Connect with us

Awareness

French Breast Implant Founder Used Industrial Silicone & Fuel Solvents In PIP Implants Is Appealing His Sentence

Published

on

The toxic chemicals in the fraudulent shells and fillers of PIP breast Implants seep out into surrounding body tissue, migrate into body organs, can cross the placenta and can be found in breast milk.

advertisement - learn more

These toxic chemicals make women very sick and many report debilitating symptoms directly linked to silicone toxicity.  Jan Spivey and Marie Robinson Co – Founders of PIP Action Campaign

-->Facebook Just Shut Us Down: We need your help in taking our power back from big tech, to overcome censorship and the attack on free speech. Click here to help!

Established in 1991, French company Poly Implant Prothese (known as PIP) was found guilty of fraud in 2013, along with its founder, Jean- Claude Mas, who was sentenced to four years in jail.

To the thousands of women who were mislead into thinking these implants were produced in a ‘safe’ manner, and have since suffered immeasurably, both physically and emotionally, this four year sentence seemed like an incredible insult. When Jean-Claude was found guilty for fraud he was fined a mere 75,000 euros, and has since spent approximately 18 months in jail.

At one point in time, PIP was the third largest breast implant manufacturer in the world, producing up to 100,000 implants each year.

Not willing to spend four years in prison, Jean-Claude has asked for an appeal, and his case began last week in France, sparking outrage in the victims who are terrified they may now never see him face his crimes.

advertisement - learn more
JS54617237

This is Jean-Claude Mas, the founder of PIP, being charged with fraud. He was sentenced to 4 years and is now asking for an appeal.

What Was Found In PIP Implants? 

When the truth was revealed about what was in these faulty breast implants, women were horrified. Instead of using medical grade silicone, PIP elected instead to use the much cheaper industrial silicone. This type of silicone is untested and not licensed for use in the human body.

Not coincidentally, PIP implants had a 500% higher risk of leaking and or rupturing than other models on the market.

Other chemicals found in PIP implants included: Toluene * Acetone Xylene Cyclohexane Ethylbenzene *D6 * Chloroform * Dichloromethane * Ethanol * Ethyl Acetate * D4* D5*  Platinum * Caesium* Methanol * Isopropanol * 1-Butanol * Butyl * Benzophenone * di-2-ethylexyl phthalate. (source)

TÜV Rheinland, the German notified body, was responsible for ensuring that PIP implants complied with the regulations, issuing a CE certificate which tells buyers and surgeons that the implants are safe. PIP implants were then sent out into the market, where they were used in approximately 500,000 women in many countries worldwide.

Upon further investigation into the ingredients of PIP implants, it was discovered that the manufacturer had also added Baysilone (a fuel additive), as well as Silopren and Rhodorsil – both of which are used as electrical cable coatings.

PIP also made male chest, buttock, and testicle implants with their industrial silicone.

It’s important to note that these chemicals have never been tested for their effects on humans. (source).

12250033_10153820740254225_957749588396738859_n

“It’s not a debate about cosmetic surgery …
It’s a serious health problem
Women affected by PIP implants want justice.
In silence we must live with our pain…
The anguish of the scandal
Robbed of rights, uncertainty
Fear, helplessness and loneliness.
Humiliated for defending our dignity
Here is the reality no-ones sees
that others caused.”

Pip Action Campaign

12241373_10153044348166076_1567850378535657090_n

Toulene – just one of the many concerning chemicals added to PIP implants.

Jean-Claude On What He Did

Statements by Jean-Claude Mas, Founder of PIP

Throughout the entire duration of the 2013 investigations, Jean-Claude Mas kept a provocative and scornful stance that particularly shocked the different protagonists of the case.

  • He confessed in particular during his hearing at the police that he had given the order to “hide the truth in 1993” from the German certification body TÜV.
  • He then detailed all fraud without the slightest embarrassment, and without showing any remorse, saying “I knew this gel was not approved, but I did this knowingly because the PIP gel had better value for money.”
  • Subsequently, and despite the exponential number of complainants and severity of the effects highlighted by physicians, Jean-Claude Mas continued to declare that his gel “did not pose a risk to human health.”
  • Speaking about the complainants, Jean-Claude Mas declared that, “These people are frail or are doing it for the money. I lived well at the time.” That is to say, he lived with a fixed salary of 30,000 euros a month.
  • Right from the start of the trial he explained that he did not “make anyone take any risks” and that “the PIP gel was not approved but was approvable,” adding that “toxicity wise, it’s the same” (as authorized Nusil gel). (source)

10312012_419704161573147_3657177315816624394_n

There is 100% evidence that all cohesive silicone gel Implants, including the “new and improved” implants, “gel bleed” inside the body while still intact, exposing the body to platinum as well as 40+ toxic ingredients and heavy metals. (source) (source)

Victims Terrified This Man Will Not Pay For His Crimes

When three of the UK’s largest cosmetic surgery providers of PIP implants refused to help women, some turned to the NHS (National Health Service) instead and were able to have their PIP implants removed. But some women are still waiting and have received no help or compensation. Many are still incredibly ill and in desperate need of medical intervention.

As you can see below from these truly grotesque photos, PIP implants were often removed looking just like this. For this particular victim, both sides had severely ruptured, so the silicone had to be scraped out of her breast cavity. This woman will now also have silicone in her body that cannot ever be fully removed, since it travels throughout the body.  The red bits are scar tissue which also had to be removed. .

It is estimated that over 40,000 women in the UK received these PIP implants. You can read here how PIP implants have affected other women worldwide.

12249894_10153820723289225_5826607413462777509_n

PIP Implants – both severely ruptured. You can see videos here of surgeons at Aurora Clinics in the UK removing PIP implants. Warning, you need a pretty strong stomach to watch.

Breast Implant Manufacturers: Should Any Be Trusted?

Over the years we have heard from countless women who are saline and silicone breast implant patients and who have suffered from complications, involving both short- and long-term health conditions believed to be related to their implants. Implants rupture and leak. Implants sometimes migrate. Implants often harden and cause capsular contracture.
Nearly all will need to be replaced at some point.

Reported conditions involve local infectionsnecrosishematomaconnective tissue disorders and immune disorders like fibromyalgiarheumatoid arthritischronic fatigue syndromemultiple sclerosislupusSjogren’s syndrome and others. National Cancer Institute studies indicate that women who have breast implants are at increased risk of brain cancerlung canceremphysemapneumonia and suicide.

Although research paid for by implant companies disagrees, those findings need to be evaluated by independent researchers. And now we learn that a rare type of immune system cancer, anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (ALCL), is found growing near the capsule of scar tissue around the breast implant. The risk of developing ALCL for women with implants was significantly higher than that found in women without breast implants.

From Terry O’Neill, President, National Organization for Women (NOW) Foundation – Presented to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, General and Plastic Surgery Devices Panel Review of Post-Approval Studies for Silicone Gel-Filled Breast Implants on August 30, 2011 (source)

The breast augmentation industry is worth billions. With an estimated 5-10 million women worldwide undergoing this procedure each year, it’s obvious that this industry is worth a lot of money. It is equally clear that it is not in the best interests of many of these companies for women to know how many risks and complications are involved.

By the late 90’s, approximately 400,000 USA women had filed and won a massive lawsuit with Dow Corning, who also made dangerous implants which ruptured at an alarming rate, with silicone leaking into women’s bodies, causing an untold amount of damage to their health. Some women have since died after having these implants put in.

Women Take Note: Silicone Is Found in ALL Implants On The Market Today

While much of the public may think that Dow’s case is old news and that the newer implants aren’t as dangerous, many women today who have these so-called ‘newer and safer’ implants are telling a much different story, reporting ruptures and ill health.

Women are often misguided into thinking that saline implants ‘only contain saline.’ This is false. The outer shell on all implants is made with silicone and a mix of other chemicals and heavy metals.

It’s vital to know that silicone, once it has leaked from the implants, cannot be removed from the body.

The distributor Sientra (who until recently handled the market for the ‘Silimed‘ implants, had this brand removed from the market because of “contamination fears,” where manufacturing particles such as cotton and silica were found in the implants) was also previously quite open about their findings and wrote in their own data sheet that their breast implants can cause adverse effects and complications such as:

  • Reoperation (additional surgeries)
  • Implant removal with or without replacement
  • Implant rupture
  • Capsular contracture
  • Wrinkling
  • Asymmetry
  • Implant displacement
  • Implant palpability/visibility
  • Scarring
  • Ptosis
  • Pain
  • Infection (including Toxic Shock Syndrome)
  • Hematoma
  • Seroma
  • Breast feeding difficulties
  • Calcium deposits
  • Extrusion
  • Necrosis
  • Delayed wound healing
  • Breast tissue atrophy/chest wall deformity
  • Lymphadenopathy
  • Connective tissue disease (CTD)
  • CTD signs and symptoms
  • Neurological disease
  • Neurological signs and symptoms
  • Cancer
  • Lymphoma
  • Suicide
  • Changes in nipple and breast sensation
  • Potential effects on offspring. (source FDA’s website)

Read The Manufacturer’s Data Sheets

Often women do not receive true informed consent before signing up to have breast implants. I know I didn’t. At the time, back in 2007, I did not even think to question if implants could be dangerous.

In my case, my own vanity overrode my sensibility.

These warnings are quite clearly listed in many brands, however. Mentor’s data sheets, for example, are well known for their “newer, safer cohesive gel implants” that many women tout as safe.

Mentor warns about many of the possible risks and complications. If all women read this in detail before they decided yes to this operation, would they end up going ahead with the procedure?  I think many would not.

While I think it’s important that Mentor makes these risks clear, it is likely that if something were to go wrong you would then be unable to sue because you had been warned ahead of time.

Again, I urge you to be very sure you know what you could be in for before saying yes.

Safety Studies Not All Completed

Other studies that were meant to be completed to prove the safety of ‘newer and improved implants’ were not at all carried out adequately. According to the article “FDA Questions Studies Of Implant Safety,” Mentor, who make the Memory Gel implants, had lost a whopping 79% of the women involved in the study. Allergan, who make Natrelle implants, also lost 40% of their women only two years after the study began.

  • Both of these companies now have their implants used in countless breast augmentations worldwide.
  • We only have to look at the case of PIP to see that manufacturers can get away with using toxic and dangerous ingredients, at least for a while. Jean-Claude had his toxic implants on the market for approximately ten years before they were recalled.
  • If you are to ask for full ingredient listings of a certain brand, the companies do not respond to emails (give it a try yourself and see!) and they certainly do not list these important details on their websites.
  • I’ve managed to find only a short list from the FDA of what is in the shells or inside of both saline and silicone implants.

Detected Heavy Metals in Implant Shell and/or Gel:

  • Barium
  • Bromine
  • Cesium
  • Chromium
  • Germanium
  • Nickel
  • Platinum
  • Tin
  • Zirconium
  • Aluminum (source)

A Warning To Women

If you are going to have something put into your body, you need to know, and have the right to know, exactly what the device is made of.

The appeal case of Jean-Claude and other members of PIP continues and I hope to update you in the near future.

I am personally praying for justice for the women affected by these toxic implants.

Until then, please think very carefully about what you may already have in your body (even if they are not PIP implants), and if you are considering having breast implants, please do a lot more research before you make this life-changing decision that could possibly detrimentally affect your health and well-being.


Forty-seven thousand women in the UK are thought to have been exposed to non-compliant PIP implants. The PIP health fraud has affected more than 500,000 women worldwide.

In addition to suffering a shocking array of symptoms, women have genuine concerns for their children exposed during pregnancy or while breast feeding. Women have rights as patients and consumers and as victims of crime.

Many women have sustained terrible injuries, many have been traumatised, virtually all express anxiety at facing an uncertain future.

Yet they have been denied their rights to a duty of care, denied access to healthcare and treatment, their consumer rights have been undermined and their right to justice obstructed by regulatory failings and powerful industry lobbies operating in the European Union and beyond.

PIP is not just about a devious, delusional manufacturer, but a corrupted regulatory system for medical devices which is failing all women.

Jan Spivey Co-Founder of PIP Action Campaign and Survivor Of PIP 

Further research 

RADIO INTERVIEW WITH JAN SPIVEY, JESS LEWIS AND TRACEY AHMET

If you are alarmed by this issue, please sign this petition here:

Breast Implants – The Ticking Time Bomb

pipactioncampaign.org

Breast Implant Awareness

Dr Susan Kolbs Newsletter

Facebook Groups

facebook.com/groups/PIPAction

facebook.com/groups/TITS Committee The Implant Truth Survivors 

facebook.com/groups/breastimplantsthetickingtimebomb

Report Your PIP Implants

Experienced an adverse event you associate with your PIP?

facebook.com/events/658956837514741

United Kingdom gov.uk/report-problem-medicine-medical-device

USA fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Safety/ReportaProblem/default.htm

Australia tga.gov.au/reporting-medical-device-problems

France Report PIP implant issues here

Thank you to Sophia Lamere for assisting with the French translation.

Become Part of CE's Inner Circle

Collective Evolution is one of the world's fastest-growing conscious media and education companies providing news and tools to raise collective consciousness. Get inside access to Collective Evolution by becoming a member of CETV.

Stream content 24/7 and enjoy mind-expanding interviews, original shows, documentaries and guided programs.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and help conscious media thrive!

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Alternative News

Positive Association Found Amongst COVID Deaths & Flu Shot Rates Worldwide In Elderly

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A recently published paper has found a positive association between COVID-19 deaths and influenza vaccination rates in elderly people worldwide.

  • Reflect On:

    Why does vaccine hesitancy continue to grow worldwide? What's going on? What information/factors are contributing to this hesitancy?

What Happened: A recently published study in PeerJ  by Christian Wehenkel, a Professor at Universidad Juárez del Estado de Durango in Mexico, has found a positive association between COVID-19 deaths and influenza vaccination rates in elderly people worldwide.

According to the study, “The results showed a positive association between COVID-19 deaths and IVR (influenza vaccination rate) of people ≥65 years-old. There is a significant increase in COVID-19 deaths from eastern to western regions in the world. Further exploration is needed to explain these findings, and additional work on this line of research may lead to prevention of deaths associated with COVID-19.”

To determine this association, data sets from 39 countries with more than half a million people were analyzed.

The study was published on October 1st, and two weeks later a note from the publisher appeared atop the paper emphasizing that correlation does not equal causation, and that this paper “should not be taken to suggest that receiving the influenza vaccination results in an increased risk of death for an individual with COVID-19 as there may be confounding factors at play.”

The paper provides evidence from others which have recently been published that ponder if the flu shot could increase ones chance of contracting and dying from COVID-19.

For example, this study published in April of 2020, reported a negative correlation between influenza vaccination rates (IVRs) and COVID-19 related mortality and morbidity. Marín-Hernández, Schwartz & Nixon (2020) also showed epidemiological evidence of an association between higher influenza vaccine uptake by elderly people and lower percentage of COVID-19 deaths in Italy, which directly contradicts the author’s own findings and suggests that the flu shot may help prevent COVID-19 related deaths.

He goes on to mention another study:

In a study analyzing 92,664 clinically and molecularly confirmed COVID-19 cases in Brazil, Fink et al. (2020) reported that patients who received a recent flu vaccine experienced on average 17% lower odds of death. Moreover, Pawlowski et al. (2020) analyzed the immunization records of 137,037 individuals who tested positive in a SARS-CoV-2 PCR. They found that polio, Hemophilus influenzae type-B, measles-mumps-rubella, varicella, pneumococcal conjugate (PCV13), geriatric flu, and hepatitis A/hepatitis B (HepA-HepB) vaccines, which had been administered in the past 1, 2, and 5 years, were associated with decreased SARS-CoV-2 infection rates.

So, its important to mention that correlations between the flu vaccine have also found that it may decrease ones chance of deaths from COVID-19.

But are there studies that have shown an increased chance of death or contracting other respiratory viruses as a result of getting the flu shot? Yes.

That’s also discussed in the paper. For example, he mentions a paper published in 2018:

In a study with 6,120 subjects, Wolff (2020) reported that influenza vaccination was significantly associated with a higher risk of some other respiratory diseases, due to virus interference. In a specific examination of non-influenza viruses, the odds of coronavirus infection (but not the COVID-19 virus) in vaccinated individuals were significantly higher, when compared to unvaccinated individuals (odds ratio = 1.36).

The study above found the flu shot to increase the risk of other coronaviruses among those who had been vaccinated for influenza by 36 percent. The study was conducted prior to COVID-19, so it’s not included and only applies to pre-existing coronaviruses. The study also found an even higher chance of contracting human metapneumovirus amongst those who had received the flu shot.

Below are some more studies regarding the flu shot and viral infections that hint to the same idea.

  • 2018 CDC study (Rikin et al 2018) found that flu shots increase the risk of non-flu acute respiratory illnesses (ARIs), including coronavirus, in children.
  • A 2011 Australian study (Kelly et al 2011) found that flu shots doubled the risk for non-flu viral lung infections.
  • 2012 Hong Kong study (Cowling et al 2012) found that flu shots increase the risk for non-flu respiratory infections by 4.4 times.
  • 2017 study (Mawson et al 2017) found vaccinated children were 5.9 times more likely to suffer pneumonia than their unvaccinated peers.

Why This Is Important: We live in an age where vaccinations are heavily marketed. We’ve seen this with the flu shot time and time again and we are also living in an age where a push for more mandated vaccines seems to be growing.

Dr. Peter Doshi is an associate editor at The BMJ (British Medical Journal) and also an assistant professor of pharmaceutical health services research at the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy. He published a paper in The BMJ titled “Influenza: Marketing Vaccines By Marketing Disease.”  In it,  he points out that the CDC pledges “to base all public health decisions on the highest quality of scientific data, openly and objectively derived,” and how this isn’t the case when it comes to the flu vaccine and its marketing. He stresses that “the vaccine may be less beneficial and less safe than has been claimed, and that “the threat of influenza seems to be overstated.”

This is a touchy subject that dives into medical ethics and the connections that big pharmaceutical companies have with our federal health regulatory agencies and health associations. Vaccines are a multi billion dollar industry.

At a recent World Health Organization conference on vaccine safety, it was expressed that vaccine hesitancy is growing at quite a fast pace, especially among doctors who are now becoming hesitant to recommend certain vaccines on the schedule. You can read more about that and find links to the conference here.

We have to ask ourselves, why is this happening? Is it because people and professionals are becoming aware of certain information that warrants the freedom of choice? Should freedom of choice with regards to what we put in our body always remain? Are we really protecting the “herd” by taking these actions?

In a 2014 analysis in the Oregon Law Review by New York University (NYU) legal scholars Mary Holland and Chase E. Zachary (who also has a Princeton-conferred doctorate in chemistry), the authors show that 60 years of compulsory vaccine policies “have not attained herd immunity for any childhood disease.” It is time, they suggest, to cast aside coercion in favor of voluntary choice.

When it comes to the flu shot, I put more information and science as to why so many people seem to refuse it, in this article if interested.

The University of California is currently being sued for mandating the flu shot for all staff, faculty and students. A judge has prevented them from doing so as a result until a decision has been made. You can read more about that here.

In South Korea, 48 people have now died after receiving the flu shot this season causing a lot of controversy. You can read more about that here.

The Takeaway: There are many concerns with vaccines, and vaccine injury is one of them. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act has paid more than $4 billion to families of vaccine injured children. A 2010 HHS pilot study by the Federal Agency for Health Care Research (AHCR) found that 1 in every 39 vaccines causes injury, a shocking comparison to the claims from the CDC of 1 in every million.

Should these statistics alone warrant the freedom of choice? Should the government have the ability to force us into measures, or would it simply be better for them to present the science, make recommendations and urge people to follow them? When the citizenry is forced and coerced into certain actions, sometimes under the guise of good-will, there always seems to be a tremendous amount of uproar and people who disagree. Why are these people silenced? Why are they censored? Why are they ridiculed? Why don’t independent health organizations receive the same voice and reach that government and state “owned” or organizations do? What’s going on here? Do we really live in a free, open and transparent world or are we simply subjected to massive amounts of perception manipulation?

When it come to the flu shot there is plenty of information on both sides of the coin that point to its effectiveness, and on the other hand there is information that points to the complete opposite. When something is not 100 percent clear, freedom of choice in all places should always remain, in my opinion.

Become Part of CE's Inner Circle

Collective Evolution is one of the world's fastest-growing conscious media and education companies providing news and tools to raise collective consciousness. Get inside access to Collective Evolution by becoming a member of CETV.

Stream content 24/7 and enjoy mind-expanding interviews, original shows, documentaries and guided programs.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and help conscious media thrive!

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Some South Korean Doctors & Politicians Call To Stop Flu Shots After 48 People Die

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    The number of South Koreans who have died after getting flu shots has risen to 48, but health authorities in South Korea have found no link between the vaccine and the deaths.

  • Reflect On:

    Is the flu shot as safe as it's marketed to be?

What Happened: It’s that time of year and flu shot programs are rolling out across the globe. The number of South Koreans who have died after getting the flu shot has now risen to 48 and some South Korean doctors and politicians have called to stop flu shots as a result, according to Reuters. The Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency (KDCA) has decided not to stop the program, and that flu vaccines would continue to be given and will reduce the chance of having simultaneous epidemics in the era of COVID-19.

Health authorities in South Korea have explained that they’ve found no direct link between these deaths and the shots. KDCA Director Jeong Eun-kyung said, “After reviewing death cases so far, it is not the time to suspend a flu vaccination programme since vaccination is very crucial this year, considering…the COVID-19 outbreaks.”

According to Reuters, “Some initial autopsy results from the police and the National Forensic Service showed that 13 people died of cardiovascular, cerebrovascular and other disorders not caused by the vaccination.”

The South Korean government is hopeful to vaccinate approximately 30 million of the country’s 54 million people.

Concerns Some People Have With The Flu Shot: One concern many people seem to have is the worry of a severe adverse reaction.

Dr. Alvin Moss, MD and professor at the West Virginia University School of Medicine emphasizes in this video:

The flu vaccine happens to be the vaccine that causes the most injury in this country. The vaccine injury compensation program, 40 percent of all vaccinations in this country are flu shots, but 60 percent of all the compensations are for the flu vaccine. So a disproportionate number of  vaccine related injuries are the flu shot.

Moss is one of many who believe that the flu vaccine is not as effective as it’s been marketed to be. For example,  A study recently published in Global Advances In Health & Medicine titled “Ascorbate as Prophylaxis and Therapy for COVID-19—Update From Shanghai and U.S. Medical Institutions outlines the following:

Recently outlined A recent consensus statement from a group of renowned infectious disease clinicians observed that vaccine programs have proven ill-suited to the fast-changing viruses underlying these illnesses, with efficacy ranging from 19% to 54% in the past few years.

Dr. Peter Doshi is an associate editor at The BMJ (British Medical Journal)  published a paper in The BMJ titled “Influenza: Marketing Vaccines By Marketing Disease.”  In it,  he points out that the CDC pledges “to base all public health decisions on the highest quality of scientific data, openly and objectively derived,” and how this isn’t the case when it comes to the flu vaccine and its marketing. He stresses that “the vaccine may be less beneficial and less safe than has been claimed, and that “the threat of influenza seems to be overstated.”

These are just a few examples out of many claiming that the flu shot has not really been effective, opposing others that claim it is.  Mercury that’s still present in some flu shots also seems to be a concern.

The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act has paid more than $4 billion to families of vaccine injured children. A 2010 HHS pilot study by the Federal Agency for Health Care Research (AHCR) found that 1 in every 39 vaccines causes injury, a shocking comparison to the claims from the CDC of 1 in every million.

Professor Heidi Larson, a Professor of Anthropology and the Risk and Decision Scientist Director at the Vaccine Confidence Project stated at a World Health Organization (WHO) conference that more doctors are starting to be hesitant when it comes to recommending vaccines.

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…

This is no secret, and actions against mandates are being taken. The University of California was recently sued for making the flu shot mandatory. That trial will begin soon, and you can read more about it here, and find information regarding the claim that the flu shot can help in the times of COVID-19.

The Takeaway: We are living in an age of extreme censorship of information, no matter how credible or how much evidence is provided, information that goes against the grain always seems to receive a harsh backlash from mainstream media as well as social media outlets. Why is there a digital fact checker patrolling the internet? Should people not have the right to examine information openly and freely and determine for themselves what is and what isn’t?

As far as vaccines are concerned, despite the fact that there are many safety issues the scientific community  is bringing up, a push for vaccine mandates continues and the idea that we are protecting other people is usually the narrative that’s pushed hard. Vaccine skepticism is growing at a fast pace among people of all professions, and people aren’t stupid. There’s a reason why more and more people are starting to question what we’ve been told for years, and those reasons should be acknowledged and openly discussed amongst people on both sides of the coin.

Become Part of CE's Inner Circle

Collective Evolution is one of the world's fastest-growing conscious media and education companies providing news and tools to raise collective consciousness. Get inside access to Collective Evolution by becoming a member of CETV.

Stream content 24/7 and enjoy mind-expanding interviews, original shows, documentaries and guided programs.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and help conscious media thrive!

Continue Reading

Alternative News

University of California Sued For Making Flu Shot Mandatory: Latest Updates

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A hearing will take on November 4th as to whether or not the University of California will be allowed to mandate the flu vaccine for all staff, faculty and students. This comes after they were sued after announcing the mandate this past summer.

  • Reflect On:

    Why has vaccine hesitancy grown so much amongst scientists and doctors?

The University of California is one of many in the United States that have made the flu shot mandatory for all students, staff and faculty. Originally, Flu shots were required to be taken by November 1st of this year, according to UC, but Judge Richard Seabolt has halted their ability to do that until November 4th, when he will determine whether or not UC can or cannot mandate the flu vaccine.

Due to the growing amount of evidence that vaccines are not completely safe for everyone, let alone completely safe, attorney’s Rick Jaffe  Robert F. Kennedy Jr, renowned attorney and Chair of Children’s Health Defense are sued the University of California for mandating the flu shot. You can read a bit of their reasoning here.

According to Greg Glaser., general counsel at the Physicians For Informed Consent (PIC), “In this lawsuit against the UC Board of Regents over their new flu vaccine mandate, some of the world’s top experts have provided declarations opposing the flu shot mandate…Their declarations will have a s significant impact on decisions made regarding public health.”

Dr. Shira Miller, founder and president of PIC says “there’s data showing that the flu shot increases one’s chances of non-flu illness by 65% – meaning that not only does this mandate lack scientific justification, but it puts UC students, faculty and staff at a greater risk of other respiratory illnesses…The studies referenced in the UC Regents’ flu vaccine mandate suggest positive effects of the flu vaccine on the incidence of illness caused by flu viruses; however, that benefit may be outweighed by an increase in non-flu respiratory illnesses. And although the possibility has been studied, there is no evidence that the vaccine prevents the spread of influenza.”

UC will not take adverse action against any employee or student who comes to campus who has not had a flu shot. We will see what happens during the trial.

Jaffe states: The judge is obviously taking this motion very seriously, and that is a very good thing. He wanted more time to consider all the papers and write an opinion that will have enormous implications. Judge Seabolt gets to be the first judge in the country to weigh in on whether the state can mandate a vaccine during a pandemic where the vaccine doesn’t treat the pandemic disease and where there is reason to believe that the flu shot could actually increase COVID cases, hospitalizations and deaths. That’s alot to think about. It seems like he’s trying to get it right, and that is certainly extremely encouraging, since in my view, the more anyone reasonable thinks about it, the worse the mandate looks because of the lack of proper procedure in its issuance, and the lack of proof that the vaccine won’t cause much more harm than good. So I am all for the judge taking all the time he needs on this.

There are many concerns with vaccines, and vaccine injury is one of them. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act has paid more than $4 billion to families of vaccine injured children. A 2010 HHS pilot study by the Federal Agency for Health Care Research (AHCR) found that 1 in every 39 vaccines causes injury, a shocking comparison to the claims from the CDC of 1 in every million.

Professor Heidi Larson, a Professor of Anthropology and the Risk and Decision Scientist Director at the Vaccine Confidence Project stated at a World Health Organization (WHO) conference statesd that:

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…

Some Science:

A study published in the journal Vaccine found a greater risk of contracting coronavirus among individuals in the study who received the influenza vaccine. These studies were conducted prior to COVID 19, and apply to already circulating coronaviruses prior to the novel coronavirus.

  • 2018 CDC study (Rikin et al 2018) found that flu shots increase the risk of non-flu acute respiratory illnesses (ARIs), including coronavirus, in children.
  • A 2011 Australian study (Kelly et al 2011) found that flu shots doubled the risk for non-flu viral lung infections.
  • 2012 Hong Kong study (Cowling et al 2012) found that flu shots increase the risk for non-flu respiratory infections by 4.4 times.
  • 2017 study (Mawson et al 2017) found vaccinated children were 5.9 times more likely to suffer pneumonia than their unvaccinated peers.

A study recently published in Global Advances In Health & Medicine titled “Ascorbate as Prophylaxis and Therapy for COVID-19—Update From Shanghai and U.S. Medical Institutions outlines the following:

“Recently outlined A recent consensus statement from a group of renowned infectious disease clinicians observed that vaccine programs have proven ill-suited to the fast-changing viruses underlying these illnesses, with efficacy ranging from 19% to 54% in the past few years.”

I’ve put more information and science about the flu shot that goes more in depth and provides more sources in an article I published last year: “Reasons Why People Refuse The Flu Shot”

The Takeaway: Why do federal health authorities and state health affiliated organizations and institutions have a right to mandate a vaccine. What about the opinions of independent health organizations? Why do their voices constantly go unacknowledged and in some cases, ridiculed?

Become Part of CE's Inner Circle

Collective Evolution is one of the world's fastest-growing conscious media and education companies providing news and tools to raise collective consciousness. Get inside access to Collective Evolution by becoming a member of CETV.

Stream content 24/7 and enjoy mind-expanding interviews, original shows, documentaries and guided programs.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and help conscious media thrive!

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

Elevate your inbox and get conscious articles sent directly to your inbox!

Choose your topics of interest below:

You have Successfully Subscribed!