~~ Social Media Engineering Meme Scam ~~

Don’t participate in this kind of 5h1t. It’s a social engineering scam used to gain access to your email.

From that point, access may be gained to – e.g. other accounts and programs for which you have used that email address as a log-in/sign-in; not to mention, several other personal, identifying details.


~~ Realtime Crowd Insights and Arizona Citizens Tracked In Facial Recognition Database In First Step For ‘REAL ID’ Implementation ~~

Arizona Citizens Tracked In Facial Recognition Database In First Step For ‘REAL ID’ Implementation

December 6, 2017


A little while ago we wrote about a similar concept:

📍Realtime Crowd Insights:

‘Realtime Crowd Insights.

This is the technology Microsoft’s Research Division was recently allowed to use at a political convention.

“A small camera scanned the room, while a monitor displayed the captured image. Every five seconds, a new image would appear with data annotated for each face – an assigned serial number, gender, estimated age and any emotions detected in the facial expression.”

Electronic Empathy. Not a good sign, guys. This is biometrics at its most invasive yet! Establishing the mood/emotions we are feeling is a huge step in the direction of pre-crime imprisonment – a reason for which Obama’s internment ‘camps’ are in existence… The ones where the U.S. government reserves the right to indefinitely detain – WITHOUT TRIAL – a citizen if it is deemed that person will one day maybe, possibly, potentially, could, perhaps, be likely to, probably, might, perchance commit a crime… A crime for which they have no criminal record, nor any history of criminality.

Realtime Crowd Insights – the technology that will soon be deciding how we are feeling and WHAT SHOULD BE DONE ABOUT THAT.’



@ 3:56 ⬇️↙️



‘Arizona citizens are now in a government database that uses facial recognition technology to track them simply for getting a driver’s license.

This allows federal and local law enforcement to use the “perpetual lineup” of suspects not accused of a crime to see if someone is wanted for a crime, Arizona Capitol Times reported.

“After someone at the Motor Vehicle Division takes your photo, your face is scanned by a system based on a proprietary algorithm that analyzes facial features.

The system compares your face against the 19 million photos in the state’s driver’s license database to look for similarities. If an image is similar enough, the system will flag it for further review.”

📍 Getting Driver’s Licence Puts Arizonans Into’Perpetual Crime Lineup’:


The program is an effort that is part of a nationwide initiative called the REAL ID Act that was created by Congress in 2005 as a response to the September 11th terror attacks. The system allows the state to comply with the federal act, which increased standards for identification documents. Although the REAL ID Act does not explicitly call for facial recognition, it does maintain that states need to take measures to reduce fraud.



The Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) already has publicly boasted about the success with more than 100 cases it has taken to court for fraud using the technology, which has been in place since early 2015.

📍 Step By Step, ADOT Facial Recognition Process Guards Against Identity Fraud:


But the use of the system to prevent identity theft isn’t what people are worried about; the problem is the lack of oversight in government programs that allows anyone with access to look into the database. As such, state-run facial recognition databases are dangerous and can lead down a slippery slope to allow other operations the technology wasn’t intended for.

The other key issue is the fact that residents in Arizona aren’t even being told that this is going on – coupled with the lack of oversight and disclosure, it becomes a nightmare for privacy rights advocates.

“If you don’t know that a system is in place, you actually don’t have the choice of consenting to it or not,” said Clare Garvie who authored the ‘perpetual line-up’ study.”…

One of the main pitfalls of such a system is not only the lack of oversight on the program by any government watchdog, but the fact that there are no laws to justify the collections, or a court between law enforcement and access to millions of people’s identities.

The only requirement for those that search is that it must involve people suspected of committing a crime or “who law enforcement may suspect is about to commit a crime.”

People could also be involved in activities that are threats to public safety, sought as part of a criminal investigation or “intelligence-gathering effort.”…

📍 Why Residents In Some American States May Soon Need A Passport For Domestic Flights:


📍For More Information:


~~ Immunity, Immunisations and Nutrition ~~

With regard to the first meme (posted below) – I posted it, not as a direct reference to Christianity’s “God”, but in relation to whoever/whatever is our creator.

For those of you who don’t buy into the vaccine scam, here’s a few articles pertaining to natural immunity, immunisation lies and immune system booster tips. There are thousands more articles to be found online; just a few here to get you started.


Expert Pediatrician Exposes Vaccine Myths



YouTube has deleted the video in this article, but the info is still there and I’ve included another link of the interview, anyway.


“Dr. Palevsky says:

‘When I went through medical school, I was taught that vaccines were completely safe and completely effective, and I had no reason to believe otherwise. All the information that I was taught was pretty standard in all the medical schools and the teachings and scientific literature throughout the country. I had no reason to disbelieve it.

Over the years, I kept practicing medicine and using vaccines and thinking that my approach to vaccines was completely onboard with everything else I was taught.

But more and more, I kept seeing that my experience of the world, my experience in using and reading about vaccines, and hearing what parents were saying about vaccines were very different from what I was taught in medical school and my residency training.

… and it became clearer to me as I read the research, listened to more and more parents, and found other practitioners who also shared the same concern that vaccines had not been completely proven safe or even completely effective, based on the literature that we have today.

… It didn’t appear that the scientific studies that we were given were actually appropriately designed to prove and test the safety and efficacy.

It also came to my attention that there were ingredients in there that were not properly tested, that the comparison groups were not appropriately set up, and that conclusions made about vaccine safety and efficacy just did not fit the scientific standards that I was trained to uphold in my medical school training.'”



Barbara Loe Fisher on the Importance of Balanced Cellular and Humoral Immune System Responses



“‘Humans and infectious microbes have coexisted for as long as humans have walked the earth, and the human immune system has developed an efficient way of dealing with viral and bacterial infections. When infected with a microorganism, the body’s first line of defense is for the cellular or ‘innate’ part of the immune system to mount an inflammatory response.

This response then signals the humoral or ‘learned’ part of the immune system to produce anti-inflammatory chemicals and antibodies that resolve inflammation, so that healing can take place, and establish future resistance to re-infection. A healthy, mature immune system requires an equal balance of cellular and humoral immune system responses. A disruption in this balance can lead to development of allergy and autoimmune disorders, including neuroimmune disorders.

Vaccination attempts to fool the body into believing it has come in contact with the real microorganism that causes infection. But vaccination does not exactly mimic the natural infection process, and often bypasses cellular immunity in favor of humoral immunity.’

— Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder and president of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC)”



Joseph Mercola, DO on the Difference Between Natural Immunity and Vaccine-lnduced Immunity



“There’s a significant difference between natural immunity and vaccination immunity. When children are born, they develop natural immunity to hundreds, thousands, millions, and even trillions of microorganisms that they breathe in, eat, and touch through their skin. Their immune systems at the lining of their airways, at the lining of their intestines, and on their skin are actively protecting their body from the outside world.

Those immune systems that are intricately and specifically located in the linings are very important to create memory and protection to the organisms that they continue to breathe, eat, and touch. That immune system response then has a domino effect on creating other memory and immune responses that give your body antibodies and protection. That’s a very important step for how the immune system matures in our children. From the linings, the immune system receives information, sends out signals to all other parts of the immune system, and creates an immune response, memory, and antibodies.

On the other hand, when you inject materials into your body, you are bypassing that crucial first step called the primary line of defense. With vaccination you are just creating an antibody. That does NOT impart long-term immunity because it does not create the kind of memory that occurs when you breathe it in, eat it, or are exposed through the skin, and then go through the course of the natural disease.

— Joseph Mercola, DO”



Michael Bennese, DC on the Misapplication of the Theory of Herd Immunity




10 Natural Immunity Essentials




Top 12 Foods for Healthy Immune Response




How to Supercharge Your Immune System




Mercola’s Nutrition Plan




5 Ways to Strengthen Your Immune System




9 Ways to Boost Your Immune System and Avoid Being a Victim of the Flu Season



~~ Suppression of the Right to Protest in America ~~

📍Suppression of the Right to Protest in America:



About the Protest and Assembly Rights Project –

In January 2012, international human rights and U.S. civil liberties experts at seven law school clinics across the United States formed the Protest and Assembly Rights Project. This joint project investigated the United States response to Occupy Wall Street in light of the government’s international legal obligations.

The participating law clinics are:

📍Project Directors and Coordinators:

The Global Justice Clinic (GJC) at NYU School of Law provides high quality, professional human rights lawyering services to individual clients and non-governmental and inter-governmental organizations, partnering with groups based in the United States and abroad, or undertaking its own projects. Serving as legal advisers, counsel, co-counsel, or advocacy partners, Clinic students work side-by-side with human rights activists from around the world.

The Walter Leitner International Human Rights Clinic at the Leitner Center for International Law and Justice at Fordham Law School aims to train a new generation of human rights lawyers and to inspire results-oriented, practical human rights work throughout the world. The Clinic works in partnership with non-governmental organizations and foreign law schools on international human rights projects ranging from legal and policy analysis, fact-finding and report writing, human rights training and capacity-building, and public interest litigation. The views expressed herein are not reflective of the official position of Fordham Law School or Fordham University.

The International Human Rights Clinic at Harvard Law School is a center for active engagement in human rights within a context of critical reflection. The Clinic works on a range of international human rights and humanitarian law projects on a variety of topics and in countries throughout the world, including the United States. Under the close supervision of clinical faculty, and in collaboration with other organizations and advocates working towards social justice, Clinic students advance the interests of clients and affected communities through a range of approaches and strategies, including documentation, litigation, research, and community education.

The International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic at Stanford Law School provides direct representation to victims and works with communities that have suffered or face potential rights abuse. The Clinic seeks both to train advocates and advance the cause of human rights and global justice and to promote sustainable conflict resolution. In its first year, the Clinic has addressed labor rights, transitional justice, gang violence and violations of the laws of war in countries as diverse and distant as Brazil, Cambodia, El Salvador, Turkey and the United States.

📍Participating Clinics:

The Civil Rights Clinic at the Charlotte School of Law gives students an opportunity to engage in real-world advocacy while at the same time advancing local civil rights causes. The Clinic educates students in various ways to perform many of the different traditional litigation skills (fact investigation, pleading, motions practice, depositions, trial work, etc.), and also teaches how to be creative within ethical bounds in order to embrace different models of advocacy to advance the particular cause or client’s interest for which they are working.

The Community Justice section of Loyola Law Clinic-New Orleans teaches law students substantive, procedural and practical advocacy skills in order to assist community members with post-disaster housing and government accountability issues. Particular emphasis is placed on social justice issues and community lawyering. Under faculty supervision, clinic students work as the lead lawyers and partner with co-counsel on individual and impact litigation civil and human rights cases.

The Constitutional Litigation Clinic at Rutgers School of Law-Newark has worked on cutting-edge constitutional reform since its founding in 1970. Through the clinic, students not only learn the law, they make the law. Students are actively involved in all aspects of the clinic’s work, including deciding which cases to take, interviewing clients, developing the facts, crafting legal theories, drafting legal briefs and preparing for oral arguments.

~~ Vaccination – Proved Useless and Dangerous ~~

“From 45 Years Of Registration Statistics”

A book written in 1889 called “45 years of Registration Statistics, Proving Vaccination To Be Both Useless And Dangerous”.

  • AUTHOR: Alfred R. Wallace, LL.D.

It covers 45 years (so starting in the year 1844) the statistics of vaccine FAILURES including an INCREASE in death from other diseases once the blood has been poisoned by vaccination. 

They cover the health of the vaccinated VERSES the UNvaccinated… bad news for the vaccinated… they were dying more from other diseases such as measles, mumps, smallpox and diphtheria because of a weakened countenance from vaccine. 

~~ FACEBOOK – “V For Vaccines” ~~

~~ Horrors Of Vaccination – Exposed And Illustrated ~~

“Petition To The President To Abolish Compulsory Vaccination In Army And Navy”

by Higgins, Chas. M.(Charles Michael),b. 1854; Anti-Vaccination League of America

  • Publication Date: 1920
  • Topics: Vaccination
  • Publisher: Brooklyn, N.Y., C. M. Higgins
  • Collection: medicalheritagelibrary; cushingwhitneymedicallibrary; americana
  • Digitizing Sponsor: Open Knowledge Commons and Yale University, Cushing/Whitney Medical Library
  • Contributor: Yale University, Cushing/Whitney Medical Library
  • Language: English


FREE Book Documenting the Horrors of Vaccination:

~~ Vaccine-Induced Diabetes Type I and Type II ~~

“Our results conclusively prove there is a causal relationship between immunization schedules and diabetes. We believe immunization schedules can be made safer”

– Dr. Bart Classen.

Today I have decided to focus on vaccine-induced diabetes – yet another autoimmune disorder, often acquired as a bonus gift after the receipt of vaccination. Thank you, Big Pharma, for your “gifts that just keep on giving!” 

So, earlier, I stumbled upon the following:

“A promising therapy for Type 1 Diabetes is in the works! In Phase 1 trials, the BCG vaccine was able to create an environment that was able to temporarily restore insulin-producing beta cells. For interesting science, like Scientifically.”

Read more: https://scientifically.co/2017/07/06/old-vaccine-new-promise-type-1-diabetes-vaccine-cured-patients-now-in-pivotal-phase-2-clinical-trials/



#PatientsForLife!, right?!! Whatever happened to “prevention is better than cure” and “do no harm”? Well, if you know the foundations of the Pharma-Cartel, you, no doubt, understand that these feel-good clichés have never actually been a sincere consideration with regard to their underlying M.O. and agenda. 

The History of the Pharma-Cartel

If you aren’t familiar with the GENUINE facts pertaining to the biological acquisition of diabetes, I recommend that you begin reading what you see below!

KNOWLEDGE IS POWER! Learn the truth, protect yourself and your family and then pay it forward! ✊🏻💜


More Proof Childhood Vaccines Cause Diabetes – BALTIMORE (PRNewswire):

The prestigious peer reviewed journal, Journal of Pediatric Endocrinology and Metabolism published a study this week by Dr. J. Bart Classen, an immunologist at Classen Immunotherapies, and David Carey Classen, an infectious disease specialist at the University of Utah, providing support for a causal relationship between several common pediatric vaccines and the development of insulin dependent diabetes. Their previously published work proved the hemophilus vaccine, a common pediatric vaccine, caused a 25% rise in insulin dependent diabetes in children under the age of 7.
Classen’s research indicates most cases of diabetes caused by vaccines occur between 24 to 48 months after immunization of young children but the delay can be shorter in older children with prior damage to their pancreas. The time delay between vaccination and diabetes corresponds exactly to work from several independent groups which showed a similar delay between the initiation of autoimmunity to the insulin secreting islet cells and the development of diabetes.

“Our results conclusively prove there is a causal relationship between immunization schedules and diabetes. We believe immunization schedules can be made safer,” stated Dr. Bart Classen. “Our findings help identify those who have been injured by vaccines and are eligible for compensation.” Parents who think their children may have developed diabetes or any other autoimmune disease from vaccines must file a claim with the US government within 3 years of the onset of the disease in order to ensure eligibility for compensation. There is generally no cost for filing a claim.

Juvenile Diabetes and Vaccination: New Evidence for a Connection:

In the fall of 1997, the Centers for Disease Control confirmed that the number of Americans living with diabetes has skyrocketed in the past 40 years with a record sixfold increase in this chronic disease since 1958. It is estimated that nearly 16 million Americans are suffering with diabetes and 5 million more may have it but not know it.

Over the past four decades, intensive national mass vaccination campaigns have dramatically increased vaccination rates among American children who now are getting 34 doses of 10 different viral and bacterial vaccines before they enter kindergarten. Recent published data in the medical literature suggest increasing numbers of childhood vaccines may be playing a role in the big jump in the number of cases of juvenile diabetes.

What is Diabetes?

The most frequent kind of diabetes is diabetes mellitus, a chronic degenerative disease caused when the pancreas either fails to produce a protein hormone called insulin or the body’s cells are resistant to the action of insulin. Without insulin, the body cannot process and use glucose, a blood sugar which is a chief source of energy for living organisms and is found in certain foods like fruit. If the body’s cells have become resistant to insulin, glucose cannot be moved from the blood to cells in order to be transformed into energy.

There are two types of diabetes mellitus: Type I, called insulin-dependent juvenile diabetes, and Type II, called adult-onset diabetes.

Type I Diabetes – 

Type I diabetes, also called insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM), occurs mostly in children and young adults. Five to 10 percent of those diagnosed with diabetes are Type I diabetics. In Type I diabetes, the body cannot produce insulin. This causes glucose to build up in the bloodstream and be secreted from the body in the urine, leaving the body to starve for energy because the body’s cells cannot get the necessary nourishment provided by glucose. Symptoms include excessive thirst, hunger, urination, dehydration and often weight loss. Insulin injections must be taken daily to keep blood glucose levels stable.

Type II Diabetes – 

Type II diabetes occurs primarily in middle age and makes up 90 percent of all diagnosed cases of diabetes. The pancreas still produces insulin in Type II diabetes but the body’s cells are resistant to the action of insulin and glucose is not absorbed properly by the cells. Obesity and a family history of diabetes are risk factors for Type II diabetes. Exercise, weight control, diet restrictions and medication can be used to control Type II diabetes in many cases. Temporary insulin injections may also be given.

Chronic Disease and High Medical Costs – 

Diabetes (Type I and Type II) is a chronic disease that can become progressively debilitating for the individual as time goes on. When uncontrolled or inadequately controlled, diabetes leads to blindness, loss of hearing, heart and kidney disease, strokes, cataracts, nerve damage, paralysis of the intestinal tract, gangrene requiring amputation of limbs and death.

There have been estimates that some 125 million people worldwide have diabetes and that this number is expected to double by the year 2025. According to the CDC, nearly 800,000 new cases of diabetes are diagnosed in the US every year, with about 6 percent of the US population now thought to have the disease.

Diabetes is the nation’s seventh leading cause of death and kills or is a co-factor in the deaths of some 200,000 Americans every year. The leading cause of acquired blindness, diabetes contributes to about 24,000 new cases of acquired blindness in the US every year. Half of all amputations performed in the US are caused by diabetes, which means that about 54,000 amputations are diabetes-related. Diabetes is the leading cause of kidney failure and the need for dialysis and kidney transplants. Between 1980 and 1994, diabetes rose 33 percent among black Americans and 11 percent among white Americans.

Costs to cope with the growing epidemic of diabetes are high. In 1992, it was estimated that diabetes cost the US $85 billion for medical treatment and an additional $47 billion for lost work time, disability payments and premature death.

Old Reports, New Evidence of Vaccine Connection – 

Doctors started making reports in the medical literature as early as 1949 that some children injected with pertussis (whooping cough) vaccine (now part of the DPT or DTaP shot) were having trouble maintaining normal glucose levels in their blood. Lab research has confirmed that pertussis vaccine can cause diabetes in mice.

As diabetes research progressed in the 1960’s, 70’s and 80’s, there were observations that viral infections may be a co-factor in causing diabetes. The introduction of live virus vaccines, such as live MMR vaccine which is made from weakened forms of the live measles, mumps and rubella viruses, has raised questions about whether live vaccine virus could by a co-factor in causing chronic diseases such as diabetes.

One virus, the rubella virus, has already been shown to be associated with diabetes. Babies infected with the rubella virus in their mother’s womb, who are born with congenitally acquired rubella syndrome, often develop Type I diabetes. One 1980 study concluded that rubella virus can infect pancreatic islet cells and that the infection can severely reduce levels of secreted insulin. Another study in the 1980’s demonstrated that, after live rubella vaccination, the rubella virus can persist in the body of a vaccinated person for many years.

Like rubella, mumps disease has been strongly associated with the development of Type 1 diabetes. Like the rubella virus, the mumps virus can infect pancreatic islet cells. And like the live rubella vaccine, there are persistent reports in the medical literature that some children develop diabetes after receiving live mumps vaccine.

An accumulation of scientific research today suggests that Type 1 diabetes is an autoimmune disease. Autoimmunity is created when the immune system malfunctions and attacks its own body. Genetic predisposition and environmental factors (such as a viral infection) are thought to be co-factors in the development of autoimmune disease, including diabetes.

Because a vaccine artificially manipulates the immune system in order to make it act as if it has recovered from and is immune to a particular disease, some scientists are investigating whether vaccination can be a co-factor in the development of autoimmune diseases like diabetes. This research is particularly important for individuals who may have a genetic predisposition to autoimmunity, such as those with a family history of autoimmune disease.

New Evidence of Vaccine-Associated Increases in Diabetes – 

Evidence of a vaccination-diabetes connection has been strengthened since 1996 by the epidemiologic investigation of J. Barthelow Classen, M.D., a former researcher at the National Institutes of Health and the founder and CEO of Classen Immunotherapies, Inc.. Dr. Classen is developing ways to prevent autoimmune disease and maintains that one reason there is a growing epidemic of diabetes in the world is because vaccines given to children at two months and older can induce immune-mediated diabetes.

Classen has analyzed mass vaccination and disease incidence data from foreign countries, which keep better records of diabetes incidence than the U.S., as well as has conducted basic science research experiments on mice and rats to support his argument. Beginning with lab experiments, he demonstrated that 8 week old rats and mice injected with DPT vaccine had a higher incidence of diabetes than those who were not injected with DPT vaccine at 8 weeks old. Then he searched for evidence in existing epidemiological data on human populations to suggest that injecting two month old babies with vaccines causes an increased incidence in diabetes.

In the May 24, 1996 New Zealand Medical Journal, Dr. Classen reported that there was a 60 percent increase in Type I diabetes (juvenile diabetes) following a massive campaign in New Zealand from 1988 to 1991 to vaccinate babies six weeks of age or older with hepatitis B vaccine. His analysis of a group of 100,000 New Zealand children prospectively followed since 1982 showed that the incidence of diabetes before the hepatitis B vaccination program began in 1988 was 11.2 cases per 100,000 children per year while the incidence of diabetes following the hepatitis B vaccination campaign was 18.2 cases per 100,000 children per year.

More Vaccines Equal More Diabetes – 

In the October 22, 1997 Infectious Diseases in Clinical Practice, Classen presented more data further substantiating his findings of a vaccine-diabetes connection. He reported that the incidence of diabetes in Finland was stable in children under 4 years of age until the government made several changes in its childhood vaccination schedule. In 1974, 130,000 children aged 3 months to 4 years were enrolled in a vaccine experimental trial and injected with Hib vaccine or meningococcal vaccine. Then, in 1976, the pertussis vaccine used in Finland was made stronger by adding a second strain of bacteria. During the years 1977 to 1979, there was a 64 percent increase in the incidence of Type 1 diabetes in Finland compared to the years 1970 to 1976.

In 1982, another vaccine was added to the childhood vaccination schedule in Finland. Children aged 14 months to six years were given the live MMR (measles-mumps-rubella) vaccine. This was followed by the injection of 114,000 Finnish children aged 3 months and older with another experimental Hib vaccine. In 1988, Finland recommended that all babies be injected with the Hib vaccine.

The introduction of these new vaccines in Finland were followed by a 62 percent rise in the incidence of diabetes in the 0 to 4 year old age group and a 19 percent rise of diabetes in the 5 to 9 year old age group between the years 1980 and 1982 and 1987 and 1989. Classen concluded:

“The net effect was the addition of three new vaccines to the 0-4 year old age group and a 147 percent increase in the incidence of IDDM [insulin dependent diabetes mellitus] , the addition of one new vaccine to the 5-9 year olds and a rise in the incidence of diabetes of 40 percent, and no new vaccines added to the 10 to 14 year olds and a rise in the incidence of IDDM by only 8 percent between the intervals 1970-1976 and 1990-1992. The rise in IDDM in the different age groups correlated with the number of vaccines given.”

Biological Mechanism Described – 

Classen says that when infants are given vaccines at two months of age and older, some infants may already have a sub-clinical inflammation of insulin secreting cells due to exposure to diabetes-inducing viruses carried by the mother such as coxsackievirus B infections. When babies with this sub-clinical inflammation are injected with vaccines, the existing inflammation is made worse by the release of interferon and causes an autoimmune state leading to immune mediated Type 1 diabetes later in childhood. Classen’s data shows there can be a 1 to 4 year latency between the time the vaccines are given and Type 1 diabetes appears.

Classen, whose company has developed pediatric immunization methods to prevent diabetes, believes that Type 1 diabetes and other autoimmune disorders can be prevented by vaccinating babies immediately after birth. He points to a much lower incidence of Type 1 diabetes in children in Sweden who were given BCG vaccine at birth compared to Swedish children who were given BCG vaccine at two months of age, data which correlates with experiments he conducted on mice and rodents he injected with BCG vaccine at birth and two weeks of age. He also points to data from other countries such as Ireland and Switzerland to make his case for vaccination at birth. Classen maintains that when vaccines are given at birth, the infant’s body releases interferon which protects the child from being colonized with diabetes-inducing viruses carried by the mother.

Vaccine Trials Flawed – 

Whether vaccination at birth will prevent vaccine-associated autoimmunity such as diabetes is not as clear as Classen’s analysis of compelling data suggesting vaccines can be a co-factor in the development of Type I diabetes in children. Without large, well designed case controlled studies, his proposed solution to vaccinate at birth cannot be confirmed.

In the meantime, Classen is critical of past and current vaccine trials used by drug companies and the FDA to license vaccines and used by the CDC to make mass vaccination policies. In conclusion, he said:

“The results indicate that previous vaccine trials are flawed because they are not designed to detect associations between vaccination and autoimmune diseases, such as IDDM. Prospective clinical trials are needed to further evaluate the effect of vaccines on IDDM.”

NVIC Calls For Government Funding of Independent Researchers – 

Although more than $1 billion dollars is appropriated by Congress to federal health agencies every year to develop, purchase and promote the mass use of vaccines by American children, none of that money is used to fund independent vaccine researchers to investigate vaccine-associated health problems like diabetes. In fact, reputable researchers outside of government like Dr. Classen, who want to do vaccine adverse event research, are not given government grants to do that kind of research.

The National Vaccine Information Center maintains that there is an inherent conflict of interest in allowing the same health officials in federal agencies responsible for researching, developing, regulating, making national policy for and promoting vaccines to also be in control of monitoring vaccine reactions and evaluating health problems associated with vaccines. There is a similar conflict of interest in relying solely on scientific data supplied by drug companies, who make and sell vaccines for a profit, to license vaccines safe for use by the public without corroborating independent scientific data about the vaccine’s safety.

“Health officials in federal agencies have no accountability to anyone when it comes to setting priorities for how our tax dollars are used when it comes to vaccine research,” said NVIC president and co-founder Barbara Loe Fisher. “They can choose to do whatever they want to do with the money they get from Congress. And they choose to ignore the mounting evidence that vaccines are playing a role in the current epidemic of chronic disease, such as diabetes, in our society. Instead, our tax money is used to create more vaccines to add to the mandatory vaccination schedule for our children. There have never been and there are no plans to fund large independent studies to back-up the scientific validity of the government’s current vaccine policies and independently confirm they are safe.”

Vaccine Induced Autoimmune Insulin Dependent Diabetes Mellitus (IDDM) in Children: Is there sufficient evidence to support a causal relationship?:

Virus Infection Triggers Insulin-Dependent Diabetes Mellitus In A Transgenic Model: Role Of Anti-Self (Virus) Immune Response:

Diabetes – Index and Quotes:

Vaccines Found to Cause Diabetes in Children:

Review of Vaccine Induced Immune Overload and the Resulting Epidemics of Type 1 Diabetes and Metabolic Syndrome, Emphasis on Explaining the Recent Accelerations in the Risk of Prediabetes and other Immune Mediated Diseases:

Childhood Vaccinations and Juvenile-Onset (Type-1) Diabetes – By Harris Coulter, Ph.D.:

Infections And Risk Of Type I Diabetes In Childhood – A Population-Based Case-Control Study:

Discontinuation of BCG Vaccination Precedes Significant Drop in Type 2 Diabetes in Japanese Children. Role of Inflammation and Cortisol Activity as a Cause of Type 2 Diabetes:

Association Between Type I Diabetes And Hib Vaccine – Causal Relation Is Likely:

Hemophilus Vaccine Study in Finland Proves a Causal Relationship Between Vaccines and Diabetes:

Hemophilus Influenza B Vaccine:

Hepatitis B Vaccine May Be Linked to Juvenile Diabetes – Research Finds Increased Risk in 12 Year Olds Who Received Vaccine:

The Timing Of Pediatric Immunization And The Risk Of Insulin-Dependent Diabetes Mellitus:

The Timing of Immunization Affects the Development of Diabetes in Rodents:

Clustering of Cases of Insulin Dependent Diabetes (IDDM) Occurring Three Years After Hemophilus Influenza B (HiB) Immunization Support Causal Relationship Between Immunization and IDDM:

Clustering of Cases of IDDM 2 to 4 Years after Hepatitis B Immunization is Consistent with Clustering after Infections and Progression to IDDM in Autoantibody Positive Individuals:

Type 1 Diabetes Versus Type 2 Diabetes/Metabolic Syndrome, Opposite Extremes of an Immune Spectrum Disorder Induced by Vaccines: 

Risk of Vaccine Induced Diabetes in Children with a Family History of Type 1 Diabetes:

Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome: Clinical Research & Reviews:

Increased Risk of Childhood Diabetes Following Immunization Receives National Recognition:

Information Provided by Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. – This page lists recent updates to the Vaccine Safety Website:

FDA Told Pneumococcal Vaccine Likely to Cause Epidemic of Diabetes:

Vaccinations and Type 1 Diabetes:

Diabetes – VaccineTruth:

Hepatitis B Vaccine:

BCG (Tuberculosis) Vaccine:

Canine Diabetes And Its Causes:

Vaccines Cause Diabetes- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC):

Natural Medicine For Cancer, Diabetes, Heart Disease, Obesity:

Orthomolecular Medicine: Natural Treatment For Diabetes and Cancer:

    MediReport – Bittersweet Profits:

      Vaccines And Autoimmunity:

      ~~ The Fallacy Of Vaccination ~~

      By John Pitcairn
      President of the Anti-Vaccination League of America

      Vaccination is the putting of an impure thing into the blood – a virus or poison — often resulting in serious evil effects. In vogue for more than one hnndred years, it has been received by most persons without question. Yet the time is passing when people will accept a medical dogma on blind faith; they now demand to know something about the practices to which they are called an to submit. And most insistent of all shonid be the demand to know something of a practice which, like vaccination, involves the risk of disease and of possible death.

      The Dangers Of Vaccination

      That vaccination has such risks is conceded even by its most zealous advocates. In Philadelphia and vicinity there were in the autumn of 1901 no fewer than thirty-six cases of tetanus, or lockjaw, which were admitted to have resulted from vaccination, and nearly all wore fatal. After a study of these and fifty-nine siniflar cases a prominent Philadelphia physician and professor, himself an ardent believer in vaccination, arrived at the conclusion that neither careless dressing of the wound nor infection from a foreign source could account for the cases of lockjaw following vaccination; for, as he pointed out, cases had occurred not only among the ignorant and filthy, but also and equally among those who lived under the most favorible conditions, and even where the utmost precautions had been taken. He concluded, therefore, that the danger lay in the virus itself. Then, ignoring the fact that this virus is nothing but the matter running from diseased sores, he recommended greater care in its preparation.1

      During the same year — 1901 — Cleveland, Ohio, was suffering from a severe epidemic of smallpox. Vaccination was carried on all over the city; and with what results? In one household three children whose vaccination had been pronounced “highly successful” broke out with a profuse eruption of smallpox nineteen days after the operation. In many instances arms swelled down to the elbow and wrist, with enlargement of the glands in the armpits, and the patients were thrown into a high fever. It was not unusual to find pieces of flesh as big as a dollar and twice as thick dropping out of the vaccination sores, leaving ugly, suppurating wounds which took from six weeks to three months to heal. The health officer of the city was appalled at the sights that met his eyes, and, despite his ardent belief in vaccination, after witnessing, to use his own words, “the tears and cries and pains and misery” of the people, he declared that “the man who can stand all that is no man.” A sigh of relief went over the city when he stopped vaccination.2

      Turning to England and Wales we find that from 1881 to 1907, inclusive, the Registrar-General reported 1,108 deaths from vaccination, the deaths averaging one every week during the first sixteen years.3 And, remember, these 1,108 deaths are all admitted by vaccinists themselves to have been due to vaccination. The reports take no account of that greater number of deaths from vaccination that were ascribed to other causes. In regard to this, Professor Alfred England and Wales alone vaccination is the probable cause of 10,000 deaths every year — deaths by five diseases of the most terrible and disgusting character, introduced by the vaccine virus.4

      Vaccination And Compulsion

      But I need hardly appeal to stastics, which might be gathered from every civilized country. Consult any mother having practical acquaintance with the results of vaccination as observed by herself and you will rarely fail to hear something of its serious and lasting ill effects.

      Surely these facts and figures are enough to show that vaccination involves serious risks, and to make it incumbent upon all, and especially on parents, to make some inquiry at least before they submit either themselves or their children to these risks.

      But, someone may ask, if all this is true why does vaccination continue? It continues, very largely, because it is enforced by law. But it has been enforced almost from its birth and has thus come to be regarded as more or less a matter of course. In all modern history no other medical operation has ever been legally enforced. But vaccination needed enforcement. Without compulsion it could never have survived; for from the very day of its introduction it has been strenously opposed both by laymen and by members of the medical profession. Eminent physicians, it is true, have supported it; but equally eminent physicians and also renowned bacteriologists and statisticians have condemned it as productive of the gravest injuries. What is vaccination? It is easier to ask this question than to get a satisfactory answer. Put the qnestion to a number of doctors and observe the conflicting replies. Not all would agree with Webster’s definition, that it is inoculation with cowpox,5 for the modern American school now holds that it is inoculation with smallpox modified from the cow!6 And then: What is vaccine virus? Of course it comes from the cow; but where did it originate? And what is its effect when put into the human blood? Ask such questions and you will see the confusion that reigns. Vaccination today is not what it was yesterday, and still less what it was in Jenner’s day. Indeed, one of the most conspicuous features of the practice has been its constant shiftiness. And so I propose to answer the question, “What is vaccination?” by a brief survey of its history, showing what it has been as well as what it now is.

      The History Of Vaccination

      The direct progenitor of vaccination was smallpox inoculation — the insertion into the blood of a healthy person of the running matter from the sore of a smallpox patient. This practice was introduced into England, in 1721, by Lady Mary Wortley Montagn, wife of the British Ambassador at Constantinople. Writing from that city Lady Montaga said that the smallpox was rendered entirely harmless there by the invention of what the Turks called “ingrafting”‘ and that there was a set or old women who made it their business to perform the operation.7

      This practice of “a set of old women” in Turkey was adopted in England, where it was soon regarded as the greatest of medical discoveries, and its influence in checking sinaflrox was spoken of as “one of the best established of medical facts.”8 Indeed the praises lavished upon inoculation by the medical profession of that day have been equaled only by those since accorded to the ever-changing forms of vaccination. In 1754 the Royal College of Physicians, of London, in a formal resolution declared that the arguments which had been urged against smallpox inoculation had been refuted by experience, and that the College thought the practice to be “highly salutary to the human race.”9 But the facts could not long be ignored. Instead of proving itself a harmless and beneficent invention, experience made it evident that the practice of smallpox inoculation actually and naturally enough spread srnaIlpox, — every inoculated person becoming a new centre of contagion. This fact so strongly impressed itself on the British public that in 1840 the inoculation which had been so highly endorsed by the Royal College of Physicians was condemed by Act of Parliament as a criminal offense.10

      But previous to this time a new “scientific” protection against smallpox bad been discovered. This discovery, as is well known, was given to the world in 1898, by Edward Jenner,11 popularly called the Father of Vaccination. It is not so well known, however, that the vaccination advocated by Jenner, like smallpox inoculation, has long since been repudiated by the medical profession. Jenner’s first experiment was with swinepox, with which he inoculated one of his own children.12 He then adopted the belief of the country people that one who had had cowpox could never take smallpox.12 With this in mind he performed his first vaccination in 1796, using a virus taken from the sore of a milkmaid infected with cowpox.14 Not satisfied with this he next turned to horse-grease, as he called it though it afterward appeared that he was really dealing, not with horse-grease, but with horsepox — using virus taken from the sore of a man who had been handling the heels of a sick mare.15 These experiments led Jenner to his final “great discovery.” This was neither cowpox nor horse-grease, but a combination of both.16

      The cow, infected with horse-grease, was in its turn to give this horse-grease cowpox to a human being. From the sores of a human being the the virus was then to be taken which Jenner claimed would make a person “forever after secure from the infection of the smallpox.”17 Four years later, in a petition to the House of Common, he stated that his new species of inoculation “must finally annihilate that dreadful disorder.”18 The claims which had been made for the old inoculation were now transferred to vaccination. It was vaccination with horse-grease cowpox which now became “one of the best established of medical facts” and “highly salutary to the human race.”19 But pernicious results followed vaccination just as they had followed inoculation. Simple observation showed that vaccination did not confer immunity for life. And not only this, but smallpox continned to spread. Then came the cry that vaccination must be repeated; a first vaccination in infancy and a second in youth; and this soon became the established doctrine.20 But still the vaccinated suffered from smallpox. Then followed other changes, until at last Jennerian vaccination was abandoned in all save the naane.21

      Arm-To-Arm Vaccination

      First came what was called “arm-to-arm vaccination.” This consisted of inoculation with pus from the sore of a vaccinated person. Then it was arm-to-arm vaccination that became “one of the best established of medical facts” and “highly salutary to the human race.” But, alas, for this improvement! Its continued practice brought the discovery that scrofula, tuberculosis, and even worse diseases latent in the constitution of the subject from whom the vaccine virus was taken, were being sown among the people.22 The growing doubt and agitation in the public mind finally led in England to the appointment of a Royal Commission — to investigate the subject. This Commission, of which Lord Herschell was chairman, was in session for seven years — from 1889 to 1896 — and received the testimony of experts from all parts of the civilized world. Its report is comprised in fourteen folio volumes and constitutes the most exhaustive collection of medical evidence ever taken.23 Though out of the sixteen members of the Commission only three were anti-vaccinists yet the result of its investigation was the passage by Parliament of the “Conscience Clause” of the Vaccination Acts. This clause, passed in 1898, exempted from vaccination the children of parents who declared a conscientious objection to the practice. England, the birthplace of vaccination, after a century of experience of its disastrous effects, thus freed her people from its enforcement.24

      The testimony taken before the Commission not only caused the enactment of the Conscience Clause; it proved also the death blow of arm-to-arm vaccination. The horse-grease cowpox of Jenner had already been discarded. Arm-to-arm vaccination, in its turn, was now discarded. Both were condemned as thoroughly as they had previously been indorsed. Now it was held that vaccine must be derived from spontaneous cowpox without infection from horse-grease, and that the matter from the running sores on a calf thus diseased furnished the only sure protection against smallpox.25 The pus from horse-grease, Jenner’s “true and genuine life-preserving fluid,” was entirely lost sight of. The new theory was only acclaimed; the true method of protection had at last been found And again we have the “best established of medical facts,” so “highy salutary to the human race.” Even this, in its turn, is now condemned and discarded. Cowpox itself has falkn into disrepute, and at the present time we have a retum to the old system of smallpox inoculation which Jenner specifically denounced; for the vaccine now used consists of pus taken from the sores of human smallpox and supposed to be modified by inoculation through a series of calves.24 Without notice to the public the word “vaccination” has been used in medical literatuire to mean totally different things at different ties? When Jenner used it he meant cowpox, not smallpox, matter Now it is used to mean smallpox, not cowpox matter. And it is still called Jennerian vaccination! Can inconsistency go further?

      The Alleged Immunity of Vaccination

      But the inconsistency is not confined to the matter of the vaccine virus. It is equally glaring in the claims as to immunity. At first one vaccination was to protect for life;28 this claim was soon modified and two vaccinations were considered necessary to confer lifelong immunity.20 The obstinacy of smallpox in attacking persons so vaccinated then resulted in shortening the period of immunity to fourteen years;30 afterward it was reduced to seven years,31 then five,32 and, in the Spanish-American War, as shown by the practice of our army surgeons, six weeks was considered the limit of immunity.33 What could better prove that vaccination never has provided immunity? For if six weeks is now the limit of immunity, then it was likewise the limit when Jenner and the College of Physicians so confidently proclaimed immunity for life. But vaccination does not provide immunity even for six weeks. This is proved by the statistics of our Philippine Army. During the five years from 1898 to 1902 there were in that army 737 cases of smallpox, with 261 deaths — a mortality of over 35 per cent!34 And yet, referring to these very cases, Chief Surgeon Lippincott reported that “vaccinations and re-vaccinations many times repeated, went on as systematically as the drills at a well-regulated post.” He added, “I believe I can say that no army was ever so carefully looked after in the matter of vaccination as ours, and that the department commander, General Otis, fully alive to the necessity, did everything in his power to make our work possible and effective.”35 But the soldiers still took smallpox and died of it. Where, then, is the immunity even for six weeks? But we need not go to the army for our illustrations; ask anyone who has suffered from smallpox whether he has been vaccinated, and the answer generally will be, “Yes.” Where, then, is the triumph of vaccination? Where the “scientific” protection against smallpox? Science is pre-eminently consistent but the only note of consistency we can discern in vaccination is that each change has invariably been proclaimed as the infallible protection and the “best established of medical facts.”

      Many Former Vaccinists Have Repudiated It

      In view of the steadily receding character of the immnnity claims made for vaccination, what; then, are the arguments by which it is still defended? First, appeal is made to an asserted unanimity of opinion in the medical profession. The statement will hardly be denied, however, that few physicians have made any original study of the subject. Vaccination is taught in the medical schools as a fact established beyond question, and it is the tendency of the human mind to accept as proved that which is established. Yet long usage proves nothing; instance the practice of blood-letting, followed for centuries. Moreover, not one of the mary varieties of vaccination has even been well established are it has been displaced by its “in- fallible” successor.

      There are many remarkable examples of medical men, who, formerly accepting vaccination as a matter of course, have been led by investigation to repudiate it entirely. Such a man was Doctor W. J. Collins, a public vaccinator of London, who, in twenty-five years vaccinated many thousands of persons. Study and his own experience finally led him to the conclusion that vaccination had never diminished smallpox, but on the contrary, had often produced it. He expressed the conviction that cowpox inoculation, whether performed with matter originating in the greasy heels of the consumptive horse or in the running sores of hutman smallpox, is a practice dangerous to the community at large; and he was so convinced of this that he abandoned vaccination altogether, thereby giving up an income of at least $2,500 a year.36

      Among the distinguished physicians whose names come to mind in this connection are the eminent pathologist, Doctor Charles Creighhton, and the equally eminent bacteriologist Professor Edgar M. Crookshank. For the purpose of writing the article on vaccination for the Ninth Edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica, Doctor Creighton made an original and exhaustive inquiry into the subject. The conviction soon forced itself upon him that vaccination is both useless and dangerous. Despite his changed views, however, the compilers of the Encyclopedia still desired him to write the article giving his honest and unbiased conclusions. The result may be read by anyone — fifteen columns, in which reason and science, experience and statistics, combine to prove the utter fallacy of vaccination.87 It should be noted, in passing, that Doctor Creighton’s article, signed “C. C.,” is not to be found in some of the American reprints of the Britannica.

      About the time Doctor Creighton’s article was published, Professor Crookshank was engaged in investigating the diseases transmissible from the lower animals to man, and the question naturally arose whether his observations would support or refute Doctor Creighton’s conclusions. Professor Crookahank, who favored vaccination, went into an original and exhaustive examination of the subject, and the result was two volumes against vaccination.33

      The Immunity Theory, A Pure Hypothesis

      The immunity theory by which vaccination is supported is a pure hypothesis. Without technical details the theory is that the introduction of vaccine virus into the human blood produces such a change therein, by the increase of certain of its corpuscles, that there is created an antagonism to the supposed smallpox germ or bacillus. The theory may be popularly illustrated by the practice anong the Borgias of taking poison in small doses, gradually increased, in order to secure immunity from similar poison; or by the opium or morphine habit — persons who indulge in this habit becoming in time immune to doses that would kill the average man. At first blush this sounds quite plausible, but the great trouble with the argument is that those who are thus rendered “immune” by vaccinaion do take smallpox and also die of it. Even the vaccinists admit that the vaccinated take smallpox — but the admission is made with qualifications. If the person dies of smallpox, then the vaccination was not successful; if the case is only a mild one, then it was only partially sucessful!

      In one of the leading scientific works on this subject, written by two prominent vaccinists of Philadelphia, the statement is made and made seriously — that in a certain ease where a vaccinated person had taken smallpox, a proof that the vaccination was “spurious” was its “signal failure to protect against smallpox.”39 But even supposing the possibility that by vaccination many times repeated one may eventually become immune — that is, provided he does not die from the process, who would envy him the condition of his blood? He is “immune” by virtue of blood poisoning; for vaccination if it “takes” means nothing less than blood poisoning. And with poisoned blood, in what condition is the system to resist the ailments to which mankind is liable? The case is well illustrated by the morphine or opium habit. It is true that one addicted to this habit becomes in time immune to the effects of morphine or opium, but who envies him his immunity?

      Statistical Arguments Brought Forth

      Pages might be filled with an analysis of the statistics brought forward to uphold vaccination, but space will permit the notice of only two or three. In general the argument from experience claims that since the introduction of vaccination smallpox has remarkably decreased. This statement is true, but the suggestion that the decrease is due to vaccination is a mere assumption. It would be nearer the truth to say that the decrease is due to public sanitation, the betterment of living conditions and the enforcement of isolation. This is especially evident in the German Empire, where sanitary and quarantine measures are so strictly enforced.40 Again, in Cuba, Panama and New Orleans, for example, the scourge of yellow fever has been exterminated solely by hygienic measures and the prevention of mosquito inoculation. The benefits of sanitation and quarantine have been freely admitted in the cases of all contagious diseases except smallpox. But where smallpox is concerned there is a curious change of front. Everything is due to vaccination! In yeflow fever the vaccnist will wage relentless war to stamp out the mosquito inoculator, but in smallpox the war is waged against those who would stamp out the hnman inoculator.

      In addition to the claim that vaccination has decreased smallpox, hospital statistics are cited to show that the mortality of smallpox among the vaccinated is never more than 17 or 18 per cent., while that of the unvaccinated runs to over 60 per cent.41 It may be noted that the necessity to prove a low mortality among the vaccinated has led, perhaps unconsciously, to forgetfulness of the claim that vaccination is certain protection against smallpox. But we pass this by to note something even more remarkable. Under the filthy conditions prevailing before vaccination was even heard of, the average smallpox mortality was less than 17 per cent.42 And now the mortality among the Vaccinated is said to be as high as 60 percent. If true, this would show not that vaccination protects, but that an opposition to vaccination carries with it an increased liability to smallpox. In other words, if you now refuse to be vaccinated, then, in spite of all modern science, sanitation and hygiene, you will be many more times liable to smallpox than if you had never heard of vaccination.

      Statistics that lead to so ridiculous a conclusion are — well, suspicious. And the suspicion is strengthened when we consider that the hospitals receive many smallpox patients in the advanced stages of the disease, when it is necessarily difficult, and even impossible, to determine the question of vaccination.43

      Japan is a favorite example of the blessings of vaccination. In Japan, under the law of 1872, strengthened in 1885, vaccination is compulsory during the first six months of life, again at six years, still again at fourteen, and after this whenever smallpox occurs. For all males there is still further vaccination on entry to the army and navy.44 The law is strictly enforced and complied with. There being, as recently stated by Surgeon-General Takaki, no anti-vaccinationists in Japan.45 Of this paradise of vaccination it is said: “Smallpox, once the scourge of the island, is now all but unknown.46

      I have before me the official statistics of the Sanitary Bureau of Tokyo, from 1889 to 1908. During these years there were in Japan 171,500 cases of smallpox, an average of over 8,500 a year, with 48,000 deaths — a mortality of 28 per cent. And in 1908, when the Empire should have been reaping the best fruits of its rigorous vaccination laws, the smallpox cases numbered 18,000 — a number not exceeded since 1897 — and the deaths were nearly 6,000, or over 32 per cent. Eighteen thousand cases, and “smallpox almost unknown”!47

      [Data from Pitcairn’s references, graph by HARpub]

      What Is Vaccine Virus?

      The fatalities from vaccination are frequently ascribed to “impure virus,” and physicians are cautioned to see that their virus is “pure.” As if there were such a thing as pure vaccine virus! Disguise it as you may, vaccine virus is simply the putrid matter ruining from the sore of a diseased calf. Further than this no physician, nor even manufacturer, knows what it is.

      The physician who buys from the drug store has no assurance of the harmlessness of his Purchase. This was strikingly illustrated by the United States Government report on the recent outbreak of foot and mouth disease. A vaccine farm near Philadelphia had procured from Japan what was supposed to be a new culture of cowpox, and the virus from this culture was sold to another vaccine farrn near Detroit. Then followed the disastrous outbreak of foot and mouth disease, which spread through several States and was suppressed only at great expense. In the Government investigation that followed it was proved that the disease had originated in the new culture of “cowpox,” which was found to be a culture of foot and mouth disease.41 But of whatever disease it may be a culture, all vaccine virus is the putrid product of disease; and this is what mothers are asked to put into the blood of their children! The blood is the life-giving stream on which all the fortress of the body depend. Maintain its purity and the body will be in health. Defile it and the body will be diseased. This proposition is axiomatic and needs no demonstration. Yet vaccination involves a denial of it. The vaccinator would improve on the blood formed in the laboratory of Nature. He would perfect it by admixture with diseased pus! For the support of a position so contrary to the instincts of reason a large burden of positive proof is imperative. And what proof has been given? Constant shifting of theory and practice; broken-down claims of immunity; discredited statistics, and a virus the mystery of which is equaled only by its danger.


      1. “Tetanus And Vaccination — An Analytical Study Of Ninety-five Cases Of This Rare (sic) Complication”, by Joseph McFarland, M.D., Professor of Pathology and Bacteriology in the Medico-Chirurgical College of Philadelphia. Read At the Second Annual Meeting of the American Association of Pathologists and Bacteriologists, March 28, 1902, and before the Philadelphia County Medical Society, April 23, 1902. Printed in the Journal of Medical Research, Boston, May, 1902, vol. vii, new series, vol. ii, pp. 474-493, 1 plate, 2 charts; and in Proceedings of the Philadelphia County Medical Society, session of 1902, vol. xxiii, new series, vol. iv, pp. 166-178.

      2. “How We Rid Cleveland Of Smallpox”, by Martin Friedrich, M.D., Health Officer of Cleveland, Ohio, in The Cleveland Medical Journal, February, 1902, vol. i, No. 2, pp. 77-89. See also: “How Cleveland Stamped Out Smallpox”, by B. O. Flower, in The Arena, April, 1902, vol. xxvii, pp.426-429; “The Confessions Of A Vaccinator”, The Vaccination Inquirer, September 1, 1902, vol. xxiv, No. 282, pp.119-120. “The Mystery Of Cleveland, Ohio”. “The Silence Of Dr. Friedrich”, ibid., June 1, 1908, vol. xxx, No. 351, pp. 49-52.

      3. The Registrar-General’s Report of Births. Deaths and Marriages in England and Wales, published annually; vols. xliv-lxx, 1881 to 1907. As reported in this Government Publication the deaths resulting from vaccination were as follows:

      4. Forty-Five Years Of Registration Statistics, Proving Vaccination To Be Both Useless And Dangerous, by Alfred R. Wallace. LL.D., second edition, London, 1889, p. 38; Third Report of the [British] Royal Commission appointed to inquire into the subject of Vaccination, Minutes of Evidence, Government Publication, London, 1890, p. 34, q. 7713.

      5. Webster’s New International Dictionary. Springfield, Mass., 1910, p. 2261.

      6. “The Antivaccinationists’ Standpoint”, by Saxton Pope, M.D., in California State Board of Health, Monthly Bulletin, Vaccination Number, August, 1910, vol, vi, No. 2, p. 53; “Vaccination And Antivaccination”, by Joseph McFarland, Professor of Pathology and Bacteriology, Medico-Chirurgical College, Philadelphia, Pa., in The Monthly Cyclopaedia of Practical Medicine, Philadelphia, October, 1906, vol. xx, new series, vol. ix, No. 10, p. 438; “Sanitary Show-down”, by Zachary T. Miller, M.D., in American Institute of Homoeopathy: Transactions of the Sixtieth Session, 1904, p. 110; “Answers To Eight Questions, Some Of Which Are Wise And Some Foolish”, in Medical Notes and Queries, Philadelphia, March, 1910, vol. v. No. 3, pp. 78-79; Acute Contagious Diseases, by William M. Welch, M.D., and Jay F. Schamberg, A.B., M.D., Philadelphia, 1905, pp. 87-90, 93; A Treatise On The Acute, Infectious Exanthemata, by William Thomas Corlett, M.D., Philadelpha, 1901, pp. 130-131; “Vaccination And Its Relation To Animal Experimentation”, by Jay Frank Schamberg, M.D., in Defense of Research, Phamphlet I, Issued by the Council on Defense of Medical Research of the American Medical Association, Chicago, Ill., 1909, pp. 44-45, 50; see the same, in shorter form, in The Journal of the American Medical Association, March 26, 1910, vol. liv, No. 13, pp. 1029-1301, 1033.

      7. The Letters And Works Of Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, new edition, London, 1887, vol. i, p. 184.

      8. For evidence of the favor with which smallpox inoculation was regarded by the medical profession during the Eighteenth Century, and some of the arguments advanced to make the practice popular, see Domestic Medicine; or, the Family Physician: Being an attempt To render the Medical Art more generally useful, by shewing people what is in their own power both with respect to the Prevention and Cure of Diseases. Chiefly Calculated to recommend a proper attention to Regimen and Simple Medicines, by William Buchan, M.D., Philadelpha, 1772, pp. 158-167.

      9. See the text of the resolution as quoted in History And Pathology Of Vaccination. Vol. I, A Critical Inquiry, by edgar M. Crookshank, M.b., London, 1889, p. 45.

      10. Act of 4 and 5 Victoria, c. 29, s. 8, July 23, 1840, English Statues, 4to., vol. xv, p. 353.

      11. An Inquiry Into The Causes And Effects Of The Variolae Vaccinae, A Disease Discovered In Some Of The Western Counties Of England, Particularly Gloucestershire, And Known By The Name Of The Cow Pox, by Edward Jenner, M.D., F.R.S., etc., London, 1798.

      12. The Life Of Edward Jenner, M.D., LL.D., F.R.S., by John Baron, M.D., F.R.S., London, 1827, 1838, vol. i, pp. 130-1331.

      13. Ibid., chapter iv, “Early History of Vaccination,” p. 121 et seq.

      14. Ibid., vol. i, p. 137.

      15. Jenner’s Inquiry (note 11, above), case xviii, plate No.2, pp. 33-35; Jenner’s Further Observations (see preceding note), pp. 92-93, 83, note.

      16. Jenner’s Inquiry (note 11, above), pp. 2-6.; Baron’s Life Of Jenner (note 12, above), vol. i, pp. 135-136, 141, 146.

      17. Jenner’s Inquiry (note 11, above), p. 7.

      18. “The Humble Petition Of Edward Jenner, Doctor Of Physic presented to the House of Commons, March 17, 1802”, quoted in The Story Of A Great Delusion In A Series Of Matter-Of-Fact Chapters, by William White, London, 1885, pp. 184-185.

      19. See Baron’s Life Of Jenner (note 12, above), vol. i, pp. 254-255.

      20. A Handbook Of Vaccination, by Edward C. Seaton, M.D., Philadelphia. 1868, pp. 305-306.

      21. Exit Dr. Jenner: A Speech At The Annual Meeting Of The National Anti-Vaccination League In Caxton Hall, Westminster, On 27th February, 1906, by C. Creighton, M.D., London, 1906; Crookshank’s History And Pathology Of Vaccination. Vol. I, A Critical Inquiry (note 9, aboe), chapter xvi; pp. 300-301.

      22. Which? Sanitation And Sanitary Remedies, Or Vaccination And The Drug Treatment? by John Pickering, F.R.G.S., F.S.S., etc., London, 1892, pp. 3-4, note 228; See the testimony of Mr. William Tebb before the British Royal Commission on Vaccination, May 14, June 11, 18 and 25, and July 2, 1890, in Third Report of the Royal Commission appointed to inquire into the subject or Vaccination; with Minutes of Evidence and Appendices, Government Publication, London, 1890, pp. 113-120, 131-140, 142-175.

      23. First, Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Final Report, ibid., Government Publications, London, 1889, 1800, 1893, 1806, 1897.

      24. Act of 61 and 62 Victoria, c. 49, August 12, 1898, English Law Reports: Statutes, vol. xxxv, p.251, renewed in 1903; Act of 7 Edward 7, c. 31, August 28, 1907, ibid., vol. xiv, p.175.

      25. “Aninal Vaccination”, in The Lancet, August 10, 1867, vol. ii for 1867, pp. 162-163.

      26. See note 6, above.

      27. Ibid; “What Is “Pure” Lymph?” by Inquisitor, in The Westminster Review, March, 1906, vol. clxv, No. 3, p. 307.

      28. Jenner’s Inquiry (note 11, above), p.7.

      29. The London Medical Gazette, August 2, 1844, new series, vol. ii, p. 608; quoted in White’s story of A Great Delusion (note 18, above), p.473.

      30. See note 20, above.

      31. “A Review Of Some Of The False Claims, Erroneous Deductions And Self-Contradictions Of The Upholders Of The Vaccination-Dogma”, by J.W. Hodge, M.D., reprinted from Medical Century, September, 1903, p. 5.

      32. First Annual Report of the Commissioner of Health of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 1905-6, by Samuel G. Dixon, M.D., Commissioner of Health, p.48.

      33. According to statements made by veterans of the American Army in the Philippine Islands it was customary for the soldiers to be vaccinated or revaccinated upon enlistment, again on arrival in San Francisco, again while on passage across the Pacific Ocean, and still again on arrival in Manila, and thereafter whenever they were moved to a new location.

      34. The following table shows the number of smallpox eases and deaths in the American Army in the Philippine Islands, during a period of five years, from 1898 to 1902, inclusive:

      The above table is collated from the official statistics published in the Annual reports of the Surgeon-General of the Unied States Army, issued by the War Department, as follows:

      35. See” Extracts From A Paper On The Expedition To The Phillippine Islands, May 27, 1898, to April 27, 1899″, by Lieut.-Col. Henry Lippincott, U.S.a., Chief Surgeon, Department of the Pacific and Eighth Army Corps. in The Philadelphia Medical Journal, April 14, 1900, vol. v, p. 829.

      36. Have You Been Vaccinated, And What Protection Is it Against The Smallpox? by W.J. Collins, M.D., etc., fourth edition, London, 1868; See also Dr. collins’s testimony before the Select Committee of the House of Commons, 1871, quoted in Vaccination Tracts. No. 1. Letters And Opinions Of Medical Men, London, William Young, 1877, p. 14.

      37. Encyclopedia Britannica, ninth [British] edition, Edinburgh, 1875-1888, article “Vaccination”, signed “C.C.”

      38. History And Pathology Of Vaccination. Vol. I. A Critical Inquiry. Vol. II. Selected Essays, by edgar M. Crookshank, M.B., London, 1889.

      39. Acute Contagious Diseases, by William M. Welch, M.D., and Jay F. Schamberg, A.B., M.D., Philadelphia, 1905, p. 43.

      40. “Is Vaccination A Disastrous Delusion?” by Ernest McCormick, second edition, London, 1909, p. 31; reprinted, with additions, from The Westminster Review, August, 1904, vol. clxii, No. 2, pp. 161-179.

      41. “Annual Report of the Municipal Hospital for the year ending December 31, 1872”, by W.M. Welch, Physician-in-charge, table ix, p. 19, in Annual Report of the Board of Health, Philadelphia, 1872.

      42. See The Wonderful Century; Its Successes And Its Failures, by Alfred Russel Wallace, LL.D., Dubl., D.C.L., Oxon, F.R.S., etc., London and New York, 1898, p. 240.

      43. Ibid., pp. 237-238.

      44. “Vaccination And Smallpox In Japan”, in The Vaccination Inquirer, June 1, 1910, vol. xxxi, p. 48.

      The regulation pertaining to vaccination in Japan, enforced from January 1, 1886 (translation of the important points only):

      First Article: A child must be vaccinated within a year after its birth. In case the result proves unsatisfactory, it must be repeated by three inoculations during the year.

      Second Article: Notwithstanding that the result of vaccination proves satisfactory, it must be repeated after five to seven years, and again after the next five to seven years.

      Third Article: In the event of prevalence of smallpox, the authority will enforce vaccination within any prescribed period irrespective of the Articles First and Second.

      Fourth Article: Physicians must grant a certificate of the result of vaccination, whether it has taken effect or otherwise.

      Army Smallpox In Japan, in The Vaccination Inquirer, July 2, 1906, vol. xxviii, p.66.

      See also The Lancet, May 19, 1906, vol. i for 1906, part 2, p.1441.

      45. Ibid.

      46. “Vaccination In Japan”, in the English periodical Health, July 25, 1908, quoted in The Vaccination Inquirer, September 1, 1908, vol. xxx, p.96.

      47. “Smallpox In Vaccinated And Re-vaccinated Japan”, in The Vaccination Inquirer, May 1, 1908, vol. xxx, p.28. “Smallpox In Japan”, ibid., July 1, 1908, vol. xxx, p.62. “Smallpox In Japan”, July 1,1909, vol. xxxi, p.71. “The Argument From Japan”, ibid., October 1, 1909, vol. xxxi, pp. 141-143.

      The following table shows the number of vaccinations carried out in Japan for each year from 1886 to 1905, inclusive, according to the official statistics supplied by Baron Kanehiro Takaki, late Director-General of tbe Medical Department of The Imperial Japanese Navy [extracted to a graph by HARPUB]:

      Annual average population 43,027,661.

      Total vaccinations, 91,351,407.

      The following table shows the number of smallpox cases and deaths, and the case-rate mortality of smallpox, in Japan, during the period of twenty years from 1889 to 1908, inclusive, according to the official statistics supplied by S. Kubota, Director of the Sanitary Bureau of the Department of Home Affairs, Tokyo:

      [See above graph for extracted data]

      See also, “The Failure Of Vaccination To Protect From Smallpox In Re-vaccinated Japan”, by J.W. Hodge, M.D., in The Twentieth Century Magazine, September, 1910, vol. ii, No. 12, pp. 518-522.

      48. “Cattle Plague Is Traced To Tainted Smallpox Virus”, in The North American, Philadelphia, Pa., Monday, May 17, 1909, first page, first column.

      “The Origins Of The Recent Outbreak Of Foot-And-Mouth Disease In The United States”, by John R. Mohler, V.M.D., and Milton J. Rosenau, M.D., in U.S. Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Animal Industry, Circular 147, issued June 16, 1909.

      “Discussion in the United States Senate during the debate on the Agricultural Appropriation Bill, February 25, 1909”, in Congressional Record, Sixtieth Congress, second session, vol. xliii, No.68, pp. 3147-3150.

      “The 1908 Outbreak Of Foot-And-Mouth Disease In The United States”, by A.D. Melvin, D.V.S., Chief of the Bureau of Animal Industry, in U.S. Department of Agriculture, Twenty-fifth Annual report of the Bureau of Animal Industry, for the Year 1908, pp. 379-392.

      Fourteenth Semi-annual Report of the Chief of the Cattle Bureau to the Massachusetts State Board of Agriculture, for the Year ending November 30, 1908, by Austin Peters, Chief of Cattle Bureau, pp. 192-198.

      Sixteenth Semi-annual Report of the Chief of the Cattle Bureau to the Massachusetts State Board of Agriculture, for the Year ending November 30, 1909, by Austin Peters, Chief of Cattle Bureau, pp. 132-133.


      Biggs, John Thomas, J.P., Testimony in “Fourth Report of the Royal Commission appointed to inquire into tbe subject of Vaccination,” Minutes of Evidence, pp 150-151, 162-168, 172-195, Appendix III, pp- 415-465, London, Government publication, 1893.

      Birch, John. An Appeal to the Public, on the Hazard and Peril of Vaccination, otherwise Cow Pox, together with his Serious Reasons for Uniformly Objecting to Vaccination; and other Tracts by the same Author, third edition, London, J. Harris, 1817.

      Collins, William Job, F.R.C.S., and James Allanson Picton. “Statement by Dr. Collins and Mr. Picton of the Grounds of their Dissent from the Commission’s Report,” in Final Report of the Royal Commission appointed to inquire into the subject of Vaccination, pp. 156-221, London, Government publication, 1890.

      Constable, H. Strickland. Our Medicine Men: A Few Hints, Kingston-upon-Hull, England, Leng and Co.
      Creighton, Charles, M.D. The Natural History of Cow Pox and Vaccinal Syphilis? Cassell and Company, 1887.

      “Vaccination,” article signed “C. C.,” in Encyclopedia Britannica, ninth edition (Omitted in some of the American reprints). Jenner and Vaccination; A Strange Chapter of Medical History, London, Swan Sonneunchein and Co., 1889. Testimony, in “Second Report of the Royal Commission appointed to inquire into the subject of Vaccination,” Minutes of Evidence, pp. 153-187, Appendix X, pp. 288-291, London, Government publication, 1890. A History of Epidemics in Britain, vol. ii, chapter iv, Smallpox, pp. 434-631, Cambridge University Press, 1894.

      Crookshank, Edgar Marsh, M.B., J.P. “History and Pathology of Vaccination,” 2 vols., London, H. K Lewis, 1889.

      Testimony, in “Fourth Report of the Royal Commission appointed to inquire into the subject of Vaccination,” Minutes of Evidence, pp.1-123, Appendix I, pp.389-412, London, Government publication, 1893.

      History of Vaccines:

      The Anti-Vaccination Movement:

      The Fallacy Of Vaccination:

      ~~ The History of the Pharma-Cartel ~~

      For most of this article, credit goes to:

        • 1911, May 15

        The Supreme Court of the U.S. finds John Rockefeller and his Trust guilty of corruption, illegal business practices and racketeering. As a result of this decision, the entire Rockefeller Standard Oil-Trust, the world’s largest corporation of its time, was sentenced to be dismantled. But Rockefeller was already above the Supreme Court and did not care about this decision.

        • 1913

        In order to disperse public and political pressure on him and other robber-barons, Rockefeller uses a trick called “philanthropy”, whereby the illegal gains from his robber-practices in the oil business are used to launch the Rockefeller Foundation. This tax haven was used to strategically take over the health care sector in the U.S..
        The Rockefeller Foundation was the front organization for a new global business venture of Rockefeller and his accomplices. This new venture was called the pharmaceutical investment business. Donations from the Rockefeller Foundation went only to medical schools and hospitals. These institutions had become missionaries of a new breed of companies: the manufacturers of patented, synthetic drugs.

        This was also the time when the first vitamins were discovered. It soon became clear however that these natural molecules had live-saving health benefits and that they were able to prevent many chronic health conditions. The first books appeared with research, subsequently abandoned, about the health benefits of vitamins. These newly discovered molecules had only one disadvantage: they were non-patentable.

        Thus, in its first years of existence, the pharmaceutical investment business already faced a mortal thread: vitamins and other micronutrients promoted as public health programs would prohibit the development of any sizable investment business based on patented drugs. The elimination of this unwanted competition from natural micronutrients therefore became a question of life and death for the pharmaceutical business.

        • 1918

        The Rockefeller Foundation uses the Spanish flu epidemic – and the media (that it already controlled by this time) – to start a witch-hunt on all forms of medicine that were not covered by its patents.
        Within the next 15 years, all medical schools in the U.S., most hospitals and the American Medical Association all essentially became pawns on the chessboard of Rockefeller’s strategy to subjugate the entire health care sector under the monopoly of his pharmaceutical investment business.

        Disguised as a “Mother Theresa”, the Rockefeller Foundation was also used to conquer foreign countries and entire continents for the pharmaceutical investment business – just as Rockefeller himself had done a few decades previously with his petrochemical investment business.

        • 1925

        On the other side of the Atlantic, in Germany, the first chemical / pharmaceutical cartel is founded in order to compete with Rockefeller’s quest for control of the global drug market. Lead by the German multinationals Bayer, BASF and Hoechst, the I.G. Farben cartel was founded with a total number of employees surpassing 80,000. The race for global control was on.

        • 1929, November 29

        The Rockefeller cartel (U.S.A.) and the I.G. Farben cartel (Germany) decided to divide the entire globe into interest spheres – the very same crime Rockefeller had been sentenced for 18 years earlier, when his trust had divided up the U.S. into “interest zones”.

        • 1932 / 33

        The I.G. Farben cartel, equally insatiable, decides no longer to be bound by the 1929 constraints. They support an uprising German politician, who promises I.G. Farben to militarily conquer the world for them. With millions of dollars in election campaign donations, this politician seized power in Germany, turned the German democracy into a dictatorship and kept his promise to launch his conquest war, a war that soon became known as WWII.
        In each and every country Hitler’s wehrmacht invaded, the first act was to rob the chemical, petrochemical and pharmaceutical industries and assign them – free of charge – to the I.G. Farben empire.

        • 1942 – 45

        In order to cement its global leadership with patented drugs, the I.G. Farben cartel tests its patented pharmaceutical substances on concentration camp inmates in Auschwitz, Dachau and many other sites. The fees for conducting these inhumane studies were transferred directly from the bank accounts of Bayer, Hoechst and BASF to the bank accounts of the SS, who operated the concentration camps.

        • 1945

        I.G. Farben’s plan to take control of the global oil and drug markets has failed. The U.S. and the other allied forces won WWII. Nevertheless, many U.S. and allied soldiers had lost their lives during the conflict, and the allies’ reward was little compared to the rewards of others. The corporate shares of the losers, I.G. Farben, went to the Rockefeller trust (U.S.A.) and Rothschild / J.P. Morgan (U.K.).

        • 1947

        In the Nuremberg war crimes tribunal, 24 managers from Bayer, BASF, Hoechst and other executives of the I.G. Farben cartel were tried for crimes against humanity. These crimes included: leading wars of aggression, instituting slavery and committing mass murder. In his final pleading, U.S.-Chief Prosecutor Telford Taylor summarized the crimes committed by these corporate criminals with the following words: “Without I.G. Farben, the second World War would not have been possible”.

        Amazingly, the real culprits for the death of 60 Million people in World War II – the I.G. Farben executives – received the mildest verdicts. Even those executives directly responsible for the crimes in I.G. Auschwitz only received a maximum of twelve years in jail. Surprised? You shouldn’t be.

        By 1944 Nelson Rockefeller had already entered the executive branch of the U.S. government. He started off as Under-Secretary of State and ended up a few years later as Special Adviser of President Truman for Special Affairs. In other words, at critical junctures of the 20th century, the Rockefeller interests took direct charge. They decided the post war shape of the world and the distribution of its wealth.
        As such, under the influence of the U.S. State Department, the verdicts in Nuremberg against the I.G. Farben managers can easily be explained. In return for taking over the corporate shares of I.G. Farben, and thereby global control of the oil and drug business, Nelson Rockefeller made sure that the real culprits of World War II were not hanged. In fact, and as we shall see, they were needed.

        • 1949

        The Federal Republic of Germany was founded. This was the first time in history that the constitution and society of an industrialized nation could be planned and modeled as a fortress of the pharmaceutical investment business – a transatlantic outpost of the Rockefeller interests.

        Within only a few years, the I.G. Farben managers sentenced in Nuremberg were released from jail and put back into their previous positions as stakeholders of the Rockefeller interests. Fritz Ter Meer, for example, sentenced to twelve years in jail for his crimes in Auschwitz, was back as chairman of the board of Germany’s largest pharmaceutical multinational, Bayer, by 1963!

        • 1945 – 49

        The role of the Rockefeller brothers was not limited to their taking over the global monopolies of the oil and drug businesses. They also needed to create the political framework for these businesses to thrive. Under their influence, therefore, the United Nations was founded in 1945, in San Francisco. To seize political control of the post war world, three countries – leading drug export nations – had all the say, and 200 other nations were rendered mere spectators.

        Founded as organizations to allegedly serve the wellbeing of the people of the world, the UN’s subsidiary organizations, such as the World Health Organization (WHO) and World Trade Organization (WTO), soon turned out to be nothing more than the political arms of the global oil and drug interests.

        • 1963

        On behalf of the Rockefeller interests, the government of the pharmaceutical banana republic Germany spearheaded one of the most infamous efforts ever made within the United Nations. Under the pretense of consumer protection, it launched a four-decade-long crusade to outlaw vitamin therapies and other natural, non-patentable health approaches in all member countries of the United Nations. The goal was to simply ban any and all competition for the multi-billion dollar business with patented drugs. The plan was simple: copy for the entire world what had already been accomplished in America in the 1920s – a monopoly on health care for the investment business with patented drugs.
        Since the marketplace for the pharmaceutical investment business depends upon the continued existence of diseases, the drugs it developed were not intended to prevent, cure or eradicate disease. Thus, the goal of the global strategy was to monopolize health for billions of people, with pills that nearly cover symptoms but hardly ever address the root cause of disease. The deprivation of billions of people from having access to life saving information about the health benefits of natural health approaches, whilst at the same time establishing a monopoly with largely ineffective and frequently toxic patented drugs, caused disease and death in genocidal proportions.
        This epidemic of unnecessary disability and death by the pharmaceutical business with disease is unparalleled in history.

        Linus Pauling and other eminent scientists deserve credit for having kept open the door of knowledge about the health benefits of vitamins and other effective natural health approaches. If it were not for them we would already be living in a health prison today, guarded by the gatekeepers of the pharmaceutical business with disease in medicine, politics and the media.

        Linus Pauling should also be credited for having identified the significance of Dr. Rath’s early research in vitamins and cardiovascular disease, and for having invited Dr. Rath to join him during his last years to continue his life’s work.

        • 1990 – 92

        These years will go down in history as the beginning of the end of the pharmaceutical business with disease. In a series of scientific publications, in some of which Dr. Rath invited Linus Pauling to join him as co-author, Dr. Rath identified micronutrient deficiency as the primary cause of diseases. These diseases include heart attacks, high blood pressure, diabetic circulatory problems, cancer and even immune deficiency diseases, including AIDS.
        Like a Sherlock Holmes of science, Dr. Rath traced the real cause of these diseases, and found that they had been deliberately nebulized or even hidden away from millions of people for one purpose only: to feed the insatiable greed of the pharmaceutical business with disease.
        IS IT SINKING IN YET?!! 
        5 Shocking Facts About Big Pharma USA vs The World – YouTube:

          Top 4 Shocking Facts About Big Pharma Companies:

            7 Facts You Probably Don’t Know About Big Pharma:

              Big Pharma News, Articles and Information – Natural News:

                Big Pharma – Whale.to:

                  Big Pharma – GreenMedInfo.com:

                    Big Pharma – Mercola.com:

                      ~~ FACEBOOK POSTS ~~

                      The Elite, Nazis, Vaccines, Sterilisation, Miscarriages, Eugenics and Depopulation:

                        Vaccines, U.N., Big Pharma and Depopulation:

                          The History of the Pharma-Cartel: 

                            America Funded the Nazis:

                            ~~ Bill “Depopulation” Gates ~~

                            I just recently learned that Bill Gates is teaming up with MIT and funding yet another vaccine scam and I figured what better time than now to bring some attention to this mogul and his efforts.
                            Bill Gates Funding MIT Development of Micro Implants to Automatically Give Babies Vaccines – In an article published by The Free Thought Project – September 18, 2017:

                            Oh, I know… There goes my tinfoil hat again with my “vaccine scam” mention. He does so much for charity and humanity; particularly with regard to his passion for third world countries and the distribution of “much-needed”, “life-saving” vaccines, right? Well, my thoughts on that… I was just re-watching:

                            Innovating To Zero:

                            I noticed a viewer, 1ranjeeves21, had commented with:

                            “No one has ever done so much for humanity. He has donated $28 billion to charity…”

                            To which I responded:

                            ‘”The Pharma is strong with this one!” He certainly has done a great deal for humanity! If not for Bill Gates, who else would cripple over 48000 people in third world countries with the receipt of sterilising vaccines?!! 
                            Not only does his generosity include mass paralysation, sterilisation, sickness and death among vaccine recipients; his selfless nature, no doubt, donates so much of his tax-deductible, dirty money – that with which he has been bought – to charities that, not only cause and promote the disease they allege to treat; they withhold life-saving cures from their patients, such as The Cancer Foundation.

                            Well, they don’t call him Bill “Depopulation” Gates for nothing, am I right?’

                            Polio – A Comprehensive Compilation Proving Decades of Fraud + Bill Gates:

                          • https://www.facebook.com/VforVaccines/posts/1202224656590428
                          • Oops, there I go again… Being a nut-job, mentioning words, such as “Depopulation”. Well, before I continue, I would appreciate if you would be ever so kind and push on this UN (United Nations) Policy Briefs link:

                            “What would it take to accelerate fertility decline in the least developed countries?” 

                            Hmmm… That certainly is an interesting question, is it not? It brings me back to Bill Gates and his TEDTalk excerpt, in this video here. I’m sure I wasn’t the only one who heard:

                            “The world today has 6.8 billion people, that’s headed up to about 9 billion. If we do a really great job on new vaccines, health-care, reproductive health-services, we could lower that by 10-15%.”

                            In other words: We will be able to decrease the population if we do an efficient job with new vaccines, health-care and reproductive health-services. 

                            If you believe this was taken out of context, I encourage to watch the entire TEDTalk:

                            Innovating To Zero:

                            Of course, there are those who are going to dismiss as nothing suspicious Gates’ claim here, justifying it with some kind of bull5h1t, such as Snopes.

                            Well, I encourage you to remember that Snopes.com has already been exposed for fraud, embezzlement, Liberal bias, lying, paying for sexual services… Just to name a few issues proving a lack of credibility on their part.

                            Before I continue, for those of you who aren’t aware, the UN has quite a displeasing reputation, to say the least.

                            Not to mention, Bill Gates is profoundly entrenched with the UN and WHO, so joint interests in the world’s population makes a little more sense now, doesn’t it? 

                            Bill Gates Buys Himself A United Nations Health Agency in Geneva:

                            This is not to mention the close links that exist between Bill Gates and the worldwide abortion industry. Bill and his wife Melinda are, through their foundations, among the most active supporters of groups like Planned Parenthood and the infamous Center for Reproductive Rights. They are also promoting population control through their own Institute for Population and Reproductive Health.

                            Bill, Melinda Gates Decry Trump’s Order Banning Abortion Funding: Worried About Contraception Funding: 

                            Bill and Melinda Gates Institute For Population and Reproductive Health:

                            Abortion for All: How the International Planned Parenthood Federation Promotes Abortion Around the World:

                            Is it a coincidence that in 2014, The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation funded the distribution of a tetanus vaccine in Africa by UNICEF – the agency that provided Kenya with the vaccine reportedly laced with Human Chorionic Gonadatropin (HCG).

                            Doctors: UN Vaccines in Kenya Used to Sterilize Women:

                            Tetanus Vaccines Found Spiked With Sterilization Chemical To Carry Out Race-Based Genocide Against Africans:

                            “Mass Sterilization”: Kenyan Doctors Find Anti-fertility Agent in UN Tetanus Vaccine:

                            CATHOLIC Church WARNING: Neonatal TetanusVaccine by WHO is DEADLY and Bad For Women Reproductivity: 

                            Bill Gates and the Anti-Fertility Agent in African Tetanus Vaccine:

                            ‘A Mass Sterilization Exercise’: Kenyan Doctors Find Anti-Fertility Agent in UN Tetanus Vaccine:

                            To add more examples to this uncanny number of depopulation coincidences is Bill Gates’ affiliation with Monsanto. The company that is owned by Bayer – the company who admitted selling HIV-tainted blood, killing thousands:

                            Monsanto – the company whose GMOs cause infertility; whose Round Up causes cancer; the company who also brought you Agent Orange, PCBs, DDT, Glyphosate, Saccharine, Aspartame, Bovine Growth Hormone and has proven links to the Rockefeller family:

                            Now, “conspiracy theorist” or not, one may safely conclude that, whether or not the rumours are true and Bill Gates is actively working towards the depopulation of humanity; his affiliations and the evidentiary material proving the population-reducing results of the efforts of those affiliations, not to mention those due to his own efforts… Well, this certainly is a major coincidence, is it not? 😉