12945544 science of vaccine damage

8/3/2019 12945544 Science of Vaccine Damage

1/35

Why Do 160,000 Cats Each Year in the USA Develop Terminal

Cancer at Their Vaccine Injection Sites

Dogsadversereactions:

Science of Vaccine DamageA team at Purdue University School of Veterinary Medicine conducted several studies(1,2) to determine if vaccines can cause changes in the immune system of dogs that mightlead to life-threatening immune-mediated diseases. They obviously conducted thisresearch because concern already existed. It was sponsored by the Haywood Foundationwhich itself was looking for evidence that such changes in the human immune

system might also be vaccine induced. It found the evidence.

The vaccinated, but not the non-vaccinated, dogs in the Purdue studies developedautoantibodies to many of their own biochemicals, including fibronectin, laminin, DNA,albumin, cytochrome C, cardiolipin and collagen.

This means that the vaccinated dogs -- but not the non-vaccinated dogs-- wereattacking their own fibronectin, which is involved in tissue repair, cell multiplication andgrowth, and differentiation between tissues and organs in a living organism.

The vaccinated Purdue dogs also developed autoantibodies to laminin, which is involvedin many cellular activities including the adhesion, spreading, differentiation, proliferationand movement of cells. Vaccines thus appear to be capable of removing the naturalintelligence of cells.

Autoantibodies to cardiolipin are frequently found in patients with the serious diseasesystemic lupus erythematosus and also in individuals with other autoimmune diseases.The presence of elevated anti-cardiolipin antibodies is significantly associated with clotswithin the heart or blood vessels, in poor blood clotting, haemorrhage, bleeding into theskin, foetal loss and neurological conditions.

The Purdue studies also found that vaccinated dogs were developing autoantibodies totheir own collagen. About one quarter of all the protein in the body is collagen. Collagenprovides structure to our bodies, protecting and supporting the softer tissues andconnecting them with the skeleton. It is no wonder that Canine Health Concern's 1997study of 4,000 dogs showed a high number of dogs developing mobility problems shortlyafter they were vaccinated (noted in my 1997 book, What Vets Don't Tell You AboutVaccines).


2/35

Perhaps most worryingly, the Purdue studies found that the vaccinated dogs haddeveloped autoantibodies to their own DNA. Did the alarm bells sound? Did thescientific community call a halt to the vaccination program? No. Instead, they stuck theirfingers in the air, saying more research is needed to ascertain whether vaccines can causegenetic damage. Meanwhile, the study dogs were found good homes, but no long-term

follow-up has been conducted. At around the same time, the American VeterinaryMedical Association (AVMA) Vaccine-Associated Feline Sarcoma Task Force initiatedseveral studies to find out why 160,000 cats each year in the USA develop terminalcancer at their vaccine injection sites.(3) The fact that cats can get vaccine-inducedcancer has been acknowledged by veterinary bodies around the world, and even theBritish Government acknowledged it through its Working Group charged with the task oflooking into canine and feline vaccines(4) following pressure from Canine HealthConcern. What do you imagine was the advice of the AVMA Task Force, veterinarybodies and governments? "Carry on vaccinating until we find out why vaccines arekilling cats, and which cats are most likely to die."

In America, in an attempt to mitigate the problem, they're vaccinating cats in the tail or

leg so they can amputate when cancer appears. Great advice if it's not your cat amongstthe hundreds of thousands on the "oops" list.

But other species are okay - right? Wrong. In August 2003, the Journal of VeterinaryMedicine carried an Italian study which showed that dogs also develop vaccine-inducedcancers at their injection sites.(5) We already know that vaccine-site cancer is a possiblesequel to human vaccines, too, since the Salk polio vaccine was said to carry a monkeyretrovirus (from cultivating the vaccine on monkey organs) that produces inheritablecancer. The monkey retrovirus SV40 keeps turning up in human cancer sites.

It is also widely acknowledged that vaccines can cause a fast-acting, usually fatal, disease

called autoimmune haemolytic anaemia (AIHA). Without treatment, and frequently withtreatment, individuals can die in agony within a matter of days. Merck, itself amultinational vaccine manufacturer, states in The Merck Manual of Diagnosis andTherapy that autoimmune haemolytic anaemia may be caused by modified live-virusvaccines, as do Tizard's Veterinary Immunology (4th edition) and the Journal ofVeterinary Internal Medicine.(6) The British Government's Working Group, despitebeing staffed by vaccine-industry consultants who say they are independent, alsoacknowledged this fact. However, no one warns the pet owners before their animals aresubjected to an unnecessary booster, and very few owners are told why after their pets dieof AIHA.

A Wide Range of Vaccine-induced Diseases

We also found some worrying correlations between vaccine events and the onset ofarthritis in our 1997 survey. Our concerns were compounded by research in the humanfield.

The New England Journal of Medicine, for example, reported that it is possible to isolatethe rubella virus from affected joints in children vaccinated against rubella. It also told of


3/35

the isolation of viruses from the peripheral blood of women with prolonged arthritisfollowing vaccination.(7)

Then, in 2000, CHC's findings were confirmed by research which showed thatpolyarthritis and other diseases like amyloidosis, which affects organs in dogs, werelinked to the combined vaccine given to dogs.(8) There is a huge body of research,despite the paucity of funding from the vaccine industry, to confirm that vaccines cancause a wide range of brain and central nervous system damage. Merck itself states in itsManual that vaccines (i.e., its own products) can cause encephalitis: braininflammation/damage. In some cases, encephalitis involves lesions in the brain andthroughout the central nervous system. Merck states that "examples are the encephalitidesfollowing measles, chickenpox, rubella, smallpox vaccination, vaccinia, and many otherless well defined viral infections".

When the dog owners who took part in the CHC survey reported that their dogsdeveloped short attention spans, 73.1% of the dogs did so within three months of avaccine event. The same percentage of dogs was diagnosed with epilepsy within three

months of a shot (but usually within days). We also found that 72.5% of dogs that wereconsidered by their owners to be nervous and of a worrying disposition, first exhibitedthese traits within the three-month post-vaccination period.

I would like to add for the sake of Oliver, my friend who suffered from paralysed rearlegs and death shortly after a vaccine shot, that "paresis" is listed in Merck's Manual as asymptom of encephalitis. This is defined as muscular weakness of a neural (brain) originwhich involves partial or incomplete paralysis, resulting from lesions at any level of thedescending pathway from the brain. Hind limb paralysis is one of the potentialconsequences. Encephalitis, incidentally, is a disease that can manifest across the scalefrom mild to severe and can also cause sudden death.

Organ failure must also be suspected when it occurs shortly after a vaccine event. DrLarry Glickman, who spearheaded the Purdue research into post-vaccination biochemicalchanges in dogs, wrote in a letter to Cavalier Spaniel breeder Bet Hargreaves:

"Our ongoing studies of dogs show that following routine vaccination, there is asignificant rise in the level of antibodies dogs produce against their own tissues.Some of these antibodies have been shown to target the thyroid gland, connectivetissue such as that found in the valves of the heart, red blood cells, DNA, etc. I dobelieve that the heart conditions in Cavalier King Charles Spaniels could be theend result of repeated immunisations by vaccines containing tissue culturecontaminants that cause a progressive immune response directed at connective

tissue in the heart valves. The clinical manifestations would be more pronouncedin dogs that have a genetic predisposition [although] the findings should begenerally applicable to all dogs regardless of their breed."

I must mention here that Dr Glickman believes that vaccines are a necessary evil, but thatsafer vaccines need to be developed.


4/35

Meanwhile, please join the queue to place your dog, cat, horse and child on the Russianroulette wheel because a scientist says you should.

Vaccines Stimulate an Inflammatory Response

The word "allergy" is synonymous with "sensitivity" and "inflammation". It should, by

rights, also be synonymous with the word "vaccination". This is what vaccines do: theysensitise (render allergic)an individual in the process of forcing them to developantibodies to fight a disease threat. In other words, as is acknowledged and accepted, aspart of the vaccine process the body will respond with inflammation. This may beapparently temporary or it may be longstanding.

Holistic doctors and veterinarians have known this for at least 100 years.

They talk about a wide range of inflammatory or "-itis" diseases which arise shortly aftera vaccine event. Vaccines, in fact, plunge many individuals into an allergic state. Again,this is a disorder that ranges from mild all the way through to the suddenly fatal.Anaphylactic shock is the culmination: it's where an individual has a massive allergicreaction to a vaccine and will die within minutes if adrenaline or its equivalent is notadministered.

There are some individuals who are genetically not well placed to withstand the vaccinechallenge. These are the people (and animals are "people", too) who have inherited faultyB and T cell function. B and T cells are components within the immune system whichidentify foreign invaders and destroy them, and hold the invader in memory so that theycannot cause future harm. However, where inflammatory responses are concerned, theimmune system overreacts and causes unwanted effects such as allergies and otherinflammatory conditions.

Merck warns in its Manual that patients with, or from families with, B and/or T cellimmunodeficiencies should not receive live-virus vaccines due to the risk of severe orfatal infection. Elsewhere, it lists features of B and T cell immunodeficiencies as foodallergies, inhalant allergies, eczema, dermatitis, neurological deterioration and heartdisease. To translate, people with these conditions can die if they receive live-virusvaccines. Their immune systems are simply not competent enough to guarantee a healthyreaction to the viral assault from modified live-virus vaccines.

Modified live-virus (MLV) vaccines replicate in the patient until an immune response isprovoked. If a defence isn't stimulated, then the vaccine continues to replicate until itgives the patient the very disease it was intending to prevent.

Alternatively, a deranged immune response will lead to inflammatory conditions such asarthritis, pancreatitis, colitis, encephalitis and any number of autoimmune diseases suchas cancer and leukaemia, where the body attacks its own cells.

A new theory, stumbled upon by Open University student Gary Smith, explains whatholistic practitioners have been saying for a very long time. Here is what a few of theholistic vets have said in relation to their patients:


5/35

Dr Jean Dodds: "Many veterinarians trace the present problems with allergic andimmunologic diseases to the introduction of MLV vaccines..." (9)

Christina Chambreau, DVM: "Routine vaccinations are probably the worst thing that wedo for our animals. They cause all types of illnesses, but not directly to where we wouldrelate them definitely to be caused by the vaccine." (10)

Martin Goldstein, DVM: "I think that vaccines...are leading killers of dogs and cats inAmerica today."

Dr Charles E. Loops, DVM: "Homoeopathic veterinarians and other holistic practitionershave maintained for some time that vaccinations do more harm than they providebenefits." (12)

Mike Kohn, DVM: "In response to this [vaccine] violation, there have been increasedautoimmune diseases (allergies being one component), epilepsy, neoplasia [tumours], aswell as behavioural problems in small animals." (13)

A Theory on Inflammation

Gary Smith explains what observant healthcare practitioners have been saying for a verylong time, but perhaps they've not understood why their observations led them to say it.His theory, incidentally, is causing a huge stir within the inner scientific sanctum. Somebelieve that his theory could lead to a cure for many diseases including cancer. For me, itexplains why the vaccine process is inherently questionable.

Gary was learning about inflammation as part of his studies when he struck upon a theoryso extraordinary that it could have implications for the treatment of almost everyinflammatory disease -- including Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, rheumatoid arthritis and even

HIV and AIDS.Gary's theory questions the received wisdom that when a person gets ill, theinflammation that occurs around the infected area helps it to heal. He claims that, inreality, inflammation prevents the body from recognising a foreign substance andtherefore serves as a hiding place for invaders. The inflammation occurs when at-riskcells produce receptors called All (known as angiotensin II type I receptors). He says thatwhile At1 has a balancing receptor, At2, which is supposed to switch off theinflammation, in most diseases this does not happen.

"Cancer has been described as the wound that never heals," he says. "All successfulcancers are surrounded by inflammation. Commonly this is thought to be the body's

reaction to try to fight the cancer, but this is not the case.

"The inflammation is not the body trying to fight the infection. It is actually the virus orbacteria deliberately causing inflammation in order to hide from the immune system[author's emphasis]." (14)

If Gary is right, then the inflammatory process so commonly stimulated by vaccines isnot, as hitherto assumed, a necessarily acceptable sign. Instead, it could be a sign that the


6/35

viral or bacterial component, or the adjuvant (which, containing foreign protein, is seenas an invader by the immune system), in the vaccine is winning by stealth.

If Gary is correct in believing that the inflammatory response is not protective but a

sign that invasion is taking place under cover of darkness, vaccines are certainly not

the friends we thought they were. They are undercover assassins working on behalf

of the enemy, and vets and medical doctors are unwittingly acting as collaborators.

Worse, we animal guardians and parents are actually paying doctors and vets to

unwittingly betray our loved ones.

Potentially, vaccines are the stealth bomb of the medical world. They are used to catapultinvaders inside the castle walls where they can wreak havoc, with none of us any thewiser. So rather than experiencing frank viral diseases such as the 'flu, measles, mumpsand rubella (and, in the case of dogs, parvovirus and distemper), we are allowing theviruses to win anyway - but with cancer, leukaemia and other inflammatory orautoimmune (self-attacking) diseases taking their place.

The Final Insult

All 27 veterinary schools in North America have changed their protocols for vaccinatingdogs and cats along the following lines; (15) however, vets in practice are reluctant tolisten to these changed protocols and official veterinary bodies in the UK and othercountries are ignoring the following facts.

Dogs' and cats' immune systems mature fully at six months. If modified live-virusvaccine is giver after six months of age, it produces immunity, which is good for the lifeof the pet. If another MLV vaccine is given a year later, the antibodies from the firstvaccine neutralise the antigens of the second vaccine and there is little or no effect. Thelitre is no "boosted", nor are more memory cells induced.

Not only are annual boosters unnecessary, but they subject the pet to potential risks suchas allergic reactions and immune-mediated haemolytic anaemia.

In plain language, veterinary schools in America, plus the American Veterinary MedicalAssociation, have looked at studies to show how long vaccines last and they haveconcluded and announced that annual vaccination is unnecessary.(16-19)

Further, they have acknowledged that vaccines are not without harm. Dr Ron Schultz,head of pathobiology at Wisconsin University and a leading light in this field, has beensaying this politely to his veterinary colleagues since the 1980s. I've been saying it for thepast 12 years. But change is so long in coming and, in the meantime, hundreds of

thousands of animals are dying every year - unnecessarily.

The good news is that thousands of animal lovers (but not enough) have heard whatwe've been saying. Canine Health Concern members around the world use real food asNature's supreme disease preventative, eschewing processed pet food, and minimise thevaccine risk. Some of us, myself included, have chosen not to vaccinate our pets at all.Our reward is healthy and long-lived dogs.


7/35

It has taken but one paragraph to tell you the good and simple news. The gratitude I feeleach day, when I embrace my healthy dogs, stretches from the centre of the Earth to theUniverse and beyond.

About the Author:

Catherine O'Driscoll runs Canine Health Concern which campaigns and also delivers aneducational program, the Foundation in Canine Healthcare. She is author of Shock to the

System (2005; see review this issue), the best-selling book What Vets Don't Tell You

About Vaccines (1997, 1998), and Who Killed the Darling Buds of May? (1997; reviewed

in NEXUS 4/04).

She lives in Scotland with her partner, Rob Ellis, and three Golden Retrievers, named

Edward, Daniel and Gwinnie, and she lectures on canine health around the world.

For more information, contact Catherine O'Driscoll at Canine Health Concern, PO Box

7533, Perth PH2 1AD, Scotland, UK, email [email protected] , website

http://www.canine-health-concern.org.uk.

Shock to the System is available in the UK from CHC, and worldwide from Dogwise athttp://www.dogwise.com.

Endnotes1. "Effects of Vaccination on the Endocrine and Immune Systems of Dogs, Phase II",Purdue University, November 1,1999, athttp://www.homestead.com/vonhapsburg/haywardstudyonvaccines.html.

2. See www.vet.purdue.edu/epi/gdhstudy.htm.

3. See http://www.avma.org/vafstf/default.asp.

4. Veterinary Products Committee (VPC) Working Group on Feline and CanineVaccination, DEFRA, May 2001.

5. JVM Series A 50(6):286-291, August 2003.

6. Duval, D. and Giger,U. (1996). "Vaccine-Associated Immune-Mediated HemolyticAnemia in the Dog", Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine 10:290-295.

7. New England Journal of Medicine, vol.313,1985.See also Clin Exp Rheumatol 20(6):767-71, Nov-Dec 2002.

8. Am Coll Vet Intern Med 14:381,2000.

9. Dodds, Jean W.,DVM, "Immune System and Disease Resistance", athttp://www.critterchat.net/immune.htm.

10. Wolf Clan magazine, April/May 1995.

11. Goldstein, Martin, The Nature of Animal Healing, Borzoi/Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.,1999.

12. Wolf Clan magazine, op. cit.


8/35

13. ibid.

14. Journal of Inflammation 1:3,2004, at http://www.journal-inflammation.comcontent/1/1/3.

15. Klingborg, D.J., Hustead, D.R. and Curry-Galvin, E. et al., "AVMA Council on

Biologic and Therapeutic Agents' report on cat and dog vaccines", Journal of theAmerican Veterinary Medical Association 221(10):1401-1407, November 15,2002,http://www.avma.org/policies/vaccination.htm.

16. ibid.

17. Schultz, R.D., "Current and future canine and feline vaccination programs", Vet Med93:233-254,1998.

18. Schultz, R.D., Ford, R.B., Olsen, J. and Scott, P., "Titer testing and vaccination: anew look at traditional practices", Vet Med 97:1-13, 2002 (insert).

19. Twark, L. and Dodds, W.J., "Clinical application of serum parvovirus and distempervirus antibody liters for determining revaccination strategies in healthy dogs", J Am VetMed Assoc 217:1021-1024,2000.

What Vets Dont Tell You About Vaccines

This is a subject I have researched in depth- the results of this research are carried in the

book, 'What Vets Don't Tell You About Vaccines'. Before I start, I want to make onething totally clear. I am not asking you to stop vaccinating your beloved animals. I don'tbelieve that any human being has the right to dictate that sort of thing to another humanbeing. However, I do believe that you have the right to the facts so that you can make aninformed choice.

FACT ONE:The first fact is this: Annual vaccination is fraud. Strong stuff, eh? There is absolutely


9/35

no scientific basis for annual vaccination. It was just a practice that was started manyyears ago, probably because the shots weren't working and someone had the bright ideato kekep repeating it in case it helped. In fact, we have discovered that, far from helping,annual vaccination is destroying our animals' immune systems. This is widely known inscientific circles - but vets are reluctant to look at the evidence too closely die to potential

lost booster income. I am sorry to say this but long years of campaigning allow me todevelop no othe conclusion. The vets who have read my book they take it very seriously.However, most refuse to read it.

"Once immunity to a virus exists, it persists for years or life." Dr. Donald D. Schultz,head of patholbiology at Wisconsin University. My own six-year-old Golden Retriever -Gwinnie -gives a good example of this. Gwinnie was vaccinated ONLY as a puppy. Wegot her when she was five months old, already vaccinated. She was never vaccinatedagain. Last year, at the age of six, Gwinnie had a blood test and this revealed that she stillhas high antibody levels to distemper and parvo. The advice from Professor Hal Thomsonat Glasgow University was "no need to revacciate." After SIX years.

Dr Jean Dodds in America has just completed study that shows much the same thing.You don't NEED to keep vaccinating your dogs. There is one exception, and this is theleptospirosis component of the vaccine. Lepto is a bacteria, not a virus, and you can't getpermanent immunity to a bacteria. However, the vaccine has been described as uselessand there have been many calls for it to be withdrawn from the market. There arehundreds of strains of leptospirosis, but only two in vaccine, AND it provides immunity(if at all) for only between three and six months. This means that your dog is probablyunprotected against the two strains for around nine months of the year, and against all theother hundreds of strains for ever. Australian research shows that the lepto component ofvaccines can cause horrendous side-effects, so top veterinary immunologists,microbiologists and pathobiologists have advised we don't use it.

FACT TWO:

Vaccines [b]can[/b] cause a whole range of diseases.

*[b]Skin problems[/b]: Frock and Brooks, in 1983, showed that dogs who weregenetically susceptible to develop atopic dermatitis ONLY contracted the conditions IFthey were vaccinated before being exposed to an allergen. So -vaccines trigger skindisease.

*[b]Arthritis[/b]: there are many, many sudies which show that vaccines can cause

arthritis. Vaccine components have even been found in the bones of arthritis sufferers.

*[b]Cancer[/b]: Vaccine components have been found at the cancer sites of victims.Worse, they have been found at the cancer sites of the CHILDREN of the people whoreceived the guilty vaccine. In other words, vaccines can cause inheritable cancer.

*[b]Leukemia[/b]: Dr Jean Dodds has linked leukemia to vaccines. Also, Merck, avaccine manufacturer, has linked leukemia to a leukemia-like retrovirus found in birds.Merck was investigating the link between this retrovirus and the eggs they cultivated the


10/35

measles vaccine on. Distemper and measles are virtually the same virus, and bothvaccines are cultivated on chick embryos.

*[b]Aggression[/b]: Vaccines are acknowledged to cause inflammation of the brainand, in severe cases, lesions in the brain and throughout the central nervous system. This

condition, known as encephalitis, lies at the root of much aggressive and violentbehavior, autism, epilepsy, attention deficit disorder, and other neurological conditions(for example, CDRM, Ataxia, ect.).

*[b]Autoimmune disease[/b]: It is widely acknowledged that vaccines can cause awhole range of autoimmune diseases, such as Cushings disease, Addisons disease,thyroid disease, autoimmune hemolytic anemia, and many others.

The scientific evidence is there for anyone who wants to look at it. Dr. Larry Glickman atPurdue University has found that routinely vaccinated dogs develop auto antibodies to awide range of their own biochemicals. This means that vaccines cause dogs to attack their

own bodies - which is what autoimmune disease is all about.

FACT THREE:

Some animals are genetically predisposed to suffer fatal reactions to vaccines, or todevelop vaccine-induced disease. The Merck Manual (the doctors bible, published by avaccine manufacturer) says that children with B and/or T cell immune deficiencies shouldnot receive live virus vaccines as the vaccine can stimulate a severe or FATAL infection.Not to put too fine a point on it, 'fatal' means death. Merck explains that features of B andT cell immune deficiencies include eczema, dermatitis, heart disease, inhalant allergies,food allergies and neurological conditions. They say that humans suffering with any ofthese conditions, or from families with these conditions, should not receive live virusvaccines because the vaccine can kill them. Our dogs also have B and T cells, and B andT cell immune deficiencies. So if your dog has allergies, or heart problems, orneurological problems . . . . . .vaccines represent a life threatening risk.

FACT FOUR:

Vaccines cause more diseases than they prevent. This is the one the scientists arecurrently arguing about. You can probably guess which way I've fallen on the debate. Inmy humble opinion, vaccination is probably the worst thing we can do for someone welove. Obviously, this is a scary statement. Let me tell you a little about why I'm heresaying this to you. Oliver, a beautiful Golden Retriever, lost the use of his back legs oneday when he was four years old. We rushed hm to the vet but he was dead by four that

afternoon. For two years, I asked every vet I met 'why?' No one could tell me until I met ahomeopathic vet called Chris Day, and he asked me when Ollie had last been vaccinated.He told me it was a classis vaccine reaction, failing within three months of the shot. Sincethen I have met many people whose dogs died in exactly the same way. Prudence,another Golden Retriever, died of leukemia when she was six. The last time I vaccinatedher, her eyes rolled in her sockets, and she climbed up on my back, begging me not tohave it done. But we carried on because I thought it was good for her. Distemper andparvo are horrible diseases, of course - but so is leukemia. You don't want to see a dog


11/35

die this way. Samson's back legs were paralyzed the day after his second puppy shot. Ithought maybe someone had put poison down because I didn't know vaccines could dothis. The next year he was boosted, and his head swelled up like a football and he ranaround screaming - I now know that this was a massive allergic reaction to the vaccine.At the age of two we had a blood test done, and it came back autoimmune disease. He

died of cancer at the age of five. Having studied the scientifuc evidence, I know thatSammie was killed the day a vaccine destroyed his immune system. Edward and Danielare three-year-old Golden Retrievers. Neither has ever been vaccinated. Not once. Theyare the healthiest two Goldens I have ever had the privilege to share my life with. Nosickness, no diarrhea, no allergies, no illness. The vet doesn't know who they are - theyhave only ever visited to have their blood tested (both have antibodies to distemper andparvo......which means they've met the diseases but not succumbed). They also went tothe vets a few weeks ago to have ticks removed. The vet remarked on how fit andhealthy they were. But that's it - their entire veterinary history at the age of three.

Compare this with Samson's veterinary history! I was literally at the vet every two weeks

with Sammie. Edward and Daniel are fed real food -raw meaty bones, vegetables, etc.This means that they have optimal immune systems, so they are in a good position tofight any viruses or bacterias that come along. They also receive the homeopathic vaccinealternative. When they were nine months old, my older vaccinated dogs contractedkennel cough. My two homeopathically protected pups didn't cough once. A few daysago on the CHC discussion list, one of our members reported meeting two 17 year oldGolden Retrievers on the beach. Both ran and jumped around like young ones. The ownertold her that they had never been vaccinated and, as he was a butcher, he had fed themraw meat. Seven years into the campaign, we are beginning to see the results of notvaccinating and feeding real food. Canine Health Concern members are now constantlylreporting that their dogs are incredibly healthy, and those who show are winning at all theshows.

Don't blame the 'irresponsible breeders' - blame vaccines. Without vaccines, you toocan hope for long-lived friends who get through their lives without the cripplingdebilitating diseases that have become common in the dog population.

One last fact: Vaccines don't offer GUARANTEED immunity. Nearly all of the dogsin the CHC vaccine survey -which involved over 4,000 dogs and is still ongoing -contracted distemper, parvo, lepto, hepatitis, etc, within three months of beingvaccinated.

I know this article is going to upset many people and I apologize for this. My motivationis that you don't have to sit and watch your beloved friends die years before their time, orsuffer from any of the many vaccine-induced diseases. We ar making a terrible mistakeon behalf of our animal friends. What we think is best for them is in fact the worst thingwe can do. I am not alone in saying this --the very top veterinary specialists agree. Wejust need to get the other vets up to date. I promise you this - annual vaccination iscoming to an end. We will look back in horror at what we used to do !!!


12/35

Article by: Catherine O'Driscoll (Printed in TNT Magazine)

Turning the world on its head, Catherine O'Driscoll gives you - ordinary dog owners andlovers - the information that vets won't or can't tell you. Her aim is to share the truth sothat dog lovers everywhere can make informed choices about the well-being of the petsthey treasure. In fact the risks are much higher than are admitted. When is it right tovaccinate, when not to vaccinate? This book reveals the answers. There is solid scientificresearch to demonstrate that vaccines can be harmful. This book gives the researchedfacts about:

vaccines that can cause encephalitis, an inflammation of the brain - encephalitishas many diverse symptoms, usually involving a highly sensitised state such asallergies, skin problems, behavioural problems, convulsions, eating disorders, and

more.

vaccines that are mixed with deadly poisons. vaccines that can cause the diseases they are designed to prevent. vaccines that shed into the environment, spreading disease. vaccines that disarm and unbalance the immune system. vaccines which need and do not need annual usage .

The following is taken word for word from Kirk's Current

Veterinary Therapy XI (Small Animal Practice), page 205,

1992.

Authors:

Tom R Phillips, DVM, Ph.D.Associate MemberThe Scripps Research Institute

La Jolla California

Ronald D Schultz, Ph.D.Professor and Chairman

Department of Pathobiological Sciences


13/35

School of Veterinary MedicineUniversity of Wisconsin

Annual Vaccination A practice that was started many years ago and that lacks scientificvalidity or verification is annual revaccinations. Almost without exception there is noimmunologic requirement for annual revaccination. Immunity to viruses persists for yearsor for the life of the animal. Successful vaccination to most bacterial pathogens producesan immunologic memory that remains for years, allowing an animal to develop aprotective anamnestic (secondary) response when exposed to virulent organisms. Onlythe immune response to toxins requires boosters (eg: tetanus in humans), and no toxinvaccines are currently used for dogs or cats. Furthermore, revaccination with most viralvaccines fails to stimulate an anamnestic (secondary) response as a result of interferanceby existing antibody (similar to maternal antibody interferance). The practice of annualvaccination in our opinion should be considered of questionable efficacy unless it is usedas a mechanism to provide an annual physical examination or is required by law (ie:rabies vaccinations in some states).

Dr. Ronald D. Schultz, Ph.D., D.V.M.

For those of you not familiar with Dr. Schultz I should mention that he is recognized as apioneer in clinical immunology and vaccinology. As Professor and Chair of Departmentof Pathobiological Sciences at the School of Veterinary Medicine, University ofWisconsin-Madison his work is well known in both the allopathic and holisticveterinarian communities.

CANINE VACCINATION

Catherine ODriscoll

The arguments for vaccination are fairly straightforward: they are designed to protect ourdogs (and other species) from infectious diseases. Without vaccines, the pro-vaccinatorsargue, diseases like rabies, distemper, parvovirus, and so on, would still be at epidemicproportions. No-one wants their dog to die of parvovirus or distemper - but neither wouldwe want our dogs to die of leukaemia or organ failure while they're young, or to suffer

from crippling diseases for half of their lives. Yet this is what vaccines are capable ofdoing to them.

Ask yourself this question: why do we need to vaccinate our dogs every year? Do wevaccinate our children annually? One vet phoned me recently from overseas. Having readmy book, Who Killed the Darling Buds of May? What Vets Don't Tell You AboutVaccines, he told me that it confirmed many of the fears he has had over the years. Healso said that when he qualified as a vet in the early '70s, he was told annual vaccination


14/35

was unnecessary, but that the vaccine companies approached vets in the '80s, suggestingthat annual vaccination would boost their practice income and provide an opportunity foran annual checkup. He told me that they knew it was fraud at the time, but they wentalong with it.

Dr Ronald D Schultz, one of the foremost veterinary immunologists in the world, is onrecord as saying that annual vaccination for viral disease is not only unnecessary, but thatit also causes significant problems. A growing number of vets, predominantly in Americabut also in the UK, contend that vaccines are now causing more diseases than they arepreventing.

The arguments against vaccination include the following viewpoints:

- vaccines do not prevent disease or immunise, they sensitise

- vaccines cause encephalitis: inflammation of the brain

- encephalitis has many diverse symptoms, ranging from acute to chronic

- vaccines are deadly poisons

- vaccines can cause the disease they are designed to prevent

- vaccines shed into the environment, spreading disease

- vaccines disarm and unbalance the immune system

Pro-vaccinators use statistics to 'prove' that vaccines have eradicated epidemics.However, the way they have interpreted these statistics is open to question. When youlook at the medical literature, you find research project after research project whichshows that as many vaccinated humans contract a disease as do unvaccinated - and it caneven be argued that more vaccinated people contract the diseases.

In absolute truth, it is clear that immunity only sometimes follows vaccination. Researchrecently conducted by the Canine Health Census (CHC) shows that at least 50% of thedogs with viral diseases (parvovirus, distemper, etc), contracted the diseases within threemonths of being vaccinated. This supports the view that vaccines often fail to protect, andthat in some cases they can actually cause the disease they are designed to prevent. In thecase of leptospirosis, every single dog with the disease contracted it within three monthsof being vaccinated. So where was the protection?

In contrast, the adverse effects of vaccination are well documented. Vaccinemanufacturers admit that vaccines can cause encephalitis, an inflammation of the brain.Encephalitis has many diverse symptoms, ranging from acute to chronic. Emeritusprofessor of neurology at Columbia University, HH Merritt, wrote of encephalitis: "Sinceany portion of the nervous system may be affected, variable clinical syndromes mayoccur...meningeal, encephalitic, brain-stem, spinal cord, and neuritic."


15/35

Diarrhoea, vomiting, flatulence, gastroenteritis, stomach aches, headaches, enuresis,constipation, breathing difficulties, hyperactivity, obsessiveness, inatentiveness, mentalretardation, seizures, paralysis, aggression, and other conditions are known to be sequelaearising from viral encephalitis.

Death is quite possible. Dr Harris L Coulter argues that encephalitis from infectiousdisease or traumatic injury is known produce severe neurologic damage in the absence ofan acute reaction, and that vaccine-induced encephalitis should be no exception. So youtake your newly-vaccinated dog home from the vet's, and he seems fine, and then a fewweeks later, he starts having skin problems or digestive problems, or biting the children.And no-one thinks to tie it in with the vaccine...except that some vets are now makingthis connection.

When a dog (or any species) reacts to a vaccine with drowsiness, a slight fever, orappears off his food, there is every reason to fear that this is the hypersensitivity reactiondescribed in the vaccine manufacturers' literature, which can cause inflammation, whichcan lead to encephalitis, which is capable of producing quite severe neurologic

consequences and even death. Further, the symptoms need not manifest themselvesimmediately for damage to ensue.

Dr JA Morris, a leading US infectious disease expert declared: "We only hear about theencephalitis and the deaths, but there is an entire spectrum between fever and death, andit's all those things in between that never get reported."

Dr R Mendelsohn said: "There now exists a growing theoretical concern which linksimmunisation to the huge increase, in recent decades, of autoimmune diseases, e.g.,rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis, lymphoma and leukaemia."

Vets and vaccine manufacturers tell us that 'only a tiny minority' of dogs suffer adverse

reactions to vaccines. According to research conducted by the CHC, this tiny minority is,in fact, one in every hundred dogs. Many dogs with behavioural problems, eatingdisorders, digestive problems, allergies, organ damage, skin complaints, autoimmunediseases, arthritis and so on, could well trace their origin to the door of the veterinarypractice, and to the needle.

I have three living Golden Retrievers, and three dead Golden Retrievers. Oliver diedwhen he was four: we woke one morning to discover that his back legs were paralysed.We rushed him to the vets where he was put on a steroid drip and died that day. Althoughthe conventional vet could offer no explanation, a homoeopathic vets tells me that, in hisview, this is a classic vaccine reaction.

Prudence died when she was six from an autoimmune disease. Dr Jean Dodds DVMclaims that, "Many veterinarians trace the present problems with allergic andimmunologic diseases to the introduction of MLV (multiple live virus) vaccines sometwenty years ago."

A few days after his puppy jab, Samson was found in the garden, his back legs - likeOliver's - were paralysed. We panicked and called the vet, who told us to give Sam aparacetamol (which, incidentally, are poisonous to dogs). Sam recovered. The next year,


16/35

again a few days after his vaccine, Samson's head swelled up like a balloon and he ranround screaming and crying. Shortly afterwards, we discovered that Samson hadautoimmune disease. He died a few weeks ago, aged five, from cancer. We can trace hisdeath right the way back to the door of the veterinary practice, to the day when a vaccinedestroyed his immune system.

And of the three living dogs? Chappie, now 13, has been treated for thyroid disease.Underlying thyroid disease pre-disposes a dog to autoimmune diseases, the triggers forwhich include vaccines. One vet observed to me that thyroid disease is itself rampantwhere vaccine coverage is high. Sophie has had arthritis since she was six - also linked tovaccines.

Gwinnie was vaccinated before she came to live with us at the age of five months: herback would ripple if you put your hand on it, and she chewed at her paws and gnawed ather flesh. We took her to a homoeopathic vet where 'vaccinosis', a morbid reaction tovaccines, was diagnosed and successfully treated. Don't imagine that I am speculatingthat vaccines are doing these things to our dogs. The scientific literature tells us that

vaccines are quite capable of causing all this damage.

According to one vaccine manufacturer, only 15 dogs had suffered adverse vaccinereactions in three million administered doses. If the vaccine manufacturer is right, thenthe probability of one of my six dogs experiencing a vaccine reaction is about three in amillion. The chances of three of my dogs having a vaccine reaction is about one in fiftybillion Tera-doses. Six out of six, like three out of six, is mathematically impossible. Sosomeone is mistaken.

The fact is that there is no effecting reporting system. No-one actually knows how manydogs react to their vaccines; and even fewer people know (because no-one has told them)how a vaccine reaction can manifest.

The vaccine manufacturers state, in their own literature - in their veterinary data sheets -that vaccination is not without risks. Does your vet warn you? One vaccine manufacturerwrites:

"Only healthy dogs should be vaccinated. Following initial vaccination dogs should notbe exposed to infection for at least 14 days. Generalised hypersensitivity reactionsfollowing administration may occasionally occur.

"A good immune response is reliant on the reaction of an immunogenic agent and a fullycompetent immune system. Immunogenicity of the vaccine antigen will be reduced bypoor storage or inappropriate administration. Immunocompetence of the animal may becompromised by a variety of factors, including poor health, nutritional status, geneticfactors, concurrent drug therapy and stress."

In plain English, this means that there are around nine factors associated with vaccinationthat will put every dog at risk. The first of these is the irrefutable statement that onlyhealthy dogs should be vaccinated. Flying in the face of this advice, vets routinelyvaccinate sick dogs. Their logic is that, because the dog is sick, he needs the protection


17/35

vaccines supposedly confer. My book contains a number of case stories where vetsvaccinated sick dogs, and the dogs died.

Nutritional factors may also render vaccines harmful. For example, in one experiment,puppies deliberately starved of vitamin B5 were injected with vaccines and died. VitaminB5 can be destroyed when cooked or frozen - and most dogs are given (cooked)processed and/or frozen food. The mineral selenium and vitamin A are vital for healthythyroid function - pet food additives ethoxyquin, BHA and BHT are proven to destroyboth selenium and vitamin A. As stated earlier, underlying thyroid disease pre-disposesdogs to autoimmune disease, triggered by vaccines.

Vaccine manufacturers warn that genetic factors might put dogs at risk from vaccination.They don't tell us what these are - but neither does your vet have a clue. He or shevaccinates anyway. At least doctors and nurses ask humans whether there is any historyof epilepsy, arthritis or allergies in the family before getting the needle out.

The phrase 'concurrent drug therapy' refers to the fact that immune-suppressant drugs

should not be given in conjunction with vaccines. A dog taking steroids, for example,might die if vaccinated. This is because the whole basis of vaccination is that a virus isinjected into a dog so that he can mount an immune response and develop antibodies tothe virus. If the dog's immune system is suppressed - either by drugs, ill health, poornutrition, genetic weaknesses, or stress - then he isn't going to be able to mount thatimmune response, and the vaccine could kill him or cause chronic disease.

MLV vaccines, by the way, are designed to multiply over time in the host. So a dog witha poor immune system will find himself gradually bombarded with a multiplying virusuntil such time as he either defeats the virus or succumbs to it (dies). The picture iscomplicated by the fact that the way the vet stores and handles the vaccine also has abearing on whether the vaccine is successful or not. Another factor is associated with theword, 'attenuation'. Attenuation is where the vaccine is supposedly rendered harmless(i.e., is not capable of producing disease). According to Dr Ronald D Schultz, vaccineswill cause disease in an animal (or human) where attenuation has been unsuccessful, orwhere the host's immune system is suppressed.

Vaccines also can, and do, shed in the environment and revert to virulence - which meansthat a dog can catch a disease from a vaccinated dog. Other species can be affected:parvovirus is thought, for example, to have been caused by shedding of the feline enteritisvaccine.

I hope that I have alarmed you sufficiently to consider whether vaccination is really

necessary, or whether there is a safer alternative, such as homoeopathic nosodes (forfurther information on this, contact us at the Canine Health Census and we may be able topoint you in the direction of a homoeopathic vet near you).

By the way, don't expect your vet to furnish you with unbiased information concerningvaccination. To begin with, in the words of Dr Jean Dodds, "vets need to be bettereducated about the risks associated with vaccination". Most vets are just as much in thedark as you are. Within weeks of the publication of my book, the National Office of


18/35

Animal Health in the UK (a trade association representing vaccine manufacturers) held apress conference. They were advising vets to tell us pet owners that our animals could dieand cost us a lot of money if we don't buy their products. If vets are being recruited as asales force, then there is little hope of you learning the truth from them. This is preciselywhy I wrote the book: to enable you to make the informed choice you have a right to

make about the lives of the animals you love.

Continued below


19/35

"Given that we have proof of principle in animals, and in some cases large

animals like horses, that DNA vaccines can work, this gives us hope that they can

be made to work in humans, too."

Dr. Jeffrey B. UlmerSenior Director & Site HeadVaccines ResearchNovartis Corp.

http://www.inovio.com/technology/understandingdnavaccines.htm

Understanding DNA Vaccines

Potential for breakthrough vaccines against cancers and infectious diseases

Immunotherapies represent a promising approach for treating an array of significantdiseases with significant unmet treatment needs. In particular, active immunotherapiesfocused on up-regulating the immune system and capable of generating a strong T-cellresponse are considered to provide the greatest potential to better address cancers andchronic infectious diseases such as HIV and hepatitis C virus. While conventionalvaccines were a tremendous breakthrough for providing preventive protection againstmultiple devastating infectious diseases, a new generation of vaccine technology isrequired to provide more capable prophylactic (prevent against future disease) and


20/35

therapeutic (treat existing disease) agents. DNA-based immunotherapies and DNAvaccines represent a promising technological path to achieve these goals, with thepotential to address diseases with significant unmet treatments needs.

The advantages of DNA vaccines: prevention AND therapy

DNA vaccines use a fragment of DNA to enable the body itself to produce a specificprotein, or antigen, uniquely associated with a cancer or an infectious disease such as abacteria or a virus. This foreign protein is intended to induce a rapid, strong immuneresponse and also build memory of this antigen. If this antigen and therefore the cancer orinfectious disease associated with it already exists in the body, or if it is encountered inthe future, the immune system will attack it.

This mechanism compares to conventional vaccines, the type of preventive vaccines mostof us have received to protect us against diseases like mumps and measles. Such vaccinesare simply a live or weakened version of a particular virus or bacteria, which normallypresent unique proteins on their surface. The body's immune system identifies these

antigenic proteins as "foreign," elicits near term antibody production in response to theseantigens, and builds memory to protect against future infection.

Conventional vaccines are also active immunotherapies, but one of their key limitationsis that they primarily generate antibodies and not T-cells, which are now considered vitalto tackling cancers and chronic infectious diseases. In the case of DNA-basedimmunotherapies and DNA vaccines, because the antigens they code for are expressed bycells of the body, they initiate a sequence of events in the immune system that is able togenerate not only antibodies but also a strong T-cell response. DNA-basedimmunotherapies and DNA vaccines possess other notable advantages over conventionalvaccines, as highlighted in the following table:


21/35

Inovio and its partners are focused on developing multiple DNA-based immunotherapiesand DNA vaccines against cancers and chronic infectious diseases such as HIV andhepatitis C virus.

Read about the challenges of DNA delivery.

More about DNA vaccines...

Why is the immune system often unable to cope with certain diseases?

The body's immune system is capable of addressing many potentially harmful diseases. Itdoes this by recognizing foreign proteins, or antigens, on the surface of a virus or bacteriaor on the surface of an infected cell. When an infectious disease first enters the body, theimmune system may generate an antibody response against the virus or bacteria. If

the virus or bacteria is not cleared by this initial immune response, some diseases

will progress further by entering and infecting cells. Once a virus or bacteria enter acell, it is then immune to an antibody response because antibodies don't enter cells.Clearing infected cells is then dependent upon the body generating a T-cell response. Ifthe body's immune system actually attacks cancerous cells, this is also undertaken by T-

cells.

But the immune system is often unable or is too slow to recognize a foreign antigen andmount an immune response against it:

The immune antibody response is often too slow against diseases that growrapidly once they enter the body. The disease may simply overwhelm the immunesystem. An example of this is influenza virus infection.


22/35

A virus or bacteria may evolve or mutate quickly under the selective pressure ofthe immune system; by the time the immune response is mounted by the body, theinfectious agent may have changed into different forms that the immune system isnot specifically seeking. An example of this is HIV.

If the antigenic proteins are produced by cells in the body, i.e. cancerous cells orcells already infected by a virus, the body may perceive them to be "self," notforeign, and will not attack them.

The magic and the missing elements of conventional vaccines

When it was discovered that creating a prior sensitivity and memory of the immunesystem against a specific invader would help the body to mount a faster and morepowerful attack against this invader if it was again encountered, the idea of preventivevaccination was born. A live or weakened version of a virus is used to make a vaccine,which introduces into the body an antigenic protein (a protein the body recognizes as"foreign") uniquely associated with a particular virus or bacteria. The immune system

responds to this "attacker" and then develops long-term memory of this protein. If thereal virus or bacteria enters the body, the immune system recognizes the unique proteinassociated with the virus or bacteria and is able to generate a more rapid and robustantibody response. This approach led to numerous successful "conventional" vaccines.

Unfortunately, conventional vaccine technology faces a number of challenges andinherent weaknesses:

Conventional vaccines are effective at triggering an antibody response. But theyare only able to address infectious diseases that do not evolve/mutate too rapidlyand only prior to the disease infecting cells. Therefore antibody responses andconventional vaccines are not effective against chronic diseases like HIV and

hepatitis C virus.

Conventional vaccines are not adept at generating a T-cell response, which isrequired to address cells that are already infected or transformed by mutation.Conventional vaccines therefore have a limited ability to treat cancers.

Conventional vaccines use a live or weakened version of a virus, which is notdesirable with diseases such as HIV due to a small risk of infection and diseasecaused by the vaccine.

Conventional vaccines can be complicated and expensive to manufacture.Is there a better approach to stimulate the immune system?

Scientists have been seeking to develop a new generation of immunotherapies toovercome these limitations. The solution they are vigorously pursuing is DNA vaccines,which have the following characteristics:

Instead of using a live or weakened virus as a vaccine, scientists identify a DNAsequence capable of producing a protein associated with the infectious disease or


23/35

cancer that they want the immune system to recognize. This DNA sequence isdelivered into a cell. The cell's own machinery will transiently "express" theprotein encoded by the DNA sequence, potentially producing sufficient quantitiesof this antigenic protein to trigger the body's immune system.

DNA vaccines are effective in stimulating antibody responses to attack infectiousdiseases before they can infect cells, therefore acting as a preventive vaccine.

Notably, DNA vaccines are efficient at generating T-cell responses because theyproduce antigen from within cells (antigens produced in this way are readilyprocessed by antigen-presenting cells). T-cells are required to kill cells that arecancerous or already infected by a virus or bacteria. DNA vaccines are thereforenot only preventive, but can treat patients with the targeted disease (i.e. they canbe used as a therapy).

DNA vaccines can potentially be developed from concept to FDA approval ineight to 10 years, rather than as much as 20 years that it took to develop such

vaccines as the chickenpox vaccine.

They can be readily and cost effectively manufactured using off-the-shelffermentation technology.

In most cases, they do not require cold storage and distribution.Development progress and successes of DNA-based therapeutics

A broad spectrum of pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies as well as governmentand non-government research organizations are making a substantial commitment toresearching and developing immunotherapy products in general. Two blockbuster

immunotherapy products are represented by the following examples: Rituxan is a monoclonal antibody (a passive immunotherapy) approved by the

FDA in November, 1997, for use in the treatment of mild cases of B-cell non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (NHL), a type of cancer. This immunotherapy, made byGenentech, Inc., had already achieved $1.8 billion in annual sales labeled as onlya cancer treatment before receiving approval in 2006 to also treat rheumatoidarthritis.

In 1998, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration granted approval to trastuzumab(Herceptin, made by Genentech, Inc.), a passive immunotherapy used as part ofa treatment regimen for the treatment of women with HER2-overexpressing breast

cancer.

In addition, big pharmaceutical companies have announced deals to in-license or acquireDNA-based vaccines and related technology. Examples of these types of transactions are:

Sanofi-Aventis signed a license agreement in March 2007 for Oxford Biomedica'scancer immunotherapy, based on Phase II results from a renal cancer study. Thedeal included $39M upfront, $651M in milestone payments, and escalating


24/35

royalties. The agent, TroVax, has potential application in a wide range of solidtumors, including renal, colorectal, lung, breast and prostate cancer.

Roche concluded a license agreement in April 2007 with Transgene for theirhuman papilloma virus (HPV) DNA vaccine, based on Phase II data. The dealincluded $18M upfront, $270M in milestone payments, and double-digitescalating royalties.

Pfizer acquired DNA vaccine delivery company PowderMed, developer of thegene gun, in October 2006 for a reported $400M.

What are the development prospects for DNA vaccines?

These approvals and deals provide technical and anecdotal evidence that immunotherapyapproaches including DNA vaccines hold significant potential to be successfullydeveloped, provide clinical benefit, and deliver value to the companies pursuing thesedevelopments.

Despite the successes, one persistent challenge to the advancement of DNA vaccines hasbeen delivery. The DNA vaccine must enter cells in selected tissue and in sufficientquantities in order for the cellular machinery to begin production of the protein forwhich the vaccine was encoded. Achieving this step requires a safe and efficient method and ideally cost effective to enable cellular uptake of a DNA vaccine andsignificantly enhance its potency. This has been elusive but Inovio is achievingpromising results with its novel, proprietary DNA delivery technology calledelectroporation.

Why is DNA vaccine delivery a challenge?

Continued below


25/35


26/35

Edible Vaccines

Image Permission Granted (Children With Diabetes)

Vaccine Production Economic Dilemma

Vaccines have been used for years to help inoculate the human population against avariety of diseases. Gradually the field has developed new vaccines to add to the list ofdiseases that we can be inoculated against, but this development has resulted in increasedcosts and supplies for the creation of these vaccines. The use of animal cells or yeastcoupled with facility requirements for refrigeration and other factors is very costly(Langridge 2000). These production costs result in expensive vaccines which have to bepaid by the patient needing the vaccination. Moreover, the creation of subunit vaccines

leads to an increased demand for proper refrigeration and storage for the newlydiscovered vaccines (Langridge 2000).

Global Problem

Not only are these vaccines way too expensive for children in third-world countries, butthese countries do not have adequate health care systems for the storage or administrationof these vaccines. Currently 20% of the worlds infants do not receive properimmunizations which lead to 2,000,000 unnecessary deaths each year (Langridge 2000).The production of edible vaccines creates the potential to use native foods in these third-world countries to be used as vectors for the vaccines. This explains why bananas, rice,

corn, wheat, and soy lead the pack in edible vaccines.

Advantage of Edible Vaccines Over Traditional Vaccination

The cost of producing edible vaccines will be as much as 10 to 50 times lower ascompared to traditional vaccine production (Giddings, G. et al 2000). Another moreobvious advantage is that syringes will not be required, which allows vaccinations to beless painful and more importantly reduces the risk of transmission of infectious diseases


27/35

which run rampant through most third-world countries. Instead, the vaccines can bedelivered by food products like bananas which can be eaten raw and served in a pureeform (Langridge 2000).

Subunit Preparation Vaccines

Traditional vaccine production used a weakened form of the actual virus that a person isbeing inoculated against to induce the persons immune system to produce the properantibodies against this weakened strain and therefore creating immunity. The onlyproblem with this methodology is that there is a slight risk that the organism will actuallynot be weakened enough and will infect the vaccinated person. A new advance intechnology known as subunit preparations use the antigenic proteins produced from apathogens genetic material (Langridge 2000). The advantage of these subunitpreparations is that there is absolutely no way the proteins would be able to reform intoan infectious organism (Langridge 2000). Anytime you produce a better method youtypically encounter a greater cost, which is the case with these subunit preparations.

Successful Animal Testing

Transmissible Gastroenteritis Virus (TGEV) is a disease which affects pigs (Giddings, G.et. al 2000). Scientists at ProdiGene were able to insert the vaccine for this virus into thecorn eaten by the pigs, and they discovered that the pigs in fact were inoculated forTGEV by the genetically altered corn (Giddings, G. et. al 2000). This animal test createsa powerful argument that edible vaccines do work and have a lot of potential for futurevaccination means.

Current Research

Currently, a lot research has been focused on using edible vaccines to inoculate againsthepatitis B which affects the liver. Charles Arntzen from Arizona State University hasbeen experimenting with the creation of a potato that carries the hepatitis B surfaceantigen to inoculate a human against hepatitis B (Dye 2001). Arntzen is also responsiblefor the first small-scale clinical trial of edible vaccines on humans in which he found that95% of the patients he administered a raw potato carrying a subunit vaccination for E.coli exhibited mucosal and systemic immune responses (Langridge 2000). Arntzenbegan this process using tobacco and then moved on to food like tomatoes and thenpotatoes, and he eventually hopes to create bananas capable of inoculation (CharlesArntzen: Edible Immunity 2002). Potatoes are also being currently investigated to serveas a vaccination vector against human papilloma virus (HPV) which causes cervicalcancer (Potato to Prevent Cervical Cancer 2002).

For most of these vaccines or subunit vaccinations, bananas seem to be the desiredvector. The advantage of bananas is that they can be eaten raw as compared to potatoesor rice that need to be cooked [typically], and bananas can also be consumed in a pureeform (Langridge 2000). Research is leaning towards the use of bananas as the vectorsince most third-world countries, who would benefit most from edible vaccines, are in


28/35

tropical climates that are suitable for growing bananas. Scientists have also discoveredthat fruits with high water content could result in proteolysis (Giddings, G. et. al 2000).Experimentation with freeze-dried food to create pellets or powder is now beinginvestigated to help avoid proteolysis and overall efficacy (Bonetta 2002).

SEARCH MORE

http://www.google.com/search?q=Vaccines+in+food

Continued below


29/35

Why Vaccination Continues even though it is unsafe

and ineffective

See: 'Vaccines are Safe' lie'Vaccines are effective' lie

"What Jenner discovered, though hardly original in its general principle, was that it paysfar better to scare 100 per cent of the fools in the worldthe vast majorityinto buyingvaccine than it does to treat the small minority who really get smallpox and who cannot

afford to pay anything. It was indeed a very great discoveryworth thousands ofmillions. That is why this kind of blackmail is still kept going."--Dr Hadwin

[The main attraction of vaccination to Allopathy is Mind control, and without it's value ingenerating disease (it kept smallpox going around the world for 100 years) the MedicalIndustry would shrink to nothing.]

1. Professional: Allopathic medicine. Smallpox Vaccination is theKEYSTONE of Vaccination, and Vaccination is the KEYSTONE ofAllopathy. Keystones that are made ofLIES.

That is why vaccines such as MMR have to be defended to the death.

"Because routine immunizations that bring parents back for repeated office calls are thebread and butter of their specialty, pediatricians continue to defend them to the death.The question parents should be asking is: Whose death? -----Robert Mendelsohn, MD

2. Pecuniary

a) Money incentive

b) The vast income treating Vaccine disease See: Vaccine Disease Racket

3.Genocide

4.Sterilisation

5. Mind control

a) Baptism into Atheistic Church of Allopathy

b) The propaganda value is incalculable. The smallpox saved millions lie and vaccinesare effective lie is what props up the rest of the pharma hoax, and lets them get awaywith the evidence-based-medicine lie


30/35

"Vaccines are the last defence of modern medicine. Vaccines are the ultimate justificationfor the overall "brilliance" of modern medicine." Vaccines - Jon Rappoport interview ofex vaccine researcher

c) Fear. Vaccination is the foundation stone of the main control ploy: Fear of Disease

"Vaccination: A business based on fear."-- Dr. G. Buchwald

"Traditionally, the power of medical sciences has been based on the fear ofdisease, particularly infectious disease."--Peter Deusberg

(Inventing The AIDS Virus).

6.Implants

Why Vaccination Continues by Guylaine Lanctot, M.D. covers a few more in detail

See: Evil denial

As medicine becomes more regimented, collectivist physicians begin to lose their senseof humanity. In a collectivist system, it is the "plan" that matters, not individuals. In fact,individuals are to be sacrificed for the "plan." .....I was told by a researcher in the field ofautism, that when he attended a conference in Italy on the genetic aspects of autism andmentioned the link between the vaccine program and autism incidence, one of the publicofficials in the Italian Health Department stood and told him in an angry tone thateveryone knew that the vaccines were causing injury to children's brains, but the success

of the vaccine "program" was more important. Further, he stated, these problems need tobe downplayed so as not to endanger the vaccine "program." Vaccine Safety Manual byNeil Z. Miller. Preface

"That vaccination continues to this day is not because of its 'assumed' benefits, but

1. because it yields millions of dollars profit to the Drug Industry,


31/35

2. because it is one of the foundation stones of Medical Science upon which theyhave undeservedly built their power and prestige, and for that reason, must remainIn place, and

3. because the majority of the public, brainwashed by medical propaganda, andunwilling to think for themselves, blindly accept it. "----Ian Sinclair

Vaccine Disease

Citations Vaccine Disease Racket

[Some of the diseases caused by vaccination. It is testimony to the power of the medical

cartel (derived from big brother) that they have got away with admitting just a handful. egChronic arthritis, Thrombocytopenic Purpura, & polio. Even when they pay out, throughgovernment, for diseases (or death) such as MS, they never actually admit, legally, anyconnection, and may even fix things (one euphemism used: "science has moved on") sothat past payouts are now deemed not connected to any vaccine (read). See what vaccinevictims go through and how they intimidated transverse myelitis experts. They havecircled the wagons to deny vaccine autism, it could be the last time they manage tosuppress the truth about the real effects of vaccination, let's hope it sinks the wholestinking racket. You can easily see the lies when they say MMR is safe even though theypay out for deaths.]

See: Vaccine Disease Racket Drug disease Dental disease Pharmaceutical drugaddiction AZT

Changing age ofdisease onset

AutoimmunediseasesBlood disordersBowel disease

Nervous systemSkin disorders

ADDAIDSAllergiesAlzheimer'sAnaphylaxis

Cot-Death--SIDS--Crib-DeathConvulsionsChronicinflammatoryCriminality

DemylenatingPolyneuropathy(CIDP).Crohn's DiseaseDemyelinationDevelopmentdisabilityDiabetes

Graves' diseaseGuillain-BarresyndromeGulf War SyndromeHair lossHeadache

HeartHearingHeller's syndromeHemolytic anemiaHenoch-SchoenleinPurpuraHepatitisHyperkinetic

NeurologicalOptic NeuritisOsteoporosisOtitis MediaPancreatitisPancytopenia

PericarditisPanniculitisParkinsonismPneumoniaPolioRenalRespiratoryScleroderma


32/35

Appetite, anorexiaAplastic anemiaArthritisAsthmaAutism

AutoimmunediseasesBell's PalsyBirth defectsBowel diseaseBrain SwellingBrain damage(severe)Blood ReactionsBullous pemphigoidBSE risk

CancerCerebral PalsyCoeliac DiseaseCFIDS/MECIC (Klinkers)CJD risk

DeathDepressionDermatomyositisDown's syndromeDyslexia

Ear infections (OtitisMedia)EncephalitisEncephalomyelitisEczemaEpilepsyErysipelasErythema multiformeEye damageFanconi's anemiaFibromyalgia

Foetal damageFoot and mouthdiseaseGait disturbancesGangreneGastroenteritisGlomerulonephritis.

syndromeInflammatory boweldiseaseImmune SuppressionIntussusception

Kidney disordersLeukemia &lymphomaLennox-gastautsyndromeLeprosyLichen planusLiver disordersLupusLyell's syndromeLyme disease

Macrophagicmyofasciitis (MMF)MEMeningitisMeningoencephalitisMitichondrialDisorderMumpsMunchausen'sMSMyocarditis

Nervous system

SeizuresSerum SicknessShaken BabySyndromeSinusitis

Skin disordersSmallpoxSpanish FluSSPEStevens-JohnsonsyndromeSyphilisTBTetanusThrombocytopeniapurpura

Tourette's SyndromeTransverse myelitisTyphoidUveitisVacciniaVasculitisVasculomyelinopathyViolent Behaviour

Feline sarcomas

[2008] Vaccines Cause Micro-Vascular Strokes: Dr. Andrew Moulden, Canadian Doctor

[2008 Sept] Carolyn Gallagher a; Melody Goodman a. Hepatitis B triple series vaccineand developmental disability in US children aged 1-9 years This study found statisticallysignificant evidence to suggest that boys in United States who were vaccinated with thetriple series Hepatitis B vaccine, during the time period in which vaccines were


33/35

manufactured with thimerosal, were more susceptible to developmental disability thanwere unvaccinated boys.

mercury poisoning has been and is a major causal factor in those who have beendiagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder (ASD), as well as in several disorders anddiseases that, prior to 1970, were virtually non-existent in children (e.g., childhoodasthma and type-II diabetes) or rare (an ASD, where reported incidence rate estimateswere on the order of 1 5 in 10,000), and have since become epidemic (occurring at arate >1 in 1,000 children).

These now-epidemic childhood diseases include, but are not limited to: asthma, type-Iand type-II diabetes, obesity, gastroenteritis, ulcerative colitis, leukemia, MS, severe foodallergies, ADHD, ADD, and the ASDs, including autism, pervasive developmentaldisorder not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS) and Aspergers.

These are all childhood medical conditions where mercury poisoning has been shownto be an actual or a probable causal factor. Key realities about autism, vaccines, vaccine-injury compensation, Thimerosal, and autism-related research----Gary S. Goldman, Ph.D& P.G. King PhD

Drug companies double their profit potential when they create vaccines and drugs whichcreate diseases and disorders that require creation and purchase of new vaccines anddrugs. It gives special meaning to the phrase "a vicious circle." [NVIC june 2006]Shingles Vaccine Targets Baby Boomers

Another time, Justice Department lawyers persuaded an expert to switch sides, helpingthem defeat a string of claims. The cases involved children who suffered seizures and

brain damage after diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus, or DPT, vaccinations. But the childrenalso had a congenital condition - tuberous sclerosis, or TS - that could trigger seizures byitself. The issue was whether the shot or only TS was to blame.

Petitioners won a couple of these cases in the early 1990s, thanks to testimony by Dr.Manuel Gomez of the Mayo Clinic, described in court rulings as "the world's expert inTS."

Facing at least two dozen similar claims, the government mounted an aggressivecounterattack. It retained three experts who then published three medical journal articlesthat supported the government's stand, according to program records.

And without the knowledge of petitioners, government attorneys also contactedGomez, briefed him on the work of their other experts and retained him as a defenseexpert.


34/35

Gomez was "the guru of tuberous sclerosis," said Robert Moxley, a Wyoming lawyer

for petitioners. His defection "was completely pivotal." Like Chin-Caplan, Moxleydescribed the government's actions as witness tampering.

In September 1997, Special Master Laura Millman issued a lengthy ruling in thegovernment's favor - basically finding that TS, not the vaccine, is usually responsiblewhen TS infants suffer seizures. Gomez, Millman noted, had believed otherwise, "but inlight of his more thorough education in the literature (courtesy of respondent) he haschanged his mind."

Her ruling led to the defeat of most TS claims. [Media, 29 Nov 2004] Witnesses forPetitioners Are Often Tough to Find

Science has proven that the following conditions may all be caused by the aluminum-

hydroxide in vaccines: Chronic fatigue, Multiple sclerosis , Lou Gehrigs disease,Demyelinating central nervous system disorders, Plymyalgia rheumatica and

rheumatoid arthritis, Motor delay, Hypotonia or diminished muscle tone, Failure to

thrive, Apoptic neurons, which are self-destructing neurons in the lumbar spinal

cord, Neuron loss in the lumbar spinal cord. Ive known for over four years now thataluminum was bad for the body, but as usual, I just didnt know how bad it is. However,there is plenty of scientific evidence, hidden in plain sight, proving the pervasiveness andtoxic nature of aluminum in our world today. Aluminum-hydroxide in vaccines causesserious health problems By Tenna Merchant

[Home] [Vaccination] [Vaccine damage]


35/35

12945544 science of vaccine damage

Documents