Connect with us

Alternative News

Girl’s Ovaries Destroyed By Gardasil: Merck Did Not Research Effects of Vaccine On Female Reproduction

Published

on

“When one looks at the independent literature, so, studies which are not sponsored by the vaccine manufactures . .  with relation to Gardasil, there have been several reports documenting multiple sclerosis and encephalitis, which is brain inflammation, in girls who have received their Gardasil vaccine. So, just because a study sponsored by the manufactures does not identify problems with the vaccine, does not necessarily mean that the vaccine is safe. In fact if one looks at the manufacturer studies, they’re often not designed to detect serious adverse events.” (source)

advertisement - learn more

The quote above comes from Dr. Lucija Tomlinjenovic, a post-doctoral research fellow at the University of British Colombia. She’s published many papers on the efficacy and safety of HPV vaccines.

-->Watch now: Sign up for the free 5G Summit starting and hear from 40 of the world's leading experts on the subject, all FREE! Click here to register now!

It’s a great quote to start this article with, because multiple studies have identified the fact that the studies used to approve this vaccine do not look for serious adverse effects. As a result, many young women have experienced drastic and debilitating changes after receiving the HPV vaccine. In rare cases it has even caused death.

Watch: The Truth About Vaccines docu-series

One example comes from a study published in the British Medical Journal titled “Premature ovarian failure 3 years after menarche in a 16-year-old girl following human papillomavirus vaccination.” The study highlights an obvious fact, that “preservation of reproductive health is a primary concern in the recipient target group.” It is therefore ironic that the demonstration of ongoing and uncompromised safety for the ovary is, as the study points out, an “urgently required” need. You would think that the vaccine manufactures would look into this before approving it as completely safe. The abstract concludes by stating that “this matter needs to be resolved for the purposes of population health and public vaccine confidence.”

The main case in this study determined that, prior to the shots, the girl had healthy ovaries, and that there were no other identified factors besides Gardasil that could have been involved in her sudden sickness.

advertisement - learn more

Another study conducted two years later by the same author documents three young women who developed premature ovarian insufficiency following quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination presented to a general practitioner in rural New South Wales, Australia.

The study points out how “further studies are required to make any claims of ovary complications. Principles of informed consent, population health, and vaccine confidence require careful, rigorous and independent research to establish ovarian safety following HPV vaccination.” 

This information alone warrants further studies, and this is exactly what the corporation avoids. They do not want to look for or conduct studies that link the HPV vaccine to such a major issue like ovarian failure, no matter how rare it is. It really puts into question whether or not it’s even worth vaccinating your child with the HPV vaccine.
Adverse effects have been reported around the world, and they are, according to many experts, like Dr. Diane Harper (more info below), far more common than what we are made to believe through the literature.
As a result of all these complications and reports of young girls who’ve had their lives destroyed, the American College of Paediatrics put out a statement regarding the matter last year:
It has recently come to the attention of the College that one of the recommended vaccines could possibly be associated with the very rare but serious condition of premature ovarian failure (POF), also known as premature menopause. There have been two case report series (3 cases each) published since 2013 in which post-menarcheal adolescent girls developed laboratory documented POF within weeks to several years of receiving Gardasil, a four-strain human papillomavirus vaccine (HPV4).
The document pointed out something that should have been addressed before this vaccine was administered en masse. Firstly, long term ovarian function was not assessed in either the original rat safety studies or the human vaccine trials. Secondly, most primary care physicians remain unaware of a possible association between HPV4 and POF and may not consider reporting POF cases or prolonged missing menstrual periods to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). Thirdly, potential mechanisms of action have been postulated based on autoimmune associations with the aluminum adjuvant used and previously documented ovarian toxicity in rats from another component, polysorbate 80. Lastly, it emphasized that, since licensure of Gardasil in 2006, there have been about 213 VAERS reports involving amenorrhea, POF or premature menopause, 88% of which have been associated with Gardasil. (source)
Another study published in the journal Pediatrics found that many paediatricians don’t strongly recommend the HPV vaccine. It found that a large percentage of paediatricians and family doctors — nearly one third of those surveyed — are not strongly recommending the HPV vaccine to parents and preteens, which is why, as illustrated by the study, HPV vaccination rates continue to drop.

Prior to this, another study was published in the journal Cancer Epidemiolog in 2015. Written by Melissa B. Gilkey, an assistant professor at Harvard Medical School, the study was designed to assess how physicians recommend the HPV vaccine. The authors were surprised to find that “physicians so often reported recommending HPV vaccination inconsistently, behind schedule, or without urgency. Of the five communication practices we assessed, about half of physicians reported two or more practices that likely discourage timely HPV vaccination.” (source)

This study found that 27% of physicians across the United States do not strongly endorse HPV vaccination, and 26% do not give the vaccinations to girls on time as recommended. Approximately 59% of physicians recommended it for adolescents.

Below is a clip from the recently released film Vaxxed of a boy named Colton and his mother Kathleen, who share his story of vaccine injury following the Gardasil vaccine with the Vaxxed team in Oren. I hope it will spark more questions and dialogue within the mainstream medical community.

Here are a few other articles of ours that deal with HPV vaccine injury;

18 More Girls Claim Adverse Reactions To HPV Vaccine: Important Info On Gardasil Parent’s Don’t Hear About

This Woman Wants You To See What An HPV Vaccine Injury Looks Like

To read more of our articles regarding the HPV vaccine, you can click here.

So, Is It Worth the Risk? Is There Any Point Vaccinating Your Child With the HPV Gardasil Vaccine?

I recently published an article featuring an interview with Dr. Diane Harper, Chair of the Department of Family and Geriatric Medicine at the University of Louisville.[3] She taught from 2009 to 2013 at the University of Missouri Kansas City‘s Department of Biomedical and Health Informatics and held a clinical, teaching, and research post at Dartmouth Medical School from 1996 to 2009.

She is one of a mere handful of experts on the human papillomavirus (HPV) and one of the leading researchers in biomedical science. She has spent her life studying vaccines; she was the principle (lead) investigator of both HPV vaccines — Gardasil manufactured by Merck, Cervarix manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline — and has published the sentinel reports about the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine in The Lancet and The New England Journal of Medicine. She designed the clinical trials for the corporations.

As one of the few people and experts involved in putting this vaccine out, Dr. Harper did something very brave, publicly countering the disinformation that was put forth by the corporation and its paid medical personnel and telling CBS news that, for the Gardasil vaccine, the “benefit is nothing,” and it will have no significant effect upon the rate of cancer in the USA.

Why? Because of all the women who get an HPV infection, approximately 70% of them will clear that infection all by themselves in the first year. You don’t even have to detect it or treat it. Within two years, approximately 90% of those women will clear it all by themselves. By three years, 10% of that original group of women left will still have an HPV infection, and 5% of this 10% will have progressed into a pre-cancerous lesion. So, “now you have that small group of women who have pre-cancerous lesions and now let’s look at that moving into invasive carcinoma. What we know then is that amongst women with. . . [pre-cancerous] lesions. . . it takes five years for about 20% of them to become invasive carcinomas. That’s a pretty slow process. It takes about thirty years for 40% of them to become invasive cervical carcinomas.” (source)

This begs the question, why do nine-year old girls need vaccinations for symptomless venereal diseases that their immune systems kill anyway?

As the video above illustrates, it has never been shown to protect against actual cervical cancer.

“It is a vaccine that’s been highly marketed, the benefits are over-hyped, and the dangers are underestimated.”

– Dr. Chris Shaw, Professor at the University of British Columbia, in the department of Neuroscience, Ophthalmology, and Visual Sciences (taken from the One More Girl documentary)

You can view the full interview HERE, as she documents how big pharma, in collusion with the government, approved and fast tracked the vaccine before appropriate scientific approval. She also documents how it doesn’t protect against cancer at all, as the corporation claims. It’s very informative and deals with issues the general public is not aware of.

I should also add, it’s important to recognize that Gardasil contains more aluminum that most vaccines. You can read more about that in the article linked below:

The Effect of Aluminum on Humans In Vaccines

A groundbreaking docu-series is coming out very soon where you can learn everything going on with the latest research behind vaccines. Check it out here.

Watch Now Free: The 5G Summit

The 5G debate is going to be one of the biggest social issues of our time in the next year or two. Understanding the basics behind 5G dangers will be very important.

Sign up now and start watching today's interviews before they are gone. Hear from 40 of the world's leading experts on the subject, all FREE! You can also download our free ebook on the science of 5G once you sign up!

Click here to register now!

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Alternative News

Our Biology Responds To Events Before They Even Happen

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Multiple experiments have shown strong evidence for precognition in several different ways. One of them comes in the form of activity within the heart and the brain responding to events before they even happen.

  • Reflect On:

    Do we have extra human capacities we are unaware of? Perhaps we can learn them, develop them, and use them for good. Perhaps when the human race is ready, we will start learning more.

Is precognition real? There are many examples suggesting that yes, it is. The remote viewing program conducted by the CIA in conjunction with Stanford University was a good example of that.  After its declassification in 1995, or at least partial declassification, the Department of Defense and those involved revealed an exceptionally high success rate:

To summarize, over the years, the back-and-forth criticism of protocols, refinement of methods, and successful replication of this type of remote viewing in independent laboratories has yielded considerable scientific evidence for the reality of the (remote viewing) phenomenon. Adding to the strength of these results was the discovery that a growing number of individuals could be found to demonstrate high-quality remote viewing, often to their own surprise… The development of this capability at SRI has evolved to the point where visiting CIA personnel with no previous exposure to such concepts have performed well under controlled laboratory conditions. (source)

The kicker? Part of remote viewing involves peering into future events as well as events that happened in the past.

It’s not only within the Department of Defense that we find this stuff, but a lot of science is emerging on this subject as well.

For example, a study (meta analysis) published in the journal Frontiers in Human Neuroscience titled “Predicting the unpredictable: critical analysis and practical implications of predictive anticipatory activity” examined a number of experiments regarding this phenomenon that were conducted by several different laboratories. These experiments indicate that the human body can actually detect randomly delivered stimuli that occur 1-10 seconds in advance. In other words, the human body seems to know of an event and reacts to the event before it has occurred. What occurs in the human body before these events are physiological changes that are measured regarding the cardiopulmonary, the skin, and the nervous system.

A few years ago, the chief scientist at the Institute of Noetic Sciences, Dr. Dean Radin, visited the scientists over at HearthMath Institute and shared the results of one of his studies. Radin is also one of multiple scientists who authored the paper above. These studies, as mentioned above, tracked the autonomic nervous system, physiological changes, etc.

Scientists at HeartMath Institute (HMI) added more protocols, which included measuring participants’ brain waves (EEG), their hearts’ electrical activity (ECG), and their heart rate variability (HRV).

As HMI explains:

Twenty-six adults experienced in using HeartMath techniques and who could sustain a heart-coherent state completed two rounds of study protocols approximately two weeks apart. Half of the participants completed the protocols after they intentionally achieved a heart-coherent state for 10 minutes. The other half completed the same procedures without first achieving heart coherence. Then they reversed the process for the second round of monitoring, with the first group not becoming heart-coherent before completing the protocols and the second group becoming heart-coherent before. The point was to test whether heart coherence affected the results of the experiment.

Participants were told the study’s purpose was to test stress reactions and were unaware of its actual purpose. (This practice meets institutional-review-board standards.) Each participant sat at a computer and was instructed to click a mouse when ready to begin.

The screen stayed blank for six seconds. The participant’s physiological data was recorded by a special software program, and then, one by one, a series of 45 pictures was displayed on the screen. Each picture, displayed for 3 seconds, evoked either a strong emotional reaction or a calm state. After each picture, the screen went blank for 10 seconds. Participants repeated this process for all 45 pictures, 30 of which were known to evoke a calm response and 15 a strong emotional response.

The Results

The results of the experiment were fascinating to say the least. The participants’ brains and hearts responded to information about the emotional quality of the pictures before the computer flashed them (random selection). This means that the heart and brain were both responding to future events. The results indicated that the responses happened, on average, 4.8 seconds before the computer selected the pictures.

How mind-altering is that?

Even more profound, perhaps, was data showing the heart received information before the brain. “It is first registered from the heart,” Rollin McCraty Ph.D. explained, “then up to the brain (emotional and pre-frontal cortex), where we can logically relate what we are intuiting, then finally down to the gut (or where something stirs).”

Another significant study (meta-analysis) that was published in Journal of Parapsychology by Charles Honorton and Diane C. Ferrari in 1989 examined a number of studies that were published between 1935 and 1987. The studies involved individuals’ attempts to predict “the identity of target stimuli selected randomly over intervals ranging from several hundred million seconds to one year following the individuals responses.” These authors investigated over 300 studies conducted by over 60 authors, using approximately 2 million individual trials by more than 50,000 people. (source)

It concluded that their analysis of precognition experiments “confirms the existence of a small but highly significant precognition effect. The effect appears to be repeatable; significant outcomes are reported by 40 investigators using a variety of methodological paradigms and subject populations. The precognition effect is not merely an unexplained departure from a theoretical chance baseline, but rather is an effect that covaries with factors known to influence more familiar aspects of human performance.” (source)

The Takeaway

“There seems to be a deep concern that the whole field will be tarnished by studying a phenomenon that is tainted by its association with superstition, spiritualism and magic. Protecting against this possibility sometimes seems more important than encouraging scientific exploration or protecting academic freedom. But this may be changing.”
 Cassandra Vieten, PhD and President/CEO at the Institute of Noetic Sciences (source)

We are living in a day and age where new information and evidence are constantly emerging, challenging what we once thought was real or what we think we know about ourselves as human beings.  It’s best to keep an open mind. Perhaps there are aspects of ourselves and our consciousness that have yet to be discovered. Perhaps if we learn and grow from these studies, they can help us better ourselves and others.

Watch Now Free: The 5G Summit

The 5G debate is going to be one of the biggest social issues of our time in the next year or two. Understanding the basics behind 5G dangers will be very important.

Sign up now and start watching today's interviews before they are gone. Hear from 40 of the world's leading experts on the subject, all FREE! You can also download our free ebook on the science of 5G once you sign up!

Click here to register now!

Continue Reading

Alternative News

The 5G Health Summit Starts Tomorrow (June 1st) – Reserve Your Free Spot Here

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A global online summit featuring doctors, scientists & activists addressing the health concerns of 5G technology and what people can do about it is set to take place the first week of June and it's free to sign up.

  • Reflect On:

    Why are safety concerns that've been published in peer-reviewed scientific journals called a "conspiracy theory?" Why is this idea ridiculed? Why don't our federal health regulatory agencies simply to some health safety testing before rolling it out?

Some of the world’s leading scientists, doctors and activists are gathering for a free online summit that begins on Monday June 1st and will run for approximately one week. The summit will dive into the health concerns of 5G technology, and why it’s a concern and what people can do about it. The summit is completely free to sign up and watch, and you can do so here.

We’ve also put together an E-book titled “Is 5G Safe? An Easy to Understand Guide” summarizing the published peer-reviewed research that is raising concerns about electromagnetic radiation that’s emitted from our favourite wireless devices, cell phones and more, as well as novel 5G technology.  It’s a great resource that you can share with family or friends who desire to look at the proof, research, evidence and concerns that thousands of doctors and scientists have been and are creating awareness about all over the globe.  We wrote it in language designed to be simple and factual.

Once you sign up for the summit, you get access to the free E-book.

It’s quite strange that any researched journalist could dismiss the health concerns of 5G technology, as well as 4G and 3G, when there are nearly 10,000 peer-reviewed scientific studies that raise cause for concern. A study published in 2019 in Frontiers in Public Health is one of many that raises concerns about 5G technology, explaining how there is no safety testing, and that in vivo and in vitro studies regarding this type of technology and it’s predecessors have shown that it’s harmful to human health, even at levels below current “safety” limits.

At the end of the day, whether you believe this type of technology is safe or you don’t, would it not be in the best interests of everybody to have the  technology go through some type of required safety testing? Shouldn’t any technology that has any sort of biological effect be put through safety testing? Why has there not been any safety testing?

In December 2018, US. Senator Richard Blumenthal and U.S. Representative Anna G. Eshoo (CA-18) sent a letter to FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr seeking answers regarding potential health risks posed by new 5G wireless technology. At  a hearing, that took place last year, Blumenthal criticized Carr for failing to provide answers, and did the same thing to other industry representatives that were in attendance for not putting the technology through safety testing. You can watch a clip of that hearing and read more about it, here.

How can our federal health regulatory agencies approve products that are clearly a cause for concern?

This is why the summit is going to be such a great resource. It will answer many questions, and again, let people know what they can do about it!

Sign up for the free 5G Summit starting June 1st. Hear from 40 of the world’s leading experts on the subject, all FREE! Click here to register now!

Watch Now Free: The 5G Summit

The 5G debate is going to be one of the biggest social issues of our time in the next year or two. Understanding the basics behind 5G dangers will be very important.

Sign up now and start watching today's interviews before they are gone. Hear from 40 of the world's leading experts on the subject, all FREE! You can also download our free ebook on the science of 5G once you sign up!

Click here to register now!

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Dr. Buttar Reveals Declassified Government Report Related to 5G Dangers

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Dr. Rashid Butter discusses a declassified report on millimetre wave technology and the effects it has on human health. These are the same waves used in 5G technology.

  • Reflect On:

    If we already know these waves cause harm to human health, why do we use them in airport scanners? Why are we about to roll out an entire wireless network based on these technologies?

People often say 5G hasn’t been tested, and to some extent that is true. But given 5G uses millimetre wave technology and that technology has been studied for quite some time, it has obviously been tested by those who have worked on them. So why hasn’t this information been widely released? Why are we not looking at the available data on millimetre wave technology as it relates to 5G?

Recently we came across 7 Russian studies that were summarized in a report declassified through the CIA. These studies were declassified in 2012 and marked “For Goverment Use Only.” From what you can gather very quickly in this report, the conclusions should shut down 5G rollout instantly. At least until someone can show, beyond any reasonable doubt, that this technology is safe.

Let’s have a quick look at how this report was concluded:

“Thus the conducted investigations indicate high biological activity and an unfavourable influence of millimeter radiowaves on the organism. The expression of the biological reactions increased with an increase of the period of iridation and depended on individual characteristics of the organism.”

What this translates to in plain English is, millimetre-wave frequencies do affect the human body negatively, and the longer the exposure, the more damage that occurs. Since 5G uses millimetre waves and is set to push a constant barrage of frequency on humans anywhere they go, this would mean sustained wave exposure, and thus inevitable biological damage.

Incredibly, these are the same wave technologies used in airport fully body scanners that we have been raising awareness about for years. It’s important to note, you CAN opt out of going through those scanners.

Dr. Rashid Buttar has given an incredible interview where he goes page by page as to exactly what this declassified CIA research reveals. The report summarizes 7 studies on the effects of millimeter-wave radiation levels between 37-60GHz. These levels are “safe” according to government, but that is NOT what the science says.

As we have said for the last year and a half, now is a potent time to understand the dangers of 5G and work to stop its rollout. This interview is a must listen. Click here to watch Dr. Rashid Buttar’s interview.


Scroll down the page when you register and you will see Dr. Buttar’s interview.

As we can tell in our world right now, a ton of truth is coming to the surface, the environment to create change is ripe. If we can stay grounded, in our hearts and avoid descending into hate, we can TRULY make a big difference here.

Watch Now Free: The 5G Summit

The 5G debate is going to be one of the biggest social issues of our time in the next year or two. Understanding the basics behind 5G dangers will be very important.

Sign up now and start watching today's interviews before they are gone. Hear from 40 of the world's leading experts on the subject, all FREE! You can also download our free ebook on the science of 5G once you sign up!

Click here to register now!

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

Pod

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

Choose your topics of interest below:

You have Successfully Subscribed!