Wednesday, July 22, 2009

Re: [IHRO] Andre Maniotis exposes the WHO agenda of mass vaccination


 
palashcbiswas,
 gostokanan, sodepur, kolkata-700110 phone:033-25659551



From: Arun1951 <arun1951@gmail.com>
To: indiagroup <ihro@yahoogroups.com>; dsgill <dsgill@sify.com>
Sent: Wednesday, 22 July, 2009 10:10:27
Subject: [IHRO] Andre Maniotis exposes the WHO agenda of mass vaccination

 

To
The Chairperson
International Human Rights Organization
New Delhi, India
 
Sir,
The attempt by WHO to force governments around the world to agree to mandatory vaccination against the swine flu has been going on. The Indian Government may also end up acquiesing to this diabolical act.
 
Andrew Maniotis is a senior scientist, has exposed the fraud of HIV testing. Here he has exposed the sham that WHO is.
This is a long paper with copy of the WHO release [July 2009].
 
Please read this article carefully and forward it to medical associations across the country. It is vital that this madness is stopped.
 
Kind regards
Arun Shrivastava
 
 

from Andrew J. Maniotis, discussion on what vaccines do and WHO's agenda of mass culling

  

Dear Hapi.Health (Alliance),

 

Regarding your fear(s) that:

 

" The big problem now is the heavy hand of government to carry out mandatory

vaccination on all citizens. I did a wide search to find even ONE country that is not participating in WHO mass vaccine program / agenda and all I could find is 'possibly' a few Arabic countries. WHO has nearly complete lock-step approval from nearly all member states / signatories."

 

"This next round will be very ugly. As usual, the effects will always be profound to the human at the most essential immunologic level. It looks like ALL school kids will get forced into this program."

 

"Anyone in "a system" will be victimized (i.e. school, work, military, hospital staff, homes for the elderly, gov workers)"

 

"I am convinced the next 4-5 years will bring requirements to travel and

passport issuance to be contingent on proof of ALL mandatory vaccines and

boosters verification and that the the new medical records data base being

sold to congress is to facilitate this more than anything else."

 

Dear Hapi.health (Alliance),

Similar to the email I just sent about Burgermeister's dubious strategy with her lawsuit against Obama, Sebelius, The WHO, and others, versus the "Tenpenny" approach I have advocated we promote (and which I have attached to this email for you to widely circulate if you find it useful), again, I

suggest we approach the problems you address "soberly" (funny for me to

say I know) by not only citing those peer-reviewed publications in the

"Tenpenny" document that I forward to you, but in every exchange/mass

mailing. Also, we should include those sentences from the July 2009 WHO

interview piece (did you read the whole thing? I did-I have attached the

entire thing to this email so that the HIVAIDsPARADIGM FOLKS CAN SEE IT since they can't view attachments on their list-serve).

 

In the WHO interview of July 2009, there are many tacit admissions of

guilt, ignorance, and assumptions by the WHO officials, and these

admissions reveal unabashedly, the very issue(s) that doctors (on our

side) have been saying for years (like Jane Orient and Chester Danehower

Garth Nicoloson, and others of AAPS-or Gary Goldman of Pearblossom and

Medical Veritas)-that there has been NO testing done-none at all-on

children, pregnant women, or other "targets" of this insane Donald

Rumsfeld-directed crusade and assault on our health, civil liberties, and

futures (I need not remind you that tamiflu is Rumsfeld's Giliad

Bioscience company's drug-and extremely toxic and debilitating one at

that).

 

One of the most egregious things of all, of course, is that WHO keeps

talking about adjuvants in this new round of vaccines, that we know

involve squalene (as indicated by the WHO document and also the "Tenpenny"

piece I previously attached).

 

Here is the title of article (the entire once again is pasted below for

your reading pleasure, and because it is a long-winded piece, followed by

reporters questions in a back and forth with WHO officials, I'll quote

only several statements from that just released document):

 

2009 (July) WHO - Vaccinate Health Care Workers, Pregnant Women, School Aged Children First

[In other words : KILL FUTURE GENERATIONS]

 

Richard Knox, National Public Radio: "Dr Kieny, you said earlier that you

do not expect safety issues to arise with the pandemic vaccine and tests

but do you think that there is less risk of Guillain-Barre syndrome with

this new swine flu vaccine than there was in 1976 and why? And secondly, I

wonder with the accelerated safety tests that will be necessary, how many

subjects will you expect to have tested and how can experts draw

conclusions about safety from these tests when the vaccine has put into a

hundreds of millions of people."

 

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: "It is not completely known why the vaccine which

was distributed against the swine flu in 1976 induced higher risk of

Guillain-Barre syndrome. There are a number of hypotheses and one of the

hypotheses is that the vaccine was contaminated by a component coming

from a bacterial infection that was inducing antibodies that

cross reacted with self protein and therefore, caused Guillain-Barre

syndrome [NON-SENSE]. The vaccines which are produced now are much better

purified [HORSE-SHIT] than the way they were in 1976, so we really do not

think that it is likely [LIKELY FOR HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF PEOPLE] that

we will have these side effects again, but to be

absolutely honest [ABSOLUTELY HONEST?????] , of course it is only when you

have a large scale distribution of vaccines that you know with certainty

the safety profile of the vaccine [OH YES, OF COURSE-YOU SHILL!]. Modern

vaccines such as those which are used to immunize children and adults

currently in all countries of the world are very safe products [VERY SAFE

INDEED!]. Nevertheless, in a very [VERY VERY VERY VERY] small numbers of

people they do induce adverse reactions and this can be the case as well

for adjuvanted vaccines and non adjuvanted vaccines. So what needs to be

put in place and everyone is working towards this direction is a very good

surveillance system and monitoring adverse effects so that as soon as a

signal [SIGNAL? THEY CALL ADVERSE REACTIONS, "SIGNALS" NOW] pops up it can

immediately be followed-up, investigated and adequate public health

measures be taken to respond to that" [SO THAT LIKE FRANCE REPEALING THE

HEP B VACCINE, IT CAN BE HALTED BEFORE 15,000 PEOPLE CLAIM VACCINE

DAMAGE].

 

(Non-sense answer to Fox's question: check it out)!

 

Maggie Fox, Reuters: "If WHO wants to reassess its best case scenario for

how many vaccine doses might be available – I think the last number for

the best case scenario was 4.9 billion. And I am also wondering about

this issue with the virus strain not producing good

results. Was this also the same for the live vaccine or only for the

killed vaccine?"

 

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: "In terms of updating the figures that we have

published for likely vaccine supply over the next 12 months, we will

update these figures but we want to wait to have some further information

to update these with some meaningful changes. First as we

have to have a definite idea of what yield manufacturers are getting with

inactivated vaccines: is it the same as seasonal, which was the assumption

that we took when we made the first calculation, or is it 50%, and these

of course as you may imagine will change the total

output. The other information which is still lacking as what is a dose of

inactivated H1N1 vaccine. Is it, without adjuvant, is it 50 micrograms, is

it 30 micrograms, we don't know [YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PROPORTIONS OF

INGREDIENTS ARE IN 4.9 BILLION VACCINES YOU ARE ABOUT TO POISON US WITH?

INTERESTING ADMISSION I'D SAY]. And we will know as soon as the result of

the first clinical trial will come out [OH YOU MEAN THERE HAVEN'T BEEN ANY

COMPLETED CLINICAL TRIALS FOR A MEDICAL PRODUCT ABOUT TO BE ADMINISTERED

TO OUR CHILDREN AND PREGNANT WOMEN? INTERESTING ADMISSION I'D SAY],

although

the result will certainly be very adapted or relevant only to the vaccine

which will be tested [UNLIKE THE SECOND VERSION SWINE FLU VACCINE OF 1976

AS ADIMITTED BY THE CDC DIRECTOR INTERVIEWED BY MIKE WALLACE], it will

still give a flavour [A FLAVOUR? IS THIS SOME NEW KIND OF SCIENTIFIC

CERTAINTY-I HAVEN'T HEARD OF IT IN ALL THE LABS I'VE BEEN IN-THE FLAVOUR

OF THE RESULTS SUGGEST..... ..] of what kind of results we will have with

the other inactivated vaccines. You asked a question about the

live-attenuated vaccine, the response and the way this vaccine induces an

immune response is very different because these are replicative organisms

[ORGANISMS?? ? VIRUSES AREN'T ORGANISMS-YOU IDIOT], so they induce

antibodies and also anti-cell response" [OH, SO YOU GUYS ARE AWARE THESE

POISONS INDUCE AUTOIMMUNE DISEASES IS WHAT YOU ARE SAYING-YOU NAZI].

 

(And what I find most disturbing, as Dr. Jane Orient and others who have

testified in Congressional hearings would agree (I suspect?) are the

following admissions in this document):

 

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: "Although in some countries the pharmaco-vigilance

system [NEW TERM-PHARMACO- VIGILANCE SYSTEM] is working very well [VERY

VERY VERY VERY WELL-LIKE VAERS DID IT IS ASSUMED, THAT IS A COMPILLATION

OF 1-10% OF ADVERSE REACTIONS??? ]and we will pick up signals (ADVERSE

REACTIONS-"SIGNALS") very easily, in other countries there need to be an

increased attention to the pharmaco-vigilance system, notably in the

developing countries and WHO is already working with countries to try

[TRY?????] and use systems in place, like the system that the Polio

Initiative uses to detect cases of acute flaccid paralysis [GREAT

EXAMPLE-WHICH IS WHY NIGERIA, AND INDIA-MOST HEAVILY POLIO VACCINATED

COUNTRIES IN THE PAST 15 YEARS HAVE THE HIGHEST RATES OF ACUTE FLACCID

PARALYSIS] to try [TRY TRY-THE OLD COLLEGE TRY--FOR 4.9 BILLION DOSES????]

and help [HELP DETECT??]detect any signs of Guillain- Barre for example

[FOR EXAMPLE]. We are both strengthening the network as well as working on

new guidelines that will be more adapted to the detection of adverse

events following vaccination with pandemic influenza vaccine."

 

Helen Branswell, Canadian Press: "I would like to get some information

about adjuvants and children. Obviously [OBVIOUSLY] young people are among

the people hardest hit by this strain so far but I don't think that there

is much [ANY] evidence at all about safety of adjuvants in that group

[RIGHT!] . I was looking at a document yesterday that shows that with

MS59 for instance [THAT IS OTHERWISE KNOWN AS SQUALENE FOLKS], it has

been given to 6 or 700 children which is not a long safety record [NOT

TERRIBLY IMPRESSIVE AS AN N-GROUP GOES I ADMIT]. Are there any other

vaccines – not influenza vaccines –but marketed vaccines with these kind

of adjuvants that children receive now and that might give us a sense of

whether or not they are safe to use in children?"

 

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: "You are absolutely right that safety data, at least

in terms of numbers are lacking in certain [CERTAIN?]populatio n groups [IT

WOULD BE NICE TO KNOW, AT LEAST, WHAT PROPORTIONS THE COMPONENTS IN THE

VACCINE ARE-AS ADMITTED ABOVE ARE UNKNOWN AT THIS TIME, BY THEIR OWN

ADMISSION]. You mentioned the children [AH YES, THE CHILDREN], certainly

there are no data in children [NO DATA IN CHILDREN!!!! !!!] more than 6

months old and less than 3 years, there are no data in pregnant women [NO

DATA IN PREGNANT WOMEN!!!!!!] , there are no data in asthmatics [NO SAFETY

DATA IN ASTHMATICS!! !!!] , so there are quite a

number of populations [ALL OF THEM] for which there are no data [WOOPS!].

SAGE has also made the point that as quickly as possible data should be

obtained on these populations groups if they are to be vaccinated with

these new vaccines [WHY BOTHER?]. In terms of use of this new novel

adjuvant in children, there is no vaccine for very young children that is

using the

formulation [NO-BUT, THERE IS A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF DATA WITH SQUALENE

IN GULF-WAR VETS RECEIVING BOTH AN EXPERIMENTAL ANTHRAX VACCINE AND AN

EXPERIMENTAL "HIV" VACCINE-WHICH IS WHY THERE ARE NO LESS THAN 300,000

PERMANENT CLAIMS FOR TOTAL DISABILITY AMONG THIS "POPULATION" OF ADULTS].

The closest being the vaccine which is currently developed as the malaria

vaccine, which has been tested in a few thousand children and is being

tested now in Africa [OF COURSE, BECAUSE THEY ARE BLACK] with this

indication for malaria in a few thousand children, but apart from that,

these data are still lacking [DOESN'T REALLY MATTER-JAB EM ANYWAY].

 

There are NO SAFTEY DATA WITH CHILDREN OR PREGNANT WOMNEN, ASTHMATICS, OR

ANYONE ELSE-AND THEY ARE ADJUVATING THE GODDAMN VACCINE WITH

MF-59-SQUALENE! !!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!! !!!!!

 

Sincerely,

 

Andrew Maniotis

 

 

2009 (July) WHO - Vaccinate Health Care Workers, Pregnant Women, School

Aged Children First

 

Filed Under Baxter Worldwide, Big Government, Big Pharma,Pandemic,

Vaccines

 

Transcript of virtual press conference with Gregory Hartl, WHO

Spokesperson for Global Alert and Response and Dr Marie-Paule Kieny,

Director of the Initiative for Vaccine Research, World Health

Organization

14 July 09

 

Mr Gregory Hartl: This is WHO Headquarters in Geneva. We welcome you all

to this virtual press briefing today. My name is Gregory Hartl and with

us today is Dr Marie-Paule Kieny, the Director of the Initiative for

Vaccine Research at WHO Headquarters who will make a few opening remarks

about the results of the SAGE Committee meeting of last week

and their recommendations and then we will open the floor to questions.

As always, please, if you have a question to ask please dial 01 to get

into the queue to ask the question and state your name and organization.

Dr Kieny over to you:

 

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: Thank you very much Gregory. It is a pleasure to be

with you again to give you this update on the recommendation of the SAGE

on H1N1 vaccine and vaccination. The SAGE is the Strategy Advisory Group

of Experts, that is the highest level of advisory body in WHO on

immunization matters and they met last week on 7 July to be

updated about the epidemiological status and the clinical status of H1N1

as well as being provided with an update on expected vaccine

availability. They also reviewed the status of production of the current

seasonal epidemic vaccine.

 

As you know we are coming to the end of the production campaign for the

vaccine which is meant to be used to fight seasonal epidemic of influenza

in the northern hemisphere starting this fall and they also met to review

various vaccine options that would be available both for seasonal

immunization and for H1N1, and to make recommendations to the

Director-General. The SAGE, which was helped by a number of experts and

also by another committee that we have established in May, which is more

specific about the expertise in the area of influenza, so the group

together came together with recommendations that were endorsed by the

Director-General on Friday. In general these recommendations

take into consideration as I said the epidemiology, the severity of the

disease, the expected availability of H1N1 vaccine and have come up with a

number of recommendations.

I will be very happy to detail them following questions but just to give

you an idea of how they go.

 

First, the Committee recognized that the H1N1 pandemic is unstoppable and

therefore that all countries will need to have access to vaccines.

Second, the Committee also recognized, really acknowledged the fact that

different countries have different epidemiological and other situations

and therefore that the countries themselves will have to take decisions

that are best adapted to their own national situation but in terms of

giving indicative consideration and guidance to countries, SAGE

recommended first that healthcare workers should be immunized in all

countries in order to maintain functional health systems as the pandemic

evolves. So there are several reasons to protect health workers when they

put themselves

at risk, when they care for patients; the other one is because they need

to remain in good health condition to care for pandemic influenza sick

people and the third is because during the time of a pandemic people will

continue to be ill with other diseases and these diseases will also need

to be taken care of. Second the SAGE considered the of the disease in

various groups and considered that countries gravity may have different

strategies when they implement immunization campaigns. So the first one

would be to try to stop transmission and if you want to stop transmission

as much as you can, and this may still be possible, in certain settings at

least to mitigate transmission, you target different population groups,

and if you just want to have other objectives: So the first objective is

to reduce transmission as much as possible. Another objective might be to

reduce morbidity and mortality and the third objective, but there is no

priority in order, would be as I said, to protect the health care

system.

 

In view of these three objectives countries might have, and depending on

their own decision, they may consider immunization of several different

groups - one of them being pregnant women e.g. as I am sure you have

followed in the news, pregnant women are at elevated risk of severe

diseases and death; other groups would be anybody over 6 months

of age with chronic health conditions and these induced variety of

conditions which are putting more people more at risk from having severe

illness. This could be chronic respiratory disease - it could be obesity

which has been now shown as being a risk factor. Another group to be

considered would be healthy adults of over 15 years of age and less than

49 which have been shown also to be surprisingly, although were healthy,

at risk of death. Yet another group would be healthy children and this is

mainly to reduce transmission as we discussed because children are

amplifiers of infection because they

meet in groups. Yet another group would be healthy elderly adults and all

country conditions need to be taken into consideration when

countries make decisions.

 

The SAGE also then, to further go into decision and in going out with

recommendation for target groups, considered the safety of adjuvant

vaccines and they noted that there was, so far, no concern of the safety

of vaccine adjuvanted with the new oil-in-water adjuvants but that it was

urgent to collect safety data in groups for which safety data is not

available in numbers for the time being. They also noted that because

these vaccines are novel, use for some of them, a very good post

marketing surveillance and pharmaco- vigilance has to be

implemented when the vaccine is deployed and that international

cooperation is requested to have results of any signal that some vaccine

might not be safe, which we don't expect but you never know, be shared

with the international community as soon as possible.

 

Finally, they considered recommendations on seasonal influenza

vaccination. They were informed that the campaign for preparation of

seasonal vaccine for the northern hemisphere were close to completion

with more than 90% of production being finalized by end of July and

therefore considered that there was no need to recommend a switch from

seasonal to H1N1 vaccine. They also considered that at the current time

there would be no change in recommendation of WHO for the seasonal

vaccine for the next season for the northern hemisphere, that

preparations should continue for this immunization as if there would

not have been a pandemic. So these are the main messages and I will be

most happy to answer your questions.

 

Mr Gregory Hartl: Dr Kieny, thank you very much. Before we go to

questions can I remind journalists that the audio file and transcript

will be available shortly afterwards as usual on the WHO website. In

addition, a web update outlining in summary, the conclusions of the

SAGE meeting will be posted shortly. Once again, journalists who want to

ask questions please press 01 on their keypad.

 

Fergus Walsh, BBC: Regarding the southern hemisphere can you tell me were

there any decision made to ask companies like CSL and Sanofi Pasteur who

will, in the general run of things, make seasonal flu vaccine for the

southern hemisphere, they would normally expect in the autumn, to get the

strain from you and do that. Whether or not you are planning to allow

next winter's southern hemisphere seasonal flu vaccine to go ahead or

whether you consider the pandemic is serious enough and that they should

just concentrate on the

pandemic vaccine and secondly, when would you expect the first doses of

pandemic vaccine from cell culture to arrive?

 

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: In terms of southern hemisphere, this was of course

discussed and SAGE considered that it was too early to make

recommendations on the upcoming production of the southern hemisphere

vaccine. Indeed, the southern hemisphere seasonal epidemic has started and

now we are in the middle of it. It seems that there is still a

significant proportion or number of cases which are caused notably by

H3N2, one of the seasonal strains. There really needs to be more data

accumulated on what is circulating in terms of the new virus or the

traditional H1, H3 and B strains. So we expect that all these data, much

more data and evidence will be available in September when traditionally

WHO will hold its meeting to determine which strain should be put into the

seasonal vaccine and by that time we hope that we will be able to be more

explicit in giving recommendations in one

direction or another. I still need to note that seasonal influenza is a

severe disease in certain population groups, like the elderly or the very

the young and nobody would want to have an epidemic of severe and

preventable seasonal epidemic in nursing homes when winter comes in the

southern hemisphere. So this is something which is watched very carefully

but it is too early to give any recommendations.

 

On when the first doses of pandemic vaccine made from cell culture would

be available, there are already vaccine doses available. They are

produced but they are by no means ready to be licensed yet. So both the

doses are available for clinical trials, from both manufacturers who have

been making vaccines from cell cultures but also coming very soon or are

already there, as you may know, from manufacturers who are making vaccines

from egg products.

 

Notably, CSL in the southern hemisphere has really been rushing to prepare

for clinical trials. So when we hear that vaccine is available already,

certainly, yes, vaccine has been produced but it is still an experimental

vaccine awaiting results of both pharmaceutical characterization to be

licensed as well as upon request of regulatory authority clinical trials.

 

Helen Branswell, Canadian Press: If I could ask 2 questions. The first is

a clarification. Dr Kieny you talked about a variety of different groups

who might be vaccinated - am I correct in thinking that what you are

saying is that the SAGE did not say these people should be

first, these people should be second, these people should be third, but

that it put a strong priority on health-care workers but after that its

somehow left in the hands of individual countries? And I would have a

follow-up question.

 

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: So you are right: the SAGE identified the health-

care workers as a main priority group for the three reasons that I already

have given. In terms of the other group it really depends on the strategy

that each country wants to follow. In certain cases, as I

mentioned countries may want to try to mitigate transmission and

therefore, children would be an obvious target. In some other cases, they

want to rather concentrate on reducing morbidity and mortality and then

some other groups may be more the target. But there is

identification on various options but no ranking and no priority are given

to these options.

 

Helen Branswell, Canadian Press: The follow-up I wanted to ask in your

presentation to that made in last week, you refer to the fact WHO has

done a survey of vaccine manufacturers asking them about their plans and

if I read the slides correctly, only 12 of the proposed pandemic vaccines

are planned to have adjuvants in them. Is WHO getting a sense

that a number of manufacturers are not planning of using adjuvants? And

do you have a position on whether or not that is appropriate under the

circumstances?

 

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: Indeed it is very difficult in a situation like in

a pandemic when you want to have a vaccine which can be distributed safely

to the population in the shortest possible time, it is very difficult to

say that you take the adjuvant of one company and you mix it with antigens

of another company when they have never been tested together. So we know

for example that clinical trials financed by the US Government have looked

at some of these combinations but these are very specific combinations. So

it is very difficult to imagine because as you have seen in the slides,

manufacturers are actually, although the vast majority of vaccine doses is

coming from companies in certain areas of the world, there are actually

vaccines manufacturers in other parts of the world, and these are

producing less vaccines in terms of output in number of doses, but it

would be very difficult to say let

us just for the sake of taking an example that you take vaccines from

country X in Asia which has never been a mix of any of this new adjuvant

and then you just make the mix and you say that this is my vaccine and it

will be safe because the safety of adjuvant is not only

depending on the adjuvant itself, it is quite often combined fact between

the purity of the antigen of a certain characteristics of the antigen and

the adjuvant. So this is why a number of manufacturers who currently have

never made any other vaccines than non adjuvanted vaccines are still

planning to go with non-adjuvanted vaccines. I may also add a comment on

that for the time being there is still the question to know whether the

immunogenicity of the A(H1N1) vaccine will be more like that we are used

to for seasonal vaccine where no problem with 15 micrograms not

adjuvanted, just one dose is fine or will it be more like H5N1 where all

the trials have shown that you either need to have a very potent adjuvant

or you need to increase the dose quite significantly, so in the absence of

theses responses, yes a number of manufacturers are planning to go ahead

with 50 microgram without adjuvant.

 

Martin Enserink, Science Magazine: Helen Branswell reported this morning

or late last night from those presentations that the virus is not growing

very well. I wonder if you can comment on that, and whether that will

cause any delay? Secondly, has SAGE made any

recommendations with regard to international solidarity? Is there any talk

of any recommendations to create equity between countries, for instance

you mentioned that countries can have different strategies but would it

not be recommendable that they use only the vaccine for those high-risk

groups and save vaccines for other countries?

 

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: First, in terms of yields, maybe there is some

confusion between the reality that is in the slides, that is now

recognized by the manufacturers and the regulatory authorities and the WHO

Network that we have a strain which are currently available to

make inactivated vaccine, the manufacturers only get moderately affected

yields. This is not to say that the viruses grow poorly, it is that for a

reason or another the hemagglutinin they can produce is

either not stable or very low. It is not known what is exactly happening

but in terms of output that they have of hemagglutinin at the end when

they grow a virus, they have poor yields, poor as between 25 and 50

percent of the normal yields that they have with good

yielders. What is the reason for this is difficult to know, that it is

well known that some strains are good yielders and some are bad yielders,

it happens that for the first series of strains which were generated and

unfortunately, we did not come up with a good yielder.

So that in order to remedy to that the WHO laboratory network is again

trying to generate new vaccines viruses from wild type virus isolated

from patients, and these will be tested again by the manufacturers and we

hope that at least one of them or more than that we hope will be giving

higher yields that would be comparable to the ones obtained with seasonal

vaccines. So for the time being, these are strains which are available and

are still giving of course enough production yields in order to make

clinical batches into test immunogenicity of new vaccines. We understand

that the regulatory authorities have said that when better yielders are

available there will not be a need to have bridging studies between the

results obtained with the strains available now and the new strains

because actually there will be

difference in yields and not in antigenicity or immunogenicity. So we hope

that as soon as possible the situation can be improved upon but for the

time being there is no reason to be really anxious about that.

 

In terms of equity, yes of course, SAGE has also made a note that WHO

should try to help with as much equity as is there in the distribution of

vaccines. We are all committed to that, we have several strategies, we are

discussing with the industry and we have already, this was

announced in the press, we have already secured a number of donations

from industry, we have also secured access to real time production during

the pandemic. WHO at the highest level is discussing with Governments to

see how much they can help to either help negotiate some doses with

industry but also help finance these vaccines and finally, but very

importantly, we are also discussing with new manufacturers who have

started to acquire the technology to make influenza vaccines in the past

three years with technical and financial support from us, to help them

accelerate their preparation and be able to produce some vaccines for

their own country. So this is the situation in terms of trying to ensure

equity for vaccines.

 

Richard Knox, National Public Radio: Dr Kieny, you said earlier that you

do not expect safety issues to arise with the pandemic vaccine and tests

but do you think that there is less risk of Guillain-Barre syndrome with

this new swine flu vaccine than there was in 1976 and why? And secondly, I

wonder with the accelerated safety tests that will be necessary, how many

subjects will you expect to have tested and how can experts draw

conclusions about safety from these tests when the vaccine has put into a

hundreds of millions of people.

 

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: It is not completely known why the vaccine which was

distributed against the swine flu in 1976 induced higher risk of

Guillain-Barre syndrome. There are a number of hypotheses and one of the

hypotheses is that the vaccine was contaminated by a component coming

from a bacterial infection that was inducing antibodies that

cross reacted with self protein and therefore, caused Guillain-Barre

syndrome. The vaccines which are produced now are much better purified

than the way they were in 1976, so we really do not think that it is

likely that we will have these side effects again, but to be

absolutely honest, of course it is only when you have a large scale

distribution of vaccines that you know with certainty the safety profile

of the vaccine. Modern vaccines such as those which are used to immunize

children and adults currently in all countries of the

world are very safe products. Nevertheless, in a very small numbers of

people they do induce adverse reactions and this can be the case as well

for adjuvanted vaccines and non adjuvanted vaccines. So what needs to be

put in place and everyone is working towards this

direction is a very good surveillance system and monitoring adverse

effects so that as soon as a signal pops up it can immediately be

followed-up, investigated and adequate public health measures be taken to

respond to that.

 

Now, in terms of these new vaccines, new adjuvants there is one

manufacturer who has had an oil-in-water adjuvanted influenza vaccine in

use for many years for seasonal vaccination and the safety database for

this particular antigen is very large although mainly in elderly

people and there does not seem to be any signal for any unexpected severe

event like Guillain-Barre. But as I said, all must be put in place to

detect any signal as early as possible.

 

Journalist, Sky Television: Your referred previously that the obese people

should probably be among those that the national government should

consider to vaccinate. On what scientific basis are made these

recommendations and if you could elaborate more on the body mass

index? And the second question is, if we have the vaccine later than

October in the Northern Hemisphere, don't you think it would be too late

to protect the people from the second pandemic wave?

 

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: In terms of obesity, obesity has been observed as

being one of the risk factors for more severe diseases other than H1N1

influenza. This is an observation. We still don't know exactly if it is

obesity itself which is a risk factor, or if it is other health

conditions which arise because of obesity. For the time being it is an

observation and a lot of investigations are conducted to try and

understand this better.

 

It has been observed in several countries that people with a body mass

index over 30, and even more, over 40, have a higher chance of having a

severe disease than noon obese people. This is why one of the groups that

was mentioned, that was listed by SAGE, and that was worth considering for

pandemic influenza vaccination contains all populations over 6 months of

age with risk factors, and one of the risk factor listed is obesity. Its

not the only one of course, you have asthma, chronic lung disease. All

these are considered as being

risk factors based on observation so far. About availability of vaccines,

all the manufacturers and the regulatory authorities are working to have

vaccine available as soon as possible. Vaccines will be available starting

from September or October. If the situation remains as it is, of course

the regulatory authorities will certainly want to have a better handle at

the safety in clinical trials and dosing in clinical trials and these

clinical trials will take some time, and therefore, to have a full

license of this new vaccine may take until the end of the year. This

being said, many countries have provision in their law, so if there is an

emergency they can invoke an emergency situation to use vaccine for which

you would have already good characterization in terms of pharmaceutical

data but not yet, all the data on clinical trials. We certainly look

towards seeing how the epidemic evolves and when it unfolds, to see what

is the situation in countries and we will take our own decisions on

whether or not to use vaccine under an emergency provision as compared to

waiting for full registration of these vaccines.

 

Maggie Fox, Reuters: If WHO wants to reassess its best case scenario for

how many vaccine doses might be available – I think the last number for

the best case scenario was 4.9 billion. And I am also wondering about

this issue with the virus strain not producing good

results. Was this also the same for the live vaccine or only for the

killed vaccine?

 

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: In terms of updating the figures that we have

published for likely vaccine supply over the next 12 months, we will

update these figures but we want to wait to have some further information

to update these with some meaningful changes. First as we

have to have a definite idea of what yield manufacturers are getting with

inactivated vaccines: is it the same as seasonal, which was the assumption

that we took when we made the first calculation, or is it 50%, and these

of course as you may imagine will change the total

output. The other information which is still lacking as what is a dose of

inactivated H1N1 vaccine. Is it, without adjuvant, is it 50 micrograms, is

it 30 micrograms, we don't know. And we will know as soon as the result of

the first clinical trial will come out, although

the result will certainly be very adapted or relevant only to the vaccine

which will be tested, it will still give a flavour of what kind of

results we will have with the other inactivated vaccines. You asked a

question about the live-attenuated vaccine, the response and the way this

vaccine induces an immune response is very different because these are

replicative organisms, so they induce antibodies and also anti-cell

response.

 

So for the time being, the results that we have from the manufacturers who

make live-attenuated vaccines, is that in terms of yields, and this is

yields in terms of growth this time – how these vaccine strains grow –

there does not seem to be any surprise and they grow

with the same titres as the seasonal vaccine that they have obtained in

normal production for a seasonal vaccine. Still there need to be clinical

trials to know what titres of these live-attenuated vaccines will have to

be used in a dose to make an effective dose. So the quick

response is that we don't know, but in terms of growth they seem to be

behaving normally.

 

Journalist, Scrip Pharmaceutical News: When the new pandemic vaccine

becomes available later this year, will WHO or Member States have any new

pharmaco-vigilance initiative to pick up ADRs (ADVERSE REACTIONS) to this

new vaccine. For example, in some countries, they allow patients to

report ADRs as other do not. Is WHO thinking about this or are you quite

happy with existing pharmaco-vigilance systems?

 

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: Although in some countries the pharmaco-vigilance

system is working very well and we will pick up signals (ADVERSE

REACTIONS) very easily, in other countries there need to be an increased

attention to the pharmaco-vigilance system, notably in the developing

countries and WHO is already working with countries to try and use

systems in place, like the system that the Polio Initiative uses to

detect cases of acute flaccid paralysis to try and help detect any signs

of Guillain- Barre for example. We are both strengthening the network as

well as working on new guidelines that will be more adapted to the

detection of adverse events following vaccination with pandemic influenza

vaccine.

 

Helen Branswell, Canadian Press: I would like to get some information

about adjuvants and children. Obviously young people are among the people

hardest hit by this strain so far but I don't think that there is much

evidence at all about safety of adjuvants in that group. I was

looking at a document yesterday that shows that with MS59 for instance,

it has been given to 6 or 700 children which is not a long safety record.

Are there any other vaccines – not influenza vaccines –but marketed

vaccines with these kind of adjuvants that children receive now and that

might give us a sense of whether or not they are safe to use in children?

 

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: You are absolutely right that safety data, at least

in terms of numbers are lacking in certain population groups. You

mentioned the children, certainly there are no data in children more than

6 months old and less than 3 years, there are no data in pregnant women,

there are no data in asthmatics, so there are quite a

number of populations for which there are no data. SAGE has also made the

point that as quickly as possible data should be obtained on these

populations groups if they are to be vaccinated with these new vaccines.

In terms of use of this new novel adjuvant in children, there is no

vaccine for very young children that is using the

formulation. The closest being the vaccine which is currently developed as

the malaria vaccine, which has been tested in a few thousand children and

is being tested now in Africa with this indication for malaria in a few

thousand children, but apart from that, these data are still lacking.

 

Journalist, German Television: If I understand correctly, talking about

the doses for the next winter, do we have to go for a mid- seasonal

vaccine and then also to go for two other doses for the new pandemic

vaccination, will there be enough vaccine for all the

countries then?

 

Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: The vaccine against seasonal influenza for the

Northern Hemisphere is finishing production. We expect to have more than

90% of doses which were planned to be produced, so this is very close to

the number of doses that were produced in 2008. We don't envisage changes

in the recommendation for seasonal vaccination, so vaccination will still

target the same persons and as in the previous national recommendations

mainly in most countries these people will be the elderly, over 60 or 65

years of age, also in some countries children as well, so yes, certain of

these groups may receive during

the upcoming fall three shots which could be one of seasonal vaccine and

two for the pandemic vaccine.

 

Mr Gregory Hartl: Dr Kieny, thank you very much. That closes our virtual

press conference for today, 13 July, from WHO headquarters in Geneva. And

just before we say goodbye, one last reminder that there will be 3 things

posted on the WHO website shortly: the normal audio file and transcript

and in addition, a web update which outlines recommendations from the

SAGE meeting will also be shortly available.

 

Goodbye.

 

So it is OK to vaccinate pregnant women, and children with or without

asthma, but please write the WHO so that at least our dogs and cats will

not be injured...

 

March 2nd, 2009

http://www.dogsadve rsereactions. com/scienceVacci neDamage. html

 

Science of Vaccine Damage

 

by Catherine O'Driscoll

 

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

catherine@carsegray .co.uk , website

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

Shock to the System is available in the UK from CHC, and worldwide

from Dogwise at http://www.dogwise. com.

 

Endnotes

1. "Effects of Vaccination on the Endocrine and Immune Systems of

Dogs, Phase II", Purdue University, November 1,1999, at

http://www.homestea d.com/vonhapsbur g/haywardstudyon vaccines. 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

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

http://www.critterc hat.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.

 

13. ibid.

 

14. Journal of Inflammation 1:3,2004, at

http://www.journal- inflammation. com 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,

http://www.avma. org/policies/ vaccination. htm.

 

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.

__._,_.___
International Human Rights Organisation (IHRO), of the Indian subcontinent, is a NGO, with national focus and overseas lobby network. It agitates both in India and internationally.
Recent Activity
Visit Your Group
Find helpful tips

for Moderators

on the Yahoo!

Groups team blog.

Group Charity

Loans that

change lives

Kiva.org

Yahoo! Groups

Cat Group

Join a group for

people who love cats

.

__,_._,___

No comments: