Category : Vaccine Safety

Home/Archive by Category" Vaccine Safety" (Page 5)

Doctor Admits Vaccine Is More Deadly Than Swine Flu Itself & Will Not Give It To His Kids

Bio
Kent Holtorf, M.D. is an expert in natural bioidentical hormone replacement and optimization for women and men, endocrinology, thyroid dysfunction (difficult thyroid cases), fatigue syndromes, adrenal insufficiency, growth hormone replacement, chronic fatigue syndrome, fibromyalgia, chronic infections and multiple endocrine dysfunction.

Dr. Holtorf is diplomate and a board examiner for American Board of Anti-Aging Medicine (ABAAM). As a board examiner, Dr. Holtorf is responsible for administering the oral portion of the board exam and evaluating the physicians’ responses to determine if their knowledge base in endocrinology and natural hormones is high enough to receive board certification in this field. Dr. Holtorf received his doctorate of medicine from St. Louis University with residency training at UCLA.

He has personally trained physicians across the country in the use of bioidentical hormones, hypothyroidism, complex endocrine dysfunction and innovative treatments of chronic fatigue syndrome, fibromyalgia and chronic infectious diseases, including Lyme disease. He was the founding medical director and developed the protocols for Fibromyalgia and Fatigue Centers and other centers across the country. Dr Holtorf is a Guest Editor/Reviewer of a number of medical journals including the journal Endocrine.

Mercury On The Mind Report

Mercury

original link: www.wellcorps.com
By Carter M. Throckmorton

In an escalating chorus of evidence from around the globe, emerging scientific research is providing direct links between amalgam dental fillings and childhood vaccinations and toxic mercury exposure. Various serious immune system and mental disorders such as Alzheimer’s, ADD/ADHD, depression, fibromyalgia, headaches, insomnia and Chronic Fatigue Immune Dysfunction Syndrome/Epstein-Barr Virus, are now believed to have a causative source from the inhalation, ingestion and absorption through mouth and nasal tissue of vaporized mercury contained in tooth fillings, and autism from the ethyl mercury (thimerosol) preservative used in childhood vaccinations.

We’ve all heard the term ‘quack’ when reference is made to an individual with no formal training or experience who tries to represent himself or herself as a medical professional. However, the majority of people in the United States don’t realize that this term was first used in 1812 to refer to the individuals who developed and sold amalgam dental filling material as an affordable and readily-available alternative to gold fillings for the mass public.

Originally opposed by dental societies of the era due to mercury’s known neurotoxic effects associated with the metal’s use in the hat-making trade, some dentists found amalgams of mercury (also known as quicksilver or quecksilber) in combination with silver, copper, tin and/or zinc to be a vast improvement over the molten lead, tin, and gold being used at that time. The quacks, as the mercury-users were called, found mercury amalgams cheap, easy-to-use and hard-setting. As the use of quicksilver increased, quacks formed powerful dental societies and the opposing groups died out.

read entire report here: www.wellcorps.com

Vaccines And Autism: What Can Parents Do During This Controversy?

MMR

original link: www.huffingtonpost.com
By Dr. Bob Sears, author of The Vaccine Book

The debate over vaccine safety rages on, with no clear end in sight. On the one side is a medical establishment made up of hundreds of thousands of doctors, researchers, infectious disease specialists, vaccine manufacturers, the FDA, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and our government, who all insist that vaccines are safe and everyone should comply with the standard recommended vaccine schedule. On the other side is a growing number of parents, and a small but growing number of physicians, who are questioning vaccine safety. Caught in the middle are the 5 million couples who have a baby every year and are faced with the decision of whether or not to vaccinate.

I’ve been studying vaccines for over 16 years, ever since my first child was born. I was in medical school at Georgetown at the time, and since I wasn’t learning much about vaccines there (besides “vaccines good, diseases bad”), I decided to educate myself on all the pros and cons of vaccines. I wanted to know what my son was being given and what the benefits and risks were. After studying everything I could get my hands on, I came to the conclusion that vaccines are effective and generally safe for most children, but that there is a small risk of a serious reaction. This may not seem like any great revelation, as most people agree that vaccines do work (although not 100%, and in some cases as low as 85%), and that most children seem to handle them just fine without harmful effects.

The reason I viewed my conclusion as significant was that back in the 1990s, the party line within the medical community was that vaccines do not cause severe reactions. Reports of seizures, encephalitis, autoimmune reactions, bleeding disorders, and neurological injuries were just coincidence. Vaccines can’t cause that. Now we know differently, and the medical establishment has acknowledged that such reactions can be attributed to vaccines (just read any vaccine product insert). So the party line has changed to the opinion that such severe reactions are so rare that the general population doesn’t (and shouldn’t) need to worry about them. But every parent is still going to worry that their one individual baby is going to be one of those statistics. And that’s an understandable concern.

Merck’s HPV Gardasil Vaccine: Risks, Benefits, Marketing – JAMA

girl vaccine

original link: www.ahrp.org

What possible risk/ benefit standard can justify giving an inadequately studied vaccine whose risks include serious, permanent adverse effects–including death– to millions of girls and women–who will likely never get cervical cancer? Two reports in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) [1][2] and an editorial written by Dr. Charlotte Haug, the editor-in-chief of the Journal of the Norwegian Medical Association, have re-ignited a debate about the rationale of encouraging–in some instances mandating–mass inoculation of women and girls (as young as 11) with the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine.

Below, Dr. Haug raises fundamental medical questions that need to be considered before adopting an invasive medical treatment whose documented risks–including 32 post-vaccination deaths–outweigh the evidence of potential benefits for the populations being targeted for “preventive treatment.”

“Whether a risk is worth taking depends not only on the absolute risk, but on the relationship between the potential risk and the potential benefit. If the potential benefits are substantial, most individuals would be willing to accept the risks. But the net benefit of the HPV vaccine to a woman is uncertain. Even if persistently infected with HPV, a woman most likely will not develop cancer if she is regularly screened. So rationally she should be willing to accept only a small risk of harmful effects from the vaccine.”

Why then is the target population for Merck’s Gardasil HPV vaccine, girls and young women in the US and other industrialized countries who are LEAST at risk of dying from cervical cancer? They are least at risk because they are protected by regular PAP screens that identify early signs which are effectively treatable.

Australia’s Swine-Flu Plan In Disarray As Insurance Companies Balk

Swine Flu Australia

The Australian Government’s plan to immunize the population against swine flu is in chaos because insurers may not cover doctors who administer the jab. Inadequate testing and the possibility of spreading other infections means there is too high a risk patients will sue, say the insurers.

Despite weeks of crisis talks, the government has refused to underwrite doctors’ liability for the vaccinations and medical groups say the program – due to start as early as mid-September – cannot proceed unless doctors are insured.

The president of the Australian Medical Association, Andrew Pesce, said: “The indemnity issue needs to be sorted out or else the vaccination program won’t go ahead … In the environment we’re in, someone has to be held accountable for rare vaccine reactions that may occur …

“If the government decides there is a priority need to roll out the vaccine, then it has a duty to indemnify the doctors who provide it.”

A spokesman for the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners, Ronald McCoy, said the wrangling could undermine community confidence in the vaccine’s safety. “It’s the public’s health that’s at risk here,” he said.

The Health Minister, Nicola Roxon, announced in May an order with vaccine supplier CSL for 21 million doses – enough to protect at least half the population from the flu strain. Analysts’ estimates suggest that contract may be worth up to $120 million.