Online Marketing Toplist
Search Engine Optimization by OnTop SEO Company
Add blog to our blog directory.

Tuesday, March 31, 2015

Herbicides used with GM crops alter antibiotic resistance of disease-causing bacteria

A new study has found that exposure to the herbicides used on GM crops changes how susceptible disease-causing bacteria are to antibiotics. In many cases the bacteria became more antibiotic-resistant, though in other cases they became less so. The study was carried out by Prof Jack Heinemann, Dr Brigitta Kurenbach, and other scientists from New Zealand and Mexico. Below Prof Heinemann and Dr Kurenbach respond to questions from GMWatch.

GMW: What did you find?

Heinemann: When we exposed either of two different species of bacteria to common herbicides that we purchased at a local store, we found that the bacteria changed their response to antibiotics. They often became antibiotic resistant, but we also occasionally saw increased susceptibility or no effect.

GMW: Which herbicides and antibiotics are you talking about?

Kurenbach: We tested commercial formulations of herbicides based on the active ingredients dicamba, 2,4-D and glyphosate. The antibiotics were representative of five major groups: β-lactams (ampicillin), chloramphenicol, tetracycline, fluroquinolones (ciprofloxacin) and aminoglycosides (kanamycin).

GMW: Why does your study matter?

Heinemann: Every day you see in the news that there are concerns about the ever increasing frequency of antibiotic resistance in bacteria that can cause disease in people and our animals. Anything that contributes to this problem should be considered because new antibiotics are rare.

Kurenbach: The effects found may be relevant if people or animals are exposed to herbicides at the higher ranges of concentration, those that occur when it is applied rather than what is normally found on food. Those kinds of exposures may be experienced by, for example, farm animals and pollinators in rural areas and potentially children and pets in urban areas.

Heinemann: And we can’t predict either the direction or size of the observed effects based on bacterial species, antibiotic or herbicide used. Thus, different potential disease-causing bacteria may react differently to the same herbicide or to the same antibiotic.

GMW: Is this the first study to show this?

Kurenbach: We’ve looked hard to find other studies like this, but haven’t found any. Other studies have reported on other substances that also change bacteria's tolerance to antibiotics (e.g. aspirin), but herbicides weren’t used.

GMW: What are the limitations of your study?

Heinemann: While we tested examples from most major groups of antibiotics, there are more individual antibiotics than we could test. And our tests are in the laboratory. We hope to get funding to test environmental samples or bacteria from animals.

Kurenbach: We only tested two species of bacteria. They were laboratory strains of disease-causing species. We’d like to test the response of more species of bacteria.

We provide genetic and biochemical evidence of how the bacteria become resistant or sensitive. But there may be more ways than we have so far described.

GMW: Have these results been replicated?

Heinemann: As part of this study we engaged another scientist at another university in a blinded replication. We sent her the bacteria and chemicals through an intermediary who kept their identities a secret. Using our protocols, she was able to confirm our findings. She also later joined the author team.

The study
Sublethal Exposure to Commercial Formulations of the Herbicides Dicamba, 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic Acid, and Glyphosate Cause Changes in Antibiotic Susceptibility in Escherichia coli and Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium
Brigitta Kurenbach, Delphine Marjoshi, Carlos F. Amábile-Cuevas, Gayle C. Ferguson, William Godsoe, Paddy Gibson, Jack A. Heinemann
mBio 6(2):e00009-15. doi:10.1128/mBio.00009-15.

ABSTRACT Biocides, such as herbicides, are routinely tested for toxicity but not for sublethal effects on microbes. Many biocides are known to induce an adaptive multiple-antibiotic resistance phenotype. This can be due to either an increase in the expression of efflux pumps, a reduced synthesis of outer membrane porins, or both. Exposures of Escherichia coli and Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium to commercial formulations of three herbicides — dicamba (Kamba), 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D), and glyphosate (Roundup) — were found to induce a changed response to antibiotics. Killing curves in the presence and absence of sublethal herbicide concentrations showed that the directions and the magnitudes of responses varied by herbicide, antibiotic, and species. When induced, MICs of antibiotics of five different classes changed up to 6-fold. In some cases the MIC increased, and in others it decreased. Herbicide concentrations needed to invoke the maximal response were above current food maximum residue levels but within application levels for all herbicides. Compounds that could cause induction had additive effects in combination. The role of soxS, an inducer of the AcrAB efflux pump, was tested in -galactosidase assays with soxSlacZ fusion strains of E. coli. Dicamba was a moderate inducer of the sox regulon. Growth assays with Phe-Arg -naphtylamide (PA N), an efflux pump inhibitor, confirmed a significant role of efflux in the increased tolerance of E. coli to chloramphenicol in the presence of dicamba and to kanamycin in the presence of glyphosate. Pathways of exposure with relevance to the health of humans, domestic animals, and critical insects are discussed.

IMPORTANCE Increasingly common chemicals used in agriculture, domestic gardens, and public places can induce a multiple antibiotic resistance phenotype in potential pathogens. The effect occurs upon simultaneous exposure to antibiotics and is faster than the lethal effect of antibiotics. The magnitude of the induced response may undermine antibiotic therapy and substantially increase the probability of spontaneous mutation to higher levels of resistance. The combination of high use of both herbicides and antibiotics in proximity to farm animals and important insects, such as honeybees, might also compromise their therapeutic effects and drive greater use of antibiotics. To address the crisis of antibiotic resistance requires broadening our view of environmental contributors to the evolution of resistance.

Quote De Jour

"The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion"  - Albert Camus 

Sunday, March 29, 2015

The index of leading economic indicators Take HUGE DIP

The composite index – an average of the indices for production, new orders, employment, supplier delivery time, and raw materials inventory – dropped from +3 in January and +1 in February to -4 in March. This ugly trend looks like this:

 Definition: The index of leading economic indicators (LEI) is intended to predict future economic activity. Typically, three consecutive monthly LEI changes in the same direction suggest a turning point in the economy. For example, consecutive negative readings would indicate a possible recession.

Quote De Jour

They wrote in the old days that it is sweet and fitting to die for one’s country. But in modern war there is nothing sweet nor fitting in your dying. You will die like a dog for no good reason. - Ernest Hemingway

Sunday, March 22, 2015

Justice Dept orders banks to CALL THE POLICE if you attempt to withdraw too much of your own cash

This is how the WSJ explained it:
The U.S. Justice Department’s criminal head said banks may need to go beyond filing suspicious activity reports when they encounter a risky customer.
“The vast majority of financial institutions file suspicious activity reports when they suspect that an account is connected to nefarious activity,” said assistant attorney general Leslie Caldwell in a Monday speech, according to prepared remarks. “But, in appropriate cases, we encourage those institutions to consider whether to take more action: specifically, to alert law enforcement authorities about the problem.”
The remarks indicate that banks may be expected to do more than just file SARs, a responsibility that itself can be expensive and time-consuming.
Some banks already have close relationships with law enforcement, said Kevin Rosenberg, chair of Goldberg Lowenstein & Weatherwax LLP’s government investigation and white collar litigation group. Ms. Caldwell’s remarks “speak to moving forward in a more collaborative way,” said Mr. Rosenberg.
A tip-off from a bank about a suspicious customer could lead law enforcement to seize funds or start an investigation, Ms. Caldwell said.
What does this mean, and why is it so critical? Simon Black of International Man explains:
Justice Department rolls out an early form of capital controls in America
Imagine going to the bank to withdraw some cash.
Having some cash on hand is always a prudent strategy, and especially today when more and more bank deposits are creeping into negative territory, meaning that you have to pay the banks for the privilege that they gamble with your money.
You tell the teller that you’d like to withdraw $5,000 from your account. She hesitates nervously and wants to know why.
You try to politely let her know that that’s none of the bank’s business as it’s your money.
The teller disappears for a few minutes, leaving you waiting.
When she returns she tells you that you can collect your money in a few days as they don’t have it on hand at the moment.
Slightly irritated because of the inconvenience, you head home.
But as you pull into your driveway later there’s an unexpected surprise waiting for you: two police officers would like to have a word with you about your intended withdrawal earlier…
If this sounds far-fetched, think again. Because it could very well become a reality in the Land of the Free if the Justice Department gets its way.
Earlier this week, a senior official from the Justice Department spoke to a group of bankers about the need for them to rat out their customers to the police.
What a lot of people don’t realize is that banks are already unpaid government spies.
Federal regulations in the Land of the Free REQUIRE banks to file ‘suspicious activity reports’ or SARs on their customers. And it’s not optional.
Banks have minimum quotas of SARs they need to fill out and submit to the federal government.
If they don’t file enough SARs, they can be fined. They can lose their banking charter. And yes, bank executives and directors can even be imprisoned for noncompliance.
This is the nature of the financial system in the Land of the Free.
And chances are, your banker has filled one out on you—they submitted 1.6 MILLION SARs in 2013 alone.
But now the Justice Department is saying that SARs aren’t enough.
Now, whenever banks suspect something ‘suspicious’ is going on, they want them to pick up the phone and call the cops:
“[W]e encourage those institutions to consider whether to take more action: specifically, to alert law enforcement authorities about the problem, who may be able to seize the funds, initiate an investigation, or take other proactive steps.”
So what exactly constitutes ‘suspicious activity’? Basically anything.
According to the handbook for the Federal Financial Institution Examination Council, banks are required to file a SAR with respect to:
“Transactions conducted or attempted by, at, or through the bank (or an affiliate) and aggregating $5,000 or more…”
It’s utterly obscene. According to the Justice Department, going to the bank and withdrawing $5,000 should potentially prompt a banker to rat you out to the police.
This may be a very early form of capital controls in the Land of the Free. This is the subject of today’s Podcast. You can listen in here.

Wednesday, March 18, 2015

Quote De Jour

"Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear."  - President Harry S. Truman

Moses was a terrorist

Tuesday, March 17, 2015

Bay Area Water Managers Take Home Massive Paychecks During Drought

A new investigation into executive pay at the four largest Bay Area water districts revealed that many of the region’s top water managers take home massive paychecks, despite the onset of a fourth year of drought in California.


According to the Bay Area News Group, the top executives at each of the four largest Bay Area water districts–the San Francisco Public Utility Commission, Contra Costa Water District, East Bay Municipal Utility District, and the Santa Clara Valley Water District–each took home more than double the paycheck of California’s top government official, Gov. Jerry Brown.
Leading the way is EBMUD General Manager Alex Coate, who earned $445,000 in salary and benefits last year, according to the report. Meanwhile, Contra Costa Water District General Manager Jerry D. Brown earned $416,000 last year, and SFPUC manager Harlan Kelly raked in $411,000. Rounding out the top four is SCVWD CEO Beau Goldie, who earned $388,o00 last year. Goldie was the only executive among the four districts whose pay did not exceed $400,000, but that recently changed when the District voted to reward Goldie with a $20,000 bonus and a $10,000 raise.
In comparison, the state’s top government official, Gov. Jerry Brown, reportedly earned $160,000 last year.
The analysis of executive pay comes as three of the four water districts consider customer rate hikes to combat falling revenue due to decreased water usage. Just one district, Contra Costa Water, will cut construction costs and dip into its own cash reserves to avoid raising customer water rates.
Both water district executives and customers alike are not happy about the bloated salaries.
“That’s absurd,” Contra Costa Water District customer John Ferrante told the San Jose Mercury News. “That’s totally out of control. They want us to bear the burden of using less water, the least the managers can do is bear some of the burden by taking less pay.”
Gary Kremen, chairman of the board at Santa Clara Valley Water District, said the district should consider re-examining the generous salaries during the drought.
“I just think it looks really bad, and we’re not leading during an increasingly bad drought,” Kremen told the Mercury News. He added that he was not present at the Board meeting in which CEO Goldie was rewarded $30,000 in bonuses and raises: “I think he should voluntarily give back the whole thing. Send a message. Show leadership.”
Yet it is not just the water district’s general managers who are taking home impressive salaries; according to the data, 86 employees at the EBMUD earned over $250,000 in 2014. Additionally, 19 employees at the SFPUC, 15 at SCVWD, and 14 at CCWD each earned over a quarter-million dollars last year.
EBMUD top executive Alex Coate said that with California struggling through the severe drought, specialized water executives are needed.

Read More Stories About:

Breitbart California, Drought, Environment, Santa Clara Valley Water District, San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, East Bay Municipal Utilities District, Water Districts, Contra Costa Water District

After Ripping Us Off For Years NOW A Bailout for Big Oil?

he Department of Energy said Friday it's considering buying 5 million barrels of oil for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) in a move that could signal a government plan to bolster an industry suffering from collapsing prices.
 The price of oil has fallen precipitously — dropping nearly 60% since June. And while the average American may be appreciating relief at the pump provided by $45-a barrel crude, everyone from the oil companies themselves to the Wall Street financiers that lend to and trade on their business has been panicking over the falling profitability of the industry.

The Strategic Petroleum Reserve was created after the Arab oil embargo of the 1970s as an emergency pool of oil in case of sudden instability. But in recent years, as the US has become less dependent on foreign oil, and thus less vulnerable to fluctuations abroad, there's more often been talk of shrinking the overall reserve.
In March 2014, the US surprised markets by selling off 5 million barrels of oil from the SPR in a test sale, while prices were high, which some interpreted as an attempt to lower prices as a jab at Russia for perceived aggression in Ukraine. And legally, the government is supposed to replace anything sold off within a year.
Some of the funds from the 2014 sale were used to create a gas reserve in the Northeast "in order to address some of the resiliency needs in the region made evident by Superstorm Sandy in 2012," a DOE spokeswoman told Reuters. The funds left over after that project are what is being used for the current low-price buyback.
While it could be construed as simply an attempt to buy low aftering selling high, others see it as a move to help a flagging industry whose profitability may be more of a government concern that the purchasing power of someone filling up a gas tank.
"When the government starts buying crude oil, it's signaling that they're picking a bottom for the market," Carl Larry, director of business development at Frost & Sullivan told Reuters. "This has to be more of a financial play."
While it remains to be seen what impact this will have on the oil market, for perspective, 5 million barrels is just over half of a day's production in the US at current rates. The SPR is the largest emergency supply of oil in the world with a capacity for over 700 million barrels.
The crude would be bought for delivery sometime in June or July most likely, though some may arrive as early as May.
After a five-year boom in production and a decrease in foreign oil imports, the government is expected to consider decreasing the overall size of the SPR. Any such plans are expected to be part of the DOE's quadrennial energy review, due to be released in the coming weeks.

Saturday, March 14, 2015

A Voice From 200 years Ago - Describes TODAY In US

If we run into such debts as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for our callings and our creeds, as the people of England are, our people, like them, must come to labor sixteen hours in the twenty--four, and give the earnings of fifteen of these to the government for their debts and daily expenses; And the sixteen being insufficient to afford us bread, we must live, as they do now, on oatmeal and potatoes, have no time to think, no means of calling the mismanagers to account; But be glad to obtain subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains around the necks of our fellow sufferers; And this is the tendency of all human governments. A departure from principle in one instance becomes a precedent for a second, that second for a third, and so on 'til the bulk of society is reduced to mere automatons of misery, to have no sensibilities left but for sinning and suffering...and the forehorse of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follows that, and in its train wretchedness and oppression. - Thomas Jefferson 

Friday, March 13, 2015

PG&E threatens to disconnect 84 yr. old woman’s power for refusing smart meter extortion fees

Lois MayaSanta Cruz CA- Utility giant PG&E is threatening to turn off the power to Lois Robin, an 84 year old woman from Santa Cruz because she’s refusing to pay “opt-out” fees for keeping an analog meter.
PG&E sent Lois a 15 day shut off notice in February, stating she owed $115. On Friday she received a message they will cut off her power today if she doesn’t pay.
Lois writes, “I have always paid all my bills, except the opt-out fees. I insisted on keeping my old meter. They did not give me a new one. I have been on record all along as refusing a smart meter.  I am 84 years old, with rapidly deteriorating vision. I would not want them to disconnect me as I get along poorly without light. Yet, I would rather they turned me off than pay their extractive fees.”
PG&E claims they have legal authority granted by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to collect the fees.  Emails between PG&E and the CPUC recently made public expose collusion, cover-up, multiple exparte violations and the broken regulatory process by which smart meter opt-out fees were concocted.  Smart meter opt-out fees were fabricated between the CPUC and PG&E long before the evidentiary hearings on costs began.
For example, PG&E’s Brian Cherry, Vice President of Regulatory Relations, emails Marzia Zafar, a CPUC Program and Project Supervisor, that PG&E wants to eliminate the initial smart meter opt out fee of $75. He writes, “They never received a SmartMeter and therefore, we can’t really charge them an upfront removal fee since we haven’t removed anything yet.”  Cherry goes on to explain that PG&E also did not feel people who were forced to have a smart meter should pay either, because of the delay list was created after the deployment. Emails show Zafar was the informant to the Commissioners. CPUC President Peevey had an intimate role in deciding the fees. The CPUC ignored PG&E’s request to eliminate the initial fee. http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Eliminate-initial-smart-meter-fee.pdf 
In 2011, The County of Santa Cruz passed an ordinance banning smart meters, but PG&E deployed smart meters anyway. Lois Robin is one of many, who refuse to be coerced into paying the fees. Lois says, “This has been very stressful. PG&E doesn’t listen to you. Talking to PG&E is like talking to automatons.”
This entry was posted in Hall of Shame, PG&E, smart meters. Bookmark the permalink.

Tuesday, March 10, 2015

COVER-UP: US Navy sailors disappear as government, doctors bury truth about Fukushima radiation

NaturalNews) U.S. Navy sailors exposed to radioactive fallout from the Fukushima nuclear disaster have been falling ill, even as the Defense Department insists that they were not exposed to dangerous levels of radiation. Many of the sailors have now joined in a class action lawsuit against Fukushima operators and builders Tokyo Electric Power Company (Tepco), Toshiba, Hitachi, Ebasco and General Electric.

Even if they wanted to -- which many do not -- the sailors would be unable to sue the Navy. According to a Supreme Court ruling from the 1950s known as the Feres Doctrine, soldiers cannot sue the government for injuries resulting directly from their military service.

Mocked and attacked

On March 11, 2011, a massive earthquake and tsunami triggered multiple meltdowns at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan. It was the worst nuclear disaster in history, releasing twice as much radioactive material as the 1986 Chernobyl disaster.

That same day, the aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan was redirected to the coast of Japan to participate in relief work for tsunami survivors. When sailors from the ship later began to fall ill, Congress asked the Defense Department for a report on the issue. The Pentagon report concluded that the sailors had not been exposed to enough radiation or contaminated water to cause health effects.

Yet in the four years since the disaster, at least 500 sailors have fallen ill, and 247 of them have joined the class-action suit. The 100-page legal complaint chronicles their symptoms: an airplane mechanic suffering from unexplained muscle wasting; a woman whose baby was born ill; a sailor told his health problems must be genetic, even though his identical twin is perfectly healthy; and case after case of cancer, internal bleeding, abscesses, thyroid dysfunction and birth defects.

The defendants initially claimed that they could not be sued in a U.S. court, so plaintiffs' attorney Paul Garner asked the sailors to come to a court hearing in San Diego, to offer moral support.

Nearly all of them refused, for fear of public attack. Initial plaintiff Lindsey Cooper, for example, had already been mocked by atomic energy experts on CNN and by conservative radio hosts. Others were afraid of being perceived as anti-military, or un-American.

Powerful interests at stake

Only one plaintiff was willing to show up: Lieutenant Steve Simmons. Once a triathlon runner, Simmons fell ill a year after returning from Japan, suffering from hair loss, muscle wasting, migraines, bloody discharge and incontinence. His fingers turned yellow or even brown, and his feet have now turned dark red. He suffers from whole-body spasms and must now use a wheelchair.

He has never received a diagnosis for his problems, and sometimes he wonders if his Defense Department doctors are deliberately withholding one, so that the Department need not be held responsible. One doctor, he said, told him it would be better if he didn't know the cause of his illness.

Disturbingly, Spiegel Online reported:

Early on, [Simmons] was in a military hospital in Washington DC together with three other men who had similar symptoms, he says. They had served on nuclear-powered submarines, but they disappeared from one day to the next, and when he asked what happened to them, everyone acted as though they had never been there in the first place.

Simmons believes that the Navy meant to do good with the mission to Japan, and does not blame USS Ronald Reagan's commander, Captain Thom Burke, for what happened to him. But he is troubled by Burke's silence now, he says. He believes that Burke will not speak out about the case because he hopes to become an admiral.

"Personal, diplomatic and economic interests are all at stake," Simmons said. "They're leaving us alone. They're closing their eyes, keeping quiet and waiting for it to blow over. There are sick soldiers everywhere, many in the hospital in San Diego, or in the medical center in Hawaii. They are ordinary folks who are poorly insured, with family and kids. Loyal and scattered. Most of them don't know how to react. Those who raise their voices are denounced in the Internet for being unpatriotic. You have to put up with a lot."

Sources for this article include:



Monday, March 9, 2015

United Nations Exposes Chemtrails 100% PROOF We Are Being Poisoned

Bet You Didn't Know

You probably remember the photo of Hillary Clinton posed with known cocaine smuggler Jorge Cabreras, right?
 I'll bet you didn't know there was a photo of Al Gore posed with the same guy, did you?

Pic De Jour

Same delusional people who say vaccines are safe also insist GMOs, glyphosate, aspartame, mercury and radiation are safe, too

(NaturalNews) If vaccines are perfectly safe as we're all told by the "institutional liars" of our delusional era, then why did Congress create a Vaccine Injury Compensation Program which has paid out nearly $3 billion in financial compensation to families of children who were provably injured by vaccines?

If vaccines don't harm anyone as we are constantly told, then why does this government vaccine injury table exist which explains:

In accordance with section 312(b) of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, title III of Pub. L. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3779 (42 U.S.C. 300aa-1 note) and section 2114(c) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300aa-14(c)), the following is a table of vaccines, the injuries, disabilities, illnesses, conditions, and deaths resulting from the administration of such vaccines, and the time period in which the first symptom or manifestation of onset or of the significant aggravation of such injuries, disabilities, illnesses, conditions, and deaths is to occur after vaccine administration for purposes of receiving compensation under the Program.

Remarkably, most Americans have no idea there even exists a Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. The media mostly ignores it, pretending it doesn't exist in precisely the same way the media pretends there's no mercury in vaccines (even though there still is).

And if you really want proof that vaccines are dangerous because of the toxic chemicals they still contain, just consider this hilarious fact: Hillary Clinton says vaccines are safe. Yep, and she wants all her emails to be made public, too, so that you can find out how the Clinton Foundation has been funded with millions of dollars from terror-linked anti-American governments known for committing "violence against women" explains the New York Times.

Anyone who's stupid enough to inject themselves with a toxic cocktail of chemicals recommended by Hillary Clinton might even be brain damaged enough to vote for another Clinton... or another Bush, for that matter. (Have you realized it's all theater yet?)

Vaccines are made dangerous by the toxic additives

Virtually all informed people have already come to the realization that vaccines are far less than perfectly safe for the simple reason that they contain mercury, MSG, formaldehyde, aborted human fetal tissue and other bizarre chemicals -- none of which are medically necessary in a vaccine in the first place.

Vaccine manufacturers add these chemicals to vaccines on purpose. They want them in the formula! And instead of removing the toxic chemicals and manufacturing "clean vaccines" that would meet almost no resistance from the public, they instead got Congress to grant the industry absolute legal immunity so that they could continue to sell flawed products that repeatedly harm children, teens and adults. How's that for corporate ethics?

If there's anyone who hasn't yet awakened to the origins of the present-day vaccine fanaticism and measles scaremongering hoax, here's something very important to consider:

The same people claiming vaccines are safe also claim all the following toxic chemicals and poisons are safe, too:

• Mercury
• Aspartame
• GMOs
• Fluoride
• Atrazine
• Glyphosate (Roundup)
• Fukushima radiation
• Statin drugs
• Antidepressant drugs
• Chemotherapy
• Fracking chemicals

In fact, vaccine pushers have never met a chemical or heavy metal they didn't absolutely love! And they're sure that infants, children and pregnant women are perfectly safe to be injected with unlimited quantities of vaccines, because that's what the corporate-funded fraudulent science says.

Their logic is utterly irrational and bizarre, of course. They argue that aluminum is safe to inject into children because there's also aluminum in Tums antacids, for example. This is the logical equivalent to arguing that because there's lead in brown rice, it is therefore safe to inject children with lead, too.

Fluoride fanatics also attempt to invoke the same twisted logic. Because fluoride is a "naturally-occurring mineral," they claim, it's a great idea to artificially inject toxic forms of fluoride into the water supply to "restore the mineral." This, too, is the logical equivalent of arguing for more arsenic in the water supply because arsenic is also a "naturally-occurring mineral." Perhaps next we'll see fluoride advocates calling for arsenic, lead, cadmium and mercury to be added to the water supply, too.

But wait: Vitamin C, midwives and medicinal herbs are all "dangerous"

The same people pushing vaccines, fluoride and GMOs as "safe" also attack everything from the natural world, condemning those things are "dangerous."

What kind of things do the vaccine, GMO and fluoride pushers say are dangerous?

• Midwives
• Vitamin C
• Organic agriculture
• Traditional Chinese Medicine
• Medicinal herbs
• Chiropractic care
• Food self-reliance
• Preparedness ("preppers")

Anything that actually protects and enhances your individual health, you see, is relentlessly attacked by the delusional "science screamers" who ridiculously believe that science is determined by who screams the loudest rather than who has the most compelling and logical evidence.

Absolute opposition to medical freedom, Gandhi, natural medicine and free speech

It's not just natural things like vitamin C that the vaccine pushers insist are dangerous: they also have a deep philosophical investment in ideas like medical fascism, the suppression of scientific reality and the destruction of human rights.

That's why they also strongly oppose:

• Medical freedom and personal choice.

Gandhi and his vaccine resistance movement.

• Free speech about medicine.

• Parenthood and the right for a parent to decide what's best for their child.

• The Bill of Rights and American freedoms.

• Anyone who still believes in civil rights, human rights and human dignity.

• Intelligent questions of any kind concerning vaccines, GMOs, medications or fluoride.

Absolute support for forced medication, criminalization of naturopaths, and outlawing all herbs and vitamins

At the same time, vaccine pushers strongly support all the following ideas, many of which are rooted in eugenics and "medical Marxism":

• Forced mass medication of the public by dripping medications into the water supply.

• The outlawing or heavy regulation of all vitamins, herbs and natural medicines.

• The criminalization and arrest of all who practice natural medicine: Herbalists, alternative cancer clinic doctors, etc.

• Mandatory organ harvesting from all citizens upon their death, to solve the "organ donor shortage" crisis.

• Death panels: A society where the government decides how long you live and then euthanizes you upon reaching a certain age.

• The elimination of free speech about medicine and health and the suppression of any discussion of natural cures on the internet. (Google, anyone?)

• Forced depopulation to reduce the global population and thereby "save the planet."

• The use of human children as guinea pigs for medical experiments.

• The imprisoning of Americans who disagree with the corporate-funded "scientific consensus" delusions of the day.

• Egomaniacal arrogance of poison pushers who are so convinced their drugs / vaccines / fluoride / GMOs are so incredibly amazing that every person on the planet should be forced to consume them at gunpoint... for their own good, of course, because the poison pushers are so compassionate.

So the next time hear some corporate-bribed TV scientist utter the delusional words "Vaccines are safe!", ask them what they had for lunch. You'll probably learn it was a toxic stew of genetically modified, artificially colored, partially-hydrogenated soybean oil processed food product laced with pesticides and flavored with MSG. Yep, for people like this, poisoning the entire world is nothing more than a reflection of what they've already done to themselves. No wonder they're so angry all the time!

Sunday, March 8, 2015

Cartoon De Jour

NYPD Says Innocent, Unarmed People Shot By Cops Are ‘Walking Into Police Bullets’

New York Police Department official Zachary Tumin has been placed in charge of the NYPD’s social media p̶r̶e̶s̶e̶n̶c̶e̶ propaganda. But the Deputy Commissioner doesn’t seem to be helping things for the infamously militarized police department that former Mayor Bloomberg rightly termed a “private army.”
Recently, Tumin gave the world a glimpse into the warped psyche of police brutality. He tweeted that innocent people shot by cops have “gone off their meds” and are “walking into police bullets.”
While there is certainly a real and tragic phenomenon as “suicide-by-cop,” Tumin suggested that officers innocently fire their weapons in one direction and those hit are simply “deranged” people who walk into the line of fire.
Was Tumin talking about people “walking into bullets” like the nine bystanders shot by NYPD “soldiers” outside of the Empire State Building back in 2012? Perhaps he meant people “walking into bullets” like the bystanders shot when the NYPD opened fire on a crowded Manhattan street near Times Square in 2013 and shot a woman in the knee and another in the buttocks. These people were innocent, unarmed, and victims of trigger-happy police who had been called to deescalate a situation. Far from doing what they were called to do, they escalated things and shot many more people than who otherwise would have been shot.
Just to clarify, no, Tumin’s comments were not in any way related to the “suicide-by-cop” phenomenon, which accounts for very few police shootings, and even fewer instances of suicide. Instead, he was responding to an article about cops who escalate situations with people they were called to help, like Tanisha Anderson, who Cleveland, Ohio cops restrained face down, and then slammed on the concrete – killing her in front of her family – even though the police had been called to help deescalate the situation.
Unfortunately, Tumin has made his Twitter account private, so that only people he approves as followers can read his tweets from here on out. That’s why we screen captured his horrific commentary, and saved the page… just in case he tries to deny that these were his words.
(Article by M. David)

Share This Article...

Saturday, March 7, 2015

[BANNED VIDEO] Police Gone Wild: Domestic Terrorist Edition

My original video upload was taken down by youtube under the guise of "copyright infringement" but then later reinstated after I proved my use of the material was legal.

Friday, March 6, 2015

March 2015 Settlements in Vaccine Court: 117 Vaccine Injuries and Deaths

by Brian Shilhavy
Health Impact News Editor
The Depart of Justice issues a report on vaccine injuries and deaths every quarter to the Advisory Commission on Childhood Vaccines. This March 5, 2015 report states that there were 117 cases for vaccine injuries and deaths compensated from 11/16/2014 to 2/15/2015.
92 of the settlements were listed in the report, giving the name of the vaccines, the injury, and the amount of time the case was pending before settlement. Five of those settlements were for deaths linked to vaccines, with three deaths related to the flu shot. 73 of the 92 settlements were for injuries and deaths due to the flu shot, and the majority of flu shot injuries were for Guillain-Barré Syndrome.
These quarterly reports on vaccine injuries and death settlements from the U.S. vaccine court are seldom, if ever, reported in the mainstream media. We report them here at Health Impact News. Here is the March 5, 2015 report:

 Most of the U.S. Public is Unaware of the Vaccine Court

In November of 2014 the Government Accounting Office (GAO)  issued the first report on America’s “Vaccine Court,” known as the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP), in almost 15 years. Most citizens of the United States are not even aware that there is something called the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, and that if you suffer harm or death due to a vaccine, that you cannot sue the manufacturer of the vaccine, but you must sue the Federal Government and try to obtain compensation from the Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund, which is funded by taxes paid on vaccines.
The November 2014 GAO report criticized the government for not making the public more aware that this program exists, and that there are funds available for vaccine injuries. Therefore, the settlements represented by vaccine injuries and deaths included in the DOJ report probably represent a small fraction of the actual vaccine injuries and deaths occurring in America today.

The Federal Vaccine Court is Not Helping Victims of Vaccine Injuries and Vaccine Deaths

But even for those families and individuals who are aware of the NVICP, fighting a legal battle that can take years to get access to the funds ensures that many who do file claims never get any of the funds reserved for vaccine injuries. That fund, the Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund, is currently over $3.5 billion, largely because the U.S. Government refuses to even hear cases related to autism which would quickly deplete the fund. (See: How the Government has Earned $3.5 BILLION from the Claim that Vaccines Don’t Cause Autism.)
Wayne Rohde, author of the book The Vaccine Court: The Dark Truth of America’s Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, explains how the NVICP is no longer a viable justice venue for the vaccine injured as Congress intended it to be. (See: GAO Report on Vaccine Court Reveals Vaccine Injured Victims Not Being Helped.)

Lies, Fraud, and Corruption Mar U.S. Vaccine Policy

The unified message presented by the U.S. mainstream media and certain government agencies is that vaccines are safe.
This is a lie. Vaccines are dangerous. People are injured and killed by vaccines, and the quarterly reports from the DOJ, which probably reflects a very small percentage of the actual cases, clearly reflect that inherent danger.
So many people were being injured and killed by vaccines in the 1980s, that the pharmaceutical companies petitioned Congress to pass legislation giving them legal immunity from cases in civil court. They basically blackmailed Congress by threatening to get out of the vaccine business if such legislation was not passed.
Congress obliged in 1986, and today we have the NVICP, while new vaccines entering this “protected” and “guaranteed” market have soared. The largest purchaser of vaccines is the CDC, purchasing over $4 billion worth of vaccines a year.
In addition, the U.S. Government holds patents on some vaccines, and earns royalties on them, such as the Gardasil vaccine. Julie Gerberding was in charge of the CDC from 2002 to 2009, which includes the years the FDA approved Gardasil as a vaccine. Soon after she took over the CDC, she reportedly completely overhauled the agency’s organizational structure, and many of the CDC’s senior scientists and leaders either left or announced plans to leave. Some have claimed that almost all of the replacements Julie Gerberding appointed had ties to the vaccine industry.
Gerberding resigned from the CDC on January 20, 2009, and is now the president of Merck’s Vaccine division, a 5 billion dollar a year operation, and the supplier of the largest number of vaccines the CDC recommends (article here).
In 2014 Dr. William Thompson, a senior epidemiologist at the CDC who co-authored and published research on the MMR vaccine for the CDC back in 2004, made the decision to become a whistleblower and reveal data that was concealed by the CDC linking the MMR vaccine to autism among African American boys. In addition, Merck has been involved in a long federal lawsuit with allegations of fraud over the mumps portion of the MMR vaccine, in a case filed back in 2010 by two whistleblowers, virologists who worked for Merck. Merck has apparently tried hard to get this case thrown out of court, and keep this news out of the media, but late in 2014 a federal judge finally ruled that the case is to move forward. (See: Why is the Mainstream Media Ignoring Measles Vaccine Fraud Cases?)

Conclusion: Do Not Trust what the Government Says About Vaccines

The U.S. government has massive conflicts of interest where it concerns policies related to the vaccine industry. Before you make a potential life-changing decision for you or your children by agreeing to be vaccinated, do your own research. The government cannot be trusted on vaccine matters, and the mainstream media and many doctors are also not doing their own research related to the vaccine industry. Be informed and educated regarding vaccines, before you become a statistic among the vaccine injured and dead.
Previous DOJ reports on vaccine injuries and deaths.
Read this article and comment at VaccineImpact.com

Saying NO To Vaccines
By Dr. Sherri Tenpenny
You have legal options!
saying no to vaccines

Supreme Court Rules that Cops DO NOT Need a Warrant to Search Your Home

In another devastating blow to freedom, the Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that police don’t need a warrant to search your property. As long as two occupants disagree about allowing officers to enter, and the resident who refuses access is then arrested, police may enter the residence.
“Instead of adhering to the warrant requirement,” Ginsburg wrote, “today’s decision tells the police they may dodge it, nevermind ample time to secure the approval of a neutral magistrate.” Tuesday’s ruling, she added, “shrinks to petite size our holding in Georgia v. Randolph.”
Georgia v. Randolph was a similar case the Supreme Court addressed in 2006, in which a domestic violence suspect would not allow police to enter his home, though his wife did offer police consent. The police ultimately entered the home. The Court ruled in the case that the man’s refusal while being present in the home should have kept authorities from entering.
“A physically present inhabitant’s express refusal of consent to a police search [of his home] is dispositive as to him, regardless of the consent of a fellow occupant,” the majority ruled in that case.
The majority, led by Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., said police need not take the time to get a magistrate’s approval before entering a home in such cases. But dissenters, led by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, warned that the decision would erode protections against warrantless home searches. The court had previously held that such protections were at the “very core” of the 4th Amendment and its ban on unreasonable searches and seizures, reports the LA Times.
According to the AP, Justice Samuel Alito wrote the court’s 6-3 decision holding that an occupant may not object to a search when he is not at home.
“We therefore hold that an occupant who is absent due to a lawful detention or arrest stands in the same shoes as an occupant who is absent for any other reason,” Alito said.
In other words, you have no property rights slave, and we can snoop through your personal belongings if we wish.
The implications for such a Stasi-esque interpretation of the 4th Amendment are staggering. This can and will open the door to even more unscrupulous police behavior. They will only need to say that someone may be in danger, and now they are justified in ransacking your home.
While this doesn’t particularly allow for police to choose and enter any home they wish, it is nothing to be downplayed, especially since Justice Ginsburg, one of their own, even stated that this could lead to even more erosion of what is left of the 4th Amendment.

Wednesday, March 4, 2015

Children Around the World Vaccinated at Gunpoint – Is the U.S. Heading in the Same Direction?

A health worker gives a polio vaccine to a child in Peshawar, Pakistan. Photograph: Mohammad Sajjad/AP
by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News
The Guardian is reporting that health officials in Pakistan are arresting and throwing into jail hundreds of parents who refuse to allow their children to receive the oral polio vaccine. These health officials are forcing children to receive the vaccine at gunpoint, as can be seen in the photo captured by AP photographer Mohammad Sadjad.
The Guardian reports:
Feroz Shah, a spokesman for the district administration in Peshawar, said 471 people had been imprisoned in the city and surrounding villages under government orders on charges of endangering public security.
Parents targeted by police were not arrested if they agreed to vaccinate their children, said Shakirullah Khan, a senior police officer in Peshawar.
Authorities have previously made scattered arrests for polio refusals, but such a widespread crackdown is rare.
“This is the first time such drastic action was taken,” Shah said. “This shows the determination of the government to eradicate polio.”
Just to emphasize the point here, these are parents of children who are being rounded up and thrown into jail in Pakistan. Not terrorists, not murders, not thieves, but parents who do not want their children to receive the polio vaccine.
As can be seen in the photo above, the oral polio vaccine is being given right on the street, and not in a clinic. How many times were these children forced to receive this vaccine? How would the health worker even know the vaccine history of these children? Do they have pre-existing conditions that would make the vaccine a risk to harm them?
It would seem such basic health questions could not be answered when the order is to vaccinate every child by force right on the street, with no objections allowed.

Is There a Polio “Epidemic” in Pakistan?

Last year (2014) polio made headline news because the World Health Organization (WHO) declared it was now an “epidemic” in certain parts of the world, and Pakistan was claimed to be an area especially hard hit. As usual, “anti-vaccine parents” were blamed for this world-wide “epidemic.”
So how bad was this polio “epidemic” that WHO declared in 2014? In May of 2014, when they made the announcement which was carried as headline news in most U.S. mainstream media outlets, there had been 74 cases – in the ENTIRE WORLD. 59 of those cases were in Pakistan at the time. Today, as of Feb. 25, 2015, there have been 10 cases so far worldwide, but 9 of those are in Pakistan.  I could find no cases of any deaths worldwide due to polio in recent years.
Leading Causes of Death Worldwide2
Polio compared to the top 10 leading causes of death worldwide, according to WHO.
Is this an “epidmec” of gloal proportions? Is this justification for authorities to roam the streets in Pakistan and force people by gunpoint to receive the vaccine, and throw hundreds of parents into jail if they don’t comply? The measles “epidemic” in the United States pales by comparison in terms of absurdity in using such fear tactics to justify forced vaccinations. One must ask: Who is actually profiting from this?
UNICEF, which partners with WHO for global vaccine purchases and distribution, is one of the largest purchasers of vaccines for worldwide distribution. In 2013, for example, they purchased 1.7 billion doses of the live oral polio vaccine to administer to children under the age of 5.

The Oral Polio Vaccine is Banned in Western Countries Due to Dangerous Side Effects

The oral polio vaccine is so dangerous that it is no longer used in developed countries like the U.S. But, it is mandated, purchased, and distributed in poor countries.
The real tragedy with the live oral polio vaccines is that they can cause the very thing they are supposed to be preventing: polio. Both “vaccine-associated paralytic poliomyelitis” and “non-polio acute flaccid paralysis” are known side effects of the live oral polio vaccine. It sheds the virus from the vaccine through feces and into sewers and sanitation systems. India recently achieved its “polio-free” status, but at the cost of tens of thousands of non-polio acute flaccid paralysis cases each year (see: The Vaccine Myth of “Polio-free” Status – Polio Vaccine Caused 53,000 Paralysis Victims in India Last Year.)
The oral polio vaccine is so easy to administer, even non-doctors can give it. Bill Gates administering the oral polio vaccine in India.
Doctors and researchers who understand the dangers and risks of the oral polio vaccine (OPV) have been calling for an end to this terrible vaccine for years now. An editorial appeared in the Oxford Journals Clinical Infectious Diseases periodical in 2005 titled, “When Can We Stop Using Oral Poliovirus Vaccine?” It was written by Dr. Harry F. Hull of the Minnesota Department of Health, and Dr. Philip D. Minor of the Division of Virology, National Institute for Biological Standards and Control, in the United Kingdom. They requested that the oral polio vaccine be stopped:
Why must OPV vaccination be stopped? Vaccine-associated paralytic poliomyelitis was recognized shortly after the introduction of OPV, with cases occurring in both vaccines and their contacts. The time is coming when the only cause of polio is likely to be the vaccine used to prevent it. Ample molecular data are now available to demonstrate that vaccine viruses can revert to full neurovirulence. Outbreaks of polio in China, Egypt, Haiti, Madagascar, and the Philippines caused by circulating, neurovirulent vaccine-derived polioviruses (VDPVs) demonstrate that these revertent strains are fully transmissible and pose significant population risks. (Source.)
Again, in 2009, an editorial was published in the Oxford Journals Clinical Infectious Diseases periodical titled, “Time for a Worldwide Shift from Oral Polio Vaccine to Inactivated Polio Vaccine“, by Dr Aamir Shahzad of the Department of Structural Biology and Biomolecular Chemistry at the University of Vienna. He wrote:
OPV has lost its effectiveness in providing herd immunity. It seems that children are getting polio from OPV, and it also seems that OPV is proving to be ineffective in stopping polio transmission from another source. Therefore, the whole world—and especially developing countries—should shift from OPV to IPV. (Source.)

Who are the Vaccine Dissenters in Pakistan?

The pro-pharma western media in places like the U.S. like to paint vaccine-dissenters in places like Pakistan as ignorant, poor people who need to be forced into a vaccination program against their will for the “greater good” of society. However, is this actually true? Just as is the case in the U.S., researchers and health professionals are not unified in their views on vaccination policies.
Karim Khan is a freelance journalist in Pakistan who has written about the sentiment towards western pharmaceutical companies and the World Health Organization in regards to mass vaccination programs. Writing in the Express Tribune last year, one of Pakistan’s leading English language publications, he wrote:
Is it the ignorance regarding both the disease and the science of the medicine that worries critical thinkers? Yes, but more so it is the lack of freedom of questioning in a country that has effectively given itself to a form of slavery by so-called non-profit international organisations that earn millions from vaccination campaigns. The recent imposition of travel restrictions on Pakistanis as “recommended” by the World Health Organisation (WHO) are more than proof of such slavery.
Worse though is the one-sided media reporting that uses language as a tool to shape voice of dissent as “propaganda” by running headlines with terms like “anti-polio” campaigns when the questions raised are in fact directed at the safety of the vaccine claimed to be effective against polio. The important question is: are parents made aware of the risks significantly early to let them make an informed decision on vaccinating their child? (Source: Polio vaccine: Is it really as safe as it is claimed to be?)

What is the Future of Mandatory Vaccinations in the U.S.?

Could we see armed health officials roaming the streets of cities in the U.S. forcing children to be vaccinated against the wishes of their parents at gunpoint?
The rationale and the legal framework for such actions is actually already in place to do just that. As we reported last month (February 2015), the Department of Homeland Security is quietly stockpiling billions of dollars worth of experimental vaccines to presumably use in the case of a “national emergency.” The U.S. government has broad powers granted to them to force people to receive these vaccines by declaring an “epidemic” or “national emergency.” (See: Homeland Security Stockpiling Billions of Dollars of Experimental Vaccines.)
All across the U.S. local state legislators and health officials are moving to take away the right to informed consent regarding vaccines for children. It Americans don’t wake up soon, whether you are pro-vaccine or anti-vaccine, and stop this rush to take away individual rights and liberties, it may not be long before the photo you see at the top of this story represents what is happening in the streets of America, with thousands of parents being arrested and thrown into jail for refusing to comply with mass vaccination programs.
The National Vaccine Information Center has an Advocacy Portal to help you keep updated on proposed legislation in your state attempting to take away your freedom to chose medical procedures like vaccines.
Sign up for alerts from NVIC Advocacy Portal for your state!
Advocacy Portal banner
Read this article and comment at VaccineImpact.com
Saying NO To Vaccines
By Dr. Sherri Tenpenny
You have legal options!
saying no to vaccines
Free Shipping Available! Order here.

Tuesday, March 3, 2015

Pic De Jour

Quote De Jour

"Germans who wish to use firearms should join the SS or the SA - ordinary citizens don't need guns, as their having guns doesn't serve the State."  - Heinrich Himmler 

Monday, March 2, 2015

If vaccines are safe, why has the US gov. paid out $3 BILLION to vaccine-injured families?

(NaturalNews) Vaccines are a very imperfect science, despite the good intentions of healthcare providers and parents seeking to protect their children from disease. Adverse, life-changing and deadly effects of vaccines are more common than ever. In fact, the US government has had to pay out over $3 billion to vaccine-injured families since 1986. Still think vaccines are safe?

The Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) lists several negative outcomes of vaccines. Many of these side effects are worse than the diseases these vaccines are for! VAERS reports that the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine is "linked to febrile seizures, which are a type of seizure that occurs in infants and young children in association with fever." While these seizures hold no long-term consequences, they can be a frightening experience.

Worse yet, VAERS reports that a whole slew of vaccines, including MMR, varicella zoster, influenza, hepatitis B, meningococcal and tetanus "are linked to anaphylaxis." Anaphylaxis shock can lead to sudden death. Many of these cases are under-reported, filed as SIDS, or sudden infant death syndrome.

Injection, regardless of vaccine type, is associated with loss of shoulder motion and fainting

The committee that studied these horrific vaccine effects "also found convincing evidence of a causal relationship between injection of vaccine, independent of the antigen involved, and
two types of adverse events, including syncope, or fainting, and deltoid bursitis, or frozen shoulder, characterized by shoulder pain and loss of motion."

Just the mere act of injecting viruses and sterilizing agents poses severe risks, since the body is not designed receive these vaccine ingredients without first processing them through the normal route of body filters (including the skin, mucous membranes, gastrointestinal tract, kidneys and liver), or at all. It seems that putting these ingredients directly into the blood can easily create an adverse health event. The committee also found that the MMR vaccine often elicits joint pain in both children and adults.

The flu, which can easily be overcome with a strong immune system, is mild compared to some of the adverse effects associated with the flu vaccine. These effects include conjunctivitis, facial swelling and upper respiratory symptoms, including coughing and wheezing.

US Vaccine Court bypasses the true judicial process, protecting vaccine makers while paying off families affected by vaccine-induced autism

What no one completely understands is how the overload of vaccinations in the 21st century is a contributing factor to the rise of autism spectrum diagnoses (which is now a greater problem than the diseases we are trying to fight).

While the autism debate rages on, silently, the US Vaccine Court, established in 1986, has awarded several families large cash settlements after confirming that their child likely did become autistic because of vaccine(s).

This separate kangaroo vaccine court allows the vaccine manufacturers and pharmaceutical companies absolute immunity from true prosecution. The government handles their cases and pays families off with an excise tax collected from the sale of... you guessed it... vaccines. It's a vicious circle that circumvents the true judicial process. This dishonest system protects the profits of vaccine makers and doesn't hold them accountable for their harmful products. The excise tax the government uses to pay off families affected by vaccines is garnered by collecting $0.75 for every vaccine dose purchased by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

In a true court of law, these adverse effects of vaccines would be put on trial. The vaccines would be investigated as a harm to the public, and the drug makers would be held accountable. Sadly, that's just not the case, and that's why so many people believe vaccines are safe today.

Here are three examples (of many recorded) linking vaccine damage to autism and encephalopathy

Here are three examples where the US Vaccine Court awarded compensation to families whose children were harmed by vaccines, resulting in autism or autism symptoms.

Richelle Oxley: DPT shot reaction: post-pertussis vaccine encephalopathy

"[N]o evidence to overcome the strong probability that the DPT was the most likely cause. ... Richelle's disabilities include autistic-like behavior, hyperactivity, and partially controlled seizures. ... The court finds further that all other statutory requirements have been met, and concludes that petitioners are entitled to compensation for injuries sustained as a result of the DPT vaccine administered on July 30, 1979."

Hannah Poling: MMR vaccine

"Court ruled in favor of compensation due to the significant aggravation of child's pre-existing mitochondrial disorder based on an MMR vaccine Table presumptive injury of encephalopathy, which eventually manifested as chronic encephalopathy with features of autism spectrum disorder and a complex partial seizure disorder as a sequelae."

Eric Lassiter: DPT vaccine

"Eric was completely healthy prior to a DPT booster. His is a 'known case of static encephalopathy after DPT immunization.' Based on the court's own findings of fact and the reasons proffered by Dr. Lichtenfeld, the court concludes that Eric, more likely than not, sustained an encephalopathy and that the first manifestation of onset of the injury occurred within the Table time frame."

Sources for this article include