Professor Owen Wolkowitz: The Biology Of Depression — The Affects Of Stress

While it is clear that stress can make depression worse, it’s never been clear why this is. Professor Owen Wolkowitz, a professor of psychiatry at University California San Francisco, explores the biological connection between stress and depression.

Mental health, managing, and living with depression, is an area of very personal interest to me. Although I have not, so far, made it a focus of my published writing, I have never hidden the fact that I have had, and still do have, to deal with depression. I am pleased to find that Dr Wolkowitz, is a contributing author to, Natural Medications for Psychiatric Disorders: Considering the Alternatives. He is well known, and widely respected as an author on numerous topics related to mental health, psychiatry, endocrinology, and pharmacology.

I am grateful to University of California TV for this video.

Training The Immune System To Naturally Fight Cancer Is Not New

Cancer is a devastating disease with roots in genetics, diet, environmental surroundings and sometimes what some see as random chaos. But another villain may also be at the helm when it comes to spreading cancer: the very ones who claim to be preventing it. Chemotherapy is a harsh treatment designed to kill both good and bad cancer cells. Extremely high cancer return percentages have led many to believe that the chemotherapy treatments spawn more cancer. Women with breast cancer commonly die from brain tumors. Were they predisposed through genetics or is chemotherapy tainted? That might be rhetorical.

The idea and concept behind chemotherapy are somewhat astounding. In all the years that it has been around, how have we had nothing else in the way of evolution? The only way to treat cancer is by destroying all our cells? Natural, holistic therapies have long been buried by large pharmaceutical companies with an interest in cancer revenue. When all things are considered, we can see why there hasn’t been much in the way of evolution.

Well, in some ways, there has been evolution. Jimmy Carter cured advanced melanoma using what is termed as, immunotherapy. With immunotherapy, the immune system is boosted in order to fight the cancer cells which wreak havoc all throughout our body and organs. Carter curing his cancer this was was, of course, a big deal. But then again, it really wasn’t. Why wasn’t it? Because publicity for logical cancer cures just don’t exist. And secondly, it has actually been around for years.

Before we get into all of that, however, let’s allow our gut instincts a moment to do its own work: Think and conclude. My intuition tells me that fighting cancer by powering up the immune system makes all the sense in the world. I’m not a doctor, but I am sure that strengthening an army with more weapons helps them defeat an enemy invader. And that’s what cancer is – an enemy invader. The current accepted, and costly method, of chemotherapy, destroys the body. It beats down the immune system, which is why patients on chemo are assigned immune boosting drugs. Does it make sense to decimate our immune system when fighting a disease? A radical might think chemo is just keeping cancer treatments in business. A radical, I said, with a smile.

In 1890, a doctor named William Coley was the first to deploy immunotherapy (a good 135 years before Jimmy Carter ever found his melanoma cure in it). Coley would try to solve a woman’s cancer first with amputation. But that failed attempt led him down a more logical, more reasonable alternative path. This was many years before chemo or radiation, so Coley had no alliances working against his seeking a greater good. The patient he performed an amputation on led him down a road to find a better solution. A more logical and practical way to cure what ails us. And so he did. An article on today’s NPR details the life, the tragedy, the events which shaped Coley’s exploration into a new frontier. And it is a mind-blowingly outstanding read.

So in the winter of 1891, William Coley the surgeon became William Coley the detective. He headed for the tenements of the Lower East Side of Manhattan where the German immigrant community lived. He knocked on door after door asking for a man named Fred Stein who had a distinctive scar across his neck. After several weeks of searching, Coley found him alive and cancer-free.

So why did Stein’s cancer go away and stay away after he got a bacterial infection? Coley speculated that the strep infection had reversed the cancer. and wondered what would happen if he tried to reproduce the effect by deliberately injecting cancer patients with bacteria.

William Coley

Coley connecting the immune system’s boost mode, if you will, to a cure for cancer, is groundbreaking, but also subjugated, material. With the exception of Carter, we rarely hear anything relating a boosted, more powerful immune system to curing cancer. We live in a society which has led us to believe that chemotherapy is the only option. In fact, we often call it a cure, even though the logic of the numbers doesn’t really add up.

TruthKings

Read The Full Article

Real Truth Behind Vaccines: The Full Documentary

Real Truth Behind Vaccines – Full HD Documentary — A collection of many documentaries such as: Shots In The Dark; Silence On Vaccines; The Greater Good; Vaccination — The Hidden Truth; Vaccine And Overdose.

Nova

Do vaccinations cause more childhood diseases than they prevent? If you have small children in your family, you owe it to them to become aware of the science, truth, and deception, which surrounds the parasitical industry and it’s love affair with vaccinations.

Thanks to Nova/PBS.

Big Sugar — Sweet, White And Deadly By Brian McKenna

The documentary about Big Sugar, from it’s early days with ties to slavery to modern times with it’s detrimental effects on the everglades and political ties. This is both part 1 and part 2. Written & Directed by: Brian McKenna, and produced by: Galafilm in 2005.

Raising Cane – A History of Big Sugar In South Florida

6,000 years ago, the Everglades were created when a receding ocean revealed a bare limestone plain that covered south Florida. Fed by heavy rainfall, subtropical plants made their home on the low nutrient soil. Rain falling across central Florida made its way to Lake Okeechobee, which frequently overflowed its southern boundaries, creating a slow moving ‘river of grass’ that once covered most of present-day Dade and Broward counties as well as the southern part of the state. As this ‘river’ slowly made its way towards Florida Bay, impurities were flushed from the water and Florida’s aquifers (large, underground limestone caves filled with fresh water) were replenished. Plants and animals thrived in this very unique ecosystem for thousands of years. Then the white man came…

The saga that is the tale of Florida’s sugar industry and its effect on the local environment is one of greed and power, of farmers and politically savvy wealthy foreigners, of bribes and Huge cattails clog the Everglade’s shady deals, all wrapped in the southern pride of the tiny town of Clewiston. It reads like the script to a Hollywood movie with no one, Democrat or Republican, being spared from ensnarement in the decade’s long legacy of abuse. Its rippling effects reach residents of both coasts, from Ft. Myers to Jensen Beach, but is primary victims remain the non-human residents of Lake Okeechobee and the long-suffering Everglades.

Of the four primary sugar-producing states, Florida is number one, accounting for half of all sugarcane acreage and generating between $1.3 and $1.6 billion in total income and over 18,000 full-time jobs. The two primary players, US Sugar and Florida Crystals, each control around 40% of Florida’s industry. But it was not always this way.

In 1920 the US government, pushed by Florida lawmakers, began ‘reclaiming’ the Everglades by dredging and building canals that drained the swamp just south of the lake. This caused Florida’s coastal population to explode and brought former General Motors magnate Charles Stewart Mott, an investor who founded U.S. Sugar in 1931. But sugar cane simply does not grow well in Florida’s climate, even after drainage and massive applications of fertilizers like phosphorus and nitrogen. As one scientist puts it “Paying lavish subsidies to produce sugar in Florida makes as much sense as creating a federal subsidy program to grow bananas in Massachusetts”. But pay the federal government does, beginning with the Sugar Act of 1934, subsidies to the tune of $180 million a year which costs the American consumer some $1.4 billion a year in higher costs for the sweet stuff.

Even with government help, however, Florida’s sugar industry remained tiny until 1959 and the Cuban Revolution. Almost overnight, all Cuban sugar was embargoed and U.S trade officials made up for the loss by offering more incentives. The Army Corps of Engineers drained even more of the Everglades, more cane was planted, and sugar began to take over south Florida, complete with politicians and the town of Clewiston wrapped around its sweet little finger. The Cuban Revolution also brought the Fanjuls.

Alfonso Fanjul was heir to the Gomez-Mena sugar empire in Cuba when Castro took power. Forced to flee, they arrived in Fl orida just as the Corps were draining more land. He and his fellow exiles bought a farm on existing land and began to expand. Today, his sons, Alfy and Pepe are the largest sugar growers in the state, with 180,000 acres. But there’s more. Even with the expansion of Florida’s sugar industry, the country still needed more sugar. The U.S. government, to protect domestic growers, assigns quotas to sugar-producing nations, the largest of which goes to the Dominican Republic. In a move that would make any hard driven capitalist proud, in 1985 the Fanjuls bought up a rival’s holdings there, allowing them to produce sugar on the cheap and making them the largest exporter of Dominican sugar. All of this after complaining about cheap labor being exploited by foreign markets.

Today, the Fanjuls are political masterminds, pouring money into both the Democrats’ and Republicans’ pockets, flying officials around in company jets, even hosting fundraisers for both parties at their posh Dominican resort, Casa de Campo. All this while snubbing everyone else, especially the press and their own workers. Their strategy is so outrageous that they have been targets for everyone from 60 Minutes to Hollywood, who presented them as villains in the 1996 movie, Striptease (based on a book of the same name by Miami born author, Carl Hiassen). But, as based on their some $500 million fortune and rank among the richest Americans (which, technically, they aren’t) it is a strategy that works.

US Sugar – their biggest rivals – meanwhile, take a different approach, virtually wrapping themselves in the American flag with their ‘down-home farmer’ image. They invite the media to every major event and woo them with sticky sweet southern hospitality. Nowhere on earth is this more evident than the town of Clewiston, a village of 6,348 residents on a narrow crescent of drained swampland within sight of Lake Okeechobee’s southern levee. In this deeply religious town, one will find monuments to Florida’s sugar history such as Sugarland Highway, Sugar Industry Appreciation Week, the Sugar Festival, the ‘Miss Sugar’ Beauty Pageant, the Taste of Sugar Country Dessert Contest and, so the black section of town can join the fun, a ‘Miss Brown Sugar’ contest.

All of this farming and fertilizing and draining were having disastrous effects on both Lake Okeechobee and the Everglades, however. The huge system of pumps, dikes and levees that the Army Corps of Engineers used to create the Everglades Agricultural Area (EAA) keeps what was once the northern part of the Everglades dry for farming. Below it, to serve as a water source for the 5 million people living on Florida’s southeast coast, lays the million-acre reservoirs known as Water Conservation Areas (the once middle part of the swamp) which is bordered by a massive north-south levee to keep the coast swamp-free. The only part of the Everglades allowed to remain natural was the southern part, created in 1947 as the Everglades National Park. In the wet summer months, excess water that would have flooded Lake Okeechobee and the EAA is drained away, some to the Water Conservation Areas (still a swamp) where it floods and drowns the wildlife there. The rest is pumped into canals connected to both the Caloosahatchee and St. Lucie rivers, sending several hundred billion gallons a year of phosphorous laden fresh water to the saltwater estuaries at the mouths of both rivers. This pollution wrecks havoc with the delicate ecosystems there, causing massive algae blooms that kill fish, oysters, crabs and tourism. Meanwhile, the Everglades National Park receives virtually no water except what is dumped there, the polluted runoff from the farms.

For many years, the sugar industry was allowed to dump its excess water wherever it wanted, either by reverse-pumping into Lake Okeechobee or allowing it to runoff into the Everglades. This water is laden with as much as 500 parts per billion of phosphorous which, when mixed into the historically low-nutrient water of the Everglades, causes native plants to die off and cattails (which love phosphorous) to grow so thickly that wading birds have no place to land and nothing to eat. In a process known as ‘eutrophication’, these plants also suck all the oxygen out of the water, killing fish. In Lake O, which is 730 square miles in size but only nine feet deep, as much as three feet of muck now covers the bottom causing one Corps official to declare it a ‘chocolate mess’. A microbiologist from Florida International University claims that a maximum of 10 parts per billion of phosphorous is a natural level.

This went on unchecked until 1988 when a young U.S. Attorney named Dexter Lehtinen, fresh from indicting Manuel Noriega, sued Florida to force it to stop big sugar from polluting the Everglades. The sugar industry responded with both guns blazing. The devil was indeed loose in south Florida.

After failing both to get the suit dismissed and discredit Lehtinen’s star expert, big sugar poured millions of dollars into the 1992 presidential campaigns. The Fanjul brothers, traditionally Republicans, split allegiances with Pepe vice-chairing the Bush-Quayle Finance Committee and Alfy hosting a $120,000 fund-raiser and serving as co-chairman for Bill Clinton’s Florida campaign. When Clinton got elected, Alfy Fanjul met with Clinton’s new interior secretary, Bruce Babbitt, and persuaded him to turn the Everglades lawsuit mess back over to the state. Now big sugar began an all-out blitzkrieg on Florida, complete with an all-star lobbying team and big money media campaign to convince voters the phosphorous problem was overblown along with thinly veiled threats that the EAA would be sold to developers if sugar was forced out.

Viola! The Everglades Forever Act, a cleanup bill so slanted in favor of big sugar (who pretty much wrote it) that leading state environmentalists refused to have their names associated with it, was signed into law by Governor Lawton Chiles in 1994. This law capped industry cleanup costs at $320 million and saddled taxpayers with the rest (some $700 million). It also set the cleanup deadline at 2003, at which point state officials, not federal scientists, would determine the allowable phosphorous level. “The Clinton Administration delivers” crowed a jubilant Alfy Fanjul. Other plans attempting to undo some of what has been done have met with similar fates.

In 1995, Republican candidates Richard Luger and Bob Dole, looking to get Florida back for the 1996 election, proposed a grower’s tax to help fund Everglades cleanup. To big sugar’s dismay, the Clinton Administration joined in, sending Al Gore to Florida promising a ‘polluter’s tax’ and, horror of horrors, to convert 100,000 acres of sugar farms back into swamp (to restore water flow from Lake Okeechobee). This led to the infamous phone call made to President Clinton on February 19, 1996 – interrupting an emotional meeting with Monica Lewinsky – in which Alfy Fanjul yelled at a sitting President. Though the White House promptly dropped the plan, thanks to a group called Save Our Everglades the tax appeared on the state ballot in 1996. This group had $13 million in funds which they used to campaign on the common sense notion that a heavily subsidized industry could afford a penny a pound tax to help fix the mess they had created.

With an astonishing $23 million in PAC money, big sugar again went to war, unleashing a $5.2 million media blitz calling the initiative ‘radical environmental extremism’ that would cost taxpayers money and jobs. They brought in Jesse Jackson to convince voters the tax was a ‘showdown between alligators and people’. They gave ‘informational tours’ to seniors, complete with a free lunch and bus ride to the cane fields. But the coup de grace was when they resorted to just plain lying, telling voters this would raise their property taxes (the tax applied only to sugar growers within the EAA). In what a Fort Lauderdale Sun Sentinel editorial called “a triumph of disinformation” the tax was defeated by a landslide.

There was also the Farm Bill of 1995 that should have, by all accounts, finally put an end to the sugar subsidy. A newly Republican Congress decided to target farm subsidies, which they considered ‘corporate welfare’. Public opinion about big sugar had swayed to anger over the environment. In May of 1995, Republican Dan Miller (from a non-sugar district in Florida) and Democrat Schumer from New York persuaded forty-seven Democrats and seventy-one Republicans to sponsor a phase-out of the sugar program and then added it to the Farm Bill. Big Sugar responded with $2 million and the usual P.R. blitz, complete with bogus reports about the price spikes of 1974 and 1980 and a deluge of scripted calls to lawmakers claiming the ‘voters’ support of the program, even professing support from churches.

Now that God had entered the picture, Congress freaked. Republican House Agricultural Chair Pat Roberts dropped the Miller-Schumer bill from the Farm Bill and forced a separate vote, which lost by five votes. Voting against the bill were its own co-sponsors. A quote from Republican Senator Larry Craig of Idaho (who received $59,602 from sugar that year) sums it up, “I ain’t no Johnny Cochran, but I can defend the sugar program”.

Big sugar attempted to extract revenge, too: when Miller returned home, he found his office picketed by growers and heard that sugar was offering $500,000 in campaign funding to anyone who would challenge him (he was reelected anyway).

Still, it isn’t all bad. The Everglades Forever Act has enjoyed some success, with phosphorus levels now down to the low 20s in some areas. The feds have joined in too, creating the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP), involving multiple state and federal agencies in what is probably the ‘most complex and expensive environmental restoration program in U.S. history’. But CERP is not without controversy, either. The plan involves storing fresh water in reservoirs that will then be released into the Everglades in an attempt to mimic natural flow and the conversion of 50,000 acres of farmland. However, the reservoirs are to be blasted out of the limestone (which no one knows will work) and scientists claim that the project won’t help the park so much as boost water supplies for existing developments. In 2006, they reported that the Everglades were still ‘starved for water’. Also, President and Governor Bush gave this project to the very entity that destroyed the Everglades in the first place, The Army Corps of Engineers.

CERP has other issues, too. Federal governments’ commitment relies on the state to hold up its end of the bargain by adhering to the terms of the settled lawsuit (Everglades Forever) and clean up the pollution. While progress has been made, phosphorus levels still remain high further north in the Everglades and even the lows are not as low as was promised. So in 2003, despite opposition from both parties, Governor Bush signed a bill pushing the deadline back to 2013. Once again, sugar prevailed, and this on an agreement that they wrote themselves. The feds are not impressed and are threatening to pull out of CERP.

Keri Hendry

Cracker Crumbs

Read The Full Article

Dr Robert Lustig: The Skinny On Obesity


Millions have watched Dr Robert Lustig’s YouTube videos on the role sugar plays in obesity. In this compilation of the popular YouTube series The Skinny On Obesity, Dr Lustig and his University of California colleagues dig deeper into the root causes of the obesity epidemic. Discover why what we eat is as important as how much we eat. Understand the effects of stress on obesity rates, and why some predict that the next generation will die younger than the current one due to obesity and the many health problems it causes.

Thanks to: Professor Robert H Lustig.

Privatisation Of The NHS: Professor Allyson Pollock

The Abolition Of The NHS In England

15 March, 2016

On Friday, the cross party NHS Bill returned to the Commons for its second reading. The Bill was filibustered by the Conservatives, and following only 17 minutes of debate, it was adjourned. The second reading is unlikely to continue.

Most people are probably unaware of what’s happening. But increasingly the market is invading. Virgin now has over 300 NHS contracts, and an active litigation department. They have successfully prevented commissioners in Hull from allowing local GPs to run primary care services, and are facing a legal challenge from the local trust in Kent to their £128 million contract because of concerns about patient and staff safety. Meanwhile Monitor the regulator has now issued 114 private provider licences. The amount spent by local commissioners and trusts on non-NHS providers went up from £6.6 billion in 2009 to £10 billion in 2014. Industry analysts estimate the community services market to be worth £10bn-to £20bn annually. Trade unions have described “a surge in privatisation“.

Nick Clegg said in 2010 that “breaking up the NHS is exactly what you do need to do“. It’s a painful irony that this is one of the more successful things the coalition government achieved. Its 2012 Health and Social Care Act, piloted by Andrew Lansley, abolished the duties of the Secretary of State to provide and secure services in accordance with the Act, and to provide listed health services throughout England. The latter was replaced by a duty on over 200 new clinical commissioning groups to make contracts for those services for persons for whom each CCG is responsible and establishing the NHS Commissioning Board (NHS England). NHS trusts were prospectively abolished, with the intention of them all becoming NHS foundation trusts which can now receive 49% of their income from outside the NHS. “Public health” functions were created as two legal categories split between the Secretary of State and local authorities, and carved out of the NHS. Virtually compulsory contractual tendering for providing NHS services was introduced and Monitor’s role as an economic regulator was extended with functions aimed at preventing anti-competitive practices.

But the rot didn’t begin with Lansley’s Act. Ken Clarke started it in 1990 with his great split. He ended direct management of services by health authorities and created “purchasers” and “providers”, turning hospitals into ‘NHS trusts’ with borrowing powers, and their own finance, human resources and PR departments. New Labour built on that by scaling up the exorbitantly expensive Private Finance Initiative, so that for one hospital built we may be paying for two. Alan Milburn paved the way for foundation trusts, and now runs a very profitable private healthcare consultancy, while Lansley advises Bain & Company, which helps healthcare companies with their strategy.

Politicians pushing laws from which they then benefit corrode the political process, and these laws have wasted billions of pounds, year on year. The purchaser-provider split was introduced to open up the market in health services. Providers compete for patients and service income. Lawyers, accountants and management consultants are needed to administer – and challenge – the market, and they can’t do their jobs without pulling clinicians away from theirs. Quantifying the costs of a market bureaucracy is fraught with difficulty, but the costs of a market bureaucracy are significantly more than the costs of a public bureaucracy. The House of Commons Select Committee in 2010 was “appalled” that the four most senior civil servants in the Department of Health could not tell them the cost of the market.The usually-cited figures for NHS administrative costs are about 5% before the 1980s, and 14% by 2005 – whilst in the US in 2009, about 30% was wasted on unnecessary services, excessive administrative costs, fraud, and other problems. Professor Paton puts the extra cost of the NHS market at about £5 billion.

This sickening state of affairs need not continue, but it will unless Parliament passes a law to stop it. The NHS Bill aims to do this, by restoring the duty to provide and returning the NHS in England to full public ownership, as in Scotland and Wales, based on bottom-up proposals developed by current commissioners, trusts and local authorities with patients, voluntary organisations, trade unionists and academics.

The most common criticism of the Bill from those who can’t see the wood for the trees is that the last thing the NHS needs is another top-down major reorganisation. Nobody wants unnecessary disruption, but massive and expensive fragmentation and disorganisation is currently underway and this is appreciated by many who work in the NHS – hence support for the Bill from Unite and the BMA.

Over 62,000 people have signed a petition urging MPs to turn up in the Commons on Friday and to support the Bill. We wait to see whether they are worthy of our trust.

Professor Allyson Pollock and Peter Roderick

This article also appeared in Huffington Post UK

Read The Full Article

This talk was given at a local TEDx event, produced independently of the TED Conferences. The 1948 Act establishing the NHS gave the Secretary of State for Health the duty to provide universal health care.

The Health and Social Care Act 2012 removes this duty and introduces a market. Allyson Pollock describes why we need to worry.

Professor Allyson Pollock is Professor of Public Health Research & Policy at Queen Mary, University of London. She is one of the UK’s leading medical intellectuals, and undertakes research and teaching intended to assist the realisation of the principles of social justice and public health, with a particular emphasis on health systems research, trade, and pharmaceuticals.

She trained in medicine in Scotland and became a consultant in public health. Among her previous roles she has been director of the Centre for International Public Health Policy at the University of Edinburgh and director of research & development at UCL Hospitals NHS Trust. She is the author of NHS plc and co-author of The New NHS: a guide.

The Health-Care Survivor’s Comment

If you care about the NHS, and the principal of providing health care as a genuine ‘service’, free at the point of use, and available on the basis of need, then this talk, and well referenced article, by Professor Allyson Pollock, should be terrifying, and sobering in equal measure, and it should spur every one of us into action. We must defend what is left of our NHS, and fight to force our government to re-instate those of its founding principals, which have already been destroyed.

PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION

John Serle: Our Shared Condition — Consciousness


American philosopher John Serle has made countless contributions to contemporary thinking about consciousness, language, artificial intelligence and rationality itself. In his early work, he focused on the nature of language and what we are conveying when we speak and how the intention behind what we intend to say can the meaning of words from context to context.

He is best known for his “Chinese Room” thought experiment, which challenges the notion of a truly intelligent artificial intelligence. In it, he imagines a room containing an individual, who speaks only English, working with a set of English instructions to write a series of Chinese characters in order to anonymous communicate with a Chinese speaker outside the room. If that individual follows the instructions carefully, she can effectively fool the Chinese speaker into thinking he’s talking to someone who understands his language. Serle argues that, at the very least, the metaphor raises deep complications as to whether or not one can truly describe convincing simulations of intelligence as intelligent.

He remains of firm believer that subjective experiences are real — even if they don’t always describe things are they really are — and are worth thinking about in objective terms because of it.

In this TEDTalk, Searle lays out the case for studying human consciousness — and systematically shoots down some of the common objections to taking it seriously. As we learn more about the brain processes that cause awareness, accepting that consciousness is a biological phenomenon is an important first step. And no, he says, consciousness is not a massive computer simulation.

Dr Nadine Burke Harris: How Childhood Trauma Affects Health Across A Lifetime

Childhood trauma isn’t something you just get over as you grow up. Paediatrician Dr Nadine Burke Harris explains that the repeated stress of abuse, neglect and parents struggling with mental health or substance abuse issues has real, tangible effects on the development of the brain. This unfolds across a lifetime, to the point where those who’ve experienced high levels of trauma are at triple the risk for heart disease and lung cancer. An impassioned plea for paediatric medicine to confront the prevention and treatment of trauma, head-on.

Notes On Herd Immunity From Dr Andrew Wakefield With Alex Jones

Let’s set out a working definition of what Herd Immunity is at a functional level in the population: Herd Immunity is the presence of adequate immunity within a population against a specific infection that operates to protect those at high risk of serious infection and consequently, reduce morbidity and mortality from that infection.

Now let’s separate out Herd Immunity, comparing what it meant in the pre-vaccine era compared with what it means in the vaccine era, using specific infections as examples.

Measles: Herd Immunity In The Pre-Vaccine Era
  • When measles first enters a population that has not been exposed to measles before, Herd Immunity is zero and there is, initially, a very high morbidity (illness) and mortality.
  • This occurs in large part as a consequence of high dose exposure.
  • High dose exposure occurs because, in the absence of viral immunity, viral replication is unimpeded in the multiple susceptible human reservoirs in which it thrives. High doses of measles virus are transmitted from one person to the next. Added to this, socioeconomic circumstances contribute to high dose exposure. This includes high population density (easy transmission) and poor antiviral defenses (e.g. low vitamins A, D, and C). An example is the ravage of measles in Confederate soldiers amassed in barracks and hospitals in the American Civil War.
  • Over time, as measles becomes endemic (constantly circulating) in a population with typical 2-yearly epidemics, Herd Immunity increases rapidly. Natural exposure leads to long term immunity. Immunity limits viral transmission and opportunities for viral replication. Concomitantly, developed countries have experienced an improvement in nutritional status and consequently antiviral immunity. Dose of exposure falls and a dramatic reduction in morbidity and mortality is observed.
  • As a consequence of natural Herd Immunity, in the developed world measles mortality had fallen by 99.6% before measles vaccines were introduced. A fall in morbidity will have paralleled the fall in mortality (mortality is the extreme of morbidity).

Let us look at an example of how natural Herd Immunity operated to provide age-appropriate immunity.

  • Infants less than one year of age have a limited ability to generate adequate immunity and are susceptible to serious measles infection.
  • In the pre-vaccine era mothers conferred good passive immunity on their infants by transplacental and breast milk transfer.
  • This passive immunity protected infants through a period of vulnerability until they were better able to cope with measles through the generation of their own active immunity.
The Vaccine Era

Measles vaccine has destroyed natural Herd Immunity and replaced it with a temporary and inadequate quasi Herd Immunity that necessitates a dependence on vaccination along with an increased risk of severe adverse outcomes. Here are some examples of how natural Herd Immunity has been destroyed.

  • The increasing Herd Immunity associated with natural measles and the accompanying decrease in morbidity and mortality, has been interrupted by vaccination. This makes it difficult to predict how vaccinated populations might respond to, say, a new strain of measles virus that has escaped the ‘protection’ conferred by measles vaccine (escape mutant). Because that population is not immune to the escape mutant we risk high morbidity and mortality from measles once again.
  • Vaccinated mothers do not confer adequate passive immunity upon their infants (< 1 year of age). Infants are unable to generate an adequate immune response to measles vaccine and in the absence of passive maternal immunity, are unprotected during the first year, putting them at risk of serious measles infection.
  • Unlike natural measles, measles vaccine does not provide lasting immunity and a substantial proportion of measles cases are reported in those who have been vaccinated against measles.
  • Boosting of immunity using repeated doses of measles vaccine is not sustained and falls off rapidly. The only answer to this diminishing return that is offered by the regulators and manufacturers is to give more and more vaccines. The vaccine is highly profitable in terms of volume of sales, precisely because it is inadequately effective.
Mumps And Herd Immunity

Mumps is acknowledged to be a trivial disease in children; many do not even know they have had mumps the symptoms are so mild. Mumps is not a trivial disease in post-pubertal males where it can cause testicular inflammation and sterility.

Mumps vaccine does not work. Protection is way below the 96% claimed by Merck and mumps epidemics are occurring worldwide in highly vaccinated populations. Merck is accused of fraudulently misrepresenting the efficacy of their mumps vaccine in order to protect their US monopoly on the MMR vaccine. I would suggest that everyone who has suffered mumps and particularly its complications despite mumps vaccination, has a valid legal claim against Merck.

Mumps vaccine failure is associated with inadequate immunity following vaccination (primary failure) and rapidly waning immunity after vaccination (secondary failure). These factors mean that populations are at greater risk as they grow older. Since severe side effects are more common in mature males, mumps vaccine has made mumps a more dangerous disease.

Natural Herd Immunity, that is, lifelong immunity following exposure of children to mumps in the pre-vaccine era, has been destroyed by mumps vaccination.

Chickenpox And Herd Immunity

The chickenpox virus (varicella zoster) causes a mild self-limiting disease in healthy children. The virus frequently establishes latent infection in the cell bodies of sensory nerve roots where it has the potential to episodically reactivate and cause shingles, a very painful and debilitating condition. Shingles can cause blindness. Historically, shingles was an uncommon disease occurring in, for example, people with immune deficiency due to cancer or immunosuppressive drug therapy.

Reactivation of zoster is inhibited by an adequate level of immunity to this virus which, in turn, is maintained by boosting of immunity in parents and grandparents by re-exposure via children with chickenpox. Natural epidemics of chickenpox maintained Herd Immunity by ‘wild-type boosting’ (referring to the natural virus) of adults which prevented shingles in otherwise healthy individuals. This is no longer the case.

Widespread chickenpox vaccination has removed natural Herd Immunity by preventing epidemics, eliminating ‘wild-type’ boosting, and allowing immunity to fall in individuals to the point where shingles is now much more common, occurring in young, apparently healthy people. Vaccination has created a new epidemic to which Merck’s response is, ‘we’ve created a market; now let’s make a vaccine to prevent shingles.’

Andrew Wakefield

TruthKings

Read The Full Article

The Health-Care-Survivor’s Comment

My sincere thanks for This article to Vaxxed:From Cover-up To Conspiracy, and, of course to, Dr Andrew Wakefield.