Category Archives: Immune System

A Simple, Inexpensive Trick to Cure a Cold

Posted on by
Reply

By: Dr. Mercola
Source: Mercola.com

Each year Americans catch more than one billion colds, making the cold virus the most common infectious disease in the United States.

It accounts for more school absences and missed work than any other illness, and it’s the number one reason people visit their physicians — even though most physicians have little to offer in the form of treatment.

It’s a widespread misconception that colds are caused by bacteria. Colds are actually triggered by a virus, which means if your physician prescribes you an antibiotic, it will be absolutely useless.

More on this shortly, but before I delve into simple prevention and treatment strategies it’s important you know how colds are contracted in the first place.

How Do You Catch a Cold?

The most common way cold viruses are spread is not from being around coughing or sneezing, or walking barefoot in the rain, but rather from hand-to-hand contact. For instance, someone with a cold blows their nose then shakes your hand or touches surfaces that you also touch.

Cold viruses can live on pens, computer keyboards, coffee mugs and other objects for hours, so it’s easy to come into contact with such viruses during daily life.

However, the key to remember is that just being exposed to a cold virus does not have to mean that you’ll catch a cold. If your immune system is operating at its peak, it should actually be quite easy for you to fend off the virus without ever getting sick.

If your immune system is impaired, on the other hand, it’s akin to having an open-door policy for viruses; they’ll easily take hold in your body. So the simple and short answer is, you catch a cold due to impairment in your immune system. There are many ways this can result, but the more common contributing factors are:

  1. Eating too much sugar and too many grains
  2. Not getting enough rest
  3. Using insufficient strategies to address emotional stressors in your life
  4. Vitamin D deficiency, as discussed below
  5. Any combination of the above

Vitamin D Deficiency: Another Reason You May “Catch” a Cold

It’s estimated that the average U.S. adult typically has two to four colds each year, while children may have up to 12! One reason for the widespread prevalence may be that vitamin D deficiency is incredibly common in the United States, especially during the winter months when cold (and flu) viruses are at their peak.

Research has confirmed that “catching” colds and flu may actually be a symptom of an underlying vitamin D deficiency. Less than optimal vitamin D levels will significantly impair your immune response and make you far more susceptible to contracting colds, influenza, and other respiratory infections.

In the largest and most nationally representative study of its kind to date, involving about 19,000 Americans, people with the lowest vitamin D levels reported having significantly more recent colds or cases of the flu – and the risk was even greater for those with chronic respiratory disorders like asthma.

At least five additional studies also show an inverse association between lower respiratory tract infections and vitamin D levels, and you can read about them in detail here. But the research is very clear, the higher your vitamin D level, the lower your risk of contracting colds, flu, and other respiratory tract infections.

It’s not surprising, then, that the average American gets so many colds each year, as current guidelines for optimal intake and normal vitamin D levels are far too low — and since most people do not get adequate sun exposure on a daily basis (which is what produces vitamin D in your skin) many are deficient. I strongly believe you could avoid colds and influenza entirely by maintaining your vitamin D level in the optimal range.

How Long Do Colds Last … and How Can You Make Your Cold Go Away Faster?

Most uncomplicated colds last between eight and nine days, but about 25 percent last two weeks, and 5-10 percent last three weeks. Even the most stubborn colds will typically resolve in a few weeks’ time; this is actually one of the ways you can distinguish a cold from allergies.

A cold will last, at most, a few weeks, but allergy symptoms can last all season.

How quickly you bounce back is typically defined by you and your collective lifestyle habits — and this does not mean popping over-the-counter cough and cold remedies or fever reducers. In fact, as long as your temperature remains below 102 degrees Fahrenheit (38.9 degrees Celsius) there is no need to lower it.

Cold viruses do not reproduce at higher body temperatures, so a slight fever should help you get rid of the virus quicker and help you to feel better much sooner.

You should avoid taking over-the-counter pain-relief medications as well, as a study showed that people who take aspirin and Tylenol (acetaminophen) suppress their body’s ability to produce antibodies to destroy the cold virus. Aspirin has even been linked to lung complications including pulmonary edema, an abnormal build up of fluid in your lungs, when taken in excess.

You should only use these medications when absolutely necessary, such as if you have a temperature greater than 105 degrees F (40.5 degrees C), severe muscle aches or weakness.

Hydrogen Peroxide: A Simple Trick to Beat a Cold

I don’t advise over-the-counter medications, but one simple treatment you can try that is surprisingly effective against upper respiratory infections is hydrogen peroxide.

Many patients at my Natural Health Center have had remarkable results in curing colds and flu within 12 to 14 hours when administering a few drops of 3 percent hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) into each ear. You will hear some bubbling, which is completely normal, and possibly feel a slight stinging sensation.

Wait until the bubbling and stinging subside (usually 5 to 10 minutes), then drain onto a tissue and repeat with the other ear. A bottle of hydrogen peroxide in 3 percent solution is available at any drug store for a couple of dollars or less. It is simply amazing how many people respond to this simple, inexpensive treatment.

So What Else Can You do to Recover From a Cold, Quicker … and Prevent One in the First Place?

As I said above, the number one way to conquer a cold (or flu) is vitamin D. Vitamin D is an amazingly effective antimicrobial agent, producing 200 to 300 different antimicrobial peptides in your body that kill bacteria, viruses and fungi. So optimizing your levels will not only help send a cold virus packing … it will help ward off cold viruses in the first place.

The best source for vitamin D is direct sun exposure. But for many of us, this just isn’t practical during the winter. The next best option to sunlight is the use of a safe indoor tanning device. If neither natural nor artificial sunlight is an option, then using oral vitamin D3 supplements is your best bet.

Based on the latest research, many experts now agree you need about 35 IU’s of vitamin D per pound of body weight. This recommendation also includes children, the elderly and pregnant women.

However, keep in mind that vitamin D requirements are highly individual, as your vitamin D status is dependent on numerous factors, such as the color of your skin, your location, and how much sunshine you’re exposed to on a regular basis. So, although these recommendations may put you closer to the ballpark of what most people likely need, it is simply impossible to make a blanket recommendation that will cover everyone’s needs.

The only way to determine your optimal dose is to get your blood tested. Ideally, you’ll want to maintain a vitamin D level of 50-65 ng/ml year-round.

For an in-depth explanation of everything you need to know before you get tested, please read my latest updates in Test Values and Treatment for Vitamin D Deficiency.

Dietary Strategies to Kick a Cold

If you feel yourself coming down with a cold or flu, this is NOT the time to be eating ANY sugar, artificial sweeteners or processed foods. Sugar is particularly damaging to your immune system — which needs to be ramped up, not suppressed, in order to combat an emerging infection.

So if you are fighting a cold, you’ll want to avoid all sugar like the plague, and this includes sugar in the form of fruit juice and even grains (which break down as sugar in your body).

Ideally, you must address nutrition, sleep, exercise and stress issues the moment you first feel yourself getting a bug. This is when immune-enhancing strategies will be most effective.

So when you’re coming down with a cold, it’s time to address ALL of the contributing factors immediately, which includes tweaking your diet in favor of foods that will strengthen your immune response. Good choices include:

  • Raw, grass-fed organic milk, and/or high-quality whey protein
  • Fermented foods such as raw kefir, kimchee, miso, pickles, sauerkraut, etc, which are rich in probiotics, or good bacteria. Scientific research shows that 80 percent of your immune system resides inside your digestive tract, so eating probiotic-rich foods, or taking a high-quality probiotic, will help support your immune system health.
  • Raw, organic eggs from free-ranging, preferably local, chickens
  • Grass-fed beef
  • Coconuts and coconut oil
  • Animal-based omega-3 fats, such as krill oil
  • Locally grown fruits and vegetables, appropriate for your nutritional type
  • Mushrooms, especially Reishi, Shiitake, and Maitake, which contain beta glucans (which have immune-enhancing properties)
  • Garlic, a potent antimicrobial that kills bacteria, viruses and fungi. Ideally this should be in fresh form, eaten raw and crushed with a spoon just before eating.
  • Herbs and spices with high ORAC scores: Turmeric, oregano, cinnamon, cloves (for more on ORAC, visit www.oracvalues.com)
  • Make sure you are drinking plenty of fresh, pure water. Water is essential for the optimal function of every system in your body and will help with nose stuffiness and loosening secretions. You should drink enough water so that your urine is a light, pale yellow.

And what about the old wives’ tale of chicken soup for your cold?

Chicken soup can help reduce your symptoms. Chicken contains a natural amino acid called cysteine, which can thin the mucus in your lungs and make it less sticky so you can expel it more easily.

Processed, canned soups won’t work as well as the homemade version, however.

For best results, make up a fresh batch yourself (or ask a friend or family member to do so) and make the soup hot and spicy with plenty of pepper. The spices will trigger a sudden release of watery fluids in your mouth, throat, and lungs, which will help thin down the respiratory mucus so it’s easier to cough up and expel.

Three Cold-Busting Lifestyle Strategies

Vitamin D, check! Hydrogen peroxide, check! Healthy diet, check! We’ve covered several of the primary “weapons” you should have in your cold-fighting arsenal, but there are others, too.

  1. High-Quality Sleep, and Plenty of It Pay attention to how you are sleeping. If you aren’t getting enough sleep, or enough restorative sleep, you’ll be at increased risk for a hostile viral takeover. Your immune system is also the most effective when you’re not sleep-deprived, so the more rested you are the quicker you’ll recover. You can find 33 secrets for a good night’s sleep here.
  2. Regular Exercise Regular exercise is a crucial strategy for increasing your resistance to illness. There is evidence that regular, moderate exercise can reduce your risk for respiratory illness by boosting your immune system. In fact, one study found that people who exercised regularly (five or more days a week) cut their risk of having a cold by close to 50 percent. And, in the event they did catch a cold, their symptoms were much less severe than among those who did not exercise.Exercise likely cuts your risk of colds so significantly because it triggers a rise in immune system cells that can attack any potential invaders. Each time you exercise you can benefit from this boost to your immune system.Ideally, establish a regular fitness program, such as Peak Fitness, now, to help you ward off colds and other illness.However, if you’re already feeling sick don’t overdo it. Over-exercising can actually place more stress on your body, which can suppress your immune system — and you don’t want that either. You might just go for a walk if you are coming down with a cold, or simply tone down your regular workout.Any rise in body temperature will be an unwelcome climate for a viral invader, though, so some exercise is likely to be beneficial.
  3. Address Your Emotional Stress Emotional stressors can also predispose you to an infection while making cold symptoms worse. Finding ways to manage daily stress as well as your reactions to circumstances beyond your control will contribute to a strong and resilient immune system.My favorite tool for this is the Emotional Freedom Technique (EFT), a system that helps balance your body’s subtle energies and repair emotional “short-circuits.” EFT may even help you overcome cold symptoms.

Supplements That Send Pathogens Packin’

Supplements can be beneficial for colds, but they should be used only as an adjunct to the lifestyle measures already discussed.

Some of the more helpful options for cold (and flu) — above and beyond vitamin D — are:

  • Vitamin C: A very potent antioxidant; use a natural form such as acerola, which contains associated micronutrients. You can take several grams every hour till you are better unless you start developing loose stools
  • Oregano Oil: The higher the carvacrol concentration, the more effective it is. Carvacrol is the most active antimicrobial agent in oregano oil.
  • Propolis: A bee resin and one of the most broad-spectrum antimicrobial compounds in the world; propolis is also the richest source of caffeic acid and apigenin, two very important compounds that aid in immune response and even fight cancer.
  • A tea made from a combination of elderflower, yarrow, boneset, linden, peppermint and ginger; drink it hot and often for combating a cold or flu. It causes you to sweat, which is helpful for eradicating a virus from your system.
  • Olive leaf extract: Ancient Egyptians and Mediterranean cultures used it for a variety of health-promoting uses and it is widely known as a natural, non-toxic immune system builder.

Remember This Tip: Wash Your Hands Sensibly

Washing your hands frequently is one of the easiest ways to wipe out germs and viruses and reduce your chances of becoming sickened by them. Thorough hand-washing truly is an important step, as you are at far greater risk of passing on an infection by shaking someone’s hand than even by sharing a kiss.

One report even found that regular hand washing may be more effective than drugs in preventing the spread of respiratory viruses such as influenza.

When you wash up, plain soap and water will do. Do not make the mistake of using antibacterial cleansers, as their widespread use is leading to strains of resistant bacteria, or “superbugs,” which cause the ingredients to lose effectiveness for the times when they really are needed, such as for surgeons prior to surgery.

Further, the active ingredient in most antibacterial products is triclosan, an antibacterial agent that kills bacteria and inhibits bacterial growth. But not only does triclosan kill bacteria, it also has been shown to kill human cells.

Antibacterial soaps are also no more effective than regular soaps. One study found people who used antibacterial soaps and cleansersdeveloped a cough, runny nose, sore throat, fever, vomiting, diarrhea and other symptoms just as often as people who used products that did not contain antibacterial ingredients. So please avoid making the mistake of using antibacterial liquids and soaps.

Too Much Hand-Washing Can Backfire …

There is another important caveat to remember, and that is your skin is actually your primary defense against bacteria — not the soap.

So resist the urge to become obsessive about washing your hands. If you wash them too frequently you can actually extract many of the protective oils in your skin, which can cause your skin to crack and bleed.

It is rare for a germ on your skin to cause a problem — it is typically only an issue when you transfer that to your nose, mouth or an open wound like cracked skin. So obsessive-compulsive washing can actually increase your risk of getting sick by providing an entryway for potentially dangerous pathogens.

So mild to moderate washing is wise, but excessive washing, especially with harsh soaps, will actually be highly counterproductive.

Avoid the Antibiotics!

More than 300 different viruses can cause colds, so each time you have a cold it is caused by a distinct virus (i.e. adenovirus, rhinovirus, parainfluenza virus, coronavirus). A virus is much smaller than a bacteria; it is a tiny cluster of genetic material surrounded by a protein wrapper.

There are currently NO drugs available that can kill these viruses. Antibiotics, including penicillin, do not have any effect on viruses, but unfortunately have been vastly over-prescribed for this very (useless) purpose. That, coupled with the excessive use of antibiotics in agriculture, has contributed to a steep rise in antibiotic-resistant diseases.

Antibiotic-resistant infections now claim more lives each year than the “modern plague” of AIDS, and cost the American health care system some $20 billion a year!

Further, according to one meta-analysis, the health risk from over-use of antibiotics is also a very personal one, as opposed to simply raising the occurrence of antibiotic resistance in the general population over time.

Whenever you use an antibiotic, you’re increasing your susceptibility to developing infections with resistance to that antibiotic — and you can become the carrier of this resistant bug, and spread it to others.

So please, if you have a simple cold remember that an antibiotic will do far more harm than good.

When Should You Call Your Physician?

Sinus, ear and lung infections (bronchitis and pneumonia) are examples of bacterial infections that do respond to antibiotics. If you develop any of the following symptoms, these are signs you may be suffering from a bacterial infection rather than a cold virus, and you should call your physician’s office:

  • Fever over 102 degrees Fahrenheit (38.9 degrees Celsius)
  • Ear pain
  • Pain around your eyes, especially with a green nasal discharge
  • Shortness of breath or a persistent uncontrollable cough
  • Persistently coughing up green and yellow sputum

Generally speaking, however, if you have a cold medical care is not necessary. Rest and attention to the lifestyle factors noted above will help you to recover quickly and, if you stick to them, will significantly reduce your chances of catching another one anytime soon.

To view the original article click here.
To reprint this article, visit the source website for reprinting guidelines

Immune Boosters ‘Can be’ Counterproductive

Posted on by
Reply

By Andreas Moritz 


This is a question form Diane Austin and she would like me to share what I think about immune boosters, and she is mentioning the IP6 and AHCC, and she is confused if they are counterproductive.

Certainly, I agree with the idea that immune boosters can be counterproductive, because when you interfere or manipulate the immune system, it can go either one way or the other. Either you boost the immune system, you increase it beyond what it is right now, or you suppress the immune system.  We know that vaccines suppress the immune system and they can eventually lead to severe issues unless of course you use an adjuvant, which are like aluminum, which can lead to a hyper reaction of the immune system which is not advisable, because when you do that, you never know when the immune system overreacts and starts turning against the body, because in a hypersensitive immune system, hyper-reactive immune system, it will start inflaming the body’s own cells and it’s called auto immune disease.

So I am not into boosting the immune system, I am not into suppressing the immune system but supporting the immune system, letting the body make sure it is as balanced as it is necessary.

Sometimes the body keeps the immune system lower in order to prevent an escalation, an inflammatory response, that could kill someone because it becomes too obstructive and so trying to boost the immune system when it is low through immune boosters, it can be very risky. So I am not in favor of that.

Many people’s immune systems are low because they suffer from vitamin D deficiency because they are not exposing their skin to the sun on a regular basis. If there’s, during a long winter period, not enough sunlight or it’s simply too cold to be outside, then I recommend using the vitamin D lamp, UV lamp, Dr. Mercola has great standing UV lamps, or there are simpler ones that basically allow you to expose the head, facial area or the upper chest area with tiny smaller UV lamps which can do the job quite well, giving you the necessary vitamin D that keeps the immune system balanced.

And there is a natural built-in mechanism that comes with regular sun exposure, UV-B is producing vitamin D in the body and UV-A that part of the UV light that penetrates deeper into the skin, UV-A makes sure that you don’t produce too much vitamin D. 

So the body knows too much of one thing or too little of the same can be damaging, and therefore there are mechanisms at place to always make sure that we have the right amount of strength in the immune system, not too little not too much.

So it’s better to go to the root causes of immune deficiency rather than trying to manipulate the immune system through immune boosters or any other mechanisms.

A healthy diet, balanced diet, healthy lifestyle, sleeping habits, all of that make sure that the immune system stays healthy. Keeping the liver clean is a great way to keep the immune system strong and balanced.

The sleep particularly is very important. There are studies to show that for every hour that we go to bed too late, and too late means anything after 10 PM, if we go to bed at 11 PM the immune system can already be deficient by 40 % for every hour you go to bed, later the immune system becomes weaker as we go along. So going to sleep at 9:30 – 10:00 PM is an excellent time to keep the immune system balanced and then having enough sunlight exposure.

Make sure that the body makes enough serotonin, that’s a powerful hormone produced in the brain and the digestive system, that keeps the immune system and the digestive system and the brain powerfully balanced in order to keep the body free of disease, and protect the body from contaminants… contaminants found in food or the environment.

So having said that, I hope this gives you some good idea why immune boosters are detrimental to the body and why we should go for the more natural immune boosters that come with a balanced lifestyle, diet, and stress-free life as much as possible, stress being obviously an immune suppressor.

We know that when we get stressed, emotionally disturbed, then that suppresses the immune system by secreting a hormone called cortisol. Cortisol suppresses the immune system.

So making sure that you have proper sleep, a good diet, clean the liver, which all helps to keep our emotions balanced, and if there is any emotional difficulty to perhaps seek help from others, speaking about it, expressing yourself, which all help to keeping the system as much as balanced as possible. 

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyperlink back to the web page

The Neurological Poison So Common Your Doctor Probably Pushes It

Posted on by
Reply

By: Dr. Mercola
Source: Mercola.com

The presumed intent of a vaccination is to help you build immunity to potentially harmful organisms that contribute to illness and disease.

However, your body’s immune system has been designed over the course of countless millennia to ward off infection naturally.

Infectious organisms do not so much invade your body, as take advantage of the opportunity provided to them by an already weakened immune system.

Vaccination is an atypical manipulation of the immune system that stimulates an artificial, temporary immunity and can also involve an atypical inflammatory response that leads to permanent immune and brain dysfunction.

When an antigen is injected directly into your body through a vaccine, and especially when combined with an immune-stimulating adjuvant, your IgA immune system (the one found in your mucous membranes, meant to fight off pathogens that are inhaled or eaten) is bypassed and your body’s adaptive immune system kicks into high gear in response to the vaccination.

Vaccine adjuvants can trigger unwanted “hyperactive” immune responses, as they can cause your immune system to overreact to the introduction of the organism you’re being vaccinated against, increasing the chance that self-tolerance will be lost, and the immune system will attack its own cells and tissue as if “other.”

It’s known that vaccine-induced inflammatory responses can lead to permanent alterations in brain and immune function.

A new report in the journal Lupus suggests “a rigorous evaluation of the vaccine-related adverse health impacts in the pediatric population is urgently needed.” Indeed, with so many children being frequently subjected to atypical manipulation of the immune system by vaccines that contain intriniscally toxic adjuvants along with over 100 antigenic compounds, such an evaluation is long overdue!

If You Follow the Recommended Vaccine Schedule, Your Child May be Exposed to Toxic Levels of Aluminum

As noted in Lupus:

“In some developed countries, by the time children are 4 to 6 years old, they will have received … high amounts of aluminum (Al) adjuvants through routine vaccinations.”

Like other adjuvants such as squalene, an oil based adjuvant used in many vaccines licensed in Europe (but not yet licensed in the U.S.), aluminum hydroxide is added to the vaccine to “boost” your immune response to the antigens in the vaccine.

An antigen is the lab-altered virus, bacteria, toxin or other foreign substances in the vaccine, which is what your body is supposed to respond to and make antibodies against to theoretically stimulate immunity and long lasting protection from natural infection. By using an adjuvant to hyper-stimulate your body’s immune response and force your body to make a high number of antibodies, the vaccine manufacturer can use a smaller amount of antigen, which makes production less expensive and increases their profits.

However, artificial vaccine induced immunity is not identical to naturally acquired immunity. Even when adjuvants hyper-stimulate the immune system to increase the antibody count (titers), there is no way to guarantee that there will be long term protection against disease because long lasting immunity involves stimulation of both cell mediated (innate) immunity and humoral (learned) immunity.

In fact, the FDA does not require vaccines to be proven effective (antibody-antigen affinity) before being released onto the market, rather, only that they are capable of producing a certain number of antibodies (titers), which is defined as “vaccine efficacy.” There is a big difference between proving that a vaccine is truly “effective” against development of infectious disease and demonstrating that the vaccine can stimulate a certain number of measurable antibodies (efficacy). Judging a vaccine’s ability to be protective by only measuring the numbers of antibodies in the blood is a semantic sleight-of-hand that has deluded most of the pro-vaccination public into thinking vaccines have actually been proven to work, which often they have not.

You could throw the chemical kitchen sink into a vaccine to “boost” antibody titers without it doing anything to actually stimulate long lasting immunity that is truly protective. Is it any wonder that experimental evidence suggests the simultaneous administration of even two or three adjuvants can “overcome genetic resistance to autoimmunity”?

Despite this, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not conduct appropriate toxicity studies during their vaccine safety assessments. However, there is reason to believe that vaccines and their adjuvants are quite toxic when administered to children, and the Lupus report highlights several of them:

“In summary, research evidence shows that increasing concerns about current vaccination practices may indeed be warranted … Taken together, these observations raise plausible concerns about the overall safety of current childhood vaccination programs. When assessing adjuvant toxicity in children, several key points ought to be considered:

  1. infants and children should not be viewed as “small adults” with regard to toxicological risk as their unique physiology makes them much more vulnerable to toxic insults
  2. in adult humans Al [aluminum] vaccine adjuvants have been linked to a variety of serious autoimmune and inflammatory conditions (i.e., “ASIA”), yet children are regularly exposed to much higher amounts of Al from vaccines than adults
  3. it is often assumed that peripheral immune responses do not affect brain function. However, it is now clearly established that there is a bidirectional neuro-immune cross-talk that plays crucial roles in immunoregulation as well as brain function. In turn, perturbations of the neuro-immune axis have been demonstrated in many autoimmune diseases encompassed in “ASIA” and are thought to be driven by a hyperactive immune response
  4. the same components of the neuro-immune axis that play key roles in brain development and immune function are heavily targeted by Al adjuvants.”

Aluminum is Only One Toxin Contained in Many Vaccines

Aluminum is a well-known neurotoxin that may lead to long-term brain inflammation, along with a broad range of serious health problems. There is overwhelming evidence that chronic immune activation (inflammation) in your brain is a major cause of brain dysfunction in numerous degenerative brain disorders, such as multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s,and ALS, which may explain the reported association between aluminum-containing vaccines and these diseases.

Writing in Current Medicinal Chemistry, researchers also noted that aluminum adjuvants in vaccines can carry serious health risks that have not been thoroughly evaluated:

“Despite almost 90 years of widespread use of aluminum adjuvants, medical science’s understanding about their mechanisms of action is still remarkably poor. There is also a concerning scarcity of data on toxicology and pharmacokinetics of these compounds. In spite of this, the notion that aluminum in vaccines is safe appears to be widely accepted.

Experimental research, however, clearly shows that aluminum adjuvants have a potential to induce serious immunological disorders in humans. In particular, aluminum in adjuvant form carries a risk for autoimmunity, long-term brain inflammation and associated neurological complications and thus may have profound and widespread adverse health consequences. In our opinion, the possibility that vaccine benefits may have been overrated and the risk of potential adverse effects underestimated, has not been rigorously evaluated in the medical and scientific community.”

And this is the overriding point that needs to be understood: there are many signs indicating that we are giving our children far too many vaccines, and that vaccines of all kinds may be far less innocuous than previously believed. The current one-size-fits-all vaccine mandates simply throws too many children under the proverbial bus, because we simply do not know what all these vaccines are doing to individuals with different genetic and biological predisposition to developing chronic inflammation in the body (which can be manifested by a personal or family history of severe allergy, autoimmunity or neurological disorders) or how different vaccines interact when given in combination.

So, while it’s known that aluminum is a toxic metal with absolutely no beneficial biological role to play when introduced into your body, it would be shortsighted and counterproductive to pin all adverse vaccine effects on this one ingredient. Different vaccines contain a number of different ingredients that can be toxic for humans and cause serious health problems, such as:

Vaccine Safety Studies are Clearly Lacking

The more vaccines are studied, the more apparent it becomes that proper vaccine studies are lacking. Vaccine expert and pediatrician Larry Palevsky has long pointed out that there is a major difference between naturally acquired immunity and vaccine-induced immunity. Depending upon the disease, obtaining natural immunity can have far greater benefits. However, this fact seems to be completely overlooked by vaccine policymakers in the United States, considering the CDC and AAP recommend that U.S. babies receive 26 doses of vaccines before age 1 (which, incidentally, is twice as many vaccinations as are given to babies in Sweden and Japan).

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.”

According to Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder and president of the non-profit National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), vaccine injury is the result of a unique interaction between the host and the type and numbers of vaccines given to that person. In other words, vaccine injury and death is induced by a number of co-factors, including:

There is a tendency by researchers investigating vaccine injury and death to want to point to “one” cause as the reason for an individual’s vaccine reaction, or population-based chronic disease prevalence. This “sole cause” hypothesis is convenient because it is simple and easy to understand. It is also easier for people to think that action can be taken to “fix” the problem if there is only one cause; i.e., separate the MMR vaccine into single doses; take thimerosal or aluminum out of the vaccines, and so forth.

However, the problem with promoting the “sole cause” hypothesis when it comes to vaccination is that the rise in chronic disease and disability among our children, including autism, is likely caused by a multiple factors in any number of combinations. Therefore, by trying to hone in on just one cause, say laying all the blame on a certain type of vaccine adjuvant or preservative and ignoring the effects of increased host susceptibility and simultaneous administration of many vaccines at once or vaccinating children when they are sick, for example, we’re likely to fail in our efforts to accurately assess all of the reasons for the vaccine-associated chronic disease and disability epidemic plaguing our children today so we can take meaningful steps to curb it.

This is a major reason why NVIC has been calling for more than two decades for methodologically sound scientific research into the biological mechanisms for vaccine injury and death and a comparison of health outcomes of vaccinated and unvaccinated children. Recently, a new Institute of Medicine Committee has been appointed to look at the feasibility of this kind of study and here is what Barbara Loe Fisher asked the new Committee to consider.

To view the original article click here.
To reprint this article, visit the source website for reprinting guidelines

Your Greatest Weapon Against Breast Cancer (Not Mammograms)

Posted on by
Reply

By: Dr. Mercola
Source: Mercola.com

According to the National Breast Cancer Foundation, 200,000 new cases of breast cancer will be diagnosed each year in the US, making it three times more common than other gynecological cancers.

Breast cancer will claim the lives of 40,000 people this year.

In fact, the only type of cancer that claims the lives of more women is lung cancer.

Even more disturbing is the speed at which breast cancer rates have risen over the past 5 decades.

In 1960, one in 20 women was diagnosed—but today, it is one in seven.

The following are some important facts about this type of cancer:

  • Breast cancer is the leading cause of death for women age 40 to 55.
  • 15 percent of all breast cancers occur in women under age 45; in this age group, breast cancers are more aggressive and have lower recovery rates.
  • 80 percent of breast lumps are NON-cancerous.
  • 70 percent of breast cancers are found through breast self-exams.
  • About 80 percent of women diagnosed with breast cancer have no family history of breast cancer.

The toxic effects of mammogram radiation are finally being acknowledged as a significant factor in the development of breast cancer. Several recent studies have clearly shown that breast cancer screenings may be causing women more harm than good.

A new study published in the British Medical Journal (December 2011) confirmed that breast cancer screening may cause women harm, especially during the early years after they start screening. This harm is largely due to surgeries, such as lumpectomies and mastectomies, and other (often unnecessary) interventions. The study highlights losses in quality of life from false positive results and unnecessary treatment.

Fortunately, we’re beginning to see the initial stirrings of change, as this latest report from the Institute of Medicine (IOM) shows, which calls into question the role environmental exposure may be playing in the development of breast cancer. The IOM committee is absolutely correct in calling for more research into the risks of various environmental exposures over the course of a woman’s lifetime. Isn’t it ironic that the mammogram—the principle diagnostic test given to women to help detect and prevent breast cancer—is responsible for increasing women’s risk for developing it?

Mammogram Radiation is Much More Damaging than a Chest X-Ray

Mammograms use ionizing radiation at a relatively high dose, which can contribute to the mutations that can lead to breast cancer. You can get as much radiation from one mammogram as you would from 1,000 chest X-rays. Mammography also compresses your breasts tightly, which can lead to a dangerous spread of cancerous cells, should they exist. Dr. Samuel Epstein, one of the world’s top cancer experts, has stated:

“The premenopausal breast is highly sensitive to radiation, each 1 rad exposure increasing breast cancer risk by about 1 percent, with a cumulative 10 percent increased risk for each breast over a decade’s screening.”

Breast Cancer Screening May Lead to Unnecessary Treatments and Surgeries that Can Actually SHORTEN Your Lifespan

Another concern is that mammograms carry an unacceptably high rate of false positives—up to six percent. False positives can lead to expensive repeat screenings, exposing you to even more radiation, and can sometimes result in unnecessary invasive procedures such as biopsies, surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy. In fact, if you undergo breast screenings, you have a 35 percent increased risk of having surgery. If a mammogram detects an abnormal spot in your breast, the next step is typically a biopsy.

This involves taking a small amount of tissue from your breast, which is then looked at by a pathologist under a microscope to determine if cancer is present. These biopsies are notoriously inaccurate, often leading to misdiagnosis and unnecessary treatments, not to mention undue emotional stress.

Just thinking you may have breast cancer, when you really do not, focuses your mind on fear and disease, and the stress is actually enough to trigger an illness. It is well established that stress has damaging effects on your health. So, a false positive diagnosis can be damaging to your health from multiple angles. In a 2009 Cochrane Database Systematic Review of breast cancer screening and mammography, the authors wrote:

“Screening led to 30 percent overdiagnosis and overtreatment, or an absolute risk increase of 0.5 percent. This means that for every 2000 women screened for 10 years, one will have her life prolonged, and 10 healthy women who would not have been diagnosed if they had not been screened, will be treated unnecessarily.”

Unfortunately, the disturbing scientific findings do not end there. This means that by having these breast cancer screenings, you may beshortening your life, rather than extending it. In reference to the 2011 BMJ findings about the damage being done by breast cancer screening, SayerJi of Green Med Info wrote:

“What is perhaps most disturbing about these findings is that, while they clearly call into question the safety and effectiveness of breast screenings, the studies upon which they are based use an outdated radiation risk model, which minimizes by a factor of 4 to 5 the carcinogenicity … What this indicates, therefore, is that breast screenings are not just ‘causing more harm than good,’ but are planting seeds of radiation-induced cancer within the breasts of millions of women.”

Mammograms are NOT Really Saving Lives, Research Says

In September 2010, the New England Journal of Medicine, one of the most prestigious medical journals, published the first study in years to examine the effectiveness of mammograms. Their findings are a far cry from what most public health officials would have you believe.The bottom line is that mammograms seem to have reduced cancer death rates by only 0.4 deaths per 1,000 women—an amount so small it might as well be zero. Put another way, 2,500 women would have to be screened over 10 years for a single breast cancer death to be avoided.

So, not only are mammograms unsafe, but they are NOT saving women’s lives, as was commonly thought. Past research has also shown that adding an annual mammogram to a careful physical examination of the breasts does not improve breast cancer survival rates over physical examination alone. If mammograms won’t save you, then what will?

Cancer’s Greatest Enemy: Your Immune System

Recent discoveries suggest that your immune system is designed to eliminate cancer. However, when you implement caustic medical interventions (such as radiation and chemotherapy) that damage your immune system so that it cannot respond appropriately, you are destroying your body’s best chances for healing. Unfortunately, mammograms tend to increase the likelihood that women will undertake medical procedures that interfere with this natural healing ability. There is now a great deal of scientific evidence supporting the theory that your own immune system is your best cancer weapon:

  • Individuals with liver or ovarian cancer survive longer if their killer T cells have invaded their tumors.
  • A 2005 study showed that colon cancers that most strongly attract T cells are the least likely to recur after treatment.
  • Another study found that 60 percent of precancerous cervical cells (found on PAP tests) revert to normal within a year,and 90 percent revert within three years.
  • Some kidney cancers are known to regress, even when highly advanced.

The presence of white blood cells in and around a tumor is often an indication that the cancer will go into remission—or even vanish altogether—as this New York Times article explains. And breast cancer is no exception.

Thirty Percent of Breast Tumors Go Away on their Own

According to breast surgeon Susan Love of UCLA, at least 30 percent of tumors found on mammograms would go away if you did absolutely nothing. These tumors appear to be destined to stop growing on their own, shrink, and even go away completely. This begs the question—how many cancer cures that are attributed to modern interventions like chemotherapy and radiation, are actually just a function of the individual’s immune system ridding itself of the tumor on its own? How many people get over cancer in spite of the treatments that wreak havoc on the body, rather than because of them? It is impossible to definitively answer this question.

But it is safe to say that the strength of your immune system is a major factor in determining whether or not you will beat cancer, once you have it.Nearly everyone has cancerous and pre-cancerous cells in their body by middle age, but not everyone develops cancer. The difference lies in the robustness of each person’s immune system.

Dr. Barnett Kramer of NIH says it’s becoming increasingly clear that cancers require more than just mutations to progress. They need the cooperation of surrounding cells, certain immune responses, and hormones to fuel them. Kramer describes cancer as a dynamic process, whereas it used to be regarded as “an arrow that moved in one direction” (e.g., from bad to worse). What does this mean for you?

The better you take care of your immune system, the better it will take care of you.

One way to strengthen your immune system is to minimize your exposure to mammograms and other sources of ionizing radiation. But you can also build up your immune system DAILY by making good diet and lifestyle choices.  One of the best ways to do this is by optimizing your vitamin D level.

Vitamin D: Cancer Fighter Extraordinaire

Vitamin D, a steroid hormone that influences virtually every cell in your body, is one of nature’s most potent cancer fighters. Receptors that respond to vitamin D have been found in almost every type of human cell, from your bones to your brain. Your liver, kidney and other tissues can convert the vitamin D in your bloodstream into calcitriol, which is the hormonal or activated version of vitamin D. Your organs then use it to repair damage and eradicate cancer cells.

Vitamin D is actually able to enter cancer cells and trigger apoptosis, or cancer cell death.

When JoEllen Welsh, a researcher with the State University of New York at Albany, injected a potent form of vitamin D into human breast cancer cells, half of them shriveled up and died within days.The vitamin D worked as well at killing cancer cells as the toxic breast cancer drug Tamoxifen, without any of the detrimental side effects and at a tiny fraction of the cost.

I strongly recommend making sure your vitamin D level is 70 to 100ng/ml if you’ve received a breast cancer diagnosis. You can achieve this through direct, safe exposure to ultraviolet light, or if this is not possible, by taking an oral vitamin D3 supplement. Vitamin D works synergistically with every cancer treatment I am aware of, without adverse effects. Please watch my free one-hour lecture on vitamin Dfor more information. For a comprehensive guide to breast cancer prevention and treatment, refer to this previous article. Some of the other research-based breast cancer fighters include the following:

  • Eating plenty of fresh, whole, organic vegetables, especially fermented vegetables
  • Avoiding all processed foods, and minimizing sugar, grains and starchy foods
  • Vitamin A plays a role in preventing breast cancer; your best sources are organic egg yolks, raw milk and butter, and beef and chicken liver (from organically raised, grass pastured animals)
  • Curcumin (the active agent in turmeric) is one of the most potent tumor-inhibiting foods; black cohosh, artemisinin, green tea, kelp, cruciferous vegetables and evening primrose oil also show promise in helping to prevent breast cancer
  • Getting plenty of exercise daily

If You Are Diagnosed With Early Stage Breast Cancer

In the event that you are diagnosed with early stage breast cancer, always get a second opinion—and possibly a third and fourth. I cannot stress this enough, as false positive rates are just too high and the diagnostic criteria is too subjective.Before you make any decision about treatment, and definitely before you decide to have surgery or chemotherapy, make sure your biopsy results have been reviewed by a breast specialist who is knowledgeable and experienced in that field.

The majority of breast cancer is preventable. But if you are hit with that diagnosis, don’t lose hope! There is a great deal you can do to harness your body’s own powerful healing abilities.

To view the original article click here.
To reprint this article, visit the source website for reprinting guidelines

Health Insurance Company Preys Upon the Poor with Junk Food Reward Program for Vaccinating Your Baby

Posted on by

By: Mike Adams
Source: NaturalNews.com

“Will vaccinate my baby for food!” That seems to be the goal of a program launched last year by the UnitedHealthcare health insurance company of Michigan. It has resorted to enticing parents with junk food to convince them to inject their infants with potentially deadly vaccines containing brain-damaging chemicals. This has been revealed in a letter acquired by NaturalNews and signed by Stephanie Esters, a vaccine-pushing RN who works for UnitedHealthcare.

The letter declares “Get a FREE $20 McDonalds, Rite Aid, Target or Meijer Gift Card when your child gets recommended shots before their second birthday.” It even goes on to offer a “FREE ride to the doctor” for those who are so poor that they don’t own cars.

Childhood vaccines, of course, are loaded with extremely toxic chemical adjuvants– chemicals designed to cause neurological inflammation in order to invoke an immunological reaction. Vaccines also contain both mercury and aluminum, both of which are highly toxic brain poisons. This is why many children who are injected with such vaccines become autistic virtually overnight (their brains are poisoned beyond their biological threshold).

While the fundamental science of inoculation is debatable, the adding of neuro-toxic chemicals to today’s vaccines — which are then injected into children in huge numbers (over 100 vaccines given to a typical child) — turns them into chemical weapons being used to medically assault innocent children. Marrying this chemical weapons program with a junk food incentive program is the height of medical stupidity. It makes about as much sense as eating fried chicken to cure breast cancer.

Such a program obviously targets lower-income families which tend to be predominantly black or Latino, according to national statistics. The RN behind this nauseating vaccinate-for-food campaign is Stephanie Esters, an African American woman, demonstrating the black-on-black medical violence being committed against African American children in America every day.

Rewarding vaccines with toxic junk food?

Perhaps the most outrageous part of this entire eugenics scheme which may have already killed an unknown number of little black babies is that the reward for being injected with neurologically-damaging chemical vaccines is a gift certificate for disease-promoting “dead” junk food.

It’s clearly an encouragement for parents to feed their babies obesity-inducing junk food that will also promote diabetes (rampant among blacks), prostate cancer (super deadly among black men) and breast cancer (a huge money-maker for the criminal cancer industry which preys upon black women). Wash it down with a cocktail of phosphoric acid and aspartame — also known as a “diet soda” — and then give yourself even more cancer and heart disease with some fries!

This is what United Healthcare encourages its customers to do? Are they so stupid that they do not realize such eating habits will increase the health-related claims against their own company?

Obviously, if UnitedHealthcare actually wanted to improve the health of low-income children in Michigan, they would reward them with a bottle of nutritional supplements or superfoods. Give the kid some organic CocoChia bars from Living Fuel! Or buy some Boku Superfood for the family!

But no, the reward for being injected with chemical vaccines is more chemicals courtesy of the hormone-injected, antibiotics-laced, GMO-fed toxic processed beef garbage sold by McDonald’s. Did you know their Chicken McNuggets are made with a silicone chemical that’s also used in Silly Putty?

Vaccine incentive programs increasingly prey on those living in poverty

The most disturbing trend in vaccine marketing today is that grocery stores and pharmacies are now resorting to marketing gimmicks and giveaways to entice parents into injecting their children with potentially deadly vaccines.

Safeway stores, for example, recently announced a 10% discount off grocery purchases for those who agreed to be vaccinated on the spot. NaturalNews also caught Walgreens stores rewarding their own employees with iPad prizes if they “recruited” customers to get injected with a vaccine shot.

This is all part of the vaccine eugenics agenda, of course, which specifically targets minorities and low-income families. Obviously a well-to-do family isn’t going to be enticed by $20 worth of McDonald’s junk food, but a poorly-informed mother living paycheck to paycheck — just barely scraping by on government assistance programs — may be more than willing to trade the health of her child for a $20 meal at McDonald’s. Especially if all the nurses and doctors assure her that vaccines are good for her children… and vaccines never cause autism, she will be told.

The whole point of vaccines is, of course, to depopulate the planet through infertility side effects or direct mortality of those receiving the vaccines. This has been openly and unambiguously admitted by the No. 1 financial contributor to vaccine research around the world — Mr. Bill Gates. In an open, public speech recorded on video, Mr. Gates explains that vaccines can help reduce world population.

Specifically, his exact quote is:

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

Watch the video yourself at NaturalNews.TV:
http://www.naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=A155D113455FAC882A3290536575C723

Kids who get sick the most are the same ones who were vaccinated

Here’s another thing everybody needs to know about children and vaccines: The healthiest children you’ll ever meet are the ones whose parents refuse to vaccinated them.

Nearly all the sick kids are the very same ones who have been injected multiple times, poked and prodded by pediatricians, and whose parents follow “conventional” medical advice about avoiding vitamins and putting their children on medication. These are the sniveling, sneezing kids who are plagued by allergies and autoimmune disorders. They’re the kids who get diagnosed with brain tumors at age 9, or who end up with type-2 diabetes in their twenties. The toxic load of all the vaccines and medications — combined with the total lack of real nutrition and mineralization — puts these kids on track to be total medical police state slaves for the rest of their lives.

And that’s the way the medical police state wants it, of course: Everybody sickened, helpless, victimized and lacking even the cognitive awareness to know what’s happening to them. Today’s vaccine rewards programs promote this outcome by pushing both toxic vaccines and disease-promoting junk foods at the same time: “Here, poison your babies and win a free meal!” It’s sickening.

Here’s the full letter sent to parents from Stephanie Esters

Click here to see original photo of the letter:
www.NaturalNews.com/gallery/articles/vaccine-bribes.jpg

UnitedHealthcare
Great Lakes Health Plan

Get a FREE $20 McDonalds, Rite Aid, Target or Meijer Gift Card when your child gets recommended shots before their second birthday.

Dear Parent or Guardian:

Your child is not up-to-date with shots that your child needs BEFORE turning age two years. All shots are FREE.

Please call your child’s doctor right away or take your child to the local health department. It may take more than one visit to get your child caught up with his or her shots.

Need a FREE ride to the doctor or health department?
Just call 1-977-892-3995 at least 4 days before your visit.

When your child gets shots, remember to bring your child’s UnitedHealthcare GLHP Member ID card, mihealth Member ID card, shot record and this letter.

How do I get my $20 McDonald’s, Rite Aid, Target or Meijer gift card?
Just take this letter with your child to the doctor or health department. Present the backside of the letter. Get the missing shots. Your child must be eligible with GLHP at the time the shots are given. Have the staff at the doctor’s office or health department sign the form on the back of this letter. Then mail the form to us. We must get this form back no later than 30 days after your child’s second birthday. You will receive your gift card in the mail once we receive proof that your child got the shots.

Best wishes for a healthy future,
- Stephanie Esters, RN

Stephanie Esters, by the way, can be reached at sesters@uhc.com or 248-331-4369.

Stealing your baby’s blood?

Esters is also involved in a child blood screening program. In a canned YouTube video that is obviously scripted word-for-word (so fake!), she insists they are taking childrens’ blood for “lead screening” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apZhylyJEjo).

Alex Jones from www.InfoWars.com has warned for years about the theft of genetic material from babies. We’ve also reported it here on NaturalNews.com:

http://www.naturalnews.com/028651_government_DNA.html

The truth is that medical personnel across the country are routinely engaged in the theft of your baby’s DNA to be used in a government database. This isn’t some wild conspiracy theory; it’s a widely-acknowledged fact. Those who have never heard about this simply haven’t been in the loop. It’s openly admitted. All sorts of lawsuits have been filed over this, and you can read up on the issue at the Citizens’ Council for Health Freedom: http://www.cchfreedom.org/issue.php/14

Blood money

UnitedHealthcare also uses McDonald’s gift certificates to entice parents into allowing their children’s blood to be taken. As explained in the company’s own literature:

LEAD SCREENING: United-Healthcare Great Lakes quality outreach staff will call you when your child needs to get his or her second lead screening. …Have the form signed and send it back to us. We will send you a Target or Mcdonald’s gift card. Your child’s name will also be entered in a monthly drawing for a $150 MasterCard gift card.

Source:http://www.uhccommunityplan.com/assets/Medicaid-UHC-GL-Winter-2011-Member…

That same document offers a chance to win a $150 MasterCard gift card if you make a second appointment with your doctor after becoming a new mom:

“POSTPARTUM CARE: If you have your postpartum visit on time, you can get another Target gift card. Your name will also be entered in a monthly drawing for a $150 MasterCard gift card. Call your OB doctor’s office right after you deliver your baby.”

It is in these follow-up visits, of course, that vaccines are aggressively pushed by medical staff. Across the nation, women who refuse to vaccinate their children may have both the police and Child Protective Services called to intervene and threaten to steal away their children

To view the original article click here.
To reprint this article, visit the source website for reprinting guidelines

CDC Researchers say Mothers Should Stop Breastfeeding to Boost ‘Efficacy’ of Vaccines

Posted on by

By: Ethan A. Huff
Source: NaturalNews.com

Remember when it was considered crazy talk to suggest that mainstream medicine viewed humanity as being born lacking in pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines, as if these synthetic inputs are necessary miracle nutrients for proper human development? Well, researchers from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recently showed that they adhere to this lunatic philosophy, having released a study that recommends women withhold breastfeeding their children in order to boost the “effectiveness” of the rotavirus vaccine.

Ten researchers from the CDC’s National Centers for Immunization and Respiratory Disease (NCIRD) released the ridiculous paper, entitled Inhibitory effect of breast milk on infectivity of live oral rotavirus vaccines, which claims the immune-boosting effects of breastmilk are a detriment to the efficacy of vaccines. The paper goes on to say that, rather than remove vaccines so that breastmilk can do its job, women should instead remove the breastmilk to allow vaccines to do their job.

The CDC researchers began their investigation by searching for answers as to why children from underdeveloped countries typically do not respond as well to the live oral rotavirus vaccine as children in developed countries typically do. They came to the conclusion that breastmilk, which is packed with immune-building immunoglobulin A (IgA), lactoferrin, lysozyme, and various other important immune factors, inhibits the vaccine from working.

Breastmilk, of course, is a young child’s lifeline. It naturally builds immunity during childhood development, and provides perfect and balanced nutrition necessary for human growth. Withholding breastmilk in order to accommodate the rotavirus vaccine, as the CDC researchers suggest, is an absolutely insane notion that will deprive children of vital nutrition and proper immune development.

But it is ludicrous notions like these that are birthed from philosophies that view drugs and vaccines as being equal, or even superior, to natural food. Oral rotavirus vaccines contain live viruses, they have questionable efficacy to begin with, and they are even known to cause rotavirus. They are also linked to causing a variety of negative side effects, including diarrhea, which is a condition the vaccine is supposed to prevent!

This is how vaccine dogma works, though. The religion of vaccines does not have to offer any solid proof that a vaccine works, or that it is even safe. A vaccine can even cause the very thing it is touted as preventing, and vaccine apologists will say that it works and that it is necessary. And now in this case, these same psychopaths are suggesting that young babies be starved of real nutrition in order to improve the effectiveness of a vaccine.

To view the original article click here.
To reprint this article, visit the source website for reprinting guidelines

New Evidence Refutes Fraud Findings in Dr. Wakefield Case

Posted on by

By: Dr. Mercola
Source: Mercola.com

In February 1998, the Lancet published Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s case series of a group of autistic children with gastric problems, which has become one of the most controversial studies in medicine because part of the patients’ story included regression after receiving the MMR vaccine.

The debate is a heated one, as the study suggests there may be a link between the MMR vaccine, bowel disease and autism.

In an interview I conducted with Dr. Wakefield in 2010, he said he knew he was about to enter treacherous waters when the study was published, and he expected the inevitable backlash from the vaccine industry.

However, “backlash” is putting it mildly, as Dr. Wakefield’s reputation was completely smeared.

The latest revelations in this controversy add yet another twist, and suggest that a series of articles published by the BMJ in January 2011 alleging that Wakefield falsified data, making the original Lancet article fraudulent, were in fact the inaccurate ones …

New Investigation Defends Wakefield’s Lancet Study

At the heart of the Wakefield controversy has been whether or not the children in the study were, in fact, diagnosed with non-specific colitis, or if that information had been fabricated — allegations that were largely initiated by investigative journalist Brian Deer.

Writing in the BMJ, research microbiologist David Lewis, of the National Whistleblowers Center, explains that he reviewed histopathological grading sheets by two of Dr. Wakefield’s coauthors, pathologists Amar Dhillon and Andrew Anthony, and concluded there was no fraud committed by Dr. Wakefield:

“As a research microbiologist involved with the collection and examination of colonic biopsy samples, I do not believe that Dr. Wakefield intentionally misinterpreted the grading sheets as evidence of “non-specific colitis.” Dhillon indicated “non-specific” in a box associated, in some cases, with other forms of colitis. In addition, if Anthony’s grading sheets are similar to ones he completed for the Lancet article, they suggest that he diagnosed “colitis” in a number of the children.”

In a press release, Lewis continued:

“The grading sheets and other evidence in Wakefield’s files clearly show that it is unreasonable to conclude, based on a comparison of the histological records, that Andrew Wakefield ‘faked’ a link between the MMR vaccine and autism.

Now that these records have seen the light of day, it is time for others to stop using them for this purpose as well. False allegations of research misconduct can destroy the careers of even the most accomplished and reputable scientists overnight. It may take years for them to prove their innocence; and even then the damages are often irreparable. In cases where mistakes are made, every effort should be taken to fully restore the reputations and careers of scientists who are falsely accused of research misconduct.”

Wakefield is Not the Only Researcher to Look Into the Possible Connection Between MMR Vaccine, Bowel Disease and Autism

While the press continues to battle over Dr. Wakefield’s purported guilt or innocence, the bigger issue — that there appears to be a connection between inflammation, and particularly gut inflammation, and autism — is getting lost in the shuffle.  Plus, other research has confirmed Wakefield’s hotly contested findings, linking the MMR triple vaccine with bowel disease and autism — contrary to what you might hear in the press.

The Daily Mail reported:

” … a team from the Wake Forest University School of Medicine in North Carolina are examining 275 children with regressive autism and bowel disease – and of the 82 tested so far, 70 prove positive for the measles virus … the team’s leader, Dr Stephen Walker, said: ‘Of the handful of results we have in so far, all are vaccine strain and none are wild measles.

This research proves that in the gastrointestinal tract of a number of children who have been diagnosed with regressive autism, there is evidence of measles virus. What it means is that the study done earlier by Dr Wakefield and published in 1998 is correct.

That study didn’t draw any conclusions about specifically what it means to find measles virus in the gut, but the implication is it may be coming from the MMR vaccine. If that’s the case, and this live virus is residing in the gastrointestinal tract of some children, and then they have GI inflammation and other problems, it may be related to the MMR.”

The lead researcher, Stephen J. Walker, Ph.D., was also quick to state however, that this does not necessarily mean the MMR vaccine causes autism. Still, his research notes the same connection that Wakefield’s team did, which is that many autistic children have chronic bowel inflammation, and have the vaccine strain of the measles virus in their intestines.

Says Dr. Wakefield of his original 1998 findings:

“… it’s been replicated in Canada, in the U.S., in Venezuela, in Italy… [but] they never get mentioned. All you ever hear is that no one else has ever been able to replicate the findings. I’m afraid that is false.”

You can see a list of 28 studies from around the world that support Dr. Wakefield’s controversial findings in this past article. In addition to his hotly contested MMR study, Dr. Wakefield has published dozens of peer-reviewed papers looking at the mechanism and cause of inflammatory bowel disease, and has extensively investigated the brain-bowel connection in the context of children with developmental disorders such as autism.  As described below, other researchers are also doing the same …

What You Should Know About Gut Health and Autism …

In her research, Dr. Campbell-McBride discovered that nearly all of the mothers of autistic children have abnormal gut flora, which is significant because newborns inherit their gut flora from their mothers at the time of birth. Establishing normal gut flora in the first 20 days or so of life plays a crucial role in the maturation of your baby’s immune system. Babies who develop abnormal gut flora are left with compromised immune systems, putting them at higher risk for suffering vaccine reactions.

If your baby has suboptimal gut flora, vaccines can become the proverbial “last straw”—the trigger that “primes” his/her immune system to develop chronic heath problems.

In short, there is a close connection between abnormal gut flora and abnormal brain development—a condition Dr. Campbell-McBride calls Gut and Psychology Syndrome (GAPS).The best way to prevent GAPS is for the mother to avoid all antibiotics and birth control pills prior to conception and then by breastfeeding and avoiding the use of antibiotics after delivering. This is because they destroy the balance of gut floras and promote the growth of pathogenic bacteria. In addition to breastfeeding, I highly recommend the use of fermented foods and probiotics for your baby to help reduce his/her risk of GAPS.

Fortunately, it’s possible to screen your child for GAPS before he or she is vaccinated, so that you can make a better-informed vaccination decision. Dr. Campbell-McBride describes the entire process in her book. It involves providing a detailed family health history to a knowledgeable healthcare provider, combined with stool and urine analysis, and these combine to give you a picture of your baby’s gut health and overall immune status. Dr. Campbell-McBride states:

“If your child has abnormal gut flora, we can assume that your child has compromised immunity, and these children must not be vaccinated with the standard vaccination protocol because they simply get damaged by it. They should not be vaccinated.”

These non-invasive tests are now available in most laboratories around the world for, typically, $80 to $100 each. This cost is insignificant compared to the incredible expense of treating an autistic child, once the damage is done.

New research published by the American Society for Microbiology further contends:

“Many children with autism have gastrointestinal (GI) disturbances that can complicate clinical management and contribute to behavioral problems. Understanding the molecular and microbial underpinnings of these GI issues is of paramount importance for elucidating pathogenesis, rendering diagnosis, and administering informed treatment.

Here we describe an association between high levels of intestinal, mucoepithelial-associated Sutterella species and GI disturbances in children with autism. These findings elevate this little-recognized bacterium to the forefront by demonstrating that Sutterella is a major component of the microbiota in over half of children with autism and gastrointestinal dysfunction (AUT-GI) and is absent in children with only gastrointestinal dysfunction (Control-GI) evaluated in this study.”

Remember, you make serious, at times life-and-death, decisions based on what and who you believe … The avalanche of autism must be curbed—and quickly! And for now the burden rests on you, the parent, to take control of your and your child’s health, and to arm yourself with information that can have life-altering ramifications when it comes to making health care decisions.

Please, as always, make your vaccination decisions educated ones.

To view the original article click here.
To reprint this article, visit the source website for reprinting guidelines

Far Safer than Vaccines in Limiting Chickenpox Spread

Posted on by

By: Dr. Mercola
Source: Mercola.com 

If your child comes down with a case of the chickenpox, which is, by the way, a mild disease without complications for the vast majority of healthy children, a healthy dose of natural sunlight may be just what the doctor ordered.

In tropical countries, chickenpox is actually far less common, and less easily spread, than in countries with cold seasons — and increased exposure to ultraviolet (UV) light, i.e. sunshine, appears to be the reason.

Sun Exposure May Help Stop the Spread of Chickenpox

After examining data from 25 studies on the varicella-zoster virus, which causes chickenpox, University of London researchers found a clear link between UV levels and the prevalence of chickenpox, with chickenpox rates far less common in the tropics where exposure to sunlight is common year-round.

In temperate regions, chickenpox also tends to flare up more often in the cold-weather months, when sunlight is scarce.

Writing in the Virology Journal, researchers noted:

“Chickenpox is seasonal in temperate zones, with the highest incidence seen in winter and spring.  One explanation for this seasonality could be the significantly higher levels in ultra-violet radiation (UVR) of approximately 10-25-fold seen in summer in temperate zones, which could inactivate virus either in vesicular lesions or after their rupture.”

The effect is likely two-fold, as not only is sunlight able to destroy many viruses directly, but it also enables your body to produce vitamin D, which gives you further anti-viral and immune-boosting benefits.

Many are not aware that prior to the advent of antibiotics about 70 years ago one of the only effective treatments for tuberculosis was sunlight.  In fact there were many TB solariums that were created specifically to use sunlight to treat TB. The sun exposure produced improvement in those with TB similar to the mechanisms discussed in this article for chickenpox.

UV Light Shown to Reduce Spread of Chickenpox in Schools Over 60 Years Ago

You may have heard the advice that hanging your laundry outside to dry in the sun is one of the best ways to get your clothes truly clean and fresh, and this is true because sunlight is a natural disinfectant. Along those lines, direct sunlight exposure on your skin may also provide “disinfectant” benefits such as deactivating viruses, including chickenpox, by breaking down their cell walls.

In fact, a study published in 1949 revealed that ultraviolet radiation successfully reduced the transmission of the chickenpox virus in U.S. schools, helping to limit its spread! And some air purification and water treatment systems currently use ultraviolet light to eliminate airborne or waterborne pathogens.

Sun Exposure Increases Your Vitamin D — Another Virus Fighter

The other reason why people in the tropics may be less likely to catch and spread the chickenpox is because their year-round sun exposure allows them to maintain healthier levels of vitamin D. In cold-weather climates, on the other hand, vitamin D deficiency is an epidemic.

If you’re vitamin-D-deficient, and many are, your immune system will not activate to do its job. Contrary to common belief, vitamin D does much more than just support healthy bones; vitamin D  functions in many different tissues and affects a large number of different diseases and health conditions. So far, scientists have found about 3,000 genes that are regulated by vitamin D – that’s more than 1 in every 10 genes in your entire genome!

Just one example of an important function that vitamin D up-regulates is your ability to fight infections, including the flu. At least five studies show an inverse association between lower respiratory tract infections and vitamin D levels. That is, the higher your vitamin D level, the lower your risk of contracting colds, flu, and other respiratory tract infections. It makes sense, therefore, that this would extend to other viral infections like chickenpox as well.

As I’ve stated before, your body was designed to benefit from sunlight exposure. Given adequate levels, your skin is able to produce a wide range of infection fighting substances, including defensins, cathelicidin, and the lesser known  cholesterol sulfate.  As Dr. Stephanie Seneff, a senior scientist at MIT, explained:

“I think of the skin as a battery – or solar panel you might say – taking in the sun’s energy and saving it in the form of the sulfate molecule storing the energy in the sun … I have a lot of thoughts about what sulfate does. One thing I’m quite sure of is that cholesterol sulfate is highly protective against bacterial and virus invasions. That’s why sun exposure protects you from infection. It strengthens your immune system. That cholesterol sulfate is incredibly important to immunity.”

The important factor when it comes to vitamin D is your serum level, which should ideally be between 50-70 ng/ml year-round. For more tips on how to optimize your vitamin D levels — ideally through sun exposure or the use of a safe tanning bed  — see this past articleHow to Get Your Vitamin D Levels to a Healthy Range. However, keep in mind that for children, becoming infected with the chickenpox virus is not necessarily something that should be avoided, especially by way of vaccination, as natural exposure provides subsequent, and safe, long-lasting immunity.

Sunlight Might Not Be Best Once You Have Active Pox Lesions

Although it is wonderful to have confirmation of the power of vitamin D in the treatment of infectious diseases that have typically been fought with vaccines, there is one caution about using sunlight as therapy for someone with active lesions.

Actually this is true for any open wound on the skin regardless if it is caused by a viral infection or a traumatic wound. Sunlight will tend to cause the wound to scar, so it is probably best to actually avoid sunlight if you have pox lesions.  However, anyone exposed to the virus without lesions could still use sunshine as a therapy. So if you or your child has active pox lesions it would likely be better to take oral vitamin D at the rate of 8,000 units a day for a typical adult and proportionately lower based on weight for a child.

Is Natural Exposure to Chickenpox Preferable to Vaccination?

As is true with many new and potentially unnecessary medical interventions used on a widespread basis, there are often unintended, adverse consequences. The chickenpox (varicella) vaccine is a perfect example.

Chickenpox is highly contagious but typically produces a mild disease characterized by small round lesions on your skin that cause intense itching. Chickenpox lasts for two to three weeks, and recovery leaves a child with long-lasting immunity. Further, some healthy children may have only minimal symptoms (such as a low fever and headache) without manifestation of blisters, indistinguishable from a mild case of the flu.

So, even in the vast majority of children who do NOT get the chickenpox vaccine and who have negative or unknown chickenpox histories, they wind up immune to chickenpox anyway. In fact, researchers have concluded that most 10-year-old children with negative or unknown histories of chickenpox are already immune!

Up to 20 percent of adults who get chickenpox develop severe complications such as pneumonia, secondary bacterial infections, and brain inflammation (which is reported in less than one percent of children who get chickenpox). Most children and adults who develop these serious complications have compromised immune systems or other health problems. Still, it is because chickenpox can be serious in adults that it is often regarded as preferable to get it as a child, as opposed to later in adulthood. Using a vaccination to prevent chickenpox in childhood is proving to be problematic, however, for several reasons:

  1. Chickenpox vaccine provides only temporary immunity, not the longer lasting immunity you get when you recover naturally from chickenpox.
  2. The vaccine is not 100 percent effective. When the chickenpox vaccine was licensed for public use in 1995, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) estimated it was 70 to 90 percent effective in preventing disease. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) later reported, “The effectiveness of the vaccine is 44 percent against disease of any severity and 86 percent against moderate or severe disease.”But the vaccine may be LESS effective than that—around 40 percent—according to an investigation of a chickenpox outbreak among 23 children at a New Hampshire daycare center. The outbreak began with a child who had already been vaccinated.
  3. The chickenpox vaccine can cause serious injury and death. Four percent of reported adverse events (about 1 in 33,000 doses) after chickenpox vaccination involve serious health problems such as shock, encephalitis (brain inflammation), and thrombocytopenia (a blood disorder). At least 14 deaths have been reported. In fact, there are at least two dozen documented adverse effects of chickenpox vaccination in the medical literature.

Another Unintended Consequence of Chickenpox Vaccination

After contracting and recovering from chickenpox (usually as a child), your natural immunity gets asymptomatically “boosted” by coming into contact with infected children, who are recovering from chickenpox. This natural “boosting” of natural immunity to the chickenpox virus helps protect you from getting shingles — a painful and potentially serious disease — later in life.

In other words, shingles can be prevented by ordinary contact, such as receiving a hug from a grandchild who is getting or recovering from the chickenpox. But with the advent of the chickenpox vaccine, there is less chickenpox around to provide that natural immune boost for children AND adults. So, as chickenpox rates have declined, shingles rates have begun to rise, and there is mounting evidence that an epidemic of shingles is developing in America from the mass, mandatory use of the chickenpox vaccine by all children.

For more information on varicella and chickenpox vaccine, see the National Vaccine Information Center’s new Chickenpox page.

If Your Child Comes Down With Chickenpox …

First, don’t panic. Remember this is a common illness that is typically mild if your child is otherwise healthy, and it should resolve in two to three weeks without complications or medical treatment. During this time, a cool or lukewarm bath with baking soda added may help to relieve symptoms, such as itching. Be sure your child does not scratch any sores, as this can lead to scarring or infection (putting gloves or socks on your child’s hands may help with this).

Also, be sure you do NOT give aspirin to your child, as this is associated with the development of Reye’s syndrome, which can cause brain damage and death. Also avoid ibuprofen, which is linked to more severe secondary infections in children with chickenpox.

To view the original article click here.
To reprint this article, visit the source website for reprinting guidelines

Global Food Giants are Moving Away from BPA in Packaging

Posted on by

By: David Gutierrez
Source: NaturalNews.com

Major food companies are starting to announce plans to remove the hormone-disrupting chemical bisphenol A (BPA) from their packaging in response to growing consumer concern and the looming specter of new government regulations.

Ninety percent of the U.S. residents test positive for BPA, a chemical increasingly linked to cancer, heart disease, infertility, impotence and even mental retardation. The chemical is found in everything from cell phone casings to sporting goods and grocery store receipts, but its most notorious use has been in baby bottles, water bottles and food packaging.

“Plasticizers such as bisphenol a, or BPA, a plastics building block used in everything from safety helmets, dental sealants, and eyeglass lenses to everyday food packaging, are what are also known as endocrine disruptors, a group of environmental contaminants that can affect our immune system and our resistance to disease in another particularly insidious way — and in particularly small doses — by disrupting our bodies’ natural hormonal signals,” writes Donna Jackson Nakazawa in her book The Autoimmune Epidemic.

In a recent survey, the investment fund Green Century Capital Management asked 26 major food companies for their policies on the chemical. Roughly 50 percent said they plan to phase it out, compared with 23 percent just one year ago. Among the companies committed to ending use of BPA are Nestle, Heinz, General Mills and Campbell Soups.

Because developing alternatives takes time, BPA-free products will not necessarily flood supermarket shelves anytime soon. Yet companies appear to be racing against a growing anti-BPA mood among government regulators, a concern reflected in warnings issued by Del Monte and Hain Celestial to their investors that new regulations could become a serious risk in the near future.

Canada has already listed BPA as a toxic chemical, and that country along with several US states have banned its use in baby products. Although the European Food Safety Agency has declared it safe, a number of individual European states have rejected that position.

To view the original article click here.
To reprint this article, visit the source website for reprinting guidelines

New Study Exposes the “60% Effective” Flu Shot as 98.5% Useless

Posted on by

By: Dr. Mercola
Source: Mercola.com

 

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends a yearly flu vaccine as “the first and most important step in protecting against flu viruses.”

This advice applies to everyone 6 months of age and older, and the CDC stresses that you “should get a flu vaccine as soon as [they] are available.”

With a promotion this strong, you might assume that getting a flu shot is a “sure thing” to protect you from all flu-like illness this year, but actually it’s not.

Not even close.

Most Flu-Like Illness is NOT Influenza

During the “flu season,” doctors and patients alike often attribute respiratory illness to “the flu” or influenza viruses when they most of the time flu-like symtpoms are actually associated with other types of viruses and bacteria.

The only way to know for sure what type of virus or bacteria is causing flu-ike symptoms is to have it lab confirmed.

The seasonal influenza vaccine only contains three strains of type A or type B influenza, which U.S. and WHO health officials select each year as the most likely influenza strains that will circulate around the world.

There are many influenza strains and most cases of flu-like illness that occur in the U.S. during a typical flu season are not associated with type A or type B influenza strains.

So, it is important to remember that, when you feel like you have the “flu,” you can’t automatically assume that your flu symptoms are caused by type A or type B influenza strains included in the seasonal flu vaccine. Also, people who do get a flu shot every year cannot automatically assume they will not get sick with either type A or type B influenza or another respiratory iillness that looks and feels like influenza.

Flu Vaccines Prevent the Flu in Only 1.5% of Adults

A new study in The Lancet Infectious Diseases reveals that the flu vaccine prevents lab confirmed type A or type B influenza in only 1.5 out of every 100 vaccinated adults … but the media is reporting this to mean “60 percent effective.”

It is estimated that, annually, only about 2.7% of adults get type A or type B influenza in the first place. The study showed that the use of flu vaccines appear to drop this down to about 1.2%. This is a roughly 60% drop, but that ignores the fact that the vaccine has no protective health benefit for 97.5% of adults.

The researchers’ own conclusions are also somewhat more lackluster in their tone than the media would have you believe:

“Influenza vaccines can provide moderate protection against virologically confirmed influenza, but such protection is greatly reduced or absent in some seasons. Evidence for protection in adults aged 65 years or older is lacking.”

So where is the 60% effectiveness claim coming from? This number is based on relative risk, and it does not mean that 59 out of 100 people who get the flu shot will be protected against the flu … allow me to explain.

Why You Need to Understand Basic Statistics Before Getting a Flu Shot

Some clinical trials are only able to show a meaningful benefit because they focus on relative risk reduction rather than absolute risk reduction. What’s the difference? You can find a very simple explanation of relative risk vs. absolute risk at the Annie Appleseed Project web site, but let me sum it up here.

  • Relative risk reduction is calculated by dividing the absolute risk reduction by the control event rate
  • Absolute risk reduction is the decrease in risk of a treatment in relation to a control treatment

In plain English, here’s what that means: let’s say you have a study of 200 women, half of whom take a drug and half take a placebo, to examine the effect on breast cancer risk. After five years, two women in the drug group develop breast cancer, compared to four who took the placebo. This data could lead to either of the following headlines, and both would be correct:

“New Miracle Drug Cuts Breast Cancer Risk by 50%!”

“New Drug Results in 2% Drop in Breast Cancer Risk!”

How can this be?

The Annie Appleseed Project explains:

“The headlines represent two different ways to express the same data. The first headline expresses the relative risk reduction — the two women who took the drug (subjects) and developed breast cancer equal half the number (50%) of the four women who took the placebo (controls) and developed breast cancer.

The second headline expresses the absolute risk reduction — 2% of the subjects (2 out of 100) who took the drug developed breast cancer and 4% of the controls (4 out of 100) who took the placebo developed breast cancer — an absolute difference of 2% (4% minus 2%).”

You can now see why clinical trials, especially those funded by drug companies, will cite relative risk reductions rather than absolute risk reductions, and as a patient you need to be aware that statistics can be easily manipulated.

As STATS at George Mason University explains:

“An important feature of relative risk is that it tells you nothing about the actual risk.”

Flu Shot Protects Against Only Three Flu Viruses …

As stated previsously, each year the flu shot contains three influenza viruses — one influenza A (H3N2) virus, one seasonal influenza A (H1N1) virus, and one influenza B virus. It only has a chance of preventing you from getting a flu-like respiratory illness during the flu season IF you so happen to be infected with one of these three specific influenza viruses.

In the United States, federal health officials at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) are in charge of selecting which viruses to include in seasonal flu vaccine, a process that is based on international “surveillance-based forecasts about what viruses are most likely to cause illness in the coming season.” U.S. health officials works with World Health Organization (WHO) health officials to come up with projectons about which three type A or type B infuenza viruses should be included in seasonal influenza vaccine each year.

In other words, it’s an educated guess.

As you might suspect, getting a “good match” between the chosen vaccine virus strains and the actual influenza viruses that do end up circulating and causing most of the type A or type B influenza in the U.S. and around the world is challenging.

As the CDC notes:

“There are a number of factors that can make getting a good vaccine virus strain for vaccine production challenging, including both scientific issues and issues of timing. Currently, only viruses grown in eggs can be used as vaccine virus strains. If specimens have been grown in other cell lines, they cannot be used for vaccine strains.

However, more and more laboratories do not use eggs to grow influenza viruses, making it difficult to obtain potential vaccine strains. In addition, some influenza viruses, like H3N2 viruses, grow poorly in eggs, making it even more difficult to obtain possible vaccine strains.

In terms of timing, in some years certain influenza viruses may not circulate until later in the influenza season, or a virus can change late in the season or from one season to the next. This can make it difficult to forecast which viruses will predominate the following season, but it can also make it difficult to identify a vaccine virus strain in time for the production process to begin.”

When you add to this gamble, the little-known fact that, according to the CDC, only about 20 percent of flu-like illnesses are actually caused by influenza type A or B, you realize how limited an effect the flu vaccine has on keeping people well during the flu season. Too many people assume that all flu-like illness is caused by influenza viruses when the truth is that about 80 percent of flu-like illness is NOT caused by type A or type B influenza. Most flu-like symptoms are actually associated with more than 200 other bugs that can make you feel just as sick — respiratory syncytial virus, bocavirus, coronavirus, and rhinovirus, to name a few.

What this means is that if you think you have the flu, odds are five to one that you actually don’t have the flu but a flu-like virus, against which the flu shot is absolutely worthless!

Is the Small Purported Flu Shot Benefit Actually due to the “Healthy User” Effect?

Lisa Jackson, a physician and senior investigator with the Group Health Research Center in Seattle, found that healthy people tend to choose flu vaccination, while the “frail elderly” didn’t or couldn’t. Her research suggested that flu vaccine itself does not reduce mortalityat all.

Healthy (and health-conscious) people tend to get the vaccine AND come down with influenza less often, not because of the vaccine itself but because they are healthier to start with.

Jackson concluded:

“The reductions in risk before influenza season indicate preferential receipt of vaccine by relatively healthy seniors… the magnitude of the bias demonstrated by the associations before the influenza season was sufficient to account entirely for the associations observed during influenza season.”

Unfortunately, Jackson’s papers were turned down for publication in the leading medical journals, even though her hypothesis makes perfect sense.

Every day you’re around viruses and bacteria and, when you’re healthy, you usually don’t get sick. But even if you do get sick, most healthy adults and children will not have serious problems moving through and recovering from influenza or other flu-like illnesses. If you do come down with influenza and have a good immune response, you will likely recover quickly without serious complications, as well as obtain natural immunity to that strain of influenza and to similar ones.

As an aside, this is one more health benefit to achieving immunity naturally by experiencing and recovering from normal infectious diseases, such as influenza.

Vaccine-acquired immunity is temporary, which is why even though the viruses in this season’s flu vaccine are the same viruses that were selected for the 2010-2011 influenza vaccine, the CDC is still recommending you get vaccinated again, even if you got the vaccine last year. The immunity that healthy individuals get by recovering from influenza naturally is usually much longer lasting.

Why Are Vaccinated Kids Getting the Measles?

Vaccine effectiveness simply cannot be taken at face value, and this applies not only to the flu vaccine but also to other diseases, like measles. Measles cases have greatly increased in parts of Canada and the United States this year. Although unvaccinated children and teens are often blamed for driving the high numbers, a recent investigation into a measles outbreak in a high school found that about half of the cases were in teens who had received the recommended two doses of vaccine in childhood.

In other words, many of the cases were among those whom health authorities would have expected to have been protected from the measles virus. Conventional medical wisdom states that the measles vaccine should protect against measles infection about 99 percent of the time.

CBC News reported:

“So the discovery that 52 of the 98 teens who caught measles were fully vaccinated came as a shock to the researchers who conducted the investigation … If other groups confirm what the Quebec investigation found, it could mean there is a lot more susceptibility to measles in the vaccinated population than is currently being assumed.”

In the United States, the minimum age for the first dose of measles vaccine is recommended as 12 months, but this may actually render the vaccine ineffective. If a breastfed child is given a measles vaccine too early, their mother’s antibodies transferred to the baby via breast milk (which also protect the baby from measles disease naturally), canl interfere with the baby obtaining measles vaccine strain virus induced antibodies. It was, in fact, due to a high rate of measles vaccine failure that a second dose of MMR (measles, mumps and rubella) vaccine was introduced in the United States in 1991.

As noted by the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC):

“An MMR vaccine manufacturer states that in a study of 279 children 11 months to 7 years of age, MMR vaccine was shown to be 95 to 99 percent effective. Protection is estimated to persist for up to 11 years. In a measles outbreak in the U.S. in the late 1980′s and early 1990′s, it was found that there were a significant number of vaccine failures in older children, teenagers and adults, when the disease can be more severe. The government proceeded to recommend that a second MMR shot be given to boost immunity either before entrance to kindergarten or before entrance to junior high school.

In the national outbreak of measles during the late 1980′s and early 1990′s, it also became apparent that children who had been vaccinated before 15 months of age were also at risk for vaccine failure, especially if their mothers had recovered naturally from measles disease as children.

An MMR vaccine manufacturer states “Infants who are less than 15 months of age may fail to respond to the measles component of the vaccine due to presence in the circulation of residual measles antibody of maternal origin, the younger the infant, the lower the likelihood of seroconversion.” The manufacturer goes on to advise that infants vaccinated at less than 12 months of age will have to be revaccinated after 15 months of age even though “there is some evidence to suggest that infants immunized at less than one year of age may not develop sustained antibody levels when later immunized.”"

Quite simply, vaccines do not confer the same type of immunity that exposure to the actual disease does …

Why the Herd Immunity Concept is Flawed

Typically, vaccine promoters will stress the importance of compliance with the vaccine schedule that requires multiple doses of a vaccine in order to create and maintain vaccine induced “herd immunity,” because a vaccine is never 100 percent effective. However, they never quite seem to be able to explain why the majority of outbreaks occur in areas that are thought to HAVE herd immunity status, i.e. where the majority of people are vaccinated and “should” therefore never get the disease.

The problem is that there is, in fact, such a thing as natural herd immunity. But what has happened is that public health officials have taken this natural phenomenon and assumed that vaccine induced herd immunity is the same as disease induced herd immunity and it is not the same. The science clearly shows that there’s a big difference between naturally developed herd immunity and vaccine-induced herd immunity in a population.

To learn more, I urge you to listen to the video above, in which Barbara Loe Fisher and I discuss the concept of herd immunity.

“The original concept of herd immunity is that when a population experiences the natural disease… natural immunity would be achieved – a robust, qualitatively superior natural herd immunity within the population, which would then protect other people from getting the disease in other age groups. It’s the way infectious diseases work…” Barbara explains. ”But the vaccinologists have adopted this idea of vaccine induced herd immunity.

The problem with it is that all vaccines only confer temporary protection… Pertussis vaccine is one the best examples… Pertussis vaccines have been used for about 50 to 60 years, and the organism has started to evolve to become vaccine resistant. I think this is not something that’s really understood generally by the public: Vaccines do not confer the same type of immunity that natural exposure to the disease does.”

Vaccine professionals would like you to believe they are the same, but they’re qualitatively two entirely different types of immune responses.

“In most cases natural exposure to disease would give you a longer lasting, more robust, qualitatively superior immunity because it gives you both cell mediated immunity and humoral immunity,” Barbara explains. ”Humoral is the antibody production. The way you measure vaccine-induced immunity is by how high the antibody titers are. (How many antibodies you have, basically.)

But the problem is that cell mediated immunity is very important as well. Most vaccines evade cell mediated immunity and go straight for the antibodies, which is only one part of immunity. That’s been the big problem with the production of vaccines.”

Are You Willing to Accept the Risks for a 1.5% Benefit?

The latest study showing the incredibly minimal benefit of the flu vaccine is in line with past research that has also concluded that flu vaccines appear to have very limited measurable benefits for children, adults or seniors.

The Cochrane Database Review—which is the gold standard for assessing the scientific evidence for the effectiveness of commonly used medical interventions – published the following telling statistics:

“Over 200 viruses cause influenza and influenza-like illness, which produce the same symptoms (fever, headache, aches and pains, cough and runny noses). Without laboratory tests, doctors cannot tell the two illnesses apart. Both last for days and rarely lead to death or serious illness. At best, vaccines might be effective against only influenza A and B, which represent about 10 percent of all circulating viruses. Each year, the World Health Organization recommends which viral strains should be included in vaccinations for the forthcoming season.

Authors of this review assessed all trials that compared vaccinated people with unvaccinated people. The combined results of these trials showed that under ideal conditions (vaccine completely matching circulating viral configuration) 33 healthy adults need to be vaccinated to avoid one set of influenza symptoms.

In average conditions (partially matching vaccine) 100 people need to be vaccinated to avoid one set of influenza symptoms.

Vaccine use did not affect the number of people hospitalized or working days lost but caused one case of Guillian-Barré syndrome [GBS] (a major neurological condition leading to paralysis) for every one million vaccinations.”

Is it really worth risking the health and well-being of 100 people in order to prevent ONE case of the flu, which may or may not result in serious illness or death in that one individual to begin with?

While infants and young children are at greatest risk, no one is exempt from the potential serious complications of vaccination, one of which is GBS.

In the video profile of vaccine injury above, Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder and president of NVIC, interviews a Connecticut artist and her mother, a former professor of nursing, who developed Guillaine-Barre syndrome after getting a seasonal flu shot in 2008 and today is permanently disabled with total body paralysis. This family has chosen to share their heartbreaking story to help those who have had the same experience feel less alone, and to educate others about what it means to be vaccine injured.

What happened to this family is a potent reminder of just how important it is to make well-informed decisions about vaccinations.

The Best Way to Prevent the Flu Has Little to do With a Vaccine

Avoiding influenza and flu-like illness during the flu season or any season doesn’t require a flu vaccine. By following the simple guidelines below, you can help keep your immune system in optimal working order so that you’re far less likely to get sick or, if you do get sick, you are better prepared to move through it without complications and soon return to good health.

  • Optimize your vitamin D levels. As I’ve previously reported, optimizing your vitamin D levels is one of the absolute best strategies for avoiding infections of ALL kinds, and vitamin D deficiency is likely the TRUE culprit behind the seasonality of the flu– not the flu virus itself. This is probably the single most important and least expensive action you can take. Regularly monitor your vitamin D levels to confirm your levels are within the therapeutic range of 50-70 ng/ml.

Ideally, you’ll want to get all your vitamin D from sun exposure or a safe tanning bed, but as a last resort you can take an oral vitamin D3 supplement. According to the latest review by Carole Baggerly (Grassrootshealth.org), adults need about 8,000 IU’s a day.

  • Avoid Sugar, Fructose and Processed Foods. Sugar impairs the function of your immune system almost immediately, and as you likely know, a healthy immune system is one of the most important keys to fighting off viruses and other illness. Be aware that sugar is present in foods you may not suspect, like ketchup and fruit juice.
  • Get Enough Rest. Just like it becomes harder for you to get your daily tasks done if you’re tired, if your body is overly fatigued it will be harder for it to fight the flu. Be sure to check out my article Guide to a Good Night’s Sleep for some great tips to help you get quality rest.
  • Have Effective Tools to Address Stress . We all face some stress every day, but if stress becomes overwhelming then your body will be less able to fight off the flu and other illness. If you feel that stress is taking a toll on your health, consider using an energy psychology tool such as the Emotional Freedom Technique, which is remarkably effective in relieving stress associated with all kinds of events, from work to family to trauma.
  • Exercise. When you exercise, you increase your circulation and your blood flow throughout your body. The components of your immune system are also better circulated, which means your immune system has a better chance of finding an illness before it spreads.
  • Take a Good Source of Animal-Based Omega-3 Fats. Increase your intake of healthy and essential fats like the omega-3 found in krill oil, which is crucial for maintaining health. It is also crucial to avoid excessive and/or oxidized omega-6 fatty acids, as well as trans fatty acids commonly found in processed foods, as they will seriously damage your immune response.
  • Wash Your Hands. Washing your hands will decrease your likelihood of spreading a virus to your nose, mouth or other people. Be sure you don’t use antibacterial soap for this — antibacterial soaps are completely unnecessary, and they cause far more harm than good. Instead, identify a simple chemical-free soap that you can switch your family to.
  • Use Natural Antibiotics. Examples include colloidal silver, oil of oregano, and garlic. These work like broad-spectrum antibiotics against bacteria, viruses, and protozoa in your body. And unlike pharmaceutical antibiotics, they do not appear to lead to resistance.
  • Avoid Hospitals. I’d recommend you stay away from hospitals unless you’re having an emergency and need expert medical care, as hospitals are prime breeding grounds for infectious microorganisms of all kinds. The best place to get plenty of rest and recover from illness that is not life-threatening is usually in the comfort of your own home.

To view the original article click here.
To reprint this article, visit the source website for reprinting guidelines

Dodgy Doctors Say: This Health Video Should be Banned

Posted on by

By: Dr. Mercola
Source: Mercola.com

The vaccine industry gives millions for conferences, grants, and medical education classes sponsored by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP).

The vaccine industry even helped build AAP’s headquarters.

Recently, the AAP President wrote a letter to the CEO of Delta Air Lines attacking the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) for creating a flu prevention video for in-flight programming shown on Delta Air Lines during the month of November.

The AAP asked Delta to block NVIC’s video from being shown to Delta travelers.

The video, which you can view above, offers sensible and proven tips for staying well during the flu season, such as:

  • Washing your hands
  • Covering your mouth when coughing
  • Eating nutritious foods and consuming proper nutrients, such as vitamins C and D
  • Getting enough sleep and lowering your stress levels
  • Exercising regularly

The video also states that flu vaccine is another option, which you can discuss with your doctor.

Putting Children’s Lives at Risk?

For showing this video filled with sensible, health-protective advice, a letter signed by AAP President Dr. Robert Block accused Delta (and by proxy NVIC) of “putting children’s lives at risk” and alleges that:

“The [NVIC] ad urges viewers to become informed about influenza and how to stay well during the flu season without resorting to the influenza vaccine.”

Imagine that!

The AAP also had the audacity to state that the video contains “harmful messages,” which is so far from the truth it’s ridiculous.

So why would the AAP leadership be so angered by a video that encourages travelers to eat right, get plenty of sleep, wash their hands and cover their mouths while coughing? Because they want you to believe their drug industry-funded propaganda that the best way to stay well during the flu season is to simply get a flu shot.

The idea that a flu shot is all you need to stay healthy is totally inaccurate, as was demonstrated in a recently published scientific study that found flu shots are less than 70 percent effective in preventing influenza. Promoting this kind of misinformation about flu vaccine speaks volumes about the AAP’s motives, which appear to be far more about pushing vaccine sales than disseminating truthful information that could actually keep children (and adults) healthier.

CBS News Reveals AAP’s Strong Financial Ties to Vaccine Makers

The AAP’s blatant attempts to censor and block public access to complete and accurate information about influenza and staying well during the flu season take on a new light when you consider where the medical trade association’s funding comes from. As revealed byCBS News investigative correspondent Sharyl Attkisson:

“The vaccine industry gives millions to the Academy of Pediatrics … The totals are kept secret, but public documents reveal bits and pieces.

  • A $342,000 payment from Wyeth, maker of the pneumococcal vaccine – which makes $2 billion a year in sales.
  • A $433,000 contribution from Merck, the same year the academy endorsed Merck’s HPV vaccine – which made $1.5 billion a year in sales.
  • Another top donor: Sanofi Aventis, maker of 17 vaccines and a … five-in-one combo shot … added to the childhood vaccine schedule …

There’s nothing illegal about the financial relationships, but to critics, they pose a serious risk for conflicts of interest. As one member of Congress put it, money from the pharmaceutical industry can shape the practices of those who hold themselves out to be “independent.”"

There seems to be a pattern to the AAP’s bad behavior when it comes to attacking NVIC efforts to provide the public with truthful information about health and vaccination. Earlier this year, the AAP President sent a letter to CBS containing misinformation about NVIC in an attempt to strong-arm the network into taking down our Times Square billboard, which included a 15-second public service message encouraging everyone to make informed vaccine choices.

In a nutshell, the AAP does not want you (or doctors and nurses giving vaccines) to have access to complete and accurate information about vaccination and health that might make you think critically, do your own research before getting vaccinated and even open up a discussion with your doctor! This kind of bullying and censorship of vital health information simply should not be tolerated in a “free” country such as the United States.

NVIC co-founder and president Barbara Loe Fisher responded to the AAP’s latest attack:

“Without cause, the AAP has used their considerable financial resources and political influence to intimidate Delta for simply showing a video that offers accurate information about ways to stay healthy during the flu season, including talking with doctors about getting a flu shot.

Censorship and attacks on consumer advocacy groups working to institute informed consent protections in public health policies should not be tolerated in this or any society that cherishes free speech and the right to self determination.”

Let Delta Know You Like NVIC’s Video

Pro-forced vaccination proponents have lined up behind the AAP’s attack on NVIC’s flu prevention video and organized an online effort to bombard Delta Air Lines with letters criticizing NVIC. If you like NVIC’s video because it informs travelers about many options for staying well during the flu season, you can send an email to Delta’s CEO, Richard Anderson, at: customer-care@delta.com.

Your Right to Informed Consent is Under Attack

If you live in the United States, there are legal exemptions that give you the right to opt out of vaccination. All 50 states allow a medical exemption to vaccination (the medical exemption can only be written by an M.D. or D.O.); 48 states allow a religious exemption to vaccination; and 18 states allow a personal, philosophical or conscientious belief exemption to vaccination.

However, vaccine exemptions are currently under attack in every state because the wealthy and powerful Pharmaceutical Industry lobby is trying to take them away. And as the largest political lobby group, they have immense power when it comes to influencing vaccine laws and public health policy.

The AAP, like other medical trade associations that receive money from vaccine manufacturers, is really only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the influence and control Big Pharma has in the creation of state and federal public health policies and laws.

This is not an issue of being for or against vaccination; it’s a matter of protecting your legal right to informed consent to medical risk-taking for yourself and your children, as well as protecting your right to access independent, unbiased information about vaccination and health.

Parental rights to give informed consent for their minor children to get vaccines for sexually transmitted diseases (STD’s) has already been taken away in California, where Governor Jerry Brown bowed to pressure from the pharmaceutical lobby and signed AB 499 into law, which permits children to get Gardasil, hepatitis B and other STD vaccines without parents ever knowing it!

As Dawn Richardson, director of advocacy for NVIC, stated:

“Governor Brown’s signing of this legislation signals a negative trend in state public health policy making. Big Pharma has been working behind the scenes in California, Washington and other states to take away parental rights and vaccine exemptions … Under federal law, parents are to help minimize risks and this new California law raises, rather than reduces, vaccine risks for children.”

Pharmaceutical and medical lobbyists were heavily involved in pushing this new vaccine law through the California state legislature this year. After all, by stripping parents of their legal right to make informed decisions about medical products and procedures that could harm their children, they have a guaranteed new market for Gardasil vaccine and every STD vaccine drug companies create and sell in the future.

This new state vaccine law is not only a violation of parental rights, it is also a violation of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. In that federal law enacted by Congress 25 years ago, vaccine safety provisions were secured by the co-founders of NVIC in order to help prevent vaccine injuries and deaths. One of the safety provisions in that 1986 law is that doctors and all vaccine providers are required to inform parents about the risks of vaccination BEFORE their children are vaccinated.

Maybe the biggest reason why the AAP leadership dislikes NVIC so much is because NVIC has always been about trying to prevent vaccine injuries and deaths and lots of pediatrians these days are writing off serious vaccine reactions as a “coincidence.” They are also throwing parents out of their offices if they ask too many questions about vaccination.

The new California law stripping parents of their informed consent rights is very dangerous because if parents do not know their minor children are getting vaccinated, they do know how to monitor their children for signs and symptoms of a vaccine reaction. Parents kept in the dark will not know, for example, how to be on the lookout for dangerous reactions like those that have been reported after Gardasil, which has had thousands of reported adverse effects, ranging from paralysis and blood clots to cardiac arrests and strokes, sometimes ending in permanent disability or even death.

It is the parent – not doctors or elected state officials – who will live with consequences and be legally responsible for caring for a minor child if that child is injured by a vaccine. Governor Brown bowed to pressure from the Pharma lobby and took away parents’ right to know and give consent to vaccination for their children and Pharma is mounting similar attacks on informed consent rights in other states. As Barbara Loe Fisher has said, informed consent is a human right:

“The right to voluntary, informed consent to a medical intervention, including use of a pharmaceutical product such as a vaccine that can injure or kill you or your child, is a human right. While the State may have the legal authority to mandate use of vaccines, nobody has the moral authority to FORCE you to get vaccinated or vaccinate your child without your voluntary, informed consent.”

What the AAP Won’t Tell You About the Flu Shot

Getting back to the flu vaccine specifically, while the AAP and government health agencies tout flu shots as the “best” way to avoid seasonal influenza, what many fail to realize is that the published science available actually does NOT support this conclusion. The AAP and public health officials are, in essence, engaging in  wishful thinking that is unsupported by scientific evidence.

Take the independent Cochrane Collaboration review of the medical literature, for example, which is an unbiased assessment of the strength of the scientific evidence for the effectiveness of common medical interventions. As discussed here in a recent article on GreenMedInfo.com, there are five Cochrane Database Reviews, published between 2006 and 2010, assessing the evidence for the effectiveness of influenza vaccine and those reviews completely debunk the false claim that flu shots are the most effective course of action to take to prevent influenza.

A large-scale, systematic review of 51 studies, published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews in 2006, found no evidence that the flu vaccine is any more effective than a placebo in children under two. The studies involved 260,000 children, age 6 to 23 months.

  1. Two years, later, in 2008, another Cochrane review again concluded that “little evidence is available” that the flu vaccine is effective for children under the age of two. Even more disturbingly, the authors stated that:“It was surprising to find only one study of inactivated vaccine in children under two years, given current recommendations to vaccinate healthy children from six months old in the USA and Canada. If immunization in children is to be recommended as a public health policy, large-scale studies assessing important outcomes and directly comparing vaccine types are urgently required.”
  2. Then, last year, Cochrane published the following bombshell conclusion:“Influenza vaccines have a modest effect in reducing influenza symptoms and working days lost. There is no evidence that they affect complications, such as pneumonia, or transmission.WARNING: This review includes 15 out of 36 trials funded by industry (four had no funding declaration). An earlier systematic review of 274 influenza vaccine studies published up to 2007 found industry funded studies were published in more prestigious journals and cited more than other studies independently from methodological quality and size. Studies funded from public sources were significantly less likely to report conclusions favorable to the vaccines.The review showed that reliable evidence on influenza vaccines is thin but there is evidence of widespread manipulation of conclusions and spurious notoriety of the studies. The content and conclusions of this review should be interpreted in light of this finding.” [Emphasis mine.]
  3. Last year, Cochrane also reviewed the available evidence with regard to protecting the elderly, and the results were equally abysmal. The authors concluded that: “The available evidence is of poor quality and provides no guidance regarding the safety, efficacy or effectiveness of influenza vaccines for people aged 65 years or older.”
  4. Cochrane also reviewed whether or not vaccinating health care workers can help protect the elderly patients with whom they work. In conclusion, the authors state that: “[T]here is no evidence that vaccinating health care workers prevents influenza in elderly residents in long-term care facilities.

Sound Strategies to Prevent Flu

I recently published a timely review of what you can do to protect yourself and your family from colds and flu this season and in years to come. I urge you to read it for my full recommendations.

Overall, your best defense against any disease is a robust immune system, which vaccines can sometimes compromise. Supporting your immune system should always be a top priority as, ultimately, it is the state of your immune system that helps determine whether or not you get sick from being exposed to viral or bacterial organisms associated with infectious diseases and, if you do get sick, whether you are more likely to heal without complications.

The key to boosting your immune system and making it a “lean, mean, disease-fighting machine” lies in your lifestyle habits – healthy food, stress relief, exercise, sleep, and exposure to sunlight, among other things – just as NVIC stated in their Delta video!

Artificially manipulating your immune system with a vaccine to try to stay healthy is not the same thing, nor does it produce the same kind of immunity and sought-after disease-fighting result if you do experience and recover from infections like influenza. Staying well is much more dependent upon the way you live your life throughout the year in terms of taking common sense precautions and steps to stay healthy than it does on getting a flu shot every year.

By following these simple guidelines, you can keep your immune system in optimal working order so that you’re far less likely to acquire a respiratory infection to begin with or, if you do get sick with influenza or another flu-like illness,  you are better prepared to move through it without complications and soon return to good health.

  • Optimize your vitamin D levels. As I’ve previously reported, optimizing your vitamin D levels is one of the absolute best strategies for avoiding infections of ALL kinds, and vitamin D deficiency is likely the TRUE culprit behind the seasonality of the flu– not the influenza virus itself. This is probably the single most important and least expensive action you can take. Regularly monitor your vitamin D levels to confirm your levels are within the therapeutic range of 50-70 ng/ml.Ideally, you’ll want to get all your vitamin D from sun exposure or a safe tanning bed, but as a last resort you can take an oral vitamin D3 supplement. According to the latest review by Carole Baggerly (Grassrootshealth.org), adults need about 8,000 IU’s a day.
  • Avoid Sugar and Processed Foods. Sugar impairs the function of your immune system almost immediately, and as you likely know, a healthy immune system is one of the most important keys to fighting off viruses and other illness. Be aware that sugar is present in foods you may not suspect, like ketchup and fruit juice.
  • Get Enough Rest. Just like it becomes harder for you to get your daily tasks done if you’re tired, if your body is overly fatigued it will be harder for it to fight influenza or any kind of illness.. Be sure to check out my article Guide to a Good Night’s Sleep for some great tips to help you get quality rest.
  • Have Effective Tools to Address Stress . We all face some stress every day, but if stress becomes overwhelming then your body will be less able to fight off the flu and other illness. If you feel that stress is taking a toll on your health, consider using an energy psychology tool such as the Emotional Freedom Technique, which is remarkably effective in relieving stress associated with all kinds of events, from work to family to trauma.
  • Exercise. When you exercise, you increase your circulation and your blood flow throughout your body. The components of your immune system are also better circulated, which means your immune system has a better chance of successfully meeting the challenge from a virus or bacteria before you get sick.
  • Take a Good Source of Animal-Based Omega-3 Fats. Increase your intake of healthy and essential fats like the omega-3 found in krill oil, which is crucial for maintaining health. It is also vitally important to avoid damaged omega-6 oils that are trans fats and in processed foods as it will seriously damage your immune response.
  • Wash Your Hands. Washing your hands will decrease your likelihood of spreading a virus to your nose, mouth or other people. Be sure you don’t use antibacterial soap for this — antibacterial soaps are completely unnecessary, and they cause far more harm than good because they can lead to resistant bacteria. Instead, identify a simple chemical-free soap that you and your family can use..
  • Use Natural Antibiotics. Examples include colloidal silver, oil of oregano, and garlic. These work like broad-spectrum antibiotics against bacteria, viruses, and protozoa in your body. And unlike pharmaceutical antibiotics, they do not appear to lead to resistance.
  • Avoid Hospitals. I’d recommend you stay away from hospitals unless you’re having an emergency and need expert medical care, as hospitals are prime breeding grounds for infections of all kinds. The best place to get plenty of rest and recover from ordinary illness that is not life threatening is usually in the comfort of your own home.

What You Can Do to Make a Difference

While it seems “old-fashioned,” the only truly effective actions you can take to protect parental rights and your right to exercise voluntary,  informed consent to vaccination, is to get personally involved with your state legislators and the leaders in your community.

THINK GLOBALLY, ACT LOCALLY.

Mass vaccination policies are made at the federal level but vaccine laws are made at the state level, and it is at the state level where your action to protect your vaccine choice rights can have the greatest impact.

Signing up for NVIC’s free Advocacy Portal at www.NVICAdvocacy.org not only gives you access to practical, useful information to help you become an effective vaccine choice advocate in your own community, but when national vaccine issues come up, you will have the up-to-date information and call to action items you need at your fingertips to make sure your voice is heard.

So please, as your first step, sign up for the NVIC Advocacy Portal.

Contact Your Elected Officials

NVIC will help you learn how to effectively write or email your elected state representatives and share your concerns. You might want to call them, or better yet, make an appointment to visit them in person in their office. Don’t let them forget you!

It is so important for you to reach out and make sure your concerns get on the radar screen of the leaders and opinion makers in your community, especially the politicians you elect and are directly involved in making vaccine laws in your state. These are your elected representatives, so you have a right and a responsibility to let them know what’s really happening in your life and the lives of people you know when it comes to vaccine mandates. Be sure to share the “real life” experiences that you or people you know have had with vaccination.

Share Your Story with the Media and People You Know

If you or a family member has suffered a serious vaccine reaction, injury or death, consider sharing your experience with others.  If we don’t share information and experiences with each other, everybody feels alone and afraid to speak up.

Write a letter to the editor if you have a different perspective on a vaccine story that appears in your local newspaper. Make a call in to a radio talk show that is only presenting one side of the vaccine story.

I must be frank with you – you have to be brave because you might be strongly criticized for daring to talk about the “other side” of the vaccine story. Be prepared for it and have the courage to not back down.  Only by sharing our perspective and what we know to be true about vaccination will the public conversation about vaccination open up so people are not afraid to talk about it.

We cannot allow the drug companies and medical trade associations funded by drug companies, like the AAP, to dominate the conversation about vaccination. The vaccine injured cannot be swept under the carpet and treated like nothing more than “statistically acceptable collateral damage” of national one-size-fits-all mass vaccination policies that put way too many people at risk for injury and death. We shouldn’t be treating people like guinea pigs instead of human beings.

Internet Resources Where You Can Learn More

I encourage you to visit the following web pages on the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) website at www.NVIC.org:

  • NVIC Memorial for Vaccine Victims: View descriptions and photos of children and adults, who have suffered vaccine reactions, injuries and deaths. If you or your child experiences an adverse vaccine event, please consider posting and sharing your story here.
  • If You Vaccinate, Ask 8 Questions: Learn how to recognize vaccine reaction symptoms and prevent vaccine injuries.
  • Vaccine Freedom Wall: View or post descriptions of harassment by doctors or government officials for making independent vaccine choices.

Connect with Your Doctor or Find a New One that Will Listen and Care

If your pediatrician or doctor refuses to provide medical care to you or your child unless you agree to get vaccines you don’t want,  I strongly encourage you to have the courage to find another doctor. Harassment, intimidation, and refusal of medical care is becoming the modus operandi of the medical establishment in an effort to stop the change in attitude of many parents about vaccinations after they become truly educated about health and vaccination.

However, there is hope.

At least 15 percent of young doctors recently polled admit that they’re starting to adopt a more individualized approach to vaccinations in direct response to the vaccine safety concerns of parents. It is good news that there is a growing number of smart young doctors, who prefer to work as partners with parents in making personalized vaccine decisions for children, including delaying vaccinations or giving children fewer vaccines on the same day or continuing to provide medical care for those families, who decline use of one or more vaccines.

So take the time to locate a doctor, who treats you with compassion and respect and is willing to work with you to do what is right for your child.

To view the original article click here.
To reprint this article, visit the source website for reprinting guidelines

Superbugs – Mankind’s Greatest Health Threat?

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz

The subject of superbugs is a topic that is becoming increasingly important for many people right now. We are now collectively facing the serious consequences of combating infections with medical drugs instead of understanding the real reasons behind infection and subsequently treating them in ways that truly benefit the body, not harm it.

The antibiotic approach to treating infections is costing human society more than anyone could have anticipated. The bugs that were ‘successfully’ subdued with antibiotics for decades are now taking revenge by producing what is known as ‘antibiotic-resistant organisms’, i.e. superbugs that defy antibiotic treatment.

Some 100,000 Americans suffer potentially deadly infections each year from a drug-resistant ‘staph superbug’. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC), more people now die from these superbugs than from AIDS diseases. Recent nationwide outbreaks of infections caused by superbugs killed teenagers in U.S. schools, reflecting the natural consequence of indiscriminate and irresponsible use of antibiotics in this country.

Just a few days ago the media reported about a new study that showed 47 percent of the meat sold in the United States is contaminated with antibiotic-resistant organisms. Most cattle in the US are pumped full with antibiotics for infections they develop as result of improper feeds, growth hormones, and unhealthy living conditions. If you handle such a piece of germ-infested meat and then touch a fruit or vegetable and subsequently eat it, you may subsequently become infected with a potentially deadly germ, or so we are told.

We are now being warned about an imminent new epidemic that involves superbugs. Before the recent announcement that superbugs are infesting nearly half of US meat supplies, in March 2011 health officials warned that California is being hit by a superbug. Over 350 cases of Carbapenem-Resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae, CRKP, have been reported in Los Angeles County alone. The CDC announced a 40 percent mortality rate for those who become infected. Of course, antibiotics are ineffective against this superbug. Now it appears that the disease has spread to most of the country. Should we all be scared?

Officials are saying that The CRKP bug is mostly impacting hospital patients, elderly patients at nursing homes, and other long-term care facilities. These are the places where antibiotics are most frequently and often unnecessarily administered. However this assessment is outdated and no longer valid.

Previously only found in hospital settings, drug-resistant staph germs are now also spreading through prisons, gyms and locker rooms, and poor urban neighborhoods. They can enter the blood, kidneys, liver, lungs and muscles around the heart. Most cases exhibit life-threatening bloodstream infections. However, about 10 percent of the cases involved the so-called flesh-eating disease, according to a study led by researchers at the federal CDC. It is estimated that 18,650 people die annually from this particular superbug, which is about 1,500 more than those who die from AIDS in the U.S. each year.

Bacteria Are Smarter Than We Think

It is a law of nature that every living organism wants to live and survive for as long as it possibly can. Bacteria that are repeatedly exposed to antibiotics will, therefore, try to become immune to them. To survive such assaults, bacteria have their own sophisticated defense strategies, which are in a way similar to ours when we need to defend ourselves against invasive bacteria or viruses. One possible way for bacteria to evade an antibiotic attack is to mutate their genes. As a result, the bacteria become resistant to the active ingredients of a drug, which subsequently renders the drug ineffective.

You may have wondered why so many brands of antibiotics stay on the market for relatively short periods of time. One reason for this is that the bacteria keep outsmarting the antibiotics, and more powerful drugs are then needed kill the newly created strains of bacteria. Another reason for withdrawing brands from the market is the increasingly frequent occurrence of serious side effects that arise from repeatedly giving the drugs to the same patients.

The more we use these drugs, the more resistant the bacteria will become. Top researchers in this field already admit that they are fighting a losing battle. We have overused antibiotics to a degree that every disease-causing bacterium has now developed mutated versions that resist at least one antibiotic.

When an antibiotic attacks a colony of bacteria, most of them die. Yet some of the microbes survive because they harbor mutant genes that resist destruction. These mutant bacteria then pass on their resistant genes to other bacteria, and within 24 hours each of them may have left an estimated 16,777,220 offspring, equally resistant to the antibiotic. The problem is that you can never predict whether this will happen to you when your doctor gives you an antibiotic.

Bacterial Warfare Leads to Self Destruction

But the nightmare doesn’t stop here. The mutant bacteria begin to share their resistant genes with other unrelated microbes they contact, making all sorts of microorganisms resistant to treatment as well. The well-known microbiologist Stanley Falkow once said that bacteria are ‘clever little devils’ that can become resistant to drugs they’ve never met and anticipate confrontations with other ones.

In this way, relatively harmless bacteria turn into superbugs, capable of evading any attack by medical drugs. They lurk particularly in places where antibiotics are most often used, i.e. hospitals and nursing homes. According to recent research findings, five to ten percent of all people checking into hospitals today are going to get infected as a result of antibiotic-resistant bacteria lodging within these buildings.

Except for the sterile environment of surgery theatres, the superbugs can be found riding on dust particles of the heating and air-conditioning systems, in bathrooms and toilets, and even in the food. They account for most of the deaths in hospitals today. The superbugs ‘choose’ patients whose immune systems have already been compromised as a result of sickness, injury, surgery, and/or previous encounters with antibiotics.

In healthy people with a strong immune system, these bugs can live on their skin or in their noses without infecting them. In other words, under normal circumstances, we can live with the bugs without ever getting infected and, even if we did get infected, our body would deal with them effectively while becoming immune to them. However, this natural resistance to the bugs decreases drastically with the first course of antibiotics taken for a simple infection. Vaccines, which also contain antibiotics, are of course, a leading cause of an increasingly widespread occurrence of superbugs, given the number of people who have been and still are being vaccinated against infectious diseases, including the flu (for more details, check out my new book, Vaccine-nation: Poisoning the Population, One Shot at a Time).

Superbugs Are Not The Enemy

Because of the excessive use of antibiotics through mass vaccination and inside and outside of hospitals, antibiotic-resistant organisms have now become the most common cause of infection. To make matters worse, in many countries people can now acquire antibiotics over the counter.

Since precise dosage depends on the individual and the potency of the infection, and since there is no clear time limit to the number of courses a person may require to kill all the germs, antibiotics can never be considered ‘safe’. Interrupted intake or too low a drug dose can encourage the growth of resistant bacteria, which may allow them to be passed on to other people as well. This may increase the risk of infection for those who are near a person who takes antibiotics and may explain why infection is higher in families where they have been used before. However, to become infected, other predisposing factors must be in place, such as poor diet, vaccination which suppresses the immune system, low vitamin D levels due to lack of regular sun exposure, and inadequate personal hygiene, among other reasons.

Indiscriminate use of antibiotics seems to be doing more damage than we can even begin to understand. Antibiotics are among the most powerful immune-suppressants that exist. Most people who are ill and die don’t actually die from their diseases. They die from a massive build up to toxins and a depleted immune system, both of which serve as an open invitation for opportunistic bacterial infections. This applies to cancer, AIDS, and most other so-called “killer diseases”. Autopsies revealed that many of the patients who died from an “AIDS” disease had never actually been infected with HIV but were killed by antibiotic-resistant superbugs.These bugs cause similar symptoms to the ones considered AIDS diseases. It is difficult to determine how many millions of AIDS victims are actually victims of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, or rather what allows them to infect the body. Our ignorance and the resistance to live in harmony with the laws of nature and take care of our basic needs combined with the incessant demand for a magic bullet to quickly put a stop to an illness, are the real enemy here.

Lessons To Be Learned

Many people have contacted me with the question whether there is a cure for infection with Clostridium difficile (CD).CD is a spore-forming bacillus that is responsible for the development of antibiotic-associated diarrhea and colitis. While CD was first described in 1935 as a part of the fecal flora of healthy newborns, the regular exposure of babies to antibiotics through vaccines and medications for minor infections has converted this beneficial bacillus into a potentially fatal superbug that can lead to the destruction of the entire digestive system, and wasting.

Unfortunately, I have seen many people deteriorate this dramatically because of the temptation to rid the body of an infection with antibiotics. CD is largely due to past use of antibiotics, chronic vitamin D deficiency (vitamin D regulates the genes responsible for natural antibiotic secretions), lack of sleep, emotional stress, all of which can lead to an unbalanced intestinal flora, which, in turn, diminishes the level of immune health.

Even though, CD comes with a certain risk, targeting the already resistant bacteria with more antibiotics (which is common practice) practically removes any chances of recovery.

It is not possible to outsmart or root out bacteria that are engaged in infecting cells that have already been damaged by antibiotics, eating nutrient-deprived foods, or chronic vitamin D deficiency. In US hospitals, where over 20 percent of patients become infected with CD, patients are given the lowest quality food you can find, sunlight is avoided at all cost, and antibiotics are administered around the clock. These are the perfect conditions for breeding and spreading superbugs.

As long as the underlying condition (damaged, weak, toxic cells) exists, specific bacteria will be drawn to those areas and infect these cells. Bacterial infection is always host-specific. That’s why not every person who is exposed to staph aureus, for example, will become infected with it. In fact, if exposed to it, only a fraction of people will become infected, namely those who are already unhealthy, like patients in a hospital or those with a compromised immune system. And as I have already mentioned, a major cause is vaccination during childhood and also adulthood: all vaccines suppress and damage the immune system. Bacterial infection cannot occur in healthy cells, even if it involves superbugs. The cell environment and cell condition determines whether an infection will or will not occur.

The outdated medical approach to dealing with infection is based on the germ theory of Louis Pasteur, which has been proven wrong by Pasteur himself at his death bed, and more recently, by documented research. It is heavily flawed and bound to fail.

The existence of antibiotic resistant organisms doesn’t show that these germs are vicious monsters. Nothing in nature is unnecessary or useless. It merely shows that they evolved into mutant bacteria to do the job they are designed to do, namely, to infect and decompose what is no longer needed and useful. If destructive germs were rooted out, life on the planet would stop. We would all suffocate in waste matter and toxins that could no longer be decomposed. The earth would be littered with corpses of humans and animals that could never decay.

Is There Any Hope For Us?

There are natural antibiotics that have also cleansing properties and at the same time stimulate the immune system, e.g. Pau D’ Arco, olive leaf extract, and for more dramatic results, MMS (formerly known as Miracle Mineral Supplement). MMS works regardless whether a germ has mutated or not. Many essential oils also exhibit these characteristics.

Remember, making vitamin D from sun exposure or a vitamin D lamp is essential for recovery. The germicidal wave length of UV light is capable of even destroying antibiotic resistant TB bacteria. Before the era of antibiotics, intense UV light (high altitudes) was used to treat TB, with a near 100% success rate. Today, some hospitals use UV to kill of antibiotic resistant organisms in air-conditioning units. There are clinics that use UV light to radiate blood with UV light which instantly breaks down the infectious germs. Of course, after the treatment, the original causes behind the infection must be dealt with adequately. If antibiotics were used at any time in the past, the liver bile ducts must also be cleaned out through a series of liver and gallbladder flushes. Otherwise, reinjection may occur.

Lastly, the fear and constant concern and emotional stress that often follows a medical diagnosis of infection with a regular bug or a superbug, can prevent recovery altogether. The diagnosis can induce a fight or flight response which quickly suppresses the immune system through the secretion of the stress hormone Cortisol. Fear can also impair digestive functions and lead to a proliferation of the germs.

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyper link back to the web page

The Consequences Of Vaccinating Our Children

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz

Pumping poisons into helpless infants’ bodies

30-odd jabs in the first 18 months of life! That’s how many times the average American infant gets vaccinated. Children in the United Kingdom are slightly better off. They get vaccinated only 25 times at this tender age. And to make sure you’re well and truly on the vaccination trail early enough, it is mandatory for babies to get nine or more different antigens pumped into their immature immune systems almost immediately after birth, some of them cocktails of more than one vaccine.

The best part for Big Pharma is that most of these vaccinations are backed by law. Children who are not vaccinated as per the CDC’s schedule cannot enter or stay within the formal education system. As if this arm-twisting were not enough, entire populations the world over are brainwashed into believing that they or their children will contract life-threatening diseases if they do not get vaccinated. And don’t we all want the best for our children?

For many decades, leading scientists and doctors have vehemently promoted the idea that immunization of children is necessary to protect them from contracting diseases such as diphtheria, smallpox, polio, cholera, typhoid and malaria. Yet evidence is mounting, showing that immunization may not only be unnecessary but even harmful. Pouring deadly chemicals into a lake doesn’t make it immune to pollutants. Likewise, injecting the live poisons contained in vaccines into the bloodstream of children hardly gives future generations a chance to lead truly healthy lives.

‘Willing’ Victims

Children are most vulnerable because their immune systems are practically defenseless against the poisons in the vaccines. They have a lot going against them since their mothers do not pass on immunity through breast milk because they were vaccinated and no longer make certain antibodies.

The fact is that the human immune system has been designed to protect us from even deadly illnesses but the key here is natural immunity. Vaccines, on the other hand, use synthetic chemicals to build artificial immunity. They work on the assumption that natural immunity is not good enough.

But could nature have made such a crucial mistake as to make us dependant on injecting foreign, toxic material into our blood when we have an immune system so complex and highly developed that millions of sophisticated computers could not imitate its performance? This is rather unlikely.

It is hard to believe then that these chemicals, which contain animal DNA, bits of weakened viruses, embalming fluid, mercury and other dangerous things are our modern-day life-savers. It is equally surprising that vaccines, which cause serious reactions and have debilitating effects on our health, are meant to stave off invading pathogens, many of which our bodies are designed to deal with naturally or are actually helping us to recover from a serious illness such as cancer.

One of the main reasons vaccines are so dangerous is that they have never been tested for safety on human beings; they are only tested on animals. Vaccines cannot be proven safe until they are given to human beings for the first time. But this would turn them into human ‘guinea pigs’ and it is not possible to predict what reactions they will have. This is the risk all people receiving vaccines have to take. Some will die, others will live but become ill years later, and many others will live without serious long-term consequences. But since all vaccines are designed to cause the very disease they are meant to prevent (to establish immunity), a truly safe vaccine is one that is not effective! Ironic, isn’t it?

Under normal circumstances, all ingested foods, beverages, etc have to pass through the mucus membranes, the intestinal walls and the liver before they are permitted into such important areas as the blood, the heart and the brain. The sudden appearance of a poison in the bloodstream is often met by a counterattack of the immune system that uses an entire arsenal of antibodies to heal the body from vaccine injuries and prevent death by poisoning. This is called an allergic reaction and in some cases, it could lead to a sudden, sometimes fatal, collapse known as anaphylactic shock.

Among the causes of anaphylactic shock are immunizations for DTaP, Hepatitis B and whooping cough. A young person’s immune system hasn’t typically matured enough to withstand such an onslaught, resulting in what the medical fraternity calls Sudden Infant Death Syndrome or SIDS.

Noted researcher Dr Kenneth Bock points out that vaccinating children may make them hypersensitive to allergies, eczemas and certain foods, provoking acute reactions to a host of stimuli that are difficult to pinpoint. Vaccinations may therefore actually be sensitizing children to allergic disorders because the chemicals and genetic material in them change the way the immune system is meant to function. It becomes skewed with regard to the Th-2 hormone with a relative deficit in Th-1.

Some researchers go so far as to say that contracting some illnesses, such as mumps and measles during childhood, is healthy as they actually bring down the risk of allergies because they strengthen the immune system. Research clearly shows that the incidence of asthma and others allergy-related illnesses increases sharply following vaccination.

Fallacy & Fallout

Ever since Louis Pasteur proposed his erroneous germ theory of disease, the scientific establishment has linked a variety of bacteria, viruses and other pathogens to life-threatening illnesses against which pharmaceutical companies have devised an armor of protection in their little vials.

The problem is that despite their claims of success, certain vaccines have been consistently linked to specific symptoms and syndromes, some of which continue to baffle scientists and doctors even today. Among the various diseases that have been correlated to vaccines are chronic fatigue syndrome, autoimmune disorders, learning disabilities, encephalitis, growth inhibition, developmental disorders and hyperactivity.

Some of these issues, such as learning disabilities, were once dismissed as simple problems of growing up. Medical researchers now recognize them as forms of encephalitis (inflammatory disease of the brain). Here’s a shocking statistic: More than 20 percent of American children – one out of five – suffer from these or related problems.

There is a mounting body of scientific research which shows that chronic diseases such as encephalitis, rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis, leukemia and other forms of cancer and even HIV may be provoked by vaccines administered in infancy.

For instance, rheumatoid arthritis, an inflammatory disease of the joints, was once an affliction of the elderly. Now, this crippling disease is widely prevalent among younger people and has been consistently associated with measles and rubella vaccinations.

Guillain-Barré Syndrome, a serious disease that leads to paralysis, is another syndrome which has been consistently associated with immunizations against measles, diphtheria, influenza, tetanus and the oral polio vaccine. This is hardly surprising when one considers the high toxicity of the vaccines. It is well-known that children whose immune systems are already weak experience more serious complications than those whose constitution and immune systems are much stronger.

Buying Into Myths

It is nearly impossible to estimate the damage and suffering that has been created and that will occur in future as a result of inadequate information about the dangers of modern immunization programs. Parents want to do what is best for their children and they carry a heavy burden of responsibility to keep them healthy and safe. Misinformation can create considerable conflict in parents because they don’t want to neglect their children’s health or cause them any harm.

Vaccine proponents argue that their chemical formulations have not just saved lives; they have also prevented epidemics and all but wiped out some deadly diseases from the face of the earth! This is nothing but a myth. The truth is that the four leading childhood killer diseases – scarlet fever, pertussis or whooping cough, diphtheria and measles – had already declined by more than 90 percent before vaccines against these diseases were introduced! The reason these diseases vanished was that living conditions such as hygiene, sanitation and standards of living had improved significantly and people increasingly had access to healthy food.

This observation is supported by noted scholars such as Dr Andrew Weil who have researched vaccines. He points out that many serious diseases like cholera, typhoid, tetanus, diphtheria and whooping cough were on the decline in the last hundred years or so well before vaccines for them were even made.

Another reputed vaccine researcher, Viera Scheibner, points out that prior to 1940, the number of people perishing from diphtheria in Europe was negligible. But post-1940, when forced vaccinations were carried out on a mass scale against the disease, epidemics of diphtheria followed in individuals who had been fully vaccinated.

The 1940s also saw mass-scale immunization campaigns against whooping cough and tetanus across several countries. These too were followed by outbreaks of the so-called ‘provocation poliomyelitis’.

Another problem with vaccination is that they are given indiscriminately, regardless of a child’s health status. Many infants don’t even get the chance to be healthy later in life because they are pumped full of these poisons against which they are helpless. At this stage of development, a baby has not yet acquired full natural immunity and has little ability to protect himself or herself.

——————————
This is an excerpt from my book VACCINE-NATION: POISONING THE POPULATION, ONE SHOT AT A TIME

 

 

 

 

 

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyper link back to the web page

Without Another Co-Factor, HIV Cannot Cause AIDS

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz

Contrary to the original HIV-AIDS hypothesis, which says there is a 50-100 percent probability of death from infection, there are only a few HIV infected people who actually die, at least not more than in any other category of disease.

When blood from AIDS patients was injected into chimpanzees in 1983, all of them tested HIV positive but when tested 10 years later, none of them had developed any signs of sickness. In another experiment, over 150 chimpanzees received injections of purified (highly concentrated) HIV in 1984, but developed no symptoms of disease to this very day. However, what the experiments did show was that their immune systems had produced antibodies against the virus within a month, just as it happens in humans. The presence of antibodies ensures that immunity against the microbes has been secured on a permanent basis. Just as animals cannot get AIDS from HIV, so can human beings not get AIDS from HIV either.

HIV cannot cause as much as the flu

Among other human viruses, such as those causing polio, flu, hepatitis, etc., HIV may be one of the most harmless ones; it is quickly and easily neutralized by our immune system. The incubation period for every known virus does not exceed more than a maximum of 6 weeks, as is the case with the human hepatitis virus. It is a well-established biological law that any germ that does not cause symptoms before it is cleared by the immune system cannot be considered a cause of disease. No virus is capable of surviving 10-15 years in a normal healthy body with an active immune system.And even if it were possible in theory that a few virus particles would survive a decade or longer, they still would have to overcome the immune system, and they would certainly not be enough in number to impair the person’s immunity (unless of course the immune system is destroyed by other causes).

The AIDS theory suggests that HIV destroys the immune system’s T4 cells, thereby leaving the body susceptible to all kinds of infections and diseases. It had already been discovered in the mid-eighties that the number of HIV infected T4 cells is far too small to cause widespread destruction and that the human body is perfectly capable of replacing T4 cells faster than HIV could destroy them.

Since the beginning of AIDS as we know it, many thousands of people, including medical workers and hemophiliacs, were accidentally infected with HIV, but only a few of them developed AIDS – in fact, not more than any other group in society. Among the health workers who developed AIDS, 90 percent belonged to the major risk group of AIDS cases – highly active homosexuals and intravenous drug users. Among hemophiliacs, who are ‘naturally’ immune-deficient, there are just as many HIV-negatives dying as there are HIV-positives dying. In other words, whether a hemophiliac is infected or not, his chances of developing an AIDS-type disease are exactly the same.

Until now, there has not been even one human or animal that has developed AIDS after being infected only with HIV. This fact may be reason enough to reconsider the role of HIV as being the sole agent responsible for causing dozens of different kinds of (AIDS) diseases. Luc Montagnier, co-discoverer of the HIV virus, has already pointed out that, without another co-factor, HIV cannot cause AIDS.

——————————
This is an excerpt from my book ENDING THE AIDS MYTH

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyper link back to the web page

AIDS – A Metabolic Disorder, Not an Infectious Disease

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz

For several years, it has been known that AIDS sufferers develop a drastic imbalance of very important amino acids before they actually deteriorate. A balanced protein metabolism is the main prerequisite for a healthy immune system. If the concentration of some of the amino acids in the body is too high or too low the immune system can no longer fight acute infections. This is particularly true for AIDS diseases.

The physiological imbalances related to basic protein metabolism in AIDS patients can be caused by any of the above factors, which all have highly stressful effects on the body. To combat such severe stress, the body triggers stress hormones, such as cortisone, designed to break down muscle proteins into basic amino acids needed for emergency reuse. This effectively means that the body is feeding off itself. If the stress persists, the amino acid balance can no longer be maintained, which eventually causes the collapse of the immune system so typically found in the AIDS disease.

During the process of destroying its own cells to obtain essential amino acids, the body has to deal with a large amount of cell debris, including the fragments from destroyed cell nucleus. It seems that some of these DNA or RNA fragments are labeled as the retrovirus HIV. Since there are various types of such fragments, there are also several types of HIV, i.e., HIV1, HIV2, etc. as well. This may explain why there are so many people now who are HIV-positive, but never were infected by HIV-contaminated blood or were in contact with HIV-infected people. Research by Dr. Hulda Clark, Canada, showed that babies can test HIV-positive, despite the fact that their parents are HIV-negative.

HIV is much more common than most people think. Many people who go through periods of extreme stress may have a strong presence of HIV in their blood for which their immune systems produce antibodies. Since they are unlikely to test for AIDS, they may never find out that they have encountered this virus. Even if they underwent a reliable AIDS test, they may not test positive for HIV1. However, if the test also searched for presence of antibodies for HIV3 or another of its variations, these individuals may now turn out to be HIV positive. For many years, the testing facilities in most countries could detect only one of the many HIV types. Today, a person’s blood may be screened for two types of HIV, which is still not enough to determine whether he is HIV positive or not (considering the high false-positive rates of HIV tests).

Unless the individual’s stress reaction continues, he may lead a perfectly healthy life. However, if stress-caused cellular destruction becomes a long-term issue, the amino acid balance becomes increasingly disturbed. This in turn may drain the immune system to such an extent that it can no longer defend the body against even the low-level infection-causing agents that permanently linger in everyone’s body. When the host’s immune system fails to neutralize the germs, a simple bacterium can cause a life-threatening infection, as seen among many AIDS patients.

Drug addicts, very active homosexuals, babies born to mothers with an unbalanced amino acid pool, people who are in need of a blood transfusion or had one, and those who are undernourished, starving, or are otherwise traumatized, all are suffering from an unbalanced amino acid pool and are, therefore, possible candidates for HIV particle generation.Intense stress responses cause the breakdown of cell nucleus, which results in an increased presence of DNA or RNA fragments. The first and natural response by the body is to produce antibodies to these fragments. Multiple Sclerosis, malaria, hepatitis B and C, tuberculosis, glandular fever, papilloma virus warts, and many other ailments can cause the body to make antibodies for the retrovirus p24.

If immunity becomes subdued through any major illness or constant stress, a flood of disease-causing agents begin to invade the body. Wherever the body is most vulnerable and exposed is where the AIDS disease is likely to strike first.

——————————
This is an excerpt from my book ENDING THE AIDS MYTH

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyper link back to the web page

Gallstones Cause Varicose Veins, Problems of The Heart, Spleen, Hormones, Circulation And Congestion

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz 

Gallstones in the liver may lead to poor circulation, enlargement of the heart and spleen, varicose veins, congested lymph vessels, and hormone imbalances. When gallstones have grown large enough to seriously distort the structural framework of the lobules (units) of the liver, blood flow through the liver becomes increasingly difficult. This not only raises the venous blood pressure in the liver, but also raises it in all the organs and areas of the body that drain used blood through their respective veins into the liver’s portal vein. Restricted blood flow in that portal vein causes congestion, particularly in the spleen, stomach, esophagus, pancreas, gallbladder, and small and large intestines. This can lead to an enlargement of these organs, to a reduction of their ability to remove cellular waste products, and to a clogging of their respective veins.

A varicose vein is one that is so dilated that the valves do not sufficiently close to prevent blood from flowing backward. Sustained pressure on the veins at the junction of the rectum and anus in the large intestine leads to the development of hemorrhoids, a type of varicose vein. Other common sites of varicose veins are the legs, the esophagus, and the scrotum. Dilation of veins and venules (small veins) can occur anywhere in the body. It always indicates an obstruction of blood flow.

Prescribed by doctors in Germany as a highly successful alternative to surgery for varicose veins, the herbal remedy horse chestnut seed, or conkers, is very effective in the treatment of ‘heavy legs’, hemorrhoids, and cramps. In combination with cleansing of the liver, colon, and kidneys, conkers can lead to complete recovery.

Poor blood flow through the liver always affects the heart. When the organs of the digestive system become weakened by an increase in venous pressure, they become congested and begin to accumulate harmful waste, including debris from cells that have been broken down. The spleen becomes enlarged while it is dealing with the extra workload associated with removing damaged or worn-out blood cells. This further slows blood circulation to and from the organs of the digestive system, which stresses the heart, raises blood pressure, and injures blood vessels. The right half of the heart, which receives venous blood via the inferior vena cava from the liver and all other parts below the lungs, becomes overloaded with toxic, sometimes infectious, material. This eventually causes enlargement, and possibly infection, of the right side of the heart.

Almost all types of heart disease have one thing in common: blood flow is being obstructed. But blood circulation does not become disrupted easily. It must be preceded by a major congestion of the bile ducts in the liver. Gallstones obstructing the bile ducts dramatically reduce or cut off the blood supply to the liver cells. Reduced blood flow through the liver affects the blood flow in the entire body, which, in turn, has a detrimental effect on the lymphatic system.

The lymphatic system, which is closely linked with the immune system, helps to clear the body of harmful metabolic waste products, foreign material, and cell debris. All cells release metabolic waste products into, and take up nutrients from, a surrounding solution, called extracellular fluid or connective tissue. The degree of nourishment and efficiency of the cells depends on how swiftly and completely waste material is removed from the extracellular fluid. Since most waste products cannot pass directly into the blood for excretion, they accumulate in the extracellular fluid until they are removed and detoxified by the lymphatic system. The potentially harmful material is filtered and neutralized by lymph nodes that are strategically located throughout the body. One of the key functions of the lymphatic system is to keep the extracellular fluid clear of toxic substances, which makes this a system of utmost importance.

Poor circulation of blood in the body causes an overload of foreign, harmful waste matter in the extracellular tissues and, consequently, in the lymph vessels and lymph nodes as well. When lymph drainage slows down or becomes obstructed, the thymus gland, tonsils, and spleen start to deteriorate quite rapidly. These organs form an important part of the body’s system of purification and immunity. In addition, microbes harbored in gallstones can be a constant source of recurring infection in the body, which may render the lymphatic and immune systems ineffective against more serious infections, such as infectious mononucleosis, measles, typhoid fever, tuberculosis, syphilis, and the like.

Owing to restricted bile flow in the liver and gallbladder, the small intestine is restricted in its capacity to digest food properly. This permits substantial amounts of waste matter and poisonous substances, such as cadaverines and putrescines (breakdown products of putrefied food), to seep into the lymphatic ducts. These toxins, along with fats and proteins, enter the body’s largest lymph vessel, the thoracic duct,at the cysterna chyli. The cysterna chyli are dilated lymph vessels in the shape of sacks, situated in front of the first two lumbar vertebrae at the level of the belly button.

Toxins, antigens, and undigested proteins from animal sources, including fish, meat, eggs, and dairy foods, as well as leaked plasma proteins, cause these lymph sacks to swell and become inflamed. When the cells of an animal become damaged or die, which happens seconds after it is killed, its protein structures are broken down by cellular enzymes. These so-called ‘degenerate’ proteins are useless for the body, and they become harmful unless they are promptly removed by the lymphatic system. Their presence usually invites enhanced microbial activity. Viruses, fungi, and bacteria feed on the pooled wastes. In some cases, allergic reactions occur.

When the cysterna chyli(lymph sacks) are overtaxed and congested, the lymphatic system is no longer able to sufficiently remove even the body’s own degenerate proteins (from worn-out cells). This results in lymph edema. While lying on the back, existing lymph edema can be felt as hard knots, sometimes as large as a fist, in the area of the belly button. These ‘rocks’ are a major cause of middle and low back pain and abdominal swelling, and, in fact, of most symptoms of ill health. Many people who have grown a ‘tummy’ consider this abdominal extension to be just a harmless nuisance or a natural part of aging. They don’t realize that they are breeding a living ‘time bomb’ that may go off some day and injure vital parts of the body. Anyone with a bloated abdomen suffers from major lymph congestion.

Some 80 percent of the lymphatic system is associated with the intestines, making this area of the body the largest center of immune activity. This is no coincidence. The part of the body where most disease-causing agents are combated or generated is, in fact, the intestinal tract. Any lymphedema, or other kind of obstruction in this important part of the lymphatic system, can lead to potentially serious complications elsewhere in the body.

Wherever a lymphduct is obstructed, lymph has also accumulated at some distance from the obstruction. Consequently, the lymph nodeslocated in such an area can no longer adequately neutralize or detoxify the following things: dead and live phagocytes and their ingested microbes, worn-out tissue cells, cells damaged by disease, products of fermentation, pesticides in food, toxic antibodies contained in most plant foods, inhaled or otherwise ingested chemical particles, cells from malignant tumors, and the millions of cancer cells every healthy person generates each day. Incomplete destruction of these things can cause these lymph nodes to become inflamed, enlarged, and congested with blood. Infected material may enter the bloodstream, causing septic poisoning and acute illnesses. In most cases, though, the lymph blockage occurs slowly, without any symptoms other than swelling of the abdomen, hands, arms, feet, or ankles, or sometimes puffiness in the face and eyes. This is often referred to as ‘water retention’, a major precursor of chronic illness.

Continuous lymphatic obstruction usually leads to chronic health problems. Almost every chronic illness results from congestion in the cysterna chyli. Eventually, the thoracic duct, which drains the cysterna chyli, is overburdened by the constant influx of toxic material and becomes clogged up, too. The thoracic duct is linked with numerous other lymph ducts that empty their waste into the thoracic ‘sewer canal’.

Since the thoracic duct has to remove nearly 85 percent of the body’s daily-generated cellular waste and other potentially hazardous material, a blockage there causes backing up of waste into other, more distant parts of the body.

When the daily-generated metabolic waste and cellular debris are not removed from an area in the body for a certain length of time, symptoms of disease start to manifest. The following are but a few typical examples of illness indicators that result directly from chronic, localized lymph congestion:

Obesity, cysts in the uterus or ovaries, enlargement of the prostate gland, rheumatism in the joints, enlargement of the left half of the heart, congestive heart failure, congested bronchi and lungs, swelling or enlargement of the neck area, stiffness in the neck and shoulders, backaches, headaches, migraines, dizziness, vertigo, ringing in the ears, earaches, deafness, dandruff, frequent colds, sinusitis, hay fever, certain types of asthma, thyroid enlargement, eye diseases, poor vision, swelling in the breasts, breast cancer, kidney problems, lower back pains, swelling of the legs and ankles, scoliosis, brain disorders, memory loss, stomach trouble, enlarged spleen, irritable bowel syndrome, hernia, polyps in the colon, and others.

The thoracic duct typically empties its detoxified waste contents into the left subclavian vein at the root of the neck. This vein enters the superior vena cava, which leads straight into the heart. In addition to blocking proper lymph drainage from the various organs or parts of the body, congestion in the cysterna chyli and thoraciuct permits toxic materials to be passed into the heart and heart arteries. This unduly stresses the heart. It also allows these toxins and disease-causing agents to enter the general circulation and spread to other parts of the body. Hardly a disease can be named that is not caused by lymphatic obstruction. Lymph blockage, in most cases, has its origin in a congested liver. In the extreme eventuality, lymphomaor cancer of the lymph may result, of which Hodgkin’s disease is the most common type.

When the circulatory system begins to malfunction because of gallstones in the liver, the endocrine system starts to be affected as well. The endocrine glands produce hormones that pass directly from the glandular cells into the bloodstream, where they influence bodily activity, growth, and nutrition. The glands most often affected by congestion are the thyroid, parathyroid, adrenal cortex, ovaries, and testes. A more severely disrupted circulatory function leads to imbalanced hormone secretions by the islets of Langerhans in the pancreas and the pineal and pituitary glands. Blood congestion, which is characterized by the thickening of the blood, prevents hormones from reaching their target places in the body in sufficient amounts and on time. Consequently, the glands go into hypersecretion (overproduction) of hormones.

When lymph drainage from the glands is inefficient, the glands themselves become congested. This brings about hyposecretion (lack) of hormones. Diseases related to imbalances of the thyroid gland include toxic goiter, Graves’ disease, cretinism, myxoedema, tumors of the thyroid, hypoparathyroidism. Thyroid disorders can also reduce calcium absorption and cause cataracts,as well as behavioral disorders and dementia.Poor calcium absorption, alone, is responsible for numerous diseases, including osteoporosis (loss of bone density). If circulatory problems disrupt the secretion of balanced amounts of insulin in the pancreatic islets of Langerhans,diabetes may develop.

Gallstones in the liver can cause liver cells to cut down protein synthesis. Reduced protein synthesis, in turn, prompts the adrenal glands to overproduce cortisol,a hormone that stimulates protein synthesis. Too much cortisol in the blood gives rise to atrophy of lymphoid tissue and a depressed immune response, which is considered the leading cause of cancer and many other major illnesses.

An imbalance in the secretion of adrenal hormones can cause a wide variety of disorders, as it leads to weakened febrile response (fever) and diminished protein synthesis. Proteins are the major building blocks for tissue cells, hormones, and so forth. The liver is capable of producing many different hormones. Hormones determine how well the body grows and heals.

The liver also inhibits certain hormones, including insulin, glucagon, cortisol, aldosterone, thyroid, and sex hormones. Gallstones in the liver impair this vital function, which may increase hormone concentrations in the blood. Hormone imbalance is an extremely serious condition and can easily occur when gallstones in the liver have disrupted major circulatory pathways that are also hormonal pathways. For example, by failing to keep blood cortisol levels balanced, a person may accumulate excessive amounts of fat in the body. If estrogens are not broken down properly, the risk of breast cancer increases. If blood insulin is not broken down properly, the risk of cancer rises, and the cells in the body may become resistant to insulin, which is a major precursor of diabetes.

Disease is naturally absent when blood flow and lymph flow are both unhindered and normal. Both types of problems – circulatory and lymphatic – can be successfully eliminated through a series of liver flushes and prevented by following a balanced diet and lifestyle.

——————————
This is an excerpt from my book THE AMAZING LIVER AND GALLBLADDER FLUSH

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyper link back to the web page

If You Go to Church, Heed This Warning

Posted on by

By: Dr. Mercola
Source: Mercola.com

Recently the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, held an invitation-only call.

The call was co-sponsored by the U.S. Health and Human Services, the Office of Minority Health, and CDC.

Conspicuously, the end of the invitation read:

“This call is off the record and is not for press purposes” – but it became public when it showed up on the HHS website.

Fortunately one of our staff was able to get on the call.

The focus of the call was on getting faith-based organizations to sponsor flu clinics with Walgreens.

Basically, they want to move inside your church, mosque or synagogue, and set up shop, with your pastor, priest, imam and rabbi on hand to convince you to get a flu shot.

As an example, they cited a priest who stopped in the middle of mass to roll up his sleeve and get vaccinated, inspiring the rest of his parish to line up behind him.

Talk to God, Get a Shot

The idea of holding out your arm and getting a shot in the middle of a worship service, with your pastoral leader urging you on, really seems to be pushing it. The reason they’re doing this, health officials said on the phone, is that they’ve found that non-traditional settings such as worship services can be highly effective in influencing people’s decisions.

Speaking directly to church leaders, Joshua DuBois, executive director of the White House Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnership, said:

“As trusted messengers, you’re able to spread messages and help get people vaccinated.”

Zeroing in on minorities, particularly older adults, blacks and Latinos, health officials said churches, mosques and schools are places where barriers to vaccinations can be taken down, and these minorities can be convinced to get vaccinated. Besides hosting flu shot clinics, churches can also help by putting reminders in their bulletins, and by church members personally reminding others to get their shots, officials said.

They even went so far as to encourage the churches to pay people’s insurance co-pays so they’d be more inclined to get the shots. For those who simply can’t pay anything, there’ll be 300,000 free shots given out as part of the flu vaccine crusade.

Who’s Funding This?

The original concept of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, developed in 2001, was to help community leaders enhance the 1998 Initiative to Eliminate Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health.

The partnership targets cancer screening, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, infant mortality, HIV/AIDS and vaccinations. It also originally covered complementary and alternative health care options, although that type of care, which would include health measures other than vaccines, was not even listed as an option during this phone conference.

For at least 10 years, this collaboration of community-based volunteers, nonprofit organizations and faith-based groups worked at a grassroots level in their respective neighborhoods, funded by Congress through various health care grants.

However, in 2010 the initiative took a turn with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which moved the initiative’s management to the Center for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, paving the way for the federal government to fund and run projects like flu clinics right in your church.

Interestingly, flu shots were already covered by most insurance plans, Medicare and the Vaccines for Children (VFC) program.

But for some reason health officials have decided it’s OK to push the government into places of worship, mid-service, to sell and administer vaccines – and this no-press-allowed phone call reiterated that over and over again. I can only wonder which vaccine they’ll move into your church next, all in the name of “community health.”

The Secret’s Out – Flu Shots Are Hardly Effective, If at All

In February 2011, new research showed that 76 percent of white seniors get flu vaccines, with 68 percent of English-speaking Hispanic seniors getting them, and 64 percent of Spanish-speaking Hispanic seniors doing so. In the phone conference, officials emphasized that they want to increase flu vaccine coverage beyond those numbers.

But unfortunately, they neglected to mention the shocking lack of evidence supporting flu vaccines.

The truth is flu vaccines just don’t do what the CDC claims they do. I’ve written about this several times so far this year and the past few years, along with major news media like Time Health. Even the Centers for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP)admitted on its website on November 4, 2011 that it’s time to revise public messages regarding this vaccine.

Specifically, what happened is that a study published in the prestigious journal The Lancet revealed that flu shots provide only “moderate protection” against the flu, and in some seasons is altogether “reduced or absent.”

Specifically, the Lancet said the vaccine is about 59 percent effective. But when you break the numbers down statistically, what it really works out to is that the vaccine prevents flu 1.5 times out of 100.

That’s right. Using the Lancet’s own numbers, statistics show that the vaccine only works 1.5 times out of 100.

It’s a far cry from the 60 percent the CDC claims on its website, or the 70 to 90 percent it claimed before it changed the numbers this year. Some people call this lying with statistics, but any way you look at it the secret’s out: flu vaccine statistics just don’t add up to warrant pushing them in your church – or anywhere for that matter.

The Real Way to Good Health this Winter

Only the CDC, HHS and the Faith-Based Partnership Center can say why they’re pushing flu vaccines in churches in the wake of statistics like this. So instead of trying to second-guess them, what I’ll do is offer up some good ways to stay healthy this winter.

Ultimately it is the state of your immune system that determines whether or not you will get sick from being exposed to viral or bacterial organisms associated with infectious diseases like the flu.

The key to boosting your immune system, then, and making it a “lean, mean, disease-fighting machine” lies in your lifestyle habits –healthy food, stress relief, exercise, sleep, and safe exposure to sunlight, among other things. Artificially manipulating your immune system with a vaccine to try to stay healthy is not the same thing, nor does it produce the same kind of immunity and sought-after, disease-fighting result. It may actually make you less healthy in the long run.

Since numerous studies show that vitamin D boosts immunity, particularly vitamin D3, the first thing you want to do is make sure you maintain your vitamin D levels at 50-70 ng/ml year-round. The only way you can be sure of what your levels are is to be tested. For an in-depth explanation of everything you need to know before you get tested, please read my latest updates in Test Values and Treatment for Vitamin D Deficiency.

While a supplement is OK, the best way to get your vitamin D is with safe exposure to sunshine, or by using a safe tanning bed (one with electronic ballasts rather than magnetic ballasts, to avoid unnecessary exposure to EMF fields). Other things that you can do include eating healthy, avoiding sugars and artificial sweeteners, exercising, and getting enough sleep. I address these issues in myfree nutrition plan here.  My free one-hour vitamin D lecture can help you here.

Other Supplements

Other supplements that can be used as an adjunct to healthy dietary and lifestyle measures are:

  • Vitamin C: A very potent antioxidant; use a natural form such as acerola, which contains associated micronutrients. You can take several grams every hour till you are better unless you start developing loose stools
  • Oregano Oil: The higher the carvacrol concentration, the more effective it is. Carvacrol is the most active antimicrobial agent in oregano oil.
  • Propolis: A bee resin and one of the most broad-spectrum antimicrobial compounds in the world; propolis is also the richest source of caffeic acid and apigenin, two very important compounds that aid in immune response.
  • A tea made from a combination of elderflower, yarrow, boneset, linden, peppermint and ginger; drink it hot and often for combating a cold or flu. It causes you to sweat, which is helpful for eradicating a virus from your system.
  • Olive leaf extract: Ancient Egyptians and Mediterranean cultures used it for a variety of health-promoting uses and it is widely known as a natural, non-toxic immune system builder.

Educate Yourself on Vaccines

Now that the government is moving into the most sacred area of your life – your place of worship – you need to be informed more than ever about vaccines and your rights when it comes to vaccine choice. The best place to learn this is from the National Vaccine Information Center. There, you’ll find resources that’ll tell you the ingredients in vaccines, their possible side effects, and the information you need to make intelligent, informed decisions about vaccinations.

This is important because when it comes right down to it, the only one who can protect you is YOU. Mass vaccination policies are made at the federal level. The laws are made at the state level. That means you must be vigilant in watching BOTH state and federal moves and programs – programs like this one that want to interrupt your church service to give you a vaccine.

One way to keep abreast of what’s going on at a state and national level is to sign up for NVIC’s free Advocacy Portal atwww.NVICAdvocacy.org, where you’ll get access to practical, useful information to help you become an effective vaccine choice advocate in your own community. This portal will also give you up-to-date information and call-to-action items that you can use.

And finally, I encourage you to visit the following NVIC web pages, where you can learn even more:

  • NVIC Memorial for Vaccine Victims: View descriptions and photos of children and adults, who have suffered vaccine reactions, injuries and deaths. If you or your child experiences an adverse vaccine event, please consider posting and sharing your story here.
  • If You Vaccinate, Ask 8 Questions: Learn how to recognize vaccine reaction symptoms and prevent vaccine injuries.
  • Vaccine Freedom Wall: View or post descriptions of harassment by doctors or government officials for making independent vaccine choices.

To view the original article click here.
To reprint this article, visit the source website for reprinting guidelines

The AIDS Challenge Can Become A Process Of Awakening

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz

HIV, which consists of human DNA or RNA fragments, cannot be considered to be the cause of AIDS. AIDS, which is an umbrella name for a number of different illnesses that all share a disrupted metabolism and immune system, is caused by one or several major risk factors. If a healthy person acquires HIV through an external source, i.e., through contact with HIV-infected blood or through the mother, it is rendered harmless and inactive by the host’s immune system. Such a person would have produced antibodies for HIV in his blood just as he would for any other previously encountered viral particles. He is in no greater danger of developing an AIDS disease than any other person without HIV does, as can be seen, for example, in the vast majority of HIV-infected Africans or Asians.

The destruction of the immune system

The occurrence of DNA or RNA fragments (HIV) in the blood of a person who actually produces abnormal cell destruction, on the other hand, indicates the presence of a serious immune deficiency. Malnutrition, starvation, dehydration, recurring injuries, or cell suffocation from internal congestion results in an imbalance of the body’s amino acid pool. To correct such an imbalance, the body begins to break down its own cell nuclei in order to obtain the missing amino acids. If there is a shortage of even one amino acid in the body, the percentage composition of all the other amino acids also becomes unbalanced. This can have a simultaneous catastrophic effect on the cells and their nucleus throughout the body. The destruction of cell nucleus results in DNA or RNA fragments; the fragments consist of human proteins called retrovirus. HIV is one the many retroviruses that can be generated in this way. Thus, HIV, which is generated within the body through destruction of cell nucleus, cannot be considered to be the cause of AIDS; it is an unavoidable byproduct of the body’s fight for survival. This fight may eventually lead to the destruction of the immune system, which is called AIDS.

AIDS – A Process of Awakening

Humankind is rapidly awakening to a new level of understanding that will discriminate between false and correct information. We are living in a time where scandals can no longer be concealed from the public eye. Whatever may be the truth about any subject, it will eventually dominate in collective consciousness. People will simply know from within themselves what is right and what is wrong. The AIDS phenomenon is one of today’s great challenges that can urge someone to search for the solutions to his problems within. Andrew, who was my first AIDS patient, made this realization almost instantly.

Andrew’s story

When I met Andrew 5 years ago, he was a young homosexual with fully developed AIDS symptoms. He was emotionally unbalanced, depressed and extremely sensitive. He lived in Athens, where, in his opinion, nightlife was the only thing “worth living for”. First, I motivated him to become a “day person” again. The Ayurvedic routine, cleansing procedures, improved nutrition, daily meditation, etc., soon improved the multiple lesions on his skin, steadily increased his T-cell counts, and what he felt was most remarkable, improved his appetite and digestion. With all that, his joy of living returned, but the new kind of joy was quite different to what he had ever before experienced. It was the joy of waking up, of appreciating the sun, nature, and day life, rather than clubs, drugs, and nightlife.

When I met Andrew a few years later, he was completely free of all signs of AIDS. He was used to the idea that he was still HIV positive, and with the understanding I was able to provide him with about this virus, it wasn’t even important anymore whether he had antibodies against it or not. What he knew was that he had overcome AIDS, which was most essential for his self-esteem and happiness. The stigma of HIV was no longer a matter of disgrace to him. Andrew had changed from being a victim of a disease (that didn’t exist) to a person worthy of love, appreciation and recognition. This is what AIDS can do. It can awaken a person to live with deeper sense of self-appreciation, love, dignity and purpose.

——————————
This is an excerpt from my book ENDING THE AIDS MYTH

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyper link back to the web page

Refined, Processed Fats And Oils Damage And Destroy The Immune System

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz

Sunlight is most beneficial for those who eat a balanced diet according to their individual requirements and body type. Sunbathing may be dangerous, however, for those who live on a diet rich in acid-forming, highly processed foods and refined fats or products made with them. Alcohol, cigarettes, and other mineral and vitamin depleting substances, such as allopathic and hallucinogenic drugs, can also make the skin highly vulnerable to ultraviolet radiation. In particular, polyunsaturated fats as contained in refined and vitamin E depleted products, such as thin vegetable oil, mayonnaise, salad dressings, and most brands of margarine, pose a particularly high risk in the development of skin cancer and most other cancers. According to Archives of Internal Medicine, 1998, polyunsaturated fats increase a woman’s risk of breast cancer by 69 percent. In contrast, monounsaturated fats, as found in olive oil, reduce breast cancer risk by 45 percent.

Untreated, expeller-pressed oils contain both types of fats, with varying ratios. Both kinds of fat are useful for the body. Sesame oil, for example has 50 percent polyunsaturated fats and 50 percent monounsaturated fats. If the monounsaturated fats are removed from the oil through the refining process, its polyunsaturated fats become highly reactive and damaging to cells.

This phenomenon is quite easy to understand. Polyunsaturated fats are more vulnerable to lipid peroxidation (rancidity) than monounsaturated fats. In other words, they rapidly attract a large number of oxygen free radicals and become oxidized. Oxygen radicals are generated when oxygen molecules lose an electron. This makes them highly reactive. These free radicals may quickly attack and damage cells, tissues, and organs. They can be formed in refined, polyunsaturated fats when these are exposed to sunlight before consumption. Free radicals may also form in the tissues after the oil has been eaten. The polyunsaturated fats in refined oils are difficult to digest, since they are deprived of their natural bulk and are no longer protected against free radicals by their natural protector, vitamin E, a powerful anti-oxidant (vitamin E interferes with the oxidation process).

Vitamin E and many other valuable nutrients are filtered out or destroyed during the refining process. Eating a hamburger and French fries can flood your body with free radicals. Both foods are heated with refined oils. Heating these oils greatly increases their oxidation and, therefore, tissue-damaging effects.

Most people have no idea what happens to the oil when it is extracted from a nut or seed. To extend the oil’s shelf life, create a clear color and remove its natural scent, it is bathed in a petroleum solvent, then “degummed” or placed in hot water and swirled at a high speed to separate out various substances. To further refine the oil, it is mixed with an alkali such as lye or caustic soda; then it is agitated, heated again, bleached, hydrogenated to stabilize it and finally deodorized. To increase shelf-life further, manufacturers add preservatives and other food additives. Although all of that improves the oil’s shelf life, it does not prevent it from turning rancid before the expiration date. The chemical treatments it undergoes disguises signs of rancidity, which makes the oil so dangerous to the unsuspecting consumer.

Saturated fats are solid and found in products such as lard and butter. They contain large quantities of natural antioxidants, which make them much safer against oxidation by free radicals. They are also digested quite easily.

The polyunsaturated fats in refined oils (stripped of their monounsaturated fats), on the other hand, are virtually indigestible and thereby become dangerous to the body. Margarine, for example, is just one molecule away from plastic, and therefore extremely difficult to digest. Free radicals, the natural cleansers of the body, try to get rid of the fatty culprit which attaches itself to the cells’ walls. But when the radicals digest these harmful fats, they also damage the cell walls. This is considered to be one of the main causes of aging and degenerative disease. This also shows how something so useful as oxygen radicals can become harmful when we expose the body to unnatural foods and chemicals.

Research has shown that out of 100 people who consumed large quantities of polyunsaturated fats, 78 showed marked clinical signs of premature aging. They also looked much older than others of the same age did. By contrast, in a recent study on the relationship between dietary fats and the risk for Alzheimer’s disease, researchers were surprised to learn that the natural, healthy fats can actually reduce the risk for Alzheimer’s by up to 80 percent. The study showed that the group with the lowest rate of Alzheimer’s ate approximately 38 grams of these healthy fats every day, while those with the highest incidence of this disease consumed only about half of that amount.

Tissue cells that have been damaged by abnormal free radical activity are unable to reproduce properly. This can impair major functions in the body, including those of the immune, digestive, nervous, and endocrine systems. Ever since refined polyunsaturated fats have been introduced to the population on a large scale during and after WWII, degenerative diseases have increased dramatically, skin cancer being one of them. In fact, polyunsaturated fats have made sunlight “dangerous”, something that would never have been the case if foods hadn’t been altered and manipulated, as they are today. When polyunsaturated fats are removed from their natural foods, they need to be refined, deodorized, and even hydrogenated, depending on the food product for which they are used. During this process some of the polyunsaturated fats undergo chemical transformations, which turns them into trans fatty acids (trans fats), often referred to as “hydrogenated vegetable oils”. Margarine can contain up to 54 percent of them, vegetable shortening up to 58 percent.

You can detect hydrogenated vegetable oils in foods by reading the food labels. Most processed foods contain them, including breads, crisps, chips, doughnuts, crackers, biscuits, pastries, all baked goods, cake and frosting mixes, baking mixes, frozen dinners, sauces, frozen vegetables, and breakfast cereals. In other words, nearly all foods that are shelved, processed, refined, preserved, and not fresh can contain trans fats.

Trans fats inhibit the cell’s ability to use oxygen, which is required to burn foodstuffs to carbon dioxide and water. Cells, which are inhibited in completing their metabolic processes, may thus become cancerous. The current movement to get trans fats out of foods has merely led to the replacement of one harmful fat with another harmful, artificially produced, fat. For all practical purposes, the new man-made fats, called “interesterified” fats, are not better than the old trans fats. Research, published in Nutrition & Metabolism (January 15, 2007), indicates that a new method of modifying fat in commercial products raises blood glucose, depresses insulin, and reduces levels of beneficial HDL-cholesterol.

The trans fats also make the blood thicker by increasing the stickiness of the platelets. This multiplies the chances of blood clots and the buildup of fatty deposits, which can lead to heart disease. Research at Harvard Medical School, in which the dietary habits of 85,000 women were observed for over 8 years, found that those eating margarine had an increased risk of coronary heart disease. Further studies have shown that trans fatty acids prevent the body from processing Low Density Lipo Protein (LDL) or bad cholesterol, thereby raising blood cholesterol to abnormal levels. A Welsh study linked the concentration of these artificial trans fats in body fat with death from heart disease. The Dutch government has already banned any products containing trans fatty acids.

Polyunsaturated fats have also been shown to suppress immunity. For this reason, they are used today in patients who have undergone kidney transplant operations or skin grafts taken from other people. This helps the patient’s immune system to not reject the foreign tissue, but of course it also leaves the person vulnerable to infection and other disorders. The same approach is used in the so-called autoimmune diseases where the immune system attempts to kill off some of the body’s own cells, i.e., those that have become toxic and are a risk to the survival of the body. The tragedy in all of this is that such treatments don’t change overall mortality rates; only the cause of death becomes altered.

The message here is that if you don’t want to damage or destroy your immune system, don’t eat refined, processed fats and oils.

——————————
This is an excerpt from my book TIMELESS SECRETS OF HEALTH & REJUVENATION

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyperlink back to the web page

Your Health Is In Your Hands – Living Emotional, Physical, And Spiritual Freedom

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz 

Threats to Health

Whenever your body is forced to defend itself against external threats of physical impurities or discordant influences, such as stress or sensory over-indulgence, it naturally develops the emotions of fear and insecurity. These emotions have the purpose of alerting you to the difficulties your body has in keeping itself vibrant, healthy and efficient.

There are many potential health threats, including a vast number of man-made environmental pollutants. Others are concealed in thousands of different foods and drinks that are factory-made. Adding to the dilemma, most processed and refined foods have lost their natural life force and are of no use other than to provide empty calories and congesting bulk. If there is any naturalness left in these foods, microwave ovens, deep frying and freezing make certain that we receive very little or no life force from the foods we eat.

The immune system is incessantly engaged in trying to defend the body against a number of other noxious things, such as chemical additives, preservatives, flavor enhancers, stabilizers, emulsifiers, nerve toxins (caffeine, nicotine, and alcohol) and the poisons that make medicinal drugs so ‘effective’.

Then there is the highly acidic metabolic waste product carbon dioxide that the body tries to eliminate with every breath. Just as too much of it in the atmosphere may disturb ecological balance, when we ingest carbonated drinks we force this gas right back into the body. This unnatural situation acidifies the blood and undermines the metabolic health of every cell in the body. A sedentary lifestyle only exacerbates this situation.

If you ingest synthetic drugs such as artificial sweeteners (Aspartame, NutraSweet, Saccharin), the body breaks them down into methanol (wood alcohol) and other poisons. These not only disrupt cell health but also blast endocrine balance. As they begin to break through the brain barrier they cause damage to the central nervous system and cause havoc throughout the body. The FDA has recorded more than 94 symptoms of disease caused by Aspartame alone, including death. Remember, artificial sweeteners are added to over 9,000 different foods and drinks, including cereals, diet drinks, sweets, fruit juices, biscuits, cakes, chewing gum and toothpastes.

Disease Is But Self-defense

When the body is no longer able to adequately deal with these or similar health threats, the immune system enters a dramatic and highly reactive phase of alert. This response is in addition to causing emotional distress, such as anxiety or even panic. Conventional medicine calls it ‘disease’; I call it ‘toxicity crisis.’

Disease doesn’t signal that there is something wrong with the body itself. Rather, it shows that the body is trying to defend itself against something that doesn’t belong there. In truth, there are no diseases, only various stages of self-defense. The body utilizes an entire arsenal of highly sophisticated defense weaponry to ward off the adverse effects resulting from such health threats.

The first line of defense consists of tiny, friendly microorganisms and micro-plasmas (invisible to most microscopes) that live on the skin and in our mucous lining. They exist everywhere in nature. These tiny organisms make up the primary force for maintaining homeostasis or balance in the body.

The second line of defense involves the body’s own immune system, which is dealing mainly with cell protection. It is highly concentrated in the mucous lining of the gastrointestinal tract. The stomach’s hydrochloric acid is also used to neutralize harmful elements, such as parasites. If there are a lot of harmful substances passing through the digestive system, the mucous lining increases in size to capture, detoxify and remove the ‘intruders’. The mucus lining normally regenerates itself after contact with the irritating substances. Constant exposure, however, causes this line of defense to be brake up. As a result, various organ structures become susceptible to harmful microbes and get inflamed or injured.

The body’s response to this threat, which makes this the third line of defense, is commonly known as infection. Infection, however, is not caused by microbes, but by the constant overexposure of body tissue to irritating toxins. Microbes are always present in the body and harmless unless they are needed to clean up putrefying and damaged cell tissue. They produce strong toxins as part of their clean-up activities. The infection itself, which often involves major lymphatic activity and inflammatory swelling, results from a massive immune response (increase of antibodies and immune cells.) At this stage of disease development, scar tissue may be formed and defects begin to occur. This marks the beginning of chronic illness, which represents the final line of defense.

Cell Mutation

When toxins eventually make their way into the tissue surrounding the cells of the body (called connective tissue) and into the cells themselves, some of them are cut off from their oxygen or nutrient supply. This causes the cell’s internal environment to become acidic, too, rendering its own defense system ineffective. To survive the assault by the acidic substances, the cell’s nucleus has no other choice but to mutate, that is, to reprogram its genes to behave in a cancerous manner.

Yet this response also is just another aspect of the body’s clever defense strategies. The cell sacrifices its normal balanced state to protect the body against sudden demise through septic poisoning or wasting. Cancer cells have learned to live without oxygen (anaerobic). To obtain energy for cell survival, they utilize metabolic waste products that are stuck in the acidified, congested area; this in turn brings temporary relief for the body.

Cancer is one of the body’s final survival attempts to minimize the life-threatening toxicity that is suffocating an area of cell tissue. When the connective tissue surrounding the cells of the body becomes saturated with highly acidified, undigested foods such as animal protein, acidosis results. Acidosis is the most common cause of illness; in fact it can paralyze the entire immune system. In such case, the cancer serves as an emergency immune system to help the body survive a little longer than it would otherwise. Eventually, however, this strategy fails, unless the concentration of toxicity is drastically reduced.

When Your Body Speaks

The physical appearance of disease always is usually accompanied by the emergence of hitherto repressed emotions that have lurked in the shadow of one’s personality. Thus, cancer, which marks the collapse of the body’s primary defense lines, is nothing more than a desperate attempt by the body/mind complex to bring to the surface of one’s attention an underlying emotional self-attack.

Having a harmful ‘habit’ is basically a form of self-denial. When you deny yourself anything in life, due to feelings of guilt or low worthiness, you will look for external or more superficial ways to gain satisfaction. When this strategy fails, you may express your dismay perhaps in the following manner: “I can’t cope anymore”, “God doesn’t love me” or “It’s all so unfair!” And if you don’t like yourself the way you are, with all your faults and gifts, you naturally tend to seek love and attention from others. All your energy and passion are channeled into securing external acceptance and approval because you believe that you are lacking these within – that you are not good enough.

Low self-worth puts you on the defense. This usually occurs when you can’t get from others what you actually want from yourself. You are truly seeking self-empowerment in life; it is built into you as a natural survival instinct. Because it is not in your best interest to have your expectations fulfilled by others, you will most likely to be disappointed more often than less if you try. To bury your hurt or deny it, you may try to cover up the frustration of not getting what you want from others or from the world. At the same time, though, you will attempt to fill the inner void with such forms of self-destruction as abusing alcohol, nicotine, caffeine, sugar, junk food, sex, money, power and influence. Each one of those attempts represents an unbalanced perception of yourself.

The body, in turn, is forced to defend itself against these direct or indirect assaults until one defense line after another breaks down. The final phase of the body’s of defense intelligence is chronic illness, such as heart disease, arthritis or cancer. These diseases are nothing but a last S-O-S call by the body to alert you that it is under attack and that it wants to be treated kindly. Like every living being on this planet, each cell of the body wants to be accepted for what it is and for what it contributes to the whole.

Health And Self-image

The degree of physical health and wellness reflects the degree of self-acceptance and self-honor. Love, health and vitality emerge or are naturally present when you love and accept each part of yourself, especially your shadow side – the side of you that you rarely let others see. The degree of self-love determines how much love and kindness others mirror back to you. Being loved by others can never really satisfy you unless you feel that same love for yourself.

In reality, there is no low self-worth or lack of any kind, only a flawed perception of yourself. Taking your health into your hands is a very powerful and direct way to bring forth your inner power, sense of security and love of self. Your body will have no more need to defend itself in any respect, because it feels loved by you and receives what it needs to fulfill its purpose.

Someone who assumes positive responsibility for everything that happens to him is free from the illusion of injustice, of being a victim of sorts. He bears no judgment against himself, and therefore against anyone else. Everything is seen as appropriate and purposeful, a gift of his own divine intention. If something doesn’t make much sense, it still has value for him. He knows there is a larger picture involved, and trusts that both the light and dark, the right and wrong, health and sickness, good and bad are necessary attributes to strengthen his relationship with his Higher Self and that of all other beings.

Illness and even death are not indications of punishment, but can be seen as useful opportunities to complete ourselves even further. There are no real victims in life. If it were so, it would violate the universal law of non-interference. We cannot be attacked or harmed by someone else or by nature and its forces unless we have agreed to this on the level of Higher Self for reasons of growth and learning.

You Create Your Own Experiences

Each one of us is always in control. We are the creators of all our personal life experiences, whether they are beautiful and uplifting, or frustrating and depressing. Everything can be purposeful in life if we give it that meaning. There is no independent purpose or meaning to an event but the one we attach to it. Someone may give a positive meaning to his illness and accepts it as life-altering event, whereas another chooses to see it as living in hell. The first one may become a healer because of this experience; the second one spreads bitterness and spews anger around him.

There is always a choice in how you interpret a given situation. The choice carries the power to be a self-fulfilling prophecy. One person uses this power to heal his body from an illness, while another person uses the same power to belittle himself and violate his body even further. Healing takes place spontaneously once self-attack and self-denial come to an end. Cleansing the body is an act of love and self-acceptance and is interpreted by the body as a green light to heal and rejuvenate itself.

Cleansing Is An Act Of Love

To successfully remove fear, anger, traumas, low self-worth from the cellular memory of the body you need to cleanse it from impurities. This will persuade the body that there is no further need to defend itself, that is, to become ill. All so-called negative emotions are not actually held within the body’s own cellular or intercellular structure, but within the accumulated toxic waste material. Anger, for example, is energetically trapped within gallstones that block the bile ducts of the liver or are held inside the gallbladder. Most people in the developed world store between 500 and 5,000 of these stones in the liver alone. These highly toxic, bacteria-infested stones keep the frequency of consciousness low, which coerces you to deal with and, hopefully, learn from the emotions of resentment and anger.

By clearing the stones and toxins from the bile ducts of the liver and from the gallbladder, you naturally remove the trapped emotions. Deciding to do this, however, is far less an intellectual decision than an emotional one. You will know it in your gut when it is time to cleanse your liver. If you need to be persuaded to do this, it is probably not the right time. It is a true act of self-love to purify the body. When you feel it, there is no more choice you need to make; you have already made it. Many life lessons are mastered through this one simple act of self love. A person who purges his liver from these stones feels uplifted, more kind and loving toward himself and others. His frequency vibrates at a higher note – the note of love and self-acceptance.

Likewise, dissolving and removing grease, crystals, and/or stones that have accumulated in the kidneys and bladder removes old fear from the body; this kind of fear is usually related to one’s upbringing and/or difficulties with parents. Deep colon cleansing, as it occurs during a colonic irrigation, allows the body to release old beliefs and self-imposed limitations. Unless you cleanse the body physically, emotional cleansing may be a never-ending process. This is because any kind of congestion in the digestive system, lymphatic system, respiratory system, urinary system, circulatory system, etc. triggers fear in the body. And fear feeds all other negative emotions. Learning to trust that your health is in your hands unerringly leads you to emotional, physical and spiritual freedom.

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyperlink back to the web page

The Sinister Truth Behind Pandemics

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz 

The truth behind pandemics

There is no doubt that pandemics are man-made or due to vaccination programs, starvation, poor hygiene and antibiotics, all of which compromise the immune system. Viral infection is an effect of illness, not its cause, just as bacteria are capable of infecting only unhealthy, weak or damaged cells.

Bacteria and viruses do not viciously or indiscriminately attack us. Nature does not fight against itself, if it did, we would all be dead. There is no war between humans and nature, unless of course, we try to destroy it or upset the balance of natural forces and resources and subsequently refer to the rebalancing process as disease or natural disaster. Still, the masses have fallen for this pseudo science as it has been deftly presented to them.

Analysis of the official statistics from several countries and their historical occurrences of diseases such as smallpox, diphtheria, cholera, typhoid, poliomyelitis, tuberculosis, bronchitis, tetanus, etc has revealed astounding findings. For example, diphtheria in France increased to an all-time high with the onset of compulsory immunization and immediately dropped again after the vaccine was withdrawn.

The situation was not very different in Germany when compulsory immunization for diphtheria was introduced on a mass scale between 1925 and 1944. During this period, the number of diphtheria victims increased from 40,000 to 240,000, with the incidence of infection being higher among immunized patients. In 1945, at the end of World War II, vaccines were no longer available in Germany and, within a few years, the number of cases dropped below 50,000.

Statistical data shows that most of these diseases were in rapid and continuous decline well before the introduction of immunization programs. The big epidemics began occurring when people from the rural areas moved to the big cities. The streets were used as garbage dumps, contaminating air and water and becoming the source of infectious diseases. Only a major clean-up of these congested cities and improved sanitation, hygiene and housing were able to halt the epidemics and led to drastic improvements in individual and collective health. Vaccination programs had nothing to do with it.

Big Pharma’s Death Grip

Spreading the notion that viruses and bacteria cause diseases is more a means to keep the masses fearful and controlled, than it is a scientific fact. And there is big money to be made from such misconceptions, therefore the unsuspecting public is led to believe that vaccines are life-savers.

During the 1960s, the vaccine industry was extremely under-funded because epidemics were nowhere to be found. Plans were made to manufacture new virus strains (to use them to induce cancer in animals for ‘cancer research’). In truth, however, the mixing of certain viral strains, normally not occurring in nature, led to new possibilities of sabotaging the immune systems of even perfectly healthy people. The intention was to generate new illnesses and for which natural immunity is helpless. When injected into people through vaccines, these virus cocktails would shut down the immune system, destroy cell nuclei and trigger the production or human retroviruses such as HIV.

Yes, the AIDS story is one such shocking and tragic example. In 1962, UCLA scientists concocted a new virus strain to induce cancer in animals (purportedly for cancer research). They combined an animal virus with a smallpox virus that was then made into a smallpox vaccine by a major pharmaceutical company.

The vaccine was generously donated to Africa to vaccinate 125 million people. What a gesture of goodwill! Those with the weakest immune systems developed severe immune deficiency symptoms, which later were misinterpreted as AIDS diseases. Of the 125 million people who were vaccinated, 98 million developed AIDS. This new disease turned out to be huge money spinner and a bargaining chip for wealthy nations to make and keep these poor countries dependent on them by distributing condoms for population control and powerful (immune-destructive) AIDS drugs to ‘cure’ AIDS.

The anti-AIDS drugs that began to pour into the developing world became a means to prevent the rise and independence of the poor countries’ economies. So in order to help these countries ‘survive’ the onslaught of a deadly virus and in exchange for expensive and otherwise unaffordable medications, developed countries persuaded poor countries to sign agreements to hand over important economic production rights and natural resources.

The virus myth is a convenient tool to control people. This is a basic truth. The only real antidote to the wily games politicians and vaccine-makers play is to educate yourself and stop playing victim in this deadly power game.

——————————
This is an excerpt from my book VACCINE-NATION: POISONING THE POPULATION, ONE SHOT AT A TIME

 

 

 

 

 

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyperlink back to the web page

Free Radicals Cannot Be Considered A Cause Of Illness And Aging

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz 

Imagine if we actually focused on removing the root causes of cancer. We would find that cancer is actually not a threatening disease at all, and certainly not the killer disease we have been made to believe it is.

You may wonder about those bad oxygen free radicals that everyone talks about. Is it not true that they are behind most cancers and other diseases? If it is true, how can we defend ourselves against them, other than by removing them with such antioxidants as vitamin C?

Oxygen free radicals are highly reactive oxygen molecules. They are involved in causing rust in iron and in turning fats rancid. They are also found in arteries that have become occluded with plaque. Many researchers believe that they are involved in the formation of cancer cells. However, like bacteria, these molecules have been given an unjustifiably bad reputation. Free radicals have existed since the beginning of life on Earth. Why would they now lead to cancer in one out of every two people when just 100 years ago only 1 in 8,000 people suffered the same fate? Did they just become a lot more ‘vicious’ in the past 100 years, ever so eager to oxidize us to death? The answer is a resounding ‘No’.

They only oxidize and destroy what is already weak and potentially damaging to the body. They never attack healthy, vital cell tissue, but they naturally turn up where there is something to be destroyed that has become useless and is an impending threat to the body’s physiological balance. Weak or worn out cells and accumulated metabolic waste material, which the body’s lymphatic system normally removes without a problem, become a hazard when they are trapped in the tissues and the free radicals are not doing their job. Increasing free radical activity and spreading infectious germs are therefore the next best alternatives to the body’s own cleansing and eliminative efforts, especially when the body’s immune system is already compromised. Thus, neither free radicals nor germs can rightfully be considered a cause of illness and aging.

Since illness is actually a healing mechanism and aging is a form of advanced congestion in the body, free radicals must, in fact, be considered the beneficial effects of illness and aging.

The more often infections are ‘prevented’ or suppressed through medical interventions, the less efficient the liver and kidneys, as well as the immune, lymphatic, and digestive systems become in keeping the body’s cell tissues free of harmful, noxious deposits.

Yet, not only infections and free radicals act as cleansers or scavengers of obstructive waste and damaged, weak cells, but pain also serves as a healing aid. Pain is merely a signal that the body is actively involved in a healing response that includes repairing damaged tissues and cleansing itself. By suppressing pain with medication, you short-circuit the body’s internal communication and healing mechanisms and practically force it to hold on to, and eventually suffocate in, its own waste. Cancer is a natural consequence of dealing with such a distressing, unnatural situation.

——————————
This is an excerpt from my book CANCER IS NOT A DISEASE! – IT’S A SURVIVAL MECHANISM

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyperlink back to the web page

Germs Don’t Cause Cancer

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz 

The germs involved in an infection become active and infectious only when physical impurities and waste matter have gathered or tissue damage has already occurred. This is true whether they are of a bacterial or viral origin and whether they are generated within the body or introduced from the external environment. Destructive microorganisms (those involved in an infection) simply have no business in a clean, well-circulated, and oxygen-rich environment. There is nothing to be disposed of, and no immune response is necessary (fever, swelling of the lymph nodes, an increase of immune cells, or other such self-defensive measures) to protect the body.

Even if harmful germs were to enter cell tissue in a healthy body, they would do it no harm. A virus simply cannot penetrate into the nucleus of a well-oxygenated cell because exposure to oxygen would kill it. A well-oxygenated cell also produces powerful anti-viral drugs, such as interferon. If for some reason a virus has made contact with a cell, but its presence is not beneficial to the body, the virus will be destroyed by the cell’s defense mechanisms or the general immune system. Viruses do not help cells mutate into cancer cells, unless this is in the best interest of the body. We should not fall into the trap of misinterpreting this to be an act of self-destruction. It is important to recall at this point that cancer is not a disease but a survival mechanism that occurs only when all other protective measures have failed.

There is profound purpose and intelligence at every level of physical creation, from the smallest of particles to the most complex star clusters in the large-scale universe. Just because many scientists and doctors prefer to see nature as behaving in a random, incoherent fashion does not mean it actually is chaotic and unpredictable. Cancer is not as chaotic as the “experts” would have us believe. It has as much purpose and meaning as does a virus or bacterium. A virus only infects the nucleus of a cell that is on the verge of becoming anaerobic. To find virus material in cancer cells is, therefore, not proof that viruses cause cancer. In fact, viruses try to prevent the demise of the body. They are created for the body and by the body. It is completely normal for weak, deteriorating cells to transform their protits colloids into bacteria, viruses, and fungi to help prevent more damage to the body than has already occurred due to the accumulation of toxic waste matter.

Suppressing an infection, such as chickenpox, with germ-killing medication destroys much of the germ population. However, it is the germ population that helps to stimulate a much-needed immune response to rid the body of cancer-causing toxins. Modern vaccination programs are largely responsible for the significant deterioration of natural immunity among the vaccinated populations around the world today. The body does not acquire real immunity to infectious diseases by exposing it to vaccines (antibody production alone does not create immunity); in fact, with each vaccine the immune system becomes more depleted.

New vaccines that, for example, are said to prevent cervical cancer (connected with the human papilloma virus or HPV) merely force the body to move toxins into other areas. This may give rise to the appearance that the “enemy” is dead and the body is now cured and safe. Not by a long shot! The short-term gain of becoming symptom-free through the use of such magic bullet approaches can have serious repercussions in the long-term. These treatments aimed at producing a quick symptomatic relief actually prevent the body from employing the assistance of destructive microbes to help break down and remove deposits in the body that resemble nuclear waste.

The toxic waste and cell debris gathered in the body can act like a time bomb, but most people do not want to hear it ticking. They stick their heads in the sand, hoping that somehow the problem will simply go away. However, when the ticking becomes too unnerving and frightening (symptoms), the resulting visit to the doctor will lead to the smashing of the timing device, but will leave the bomb intact. Hence, it is just a matter of time before the bomb explodes; only this time, since the clock is now gone, there won’t be much of a warning. On the other hand, allowing the body to receive assistance from destructive germs may not only defuse the time bomb but also dismantle it. The toxic secretions from these microbes prompt the immune system to launch a preemptive strike against potential cancer formation. A spontaneous remission of cancer is not a rare miracle. It happens in millions of people who unknowingly diffuse these “time bombs” through an infection, such as the simple cold or flu. This is how 95 percent of all cancers come and go without any medical intervention.

Based on current statistical information, we can estimate that treating cancer with suppressive methods, e.g. radiation, chemotherapy, and surgery, reduces the chance of complete remission from 28% percent to 7% or less. In other words, medical treatment is responsible for the deaths of at least 21,000 people in every 100,000 cancer patients! These 21,000 people would recover if they did not receive any treatment at all. According to the American Cancer Society’s estimated 2008 cancer mortality rates, 565,650 men and women will die from cancer this year (2008). That’s 6,000 deaths more than in 2007. In a country that supposedly has the most advanced and successful medical system in the world, this trend clearly shows that the currently applied symptom-oriented approaches to cancer are heavily flawed and in fact, have failed.

——————————
This is an excerpt from my book CANCER IS NOT A DISEASE! – IT’S A SURVIVAL MECHANISM

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyperlink back to the web page

The AIDS Theory Under Scrutiny

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz 

It was in 1980 when the first AIDS cases were diagnosed, but despite the most colossal efforts by scientists and policy makers, AIDS has remained a mystery disease. Commonly believed to be caused by HIV – Human Immune Deficiency Virus – scientists still haven’t found an antidote for the disease. To this day, there is no convincing medical knowledge as to how the pathogen HIV is supposed to cause AIDS.The current AIDS theory also falls short in predicting the kind of AIDS disease an infected person may be manifesting, and there is no accurate system to determine how long it will take for the disease to develop. The HIV/AIDS theory contains no information that can truly help identify those who are at risk of developing AIDS.

With regard to “treating” AIDS, until recently, patients were able to choose between a small number of drugs that were originally developed as cancer chemotherapies, but had to bear with extreme side effects, such as loss of hair, anemia, muscle deterioration, nausea, and other immune suppressing effects. A newly introduced cocktail of three drugs (protease inhibitors), which are less toxic than the originally used drugs, seemed promising at first in being able to suppress HIV. Yet the cumulative failure rate of the new drugs has now reached 50 percent and continues to increase as strains of HIV develop resistance to them. Already between 20 and 30 percent of patients are now infected with viruses resistant to protease inhibitors, and the situation is worsening day by day. Although the drugs have given many AIDS patients a “new lease of life” (not necessarily because the drugs suppress HIV, but because they also subdue most other disease-causing agents, at least for a while), the initial euphoria about the new AIDS treatment has died down and so has the hope of finding a cure, at least within the medical field.

The fact that there is no reliable latency period – the length of time from being infected with HIV and developing AIDS symptoms – makes it virtually impossible to predict the beginning of the disease. The first AIDS victims were told that they could expect to die within one year after infection, but today the grace period ranges from 12 to15 years, which makes immediate treatment after HIV infection dubious. This is certainly not the last revision. The majority of HIV infected people continue to be AIDS-free and only a fraction of them develop AIDS symptoms such as pneumonia, cancer of the blood, or dementia.

To add more confusion to the situation, health officials are unable to predict how many people will be afflicted with AIDS in the future, as only a small percentage of the one million HIV-infected Americans will get the disease. In the first 20 years or so of the epidemic, 95 percent of the AIDS cases were among the major health risk groups – highly active homosexuals, heroin addicts, or, in a few cases, hemophiliacs, and since then more and more heterosexual men and women are found to test HIV positive.

According to official estimates, two thirds of infected persons supposedly are in Africa, where the epidemic exploded during the 1990s, and one fifth are in Asia, where the epidemic has been growing rapidly in recent years. As of the end of 2003, an estimated 34.6 million to 42.3 million people throughout the world were living with HIV infection, and more than 20 million had died of AIDS. In that year alone, about 4.8 million people became infected with HIV, and about 2.9 million died of AIDS. However, as we shall see, these estimates are significantly flawed and manipulated.

Just four years earlier in 1999, the statistics showed figures that in no way support today’s figures. With the officially proclaimed mortality rate of 50-100 percent among HIV infected people, we should have had many more deaths in Africa where the number of infected at that time was estimated to be as large as six to eight million, and also in Haiti, where over six percent of the population tested HIV-positive. Yet during the nineties, the African continent had only 250,000 AIDS cases, and Haiti had almost none. This leads to the simple, but most important and almost forsaken question regarding AIDS, which is “What causes it?”

So far, there is no scientific evidence that AIDS is a contagious disease, although it seems to be that way to most people. What is known from recently published research is that HIV only extremely rarely spreads heterosexually and can, therefore, not be responsible for an epidemic that involves millions of AIDS victims around the world. There is also no proof to show that HIV causes AIDS. On the other hand, it is an established fact that the retrovirus HIV, which is composed of human gene fragments, is incapable of destroying human cells – yet cell destruction is the main characteristic of every AIDS disease.

Even the principal discoverer of HIV, Luc Montagnier, no longer believes that HIV is solely responsible for causing AIDS. In fact, he showed that HIV alone cannot cause AIDS. There is also increasing evidence that AIDS may be a toxicity syndrome or metabolic disorder that is caused by immunity risk factors, including heroin, sex drugs, antibiotics, commonly prescribed AIDS drugs, rectal intercourse, starvation, malnutrition and dehydration. Dozens of prominent scientists working at the forefront of the AIDS research are now openly questioning the virus hypothesis of AIDS.

——————————
This is an excerpt from my book ENDING THE AIDS MYTH

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyperlink back to the web page

Definition Of Disease In The Context Of Vaccines And Immunity

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz 

Before I illustrate how vaccines cause, and not prevent disease, let us first define ‘disease’ in the context of vaccines and immunity.

It has long been known that in some illnesses such as measles, chickenpox and scarlet fever, one bout of the illness usually provides lifelong immunity. A second experience with measles or scarlet fever is extremely rare. Why is that so? That is because nature has gifted the human body with wonderful natural armor – an in-built immunity – that protects the body by kicking in after a bout of a particular disease.

Till modern science unraveled the secrets of the immune system, the concepts of medicine formulated in the 19thcentury were in part based on the understanding of medicine by the ancient Greek physician Hippocrates. According to Hippocrates, an illness manifests itself as signs and symptoms that travel from the inner vital organs and blood circulation to the outer surface of the body. These outer symptoms manifest themselves as visible symptoms such as a rash or discharge of blood, mucus or pus.

This ‘throwing off’ of an illness was considered a natural healing response which returned the body to a state of balance or equilibrium. And it took place only after the inner poisons produced by the disease were cooked and digested (pepsis) during the inflammatory process. Hippocrates’s astute observations were further developed by modern science, which later uncovered the actual mechanisms of infection, inflammation and healing on these very same lines.

Disease symptoms can indeed be caused by pathogens such as bacteria and viruses. But we have also been led to think of them as enemies that we need to battle. The fact is that disease does not begin when we are exposed to or are infected with a bacterium or virus. It begins when the body begins to respond to a pathogen or the inflammatory-infectious process that it sets in motion. This means that disease equals healing, which is the body’s way of returning to a balanced condition (homeostasis). Disease is a sure sign that the body is engaged in correcting an underlying condition that is otherwise unfavorable to its efficiency and survival.

It is critical to understand this because it turns on its head the very foundation on which vaccination theory rests. The human body’s inflammatory response to disease is, in fact, a healing process. Symptoms of disease are the body’s attempt to deal with accumulated toxins, waste matter, and weakened or damaged cells. The so-called pathogens appropriately assist the body in destroying and eliminating such potentially harmful materials from the system, and return the body to a healthy state of equilibrium.

Also, the magnitude of the body’s response, or the severity of illness, is not only influenced by the magnitude of the resulting infection but also by the stamina of its immune system.

The healing force employed by the body is, in turn, influenced by a variety of factors such as the individual’s emotional state, spiritual foundation, diet, lifestyle, environment, etc. It definitely does not depend on whether we have been vaccinated against infectious agents.

If the immune system is weak, the body becomes congested and toxic, or vice versa. As a result, pathogens are likely to invade the body and start the detoxification process (disease), although the majority of germ ‘invasions’ occur silently, without ever disturbing us. Think about it. The human body is exposed to a multitude of pathogens every day, some of them agents of (presumed) deadly diseases. If germ invasion were synonymous with disease and death, most human beings would not survive very long.

——————————
This is an excerpt from my book VACCINE-NATION: POISONING THE POPULATION, ONE SHOT AT A TIME

 

 

 

 

 

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyperlink back to the web page

 

The Dangerous Side Effects Of Steroids, Arthritis Drugs, And NSAIDs

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz 

Commonly prescribed drugs and their dangerous side effects

A medical investigation in the United States has shown that three times more people die from legal prescription drugs than from illegal narcotic drugs, such as heroin and cocaine. This study does not account for the contra-indications of the drugs, which kill at least 30,000 a year in the U.S.

These are people who take medications, but have conditions (including drug allergies) that would cause these drugs to be dangerous for them. It is nearly impossible to determine how many people are being hospitalized because of contra-indications from drugs, but careful official estimates indicate that they make up about 5 percent of all lying in American and British hospitals today.

Steroids belong to another group of drugs that were formerly used only for extreme, life-threatening conditions. Today, they are used for minor problems such as sunburn, skin eruptions, acne and glandular fever. Patients are rarely aware of the dangers that may arise from taking these drugs. Side effects include high blood pressure, stomach ulcers with possible perforation of the stomach wall (this is how my father died), cramps and dizziness, inhibited growth in children within six weeks of taken the drugs, irregular menstruation, weakening of muscular strength, slowed healing of wounds, vision problems, skin atrophy, allergic shock, loss of libido, decrease in bone density, manic depression, and the emergence of latent diabetes.

Steroids are now handed out, even for babies, at the first sign of inflammation of any kind. But these drugs cannot cure a single condition; all they do is stop the body from responding to an abnormal condition. The new diseases caused by such drugs may require further treatment using even stronger drugs, thus adding more side effects to the ones that have already occurred.

The latest ‘breakthrough’ drugs for arthritis produce such strong side effects that it might be better to live with arthritis than to risk one’s life. The manufacturer of one popular brand was obliged to warn the consumer that this particular drug was very strong and had led to cases of leukemia (cancer of the blood) even after short term use. Additionally, the drug can have 92 side effects including hepatitis, high blood pressure, dizziness and unconsciousness, as well as headaches. The manufacturer advises the attending physician to enlighten his patients about the possible dangers that can arise from taking the drug, particularly if they are over 40 years old, and to use the smallest possible, but still effective, dosage. The manufacturers admit that the drug can cause serious and life-threatening reactions while having no effect on improving the condition of the disease!

NSAIDs, the common name for over a dozen or more non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (including aspirin, ibuprofen and acetaminophen), are used to treat rheumatoid and osteoarthritis. However, for the past few years, these drugs have been given to people for such simple complaints as recurring headaches or inflammation. In return for the pain relief, however, the patient may die as a result of gastric bleeding caused by the extreme toxicity of the drugs. A warning placed on each NSAID prescription says: “Serious gastrointestinal toxicity such as bleeding, ulceration, and perforation can occur at any time, with or without warning symptoms, in patients treated chronically with NSAID therapy.”

If this doesn’t sound like Russian Roulette to you, the death toll from taking these drugs may convince you otherwise. In the U.K., 4,000 people die each year from taking NSAIDS. In the U.S., the fatality figure is up to five times as high as it is in the U.K. Each year, hundreds of thousands of people are hospitalized due to gastric bleeding caused directly by taking NSAIDs. Other side effects include perforation of the colon, colitis, Crohn’s disease, blurred vision, Parkinson’s disease, liver and kidney damage, hepatitis and hypertension.

A 20-year-old acne medicine that millions of American teens are, no doubt, taking every day has been linked to a stunning array of negative psychiatric conditions including suicide, depression, psychosis, violent and aggressive behaviors, mood swings, emotional instability, paranoia and changes in personality. This makes one wonder if any drug, no matter how commonly prescribed, is even remotely safe.

The small print

With the enormous variety of drugs available today, many doctors no longer have the time to study the side effects of each drug they prescribe, and most patients never read the list of side effects that accompanies the drug. Also, few patients read the small printed contra-indications or ask their doctor about the possible dangers of the drugs. Doctors don’t seem to have the time to warn their patients about possible side effects either.

One report on a survey published in a 1996 issue of the British Medical Journal found that less than two-thirds of patients recalled receiving any advice from their doctors on potential side effects. Although the doctor has a moral as well as a legal obligation to inform the patient about the risks of treatment, in most cases this important step is omitted. The drug company is legally protected as long as the side effects and contra-indications are listed. This leaves it up to the patient to decide whether to take a drug.

Read side-effect labels to save your life

Side effects arising from the use of common pharmaceutical drugs can develop into some of the most grotesque symptoms imaginable. The Stevens-Johnson Syndrome (SJS), which can progress into a complication called TENS (toxic epidermal necrolysis), is caused by adverse drug reactions. Before you start taking common prescription drugs, you may need to inform yourself about this often-fatal reaction. The list of drugs that may be problematic includes antiepileptic and anticonvulsant drugs, sulfonamides, ampicillin, allopurinol and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents (NSAIDs), as well as some vaccinations (such as anthrax).

The frightening fact about these drugs is that the body’s reaction to them is completely unpredictable. For instance, you may have taken ibuprofen, a popular NSAID, a hundred times, but you can never know for sure whether or when the body will suddenly become hypersensitive to the drug. When your body starts fighting the drug, it will go into an extreme inflammatory response that causes your skin to die and literally burn away. This side effect can occur with any age group, from infants and teens to the elderly. The mortality rate ranges from 25 to 80 percent. Those who survive the ordeal are scarred for life, often to a point of total disfigurement. As the number of people taking these drugs rises, the number of victims increases.

Do you really need to take these drugs?

There is no real need to take any of these drugs. Suppression of symptoms jeopardizes the body’s own healing efforts and only makes matters worse. If you do opt to take a prescription that puts you at risk for SJS or TENS, watch for any signs of an allergic reaction, such as a rash, blisters, a scalding sensation or fever, and discontinue the medication immediately. Don’t wait for your doctor to take you off the medication because your life may be at stake.

——————————
This is an excerpt from my book TIMELESS SECRETS OF HEALTH & REJUVENATION

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyperlink back to the web page

New Evidence Shows That HIV Rarely Spreads Heterosexually

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz 

In the developing world, the virus has existed for at least 65 years because HIV is rarely spread heterosexually. Research that studied the wives of infected hemophiliacs showed that an HIV-positive person requires over 1,000 unprotected sexual contacts with an HIV-negative person from the opposite sex to pass along the virus just once. In another surprise study, published in the Lancet, 1997, 349:851-2, French doctors at the Cochin-Port Royal hospital in Paris looked at the risk of married couples wanting to conceive a baby where the man was HIV-positive. Their findings are in line with infection rates of 1 per 1000 acts of unprotected sex among stable heterosexual couples.

According to this published research, it would take an HIV-infected heterosexual who has sexual intercourse 2-3 times a week about seven years to infect another person with HIV! This practically means that it would take the HIV-infected males of one million couples 2,739 years of daily unprotected sex to infect all female partners. In the developing world, unprotected sex among heterosexuals cannot, therefore, be held responsible for the high number of people who test HIV positive (even if HIV tests were 100% reliable, which they are not).

How is AIDS contracted?

However, the situation is different with regard to infected pregnant women. A baby is directly and constantly exposed to the mother’s blood for a period of 9 months. During this period the virus has a 50% chance of being passed on to the baby. Retroviruses survive when they reach a new host prenatally (passed from mother to child). This way of passing on a virus is at least 500 times more efficient than through sexual transmission. (Blood transfusion is another obvious way of contracting the virus)

In contrast to the situation in wealthy nations, HIV in Third World countries is equally distributed between both sexes, which means, it must have been passed on from mother to child for many centuries. Had HIV been a deadly killer virus, the babies of infected mothers would have obviously been born deformed, miscarried, or dead, because newly born babies have not yet developed adequate immunity to defend themselves against a killer virus. Even if they somehow managed to survive, they could only last for a maximum of two years – the latency period given to infected babies before developing AIDS. The spreading of the virus would have stopped automatically through the destruction of all new babies that were infected by their mothers.

Due to the low rates of homosexuality in developing countries, the prenatal route of transmission has been their only efficient way (50 percent chance) to pass on HIV to the new generations. Grown female children who become mothers would again have a 50 percent chance of passing the virus to their children. Therefore, in Africa alone, HIV must have been around for many generations before it was able to infect as many as 6-8 million people. The latest argument that the increased condom use in some African nations helped to slow the rate of infection is hardly convincing since the main route of HIV infection in Africa is from mother to child.

Who Gets AIDS?

The situation is much different in the industrialized world where HIV is mostly transmitted through different routes. The most susceptible groups are very active homosexuals, needle-sharing heroin addicts, and hemophiliacs who receive transfusions. They represent the main and easiest routes through which disease-causing microbes can be passed on to others who share one common risk factor: immune deficiency. In other words, the groups in society where HIV is commonly present amongst their members are also the groups with the biggest health risks and, therefore, more likely to produce AIDS symptoms. Still, HIV’s most concentrated occurrence among health risk groups cannot be blamed for causing AIDS diseases, just as elevated cholesterol levels cannot be held responsible for causing heart disease. These are mere correlations. Another problem is that gay men, drug users, and hemophiliacs who are exposed to semen, drugs, blood transfusions, hepatitis, the Epstein Barr virus, and many other diseases or factors known to cause biological false positives in HIV tests, represent the most unreliable groups in society to demonstrate real presence of HIV.

As prophesied 13 years ago, AIDS has invaded the heterosexual community, or so it appears. Since cervical cancer and other female diseases have more recently been renamed AIDS diseases, AIDS seems to have affected the female population. However, most AIDS patients are still male.

Anything and everything that strongly abuses the body and depletes the immune system must be held responsible for causing illness, regardless of whether it is a stroke, cancer, or an AIDS disease. Emotional stress, insufficient nutrition, dehydration, sleep deprivation, alcohol, cigarettes, antibiotics, hard drugs, excessive sexual activity, etc., can all damage the immune system. A dormant piece of viral material such as HIV, on the other hand, can do no harm in a healthy body.

Whoever continuously exposes himself to immune risk factors is also more susceptible to developing the Acquired Human Immune Deficiency Syndrome. Someone may argue: “What about an innocent baby who becomes infected with HIV by its parents and dies from pneumonia? Is that not AIDS?” The fact is that at least as many children die from pneumonia with or without HIV, and it doesn’t significantly influence the outcome of the disease whether they had a previous encounter with HIV or not. What can make a big difference, however, is how the pneumonia is treated.

——————————
This is an excerpt from my book ENDING THE AIDS MYTH

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyperlink back to the web page

HIV Behaves Like Every Other Virus

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz 

Man lived with the HIV virus long before it was discovered and before large numbers of people underwent AIDS tests. The same applies to other types of viruses. For example, the herpes virus is present in two out of three Americans; another two thirds carry the herpes class cytomegalovirus. Four out of five Americans walk around with the Eppstein-Barr virus, which in few of them causes mononucleosis or ‘kissing disease’. Even more people are host to the papilloma virus, which is known to cause warts.

There is hardly anyone living on this planet who does not carry at least a dozen or so viruses in his body, each one related to a specific infectious disease. Yet no scientist in the world would use these facts to announce a mass outbreak of viral epidemics. Every experienced virologist knows that all these viruses are dormant, i.e., they have been neutralized by the immune system. He also knows that this makes the infected people immune against re-infection, unless of course the immune system is damaged or suppressed through other factors.

If HIV, herpes, and all the other types of viruses that are latent in humans and animals living on the planet were capable of killing people, there would hardly be anyone left to treat the billions of sufferers. HIV, being a human retrovirus (produced by the body itself), is totally benign to its host cells and is, therefore, incapable of destroying any cell it has infected. This applies especially to the cells of the immune system, which are equipped with highly sophisticated defense mechanisms. For HIV to have any destructive value, it would literally have to flood the body with active viral particles.

Yet HIV can barely be detected even in late stage AIDS patients, despite using the most sensitive of tests. The traces of HIV virus found in some AIDS patients is inactive, which means, it is harmless, and therefore not responsible for the destruction of the body. If HIV were the cause of AIDS, it would have to do this during the two phases of HIV infection where blood levels of HIV are significant:

1. Soon after infection when the immune system produces antibodies.

2. At the very end stage of AIDS when the levels of all viral activity increase because the immune system has collapsed (due to other reasons than HIV infection).

There is enough scientific data to show that HIV, being and remaining inactive even in AIDS patients, does not kill T-cells and, therefore, cannot cause AIDS!

——————————
This is an excerpt from my book ENDING THE AIDS MYTH

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyperlink back to the web page

Now Anything That Even Remotely Resembles Immune Deficiency Plus HIV Counts As An AIDS Disease

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz 

More and more studies are being published to show that AIDS, which cannot be classified as a disease because every case displays a different combination of symptoms, occurs only in people who test HIV-positive. Before HIV was discovered, pneumonia, dementia, herpes-infections, weight loss, tuberculosis, Kaposi’s sarcoma, chronic diarrhea, several lymphomas, yeast infection, and other opportunistic infections were considered separate diseases. Depending on whether a patient had already a deficient immune system or belonged to a certain health risk group, the symptoms of these diseases exactly matched those which are now considered AIDS diseases.

Before the HIV-AIDS hypothesis, a patient who died from pneumonia, tuberculosis, or a lymphoma died from the respective causes of these diseases. By contrast, a patient who dies from pneumonia today and happens to have antibodies to HIV or p24 in his blood, is automatically labeled and listed as an AIDS victim. People with a low T-cell count in their blood are considered immune deficient, but if they continue having the same condition after testing positive for HIV, they are routinely ‘sentenced’ to AIDS, with or without clinical symptoms.

There are already over 35 such diseases now that have been renamed ‘AIDS’ in this way. One of the latest ones is cervical cancer, which has become the first AIDS disease that can only affect the female gender. This may give the false impression that AIDS is now penetrating the heterosexual community as well. The inclusion of cervical cancer as an AIDS disease has ‘increased’ the number of AIDS victims among women quite dramatically, yet at the same time, it has ‘decreased’ the number of ordinary cervical cancers among women. Overall, the mortality rate of these diseases has not changed at all. The claim that more and more heterosexuals are now afflicted with AIDS is not based on real science, but ignorance or denial of the facts.

The renaming of old diseases as AIDS further supports the hypothesis that the AIDS syndrome is never found in anyone without presence of HIV. By definition, there is no AIDS without HIV, regardless how many non-HIV people may die from the very same symptoms. Accordingly, anything that even remotely resembles immune deficiency plus HIV now counts as an AIDS disease, despite the fact that AIDS patients with Kaposi’s sarcoma have been reported to have normal immune systems.

It has been argued that wherever there is HIV, AIDS will be the consequence. However, this argument is heavily flawed. AIDS-like indigenous diseases existed long before the testing of antibodies for HIV was introduced. What is different today is that the old diseases are renamed and ‘become’ AIDS diseases whenever HIV is found to be present as well. In real terms, though, there are not any more AIDS cases with HIV in the world than there are without HIV.

——————————
This is an excerpt from my book ENDING THE AIDS MYTH

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyperlink back to the web page

Green Tea Supplements Prevent Flu Better Than Vaccination

Posted on by

By: Ethan Evers
Source: NaturalNews.com

Flu season is now in full swing and seasonal vaccinations are being pushed from every corner. Nonetheless, a recent clinical trial showed that green tea-based supplements reduced the risk of flu by 75%. This is far better than the 60% risk reduction recently reported in the Lancet for vaccinations. Given that green tea provides a host of other health benefits and none of the risks of injections, it would appear to be a far superior alternative to vaccination.

Green Tea: Natural Antiviral and Immune Enhancer

For many years it has been known that green tea polyphenols actively suppress many bacterial, fungal and viral species. On the virus front, green tea suppresses the adenovirus, Epstein-Barr, herpes simplex, HIV-1 and influenza viruses. EGCG, one of the main polyphenols in green tea, is mainly responsible for this suppression. Specifically, ECGC binds to the hemagglutinin of the influenza virus, which blocks it from attaching to (and infecting) target receptor cells. EGCG also alters the virus cell membrane, which further inhibits its ability to infect other cells. Another important component of green tea is the amino acid L-theanine, which has been shown to activate human gamma-delta-T lymphocytes to proliferate and make interferon-gamma, a potent antimicrobial cytokine. These lymphocytes are considered to be the body’s first line of defence against infection. Green tea therefore offers a two-pronged protection from the flu which vaccination simply cannot match. But for final proof, we need clinical trials.

Green Tea Lowers Flu Risk: Early Clinical Evidence

One early trial using green tea against the flu involved gargling three times daily with a weak solution of green tea (50 mg of catechins per cup, of which 60% was EGCG). The theory was that since the throat was a major infection site of influenza, gargling could stop the flu virus there. The theory was right: 1.3% of garglers contracted the flu vs. 10% of the control group. In another more sophisticated trial on 97 healthy adults, a proprietary blend of theanine and green tea polyphenols (apparently worth about 10 cups of green tea per day, but exact amounts were not disclosed) was used for three months during flu season. This trial was randomized, double-blind and placebo controlled. The supplement takers experienced 32% less illnesses and 35% fewer “symptom days.” However, participants were included in the statistical analysis even if their compliance (actually taking the green tea pills) was only 70%.

Latest Clinical Trial Provides Stunning Results: 75% Less Illness

More recently, a better controlled trial was performed on 198 health care workers. This was randomized, double-blind and placebo controlled: the gold standard in clinical trials. The treatment group was each given a daily dose of 378 mg green tea catechins (containing 270 mg EGCG) and 210 mg of theanine from November 2009 to April 2010. The compliance rate in this trial was better: 93% took their pills according to plan. Those taking the green tea experienced 75% less clinically defined flu infection and this was statistically significant (P=0.022). But not all observed sicknesses were bona fide flu. When laboratory tests were used to confirm real influenza infection, it showed that green tea provided a stunning 83% reduction in flu risk, however this was not statistically significant (P=0.112) due to the small number of actual flu cases.

This latest trial shows that green tea supplements easily outperform flu vaccination for preventing illness. This may be a shocker to most people’s vaccine-indoctrinated mind-set, but for those who already study, understand and practice the principles of natural health, it’s really no surprise at all.

To view the original article click here.
To reprint this article, visit the source website for reprinting guidelines

What Is Congestion, Obstruction or a Blockage?

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz 

All diseases or symptoms of ill health are caused by an obstruction of some sort. For example, a blood capillary that is blocked can no longer deliver vital oxygen and nutrients to a group of cells it is in charge of supplying. To survive, these cells will need to enforce specific survival measures. Of course, many of the afflicted cells will not live through the “famine” and will simply die off.

Yet other, more resilient cells will adjust to this adverse situation through the process of cell mutation and learn to utilize trapped metabolic waste products, such as lactic acid, to cover their energy needs. These cells may be compared to a man in the desert who, for lack of water, relies on drinking his own urine in order to live a little longer than he would otherwise.

Cell mutation leading to cancer is only the body’s final attempt to help prevent its immediate demise through septic poisoning and a collapsing organ structure. Although common practice, it is far-fetched to call the body’s normal response to the accumulation of toxic waste matter and decomposing cell material a disease.

Unfortunately, ignorance of the body’s true nature has caused many to believe that this survival mechanism is an “autoimmune disease.” The word “autoimmune” suggests that the body attempts to attack itself and practically tries to commit suicide. Nothing could be further from the truth. Cancerous tumors result from major congestion in the connective tissues, blood vessel walls, and lymphatic ducts, all of which prevent healthy cells from receiving enough oxygen and other vital nutrients.

Other, more apparent obstructions can disrupt your well-being just as much. A constipated large intestine prevents the body from eliminating the waste products contained in feces. The holding back of fecal matter in the lower parts of the intestinal tract leads to a toxic environment in the colon and, if the situation is not resolved, in the entire body.

Kidney infection and kidney failure may occur in response to the accumulation of calcified stones or deposits of kidney grease, thereby obstructing the flow of urine in the kidneys or urinary bladder. The buildup of such mineral deposits in the urinary system can lead to fluid retention, weight gain, and dozens of disease symptoms.

If acidic, toxic waste matter builds up in the chest and lungs, the body responds with mucus secretions to trap these noxious substances. As a result, the air passages of your lungs become congested, and you literally run out of breath. If your body is already highly toxic and congested, you may even develop a lung infection. Lung infections occur to help destroy and remove any damaged, weak lung cells that otherwise would start rotting or have already been decomposed (pus formation).

Lung congestion prevents the natural removal of damaged or weak cells. If the congestion is not cleared up through natural means, or if it increases further through poor dietary habits, the pus will be trapped in the lung tissue. Naturally, destructive bacteria will increasingly populate the scene to assist the body in its desperate effort to clear up this congested area, which comprises decomposing cells and other waste products. Doctors call this survival mechanism “staph infection,” or pneumonia.

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyper link back to the web page

Natural Immunity Versus Acquired Immunity (Through Vaccines)

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz 

Childhood infectious diseases gift the body with a natural immunity that vaccines purport to artificially induce, but in vain.

The fact is that we are assaulted by pathogens – bacteria, viruses, amoeba, etc – every single day but do not succumb to the infectious diseases that these germs are alleged to produce. This is solely due to the body’s immune system and other natural filters that continuously and tirelessly kill and weed out non-beneficial germs and debris every single day of our lives.

Individuals whose immune system has been compromised and who are unable able to keep their insides clean require an invasion and proliferation of germs to help detoxify their bodies for them.

The immune system consists primarily of white blood cells, antibodies and the lymphatic system. White blood cells and lymph circulate throughout our organs, tissues and cells while simultaneously cleansing them of cellular debris, toxins and naturalizing pathogens along the way.

That’s not all. The immune system is beautifully layered and operates at various levels. It is also composed of various lines of defense that a pathogen must encounter so that it can effectively deal with the pathogen. In other words, the body uses multiple filters while screening for pathogens to make sure anything that is harmful perishes before it can cause an infection, unless, of course, an infection becomes warranted and the body allows it.

What are these various ‘filters’? In addition to the already mentioned mucus lining along the body’s orifices, saliva protects against germs and our skin serves as armor for our internal organs. The liver is the body’s supreme filter and purifier, and cleanses the blood of all types of toxic waste including chemicals and by-products from drugs as the blood passes through the organ.

Then there are the excretory organs such as the kidneys and the large intestine and bowels to get rid of solid waste. When you breathe out, the air you exhale too contains cellular waste just as your perspiration does.

The fact is that in order to create natural and real immunity to disease, a pathogen must provoke the complete inflammatory and immune response. This is a complex response that resonates throughout the body’s equally complex immune system. When this happens naturally, the body acquires life-long immunity to a particular germ.

But for this to happen, the pathogen must pass through natural channels, from outside to inside. For instance, the pathogen must pass from the respiratory system or through the saliva or skin and then to the other organs involved in filtering it out such as the mucus membranes, thymus, liver and spleen.

Vaccines do not do this. Instead, they completely bypass the outside-to-inside process by being directly injected, thereby failing to provoke the full immune response.

By injecting a live but attenuated virus, parts of a virus or a dead virus, vaccines trick the immune system into releasing antibodies against a particular pathogen. This shortcut, as it were, is what vaccine theory is based on and is seriously flawed.

For instance, it was only later discovered that the immune system is composed of two parts. While one part is active, it suppresses the other part and vice-versa. Artificially stimulating one part of the system to produce antibodies abnormally inhibits the other part of the system and thus throws the entire immunological response out of gear.

One of the major repercussions of this is that the body sometimes begins to produce antibodies that attack its own cells, thus creating an autoimmune disease. At least that’s the theory behind such autoimmune disorders; but I will offer a slightly different explanation below. The organ that is affected depends on which tissues are attacked by the antibodies.

For instance, when the brain and spinal cord are attacked, the individual develops vaccine-induced encephalitis. This in turn leads to a number of diseases including Guillain-Barre Syndrome and other neurological diseases that often manifest themselves in behavioral symptoms.

Is it pure coincidence that the incidence of autoimmune diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis, asthma, minimal brain disorder, autism and subacute lupus erythematosus has increased dramatically as the medical establishment recommends multiple-vaccine immunization?

Indeed there are other factors that cause autoimmune diseases but some researchers are unequivocal that vaccines are also responsible. In my opinion, it is not the antigen itself, but the foreign protein particles and chemical additives in the vaccines, such as mercury, aluminum, formaldehyde, body parts containing foreign DNA, and squalene that produce the same response.

Once this toxic sludge is injected directly into the blood, it will inevitably make its way into the brain, spleen, kidneys, liver, joint fluids, blood vessel walls, lymph vessels and connective tissues of intestines, lungs, breasts and other parts. The multiple tissue damage caused by these toxins requires a continuous and significant healing response by the body that includes the production of antibodies. As already mentioned, the body uses antibodies to heal damaged tissue and neutralize accumulated harmful toxic substances. To successfully detoxify and heal the affected tissues, antibodies and other cells of the immune system must inflame them first.

An overreaction of the immune system may occur when the body becomes overwhelmed with the sudden appearance of unnatural, toxic substances in the blood such as mercury and antibiotics. Modern medicine conveniently calls such a healing attempt autoimmune disease, meaning, the body attacks itself. In truth, the body has no intention to commit suicide.

Let us now see how vaccines contaminate the immune system and why they throw it off-balance. Most vaccines are ‘live’ vaccines i.e. they contain the intended virus, which is weakened so that it doesn’t produce full-blown symptoms of disease, before it is introduced into the human body.

Before that, the virus must be ‘cultured’ or grown artificially while being fed on nutrient-rich substances such as aborted human fetuses, chick embryos, pig embryonic tissues, and monkey kidney cells.

Can you imagine how putrid this ‘culture’ must be? The next step is to remove the impurities and isolate the virus by subjecting it to a series of complex chemical processes.

When the attenuated or weakened virus is introduced into the human body, the body by reflex attempts to neutralize the intruder and produces a greater amount of antibodies in the process. This is a violent biochemical reaction as under normal circumstances, viruses rarely if ever enter the body directly through the bloodstream.

Yet, vaccines contain chemical additives called adjuvants to exaggerate the initial immune response. They also contain chemical fixers to stop the immune system from altogether destroying the antigen. Destroying the viral material would defeat the very purpose of the vaccine, right? Next, preservatives are added to the vaccine to prevent it from putrefying and to create shelf-life.

Among the chemical additives in vaccines are monosodium glutamate, thimerosal (mercury), antibiotics, anti-freeze and other acidic and toxic compounds.

Children are the most vulnerable section of the population because their immune systems are practically defenseless against these poisons. They have a lot against them since most mothers were once vaccinated and hence fail to pass on their own natural immunity to them through breast milk.

More evidence that vaccines are lethal to children comes from James R Shannon of the National Institutes of Health. He said, “No vaccination can be proven safe before it is given to children.”

A new life, whose immune system is already compromised, cannot effectively cope with such a genetic and chemical assault. According to an Australian study, children who received the pertussis vaccine were five times more likely to contract encephalitis from the vaccine than developing encephalitis by contacting pertussis through natural means.

Also, when babies are immunized, there is no regard for the infant’s unique biochemical make-up. Since babies scarcely have a medical ‘history’, there is no way to tell what medical vulnerabilities the infant might have. For example, a prematurely born child is typically not as healthy as one that was born at full-term.

Still, vaccines are administered regardless of individual differences (the same applies to older children and adults). It’s a one-dose-fits-all policy. Also, doses are not varied with body weight and other variables.

As soon as the vaccine is administered, the infant’s body musters all its strength to eliminate it. If the child is biologically sensitive or weak, the vaccine may pass through the crucial blood-brain barrier and damage the brain’s cells. Autism is just one of the many debilitating neurological consequences of vaccination which declares an all-out war against the human immune system.

————————–
This is an excerpt from my book VACCINE-NATION: POISONING THE POPULATION, ONE SHOT AT A TIME

 

 

 

 

 

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyper link back to the web page

Painkillers – The Beginning of a Vicious Cycle

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz

Taking painkillers, unless it is absolutely necessary for extremely painful conditions, is an act of suppressing and destroying the healing intelligence of the body. When ill, the body may require pain signals to trigger the appropriate immune response for the removal of toxins from a localized area and to prevent the individual from further harming himself. Pain is not a disease and should therefore not be treated as one. Pain is the body’s natural response to congestion and the subsequent dehydration and malnourishment of the cells and tissues. It occurs in the presence of toxic material and is often accompanied by infection. In most cases, a pain signal occurs when one of the brain’s first aid hormones, called histamine, is secreted in large amounts and passes over the pain nerves near or alongside a congested area.

The body also uses histamines to reject foreign materials such as viral particles or toxic substances and to direct other hormones or systems in the body to regulate water distribution. The latter function of histamine is very important, for where there is a buildup of toxins, there is also an acute water shortage (dehydration). When the pain signal becomes suppressed, however, the body is confused over how it should deal with the congestion and subsequent increase of toxicity. Painkillers also prevent the body from learning about the progressive condition of cellular dehydration. In addition, in order to process painkillers, the cells of the body have to give up even more of their precious water.

Usually, the intensity of pain rises with the concentration of toxins and materials such as blood proteins trapped in the fluid surrounding the cells. This liquid substance is called interstitial fluid or connective tissue, and it is drained by the lymphatic system. When the lymphatic system is congested due to digestive problems or other reasons which I will explain later, the escape route for these blood proteins and toxins is closed. To prevent the immediate destruction of the cells by these highly acidic and reactive proteins and toxins, the body surrounds them with water. This in turn causes further obstruction and prevents the proper oxygenation of the cells. Pain directly results from this lack of oxygen. Research published in December 1964 by one of the earlier journals of the American Medical Association, Today’s Health, proved that blood proteins naturally leave the bloodstream and enter the connective tissues, but if not instantly removed by the lymphatic system, they can cause disease and death in as little as 24 hours.

The body certainly knows about this danger and acts accordingly. The brain produces the perfect amount of natural painkillers, i.e. endorphins (endogenous opioids), in order to keep the pain tolerable but still strong enough to maintain a powerful and active immune and cleansing response. Synthetically derived painkillers on the other hand cause an electrical short circuit of the pain signal. The brain and the immune system, though, need to receive this signal to be able to attend to the endangered area. The sudden suppression of pain can be likened to cutting the wires of an alarm system that is protecting a house. When a burglar enters this house, nobody will notice it. By cutting off its communication with the brain, the body is unable to remove all the trapped toxins and blood proteins, and their destructive effect may go unnoticed. What is so disturbing about taking pharmaceutical drugs, such as pain medication, is that they need blood proteins to carry them to their destinations. Since the blood proteins are trapped in the connective tissues of an organ, these drugs become trapped there, too. This causes the serious side effects and frequent deaths for which these drugs are so well known. The pharmaceutical industry, of course, does not want you to know that by taking their drugs you are gambling with your life.

Pain medications not only keep the body ignorant about a particular physical problem, they also sabotage its healing efforts. The regular use of painkillers suppresses endorphin production in the brain, thereby causing drug dependency. This also lowers the body’s tolerance level for pain, making even minor problems of congestion very painful. Some people have abused their bodies in this way to such an extent that they suffer from excruciating chronic pain, although the causal problem may actually be only a minor one. When painkillers are no longer effective enough, some people may even wish to take their lives to obtain the desired relief.

If you have been on painkillers for arthritis or other painful conditions but now know that taking drugs such as Vioxx, Aleve, Celebrex, and aspirin dramatically increases your risk of heart attack and stroke, you may want to switch to natural alternatives until you have eliminated the root causes of your pain. According to the New England Journal of Medicine, “anti-inflammatory drugs (prescription and over-the-counter medications which include Advil, Motrin, Aleve, Ordus, aspirin, and over 20 others) alone cause over 16,500 deaths and over 103,000 hospitalizations per year just in the U.S.” The amount of five major painkillers sold at retail establishments rose 90 percent between 1997 and 2005, according to an Associated Press analysis of statistics from the Drug Enforcement Administration.

Even the smallest amount of aspirin triggers at least some degree of intestinal bleeding. Regular use of aspirin has serious consequences. Nearly 70 percent of those taking aspirin daily show a blood loss of to 1 teaspoons per day, and 10 percent lose as much as two teaspoons per day.

A recent study published in the Annals of Internal Medicine showed that use of NSAIDs such as aspirin and ibuprofen increased the risk of high blood pressure (HPP) by nearly 40 percent. Similar use of acetaminophen was found to increase HBP risk by 34 percent.

——————————
This is an excerpt from my book TIMELESS SECRETS OF HEALTH & REJUVENATION

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyper link back to the web page

Protect Yourself Against the Flu Vaccine!

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz

The vaccine industry insists that their vaccines against the flu serve as the key to a healthy winter. Although there has not been a serious flu epidemic for 38 years, their vaccines are prescribed to millions of people each year. You may wonder why perfectly healthy people are injected with a normally harmless bug whose strains mutate from year to year? Although flu vaccines can never be accurate, encouraged by their employers, millions of employees submit to a flu jab each year, trying to avoid the loss of working days.

Influenza always starts in the Far East, and then spreads to the West in early winter, reaching its peak during February and March. It may come in either of three types, A, B, or C. During the last several years, type A has been the dominant version. What makes vaccination against the flu so unsuccessful is that the strains of the flu virus are different every year and the so-called protection lasts for only six months. So each autumn you require a new vaccination for a different virus. The trouble is, drug companies have no way of knowing in summer which new strain of the flu virus is going to hit the Western Hemisphere during the winter months.

The vaccine producers grow the vaccines, consisting of live viruses, in hen’s eggs, which when injected into the body can cause side effects such as redness and soreness at the injection site and a mild form of flu. Very serious complications arise in people who are taking immune-suppressing drugs or who have a heart condition. If you are allergic to eggs, having a flu-shot may also endanger your health.

For the average healthy person, coming down with the flu is not serious at all. On the contrary, it can build up natural immunity even against future encounters with new strains of the flu virus. The very reason why nature creates these new forms of virus every year and spreads them with accurate timing is to ensure continued ecological balance and strong immunity in plants, animals, and humans alike. Anyone prone to repeated infections is likely to have a toxic liver with many hundreds of stones accumulated in the liver and gallbladder. Gallstones, which harbor many types of infectious bacteria and viruses, are a constant source of immune suppression. Cleansing the liver of all gallstones is about the best prevention against any type of infection. People who have cleansed their liver in this way have reported that they never catch a cold or the flu anymore.

Flu virus vaccines used until 2002 contained “live” viruses and produced so many serious, adverse reactions that new vaccines had to be concocted. The new formula for flu vaccines is called the “subvirion,” which basically is a mutilated virus “blended, spliced and macerated” until just bits and pieces of the original virus are left. This in no way makes the virus less dangerous. In fact, the antigens or foreign proteins in the vaccine, for which the body is forced to produce antibodies against, are still as poisonous and harmful as live virus.

Besides the subvirion, there are plenty of other substances added to the flu vaccine, most of which you would never want to consciously ingest. These include:

* Hemagglutinin antigens that cause clumping of the red blood cells, leading to cardiovascular disease.
* The enzyme neuraminidase, which cuts out neuraminic acid from the cell membrane, weakening all of the trillions of cell membranes in the body.
* White crystalline substance called allantoin, a toxic animal waste product. Due to its high nitrogen content, allantoin is used as fertilizer; leads to kidneys and bladder stones.
* Gentamicin, a broad spectrum antibiotic, is added to each embryonated chicken egg to inhibit the growth of bacteria (vaccine is grown in chicken eggs).
* Formaldehyde (carcinogenic), used as a preservative and to inactivate the virus.
* The toxic chemicals, tri butylphosphate and Polysorbate 80, USP.
* Resin, to eliminate “substantial portions” of tri butylphosphate and Polysorbate 80
* Thimerosal, a mercury derivative, to preserve the vaccine cocktail.
* Polyethylene glycol, a relative of ethylene glycol (antifreeze); often used to poison dogs and other predators of sheep.
* Isocctylphenyl ether, a compound of ether; has anesthetic properties; a teratogen, causing abnormal prenatal development. It also induces testicular atrophy in animals.

The vaccine producers are unable to guarantee that the vaccine will protect you against the flu. So they carefully tell you that the vaccine “reduces the likelihood of infection; or if you do develop the disease it will be a milder case.” Some express the same uncertainly about their product in this way: “It is known definitely that influenza virus vaccine, as now constituted, is not effective against all possible strains of influenza virus.”

Why would you want to entrust your health to a cocktail of poisonous chemicals when even a somewhat weakened immune system stands a far better chance to protect you against harm from a bout of influenza. Our body’s sophisticated immune system, which has evolved over millions of years, can certainly do a better job of protecting you against the flu than anything man-made. All it needs is some basic care taking on your part. With each new flu shot, on the other hand, your immune system becomes more depleted and side-effects become more pronounced and severe. And, you may still get the flu anyway. The following list includes the possible consequences you can expect if you go down the road of vaccination:

The most frequent side effects of vaccination:

* Soreness at the site of the vaccination
* Pain or tenderness
* Erythema
* Inflammation
* Skin discoloration
* Induration
* A mass or lump
* Hypersensitivity reactions incl. puritus and urticaria
* Fever
* Malaise
* Myalgia
* Arthralgia
* Asthenia
* Chills
* Headache
* Lymphadenopathy
* Rash
* Nausea
* Vomiting
* Diarrhea
* Pharyngitis
* Angiopathy
* Vasculiltis
* Anaphylaxis in asthmatics, with possible death
* Anaphylactic shock, with possible death

Vaccination certainly does not create immunity. You cannot become immune by ingesting poisons that destroy the immune system. Studies by a group of Italian scientists showed that the flu vaccine reduced the occurrence of clinical episodes of influenza by only 6 percent in adults, and effectiveness tended to decrease with age. They concluded that universal immunization wasn’t warranted. Stated simply, hand washing and other hygienic and nutritional measures are far superior to the flu vaccine in effectiveness. When cared for hygienically, and by eating nutritious foods and keeping one’s intestines and liver clean, influenza never becomes a deadly disease. Getting vaccinated against the flu, on the other hand, is a sure way to sow the seeds for new illnesses in the body. All vaccines are poisonous, and as such act like time bombs that will explode in due time.

Why People Get the Flu

Flu jabs lower natural immunity by injecting alien and toxic substances directly into the blood stream. No other animal in the world takes recourse to such unnatural, superficial and crude means to defend itself against invading viruses. The normal route of contact with a viral particle is via the lungs. The vast majority of the population has a normal, healthy immune system and is perfectly capable of dealing with the invaders without getting sick. But if the body’s infection fighters have temporarily gone “on strike” for reasons other than the lack of a vaccine, the flu virus can gain unrestricted access into the body and cause an infection.

Regular vaccination (of any kind) is one of the major causes of depleted immunity. The yearly-administered flu jabs burden the immune system and cells of the body with foreign toxic material without giving them a chance to remove them again. The toxic viral particles can remain latent in the cells and gallstones for as long as 20 years; when they emerge they can cause serious cell damage. With each new vaccination the immune system becomes more and more restricted in its effort to neutralize the live virus that suddenly appears in the blood. It may produce antibodies for the virus (although in many cases the immune system fails to do even that), which is finally subdued, but this encounter leaves the host’s immune system unnecessarily tired and weak.

Besides immune damage, vaccines of all kinds produce alterations in genetic material and thereby cause a whole range of malfunctions in the body. Vaccines may even be the cause of the increasing incidence of malignant diseases in children. Mass immunization programs have created such weak immune systems that they are even susceptible to such harmless viruses as the one causing the flu. We may have gone as far as to replace mumps and measles with cancer, leukemia, and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.

Flu vaccinations are mainly targeted at the older generation and young children. In the United Kingdom, about 10,000 people, most of them are of very advanced age, (supposedly) die from flu-related illnesses. It may, therefore, sound reasonable to vaccinate the older people to protect them against the flu virus. But there is no total protection even among those vaccinated. Around 20 percent or more of the elderly people who get the vaccine still get a more virulent strain of flu, and many others get a lighter form of the flu. The same is true for the people in the same age group who haven’t been immunized. The weak and elderly people are more likely among those who die from the flu, regardless whether they have been immunized or not. The bottom line is that there is no real advantage in having a flu jab. And certainly, given the frailty of so many of the oldest members of society, there is absolutely no reliable way of telling whether the flu or something else may lead to their death. According to several studies released in February 2005 and reported by major news media such as CNN, the death rate in and out of the flu season among the elderly remains unchanged. In a statement commenting on the results of the new research, a CDC spokesman reiterated they still hold the strong belief that vaccinating the elderly and young is necessary. It is scary to entrust the life of millions of adults and children in the hands of people who base their decisions on mere personal belief, instead of on facts. As we have seen with AIDS (chapter 12), statistics can be manipulated in ways that support theories which have only one objective, to keep the medical business going. When a person who is about to die anyway also catches the flu, he will be automatically listed as a flu victim. This statistical deception will justify the use of vaccines in the rest of the elderly population, and the children.

Instead of giving the elderly population vaccines – in the misguided belief that this would take care of them – we could help them much more by improving their general resistance to disease through good diet, social engagements and exercise programs. Many old people don’t have adequate nutrition and suffer from depression; both these factors work as powerful immune suppressants. Others don’t have a warm home or they live alone. Research has shown that these are the major risk factors for illness and death in the older generation. A series of liver cleanses alone can strengthen natural immunity, improve digestion, retard the aging process, restore health, and foremost of all, enhance mental functions.

In developing countries, where the elderly play an important role in society, general illness is low, provided there is enough food available. In these countries it is more likely that old people die from malnutrition than from a strain of virus.

There are an increasing number of reports that indicate a worsening of high blood pressure, diabetes, gout, and Parkinson’s disease as well as an increase in all kinds of allergic complaints in adults who regularly receive flu jabs. In 1976 an extensive flu vaccination program in America led to a massive outbreak of Guillain-Barre syndrome, a disease affecting the nervous system. The outbreak, known as the “Great Swine Flue Fiasco,” paralyzed 656 people and 30 elderly persons were found dead within hours after they were vaccinated. Compensation claims were enormous, which helped slowing down the program, but only for a while.

What about the other high-risk group, young children? Japanese researchers have shown that infants under one year of age fail to even generate a good antibody response following the vaccine. There is no point pumping children full with vaccine poisons, except enriching the pharmaceutical companies.

Seniors, of course, are one of the core target groups for the flu vaccine program. So every year we’re told how older people are particularly vulnerable to the flu. We’re also told that government officials are holding their breath over their fear of a devastating flu pandemic. We’re even told that about 36,000 people die of flu related complications in the United States each year, and most of those deaths are elderly people. The reality of the matter is quite different, though. How many people do you think died of the flu last year? Less than 175, according to Sherri J. Tenpenny, D.O., an internationally known leader in vaccine research! And yet, the official line propagated by media campaigns is to be prepared for another wave of deadly flu epidemic, killing thousands of people each new season.

The latest scare campaign about a possible bird-flu pandemic that recently swept the mass media and was written about in the a February issue of the New Yorker magazine is not justified, according to most research experts in the field. That 180 million people are projected to die from the bird-flu if it spreads is based on guess work, without any real scientific proof. It is like forecasting the long-awaited massive earthquake in California. At this time, there is no reason to believe that such a pandemic will occur.

In the Name of Prevention

The pharmaceutical companies producing the vaccines seem to have a more powerful effect on the population than the scientists have who invented them. As early as 1980, Dr Albert Sabin, one of the world’s leading virologists and pioneer of the polio vaccine, spoke vehemently against the use of the flu vaccine, claiming that it was unnecessary for over 90 percent of the population. This, however, has not discouraged the vaccination industry to endorse vaccination for all in the name of health and protection against disease.

What makes matters worse is that there has never been a properly controlled clinical trial with the flu vaccine. Because we don’t know anything about it’s its long-term effects, we may be unknowingly producing generations of people with debilitated immune systems and chronic diseases. Flu vaccination is an unproved and unscientific practice and there is nothing in the scientific literature that can certify or guarantee its safety. The most effective way to fight infections, including the flu, is to prevent it. There is no substitute for a health-increasing regimen. Vaccination, on the other hand, offers no real protection. Injecting the body with foreign and poisonous viral material is counterproductive to improving our well being. Dr. John Seal from the American National Institute for Allergies and Infectious Diseases warned that we have to assume that every flu vaccination can cause the Guillain-Barre Syndrome. In this sense, prevention is not better than cure.

Help From Mother Nature

For those who are concerned about the flu and its possible effects, there is a remarkable herbal extract (andrographis paniculata) that has been used for centuries in Ayurvedic (traditional Indian) therapies and traditional Chinese Medicine. It is used to treat everything from isolated cases of the sniffles to full-blown outbreaks of influenza. Apparently, Andrographis is believed to have halted the spread of the 1919 Indian flu pandemic.

There is scientific evidence to support that theory. Researchers at the Universities of Exeter and Plymouth in the UK conducted a survey of medical databases, herbal manufacturer information and World Health Organization reports to select seven studies that met the criteria for double-blind, controlled trials. The combined studies tested the use of andrographis as a treatment for respiratory tract infection in nearly 900 subjects.
In all seven of these studies, subjects who took andrographis after the onset of cold symptoms reported faster recovery, compared to subjects who took placeboes or medication.

Researchers concluded that andrographis may be effective in treating “uncomplicated” infection in the upper respiratory tract (throat, sinuses and ears). According to previous laboratory trials andrographis extract doesn’t actually kill the organisms that make you sick – at least not directly. Instead, the herbal compound boosts your immune system and stimulates natural antibodies.

Animal research also showed that andrographis may help prevent myocardial ischemia (inadequate blood circulation in the heart caused by coronary artery disease), inhibit the formation of blood clots, lower blood sugar levels in diabetics, lowered systolic blood pressure, and protect the liver against damage.

Kan Jang is a brand of standardized extract of andrographis that has consistently outsold all other cold medications in Scandinavia for 13 years running. The Swedish Herbal Institute, the formulator of Kan Jang, recommends that you take one tablet four times daily to fight colds or the flu. Kan Jang can be purchased at dietary supplement stores and through Internet sites.

——————————
This is an excerpt from my book TIMELESS SECRETS OF HEALTH AND REJUVENATION

                                     

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyper link back to the web page

It Can Destroy Your Immune System and is Like Eating an Insecticide

Posted on by

By: Dr. Mercola
Source: Mercola.com

In early studies of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), it was shown to be most prevalent in countries such as the United Kingdom, the United States and those in northern Europe.

However, in more recent studies, Canada has suddenly shot to the top of the list as the country with the highest incidence.

In 1981, the incidence of IBD in Alberta, Canada was only 44 per 100,000; less than half that of Olmsted County in Minnesota.

By the year 2000, the incidence in Alberta had skyrocketed to 283 per 100,000; now 63 percent higher than that in Olmstead County in the US.

The question is, why?

Could Widespread Consumption of Splenda Explain Skyrocketing IBD Rates?

It’s worth noting here that IBD is different from another condition that sounds very similar, namelyinflammatory bowel syndrome, or IBS.

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is an autoimmune disease that can have very serious consequences, while IBS is a functional bowel disorder.

Many IBD patients wind up having extensive sections of their colon removed to address the problem when conventional therapies fail and this can result in devastating and life-threatening complications.

A paper published in the Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology theorizes that the increase in this troublesome disease may be related to the impairment of digestive proteases, caused by the inhibition of gut bacteria by dietary chemicals, such as saccharin and sucralose.  Saccharin fails to provide an explanation for the rise of IBD, as Canada adopted stringent standards for the use of saccharin in 1977 — but this is not the case for sucralose (Splenda).

According to the authors:

“If not saccharin, then what caused the remarkable increase of IBD in Canada? … [Sucralose] may be the culprit … In 1991, Canada was the first country to approve the use of sucralose, and it was allowed to be used as a tabletop sweetener in breakfast cereals, beverages, desserts, toppings, fillings, chewing gum, breath mints, fruit spreads, salad dressings, confectionary, bakery products, processed fruits and vegetables, alcoholic beverages, puddings and table syrups.”

The theory that Splenda may be a culprit in the rise of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) appears to be a reasonable one, echoing the results from a 2008 study published in the Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, which discovered that Splenda:

  • Increases the pH level in your intestines, and
  • Reduces the amount of good bacteria in your intestines by 50 percent!

In the featured paper, the author states that sucralose has a potent inhibitory effect on your gut bacteria and inactivates digestive protease. It also alters gut barrier function. All in all, this may help explain the pronounced increase in IBD in Canada since its introduction into the food supply.

Believe me, if you keep destroying up to half of your gut flora by regularly consuming Splenda, then poor health is virtually guaranteed! Making matters worse, most people are already deficient in healthy bacteria due to excessive consumption of highly processed foods, which is why a high quality probiotic supplement is a good idea for most people. If you add sucralose to an already unbalanced intestinal tract, health problems are very likely to ensue…

The Signs and Symptoms of Sucralose Toxicity

I have done a fair level of literature review on this as I invested several years with four other professionals to write the definitive work on Splenda, which was published by Putnam in 2006.

It’s important to understand that despite its misleading slogan, Splenda (sucralose) is nothing like sugar. Rather it’s a chlorinated artificial sweetener in line with aspartame and saccharin, and with detrimental health effects to match. In fact, while sucralose starts out as a sugar molecule, by the time the manufacturing process is completed, it more closely resembles DDT than sugar.

It could easily be likened to eating an insecticide…

Unfortunately, many fail to connect the dots between their symptoms and their use of Splenda, or other artificial sweeteners. I recommend reading through the first-hand accounts of my readers, at least one of whom say that Splenda is “worse than chemical warfare” based on the adverse effects she suffered before she figured out the cause. Just as with aspartame, many Splenda users complain of general malaise or “feeling under the weather,” along with a variety of neurological changes, such as foggy-headedness, lack of concentration, and “bad mood.”

Commonly reported symptoms (usually experienced within 24 hours after consuming Splenda) include:

If you experience any of these symptoms and have just consumed Splenda, or consume it on a regular basis, I strongly recommend carefully avoiding any further exposure for a few days to a few weeks to see if the symptoms disappear. If they do, you may just have solved your own “health mystery.” Likewise, if you have irritable bowel disease and consume any kind of Splenda product or other artificial sweetener, you’d be wise to avoid such items in order to improve your condition.

I believe it’s important to identify the culprit, as the long-term damage of Splenda consumption is largely unknown. Still, it would probably be a fair guess that long-term exposure is not going to be beneficial to your health—especially if you’re having symptoms of toxicity! It’s a sad reality that very few appropriate studies have been performed on Splenda. The vast majority of the studies that formed the basis for its approval in the US were done on animals, and they actually found plenty of problems even though they were ultimately dismissed, including:

  • Brain lesions
  • Decreased red blood cell count and anemia
  • Enlarged and calcified kidneys
  • Increased mortality
  • Male infertility
  • Spontaneous abortions in rabbits

Diet Soda May Also Raise Your Stroke Risk

Another recent study, featured by Dr. Sanjay Gupta, reported that diet soda consumption was linked to higher rates of strokes, heart attacks and other lethal vascular events. (The study did not specify any particular artificial sweetener involved, but diet sodas typically use either aspartame or sucralose, sometimes both, and both have similar health hazards.)

The researchers concluded that:

“This study suggests that diet soda is not an optimal substitute for sugar-sweetened beverages, and may be associated with a greater risk of stroke, myocardial infarction, or vascular death than regular soda.”

While more research will likely be needed to confirm this potential link, there’s plenty of evidence showing that artificial sweeteners such as sucralose and aspartame can be dangerous to your health.

Ready to Kick the Artificial Sweetener Habit?

If you’re using an artificial sweetener, it’s probably because you’re trying to avoid the calories while still craving that sweet taste. Sweet cravings are very common, and quite understandable when you realize that sugar is as addictive as some hard-core street drugs. Unfortunately, switching to artificial sweeteners will neither reduce these cravings nor increase your satiety. On the contrary, you’re likely making matters worse.

Your body tends to crave sugary foods when it’s lacking proper fuel. Sugar is very quick fuel and can give your body a boost when it’s running low. However, using artificial sweeteners will not trick your body into thinking it has had its fill; rather it wants more sweets because it didn’t get the energy boost that normally goes along with the sweet taste. In fact, this is part of why artificial sweeteners are associated with increased weight gain rather than weight loss. You’re simply confusing your body.

The most powerful solution to help curb your cravings is to eat a wholesome diet of real food, and by ‘real food’ I mean fresh, whole (preferably organic, as it’s more nutrient-dense) foods that have been minimally processed, if at all. Once your body has the fuel it needs to keep going, it doesn’t need to “remind” you, in the form of sugar cravings, that it needs an energy boost.

To learn what a “healthful diet” really is, I invite you to review my nutrition plan, which is divided into three steps: beginners, intermediary and advanced, so that you can progress at your own pace.

Earlier this summer, nutrition- and fitness expert Ori Hofmekler also shared a fascinating benefit of caffeine that can be helpful here. If you like coffee, drinking organic black coffee (without sugar or milk) can help eliminate sugar cravings because the caffeine is anopioid receptor antagonist. Sugar binds to the same opioid receptors as cocaine and other addictive substances, but when an opioid receptor antagonist already occupies that receptor, it prohibits you from becoming addicted to something else. Therefore, caffeine may attenuate the addictive impact of sugar.  There are a few caveats to using this strategy however, including:

  • Only drink organic coffee (as it’s one of the most pesticide-heavy crops there are)
  • Drink it black, sans sugar/artificial sweeteners or milk
  • Only drink coffee in the morning, prior to exercise
  • Limit your consumption to one or two cups

Guidelines for Addressing Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

Since I began this discussion with Splenda’s potential impact on inflammatory bowel diseases, I want to address a few of the most important lifestyle factors involved. Now, those with IBD need to strictly limit or eliminate their sugar consumption, but I firmly believe that switching to an artificial sweetener is an unwise move for all the reasons discussed above. While sugar will promote inflammation by increasing your insulin levels, artificial sweeteners will destroy your gut flora and further damage your intestines, and more…

If you have IBD and battle sugar cravings, I urge you to carefully review my ‘quitting’ recommendations just covered, and address your diet to put an end to those cravings. The following strategies are also important if you’re struggling with IBD:

  • Take a high quality animal-based omega-3 fat supplement. If you’re already taking a plant-based omega-3 such as flax, know that it will not work as your body needs the omega-3 fat DHA to have a serious impact on this disease, not the omega-3 ALA found in flax.
  • Avoid all types of sugars, particularly fructose, as these will increase inflammation by increasing your insulin levels.
  • Also avoid grains until your symptoms are under control. Many with inflammatory bowel disease have gluten sensitivities. Additionally, the grains tend to increase insulin levels, promoting inflammation.
  • Optimize your vitamin D levels. Vitamin D appears to be nearly as effective as animal-based omega-3 fats.
  • Get plenty of beneficial bacteria (probiotics) in your diet, as this will help to heal your intestinal tract. You can do this by regularly consuming traditionally fermented foods, or taking a high quality probiotic supplement.

To view the original article click here.
To reprint this article, visit the source website for reprinting guidelines

The Detrimental Effects of Daylight Saving Time, and What You Can Do to Minimize Them

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz 

Hi, this is a very good question about daylight savings time and the question is “Does daylight savings time affect our health and wellbeing?”

And in fact, it does. There are studies to show that there is a higher incidence of depression and cardiovascular episodes such as heart attack during the time of changing into daylight savings or going back to standard time.

This practice of changing time has been practiced basically for a hundred years on this recently developed world and mostly in North American, and some South American countries, as well as most European countries. Now the problem with time change is that for one thing we don’t really to save much energy. It has been estimated that on average a household saves about four dollars in one year simply because of making these time adjustments.

The problem, however, is that productivity drops dramatically during and around the times of the changes, which amounts to a loss of 400 million US dollars per year. So it doesn’t really make sense form the energy point of view, we don’t save much energy costs and we lose a lot of productivity due to fatigue that arises during this time.

The other problem is that because of the hormones in our system, in our body, are closely interconnected with the circadian rhythm. That means the movement of the earth around the sun and these rhythms have very powerful influences on most essential, most effective and powerful hormones in our body, such as serotonin which is light-sensitive and melatonin which is dark-sensitive.

When we experience a shortage of light because of time changes or we have too much light and we are not experiencing enough darkness, then either way this can cause major physiological changes which can have damaging effects on our body, for example, if a normal, during the standard time, the winter period when the melatonin secretion which is a hormone produced in the pineal gland is secreted at 9:30 in the evening which is typical, then if you have let’s say, a different time introduced into your schedule such as suddenly the time during the adjusted time period is now 10:30 for the melatonin cycle to begin, then that can interfere with your sleeping habits, you may not get good quality sleep because you are going to bed an hour later than you are supposed to go to sleep in order to maximize the full secretion of melatonin.

Melatonin is a very powerful hormone that regulates the thyroid, and through the thyroid, all the other endocrine glands and hormones. So when you start interfering with the thyroid hormone and the other hormones in the body, a lot of undesirable changes can happen in the body.

This can effectively also lead in the long term to serotonin deficiency which goes along with happiness, and when you become deficient in serotonin, the end result is that you are depressed or you become sad, or you become just unhappy in some ways that leads to other problems, making mistakes, and not having the enthusiasm and the joy, not digesting food properly. We know that serotonin regulates most of the digestive functions because it’s well known that most serotonin is actually produced in the digestive system to regulate the digestive secretions and if your melatonin drops below normal because you are going to bed an hour later than you are supposed to go to bed, then the next day you don’t secrete enough serotonin to digest your food well, and so this can cause a number of issues, not just with regard to digestive functions but because of a lot of undigested food curing in the digestive tract. This can interfere with the absorption of nutrients, your energy levels may drop, and your brain may not get enough nutrients or glucose as a result.

These are subtle changes that sort of… if it happens every year, year after year, that you may have a chronic illness or issue that can… that otherwise never would have happened if you don’t have to follow these time changes.

Now we are not complete victims in all of that. We can make changes and there are a number of them that can get you through these time changes or shifts, these are natural shifts in a sort of more relaxed manner, and one of them is that it has been know that light therapy… looking at certain kinds of lights or lamps that emit light effectively… that they can, in fact, reduce the adjustment period, the length of having to adjust to the new cycles, for example this is a light that can do that and you can find these on amazon.com. They are pretty useful also for people who have jet lag that have traveled a long way and they, like… to another country and then they come back and they are jet-lagged and this reduces the length of time you are experiencing the jet lag, so light therapy is definitely very good. SAD, which is Seasonal Affective Disorder, which is more prevalent in countries that don’t have enough sun exposure, it’s a very, very useful tool to keep the balance.

Then another thing that has been found to be beneficial is during the times of time changes to socialize with other people, spend time with your friends, with children playing, this has also shown benefit, and to benefit the serotonin production which is the happiness hormone, so anything that makes you happy also allows you to adjust better.

Another good way to get over this period more easily and effectively is exercising. So, it’s important to do that anyway, but during this time even more so, and this will help to once again make create balance to the serotonin – melatonin hormonal changes.

And also a person who has a full body massage that has been shown simply by activating certain receptors on the surface of the skin that are related to serotonin production, that will also benefit greatly when you go through that.

Another way is when you, when there is a shortage of time, and let’s say, when you enter the summer period and the daylight savings time, and you have an hour’s less sleep, that’s the time to somehow, for at least like a week, still try to get your eight hours of sleep instead of the seven hours that you may have given yourself simply by once again going to bed a little earlier and maybe sleeping a little longer, so that you do get your eight hours of sleep, and that has also been shown to be of great benefit.

So having said that, I think that there are certain things that we can do, sometimes we can also exert pressure on the governance and some have listened, some have discovered that it’s actually a great loss to go through these changes, some states in United States like Arizona and Hawaii, they don’t have daylight savings time, and they are little smarter than the rest of us, and there are some countries that also resist doing that. It has particularly with the modern communication systems being so fast and the countries being so interconnected, it has created a big, big problem and lots of expenditures simply by constantly having to adjust the different devices, computers, twice a year, which is a great problem now with inter-country communications. Some countries, they start daylight savings time early, and some start it later and this is a real nuisance for many countries.

So letting your government, your representatives know that there is now a great deal of evidence, you can do a Google search you will find a lot of evidence to show that daylight savings time is not really saving us very much, except perhaps being in the daylight a little longer during the summer period, but apart from that, there is really no other benefit from following such a time schedule.

Thanks for listening and have a wonderful beautifully sun-filled day.

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyper link back to the web page

In ‘Universal’ Flu Shot Push, Medical Industry Admits That Current Flu Shots are Useless

Posted on by

By: Ethan A. Huff
Source: NaturalNews.com

The medical community is in the process of unveiling a “universal” influenza vaccine that it claims will prevent all flu strains with a single jab. The only problem is that, in the process, the system has inadvertently admitted that current flu shots are medically useless because they fail to target the correct flu strain in many cases, and they do not stimulate a natural flu-fighting immune response even when the strain is a match.

A recent report by CBS 11 News in Dallas / Fort Worth explains that researchers from the University of Texas (UT) Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas have identified a compound they say spurs the growth of a key protein known as REDD-1, which prevents cells from becoming infected. By injecting this compound into patients, REDD-1 will increase, say the researchers, and thus effectively prevent any strain of flu from taking hold.

But what about current flu vaccines? Dr. Beatrice Fontoura, one of the head researchers involved with the new universal flu shot, explained to CBS 11 that it works differently than current flu shots because it “stimulates our own (immune) response which is already there and boost[s] it to fight an infection.”

In other words, flu shots being sold today at pharmacies across the country do not actually promote natural immunity at all, which begs an important question. If current flu shots do not boost the immune response, then what, exactly, are they good for?

Not much, according to a recent study published inThe Lancet. Though the mainstream media widely reported that the study’s findings showed an effectiveness rate of 60 percent for flu shots, actual data in the study reveal that flu shots help about 1.5 out of every 100 adults. This, of course, translates into a measly 1.5 percent effectiveness rate.

And yet, for years, medical professionals everywhere have been hounding the public to get their flu shots or else face horrific sickness and even death. And those who continue to avoid the flu shot based on concerns about its safety and effectiveness have been routinely dubbed “anti-science,” or worse.

Ironically, the CBS 11 piece about the universal flu shot also contains an interview with a woman who admits that she stopped getting the flu shot because it made her sick every single year. Once she stopped getting flu shots, she stopped getting the flu. So why, again, do we even need a universal flu shot?

To view the original article click here.
To reprint this article, visit the source website for reprinting guidelines

What Every Parent Must Know: This Occurs Before the Age of 6

Posted on by

By: Dr. Mercola
Source: Mercola.com

Common sense would suggest that, if we are giving our children more than five dozen vaccinations from day of birth to age 18, we are over-vaccinating our children.

Yet, authorities continue to insist that “more is better” when it comes to vaccines without providing adequate scientific evidence to justify that  assumption.

If you follow the CDC’s recommended vaccination schedule, your child will receive 49 doses of 14 vaccines by the time he/she is 6 years of age.

And by the age of 18, the CDC recommends that children should have gotten 69 doses of 16 vaccines.

When I first started practicing medicine in 1985, it cost parents $80 to purchase vaccines for their children (plus the cost of a doctor’s visit) to comply with the CDC’s recommended childhood vaccination schedule.

Today, you’ll pay $2200 to purchase all government recommended and mandated vaccines for a child (plus the cost of office visits) because the numbers of vaccines recommended for children have tripled in the past three decades.

Sadly though, the short term financial costs to fully vaccinate your child according to the CDC schedule may actually pale in comparison to the costs to your child’s long-term health.

The list of problems related to today’s vaccines, and vaccine policy, is long and troubling.

For starters:

  1. Children not all biologically identical. The current one-size-fits-all approach to vaccination does not take into account differences among children’s genetic profiles or immune responses based on factors such as age, weight, and overall health status.
  2. Infant mortality rates between nations appears to be linked to the numbers of vaccinations given to babies before the age of 12 months. More vaccines may contribute to higher infant mortality.
  3. Babies receive several vaccines at once—they may receive 8 vaccines or more simultaneously at a doctor visit (between 2 and 15 months of age). Vaccine “layering” may increase the risk for a serious vaccine reaction.
  4. Vaccines have not been adequately tested for safety using methodologically sound scientific studies, so their long-term health effects are unknown. Moreover, the effects ofmultiple vaccines given together have not been adequately tested. And pharmaceutical companies have financed nearly all vaccine research to date, which introduces enormous bias.
  5. Vaccines do not provide complete or permanent protection against infectious disease. For example, 75 percent of children who contracted chickenpox in a 2001 Maryland outbreak had been vaccinated against chickenpox. A high number of vaccinated persons also have been found in pertussis and mumps outbreaks.
  6. Vaccines are not always sterile but can be contaminated with bacteria, viral fragments, and foreign human and animal DNA.
  7. Vaccines may contain toxic additives (including aluminum and mercury), which can contribute to your child’s toxic load.
  8. Some vaccines are associated with a higher number of serious health problems, both immediate and delayed, yet healthcare professionals rarely report vaccine adverse events. Every year, more than 25,000 adverse reactions are reported to the government, including irreversible injuries and deaths. It’s been estimated that this represents only about 1 to 10 percent of total vaccine reactions, which means that millions of people may have suffered vaccine reactions and injuries over the past few years.
  9. Vaccines, say some researchers, may contain excitotoxins that disrupt your child’s immune system (through microglial overstimulation) and damage developing brain structures, which raises his/her risk for a wide range of diseases, including autism, learning disabilities, and psychiatric disorders. New research gives evidence for a link between the high number of vaccines and the autism epidemic.
  10. Many children receive even more vaccines than the vaccination schedule recommends. If you take your child to multiple health care providers or facilities, the odds are increased that your child may be given “extra” doses. Ten percent of children aged 19 to 35 months were found to have received extra vaccinations, according to a National Immunization Survey.
  11. Preventing natural immune responses to environmental pathogens may not be in your child’s best interest. Healthy children receive life-long benefits from naturally occurring immune responses.

Current Vaccine Policy Could Explain Our Higher Infant Mortality Rate

In a recent report on Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality, an Institute of Medicine committee of medical experts acknowledged a casual link between adverse health effects and vaccination, while confirming that there are too few methodologically sound studies published in the medical literature to make definitive conclusions about many other serious health problems linked with vaccination. This report was published after a review of more than 1,000 vaccine studies by the Institute of Medicine.

According to the most recent National Vital Statistics Report, more than 26,000 American babies born alive in 2009 died before their first birthday, which gives the U.S. a very high infant mortality rate of six infant deaths per 1,000 live births. In 1960, America ranked 12th in infant mortality among all nations of the world. In 2005, we had fallen to number 30. Today in America, there are more premature babies than ever before and more full term babies die before their first birthday than in most European countries.

The most recent study (2011) looking and infant mortality and vaccination is perhaps the most disturbing. It finds that developed nations with the poorest infant mortality rates, like the U.S., tend to give their infants more vaccine doses before age one. To put this into perspective, doctors give American babies 26 vaccine doses before age one, which is twice as many vaccinations as are given babies in Sweden and Japan. Is it really just a “coincidence” that the infant mortality rate is twice as high in America as it is in Sweden and Japan?

Natural Immunity is Superior to Vaccine-Induced Immunity

The more vaccines are studied, the more apparent it becomes that proper vaccine studies are lacking, as vaccine expert and pediatrician Larry Palevsky explains. There is a major difference between natural immunity and vaccine-induced immunity. Obtaining natural immunity has far greater benefits.

When children are born, they develop natural immunity to a large variety of microorganisms that they breathe, eat, and touch. The immune responses by cells lining their airways, skin and intestines, are very important in creating “memory” and protection against the organisms they naturally come into contact with. That primary line of defense is a very important step in the maturation of your child’s immune system—and it’s bypassed when he/she gets a vaccine.

With vaccination, you are merely creating an antibody.

Vaccines do NOT impart long-term immunity because they don’t create the kind of memory that occurs when you go through the process of a natural immune response. And natural exposure does not necessarily lead to infection—it is possible to obtain natural immunity without actually getting sick, if your immune system is robust. In fact, vaccines do NOT strengthen the healthy functioning of the immune system, but actually may weaken it.

Bombardment by Multiple Vaccines Can Damage Your Child’s Developing Brain

Dr. Russell Blaylock is a board-certified neurosurgeon and expert on vaccines and the nervous system. He may have discovered the central mechanism of how vaccines can contribute to the development of neurological diseases and has proposed a theory about the cause of autism spectrum disorders. Dr. Blaylock’s theory can be summarized as follows:

  1. Priming: Your child’s immune system gets “primed” through exposure to an excitotoxin, such as a vaccine or an infectious agent, causing his/her microglia (special immune cells within the brain) to shift into “readiness mode.”
  2. Microglial Activation: Subsequent exposures to vaccines or other immune stresses over a relatively short period of time activate the microglia into full “battle mode,” prepared to defend your child’s body against what they perceive as an all-out invasion.
  3. Bystander Damage: Excitotoxins and free radicals are generated, causing “bystander damage” in a runaway process that cannot be shut down. This leads to chronic inflammation and damage to brain tissues, including mitochondrial dysfunction, brain inflammation, seizures, and the other difficulties seen with autism.

Vaccines differ from natural infections in that vaccines can cause brain stimulation for very prolonged periods—the immune system in your child’s brain is activated and re-activated by repeated exposure. Babies do not respond to vaccines in the same way as adults, even by one year of age. Immune over-activation can be especially damaging to a baby or young child’s developing brain structures, such as the amygdala and limbic system.

This cycle is magnified by the administration of multiple vaccines at once. Many studies suggest this is very risky. Did you know that your 12 or 15 month old baby is allowed to get up to 13 vaccines at once under the CDC Immunization Schedule?  How can this NOT be an assault to the immune system or developing brain? When was the last time YOU took 13 different prescription drugs at once without suffering side effects?

Certain children appear to have a higher risk for developing chronic brain and immune system dysfuntion including autism, than others, if their immune systems are more easily “primed.” All it takes is the insult of ONE more vaccine, or ONE more infection, and the stage is set for regression into autism.or development of other kinds of neuroimmune disorders like ADD/ADHD and seizures. One of the factors that can increase vaccine risks is if your child is particularly susceptible to immune dysfunction because of an imbalance in their gut flora..

Gut Bacteria May Increase Vulnerability to Vaccine Damage

Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride found why some children are more vulnerable than others to developing autism. She discovered a close connection between abnormal gut flora and abnormal brain development—a condition she calls Gut and Psychology Syndrome (GAPS).

Your child’s immune system begins in his/her gut. Pathogenic microbes inside your child’s digestive tract can damage their gut wall integrity, allowing all sorts of toxins and microbes to enter their bloodstream and then his/her brain. With GAPS, your child’s digestive system becomes a source of toxicity, rather than a source of nourishment.



In her research, Dr. Campbell-McBride discovered that 100 percent of the mothers of autistic children have abnormal gut flora, which is significant because newborns inherit their gut flora from their mothers at the time of birth. Establishing normal gut flora in the first 20 days or so of life plays a crucial role in the maturation of your baby’s immune system. Babies who develop abnormal gut flora are left with compromised immune systems, putting them at higher risk for suffering vaccine reactions.

If your baby has suboptimal gut flora, vaccines can become the proverbial “last straw”—the trigger that “primes” his/her immune system to develop chronic heath problems, remembering Dr. Blaylock’s model.

The best way to prevent GAPS is by breastfeeding. and avoiding the use of antibiotics because they destroy the balance of gut floras and promote the growth of pathogenic bacteria. In addition to breastfeeding, I highly recommend the use of fermented foods and probiotics for your baby to help reduce his/her risk of GAPS.

Fortunately, it’s possible to screen your child for GAPS before he or she is vaccinated, so that you can make a better-informed vaccination decision. Dr. Campbell-McBride describes the entire process in her book. It involves providing a detailed family health history to a knowledgeable healthcare provider, combined with stool and urine analysis, and these combine to give you a picture of your baby’s gut health and overall immune status.

Dr. Campbell-McBride states:

“If your child has abnormal gut flora, we can assume that your child has compromised immunity, and these children must not be vaccinated with the standard vaccination protocol because they simply get damaged by it. They should not be vaccinated.”

These non-invasive tests are now available in most laboratories around the world for, typically, $80 to $100 each. This cost is insignificant compared to the incredible expense of treating an autistic child, once the damage is done.

Recommendations for Preventing Vaccination Overdose

Ultimately it is your responsibility to do the due diligence and research to decide for yourself which vaccines you want your child to have. My only caution is to warn you not to rely exclusively on government, drug company or medical trade association information as those sources will not disclose the full story about vaccine risks. Please do an independent analysis by getting information from many sources, including organizations dedicated to preventing vaccine injuries and deaths, rather than from entities that make billions of dollars from promoting one-size-fits all forced vaccination policies.  Please realize that right now in most American states, you have the right to opt out of vaccines. However, also be aware that vaccine exemptions are under attack in every state because the wealthy and powerful Pharma/Medical lobby is trying to take them away.

Below are a few recommendations that will help you prevent extra vaccine doses and minimize a vaccine risk for you or your child:

  • Keep a detailed record of the vaccinations your child has received and when. DO NOT rely on your doctor’s office to do that for you. It is also a good idea to have your child’s vaccination history on hand in the event there is a vaccine reaction.
  • Make sure that your doctors or vaccine provider reports vaccine adverse reactions to VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Effects Reporting System) or make a reaction report yourself.
  • Consider having your child evaluated for GAPS prior to any vaccination to help decrease vaccine risks.
  • Consider using an individualized vaccine schedule. Find a doctor to work with you to if you want to have fewer vaccines administered on the same day and/or allow more time between vaccinations.
  • Breastfeed your baby. Consider feeding him/her naturally fermented foods, rich in natural probiotics, as a regular part of his or her diet. Avoid antibiotics whenever you can.

To view the original article click here.
To reprint this article, visit the source website for reprinting guidelines

The Hidden Risks in This Heavily Promoted Seasonal Routine…

Posted on by

By: Dr. Mercola
Source: Mercola.com

Guillain Barre Syndrome (GBS) is not contagious.

It is an autoimmune disorder that develops when a person’s own immune system attacks and damages the myelin sheath of the body’s nerves, causing muscle weakeness and paralysis.

GBS symptoms can last for a few weeks or months or can become permanent.

In rare cases, people die from GBS, usually because they cannot breathe.

In the U.S., an estimated 3,000 to 6,000 people develop GBS annually.

Some healthy people, who develop GBS, have recently recovered from a viral or bacterial infection within the previous 4-8 weeks but others have recently been vaccinated.

The inactivated influenza vaccine has been associated with development of GBS since 1976, when an inactivated “swine flu” shot given to millions of healthy Americans caused GBS in several hundred previously healthy Americans and there were 30 deaths.

The CDC says: ”In 1976 there was a small increased risk of GBS following vaccination with an influenza vaccine made to protect against a swine flu virus. The increased risk was approximately 1 additional case of GBS per 100,000 people who got the swine flu vaccine. The Institute of Medicine (IOM) conducted a thorough scientific review of this issue in 2003 and concluded that people who received the 1976 swine influenza vaccine had an increased risk for developing GBS.

Scientists have multiple theories on why this increased risk may have occurred, but the exact reason for this association remains unknown.”

Early symptoms of GBS include sudden muscle weakness, fatigue and tingling sensations in the legs that can take days or weeks to spread to the arms and upper body and can become painful, eventually ending with either partial or total paralysis.

When there is total paralysis, GBS becomes life-threatening because it can impair breathing and interfere with the heart rate and cause high or low blood pressure that can lead to serious complications, such as heart attack and stroke.

It is important to recognize the early symptoms of GBS, whether you have been vaccinated or not, and seek immediate medical care.

Powerful Profile of a Vaccine Victim

While infants and young children are at greatest risk, NO ONE is exempt from the potential serious complications of vaccination, one of which is GBS.

In the video profile of vaccine injury above, Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder and president of the non-profit National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), interviews a Connecticut artist and her mother, a former professor of nursing, who developed Guillaine-Barre syndrome after getting a seasonal flu shot in 2008 and today is permanently disabled with total body paralysis. This family has chosen to share their heartbreaking story to help those, who have had the same experience, feel less alone, and to educate others about what it means to be vaccine injured. What happened to this family is a potent reminder of just how important it is to make well-informed decisions about vaccinations.

Getting Flu Shot at Pharmacy is a Risky Proposition

While many have become used to vaccines being considered “routine,” there’s really nothing routine about them. Each and every vaccine carries an inherent risk of causing a reaction, injury or death that can be greater for some individuals than others. The seasonal flu vaccine is no exception when it comes to serious health risks, both short- and long-term, for some people.   This is why the trend of getting your flu shot at the local drugstore, grocery store or other non-medical setting is so troubling.

According to a recent article in NPR:

“In 2010, 18.4 percent of adults who were immunized received the flu vaccine at a supermarket or drugstore, just edging out workplace vaccinations for the second most popular venue, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

… [W]hile more people are going to the pharmacy, the number of Americans who get the flu vaccine each year has remained fairly constant at about 40 percent of all adults. Drugstores and supermarket pharmacies are eager to stake out a bigger piece of that market. Nationwide, the number of pharmacists trained to deliver vaccines has nearly quadrupled since 2007, from 40,000 to 150,000.”

While pharmacists are trained to administer the vaccine, they’re not necessarily trained to address a sudden and life threatening health emergency that may arise after the shot is given. It’s important to understand that ALL vaccines carry a risk for provoking an acute adverse reaction, such as fainting or having a seizure, which could be truly life threatening if you’re driving a car or crossing a street after you have left the store, for example.

All Vaccines Suppress Your Immune System

Vaccines can also be immune suppressive—that is, they can suppress your immune system, which may not return to normal for weeks to months. Here are just some of the ways vaccines can impair and alter your immune response:

  • Some components in vaccines are neurotoxic and may depress your immune response or cause brain and immune dysfunction, particularly heavy metals such as mercury preservatives and aluminum adjuvants
  • The lab altered vaccine viruses themselves may also affect your immune response in a negative way
  • Vaccines may alter your t-cell function and lead you to become chronically ill
  • Vaccines can trigger allergies or autoimmune disorders. Vaccines introduce large foreign protein molecules into your body. Your body can respond to these foreign particles in a way that causes an allergic reaction or triggers autoimmunty, especially in persons genetically or biologically vulnerable to allergy and autoimmunity

The flu vaccine may also pose an immediate risk to your cardiovascular system due to the fact that they elicit an inflammatory response. One 2007 study published in the Annals of Medicine concluded that:

“Abnormalities in arterial function and LDL oxidation may persist for at least two weeks after a slight inflammatory reaction induced by influenza vaccination. These could explain in part the earlier reported increase in cardiovascular risk during the first weeks after an acute inflammatory disorder.”

Mercury is a Well-Known Neurotoxin

Thimerosal, which is 49 percent mercury by volume, is a widely used vaccine preservative.

It is present in many different vaccines used in the U.S., including the majority of seasonal flu vaccines, although there are a few million doses of thimerosal-free single dose vials of influenza vaccine manufactured by drug companies that are supposed to be reserved for infants and pregnant women.

However if you are pregnant or have an infant and want to get a flu shot, be aware that you may have to specifically insist on getting the thimerosal-free single vial version as many health practitioners and pharmacists are still clueless about the health risks associated with thimerosal.

Some don’t even know that thimerosal is a mercury derivative!

A typical dose of thimerosal-containing flu vaccine contains 25 micrograms thimerosal. According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the safe limit for human exposure to mercury is 0.1 mcg per kilo of weight per day.

Since almost half of the thimerosal is mercury, this means that each flu shot contains just over 12 mcg’s of mercury, which would be considered unsafe for anyone weighing less than 120 kilos, or just under 265 pounds.

There’s really no debate about whether or not mercury is a neurotoxin. It’s a well-established fact that it is. It’s also well understood that mercury is particularly damaging to young, developing brains, and this is one of the core concerns about vaccines. If it’s unsafe to breathe or ingest mercury, why would it suddenly become harmless when injected directly into your body, bypassing all of your body’s natural detoxification pathways?

If anything, the damage is likely to be far more profound!  The following video offers a powerful illustration of how mercury literally destroys brain neurons.


Why Did Vaccine Maker Fail to Reveal Massive Increase in Reactions?

On October 18, The Australian published an article questioning the omission of research showing a dramatic uptick in side effects from the flu vaccine in 2006. As you may recall, last year, Australia temporarily suspended all seasonal flu vaccinations for children under the age of five after noticing a 200 percent increase in unusual fevers and convulsions. At that time, CSL submitted updated research from 2006 showing a sharp rise in fevers linked to its vaccine, which they had omitted from the legally required product information sheets given to doctors.

The product sheets instead listed figures from 2005.

The 2005 information showed 22.5 per cent of children under three, and nearly 16 percent of children aged three to nine experienced fever as a side effect. Meanwhile the updated figures for 2006 showed the rate of unusual fevers had nearly DOUBLED, to 39.5 percent in children up to three, and 27 percent for three to nine-year olds.

According to The Australian:

“Both sets of results were published in 2009, but CSL has still not included the more alarming set of figures in the product information. The Medical Journal of Australia reported… that CSL did not give this information to Australia’s drug regulator, the Therapeutic Goods Administration, until last year when the spate of serious febrile convulsions in young children given the annual flu jab triggered a suspension on the use of such vaccines for children under five.”

The CSL’s explanation for the omission is that they didn’t think the 2006 figures were “clinically substantially different” to the 2005 figures.  Really? If a doubling of side effects is not substantially and clinically different, then what is?

Was Blend of Flu Viruses to Blame for Increase in Adverse Effects?

CSL now claims to have pinpointed the potential problem causing their H1N1 vaccine (Fluvax) to be so much more reactive than seasonal flu vaccines of the past. According to a September 3 article in The Australian:

“CSL followed World Health Organisation recommendations when it concocted its controversial Fluvax vaccine, which combined swine flu with two seasonal strains of influenza for the first time… CSL yesterday revealed a breakthrough in its 18-month scientific investigation…  It said the interim findings pointed to a problem with how the three virus strains interacted.

“Our scientific studies indicate that the interaction between the particular virus strains used in the 2010 . . . vaccine contributed to the reactions, but we are still working to understand the how and why,” a CSL spokeswoman told The Weekend Australian. “We have completed comprehensive investigations into our manufacturing operations (which) have not identified any change or deviation in our standard registered manufacturing process that could have contributed to the increased reactions.”"

However, the World Health Organization (WHO) has rebutted CSL’s conclusions stating that:

“None of the other manufacturers have seen the same sort of effects with these strains,” Dr [Ian] Barr [deputy director of the WHO's influenza research laboratory in Melbourne] said. He ruled out testing the WHO’s flu-shot recipe — which tends to change each year — before new vaccines were used on people. “It’s just not possible because this is more or less a just-in-time vaccine,” he said.”

Both the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Australian counterpart, the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), have blamed the problem on manufacturing deficiencies, poor management, and inadequate cleaning and testing at the CSL facility.According to The Australian:

“The TGA said yesterday different manufacturing processes could explain why only CSL’s vaccine caused such widespread side-effects in children last year.”While the different brands of seasonal influenza vaccines use the same strains of virus, there are differences in manufacturing processes that may result in differences in the biology of the vaccines,” an administration spokeswoman said.

Finland Vows to Pay for Lifetime Medical Care for Kids Harmed by H1N1 Vaccine

The 2009-2010 H1N1 swine flu vaccine wreaked uncommon havoc in many countries. For example, several European countries noticed a staggering uptick in narcolepsy —a rare and devastating sleeping disorder.  Unfortunately, vaccine makers are completely shielded from liability for any harm caused by a pandemic vaccine, which is what the H1N1 flu vaccine was, so the fact that this vaccine turned out to be so harmful is a red flag for everyone to carefully weigh potential benefits and risks, and not trust blindly when health officials and doctors give standard assurances of vaccine safety and effectiveness.

In a rare and welcome demonstration of compassion and respect for the vaccine injured, the Finnish government and major health insurance companies recently announced they will pay for lifetime medical care for all the children diagnosed with narcolepsy after receiving the swine flu vaccine.

As reported by Yahoo News:

“Finnish and international researchers recently found a conclusive link between the Pandemrix swine flu vaccine and new cases of narcolepsy… The Finnish Pharmaceutical Insurance Pool (LVP), which represents insurance companies, said… it would honor all insurance claims in this category… The Finnish government meanwhile agreed to cover any medical costs exceeding the insurance claims.

In Finland, 79 children between the ages of four and 19 developed narcolepsy after receiving the Pandemrix vaccine in 2009 and 2010. Of these cases, an unusually high number, 76, also suffered from bouts of cataplexy, suffering hallucinations or paralysing physical collapses, according to Finnish research.”

Flu Vaccine for Pregnant Women Now Called into Question

In the U.S., trivalent influenza vaccination is universally recommended for all pregnant women, but a new study now calls this practice into question. The study examined “the magnitude, time course, and variance in inflammatory responses following seasonal influenza virus vaccination among pregnant women.”  The women were assessed prior to, and at one day, two days, and one week following vaccination..

The analysis showed significant increases in C-reactive protein (CRP) and other markers of inflammation following the vaccinations.According to the authors:

“Trivalent influenza virus vaccination elicits a measurable inflammatory response among pregnant women … There was considerable variability in magnitude of response; coefficients of variation for change at two days post-vaccination ranged from 122 percent to 728 percent, with the greatest variability in IL-6 responses at this timepoint.

… As adverse perinatal health outcomes including preeclampsia and preterm birth have an inflammatory component, a tendency toward greater inflammatory responding to immune triggers may predict risk of adverse outcomes, providing insight into biological mechanisms underlying risk… further research is needed to confirm that the mild inflammatory response elicited by vaccination is benign in pregnancy.”

Are Flu Vaccines Increasing Inflammation in Pregnant Women to Dangerous Levels?

The issue of inflammation is very important, and may be a crucial concern for pregnant women and infants. Pregnant women experiencing acute inflammation, whether from natural infection or from a vaccination, may well suffer an increased risk of their unborn child suffering health damage as a result.

It has always been a principle in medicine that one should not expose pregnant women to unnecessary risks from smoking or ingesting drugs or alcohol or other toxins because the risk to the unborn child is too great. Until a decade ago, most women were not routinely advised by doctors to get vaccinated during pregnancy but, today, there is a big push by the CDC and medical trade organizations to vaccinate all pregnant women in any trimester. The really big push began in earnest during the much-hyped pandemic “swine flu” influenza scare of 2009, a flu that turned out to be less severe than most annual “flu seasons.”

Researchers are now questioning the assumed safety of giving flu shots to pregnant women because stimulating a woman’s immune system during midterm and later term pregnancy may significantly increase the risk that her baby will develop autism during childhood and schizophrenia sometime during the teenage years and afterward. This risk is not minor. According to Dr. Blaylock, it’s a well-accepted fact within neuroscience that eliciting an immune response during pregnancy increases the risk of autism and schizophrenia in her offspring seven- to 14-fold!

In fact, a number of neurodevelopmental and behavioral problems can occur in babies born to women immunologically stimulatedduring pregnancy. For example, in one study done by Dr. Laura Hewitson, a professor of obstetrics at the University of Pittsburg Medical Center, found that a single vaccine used in human babies, when used in newborn monkeys, caused significant abnormalities in brainstem development.

It’s true that serious flu infections or E. coli infections during pregnancy are a major risk for all these complications, but a woman’s risk of actually becoming infected is quite small.

Two years ago, I interviewed Dr. Blaylock, a board certified neurosurgeon and author of Excitotoxins: the Taste that Kills, on this topic. At the time, we were discussing the swine flu and H1N1 vaccine, but one particular segment relates to the issue of vaccinations during pregnancy in general. As stated above, vaccines elicit an inflammatory response, and according to Dr. Blaylock, this is of considerableconcern for pregnant women.

Based on the data Dr. Blaylock shared in that interview, pregnant women had about a 99.97 percent chance of NOT becoming so ill from the swine flu that they would require any type of hospital care. Put another way, a pregnant woman only had a 0.03 percent chance of contracting a life-threatening case of influenza. These statistics would likely be applicable for most “regular” flu seasons as well. With the risk of suffering complications from naturally-acquired influenza being so low, why is the US government insisting on vaccinating ALL pregnant women; thereby significantly increasing the risk to ALL unborn infants?

What Your Obstetrician Doesn’t Know about Vaccines Can Jeopardize Your Baby

Each year, the CDC and medical trade associations like the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) urge pregnant women and young children to get a flu shot because, they say, pregnant women and young children are “particularly at risk” for flu complications and death. However, the statistics simply do not support this recommendation.

Neither does the science…

Unfortunately, many obstetricians and pediatricians strongly recommend the flu vaccine to their pregnant patients because they simply don’t know any better.

Doctors typically do not read neuroscience journals, perhaps because they don’t have the time or because it is a lot easier to just blindly trust and follow the CDC or AAP “recommendations” without every checking them out.  But the link between inflammatory cytokine production during pregnancy and subsequent health problems in infants and young children is well explained in the medical literature; it’s been published in well-respected journals and is already accepted within the field of neuroscience.

How to Protect Yourself Against the Flu Without Vaccination

Fortunately, avoiding a serious case of the flu doesn’t require a flu vaccine. By following these simple guidelines, you can keep your immune system in optimal working order so that you’re far less likely to acquire the infection to begin with or, if you do get sick with the flu, you are better prepared to move through it without complications and soon return to good health.

  • Optimize your vitamin D levels. As I’ve previously reported, optimizing your vitamin D levels is one of the absolute best strategies for avoiding infections of ALL kinds, and vitamin D deficiency is likely the TRUE culprit behind the seasonality of the flu– not the flu virus itself. This is probably the single most important and least expensive action you can take. Regularly monitor your vitamin D levels to confirm your levels are within the therapeutic range of 50-70 ng/ml.

         Ideally, you’ll want to get all your vitamin D from sun exposure or a safe tanning                    bed, but as a last resort you can take an oral vitamin D3 supplement.                                    According to the latest review by Carole Baggerly (Grassrootshealth.org),                            adults need about 8,000 IU’s a day.

  • Avoid Sugar and Processed Foods. Sugar impairs the function of your immune system almost immediately, and as you likely know, a healthy immune system is one of the most important keys to fighting off viruses and other illness. Be aware that sugar is present in foods you may not suspect, like ketchup and fruit juice.
  • Get Enough Rest. Just like it becomes harder for you to get your daily tasks done if you’re tired, if your body is overly fatigued it will be harder for it to fight the flu. Be sure to check out my article Guide to a Good Night’s Sleep for some great tips to help you get quality rest.
  • Have Effective Tools to Address Stress . We all face some stress every day, but if stress becomes overwhelming then your body will be less able to fight off the flu and other illness. If you feel that stress is taking a toll on your health, consider using an energy psychology tool such as the Emotional Freedom Technique, which is remarkably effective in relieving stress associated with all kinds of events, from work to family to trauma.
  • Exercise. When you exercise, you increase your circulation and your blood flow throughout your body. The components of your immune system are also better circulated, which means your immune system has a better chance of finding an illness before it spreads.
  • Take a Good Source of Animal-Based Omega-3 Fats. Increase your intake of healthy and essential fats like the omega-3 found in krill oil, which is crucial for maintaining health. It is also vitally important to avoid damaged omega-6 oils that are trans fats and in processed foods as it will seriously damage your immune response.
  • Wash Your Hands. Washing your hands will decrease your likelihood of spreading a virus to your nose, mouth or other people. Be sure you don’t use antibacterial soap for this — antibacterial soaps are completely unnecessary, and they cause far more harm than good. Instead, identify a simple chemical-free soap that you can switch your family to.
  • Use Natural Antibiotics. Examples include colloidal silver, oil of oregano, and garlic. These work like broad-spectrum antibiotics against bacteria, viruses, and protozoa in your body. And unlike pharmaceutical antibiotics, they do not appear to lead to resistance.
  • Avoid Hospitals.  I’d recommend you stay away from hospitals unless you’re having an emergency and need expert medical care, as hospitals are prime breeding grounds for infections of all kinds. The best place to get plenty of rest and recover from illness that is not life-threatening is usually in the comfort of your own home.

To view the original article click here.
To reprint this article, visit the source website for reprinting guidelines

Deadly Immunity – Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Investigates the Mercury / Autism Scandal.

Posted on by

 

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. investigates the government cover-up of a mercury/autism scandal. The CDC, FDA, WHO and pharmaceutical companies have been involved in a massive deception of the public in order to ensure their sustained profitability. My hope is that this will motivate more people to begin independently investigating these companies and the relationships between those who are looking out for the health of our population and those who stand to profit from our illness. This is not intended to promote an anti-vaccine agenda, merely facilitate a broader discussion about the safety, timing, and risk/reward of our “recommended” vaccination schedule. ————– Never doubt that a small, group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.

To view the original article click here.
To reprint this article, visit the source website for reprinting guidelines

Vitamin D Triggers Natural Immune Response Against Tuberculosis, Study Finds

Posted on by

By: Jonathan Benson
Source: NaturalNews.com

There is no need to get vaccinated against tuberculosis if you maintain high enough levels of vitamin D, suggests a new study published in the journal Science Translational Medicine. Researchers found that, in the presence of even minimally adequate levels of vitamin D, the body’s own immune system will naturally trigger an immune response against the disease and many others without the need for drug or chemical interventions.

Mario Fabri, who currently works in the Department of Dermatology at the University of Cologne in Germany, examined the effects of vitamin D on immunity during his time at the University of California, Los Angeles. He discovered that the vitamin D hormone is crucial for T-cells, which are the first responders to immune invaders, to produce a protein called interferon. And interferon has been shown to directly attack tuberculosis bacteria and prevent it from taking hold.

“Over the centuries, vitamin D has intrinsically been used to treat tuberculosis,” said Fabri, referencing the age-old practice of putting tuberculosis patients in areas of high sun exposure as part of their treatment. “Our findings suggest that increasing vitamin D levels through supplementation may improve the immune response to infections such as tuberculosis.”

Fabri’s previous studies also found that vitamin D is necessary for the immune system to produce cathelicidin, an antimicrobial peptide that, like interferons, provides humans and other mammals with protection against bacterial infections. In other words, vitamin D equips the body with the tools it needs to prevent infection without the need for drug-based antibiotics.

“At a time when drug-resistant forms of tuberculosis are emerging, understanding how to enhance natural innate and acquired immunity through vitamin D may be very helpful,” added Barry Bloom, co-author of the study and former dean of faculty at the Harvard School of Public Health.

What is even better is that interferons fight more than just tuberculosis. These powerful pathways of cell communication are known to exhibit an immune response to all sorts of viruses, bacteria, parasites, and even tumor cells, which means they can help prevent a host of other diseases besides just tuberculosis.

To view the original article click here.
To reprint this article, visit the source website for reprinting guidelines

Shock Vaccine Study Reveals Influenza Vaccines only Prevent the Flu in 1.5 out of 100 Adults (Not 60% As You’ve Been Told)

Posted on by

By: Mike Adams
Source: NaturalNews.com

A new scientific study published in The Lancet reveals that influenza vaccines only prevent influenza in 1.5 out of every 100 adults who are injected with the flu vaccine. Yet, predictably, this report is being touted by the quack science community, the vaccine-pushing CDC and the scientifically-inept mainstream media as proof that “flu vaccines are 60% effective!”

This absurd claim was repeated across the mainstream media over the past few days, with all sorts of sloppy reporting that didn’t even bother to read the study itself (as usual).

NaturalNews continues to earn a reputation for actually READING these “scientific” studies and then reporting what they really reveal, not what some vaccine-pushing CDC bureaucrat wants them to say. So we purchased the PDF file from The Lancet and read this study to get the real story.

The “60% effectiveness” claim is a total lie – here’s why

What we found is that the “60% effectiveness” claim is utterly absurd and highly misleading. For starters, most people think that “60% effectiveness” means that for every 100 people injected with the flu shot, 60 of them won’t get the flu!

Thus, the “60% effectiveness” claim implies that getting a flu shot has about a 6 in 10 chance of preventing you from getting the flu.

This is utterly false.

In reality — and this is spelled out right in Figure 2 of the study itself, which is entitled, “Efficacy and effectiveness of influenza vaccines: a systematic review and meta-analysis” — only about 2.7 in 100 adults get the flu in the first place!

Flu vaccine stops influenza in only 1.5 out of 100 adults who get the shots

Let’s start with the actual numbers from the study.

The “control group” of adults consisted of 13,095 non-vaccinated adults who were monitored to see if they caught influenza. Over 97% of them did not. Only 357 of them caught influenza, which means only 2.7% of these adults caught the flu in the first place.

The “treatment group” consisted of adults who were vaccinated with a trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine. Out of this group, according to the study, only 1.2% did not catch the flu.

The difference between these two groups is 1.5 people out of 100.

So even if you believe this study, and even if you believe all the pro-vaccine hype behind it, the truly “scientific” conclusion from this is rather astonishing:

Flu vaccines only prevent the flu in 1.5 out of every 100 adults injected with the vaccine!

Note that this is very, very close to my own analysis of the effectiveness vaccines as I wrote back in September of 2010 in an article entitled, Evidence-based vaccinations: A scientific look at the missing science behind flu season vaccines

In that article, I proclaimed that flu vaccines “don’t work on 99 out of 100 people.” Apparently, if you believe the new study, I was off by 0.5 people out of 100 (at least in adults, see below for more discussion of effectiveness on children).

So where does the media get “60% effective?”

This is called “massaging the numbers,” and it’s an old statistical trick that the vaccine industry (and the pharmaceutical industry) uses over and over again to trick people into thinking their useless drugs actually work.

First, you take the 2.73% in the control group who got the flu, and you divide that into the 1.18% in the treatment group who got the flu. This gives you 0.43.

You can then say that 0.43 is “43% of 2.73,” and claim that the vaccine therefore results in a “57% decrease” in influenza infections. This then becomes a “57% effectiveness rate” claim.

The overall “60% effectiveness” being claimed from this study comes from adding additional data about vaccine efficacy for children, which returned higher numbers than adults (see below). There were other problems with the data for children, however, including one study that showed an increase in influenza rates in the second year after the flu shot.

So when the media (or your doctor, or pharmacist, or CDC official) says these vaccines are “60% effective,” what they really mean is that you would have to inject 100 adults to avoid the flu in just 1.5 of them.

Or, put another way, flu vaccines do nothing in 98.5% of adults.

But you’ve probably already noticed that the mainstream media won’t dare print this statistical revelation. They would much rather mislead everybody into the utterly false and ridiculous belief that flu vaccines are “60% effective,” whatever that means.

How to lie with statistics

This little statistical lying technique is very popular in the cancer industry, too, where these “relative numbers” are used to lie about all sorts of drugs.

You may have heard, for example, that a breast cancer drug is “50% effective at preventing breast cancer!”

But what does that really mean? It could mean that 2 women out of 100 got breast cancer in the control group, and only 1 woman out of 100 got it in the treatment group. Thus, the drug is only shown to work on 1 out of 100 women.

But since 1 is 50% of 2, they will spin the store and claim a “50% breast cancer prevention rate!” And most consumers will buy into this because they don’t understand how the medical industry lies with these statistics. So they will think to themselves, “Wow, if I take this medication, there is a 50% chance this will prevent breast cancer for me!”

And yet that’s utterly false. In fact, there is only a 1% chance it will prevent breast cancer for you, according to the study.

Minimizing side effects with yet more statistical lies

At the same time the vaccine and drug industries are lying with relative statistics to make you think their drugs really work (even when they don’t), they will also use absolute statistics to try to minimize any perception of side effects.

In the fictional example given above for a breast cancer drug, let’s suppose the drug prevented breast cancer in 1 out of 100 women, but while doing that, it caused kidney failure in 4 out of 100 women who take it. The manufacturer of the drug would spin all this and say something like the following:

“This amazing new drug has a 50% efficacy rate! But it only causes side effects in 4%!”

You see how this game is played? So they make the benefits look huge and the side effects look small. But in reality — scientifically speaking — you are 400% more likely to be injured by the drug than helped by it! (Or 4 times more likely, which is the same thing stated differently.)

How many people are harmed by influenza vaccines?

Much the same is true with vaccines. In this influenza vaccine study just published in The Lancet, it shows that you have to inject 100 adults to avoid influenza in just 1.5 adults. But what they don’t tell you is the side effect rate in all 100 adults!

It’s very likely that upon injecting 100 adults with vaccines containing chemical adjuvants (inflammatory chemicals used to make flu vaccines “work” better), you might get 7.5 cases of long-term neurological side effects such as dementia or Alzheimer’s. This is an estimate, by the way, used here to illustrate the statistics involved.

So for every 100 adults you injected with this flu vaccine, you prevent the flu in 1.5 of them, but you cause a neurological disorder in 7.5 of them! This means you are 500% more likely to be harmed by the flu vaccine than helped by it. (A theoretical example only. This study did not contain statistics on the harm of vaccines.)

Much the same is true with mammograms, by the way, which harm 10 women for every 1 woman they actually help

Chemotherapy is also a similar story. Sure, chemotherapy may “shrink tumors” in 80% of those who receive it, but shrinking tumors does not prevent death. And in reality, chemotherapy eventually kills most of those who receive it. Many of those people who describe themselves as “cancer survivors” are, for the most part, actually “chemo survivors.”

Good news for children?

If there’s any “good news” in this study, it’s that the data show vaccines to be considerably more effective on children than on adults. According to the actual data (from Figure 2 of the study itself), influenza vaccines are effective at preventing influenza infections in 12 out of 100 children.

So the best result of the study (which still has many problems, see below) is that the vaccines work on 12% of children who are injected. But again, this data is almost certainly largely falsified in favor of the vaccine industry, as explained below. It also completely ignores the vaccine / autism link, which is provably quite real and yet has been politically and financially swept under the rug by the criminal vaccine industry (which relies on scientific lies to stay in business).

Guess who funded this study?

This study was funded by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, the very same non-profit that gives grant money to Wikipedia (which has an obvious pro-vaccine slant), and is staffed by pharma loyalists.

For example, the Vice President for Human Resources and Program Management at the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation is none other than Gail Pesyna, a former DuPont executive (DuPont is second in the world in GMO biotech activities, just behind Monsanto) with special expertise in pharmaceuticals and medical diagnostics.

The Alred P. Sloan Foundation also gave a $650,000 grant to fund the creation of a film called “Shots in the Dark: The Wayward Search for an AIDS Vaccine,” which features a pro-vaccine slant that focuses on the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative, an AIDS-centric front group for Big Pharma which was founded by none other than the Rockefeller Foundation.

Seven significant credibility problems with this Lancet study

Beyond all the points already mentioned above, this study suffers from at least seven significant problems that any honest journalist should have pointed out:

Problem #1) The “control” group was often given a vaccine, too

In many of the studies used in this meta analysis, the “control” groups were given so-called “insert” vaccines which may have contained chemical adjuvants and other additives but not attenuated viruses. Why does this matter? Because the adjuvants can cause immune system disorders, thereby making the control group more susceptible to influenza infections and distorting the data in favor of vaccines. The “control” group, in other words, wasn’t really a proper control group in many studies.

Problem #2) Flu vaccines are NEVER tested against non-vaccinated healthy children

It’s the most horrifying thought of all for the vaccine industry: Testing healthy, non-vaccinated children against vaccinated children. It’s no surprise, therefore, that flu shots were simply not tested against “never vaccinated” children who have avoided flu shots for their entire lives. That would be a real test, huh? But of course you will never see that test conducted because it would make flu shots look laughably useless by comparison.

Problem #3) Influenza vaccines were not tested against vitamin D

Vitamin D prevents influenza at a rate that is 8 times more effective than flu shots. Read the article to see the actual “absolute” numbers in this study.

Problem #4) There is no observation of long-term health effects of vaccines

Vaccines are considered “effective” if they merely prevent the flu. But what if they also cause a 50% increase in Alzheimer’s two decades later? Is that still a “success?” If you’re a drug manufacturer it is, because you can make money on the vaccine and then later on the Alzheimer’s pills, too. That’s probably why neither the CDC nor the FDA ever conducts long-term testing of influenza vaccines. They simply have no willingness whatsoever to observe and record the actual long-term results of vaccines.

Problem #5) 99.5% of eligible studies were excluded from this meta-analysis

There were 5,707 potentially eligible studied identified for this meta-analysis study. A whopping 99.5% of those studies were excluded for one reason or another, leaving only 28 studies that were “selected” for inclusion. Give that this study was published in a pro-vaccine medical journal, and authored by researchers who likely have financial ties to the vaccine industry, it is very difficult to imagine that this selection of 28 studies was not in some way slanted to favor vaccine efficacy.

Remember: Scientific fraud isn’t the exception in modern medicine; it is the rule. Most of the “science” you read in today’s medical journals is really just corporate-funded quackery dressed up in the language of science.

Problem #6) Authors of the studies included in this meta-analysis almost certainly have financial ties to vaccine manufacturers

I haven’t had time to follow the money ties for each individual study and author included in this meta analysis, but I’m willing to publicly and openly bet you large sums of money that at least some of these study authors have financial ties to the vaccine industry (drug makers). The corruption, financial influence and outright bribery is so pervasive in “scientific” circles today that you can hardly find a published author writing about vaccines who hasn’t been in some way financially influenced (or outright bought out) by the vaccine industry itself. It would be a fascinating follow-up study to explore and reveal all these financial ties. But don’t expect the medical journals to print that article, of course. They’d rather not reveal what happens when you follow the money.

Problem #7) The Lancet is, itself, a pro-vaccine propaganda mouthpiece funded by the vaccine industry!

Need we point out the obvious? Trusting The Lancet to report on the effectiveness of vaccines is sort of like asking the Pentagon to report on the effectiveness of cruise missiles. Does anyone really think we’re going to get a truthful report from a medical journal that depends on vaccine company revenues for its very existence?

That’s a lot like listening to big government tell you how great government is for protecting your rights. Or listening to the Federal Reserve tell you why the Fed is so good for the U.S. economy. You might as well just ask the Devil whether you should be good or evil, eh?

Just for fun, let’s conduct a thought experiment and suppose that The Lancet actually reported the truth, and that this study was conducted with total honesty and perfect scientific integrity. Do you realize that even if you believe all this, the study concludes that flu vaccines only prevent the flu in 1.5 out of 100 adults?

Or to put it another way, even when pro-vaccine medical journals publish pro-vaccine studies paid for by pro-vaccine non-profit groups, the very best data they can manage to contort into existence only shows flu vaccines preventing influenza in 1.5 out of 100 adults.

Gee, imagine the results if all these studies were independent reviews with no financial ties to Big Pharma! Do you think the results would be even worse? You bet they would. They would probably show a negative efficacy rate, meaning that flu shots actually cause more cases of influenza to appear. That’s the far more likely reality of the situation.

Flu shots, you see, actually cause the flu in some people. That’s why the people who get sick with the flu every winter are largely the very same people who got flu shots! (Just ask ‘em yourself this coming winter, and you’ll see.)

What the public believes

Thanks to the outright lies of the CDC, the flu shot propaganda of retail pharmacies, and the quack science published in conventional medical journals, most people today falsely believe that flu shots are “70 to 90 percent effective.” This is the official propaganda on the effectiveness of vaccines.

It is so pervasive that when this new study came out reporting vaccines to be “only” 60% effective, some mainstream media outlets actually published articles with headlines like, “Vaccines don’t work as well as you might have thought.” These headlines were followed up with explanations like “Even though we all thought vaccines were up to 90% effective, it turns out they are only 60% effective!”

I hate to break it to ‘em all, but the truth is that flu shots, even in the best case the industry can come up with, really only prevent the flu in 1.5 out of 100 adults.

Or, put another way, when you see 100 adults lined up at a pharmacy waiting to receive their coveted flu shots, nearly 99 out of those 100 are not only wasting their time (and money), but may actually be subjecting themselves to long-term neurological damage as a result of being injected with flu shot chemical adjuvants.

Outright fraudulent marketing

Given their 1.5% effectiveness among adults, the marketing of flu shots is one of the most outrageous examples of fraudulent marketing ever witnessed in modern society. Can you imagine a car company selling a car that only worked 1.5% of the time? Or a computer company selling a computer that only worked 1.5% of the time? They would be indicted for fraud by the FTC!

So why does the vaccine industry get away with marketing its flu shots that even the most desperately pro-vaccine statistical analysis reveals only works on 1.5 out of 100 adults?

It’s truly astonishing. This puts flu shots in roughly the same efficacy category as rubbing a rabbit’s foot or wishing really hard. That this is what passes as “science” today is so snortingly laughable that it makes your ribs hurt.

That so many adults today buy into this total marketing fraud is a powerful commentary on the gullibility of the population and the power of TV-driven news propaganda. Apparently, actually getting people to buy something totally useless that might actually harm them (or kill them) isn’t difficult these days. Just shroud it all under “science” jargon and offer prizes to the pharmacy workers who strong-arm the most customers to get injected. And it works!

The real story on flu shots that you probably don’t want to know

Want to know the real story on what flu shots are for? They aren’t for halting the flu. We’ve already established that. They hardly work at all, even if you believe the “science” on that.

So what are flu shots really for?

You won’t like this answer, but I’ll tell you what I now believe to be true: The purpose of flu shots is to “soft kill” the global population. Vaccines are population control technologies, as openly admitted by Bill Gates and they are so cleverly packaged under the fabricated “public health” message that even those who administer vaccines have no idea they are actually engaged in the reduction of human population through vaccine-induced infertility and genetic mutations.

Vaccines ultimately have but one purpose: To permanently alter the human gene pool and “weed out” those humans who are stupid enough to fall for vaccine propaganda.

And for that nefarious purpose, they probably are 60% effective after all.

To view the original article click here.
To reprint this article, visit the source website for reprinting guidelines

Healing Lyme Disease

Posted on by

Healing Lyme Disease

Hi, this is a question from Mary and she is concerned about Lyme disease and she is wondering how I explain Lyme disease.

This is a very complex question even though it sounds very simple because it involves many, many factors that influence the body’s immune system. Lyme disease in my opinion is not necessarily due to the tick bite, that the parasite that is transferred by ticks into the human body, but it is rather a response by the body to a host of different influences that are of a toxic nature. An immune system that is already burdened by toxins and environmental factors as well as thoughts, feeling, emotions that inhibit the immune system. There could be things like lack of vitamin D which is again associated with Lyme disease, not being exposed on a regular basis to sunshine, ultra violet light, that diminished the vitamin D content in the body. Many people blame the tick for causing the Lyme disease and most doctors would, but you can have the symptom of Lyme disease in people who were never exposed to tick bites. So there is a lot of misconception in this field. And destroying the bacterium with antibiotics is in most cases not sufficient, it may lead to flare up very shortly after, because the underlying weakness of the immune system is still prevailing.

I have a different approach to that.  I would suggest cleaning out the liver so that the immune system can pick up again. The liver and gall bladder cleanse is very important in restoring the digestive functions and to allow the body to eliminate and break down any pathogenic invaders that may be causing the direct sickness or the feeling ill and weak because of so called Lyme disease. So, I would prefer to deal with the underlying causes rather than simply the effect of that particular infection and once again looking at the body in a holistic way that, infection is a reaction to something that the body is incapable of clearing up silently without much fuss, It has to use inflammation in order to deal with it because the body is incapable of removing any invading organism in the natural way.

So, the best approach in my opinion is getting vitamin D back up, regular sun exposure, drinking a good water, I would suggest adya clarity, using that water to remove any contaminants in that water which happens when you add a  couple of drops of adya clarity to your drinking water, like eight ounces of drinking water, you will see sediments at the bottom of a glass, even filtered water has these kinds of sediments that includes heavy metals and other contaminants which are important to remove and it also minimalizes the waters so, it enhances the immune system while allowing the body to get rid of existing toxins, chemicals and heavy metals which always seem to play a major role in Lyme disease. You can find adya clarity on the internet. It spells A-D-Y-A and then clarity, as in clarity of mind. It has many, many benefits, but combined with liver cleansing, this would be the best strategy. I would suggest also changing the diet to a vegetarian diet. Avoiding any kind of meat, chicken, fish, anything that can recontaminate the body and burden the immune system. Sugar as well, sugar should be avoided, because, with Lyme disease there is also a large flare up of Candida growth involved which you do not want to feed by adding more sugar to your diet.

Hope this might be helpful to you, and once again if you need more information “TIMELESS SECRETS OF HEALTH AND REJUVENATION” is a book that contains everything that you need to know in order to restore your health from ground up rather than targeting symptoms such as Lyme disease which is merely a symptom of an underlying issue that has not emerged, that has not shown up before, but a trigger like a tick bite might just bring them to surface and allow the body to deal with it more effectively. But it is always important to support the body through it rather than stop the body at its trying.

Thank you

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyper link back to the web page

Protecting Our Unvaccinated Children as They Grow Up

Posted on by

Protecting our unvaccinated children as they grow up

Hi, this is a question in response to a post I made about vaccination and it refers to my book “VACCINE-NATION: POISONING THE POPULATION, ONE SHOT AT A TIME” and the question is so then how do we protect our unvaccinated kids as they get older?

The answer is really by not vaccinating the kids, you are allowing their immune systems to develop. They are not stifled, they are not suppressed because vaccines  definitely suppress the immune system by only activating what is known as the antibody response. The antibody immune system and when you do that you are automatically suppressing the cellular immune system which is the one associated with you gut.

We know that sixty percent of the immune system, the main tract of the immune system, sits in the digestive track, small intestine, partly large intestine and even in the stomach. We have parts of the immune system even in the throat area, in the tonsils, so there is a thymus, there are lots of parts of immune system in out body, circulating immune system, cellular immune system that consists of B-cells, white blood cells, sarcophagus and others. So when a person is immunized with vaccines like, we know that hepatitis B vaccine given right after a child is born, and that has a whole host of serious side effects that can include diabetes later in life, cancers, heart disease and many other conditions.

So when a person is vaccinated it does not mean that the person is protected, It actually means that the person is unprotected. When you look at people that develop, if there is a mumps outbreak like we had three years ago in New York,  seventy-seven  percent of those one thousand infected people, that was  seven hundred and seventy people were actually previously fully vaccinated, they had all their booster shoots. So that means if you are vaccinated, you are more likely to became infected with an infectious agent than if you are not vaccinated

In other words, your question which said how do we then make sure that the our unvaccinated children stay protected as they get older, that is the perfection. Not being vaccinated is the protection because it allows the immune system to grow strong, to have contact with infectious agents, germs, pathogens, with bacteria in the soil, in the air, in the food without having a suppression of the immune system which can easily suppress the onset of an illness but this does not mean the child is healthier.

A healthy child may go through two or three childhood illnesses and acquire not just immunity to those particular viruses that are typically associated with these infections but on the other hand, the immune system will be more protected against all sorts of pathogens or toxins, in fact, so a strong immune system builds in coordination, in collaboration, with the natural environment as the child grows up. It needs to be in contact with all sorts of germs, viruses, fungi, bacteria, the more the better, children that eat dirt, that are playing in the ground, in the soil, that put soil in the mouth they have strong immune system and they are least likely to develop allergies and things like asthma.

So it is very well known that the vaccinated kids have four to five times higher rates of asthma and five times more the rate of allergies and many times the rate of autism, many, many different kinds of infections, ear infections, very, very low rates among the non-vaccinated but very high among vaccinated. So these are all studies that have been showing again and again that natural immunity is far, far better than artificially induced immunity which is not real immunity.

As we have seen, in the case of most infectious diseases and epidemics , the people that used to develop infections of even diaphragm, like diphtheria, go back to the time before World War II in Germany when diphtheria mass vaccinations were introduced, that the rates have moved up from forty  to two hundred and fifty thousand people infected.  And when World War II broke out and there were no vaccines available any more the rates dropped back to forty-five to fifty thousand. So that means that the vaccines were actually responsible for some of the greatest epidemics we have. The same thing is applied to polio, and we know now very clearly that the polio vaccine according to the inventor or the discoverer of the polio vaccine, he himself had admitted in front of the US congress that the polio vaccine was actually responsible for creating the biggest polio outbreak we ever had.

So once again there is no protection from vaccines, it has never been shown, there are no double blind control studies that are allowed by the CDC, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, to allow comparative studies where you have two groups of people, one is vaccinated, the other is not vaccinated,  and you compare who feels better when exposed to infectious agents and we now know that simply because of outbreaks, that the ones that are more readily infected are the ones that are fully vaccinated and those who are more protected are the ones that are non-vaccinated.

Once again here is your answer, just by not vaccinating your child, he has a stronger chance of going through life without any major illnesses.

Lastly there are one hundred and fifty-one scientific studies over the last the last hundred and twenty, hundred and thirty years, and they all published, reviewed studies and one University in 2008 started looking at all those hundred and fifty-one studies and put them all together and then created a, basically reported, a result that vaccination of children to prevent childhood illnesses is responsible for a significant increase of cancer in these people later in life.

So we have an epidemic of cancer now simply because we have opted to vaccinate children during their childhood, which is horrendous, when you look at the amount of suffering that people have, that potentially develop cancer because they have been vaccinated during their childhood, versus people that may have had some insignificant childhood illnesses that pass after five, six, seven, eight,  ten days, some inconvenience for parents and children, yet, they are more likely to be protected against cancer later throughout their lives.

Once again better just by doing nothing, not vaccinating children, children fare much better with regard to proper immunity.

Thank you.

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyper link back to the web page

Disorders of the Joints

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz 

There are three types of joints in our body: fibrous or fixed joints, cartilaginous or slightly movable joints and synovial or freely movable joints. The most susceptible to disease are the joints of the hands, feet, knees, shoulders, elbows and hips. The most commonly found diseases include rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis and gout.

Most people with rheumatoid arthritis have a long history of intestinal complaints: bloatedness, flatulence, heartburn, belching, constipation, diarrhea, coldness and swelling of hands and feet, increased perspiration, general fatigue, loss of appetite, weight reduction, etc. It is reasonable, therefore, to conclude that rheumatoid arthritis is linked with any of these, or similar symptoms of major intestinal and metabolic difficulties. I have personally experienced all of the symptoms mentioned here when I suffered bouts of juvenile rheumatoid arthritis during my childhood years.

The gastro-intestinal tract is constantly exposed to a large number of viruses, bacteria and parasites. In addition to the many antigens (foreign material) contained in foods, the digestive system may also have to deal with insecticides, pesticides, hormones, antibiotic residues, preservatives and colorings contained in so many foodstuffs today. Other possible antigens include pollen from flowers, plants, plant antibodies, fungi, bacteria and some large molecule drugs, such as penicillin. It is the task of the immune system, most of which is located in the intestinal wall, to protect us against all of these potentially harmful invaders and substances. To be able to accomplish this task on a daily basis, both the digestive and lymphatic systems must remain unobstructed and efficient. Gallstones in the liver seriously disturb the digestive process, which leads to an overload of toxic substances in the blood and lymph, as mentioned above (see Disorders of the Circulatory System).

Arthritis is considered to be an auto-immune disease affecting the synovial membrane. Auto-immunity, a condition in which the immune system develops immunity to its own cells, results when antigen/antibody complexes (rheumatoid factors) are formed and present in the blood. Naturally, the B-lymphocytes (immune cells) in the intestinal wall become stimulated and produce antibodies (immunoglobulins) when coming into contact with these antigens. The immune cells circulate in the blood and some settle in the lymph nodes, spleen, mucous membrane of the salivary glands, lymphatic system of the bronchial tubes, vagina or uterus, milk-producing mammary glands of the breasts and capsular tissues of the joints.

If there is repeated exposure to the same types of toxic antigens, antibody production will increase dramatically, particularly in areas where immune cells have settled due to a previous encounter with the invaders. These harmful antigens may consist of protein particles from putrefying animal foods, for example. In such a case, there can be intense microbial activity. The new encounter with the antigens raises the level of antigen/antibody complexes in the blood and upsets the fine balance that exists between the immune reaction and its suppression. Auto-immune diseases, which indicate an extremely high level of toxicity in the body, directly result from a disturbance of this balance. If antibody production is continually high in synovial joints, inflammation becomes chronic, leading to increasing deformity, pain and loss of function. The overuse of the immune system leads to self-destruction in the body. If this form of self-destruction occurs in nerve tissue, it is called MS, and if it occurs in organ tissue, it is called cancer. Yet, seen from a deeper perspective, the self-destruction is but a final attempt at self-preservation. The body only attacks itself if the toxicity could cause more damage than an auto-immune response would. Gallstones in the liver are the leading cause of toxicity. They can paralyze the body’s ability to keep itself nourished and clean.

Osteoarthritis is a degenerative non-inflammatory disease. It occurs when the renewal of articular cartilage (a smooth, strong surface, covering bones that are in contact with other bones) does not keep pace with its removal. The articular cartilage gradually becomes thinner until, eventually, the bony articular surfaces come into contact and the bones begin to degenerate. Abnormal bone repair and chronic inflammation may follow this form of injury. This disease is also caused by long-standing digestive disorder. As fewer nutrients are absorbed and distributed for tissue building, it becomes increasingly difficult to maintain healthy sustenance of bone and articular cartilage. Gallstones in the liver impair the basic digestive processes and, therefore, play perhaps the most important role in the development of osteoarthritis.

Gout, which is another joint disease directly connected to weak liver performance, is caused by sodium urate crystals in joints and tendons. Gout occurs in some people whose blood uric acid is abnormally high. When gallstones in the liver begin to affect blood circulation in the kidneys (see Urinary Disorders), uric acid excretion becomes inefficient. This also causes increased cell damage and cell destruction in the liver and kidneys, as well as in other parts of the body.

Uric acid is a waste product of the breakdown of cell nuclei and is produced in excess with increased cell destruction. Smoking cigarettes, drinking alcoholic beverages regularly, using stimulants, etc., cause marked cell destruction which releases large quantities of degenerate cell protein into the blood stream. In addition, uric acid production rises sharply with over-consumption of protein foods, such as meat, fish, eggs, cheese, etc. Incidentally, all of the aforementioned foods and substances lead to gallstone formation in the liver and gallbladder. There may be several acute attacks of arthritis before damage of joints decreases mobility and the gout condition becomes chronic.

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyper link back to the web page

Disorders of the Respiratory System

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz 

Both mental and physical health depend on the effectiveness and vitality of the cells in the body. Most of the energy required by the cells is derived from chemical reactions that can only take place in the presence of oxygen. One of the resultant waste products is carbon dioxide. The respiratory system provides the routes by which sufficient oxygen is taken into the body and carbon dioxide is excreted from the body. Blood serves as the transport system for the exchange of these gases between the lungs and the cells.

Gallstones in the liver can impair respiratory functions and cause allergies, disorders of the nose, nasal cavities and diseases of the bronchi and lungs. When gallstones distort the lobules (units) of the liver, the blood-cleansing ability of the liver, small intestine, lymphatic system and immune system weakens. Waste material and toxic substances, normally rendered harmless by these organs and systems, now begin to seep into the heart, lungs, bronchi and other respiratory passages. Constant exposure to these irritating agents lowers the resistance of the respiratory system against them. Lymph congestion in the abdominal region, particularly in the cysterna chyli and thoracic duct, hampers proper lymphatic drainage from the respiratory organs. Most respiratory ailments occur as a consequence of such lymph blockages.

Pneumonia results when protective measures fail to prevent inhaled or blood-borne microbes from reaching and colonizing the lungs. Gallstones harbor harmful microbes, as well as very toxic, irritating material, which can enter the blood via the damaged liver sites. Gallstones are, therefore, a constant source of immune suppression, which leaves the body, and particularly the upper respiratory tract, susceptible to both internal and external disease-causing factors. These include both blood-borne and air-borne microbes (believed to cause pneumonia), cigarette smoke, alcohol, X-rays, corticosteroids, allergens, antigens, common pollutants, etc.

Further respiratory complications arise when handfuls of gallstones accumulating in the liver bile ducts enforce an enlargement of the liver. The liver, situated in the upper abdominal cavity, spans almost the entire width of the body. Its upper and anterior surfaces are smooth and curved to fit under the surface of the diaphragm. When enlarged, the liver obstructs the movement of the diaphragm and prevents the lungs from extending to their normal capacity during inhalation. By contrast, a healthy liver permits the lungs to extend into the abdominal region, which puts pressure on the abdomen. Consequently, the abdomen moves forward, as can be seen in healthy babies, especially. Due to the increased expansion of the abdomen during inhalation, blood and lymph are pressed upward towards the heart, which helps maintain proper circulation. An enlarged liver prevents full extension of the diaphragm and lungs, which causes reduced exchange of gases in the lungs, lymphatic congestion and retention of excessive amounts of carbon dioxide in the lungs. The restricted intake of oxygen affects cellular functions throughout the body.

Most people in the industrialized world have an enlarged liver. What is generally considered to be a ‘normal-size’ liver is actually oversized. Once all gallstones are removed through a series of liver flushes, the liver returns to its normal size within about six months.

Almost all diseases of the lungs, bronchi and upper respiratory passages are either caused or worsened by gallstones in the liver, and can be improved or cured by eliminating these stones through the liver cleanse.

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyper link back to the web page