Jabbed

Few words evoke as much fear as “polio,” and it’s felt the most among those who experienced the deadly polio outbreaks of the 1950s. The lingering message for the survivors of that generation and for their posterity remains firmly entrenched: the polio vaccine prevented a polio apocalypse, so only a fool would question the efficacy of polio vaccinations. Get ready for the shocker: many scientists, researchers, public health officials, and doctors not only question the efficacy, they question the entire polio vaccine narrative.

The 1950s was a heady time for scientists and researchers. They had identified what they believed to be the sole cause of poliomyelitis: three separate but related polioviruses. The race was on to create a vaccine that would—safely and effectively, of course—protect against the scourge of polio.

Whose name would be identified as the eventual savior of humanity against the dreaded illness? Two emerged: Dr. Jonas Salk and Dr. Albert Sabin, both American physicians and microbiologists. As the head of the Virus Research Laboratory at the University of Pittsburgh, Salk developed the “inactivated” polio vaccine by combining the three polioviruses in cultures made from monkey kidneys. Using formaldehyde, Sabin sought to kill or inactivate the viruses so a population injected with his vaccine would develop an antibody response without causing polio.

Perhaps Sabin learned from Salk that testing his live virus vaccine on American children made for poor public relations. That may explain why he conducted his initial human trials in the U.S.S.R., where his team vaccinated more than 6 million people in Latvia, Estonia, and Kazakhstan between 1958 and 1959.³

Sabin’s “sugar-cube” vaccine made its way into the hearts of vaccine regulators and the bodies of American children by 1963. Most children responded to the vaccine without incident. However, some individuals with compromised immune systems contracted polio either as recipients of the vaccine or by coming into contact with recently vaccinated children. Such occurrences were rare because severely immunocompromised individuals are also rare due to the USA’s relatively advanced standard of living.

Salk’s oral polio vaccine (OPV) dominated the US market until the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)—a body made up of 15 individuals with close ties to the pharmaceutical industry—recommended in 1999 that the CDC “update” its polio vaccine policy for the USA by reverting back to the killed-virus shot. The CDC described the process at follows:

On June 17, 1999, the Advisory Committee for [sic] Immunization Practices (ACIP) voted to change the recommendation for routine childhood polio vaccination beginning in 2000 to a schedule using only the inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) to eliminate the occurrence of vaccine-associated paralytic poliomyelitis (VAPP) in the United States. . . . The committee voted that oral polio vaccine will be acceptable only in special circumstances.

Since 1979, the only cases of polio disease in the United States have been caused by the oral polio vaccine (OPV), which had been used routinely for childhood vaccination since 1965.⁴

. . . When I looked at the contraindications it stated that inactivated polio vaccine and not oral polio vaccine should be used in situations where families had HIV—where there was a history of HIV in the family. And when I got this information I was really shocked because since 1984 Uganda has had a very difficult HIV and AIDS problem. In fact it says that if a child is inadvertently given the oral polio vaccine, that that child should be quarantined for four to seven weeks because oral polio vaccine is “live” and they keep shedding it between that period, and they could contaminate other people.5

Nkuba goes on to explain more precisely how difficult the problem of HIV and AIDS is in many African countries:

. . . HIV is very big in Uganda—very big in East Africa. I was born in a family of eleven, but from 1987 up to today I have lost eight members of my family through HIV.

So when the manufacturer says “Do not give this vaccine to families that have a history of HIV” there are no families in Uganda that have no history of HIV. Everybody knows somebody who has died or has lost an uncle or a brother’s wife or his children through HIV. And it’s that relationship that people were able to put together saying “Maybe really the oral polio vaccine, when given . . . to a population that has HIV, it produces that reaction.”⁶

The Ugandan government did not take kindly to Nkuba or to his radio program in which he exposed the dangers of the oral polio vaccine to immunocompromised people—his people. They initially told him that he could be charged with sedition and, if found guilty, put to death. But why fuss with due process when white men in pickup trucks can accomplish the same thing by running agitators like Nkuba off the road? Nkuba “knew that they were going to make their point and they were going to make it very well,” after walking away from such an accident. But he “had passed the door of no return, and . . . could not take a step backwards.”

This is not me now. You can’t arrest me. You have to arrest the Centers for Disease Control, because, I mean, it’s them doing the talking. It’s not me. I have just given them space on the radio!7

Trust in the government eroded when Ugandan parents learned that a vaccine that was too dangerous for healthy American children was required for all children in developing countries, even though many of those children are immunocompromised from birth onward due to the effects of poverty, malnutrition, overcrowding, chronic exposure to pesticides and other chemicals, unsanitary living conditions, and diseases including HIV and AIDS. Sociopathy can be the only explanation for vaccinating such children at all, let alone vaccinating them with the oral polio vaccine. As Nkuba learned in conversations with numerous people, the results were catastrophic. As he said,

So I was told by this preacher that when the government introduced the National Immunization Days in 1997, most of the children after vaccination started dying. The preacher told me that they had so much death that his cassock, that he wears to go and conduct the burial ceremony, got old. He said, “I buried the children and my cassock got old.”

. . . There was one mother who had four children, and she hid one and took three other children for vaccination, and three children died and that one survived. Now when I went to do my presentation and I asked most of the people who were there—about two, three thousand people—each person had the same story.⁸

Nkuba also learned that in the United States children receive vaccinations on a schedule and vaccinations are documented in medical records. In the rural regions of Uganda, public health officials drive into villages and vaccinate all children regardless of whether they already had the disease or were previously vaccinated. And, according to Nkuba, no vaccination records are kept.

. . . The government was ready for them—not really the government—the minister of health, the World Health Organization and the UNICEF. They mobilized the army, and the police and moved from house to house. They had asked the local authorities to do a list of people who had children, so they moved from house to house, grabbing children at gunpoint and vaccinating them.

Now those that knew—as soon as the army got into the village— the rest of the people who had children would run into the bush, and they stayed there for a week. And there is the story of this child who was met on the road, and they grabbed him and asked him whether he was immunized, and he said “Yes.” He lied to them—said “Yes”—He was running away, but he said “Yes” and they said “Well, we still have to immunize you anyway.” So they got the (dose). They put it in his mouth and the child spit it out—first time. They put it a second time (spit)—third (spit)—fourth (spit) and then they hit the child and then the child ran away unvaccinated.9

The cruelest irony in administering the oral polio vaccine to African children with HIV or AIDS is that the first cases of HIV may have crossed the species barrier from chimpanzees to humans through experimental oral polio vaccines that were manufactured and administered to over one million Africans from 1957 to 1960. These experiments were led by Dr. Hilary Koprowski, director of the Wistar Institute in Philadelphia. Koprowski viewed himself as Dr. Sabin’s competitor in the race to replace the Salk vaccine. Both Sabin’s and Koprowski’s vaccines were grown in monkey kidney tissue. No AIDS cases emerged following Sabin’s human trials in the U.S.S.R. Koprowski conducted his trials in the Belgian Congo. “Between 1956 and 1960 more then 1 million African people were ‘encouraged’ to receive Koprowski’s vaccine called CHAT.”¹⁰

The OPV-HIV theory is not without its detractors, but dozens of articles, including some from prominent researchers, conclude that this theory is more plausible than any other. University professor and social scientist Brian Martin catalogues many of these articles on his webpage, which is part of the University of Wollongong Australia’s website. Martin writes,

One theory of the origin of AIDS is that it developed from contaminated vaccines used in the world’s first mass immunisation for polio. There are a number of reasons why this theory is plausible enough to be worthy of further investigation.

The location coincides dramatically. The earliest known cases of AIDS occurred in central Africa, in the same regions where Koprowski’s polio vaccine was given to over a million people in 1957-1960.

The timing coincides. There is no documented case of HIV infection or AIDS before 1959. Centuries of the slave trade and European exploitation of Africa exposed Africans and others to all other diseases then known; it is implausible that HIV could have been present and spreading in Africa without being recognised.

Polio vaccines are grown (cultured) on monkey kidneys which could have been contaminated by SIVs. Polio vaccines could not be screened for SIV contamination before 1985.

Another monkey virus, SV-40, is known to have been passed to humans through polio vaccines. A specific pool of Koprowski’s vaccine was later shown to have been contaminated by an unknown virus.

In order for a virus to infect a different species, it is helpful to reduce the resistance of the new host’s immune system. Koprowski’s polio vaccine was given to many children less than one month old, before their immune systems were fully developed. Indeed, in one trial, infants were given 15 times the standard dose in order to ensure effective immunisation.11

More well known than the probable link between OPV and HIV is the absolute link between OPV and SV40, or simian virus 40, the virus that Martin referred to in the quote above. SV40 was the 40th simian virus that researchers discovered in the vaccines grown in monkey kidney cultures. As mentioned previously, Bernice Eddy, a government scientist with the National Institutes of Health, discovered the oncogenic virus in 1959. Her superiors rewarded her good work by barring her from publicly revealing the news, removing her from her lab, and giving her a demotion.¹²

Vaccine researcher and author Neil Miller provided a detailed account of scientists’ dealings with SV40 in his article titled “The polio vaccine: a critical assessment of its arcane history, efficacy, and long-term health-related consequences.” Miller wrote,

In 1960, Drs. Ben Sweet and M.R. Hilleman, pharmaceutical researchers for the Merck Institute for Therapeutic Research, were credited with discovering this infectious agent—SV-40, a monkey virus that infected nearly all rhesus monkeys, whose kidneys were used to produce polio vaccines. Hilleman and Sweet found SV-40 in all three types of Albert Sabin’s live oral polio vaccine, and noted the possibility that it might cause cancer, “especially when administered to human babies. . . .” According to Sweet, “It was a frightening discovery because, back then, it was not possible to detect the virus with the testing procedures we had. . . . We had no idea of what this virus would do. . . .” Sweet elaborated: “First, we knew that SV-40 had oncogenic (cancer-causing) properties in hamsters, which was bad news. Secondly, we found out that it hybridized with certain DNA viruses . . . such that [they] would then have SV-40 genes attached [to them] . . . . When we started growing the vaccines, we just couldn’t get rid of the SV-40 contaminated virus. We tried to neutralize it, but couldn’t . . . . Now, with the theoretical links to HIV and cancer, it just blows my mind. . . .”13

SV40 was bad news for the vaccine program, but apparently not bad enough to immediately remove from the market all vaccines potentially contaminated with the carcinogenic virus. The SV40 Cancer Foundation shares the following on its website:

Upon the discovery that SV40 was an animal carcinogen that had found its way into the polio vaccines, a new federal law was passed in 1961 that required that no vaccines contain this virus. However, this law did not require that SV40 contaminated vaccines be thrown away or that the contaminated seed material (used to make all polio vaccines for the next four decades) be discarded. As a result, known SV40 contaminated vaccines were injected into children up until 1963. In addition, it has been alleged that there have been SV40-contaminated batches of oral polio vaccine administered to some children until the end of the 1990’s.¹⁴

Money Magazine published an article in 1996 titled “The Lethal Dangers of the Billion-Dollar Vaccine Business.” The author of the article, Andrea Rock, wrote of Michele Carbone, a molecular pathologist at Chicago’s Loyola University Medical Center, and his research on hamsters exposed to SV-40. According to Rock:

[Dr. Carbone] discovered SV-40 genes and proteins in 60% of patients with mesothelioma, a particularly deadly form of lung cancer, and in 38% of those with bone cancer. His most recent research . . . connects SV-40 and these cancers even more clearly by describing the mechanism through which SV-40 turns a cell cancerous. Carbone’s research shows that SV-40 switches off a protein that protects cells from becoming malignant. Not everyone who is infected with SV-40 gets cancer for the same reason that not every smoker gets lung cancer: A variety of assaults on the immune system usually combine to trigger malignancy. But SV-40 could be a factor that predisposes some people to develop tumors of the brain, bone, and tissue that surrounds the lung.15

In 1999, the journal Anticancer Research published similar findings in an article titled “Cancer risk associated with simian virus 40 contaminated polio vaccine.” Carbone’s name is listed as one of three names on the paper. The circumspect tone of the authors fails to mute the horrifying results:

Our analysis indicates increased rates of ependymomas (37%), osteogenic sarcomas (26%), other bone tumors (34%) and mesothelioma (90%) among those in the exposed as compared to the unexposed birth cohort. . . .

These data suggest that there may be an increased incidence of certain cancers among the 98 million persons exposed to contaminated polio vaccine in the US; further investigations are clearly justified.¹⁶

In 2002, the National Academy of Science Institute of Medicine (IOM) Immunization Safety Committee published their findings in an article titled “SV40 Contamination of Polio Vaccine and Cancer.” The committee concluded

. . . that the biological evidence is strong that SV40 is a transforming [i.e., cancer-causing] virus, . . . that the biological evidence is of moderate strength that SV40 exposure could lead to cancer in humans under natural conditions, [and] that the biological evidence is of moderate strength that SV40 exposure from the polio vaccine is related to SV40 infection in humans.¹⁷

The CDC tells a different story about SV40, and the language it uses to tell that story is not the language of science; it’s that of religious dogma. The title of the webpage supposedly dedicated to the discussion of risks associated with vaccines is “Historical Vaccine Safety Concerns.” SV40 is currently present in the bodies of millions of people throughout the world, and according to numerous respected scientists, the virus plays a part in the modern cancer epidemic. That’s not history; it’s a current and ongoing safety concern. The introductory paragraph to the CDC’s rendition of “Historical Vaccine Safety Concerns” is as follows:

There is solid medical and scientific evidence that the benefits of vaccines far outweigh the risks. Despite this, there have been concerns about the safety of vaccines for as long as they have been available in the US. This page will explain past vaccine safety concerns, how they have been resolved, and what we have learned.18

Summary: Benefits far outweigh risks. Safety concerns have been resolved. No worries now. Go back to sleep. The single paragraph dedicated to the discussion of SV40 contains the same elements:

Some of the polio vaccine administered from 1955 to 1963 was contaminated with a virus called simian virus 40 (SV40). The virus came from the monkey kidney cells used to produce the vaccines. Once the contamination was discovered in the Salk inactivated polio vaccine in use at that time, the US government established requirements for vaccine testing to verify that all new batches of the polio vaccine were free of SV40. Because of research done with SV40 in animal models, there was some concern that the virus could cause cancer. However, evidence suggests that SV40 has not caused cancer in humans.¹⁹

End of discussion. The Herd must now lie down beside the still waters and be quiet.

For those who desire more information, the CDC provides a link to a PDF document titled “Vaccine Safety and Your Child: Separating Fact from Fiction.” The link is dead, but the address indicates that the article was written by Paul Offit, the man made rich from his patented rotavirus vaccine and the man who said that babies can safely receive 100,000 vaccines. Very reassuring.

Less known than SV40 is the contamination of polio vaccines by the chimpanzee coryza virus, now known as respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). The British Medical Journal published a paper in 2012 authored by Dr. Viera Scheibner. According to the vaccine researcher and author,

RSV has spread via contaminated polio vaccines like a wildfire all over the world and continues causing serious lower respiratory tract infections in infants. . . .

Data from ten developing countries, with intense polio vaccination, showed RSV the most frequent cause of LRT infections (70% of all cases).

Polio vaccines are not only ineffective in preventing paralysis, they carry the risk of contamination with many harmful adventitious microorganisms, of which only some monkey viruses have been researched in more detail. Many other potentially dangerous microorganisms remain unaddressed.20

Returning to the discussion of the oral polio vaccine and the immunocompromised, it’s worth noting that OPV is not the only vaccine recommended for individuals based on their country rather than their health status. The CDC follows the recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) made specifically for residents of the USA. ACIP provides a unique set of recommendations “. . . for persons with altered immunocompetence” as follows:

In general, persons known to be HIV infected should not receive live-virus or live-bacteria vaccines. . . .

MMR vaccine should not be administered to severely immunocompromised persons. . . .

OPV should not be used to immunize immunocompromised patients, their household contacts, or nursing personnel in close contact with such patients. . . . Immunocompromised patients may be unable to limit replication of vaccine virus effectively, and administration of OPV to children with congenital immunodeficiency has resulted in severe, progressive neurologic involvement. . . . If OPV is inadvertently administered to a household or intimate contact (regardless of prior immunization status) of an immunocompromised patient, close contact between the patient and the recipient of OPV should be avoided for approximately 1 month after vaccination, the period of maximum excretion of vaccine virus. Because of the possibility of immunodeficiency in other children born to a family in which there has been one such case, OPV should not be administered to a member of a household in which there is a history of inherited immunodeficiency until the immune status of the recipient and other children in the family is documented.²¹

The ACIP’s recommendation also reads, “The degree to which an individual patient is immunocompromised should be determined by a physician.”²² It is unlikely that Ugandan doctors stand between vaccinators and gun-toting soldiers to prevent sick and malnourished children from receiving their latest round of undocumented live-virus vaccinations.

Russell Blaylock, MD, comments on the bizarre policy of vaccinating sick children in developing countries with vaccines that are now banned in the USA:

It . . . needs to be appreciated that children in developing countries are at a much greater risk of complications from vaccinations and from mercury toxicity than children in developed countries. This is because of poor nutrition, concomitant parasitic and bacterial infections and a high incidence of low birth weight in these children. We are now witnessing a disaster in African countries caused by the use of older live virus polio vaccines that has now produced an epidemic of vaccine related polio, that is, polio caused by the vaccine itself. In, fact, in some African countries, polio was not seen until the vaccine was introduced.

The WHO and the “vaccinologist experts” from this country now justify a continued polio vaccination program with this dangerous vaccine on the basis that now that they have created the epidemic of polio, they cannot stop the program. In a recent article it was pointed out that this is the most deranged reasoning, since more vaccines will mean more vaccine-related cases of polio.²⁴

India provides another example of the “deranged reasoning” that the WHO and other global vaccine architects use to justify the ongoing injuring and killing of millions of people already suffering from the effects of poverty. A 2010 Oxford analysis “concluded that there were more poor in India than in sub-Saharan Africa. Its 2014 analysis said the largest number of people classified as ‘destitute’ among developing countries was in India.”²⁵

The Hindustan Times reported in 2015 that more than 1,000 Indian children die every day from diarrhea, most caused by poor sanitation and hygiene and unsafe water. The article does not credit vaccines with childhood deaths, but endemic sickness, disease, and dying and dead children are proof that millions are living in a chronically immunocompromised state.²⁶

In 2012, the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics published an article that documents the horrific consequences of India’s ongoing use of the oral polio vaccine. The authors, Neetu Vashisht and Jacob Puliyel of the Department of Pediatrics at St Stephens Hospital, wrote,

. . . While India has been polio-free for a year, there has been a huge increase in non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP). In 2011, there were an extra 47,500 new cases of NPAFP. Clinically indistinguishable from polio paralysis but twice as deadly, the incidence of NPAFP was directly proportional to doses of oral polio received. Though this data was collected within the polio surveillance system, it was not investigated. The principle of primum-non-nocere [first do no harm] was violated.27

To put this into historical context, the CDC reports, “Polio reached a peak in the United States in 1952, with more than 21,000 paralytic cases.”²⁸

Jagannath Chatterjee suffered an adverse reaction to vaccination in 1979, which may have sparked his interest in vaccine research and activism. In 2014, the Indian researcher published an article on his website titled “India’s Polio-Free Status a Cruel Joke.” Part of that joke was demonstrated in the response of health officials to the problem of viral shedding from recently vaccinated individuals and subsequent paralysis and disease outbreaks. Chatterjee commented,

Because those vaccinated tend to shed the virus in their stool, it can mutate into a virulent form, causing paralytic polio in others, even leading to polio epidemics. When this phenomenon was noticed and reported by Indian doctors they were asked to increase the number of doses given to children!²⁹

The National Polio Surveillance Project data show that the polio eradication programme has increased paralysis among children—from 1,005 cases yearly in 1996 to 60,992 cases in 2012, most now being classified as NPAFP [Non-polio Acute Flaccid Paralysis] instead of polio. The government does not reveal how many of these cases are due to the vaccine. It was observed in 2005 that, against 66 cases of polio caused by the wild polio virus that year, 1,645 were caused by the vaccine. As the number of polio doses given to every child has increased exponentially over the years, the number of children affected by the vaccine has climbed new heights. Data reveals that those vaccinated are 6.26 times more likely to be paralysed. Doctors investigating the affected children have expressed anguish over how these children have been ignored by the government of India and have been left to fend for themselves. Deaths from the vaccine have also been reported.³⁰

In 1988, the World Health Assembly—the governing body of the World Health Organization—declared a crusade to eradicate polio, presumably for humanitarian purposes. Sabin’s oral polio vaccine was designated as the single weapon millions of vaccinators would use to achieve this goal.³²

Modern scientists know full well that there are a host of potential negative consequences associated with the quixotic attempt to bring viruses to extinction. In the case of polio, one such consequence is paralyzing hundreds of thousands with the vaccine meant to prevent paralysis. But that’s just the beginning. Like all living creatures, viruses evolve over time. Tinkering with viruses in laboratories results in novel life forms that have never existed in nature. So even if the global polio eradication initiative succeeds in eliminating the three viruses identified in the 1950s as the cause of polio, it will also result in novel viruses that may eclipse the pathogenicity of the original polioviruses.

According to Debabar Bannerjee, professor emeritus at Centre of Social Health and Medicine at Jawaharlal Nehru University, and other eminent doctors, “vaccine viruses had mutated into virulent strains and were circulating” in India since at least 2004, rendering polio eradication impossible.³³

Chatterjee notes that the 1950s notion that polio is solely caused by three enteroviruses is false. Researchers in the USA have already documented more virulent strains that have the potential to replace the three viruses targeted by both the IPV and the OPV: “This phenomenon may soon become global as viruses change roles in response to misguided efforts that seek to eliminate them.”³⁴

In addition, scientists have mapped the genetic sequence of the polioviruses. The eradication of wild polio coupled with the existence of synthetic polio is the stuff of bioterrorists’ dreams and the world’s nightmare: polio in a non-immunized human population. Vashisht and Puliyel state, “The synthesis of polio virus in 2002, made eradication impossible. It is argued that getting poor countries to expend their scarce resources on an impossible dream over the last 10 years was unethical.” They are not alone in their critique against the polio eradication plan. Critics include Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet, and Arthur L. Caplan, director of the University of Pennsylvania’s bioethics center.³⁵

According to Professor William Muraskin, author of Polio Eradication and Its Discontents: A Historian’s Journey Through an International Public Health (Un)Civil War, the global polio eradication initiative has a political element to it that taints its supposed humanitarian purpose:

The literature on polio eradication is written by, and for, public health people, and it is massive. Unfortunately, much of that literature has been generated by the global polio eradication campaign itself. Even when it is being self-critical (which is not uncommon), it assumes the “naturalness” and “inevitability” of polio eradication as a world goal, with the aim of supporting, justifying, and making the campaign more effective. In other words, it takes for granted the question that needs answering: Why polio eradication? In addition, many of the key articles dealing with polio policy questions show signs of being significantly affected by “political” considerations in the conclusions that they reach. . . . [T]he public health literature on polio eradication is less a “scientific” literature than one would like or expect it to be. Especially disturbing is the discovery that conclusions of articles often do not follow the logic of the evidence presented in the heart of the text. When it comes to policy questions, the published literature is too often more a “hostile witness” than the objective resource it purports to be.36

Muraskin also noted in his book that from the first meetings in which the eradication of polio was discussed, scientists doubted the viability of such a plan.³⁷

Meanwhile, decades later, the CDC is already referring to the “lasting legacy” of the eradication of polio as the only possible outcome:

When the spread of wild polio virus (WPV) is stopped, the international partners expect to plan and carry out a series of activities in various stages to certify the eradication of polio and minimize the possibility that the disease will return. . . .

The expansion of the national delivery systems that brought polio vaccine to remote and medically underserved populations, paving the way for other preventive health services, will be a lasting legacy of the GPEI.³⁸

According to a 1999 article published by the CDC, the failure to eradicate polio is not a public relations option: “A failure, especially in achieving poliomyelitis eradication, could as certainly call into question the credibility of the public health profession as did the collapse of the disastrous malaria eradication effort.”³⁹

The polio eradication programme epitomises nearly everything that is wrong with donor funded ‘disease specific’ vertical projects, at the cost of investments in community-oriented primary health care (horizontal programmes). . . .

With polio eradication there was a huge increase in non-polio AFP, in direct proportion to the number of doses of the vaccine used. Though all the data was collected within an excellent surveillance system, the increase was not investigated openly. Another question ethicists will ask, is why champions of the programme continued to exhort poor countries to spend scarce resources on a programme they should have known, in 2002, was never going to succeed.⁴¹

Chatterjee takes the rebuke up a level by calling for the legal prosecution against the perpetrators of India’s modern epidemic of “non-polio” polio outbreaks:

It is very important to find out exactly who have benefitted from the programme and take heed of calls by ethical doctors like Phadke that those guilty must be identified and punished. He says, “It is necessary that all these children who have lost their limbs be fully rehabilitated, and their parents adequately compensated. Criminal liability should be ascertained for those officials who have suppressed this information of breakup of follow-up of AFP cases, and those officials and policymakers who are responsible for continuing this policy of Polio Eradication Initiative.”⁴²

Those “who have benefitted from the programme” likely include members of the World Health Organization. Several doctors including Dr. Debabar Bannerjee, quoted previously, wrote a letter to WHO officials, charging them with inflating cases of wild polio “to justify the programme” and also repeatedly redefining polio “since the programme was launched, thus automatically leading to a drastic fall in the number of cases.”⁴³

Redefining statistics to promote the safety and efficacy of vaccines that are neither safe nor effective is yet another legacy of the vaccine story.

Whether by accident or by design, the CDC mastered the art of redefinition from the onset of the polio vaccine program. When the vaccines first hit the market, virtually all cases of infantile paralysis were attributed to polio. By 1958, the polio pie had been divided into at least ten different conditions including: coxsackie or ECHO enteroviruses, congenital syphilis, arsenic and DDT toxicity, transverse myelitis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, hand, foot, and mouth disease, lead poisoning, and provocation of limb paralysis by intramuscular injections of many types, including a variety of vaccines.⁴⁵

In the previous chapter, a portion of Dr. Viera Scheibner’s letter to The Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources was quoted, demonstrating the false narrative surrounding the smallpox vaccine. Following is the portion of her letter addressing polio:

Polio has not been eradicated by vaccination, it is lurking behind a redefinition and new diagnostic names like viral or aseptic meningitis. When the first, injectable, polio vaccine was tested on some 1.8 million children in the United States in 1954, within 9 days there was huge epidemic of paralytic polio in the vaccinated and some of their parents and other contacts. The US Surgeon General discontinued the trial for 2 weeks. The vaccinators then put their heads together and came back with a new definition of poliomyelitis. The old, classical, definition: a disease with residual paralysis which resolves within 60 days has been changed to a disease with residual paralysis which persists for more than 60 days. Knowing the reality of polio disease, this nifty but dishonest administrative move excluded more than 90% of polio cases from the definition of polio. Ever since then, when a polio-vaccinated person gets polio, it will not be diagnosed as polio, it will be diagnosed as viral or aseptic meningitis. According to one of the 1997 issues of the MMWR [Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report], there are some 30,000 to 50,000 cases of viral meningitis per year in the United States alone. That’s where all those 30,000 - 50,000 cases of polio disappeared after the introduction of mass vaccination. One must also be aware that polio is a man-made disease since those well-publicized outbreaks are misrepresented that those huge outbreaks were causally linked to intensified diphtheria and other vaccinations at the relevant time. They even have a name for it: provocation poliomyelitis.⁴⁶

[h]e quoted another doctor that “wherever DDT had been used intensively against polio, not only was there an epidemic of the syndrome I have described but the incidence of polio continued to rise and in fact appeared where it had not been before.

“This is not surprising since it is known that not only can DDT poisoning produce a condition that may easily be mistaken for polio in an epidemic but also being a nerve poison itself, may damage cells in the spinal cord and thus increase the susceptibility to the virus.”

“Facts are stubborn,” Biskind concluded, “and refusal to accept them does not avoid their inexorable effects—the tragic consequences are now upon us.”⁴⁸

How might the state of public health be different today if it had modeled public health policy based on the disease-reducing policy instituted by the British town of Leicester’s anti-vaccinators of the 1800s? How would the world be different if public health officials emphasized wholesome organic foods over toxic pharmaceutical formulations found in vaccines and other drugs? How might the world be different if public health officials studied to learn why 99% of the population experience polio much as they might experience a common cold? What do the 99% possess that protects them from experiencing the paralyzing effects of polio? What do the remaining 1% lack that makes them vulnerable to paralysis? What can be done to increase natural protective factors in immunocompromised individuals? How can the human race work with nature rather than fight against nature to increase mutual health and well-being? If public health had done more to promote healthy immune systems and done less to manipulate immune systems with vaccines, would the world be burdened with the ongoing cancer epidemic? Would the world know AIDS? Would the children in the USA and much of the rest of the world be suffering from a host of other chronic health problems and disabilities?

The suffering of polio’s victims is honored by learning all of its lessons, including the danger of environmental toxins and the perils of ignoring their role in modern disease; the risk of focusing all of our energy on vaccinations as magic bullets, and the fundamental ethical obligation to search for the truth without fear or favor. Only then can we work out the real nature of illnesses that confront us here and now, ranging from autism to Parkinson’s to the persistence of poliomyelitis itself. Only then can we begin to prevent such disasters as The Age of Polio.49

Inasmuch as Africans may have suffered more harm from the devastating consequences of vaccinations than any other people, it is appropriate to conclude this chapter with a quote from Kihura Nkuba, who provides a poignant African perspective and asks a question that international public health officials should be required to answer:

In Africa polio does not kill anybody and they say it’s very rare to catch. It’s really very rare to get paralytic polio. . . . So what is it that is killing people in Africa? Malaria. Every five seconds a child is dying of malaria in Africa. Now to get the dose of life-saving anti-malaria is about $5 but there is no government to give anti-malaria. When somebody gets malaria, if they have no money they even die.

So the question I was asking and many people were asking was “If you really want to help children, why begin with a disease that they don’t have?”50

Well-meaning or not, people who support global vaccination initiatives are in fact party to policies that perpetrate ill-gotten pharmaceutical profits as well as institutional racism, classism, and genocide—policies that will certainly return home with ill will, hatred, and violence and may also return home in the form of plagues far greater than the diseases they hope to contain or eradicate.

Chapter Seven

POLIO VACCINE:
MORE LORE, MORE LIES

Chapter Seven

POLIO VACCINE: MORE LORE, MORE LIES

POLIO VACCINE:
MORE LORE, MORE LIES