Reader, after being called a conspiracy theorist by the congress of [the]United States in a new bill, H.RES 179, which is designed to put pressure on the congress to mandate vaccinations, I decided to do a little research, lay down some facts, and prove these corrupt legislators wrong.
This bill titled "Recognizing the importance of vaccinations and immunizations in the United States" is sponsored by none other than NWO protagonist House Rep of CA, Adam Schiff.
In a summary it states: "that there is no credible evidence that vaccines cause life-threatening or disabling diseases in healthy children or adults".
In paragraph 4 of the text it states: " Whereas the scientific and medical communities are in overwhelming consensus that vaccines are both effective and safe, and the dissemination of unfounded, and debunked, theories about the dangers of vaccinations pose a great risk to public health, and scientifically sound education and outreach campaigns about vaccination and immunization are fundamental for a well-informed public"
Reader, anytime we are dealing with any branch of [the] United States Inc, we need to study the wording they use because this is how they get us. Grammar- punctuation-phraseology, it all needs to be understood correctly. These people are out to get us and this is their first line of offense.
First lets look at the wording in paragraph 4 where it talks about an "overwhelming consensus".
A consensus is arrived at by multiple parties in agreement after evidence is reviewed. This evidence can be either forensic or .....theory.
Example: the medical industry is referred to as a "practice" therefore it is not a fact, when in fact it is a theory.
Consensus is only needed for a group trying to prove a theory in order to push a preconceived agenda toward general acceptance.
The word "overwhelming": a very great amount, a majority. This does not translate to total or complete. It does not mean 100%.
How many people are in this group? How many are not in this group? How many agreed and how many disagreed? If there were 100 people in this group and 51 agreed, there's your consensus. This is theory.
A fact is a fact. 2+2=4. We don't need to agree. There is no consensus needed. It is a fact.
In this bill Adam Schiff is asking the congress to vote "yea" on the theory of a group of people with an underlying agenda to create a general acceptance of a specific theory that vaccinations are safe.
Another theory stated in paragraph 13: "World Health Organization (WHO) recently identified vaccine hesitancy as a top health threat for 2019".
Adam Schiff "urges everyone to follow the scientific evidence and consensus of medical experts in favor of timely vaccinations".
The WHO, through the congress, has created an unfounded sense of urgency to push through a bill that forces all people to vaccinate when the government says so.
And, in paragraph 11 we find a truth of the matter, money: "strong investments in biomedical research to improve existing vaccines and develop many more life-saving vaccines".
This report on autism, one of the many debilitating results of bad vaccination, admits "Further work is needed to evaluate multiple factors contributing to increases in estimated ASD prevalence over time".
Now that I've outlined my issues with this bill, lets take a look at the facts.
By the way, I don't mind being called a conspiracy theorist, especially by a foreign government mismanaging our affairs. I wear the title like a badge of honor.
Lets talk about VAERS–Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.
If there is oversight in this Big Pharma/FDA/CDC partnership, it is obviously being rejected by the scientific medical community.
The following is copied right out of the VAERS report conducted by:
Principal Investigator: Lazarus, Ross, MBBS, MPH, MMed, GDCompSci
Team members: Michael Klompas, MD, MPH
Performing Organization: Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, Inc.
Project Officer: Steve Bernstein.
Submitted to: The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Here is the full pdf.
Before we proceed: in 2012 the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said, 1 in 88 children in the U.S. has an autism spectrum disorder (ASD) — a nearly 25% increase from 2006, when the rate was 1 in 110, and a stunning 78% increase since 2000.
Today, According to the CDC: About 1 in 59 children has been identified with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) according to estimates from CDC’s Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring (ADDM) Network.
So, since the following report was conducted 2006 to 2009, the above CDC statement is quite revealing.
Here we go. From her on out, this is what Adam Schiff et al. don't want you to know.
"VAERS preliminary data were collected from June 2006 through October 2009 on 715,000 patients, and 1.4 million doses (of 45 different vaccines) were given to 376,452 individuals.
Of these doses, 35,570 possible reactions (2.6 percent of vaccinations) were identified.
This is an average of 890 possible events, an average of 1.3 events per clinician, per month.
These data were presented at the 2009 AMIA conference. In addition, ESP:VAERS investigators participated on a panel to explore the perspective of clinicians, electronic health record (EHR) vendors, the pharmaceutical industry, and the FDA towards systems that use proactive, automated adverse event reporting.
Adverse events from drugs and vaccines are common, but underreported.
Although 25% of ambulatory patients experience an adverse drug event, less than 0.3% of all adverse drug events and 1-13% of serious events are reported to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Likewise, fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported.
Ross Lazarus et al. concluded the following:
Low reporting rates preclude or slow the identification of “problem” drugs and vaccines that endanger public health. New surveillance methods for drug and vaccine adverse effects are needed. Barriers to reporting include a lack of clinician awareness, uncertainty about when and what to report, as well as the burdens of reporting: reporting is not part of clinicians’ usual workflow, takes time, and is duplicative. Proactive, spontaneous, automated adverse event reporting imbedded within EHRs and other information systems has the potential to speed the identification of problems with new drugs and more careful quantification of the risks of older drugs. Unfortunately, there was never an opportunity to perform system performance assessments because the necessary CDC contacts were no longer available and the CDC consultants responsible for receiving data were no longer responsive to our multiple requests to proceed with testing and evaluation."
Wow!
That data came from just one health care facility.
After reviewing the numbers in VAERS report and the current VICP report, the following can be deduced.
Ashley Everly does a fine job laying the facts down:
Vaccine adverse events and injuries: Is the risk one in a million?
The CDC states that 30,000 adverse events are reported to VAERS each year.
A report funded by the Department of Health & Human Services states that less than 1% of vaccine adverse events are ever reported to VAERS.
This equates to 3 million or more adverse events that occur within 30 days following vaccination that should be reported to VAERS, each year.
287 million doses of vaccines are administered on average each year.
3 million adverse events out of 287 million doses, is a risk of adverse events near 1 in 100.
One adverse event per 100 doses of vaccines administered.
Not, one in a million.
Considering the fact that by the time they’re 18, children are given 72 doses of vaccines, assuming the vast majority of vaccines given in the US are given to kids under 18, that is a HIGH likelihood that your child will experience an adverse event (mild to severe), but most will have no idea that their child’s injury or reaction is vaccine-related.
If that wasn't all, here's more proof. A confidential GlaxoSmithKline document recently leaked to the press exposed that within a two-year period, a total of 36 infants died after receiving the 6-in-1 vaccine, Infanrix Hexa.
And they're calling us conspiracy nuts.
Reader, it sounds to me that this congressional medical science community has some explaining to do.
Who are these medical professionals Adam Schiff talks about? Chances are we will never know.
I'd like to close this segment down today by asking you to get involved in the political process. We the people have been railroaded for far too long by foreign entities masquerading around like they are doing us a service when in fact they are making life more miserable by the day for us who elect them. They've done enough damage.
Contact you congress-person here and let them now you don't approve of this bill and that more oversight needs to be in place to protect us American people and that you won't be sold on something so important with some theory that has just been proven false.
If you want, copy and paste the meat and potatoes of this expose into a doc and put your name on it. With a tweak here and there you can provide forensic evidence, facts, to your legislator.
Believe nothing, believe everything.
Stay vigilant!
:Baron- T3