Connect with us

Awareness

Breast Implants: The Ticking Time Bomb In Millions Of Women’s Bodies

Avatar

Published

on

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

“They do not last. They rupture. And the longer they’re in the body the more likely they are to rupture. The statistics are kind of scary, because around about 50 percent are ruptured by 10 years. And when it gets to 15 to 20 years you’re looking at almost 90 percent of implants that are ruptured.

advertisement - learn more

What is most worrisome is that while most of the silicone is contained within the capsule, some of it leaks out, we don’t know where it goes, we don’t know what it does, we have no idea.”

--> Our latest podcast episode: Were humans created by extraterrestrials? Joe sits down with Bruce Fenton, multidisciplinary researcher and author to explore the fascinating evidence behind this question. Click here to listen!

– Dr. Ed Melmed, board certified plastic surgeon

Each year in the United States approximately 300,000 women and teenagers undergo breast augmentation. It’s thought that the total number of implants carried out each year worldwide is anywhere between 5 to 10 million.

Before the operations women are often told by their surgeons that it is a safe procedure with “very little” risk. The FDA also says breast implants are relatively safe.

Most of these women don’t know that this is simply not the case.

advertisement - learn more

There is in fact a growing body of evidence, in conjunction with thousands of horror stories from women all over the world whose implants ended in disaster, to prove that they are not safe and are actually causing debilitating autoimmune disorders and other physical problems in many women.

If you have breast implants, or are considering them, I urge you to take this article very seriously. And if any of your friends or family members already have implants, please show them this article. Their health and life (as well as your own) may depend on this knowledge.

This is a lengthy article but much has to be shared with you so that you can have a deeper level of knowledge.

pamelaquote

Like many women, I grew up feeling insecure about my body. At age 30, after gaining some weight, I chose to have breast implants. The surgery, whilst extremely painful, went “very well” according to the surgeon.

I was pleased to hear that I could have mine in for the “rest of my life,” so I wouldn’t have to spend any more money on them.

But what I didn’t know is that this was a lie. My surgeon actually gave me extremely dangerous and possibly deadly advice.

The truth is, no implant on the market today can last a lifetime. Every type (each of which I will cover shortly) is prone to leaking and rupturing, and in cases of the saline valve implants, they can even become black with mould, causing a systemic fungal problem in a person’s body.

What women don’t know is that while they may be happier with how their breasts look, they may end up with auto-immune disorders that are so bad they end up in wheelchairs, or develop arthritis, chronic fatigue, fibromyalgia, and a whole host of other problems.

In the eyes of some plastic surgeons (typically the ones that are cleaning up the damage from implant operations), breast implants are a ticking time bomb that put all women are at risk.

breast-implant-placement-2

Typical Breast Implants Placement

Silicone Breast Implant Scandal

We’ve known from fairly recent history that breast implants have caused serious health problems, but for most of the public, that problem is assumed to be an historic one, and that because those implants were removed from the market, the current implants on the market must be very safe.

While the FDA now openly mentions problems that often occur in many women with breast implants, such as leaking and rupturing, they fail to warn the public about the more dangerous connection to auto-immune disorders.

The FDA actually allowed implants to be put onto the market for over 40 years without formally approving them, so it’s not always wise to trust what they say. (1)

You may remember hearing in the media about the huge lawsuit in the late 90s involving 450,000 American women who took to court Dow Corning, one of the world’s main manufacturers of silicone implants.

While Dow Corning never admitted that their implants were dangerous, they paid out enormous amounts to the victims. Their implants of the 1970s had a very thin outer shell, were “greasy,” and had a high leakage rate. Many women even lost their lives from illness caused by these implants, while waiting for the court to fine Dow.

It was also found that, according to a whistleblower, staff at Dow Corning knew for a very long time that their implants were toxic, yet covered it up for as long as they could.

v18nspea04f07

In their own animal studies, researchers found that silicone could easily leak into the body, and caused tumours in up to 80% of the rats that were being tested on. The numbers were so alarming that the FDA, instead of being concerned, called these studies “erroneous,” which basically means they ‘must’ have been incorrect. The FDA then approved the Dow Corning implants, despite protests from some staff members that there were troubling warning signs.

We’ve also heard about the now infamous French PIP implant scandal that hit worldwide news recently. These implants (which were found to contain toxic chemicals used in mattresses and not approved for human use) are now banned, and women in the UK were offered free treatment to have them removed.

Silicone Implants Now Back on the Market

Despite the huge lawsuits that affected the main silicone manufacturers Dow Corning, Bristol-Myers Scribb, and Baxter Healthcare Corporation (who were sued a whopping 3.7 billion combined), silicone implants are now back in use. They have been added back on the market without adequate long term studies, and the available data on their safety is very concerning.

Shocking Ingredients Found in Dow Silicone Implants

When women are told that their implants contain silicone or saline, they often don’t tend to ask if anything else is being used alongside it. They certainly aren’t told this by the surgeons, who more than likely don’t even know themselves.

Check out the long list of alarming ingredients used in Dow’s silicone implants which came out during their court case when they were forced to disclose what was in their dangerous implants:

  • Methyl ethyl ketone (neurotoxin)
  • Cyclohexanone (neurotoxin)
  • Isopropyl Alcohol
  • Denatured Alcohol
  • Acetone (used in nail polish remover and is a neurotoxin)
  • Urethane
  • Polyvinyl chloride (neurotoxin)
  • Amine
  • Toulene
  • Dicholormethane (carcinogen)
  • Chloromethane
  • Ethyl acetate (neurotoxin)
  • Silicone
  • Sodium fluoride
  • Lead Based Solder
  • Formaldehyde
  • Talcum powder
  • Oakite (cleaning solvent)
  • Methyl 2- Cynanoacrylates
  • Ethylene Oxide (Carcinogen)
  • Xylene (neurotoxin)
  • Hexon
  • 2-Hedanone
  • Thixon-OSN-2
  • Stearic Acid
  • Zinc Oxide
  • Naptha (rubber solvent)
  • Phenol (neurotoxin)
  • Benzene (carcinogen/neurotoxin)
  • Lacquer thinner
  • Epoxy resin
  • Epoxy hardener
  • Printing Ink
  • Metal cleaning acid
  • Colour pigments as release agents
  • Heavy metals such as aluminium (neurotoxin linked to Alzheimer’s and auto immune disorders)
  • Platinium
  • Silica * (2)

It’s frightening, to say the least.

What’s in Implants Today?

The problem we have currently is, we just don’t know. Its very difficult to find out exactly what is in current implants in use today. I cannot find any information that shows a full ingredient list. I have asked plastic surgeons to tell me and they have “never seen a full list.” I have looked at implant websites, and none disclose what is in their products. It seems impossible to find out. The fact that ingredient information is not at all easy to find tells me that the manufacturers might not want us to know.

I asked Dr. Susan Kolb about current ingredients used, and she said, “The above list reflects what was in the silicone implants (not just Dow, but all silicone) at the time of the moratorium. It is possible that the list is still accurate if Dow Corning is still manufacturing the silicone that is used to make the implants.”

Some scientists have been taking an in-depth look at the platinum, a toxic salt, found in silicone implants and its connection to ill health. However, after looking at this list above, it seems ludicrous to suggest that one individual ingredient would be the sole cause of these health problems. It’s clear that breast implants are completely toxic.

Its important to know that saline implants ALL have silicone outer shells, so these too can leak silicone and other ingredients into the body, either through rupturing or when the textured surface flakes off.

Absolutely-Safe-3

One to watch: Absolutely Safe – A documentary on the dangers of implants – click the image to go their website

Types of Breast Implants Used Today

Silicone Implants

Many women opt out of having silicone implants due to the Dow Corning Lawsuit. But a growing number of women are now choosing to have them again due to the implant’s ability to look more natural than other types. These implants have an elastic type envelope that is pre-filled with a sticky, clear, jelly-like form of silicone. There are a few varieties of shapes to choose from, with smooth or textured surfaces.

With the FDA allowing silicone implants to come back on the market, it is very concerning to know that statistics show (according to Nancy Bruning, author of Breast Implants — Everything You Need To Know) that almost half of all women who have this type of implant will experience a rupture within 6-10 years, and one in five women were found to have silicone migrate to other parts of their bodies.

According to Dr. Susan Kolb, world expert on breast implants, silicone implants should be completely avoided.

saline-breast-implant

Saline implants – silicone outer shell, saline liquid inserted during surgery by surgeon

Saline Implants

Saline implants are commonly thought to be safer, yet according to Dr. Kolb, they too have their own problems, which I will cover further on. Saline implants have a silicone shell filled with a saline water, which is salt-based and ‘sterile.’ Some types are inserted empty, which the surgeon will inflate during surgery with this saline liquid. There is another type of saline implant, which also has a silicone shell, but the inside contains a gel-like substance. There are smooth surface saline implants and textured surface saline implants.

According to Nancy Bruning, 60% of women with these types of implants have complications within four years, and one out of five require additional surgery within three years. This is worrisome, since we are commonly told that implants either never need to be removed or should be removed every ten years.

textured-and-saline-breast-implant

Other types of saline implants

Video: Dr. Melmed and the FDA showing a severely ruptured implant

Possible Side Effects After Having Implants Inserted:

This is what your surgeon won’t tell you may happen.

  • tenderness, lumpiness, or discomfort around the implants
  • change in the shape of your breast(s)
  • change in the consistency of your breast, such as increased softness
  • change in the way your breast moves — all of these symptoms may be a sign your implant has ruptured.
  • hardening of breast tissue
  • muscle pain
  • pain and swelling of the joints
  • pain in the soft tissues
  • a burning sensation of pain
  • tightness, redness, or swelling of the skin
  • swollen glands or lymph nodes
  • unusual, extreme, or unexplained fatigue
  • swelling of the hands and feet
  • unusual hair loss
  • rashes
  • skin thickening or hardening
  • dry eyes, mouth, or vagina
  • loss of memory, mental confusion, or ‘fogginess’
  • autoimmune disorders such as fibromyalgia, rheumatoid arthritis, scleroderma, multiple chemical sensitivity disorder, cancer, and biotoxicity problems.

This list was found in the book Breast Implants – All You Need To Know by Nancy Bruning.

Ruptured_silicone_implant

A ruptured silicone implant. The red is tissue that had to be removed from the patient. The sticky consistency on the right is what comes out when ruptures and leakage occur.

“It’s rare that something shocks me. But I sat on the panel in ’92 and that was 11 years ago. How we could have come from 11 years ago, where we were going to collect data, to a point where we have a year’s data simply boggles the mind.”

— FDA Panelist Nancy Dubler in 2003 at the hearings on implant safety

Breast Implants Can Cause Cancer 

It might not surprise some of you reading this to learn that there is a link between cancer and implants. Just recently in France, their National Cancer Institute released a study that found a “clearly established link” between Anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL) and breast implants.

French officials have now recommended that breast implants in their country must carry a “cancer warning.”

There is also more evidence to back this connection now that a study conducted by Cambridge University in the UK found that nearly all cases of ALCL were discovered in women who had breast implants.

When you think about how breast implants are inserted — indeed it is quite gory and gruesome surgery — and about the horrific chemicals they are comprised of, it makes sense that they would, of course, pose a cancer risk. And now we have the data to support this.

breastimplantrisks-2-665x1024

Systemic Problems Caused By Mould

Another little-known but very serious problem associated with breast implants is that they can grow mould and bacteria, which can wreak utter havoc on the immune system. This is why Dr. Kolb feels saline implants could be just as dangerous as silicone implants. If you have the saline implants that have a valve — designed to allow the solution to be inserted during surgery — and if that implant is damaged later on due to a car accident, hard bump, or mammogram, serious bacterial and fungal problems, known as “biotoxicity,” can ensue.  Dr. Kolb discussed this with Dr Mercola:

Once the valve is damaged, especially in certain implants, mold and bacteria can grow inside the implant. If the valve damage causes the implant just to deflate, then the woman will go ahead and get it changed out, and she won’t become ill. But in some implants, the valve injury does not cause the fluid to leak out, but can allow bacteria and especially mold and fungus inside the implant.

I’ve had patients who have had inside the saline in this implant a mold called pennicillium growing. Whenever somebody hugged them too hard or even [due to] breast exams … the patient can become very ill, specifically because she was allergic to penicillin. She would have an anaphylactic-type reaction whenever her implant was manipulated. It can be very, very serious.

… In general, women who have this … bacterial and mold infection in their chest are deathly ill. The mold produces a biotoxin that’s also a neurotoxin. Many of my women come in in wheelchairs. They come in with the diagnosis of MS and lupus together. Fortunately, they have neither.

But some of them are incredibly ill. They have severe mental clouding. They can’t even have a conversation. They can’t hold their head up … Many doctors have said they’re going to die, but of course, they find me and come in.

implant_infected

An originally clear implant which turned black with mould

Video: Breast Implants Can Poison Body With Black Mould

Suicide Risk

Another little known factor about breast implants is that there is a connection to suicide. While this connection might be more about the woman’s mental status prior to having the surgery (perhaps she suffered from low self esteem and thought implants would make her much happier), it could also be because of the stressful impact the implants have on the body and its many important systems. As we have seen above, implants are linked to neurological disorders, amongst other concerns.

Women who have implants are at least three (some sources say four) times more likely to commit suicide than those who do not have them.

Doctors Who Say “Absolutely Safe” Profit From Breast Implants

Sadly, most surgeons will tell unsuspecting women that breast implants are very safe. With the FDA only really focusing on rupture or leakage problems, then this too also makes the surgeons think the problems are only in one main area.

Perhaps many of them are in denial. They simply do not want to believe that implants are in fact dangerous, can cause cancer, and trigger immune problems in many women. They probably have never looked into it further than what the FDA tells them.

Let us not forget that most plastic surgeons make the majority of their money from this increasingly popular operation. Who wants to be told that something that earns them hundreds of thousands of dollars a year may in fact be incredibly harmful to their patients?

Check out this video below from a wealthy American plastic surgeon, Dana Goldberg, who went out of her way to make a YouTube video saying that “breast implants are safe and that there is no cancer risk” and that the information going around is just “scaremongering.”

Plastic Surgeon Dana Goldberg’s “Breast Implants Are Safe” Video

I personally would worry that any concerns I raised with her or a surgeon like her would be dismissed.

Breast Implant Studies

It may come as no surprise to discover that most of the breast implant studies that ‘prove’ the safety of this procedure come from the manufacturers themselves. Diana Zuckerman, Ph.D, was involved in more than a dozen congressional investigations (in the 90s) that discussed breast implant safety (and its serious lack thereof). She raised questions about the huge lack of safety data about implants. This is what I found in Nancy Brunning’s book Breast Implants – Everything You Need To Know:

The poor quality of these studies is why I keep saying we don’t know whether implants are safe over the long term, because the studies were not well enough designed to be persuasive. The information on the IOM panel studied was based on studies that had substantial flaws. There was no federally funded research until recently. Virtually all research done was paid for by the manufacturers or plastic surgeons, and, not surprisingly, their research found that implants were safe. If the only research on cancer and smoking we had was funded by Philip Morris, we would still be listening to the scientists who were saying there’s an association but that doesn’t mean causation.

There have been federally funded studies into longer term safety about breast implants. One of them, which was the first study to ever follow women with ruptured implants, was conducted by the FDA. The researchers found that the women who had this problem were more likely to report also having fibromyalgia or other “potentially fatal” autoimmune diseases or related illnesses such as dermatomyositis, hashimotos thyroiditis, polymyaligia and polyositis, and pulmonary fibrosis. This was because the silicone gel had migrated from the scar tissue into the body. (2)

Another two separate studies, both of which were conducted by the National Cancer Institute (NCI), found the following alarming information: Women who had breast implants, compared to other plastic surgery operations, were three times more likely to die from cancer of the lung or suffer with emphysema or pneumonia. They were also twice as likely to die from brain cancer.  (3)

The other study by NCI found that women with implants experienced a 21% increased cancer risk. These types were mainly brain cancers, cervical cancer, leukaemia, vulvar cancer, and respiratory cancer. This often fatal lung-disease connection is from ruptured implants causing an increased incidence of lung disease. (4)

While there has been an improvement in the quality of studies, we cannot guarantee that they are all being done accurately. More recently, in 2013, Dr. Zuckerman released a statement regarding the FDA’s quiet approval (which did not have a public Advisory Committee meeting to discuss data, unlike other breast implant approvals) of a new type of silicone implant called Natrelle 410, manufactured by the company Allergen. This is part of what she wrote:

Unfortunately, Allergan has not done a good job of doing post-market studies once their implants have been approved. And, even if they do these studies, by the time these studies are done to find out what the risks are, hundreds of thousands of women could have these inadequately studied devices in their bodies, and could have been harmed by them.

The FDA even admits that Allergan’s own studies didn’t compare the effectiveness and safety of their new implant to other previously approved silicone gel-filled implants on the market.

Not very reassuring, is it? Other studies have been performed to examine what happens to some of the autoimmune disorders and other unwanted symptoms after the implants are removed or have not been removed.

97% of women reported vast improvement after removal, and in the 96% that did not have them removed, their symptoms worsened.

I think it’s safe to say, at least in my own opinion, that breast implants are simply a danger to the body.

Mammograms Can Rupture Breast Implants

Mammography

Mammogram on a patient without implants – note how squashed the tissue is. How would this be okay for a breast in general, let alone ones filled with implants?

If you have implants, you need to be aware that having mammograms can actually do serious damage to them. Because the procedure involves intense squashing down of the breast tissue, it has been known to cause ruptures, and if the implants do begin to leak, what is inside them will likely leak into your body.

Video: A lady’s experience with ruptured implants caused by mammogram 

It must be said that there is also alarming information that mammograms are not safe to have, even if you don’t have implants.

Video: Dr. Mercola interviews world renowned expert on the dangers of implants Dr. Susan Kolb, MD., F.A.C.S., A.B.I.H.M, who is also the author of The Naked Truth About Breast Implants 

Is There a Safe Implant?

If you absolutely must get implants, then according to breast implant expert Dr. Susan Kolb, the safest type is the saline implant that has a smooth surface and does not have a valve. This is because the textured implants have been found to have particles flake off into the person’s body, which can then attack the immune system. And if there is a valve, as mentioned previously, a systemic fungal infection can ensue. But even with this type, problems can happen down the road. I personally believe there is no such thing as a safe implant.

Checking Up on Your Implants

A good way to check up on your implants is to use ultrasound testing.

If you already have implants, I’d be willing to wager that, like myself, you were never told to have them checked for leakage or problems every few years. But this is what we should have been told.

There are a few ways to monitor any possible problems. The first is by ultrasound and the second is by MRI scans. Both of these can pick up on ruptures and leaking. I would personally go for the ultrasound, as MRIs have their own risks, too. I urge you to consider having checkups done so you can keep an eye on how they are doing inside your body.

And, I am very sorry to say this, but even checkups can not give you a guarantee that the implants are not causing you problems. Some women who developed auto-immune reactions to their implants had them checked and scans were ‘all clear.’ Because tiny particles can flake off and the chemicals they are made of can be easily absorbed by the body, the scan’s aren’t able to tell you the full story.

2AD151B900000578-3173992-image-a-4_1437780342136

Reality TV star and wife of music genius David Foster, Yolanda Foster has had her breast implants removed. She is also suffering from Lyme disease.

Removal Process: Difficult, Risky, and Surgeons Often Have Not Done Many Correctly

If you decide to have your implants taken out, it might not be as simple as you would like to think. If you have health problems associated with your implants, such as leakage or mould, you will need a surgeon who is highly skilled in the removal process. Dr. Kolb was interviewed by Dr. Mercola about this:

I would advise people to ask a surgeon how many explantation surgeries they’ve done. Unlike putting implants in, taking them out is very technically difficult, especially if they’re under the muscle. There can be a very thin layer of tissue between the lung and the capsule. You have to know how to do this correctly, or you can get what we call pneumothorax or entering into the chest cavity, which is where you’re not supposed to be.

Surgeons who have not done at least 50 explantations do not know about all the different things you might encounter, and are not comfortable removing the entire capsule. They probably should not be doing the surgery. Leaving the capsule behind is quite dangerous in terms of the patient not getting well. There is not only silicone in that scar capsule, but there’s a biofilm of bacteria, fungi, and other elements we don’t know. Biofilm is very difficult to treat with anything other than surgery, and women simply don’t get well.

Many surgeons don’t use drains. Surgeons not using drains are not good because that fluid needs to drain out because after all, fluid in the chest wall is a nice warm, dark space that can grow fungus. It can grow bacteria. Women often become way more ill after surgery because their surgeons gave them antibiotics without giving them antifungals. I tell all my patients, “For the rest of your life, you’re going to need to take antifungals whenever you take antibiotics.” And it’s so true.

You must also be aware (and rarely do the surgeons stress this to you) that when you sign up to have implants, they must be changed every 8-10 years so that they remain in the “best and safest” condition.  

I was personally told by my clinic in Europe that mine would “last a lifetime.” I was also told they were so robust that they would not burst and could even have a car driven over them! I now feel very cheated knowing this is dangerous and highly incorrect advice.  

What they should have said to me is this: “All breast implants will eventually break, but it is not known how many years the breast implants that are currently on the market will last. Studies of silicone breast implants suggest that most implants last seven to 12 years, but some break during the first few months or years, while others last more than 15 years.” (5)

If you are contemplating having implants, it’s wise to think realistically about the longterm cost of breast implants, as they are not just a one-time procedure. If you are to do it as ‘safely’ as possible, and have them replaced every decade or so, then you could be looking at spending tens of thousands of dollars over a lifetime. Can you really afford this, or the care that is needed if something goes wrong?

You must also remember that there are no guarantees that they will even be safe for those ten years — you could run into problems months or even a few short years after initial implantation.

You’ve got to ask yourself, is it really worth all that money, pain, and possible risks to your health?

Getting Them Out May Not Be Immediately Possible 

As someone who has implants myself (I have entered into my 9th year, which is now creeping right into the danger period of when problems can occur), it’s incredibly frightening to have this knowledge, and of course as soon as I did this research, I wanted them taken out immediately.

However, just like having many mercury fillings in your mouth — and realizing you want them removed immediately yet can’t afford to — removing implants with a skilled surgeon is a very costly procedure and has to be done by someone highly qualified (who might not be that easy to find).  

And if, like me, you also don’t have the money, it becomes extremely difficult to just suddenly decide, “I am going to have them out ASAP.”

Personally, I have two problems right now: One is a lack of funds, and the other is that even if I had the money, I am soon to be expecting my second child in just a few weeks’ time, so I now cannot possibly have them removed, as I want to breastfeed.

Worryingly, information is now emerging that mothers having breast implants may be risking the health of their children!

Baby-breast-feeding

As discussed in the article “What You Need To Know About Breast Implants,” the authors wrote about the concerns with breastfeeding and toxicity:

According to the Institute of Medicine (IOM), women with any kind of breast surgery, including breast implant surgery, are at least three times as likely to have an inadequate milk supply for breastfeeding. Concerns about the safety of breast milk have also been raised, but there has not been enough research to resolve this issue. A study of a small number of women with silicone gel breast implants found that the offspring born and breastfed after the mother had breast implants had higher levels of a toxic form of platinum in their blood than offspring born before the same women had breast implants.

I’m taking measures to decrease my toxic load until I have my implants removed, yet I still worry about what I could be doing to the health of my daughter and any future babies. I will be testing both my children for heavy metals and ensuring they are on a very good diet and supplement protocol.

11060470_1571070396510923_4839663338610845104_n

Actress Jennifer Connelly, another celebrity who is rumoured to have had their implants taken out. She is much thinner in the right picture but the breast size difference seems to be more than just losing weight.

Research Thoroughly Before You Decide

Before I had my operation, I spent hours trying to find the ‘right’ clinic and surgeon. But none of my research involved looking at this other, darker side to breast implant surgery. If only I had looked into this more before I made such a serious decision.

Perhaps I never looked into this side because my vanity took precedence over safety. Even with this alarming information I have presented, many women may still want to ignore it because the thought of having their implants taken out — and what that will do to their self esteem — worries them more than these health risks.

“Dr Frank Vasey suggests that the cosmetic and psychological benefits of implants are so powerful that they keep women in denial, reluctant to even consider the possibility that in order to get healthy, they may have to give up their implants. I find this true even when we experience definite physical symptoms such as pain, tightness, and hardness. Most of us love(d) our implants. We got them because we wanted them; we were willing to undergo surgery for them – some of us many times. Symptoms, no matter how severe, have a tough time outweighing the desire to be whole again or to fulfil our society’s standard of beauty.”

– Nancy Bruning 

Ladies, if you want bigger breasts because you don’t think what you have is good enough, please think very carefully about having breast implants for just that reason. They may end up causing you much more trouble than they’re worth. 

There may well be a place for breast implants, especially for those who have suffered breast cancer or serious disfigurement, and as I have covered previously, there is a type of implant that is thought to be the ‘safest,’ but even then, these implants may in fact put women’s lives at further risk.

These women would need to regularly check that their implants were not leaking or have ruptured and it would also mean getting them replaced within the specified time. They would also really need to gauge their health and see how they feel as time goes on. 

Please check out Susan’s nightmarish experience, which is still affecting her health today. Below is a picture of her recently-removed implants.

10408693_516470035186407_6632726130872222195_n

Susan’s implants, which were removed back in April this year. The one on the left was so ‘jelly like’ it had to be scraped off her ribs. The right one, although it looks quite normal, actually had a small rupture too. The red tissue is what the surgeon also had to remove to ensure all the silicone was gone.

003poshDM2711_468x467

Victoria Beckham is amongst many celebrities who have had their obviously fake implants removed. Doesn’t she look so much better?

The Urgency to Change Society’s Obsession With Appearance

As a society, it is urgent that we stop making women (and young girls especially) feel they are less than perfect if they don’t measure up to the air-brushed models and celebrities we see in magazines. Living in our superficial world today is much more challenging for young people, who are growing up seeing so much emphasis placed on looks; it’s no wonder that they have such low self esteem and often think, “If only I were prettier, richer, famous, had bigger boobs — then I would be much happier.”

We’ve got to somehow stop our children and teens from becoming narcissistic and obsessed with beauty. We need people to see what breasts are really for, and that is for feeding children. They have become so sexualized that we have collectively forgotten their purpose.

It’s great to see many famous celebrities opting to have their implants taken out. I am sure you might agree with me that they look much better with their natural, smaller breasts.

Why do we want to mess with our breasts (and our bodies in general), cause unnecessary stress on our health, and risk developing cancer and debilitating autoimmune disorders, just so we can look better?

scarlett-johansson-breast-reduction

Actress Scarlett-Johansson, who is rumoured to have had her breast implants taken out. Another person who looks better without them!

“No one told me there were risks in having implants. I was young and did not think having foreign objects in my body could cause any problems. I was wrong. My breast implants started to cause me a lot of pain and then they ruptured. I became extremely sick and at first didn’t know why.

As I look back 15 years ago, the year I got my saline implants under my muscle, I had many health issues. I had my gallbladder out due to illness, a staph infection & a terrible flu. Was it all due to the fact that my immune system was compromised because of these foreign objects called implants?

No one warned me. I am lucky that I came across information about the dangers of breast implants. My original surgeon said that they were not the cause of my problems. He was wrong. There is evidence out there to prove their is a connection. There needs to be information given to every woman out there.

How many women right now are suffering similar problems yet are being told it’s all in their head. Women who undergone mastectomies and have implants after having breast cancer often have no idea that putting these chemically based products into their bodies CAN CAUSE further health problems.”

– Leigh, Laguna Beach, CA

If you’d like to join my Facebook group, called Breast Implants — The Ticking Time Bomb, please click here: 

References and further research resources:

51T+wzx3TdL._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_

(1) FDA Allowed Implants Onto Market Without FDA Formal Approval

(2),(3),(4) Breast Implants – Everything You Need To Know by Nancy Bruning

(5) The Naked Truth About Breast Implants, Kolb S 2010.

 

Further Research:

Video: Breast Implants & Health Problems with Dr. Ed Melmed on Know The Cause 

Books: The Naked Truth About Breast Implants by Susan Kolb MD

Breast Implants – Everything You Need To Know by Nancy Bruning

Helpful Websites:

History of Breast Implants
www.humanticsfoundation.com
www.breastimplantinfo.org
What The FDA Says About Implants (mentions ruptures and the need to replace them, but nothing about autoimmune disorders)

Explant Website

Articles:

Breast implants and cancer
What You Need To Know About Implants
Explant Breast Implant Removal
Breast Implant Ruptures
Breast Implant Horror, Leaky, Scarring, Black With Mold 

Support Groups:
Breast Implant Removal & Detox

World Wide: List Of Highly Skilled Explant Surgeons

Dive Deeper

These days, it’s not just knowing information and facts that will create change, it’s changing ourselves, how we go about communicating, and re-assessing the underlying stories, ideas and beliefs that form our world. We have to practice these things if we truly want to change. At Collective Evolution and CETV, this is a big part of our mission.

Amongst 100's of hours of exclusive content, we have recently completed two short courses to help you become an effective changemaker, one called Profound Realization and the other called How To Do An Effective Media Detox.

Join CETV, engage with these courses and more here!

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Awareness

Study: Organic Diet “Significantly Reduces” Urinary Pesticide Levels In Children & Adults

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 4 minute read

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A 2019 study published in the journal Environmental Research found that an organic diet significantly reduced the pesticide levels in children and adults. Their urine was used to measure pesticide levels.

  • Reflect On:

    Are the justifications used to to spray our crops actually justified? Are they really necessary or can we figure out a better way of doing things?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

What Happened:  A 2019 study published in the journal Environmental Research titled, Organic diet intervention significantly reduces urinary pesticide levels in U.S. children and adults” highlighted that diet is the primary source of pesticide exposure in both children and adults in the United States. It found that an organic diet significantly reduced neonicotinoid, OP pyrethroid, 2,4-D exposure, with the greatest reduction observed in malathion, clothianidin, and chlorpyrifos.

The researchers noted that all of us are exposed “to a cocktail of toxic synthetic pesticides linked to a range of health problems from our daily diets.” They explain how “certified organic food is produced without these pesticides,” and ask the question, “Can eating organic really reduce levels of pesticides in our bodies?” They tested four American families that don’t typically eat organic food to find out.  All pesticides detected in the body dropped an average of 60.5% after just six days on an organic diet.

First, we tested the levels of pesticides in their bodies on a non-organic diet for six days. We found 14 chemicals representing potential exposure to 40 different pesticides in every study participant. These included organophosphates, pyrethroids, neonicotinoids and the phenoxy herbicide 2,4-D. Some of the pesticides we found are linked to increased risk of cancer, infertility, learning disabilities, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s and more. (source)

The most significant drops occurred in a class of nerve agent pesticides called organophosphates. This class includes chlorpyrifos, a highly toxic pesticide linked to increased rates of autism, learning disabilities and reduced IQ in children. Organophosphates are so harmful to children’s developing brains that scientists have called for a full ban. (source)

A lot of the food we now spray on our food were  initially developed as nerve gases for chemical warfare:

To understand this controversial issue it is helpful to look at the history of pesticide use. Prior to World War II, the pesticides that we use now did not yet exist. Some pesticides currently in use were in fact developed during World War II for use in warfare. The organophosphate insecticides were developed as nerve gases, and the phenoxy herbicides, including 2,4-D (the most commonly used herbicide in Canada), were created to eradicate the Japanese rice crop, and later used as a component of Agent Orange to defoliate large areas in jungle warfare. After World War II, these chemicals began to be used as pesticides in agricultural production, for environmental spraying of neighbourhoods, for mosquito eradication, and for individual home and garden use. –  Ontario College of Family Physicians

It’s also noteworthy to mention that A study published in the British Journal of Nutrition carried out a meta-analysis based on 343 peer-reviewed publications that indicate “statistically significant and meaningful differences in composition between organic and non-organic crops/crop based foods.” The study found that

The study found that Phenolic acids are 19% higher in organic foods,  Flavanones are 69% higher in organic foods (linked to reduced risk of several age-related chronic diseases),  Stilbenes are 28% higher in organic foods, Flavones are 26% higher in organic foods, Flavonol is 50% higher in organic foods and Anthocyanins are 51% higher in organic foods.

Apart from nutritional content, the study also measured for concentrations of the toxic metal Cadmium (Cd), finding that in conventional foods, “significantly higher concentrations” were found. Conventional foods appear to have nearly 50 percent more of this heavy metal than organic foods. Furthermore, significant differences were also detected for other minerals and vitamins.

When it comes to pesticide residues on non-organic foods, the authors found that the volume of pesticide residues was four times higher in conventional crops.

Another study conducted by researchers from RMIT university nearly 5 years ago published in the journal Environmental Research found that eating an organic diet for just one week significantly reduced pesticide exposure in adults by up to 90 percent.

The Takeaway: At the end of the day, people are and have been voting with their dollar. More grocery stores and brands are offering organic options, and the industry is starting to recognize that it’s in demand. Furthermore, more people are growing whatever food they can. At the end of the day, sprayed food not only has implications for human health, but it’s detrimental to the environment as well. This is a big problem on plane Earth, we are constantly told that GMO food and the spraying of crops is the only way to combat world hunger and changes in climate, but this sentiment goes against a plethora of information showing that local organic farming/agriculture is the most sustainable.

Dive Deeper

These days, it’s not just knowing information and facts that will create change, it’s changing ourselves, how we go about communicating, and re-assessing the underlying stories, ideas and beliefs that form our world. We have to practice these things if we truly want to change. At Collective Evolution and CETV, this is a big part of our mission.

Amongst 100's of hours of exclusive content, we have recently completed two short courses to help you become an effective changemaker, one called Profound Realization and the other called How To Do An Effective Media Detox.

Join CETV, engage with these courses and more here!

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Fact-Checker Claims No Causal Relationship Between 929 Deaths Reported After COVID Vaccine

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 13 minute read

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Data from the CDC's Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) shows, as of today, 929 deaths, 316 permanent disabilities and more than 15,000 adverse reactions reported after of the COVID-19 vaccine.

  • Reflect On:

    Should private institutions/companies have the right to mandate this vaccine for people and employees? When it comes to vaccines, should freedom of choice remain? Why is only one perspective presented by mainstream media?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

What Happened: According to the CDC Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), as of today (February 20th, 2021) 929 deaths, 316 permanent disabilities and more than 15,000 adverse events have been reported from people after taking the COVID-19 vaccine. This mainly represents reports that are coming in from the United States. The data shows that 799 of the deaths were reported in the U.S., and that about one-third of those deaths occurred within 48 hours of the individual receiving the vaccination. You can look it up for yourself and/or see the screenshot below. I have not looked up, or attempted to look up reports from countries outside of the U.S.

Many articles have been using VAERS to claim that the COVID-19 vaccine is causing deaths & injuries, but according to Facebook Fact Checker Health Feedback, the adverse events attributed to the COVID-19 don’t demonstrate a causal relationship between the vaccine and the adverse events. They do acknowledge, however, that VAERS records adverse events occurring after vaccination.

Health Feedback highlights the following point:

Both COVID-19 vaccines approved for emergency use by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration were thoroughly reviewed for safety and efficacy before approval. The U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) enables the public and healthcare providers to report adverse events that occur after they received a vaccine. While VAERS serves as an early warning system for potential problems with vaccines, determining whether there is a causal link requires further investigation into these reports. VAERS data only tells us that an adverse event might have occurred after vaccination; on its own it cannot prove that vaccines caused the adverse event.

VAERS themselves makes this point clear by stating:

A report to VAERS generally does not prove that the identified vaccine(s) cause the adverse event described. It only confirms that the reported event occurred sometime after (the) vaccine was given. No proof that the event was caused by the vaccine is required in order for VAERS to accept the report VAERS accepts all reports without judging whether the event was caused by the vaccine.

Keep in mind that approximately 40 million Americans have had at least one COVID shot thus far.

The VAERS data can also be perceived from another perspective. There is no proof showing that the vaccine did not cause the adverse events. The reports coming into VAERS are from people who believe the vaccine is indeed responsible for the adverse event. There are, as I’ve written about many times before, other important factors that have been noted about VAERS. For example, according to some, like this U.S. Department of Health and Human Services report, VAERS is estimated to capture an estimated one percent of vaccine injuries, or at least reports by those who believe to be injured by a vaccine, because the majority of them are believed to be unreported. It’s not clear how many health professionals let alone people are even aware of VAERS.

VAERS has come under fire multiple times, a critic familiar with VAERS’  bluntly condemned VAERS in The BMJ as “nothing more than window dressing, and a part of U.S. authorities’ systematic effort to reassure/deceive us about vaccine safety.”

It’s also noteworthy to mention that, when it comes to vaccine injury In the United States, the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP)  has paid out more than $4 billion dollars due to vaccine injuries. Since 2015, the program has paid out an average total of $216 million to an average of 615 claimants each year. Furthermore, those injured by the COVID-19 vaccine won’t be eligible for compensation from the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) while COVID is still an “emergency.”

lyson Kelvin, a virologist and assistant professor at Dalhousie University, who is currently working on COVID-19 vaccines with VIDO-InterVac, told Global News that “there’s a difference between “adverse events following immunization” and adverse events “directly related to a vaccine…Just because it’s an adverse event, doesn’t mean it’s directly related to the vaccine. It just means that it happened after someone got a vaccination… In Norway’s case, we’re talking about adverse events following immunization.”

Below is a screen shot from of the DATA:

When it comes to science and determining whether or not a vaccine is the direct cause of an injury, there doesn’t seem to be, in my opinion appropriate systems in place to investigate this. Furthermore, the VICP protects pharmaceutical companies from any liability with regards to vaccine injuries. Vaccines are a liability free product.

The scientific method in general is quick to point out that correlation does not mean causation, but again, in some cases correlation may actually mean causation. The Bradford Hill Criteria is one of the most cited concepts in health research and are still upheld as valid tools for aiding causal inference. You can look more into that too see how it all works if interested.

Another factor one must consider, also, is the politicization of science. Kamran Abbas is a doctor, recent former executive editor of the British Medical Journal, and the editor of the Bulletin of the World Health Organization. He has published an article about COVID-19, the suppression of science and the politicization of medicine, and the medical industrial complex.

Science is being suppressed for political and financial gain. Covid-19 has unleashed state corruption on a grand scale, and it is harmful to public health. Politicians and industry are responsible for this opportunistic embezzlement. So too are scientists and health experts. The pandemic has revealed how the medical-political complex can be manipulated in an emergency—a time when it is even more important to safeguard science…The UK’s pandemic response relies too heavily on scientists and other government appointees with worrying competing interests, including shareholdings in companies that manufacture covid-19 diagnostic tests, treatments, and vaccines.

According to Arnold Seymour Relman (1923-2014), Harvard professor of medicine and former Editor-in-Chief of The New England Medical Journal. 

“The medical profession is being bought by the pharmaceutical industry, not only in terms of the practice of medicine, but also in terms of teaching and research. The academic institutions of this country are allowing themselves to be the paid agents of the pharmaceutical industry. I think it’s disgraceful.”

It’s no secret that vaccine hesitancy is quite high in some places when it comes to the COVID-19 vaccine, and with vaccines in general.  The Washington Post reported this week that nearly a third of military personnel are opting out of the vaccines, and ESPN reported that top NBA players are reluctant to promote the vaccine.

A survey conducted at Chicago’s Loretto Hospital shows that only 40 percent of healthcare workers will not take the COVID-19 vaccine once it’s available to them. Riverside County, California has a population of approximately 2.4 million, and about 50 percent of healthcare workers in the county are refusing to take the COVID-19 vaccine despite the fact that they have top priority and access to it.

At Providence Holy Cross Medical Center in Mission Hills, one in five frontline nurses and doctors have declined the shot. Roughly 20% to 40% of L.A. County’s frontline workers who were offered the vaccine did the same, according to county public health officials.

Vaccine hesitancy among physicians and academics is nothing new. To illustrate this I often point to a conference held at the end of 2019 put on by the World Health Organization (WHO). At the conference, Dr. Heidi Larson a Professor of Anthropology and the Risk and Decision Scientist Director at the Vaccine Confidence Project Emphasized this point, having  stated,

The other thing that’s a trend, and an issue, is not just confidence in providers but confidence of health care providers. We have a very wobbly health professional frontline that is starting to question vaccines and the safety of vaccines. That’s a huge problem, because to this day any study I’ve seen…still, the most trusted person on any study I’ve seen globally is the health care provider.

A study published in the journal EbioMedicine  as far back as 2013 outlines this point, among many others.

Drene Keyes, described as a “gifted singer and grandmother of six,” found herself unable to breathe and began vomiting within a couple hours of being vaccinated, according to media reports. She was rushed to Riverside Tappahannock Hospital, where doctors administered an EpiPen, CPR and oxygen. Keyes’ daughter, Lisa Jones, told WKTR:  “They tried to remove fluid from her lungs. They called it ‘flash pulmonary edema,’ and doctors told me that it can be caused by anaphylaxis. The doctor told me that often during anaphylaxis, chemicals are released inside of a person’s body and can cause this to happen.”

Heidi Neckelmann, the wife of Dr. Gregory Michael from California, said that in her mind, her 56-year-old husband’s death was “100% linked” to the vaccine.  Now, at least one doctor has come forward publicly to say he also believes the vaccine caused Michael to develop acute idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP), the disorder that killed him. According to the New York Times: “Dr. Jerry L. Spivak, an expert on blood disorders at Johns Hopkins University, who was not involved in Dr. Michael’s care, said that based on Ms. Neckelmann’s description, ‘I think it is a medical certainty that the vaccine was related.’“‘This is going to be very rare,’ said Dr. Spivak, an emeritus professor of medicine. But he added, ‘It happened and it could happen again.’

Heidi made a Facebook post about the incident:

The love of my life, my husband Gregory Michael MD an obstetrician that had his office in Mount Sinai Medical Center in Miami Beach Died the day before yesterday due to a strong reaction to the COVID vaccine. He was a very healthy 56 year old, loved by everyone in the community, delivered hundreds of healthy babies and worked tireless through the pandemic . He was vaccinated with the Pfizer vaccine at MSMC on December 18, 3 days later he saw a strong set of petechiae on his feet and hands which made him seek attention at the emergency room at MSMC…read the full post HERE.

Approximately one month ago, Norway registered a total of 29 deaths among people over the age of 75 who had their first COVID-19 vaccine. As a result, the country changed which groups to target in national inoculation programs.  Steinar Madsen, medical director of the Norwegian Medicines Agency (NOMA), told the British Medical Journal (BMJ) that “There is no certain connection between these deaths and the vaccine.”  Bloomberg Reported that the “Pfizer/BioNTech was the only vaccine available in Norway”, stating that the Norwegian Medicines Agency told them that as a result “all deaths are thus linked to this vaccine.” So, there seemed to be some conflicting information there as well, one piece of information stating that the vaccine was linked, and the other stating that it wasn’t, both from the same source.

Dr. Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard University, a biostatistician, and epidemiologist, Dr. Sunetra Gupta, professor at Oxford University, an epidemiologist with expertise in immunology, and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professor at Stanford University Medical School, a physician and epidemiologist were all the initiators of The Great Barrington Declaration. They recently announced that they are strongly in favour of voluntary COVID-19 vaccination.

It doesn’t seem like governments are going to mandate the vaccine. What instead seems to be the case is that private businesses and institutions may do so. For example, certain airlines may not allow people to travel unless they’ve had the shot. Some restaurant, entertainment facilities and other places of businesses might follow suit. Certain employers may require their employees to take the shot. All of this of course raises a number of legal and ethical concerns. We will just have to wait and see what happens. In all circumstances, I do believe the COVID vaccine should always remain voluntary, especially when it’s quite unclear if they can even reduce the risk of transmission and infection, and there does seem to be a number of concerns being raised with the vaccine.

Dr. Peter Doshi, an associate editor at the British Medical Journal published a piece in the Journal issuing a word of caution about the supposed “95% Effective” COVID vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna. You can access that here.

A few other papers have raised concerns as well, for example. A study published in October of 2020 in the International Journal of Clinical Practice states:

 COVID-19 vaccines designed to elicit neutralising antibodies may sensitise vaccine recipients to more severe disease than if they were not vaccinated. Vaccines for SARS, MERS and RSV have never been approved, and the data generated in the development and testing of these vaccines suggest a serious mechanistic concern: that vaccines designed empirically using the traditional approach (consisting of the unmodified or minimally modified coronavirus viral spike to elicit neutralising antibodies), be they composed of protein, viral vector, DNA or RNA and irrespective of delivery method, may worsen COVID-19 disease via antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE). This risk is sufficiently obscured in clinical trial protocols and consent forms for ongoing COVID-19 vaccine trials that adequate patient comprehension of this risk is unlikely to occur, obviating truly informed consent by subjects in these trials.

In a new research article published in Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, veteran immunologist J. Bart Classen expresses similar concerns and writes that “RNA-based COVID vaccines have the potential to cause more disease than the epidemic of COVID-19.”

For decades, Classen has published papers exploring how vaccination can give rise to chronic conditions such as Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes — not right away, but three or four years down the road. In this latest paper, Classen warns that the RNA-based vaccine technology could create “new potential mechanisms” of vaccine adverse events that may take years to come to light.

Again, these are a few of multiple examples, I just wanted to provide some context. All of this warrants freedom of choice, does it not?

The Takeaway:  One thing that seems to be quite evident, in my opinion, is the fact that mainstream media and the “mainstream” in general is failing at having proper conversations around controversial topics, like vaccines, for example. Instead of using terms like “Anti-Vax conspiracy theorist, as well as ridicule, it would be great if mainstream media advocates actually addressed the concerns being raised by those who are concerned about vaccine safety and effectiveness. Should private institutions/companies have the right to mandate this vaccine for people and employees? When it comes to vaccines, should freedom of choice remain? Why is only one perspective presented by mainstream media?

Dive Deeper

These days, it’s not just knowing information and facts that will create change, it’s changing ourselves, how we go about communicating, and re-assessing the underlying stories, ideas and beliefs that form our world. We have to practice these things if we truly want to change. At Collective Evolution and CETV, this is a big part of our mission.

Amongst 100's of hours of exclusive content, we have recently completed two short courses to help you become an effective changemaker, one called Profound Realization and the other called How To Do An Effective Media Detox.

Join CETV, engage with these courses and more here!

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Norway Investigates 29 Deaths in Elderly Patients After Pfizer Covid-19 Vaccination

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 7 minute read

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Norway has registered a total of 29 deaths among people over the age of 75 who’ve had their first Covid-19 vaccination shot, raising questions over which groups to target in national inoculation programs.

  • Reflect On:

    Should freedom of choice always remain here? Should governments and private institutions not be allowed to mandate this vaccine in order to have access to certain rights and freedoms?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

What Happened: 29 patients who were quite old and frail have died following their first dose of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccination. As a result, Norwegian officials have since adjusted their advice on who should get the COVID-19 vaccine.

This doesn’t come as a surprise to many given the fact that the clinical trials were conducted with people who are healthy. Older and sick people with co-morbidities were not used in the trials, and people with severe allergies and other diseases that can make one more susceptible to vaccine injury were not used either. It can be confusing given the fact that vaccination is being encouraged for the elderly in nursing homes and those who are more vulnerable to COVID-19.

Steinar Madsen, medical director of the Norwegian Medicines Agency (NOMA), told the British Medical Journal (BMJ) that “There is no certain connection between these deaths and the vaccine.”

On the 15th of January it was 23 deaths, Bloomberg is now reporting that a total of 29 deaths among people over the age of 75 who’ve had their first COVID-19 shot. They point out that “Until Friday, Pfizer/BioNTech was the only vaccine available in Norway”, stating that the Norwegian Medicines Agency told them that as a result “all deaths are thus linked to this vaccine.”

“There are 13 deaths that have been assessed, and we are aware of another 16 deaths that are currently being assessed,” the agency said. All the reported deaths related to “elderly people with serious basic disorders,” it said. “Most people have experienced the expected side effects of the vaccine, such as nausea and vomiting, fever, local reactions at the injection site, and worsening of their underlying condition.”

Madsen also told the BMJ that,

There is a possibility that these common adverse reactions, that are not dangerous in fitter, younger patients and are not unusual with vaccines, may aggravate underlying disease in the elderly. We are not alarmed or worried about this, because these are very rare occurrences and they occurred in very frail patients with very serious disease. We are not asking for doctors to continue with vaccination, but to carry out extra evaluation of very sick people whose underlying condition might be aggravated by it. This evaluation includes discussing the risks and benefits of vaccination with the patient and their families to decide whether or not vaccination is the best course.

The BMJ article goes on to point out that the Paul Ehrlich Institute in Germany is also investigating 10 deaths shortly after COVID-19 vaccination, and closes with the following information:

In a statement, Pfizer said, “Pfizer and BioNTech are aware of reported deaths following administration of BNT162b2. We are working with NOMA to gather all the relevant information.

“Norwegian authorities have prioritised the immunisation of residents in nursing homes, most of whom are very elderly with underlying medical conditions and some of whom are terminally ill. NOMA confirm the number of incidents so far is not alarming, and in line with expectations. All reported deaths will be thoroughly evaluated by NOMA to determine if these incidents are related to the vaccine. The Norwegian government will also consider adjusting their vaccination instructions to take the patients’ health into more consideration.

“Our immediate thoughts are with the bereaved families.”

Vaccine Hesitancy is Growing Among Healthcare Workers: Vaccine hesitancy is growing all over the globe, one of the latest examples comes from Riverside County, California. It has a population of approximately 2.4 million, and about 50 percent of healthcare workers in the county are refusing to take the COVID-19 vaccine despite the fact that they have top priority and access to it.  At Providence Holy Cross Medical Center in Mission Hills, one in five frontline nurses and doctors have declined the shot. Roughly 20% to 40% of L.A. County’s frontline workers who were offered the vaccine did the same, according to county public health officials. You can read more about that story here.

Vaccine hesitancy among physicians and academics is nothing new. To illustrate this I often point to a conference held at the end of 2019 put on by the World Health Organization (WHO). At the conference, Dr. Heidi Larson a Professor of Anthropology and the Risk and Decision Scientist Director at the Vaccine Confidence Project Emphasized this point, having  stated,

The other thing that’s a trend, and an issue, is not just confidence in providers but confidence of health care providers. We have a very wobbly health professional frontline that is starting to question vaccines and the safety of vaccines. That’s a huge problem, because to this day any study I’ve seen…still, the most trusted person on any study I’ve seen globally is the health care provider.

A study published in the journal EbioMedicine  as far back as 2013 outlines this point, among many others.

Pfizer’s Questionable History:  Losing faith in “big pharma” does not come without good reason. For example, in 2010 Robert G. Evans, PhD, Centre for Health Services and Policy Research Emeritus Professor, Vancouver School of Economics, UBC, published a paper that’s accessible in PubMed titled “Tough on Crime? Pfizer and the CIHR.”

In it, he outlines the fact that,

Pfizer has been a “habitual offender,” persistently engaging in illegal and corrupt marketing practices, bribing physicians and suppressing adverse trial results. Since 2002 the company and its subsidiaries have been assessed $3 billion in criminal convictions, civil penalties and jury awards. The 2.3-billion settlement…set a new record for both criminal fines and total penalties. A link with Pfizer might well advance the commercialization of Canadian research.

Suppressing clinical trial results is something I’ve come across multiple times with several different medicines. Five years ago I wrote about how big pharma did not share adverse reactions people had and harmful results from their clinical trials for commonly used antidepressant drugs.

Even scientists from within federal these health regulatory agencies have been sounding the alarm. For example, a few years ago more than a dozen scientists from within the CDC put out an anonymous public statement detailing the influence corporations have on government policies. They were referred to as the  Spider Papers.

The Takeaway: Given the fact that everything is not black and white, especially when it comes to vaccine safety, do we really want to give government health agencies and/or private institutions the right to enforce mandatory vaccination requirements when their efficacy have been called into question? Should people have the freedom of choice? It’s a subject that has many people polarized in their beliefs, but at the end of the day the sharing of information, opinion and evidence should not be shut down, discouraged, ridiculed or censored.

In a day and age where more people are starting to see our planet in a completely different light, one which has more and more questioning the human experience and why we live the way we do it seems the ‘crack down’ on free thought gets tighter and tighter. Do we really want to live in a world where we lose the right to choose what we do with our own body, or one where certain rights and freedoms are taken away if we don’t comply? The next question is, what do we do about it? Those who are in a position to enforce these measures must, it seems, have a shift in consciousness and refuse to implement them. There doesn’t seem to be a clear cut answer, but there is no doubt that we are currently going through that possible process, we are living in it.

Dive Deeper

These days, it’s not just knowing information and facts that will create change, it’s changing ourselves, how we go about communicating, and re-assessing the underlying stories, ideas and beliefs that form our world. We have to practice these things if we truly want to change. At Collective Evolution and CETV, this is a big part of our mission.

Amongst 100's of hours of exclusive content, we have recently completed two short courses to help you become an effective changemaker, one called Profound Realization and the other called How To Do An Effective Media Detox.

Join CETV, engage with these courses and more here!

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

Due to censorship, please join us on Telegram

We post important content to Telegram daily so we don't have to rely on Facebook.

You have Successfully Subscribed!