I finally found the article I’d seen which had the charts of the decline in the infectious diseases through the 1900’s – which isn’t attributable to vaccines.
I seems this article is important enough to save – people are CONSTANTLY trying to say that vaccines are what saved the world……from infectious diseases like polio…measles, etc.
Quote: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.
Since 1900, the mortality rate in America and other first-world countries has declined by roughly 74%, creating a dramatic improvement in quality of life and life expectancy for Americans.
The simple question: “How did this happen?”
Why did the mortality rate decline so precipitously? If you listen to vaccine promoters, the answer is simple: vaccines saved us. What’s crazy about this narrative is how easy it is to disprove, the data is hiding in plain sight. The fact that this easily-proven-false narrative persists, however, tells us a lot about the world we live in, and I hope will encourage parents to reconsider the veracity of many of the narratives they’ve been fed about vaccines, and do their own primary research.
...But what if most of the history about the role vaccines played in declining mortality isn’t even true?
“…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.”
...“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.”
...understanding WHY infectious diseases had declined so dramatically in the U.S. (as well as other first world countries). Was it nutrition? Sanitary methods? A reduction in home crowding? (We’ve since learned the answer to all three questions is, “Yes.”)
1977: McKinlay & McKinlay: The most famous study you’ve never heard of
Quote:...their study warned against the very behavior we are now seeing in the world of vaccines. Namely, they warned that a group of profiteers might take more credit for the results of an intervention (vaccines) than the intervention deserves, and then use those fake results to create a world where their product must be used by everyone. Seriously, they predicted that this would happen. (It’s worth noting that the McKinlay Study used to be required reading at every medical school.)
…they warned that a group of profiteers might take more credit for the results of an intervention (vaccines) than the intervention deserves, and then use those fake results to create a world where their product must be used by everyone.
Published in 1977 in The Millbank Memorial Fund Quarterly, the McKinlay’s study was titled, “The Questionable Contribution of Medical Measures to the Decline of Mortality in the United States in the Twentieth Century.” The study clearly proved, with data, something that the McKinlay’s acknowledged might be viewed by some as medical “heresy.” Namely:
“that the introduction of specific medical measures and/or the expansion of medical services are generally NOT responsible for most of the modern decline in mortality.”
By “medical measures,” the McKinlay’s really meant ANYTHING modern medicine had come up with, whether that was antibiotics, vaccines, new prescription drugs, whatever. The McKinlay’s 23-page study really should be read cover to cover, but in a nutshell the McKinlay’s sought to analyze how much of an impact medical interventions (antibiotics, surgery, vaccines) had on this massive decline in mortality rates between 1900 and 1970:
Here are some of the major points their 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.”
And, here’s the two doozies…
The paper makes two points that I really want 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.”
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.
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%).
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.”
Sound familiar?
(This post was last modified: 03-15-2021 10:50 AM by GoodOwl.)
(03-01-2021 01:20 PM)ECUGrad07 Wrote: Indoor plumbing pretty much wiped out polio on its own...
Municipal potable water systems and sewers are actually why we saw the rise in Polio cases.
Before the turn of the century your immune system started with polio antibodies at birth and from breastfeeding, so when you were exposed due to the unsanitary water supply it was during this period of early protection and your immune system was able to respond and create more antibodies and the effects were minimal.
Clean water and sanitary sewers mean less and less people were exposed, so you hit a tipping point where many mothers didn't have antibodies to pass to their kids, or even if they did their first exposure wasn't early in life when they still carried them but much later in childhood when they no longer had moms antibodies to kickstart their immune system.
So sanitary sewers and potable water stopped the widespread prevalence of polio, but the side effect of that is that when people were exposed it was later in life and the effects were devastating. The disease that we think of as polio is really an unintended consequence of clean water eradicating it from our day to day lives making contact much more severe.
(03-01-2021 01:20 PM)ECUGrad07 Wrote: Indoor plumbing pretty much wiped out polio on its own...
Antibiotics.
The scary part of the story is the rise of resistant bacteria. Much of our miraculous surgeries would be very, very risky if we no longer had effective antibiotics.
(03-01-2021 05:04 PM)solohawks Wrote: My kids pediatrician got paid $450 to do his routine vaccines by the insurance. He got paid $150 for the wellness visit itself.
I'm not against vaccines, but they are big business and moneymakers
I'm not against vaccines, just realistic about them. Some are better than others. Many are a cash grab and/or power grab by the oligarchs.
(03-01-2021 01:20 PM)ECUGrad07 Wrote: Indoor plumbing pretty much wiped out polio on its own...
Antibiotics.
The scary part of the story is the rise of resistant bacteria. Much of our miraculous surgeries would be very, very risky if we no longer had effective antibiotics.
(03-01-2021 01:20 PM)ECUGrad07 Wrote: Indoor plumbing pretty much wiped out polio on its own...
Antibiotics.
The scary part of the story is the rise of resistant bacteria. Much of our miraculous surgeries would be very, very risky if we no longer had effective antibiotics.
This. and....... The biggest factor of all.
Infant mortality rates.
Just imagine how much lower those could be if the Left didn't enjoy and encourage the willful mortality of half of all minority infants.
The reason J&J and everyone else in the mega pharma world are jumping into the Covid vaccine biz is they know this is going to be a new annual vaccine ala the annual flu.
This is going to make the influenza $$ look like child’s play because there are a lot of dummies out there.
Even some in the independent media have bought into the hype surrounding the Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID vaccine and its "non-profit" nature, which is a complete LIE. But once you peel back the layers of obfuscation you quickly find not only the profit motive hiding underneath, but the dark specter of racist eugenics. Whitney Webb of Unlimited Hangout joins us to discuss her recent article, "Developers of Oxford-AstraZeneca Vaccine Tied to UK Eugenics Movement."
The AstraZeneca vaccine is being promoted for developing countries, in part because it doesn’t require the deep-freeze cold storage that mRNA vaccines do, so the logistics surrounding distribution are less complex
Patents and royalties for the AstraZeneca vaccine are held by a private company called Vaccitech, investors of which include Google Ventures, the Wellcome Trust, the Chinese branch of Sequoia Capital, the Chinese drug company Fosun Pharma and the British government
While AstraZeneca has promised it will not make any profit from its vaccine, there’s a time limit on this pledge. The not-for-profit vow expires once the pandemic is over, and AstraZeneca itself appears to have a say when it comes to declaring the end date
The AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine was co-developed by Adrian Hill, who has long-term ties to the British eugenics movement through his work with the Wellcome Trust’s Centre for Human Genetics and affiliation with the Galton Institute, formerly the U.K. Eugenics Society
Members of the Galton Institute have called for population reduction in Latin America, South and Southeast Asia and Africa, the very areas where the AstraZeneca vaccine is being promoted
In the video above, James Corbett of The Corbett Report interviews1 Whitney Webb, a writer and researcher who covers intelligence, Big Tech, surveillance and civil liberties, about some of the basic differences between these vaccines.
They then delve into the curious ties between Oxford University, AstraZeneca and the British eugenics movement — a topic Webb covered in her in-depth December 26, 2020, investigative report "Developers of Oxford-AstraZeneca Vaccine Tied to U.K. Eugenics Movement,"2 co-written with Jeremy Loffredo.
The Corbett Report interview and this article offer only a cursory summary of the findings in that report, so I highly recommend reading Webb's original article for a more detailed view.
Now, while AstraZeneca has promised it will not make any profit from its vaccine, there's a time limit on this pledge that most media pundits fail to note. The not-for-profit vow expires once the pandemic is over, and AstraZeneca itself appears to have a say when it comes to declaring the end date. It could be as early as July 1, 2021, according to a company memo obtained by the Financial Times.5
As explained by Webb, the patents and royalties for the AstraZeneca vaccine are held by a private company called Vaccitech, the investors of which include BRAAVOS (a capital investment company set up by a Deutche Bank executive), Google Ventures, the Wellcome Trust, the Chinese branch of Sequoia Capital, the Chinese drug company Fosun Pharma and the British government.
All of these investors stand to profit from this vaccine at some point in the near future, and Vaccitech has been quite open about the future profit potential with its shareholders, noting that the COVID-19 vaccine will most likely become an annual vaccine that is updated each season much like the seasonal flu vaccine.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) is among those who have promoted the idea that the COVID-19 vaccine will need to become an annual inoculation, which will allow Vaccitech and its investors to massively profit well into the future.
Adrian Hill's Ties to Eugenics
Adrian Hill is the director of the Jenner Institute and was a lead developer of the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine. Hill also heads the U.K. Vaccine Network, a government entity that decides where to funnel funding and vaccine technology.
One of Hill's bosses early on in his career, and his thesis adviser when he was a doctoral student, was the late David Weatherall, founder of the Weatherall Institute of Molecular Medicine, a research institute at the University of Oxford.
Weatherall was a member of the Galton Institute from a time when it was known as the U.K. Eugenics Society, and he remained a member until his death in 2018. Hill gave a lecture at Galton in 2008 for its 100-year anniversary. As noted in Webb's article:8
"Arguably most troubling of all is the direct link of the vaccine's lead developers to the Wellcome Trust and, in the case of Adrian Hill, the Galton Institute, two groups with longstanding ties to the UK eugenics movement.
The latter organization, named for the 'father of eugenics' Francis Galton, is the renamed U.K. Eugenics Society, a group notorious for over a century for its promotion of racist pseudoscience and efforts to 'improve racial stock' by reducing the population of those deemed inferior.
The ties of Adrian Hill to the Galton Institute should raise obvious concerns given the push to make the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine he developed with [Sarah] Gilbert the vaccine of choice for the developing world, particularly countries in Latin America, South and Southeast Asia, and Africa, the very areas where the Galton Institute's past members have called for reducing population growth …
While the Galton Institute has attempted to distance itself from its past of promoting racial eugenics with surface-level public relations efforts, it has not stopped family members of the infamous racist from achieving leadership positions at the institute.
Emeritus professor of molecular genetics at the Galton Institute and one of its officers is none other than David J. Galton, whose work includes 'Eugenics: The Future of Human Life in the 21st Century.'
David Galton has written that the Human Genome Mapping Project, originally dreamt up by Galton's former president Walter Bodmer, had 'enormously increased … the scope for eugenics … because of the development of a very powerful technology for the manipulation of DNA.'
This new 'wider definition of eugenics,' Galton has said, 'would cover methods of regulating population numbers as well as improving genome quality by selective artificial insemination by donor, gene therapy or gene manipulation of germ-line cells.' In expanding on this new definition, Galton is neutral as to 'whether some methods should be made compulsory by the state, or left entirely to the personal choice of the individual.'"
Racist Agenda, and Eugenics
Webb also points out how so-called "woke vaccine policy" is using systemic racism as a justification for making sure the COVID-19 vaccine is given to minorities first.
Such justifications become all the more questionable if not outright suspicious in light of the eugenics angle, which tends to be heavily focused on reducing populations of Blacks and various native groups.
"There are plans in place to exercise what could reasonably be described as economic coercion to pressure people to 'voluntarily' get vaccinated. Such coercion will be obviously be more effective on poor and working communities, meaning communities of color will be disproportionately affected as well.
As such, the public should take all vaccine rollout policy assertions with a grain of salt, even when they come cloaked in language of inclusion, racial justice, and public health preservation.
As the cofounder of the American Eugenics Society (later renamed Society for the Study of Social Biology) Frederick Osborn put it in 1968, 'Eugenic goals are most likely to be attained under a name other than eugenics.'"
This "vaccine", which is not even a real vaccine at all is the perfect way to achieve the goal of eugenics.
My daughter is on an "alternate" vaccine schedule. By the time she starts school she will have all the required vaccines, but not a single one more than that and if she goes to pvt school there may be more we can cut out. Through the first two years I think we made an extra 8-10 trips to the doctors office for vaccines to space them out and we passed on about 10 total that she didn't need. So far she hasn't ever had a runny nose, fever, or even a case of diarrhea and no known allergies. My sister's kids (9 and 6 years older and got every vaccine) were sick constantly until they were about 4-5, and are allergic to several things neither my sister or her husband are.
I see no reason kids today are getting 15-20 more vaccines than I received 40 years ago.
(03-15-2021 11:17 AM)200yrs2late Wrote: My daughter is on an "alternate" vaccine schedule. By the time she starts school she will have all the required vaccines, but not a single one more than that and if she goes to pvt school there may be more we can cut out. Through the first two years I think we made an extra 8-10 trips to the doctors office for vaccines to space them out and we passed on about 10 total that she didn't need. So far she hasn't ever had a runny nose, fever, or even a case of diarrhea and no known allergies. My sister's kids (9 and 6 years older and got every vaccine) were sick constantly until they were about 4-5, and are allergic to several things neither my sister or her husband are.
I see no reason kids today are getting 15-20 more vaccines than I received 40 years ago.
(03-01-2021 05:04 PM)solohawks Wrote: My kids pediatrician got paid $450 to do his routine vaccines by the insurance. He got paid $150 for the wellness visit itself.
I'm not against vaccines, but they are big business and moneymakers
Which I've been saying for some time now. Doctors have become like lawyers, car salespeople, and really any business that doesn't care about the customer but rather the money they can grasp from pharma and hospitals. It's a "you scratch my back I'll scratch yours" mindset.
The only reason I visit my doctor is because if I don't go to my routine checkup I can't get my meds from the pharmacy. "show me the money"
(03-01-2021 05:04 PM)solohawks Wrote: My kids pediatrician got paid $450 to do his routine vaccines by the insurance. He got paid $150 for the wellness visit itself.
I'm not against vaccines, but they are big business and moneymakers
Which I've been saying for some time now. Doctors have become like lawyers, car salespeople, and really any business that doesn't care about the customer but rather the money they can grasp from pharma and hospitals. It's a "you scratch my back I'll scratch yours" mindset.
The only reason I visit my doctor is because if I don't go to my routine checkup I can't get my meds from the pharmacy. "show me the money"
"have become".....lmmfao
ever hear the one about the medicine man, practicing medicine, or pick ze poison...
as a species, we're barely into alchemist land o' genome...
(03-02-2021 11:41 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote: The reason J&J and everyone else in the mega pharma world are jumping into the Covid vaccine biz is they know this is going to be a new annual vaccine ala the annual flu.
This is going to make the influenza $$ look like child’s play because there are a lot of dummies out there.
(03-02-2021 11:41 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote: The reason J&J and everyone else in the mega pharma world are jumping into the Covid vaccine biz is they know this is going to be a new annual vaccine ala the annual flu.
This is going to make the influenza $$ look like child’s play because there are a lot of dummies out there.
That and the Feds will be paying for everyone
When the Feds pay, costs are outrageous.
Lots of profit to be made
fweeeeee will end in your lifetime.....just like muh nieces, nephews, and daughter....
(03-02-2021 11:41 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote: The reason J&J and everyone else in the mega pharma world are jumping into the Covid vaccine biz is they know this is going to be a new annual vaccine ala the annual flu.
This is going to make the influenza $$ look like child’s play because there are a lot of dummies out there.
That and the Feds will be paying for everyone
When the Feds pay, costs are outrageous.
Lots of profit to be made
fweeeeee will end in your lifetime.....just like muh nieces, nephews, and daughter....
IMPLOSION INEVITABLE WHEN FC WEEEEE
Yeah. The best I can do is make sure my family is in a sound financial spot. You cannot allow yourself to become dependent on this "free money"
(03-02-2021 11:41 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote: The reason J&J and everyone else in the mega pharma world are jumping into the Covid vaccine biz is they know this is going to be a new annual vaccine ala the annual flu.
This is going to make the influenza $$ look like child’s play because there are a lot of dummies out there.
That and the Feds will be paying for everyone
When the Feds pay, costs are outrageous.
Lots of profit to be made
fweeeeee will end in your lifetime.....just like muh nieces, nephews, and daughter....
IMPLOSION INEVITABLE WHEN FC WEEEEE
Yeah. The best I can do is make sure my family is in a sound financial spot. You cannot allow yourself to become dependent on this "free money"
which is the crux of any version of slavery....
#goodLuckInEarnest
(This post was last modified: 03-15-2021 12:35 PM by stinkfist.)
(03-01-2021 05:04 PM)solohawks Wrote: My kids pediatrician got paid $450 to do his routine vaccines by the insurance. He got paid $150 for the wellness visit itself.
I'm not against vaccines, but they are big business and moneymakers
So, I'll put you down as IN FAVOR of universal health insurance then?
![[Image: 03-12-19-Wiley.jpg]](https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/03-12-19-Wiley.jpg)
![[Image: 03-12-19-Figure-4.jpg]](https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/03-12-19-Figure-4.jpg)
