IF YOU READ NOTHING ELSE ON THIS WEBSITE READ THIS ARTICLE:
THE IMPACT OF VACCINES ON MORTALITY DECLINE SINCE 1900—ACCORDING TO PUBLISHED SCIENCE BY J.B. HANDLEY
I consider it so important I’m going to give you the headlines and links to the resources mentioned. The reason I consider it so important is
1 it reveals clearly the TOTALLY FRAUDULENT foundations upon which the entire vaccine industry is founded and
2 it highlights the absolutely critical issue of NSE’s – NON SPECIFIC EFFECTS
The conclusion from this article can only be:
FAR FROM PREVENTING DISEASE VACCINES CAUSE DISEASE
The evidence is there for all to see who have a will to look at it
The article opens:
Since 1900, there’s been a 74% decline in mortality rates in developed countries, largely due to a marked decrease in deaths from infectious diseases. How much of this decline was due to vaccines? The history and data provide clear answers that matter greatly in today’s vitriolic debate about vaccines.
It draws attention to the following FACTS:
IN 1970
‘Standing before his colleagues on October 19, 1970, Harvard’s Dr. Edward H. Kass gave a speech to the annual meeting of the Infectious Diseases Society of America that would likely get him run out of this same profession today
Dr. Kass took his infectious disease colleagues to task, warning them that drawing false conclusions about WHY mortality rates had declined so much could cause them to focus on the wrong things. As he explained:
“…we had accepted some half truths and had stopped searching for the whole truths. The principal half truths were that medical research had stamped out the great killers of the past —tuberculosis, diphtheria, pneumonia, puerperal sepsis, etc. —and that medical research and our superior system of medical care were major factors extending life expectancy, thus providing the American people with the highest level of health available in the world. That these are half truths is known but is perhaps not as well known as it should be.”
Dr. Kass then shared some eye-opening charts with his colleagues. These charts which can be seen on Kennedy’s website see:
clearly demonstrate that mortality from every one of the diseases that have plagued mankind had dropped by more than 90% BEFORE the introduction of vaccines
As Kass pointed out:
“This decline in rates of certain disorders, correlated roughly with socioeconomic circumstances, is merely the most important happening in the history of the health of man, yet we have only the vaguest and most general notions about how it happened and by what mechanisms socioeconomic improvement and decreased rates of certain diseases run in parallel.”
In other words socioeconomic factors - introduction of universal sanitation, sewage disposal, public hygiene, proper nutrition, clean water, general increase in standard of living was responsible for the precipitous decline in mortality rates before vaccines were ever introduced
Here is the full text of Kass’s speech. Of course it’s only available on the wayback machine and who knows how long that will survive:
https://web.archive.org/web/20210117143943/http://vaccinesafetycommission.org/pdfs/Kass%201971.pdf
As Mr Handley points out
1 Kass never referred to vaccines as “mankind’s greatest invention” or one of the other many hyperbolic ways vaccines are described all the time by vaccine promoters in the press today. Vaccines weren’t responsible for saving “millions of lives” in the United States, as Dr. Kass well knew.
2 In fact, he never gave vaccines much credit AT ALL for the developed world’s dramatic mortality decline.
‘Which makes sense, because none of the data he had would have supported that view. Which made me wonder, “has anyone tried to put the contribution of vaccines to the decline in human mortality in the 20th century in context?” Said differently, is there any data that measures exactly how much impact vaccines had in saving humanity? Yes, indeed there is. Read on.’
& Handley proceeds to:
1977: MCKINLAY & MCKINLAY: THE MOST FAMOUS STUDY YOU’VE NEVER HEARD OF
The title of the Study says it all:
THE QUESTIONABLE CONTRIBUTION OF MEDICAL MEASURES TO THE DECLINE OF MORTALITY IN THE UNITED STATES IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY
AUTHOR(S): JOHN B. MCKINLAY AND SONJA M. MCKINLAY
Source: The Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly. Health and Society, Vol. 55, No. 3 (Summer, 1977), pp. 405-428 Published by: Wiley on behalf of Milbank Memorial Fund Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3349539 Accessed: 14-05-2018 19:22 UTC
Here are some of the major points the paper made:
92.3% OF THE MORTALITY RATE DECLINE HAPPENED BETWEEN 1900 AND 1950 [BEFORE MOST VACCINES EXISTED]
Medical measures “appear to have contributed little to the overall decline in mortality in the United States since about 1900–having in many instances been introduced several decades after a marked decline had already set in and having no detectable influence in most instances.”
The paper makes two points that Handley really wants to highlight, because they are so important. The first one concerns vaccines. They write:
“Even if it were assumed that this change was entirely due to the vaccines, then only about one percent of the decline following interventions for the diseases considered here could be attributed to medical measures. Rather more conservatively, if we attribute some of the subsequent fall in the death rates for pneumonia, influenza, whooping cough, and diphtheria to medical measures, then perhaps 3.5 percent of the fall in the overall death rate can be explained through medical intervention in the major infectious diseases considered here. Indeed, given that it is precisely for these diseases that medicine claims most success in lowering mortality, 3.5 percent probably represents a reasonable upper-limit estimate of the total contribution of medical measures to the decline in mortality in the United States since 1900.”
Handley interprets this as follows:
In plain English: of the total decline in mortality since 1900, that 74% number I keep mentioning, vaccines (and other medical interventions like antibiotics) were responsible for somewhere between 1% and 3.5% of that decline. Said differently, at least 96.5% of the decline (and likely more than that since their numbers included ALL medical interventions, not ONLY vaccines) had nothing to do with vaccines.
And Handley points out:
You don’t get to say you saved humanity if, at most, you were responsible for 3.5% of the decline in mortality rates since 1900 (and probably closer to 1%).
Handley continues:
‘And then the McKinlay’s wrote something that made me laugh out loud, because it’s the thing we are seeing every day in today’s vaccine-hyped world’:
“It is not uncommon today for biotechnological knowledge and specific medical interventions to be invoked as the major reason for most of the modern (twentieth century) decline in mortality. Responsibility for this decline is often claimed by, or ascribed to, the present-day major beneficiaries of this prevailing explanation.”
NEXT:
2000: THE CDC PUTS THE FINAL NAIL IN THE COFFIN
‘Published in September 2000 in the journal Pediatrics and titled, “Annual Summary of Vital Statistics: Trends in the Health of Americans During the 20th Century,” epidemiologists from both Johns Hopkins and the Centers for Disease Control reaffirmed what we had already learned from McKinlay and McKinlay:
“Thus vaccination does not account for the impressive declines in mortality seen in the first half of the century…nearly 90% of the decline in infectious disease mortality among US children occurred before 1940, when few antibiotics or vaccine were available.”
The study went on to explain the things that actually were responsible for a massive decline in mortality:
“water treatment, food safety, organized solid waste disposal, and public education about hygienic practices.” Also, “improvements in crowding in US cities” played a major role. Clean water. Safe food. Nutrition. Plumbing. Hygiene. These were the primary reasons mortality declined so precipitously. At least according to the data and published science.’
In light of all of which to claim that vaccines have been the saviour of Mankind can be seen to be a little wide of the mark....
Handley observes the vaccine injury rate is about 2% of people who receive vaccines, according to a study commissioned and paid for by the CDC when they actually automated the tracking of vaccine injuries which can be found here:
Handley observes:
The “one in a million” figure thrown around by vaccine promoters is simply an unsupportable lie. 2% of 1 million = 20,000
NEXT
Handley draws attention to the fact that the prevalence of disease in Africa and Third World countries generally must surely have something to do with the fact that living conditions for the vast majority of citizens in those countries is comparable with the living conditions that prevailed in the West prior to the introduction of proper sanitation and public health measures – NOT TO AN ABSENCE OF VACCINES
And indeed there is ample evidence that vaccines have only EXACERBATED the prevalence of disease in the Third World. See WHY VACCINES ARE BAD FOR YOUR HEALTH on this website
Handley draws attention to the work of Peter Aaby:
Published in the peer-reviewed journal EBioMedicine in 2017, the study is titled:
“The Introduction of Diphtheria-Tetanus-Pertussis and Oral Polio Vaccine Among Young Infants in an Urban African Community: A Natural Experiment.”
See https://www.thelancet.com/journals/ebiom/article/PIIS2352-3964(17)30046-4/fulltext
Researchers from the Research Center for Vitamins and Vaccines, Statens Serum Institut (Denmark), and Bandim Health Project looked closely at data from the West African nation of Guinea-Bissau. Aaby and his associates have closely studied the concept of NSEs, “nonspecific effects” of vaccines.
Aaby had previously assumed NSE’s to be positive. His experience in Guinea-Bissau with the DTP vaccine made him realise that NSE’s could be positively harmful. He realised the vaccines could well be making a child more susceptible to other infections. The team found that the data for African children who had been vaccinated with the DTP vaccine:
“was associated with 5-fold higher mortality than being unvaccinated. No prospective study has shown beneficial survival effects of DTP. . . . DTP is the most widely used vaccine. . . . All currently available evidence suggests that DTP vaccine may kill more children from other causes than it saves from diphtheria, tetanus, or pertussis. Though a vaccine protects children against the target disease, it may simultaneously increase susceptibility to unrelated infections.”
This is not just the case with the DTP vaccine
NEXT
Handley quotes from Archie Kalokerinos’ book EVERY SECOND CHILD:
“At first it was just a simple clinical observation. I observed that many infants, after they received routine vaccines like tetanus, diphtheria, polio, whooping cough or whatever, became ill. Some became extremely ill, and in fact some died. It was an observation, it was not a theory. So my first reaction was to look at the reasons why this happened. Of course I found it was more likely to happen in infants who were ill at the time of receiving a vaccine, or infants who had been ill recently, or infants who were incubating an infection. Of course in the early stages of incubation there is no way whatsoever that anyone can detect the disease. They turn up later on. Furthermore, some of the reactions to the vaccines were not those that were listed in the standard literature.
They were very strange reactions indeed. A third observation was that with some of these reactions which normally resulted in death I found that I could reverse them by giving large amounts of vitamin C intramuscularly or intravenously. One would have expected, of course, that the authorities would take an interest in these observations that resulted in a dramatic drop in the death rate of infants in the area under my control, a very dramatic drop. But instead of taking an interest their reaction was one of extreme hostility. This forced me to look into the question of vaccination further, and the further I looked into it the more shocked I became. I found that the whole vaccine business was indeed a gigantic hoax. Most doctors are convinced that they are useful, but if you look at the proper statistics and study the instance of these diseases you will realise that this is not so.”
Handley continues:
Dr Kalokerinos also said something in 1995 that it appears Dr. Aaby’s study was able to corroborate in 2017:
“AND IF YOU WANT TO SEE WHAT HARM VACCINES DO, DON’T COME TO AUSTRALIA OR NEW ZEALAND OR ANY PLACE, GO TO AFRICA AND YOU WILL SEE IT THERE.”
‘We actually knew the truth in the early 1900s, even before the rapid decline in mortality. Well ahead of his time, Englishman John Thomas Biggs was the sanitary engineer for his town of Leicester and had to actively respond to outbreaks of smallpox. He quickly learned that the public health outcomes from sanitation vastly outweighed the impact of vaccination (where he saw dramatic vaccine injury and ineffectiveness). He wrote a definitive work in 1912, Leicester: Sanitation versus Vaccination. More than one hundred years ago, Mr. Biggs discovered what the CDC reaffirmed in 2000: Nothing protects from infectious disease like proper sanitation. He explained:
“Leicester has furnished, both by precept and example, irrefutable proof of the capability and influence of Sanitation, not only in combating and controlling, but also in practically banishing infectious diseases from its midst. . . . A town newly planned on the most up-to-date principles of space and air, and adopting the “Leicester Method” of Sanitation, could bid defiance not to small-pox only, but to other infectious, if not to nearly all zymotic, diseases.”’
And Handley concludes with a graph demonstrating that in 1985 before the notorious 1986 Act of Congress in America absolving pharmaceutical companies from all liability should citizens be injured by vaccines when the schedule was a fraction of what it is now, 99.999% of the population survived all the diseases they have since been compelled to be vaccinated against.
Handley observes:
VACCINES DIDN’T SAVE HUMANITY. THEIR IMPACT WAS SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 1-3.5% OF THE TOTAL DECLINE IN MORTALITY RATES. IMPROVEMENT IN SANITATION AND STANDARDS OF LIVING REALLY DID (NUTRITION, LIVING CONDITIONS, ETC.).
READ THIS ARTICLE, STUDY THE GRAPHS AND MAKE YOUR OWN MIND UP
SEE:
Not only have vaccines had virtually zero impact on mortality rates they have contributed to an explosion of disease conditions, principally AUTO IMMUNE DISEASES, which can all be classified as Peter Aaby has identified as NSE’s NON SPECIFIC EFFECTS.
I would submit we are witnessing an explosion of NSE’s to the COVID Vaccines. You receive your COVID vaccine. Ten days later you suffer a heart attack or stroke or other neurological collapse. NO CONNECTION. Doctor, Nurses and Pharmaceutical companies, Governments ALL ABSOLVED.