Originally posted by Anna Rodgersmarch, Collective Evolution
In regards to vaccines, would you assume that when a new vaccine is being added to the schedule, there would be lengthy discussions, regarding proof of safety testing, so that the committee members would all feel very confident that this was a vaccine that should be added to the vaccine program?
Well you might find yourself in disbelief after viewing this short video of a recent meeting regarding the HEPLISAV-B, a new Hepatitis B vaccine by the Advisory Committee On Immunization Practices, and instead, you may feel very concerned that these committee members really do not seem to care that there isn’t any proof that it is indeed safe for use.
HEPLISAV-B, the vaccine in question, is the first new vaccine for Hepatitis B ‘prevention’ in 25 years in the USA and is made by the company Dynanax Technologies. This vaccine contains two new adjuvants, called HBsAg and CpG 1018, and they have never been used in any other vaccines before.
Vaccine Insert Shows Disturbing Findings
Interestingly, when you take a look at the vaccine insert for the HEPLISAV-B, it states that 5 clinical trials were carried out on this vaccine, yet they only shared 3 of the 5 trials data on it’s insert. Where is the data on the other two trials? Why wasn’t it included?
The post safety data was carried out between 1 week to 13 months after the first vaccine was given. It is important to note there is also no information in the insert on how many participants had more than one dose of this vaccine yet, it is recommended that two doses are given to each adult.
18 Deaths Reported During Trials
Just under 10,000 people took part in these 5 trials. 18 deaths were reported out of the 3 trials data which was included on the insert. This also begs the question, with the missing two trials data, how many deaths were recorded, none, or many? What other adverse reactions were recorded? Without seeing this data, of course one must pose a question like this. It is disturbing that we just don’t know what else happened.
No Fault Law Is The Issue Here
How can this happen? How can a vaccine that has no safety data on it’s use of two new adjuvants be allowed onto the schedule? The answer lies in the law.
When you learn that there has been a no fault clause for the vaccine manufacturers since 1986 when the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act came into place, it really makes it clear that people in charge of these organizations have no pressure being put on them if something does go wrong with any of the vaccines they agree to put through. Below is the NCVI Act:
The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) of 1986 (42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to 300aa-34) was signed into law by President Ronald Reagan as part of a larger health bill on Nov 14, 1986, in the United States, to reduce the potential financial liability of vaccine makers due to vaccine injury claims.
For many parents who now have vaccine injured children, they often say they had no clue about this law. They assumed that if anything went wrong with a vaccine their child was given, that they would receive the help they needed to get compensation and the health care needed. Nothing could be further from the reality.
Despite that the vaccine compensation scheme has paid out close to $3.8 billion dollars, you might not be aware that the process for suing is completely different to normal pharmaceutical drugs. In fact the way that vaccine court is carried out is quite shocking.
It can often take up to ten years to receive compensation, and it’s said to be a very stressful process to go through. There are hundreds of thousands of families who say they have received not a penny for their child’s vaccine injury, despite going through vaccine court. Most cases are turned down.
Vaccines receive far less scrutiny on the way their studies are carried out. Normal drugs go through much more rigorous testing and it’s harder to get them approved by the FDA in comparison. However, we must not ignore that it’s been discovered in a Yale study that 1 in 3 drugs have safety issues even after the FDA approved them.
We must therefore know what we are getting into before we agree to have a vaccine. The vaccine inserts are absolutely vital to read, and videos like the one below must be seen.
The public has to see how easily it is for vaccines to be added to the schedule and that the people in charge admit the safety data is really only done when the vaccine has been put out into the population.
I strongly urge you to view this video to see with your own eyes how things are discussed, the shocking replies that were given, and how quickly it took for everyone to vote yes to put this vaccine through.
The questions in this clip are basically as follows:
Q: Is it dangerous to use this new vaccine with other vaccines?
A: We have no data on that. Once it’s approved, it will be given along with other vaccines but we have no clue whether that is safe or not.
Q: Do we at least have any data from other countries that have already used this vaccine in combination with other vaccines?
After hearing this, 100% of the committee members immediately all voted yes.
Only after they voted, one man voiced his concern over heart attack deaths in the trials and advised that the ‘post marketing data should be watched carefully’.
Does this not sound like the public is therefore being tested on?