The Hidden Dangers In Polio Vaccine
(Chapter 10 of Poisoned Needle plus addendums) by Eleanor McBean
CHAPTER X: THE HIDDEN DANGERS IN POLIO VACCINE
The following is a sample of the propaganda that is frequently seen in the magazines and newspapers and all channels of national advertising
|
GET POLIO VACCINATION NOW
To Protect Your Child This Summer Your boy or girl will have the best chance for protection before polio hits again, if vaccine is given now. The Salk vaccine strikingly reduced paralytic polio among those who received it in 1955 and it will protect many thousands in 1956, if it is used in time. To make a real dent in polio in 1956, vaccinations must be stepped up immediately. Success will depend on how many children receive at least two vaccine shots before the next polio season begins. See your doctor or public health officer NOW for advice about when and where to obtain vaccine. |
This is what the people are told. Let’s uncover the facts and see what actually happens when polio vaccine is used.
"Salk vaccine is hard to make and no batch can ever be proved safe before it is given to children." This is an admission that was made by Dr. Scheele, (Surgeon General) before the Atlantic City Convention of the American Association in 1955. (Reported in New York Times, June 8, 1955.)
Being fully aware of the hazardous aspects of the polio vaccine, Dr. Scheele announced that it was the intention of the U.S. Government to inoculate 57 million people before August 1955. (Report from the Lancet, June 4, 1955)
SAFETY PROMISED WITHOUT INVESTIGATION OR PROOF
$9,000,000 of public funds were gambled on this financially promising but highly questionable venture before it was even declared safe and usable. Later, when the over dramatized announcement was made that it was "safe" there was still no scientific evidence or factual proof of its safety. The promoters of this inflated vaccine "scheme" expected a 5 billion dollar profit in the first year of operation. (Direct quotations supporting this statement are given under the topic heading, THE MONEY MOTIVE, at the end of the chapter.)
Even after the vaccine had killed 7 people and the number was mounting every day, the propaganda committee put words into the mouths of important government officials, still insisting that the vaccine was "safe" and must be continued.
The Cutter laboratory was used as the "scape goat" until the many disasters from the other laboratories could no longer be concealed. Then instead of abandoning the whole "deadly mess", the Cutter laboratory was declared in good standing again and allowed to continue—not because its vaccine was any safer, but because the vaccine from the rest of them was just as deadly, and none of them intended to stop or lose any profits.
Any doctor, scientist or authority on the subject of vaccine knows that these substances are "highly toxic" (poison), therefore, no vaccine can be made safe. Current magazine articles have described in detail, the composition of the Salk vaccine so it will not be repeated here except to say that the decomposed kidney tissues and pus from a diseased animal combined with the two poison drugs cannot be injected into the living blood stream without harmful effects. The records of the experiments on children show that more of the vaccinated people died or contracted polio than did the unvaccinated. The fact that all the vaccinated people did not die does not mean that they were not harmed. No one knows yet, what the future results will be.
James McIntosh, Professor of Pathology at London University, in an address before the Royal Society of Medicine, October 19, 1926, stated:
"Scientifically it cannot be disputed that every point of view the injection of virus capable of multiplying in the body of the individual is bad. When multiplication of the virus occurs, then there is no possibility of estimating the dose to which the patient has been subjected. Thus the effect cannot be controlled, and in susceptible individuals this may lead to unforeseen results."
Data from the bleedings performed five months after inoculation of Salk vaccine, indicated that the immunity (if any) did not last long. Dr. Salk is reported to have said that "children vaccinated last year should be given booster inoculations this year." An editorial in the Lancet (weekly Medical Journal April 23, 1955) comments: "If it is found that, contrary to Salk’s hopes antibody levels cannot be maintained without a succession of booster doses, then a serious problem will arise. Will it be necessary to give injections every year; and, if so, for how long would they be given? . . . If injections are given regularly for several years to millions of children the risk of allergic reactions to monkey kidney tissue will become increasingly grave." (Emphasis mine, McBean)
Dr. Ritchie Russell of the Department of Neurology, Radcliffe Infirmary Oxford, said, "When poliomyelitis is precipitated by inoculation the natural defences of the nervous system seem to be ineffective, and nearly all such illnesses develop into a paralytic form of the disease affecting especially the limb used for the injection." (Lancet, May 21, 1955, p. 1071)
The Manchester Guardian (April 15, 1955) stated, "One of Britain’s greatest physiologists said to-day that if it means that a child should be re-inoculated at frequent intervals with a preparation derived from monkey kidneys it is terrifying in its possibilities. Among them is the risk of the child’s developing sensitivity to some of the ingredients of the vaccine." The editor of the Lancet (June 11, 1955, p. 1207) emphasized this further when he wrote: "In addition to the possibility of producing the very disease the vaccine is used to prevent, ‘there is a risk, of unknown dimensions, that repeated injection of a vaccine prepared from monkey kidney may eventually sensitize the child in some harmful way’."
BRITISH PAPERS WARN AGAINST SALK VACCINE
In April, 1955 after the "big Salk campaign" had been launched in the United States, the Government and all officials and agencies concerned announced to the world that "the war against polio was almost certainly at an end."
The other countries are a little more conservative and a little less willing to be "taken in" by the sales propaganda of the Salk promoters. The general sentiment of our foreign neighbors was expressed by Dr. A. M. Payne when he declared: "Poliomyelitis is not beaten. We do not know how long the effect lasts. . . we do not know if it will be effective under other conditions than those in which it was used; we do not know how best to use it. We do know that there are many (unsolved) intricate problems in the manufacture of this vaccine." (Manchester Guardian, April 14, 1955)
"LONDON, April 22, 1955 (Reuters)—The British Medical Journal today warned physicians against over enthusiastic acceptance of the Salk anti-polio vaccine citing ‘the possibility of toxic effects’."
On this same point the Lancet said it would be "very reluctant to see the vaccine used on a large scale in Britain without further tests." It also warned, "the possibility of toxic effects from repeated injections with monkey tissues must be considered."
Caution was cast to the winds in this country and our U.S. Government and medical profession had no hesitancy in using the unproved vaccine and repeating their blundering tests on millions of human beings even after the large number of deaths and paralysis had proved it to be not only a failure but a dangerous killer. Most of the experiments were made on children too small to fight back.
A PARTIAL LIST OF DEATHS FROM SALK VACCINE
Susan Pierce (age 7), Pocatello, Idaho, died April 27, 1955
Ronald Fitzgerald (age 4), Oakland, Calif., died April 27, 1955
Allen Davis Jr. (age 2), New Orleans, La., died May 4, 1955
Janet Kincaid (age 7), Moscow, Idaho, died May 1, 1955
Danny Eggers (age 6), Idaho Falls, Idaho, died May 10, 1955
1.Are the men who set themselves up as authorities on polio really qualified to decide the issues of life and death?
2. Have the self-styled medical "experts" been infallible enough in their past decisions to be trusted with the precious lives of our children and our future generations?
3. Have the more effective drugless methods of prevention and treatment of polio been investigated and tested?
These are some of the questions that people are asking and to which they have a right to expect satisfactory answers.
SALK "SPEAKS UP" IN LIFE MAGAZINE
In an article titled TRACKING THE KILLER, in LIFE magazine Dr. Salk was asked if his monkey vaccine was safe. To this query he replied:
"There is no question of ‘how safe is it?’ It is safe, and it can’t be safer than safe’."
Many people would seriously like to believe this statement but available scientific facts condemn it and hold it up to ridicule.
Shortly after the Salk vaccination program was swung into action, the American Public Health Service (June 23, 1955) Announced that there had been "168 confirmed cases of poliomyelitis among the vaccinated, with six deaths……How many vaccinated children will eventually be reported as developing the disease is as yet unknown . .
"The interval between inoculation and the first sign of paralysis ranged from 5 to 20 days and in a large proportion of cases it started in the limb on which the injection had been given. Another feature of the tragedy was that the numbers developing polio were far greater than would have been expected had no inoculations been given. In fact in the state of Idaho, according to a statement by Dr. Carl Eklund, one of the Government’s chief virus authorities, polio struck only vaccinated children in areas where there had been no cases of polio since the preceding autumn; in 9 out of 10 cases the paralysis occurred in the arms in which the vaccine had been injected." (News Chronicle, May 6, 1955)
According to the Daily Telegraph (June 18, 1955) Mr. Peterson, State Health Director of Idaho, stopped further inoculations and stated: "We have lost confidence in the Salk Vaccine." He also stated that he "holds the vaccine, together with the instructions for its manufacture, directly responsible for the outbreak of polio and the deaths that had occurred."
The serum makers were gambling for big stakes and decided that the "show must go on" in spite of death and disaster. The condemned Cutter laboratory had over a million dollars worth of deadly vaccine on hand and the disasters had caused its stock to drop from $15.50 to $8.75 per share, (according to Time, June 20, 1955). The other 5 laboratories with their $8,000,000 supply of "Salk liability" were involved also because deaths and disease were being reported from their vaccines every day. Then suddenly the deaths from Salk vaccine ceased to be reported. In a letter published in Defender Magazine, the writer stated: "I am informed by someone who works in a newspaper office that much of the bad news concerning the results of the Salk Program is being censored and deleted out of the news to keep people complacent and acquiescent."
SOME COUNTRIES REJECT VACCINES
In Australia when a few children died as a result of smallpox vaccinations the government abolished compulsory vaccination in that country and smallpox suddenly declined to the vanishing point. Australia had only three cases of smallpox in 15 years as compared with Japan’s record of 165,774 cases and 28,979 deaths from this cause in only 7 years (1886-1892) under compulsory vaccination and re-vaccination.
In Austria, where Bela Schick invented the Schick test for diptheria, it killed several children and the rulers there declared it to be too dangerous and prohibited its use in that country. Apparently Mr. Schick was not concerned with such trivialities as death and disease; he was out to make money. Most of the European countries didn’t trust him and rejected his poisons, so he brought it to America where he knew the unscrupulous medical and drug trusts dominate the healing field. Here he found a ready market. A lush harvest was promised and the customary pressure technique was turned on and the exploitable public was again used and abused. So we have seen with the passing of years, that the Schick test and diphtheria anti-toxin continue to take their toll of lives while our elected officers and public protectors (?) look the other way.
To show how death, disease and failure of vaccination is ignored in this country, in favor of fabulous profits for a few, let us recall one of the many disasters that bear this out:
In Dallas, Texas, 10 children died as a direct result of the "safe" diphtheria anti-toxin shots. For every one who died, hundreds suffered from the various vaccine diseases, many of which left permanent disabilities. This is not a special case; it is typical of all vaccinations. But most parents do not sue and the other cases never reach public notice. But these Texas parents were not to be "put off" by medical excuses. Numerous damage suits were brought against the doctors and the serum manufacturer, H. K. Mulford Co. The doctors succeeded in evading the issue by claiming that it was a bad batch of serum. (All serum is bad that doesn’t stop them). The Mulford Co. insisted that it was not a bad batch of serum but was just the same as all their serum and this lot (series A 377061) had been re-tested and passed satisfactorily all the tests and requirements conforming to the laboratory of the Public Health Service at Washington D.C.
The complaints of the parents were that "the diphtheria anti-toxin sold by the Mulford Co., was unfit, poisonous, dangerous and deadly." The doctors and serum company displayed great dexterity in juggling terms, inventing excuses and denying guilt but the children were still just as dead as a result of shots from the "whitewashed" serum as if they had been shot with bullets, and it was irrefutably proved in court that the vaccine serum killed them. Damages aggregating $78,000 were paid to the parents of the dead children, by the Mulford Co. The Mulford Co. wishing to continue in the same blood poisoning business and also wishing to dodge public disapproval, had its attorneys specify that "the judgement shall fall, not on the Mulford Co. but on Mr. Pierce Russell, the Mulford distributor." He was, probably, the least guilty of any of them because he could not have contaminated the sealed ampules of vaccines. However, his employer, undoubtedly made it worth his while—financially.......to take the blame. In this type of "white collar" murder, (the legally proved), guilty parties are not reprimanded or even asked to cease and desist" from a continuance of the crimes.
CONTINUE READING,......... CHECK OUT THE EXTENSIVE LIST OF LINKS AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS ARTICLE. THIS CHAPTER IS 10 PAGES LONG
http://www.whale.to/a/mcbean5.html