At the WHO Global Vaccine Safety Summit on December 3, 2019, a series of significant acknowledgments were made that officials worldwide working with vaccines should be aware of and take to heart. Particularly important was the honesty and acknowledgment that vaccine safety is severely lacking, vaccines do not undergo the safety studies they should, and there are no proper pharmacological reporting systems in place for risk management. There was also an honest recognition that vaccine hesitancy is primarily not about misinformation, but about the reality of inadequate safety, which many healthcare professionals are concerned about. It was emphasized to stop labeling people as ”vaccine deniers,” which has become a form of mockery, and instead discuss the real issue of safety. Those who study vaccine literature are already familiar with this safety issue, an aspect often overlooked by journalists. When doubts about vaccines are mentioned in the media, there is rarely a discussion about the real issue of safety; instead, there is often mockery of the uninformed ”vaccine deniers.” However, as acknowledged by the WHO, the major global concern regarding vaccine hesitancy is indeed safety. It is not about misinformation about the vaccines themselves; it primarily concerns the fact that so-called ”vaccine deniers” and those skeptical of some vaccines have always been correct in asserting that vaccines do not undergo serious safety checks. There is a growing consensus and a mounting body of evidence indicating that vaccine-induced immune activation, particularly aluminum adjuvants, can cause mental illnesses and neurological developmental disorders, including autism.
Review of the WHO Conference 2019
• FDA Chief Approves Safety Monitoring Plan
Dr. Marion Gruber, Director of the Office of Vaccines Research and Review, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, FDA, discusses pharmacological systems that do not yet exist, which is crucial for ”truly informing risk management.”
• Oppression of a Few
Dr. David Kaslow, V.P., PATH, CVIA, discusses the dilemma of ”oppression of a few” during small clinical trials for vaccine safety. Dr. Marion Gruber, Director of the Office of Vaccines Research and Review, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, FDA, discusses current issues regarding the duration of follow-up studies and post-market studies on vaccine safety.
• An alarm clock for real research on safety
Professor Heidi Larson, Ph.D., professor of anthropology and director of the Vaccine Confidence Project, urges the medical community to invest in safety research, stating that ”you can’t recycle the same old science to make it sound better if you don’t have the science that’s relevant to the new problem.”
• How much education do doctors receive regarding vaccines?
Professor Heidi Larson, Ph.D., professor of anthropology and director of the Vaccine Confidence Project, explains at the WHO’s global summit on vaccine safety how little education doctors receive about vaccines.
• Is the term ”vaccine hesitancy” a mockery?
Professor Heidi Larson, Ph.D., professor of anthropology and head of the Vaccine Confidence Project, urges the healthcare sector to stop using the derogatory term ”vaccine hesitancy.”
• WHO recognizes that it is not about ”misinformation” about vaccines
Professor Heidi Larson, Ph.D., professor of anthropology and director of the Vaccine Confidence Project, acknowledges that the biggest problem with vaccine hesitancy on the internet is that ”a lot of it is not about misinformation” and that there is ”a lot of hesitancy about safety.”
• Safety is the biggest issue
Professor Heidi Larson, Ph.D., professor of anthropology and director of the Vaccine Confidence Project, discusses the biggest issue surrounding the growing vaccine hesitancy worldwide.
• Healthcare professionals question vaccine safety
Professor Heidi Larson, Ph.D., professor of anthropology and head of the Vaccine Confidence Project, describes a ”very wobbly front line among healthcare professionals who are starting to question vaccine safety.”
• Chief scientist at WHO caught lying to the public
Dr. Soumya Swaminathan, Chief Scientist at WHO, addresses the entire world in a campaign video where she guarantees the existence of effective safety systems and comprehensive safety regarding vaccines. Five days later, her diametrically opposite opinion is revealed behind closed doors during the Global Vaccine Safety Summit on December 3, 2019.
• Antigens & Adjuvants: Everything You Don’t Know
Professor Stephen Evans from LSHTM mentions an obvious problem regarding the lack of statistical reliability in safety tests. Dr. Martin Howell Friede, FDA, and Dr. David Kaslow, V.P., PATH, CVIA, W.H.O attempt to address his question.
• Good question, terrible answer
The Nigerian doctor and program manager for NEEICC, Bassey Okposen, asks a very important question regarding safety research on the use of different vaccines, adjuvants, and antigens. Dr. Robert Chen, scientific director of the Brighton Collaboration, attempts to clarify the answer.
Watch all videos without comments here.
Health authorities overseeing federal vaccine initiatives have previously acknowledged their limited understanding of toxicological research and the metals and adjuvants – mercury and aluminum – added to many vaccines. Several similar conferences to this WHO conference in 2019 have taken place in previous years, such as a CDC conference in 2000, where they openly admit that vaccines are not safety-tested, and we do not know enough about potential synergy effects of different adjuvants or the age-related toxicity of aluminum, especially when dealing with very young infants. Despite these acknowledgments and explicit attention from authorities, no action is taken to safety-test vaccines and to learn more about these metals and adjuvants. Several of the first adjuvants that began to be used in vaccines from the very beginning, their molecular mechanisms, and their actions are still not fully understood. Aluminum adjuvanticity, the ability to modify the immune response, is still an unknown mode of action despite the frequent use of vaccine adjuvants in humans.
Recently, we got a good example of how little consideration is given to whether vaccines are properly safety-tested or not. Here is an article about the heart attack issue with Hepislav B (there are many). Are you comfortable knowing that doctors know nothing about the heart attack issue but are now giving this vaccine to people with the belief that it is safe? Should it be illegal for people and their families to choose not to take this vaccine when they have done their research and know that the FDA cardiologist writing this article believes the vaccine may have the potential to cause heart attacks? This is why the Nuremberg Code exists.
Members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) discuss limited safety. They have no data and no clinical studies of vaccines in combination with each other. What is shown here is a common and recurring issue with officials working on vaccines, which should be considered criminal: the acceptance and approval of vaccines that are not proven to be safe, such as those that may cause heart attacks, based on a prevailing attitude within these authorities that does not prioritize safety.
The CDC conference in the year 2000 where it was acknowledged that they do not know if aluminum and mercury are safe
In June 2000, the CDC sponsored a conference on thimerosal (mercury) in vaccines, although aluminum was also discussed. CDC researchers analyzed one of the agency’s databases called Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD), which contains thousands of medical records of vaccinated children. They found statistically significant relationships between mercury in vaccines and developmental delays, tics, and concentration difficulties. Dr. Tom Verstraeten, an epidemiologist at the CDC, analyzed the data and concluded that the injuries may have been caused by aluminum in the vaccines. It is also possible that the neurological damage was due to the synergistic effects of both aluminum and mercury in the vaccines given to the affected children.
Despite millions of children receiving vaccines containing aluminum and mercury each year, there is a lack of evidence supporting the safety of this practice. For example, Dr. Richard Johnston, an immunologist and professor of pediatrics at the University of Colorado School of Medicine, highlighted that ”aluminum and mercury are often administered simultaneously to infants, both through the same injection site and through different sites. But … there is absolutely no data, including animal data, on the potential for synergy, additivity, or antagonism, all of which can occur in binary metal mixtures.”
Dr. Alison Maule, who attended the Workshop on Aluminum in Vaccines, expressed similar concerns: ”We must remember that we are not just dealing with aluminum here; we are also using mercury. Often, these effects are additive, but there is always the possibility of synergy. We know nothing about it.”
Dr. Vito Caserta, Chief Medical Officer for the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, stated, ”One of the things I learned at the aluminum conference in Puerto Rico … that I never really understood before is the interactive effect between different metals when they are together in the same organism. They are not the same as when they are alone, and I think it would be foolish of us not to keep aluminum in mind in this regard.”
Dr. William Weil, a pediatrician and former member of the National Institutes of Health, expressed concerns about the lack of data: ”We seem not to have information about the age-related toxicity of aluminum, especially when dealing with very young infants…. We do not know whether there is a difference in susceptibility by age, as there is with other metals.”
Some health authorities overseeing federal vaccine initiatives acknowledged their limited understanding of metals – aluminum and mercury – added to several vaccines. Dr. Martin Myers, head of the National Vaccine Program Office and host of the HHS-sponsored Workshop on Aluminum in Vaccines, candidly admitted: ”Perhaps the most important thing I took away from the last meeting is that those of us who deal with vaccines really have very little applicable background with metals and toxicology research.”
Dr. Neal Halsey, head of the Institute for Vaccine Safety at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, and former member of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), also attended the aluminum workshop. He had concerns about the lack of data: ”We don’t seem to have information on the age-related toxicity of aluminum, especially when dealing with very young infants…. We don’t know whether there is a difference in susceptibility by age, as there is with other metals.”
Some health authorities seemed to acknowledge that, even if aluminum is hazardous, it would be challenging to eliminate it. Dr. John Clements, with the World Health Organization’s Expanded Programme on Immunization, stated, ”There is no simple and clear replacement for aluminum adjuvants…. The existing vaccines, if they change the adjuvant for any reason, then they would need to be reconsidered in clinical trials to investigate safety and efficacy, which would take a long time to do.”
Furthermore, ”aluminum is not perceived, I believe, by the public as a dangerous metal. Therefore, we have a much more comfortable margin when it comes to defending its presence in vaccines.”
Note that in 2005, five years after conference participants spoke about the lack of data on the effects of mixing different metals in childhood vaccines, Dr. Boyd Haley, former professor of medical chemistry and chairman of the chemistry department at the University of Kentucky, published a study examining the effect of combining aluminum hydroxide with thimerosal. In this study, cultured nerve cells showed no significant cell death six hours after exposure to aluminum alone; more than 90% survived. Thimerosal alone also caused few nerve cells to die after six hours of exposure. Again, more than 90% survived. But when cultured nerve cells were exposed to both aluminum and thimerosal, only about 40% survived after six hours, clearly demonstrating synergistic toxicity.
Read more here about the growing consensus and increasing evidence indicating that vaccine-induced immune activation, especially aluminum adjuvants, may cause mental illnesses and neurological developmental disorders, including autism. Published studies indicate that autism is caused by an immune response. The adjuvant in vaccines – aluminum adjuvants – can activate the brain’s immune defense and is far more neurotoxic than previously thought – all this new science has been published in just the last few years. Aluminum can cause [elevated] IL-6 levels, the central cytokine involved in autism. Chinese researchers used – for the first time anywhere in the world – a vaccine to trigger an immune response and recorded elevated IL-6 levels in rats. This is a biological basis for HOW a vaccine can cause autism.
WHO conference acknowledges shortcomings in vaccine safety
