Monthly Archives: June 2015


June 13, 2015 by

The vaccine debate is a debate that has been framed by the mainstream media as a debate between parents and doctors. It’s much more than that. It is an ongoing debate among scientists. There are a number of scientists who are against vaccines, others who are against the current vaccine combinations, and others against the current vaccine schedule.

Harris L. Coulter, PhD

Harris Coulter is a medical historian and scientist. He has completed extensive research in homeopathic medicine and he is considered the leading homeopathic historian of the late 20th century. Coulter’s work details the schism in medicine since the time of Hippocrates to the present. His four-volume work Divided Legacy: A History Of the Schism in Medical Thoughthas detailed two opposing schools of medicine. Coulter documents the suppression of homeopathy by allopathic medicine. His dissertation is titledPolitical and Social Aspects of Nineteenth-Century Medicine in the United States: The Formation of the American Medical Association and its Struggle with the Homeopathic and Eclectic Physicians.

Coulter has also done research on cancer and the dangers of vaccines. He co-authored the books DPT Shot in the Dark and Vaccination, Social Violence and Criminality with Barbara Loe Fisher. Coulter has also served on several medical advisory panels and boards.

Coulter is also an accomplished linguist fluent in German, French, Spanish, Latin, Russian, Hungarian, and Serbo-Croatian.

Probably 20% of American children-one youngster in five— suffers from ‘development disability’. This is a stupefying figure. We have inflicted it on ourselves.. “development disabilities” are nearly always generated by encephalitis. And the primary cause of encephalitis in the USA and other industrialised countries is the childhood vaccination program. To be specific, a large proportion of the millions of US children and adults suffering from autism, seizures, mental retardation, hyperactivity, dyslexia, and other shoots or branches of the hydraheaded entity called “development disabilities”, owe their disorders to one or another of the vaccines against childhood diseases.

Society today is paying a heavy price in disease and death for the monopoly granted the medical profession in the 1920’s. In fact, the situation peculiarly resembles that of the 1830s when physicians relied on bloodletting, mercurial medicines, and quinine, even though knowing them to be intrinsically harmful. And precisely the same arguments were made in defense of these medicines as are employed today, namely, that the benefits outweigh the risks. In truth, the benefits accrue to the physician, while the patient runs the risks.

“Crib death’ was so infrequent in the pre-vaccination era that it was not even mentioned in the statistics, but it started to climb in the 1950s with the spread of mass vaccination against diseases of childhood. It became a matter of public and professional concern and even acquired a new name, “sudden infant death of unknown origin,.” or, for short, SIDS. This name is significant, in the light of subsequent controversies, since “of unknown origin” means exactly that. So, when the medical establishment assures us that SIDS is unrelated to vaccinations, the obvious response is, How do you know?, if it is defined as “of unknown origin”? At this (as with most common-sense questions about vaccinations) the medical establishment prefers to retire from the debate in dignified silence.

So we have witnessed a steady rise in the incidence of SIDS, closely following the growth in childhood vaccinations. But information on the progress of this epidemic has been radically suppressed in the official literature. Whereas in earlier decades – up to the end of the 1950s – the medical establishment could recognize the fact of death after vaccination, more recently, as the official position has hardened, the earlier concessions have been withdrawn, and vaccinations of all kinds are now declared absolutely safe at all times and in all places. This has required some fancy footwork with the epidemiologic statistics, as we will see below. And since no physician or scientist with a normal IQ could really believe this “epidemiology,” one is forced to conclude that the medical establishment, in its wisdom, has decided that 7000-8000 cases of crib death every year are a reasonable price to pay for a nice steady flow of vaccines with all their concomitant benefits for the public health (except, of course, for these same 7000-8000 babies each year who have already enjoyed all the possible advantages of childhood vaccines).

After all, they say to themselves, you can’t make an omelette without breaking eggs. But the eggs being broken are small, helpless, and innocent babies, while the omelette is being enjoyed by the pediatricians and vaccine manufacturers. Death after whooping-cough vaccination was first described by a Danish physician in 1933. Two Americans in 1946 described the deaths of identical twins within 24 hours of a DPT shot (on the background and history of SIDS see H. Coulter and B. Fisher, DPT: A Shot in the Dark). E. M. Taylor and J. L. Emery in 1982 wrote: “…we cannot exclude the possibility of recent immunization being one of several contributory factors in an occasional unexpected infant death.” But the early 1980s were a turning-point in the official line. In that same year of 1982 matters came to a crisis when William C. Torch, M.D., Director of Child Neurology, Department of Pediatrics, University of Nevada School of Medicine, at the 34th Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Pediatrics, presented a study linking the DPT shot with SIDS. Torch concluded: “These data show that DPT vaccination may be a generally unrecognized major cause of sudden infant and early childhood death, and that the risks of immunization may outweigh its potential benefits. A need for reevaluation and possible modification of current vaccination procedures is indicated by this study.

Dr. Boyd Haley

Boyd Haley is a Professor of Chemistry at the University of Kentucky. He is an experienced biochemist and researcher. He is also the co-founder and scientific advisor of Affinity Labeling Technologies, Inc. a biotech company that specializes in nucleotide photoaffinity analogs for biomedical research. In addition, Dr. Haley is a member of the Autism Think Tank of the Autism Association and he is on the board of the Swedish Foundation for Metal Biology.

Dr. Haley has also pioneered a diagnostic marker for Alzheimer’s disease that is currently being developed by others. Dr. Haley has testified before several different government agencies on the effects of mercury toxicity from both dental amalgams and vaccines. Haley is not in favor of using mercury in medicine at all.

Dr. Haley’s research has led him to take a professional stance against mercury and thimerosal in vaccines. For many years, Haley has studied the biochemistry of Alzheimer’s disease. This research prompted him to identify mercury toxicity as a major contributing factor, and possibly a causal factor in developing Alzheimer’s.

Dr. Haley was the first scientist to argue that the preservative thimerosal widely used in vaccines was the most likely environmental toxin contributing to our rising rates of autism. Haley has even followed that research with additional work that demonstrates that several substances such as some antibiotics, and the hormone testosterone, actually increase the toxicity of thimerosal; a concept known as synergistic toxicity. In addition, while in collaboration with others, he has shown that mercury analysis of birth-hair reveals that autistics represent a genetic subset of the population who cannot effectively excrete mercury.

Dr. Haley has challenged vaccine advocate Paul Offit M.D. to numerous public debates about vaccines. Dr. Offit has always turned him down. Dr. Haley is also an outspoken critic of a great deal of the vaccine research that is funded by the pharmaceutical industries, calling much of it fraudulent.

Dr. Haley has testified before numerous government agencies on the effects of mercury toxicity from dental amalgams and vaccines. He has testified twice before congress and before the legislative committees of Maine and New Hampshire. He has testified before countless other government bodies. He also gives lectures on mercury toxicity and neurological diseases in conferences all over the world.

We should all consider that there are two top priorities in the vaccine/autism issue every American should be concerned with. We need to develop a safe vaccination program, and we need to find the cause of autism and eliminate it if possible. I have been a strong proponent of investigating thimerosal as the casual agent for autism spectrum disorders based on the biological science that shows thimerosal to be incredibly toxic, especially to infants. I know of nothing remotely as toxic as thimerosal that numerous infants would be exposed to before 3 to 4 years of age.

  1. Autism was not a known, described illness until about 1941-3, 8 to 10 years after the introduction of thimerosal and similar organic thiol-mercury compounds in biological mixtures used in medicine and other areas. This argues against autism being a genetic illness.
  2. In 1977, 10 of 13 infants treated in a single hospital by topical application of thimerosal for umbilical cord infections died of mercury toxicity. This same topical was used on adolescents without obvious ill effects which strongly supports the concept that infants are very susceptible to thimerosal toxicity. 
  3. The recent increase (starting about 1990) of autism spectrum disorders correlated well with the advent of the CDC mandated vaccine program, which increased thimerosal exposures with increased vaccinations. Due to its toxicity, thimerosal would have to be suspect for causing autism. 
  4. As expected by science, extensive searching for a genetic cause of autism has not turned up a significant find that would explain the recent increased rate in autism. The latest genetic find, at best, might explain 0.5% of autism causation. Most agree that a genetic predisposition is likely (like those that lead to low glutathione levels), but that a toxic exposure is absolutely needed. Consider also, that this increased toxic exposure would have had to occur in all 50 states at about the same time as all states have reported similar increases in autism rates. Only something like the government recommended vaccine program fits this need for a time dependent, uniform exposure of a toxin throughout all the states.


There is no safe level of mercury and no one has actually shown there is a safe level.” – Dr. Friberg MD, Ph.D. Former Head of Toxicology WHO”

Viera Scheibner, PhD

Dr. Viera Scheibner became interested in vaccines in the mid 1980s while studying babies’ breathing patterns with her late husband, Leif Karlson, who developed the Cotwatch breathing monitor.

Following vaccinations, babies’ breathing patterns often triggered alarms, and indication of stress. This is what prompted her interest in vaccines. She then began extensive research of medical papers dealing with vaccinations. To date, she has collected and studied more than 100,000 pages of medical papers published over the last century. From her research she has concluded that there is no scientific evidence that vaccines are anything other than harmful. She says that vaccines increase susceptibility to the very diseases they are intended to protect against, and they make the recipient more susceptible to disease of all kinds – infectious diseases and the newfound modern ills of childhood such as diabetes, auto-immune diseases, cancers, and developmental disabilities along with other health problems.

Her research into vaccination has produced two books and numerous papers published in a variety of scientific and medical publications. She also conducts frequent international lecture tours to present the results of her research to parents, health and medical professionals, and anyone else who is interested. She has also been an expert witness for court cases relating to deaths and injuries caused by vaccines that are attributed to other causes such as the so-called “shaken baby” syndrome.

It is officially admitted that all cases of polio in the US, since the introduction of the vaccine, are caused by the vaccine. The same has been seen in Australia and other countries like England. So the occurrence of the same phenomenon all around the world would be asking too much of coincidence.

In the USA in 1978, they mandated vaccination and it resulted in a three fold increase in the reported incidence of whooping cough.

During a 3-year period, November 1964 to December 1967, 124 lots of human kidney cell cultures were examined, and seven viruses (6%) were isolated. These included two measles viruses, two foamy viruses, one reovirus, one adenovirus, and one myxovirus. One measles virus isolation was made from a lot of human kidney cell culture from a 3-year old child who had been exposed to measles and had been given 0.6 ml of gamma globulin at the time of exposure. The child died 2 weeks later. The presence of measles virus in this child’s kidney cell culture would not have been recognized if the kidney cell cultures would not have been kept for 33 days after planting. This example illustrates the standing problem in research of not keeping the cultures used for whatever reason for a sufficient period of time. A lot of viruses (and other organisms) and their cytopathic effects simply escape detection. Herpesvirus group viruses were isolated in monkeys of the Old World species represented by herpes B or Herpesvirus simiae produced a naturally occurring mild infection. However, most human cases of B virus infection have been fatal. Hull and Nash (61) showed that 10% of newly caught rhesus monkeys had antibodies to the B virus, and the percentage rose to 60% to 70% when the monkeys were confined in “gang-cages”. Other studied indicate that 100% of the experimental monkeys showed B virus antibody rise when the monkeys were housed together over a period of 6 weeks. Vaccine cultured on their kidney were contaminated by all these viruses and then injected into millions of infants all over the world. It is a real horror story. Just how much longer are we going to let the vaccine producers get away with destroying the human immune system and even the genetic code, and literally get away with murder?

Dr. Gerhard Buchwald, MD

Dr. Buchwald is a specialist in internal medicine and lung diseases. For many decades he has relentlessly worked for civil rights in regards to access to vaccine information and freedom of choice regarding vaccines. Dr. Buchwald has given over 500 lectures and has authored more than 200 scientific papers regarding vaccines and the damage caused by vaccines. He has also provided around 150 medical assessments of cases of vaccine damage. He is one of the world’s foremost experts on vaccines.

Vaccines have never had the proclaimed preventive effect on infections. The regression of infectious diseases started over 200 years ago, which means long before the introduction of vaccination, and it was due to the improved social conditions of the population: nutrition and hygiene.

Contrarily to general belief, the vaccinations have had a negative influence on the decrease of the infective maladies and mortality. Statistics started off at a period when the infectious diseases were already on the downgrade. Careful studies over a period of many years have revealed that each introduction of a mass vaccination has obtained only one result: the immediate recrudescence of the malady that the vaccine should have prevented, but which it has solicited instead. The temporary but immediate isolation of infected patients has each time proved sufficient to prevent an epidemic.

After every flare-up of an infection due to vaccination, the maladies have resumed the downward course which existed already before the vaccination. In general and over a period of many years, every vaccination has caused more casualties than the infection it was supposed to prevent. This happened for instance with the smallpox vaccination in Germany and many other countries… Vaccines don’t protect, but do harm. A scientific proof of their usefulness has never existed, whereas the severe, sometimes fatal damages they cause are a proven fact.

There is a growing body of scientific research that links vaccines to all kinds of health problems and adverse reactions. Some of these problems include but are not limited to:

  • Encephalitis (brain inflammation)
  • Unexplained Infant Death (SIDS)
  • Autoimmune Disease
  • Chronic Illness
  • Vaccine Contamination
  • Gut-Brain-Immune System Connection and Malfunction
  • Vaccine Failure
  • Vaccine Disease Transmission
  • Paralysis
  • Autism and other Neurological Disorders

It is difficult to find objective research that isn’t in some way tied to the pharmaceutical industries. When the research is truly independent, a different picture emerges. For instance, many of the studies that “prove” vaccine safety are done with only two groups, those who receive the vaccine and those that receive the placebo. The problem is, the placebos contain all of the toxic ingredients that the vaccines do, only minus the attenuated virus. So still full of toxins like mercury, aluminum, genetically modified yeast, antibiotics, aborted fetus cell lines, etc. So is it any wonder that those who receive the placebo are not any better off than the others in the experiment?

There is a great deal of evidence to prove that immunization of children does more harm than good.” – Dr. J. Anthony Morris, Former Chief Vaccine Control Officer and Research Virologist U.S. FDA


Science is ultimately self-correcting, but this self-correction can take some time. When large sums of money are involved, and research is primarily funded by industry, at least for a time it is possible to obscure many of the results. You’ve probably heard about the thousands of studies “proving vaccine safety”. There are enough of these industry-funded studies to fool some of the people, some of the time. It doesn’t however fool all of the people all of the time. The greatest lie ever told is that vaccines prevent disease, when in fact they cause many diseases such as autism. No lie can live forever. While the pharma-funded, mainstream media claims the debate is over, these and other scientists are raising the alarm. The debate is far from over, and the dangers of vaccines are becoming better known.

Further Reading:


Millions made with anti-Cholestrol drugs and incorrect advice.

Big Pharma Revealed As Puppetmaster Behind TPP Secrecy

Tyler Durden's picture

 It is no secret that US healthcare corporations have been among, if not the biggest beneficiaries of Obamacare: by “socializing” costs and spreading the reimbursement pool over the entire population in the form of a tax, pharmaceutical companies have been able to boost medical product and service costs to unprecedented levels with the help of complicit insurance companies who have subsequently passed through these costs to the consumer, in the process sending the price of biotech and pharma stocks to levels not seen since the dot com bubble. But when it came to the highly confidential TPP, it was unclear just which corporations were dominant in pulling the strings.
Now thanks to more documents published by Wikileaks, and analyzed by the NYT, it appears that “big pharma” is once again pulling the strings, this time of the Trans Pacific Partnership, which if passed will “empower big pharmaceutical firms to command higher reimbursement rates in the United States and abroad, at the expense of consumers” according to “public health professionals, generic-drug makers and activists opposed to the trade deal.”
In other words, just like the narrowly-passed Obamacare was a gift for big Pharma, so America’s legal drug dealers are now trying to go for another price boosting catalyst, one which however will involve not just the US but some 12 countries in the Asia-Pacific region. Worst of all, the negotiations for the next price increase is taking place in utmost secrecy where “American negotiators are still pressing participating governments to open the process that sets reimbursement rates for drugs and medical devices.”
As RT notes, the latest disclosure links the Healthcare Annex to the secret draft of the quite aptly-named “Transparency” Chapter of the TPP, along with each country’s negotiating position. The leaked “Annex on transparency and procedural fairness for pharmaceutical products and medical devices” is dated from December 2014, with the draft being restricted from release for four years after the passage of the TPP into law.
RELEASE: TPP Transparency Chapter Healthcare Annex #TPP #TTIP

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) June 10, 2015

Worse, while in the US the rising healthcare costs are at least spread across a broader social safety net, the TPP is targeting countries where the potential jump in drug prices will have dramatic effects. As the NYT notes, “foreign governments and health care activists have accused pharmaceutical giants, mostly based in the United States, of protecting profits over public health, especially in poor countrieswhere neither the government nor consumers can afford to pay rates anywhere close to those charged in wealthier nations.

“That fight re-emerged in the Pacific trade negotiations, which involve countries with strong cost-containment policies, like New Zealand, as well as poor countries like Peru and Vietnam.The agreement “will increase the cost of medicines worldwide, starting with the 12 countries that are negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership,” said Judit Rius Sanjuan, a lawyer at Doctors Without Borders, a humanitarian organization that provides medical care in more than 60 countries.
None other than the CEO of Mylan explained in the simplest possible way what is going on: a government mandated monopoly under the guise of a trade pact: “Heather Bresch, the chief executive of Mylan, one of the largest generic-drug makers, said the brand-name pharmaceutical industry was “establishing, through U.S. trade policy, an international system designed to maximize its monopolies.”
But where the alarm bells truly go off is when someone, anyone, uses the word “fair” to justify policy, such as surging drug costs. To wit: “drug companies, however, say they need to be able to charge fair prices to compensate for the billions of dollars and decades of research that go into their medicines.”

What is amusing is that the true motive behind theTPP’s secrecy have been quite clear tovirtually everyone butthe population of theTPP’s host nation:

 “It was very clear to everyone except the U.S. that the initial proposal wasn’t about transparency. It was about getting market access for the pharmaceutical industry by giving them greater access to and influence over decision-making processes around pricing and reimbursement,” said Deborah Gleeson, a lecturer at the School of Psychology and Public Health at La Trobe University in Australia. And even though the section, known as the transparency annex, has been toned down, she said, “I think it’s a shame that the annex is still being considered at all for the T.P.P.”

RT adds that one country that should be in arms over the TPP is Australia:

The secret negotiations now allegedly reveal that Australia’s Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme might be undermined, pushing up the cost of medicines in the country.
“United States trade negotiators have aggressively pushed for provisions favoring multinational pharmaceutical manufacturers at the expense of national governments and public healthcare systems,”
the Sydney Morning Herald wrote.
But the one place where the biggest price shock may be unleashed is, not surprisingly, the US itself :
The leaked TPP document “shows that the pact could expose Medicare to pharmaceutical company attacks and constrain future policy reforms, including the ability of the US government to curb rising and unsustainable drug prices,” the US consumer rights advocacy group and think tank Public Citizen said in its Wednesday statement.
The group says president Obama’s administration has been “acting at the behest of pharmaceutical companies,” and the secret negotiations it has been holding within the partnership might affect Medicare, limiting “Congress’ ability to enact policy reforms that would reduce prescription drug costs for Americans.”
The same Congress, incidentally, which gladly washed its hands of any discussion of the TPP when the Senate “fast-tracked” its passage and as the NYT further notes, “a House vote on final passage of the bill, now expected on Friday, appears extremely close.”
In other words, in exchange for a few million in lobby spending, aka bribes, by Big Pharma, the US Congress has once again sold out the US population, and this time it even voluntarily bypassed even the mock democratic process of debating the law it will pass.

Why? Just so shareholders of pharmaceutical companies could reap even greater profits at theexpense of not just the US population, but of the populations of some of the biggest US trading partners, all of whom are about to see the prices of medical care skyrocket.And since nothing is confirmed until it is officially denied, here is the punchline:

“The transparency annex in T.P.P. is not subject to Investor-State Dispute Settlement, and nothing in its provisions will undermine our ability to pursue the best health care policy for Americans, including any future action on health care expenditures and cost containment,” a trade representative spokesman said.

Those Americans who may wish to challenge the claim well, they are out of luck: Congress is about to make sure there is no way anyone can have a say into what big corporations have in store for the US population.

The Double minded Homoeopaths in our midst.

Are you a homoeopath? Do you make prescriptions for people’s health using the dilutions? Do you advise people on their health using only this method?

A few years ago I was a member of a discussion group  that included very well known medical and lay  members of the homeopathic community who professed a commitment to forwarding the practice using classical methodologies.

During one discussion the question of what to do when a patient was thought to perhaps have a cancer.  One of the practitioners stated emphatically that it was essential to have the full investigations regarding a cancer. I asked him why he thought it essential. His reply was “of course it is essential! Only then could the patient be directed toward the proper treatment for his or her cancer!”

I asked him “so what is the proper treatment of the cancer?” There was a deafening silence.

This person is the president of an American homeopathic medical Association. I quit the group very shortly after because I realised our aims, knowledge and understanding of the therapy were very different.

One of the problems within our therapy today is the lack of knowledge, understanding or comprehension regarding the law of similars and how it is different from the allopathic treatment that is the current medical status quo. To add to this problem, most people taught homeopathy in the last 80 years, have the disadvantage of being taught Kentian philosophy instead of the Hahnemannian tried and tested protocols for the application of the law of similars within his therapeutic model. The therapy is in the sad position of being based upon the Swedenborgian religious and philosophical writings of the supposedly Hahnemannian practitioner called James Tyler Kent. This man was the epitome of the wrong thinking of the  late 19th-century American school of thought as headed by Hering.

If you read the writings of Richard Haehl a biographer of the life and works of Samuel Hahnemann, you will see that Hahnemann complained bitterly that while many embraced the tenets of homeopathy, they were not prepared to practice it properly or redress the faults introduced by an allopathic application of the medicines. So from the beginning of the introduction of homeopathy, very few people took the time to learn the application correctly.

Of late, I have seen many of my colleagues rush for allopathic treatment when an incident occurs. I do believe there is a time and place for pain relief or occasional use of an Antibiotic when an infection is overwhelming, however, Im surprised that people of many years in the therapy still think of it as a second rate medical practice.

It is my belief that the REALITY of low success in the clinic, plus faulty understanding of the methodology is to blame. Kents insistence on mental prescribing based on personality has destroyed many a good prescription. No where in his writings do we see Hahnemann deviate from his rule of prescribing for altered and changed symptoms ONLY.

A practitioner needs to be convinced of the efficacy of the therapy and needs to know how to practice it according to Hahnemann. If not, there is no place for a person who always resorts to allopathy when his or her prescription fails.

Learning from History

Killer Drugs? Homicide Risk Linked to Medication

By Cari Nierenberg, Contributing Writer   |   June 01, 2015 03:00am