Because you mentioned Vioxx, let's get into that a bit. Vioxx was pushed in a fake peer-review journal created in Australia by a publishing firm that was paid off by the Australian Merck branch to do so. I would like to be clear, that was not a peer-review journal. That was a sick attempt by Merck to push research and drugs they knew wouldn't pass a real test. You can't just mention Vioxx and then not mention that it was never actually peer-reviewed. There was a breakdown in the integrity of the publishing company, to the detriment of everyone who trusted them. There should've been more severe consequences in my opinion. I wrote out a whole long explanation for you about peer-review, but I don't think it'll do much. The system may not be perfect, but I acknowledge it's usefulness. That's where our beliefs split off. There's no way I can convince you it is useful, and vice versa. It all comes down to what you think is worth it, and I happen to think it's a valid means to verification of research, as does almost all of the scientific community.
[–]lancelot152 1 point 1 month ago*
i wasn't trying to associate vioxx with the decline in meaning of peer review. two separate things. vioxx is a precedent showing that fraud is rampant and for every one we find, how many others are still secret? could vaccine "science" also be one of those
while i know vioxx was pushed in a fake journal, how can you be so sure vioxx didn't pass peer review in other journals. That seems pretty ludicrous that a drug could get passed without going thru peer review. Facts and history in the following refutes your claim: This NEJM article , (the nejm presumably does peer review for all articles) to show good results of vioxx over naproxen at least relating to what they were investigating https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11087881 and yet you can see in the statement of concern, how it took 5 yrs before editors asked Merck to correct its omitted data of 3 heart attack patients. (note vioxx was pulled in sept 2004) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1315637/
I would like to also think Circulation and The Annals of Int Med are peer reviewed journals. They also peer reviewed positive vioxx studies https://www.bmj.com/content/334/7585/120
i don't see ur appeal to the scientific community being in almost consensus with peer review as a valid argument. , whereas i showed you jefferson and horton's data on it.
almost everybody in the scientific community used to think washing hands didn't do anything until semmelweis came along. almost everybody thought the earth was the center of the universe.
[–]lancelot152 1 point 1 month ago
I'm not shocked that drs are circle jerking each other and trying to one up each other saying "hey, found this cool new study that does so and so" "cool have you heard of this one that seems promising" . That's not real deep research. That's reading a bought for paid journal or reading the latest buzz mainstream articles, few of which will be replicated as many former editors including editors in chiefs of the most prestigious medical journals state that most published research is inaccurate, misleading, or useless.
Compare this to bringing up a taboo topic of Safety in the stuff we put into almost everyone all without sufficient studies backing it up as indicated by the IOM (proper real placebo controlled ones)
[–]xNovaz 3 points 1 month ago
The package insert. Unless you don’t think brain swelling or brain damage is dangerous.
It’s reported.
Naysayers will say it’s “rare.”
How would you feel if your the 1 lucky person.
[–]domesticatedfire 9 points 1 month ago
Ohhh boooy, wonder how long this post will be "allowed" to stay up. I agree with you, I'd need to look into it more for the cancer specific parts but the MMR, and my near-death reaction to it as a kid, is what made my mom hesitant about vaccines; especially when the diseases it protects against are only so bad as a mild flu and result in lifelong immunity to that disease (opposed to the annual 10 year boosters vaccinated people need to get).
I think vaccines can and have done good, but the rabid, nearly militant support they get from the general public makes them dangerous. We need to stay skeptical of big businesses (and if you ask anyone if they trust big pharmaceutical companies, they say "oh, wait, nope"). And especially skeptical of big businesses thaf mass-produce injections and medicines. The cherry on top is that the mass production is done in China, where pollution is rampant and quality control is spotty at best. We should always have (protected) third parties testing for quality, anything less would be unwise.
[–]jimmyb207 10 points 1 month ago
This is why Flu Vaccines are being given out for free. There will be a future pay off for Big Pharma when these flu Vax recipients end up with cancer and other diseases later in life.
[–]dowodenum 2 points 1 month ago
Imagine thinking that only the establishment's Scientism is "real" science.
https://mobile.twitter.com/forrestmaready/status/1005127713848463361
[–]pizzapie186 4 points 1 month ago
Seems to me that he is just a random guy pushing a book he wrote. 2-3 of his 40 tweets were just him telling us to buy his book.
[–]Thor1noak 2 points 1 month ago*
cancer viruses in vaccines
ON WHAT PLANET ARE YOU LIVING GOD I CANT STAND READING SUCH BULLSHIT
[–]MentalRope 6 points 1 month ago
as vaccines are rigirously tested
That's a fucking lie.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3QeoKiDshU
https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/aw1dqm/assumptions_i_had_when_i_was_a_provaxxer?sort=new
[–]chadwickofwv 4 points 1 month ago
Bullshit. There are no double blind placebo safety tests of any vaccine on the damn market, but assholes like you come in here trying to claim that "the safety tests have been done" when even in the castrated tests they do, which use another vaccine as the placebo will only look at the patients for a maximum of two weeks after getting the vaccine. Usually it is only two days. In every other drug on the market safety testing absolutely requires a double blind placebo test which follows all participants for several years. The safety tests are intentionally not done.
[–]geneticshill[S] 3 points 1 month ago
Either you can believe the honest people with nothing to gain, or you can put your trust in the Big Pharma Mafia. As I say, we know what happens when the lab is disclosed, it becomes a target. Big Pharma want to crush Corvelva, as soon as they get half a chance they will try.
[–]Tsuikaya 3 points 1 month ago
Nobody said anything about you have to fully trust, it's more of a rabbit hole to begin your journey. It is very real for scientists who speak out against pharma are attacked and destroyed.
want actual proof of this happening? Just look at Vioxx
Merck emails from 1999 showed company execs complaining about doctors who disliked using Vioxx.
One email said: We may need to seek them out and destroy them where they live
This same company produces your childhood vaccines and this is what they think of you as a customer for their product. They would rather attack and destroy doctors speaking out against their product than attempt to improve it. Now look at vaccine, their golden cow, their prized money maker with no liability. What lengths do you think they would go to defend it?
[–]gabsofgush620 9 points 1 month ago
Not OP, but I would like to point out that the scientists from the Italian study stated that in no way are they against vaccinations and do think that are an integral part of one's health.
[–]domesticatedfire 10 points 1 month ago
Wanted to add that we also need to keep big pharma in check, they will try to cut corners to increase profit. I'm not an antivaxxer (I mean, I guess I'm in the middle) but I think we need to be reminded that these companies are not infallible or really care about the individual.
[–]lancelot152 1 point 1 month ago
old cdc head is President of merck's division
[–]Tsuikaya 1 point 1 month ago
Yeah that was it. I cant see how she was bribed at all. Didn't she get that position just a year after leaving merck a.k.a basically no clause in place to prevent this obvious bribe?
On top of all that she got bonuses in stock and other shit so even more bribery.
[–]lancelot152 1 point 1 month ago
she was cdc chair from 2002-2009 and became president immediately? of mercks vacc division in 2010
[–]bankobankroll 1 point 1 month ago
[–]Tsuikaya 3 points 1 month ago
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is the leading national public health institute of the United States. The CDC is a United States federal agency under the Department of Health and Human Services and is headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia.
Are you absolutely certain about that?
The United States Department of Health & Human Services (HHS), also known as the Health Department, is a cabinet-level department of the U.S. federal government with the goal of protecting the health of all Americans and providing essential human services.
CDC is under their jurisdiction and they are a department of the federal government.
[–]bankobankroll 1 point 1 month ago
My mistake to whoever. CDC is not private.
[–]Tsuikaya 2 points 1 month ago
You know you can be pro-vax and have issues with vaccines right? Nobody said you have to be 100% on board with every vaccine ever and there has never been a death from a vaccine ever and anything else is anecdotal.
Many scientists speak out against individual vaccines because you can't just use blanket statements of vaccine(s) are safe because every vaccine is different and has different benefits and risks.
[–]gabsofgush620 2 points 1 month ago
I'm aware. That wasn't what I was trying to point out either. I fully agree that there needs to be more regulation on the companies that create vaccines. I was pointing out that the scientists involved in this study still think you should have the vaccination itself unless I read the article wrong.
[–]Tsuikaya 4 points 1 month ago
I can't speak for them entirely but if you are a doctor you can basically have your license taken away for saying vaccines are dangerous. So even if you find a danger within a vaccine you have to be pro-vax or lose everything.
That is a major problem with the pharmaceutical industry right now since we are seeing more and more doctors and nurses who have left the industry are now speaking out because pharma can no longer threaten them with their license and livelihood.
[–]omenofdread 6 points 1 month ago
Dangerous? I doubt it.
Measles is not a deadly disease in developed countries. Natural immunity will also be more effective, as the vaccine wears off (and even with two doses it's only 97% effective, you can still catch measles even if you are vaccinated.) and natural immunity to measles will actually prevent certain kinds of cancer.
Are you fully vaccinated according to the latest adult schedule? If not, you should realize that you are de-facto anti vax.
Also herd immunity will never occur in our society. It's not even remotely feasible unless you are forcing vaccination... which of course brings to mind questions about who actually owns your body
[–]Tsuikaya 4 points 1 month ago
if not thousands of peer reviewed papers showing the longterm effects of vaccinating.
Uh oh, I hate to burst your bubble but...
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.
Maybe the CDC will save us here!
Q: How do we know vaccines aren’t causing long-term health problems?
A: Observing vaccinated children for many years to look for long-term health conditions would not be practical
I don't know how else to explain, maybe you should actually try providing evidence.
[–]dowodenum 4 points 1 month ago
Hundreds, if not thousands, eh? Want to link to a couple? Shouldn't be hard.
[–]cheese1102 2 points 1 month ago
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/3778422/
https://academic.oup.com/aje/article/187/1/161/3883627
If you need anymore, let me know
[–]32ndghost[🍰] 4 points 1 month ago*
You're confusing "effectiveness" and "efficacy" (words in the titles of the studies you cite) with "effect". These studies are only concerned with things like how long antibodies remained after the vaccine was applied and how long it protected against the disease it was supposed to prevent.
Now for "effects", meaning overall health impact of the vaccine including adverse effects, one of the larger studies done was the Harvard Pilgrim study. Here, they followed patients for 30 days after being vaccinated and looked at their health records in that period to catch adverse events.
Preliminary data were collected from June 2006 through October 2009 on 715,000 patients, and 1.4 million doses (of 45 different vaccines) were given to 376,452 individuals. Of these doses, 35,570 possible reactions (2.6 percent of vaccinations) were identified.
376,452 individuals, 35,570 possible reactions (meaning adverse effects). So, yes there may be benefits to vaccinations but there are also risks, and orders of magnitude higher than the 1 in a million that pharma PR people like to cite.
[–]chadwickofwv 3 points 1 month ago
Double blind, placebo tests, not bullshit tests like these.
[–]Tsuikaya 3 points 1 month ago
A long-term follow-up study on the efficacy of further attenuated live measles vaccine, Biken CAM vaccine.
Long-Term Effectiveness of the Live Zoster Vaccine in Preventing Shingles: A Cohort Study
Effectiveness: the degree to which something is successful in producing a desired result; success.
Safety: the condition of being protected from or unlikely to cause danger, risk, or injury.
[–]aarg1 -1 points 1 month ago
Measles is not a mild illness.
[–]Tsuikaya 5 points 1 month ago
A death rate of 0.01% without even accounting for whether the deaths were of people with underlying health conditions is a very mild illness.
[–]geneticshill[S] 5 points 1 month ago
It was very mild for me and all of my brothers and sisters.
Here's some information on measles from honest doctors not paid off by Big Pharma.
https://physiciansforinformedconsent.org/measles/dis/
[–]pizzapie186 5 points 1 month ago
From the article you linked “In rare situations, measles can cause brain damage and death.3,4”. Just because it was mild for you and your family, doesn’t mean it is for everyone. Your anecdotal evidence means nothing.
[–]geneticshill[S] 5 points 1 month ago
Someone malnourished may well have problems with measles, but many healthy people will be left disabled by MMR
[–]domesticatedfire 2 points 1 month ago
Measle's death rate is about 0.1-0.2%, and these cases usually have other complications like malnutrition (particularly a vitamin A deficiency). That's not counting the complications that can be lifelong, but still, having alternative groups challenge the safety and quality of a product mass-produced by mega pharmaceutical company isn't bad. We all know big businesses will try to cut corners to increase profit, it's just the way capitalism works, so having a third party examine and help safeguard is definitely a bonus.
I still get my vaccines (as single dose vials), but I nearly died from the MMR vaccine, so I'm happy that a group is taking the population's safety seriously and calling out quality control issues.
Vaccine manufacturers are combining vaccines: Vaccine combinations not properly tested in relationship to one another before being brought to market:
