Research into concerns over the use of formaldehyde in vaccines is examined closely in our book VACCINE SCIENCE REVISITED: Are Childhood Immunizations As Safe As Claimed?

Relevant excerpts from the book relating to this vexing issue, and other issues concerning vaccine safety, follow:

When formaldehyde enters a cell, it attaches itself to the DNA strand. This can be concerning because it can cause certain genes to be turned off when we need them turned on. Once this happens it’s very difficult to reverse or turn back on[184].

Dexter French wrote a research paper on using formaldehyde in vaccines. He expressed concern about its stability: “Formaldehyde, however, owing to the very compact structure of the molecule and its high reactivity, is a particularly versatile reagent with a vast range of possible reactions.”[185]

On the National Institute of Health’s (NIH) Open Chemistry Database, it says that liquid form of FA (formalin) “is considered a hazardous compound, and its vapor toxic.”[186] It also says: “Formaldehyde is a Standardized Chemical Allergen. “Aqueous formaldehyde is corrosive to carbon steel, […]. “When liquid formaldehyde is warmed to room temp in a sealed ampule, it polymerizes rapidly with the evolution of heat […]”[187]  

Under the header Disinfectants, it defines formaldehyde as: “[…] used on inanimate objects that destroy harmful microorganisms or inhibit their activity. Disinfectants are classed as complete, destroying SPORES as well as vegetative forms of microorganisms, […]”[188]

It sounds to us like formaldehyde in liquid form can have harmful effects. We understand the dosing is the argument here, but a safe dose is not the same for every single person. And how does formaldehyde react…

Synergism Unfortunately, in vaccines, it seems the synergistic effects of the toxins have never been studied. However, other fields of study have expressed concern for toxic synergism and researched the synergistic effects it has on our bodies when exposed to multiple toxins simultaneously. As with the paper we mentioned earlier regarding accumulation of formaldehyde, this study shows synergistic effects when…

The interesting part of the study was the fact that when the mice were exposed to toxins alone or formaldehyde alone, it “had little or no effect on the mouse brain.” When the mice were co-exposed to air pollutants and formaldehyde, it “had a significant synergistic adverse effect.”[190]

The paper also states that “[t]hese safe levels for alone exposure turned into dangerous at co-exposure.”[193]

A study by the biopharmaceutical company, Pfizer, showed the impact formaldehyde and other impurities can have on the proteins used in their pharmaceutical products. The authors of this paper made note of the fact that p80 is efficient at forming formaldehyde: “Both formaldehyde and formic acid can be formed from oxidative degradation of polysorbates.”[196]

The authors don’t just concern themselves with polysorbates, of which polysorbate 80 appears most potent, they state that: “These residual impurities and contaminants can potentially impact the protein stability significantly.”[197]

In their conclusion they summarize the limitations of the manufacturing process by saying that: “Although many process-related impurities are routinely monitored, contaminants are generally not, […]. This is because the level of these contaminants in a drug product is often too low to be detected by traditional analytical methods, and does not lead to serious safety concerns.”[198] We find their comment that “it does not lead to safety concerns” after stating these “contaminants can potentially impact the protein stability significantly” rather interesting given much of the paper is about safety concerns.

So, we have known this for at least 25 years, yet when it’s put in vaccines scientists don’t bother to test it. It appears that once these substances have been added to the vaccine, the concern for toxicity magically disappears.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) reviewed the potency of EtO and observed that in mammalian cells, its: “[…] effects include gene mutations, micronucleus formation, chromosomal aberrations, cell transformation, unscheduled DNA synthesis, sister chromatid exchange, and DNA strand breaks.”[234]

Sounds to us like the perfect recipe for causing cancer. And on that note, how much does vaccine research take into account long term, harmful health effects as opposed to merely childhood health risks? For example, how much research takes into account whether vaccines in childhood could cause autoimmune disorders in early adulthood, or cancer in middle-age, or Alzheimer’s disease (AD) in old age?

One cannot help but wonder about the vaccines’ role in all this. As our brain uses a lot of oxygen, it is prone to much oxidative stress. Compared to a healthy active person, the brain of an infant or an elderly person is less likely to be able to fight the stress. This can lead to such things as Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and Parkinson’s disease in the elderly[252].

According to our calculations, this means that a substance needs to contain 400 ppb of thimerosal to be considered hazardous waste. Compared to the 50,000 ppb thimerosal in the influenza vaccine, we can safely say that it contains more than a hundred times more thimerosal than the legal limit of a toxic waste.

It’s important to note not all flu vaccines contain thimerosal. There are flu vaccines available that are labeled “thimerosal-free”. We encourage those who decide to be vaccinated against the flu to ask which flu vaccine you’re about to receive.

We’re not sure how relevant their findings are because, as we understand it, all they are saying is that it appears the GSH is clearing out the mercury as it’s supposed to do or that the body is actively eliminating the toxin. These are healthy infants, so this is to be expected. But the paper makes no mention of the expected amount of mercury to be excreted when injected with the vaccines these infants were given.

Since they didn’t collect stool sample from the control group, in order to compare and to see if dietary sources contaminated with mercury could be a factor, they chose nine other babies (unrelated to the study) who had not been injected with thimerosal-containing vaccine. The babies in this group, which was less than half the size of the regular control group, turned out to have a “significantly lower” amount of mercury in their stool. This is only to be expected and not at all surprising. God only knows why they deviated from the study design in this manner, omitting the control group infants and picking nine other infants who were not a part of the study, is a mystery to us. They didn’t explain this.

The researchers also measured the blood half-life of ethylmercury by measuring the mercury blood levels consistently over many days. In the end they estimated the half-life to be seven days. This means that when the mercury was no longer measurable in the blood, it was assumed to be cleared out of the body.

To be continued…


VACCINE SCIENCE REVISITED: Are Childhood Immunizations As Safe As Claimed? (The Underground Knowledge Series Book 8) by [Morcan, James, Morcan, Lance]

Vaccine Science Revisited  is available via Amazon:

(Book’s Amazon review rating = 4.4 out of 5 stars).



We devote considerable space to the use of aluminum in vaccines in our book VACCINE SCIENCE REVISITED: Are Childhood Immunizations As Safe As Claimed? – as the following excerpts show:

A research paper on the effects of aluminum in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) from 2011 states: “Whilst being environmentally abundant, aluminum is not essential for life. On the contrary, aluminum is widely recognized neurotoxin that inhibits more than 200 biologically important functions and causes various adverse effects in plants, animals and humans.” [124]

A Dr. Thomas Jefferson[125] was “funded to investigate vaccine safety by the European Commission,”[126] and was at the time “the head of the vaccine division of the Cochrane Collaboration”[127]… In a research paper on aluminum in diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis (DTP) vaccines from 2004, Dr. Jefferson states that: “We found no evidence that aluminium salts in vaccines cause any serious or long-lasting adverse events…”

To help validate her argument, she continues to use Dr. Jefferson’s own words, this time from 2002 where he states that: “Most safety studies on childhood vaccines have not been conducted thoroughly enough to tell whether the jabs cause side effects. […] There is some good research, but it is overwhelmed by the bad.  The public has been let down because the proper studies have not been done.”[135]

We understand her argument and feel our notion on the studies’ lack of weight has been validated. The authors are suggesting we can actually make scientifically firm conclusions on limited data?

They also observed that the amygdala in the vaccinated monkeys didn’t mature with time as it was supposed to. The amygdala, incidentally, plays an important role in social interactions… What this means is the research showed that the social behavior of those monkeys that received the actual vaccines, where the DPN levels did not decrease, turned anti-social.

Scientists may not know exactly which parts of the vaccines our body decides to react to. Each person reacts so differently. But it seems likely there is validity in questioning vaccine safety when a concoction of substances is used to provoke our immune system.

Because each immune system is different, scientists can’t predict its reaction when presented with something foreign. Especially when the vaccine contains scientifically proven neurotoxins, such as aluminum.

When scientists use the entire germ in the vaccine, they have to kill it or weaken it substantially before putting it into the vaccine. In order to do this, they use a chemical. The most common chemical for this process is Formaldehyde (FA) or Formalin (liquid form of formaldehyde).

Many scientists have expressed concern about injecting embalming fluid into the bodies of little infants. We thought therefore we should take a closer look at the validity of this concern. In order to do this, we need to know which part of our body it affects and what formaldehyde does when directly exposed to our cells.

During our research digging we found it difficult to understand how so many scientific studies out there can be studying the exact same thing, yet their conclusions completely contradict each other. Formaldehyde studies are no exception. If each study can be replicated by a third party in the laboratory, how the results can vary so greatly?

Some health professionals are concerned about formaldehyde accumulating in the body. For example, Sherri Tenpenny, Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine (DO), who has great insight into the field of natural health, argues that by the time a child is five, they have received 1.795 mg Formaldehyde.

Dr. Tenpenny says: “Through sloppy and negligent math, lawmakers and manufacturers fail to throw up a red flag regarding the large amount of formaldehyde injected into young bodies with developing brains, neurological systems and organs.”[168]

We found a study that measured accumulated formaldehyde in the brain. Yes, apparently accumulated formaldehyde does exist. The study showed that the more it accumulates, the less there will be “cognitive abilities during human aging”[175]. The more severe the dementia in Alzheimer’s disease patients, the higher the formaldehyde accumulation[176].

Something else the authors of that study observed was when we age, the “accumulation of formaldehyde” prevents “new formation of spatial memory (i.e., learning difficulty)” [177].

Another observation was that in late stage Alzheimer’s disease there’s “chronic accumulation of hippocampal formaldehyde” which “induces loss of remote memory.” What caught our attention was the paper listed a correlation between the presence of both mercury and formaldehyde (as an environmental factor)[178].

This study was not done on children, but on adults with Alzheimer’s disease. We wonder if there’s any type of defect in our ability to clear formaldehyde out of the body and that somehow renders the aforementioned short half-life to be irrelevant? Can this formaldehyde accumulation start as early as with the administration of childhood…

To be continued…


VACCINE SCIENCE REVISITED: Are Childhood Immunizations As Safe As Claimed? (The Underground Knowledge Series Book 8) by [Morcan, James, Morcan, Lance]

Vaccine Science Revisited  is available via Amazon:

(Book’s average Amazon review rating = 4.4 out of 5 stars).



Further to our last blog, here’s more quotes (below) from our recent release book VACCINE SCIENCE REVISITED: Are Childhood Immunizations As Safe As Claimed? 

We rely almost entirely on our mother’s antibodies until we are about six months old, which is when we slowly start developing a more complex immune system. As a baby starts building its own immunity, the mother’s antibodies disappear from the baby’s body.

Something we weren’t quite able to figure out was why babies receive so many vaccines before they start creating their own antibodies. A vaccine is meant to encourage the body to create antibodies against it.  We can see how vaccinating an infant that’s not good at creating its own antibodies yet, would only have limited protective effects.

We also wondered whether the vaccine would therefore have a different effect on the infant than it would on a child with a fully developed immune system. Although we came up short on some of these concerns, we were able to get some answers we’ll share with you in this book.

Given the way vaccinations are presented to our system, it seems to us there may be other factors than antibody concentration to consider. We found an interesting older study in The Lancet that tested individuals who were unable to produce their own antibodies[93]. When these individuals came down with measles, they showed all the natural signs and symptoms of natural disease. After the course of the illness, they became immune to measles. The scientists conducting this study had blood drawn from these patients and tested it for antibody levels. There were no antibodies for measles in the blood (serum) samples.  This goes to show that the immune system can create immunity against a disease without producing antibodies. And this means the immunity had nothing to do with Th2 cells or B cells, which are a part of the acquired (adaptive) immunity.

The immune system needs to be artificially triggered and tricked into attacking these useless invaders. As a solution to this problem, scientists came up with the idea of attaching a substance to the vaccine antigen that would trigger B cells to produce antibodies. This substance is called an adjuvant.

Up until the early 2000s, mercury was often used as an adjuvant. As a result of some severe consequences and pressure from concerned citizens, mercury was eliminated from most vaccines.

The scientists knew the vaccine still needed an adjuvant if it was going to elicit an immune response. So, they added al…

This raised two important questions for us: How many antigens are there in a vaccine; and when injecting multiple vaccines simultaneously, could this accumulation of adjuvants be more harmful – especially for infants?

Keep in mind, it isn’t natural for the body to be exposed to a variety of diseases all at the same time, especially all bypassing the innate immune system (first responders). And yet how many times have you heard of children being naturally sick with multiple childhood diseases all at the same time?

One of those popular, across-the-board-ingredients, as long as it is not a live/attenuated vaccine, is the aluminum (Al) adjuvant.

Aluminum is a neurotoxin and the most commonly used adjuvant today. It comes in the form of salts or gels. It irritates our immune system, causing it to attack the invading germ or antigen it’s attached to.

It’s very important the person being vaccinated has healthy kidneys as they are a vital part of eliminating aluminum (Al) from the blood.

“Experimental research, however, clearly shows that aluminum adjuvants have a potential to induce serious immunological disorders in humans. In particular, aluminum in adjuvant form carries a risk for autoimmunity, long-term brain inflammation and associated neurological complications […].”[109]

We noticed when researching narrow subjects, it’s often the same authors involved in much of the research. This is unfortunate, as it would be great to have reliable data from various authors.

“The literature demonstrates clearly negative impacts of aluminum on the nervous system across the age span.”[110]

Other aluminum-associated disorders include lupus, diabetes, Alzheimer’s disease (AD), arthritis, Hashimoto’s, Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) and many others. We investigate some of them in more depth in future chapters.

There is enough aluminum in the vaccine to aggravate our immune system to the point it tricks our cells into thinking we have a living germ invading our body. In fact, the body starts attacking the dead or dissected germ. Yet, somehow, the aluminum is not strong enough to damage our cells?

Protecting our brain from foreign substances is the blood-brain barrier (BBB). This barrier protects our brain and spinal cord. Apart from problems resulting from an immature, aged or diseased blood-brain barrier, there are many toxins that can damage it – aluminum and mercury included.

When reviewing multiple papers on the same topic, we have noticed it’s quite common to find inconsistencies in the observations recorded. Research that should be reproducible and therefore consistent regardless of which scientists are performing it, appears to diminish the closer we look.

To be continued


VACCINE SCIENCE REVISITED: Are Childhood Immunizations As Safe As Claimed? (The Underground Knowledge Series Book 8) by [Morcan, James, Morcan, Lance]

Vaccine Science Revisited  is available via Amazon:


“Again though, it’s also nearly impossible to distinguish between fake data and true data. So in the end, it’s difficult to know which scientific authors or papers to trust when researching immunization studies. To combat this, James and Lance have searched for consistency using papers from multiple authors in order to uncover true or accurate data.”

That’s one of my favorite quotes from our book VACCINE SCIENCE REVISITED: Are Childhood Immunizations As Safe As Claimed? – lifted from the book’s Foreword, which was penned by US medical laboratory scientist Elísabet Norris.


VACCINE SCIENCE REVISITED: Are Childhood Immunizations As Safe As Claimed? (The Underground Knowledge Series Book 8) by [Morcan, James, Morcan, Lance]


Other quotes from the book follow:

Focusing on our cellular levels is so important in this field of research because cells cover our entire body. So rather than narrowing our perspective solely to damage within one location of the body, we obtain a broader, more holistic view by studying the influence of vaccine ingredients on cells. It becomes clear when reading this book that what happens in one part of the body has consequences on other parts of the body as well.

A lifetime’s interest in health combined with our previous investigations into the medical sector, or sectors, had taught us that nature often finds ways to take care of itself, the human body included. We realized early on in our research there was a real concern about introducing the body to toxins it has never had to deal with before. Toxins that enter the body unnaturally and bypass our natural defense system.

…after we started reading the package inserts for each vaccine, we realized that all the inserts come with warnings on who should not be given vaccines. Check these package inserts out. They make for very interesting reading.

It’s an unfortunate truth that modern science, like mainstream medicine, has been shown to be corrupt at times, or unconsciously biased at other times, and is often fallible.

One good piece of advice we received from our medical advisory team was that after we found any research papers that met the qualifying criteria, we couldn’t just read the abstract or the conclusion. This, our experts informed us, was the problem for many health professionals. They simply don’t have the time to read the research, so they make do with the abstract or sometimes just the study’s conclusion. This forced us to read through entire research papers.

The vaccine types can be organized into four categories: live/attenuated (weakened) vaccines, inactivated/killed vaccines, toxoid vaccines and subunit/conjugate vaccines[66].

Vaccines that are manufactured this way are the rotavirus, measles-mumps-rubella (MMR), smallpox and chickenpox vaccines.

Technically, a virus is not a living thing, yet we consider them (viruses) living in terms of vaccines. Because virus is not alive, it can’t replicate on its own. So, in order to produce live viral vaccines, living cells are needed in order to do the replication for it.

Since we’re not really aware these viruses exist, we don’t know how they will affect the human body when injected, nor do we know how to test for them. These unintended viruses are often called passenger viruses.

The concern scientists had regarding passenger viruses was not unfounded. You may recall the disastrous SV40 monkey virus which contaminated the polio vaccines. There are scientists who claim this virus is the cause of multiple human cancers. On CDC’s website a page on vaccine safety, which was suddenly removed (archived copies exist), states that: “SV40 virus has been found in certain types of cancer in humans, but it has not been determined that SV40 causes these cancers.”[84]

The concern arises when these materials become a danger to our body, which becomes overwhelmed from being bombarded with toxins and protein particles. This attack is, for some children, too much to handle, and they suffer permanent ill health or lose the fight to live.

We understand that even before vaccinations, diseases killed huge numbers of people all over the world. As we mentioned at the end of the first chapter, when populations grew and people started living closer together, germs had more opportunities to spread amongst humans, especially where sanitation was a major problem. So, it makes us wonder if with improved living conditions would these diseases have been such a big issue? Did scientists become too focused on being a part of the medical revolution to see that perhaps the real solution lies in improving our environment?


To be continued


Vaccine Science Revisited  is available via Amazon:  



★★★★★ “Definitely not a book to be missed.” -Amazon Top 500 reviewer Carol Newsom

Morcan Books & Films

The link between diet and health is well proven and, more importantly, widely acknowledged by doctors, for ailments such as diabetes and heart disease, but are roundly ignored by them in treating other human conditions – cancer being one of those. We address this in our book Medical Industrial Complex, and we ask why mainstream (Western) medicine seems to go out of its way to discourage cancer patients from making too much of the cancer-diet connection.

Image result for cancer diets

Further to our blog of October 28, here’s another excerpt from Medical Industrial Complex:

The good health site  neatly addresses this in an article quoting Dr. Carolyn Dean, a medical advisory board member of the nonprofit Nutritional Magnesium Association. She says, “There are many reasons why diet is not stressed in cancer treatment” and “Most of them stem from the fact that medicine does not put any emphasis on nutrition…

View original post 568 more words

Our adventure-romance epic Fiji: A Novel (The World Duology Book 2)  appears to have resonated with this Fijian book blogger and reviewer…

★★★★★ “As a Fijian, I find the old traditions of our people fascinating and just as great as they are crude and gruesome. The novel touches on most of these now extinct practices, in mad detail and it’s AWESOME! … Racial prejudice, religion, culture and family were the underlying messages … The adventure, fast-paced and nail biting … The romance, sizzling, exciting, forbidden … I give it 5 stars because that’s the maximum amount of stars we’re allowed to give.” -Random Writings Book Reviews (Suva, Fiji)


Book: Fiji - A Novel (The World Duology Book 2) by James & Lance Morcan

As the pharaohs of ancient Egypt build their mighty pyramids, and Chinese civilization evolves under the Shang Dynasty, adventurous seafarers from South East Asia begin to settle the far-flung islands of the South Pacific. The exotic archipelago of Fiji is one of the last island groups to be discovered and will remain hidden from the outside world for many centuries to come. By the mid-1800’s, Fiji has become a melting pot of cannibals, warring native tribes, sailors, traders, prostitutes, escaped convicts and all manner of foreign undesirables. It’s in this hostile environment an innocent young Englishwoman and a worldly American adventurer find themselves.


Fiji: A Novel is available as a paperback and Kindle ebook via Amazon:



★★★★★ “A book sure to inspire debate.” -Author J. Rogers Barrow

Morcan Books & Films

The Catcher in the Rye Enigma: J.D. Salinger's Mind Control Triggering Device or a Coincidental Literary Obsession of Criminals? (The Underground Knowledge Series Book 4)

In our book The Catcher in the Rye Enigma, we observe that J.D. Salinger’s bestselling novel The Catcher in the Rye is now ‘required reading’ in most high school English courses in the US and throughout much of the Western world. This despite the fact it has been banned by various schools and libraries, and criticized by numerous parent and teacher groups as being immoral literature due to its use of profanity and themes of excessive rebellion and alienation.

The Catcher in the Rye

Salinger’s classic novel.

We explore this in the following excerpt from (our book) The Catcher in the Rye Enigma:

The fact that The Catcher in the Rye  is now required reading has inspired some conspiracy theorists – most probably of the Tinfoil Hat variety – to envisage a grand conspiracy in which mind control is being conducted on a mass scale in order to corrupt, pacify or otherwise…

View original post 188 more words