SOURCE: NATURAL NEWS /TRUTH PUBLISHING CARTOON, CREATED BY

MIKE ADAMS: click on to divert to Mike's site.

Sadly, a girl, Natalie Morton aged 14, died this week in the UK (Sept 2009) apparently after having the cervical cancer vaccine. In all cases of death, there may be underlying causes, as there have been with the swine flu deaths noted on mainstream media; however, in OTHER DEATHS worldwide, there are cases where no apparent pathologies were evident - young girls, some very healthy and fit, have died immediately or within a very short period after having the jab. Some have had a history of allergies, and it is interesting that the rise in allergies has also been linked to earlier childhood jabs. Some, as Barbara Loes comments in a video below, may have been killed in car crashes following a sudden seizure after the jab, a known (reported) side-effect.

The news now says (1st Oct 2009) that Miss Morton had underlying health problems, a tumour ... which raises the question why jabsters do not do thorough medical investigations of their patients - no, they're just lined up and jabbed. Time for a serious change in protocol here.

Since hearing about the campaign, I committed many hours chasing up critics' opinions and testing their sources and I came to the conclusion that the campaign was monetarily motivated and pure hype. Some people believe that the FDA had the causation the wrong way around (which I put to my pathology lecturer at the time and, with a gulp, he noted what I said as being tenable): that is, do warts cause cancerous cells or do cancerous cells cause warts? Warts are correlated with cancer, but as any year 10 studying statistics should know, which way the causation lies is not so obvious. My research led to the compilation of a large A4 file on worrying stories, summaries of which I have shared with pupils who may be thinking about (or usually not thinking about) having the jab: most have gone on to have the jab and I respect their decision, but as their teacher I could not conscientiously not share the thoughts I have: so much PROPAGANDA motivates people's decisions that they do not hear or even know about the alternative views.

What is hence disturbing is that girls from the school which Miss Morton attended, are quoted as saying that they did not know that there could be adverse reactions. Why did they not know? IT IS THE DUTY OF EVERY PARENT to research such campaigns carefully - YOUR CHILD'S HEALTH IS AT RISK from any medication and you should check carefully and do your research well before drugs are administered. It should also be THE DUTY OF EVERY HEAD IN THE COUNTRY TO CHECK UP ON THE RISKS, not that drugs should be administered in a school environment anyway. Many parents probably spend more time researching their children's mobile phone deals than checking the risks of mass medication. You can change that! The effects of vaccines are forever, a mobile contract can be changed in very little time. That is not to say that parents are at fault when their children suffer from pharamaceutical side-effects, for most do trust the authorities and their doctors that they are doing the right thing. Our schooling, our media, our tv shows, all run together to emphasise how we should put our trust in experts and especially those in the medical industry. The Greek-Latin words put people off learning medicine, it creates a barrier, but simple terms like 'side-effects' are not difficult to ask about. And since most of us have access to the internet in some form of other, it does not take long to search or to ask a friend to search the 'truth about X drug' or the 'known side effects of X'.

As children we were taught not to take sweets from strangers - does that change if the stranger wears a lab coat?

The science behind vaccines is not exact; the profits to be earned are though. The legends of Jenner and the eradication of small pox are just myths. Jenner's vaccination campaign led to the deaths of tens of thousands of people in the UK before the government BANNED VACCINES (44,000 after a 97% immunisation experiment!)! There have been no studies of the long term health effects of any vaccine - we do not know whether the proliferation of cancers in the human population is due to the vaccines administered in childhood (although there are medical voices commenting that cancers rarely affect those who were unvaccinated) or whether the senile diseases suffered by our elderly relate to the vaccines administered in their childhood. And scientists DO NOT KNOW whether the CV campaign will affect the fertility of the girls in later life. NO EVIDENCE. NO TRIALS. NO SCIENCE.

This is from a Medical Doctor's site in the States:

Edward Jenner, a notorious fake and quack, is credited with having "discovered" vaccination. However, it was a practice of many ancient peoples long before his time. Savage and barbaric tribes in various parts of the world practiced inoculation even before Jenner's time. It is conjectured to have begun in India and then spread to Africa and Europe. Lady Mary Wortley Montague, wife of the British Ambassador to the Ottoman Court in l7l7 introduced the practice to Europe. But, due to its proven evils, one of which was an increase in smallpox in England, the practice was abolished in l840.

It is pertinent that James Phipps, the eight year old boy vaccinated by Jenner in l896, died at the age of 20. He had been re-vaccinated twenty times. Jenner's own son who had also been vaccinated more than once died at the young age of twenty-one. Both succumbed to tuberculosis, a condition that some researchers have linked to the smallpox vaccine. (Eleanor McBean, The Poisoned Needle, 28,29,66 ). SOURCE

And a useful video:

After being told by our health care visitor to 'do some research' into vaccines and after a conversation (for which I am eternally grateful) with a colleague on a course, a man who had never been vaccinated (and who was still alive and well, weird, I thought - surely without vaccines he should have succumbed to all those diseases that we were threatened with), I have spent hours reading articles by critics, medics, and whistleblowers on big pharma; and I have come to the conclusion that there is no proper science behind the jabs and a lot of hype and horror stories in their wake. Here's a report from a medical article online.

April 30, 2009 (Seattle) -- Girls and women who receive the Gardasil vaccine to prevent cervical cancer may be at increased risk of a rare but serious disorder of the nervous system in the first few weeks after getting their shots, researchers report. Overall, the vaccine does not raise the odds of developing Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS), a disorder of the peripheral nervous system, says Nizar Souayah, MD, of the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey in Newark.“But there is clear evidence from our database of an increased incidence of Guillain-Barre syndrome in the first six weeks, especially the first two weeks, after vaccination,” he tells WebMD. SOURCE

What does lie behind the vaccines is politics, power, and money. (See the rap video summary below).

Why are vaccines administered in schools? To assert some kind of control and dominance over the children, to make them feel obliged to take the vaccine. Schools have acted like military training grounds since their inception, and it is not surprising that both the military and the school systems, both of which use control, threats, and force to 'train', are used as vehicles for medical experimentation. IS THE CV DRUG A MEDICAL EXPERIMENT? OF COURSE IT IS - there have been NO LONG TERM FIELD TRIALS ON UNDER 18yr olds, NO FIELD TRIALS ON 13yr OLDS, NO LONGITUDINAL STUDIES. That has to be repeated, for many people assume that people bearing white lab coats and stethoscopes know what they are doing. Not necessarily. A uniform is a cover, a moral cover that hides the responsilbity of the individual behind a collective power - the BMA, AMA, NHS ... the state, and statism is a very pernicious philosophy indeed. It is the same with the army - a man wears a uniform and it confers POWER and hence the implication of force and threat.

We are trained to TRUST people in UNIFORMS. Why?

Millions of girls around the world have placed their bodies and their future health in the hands of people they are supposed to trust - doctors, school administrators, nurses, health visitors. Some of these may sincerely believe that they are doing the good thing by administering a jab; but how many have researched the deaths that have been noted, how many ask pertinent medical questions prior to administering the jab (such as - have you ever had an reactions to any injections prior to this, are they any incidences of cancer or reactions in your family, do you have MS, or other auto-immune conditions in the family (auto-immune conditions have been correlated with vaccines by some critics). Such questions, you may admit, DO NOT BELONG IN A SCHOOL ENVIRONMENT. Vaccines are medical instruments to be administered, if you still think they can do something, in a medical environment.

The following came directly from the FDA adverse website concerning the gardasil vaccine. The piece can be found HERE.

There have been 3,461 reports of adverse events, including a maximum of 11 deaths, in patients receiving Merck’s cervical cancer vaccine Gardasil, public interest group Judicial Watch said.

Since May, the group has found documents detailing 1,824 reports of adverse reactions to Gardasil (quadrivalent human papillomavirus [Types 6, 11, 16, 18] recombinant vaccine), including eight deaths. Before May, Judicial Watch had obtained 1,637 adverse event reports. The group received the data from the FDA through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.

Of the 1,824 adverse events reported between May 10 and Sept. 7, 347 were serious reactions including paralysis, Bell’s palsy, Guillain-Barre syndrome and seizures, according to the group.

Thirty-three out of 77 pregnant women who received the vaccine experienced side effects, including spontaneous abortion and fetal abnormalities, Judicial Watch added.

“In light of this information, it is disturbing that state and local governments might mandate in any way this vaccine for young girls,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said.”

This article is from October of 2007. SOURCE

Below is the publisher review from amazon on Dr Halvorsen's book (see left panel) - it is a good summary that captures why parents need to do more thinking about mass medication programmes:

As we lurch from scare to scare about vaccines, we no longer fully trust what we are being told by doctors. In a series of investigations over seven years into all the new and commonly-prescribed vaccines (including HPV), autism, immune diseases and allergies, Dr Richard Halvorsen spoke to health officials, researchers, fellow doctors and parents. He discovered that vaccines are being given to children without knowing enough about them. Parents are regularly being misguided about vaccine effectiveness and their safety. Doctors are not being provided with the right information. They even live in fear of being seen to challenge perceived wisdom. Medical researchers often find that impartial vaccine research is impossible - those who dare speak-out, risk being discredited. By presenting all the original medical research in an easy, readable form, Dr Halvorsen allows parents to distinguish fact from fiction and make an informed decision about the right choice for their child. This new edition was expanded with two new chapters on autism and new medical and pharmaceutical research, and contains an alternative vaccination schedule for both NHS and private patients. Source: click on the amazon.co.uk ad to the left (no purchase necessary of course!)

My scepticism against vaccines was heightened after reading Edward Hooper's The River, a tome that every medic should read (mine is being borrowed by a medical student at present). Hooper, who runs the aidsorigins site noted below, investigates the theory that AIDS was unleashed by a polio vaccine campaign in the late 1950s. Whether it was inadvertent or not I'll leave readers to conjecture, but Hooper's excellent journalism and research and his own driving scepticism to question everything he considers puts to shame the off-handed and at times arrogant presumptions of innocence that the medical community can be guilty of. More relevantly, his research, which points to the artificial creation of HIV2, illustrates all too well the human element that can motivate scientific research as well as get it its way. His thesis has yet to be demolished by scientific evidence: the evidence so far amassed to find his reasoning at fault does not, in turn, stand up to much scrutiny. Hooper's scrutinising is remarkable - and if there is anything permanent that western civilisation has been built on it's driving scepticism and the freedom of inquiry and thought. We must be free to challenge and to question - experts or otherwise. However, when Big Pharma's revenues run into the billions of dollars and when the links between governments and Big Pharma would embarrass a Roman Senator, our scepticism should be strengthened! (A CV jabster boss sits on OFSTED it has been noted!)

The establishment's view of AIDS' origins is that it came from monkeys biting people, a theory adequately demolished by Hooper in his research (he checked the data, researched the journals); the establishment view of vaccine deaths or neurological pathologies are that they are coincidental. At least Hooper dealt with a reasonable scientific thesis rather than a dismissal of correlation, fact, and theory.

Perhaps for 'most people' taking the cv vaccine, no threat will emerge to their health (but we won't know that for decades and by then the jab apologists may deny and correlation for a myriad of other causes may be said to have come into play); statistically, the odds of a severe reaction are low. Statistically. Note the word state in there, it's there for a reason. Statistics began with William Petty (1623-87) in his Political Arithmetick: the amassing of data to give the government (the Stuart dynasty in Great Britain) greater control over its taxes. Statistics are for the state - they involve the state's interests, and the state's interests, if you've not understood this yet please do pick up a history book or a philosophy book, are not necessarily the same as your interests. That one in a million ('one less' was the Merck marketing campaign!) may be a one in one for you or your child though. What is a small percentage for the state is 100% for you.

When I was contemplating my child's jab programme, I suddenly realised, as others have done, that it was like playing Russian roulette. If there were six chambers and one bullet, would you play the game? What if there were a hundred chambers and one bullet? What if there were a million chambers and one bullet? WHY PICK UP THE GUN IN THE FIRST PLACE??! (A worrying thought when some jabsters are up for mandating putting the gun to the head). So we went vaccine free, and guess what, he's living and healthy and robust and clear eyed and bright. Naturopaths and homeopaths, I have been informed, can tell when a baby has had their vaccines - it's anecdotal of course, but they see dull eyes and then an ensuing history of immune system related problems from allergies through to asthmas to more complicated issues (and potentially autism - there are more Drs than Andrew Wakefield who've made the link there).

The state works on statistics - if a hundred women die from cervical cancer, it is worth inoculating millions out of whom one or two may die, to reduce the mortality from cancer statistic. Quite the sacrificial ethic: the innocent must shed their blood so that others may survive. There is much to unpack in that philosophy, especially the notion that your life is not really yours to live but yours to lay down for medical science or for your unknown neighbour (why do you think wars start...?), but more critically is the assumption that cancer just hops into people uninvited and it's just luck that you don't get it. Really? That's a convenient myth for those who want to sell cancer fighting drugs and jabs...it's not pathology though.

Cancers form all the time in the body, whose 100 trillion odd cells (nobody's really counted them) replicate through varying lifecycles, some of whom may get the wrong code and mutate and become cancerous - they are then, in the healthy body, destroyed and flushed out of the body. However, if the body's immune systems fail, then cancer cells begin to take root and from there unless checked by a radical improvement in the immune system, they may go onto proliferate throughout the body raising the probability of mortality. The critical point is that if the body's natural defences fail, then cancer takes hold. That's why people who have endured chemo and radiotherapies may have the cancer or other issues return: both therapies (which reflect a western view of medicine that diseases and cancers are something to wage war upon, but that's another story) wreck immune systems, and, as with my late uncle's treatment, the issue is what is killed first - the cancerous cells or the entire organism. My uncle died. Some are more lucky and swear by their treatments - that is their experience, but such invasive treatments can cause more harm than good, especially if the immune system is otherwise compromised. Which is why, for cervical cancer, it's not so much the warts that are at fault, but the issues that led to the warts (or the cancer which then permits the warts to flourish - either way, something is failing in the body's ability to tackle a problem). It may be that earlier jabs caused immune issues (the mercury and aluminium therein sitting dangerously in the nervous system - yes, they are dangerous elements to have sitting in neurons), or that lifestyle promoted declining immunity that encouraged cancerous cells to proliferate. Cancers tend to proliferate where cell structures change, where epithelial become squamous cells, these are tenuous areas where they can also be zones (such as the cervical 'neck' region of the vagina) where there may be undue tensions from multiple partners heightened by unprotected sex, poor diet, stress smoking, and/or drug use.

That is, if the body's healthy, free of dis-ease as chiropractors say, as much as disease, and you live a healthy, balanced life and lifestyle avoiding imposing too many modern toxins onto your immune system or pushing your body's abilities to repair to the limits through, then the chances of succumbing to cancer fall. Some medics like Chopra emphasise the power of the mind to help healing (although he does not eschew mainstream techniques such as chemo), others such as Mike Adams on naturalnews.com emphasise the importance of a healthy life style and diet to counterbalance modern life's environmental pressures on immunity. Summarising what I have learned over the past two years, I explain to my students that health is a choice and that healthy options have to be chosen daily (rather than short cut options for sweet fixes let's say); that maintaining health demands some focus and thought on how life is lived and how diet affects our systems; that unhealthy lifestyles (which would include promiscuity, for each partner becomes a new assailant with his/her own sets of bacteria and viruses for the body to become accustomed to, and so more partners means more assaults on immunity as it were!) and unhealthy eating options lead to illness, as does stress and pollution. Taking medicine of any kind should be a last resort and not taken lightly - as I was taught by chiropractic tutors, I am responsible for my immune system. Which implies - not the government, not the chemists, not my parents, nor my teachers. We are responsible to teach our children what is healthy though - we lead by example. Cervical cancer kills; but so too can these jabs. The lifestyle that leads to the former can be altered (especially in the west where famines and wars that seriously compromise the immune system, to say the least, are irregular or non-existent), but the effects of jabs cannot be easily altered. Homeopaths have methods of dealing with vaccine damage, but sometimes the damage may be too far gone. My father-in-law, who worked for Big Pharma, is against vaccines - what goes into the body's systems cannot be taken out, he notes, while a virus can be fought by other means. For Mike Adams and co at naturalnews.com, that implies changing diet and lifestyle, for Chopra that implies changing how we think about our bodies and minds. The two of course merge: think healthy, be healthy, act healthily.

As a father my deepest sympathy goes out to the cv jabsters' latest victim and her family, a sympathy which thrusts aside all political comments, a sympathy laden only with a man's pity.

Dr Alexander Moseley

NOTES, ETC.

While I have put many videos and links on this page to grasp the magnitude of the jabsters' products, Adams provides a detailed account of the cancer vaccine jab's history here:

The Great HPV Vaccine Hoax Exposed 

SOURCES AND OTHER LINKS

LINKS - selective; the comments I make and the facts alluded to can be found from a variety of sources. I try not to throw in cavalier statements not backed by deeper research; I know how to research but I also understand what makes sense logically and politically so I tend to filter the bs from the propaganda from the idiotic theories. Nonetheless, I keep coming back to the conclusion that vaccines are mercantile-political tools, not scientific tools. As a political philosopher and economist, it's easy to sniff out self-interested programmes - and vaccines certainly fall within the criteria. Other critics also note how the Big Pharma companies sponsor world depopulation programmes (hmmmm), a policy that most school children outside of the Catholic schools at least, are told is quite a normal policy for a world of 'limited resources'. Introducing a harmful jab programme may make sense in that respect - albeit from a conspirational angle (and there's nothing wrong with conspiracies per se, it's what they assert and whether there's evidence backing up the assertions are what count!).

http://cervicalcancervaccinetruth.com/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1216714/Schoolgirl-14-dies-given-cervical-cancer-jab.html

(Note in the above article the statistician's apology that overall the benefits outweigh the costs ... FOR WHOM?????)

http://www.nvic.org/

http://www.judicialwatch.org/gardasil

http://www.cynthiajanak.com/Gardasil.html

http://www.naturalnews.com/Report_HPV_Vaccine_1.html

http://www.naturalnews.com/022400.html

http://www.naturalnews.com/024774.html

http://www.naturalnews.com/024129_cancer_cervical_cancer_chronic_stress.html

http://www.aidsorigins.com/

Merck researcher speaks out against the jab

Deaths:

http://www.naturalnews.com/026722_Gardasil_HPV_cervical_cancer.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,325470,00.html

http://www.naturalnews.com/022140.html

http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS123707+09-Feb-2009+BW20090209

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/02/06/eveningnews/main4781658.shtml

Alexander Moseley

Usual caveats apply: get advice from a professional, don't trust me, I'm not 'an expert' in gynaecology or medicine although I've passed undergraduate exams in pathology, anatomy, and physiology to understand enough of what I read; think, do your research, think again. Life today's one big government big business juggernaut and the pain and loss in its wake is horrendous - let's do some thinking for ourselves for a change. Shut the TV off, check different newsites and get your own mind back.

Second caveat - these are opinions and may or may not be condoned by the people and institutions linked to in this article. It's a dumb world, so I'd better put that.