Research Resources and Critiques
The information pushers of the status quo – be it the mainstream media, government officials, pharmaceutical companies, or Astroturf bloggers – would have us believe that all vaccines are safe. They attempt to vilify those who simply question the efficacy and safety of the policy “all vaccines for all children.”
These status quo pushers have money interests in keeping all as it is now. Those that question toxic vaccine ingredients and conflicts of interests have nothing to gain, except vaccine safety for our children… everyone’s children. Most questioning “all vaccines for all children” are parents who, acting on the blind faith that their government and pharmaceutical companies would never do anything to injure their child, held their infants down and complied with vaccine policies they believed were intended to keep their children healthy. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The resources and critiques below provide you with the counter view backed up by facts that the status quo doesn’t want you to know.
Published on February 23rd in BMJ, Allan S. Cunningham’s response to “What did we learn from Tamiflu?” asks why we spend so much money on influenza vaccines and not take into consideration that they actually increase the risk of illness from noninfluenza virus infections. Furthermore, no one looks at any vaccine adverse effects such as […]
Get Dr. Alan Palmer’s FREE 718-page interactive eBook, containing excerpts from over 1,400 published PubMed studies, that contradict what we are being told by many medical doctors, the media, our government officials and the pharmaceutical industry about the safety and effectiveness of vaccines.
Pregnant women are a WHO priority group for influenza vaccination, but evidence from observational studies in pregnancy is subject, among others, to the healthy-vaccinee bias, overestimating the vaccine effectiveness and safety. An USA survey adds new evidence that documents this bias. Therefore, it is essential to assess vaccine effectiveness and safety with RCTs. Cochrane reviews identified one RCT with “low risk of bias”, in a medium-income country, with NNV 55 for mothers. Its data show an excess of local adverse effects, and a tendency to harm for serious adverse events, with uncertain or very limited protection against influenza.
A Cochrane review that gave the all-clear to vaccines designed to prevent cervical cancer did not include all the relevant trials and ignored possible sources of bias, a new analysis has found.
Policy Prescriptions: The firepower of the EU Pharmaceutical Lobby and Implications for Public Health
This report exposes the excessive lobbying influence of the pharmaceutical industry on EU decision-making. Big pharma enjoys semi-systematic privileged access to decision-making in Brussels, facilitated by its vast lobby expenditure, complex web of actors, extensive meetings with policy-makers, and participation in advisory groups.
Here is a list compiled of the 19 studies from various lists on CDC’s websites to defend the use of thmerosal in vaccines. These are the studies that CDC uses to claim thimerosal’s safety. Each is fatally flawed through the use of incorrect and even fraudulent statistics. Even so, these studies demonstrate that thimerosal has been linked with tics, IQ deficits, speech delay and language delay.