Posts Tagged ‘Nursing’

MEDICAL INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX: The $ickness Industry, Big Pharma and Suppressed Cures (The Underground Knowledge Series Book 3) by [Morcan, James, Morcan, Lance]

Book 3 in The Underground Knowledge Series is a no-holds barred critique of mainstream medicine and the various players who make up one of the largest and most profitable industries on the planet. This explosive book explores the contention that Big Pharma and other participants in the healthcare sector put profits ahead of patients’ wellbeing and dollars ahead of lives. It leaves no doubt that something has run a mock in the medical field, and what should be the noblest profession has been severely compromised by the various conflicting interests. 

 

“Great read for anyone engaging with the Health Care system and especially Health Care providers who are numb to the subtle corrosive influence of Big-Pharma corruption. A broad and insightful overview of the corrupting culture of corporate Medicine, and the unenviable situation the medical establishment finds itself. Totally dependent upon Big Pharma and its mates in the Food Chain system. Sobering, and not new. We all need a shake up.” –Dr. Kevin Coleman, MB.BS. MPH. MasterGP Psychiatry, FRACGP

 

Medical Industrial Complex  is available exclusively via Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/MEDICAL-INDUSTRIAL-COMPLEX-Suppressed-Underground-ebook/dp/B00Y8Y3TUM/

 

**********************************************

Advertisements

The following exerts from our book VACCINE SCIENCE REVISITED: Are Childhood Immunizations As Safe As Claimed?  address the inextricably linked issues of vaccine ingredients and child health:

It is impossible to determine the maximum amount of a substance one child or infant can have based on the amount given to another child. We see evidence of this every day in our daily lives. Let’s take 20 kindergartners for instance. It’s the first day of school and they’re all playing together in the same classroom. Some will come home sick while others won’t. We’re not saying this is the same thing, we are merely pointing out that humans can react very differently even when exposed to the exact same environment.

There appears to be enough toxic ingredients and unknown dangers packed into the solution we’re injected with. It should be mandatory to fully inform us before we consent to be vaccinated or have our children vaccinated. Such knowledge would empower us to make more informed decisions affecting our health and our children’s health.

To keep us in the dark on these dangers and force vaccination upon everyone feels highly unethical and undemocratic. To get a closer look at forced vaccinations, we visited a website for the vaccine schedules in EU countries[402]. It appears not all the countries in the European Union feel it’s necessary to force vaccinations on their children 18 months or younger. We discovered that although all 31 countries recommend vaccinations, 20 don’t mandate any of them.

Surprisingly, some of the countries don’t recommend the varicella vaccine. Only two (Italy and Latvia) mandate all the vaccines on the list (diptheria, tetanus, pertussis, hepB, polio, hib, measles, mumps, rubella, varicella).

Viruses are not considered living organisms and are unable to replicate without the help of a living host. It is therefore necessary to inject the vaccine virus into living cell cultures in order for it to make copies of itself.

“Leave your drugs in the chemist’s pot if you can cure the patient with food.” Hippocrates 420 BC. (Greek phycisian)

A paper on HUB in a DPT vaccine study on SIDS reported in 1992 that, to reconfirm what we said above, those who have a predisposition for SIDS or encephalopathy would not be given the vaccine for the study. Therefore, it doesn’t represent the actual risk of the vaccine[433]. Instead, these individuals are put in the unvaccinated group, which makes this group unfairly prone to illness or death.

In a nutshell, as we understand it, the authors of the study are expressing concerns that the study design is excluding the very people who are prone to adverse effects potentially triggered or caused by the vaccine. In their concluding remarks, they state: “The fact that such biases do exist makes it difficult to demonstrate convincingly that a vaccine is not responsible for rare, severe, adverse reactions.”

The WHO published a review on several DTP vaccine studies and infant deaths. They found the studies were designed or performed in a biased and inconsistent manner[435].

Perhaps the statement that stood out the most to us in the above-mentioned study was when the authors suggested that: “All currently available evidence suggests that DTP vaccine may kill more children from other causes than it saves from diphtheria, tetanus or pertussis. Though a vaccine protects children against the target disease it may simultaneously increase susceptibility to unrelated infections.”[438]

Another concern is when we vaccinate against a germ it can adapt to its environment and survive by changing its appearance enough so the vaccine doesn’t recognize it anymore. This means we now have a new germ strain created by the vaccines. Another side to this coin is the fact that usually germs already have multiple strains. Vaccinating for only one or few of them gives the other strains the opportunity to take their place.

And another concern we have is, if the criteria for what constitutes the symptoms keeps changing, should not the safety studies be reviewed or redone to mirror the updated criteria?

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:   https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07MQTN3CG/

(Book’s Amazon review rating = 4.5 out of 5 stars).

 

***********************************

The presence of glyphosate in vaccines is one of many concerns highlighted in our book VACCINE SCIENCE REVISITED: Are Childhood Immunizations As Safe As Claimed?

Excerpts from the book follow:

Since glyphosate isn’t really a vaccine ingredient, but rather a contaminant, how does it enter vaccines in the first place? Think about what vaccine viruses are grown in. The medium often consists of some type of animal source: “Contamination may come through bovine protein, bovine calf serum, bovine casein, egg protein and/or gelatin.”[344]

Of the 19 vaccines they tested, the vaccine that had the most glyphosate was the MMR II vaccine by Merck.

Both sugar beets and cow’s milk are contaminated with glyphosate. Keep this in mind when reading the ingredients of the medium (where the germ is grown). Think of yeast, for instance. The yeast needs to be living and therefore the medium is given nutrients[347] to keep it alive. These include nutrients such as galactose and glucose, or in simple terms, milk and sugar. The glucose being the sugar source and galactose is from the lactose in the milk.

The above paper says the MMR vaccine contained the most glyphosate, why is that? “This vaccine uses up to 12% hydrolysed gelatin as an excipient–stabilizer; as well as foetal bovine serum albumin, human serum albumin and residual chick embryo; all of w…

Monsanto realized that glyphosate kills bacteria, so, in 2010, they patented glyphosate as an antimicrobial[349]. The list of pathogens affected by glyphosate is very long. What needs to be considered also is the fact that bacterium that’s a pathogen in one part of the body is not necessarily a pathogen …

As a matter of fact, it has been shown that glyphosate “damages DNA and is a driver of mutations that lead to cancer.”[351]. This statement is based on using the US government GE crop data to find connections between glyphosate and 22 diseases, including stroke, diabetes, obesity, Alzheimer’s disease (AD), autism and multiple sclerosis (MS). This study also answers the question of how on earth crops can survive glyphosate while it’s killing everything else around it.

A ‘hazard assessment’ by the World Health Organization’s (WHO) International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) was released in March 2015 stating that glyphosate is “probably carcinogenic to humans.”[362]

Sleep is very important to human health. Stephanie Seneff, a senior research scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)[369], explains that in order for us to get good sleep, we need “to clear cellular debris”[370].

In her presentation, Dr. Seneff explains how the pineal gland releases melatonin. The melatonin then enters the fluid in our brain and spinal cord. Melatonin puts us in REM sleep. Without the shikimate pathway, there is no melatonin because the shikimate pathway produces the precursor for melatonin[371].

Dr. Seneff continues to explain how lack of REM sleep, together with a calcified pineal gland, has been linked to Alzheimer’s disease (AD). The pineal gland makes it possible for us to clean up our cellular debris, but when it’s calcified it doesn’t function properly…

Because the pineal gland is not protected by the blood-brain barrier (BBB), it’s more vulnerable to aluminum and mercury toxicity. When aluminum accumulates inside the pineal gland, it hinders its ability to clean cellular debris.

When a chemical that’s not supposed to be there enters our body, the consequences can range from not being a big deal at all to being life threatening. Most healthy individuals are able to take care of incoming toxicity and everything works out fine or at least seems to work out fine. We don’t always connect the dots to future illnesses.

Then there are individuals who have some dysfunction in their biological makeup they may not even know about. These dysfunctions may not cause any harm until they’re exposed to certain elements or toxins.

If glyphosate is so bad for us, why do we have so many research papers saying how great it is? A paper published in 2010, states that: “[…] glyphosate is a one in a 100-year discovery that is important for reliable global food production as penicillin is for battling disease.”[376]

Did the biological agent change? Did science change? How can they both be examining the same agent and reach opposite conclusions?

This is where science gets tricky and it’s easy to manipulate theories to mold a pleasing conclusion. Wordplay can be very confusing and misleading.  The minority report from the Congressional hearing in February 2018, which can be watched online[387], explains it this way: “According to IARC, a cancer ‘hazard’ is an agent that is capable of causing cancer under some circumstances, while a cancer ‘risk’ is an estimate of the carcinogenic effects expected from exposure to a cancer hazard.”

If you’re interested in Monsanto, we highly recommend listening to the entire hearing, where the Committee on Science, Space & Technology: “[…] describes some of the tactics Monsanto has used to control the public debate about glyphosate as well as the scientific studies that have been conducted to assess its potential harm. These efforts appear aimed at corrupting and disrupting any honest, thorough and complete scientific evaluation of glyphosate and its potential adverse impact on the public’s health.”[390]

We also find it difficult to know which papers are legit, but we feel the research showing how glyphosate affects our cells on so many levels is worthy of notice. Although the argument is that glyphosate doesn’t affect human cells, through the research we did for this chapter it’s evident to us that our gut bacteria, which contains the shikimate pathway, is vital to many of our functions, especially its co-operation with our pineal gland.

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:   https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07MQTN3CG/

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

***********************************

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

Amazon No.1 bestseller.

 

“Easily the most comprehensive work I have read on the subject of vaccine safety. This book is truly a masterpiece!” -Amazon Reviews

“Thought-provoking and very readable (with) 740 references with hyperlinks to the original papers.” -Pro-vaccine author and mom Lee Murray

“Possibly the most well-referenced work yet to explore this contentious healthcare subject.” –Medical Laboratory Scientist Elísabet Norris (B.S.)

“Essential book for any Medical Professional and/or parent trying to navigate the confusing world of childhood vaccines.” -Ila in Maine

 

To see all Amazon reviews for VACCINE SCIENCE REVISITED: Are Childhood Immunizations As Safe As Claimed?  go to: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07MQTN3CG/

 

***************************************

Whether scientists intended it to or not, vaccines are quite effective in causing the body to react in a way nature did not prepare it for. We elaborate on this in an early chapter of our new release book Vaccine Science Revisited: Are Childhood Immunizations As Safe As Claimed?

Excerpt follows:

Our own army of superheroes

“Birds born in cages think that flying is a disease.” -Alejandro Jodorowsky (Chilean-French filmmaker)

Vaccines entering the body come fully loaded with heavy artillery. Not all vaccine ingredients are well behaved, but rather are prone to vandalism once inside the body. In their defense, these ingredients are put in the vaccines because of their ability to ravage.

Whether the scientists intended it to or not, the vaccines are quite effective in causing the body to react in a way nature did not prepare it for. Most of the vaccine ingredients and trace elements are added in order to provide safety and efficacy. Each vaccine is different and comes with its own recipe and ingredients. So far, regardless of which vaccine it is or which recipe is used, our immune system reacts accordingly.

The body is extremely methodological in its defense/attack strategies. As authors, we felt it was very important to understand how some of these strategies work. The immune system is an extremely intelligent and intricate mechanism and we cannot possibly do it justice in only a few pages. In this chapter we share a fraction of its intricate puzzle, but hopefully it’s enough to make sense of how our bodies are designed to react when presented with foreign substances.

Concepts such as the immune system adjusting to a growing fetus bring to mind other instances that may have had similar outcomes. The body adjusts to the germs in the environment and is able to protect itself from these germs and even draw benefits from them.

Sometimes the germs are so clever at surviving and upholding their genetic makeup they become a part of our human DNA.

A recent article at Livescience.com mentions some research papers on how ancient viruses could be the reason humans have conscious thoughts, a functioning immune system and are able to develop embryo.

Another interesting finding the article points out is that we have a viral gene called the Arc gene . This gene plays an important role in writing genetic information and getting it across to other neurons. It’s so important, in fact, that without it, synapses will fade away. (A synapse is the area where the nerve signalling takes place: From the axon terminal, across the synaptic cleft and over to the dendrite). People who have been diagnosed with autism or other atypical neural diseases have been shown to have a dysfunctioning Arc gene.

Having read some of the massive amount of information on vaccines and related topics, we do wonder if our bodies would have evolved in such a way to withstand the diseases that concern us today without help of drugs or vaccines.

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?

The story of surgeon Ignas Semmelweis, who claimed washing hands would make childbirth much safer, is one example of improving the environment. He is now known for the recognize-explain-act approach, which is still used today as an epidemiological model for preventing infections.

 

References for Chapter 7: Our own army of superheroes:

Letzter, R. (2018, February 2). An Ancient Virus May Be Responsible for Human Consciousness. Retrieved from https://www.livescience.com/61627-anc

https://www.genecards.org/cgi-bin/car

WHO Guidelines on Hand Hygiene in Health Care: First Global Patient Safety Challenge Clean Care Is Safer Care. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2009. 4, Historical perspective on hand hygiene in health care. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NB

 

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: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07MQTN3CG/

****************************************

In the following excerpt from our bestselling, new release book, VACCINE SCIENCE REVISITED: Are Childhood Immunizations As Safe As Claimed?, we highlight germs and different types of vaccines. You’ll see we discovered the differences between some vaccine types doesn’t seem to be clearly understood by many we’ve come across in the medical field.

 

“Without laboratories men of science are soldiers without arms.” -Louis Pasteur (French biologist)

 

Some inactivated vaccines use the entire germ, while others use disease-causing portions of the germ. In vaccines containing the whole germ, scientists will inactivate or kill the germ in order to prevent viral replication. They do this by using chemicals. A chemical that’s very good at this job is formaldehyde (FA) or formalin (liquid form of FA).

Even though the germ is killed and can no longer replicate, it’s still whole, so our immune system is able to recognize it and attack it.

Unfortunately, the killed germ doesn’t keep our body immune as long as a living germ will, so we need to get booster shots every so often to keep the immune response up. Examples of vaccines using killed germs are Hepatitis A and polio (shot).

Inactivated toxins (toxoids) vaccine

When the disease is caused by bacteria, it’s often not the actual bacteria itself causing the sickness, but rather a toxic component of the bacteria. The goal of this vaccine is to inactivate the toxic component (toxoid), so it can be injected into our body without harming it. Toxoids are not quite the same as toxins. Toxins are the pure product of the bacteria and toxoids are the toxins after they have been chemically altered or inactivated in the lab.

Examples of toxoid vaccines are diphtheria and tetanus.

Subunit/conjugate/recombinant vaccine

The differences between these types of vaccines (subunit/conjugate/recombinant) doesn’t seem to be clearly understood by many we’ve come across in the medical field.

Subunit vaccines use only portions of the germ or as the NIH website explains it, they “include only the antigens that best stimulate the immune system.”

The conjugate vaccines, on the other hand, use only the bacterial sugar coat in order to “disguise a bacterium’s antigens so that the immature immune systems of infants and younger children can’t recognize or respond to them.” The coating also contains the information that makes us sick.

But this is not an actual germ, so if it is just injected into the body by itself, we won’t recognize how dangerous the coating is. To solve this problem, the scientists attach it to a toxic molecule that will stir up our immune system. In order to attach the coating to the toxin, they need other chemicals to finish the job. By using a chemical, the coating material attaches to a carrier protein. Examples of these types of vaccines are the Hib, HPV, pneumococcal and meningococcal vaccines.

The recombinant vaccines, use carriers or vectors “to introduce microbial DNA to cells of the body.” These carriers/vectors are weakened viruses or bacteria, meaning they mix and match DNA from different sources into one germ or cell.

There are different ways to produce these vaccines. One way is to isolate a specific piece from a germ and use it in the vaccine. Another way is via genetic engineering. Here the germ is inserted into plasmid that has been manipulated by scientists. This type of plasmid is circular segments of DNA extracted from bacteria to serve as a vector. Scientists can add multiple genes and whatever genes they want into this plasmid. In case of vaccines, this includes a genetic piece of the vaccine germ and normally a gene for antibiotic resistance.

This means that when the toxic gene is cultured inside the yeast, it has been designed with a new genetic code that makes it resistant to the antibiotic it’s coded for.

The gene-plasmid combo is inserted into a yeast cell to be replicated. When the yeast replicates, the DNA from the plasmid is reproduced as a part of the yeast DNA. Once enough cells have been replicated, the genetic material in the new and improved yeast cell is extracted and put into the vaccine. Examples of this vaccine are the acellular pertussis and hepatitis B vaccines.

One thing that doesn’t seem to concern scientists is the fact that the manmade genetic combination becomes the vaccine component. This mixture of intended and unintended genetic information may cause our immune system to overreact. This can be especially complicated for a child with compromised immune system.

Another concern is that this new genetic code can become integrated with our own genetic material. Yeast, for instance, is very much like human DNA. It shares about one third of our proteins.

What have they done?

Here you have substances that are designed to aggravate the immune system towards an attack. So, that’s what it does. Our immune system launches an attack on the invader. Sometimes the invader, like yeast, has many of the same protein codes as us. Our immune system downloads these protein codes and labels them as enemies. It signals a full-on attack on everything with that code in our body. Unfortunately, when the codes are similar, we don’t always know how to distinguish between vaccine proteins and our own proteins.

Trace elements

Trace components that end up in the final product and become a part of the vaccine are usually left-over elements from the manufacturing process.

These components were added during production in order to either keep cells alive or kill them or keep them free from contamination or to alter genetic materials during production. Other components are added to stir up our immune system to respond to the vaccine. As you perhaps can see, the materials scientists purposely add to the vaccine-making process serve the purpose of keeping us as safe as possible.

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.

What is it exactly that ends up in the vaccines our children are given, and what happens when these vaccines enter their bodies? We attempt to answer these questions in the next chapter.

 

References for Chapter 6: Altered germs:

World Health Organization. (n.d.) Module 2: Types of Vaccine and Adverse Reactions. Retrieved from https://vaccine-safety-training.org/s

 

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

Amazon #1 Bestseller in Emergency Pediatrics: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07MQTN3CG/

****************************************