Vaccination, the holy sacrament of allopathic medicine, is a crime against humanity. Under all circumstances, they are neither safe nor effective. By their very nature they bypass the natural laws of immunity and are antithetical to health. Vaccination is an assault upon everyone who accepts it, and it has left a trail of debility, disease and death in its wake. This grotesque ritual is one of the greatest scams foisted upon citizens of the world.
Most truly health-conscious researchers know that vaccines contain very hazardous ingredients: Aluminum, polysorbate 80, formaldehyde, aspartame, benzethonium chloride, glutaraldehyde, thimerosal, MSG, squalene, cetyltrimethylammonium bromide and phenoxyethanol, just to name a few.
Additives aside, what about the vaccine 'seed'? How do scientists acquire the main ingredient? What is the process of procuring the viruses used in this deadly concoction? While researching vaccine production, it struck me that the main ingredient seems to just appear out of nowhere. The virus is just there. It's taken from somewhere and grown in something. It's attenuated (reduced in virulence), or not, 'purified', strained and mixed with additives, and voila!... a vaccine is born.
But that is not the whole story. It doesn't explain how virus samples are collected and cultivated. The high priests in the Cult of Vaccination would have you believe that there is a Virus Fairy making deliveries to labs around the world, but there isn't. I don't know about you, but I don't believe in the Virus Fairy. This stuff has to come from somewhere.
Picture a bucolic English farm in the Gloucestershire countryside in the late 1700s. Edward Jenner and his friend -- let's call him Ralph -- were talking about the belief at the time that milkmaids who caught cowpox were free of smallpox. Edward thought it was due to their daily interactions with cowpox-infected cows. He came up with an idea for an experiment.
(Author's re-enactment)Jenner went on to experiment not just with cow pus but with smallpox pus and 'horse grease' (pus from an infected horse hoof). Experimental vaccination campaigns proceeded with disastrous and deadly results. Sadly, these methods of playing around with putrid matter are still with us, and they are no more 'scientific' today than they were then.
Edward: See that milkmaid with the cowpox sores on her hands?
Edward: I'm gonna go over there and dig around in her sores, get some of the pus and rub it into the arm of an eight year old kid I know. I'll be back.
How are viruses produced for vaccines?
That's a good question, and the answer wasn't easy to find because it seems that the myth of the Virus Fairy will never die. Have you ever been asked to spit your sputum into a cup? Have you ever had a swab of your nasal passages, throat or any other area of your body collected? How about nasal aspiration? Blood draw? Biopsy or surgical removal? What about an autopsy? (Okay, that was a trick question, but it's relevant.) These are all clinical samples. Clinical samples are waste matter from sick -- or, in some cases, dead -- people. The CDC and WHO collects these offerings from hospitals for virus isolation and testing. In the case of the yearly flu vaccine, the High Church of the Cult of Vaccination decides which viral strains will be offered for the yearly sacrament and ships them off to select laboratories around the world.
What happens next?
Viruses can't exist on their own. They need a host in which to grow. Unfortunately for us, this involves more human and animal detritus.
I stumbled upon the transcript of the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) meeting at the FDA. This meeting took place in 2012 and gives startling information on the materials used to grow viruses and to make vaccines. Vaccine manufacturers and industry insiders blithely refer to them as cell cultures, cell lines or substrates. They give them code names so you have to dig and dig to find out what they really are. But let's call these cell lines what they really are; human and animal bits.
Here's a list, which is by no means complete. [Caution: This may be double-sick-bag time. One for you and one for whoever walks by and happens to peer over your shoulder as you're reading this.]
2. MRC-5 cells. A diploid cell harvested from the lung tissues of a white baby boy aborted at 14 weeks in 1966 due to his mother having "psychiatric issues". Used for the hepatitis A, rabies, chicken pox and MMR vaccines.
3. Hi-5 cells. Ovarian cells of the cabbage looper caterpillar. Used for the HPV vaccine.
4. Vero cells. Derived from the kidney cells of the African green monkey in 1962. They are aneuploid, meaning they have an abnormal number of chromosomes. They are used in the Japanese encephalitis vaccine as well as DTap (diptheria, tetanus, pertussis), hepatitis B, smallpox, rotavirus and current polio vaccines. An interesting side-note about the Salk polio vaccine is that is was found to be contaminated with simian virus 40 from the kidney cells of the rhesus monkeys used to make it, which has been implicated in the high rates of cancer we see today.
5.MDCK (Madin Darby Canine Kidney) cells. Derived from the kidney of an adult female cocker spaniel in 1958. Used to develop Flucelvax for the seasonal flu.
6. WI-38 cells. Derived from the lung tissue of an aborted 3-month-old white female fetus in the 1960s. Used for the adenovirus and MMR vaccines.
7. RA 27/3 cells. Derived from an aborted fetus whose mother had rubella. It was then grown on WI-38 cells to develop the rubella vaccine.
So, did these quacks get together at the FDA to say, "Oh, this is disgusting! We really shouldn't be using this crud to manufacture vaccines. What if people get sick and die?" No. Their meeting was on the advisability of using cancer cell lines for vaccine substrates.
Here are three cells lines they brought up for discussion:
1. CEM cells. Derived from a 4 y.o. white female with acute lymphoblastic T-cell leukemia.
3. A549 cells. Cancerous lung tissue collected from a 59 year old white male in 1972.
Why do these madmen of the Vaccination Cult like cancer cell substrates so much?
CEM, HeLa and A549 are all immortal. As all cancer cells are wont to do, they continue to multiply forever. (Well, as long as they're kept at the right temperature and fed enough calf serum, that is.) This is apparently a real boon for these evil wizards as they don't have to go spending even more money on procuring cell lines that eventually senesce, or die. Moreover, they increase their virus yield with these immortal cell lines. God bless 'em; they are so concerned for our health that they don't want anything to slow down the production of their life-saving vaccines.
These so-called doctors at the VRBPAC meeting expressed some passing concern that "normal" (meaning not derived from cancerous cells) viral DNA fragments found in vaccines could mutate and cause cancer. But don't worry. There are strict limits on the amount of DNA allowed in each vaccine dose. And the actual cancerous cells used as a growth medium? They admit that these can cause tumors, but no problem. The vaccines are
Thank you, kind doctors, but no matter what you do, at the end of the day, purified shit is still shit.
How will they get the public to go along with this insanity?
To get an idea of how these vaccine cultists come up with their sermons to woo the public, here are some choice quotes from the meeting:
Dr. James Cook, Director of Infectious Disease at Loyola Medical Center:Are they even capable of thinking like a normal person who is rightfully disgusted and afraid of these polluted concoctions?
"[...] I think the FDA ought to develop a project that's called "Think like a Patient."
More from Dr. Cook:That's right. God has spoken. You shall obey.
"You need to have people who are going to be in the clinics every week talking to their patients or to the parents of their patients, explaining to them why they think this is a good idea. And they are going to have to be convinced.
But they are going to have to understand the patient's perspective, which is, is it safe and will this help me? They are not going to care a whole lot, I guarantee you, about what it was made in, as long as their physicians, who they have trusted over the course of many years, tell them, I've thought about this carefully and this is what I think you should do. "
Dr. Cook again:Translation: Normal people will find this abominable. We just have to come up with the right spin.
"I think there's a brave-new-world aspect to this that we have to deal with. I think we have to tell providers about it in a way that they get it. I think we have to tell the public about it in a way that they get it. But I'm convinced after hearing the data today and the discussion today that these cell lines are important in continued development of vaccines. "
Dr. Pedro Piedra, Baylor College of Medicine:Translation: If we test it and believe it's safe, and review our corrupt studies that say it's safe, I think we can get away with not mentioning the fact that these viruses were grown on cancerous tissues onto the vaccine package insert.
This is much downstream, but it goes with the issue of public perception. At the end of the day, information will need to be included in the vaccine safety information and the package insert. When one does animal testing and you see that tumors were induced at such-and-such with the cells --let's say at 10^4 -- will that type of information then be translated into there being a potential risk for induction of tumor, in the package insert or vaccine safety information?Dr. Phil Krause, Acting Deputy Director of the FDA office of vaccines:
I think we would have to work that out, depending on whether or not we believe there is a risk for potential induction of tumor. Listening to Dr. Gruber's earlier comment, I think we would be very reluctant, and I'm sure manufacturers would be very reluctant, to proceed if they really thought there was a significant risk of a potential induction of a tumor. Normally the package inserts describe ingredients in products which are safety factors, that have some role in assessing the safety of the product.Dr. Marion Gruber, Acting director of the FDA office of vaccines:
So I can't answer your question directly, because it will depend on that final assessment. But the hope would be that if one could proceed with these cells, one would have addressed those issues as well as one possibly could.
I would like add to this -- it goes back to the earlier point I made -- I think the minute that we think that we have to address any of these concerns in the clinic, we would not be using -- we would be very reluctant for a cell substrate such as these cells to be used for vaccine production, if we are not reasonably assured that the characterization done, as we have discussed today, is adequate. The minute you describe something in the package insert in terms of potential clinical safety concerns, I think that really precludes using these cell substrates.
That I don't think we would really elaborate on in a package insert, because these things should be thoroughly tested and evaluated in establishing the manufacturing process. In our review of the data, we will have to have come to the conclusion that these cells are safe for use for vaccine production. "
Excuse me, doctor, but what if it isn't tested enough? What if there is some unknown matter in the final product the "scientists" don't have a test for? What if the adherents to the sacred doctrine of germ theory don't have a clue as to what they are doing?
More from Dr. Cook:Still think that the FDA's function is to protect people? Not only is the FDA in bed with Big Pharma, they've gotten married and are on an extended honeymoon.
"I'm not a regulator, so I will say just what I think in reaction to the comment about putting comments in a package insert about tumor cells making tumors in which vaccines were made. I would say, from a personal opinion, that you would have to be very careful about the degrees of separation between where the stuff comes from and what you are putting in the vial that the package insert is describing. It's not at all related, in a certain sense. I'm not 100 percent convinced that whether or not a cell makes a tumor in a nude mouse has anything to do with the safety of a vaccine that ends up getting made.
There are concerns we have. It's a really interesting intellectual discussion. When it gets right down to what's in the vial and what the patient is going to ask me about, whether it's safe, I'm not going to go back and say, well, you know, HeLa cells kill nude mice. It's not a very good analogy, but think about what we do in terms of making bacterial toxins or preparations related to that. You don't want to go to somebody and say, "You know, botulinum kills people. It can paralyze you. It's really dangerous," or, "Anthrax kills people," when you are trying to make some kind of an antibody against protective antigen or lethal factor. The degrees of separation between what is being used to make it and what the product is in the vial have to be considered when you are talking to the lay person, or they are going to get completely confused and refuse to use anything. They do that already. They come in with a PDR. You can imagine how it is trying to tell them what to do. So I would be very careful about that. "
What is it with these vaccine fundamentalist whack-jobs? They can't be human. Most normal human beings like to stay far removed from their own and other people's bodily discharges. When normal people see something dead or diseased, they have to work to contain their disgust. There's a reason we have soap and water and tissues and garbage cans and sanitation departments. That mess is supposed to be washed off, thrown away, burned or buried.
When exposed to waste matter, normal people don't invent recipes for injections, but the high priests of the pus cult do. They make signature collections of waste matter, patent them and sell these medical equivalents of papal indulgences as "preventive vaccines", and the people line up for them. They believe the myth of 'salvation in a syringe', and that vaccines will prevent their suffering. They are entitled to their choice.
Cancerous matter or non-cancerous matter? I choose neither
If the vaccination scientists like fiddling about with diseased matter, that's their business. Never mind that after decades of "scientific" study, thousands of research papers and billions of spent (taxpayer) dollars, this is all they came up with: injecting chemical-laden waste matter into people's arms. They've moved no further than Jenner's experiments with cow pus. This is the epitome of creativity for them.
Well, they can have it. If they want to wallow in filth, let them. I, on the other hand, draw the line at being coerced, manipulated or forced into accepting their toxic brews. If the vaccinationists want to continue their worship at the altar of pus, that's fine. Just stop trying to drag normal people into it.