|
by Sayer Ji
Contributing Writer
January 24, 2012
from
ActivistPost Website
Spanish version
Let's face it: the only
real justification for using vaccines to "immunize" ourselves
against disease is derived from the natural fact that when
challenged by infectious agents the humoral arm of our immune system
launches a successful response capable of conferring lasting
immunity.
Were it not for the elegance, proficiency, and mostly asymptomatic
success of our recombinatorial immune system in dealing so well with
infectious challenges, vaccination would have no cause, no
scientific explanation, no justification whatsoever.
In fact, ever since the adaptive, antigen-specific
immune system
evolved in early vertebrates 500 million years ago, our bodies have
been doing a pretty good job of keeping us alive on this planet
without need for synthetic, vaccine-mediated immunity.
Indeed, infectious challenges are necessary for the development of a
healthy immune system, and in order to prevent autoimmune conditions
from emerging as a result of
TH2 dominance.
In other words, take away these natural infectious challenges, and
the immune system can and will turn upon itself; take away these
infectious challenges and lasting immunity against tens, if not
hundreds of thousands of pathogens we are exposed to throughout our
lives, would not be possible.
-
Can vaccines
really co-opt, improve upon, and replace natural immunity
with synthetic immunity?
-
How many will
this require?
-
Are we not
already at the critical threshold of vaccine overload?
By "improving" upon our
humanness in this way, are we not also at the same moment departing
dramatically from it?
Presently, compliance
with the CDC's immunization schedule for children from birth through
6 years of age requires 60 vaccines 1 be administered,
purportedly to make them healthier than non-vaccinated or naturally
immunized ones.2
Sixty vaccines, while a
disturbingly high amount (for those who retain the complementary
human faculties of reason and intuition), does not, however,
correctly convey just how many antigenic challenges these children
face in total....
A new paper published in the journal Lupus entitled "Mechanisms of
aluminum adjuvant toxicity and autoimmunity in pediatric
populations," points out that as many as 125 antigenic compounds,
along with high amounts of aluminum (AI) adjuvants are given to
children by the time they are 4 and 6 years old, in some "developed"
countries.
The authors also state:
"Immune challenges
during early development, including those vaccine-induced, can
lead to permanent detrimental alterations of the brain and
immune function.
Experimental evidence also shows that
simultaneous administration of as little as two to three immune adjuvants can overcome genetic resistance to autoimmunity."
Vaccine adjuvants are
agents that accelerate, enhance or prolong the antigen-specific
immune responses vaccines intend to illicit.
In essence, they enhance
vaccine "efficacy," which is defined by the ability to raise
antibody titers. A vaccine's "effectiveness," on the other hand -
and which is the real-world measure of whether a vaccine works or
not - is not ascertainable through the number of antibodies
produced.
Whether or not a vaccine
or vaccine adjuvant boosts antibodies that have actual affinity with
the intended pathogen is what counts in the real world, i.e.
antibody-antigen affinity, (and not the sheer volume of antibodies
produced) determines whether a vaccine will be effective or not.
The semantic confusion between "vaccine efficacy" and "vaccine
effectiveness" ensures that vaccines which disrupt/harm/hypersensitize
the immune system by stimulating unnaturally elevated
antibody
titers may obtain FDA approval, despite the fact that they have
never been shown to confer real-world protection.3
Some vaccine researchers
have even suggested that breastfeeding, which may reduce
vaccine-induced elevations in antibody titers in infants, i.e. its
iatrogenic disease-promoting effects, should temporarily be delayed
in order
not to interfere with the vaccine's so-called "efficacy."
Common adjuvants include:
...all of which are inherently
toxic, no matter what the
route of exposure.
Many parents today do not consider how dangerous it is to inject
adjuvants directly into the muscle (and sometimes blood, due to
incorrect and/or non-existent aspiration techniques), especially in
non-infected, healthy offspring whose immune systems are only just
learning to launch effective responses to the innumerable pathogens
already blanketing their environment.
Adequate breastfeeding, in fact, is the most successful strategy in
the prevention of morbidity and mortality associated with infectious
challenges, and is so distinctively mammalian (i.e. obtaining
nourishment and immunity through the mammary glands), that without
adequate levels (only 11.3% of infants in the US were exclusively
breastfed through the first six months of life - Source: CDC, 2004)
infants become much more readily susceptible to illness.
Not only have humans strayed from their mammalian roots by creating
and promoting
infant formula over breast milk, and then promoting
synthetic immunity via vaccines over the natural immunity conferred
through breastfeeding and sunlight exposure, for instance, but
implicit within the dominant medical model is to replace natural
immunity with a synthetic one.
This is the philosophy
of
transhumanism, a movement which intends to improve upon and
transcend our humanity, and has close affiliation with some aspects
of eugenics.4
The CDC's immunization schedule reflects a callous lack of regard
for the 3 billion years of evolution that brought us to our present,
intact form, without elaborate technologies like vaccination - and
likely only because we never had them at our disposal to inflict
potentially catastrophic harm to ourselves.
The CDC is largely
responsible for generating the mass public perception that there is
greater harm in not "prophylactically" injecting well over 100
distinct disease-promoting and immune-disruptive substances into the
bodies of healthy children.
They have been
successful in instilling the concept into the masses that Nature
failed in her design, and that medical and genetic technologies and
interventions can be used to create a superior human being.
In this culture of vaccination, the non-vaccinated child is
"inferior," "dirty," perhaps even "sub-human" to those who look upon
vaccination as the answer to what perfects the human immune system.
Transhumanism participates in a dialectic which requires a
simultaneous and systematic dehumanization of those who do not share
the same way of thinking and behaving.
The eugenic undertones
of mass vaccination and the cult of synthetic immunity are now only
thinly veiled, as we move closer to the point where a pseudo-scientific
medical dictatorship lays claim to our very bodies, and the bodies
of our children.
The point of no return (if not already traversed) is only around the
corner:
the mass
introduction of DNA and Recombinant Vector Vaccine technology.
Vaccines moved through
the following stages (a tortured history of failures and massive
"collateral damage"):
Live Vaccines -->
Attenuated Vaccines --> Subunit Vaccines --> Toxid Vaccines
-->
Conjugate Vaccines,
...only now reaching
towards converting our living tissue into "vaccine-making factories"
through the use of
DNA and Recombinant Vector Vaccines, which are
designed to directly alter cells within the vaccinated person's body
so that they create the antigens normally provided by vaccines
themselves.5
While not yet in use, clinical trials are now underway to
obtain FDA
'approval.'
If we do not educate ourselves now and act accordingly,
their mass implementation is inevitable, and our very genomes will
become the next target of the vaccination/transhumanist agenda.
Notes
1- Counting the
number of vaccine antigens, in total, e.g. trivalent influenza =
3 vaccine antigens.
2- Natural immunization occurs to those who gain immunological
competence by being infected (often asymptomatically) by a
wild-type pathogen, launching a normal immune response,
overcoming the infectious challenge, and as a consequence
obtaining lasting immunity.
3- Transhumanism is an international movement that believes in
the transformation of the human condition by using technologies
to enhance human intellectual, physical and psychological
capacities.
4- The term "efficacy," when used in the context of a vaccine's
antibody-elevating effects, does not equate to effectiveness,
i.e. whether or not a vaccine actually works in real life to
protect against the infectious agent of concern.
It is this semantic trick (conflating and confusing "efficacy"
with "effectiveness") which convinces most of the "developed"
world that vaccine research is "evidence-based" and focused on
creating enhanced immunity, when in fact it is primarily a
highly successful business enterprise dependent on defrauding
its "customers" of both their money and health.
The dangers of
common vaccines are so well known by "health experts," and the
manufacturers who produce, them that their risk (like nuclear
power) is underwritten by world governments. The importance of
this fact can not be overestimated or understated.
Introducing foreign pathogenic DNA, chemicals, metals,
preservatives, etc., into the body through a syringe will
generate a response not unlike kicking a bee hive. The harder
you kick that beehive, the greater will be the "efficacy" (i.e.
elevated antibodies), but the actual affinity that these
antibodies will have for the antigen (i.e. pathogen) of concern,
can not be guaranteed; nor must the vaccine researchers prove
antibody-antigen affinity to receive FDA approval.
Also, valuable immune resources are wasted by generating "false
flag" responses to threats which may not readily exist in the
environment, e.g. there are over 200 forms of influenza A, B & C
which can cause the symptoms associated with annual influenza A,
so the seasonal trivalent flu vaccine only takes care of little
more than 1% of the possible vectors of infection - and often at
the price of distracting resources away from real threats, as
well as exhausting and/or damaging the entire immune apparatus.
Truth be told, there is actually a
shocking lack of evidence to
support flu vaccines, in any age or population.
What's worse, the vaccine response can "blow back" causing loss
of self-tolerance and, via the resultant Th2 dominant immune
system, the body can attack itself (auto-immunity). In the
meantime, the first line of defense against infection (Th1) is
compromised and this "front door" can be left wide open to unmet
infectious challenges.
It is clear that one can create a synthetic immune response
through vaccination, but it is not likely to result in enhanced
immunity, insofar as real-world effectiveness is concerned,
which is the only true judge of whether a vaccine is valuable or
not.
One might view the basic criteria used by vaccine
researchers, namely, that generating elevated antibody titers
proves the value of the vaccine, oppositely: proving the vaccine
is causing harm to the developing infant by generating
unnecessarily elevated antibodies by any means necessary, i.e.
throwing the chemical and biological kitchen sink at the immune
system, e.g. aluminum, phenol, diploid (aborted fetal) cells,
peanut oil, pertactin, etc.
5- The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases,
Types of Vaccines.
|
