Smoke Blessing

Posted on by 0 comment

author unknown


A Native American Smoke Blessing

Oh Great Spirit, I raise smoke to the four sacred winds and the four corners,  so that the blessings can reach my brothers and sisters in every corner  of Great Mother Earth, while the smoke disperses all over Father Sky, lit by Mother Moon.

Let the smoke pass to each their blessing

and do away with all sorrows and unhappiness,

fill their homes with love, and the light of your wisdom.

If any be sick, cure them,

If sad, make them happy,

If they have needs, fulfill them.

Protect them from all evil. Please Father, keep them well in good health,

give them long life and wealth. Give them all your love as they love you.

They can give testimony to your power and mercy, and most important your love.

Oh Great Spirit, I love you with all my heart as I love my brothers and sisters all. I am your servant and theirs. I ask for only one thing – give me strength  to keep going on doing as I do on this spirit path.

And so it is! Amen.h

Category: Blog, Non-Fiction, Words | Tags: , ,

Joni Mitchell Speaks

Posted on by 0 comment

by Joni Mitchell


“I don’t know if I’ve learned anything yet! I did learn how to have a happy home, but I consider myself fortunate in that regard because I could’ve rolled right by it. Everybody has a superficial side and a deep side, but this culture doesn’t place much value on depth — we don’t have shamans or soothsayers, and depth isn’t encouraged or understood. Surrounded by this shallow, glossy society we develop a shallow side, too, and we become attracted to fluff. That’s reflected in the fact that this culture sets up an addiction to romance based on insecurity — the uncertainty of whether or not you’re truly united with the object of your obsession is the rush people get hooked on. I’ve seen this pattern so much in myself and my friends and some people never get off that line.

But along with developing my superficial side, I always nurtured a deeper longing, so even when I was falling into the trap of that other kind of love, I was hip to what I was doing. I recently read an article in Esquire magazine called ‘The End of Sex,’ that said something that struck me as very true. It said: “If you want endless repetition, see a lot of different people. If you want infinite variety, stay with one.” What happens when you date is you run all your best moves and tell all your best stories — and in a way, that routine is a method for falling in love with yourself over and over.

You can’t do that with a longtime mate because he knows all that old material. With a long relationship, things die then are rekindled, and that shared process of rebirth deepens the love. It’s hard work, though, and a lot of people run at the first sign of trouble. You’re with this person, and suddenly you look like an asshole to them or they look like an asshole to you — it’s unpleasant, but if you can get through it you get closer and you learn a way of loving that’s different from the neurotic love enshrined in movies. It’s warmer and has more padding to it.” ~ Joni Mitchell

Category: Blog, Editorial, Words | Tags: , ,

Are lockdowns unconstitutional?

Posted on by 0 comment

author unknown


Ontario constitutional lawyer answers your lockdown questions

The Post Millennial reached out to Lisa Bildy, a lawyer for the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedom who plans to challenge the new lockdowns imposed by the Ontario government in court.

As the big tech tyrants tighten their grip, join us for more free speech at Parler—the anti-censorship social media platform.

Jurisdictions across the world are reimposing lockdowns to “curve the spread” of the second wave of COVID-19. In Canada, Manitoba and Nunavut have already reimposed full lockdowns and some doctors are pushing for other provinces to follow suit.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford has also reimposed a full lockdown in Toronto and Peel region, after spending the week warning he would do so. The new lockdowns in Ontario means that “non-essential” stores, gyms, and restauranrs being once again forced to shut down. The government has also completely banned private indoor gatherings in the two affected regions. Many questions have arised about the legality of these lockdowns and if they are constitutional.

The Post Millennial reached out to Lisa Bildy, a lawyer for the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedom who plans to challenge the new lockdown imposed by the Ontario government in court. We asked Bildy, who believes that governments always need boundaries, commonly asked legal questions about government imposed lockdowns.

How are COVID-19 lockdowns imposed by provincial governments unconstitutional?

“The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees citizens the right to worship, assemble, travel, move and associate as they see fit. The Charter requires that any violation of those rights by the state must be ‘demonstrably justified’ in a free and democratic society. The burden of proof is on the government to show that the measures it is taking do more good than harm, and are a minimal impairment of those rights.

“Even back in the spring, when lockdowns were first initiated, the modelling that was done suggested that the threat was far greater than it actually was. All provinces did better than the best-case scenarios, even then. Now, death rates are even lower and the data shows that for the vast majority of the population, other than the very elderly and the already very sick, this virus is not a significant threat to life or health. Given all the data we now have about this virus, ongoing lockdowns are likely no longer demonstrably justifiable and are therefore unconstitutional.

“Further, in some provinces the health orders are being imposed unilaterally, without legislative oversight, by unelected officials who have essentially no limits on their authority. This is unconstitutional because law-making power is bestowed on legislatures, not individuals. The broad shutdown of society by one individual, like a chief medical officer, violates the requirement that laws be democratically implemented.”

Do governments have the right to override the charter of rights and freedoms through declaring a state of emergency? and is there a limit to how long a state of emergency can last?

“Declaring a state of emergency may signal that the government believes the violation of citizens Charter-guaranteed freedoms are justified, but the onus is still on the government, if challenged in court, to prove that the measures they are taking are justified, and are being properly balanced against the harms caused by such measures. Whether they are taken to court or not, the government should be doing this analysis before taking steps to curtail peoples’ normally-legal activities, or shutting down their livelihoods.”

“Although a state of emergency was declared in the spring, the Ford government brought in Bill 195 (the Reopening Ontario Act) in July to end the formal emergency declaration, but keep the power to restrict peoples’ rights as though there were an emergency. They have granted themselves this power to continually extend or amend orders limiting gatherings and restricting businesses for up to a year, without having to go back to the legislature for debate and review.”

Are potential penalties imposed by the government for religious people that defy restrictions and worship with their congregations during the lockdown guaranteed to be overruled in court?

“Nothing is guaranteed, but any restrictions that single out places of worship or religious groups would likely be found to be unconstitutional because they disproportionately target specific groups/religions. Unreasonable government interference with certain religious practices might also be overruled, but this hasn’t really been put to the test in the courts in Canada during the pandemic. In both of the religious freedom cases that the Justice Centre started or threatened in the spring, the Ford government backed down and amended its orders to be less restrictive, so the cases didn’t get into court.”

Would Provincial governments be allowed to strictly limit people’s movements, like what France is doing with their lockdown?

“Governments can make laws that limit peoples’ freedoms in all sorts of ways, some of which could be quite draconian. If there is no sound evidentiary basis for it, and the Justice Centre strongly takes the view that there is not, then such laws should be immediately challenged in the courts and the government should be expected to prove that its laws are not unconstitutional.”

Are you confident that a judge would make a ruling against lockdowns? and why?

“To the extent that there have been rulings so far, and there have only been a few, the courts were inclined to grant the governments in this country wide latitude to handle this virus. This was when little was known about the virus, and the courts themselves had largely voluntarily closed down, except for urgent cases. That is no longer the case. Ultimately, governments know they have to justify their actions in the courts, and if they go too far, we will certainly force them to do that.”

If a provincial lockdown is struck down by the courts, could premiers use the “notwithstanding clause” to keep it in place?

“While governments could do so, it would be politically foolish to try it. They would look like complete tyrants if they attempted another widespread curtailment of civil liberties over a virus that has such a low fatality rate, and then prevented any access to the courts to make them justify it.”

With Canada going through its second wave of COVID-19 and seeing grim projections, what are some constitutional ways to “flatten the curve” that governments could put in place instead of lockdowns?

“First of all, these projections must be taken with a grain of salt, given how vastly overstated they have been all along, and given the extreme limitations of the PCR tests being used to generate case numbers. Even Associate Chief Medical Officer of Health, Dr. Barbara Yaffe, has stated that such tests present false-positives at least 50 percent of the time when testing large populations without COVID.”

Ontario residents should be treated like the adults living in a free society that they are, and should be presented with the data necessary to assess their own risk. Imagine the number of hospitals that could have been built with the funds that have been expended to keep healthy people at home and out of work. Efforts should be directed toward protecting vulnerable populations, to the extent they wish to be protected.

Bildy also cited the fact that Ontario has a population of 14.4 million people, and an average 115,000 deaths per year. So far in Ontario, over 3400 people have died from COVID -19. However, Canada also saw an alarming 111,600 deaths caused by drug overdoses, cancelled surgeries, delayed cancer diagnoses and other conditions worsened by the negative impacts of lockdowns.

On the claim from doctors that hospitals are on the verge of overcapacity, Bildy says that COVID-19 patients are using less than 2% of Ontario’s hospital beds and less than 2% of ICU capacity, and that COVID-19 deaths make up less than 3% of total deaths. She added that “Premier Ford calls it a crisis that justifies lockdowns.”

Category: Non-Fiction | Tags: , ,

False Arrest: It happened to me.

Posted on by 0 comment

by DGR


20181207

Call to U-Haul

– Ashley in NC, USA provided the following info today
– status: currently unresolved
– assigned to marketing company president today, John Fisher
– 800-263-4809, 905-578-9119
– 1-800-468-4285, General Number

905-730-8796, Lucy, U-Haul, or 905-573-6006, office


U-haul_arrest_incident

At approximately 10:30am Wednesday January 2, 2018
– driving U-Haul 10ft truck southbound on Sherman Avenue
– Occupants: Son and myself
– The police pulled the truck over on Sherman Avenue at King by two Hamilton Police officers: constables White and Houle
– Officers proceeded to ask for identification and ownership
– I produced my license. No ownership in the vehicle
– Officers proceeded to advise that I and Son were under arrest
– We were hand-cuffed and put in the back of separate cruisers
– We remained in the cruisers for approximately 30 minutes.
– I was informed at first that the truck plates were stolen
– I was then told that the truck was reported stolen
– I was then told that there was some kind of theft event on December 24th in Hamilton involving U-haul
– I was than told that anything I said could be used against me in court.
– I told the officer the situation as far as I knew it to be and that I had nothing to hide
– My son noticed that one officer was viewing porn on his phone in the cruiser while waiting (I believe it was officer Houle)
– Eventually we were released unconditionally
– the officer (white) advised that we take the truck back immediately as it was still registered as stolen
– I dropped son off at the library
– I parked the truck in the Dundurn Castle parking lot and proceeded to phone U-Haul head office
– I spoke with the “traffic supervisor” (female)
– I told her the story.
– She asked for the officer names and badge numbers so that she could confirm the event.
– I did not have the arresting officer info
– She said she would follow up with the Police service in Hamilton and call me right back
– After 30 minutes and no return call, I called the police service to track down the arresting officers names
– I then called U-Haul to speak again with the traffic supervisor
– I spoke with John at the Regional Office in Hamilton.
– John advised that the supervisor was on vacation
– John offered me a $20 VIP voucher.
– I declined the voucher
– John advised that the Supervisor would follow up with me at her earliest opportunity.
– I confirmed further that the truck was cleared
– I put gas in the truck and drove it home.
– I called Deborah at the U-Haul office. She gave me a number to call to complete a ‘form’
– I will call that number this afternoon.

Letter to U-Haul via
https://www.uhaul.com/Contact/Email/ (consumer arbitration)

“January 2, 2018

The 10′ truck I was driving was pulled over by local police this morning and I was arrested (temporarily). The truck/plate was reported stolen (in 2017 it turns out). I and my helper were hand-cuffed at put in separate cruisers for close to 30 minutes through no fault of our own. This was a humiliating, unfair, negligent and perfect example of corporate ineptitude and I wish to be compensated in full for having had this experience inflicted on me via U-Haul. I have a complete timeline of the incident and I am following up with local police services and seeking legal advice in an effort to obtain some form of compensation without resorting to a legal remedy.

I was in contact with the U-Haul regional office immediately after the incident and spoke with the Traffic Manager/Supervisor (female) who promised a prompt response. When I didn’t receive a response after 1 hour I called the office again and spoke with ‘John’ who offered me a VIP voucher which I declined. He said the supervisor was on vacation and that she would contact me asap to begin to resolve the issue. I also gave John the arresting officer’s names.

I am a repeat customer and have received excellent service from the 419 Plains Road East, Burlington, Ontario location (staff knows the product, very helpful). I have recommended U-Haul extensively and use your truck rentals exclusively. I am very disappointed and surprised at the kind of resolution offered to me so far.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this serious matter.”


1

https://www.quora.com/What-happens-if-you-fail-to-drop-off-a-U-Haul-truck-and-they-report-it-stolen

First, they don’t report the vehicle as stolen. It was leased to the user, not stolen.

Second, if you fail to return the truck, they add extra fees, plus interest.

Third, they can and will repossess the truck. Legally, they’re supposed to remove any of your property that’s in the truck and return it to you

2

If the U-Haul Center or independent Dealer follows the protocols, it wouldn’t be reported as a stolen vehicle. Failure to return a rental vehicle when due, if it was legitimately rented, is not considered vehicle theft but only a violation of the rental contract with whatever financial penalties – such as forfeiture of deposit and overtime charges – as noted in the Contract Terms. Why? Because the customer didn’t steal the truck, it was voluntarily leased to him or her by the dealer; s/he was given the keys at the beginning of the rental period.

To establish vehicle theft – assuming it wasn’t initially “hot wired” off a U-Haul lot w/o a contract in the first instance or stolen from a legitimate renter – it is necessary to show that the customer altered the vehicle in some way – such as repainting – to disguise it as something other than a U-Haul vehicle – and/or other evidence that the customer never intended to return the vehicle at all. (Hidden in a cave; stuff like that.)

3

First Uhaul will try to contact you multiple times then if you ignore the 10–50 missed calls and don’t make contact they report the vehicle stolen because your contract is up. Then either the police find you or U-Haul employees whose job is to find stolen equipment find you.


https://constitutional.findlaw.ca/charter-of-rights-and-freedoms/article/can-i-sue-if-ive-been-wrongfully-arrested/

In order for the police to be considered to have falsely or wrongfully arrested someone, they have to be considered to have done one of these two factors:

Acted without authority; or
Acted beyond the scope of their powers.

It’s simply not enough to accuse the police of false arrest if they did have reasonable belief that a person has committed a crime and if neither of these two factors is in place.

Scientific Fraud and Conflict Of Interest In Vaccine Research

Posted on by 0 comment

by Michael Belkin

Shoot First and Ask Questions Later

Presented at The 2nd International Public Conference on Vaccination 2000, Arlington Virginia (10-15-2000)


       In Business School, (Organizational Behavior) we studied what can happen to organizations that suffer ethical management breakdowns (such as Johns Manville with asbestos, Owens Corning breast implants, etc.). Nothing illustrates the syndrome of management ethical failure more clearly than the current scandal faced by Firestone and Ford. Those companies denied and concealed deaths and injuries caused by tread separation and a high center of gravity in the Ford Explorer for years. Management knew, denied and concealed that their products were defective and were killing people — the classic ethical breakdown.

       In the vaccine industry, scientific fraud and conflicts of interest are causing a similar (but much larger) cycle of deaths and injuries that is being concealed and denied by regulators and vaccine manufacturers. However, (as with Firestone and Ford) a noose of their own making may be slowly tightening around the vaccine scandal perpetrator’s necks.

       Financial conflict of interest is a complex issue — because few investors (except perhaps Tibetan Monks or Jesuit Priests) are likely to not have pharmaceutical shares in their diversified portfolios in this day and age. But financial conflicts of interest and scientific fraud (that lead to corrupt public policy) damage the public interest and could eventually bankrupt vaccine manufacturers that have perverted the regulatory process. Shareholders should investigate the issue carefully.

       There’s only about 100 US Deaths from Firestone tire blowouts. There are thousands of deaths and many thousands of cases of disability and neurological damage lurking in the FDA Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). This is a potential legal scandal of much larger scope than the Firestone/Ford episode.

       US vaccines are licensed by the FDA and immunization recommendations are made by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), which is a committee whose members are appointed by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). ACIP immunization recommendations are enacted into law by public health departments and/or legislatures at the state level, via the energetic efforts of vaccine manufacturer sales representatives. While the ACIP does nothing more than craft and finalize the exact wording detailing recommended doses and ages for administration of vaccines, ACIP recommendations are extraordinarily influential, because they get turned into mandates at the state level.

       These vaccine mandates are despotic intrusions into personal liberty and democracy. School districts and social service departments demand that: You must inject these viruses and bacteria into your body (or your child’s body) or you (or your child) may not attend school, you may be charged with child abuse and your children may be removed from your home, placed in foster care and forcibly vaccinated.

       Such intimidation is taking place with greater intensity and frequency as more and more ACIP recommendations and subsequent state vaccine mandates are enacted. Furthermore, parents are being wrongfully accused and convicted of shaken baby syndrome in cases where their children die immediately after vaccination and have swollen brains in the autopsy report (brain inflammation is a classic vaccine adverse reaction).

       The enforcement of ACIP vaccine recommendations at the state and local level by plodding and heavy-handed health and social service department employees is a threat to the neurological systems of those vaccinated. Vaccine adverse reactions are defined as the same thing as disease complications in the medical literature — encephalitis. “Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (postinfectious encephalomyelitis–see also Acute Viral Encephalitis and Aseptic Meningitis) is characterized by perivascular Central Nervous System demyelination, which can occur spontaneously but usually follows a viral infection or VIRAL VACCINATION (or, very rarely, BACTERIAL VACCINATION), suggesting an immunologic cause.” Merck Manual (http://www.merck.com/…/section14/chapter180/180a.htm)

       Thousands of reports of adverse reactions such as convulsions, brain inflammation, inconsolable screaming syndrome, SIDS and neurological diseases such as Multiple Sclerosis, Transverse Myelitis and Guillain-Barre Syndrome continue to flood into the FDA Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), where they are largely ignored or tolerated as the cost of some mythical victory over disease. Children and adults are developing the same encephalitic and neurological complications after vaccination that science takes credit for eliminating through immunization — but the CDC, ACIP and American Academy of Pediatrics all insist the vaccine adverse reactions don’t exist or are coincidences.

       Their double standard is: You are required to receive this vaccination so you and society don’t develop encephalitic and neurological complications from disease, but if you die or develop encephalitic or neurological complications immediately after receiving the vaccine (which contains the same virus or bacteria that causes the neurological complications), then it’s all in your imagination, it’s a coincidence or we’re still doing studies and we’ll get back to you when they are done.

Shoot first and ask questions later.

       Unelected, unregulated and unaccountable ACIP medical bureaucrats have blatant financial conflicts of interest and are committing scientific fraud by recommending administration of vaccines that have not been tested for safety in the age groups or populations targeted. Dr. John Modlin, current Chairman of the ACIP (Merck Immunization Advisory Board 1996 – present, Merck shareholder) gave his definition of scientific validity in a March 1999 University of New Hampshire debate:

       “Has the information withstood the test of peer review? Has the information been published in a respected medical or scientific journal? … this is the standard that you should hold me to today … has the information been published in a scientifically reputable journal?”

       One month earlier at the February 1999 ACIP meeting Chairman Modlin lobbied for the ACIP to recommend the Rotavirus vaccine for premature infants, although no safety studies had been done, much less peer reviewed or published:

“.. available data are insufficient to fully establish the safety and efficacy of rotavirus vaccine in premature infants … there is a section under Adverse Events that details what little information there actually are with respect to premature infants … To my knowledge we don’t have data from a clinical trial specifically … Some bit of information from Seattle, as I recall, that had suggested that was a slight increase in relative risk for hospitalization for premature infants … Obviously a situation where we have to make a judgment in the absence of data, and with a vaccine that has not yet been tested in the group …” (ACIP transcript, pages 102-112)

       Modlin then held a vote and the recommendation for premature infants passed nine to one — Modlin voted yes.

Shoot first and ask questions later.

       As a member of The Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) and Chairman of the Rotavirus working group, Modlin had data showing a risk of intussusception (life threatening bowel obstructions) in clinical trials of Rotavirus vaccine before that February 1999 ACIP meeting. The Rotavirus vaccine was withdrawn from the market in October 1999 after 113 cases of intussusception. One premature baby died after getting rotavirus vaccine in a vaccine cocktail and another five-month-old infant died after developing intussusception five days after receipt of the vaccine.

       By ACIP Chairman Modlin’s own definition, the ACIP’s recommendation was scientifically invalid. I’ll go one step further and say the ACIP Chairman committed blatant scientific fraud by issuing an ACIP recommendation that Rotavirus vaccine be given to premature newborns without scientific proof that it was safe to do so. And what was the penalty? Modlin was apparently reappointed to another term as ACIP Chairman by the CDC. Commit scientific fraud that causes death and grievous injury — and get reappointed. That is the incentive system in the US vaccine regulatory system.

       Another case suggesting scientific fraud is the still-existing 1991 ACIP recommendation that every newborn baby receive the hepatitis B vaccine in the hospital within hours of birth. Samuel L. Katz, MD, who instituted that policy when he was ACIP Chairman in 1991 has admitted they had no peer-reviewed, published studies showing that it was safe to give to newborns when the ACIP made that recommendation. (Katz is former Chairman Committee on Infectious Diseases of the American Academy of Pediatrics, former Chairman of the Public Policy Council of the Infectious Diseases Society of America).

       When I asked Katz in the question/answer session after his April 12, 2000 NY/Cornell Medical School lecture on “Vaccines in the New Millennium” what peer-reviewed, published safety study he used when he was ACIP Chairman to recommend at-birth immunization of newborns in 1991 he answered: “you are quite right there was no published peer-reviewed study” (tape and transcript available). Newborns have negligible risk of contracting the hepatitis B virus, unless the mother is infected. That risk can easily be determined by a maternal blood test. No US vaccine had ever been mandated for newborn babies before. But Katz and the ACIP decided it was safe to vaccinate not-at-risk for hepatitis B newborns without any proper safety study.

Shoot first and ask questions later.

       The results of that uncontrolled experiment are in: upwards of 36,000 adverse reactions and more than 440 deaths (VAERS). My daughter died after receiving the hepatitis B vaccine. Katz also admitted that vaccine adverse reactions are the same thing as neurological complications from disease when I pressed him if he disagreed with that definition from the Merck Manual saying “with measles vaccine it is possible that maybe one out of 150,000 children who get the vaccine may get something that mimics measles encephalitis.”

       Parents report their children were perfectly normal until receiving the MMR measles/mumps/rubella vaccine, at which point the children became autistic after a neurological adverse reaction to the MMR vaccine (“something that mimics measles encephalitis”). The incidence of measles disease may be down to about 100 cases annually in the US, but the rate of Autism has soared hundreds of percent — a disease historically called “post-encephalitic syndrome.”

       For vaccine manufacturers — the ACIP is a gold mine. ACIP recommendations are a license for vaccine manufacturers to use state governments, school systems and social service systems as a marketing department for their products. With an ACIP recommendation in hand, vaccine manufacturers use the government to say “you must buy my product and inject it into your body, even if it kills you or causes brain damage.”

       This is a huge Anti-Trust violation. The Orwellian spectacle of monopolistic and oligopolistic pharmaceutical manufacturers subverting government agencies to ram unsafe products down children’s veins is a violation of the basic principals of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

       Our forefathers said “No Taxation Without Representation” to their British oppressors. I say “No Vaccination Without Representation” to the corporate tyrants at Merck, Smithkline and other vaccine manufacturers who have so utterly subverted the US vaccine regulatory process.

       Dr. John Modlin must be removed as Chairman of the ACIP and the scientifically invalid newborn hepatitis B vaccine policy instituted without safety studies by Dr. Katz must be revoked. The investors and directors of vaccine manufacturers such as Merck and Smithkline must recognize that those companies are conducting the classic ethical blunder of selling products that are killing and injuring people — and then concealing and denying the evidence.

       A Canadian doctor who treats hepatitis B vaccine adverse event victims told me when he called Merck, they told him he was the first one who had ever called them with such a problem. There are upwards of 36,000 reports in VAERS and I would be delighted to provide them to anyone who cares to investigate the issue for themselves, sorted by deaths, convulsions, screaming syndrome, liver disorder and neurological damage — median onset one day after vaccination.

This is the CDC’s Mission Statement

       “To promote the health and quality of life by preventing and controlling disease, injury and disability.” “CDC pledges to be a diligent steward of the funds entrusted to it.” “CDC pledges to base all public health decisions on the highest quality scientific data, openly and objectively derived.” CDC Core values: Accountability — we ensure that our services are based on sound science and meet real public needs …”

That’s What They Say, Here’s What They Do

       The CDC misallocated funds that were targeted for chronic fatigue syndrome (a vaccine adverse event) to some other non-vaccine related pet project. The ACIP Chairman recommended the Rotavirus Vaccine for premature infants without any data whatsoever showing that it was safe. The ACIP recommended the hepatitis B vaccine for newborns without any public, peer-reviewed, published study showing it was safe. The head of epidemiology of the CDC presented a slide showing serious reactions to the hepatitis B vaccine were approximately 10 times higher than for other vaccines at the February 1999 ACIP meeting. The CDC has ignored FOIA requests for the scientific data used to justify the 1991 newborn hep B vaccine mandate.

       The CDC has violated its own mission statement and current leadership needs to be replaced. Most people don’t realize that the CDC is a quasi-Military organization that takes great pride in dressing up in uniforms and strutting around one day a week.

Category: Blog, Non-Fiction, Words | Tags: , ,