SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 2011
Quack of the Day: Alan Phillips
Here we go.
As mentioned previously, Mr. Hubbs thought it was a good idea to cite the work of Alan Phillips, because Hubbs felt Phillips was qualified to write on the subject of vaccines. Thus, if we wish to be logical and speak about qualifications we should determine who Alan Phillips is. Phillips is not a doctor, he is not a research scientist, he does not hold a PhD, nor has he written any peer-reviewed papers. He is not an immunologist nor has he attended medical school. He isn't a nurse, he doesn't hold an advanced degree in any medical or scientific field, and as far as I can tell he has never so much as set foot in a research lab where vaccines are being studied.As mentioned previously, Mr. Hubbs thought it was a good idea to cite the work of Alan Phillips, because Hubbs felt Phillips was qualified to write on the subject of vaccines. Thus, if we wish to be logical and speak about qualifications we should determine who Alan Phillips is. Phillips is not a doctor, he is not a research scientist, he does not hold a PhD, nor has he written any peer-reviewed papers. He is not an immunologist nor has he attended medical school. He isn't a nurse, he doesn't hold an advanced degree in any medical or scientific field, and as far as I can tell he has never so much as set foot in a research lab where vaccines are being studied.
Sunday, February 27, 2011
Saturday, February 26, 2011
One more misinforming and dis-informing blog, by Costner
Vaccine Philosophical Exemptions: An Anti-Vaxer Guide of Nonsense
First, lets start with : The pro-vaccine protocol. Directly from the well known pro-vaccine bible.
Make the opposition to vaccines appear to be misguided and falsely without real basis inform and fear monger the public that it will cause massive death, to avoid vaccines.
Proclaim falsely that all the needed science is there, to support safety and effectiveness of vaccines, and as well all vaccines.
Falsely inform the masses that if they dispute anything as to vaccines, that they do not understand the science, and the scientific method.
Falsely attack as misguided quackery, every last source of alternative and unbiased information on vaccines, and as well every last source providing that information, be it any researcher, any medically educated professional, and no matter what their level of experience and expertise.
Falsely attack any source of vaccine truth or person putting that truth forward as mentally defective, outright crazy, and unable to comprehend even basic common sense. Above all, do not approach any information from an unbiased perspective; nor acknowledge any unbiased non CDC claims and protocol information, if at all possible. Pick and choose, cherry pick only the information to reply to that you know you can twist the facts, lie about it, deny it is there, and what is there; and if that doesn't work, flat out refuse to accept and acknowledge the data in question and being presented. Above all do not accept an any anecdotal accounts of vaccine harm and damage. They can never prove to you it was anything but a coincidence, and all doctors follow that well accepted principal. In no case, ever acknowledge that VAERS with its 1 to 10% reporting factor even exists. Tell them there was no proof it was the vaccine, ever. Maintain that the vaccinated numbers make the VAERS reports a trivial matter.
Call everything that dissents from the standard modern medicine and vaccines failed protocol, a conspiracy theory; and anyone that presents it, a conspiracy theorist; no mater how much evidence there is to the contrary.
If all else fails, lie and lie some more, admit to nothing. Tell them they are all improperly uneducated to the facts and science. Tell them do not understand the scientific method! tell them they are only educated at the college of google, and haven't spent time in lab. And what good would that do within a false and corrupt system that hides from view and suppresses any natual means to real physiological understanding of health and the God given self healing body. This has been going on for a full century. They took out the creator and replaced it with man. The soil and the seed, who was right. Between allopathic medicine and natural protocols; which protocals work amazingly well, and which have failed. Which ones should be promoted, and should have been promoted, given the large failure of modern medicines pharmaceuticals and protocols? Learn the truth, and you will never again have any doubt. You are not ever going to get people like Costner to admit to that. To much to lose for someone.
Bash any and all forms of alternative information and websites, as all misguided incompetent nut cases which promote quackery and snake oil selling. Insist that their motive is only profit from a product. Exploit any and all even remotely accusable conflict of interest. Deny that big pharma, and the FDA/CDC have any conflict of interest, and claim that the science is all solid and non debatable; regardless of how much damage has been done.
I don't know how much more insane that could get. Nor how much more insane it could get, than to inject the multiple vaccines they have today, with these known ingredients! Especially into an infant or child. And it is the same system of health care that is the known third leading cause of death in America, which also promotes this misguided vaccine agenda; as a largely failed system of "health care". The selling sickness nightmare, and creating more chronic disorders and disease every day. People and children are not getting healthier, they are getting sicker. Dependant on what; more largely failed and very profitable pharmaceuticals. The entire concept of true physiological healing has been lost, for corporate pharmaceutical profit. They now have to much to lose, the truth be known.
Now, lets take a closer look here at what is put forth in Costner's said blog page below.
Vaccine Philosophical Exemptions: An Anti-Vaxer Guide of Nonsense
This is alias, (he has no known identity) Costner's response to an information article on "herd immunity", that I sent him via a message to his referenced to blog. That page was his analysis of the article by Alan Phillips. Don't forget the blog he created last week on the same subject of "herd immunity", and the response I made to that mind bending and in denial essay as well. And here we go again. Nothing is ever enough, nor never has been, nor ever will be. Someone apparently connected to this, has to much to lose. Or is he just so mentally sick he has a mission and obsession with endlessly attacking me for putting the truth out there. Trying to destroy me on every level. Anyones guess? The mission he has had has been ongoing, and is a vendetta for what occurred on the Argus. Time and again he looks and plays the part of the fool, and regardless of if he admits it or not. But this is typical protocol from the main stream side of their false defense; and has been seen time and again.
This is the said article I sent, and is being referenced to in Costner's linked to blog page.
And I made a comment to Costner's blog in reference to the his said blog page, and the article referenced to above; which that reply comment he has again failed to publish. Unfortunately, I didn't copy it but the message goes something like this. What is it that you do not understand about herd immunity failure? Those failures were in fully vaccinated groups and schools, with the CDC required percentage levels of vaccination to attain so called herd immunity. Those cases were not only in the un-vaccinated, nor those that could not be vaccinated. The largest percentage was in the vaccinated! The article above references those failures, and as well this blog and my site has referenced many of those vaccine and herd immunity failures.
You can see by the wording in his blog page he totally attempts to misrepresent that fact, and the clear facts of those numerous herd immunity failures, up to and including 100% herd immunity coverage. Proving further that there is no scientific basis to the concept of herd immunity. In fact Costner was asked last week to produce the science to support herd immmunity, and of course he could not. He of course attempts to falsely mislead everyone that he did a great job, but in fact that one referenced article does not support the concept of herd immunity, and even more the study iself is deeply flawed.
More specific analysis of the said blog page below.
As said, last weeks blog examples .
You can’t hide in the herd
Response to: You can’t hide in the herd
Herd Immunity - Facts.
First, Costner went on the attack as to both me and the author of the article. Claiming as well that the article was not referenced. In fact as to the subject issue of herd immunity in itself, it was referenced quite well, and I have listed before, many more vaccine and actual herd immunity failures than was listed there. Many of those additonla references can be found on the the blog pages here, as well as my site.. I am not listing those over and over and over; only to be again, ignored.
Some statements made in the blog:
Mr. Hubbs then went on to list the following article: Vaccine philosophical exemptions: A moral and ethical imperative, published Friday, February 18, 2011 by Alan Phillips. The full text can be found here.
With that said, let's look at the idiotic editorial that Mr. Hubbs has provided (because contrary to what Mr. Hubbs may think, this is in no way a research study nor is it even a published paper) and discuss some of the glaring flaws in it.
In the first section (I.) Mr. Phillips (who is not a doctor nor a research scientist by the way) claims that "on average, about 90 percent of infectious disease decline preceded vaccines" but he offers no evidence to support his claims. A 90% reduction is quite extreme so one would think he should at least be able to back this up with some hard numbers... but that isn't the anti-vaxer way.
As for you Costner, you can believe what you want, but the facts are there as to so called disease decline, on multiple levels, and as to known historical record and knowledge of it, and indeed those said facts are true!
Then he goes on to accuse Mr. Phillips, who is not an MD, but an attorney specializing in vaccine exemptions, and as as well me, of intellectual dishonesty.
Note to Mr. Hubbs: We are going to be talking about intellectual dishonesty several times, so you should probably look it up now so you understand the concept.
If there is ANYTHING that I have witnessed as to Costner, it is the repeated intellectual dishonesty he has put for on his former Argus Leader Voices vaccines letter posting, and to date! Is he a hypocrite? Well, lets say, as a fact he without any doubt wrote the book on intellectual hypocrisy as well. There never is, was, nor ever will be any level playing field. Proof of fact, comes right back on in denial as if anything at all was put forth. Peer reviewed studies put forth, comes right back oin claiming they do not count, and are substandard for his acceptance. Yet he will later claim he accepts any such studies from anywhere in the world, for full consideration A flat out lie, as his track record shows clearly the opposite. He is a lying denialist hit man, worse than Gorski, Orac, and Quackwatch put together. And who does he always go to for some perfected denial of fact and back up? Gorski.
Who's statements does he always coin? And where as well did he coin the term intellectual dishonesty from? Straight from David Gorski's articles. Why would you think that information from Gorski is put out there? Who is Gorski, editor of the so called Science Based Medicine site? He is a pharma hit man, just like Orac, and QuackWatch. There are few people with more intellectual dishonesty than Dr. David Gorski, and it is clearly his trademark. His articles speak to that clearly. These people bash any alternative health care and vaccine information that is out there. Living in a highly delusional world of false medical grandure; they with blinders on - intentionally fail to see the huge reality that is around them. Just like Costner, they as well will attack any and all persons who put that information forward. To much to lose. Talk about real and the true ...ilk! Another one of their bonified phrases used in referring to those who put the truth forward.
You know what? It is all about what information you are willing to accept! If you are determined to stick to the safe and effective CDC mantra, and not accept anything else for information. If you as well have to much to lose, the truth be known and admitted to? If you demand that any information be from a highly recognized main stream journal; then you will never know nor accept the truth. The children will continue to be needlessly damaged, and they will continue to add numerous more vaccines to the schedule until the truth is so self evident there is no way to deny it was not a coincidence. It is not denialble now! This full on disaster is now unavoidable, unless the truth becomes widely known. The basis for modern medicine is false, that was known from the beginning, and it ALL was bought off; period. What has been hidden from us, and as to the medical industry as a whole, is evil and unthinkable, but none the less must be known. As far as your comments as to whale.to, Costner. You must discredit the sources of information by whatever means you have. When was the last time you actually could and did refute any of that material? But then, honest debate and truth were not ever your strong point.
Just one source among many for the historical truth concerning the evolution of so called modern medicine
As for your little expose statement on antibiotics as the cause of eradication of everything from scarlet fever, to typhoid and TB, and as well a vaccine for typhoid and TB; that claim is unprovable and simply delusional, and it thus truly and simply requires little response. As well, actually effective antibiotics were not in any form of use, or wide spread use until 1939 and later.
As far as your attack on Phillips inclusion of scurvy, I fully realize scurvy is a deficiency of vitamin C, and is not a virus. I do not know what his intent was - as to what the connection is nor was. However, it is fact that deficiency of vitamin C can make a child or infant more prone to adverse vaccine reactions as well as more prone to disease. Now, if we added some vitamin D3 at 2000 UI, and not the typical BS 400 IU recommended, there would be no need for vaccines. How about testing for vitamin D levels in the clinics? No, the established powers that be only want you to buy vaccines and pharmceuticals. Vitamin D is not patentable as a 3000% markup and billion dollars sales item. If you are concerned about viral or bacterial infection, as well, eliminate the immune system depleting sugar and junk food from the child's or adults diet. Nope, didn't learn that in a lab either. What did you learn in a lab; doesn't look like much? What is your actual degree, alias Costner?
Review the work of Dr. Archie Kalokerinos
CHAPTER 3: ANTI-TYPHOID VACCINE CAUSES A WORSE DISEASE WHICH THE DOCTORS NAME PARATYPHOID
"Aren't vaccines great"?
"Aren't vaccines great"?
As to TB vaccines, Costners made this next statement.
I'd suggest Mr. Phillips, as well as Mr. Hubbs, consult the following paper for additional factual information: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16710326
Sorry to inform you Costner, but that pubmed study has nothing to do with any effectiveness of TB vaccine; in fact just the opposite. The study focuses on the need for an improved TB vaccine. Who in their right mind would take a TB vaccine, unless they worked in a TB treatment facility or something? Have you taken yours yet? Looks like as to past TB vaccines, that it doesn't even work effectively?
Remember you made this below statement, Costner!!! Were about to see where the reality of that really exists!
Ok - so the editorial / article / hack piece or whatever you wish to call it is clearly horribly written, totally unsupported, and full of factual errors and shoddy understanding of the issues. It is obviously produced knowing full well it relies upon intellectual dishonesty and manipulation of data and source material, and it hasn't given us a single piece of provable information which suggests vaccines are harmful or that the benefits don't outweigh the risks by a large margin. So that much is settled, but who exactly is the man who wrote it, and why would Mr. Hubbs reference him?
Then Costner continues on to make this bonified statement, which he of course does not reference the source, but is taken right from the CDC format of safe and effective false mantra.
Phillips then goes on to repeat what Mr. Hubbs has claimed in the past - that polio increased after the polio vaccine was introduced, but does Phillips offer any proof for this claim? No, in fact the only "reference" he can source is the statement made by one Doctor in the 1960s and even that doctor didn't have any facts to support the viewpoint. So let's look at the real numbers (just as we have done before). Polio was first recognized in 1840 and major outbreaks occurred in Europe in the 1880s and soon thereafter in the US where it peaked in the 1950s and 60s. In 1952 there were at least 58,000 cases of polio diagnosed in the US. By 1957 after a mass immunization campaign, there were only around 5,600 cases of polio diagnosed in the US, so I'm not exactly sure how Phillips (or Hubbs) thinks that is actually an increase in the cases of polio. That is over a 90% reduction in less than five years that Mr. Phillips conveniently ignores, but the facts are by 1964 there were less than 125 diagnosed cases of polio in the entire nation, so not only did polio NOT increase after the vaccination was released, but it was practically eradicated. To this day polio vaccines are still given on a regular basis, yet when is the last time you met someone in the modern era who was diagnosed with polio? Exactly my point.
Costner, if you THINK vaccines eradicated polio, you need to read and familiarize yourself with the information in THIS referenced document below! Here are some excerpts from the referenced article linked to below. Are those references good enough for you; of course not, and they never would be. Nothing is ever enough. Do your next blog page on this article; forget more senseless personal false bashing of Alan Phillips!
The polio vaccine: a critical assessment of its arcane history, efficacy, and long-term health-related consequence. Neil Z. Miller, Thinktwice Global Vaccine Institute
Excerpts: Doctors and scientists on the staff of the National Institutes of Health during the 1950s were well aware that the Salk vaccine was causing polio. Some frankly stated that it was “worthless as a preventive and dangerous to take [26:142].” They refused to vaccinate their own children [26:142]. Health departments banned the inoculations [26:140]. The Idaho State Health Director angrily declared: “I hold the Salk vaccine and its manufacturers responsible” for a polio outbreak that killed several Idahoans and hospitalized dozens more [26:140]. Even Salk himself was quoted as saying: “When you inoculate children with a polio vaccine you don’t sleep well for two or three weeks [26:144;43].” But the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis, and drug companies with large investments in the vaccine coerced the U.S. Public Health Service into falsely proclaiming the vaccine was safe and effective [26:142-5].
The standards for defining polio were changed when the polio vaccine was introduced. The new definition of a polio epidemic required more cases to be reported. Paralytic polio was redefined as well, making it more difficult to confirm, and therefore tally, cases. Prior to the introduction of the vaccine the patient only had to exhibit paralytic symptoms for 24 hours. Laboratory confirmation and tests to determine residual paralysis were not required. The new definition required the patient to exhibit paralytic symptoms for at least 60 days, and residual paralysis had to be confirmed twice during the course of the disease. Also, after the vaccine was introduced cases of aseptic meningitis (an infectious disease often difficult to distinguish from polio) and coxsackie virus infections were more often reported as separate diseases from polio. But such cases were counted as polio before the vaccine was introduced. The vaccine’s reported effectiveness was therefore skewed (Table 1 and Figure 5) [52,53]
There are many other highlights in this article to numerous to excerpt. Why should I when you can just read it yourself. And guess what, that article is even a larger strike against the failed concept of herd immunity, and that has no science to back up that concept!The - Think Twice Website.
Neil Z. Miller, and vaccine truth books for parents, written.
Vaccines: Are They Really Safe and Effective? Neil Z Miller
Statement made about the book: This is the best introductory vaccine book in the world.
It includes 30 charts and graphs plus more than 900 citations so that all of the information may be confirmed.
SURVIVAL FACTOR IN NEOPLASTIC AND VIRAL DISEASES
WILLIAM FREDERICK KOCH, Ph.D., M.D.
VIRUS AND CANCER CELLS, William Koch
Excerpt: Nationwide statistics issued January 4, 1960, by the United States Public Health Service, show that for the year 1959, up to December 26th (51 weeks), the increase in the incidence of Polio rose 85% over that of the same period of 1958. There were 8,531 cases listed for 1959, of which 5,661 were paralytic, as compared to 5,987 in 1958, of which 3,090 were paralytic. We just showed the great increase in 1958 over the incidence of the total and the paralytic cases of 1957. Where compulsory vaccination was practiced as in North Carolina and Tennessee, Bealle’s investigations report a 400% increase in paralytic and non-paralytic Polio during 1959 over 1958. So it seems that the more vaccine that is used the more the actual infection that comes about. The statistical analysis teaches much about the nature of the virus.
Read much more about the real statistics.
Eleanora McBean Ph.D., N.D.
The Poisoned Needle, Eleanora McBean Ph.D., N.D.
The Hidden Dangers In Polio Vaccine
(Chapter 10 of Poisoned Needle plus addendums)
by Eleanor McBean
They can bash whale.to source all they want, but they can never refute those facts. When was the last time you seen them even try.
Raymond Obomsawin, PhD Alternative Doctor - on Vaccines.
Vaccine Philosophical Exemptions: An Anti-Vaxer Guide of Nonsense
In general, the risks benefit ratio of most vaccines clearly does not unweigh the high risk of injecting thsoe toxins, and along with multiple toxins from other vaccines as well. Unless you view the whole picture of vaccines from an unbiased viewpoint, you will never Costner, nor any of your cronies ever admit to that!
Mr. Hubbs obviously doesn't understand that having footnotes on an article doesn't mean it is "fully referenced" because as I have shown above Phillips isn't able to provide sources for his most bold of statements (and when I say the most bold, I'm referring to some of the statements that Phillips himself has chosen to emphasize with underlining and/or Capital letters). Not only is this a totally unscientific and poorly drafted editorial (I'm not even sure this piece does the term 'article' justice), but unfortunately for Mr. Hubbs and the other antivaxers out there, it is not fully sourced whatsoever.
In reply Costner: The subject matter was vaccines and herd immunity; remember your previous blog page titled, You can't Hide in the Herd! As to the referenced information in your latest blg page article in regard to the article, Vaccine philosophical exemptions: A moral and ethical imperative; as a fact the referenced to information in that article more than satisfy the claims in the article that herd immunity has been dis-proven. That was my point! Arguing the definition of words or terms ("referenced or"fully referenced"), is the first sign of your defeat! The remainder of it involves, what are you willing to accept for information? Clearly for you that is nothing that doesn't fit your stubborn views. I never stated that it was 100 percent scientifically in a peer reviewed journal referenced. That will never be, as they clearly refuse to allow it, and any dissent against vaccines in the journals you seem to claim are acceptable. By the way, pubmed does have many citations that are not actually favorable to vaccines.
Dispelling Vaccination Myths: Part I , by Alan Phillips
An introduction to the contradictions between medical science and immunization policy
Another blind to fact statement Costner made.
Truth be told, Phillips is actually a lawyer, and the more you read about him, the more unsettling it becomes that he is trying to act as an expert of some type of the issues of vaccinations. It is so comical in fact, that I've had to devote an entire post to it because the more I read, the more humorous it became and I just couldn't fit it all here (as this post is already longer than it should be). Thus I'll be releasing another post in upcoming days that will provide full detail about Alan Phillips and his professional credentials - or lack thereof.
Looks like one of your next blog page Costner, is going to be a little involved??? You can start with an analysis of the above document. But of course only further and false attempts to discredit Phillips credentials, is par for the course for you!
How about this one!
In many cases the disease can be traced back to someone who traveled to an area with lower rates of vaccination, contracted the disease, and then returned to the area they originated from where they will then spread the disease around. Yes in some cases a small number of those who have received vaccines will become infected, but that is due to mutations in the disease and various strains. When such mutations are realized, scientists will work on newer and improved vaccines to combat them in the future, but when you boil it down we probably wouldn't have these mutations and various strains if those people healthy enough to receive vaccines would in fact do so, thus preventing the disease in the first place.
This above paragraph rant is intellectual dishonesty at its best, to the point of being purely delusional. The fact is that the pertussis virus has mutated and has produced a more virulent strain; how fast have the vaccine makers been onto that? They haven't. Period. To do so would make their existing vaccine obsolete and they do not dispose of vaccines, they sell them until gone. The chances are real good as well that the cause of that mutation and change is the vaccine itself.
Whooping Cough Outbreaks & Vaccine Failures
Whooping Cough Kills 5 in California - State Declares an Epidemic - Learn the real truth.
But oh, you want to see that in pubmed, or its not true. And if it was in pubmed you would find some excuse to discount it.
One of Costners statements:
This is why we have a scientific process which begins with defining a question, gathering information, forming a hypothesis (after the information is gathered... not before), performing experiments, analyzing the data from those experiements, interpreting the data from those experiments, drawing conclusions, publishing the results of the experiments, and then retesting to ensure the results can be replicated (which is often done by others to ensure the results are able to be replicated). You don't get to decide what the findings should be and then try to find ways to ensure the findings are valid, and you surely don't get to run around making claims that haven't undergone the rigors of the scientific process.
My reply is this; if that were all good, modern medicine would NOT be now the third leading cause of death in the US!!! You again ignore the facts! Children would not be dying of vaccine reactions and as well as permanently disabled by vaccines, in the large numbers that they are, and the parent groups of the vaccine truth and anti-vaccine movement, would not be growing like it is. But as you refuse to acknowledge that, it is still all good for you!
But of course that was not in your appropriate source of information, so continue to ignore it! But it was in the AMA Journal.
One Nation Under Drugs: Chemist Shows How The FDA is Sabotaging Your Health
And here Costner states:
Mr. Phillips also inaccurately tries to tie the number of swine flu vaccinated people in an area to the number of swine flu deaths, but this is a classic case of intellectual dishonesty in that he purposefully is attempting to manipulate the data to his liking. Yes it is true that the US vaccinated more than other nations, but that doesn't automatically suggest such vaccinations actually creates swine flu or puts people at risk. Instead, the reality is the US vaccinated more because we had the highest rates of infection before the vaccines were even available. This is a classic case of cause and effect, although in Phillips' case he seems to believe effect comes before cause. It is unfortunate he has such as misunderstanding of science, and even more unfortunate that the ignorant souls who will read his article without the ability to question the information due to their lack of understanding of complex subject matter and sub-par cognigtive abilities.
My reply: What? [Instead, the reality is the US vaccinated more because we had the highest rates of infection before the vaccines were even available.] And I see you provided a source of verification of that as a fact? You can not create a more non verifiable and twisted assessment than that. The only thing that creates vaccine usage is false fear mongering! The use of that was clearly evident in the US! However it does not conclude that if we vaccinated more in the US, that we had more H1N1 circulating than in any other country. How about the fact that Poland rejected the H1N1 vaccine and had only 1 tenth of its proportional share the deaths? Do you not understand the term proportional?
It is pretty easy to see who actually has the sub-par cognigtive abilities, Costner! You can't as well, even spell cognitive! But get the truth out there, I don't care about perfect spelling!
I see you also refused to address the of the historical and huge success of homeoprophaxis, and vitamin D! Conveniently.
More excerpted comments:
I'm actually starting to wonder if the antivaxers out there know how to actually do any research whatsoever or if they understand the scientific method, because it seems that they have the process backwards. A typical antivaxer actually decides what outcome they wish to reach (that vaccines are bad) and then they backtrack into that position by cherry-picking data, referencing blogs and websites and articles while ignoring real science and facts. Unfortunately that isn't how things work in the real world, and science will always prevail over opinion and quackery.
Really Costner, and now who is it really, that is cherry picking the data and the science? Who has maintained the promotion of the real quackery? But you will never admit it. This stuff is flat out sick dude!!! Your nearly now a year long attack on me, and everyone I put forth their information, be it doctors, researchers, you name it. It can NOT ALL be wrong, and you know it! You are actually doing more damage than good to your cause, because any parent or concerned person in seeing how deceptive you are, will definitely thus further be prompted to, and want to search further for the real truths.
More of Costner's comments:
What bothers me most about Phillips however is that he makes very bold statements which he not only doesn't have sources to support, but that he couldn't support even if he wished. Case in point, he claims the data he writes about "strongly suggest that the swine flu immunization campaigns may actually have been counterproductive" but he has no studies or peer-reviewed science to support that statement and it is entirely based upon a misunderstanding of how vaccines are a response to disease rather than disease being a response to vaccines. The studies I cited above will clearly show the effectiveness of vaccines in double-blind clinical trials, but Phillips conveniently (dishonestly?) ignores them.
Reply: He had the by country proportional studies Costner, that weren't good enough for you, how would anything else be? How about the fact that Canadian studies found that getting a seasonal flu vaccine increased the risk for H1N1, would that explain anything? But yet those studies have not yet made it to the peer review journal they were submitted to. Of course, vaccines dis-regulate and deplete immune function; they are NOT going to admit ...that!
And as far as your claim that, but he has no studies or peer-reviewed science to support that statement and it is entirely based upon a misunderstanding of how vaccines are a response to disease rather than disease being a response to vaccines. You have it all ass backwards, Costner! Disease in fact can be a response to vaccines. You do not as well understand the concept of the soil and the seed. If the human body is kept free of toxins, healthy, and as well free of pathogens not listed on the vaccine insert, illness can not take hold and has far less chances of produce life threatening circumstances. Take your pick of the better options. Enter the known concept of ph, and proper and normal ph, and well ahhh? You will never get it in 100 years, the same amount of time that the Rockefeller bought medical establishment has had it wrong. The false germ theory, and forgetting the human physiology and real God given immune system that was already there. There is no better way, and no safe vaccine!
Regular Flu Vaccine Actually INCREASES Risk of Swine Flu
The primary point here is obvious: Mr. Hubbs still does not understand science nor does he have the brain power to interpret data that is put before his very eyes. Sad but true.
Lets take a look at those studies. You keep trying to claim that science has double blind studies to prove the effectiveness of vaccines. How can that be when not only do most all vaccine clinical trials never use a true placebo, and the result is a profile of vaccinated persons with an almost identical list of adverse reactions. Look at the Gardasil clinical trials for example, they used a claimed placebo that one had the carrier agent left in it, and one had aluminum in it. What purpose would there be for not using a saline placebo; and how do they get away with that? As well, the evidence of antibody titers only is claimed in terms of efficacy, actual efficiency is entirely a different outcome. Antibody titers are NOT proof of immunity, never were. The immune system is more complex than that. I have referenced to that before, and as well in this blog.
Since I'm a big fan of real sources, here is some more reading material for Phillips and Hubbs (although at this point I'm not sure either of them can actually understand complex subjects or interpret scientific data):
1.The Spatial Dynamics of Poliomyelitis in the United States: From Epidemic Emergence to Vaccine-Induced Retreat, 1910-1971.
Excerpt: Against this background, the article draws upon information included in the U.S. Public Health Service's Public Health Reports and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report to examine the spatial dynamics of poliomyelitis during the phases of epidemic emergence (1910-1955) and vaccine-induced retreat (1955-1971) in the United States.
We have already proven that data to be fraudulent. Case closed!
2. Eradicating polio: today's challenges and tomorrow's legacy.
Excerpt: Since its launch in 1988, the Global Polio Eradication Initiative has grown into one of the largest international health efforts in history, operating in every country and area in the world. The burden of polio disease has been reduced by over 99%, and the number of countries with indigenous virus has fallen from more than 125 to just four. As importantly, a strong surveillance and laboratory infrastructure has been established for vaccine-preventable diseases (including measles, tetanus, yellow fever, rubella and Japanese encephalitis), and a massive investment has been made in the physical infrastructure and human resources needed to deliver routine immunizations and other health services in developing countries. Between 2000 and 2003, new challenges to polio eradication emerged, threatening the interruption of the transmission of wild poliovirus globally and the eventual elimination of any residual polio disease as the result of the continued use of oral polio vaccines.
Obviously they forgot to mention the many polio vaccine failures in those countries, and just like the said US Health Service, their claims are bogus! And what happens to an under nourished child that gets slammed with a bunch of vaccines? Is their risk for adverse effects higher or lower? How about their ability to develop any actual immunity?
Just a few of those global polio vaccine failures.
What the so called authorities say.
In 1997, the ACIP recommended routine use of inactivated (IPV) rather than oral (OPV) polio vaccine to eliminate the risk of vaccine associated paralytic polio in the United States, yet since then they have gone into such other countries with OPV; what sense does that make?
In other words they can not eradicate polio even if the success numbers were true, because as well the vaccine derived strain keeps circulating to un-vaccinated persons; and regardless if it is used IPV or OPV has been used. And they know they can not achieve herd immunity percentage levels, even if herd immunity actually worked.
WHO hides the continuing polio epidemic.
WHO Polio will soon be history.
3. Vaccine-derived polioviruses and the endgame strategy for global polio eradication.
Excerpt: Developing a posteradication strategy to minimize the risks of VDPV emergence and spread has become an urgent WHO priority.
Obviously they did not eradicate polio in those countries, they are still using the OPV, and the outcome will be an endless recurrence of polio.
This is a CDC document, and they claim OPV caused VAPP is rare, claiming one case of VAPP occurred for every 2 to 3 million doses of OPV administered, which resulted in 8 to 10 cases of VAPP each year in the United States. Of course they would never underestimate that? They seem to contradict themselves as to IPV's chances of ever shedding. Again, there is nothing for claims you can trust within a CDC document, ever!
More of his blog page studies.
In part II Phillips tries to suggest the risk-benefit assessment of vaccines isn't feasible, but it takes about 15 seconds to prove that wrong via numerous studies in pubmed.
Case in point:
1. Pentavalent rotavirus vaccine in developing countries: safety and health care resource utilization.
A total of 1804 Jamaican infants, 6 to 12 weeks of age at entry and primarily from low/middle-income families of African heritage, received ≥1 dose. During the first year after dose 1, there were 2 and 11 hospitalizations or emergency department visits attributable to rotavirus gastroenteritis involving any serotype among 831 evaluable vaccine recipients and 809 evaluable placebo recipients, respectively (rate reduction: 82.2% [95% confidence interval:
Of the 1802 subjects included in the safety analyses, intussusception was confirmed for 1 vaccine recipient (115 days after the third dose) and 3 placebo recipients. One vaccine recipient and 3 placebo recipients died during the follow-up period, but none of the deaths was considered to be vaccine-related.
So, in 1802 subjects, among 831 evaluable vaccine recipients, they claim to have prevented 9 cases of rotavirus requiring hospitalization. Wow, I am so impressed! And one vaccine recipient acquired intussception, while none of the placebo group did.
2. Clinical efficacy of cell culture–derived and egg‐derived inactivated subunit influenza vaccines in healthy adults.
METHODS: A total of 11,404 study participants aged 18-49 years were randomized equally to receive CCIV (Optaflu; n = 3828), TIV (Agrippal; n = 3676), or placebo (n = 3900).
Each participant was observed during a 6-month study surveillance period. Nasal and throat swabs for virus isolation and characterization were collected from all patients with influenza-like illness. Vaccine immunogenicity was evaluated in a subset of 1045 participants.
RESULTS: Efficacy of CCIV and TIV against vaccine-like (83.8% [1-sided 97.5% confidence interval [CI] lower limit, 61.0%] and 78.4% [1-sided 97.5% CI lower limit, 52.1%], respectively) and all circulating influenza virus strains (69.5%
And if you believe they actually swabbed the throats of any and all of the 11,404 recipients that acquired flu like illness, maybe you should buy some development land in the middle of the Everglades! And how many of those flu like illnesses turned out to be one of the others dozens of flu like viruses that were not even in the vaccine? What type of a test did they use, it doesn't say.
Here are some better studies, that are unbiased!
The Truth About the Flu Shot.
Annual Flu Deaths It's a Guess.
3. Efficacy and safety of a recombinant hepatitis E vaccine in healthy adults: a large-scale, randomised, double-blind placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.
If there were 11,165 of the trial participants tested for hepatitis E virus IgG, of which 5285 (47%) were seropositive for hepatitis E virus, what was the total of the participants in either group that were already positive. Why do any such study including anyone that was already positive for Hep E? Makes no sense, and as well the placebo group appears to have been given Hep B vaccine; why is that? And during the preceding 12 months, 15 people in the placebo group after 30 days tested positive for Hep E, and none in the vaccinated group. How do they know none were not already Hep E positive, or had contracted it? With an incubation period of from 3 to 10 week, depending on the source you check. And the vaccine contains aluminum, a known neuro-toxin. Why not just protect yourself from exposure to Hep E?
Hepatitis E (hep E) is usually spread by putting something in the mouth that has been contaminated with the stool of a person (or animal) infected with hepatitis E (even though it may look clean). The virus is shed in the feces of infected people and animals, and this type of transmission is known as fecal-oral transmission.
And tell me again way a new born infant requires a hepatitis B vaccine, for a sexually transmitted disease? Insanity for profit, and the parents are to be and remain none the wiser.
Hepatitis B Vaccine Continues to Kill Infants
GRANDMOTHER WANTS PARENTS INFORMED OF HEPATITIS INOCULATION
Baby's injury spurs bill on vaccine
4. Efficacy of pentavalent rotavirus vaccine against severe rotavirus gastroenteritis in infants in developing countries in Asia: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
INTERPRETATION: In infants in developing countries in Asia, pentavalent rotavirus vaccine is safe and efficacious against severe rotavirus gastroenteritis, and our results support expanded WHO recommendations to promote its global use.
38 cases of severe rotavirus gastroenteritis in the vaccine group and 71 in the placebo group. Somehow that doesn't impress me much! And both the vaccine group and the placebo group received all the said other vaccines on the schedule. My guess is that if NONE of the clinical trial participants had received any vaccines, there would have been no rotavirus gastroenteritis infection found at all!!!! You never hear of it in non-vaccinated children, because their immune systems are left unaffected by all those vaccine toxins!
And the study appears to be directly connected to the pharma corrupt, World Health Organization.
5. Efficacy of pentavalent rotavirus vaccine against severe rotavirus gastroenteritis in infants in developing countries in sub-Saharan Africa: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
Another rotavirus study. 79 cases of severe rotavirus gastroenteritis were reported in 2610.6 person-years in the vaccine group, compared with 129 cases in 2585.9 person-years in the placebo group, resulting in a vaccine efficacy against severe rotavirus gastroenteritis of 39.3%. Wow, thats not all that impressive? And done in an African nation. Again, connected to the WHO. I bet Paul Offit would have absolutely no connection to that?
6. Efficacy of live attenuated influenza vaccine in children 6 months to 17 years of age.
There isn't allot to go on with this study, as it gives no real details of nor on it.
OBJECTIVE: To examine data from previously published pediatric studies to determine the efficacy of LAIV in various age groups.
CONCLUSIONS: The available data from prospective, randomized studies in children does not support the concept that prior repeated exposure to influenza, either through wild-type infection or vaccination with live, attenuated or inactivated vaccines, reduces the efficacy of LAIV compared with placebo or TIV
There have been many flu vaccine studies analysed by the Cochrane data base, and some of those are included in the Truth About The Flu Shot referenced above. The unbiased studies and analysis have repeatedly shown the ineffectiveness of flu shots in all age groups. Vitamin D and C, and forget the shots. Eliminate all forms of immune system depleting sugar. I have never had a flu shot nor the flu in over 15 years. I will not be so stupid as to inject all those toxins including thimerosal, (mercury), in some misguided attempt to prevent flu or any illness.
7. Efficacy of 23-valent pneumococcal vaccine in preventing pneumonia and improving survival in nursing home residents: double blind, randomised and placebo controlled trial.
RESULTS: Pneumonia occurred in 63 (12.5%) participants in the vaccine group and 104 (20.6%) in the placebo group. Pneumococcal pneumonia was diagnosed in 14 (2.8%) participants in the vaccine group and 37 (7.3%) in the placebo group (P<0.001). All cause pneumonia and pneumococcal pneumonia were significantly more frequent in the placebo group than in the vaccine group:
Wow, 63 in the vaccine group still got pneumococcal pneumonia? If the vaccine really worked none of them would have? Is it worth it? And some of those 4 vaccines have aluminum, mercury, and or latex as ingredients. Good choice. Wouldn't it have better to supplement 2000 IU of Vitamin D, and make sure they get some vitamin C? How about some oranges?
Pneumococcal vaccine ingredients.
And where are the effectiveness and safety studies on the pertussis, measles, and mumps vaccines? You know every person on the planet is at risk for tetanus, according to the medical clinics, better get a DTaP shot; no sense separating it. Look at all the safe and effective wonderful ingredients in just the tetanus vaccine? Aluminum, Formaldehyde, mercury, and chemicals you can barely pronounce? Wow.
Tetanus Vaccine Ingredients
And look at DTaP, even worse!!!
Where are your safety and effectiveness studies on combined vaccines, and the combined effect of the current CDC vaccine schedule? I read the CDC information, and guess what, their actual science was as paltry and absent as the feathers on a hen pecked chickens butt!
Here is your comment, Costner! As always, facts and science cannot be disputed nor debated.
I don't know which you are more of, delusional, stupid, or just flat out crazy...dude!!!!
Interview with Dr Suzanne Humphries - Learn the REAL truth about vaccines!
Interview with Dr Suzanne Humphries about vaccines, interviewed by Mike Adams.
And no matter how much evidence to the contrary that exists Costner still claims Wakefield is and was a fraud. Well, the evidence now points an entirely different direction. But what would he care if children are vaccine damaged, he has a largely bogus medical model to defend.
Dr. Wakefield Video Interview On Damanding BMJ Retraction.
Interview with Dr Andrew Wakefield about the British Medical Journal, science and vaccines
Research References, Autism and the Gut MMR issues.
Dr. Andrew Wakefield In-Studio: British Researcher Exposes Fraudulent Data Kept on Autism 1/3
Dr. Andrew Wakefield In-Studio: British Researcher Exposes Fraudulent Data Kept on Autism 2/3
Dr. Andrew Wakefield In-Studio: British Researcher Exposes Fraudulent Data Kept on Autism 3/3
Hey Costner! Once AGAIN!
The Symbol of Madness! The CDC spokes model.
"Not so fast, I said children could safely handle 10,000 vaccines, not 100,000"!!! You know that we all are exposed to 1000's of pathogens and sickening substances every day, and thus we could inject all those safely in your children with multiple vaccine toxins included and it would be the same thing. I have can state that I have absolutely no conflict of interest in saying that, and the billions in profits have nothing to do with it. Get VACCINATED! Look at our pharma/ CDC science; all those children they claim are vaccine damaged and they claim children are sicker than they have ever been, that is a coincidence, you can't ever prove that". "The parents that claim otherwise are all misinformed and wacko conspiracy theorists"!
The American Medical Association (AMA): Two Ways They Get You Hooked on Prescription Drugs. The real story on the history of modern medicine!
Jared Lee Loughner: Psychotic or Vaccine Induced Madman? More real fact than fiction!
More information as to that the FDA is NOT protecting the citizens! This does not only involve drugs and vaccines. This country needs to wake up to what is going on!
Video on GMO Food Dangers - If you believe what is going on with Monsanto and GMO seeds and crops is a good thing, take a look at and review THIS!
To view this excellent health documentary free (86 minutes)
Health Video Documentary
The Future of Food
Monsanto Shifts ALL Liability to Farmers.
Roundup, GMOs linked to emergence of deadly new pathogen causing spontaneous abortions among animals.
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/031473_GMOs_pathogens.html
For a well documented, 10-page summary of the hidden risks of GM foods with detailed footnotes: