You are on page 1of 35

Why Do 160,000 Cats Each Year in the USA Develop Terminal Cancer at Their Vaccine Injection Sites


Science of Vaccine Damage

A 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 might lead to life-threatening immune-mediated diseases. They obviously conducted this research because concern already existed. It was sponsored by the Haywood Foundation which 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 developed autoantibodies 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-- were attacking their own fibronectin, which is involved in tissue repair, cell multiplication and growth, and differentiation between tissues and organs in a living organism. The vaccinated Purdue dogs also developed autoantibodies to laminin, which is involved in many cellular activities including the adhesion, spreading, differentiation, proliferation and movement of cells. Vaccines thus appear to be capable of removing the natural intelligence of cells. Autoantibodies to cardiolipin are frequently found in patients with the serious disease systemic lupus erythematosus and also in individuals with other autoimmune diseases. The presence of elevated anti-cardiolipin antibodies is significantly associated with clots within the heart or blood vessels, in poor blood clotting, haemorrhage, bleeding into the skin, foetal loss and neurological conditions. The Purdue studies also found that vaccinated dogs were developing autoantibodies to their own collagen. About one quarter of all the protein in the body is collagen. Collagen provides structure to our bodies, protecting and supporting the softer tissues and connecting them with the skeleton. It is no wonder that Canine Health Concern's 1997 study of 4,000 dogs showed a high number of dogs developing mobility problems shortly after they were vaccinated (noted in my 1997 book, What Vets Don't Tell You About Vaccines).

Perhaps most worryingly, the Purdue studies found that the vaccinated dogs had developed autoantibodies to their own DNA. Did the alarm bells sound? Did the scientific community call a halt to the vaccination program? No. Instead, they stuck their fingers in the air, saying more research is needed to ascertain whether vaccines can cause genetic 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 Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) Vaccine-Associated Feline Sarcoma Task Force initiated several studies to find out why 160,000 cats each year in the USA develop terminal cancer at their vaccine injection sites.(3) The fact that cats can get vaccine-induced cancer has been acknowledged by veterinary bodies around the world, and even the British Government acknowledged it through its Working Group charged with the task of looking into canine and feline vaccines(4) following pressure from Canine Health Concern. What do you imagine was the advice of the AVMA Task Force, veterinary bodies and governments? "Carry on vaccinating until we find out why vaccines are killing 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 amongst the hundreds of thousands on the "oops" list. But other species are okay - right? Wrong. In August 2003, the Journal of Veterinary Medicine carried an Italian study which showed that dogs also develop vaccine-induced cancers at their injection sites.(5) We already know that vaccine-site cancer is a possible sequel to human vaccines, too, since the Salk polio vaccine was said to carry a monkey retrovirus (from cultivating the vaccine on monkey organs) that produces inheritable cancer. 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 with treatment, individuals can die in agony within a matter of days. Merck, itself a multinational vaccine manufacturer, states in The Merck Manual of Diagnosis and Therapy that autoimmune haemolytic anaemia may be caused by modified live-virus vaccines, as do Tizard's Veterinary Immunology (4th edition) and the Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine.(6) The British Government's Working Group, despite being staffed by vaccine-industry consultants who say they are independent, also acknowledged this fact. However, no one warns the pet owners before their animals are subjected to an unnecessary booster, and very few owners are told why after their pets die of AIHA. A Wide Range of Vaccine-induced Diseases We also found some worrying correlations between vaccine events and the onset of arthritis in our 1997 survey. Our concerns were compounded by research in the human field. The New England Journal of Medicine, for example, reported that it is possible to isolate the rubella virus from affected joints in children vaccinated against rubella. It also told of

the isolation of viruses from the peripheral blood of women with prolonged arthritis following vaccination.(7) Then, in 2000, CHC's findings were confirmed by research which showed that polyarthritis and other diseases like amyloidosis, which affects organs in dogs, were linked 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 can cause a wide range of brain and central nervous system damage. Merck itself states in its Manual that vaccines (i.e., its own products) can cause encephalitis: brain inflammation/damage. In some cases, encephalitis involves lesions in the brain and throughout the central nervous system. Merck states that "examples are the encephalitides following measles, chickenpox, rubella, smallpox vaccination, vaccinia, and many other less well defined viral infections". When the dog owners who took part in the CHC survey reported that their dogs developed short attention spans, 73.1% of the dogs did so within three months of a vaccine 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 were considered by their owners to be nervous and of a worrying disposition, first exhibited these traits within the three-month post-vaccination period. I would like to add for the sake of Oliver, my friend who suffered from paralysed rear legs and death shortly after a vaccine shot, that "paresis" is listed in Merck's Manual as a symptom of encephalitis. This is defined as muscular weakness of a neural (brain) origin which involves partial or incomplete paralysis, resulting from lesions at any level of the descending pathway from the brain. Hind limb paralysis is one of the potential consequences. Encephalitis, incidentally, is a disease that can manifest across the scale from mild to severe and can also cause sudden death. Organ failure must also be suspected when it occurs shortly after a vaccine event. Dr Larry Glickman, who spearheaded the Purdue research into post-vaccination biochemical changes in dogs, wrote in a letter to Cavalier Spaniel breeder Bet Hargreaves: "Our ongoing studies of dogs show that following routine vaccination, there is a significant rise in the level of antibodies dogs produce against their own tissues. Some of these antibodies have been shown to target the thyroid gland, connective tissue such as that found in the valves of the heart, red blood cells, DNA, etc. I do believe that the heart conditions in Cavalier King Charles Spaniels could be the end result of repeated immunisations by vaccines containing tissue culture contaminants that cause a progressive immune response directed at connective tissue in the heart valves. The clinical manifestations would be more pronounced in dogs that have a genetic predisposition [although] the findings should be generally applicable to all dogs regardless of their breed." I must mention here that Dr Glickman believes that vaccines are a necessary evil, but that safer vaccines need to be developed.

Meanwhile, please join the queue to place your dog, cat, horse and child on the Russian roulette 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: they sensitise (render allergic)an individual in the process of forcing them to develop antibodies to fight a disease threat. In other words, as is acknowledged and accepted, as part of the vaccine process the body will respond with inflammation. This may be apparently 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 after a 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 allergic reaction to a vaccine and will die within minutes if adrenaline or its equivalent is not administered. There are some individuals who are genetically not well placed to withstand the vaccine challenge. These are the people (and animals are "people", too) who have inherited faulty B and T cell function. B and T cells are components within the immune system which identify foreign invaders and destroy them, and hold the invader in memory so that they cannot cause future harm. However, where inflammatory responses are concerned, the immune system overreacts and causes unwanted effects such as allergies and other inflammatory conditions. Merck warns in its Manual that patients with, or from families with, B and/or T cell immunodeficiencies should not receive live-virus vaccines due to the risk of severe or fatal infection. Elsewhere, it lists features of B and T cell immunodeficiencies as food allergies, inhalant allergies, eczema, dermatitis, neurological deterioration and heart disease. To translate, people with these conditions can die if they receive live-virus vaccines. Their immune systems are simply not competent enough to guarantee a healthy reaction to the viral assault from modified live-virus vaccines. Modified live-virus (MLV) vaccines replicate in the patient until an immune response is provoked. If a defence isn't stimulated, then the vaccine continues to replicate until it gives the patient the very disease it was intending to prevent. Alternatively, a deranged immune response will lead to inflammatory conditions such as arthritis, pancreatitis, colitis, encephalitis and any number of autoimmune diseases such as cancer and leukaemia, where the body attacks its own cells. A new theory, stumbled upon by Open University student Gary Smith, explains what holistic practitioners have been saying for a very long time. Here is what a few of the holistic vets have said in relation to their patients:

Dr Jean Dodds: "Many veterinarians trace the present problems with allergic and immunologic diseases to the introduction of MLV vaccines..." (9) Christina Chambreau, DVM: "Routine vaccinations are probably the worst thing that we do for our animals. They cause all types of illnesses, but not directly to where we would relate them definitely to be caused by the vaccine." (10) Martin Goldstein, DVM: "I think that vaccines...are leading killers of dogs and cats in America today." Dr Charles E. Loops, DVM: "Homoeopathic veterinarians and other holistic practitioners have maintained for some time that vaccinations do more harm than they provide benefits." (12) Mike Kohn, DVM: "In response to this [vaccine] violation, there have been increased autoimmune diseases (allergies being one component), epilepsy, neoplasia [tumours], as well as behavioural problems in small animals." (13) A Theory on Inflammation Gary Smith explains what observant healthcare practitioners have been saying for a very long 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. Some believe that his theory could lead to a cure for many diseases including cancer. For me, it explains why the vaccine process is inherently questionable. Gary was learning about inflammation as part of his studies when he struck upon a theory so extraordinary that it could have implications for the treatment of almost every inflammatory 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, the inflammation that occurs around the infected area helps it to heal. He claims that, in reality, inflammation prevents the body from recognising a foreign substance and therefore serves as a hiding place for invaders. The inflammation occurs when at-risk cells produce receptors called All (known as angiotensin II type I receptors). He says that while At1 has a balancing receptor, At2, which is supposed to switch off the inflammation, in most diseases this does not happen. "Cancer has been described as the wound that never heals," he says. "All successful cancers 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 or bacteria 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 is not, as hitherto assumed, a necessarily acceptable sign. Instead, it could be a sign that the

viral or bacterial component, or the adjuvant (which, containing foreign protein, is seen as 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 catapult invaders inside the castle walls where they can wreak havoc, with none of us any the wiser. So rather than experiencing frank viral diseases such as the 'flu, measles, mumps and rubella (and, in the case of dogs, parvovirus and distemper), we are allowing the viruses to win anyway - but with cancer, leukaemia and other inflammatory or autoimmune (self-attacking) diseases taking their place. The Final Insult All 27 veterinary schools in North America have changed their protocols for vaccinating dogs and cats along the following lines; (15) however, vets in practice are reluctant to listen to these changed protocols and official veterinary bodies in the UK and other countries are ignoring the following facts. Dogs' and cats' immune systems mature fully at six months. If modified live-virus vaccine is giver after six months of age, it produces immunity, which is good for the life of the pet. If another MLV vaccine is given a year later, the antibodies from the first vaccine neutralise the antigens of the second vaccine and there is little or no effect. The litre is no "boosted", nor are more memory cells induced. Not only are annual boosters unnecessary, but they subject the pet to potential risks such as allergic reactions and immune-mediated haemolytic anaemia. In plain language, veterinary schools in America, plus the American Veterinary Medical Association, have looked at studies to show how long vaccines last and they have concluded 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 been saying this politely to his veterinary colleagues since the 1980s. I've been saying it for the past 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 what we've been saying. Canine Health Concern members around the world use real food as Nature's supreme disease preventative, eschewing processed pet food, and minimise the vaccine risk. Some of us, myself included, have chosen not to vaccinate our pets at all. Our reward is healthy and long-lived dogs.

It has taken but one paragraph to tell you the good and simple news. The gratitude I feel each day, when I embrace my healthy dogs, stretches from the centre of the Earth to the Universe and beyond. About the Author: Catherine O'Driscoll runs Canine Health Concern which campaigns and also delivers an educational 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 , website Shock to the System is available in the UK from CHC, and worldwide from Dogwise at Endnotes 1. "Effects of Vaccination on the Endocrine and Immune Systems of Dogs, Phase II", Purdue University, November 1,1999, at 2. See 3. See 4. Veterinary Products Committee (VPC) Working Group on Feline and Canine Vaccination, DEFRA, May 2001. 5. JVM Series A 50(6):286-291, August 2003. 6. Duval, D. and Giger,U. (1996). "Vaccine-Associated Immune-Mediated Hemolytic Anemia 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", at 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.

13. ibid. 14. Journal of Inflammation 1:3,2004, at content/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 the American Veterinary Medical Association 221(10):1401-1407, November 15,2002, 16. ibid. 17. Schultz, R.D., "Current and future canine and feline vaccination programs", Vet Med 93:233-254,1998. 18. Schultz, R.D., Ford, R.B., Olsen, J. and Scott, P., "Titer testing and vaccination: a new look at traditional practices", Vet Med 97:1-13, 2002 (insert). 19. Twark, L. and Dodds, W.J., "Clinical application of serum parvovirus and distemper virus antibody liters for determining revaccination strategies in healthy dogs", J Am Vet Med 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 one thing totally clear. I am not asking you to stop vaccinating your beloved animals. I don't believe that any human being has the right to dictate that sort of thing to another human being. However, I do believe that you have the right to the facts so that you can make an informed choice. FACT ONE: The first fact is this: Annual vaccination is fraud. Strong stuff, eh? There is absolutely

no scientific basis for annual vaccination. It was just a practice that was started many years ago, probably because the shots weren't working and someone had the bright idea to 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 in scientific 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 to develop 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. We got her when she was five months old, already vaccinated. She was never vaccinated again. Last year, at the age of six, Gwinnie had a blood test and this revealed that she still has high antibody levels to distemper and parvo. The advice from Professor Hal Thomson at 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 the leptospirosis component of the vaccine. Lepto is a bacteria, not a virus, and you can't get permanent immunity to a bacteria. However, the vaccine has been described as useless and there have been many calls for it to be withdrawn from the market. There are hundreds 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 probably unprotected against the two strains for around nine months of the year, and against all the other hundreds of strains for ever. Australian research shows that the lepto component of vaccines 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 were genetically susceptible to develop atopic dermatitis ONLY contracted the conditions IF they were vaccinated before being exposed to an allergen. So -vaccines trigger skin disease. *[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 who received the guilty vaccine. In other words, vaccines can cause inheritable cancer. *[b]Leukemia[/b]: Dr Jean Dodds has linked leukemia to vaccines. Also, Merck, a vaccine 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

measles vaccine on. Distemper and measles are virtually the same virus, and both vaccines are cultivated on chick embryos. *[b]Aggression[/b]: Vaccines are acknowledged to cause inflammation of the brain and, 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 violent behavior, 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 a whole 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 at Purdue University has found that routinely vaccinated dogs develop auto antibodies to a wide 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 to develop vaccine-induced disease. The Merck Manual (the doctors bible, published by a vaccine manufacturer) says that children with B and/or T cell immune deficiencies should not 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 and T cell immune deficiencies include eczema, dermatitis, heart disease, inhalant allergies, food allergies and neurological conditions. They say that humans suffering with any of these conditions, or from families with these conditions, should not receive live virus vaccines because the vaccine can kill them. Our dogs also have B and T cells, and B and T cell immune deficiencies. So if your dog has allergies, or heart problems, or neurological problems . . . . . .vaccines represent a life threatening risk. FACT FOUR: Vaccines cause more diseases than they prevent. This is the one the scientists are currently arguing about. You can probably guess which way I've fallen on the debate. In my humble opinion, vaccination is probably the worst thing we can do for someone we love. Obviously, this is a scary statement. Let me tell you a little about why I'm here saying this to you. Oliver, a beautiful Golden Retriever, lost the use of his back legs one day 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 a homeopathic 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. Since then 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 vaccinated her, her eyes rolled in her sockets, and she climbed up on my back, begging me not to have it done. But we carried on because I thought it was good for her. Distemper and parvo are horrible diseases, of course - but so is leukemia. You don't want to see a dog

die this way. Samson's back legs were paralyzed the day after his second puppy shot. I thought maybe someone had put poison down because I didn't know vaccines could do this. The next year he was boosted, and his head swelled up like a football and he ran around 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 that Sammie was killed the day a vaccine destroyed his immune system. Edward and Daniel are three-year-old Golden Retrievers. Neither has ever been vaccinated. Not once. They are the healthiest two Goldens I have ever had the privilege to share my life with. No sickness, no diarrhea, no allergies, no illness. The vet doesn't know who they are - they have only ever visited to have their blood tested (both have antibodies to distemper and parvo......which means they've met the diseases but not succumbed). They also went to the vets a few weeks ago to have ticks removed. The vet remarked on how fit and healthy 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 to fight any viruses or bacterias that come along. They also receive the homeopathic vaccine alternative. When they were nine months old, my older vaccinated dogs contracted kennel cough. My two homeopathically protected pups didn't cough once. A few days ago on the CHC discussion list, one of our members reported meeting two 17 year old Golden Retrievers on the beach. Both ran and jumped around like young ones. The owner told her that they had never been vaccinated and, as he was a butcher, he had fed them raw meat. Seven years into the campaign, we are beginning to see the results of not vaccinating and feeding real food. Canine Health Concern members are now constantlyl reporting that their dogs are incredibly healthy, and those who show are winning at all the shows. Don't blame the 'irresponsible breeders' - blame vaccines. Without vaccines, you too can hope for long-lived friends who get through their lives without the crippling debilitating diseases that have become common in the dog population. One last fact: Vaccines don't offer GUARANTEED immunity. Nearly all of the dogs in the CHC vaccine survey -which involved over 4,000 dogs and is still ongoing contracted distemper, parvo, lepto, hepatitis, etc, within three months of being vaccinated. I know this article is going to upset many people and I apologize for this. My motivation is that you don't have to sit and watch your beloved friends die years before their time, or suffer from any of the many vaccine-induced diseases. We ar making a terrible mistake on behalf of our animal friends. What we think is best for them is in fact the worst thing we can do. I am not alone in saying this --the very top veterinary specialists agree. We just need to get the other vets up to date. I promise you this - annual vaccination is coming to an end. We will look back in horror at what we used to do !!!

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

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

vaccines that can cause encephalitis, an inflammation of the brain - encephalitis has many diverse symptoms, usually involving a highly sensitised state such as allergies, 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 Member The Scripps Research Institute La Jolla California Ronald D Schultz, Ph.D. Professor and Chairman Department of Pathobiological Sciences

School of Veterinary Medicine University of Wisconsin Annual Vaccination A practice that was started many years ago and that lacks scientific validity or verification is annual revaccinations. Almost without exception there is no immunologic requirement for annual revaccination. Immunity to viruses persists for years or for the life of the animal. Successful vaccination to most bacterial pathogens produces an immunologic memory that remains for years, allowing an animal to develop a protective anamnestic (secondary) response when exposed to virulent organisms. Only the immune response to toxins requires boosters (eg: tetanus in humans), and no toxin vaccines are currently used for dogs or cats. Furthermore, revaccination with most viral vaccines fails to stimulate an anamnestic (secondary) response as a result of interferance by existing antibody (similar to maternal antibody interferance). The practice of annual vaccination in our opinion should be considered of questionable efficacy unless it is used as 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 a pioneer in clinical immunology and vaccinology. As Professor and Chair of Department of Pathobiological Sciences at the School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison his work is well known in both the allopathic and holistic veterinarian communities.

Catherine ODriscoll The arguments for vaccination are fairly straightforward: they are designed to protect our dogs (and other species) from infectious diseases. Without vaccines, the pro-vaccinators argue, diseases like rabies, distemper, parvovirus, and so on, would still be at epidemic proportions. No-one wants their dog to die of parvovirus or distemper - but neither would we 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 of doing to them. Ask yourself this question: why do we need to vaccinate our dogs every year? Do we vaccinate our children annually? One vet phoned me recently from overseas. Having read my book, Who Killed the Darling Buds of May? What Vets Don't Tell You About Vaccines, he told me that it confirmed many of the fears he has had over the years. He also said that when he qualified as a vet in the early '70s, he was told annual vaccination

was unnecessary, but that the vaccine companies approached vets in the '80s, suggesting that annual vaccination would boost their practice income and provide an opportunity for an annual checkup. He told me that they knew it was fraud at the time, but they went along with it. Dr Ronald D Schultz, one of the foremost veterinary immunologists in the world, is on record as saying that annual vaccination for viral disease is not only unnecessary, but that it also causes significant problems. A growing number of vets, predominantly in America but also in the UK, contend that vaccines are now causing more diseases than they are preventing. 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 you look at the medical literature, you find research project after research project which shows that as many vaccinated humans contract a disease as do unvaccinated - and it can even be argued that more vaccinated people contract the diseases. In absolute truth, it is clear that immunity only sometimes follows vaccination. Research recently conducted by the Canine Health Census (CHC) shows that at least 50% of the dogs with viral diseases (parvovirus, distemper, etc), contracted the diseases within three months of being vaccinated. This supports the view that vaccines often fail to protect, and that in some cases they can actually cause the disease they are designed to prevent. In the case of leptospirosis, every single dog with the disease contracted it within three months of being vaccinated. So where was the protection? In contrast, the adverse effects of vaccination are well documented. Vaccine manufacturers admit that vaccines can cause encephalitis, an inflammation of the brain. Encephalitis has many diverse symptoms, ranging from acute to chronic. Emeritus professor of neurology at Columbia University, HH Merritt, wrote of encephalitis: "Since any portion of the nervous system may be affected, variable clinical syndromes may occur...meningeal, encephalitic, brain-stem, spinal cord, and neuritic."

Diarrhoea, vomiting, flatulence, gastroenteritis, stomach aches, headaches, enuresis, constipation, breathing difficulties, hyperactivity, obsessiveness, inatentiveness, mental retardation, seizures, paralysis, aggression, and other conditions are known to be sequelae arising from viral encephalitis. Death is quite possible. Dr Harris L Coulter argues that encephalitis from infectious disease or traumatic injury is known produce severe neurologic damage in the absence of an acute reaction, and that vaccine-induced encephalitis should be no exception. So you take your newly-vaccinated dog home from the vet's, and he seems fine, and then a few weeks 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 making this connection. When a dog (or any species) reacts to a vaccine with drowsiness, a slight fever, or appears off his food, there is every reason to fear that this is the hypersensitivity reaction described in the vaccine manufacturers' literature, which can cause inflammation, which can lead to encephalitis, which is capable of producing quite severe neurologic consequences and even death. Further, the symptoms need not manifest themselves immediately for damage to ensue. Dr JA Morris, a leading US infectious disease expert declared: "We only hear about the encephalitis and the deaths, but there is an entire spectrum between fever and death, and it's all those things in between that never get reported." Dr R Mendelsohn said: "There now exists a growing theoretical concern which links immunisation 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, eating disorders, digestive problems, allergies, organ damage, skin complaints, autoimmune diseases, arthritis and so on, could well trace their origin to the door of the veterinary practice, and to the needle. I have three living Golden Retrievers, and three dead Golden Retrievers. Oliver died when 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. Although the conventional vet could offer no explanation, a homoeopathic vets tells me that, in his view, this is a classic vaccine reaction. Prudence died when she was six from an autoimmune disease. Dr Jean Dodds DVM claims that, "Many veterinarians trace the present problems with allergic and immunologic diseases to the introduction of MLV (multiple live virus) vaccines some twenty years ago." A few days after his puppy jab, Samson was found in the garden, his back legs - like Oliver's - were paralysed. We panicked and called the vet, who told us to give Sam a paracetamol (which, incidentally, are poisonous to dogs). Sam recovered. The next year,

again a few days after his vaccine, Samson's head swelled up like a balloon and he ran round screaming and crying. Shortly afterwards, we discovered that Samson had autoimmune disease. He died a few weeks ago, aged five, from cancer. We can trace his death right the way back to the door of the veterinary practice, to the day when a vaccine destroyed 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 for which include vaccines. One vet observed to me that thyroid disease is itself rampant where vaccine coverage is high. Sophie has had arthritis since she was six - also linked to vaccines. Gwinnie was vaccinated before she came to live with us at the age of five months: her back would ripple if you put your hand on it, and she chewed at her paws and gnawed at her flesh. We took her to a homoeopathic vet where 'vaccinosis', a morbid reaction to vaccines, was diagnosed and successfully treated. Don't imagine that I am speculating that 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 vaccine reactions in three million administered doses. If the vaccine manufacturer is right, then the probability of one of my six dogs experiencing a vaccine reaction is about three in a million. The chances of three of my dogs having a vaccine reaction is about one in fifty billion Tera-doses. Six out of six, like three out of six, is mathematically impossible. So someone is mistaken. The fact is that there is no effecting reporting system. No-one actually knows how many dogs 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 manufacturer writes: "Only healthy dogs should be vaccinated. Following initial vaccination dogs should not be exposed to infection for at least 14 days. Generalised hypersensitivity reactions following administration may occasionally occur. "A good immune response is reliant on the reaction of an immunogenic agent and a fully competent immune system. Immunogenicity of the vaccine antigen will be reduced by poor storage or inappropriate administration. Immunocompetence of the animal may be compromised by a variety of factors, including poor health, nutritional status, genetic factors, concurrent drug therapy and stress." In plain English, this means that there are around nine factors associated with vaccination that will put every dog at risk. The first of these is the irrefutable statement that only healthy dogs should be vaccinated. Flying in the face of this advice, vets routinely vaccinate sick dogs. Their logic is that, because the dog is sick, he needs the protection

vaccines supposedly confer. My book contains a number of case stories where vets vaccinated 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. Vitamin B5 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 healthy thyroid function - pet food additives ethoxyquin, BHA and BHT are proven to destroy both selenium and vitamin A. As stated earlier, underlying thyroid disease pre-disposes dogs 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 she vaccinates anyway. At least doctors and nurses ask humans whether there is any history of 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 is injected into a dog so that he can mount an immune response and develop antibodies to the virus. If the dog's immune system is suppressed - either by drugs, ill health, poor nutrition, genetic weaknesses, or stress - then he isn't going to be able to mount that immune 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 with a poor immune system will find himself gradually bombarded with a multiplying virus until such time as he either defeats the virus or succumbs to it (dies). The picture is complicated by the fact that the way the vet stores and handles the vaccine also has a bearing on whether the vaccine is successful or not. Another factor is associated with the word, 'attenuation'. Attenuation is where the vaccine is supposedly rendered harmless (i.e., is not capable of producing disease). According to Dr Ronald D Schultz, vaccines will cause disease in an animal (or human) where attenuation has been unsuccessful, or where the host's immune system is suppressed. Vaccines also can, and do, shed in the environment and revert to virulence - which means that 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 enteritis vaccine. 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 (for further information on this, contact us at the Canine Health Census and we may be able to point you in the direction of a homoeopathic vet near you). By the way, don't expect your vet to furnish you with unbiased information concerning vaccination. To begin with, in the words of Dr Jean Dodds, "vets need to be better educated about the risks associated with vaccination". Most vets are just as much in the dark as you are. Within weeks of the publication of my book, the National Office of

Animal Health in the UK (a trade association representing vaccine manufacturers) held a press conference. They were advising vets to tell us pet owners that our animals could die and cost us a lot of money if we don't buy their products. If vets are being recruited as a sales force, then there is little hope of you learning the truth from them. This is precisely why 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

"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. Ulmer Senior Director & Site Head Vaccines Research Novartis Corp.

Understanding DNA Vaccines

Potential for breakthrough vaccines against cancers and infectious diseases Immunotherapies represent a promising approach for treating an array of significant diseases with significant unmet treatment needs. In particular, active immunotherapies focused on up-regulating the immune system and capable of generating a strong T-cell response are considered to provide the greatest potential to better address cancers and chronic infectious diseases such as HIV and hepatitis C virus. While conventional vaccines were a tremendous breakthrough for providing preventive protection against multiple devastating infectious diseases, a new generation of vaccine technology is required to provide more capable prophylactic (prevent against future disease) and

therapeutic (treat existing disease) agents. DNA-based immunotherapies and DNA vaccines represent a promising technological path to achieve these goals, with the potential 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 specific protein, or antigen, uniquely associated with a cancer or an infectious disease such as a bacteria or a virus. This foreign protein is intended to induce a rapid, strong immune response and also build memory of this antigen. If this antigen and therefore the cancer or infectious disease associated with it already exists in the body, or if it is encountered in the future, the immune system will attack it. This mechanism compares to conventional vaccines, the type of preventive vaccines most of us have received to protect us against diseases like mumps and measles. Such vaccines are simply a live or weakened version of a particular virus or bacteria, which normally present unique proteins on their surface. The body's immune system identifies these antigenic proteins as "foreign," elicits near term antibody production in response to these antigens, and builds memory to protect against future infection. Conventional vaccines are also active immunotherapies, but one of their key limitations is that they primarily generate antibodies and not T-cells, which are now considered vital to tackling cancers and chronic infectious diseases. In the case of DNA-based immunotherapies and DNA vaccines, because the antigens they code for are expressed by cells of the body, they initiate a sequence of events in the immune system that is able to generate not only antibodies but also a strong T-cell response. DNA-based immunotherapies and DNA vaccines possess other notable advantages over conventional vaccines, as highlighted in the following table:

Inovio and its partners are focused on developing multiple DNA-based immunotherapies and DNA vaccines against cancers and chronic infectious diseases such as HIV and hepatitis 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. It does this by recognizing foreign proteins, or antigens, on the surface of a virus or bacteria or on the surface of an infected cell. When an infectious disease first enters the body, the immune 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 a cell, 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. If the body's immune system actually attacks cancerous cells, this is also undertaken by Tcells. But the immune system is often unable or is too slow to recognize a foreign antigen and mount an immune response against it:

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

A virus or bacteria may evolve or mutate quickly under the selective pressure of the immune system; by the time the immune response is mounted by the body, the infectious agent may have changed into different forms that the immune system is not specifically seeking. An example of this is HIV. If the antigenic proteins are produced by cells in the body, i.e. cancerous cells or cells already infected by a virus, the body may perceive them to be "self," not foreign, 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 immune system against a specific invader would help the body to mount a faster and more powerful attack against this invader if it was again encountered, the idea of preventive vaccination 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 the real virus or bacteria enters the body, the immune system recognizes the unique protein associated with the virus or bacteria and is able to generate a more rapid and robust antibody response. This approach led to numerous successful "conventional" vaccines. Unfortunately, conventional vaccine technology faces a number of challenges and inherent weaknesses:

Conventional vaccines are effective at triggering an antibody response. But they are only able to address infectious diseases that do not evolve/mutate too rapidly and only prior to the disease infecting cells. Therefore antibody responses and conventional 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 is required 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 not desirable with diseases such as HIV due to a small risk of infection and disease caused 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 to overcome 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 DNA sequence capable of producing a protein associated with the infectious disease or

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

DNA vaccines are effective in stimulating antibody responses to attack infectious diseases before they can infect cells, therefore acting as a preventive vaccine. Notably, DNA vaccines are efficient at generating T-cell responses because they produce antigen from within cells (antigens produced in this way are readily processed by antigen-presenting cells). T-cells are required to kill cells that are cancerous or already infected by a virus or bacteria. DNA vaccines are therefore not only preventive, but can treat patients with the targeted disease (i.e. they can be used as a therapy). DNA vaccines can potentially be developed from concept to FDA approval in eight 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-shelf fermentation 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 government and non-government research organizations are making a substantial commitment to researching 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 nonHodgkin Lymphoma (NHL), a type of cancer. This immunotherapy, made by Genentech, Inc., had already achieved $1.8 billion in annual sales labeled as only a cancer treatment before receiving approval in 2006 to also treat rheumatoid arthritis. In 1998, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration granted approval to trastuzumab (Herceptin, made by Genentech, Inc.), a passive immunotherapy used as part of a treatment regimen for the treatment of women with HER2-overexpressing breast cancer.

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

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

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

Roche concluded a license agreement in April 2007 with Transgene for their human papilloma virus (HPV) DNA vaccine, based on Phase II data. The deal included $18M upfront, $270M in milestone payments, and double-digit escalating royalties. Pfizer acquired DNA vaccine delivery company PowderMed, developer of the gene 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 immunotherapy approaches including DNA vaccines hold significant potential to be successfully developed, provide clinical benefit, and deliver value to the companies pursuing these developments. Despite the successes, one persistent challenge to the advancement of DNA vaccines has been delivery. The DNA vaccine must enter cells in selected tissue and in sufficient quantities in order for the cellular machinery to begin production of the protein for which 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 and significantly enhance its potency. This has been elusive but Inovio is achieving promising results with its novel, proprietary DNA delivery technology called electroporation. Why is DNA vaccine delivery a challenge?

Continued below

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 a variety of diseases. Gradually the field has developed new vaccines to add to the list of diseases that we can be inoculated against, but this development has resulted in increased costs and supplies for the creation of these vaccines. The use of animal cells or yeast coupled with facility requirements for refrigeration and other factors is very costly (Langridge 2000). These production costs result in expensive vaccines which have to be paid by the patient needing the vaccination. Moreover, the creation of subunit vaccines leads to an increased demand for proper refrigeration and storage for the newly discovered vaccines (Langridge 2000). Global Problem Not only are these vaccines way too expensive for children in third-world countries, but these countries do not have adequate health care systems for the storage or administration of these vaccines. Currently 20% of the worlds infants do not receive proper immunizations 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 thirdworld 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 as compared to traditional vaccine production (Giddings, G. et al 2000). Another more obvious advantage is that syringes will not be required, which allows vaccinations to be less painful and more importantly reduces the risk of transmission of infectious diseases

which run rampant through most third-world countries. Instead, the vaccines can be delivered by food products like bananas which can be eaten raw and served in a puree form (Langridge 2000). Subunit Preparation Vaccines Traditional vaccine production used a weakened form of the actual virus that a person is being inoculated against to induce the persons immune system to produce the proper antibodies against this weakened strain and therefore creating immunity. The only problem with this methodology is that there is a slight risk that the organism will actually not be weakened enough and will infect the vaccinated person. A new advance in technology known as subunit preparations use the antigenic proteins produced from a pathogens genetic material (Langridge 2000). The advantage of these subunit preparations is that there is absolutely no way the proteins would be able to reform into an infectious organism (Langridge 2000). Anytime you produce a better method you typically 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 the corn eaten by the pigs, and they discovered that the pigs in fact were inoculated for TGEV by the genetically altered corn (Giddings, G. et. al 2000). This animal test creates a powerful argument that edible vaccines do work and have a lot of potential for future vaccination means. Current Research Currently, a lot research has been focused on using edible vaccines to inoculate against hepatitis B which affects the liver. Charles Arntzen from Arizona State University has been experimenting with the creation of a potato that carries the hepatitis B surface antigen to inoculate a human against hepatitis B (Dye 2001). Arntzen is also responsible for the first small-scale clinical trial of edible vaccines on humans in which he found that 95% of the patients he administered a raw potato carrying a subunit vaccination for E. coli exhibited mucosal and systemic immune responses (Langridge 2000). Arntzen began this process using tobacco and then moved on to food like tomatoes and then potatoes, and he eventually hopes to create bananas capable of inoculation (Charles Arntzen: Edible Immunity 2002). Potatoes are also being currently investigated to serve as a vaccination vector against human papilloma virus (HPV) which causes cervical cancer (Potato to Prevent Cervical Cancer 2002). For most of these vaccines or subunit vaccinations, bananas seem to be the desired vector. The advantage of bananas is that they can be eaten raw as compared to potatoes or rice that need to be cooked [typically], and bananas can also be consumed in a puree form (Langridge 2000). Research is leaning towards the use of bananas as the vector since most third-world countries, who would benefit most from edible vaccines, are in

tropical climates that are suitable for growing bananas. Scientists have also discovered that 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 being investigated to help avoid proteolysis and overall efficacy (Bonetta 2002).


Continued below

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 pays far better to scare 100 per cent of the fools in the worldthe vast majorityinto buying vaccine 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 of millions. 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 in generating disease (it kept smallpox going around the world for 100 years) the Medical Industry would shrink to nothing.] 1. Professional: Allopathic medicine. Smallpox Vaccination is the KEYSTONE of Vaccination, and Vaccination is the KEYSTONE of Allopathy. Keystones that are made of LIES. 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 the bread 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 vaccines are effective lie is what props up the rest of the pharma hoax, and lets them get away with the evidence-based-medicine lie

"Vaccines are the last defence of modern medicine. Vaccines are the ultimate justification for the overall "brilliance" of modern medicine." Vaccines - Jon Rappoport interview of ex 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 of disease, 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 sense of 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 of autism, that when he attended a conference in Italy on the genetic aspects of autism and mentioned the link between the vaccine program and autism incidence, one of the public officials in the Italian Health Department stood and told him in an angry tone that everyone 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 to be downplayed so as not to endanger the vaccine "program." Vaccine Safety Manual by Neil 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,

2. because it is one of the foundation stones of Medical Science upon which they have undeservedly built their power and prestige, and for that reason, must remain In place, and 3. because the majority of the public, brainwashed by medical propaganda, and unwilling 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. eg Chronic arthritis, Thrombocytopenic Purpura, & polio. Even when they pay out, through government, for diseases (or death) such as MS, they never actually admit, legally, any connection, and may even fix things (one euphemism used: "science has moved on") so that past payouts are now deemed not connected to any vaccine (read). See what vaccine victims go through and how they intimidated transverse myelitis experts. They have circled the wagons to deny vaccine autism, it could be the last time they manage to suppress the truth about the real effects of vaccination, let's hope it sinks the whole stinking racket. You can easily see the lies when they say MMR is safe even though they pay out for deaths.]

See: Vaccine Disease Racket Drug disease Dental disease Pharmaceutical drug
addiction AZT

Changing age of disease onset Autoimmune diseases Blood disorders Bowel disease Nervous system Skin disorders ADD AIDS Allergies Alzheimer's Anaphylaxis

Cot-Death--SIDS-Crib-Death Convulsions Chronic inflammatory Criminality Demylenating Polyneuropathy (CIDP). Crohn's Disease Demyelination Development disability Diabetes

Graves' disease Guillain-Barre syndrome Gulf War Syndrome Hair loss Headache Heart Hearing Heller's syndrome Hemolytic anemia Henoch-Schoenlein Purpura Hepatitis Hyperkinetic

Neurological Optic Neuritis Osteoporosis Otitis Media Pancreatitis Pancytopenia Pericarditis Panniculitis Parkinsonism Pneumonia Polio Renal Respiratory Scleroderma

Appetite, anorexia Aplastic anemia Arthritis Asthma Autism Autoimmune diseases Bell's Palsy Birth defects Bowel disease Brain Swelling Brain damage (severe) Blood Reactions Bullous pemphigoid BSE risk Cancer Cerebral Palsy Coeliac Disease CFIDS/ME CIC (Klinkers) CJD risk

Death Depression Dermatomyositis Down's syndrome Dyslexia Ear infections (Otitis Media) Encephalitis Encephalomyelitis Eczema Epilepsy Erysipelas Erythema multiforme Eye damage Fanconi's anemia Fibromyalgia Foetal damage Foot and mouth disease Gait disturbances Gangrene Gastroenteritis Glomerulonephritis.

syndrome Inflammatory bowel disease Immune Suppression Intussusception Kidney disorders Leukemia & lymphoma Lennox-gastaut syndrome Leprosy Lichen planus Liver disorders Lupus Lyell's syndrome Lyme disease Macrophagic myofasciitis (MMF) ME Meningitis Meningoencephalitis Mitichondrial Disorder Mumps Munchausen's MS Myocarditis Nervous system

Seizures Serum Sickness Shaken Baby Syndrome Sinusitis Skin disorders Smallpox Spanish Flu SSPE Stevens-Johnson syndrome Syphilis TB Tetanus Thrombocytopenia purpura Tourette's Syndrome Transverse myelitis Typhoid Uveitis Vaccinia Vasculitis Vasculomyelinopathy Violent 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 vaccine and developmental disability in US children aged 1-9 years This study found statistically significant evidence to suggest that boys in United States who were vaccinated with the triple series Hepatitis B vaccine, during the time period in which vaccines were

manufactured with thimerosal, were more susceptible to developmental disability than were unvaccinated boys. mercury poisoning has been and is a major causal factor in those who have been diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder (ASD), as well as in several disorders and diseases that, prior to 1970, were virtually non-existent in children (e.g., childhood asthma and type-II diabetes) or rare (an ASD, where reported incidence rate estimates were on the order of 1 5 in 10,000), and have since become epidemic (occurring at a rate >1 in 1,000 children). These now-epidemic childhood diseases include, but are not limited to: asthma, type-I and type-II diabetes, obesity, gastroenteritis, ulcerative colitis, leukemia, MS, severe food allergies, ADHD, ADD, and the ASDs, including autism, pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS) and Aspergers. These are all childhood medical conditions where mercury poisoning has been shown to be an actual or a probable causal factor. Key realities about autism, vaccines, vaccineinjury 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 which create diseases and disorders that require creation and purchase of new vaccines and drugs. 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, helping them defeat a string of claims. The cases involved children who suffered seizures and brain damage after diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus, or DPT, vaccinations. But the children also had a congenital condition - tuberous sclerosis, or TS - that could trigger seizures by itself. 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 in TS." Facing at least two dozen similar claims, the government mounted an aggressive counterattack. It retained three experts who then published three medical journal articles that supported the government's stand, according to program records. And without the knowledge of petitioners, government attorneys also contacted Gomez, briefed him on the work of their other experts and retained him as a defense expert.

Gomez was "the guru of tuberous sclerosis," said Robert Moxley, a Wyoming lawyer for petitioners. His defection "was completely pivotal." Like Chin-Caplan, Moxley described the government's actions as witness tampering. In September 1997, Special Master Laura Millman issued a lengthy ruling in the government's favor - basically finding that TS, not the vaccine, is usually responsible when TS infants suffer seizures. Gomez, Millman noted, had believed otherwise, "but in light of his more thorough education in the literature (courtesy of respondent) he has changed his mind." Her ruling led to the defeat of most TS claims. [Media, 29 Nov 2004] Witnesses for Petitioners Are Often Tough to Find Science has proven that the following conditions may all be caused by the aluminumhydroxide 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 that aluminum 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 and toxic nature of aluminum in our world today. Aluminum-hydroxide in vaccines causes serious health problems By Tenna Merchant

[Home] [Vaccination] [Vaccine damage]