Tuesday, February 09, 2010
   
Text Size

Site Search - enter your search term

Deutsch (DE-CH-AT)French (Fr)Svenska (Sverige)Nederlands - nl-NLPolish (Poland)English (United Kingdom)

Are Populations Being Primed For Nano-Microchips Inside Vaccines?

News - Latest News


Are Populations Being Primed For Nano-Microchips Inside Vaccines?


It's almost surreal, like something out of a sci-fi flick, but nano-microchips invisible to the naked eye are a reality that are already being hosted in wide-range of applications. The question is, how long will it take governments and big pharma to immerse nano-microchips inside of vaccines to tag and surveil global populations?

Nanotechnology deals with structures smaller than one micrometer (less than 1/30th the width of a human hair), and involves developing materials or devices within that size. To put the size of a nanometer in perspective, it is 100,000 times smaller than the width of a human hair.

More than ten years ago, simple low-cost techniques improved the design and manufacture of nano-microchips. That unlocked a multitude of methodologies for their manufacture in a wide-range of applications including optical, biological, and electronic devices.

The joint use of nanoelectronics, photolithography, and new biomaterials, have enabled the required manufacturing technology towards nanorobots for common medical applications, such as surgical instrumentation, diagnosis and drug delivery.

Japan's Hitachi says it has developed the world's smallest and thinnest microchip, that can be embedded in paper to track down parcels or prove the authenticity of a document. The integrated circuit (IC) chip is as minute as a speck of dust.

Nanoelectrodes implanted in the brain are increasingly being used to manage neurological disorders. Mohammad Reza Abidian, a post-doctoral researcher at the U-M Department of Biomedical Engineering said that polymers in nanotubes "are biocompatible and have both electronic and ionic conductivity." He further stated "therefore, these materials are good candidates for biomedical applications such as neural interfaces, biosensors and drug delivery systems."

Depending on the objectives of such studies, research could theoretically pave the way for smart recording electrodes that can deliver drugs to positively or negatively affect the immune response.

Through nanotechnology, researchers have also been able to create artificial pores able to transmit nanoscale materials through membranes.

A UC biomedical engineering study appearing in the journal Nature Nanotechnology, Sept. 27, 2009, successfully inserted the modified core of a nanomotor, a microscopic biological machine, into a lipid membrane. The resulting channel enabled them to move both single- and double-stranded DNA through the membrane.

Professor Peixuan Guo who led the study said past work with biological channels has been focused on channels large enough to move only single-stranded genetic material.

"Since the genomic DNA of human, animals, plants, fungus and bacteria are double stranded, the development of single pore system that can sequence double-stranded DNA is very important," he says.

Such engineered channels could have applications in nano-sensing, DNA sequencing, drug loading, including innovative techniques to implement DNA packaging mechanisms of viral nanomotors and vaccine delivery.

"The idea that a DNA molecule travels through the nanopore, advancing nucleotide by nucleotide, could lead to the development of a single pore DNA sequencing apparatus, an area of strong national interest," Guo said.

Scientists working at Queen Mary, University of London, have developed micrometer-sized capsules to safely deliver drugs inside living cells. These "micro shuttles" could hypothetically be loaded with a specific microchip controlling the dose of medication to be opened remotely, releasing their contents. Besides monitoring the dosage, the same microchip could be used to surveil the patient in conjunction with various tracking systems.

Scientists in the United Kingdom have recently reported advances towards overcoming key challenges in nanotechnology. They demonstrated how nanoparticles could move quickly in a desired direction without help from outside forces. Their achievement has broad implications, the scientists say, raising the possibility of coaxing cells to move and grow in specific directions.

Doug Dorst, a microbiologist and vaccine critic in South Wales, says these advances have an immense appeal to vaccine makers. "Biotech companies and their researchers have quickly moved most funding initiatives towards nanotechnology to increase the potency of their vaccines," he said. If microorganisms inside of vaccines can be coaxed into targeting or invading specific cells, they could achieve their goal at an accelerated rate over conventional vaccines. "Depending on which side of the vaccine debate you're on, whether pro or con, nanobots inside vaccine preparations could advance their effectiveness exponentially by either dramatically improving or destroying immunity depending on their design," he added.

Dorst claims that present day nanobot technology could just as easily be used to advance biological weapons as they can to advance human health. "For every fear that biotech propaganda proliferates about deadly diseases and how vaccines prevent them, it is one more lie to incrementally convince the masses that vaccines are effective."

The worry for Dorst is that one day vaccines "will do what they've always been intended for...control of the global populace."

Nanoemulsion platforms are already capable of developing vaccines from very diverse materials. Mixtures of soybean oil, alcohol, water and detergents can be emulsified into ultra-small particles smaller than 400 nanometers wide (about 1/200th the width of a human hair). These could be combined with any number of nano-microchips with all or part of disease-causing microbes to trigger the body's immune system.

In 2007 researchers at the Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL) announced in an article in the journal, Nature Biotechnology, that they had developed a “nanoparticle that can deliver vaccines more effectively, with fewer side effects, and at a fraction of the cost of current vaccine technologies.” The article went on to describe the effects of their breakthrough: “At a mere 25 nanometers, these particles are so tiny that once injected, they flow through the skin’s extracellular matrix, making a beeline to the lymph nodes. Within minutes, they’ve reached a concentration of DCs thousands of times greater than in the skin."

Russia has recently announced a new manufacturing plant that will strictly produce nano-vaccines. Project plans include development of two vaccines for human flu and bird flu and three biopharmaceuticals for boosting the immune system and increasing the efficiency of antibacterial and antiviral drugs, among other initiatives.

The human body is very resistant to nanoparticles that attempt to invade human cells. Scientists are intensely investigating methods to disrupt human enzymes that may degrade nanoparticles. Experts at the University of Liverpool found a way around this obstacle that could mean more efficient, topical drugs in the future, which could act a whole lot faster than the ones currently in use.

All these nanotechnological advances raise many issues and concerns about the toxicity and environmental impact of nanomaterials, and their potential effects on medicine, global economics, as well as speculation about government surveillance. These concerns have led to a debate among advocacy groups and governments on whether special regulation of nanotechnology is warranted.

The Environmental Protection Agency issued a news release last week saying that it had “today outlined a new research strategy to better understand how manufactured nanomaterials may harm human health and the environment.” Interesting as that strategy document is, it was hardly hot off the presses.

Indeed, many companies advertise their use of such billionth-of-a-meter-scale constituents as a measure of a product's state-of-the-art status, implying that ultra-small ingredients are an inherently good thing. They aren’t. Nor does size necessarily make these materials worse than others. At this point it's just maddeningly unpredictable what nano things will do.

Proponents of nanotechnology are very critical of regulatory measures that may impeed its progression. Many of these critics have staunchly dismissed concerns as being fear-hyped conspiracy theories based on science fiction.

In the popular video game series Metal Gear Solid, many characters and soldiers in general, have "nanomachines" in their bloodstream, and are used to block pain, allow members of fire teams/patrols to share sensory information, heal bodily damage, as well as manipulating viruses central to video game's plot line.

Through the use of special effects and computer-generated imagery, several blockbusters starring Keanu Reeves including The Matrix Trilogy and The Day the Earth Stood Still, have dramatized how nanobots could effectively take control of their organic and inorganic targets.

Star Trek episodes and their theatrical releases such as Star Trek: First Contact have also depicted how nanoprobes (nanites) could infect an individual's bloodstream through a pair of tubules.

Regardless of the recurring themes of nanobots in video games, sci-fi shows and movies, nanotechnology is a reality, and nano-microchips are well on their way to being utilized in ways which may be detrimental to human health and freedom on a global scale.

The development of nano-microchips are a major thrust of governments and pharmaceutical industries who want the ultimate power and leverage over global populations for more profit and more control.

In December 2000, Former Chief Medical Officer of Finland, Rauni-Leena Luukanen-Kilde, MD stated that it is technically possible for every newborn to be injected with a microchip, which could then function to identify the person for the rest of his or her life. Such plans are secretly being discussed in the U.S. without any public airing of the privacy issues involved.

Today's microchips operate by means of low-frequency radio waves that target them. With the help of satellites, the implanted person can be tracked anywhere on the globe. Such a technique was among a number tested in the Iraq war, according to Dr. Carl Sanders, who invented the intelligence-manned interface (IMI) biotic, which is injected into people. (Earlier during the Vietnam War, soldiers were injected with the Rambo chip, designed to increase adrenaline flow into the bloodstream.) The 20-billion-bit/second supercomputers at the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) could now "see and hear" what soldiers experience in the battlefield with a remote monitoring system (RMS).

When a 5-micromillimeter microchip (the diameter of a strand of hair is 50 micromillimeters) is placed into optical nerve of the eye, it draws neuroimpulses from the brain that embody the experiences, smells, sights, and voice of the implanted person. Once transferred and stored in a computer, these neuroimpulses can be projected back to the person’s brain via the microchip to be reexperienced. Using a RMS, a land-based computer operator can send electromagnetic messages (encoded as signals) to the nervous system, affecting the target's performance. With RMS, healthy persons can be induced to see hallucinations and to hear voices in their heads.

Every thought, reaction, hearing, and visual observation causes a certain neurological potential, spikes, and patterns in the brain and its electromagnetic fields, which can now be decoded into thoughts, pictures, and voices. Electromagnetic stimulation can therefore change a person's brainwaves and affect muscular activity, causing painful muscular cramps experienced as torture.

The NSA's electronic surveillance system can simultaneously follow and handle millions of people. Each of us has a unique bioelectrical resonance frequency in the brain, just as we have unique fingerprints. With electromagnetic frequency (EMF) brain stimulation fully coded, pulsating electromagnetic signals can be sent to the brain, causing the desired voice and visual effects to be experienced by the target. This is a form of electronic warfare. U.S. astronauts were implanted before they were sent into space so their thoughts could be followed and all their emotions could be registered 24 hours a day.

The mass media has not reported that an implanted person's privacy vanishes for the rest of his or her life. S/he can be manipulated in many ways. Using different frequencies, the secret controller of this equipment can even change a person's emotional life. S/he can be made aggressive or lethargic. Sexuality can be artificially influenced. Thought signals and subconscious thinking can be read, dreams affected and even induced, all without the knowledge or consent of the implanted person.

This secret technology has been used by military forces in certain NATO countries since the 1980s without civilian and academic populations having heard anything about it. Thus, little information about such invasive mind-control systems is available in professional and academic journals.

The NSA's Signals Intelligence group can remotely monitor information from human brains by decoding the evoked potentials (3.50HZ, 5 milliwatt) emitted by the brain. Prisoner experimentees in both Gothenburg, Sweden and Vienna, Austria have been found to have evident brain lesions. Diminished blood circulation and lack of oxygen in the right temporal frontal lobes result where brain implants are usually operative. A Finnish experimentee experienced brain atrophy and intermittent attacks of unconsciousness due to lack of oxygen.

Targeting people’s brain functions with electromagnetic fields and beams (from helicopters and airplanes, satellites, from parked vans, neighboring houses, telephone poles, electrical appliances, mobile phones, TV, radio, etc.) is part of the radiation problem that should be addressed by democratically elected governments. However, there is currently no interest by any national government to seriously address this issue.

The timeline for integrating nano-microchips inside of vaccines is speculative. It could be just a few years, months or perhaps it is here and we already unaware of their integration within pharmaceuticals. Regardless, due to the many military and political advantages, their implementation is inevitable.

However fraudulent, it was an imperative for world powers and pharmaceutical cartels to promote the effectiveness of vaccinations and enact national pandemic preparedness policies which mandate vaccinations.

In 2005 the World Health Organization (WHO) developed international health regulations that would bind all 194 member countries to pandemic emergency guidelines which could enforce such a mandate. Without these procedures of public health (and propagandized vaccine campaigns) in place, there would be little or no voluntary cooperation from the public to roll up their sleeves and accept the inoculations. Public participation is an essential tool that will soon allow big pharma to inject the most effective surveillence tool ever designed into billions of people.

Although nanotechnology manufacturing is currently available on a global scale, before biotech companies are able to initiate mass production and testing of nano-microchips inside of vaccines, they will likely sell the idea to the public. Through various "health enhancement scenarios" they will encourage participation and publicly announce regulatory approval from the same policies and regulatory agencies they helped create.

By mid-summer of 2009, the WHO and the Center of Disease Control (CDC) effectively hyped a false flu pandemic and convinced the world to submit to H1N1 vaccines. Additional doses of propaganda and possibly a biological event, may equally convince populations to knowingly accept microchips inside of vaccines under the guise of a "greater good" for humanity.

When our brain functions are already connected to supercomputers by means of radio implants and microchips, it will be too late for protest. This threat can be defeated only by educating the public, using available literature on biotelemetry, nanorobotics and information exchanged at international congresses.

The time to act is now!

Original article (with videos and audio files)



Add this page to Social Bookmarking websites
Reddit! Del.icio.us! Mixx! Free and Open Source Software News Google! Live! Facebook! StumbleUpon! TwitThis Joomla Free PHP

Thank you for helping spreading the news!
Comments
Add New Search RSS
Mark of the beast technology...
Richard Rice 2009-10-30 17:28:26

The goal is to enforce Sunday laws. There is an increase in knowledge in these last days. More and more people are waking up to the illuminati (aka Jesuit)-run New World Order. Wolves in sheep's clothing. They seek to destroy the protestant nations (or what is left of them - U.S.A. being the greatest remaining) by whatever means necessary. It's always by design and diversion. Swine Flu and bank bailouts all originated with them. They are the most intelligent dedicated group of men on the planet but they're working for the wrong lord. Jesus is Lord of all and everyone (Jesuit and protestant alike) needs to repent. God is no respecter of persons. We are all sinners in need of salvation. The enemy is fallen lucifer (or Satan) who wants all peoples to bow and worhsip him as the man god (or pope). Trust in the Lord and He will deliver you in these last days. Praise the Lord and take your vitamin D.
Henk 2009-10-31 06:30:34

Jesus never existed, it's people ignorant of basic history, as you display, that make it possible for governments to control the masses.

Read the bible, read the history of the bible, read what was left out by the bible and learn about the many fraudulent passages in the New Testament.

This supposed new world order is not super smart, it's the majority of the Western world that remains willingly dumb.

People who believe in Jesus, Santa, Mohammed, deserve to be frauded out of there freedom, since they gave it up already anyway.

Just my two cents.

Jesus is Lord
Thomas Jettel 2009-10-31 12:15:54

The Lord Jesus Christ is the only hope for this world. He is risen from the dead. I can testify. He changed my life, gave me hope and peace - and security of salvation - for eternity. I have been living with him for more than 30 years. He daily leads me. He has never disappointed me. He will come on the last day - and set up his kingdom in his New and Eternal World. And he will destroy all those who destroyed the earth - the people of the earth - and he will punish them - and all those who neglected him and denied his Lordship.
God bless you!

Thomas
Who Controls Nanotechnology?
Life 2009-10-30 17:43:44

Hi All.

I reported on this subject in September, here is what I found :

Chatham House…RIIA…Nanotechnology…The Flu Vaccination :

http://www.lifeinthemixtalk.com/?p=2796


Nano Particles Used In Untested H1N1 Swine Flu Vaccines :

http://www.lifeinthemixtalk.com/?p=2864

Microchipped Vaccinations Hitachi Making A Comeback For All The Wrong Reasons :

http://www.lifeinthemixtalk.com/?p=2864


Very naughty indeed....
zbigniew_brzezinski 2009-10-30 19:33:35

http://www.shatteringdenial.com/images/06/zbigniew_brzezinski.jpg

"Listen, I have 2 nanochips in my body and I feel fantastic..."


pinqui 2009-10-30 22:08:50

He LOOKS fantastic TOO! Where do I sign up? "Just get yer damn vaccine folks!"
"Does the Vaccine Matter?" (Excerpt) - The Atlan
AnoniCanuck 2009-10-30 19:34:46

"Does the Vaccine Matter?" (Excerpt)

The Atlantic (November 2009)

"...Flu comes and goes with the seasons, and often it does not kill people directly, but rather contributes to death by making the body more susceptible to secondary infections like pneumonia or bronchitis. For this reason, researchers studying the impact of flu vaccination typically look at deaths from all causes during flu season, and compare the vaccinated and unvaccinated populations.

Such comparisons have shown a dramatic difference in mortality between these two groups: study after study has found that people who get a flu shot in the fall are about half as likely to die that winter—from any cause—as people who do not. Get your flu shot each year, the literature suggests, and you will dramatically reduce your chance of dying during flu season.

Yet in the view of several vaccine skeptics, this claim is suspicious on its face. Influenza causes only a small minority of all deaths in the U.S., even among senior citizens, and even after adding in the deaths to which flu might have contributed indirectly. When researchers from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases included all deaths from illnesses that flu aggravates, like lung disease or chronic heart failure, they found that flu accounts for, at most, 10 percent of winter deaths among the elderly. So how could flu vaccine possibly reduce total deaths by half? Tom Jefferson, a physician based in Rome and the head of the Vaccines Field at the Cochrane Collaboration, a highly respected international network of researchers who appraise medical evidence, says: “For a vaccine to reduce mortality by 50 percent and up to 90 percent in some studies means it has to prevent deaths not just from influenza, but also from falls, fires, heart disease, strokes, and car accidents. That’s not a vaccine, that’s a miracle.”

The estimate of 50 percent mortality reduction is based on “cohort studies,” which compare death rates in large groups, or cohorts, of people who choose to be vaccinated, against death rates in groups who don’t. But people who choose to be vaccinated may differ in many important respects from people who go unvaccinated—and those differences can influence the chance of death during flu season. Education, lifestyle, income, and many other “confounding” factors can come into play, and as a result, cohort studies are notoriously prone to bias. When researchers crunch the numbers, they typically try to factor out variables that could bias the results, but, as Jefferson remarks, “you can adjust for the confounders you know about, not for the ones you don’t,” and researchers can’t always anticipate what factors are likely to be important to whether a patient dies from flu. There is always the chance that they might miss some critical confounder that renders their results entirely wrong.

When Lisa Jackson, a physician and senior investigator with the Group Health Research Center, in Seattle, began wondering aloud to colleagues if maybe something was amiss with the estimate of 50 percent mortality reduction for people who get flu vaccine, the response she got sounded more like doctrine than science. “People told me, ‘No good can come of [asking] this,’” she says. “‘Potentially a lot of bad could happen’ for me professionally by raising any criticism that might dissuade people from getting vaccinated, because of course, ‘We know that vaccine works.’ This was the prevailing wisdom.”

Nonetheless, in 2004, Jackson and three colleagues set out to determine whether the mortality difference between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated might be caused by a phenomenon known as the “healthy user effect.” They hypothesized that on average, people who get vaccinated are simply healthier than those who don’t, and thus less liable to die over the short term. People who don’t get vaccinated may be bedridden or otherwise too sick to go get a shot. They may also be more likely to succumb to flu or any other illness, because they are generally older and sicker. To test their thesis, Jackson and her colleagues combed through eight years of medical data on more than 72,000 people 65 and older. They looked at who got flu shots and who didn’t. Then they examined which group’s members were more likely to die of any cause when it was not flu season.

Jackson’s findings showed that outside of flu season, the baseline risk of death among people who did not get vaccinated was approximately 60 percent higher than among those who did, lending support to the hypothesis that on average, healthy people chose to get the vaccine, while the “frail elderly” didn’t or couldn’t. In fact, the healthy-user effect explained the entire benefit that other researchers were attributing to flu vaccine, suggesting that the vaccine itself might not reduce mortality at all. Jackson’s papers “are beautiful,” says Lone Simonsen, who is a professor of global health at George Washington University, in Washington, D.C., and an internationally recognized expert in influenza and vaccine epidemiology. “They are classic studies in epidemiology, they are so carefully done.”

The results were also so unexpected that many experts simply refused to believe them. Jackson’s papers were turned down for publication in the top-ranked medical journals. One flu expert who reviewed her studies for the Journal of the American Medical Association wrote, “To accept these results would be to say that the earth is flat!” When the papers were finally published in 2006, in the less prominent International Journal of Epidemiology, they were largely ignored by doctors and public-health officials. “The answer I got,” says Jackson, “was not the right answer.”

The history of flu vaccination suggests other reasons to doubt claims that it dramatically reduces mortality. In 2004, for example, vaccine production fell behind, causing a 40 percent drop in immunization rates. Yet mortality did not rise. In addition, vaccine “mismatches” occurred in 1968 and 1997: in both years, the vaccine that had been produced in the summer protected against one set of viruses, but come winter, a different set was circulating. In effect, nobody was vaccinated. Yet death rates from all causes, including flu and the various illnesses it can exacerbate, did not budge. Sumit Majumdar, a physician and researcher at the University of Alberta, in Canada, offers another historical observation: rising rates of vaccination of the elderly over the past two decades have not coincided with a lower overall mortality rate. In 1989, only 15 percent of people over age 65 in the U.S. and Canada were vaccinated against flu. Today, more than 65 percent are immunized. Yet death rates among the elderly during flu season have increased rather than decreased.

Vaccine proponents call Majumdar’s last observation an “ecological fallacy,” because he fails, in their view, to consider changes in the larger environment that could have boosted death rates over the years—even as rising vaccination rates were doing their part to keep mortality in check. The proponents suggest, for instance, that influenza viruses may have become more contagious over time, and thus are infecting greater numbers of elderly people, including some who have been vaccinated. Or maybe the viruses are becoming more lethal. Or maybe the elderly have less immunity to flu than they once did because, say, their diets have changed.

Or maybe vaccine just doesn’t prevent deaths in the elderly. Of course, that’s the one possibility that vaccine adherents won’t consider. Nancy Cox, the CDC’s influenza division chief, says flatly, “The flu vaccine is the best way to protect against flu.” Anthony Fauci, a physician and the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the NIH, where much of the basic science of flu vaccine has been worked out, says, “I have no doubt that it is effective in conferring some degree of protection. To say othe...
(Continued) [b]"Does the Vaccine Matter?" (Excer
AnoniCanuck 2009-10-30 19:38:44

"Does the Vaccine Matter?" (Excerpt) (Continued)

The Atlantic (November 2009)

"Or maybe vaccine just doesn’t prevent deaths in the elderly. Of course, that’s the one possibility that vaccine adherents won’t consider. Nancy Cox, the CDC’s influenza division chief, says flatly, “The flu vaccine is the best way to protect against flu.” Anthony Fauci, a physician and the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the NIH, where much of the basic science of flu vaccine has been worked out, says, “I have no doubt that it is effective in conferring some degree of protection. To say otherwise is a minority view.”

Majumdar says, “We keep coming up against the belief that we’ve reduced mortality by 50 percent,” and when researchers poke holes in the evidence, “people pound the pulpit.”

The most vocal—and undoubtedly most vexing—critic of the gospel of flu vaccine is the Cochrane Collaboration’s Jefferson, who’s also an epidemiologist trained at the famed London School of Tropical Hygiene, and who, in Lisa Jackson’s view, makes other skeptics seem “moderate by comparison.” Among his fellow flu researchers, Jefferson’s outspokenness has made him something of a pariah. At a 2007 meeting on pandemic preparedness at a hotel in Bethesda, Maryland, Jefferson, who’d been invited to speak at the conference, was not greeted by any of the colleagues milling about the lobby. He ate his meals in the hotel restaurant alone, surrounded by scientists chatting amiably at other tables. He shrugs off such treatment. As a medical officer working for the United Nations in 1992, during the siege of Sarajevo, he and other peacekeepers were captured and held for more than a month by militiamen brandishing AK-47s and reeking of alcohol. Professional shunning seems trivial by comparison, he says.

“Tom Jefferson has taken a lot of heat just for saying, ‘Here’s the evidence: it’s not very good,’” says Majumdar. “The reaction has been so dogmatic and even hysterical that you’d think he was advocating stealing babies.” Yet while other flu researchers may not like what Jefferson has to say, they cannot ignore the fact that he knows the flu-vaccine literature better than anyone else on the planet. He leads an international team of researchers who have combed through hundreds of flu-vaccine studies. The vast majority of the studies were deeply flawed, says Jefferson. “Rubbish is not a scientific term, but I think it’s the term that applies.” Only four studies were properly designed to pin down the effectiveness of flu vaccine, he says, and two of those showed that it might be effective in certain groups of patients, such as school-age children with no underlying health issues like asthma. The other two showed equivocal results or no benefit.

Flu researchers have been fooled into thinking vaccine is more effective than the data suggest, in part, says Jefferson, by the imprecision of the statistics. The only way to know if someone has the flu—as opposed to influenza-like illness—is by putting a Q-tip into the patient’s throat or nose and running a test, which simply isn’t done that often. Likewise, nobody really has a handle on how many of the deaths that are blamed on flu were actually caused by a flu virus, because few are confirmed by a laboratory. “I used to be a family physician,” says Jefferson. “I’ve never seen a patient come to my office with H1N1 written on his forehead. When an old person dies of respiratory failure after an influenza-like illness, they nearly always get coded as influenza.”

There’s one other way flu researchers may be fooled into thinking flu vaccine is effective, Jefferson says. All vaccines work by delivering a dose of killed or weakened virus or bacteria, which provokes the immune system into producing antibodies. When the person is subsequently exposed to the real thing, the body is already prepared to repel the bug completely or to get rid of it after a mild illness. Flu researchers often use antibody response as a way of gauging the effectiveness of vaccine, on the assumption that levels of antibodies in the blood of people who have been vaccinated are a good predictor—although an imperfect one—of how well they can ward off the infection.

There’s some merit to this reasoning. Unfortunately, the very people who most need protection from the flu also have immune systems that are least likely to respond to vaccine. Studies show that young, healthy people mount a glorious immune response to seasonal flu vaccine, and their response reduces their chances of getting the flu and may lessen the severity of symptoms if they do get it. But they aren’t the people who die from seasonal flu. By contrast, the elderly, particularly those over age70, don’t have a good immune response to vaccine—and they’re the ones who account for most flu deaths. (Infants with severe disabilities, such as leukemia and congenital lung disease, and people who are immune-compromised—from AIDS, or diabetes, or cancer treatment—make up the rest. As of August8, only 36 deaths from swine flu had been confirmed among children in the U.S., and the overwhelming majority of those children had multiple, severe health disorders.)

In Jefferson’s view, this raises a troubling conundrum: Is vaccine necessary for those in whom it is effective, namely the young and healthy? Conversely, is it effective in those for whom it seems to be necessary, namely the old, the very young, and the infirm? These questions have led to the most controversial aspect of Jefferson’s work: his call for placebo-controlled trials, studies that would randomly give half the test subjects vaccine and the other half a dummy shot, or placebo. Only such large, well-constructed, randomized trials can show with any precision how effective vaccine really is, and for whom.

In the flu-vaccine world, Jefferson’s call for placebo-controlled studies is considered so radical that even some of his fellow skeptics oppose it. Majumdar, the Ottawa researcher, says he believes that evidence of a benefit among children is established and that public-health officials should try to protect seniors by immunizing children, health-care workers, and other people around them, and thus reduce the spread of the flu. Lone Simonsen explains the prevailing view: “It is considered unethical to do trials in populations that are recommended to have vaccine,” a stance that is shared by everybody from the CDC’s Nancy Cox to Anthony Fauci at the NIH. They feel strongly that vaccine has been shown to be effective and that a sham vaccine would put test subjects at unnecessary risk of getting a serious case of the flu. In a phone interview, Fauci at first voiced the opinion that a placebo trial in the elderly might be acceptable, but he called back later to retract his comment, saying that such a trial “would be unethical.” Jefferson finds this view almost exactly backward: “What do you do when you have uncertainty? You test,” he says. “We have built huge, population-based policies on the flimsiest of scientific evidence. The most unethical thing to do is to carry on business as usual.”..."

Read the rest of this outstanding article here: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200911/brownlee-h1n1
Get Rid 2009-10-30 22:17:25

Get rid of the photographs.
IP
Country
Induviduals.
Get Rid 2009-10-30 22:18:22

it's your choice.
Children love nano-chips-vaccinations
Northpal 2009-10-30 22:25:09

http://photos2.meetupstatic.com/photos/member/1/2/f/c/highres_80448...
Funny 2009-10-30 22:30:09

keep it up.
Funny 2009-10-30 22:31:16

btw, you got owned.
Muppet 2009-10-30 22:50:15

Twente?
Potter 2009-10-30 22:54:16

Niet te veel hits op deze site he, maakt verd8 :)
Muppet 2009-10-30 23:32:29

without Blitter eh :)
You got 2009-10-30 23:47:04

Owned.
“MEET THE NEED FOR RFID” at RFID Eurasia 2007, Ist
Harish 2009-10-31 01:15:37

Once the nanochips are in place inside the body, you effectively become a part of a automation system. Read the following paper and understand the horrendous implications.

Far Range Transponder Field-physical basis for electrically coupled bidirectional far range transponders
Prof. Dr. Konstantin Meyl


The main subject of the conference presentation will be the wireless system and the practical use of it as a far range transponder (RFID for large distances). Let me explain some expressions as used in the paper.

A "scalar wave" spreads like every wave directed, but it consists of physical particles or formations, which represent for their part scalar sizes. Therefore the name, which is avoided by some critics or is even disparaged, because of the apparent contradiction in the designation, which makes believe the wave is not directional, which does not apply however.

The term "scalar wave" originates from mathematics and is as old as the wave equation itself, which again goes back on the mathematician Laplace. It can be used favourably as generic term for a large group of wave features, e.g. for acoustic waves, gravitational waves or plasma waves.
Seen from the physical characteristics they are longitudinal waves. Contrary to the transverse waves, for example the electromagnetic waves, scalar waves carry and transport energy and impulse. Thus one of the tasks of scalar wave transponders is fulfilled.

The term "transponder" consists of the terms transmitter and responder, describes thus radio devices which receive incoming signals, in order to redirect or answer to them. First there were only active transponders, which are dependent on a power supply from outside. For some time passive systems were developed in addition, whose receiver gets the necessary energy at the same time conveyed by the transmitter wirelessly.



But new areas of application with increased requirements are constantly added apart from the desire for a larger range:
• in telemetry plants rotary sensors are to be supplied with energy (in the car e.g. to control tire pressure).
• also with heat meters the energy should come from a central unit and be spread wirelessly in the whole house to the heating cost meters without the use of batteries
• in airports contents of freight containers are to be seized,without these to having be opened (security checks).
• the forwarding trade wants to examine closed truck charges by transponder technology.
• in the robot and handling technique the wirings are to be replaced by a wireless technology (wear problem).
• portable radio devices, mobile phones, Notebooks and remote controls working without batteries and Accumulators (reduction of the environ-mental impact).


www.k-meyl.de/go/60_Primaerliteratur/Proc_RFID_Eurasia.pdf
illuminati
kirk 2009-10-31 01:18:58

why do they age so well? drinking of human baby blood?
Why are these
Christine 2009-10-31 07:21:23

We know we have people who claim they know how to govern others, but we are seeing they cannot and that those who currently think so are quite insane and in need of mental health care.

This flu vaccine is one example, but the government with all of their new bills they are passing are showing how paranoid these people function in this world and how obsessively controlling their personalities have become.

These are not normal, well adjusted, mentaly stable human beings. Why are they in leadership positions? We need to replace them with mentally sound individuals. They should be stripped of their titles and duties immediately.

These folks, including Obama and all of the other presidents and UN officials, do not qualify to lead, but rather they do qualify to be hospitalized and under a psychiatists care. Any normal person can see this. It's not rocket science!

They need to be rounded up and given the mental health care they need, deprogramming.
i disagree
larry 2009-10-31 23:22:01

the bible leaves out nothing the meanings of manythings are hiden to where in order to uncover it you need the Holy Ghost im so sick of people under minding Christains Because they want to live and learn forever. you dont understand most of the bible cause u dont have the holy Ghost. and we wont be losing our freedom before this system breaks out and gets even worse the True Christains will finaly go to heaven.

so it will only be the sinners that get there freedoms totaly striped sorry to burst ur bubble. u still have time to make it to Heaven unless u like surving Satan with zero benifets. Acts 2:38 Repent be Baptized and Receave the Holy Ghost. O there is only One God that is Jesus

Love Does No Harm
Christine 2009-11-01 00:53:32

You can disagree all you want. You have been grossly misled by whomever taught you those lies. You have not yet learned the truth. The kingdom, heaven, is within you. To sin is to "miss the mark" of perfecton. We all do, some more grossly miss the mark than others. No one is perfect. If you are claiming to be perfect, then you have deceived yourself and are mistaken. God is Love. That is the scriptural definition of God. God = Love. The scriptures are full of the lessons of love and compassion, about God. We are admonished to develop the state of being to be in likeness to God. You haven't put the pieces together yet, but you will. The holy spirit is all about love, the embodiment of love. Love does no harm nor wishes it upon others.
larry 2009-11-01 01:10:24

im sorry i missread ur message i thought you were another atheist trying to disprove God. my apoligies i read the meassege and got the wrong idea and read it again and it click.

Ive had the Holy Ghost for 7yrs active 1very active. I know how God is what he stands for and what He does my family is proff of that.
and actualy everything i said was the truth i searched it and its true I dont just beleave what i hear like most people I do my own research everything I said is ture you can search it yourself those that look for lies will find lies. Pray for God to Open you up and lead u to truth.

nice chating with you take care my friend
B3 2009-11-01 01:18:45

Praise the Lord Jesus Christ, for flesh and blood have not revealed this to you but our Father in Heaven. Our patience is the Commandments of God And the faith of Jesus Christ. God has greatly blessed you Richard Rice. Amen
Mind Control ELF Towers going up worldwide!!!
Anonymous 2009-11-01 11:51:17

http://educate-yourself.org/dc/dclatestonmctowerarrays25may02.shtml
Link for Mind Control ELF or Cell Towers!!!
Anonymous 2009-11-01 11:52:06

http://educate-yourself.org/dc/dclatestonmctowerarrays25may02.shtml
URGENT UNITED KINGDOM
Doctors plan MASS swine flu ja 2009-11-01 22:54:51


Doctors plan mass swine flu jabs for under-18s
Steven Swinford (( Times Online ))

Government advisers are preparing for the mass vaccination of schoolchildren to stop the spread of swine flu.
A committee of scientists advising the Department of Health is expected to recommend that the vaccination of 10 to 18-year-olds begins by the end of the year.
The plans come amid growing concern about the number and severity of infections in children. Figures released last week show that children under the age of 15 account for a fifth of all swine flu hospital admissions. A total of 217 children have been treated in hospital, including 27 who are in critical care.
Overall, the number of new cases in England increased by 50% last week to 78,000.
The government’s vaccination programme, which began last month, is targeting 11m priority patients and frontline health workers. The patients include pregnant women and those with conditions such as asthma and diabetes.
Last month the joint committee on vaccination and immunisation discussed extending the programme to include under-18s, once the priority cases have been vaccinated. If the virus continues to spread at current rates and enough vaccine is available, it will be extended to schoolchildren.
Professor Peter Openshaw, an expert on respiratory infections at Imperial College London and a member of the committee, said: “As increasing quantities of vaccine become available, then the initial recommendations will be extended [to children and teenagers].
“It depends on the emerging circumstances such as the efficacy and availability of the vaccine and the spread of the virus.”
Scientists believe the virus is more severe in children because they have not been exposed to related outbreaks. The elderly, by contrast, have not suffered as badly.
The United States is already offering immunisation to everyone aged from six months to 24 years, in addition to at-risk groups.
In Britain, vaccination is likely to focus initially on children aged 10 to 18. The committee is waiting for further research to be completed about the effectiveness of the vaccine in younger children.
The move to vaccinate children was backed by the Royal College of General Practitioners.
Steve Field, its chairman, said: “If there is enough vaccine available, it would be sensible to use it for children, who are the most vulnerable. They have had no previous immunisation or exposure to the virus.”
A spokesman for the Department of Health said: “The vaccination programme is in its early stages, allowing time to plan for which groups will be offered the vaccine next. A decision has not yet been made.”


THE LINK Times Online
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/health/Swine_flu/article68981 87.ece
Andrea 2009-11-03 20:09:23

The fool says in his heart, "There is no God". Psalm 14.1
666
paul 2009-11-07 18:02:41

This satanic government will soon deploy military forces and depopulae the world....The elect must reject the "mark of the beast".

prepare
God do exist period!
Raz 2009-11-10 03:28:34

God do exist period! for people dont believe in God. You are not one of childrens of God. Go ahead try to pray u will get answer from God in mystery way.
Write comment
Name:
Email:
 
Website:
Title:
UBBCode:
[b] [i] [u] [url] [quote] [code] [img] 
 
Please input the anti-spam code that you can read in the image.
We have 363 guests online

Login Form