Connect with us

Awareness

How Mammograms Increase Your Risk of Breast Cancer – Why Are They Promoted As A Prevention Tool?

Published

on

Early detection through mammography is often touted as the best way to prevent breast cancer. Women are constantly barraged with pink ribbon reminders that they need to get their mammography done, as it could potentially save their lives. It is recommended that women get a mammogram every second year after age 50, that being said, a mammogram cannot prevent cancer, but it can detect cancerous lumps.

advertisement - learn more

 Mammograms can also cause breast cancer.

Doesn’t this seem a bit backward? That we would use a method so regularly which can cause cancer to “prevent” cancer? There are much better prevention methods that we could be utilizing.

Yes, in many instances mammograms have detected cancerous tumors, but there are many other methods can do the same thing that aren’t carcinogenic, so why aren’t we using those methods? Oh right, because we are living in topsy turvy land where everything is is upside down. Cancer is a serious money making industry.

Related CE Article:  The True History of Chemotherapy & The Pharmaceutical Monopoly

6 Reasons Why Many People Think Chemotherapy & The Cancer Industry Is A Giant Scam

advertisement - learn more

Mammography Contains Ionizing Radiation


Radiation is a known carcinogen and using it to discern breast tumors is a risk factor for the development of breast cancer. Additionally, if you do have a malignant tumor, the crushing compression of your breast from the machine could potentially cause it to spread.

None if this information is readily available to the public as we never hear about the potential risks of mammography coming from the numerous pinkwashing campaigns. It’s similar to what we see with that little pink ribbon on many products containing known carcinogenic chemicals, like chewing gum containing aspartame, antiperspirants containing aluminum, and buckets of KFC — the list goes on. In fact, the Pink Ribbon campaigns do little to raise awareness about potential cancer-causing substances having women avoid them. You’d think there would be more of a push to have these chemicals banned rather than to promote them using that little pink ribbon, but unfortunately, women buy these products feeling as though they are contributing to a genuine charity which is aimed at finding a cure and helping those in need.  In reality, this charity is a huge, money making business and very little is done to actually fix the issue. For more information on the pink ribbon marketing scam, I highly recommend the documentary, Pink Ribbons Inc.

I also recommend checking out the list of articles linked at the end of this one. They go into detail with examples and the science behind this issue.

Related CE Article: Mammograms Increase The Risk of Breast Cancer: Here Are The Are The Safe Alternatives For Breast Exams

Detection Is Not Prevention

The idea that detecting breast cancer early is in some way preventative is, in my opinion, complete and utter nonsense. Detection is not prevention and shouldn’t be advertised as such. There are many factors that a woman should consider in her life in order to prevent breast cancer — avoiding many cancer-causing products, foods, and certain lifestyle habits can prevent breast cancer —but a mammography is absolutely no way whatsoever a tool to prevent breast cancer. This is an idea that we definitely need to get out of our heads.

The important thing to consider here is how much mammography is promoted, while things like a healthy diet consisting of an abundance of fruits and vegetables is extremely downplayed. On the National Breast Cancer Foundation’s website, if you type in the word “carcinogen” nothing will come up. Not a single page of the website has any information on the role of carcinogenic chemicals and their relation to the development of breast cancer.

On the Susan G. Komen website, the search term “carcinogen” yields one study on an ingredient in an antidepressant medication. This word cannot even be found in the breast cancer glossary.

This is absolutely crazy because researchers have identified a number of cancer causing chemicals that definitely do increase your chance of getting breast cancer. Now, doesn’t avoiding toxic exposures of known carcinogenic substances sound like a much more rational approach to preventing breast cancer?

Why are these big corporations that are claiming to “find a cure” and help to “prevent cancer” focusing on the important factors that your diet and lifestyle play in the development of cancer? These massive organizations collect billions of donations every year all in the name of “finding a cure.” Maybe, we need to stop focusing on finding a cure, and start putting more awareness towards what is causing the cancer in the first place, and avoiding these things.

Related CE Article: Researchers Reveal Horrendous Facts About Breast Screenings/Mammograms

Below is a trailer to a documentary entitled, “The Promise.”  The film interviews various researchers, scientists, doctors (and more), all of whom are hoping to shed light on a practice which is turning out to be not only useless, but harmful to those taking part. There is more information below the video, but I highly recommend you watch the documentary.

“I believe that if you did have a tumor, the last thing you would want to do is crush that tumor between two plates, because that would spread it.” – Dr. Sarah Mybill, General Practitioner (taken from the documentary trailer below)

“I think if a woman from the age of 50 has a mammogram every year, or every two years, she’s going to get breast cancer as a direct result from that” – Dr. Patrick Kingsley, Clinical Ecologist (take from the documentary trailer below)

A study that was recently published in the British Medical Journal concluded that regular mammogram screenings do not reduce breast cancer death rates. The researchers found no evidence to suggest that mammograms are more effective than personal breast exams at detecting cancer in the designated age group. The study involved 90, 000 Canadian women and compared breast cancer incidence and mortality up to 25 years in women aged 40-59 (source).

22% of screenings detected invasive breast cancers were over-diagnosed, representing one over-diagnosed breast cancer for every 424 women who received mammography screening in the trial. The doctors explained: “This means that 106 of the 44,925 healthy women in the screening group were diagnosed with and treated for breast cancer unnecessarily, which resulted in needless surgical interventions, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or some combination of these therapies.”

Given the overwhelming amount of research showing the ineffectiveness of mammograms, the board recommended completely abolishing mammogram screenings. In addition, approximately 50 percent of women have dense breast tissue, meaning that it’s difficult for mammographs to even process. Both dense breast tissue and cancer appear white on an X-ray, thus it’s extremely difficult and practically impossible for a doctor to detect cancer with this type of tissue (source).

 A study published in the British Medical Journal in 2012 proved that women carrying the BRCA 1/2 mutation are extremely susceptible to developing radiation-induced cancer, meaning that mammograms are much more harmful to them. Women with this mutated gene who were exposed to diagnostic radiation before the age of 30 were found to be twice as likely to develop breast cancer in comparison to women without that mutation.

The study also found that the radiation-induced cancer was dose-responsive; in other words, the higher the dosage, the greater their risk of developing cancer. The authors stated, “The results of this study support the use of non-ionizing radiation imaging techniques (such as magnetic resonance imaging) as the main tool for surveillance in young women with BRCA 1/2 mutations.”

The list goes on and on.

The following video is taken from The Truth About Cancer, in which Ty Bollinger interviews Dr. Ben Johnson on the correlation between mammograms and breast cancer:

Alternatives To Mammography

One important factor to consider in regard to mammography is the instance of false positives. Sometimes the machine gives a false positive suggesting that the woman does indeed have a cancerous tumor when in fact she doesn’t. These women sometimes opt for aggressive treatments such as mastectomy, radiation and/or chemotherapy after a false positive diagnoses they also undergo physical pain and suffering, “for nothing.” They then believe that their lives were saved by mammography, and thus continues to perpetuate that mammograms are they only way to “prevent” cancer.

An article that was recently published in Forbes titled, “Has Mammography Created An Epidemic Of Pseudo Survivorship?” addresses the fact that there are many women who believe that they’re breast cancer survivors even though they may not have even had a life-threatening tumor in the first place. They are not survivors of breast cancer; they’re survivors of breast cancer treatment.

Check out the following for a list of safer alternatives to mammograms: Mammograms Increase The Risk Of Breast Cancer, Here Are The Safe Alternatives

What Are The Best Ways To Prevent Breast Cancer

There are many things to be aware of in regard to preventing breast cancer, and the following is a list compiled by Dr. Mercola.

Eat real food; avoid processed foods and sugars, especially processed fructose. All forms of sugar are detrimental to health in general and promote cancer. Fructose, however, is clearly one of the most harmful and should be avoided as much as possible.

    • Stop eating AT LEAST three hours before going to bed. There is quite compelling evidence showing that when you supply fuel to the mitochondria in your cells at a time when they don’t need it, they will leak a large number of electrons that will liberate reactive oxygen species (free radicals), which damage mitochondrial and eventually nuclear DNA. There is also evidence to indicate that cancer cells uniformly have damaged mitochondria, so the last thing you want to do is eat before you go to bed. Personally, I strive for six hours of fasting before bedtime.
    • Optimize your vitamin D. Vitamin D influences virtually every cell in your body and is one of nature’s most potent cancer fighters. Vitamin D is actually able to enter cancer cells and trigger apoptosis (cell death). If you have cancer, your vitamin D level should be between 70 and 100 ng/ml. Vitamin D works synergistically with every cancer treatment I’m aware of, with no adverse effects. I suggest you try watching my one-hour free lecture on vitamin D to learn more.
    • Limit your protein. Newer research has emphasized the importance of the mTOR pathways. When these are active, cancer growth is accelerated. To quiet this pathway, I believe it may be wise to limit your protein to one gram of protein per kilogram of lean body mass, or roughly a bit less than half a gram of protein per every pound of lean body weight.
    • Avoid unfermented soy products. Unfermented soy is high in plant estrogens, or phytoestrogens, also known as isoflavones. In some studies, soy appears to work in concert with human estrogen to increase breast cell proliferation, which increases the chances for mutations and cancerous cells.
    • Improve your insulin and leptin receptor sensitivity. The best way to do this is by avoiding sugar and grains and restricting carbs to mostly fiber vegetables. Also making sure you are exercising, especially with high-intensity interval training.
    • Exercise regularly. One of the primary reasons exercise works to lower your cancer risk is because it drives your insulin levels down, and controlling your insulin levels is one of the most powerful ways to reduce your cancer risks. It’s also been suggested that apoptosis (programmed cell death) is triggered by exercise, causing cancer cells to die. Studies have also found that the number of tumors decrease along with body fat, which may be an additional factor. This is because exercise helps lower your estrogen levels, which explains why exercise appears to be particularly potent against breast cancer.
    • Maintain a healthy body weight. This will come naturally when you begin eating right for your nutritional type and exercising. It’s important to lose excess body fat because fat produces estrogen.
    • Drink a pint to a quart of organic green vegetable juice daily. Please review my juicing instructions for more detailed information.
    • Get plenty of high quality animal-based omega-3 fats, such as krill oil. Omega-3 deficiency is a common underlying factor for cancer.
    • Use curcumin. This is the active ingredient in turmeric and in high concentrations can be very useful adjunct in the treatment of cancer. For example, it has demonstrated major therapeutic potential in preventing breast cancer metastasis. It’s important to know that curcumin is generally not absorbed that well, so I’ve provided several absorption tips here.
    • Avoid drinking alcohol, or at least limit your alcoholic drinks to one per day.
    • Avoid electromagnetic fields as much as possible. Even electric blankets can increase your cancer risk.
    • Avoid synthetic hormone replacement therapy, especially if you have risk factors for breast cancer. Breast cancer is an estrogen-related cancer, and according to a study published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, breast cancer rates for women dropped in tandem with decreased use of hormone replacement therapy. (There are similar risks for younger women who use oral contraceptives. Birth control pills, which are also comprised of synthetic hormones, have been linked to cervical and breast cancers.)

If you are experiencing excessive menopausal symptoms, you may want to consider bioidentical hormone replacement therapy instead, which uses hormones that are molecularly identical to the ones your body produces and do not wreak havoc on your system. This is a much safer alternative.

    • Avoid BPA, phthalates, and other xenoestrogens. These are estrogen-like compounds that have been linked to increased breast cancer risk
    • Make sure you’re not iodine deficient, as there’s compelling evidence linking iodine deficiency with certain forms of cancer. Dr. David Brownstein, author of the book Iodine: Why You Need it, Why You Can’t Live Without It, is a proponent of iodine for breast cancer. It actually has potent anticancer properties and has been shown to cause cell death in breast and thyroid cancer cells.

For more information, I recommend reading Dr. Brownstein’s book. I have been researching iodine for some time ever since I interviewed Dr. Brownstein as I do believe that the bulk of what he states is spot on. However, I am not at all convinced that his dosage recommendations are correct. I believe they are too high.

Avoid charring your meats. Charcoal or flame broiled meat is linked with increased breast cancer risk. Acrylamide — a carcinogen created when starchy foods are baked, roasted, or fried — has been found to increase cancer risk as well.

Related CE Articles

Why Mammography Was Recently Condemned By The Swiss Medical Board

Mammograms Increase The Risk of Breast Cancer: Here Are The Are The Safe Alternatives For Breast Exams

Researchers Reveal Horrendous Facts About Breast Screenings/Mammograms

How Mammograms Lead To Invalid Diagnoses & Cause Harm

New X-Ray System Produces 3D Images With 85% Less Radiation & Reduces The Dangers of Mammography

 

 

We Need Your Support...

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Awareness

U. S. Congressman-Elect Tells Constituents Vaccines May Cause Autism

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Congressman-Elect Mark Green told his constituents not only that he believes there may be a causal relationship between vaccines and autism, but that the Centers for Disease Control has 'fraudulently managed' their research data on vaccine safety.

  • Reflect On:

    Does the unusually bold statements of a public official against the CDC's vaccine safety narrative represent the next step in our getting to the truth about vaccines?

If you are someone who has been following the vaccine/autism debate for a while, you are no doubt aware that public figures rarely take on the Big Pharma-CDC Axis, as they are prone to face serious and debilitating consequences at their own peril. Doctors like Andrew Wakefield, who famously published a study in 1998 in The Lancet that linked the MMR vaccine to autism, experienced the full weight of the medical establishment muscle when sales of the MMR vaccine were threatened.

As far as Western Medicine is concerned, Dr. Wakefield’s study has been ‘debunked’ as a result of their concerted campaign to say and do whatever they could to invalidate his main point by attacking ancillary facts that really had nothing to do with the evidence. You can read our recent article ‘A Statistically Strong Relationship Has Been Found Between The MMR Vaccine & Autism‘ to see how Dr. Brian Hooker has resurrected the study to make an argument in favor of the strong correlation found in the study between the MMR vaccine and autism, and judge for yourself.

While the majority of people probably believe that the safety of vaccines has been proven, the veils of mainstream deception are starting to get threadbare. And with this, whistleblowers, researchers and other challengers to the mainstream notion are starting to get bolder and more forthright. Researcher Judy Mikovits and others like her paved the way by standing firmly in the truth of her research and refusing to buckle under the pressure and coercion of the Western Medical Establishment to recant studies that are threatening to the pharmaceutical industry, as detailed in the article ‘Researcher Jailed After Uncovering Deadly Virus Delivered Through Human Vaccines.’

Congressman-Elect Makes Bold Claim

Still, researchers are one thing. Politicians are a whole different kettle of fish. It is still a relatively new occurrence that a politician could speak out against the vaccine industry and not be committing political suicide and open him or herself up to massive attacks from the Western Medical Establishment. It was helpful, perhaps even groundbreaking, that Donald Trump staked his claim on this matter while campaigning for the presidency:

“When I was growing up, autism wasn’t really a factor, and now all of a sudden, it’s an epidemic. Everybody has their theory. My theory, and I study it because I have young children, my theory is the shots. We’ve giving these massive injections at one time, and I really think it does something to the children.” (source)

Now, according to this article in the Tennessean, Congressman-Elect Mark Green told his constituents not only that he believes there may be a causal relationship between vaccines and autism, he suggests the Centers for Disease Control has ‘fraudulently managed’ the research data that the CDC uses to say there is no link between vaccines and autism. As the video below confirms, Green, who by the way is also a licensed doctor, is truly throwing down the gauntlet against the CDC.

advertisement - learn more

“Let me say this about autism. I have committed to people in my community, up in Montgomery County, to stand on the CDC’s desk and get the real data on vaccines. Because there is some concern that the rise in autism is the result of the preservatives that are in our vaccines.

As a physician, I can make that argument and I can look at it academically and make the argument against the CDC, if they really want to engage me on it. But it appears some of that data has been, honestly, maybe fraudulently managed. So we’ve got to go up there and stand against that and make sure we get that fixed, that issue addressed.”

The Takeaway

The challenges to the official narrative that vaccines are proven to be safe and do not correlate with the incidence of autism is like chipping away at an old brick wall. With each brick that is removed, more and more people see the holes in the mainstream narrative, and opponents to vaccine safety are becoming bolder and more direct with their challenges. I believe that in the not-so-distant future we will look back to this time and history and be amazed that it took us so long to see through the industry-sponsored fraud of vaccine safety.

We Need Your Support...

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Continue Reading

Awareness

“5G: The Most Censored Story Of 2018” – Journalist Masterfully Educates Houston City Council

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Derrick Broze, a journalist and activist recently presented to Houston about the new proposed 5G network. He points to multiple studies and scientists outlining serious health concerns for all.

  • Reflect On:

    What can you do to mitigate this? There are solutions presented in the article but are you taking any? How can our regulatory agencies approve a technology that's so harmful to human biology? What is going on here?

The 5G network is new, and it’s being accepted, approved and implemented already without any appropriate safety testing nor discussion with the public.

Recent research has revealed that the frequencies utilized in crowd control weapons are the same as the frequencies used in the 5G network, and there is absolutely no question about the fact that these electromagnetic frequencies impact our biology in multiple harmful ways. With more than 2000 peer-reviewed studies on the subject, thousands of scientists raising multiple causes for concern, hundreds of scientists petitioning the United Nations, and absolutely no oversight, regulation or safety testing, how is it that this type of thing is legal and allowed to be approved?

Well, the 5G, and the entire global network of wireless technology is controlled by a few people and corporations. This highlights the relationship that western corporations have with government regulatory agencies. These corporations sit above the government, and through lobbying, corporations provide instructions to government regulatory agencies. Our regulatory health agencies are a cesspool of corruption as well, so much to the point where those who work within these agencies are actually starting to have a shift in consciousness and are speaking out. The problem has become so big and widespread that they cannot remain silent. The SPIDER papers from multiple CDC scientists was an excellent example, outlining the grave concern about the CDC’s relationship with corporations and the stranglehold these corporations have over them.

Multiple countries around the world have banned WiFi and the building of cell phone towers near primary schools and nurseries, among many other places due to the evidence that shows they are not safe and can implicate the health of young children and adults.

Dr. Devra Lee Davis,  founding director of the board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology of the U.S. National Research Council, National Academy of Sciences, founding director of the Center for Environmental Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, and President of the Environmental Health Trust stated:

“If you are one of the millions who seek faster downloads of movies, games and virtual pornography, a solution is at hand, that is, if you do not mind volunteering your living body in a giant uncontrolled experiment on the human population. At this moment, residents of the Washington, DC region – like those of 100 Chinese cities – are about to be living within a vast experimental Millimeter wave network to which they have not consented – all courtesy of American taxpayers,”

advertisement - learn more

Journalist Presents to Houston City Council

That’s why the video below is so important, it’s a video of Derrick Broze, founder of the Conscious Resistance network.  Not only are scientists speaking out about this issue, and continuing to publish eye-opening research, much of which can be found at The Environmental Health Trust, but citizens and activists are getting involved too.

The speech below takes place at a hearing in Houston. This, like so many other health issues we are facing, is important to raise awareness about together. The more people speaking up and creating awareness, the more chances we have of that this awareness leads to action or at the very least, a deep realization by council members that they are being bullied by corporations, much like we’re seeing in France.

A Little More On 5G

Dr. Sharon Goldberg, an internal medicine physician and professor also recently gave her testimony regarding the dangers of electromagnetic radiation. She says:

Wireless radiation has biological effects. Period. This is no longer a subject for debate when you look at PubMed and the peer-review literature. These effects are seen in all life forms; plants, animals, insects, microbes. In humans, we have clear evidence of cancer now: there is no question We have evidence of DNA damage, cardiomyopathy, which is the precursor of congestive heart failure, neuropsychiatric effects…5G is an untested application of a technology that we know is harmful; we know it from the science. In academics, this is called human subjects research.” – Goldberg

You can watch her testimony and read more about it here.

Again, if you want to look at the science/research, a good place to start is with the Environmental Health Trust.

The Takeaway

There are multiple solutions for reducing your exposure to EMF radiation. You could have a wired internet connection at home, which is actually faster. You could unplug your devices before bed, you can purchase electromagnetic radiation shielded clothing from multiple providers. You can also purchase small devices that go right on your phone that help protect against this radiation. Do your research on ‘EMF protection devices’ to find what works for you.

You could also mitigate some effects by living a more healthy lifestyle. This includes diet, nature exposure, limiting screen and phone time and other wellness practices.

The key thing here is to recognize that, in a world where our voice is constantly being silenced and information is swept under the rug for the sake of profit and control (among other reasons), we do still have a voice, and we have to use it.

We are so caught up in our own lives, doing our own thing that we’ve neglected the planet and fail to even look into what’s going on. We’ve given our consciousness away to others who are manipulating it. It’s time to take it back, to wake up, and to start thinking for ourselves instead of relying on a group of powerful people to disseminate information.

We Need Your Support...

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Continue Reading

Awareness

A Statistically Strong Relationship Has Been Found Between The MMR Vaccine & Autism

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Dr. Brian Hooker, one of multiple people who received committed data from a CDC senior scientists regarding a 2005 MMR autism vaccine study has done a reanalysis that clearly shows a statistically significant relationship.

  • Reflect On:

    Why are negative aspects and important research/testimony regarding vaccines completely ignored? Why are people believing that vaccines are safe and effective if all of the evidence points otherwise? Why is the only response ridicule?

After four long years, CHD Board Member, Dr. Brian Hooker‘sreanalysis of the CDC’s MMR-autism data from the original DeStefano et al. 2004 Pediatrics paper has been republished in the Winter 2018 Edition of the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons. The data, when properly analyzed, using the CDC’s own study protocol, show a strong, statistically significant relationship between the timing of the first MMR vaccine and autism, specifically in African American males. In addition, a relationship also exists in the timing of the MMR vaccine and those individuals who were diagnosed with autism without mental retardation. These relationships call into question the conclusion of the original DeStefano et al. 2004 paper which dismissed a connection between the MMR vaccine and autism.

Main Points from Reanalysis:

  • The rate of autism diagnoses has increased alarmingly in the U.S., and is about 25 percent higher in black children. Boys are far more likely than girls to receive this diagnosis.
  • As early as 2001, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) had data showing an increased rate of autism diagnoses in black male school children in Atlanta who received their first measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccination before 36 months of age.
  • The original publication concerning the data downplayed the association, and no follow-up was conducted.
  • Dr. Hooker noted that the CDC deviated from its original data analysis plan, possibly because of unwanted results.
  • The relationship loses its statistical significance if the analysis is restricted to children with a Georgia birth certificate, which decreases the sample size by about 40 percent.
  • Dr. Hooker reanalyzed the same data set using the same methodology of conditional logistic regression but didn’t exclude children lacking a Georgia birth certificate.
  • By stratifying data for African-American males by birth year, Dr. Hooker also found a statistically significant higher risk of an autism diagnosis in children who had received the first MMR vaccine 1 year earlier, only in children born in 1990 or later. Thimerosal exposure increased in the early 1990s, and it was not removed from most pediatric vaccines until 2001-2004. Dr. Hooker suggests the possibility that there may be some interaction between increased mercury exposure and early MMR vaccination. Further study would be needed to explore this possibility.
  • Dr. Hooker’s interest was sparked, he reports, by communication with a CDC whistleblower, a senior scientist, who had retained some of the original analyses.
  • Dr. Hooker concludes that failure to follow-up on these observations represents a huge lost opportunity to understand possible reasons for the enormous increase in this devastating neurological disability.

Introduction from Dr. Hooker’s article:

“This study is a re-analysis of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data pertaining to the relationship of autism incidence and the age at which children got their first measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine. Statistically significant relationships were observed when African-American males were considered separately while looking at those individuals who were vaccinated prior to and after a 36-month age cut-off. CDC officials observed very similar relationships as early as November 2001, but failed to report them in their final publication. In addition, a relationship is seen when specifically considering children who received a diagnosis of autism without mental retardation. Although this was reported in the original 2004 paper, it was not discussed, nor was any follow-up study conducted. Preliminary results also suggest the possibility of a synergism between thimerosal exposure and MMR timing leading to a greater risk of autism.”

Conclusion from Dr. Hooker’s article:

“The first data set used by DeStefano et.al represents a huge lost opportunity to understand any role between the timing of the first MMR vaccine and autism. The re-analysis presented here elucidates effects that should at least merit further investigation. Specifically, increased risks of earlier vaccination are observed for African-American males and among cases of autism without MR. Both phenomena deserve additional study that could yield important clues regarding the current enormous increase in autism.”

Dr. Hooker’s Reanalysis of CDC Data on Autism Incidence and Time of First MMR Vaccination was published December 7, 2018 in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons.

Important Reminder From Collective Evolution

Dr. William Thompson (senior CDC scientist), who is  mentioned above as co-author of this study, blew the whistle and admitted that he was pressured to omit statistically significant data, and that there is a connection between this vaccine and autism. He released this statement in an official capacity, as explained by the Congressman in the video below. This story was an has been completely ignored by mainstream media.

Dr. Hooker and Thompson were in touch, Hooker was the one who did the reanalysis as you can see above.

advertisement - learn more

Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. CHD is planning many strategies, including legal, in an effort to defend the health of our children and obtain justice for those already injured. Your support is essential to CHD’s successful mission.

We Need Your Support...

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

EL

We Need Your Support...

 

With censorship, things have become tough. If just 5% of people seeing this today supported CE, we'd be able to fund a TRUE investigative team INSTANTLY. Your support truly matters and goes a long way! 

Thanks, you're keeping conscious media alive.