So far, I have always been interested in health and how to be healthy.
I did not deal with diseases, drugs and medicine
it's not my job, I'm not competent nor interested in it.
For me, it's health first ...
And then, I became a dad a year ago.
It is the most beautiful experience of my life.
like all fathers, I was
confronted with the question of vaccination at one point or another
And frankly, I hear everything and its opposite.
This goes from the classical speech about the obvious
and the absolutely essential and harmless nature of vaccines
up to the most disturbing testimonials,
especially in my environment. I have examples around me.
I realize that in the end,
I do not have the elements to make a choice on vaccination, the famous informed choice.
And for my son, I want the best, the full health.
I do not want to make random choices, and especially not play the Russian roulette ...
We talk about free and informed consent,
so, since nobody seemed to be able to inform me without taking sides,
I started an investigation, I did my own investigation,
with all the energy that is given by the love for my son.
Music: "Shine" by Hicham Chahidi
I wanted finally to know what was the "truth about vaccination".
My opinion does not matter at the end, and neither do my choices.
What I want is to give everyone clear, rational information
and based on scientific facts in order to make an informed choice.
I am not "anti-vaccine", I am pro-science, pro-public health,
pro-happy and healthy child,
so I will ask questions and try to answer them!
VACCINATION INVESTIGATION Episode 1: What is the principle of vaccination? General Information about the Immune System, Smallpox
We all want our children to be healthy, right?
I called my friend Alex to film my testimonial about my investigation
and that he can account for the path I had taken
to make the difference between what is true and what is false.
This film is the testimonial of this investigation,
it's my way to the truth about vaccination!
Alex: Ok it's on. It's been 6 months since you started your research on vaccines
Thierry: Yes I developed an interest for this issue of vaccination, from a question
the answers I found to this question were caricatural in one way as in the other.
A : Yes
T: You know, I like rational, scientific things;
I come from a science background.
And neither side had satisfactory answers for me.
So I thought I had to get to work.
And that's why I asked you to come because now
And that's why I asked you to come because now
after 6 months I am beginning to reach some conclusions.
The conclusions are personal
but I especially wanted to share all the elements that I had been able to collect
and the approach I had followed. Are you ready?
A: Okay. Are these elements coming mainly from scientific studies?
T: So, yes I asked myself some questions.
And I searched for approved scientific information
to be able to answer these questions.
Besides, you'll see with each video - I can give you the files -
but with each video
you'll have all the scientific studies that I've relied on,
with French translation since most are in English.
They come from known scientific portals as NCBI or PubMed
which are really the most used medical scientific portals in the world.
And I relied on reports from the WHO,
reports from the French Health Products Safety Agency, and the French National Health and Medical Research Institute, here in France,
so many institutes that are official and well established.
I tried to omit anything that could be questionable
in terms of scientific proof.
A: OK, great
T: You have your folder in hand, you can look at it A: Great
T: You have your folder in hand, you can look at it A: Great
T: You have your folder in hand, you can look at it A: Great
T: I'm going to present to you my conclusions and you'll be able to refer to this study.
For people watching the video, below the video,
you will have two documents:
the full document and a summary document that summarizes the purpose of this video.
You can refer to it for all references.
A: OK, great. So, I confess that in this matter,
I do not know almost nothing
T: That's fine
A: It's very very large.
What was your approach to start this investigation?
What was your angle?
T: So I just started to get interested in what was the theory of vaccination.
The theory of vaccination is simple.
It states that eventually when there is elevation of antibodies - the antibodies ...
We will make it simple. In the body, we have what is called an immune system.
The immune system is the body's defense system,
which protects us from foreign substances.
In nature, there are lots of viruses, bacteria.
There are some that are necessary for life,
we know more and more now that humans carry more bacterial cells than human ones.
We talk about microbiota, virobiote.
But we also know that in nature there are lots of viruses and bacteria
which are particularly virulent and it is important that
the body knows the difference between what is good and what is not.
That's the work of the immune system.
In this immune system,
there is a part that works with a reporting system,
called antibodies and antigens.
The antibodies are ...
I do not know if you have noticed while you are walking in the forest,
you are walking in the forest and there are some trees
which are marked with a cross.
That's the National Forest Service that went to tell the woodcutters
which trees they have to cut.
The antigen and antibody agents work the same way.
The body, using a special marker
recognizes foreign substances and at that time,
the body will produce antigens (woodcutters in some way)
which will come to get rid of these foreign substances.
The vaccine theory
- I specify, the antibodies are specific to a virus or a bacteria -
when you have elevated specific antibodies to a virus or bacteria,
at that moment the body is immune.
And so, once we've validated that,
this vaccine theory, that is to say high antibodies = immunity, at that time
we just need to check the elevation of the antibodies to say the person is immune.
And as a scientist, I thought something was wrong with this,
because correlation (that is, when you have immunity, you have high antibodies),
Correlation does not mean Causality.
It is not because you have high antibodies that you are immune.
You see, here we have two phenomena happening at the same time
and we deduce that one causes the other.
And in science, we do not have the right to say that.
So I started looking for studies,
elements that could make me say that even when one has high antibodies,
Well, he is not immune.
Or, one can be immune without antibodies,
like that, it would separate the two.
And so in the studies I gave you,
you will see that there are several ones that show for example
that people who have high amount of antibodies to a virus strain (so there is a virus)
the antibodies are measured in the blood
and we realize that they have high antibodies:
if these high antibodies come from the fact that they have been naturally immunized
because they have encountered the virus during their lifetime
as anyone develops immunity,
well at that point, they have three times less chance of infection than someone
who had high antibodies simply because he was exposed to a vaccine.
So natural immunity and immunity through vaccines are two different things.
After, I had been looking, you'll see in these studies,
I was trying to find out if there were any cases
in which there was no antibody and yet we were immune.
And I found many examples, with mice for example,
in which mice that have no antibodies
and yet they are specifically treated to remove any form of antibodies
and despite this, they do not develop infections.
So, protection by antibodies is not necessary for immunity.
Immunity is not just about antibodies.
T: In the same way, I found lots of studies, and one in particular,
which reported massive tetanus infection,
- the famous tetanus for which everyone is vaccinated -
in people who were perfectly immune.
So no: for people with a high level of antibodies.
You see, that's the difference.
That is to say, we will be told "they have a high level of antibodies, so they are immune.
So if they are immune they do not develop the disease. "
There are cases of massive infections with this disease,
it means that immunity and high level of antibodies are not the same thing.
If the vaccines bring a high level of antibodies,
we are told vaccines are immunity, No!
The vaccines correspond to a high level of antibodies.
I can give you lots of other examples, for example,
a measles outbreak occurred in the Quebec City area
despite a vaccination coverage of 99%.
So there was a measles outbreak when people have very high levels of antibodies,
despite this, we have a measles epidemic.
This means that immunity is not just a high level of antibodies.
Mumps epidemic in Switzerland, with more than 80% of children who are affected, and who are immune.
So supposedly immune, in fact 80% of children have
an extremely high level of antibodies. Despite this, well, they are affected.
My goal at first was to say "there is a vaccine theory".
The vaccine theory corresponds to: high level of antibodies = immunity;
I have many proofs, there are others in the documents,
I selected some of them from hundreds,
I have multiple proofs that this is not self-evident.
one does not mean the other
Vaccination is not immunization,
and the question of immunity is not simply a matter of antibodies.
So already, you see, this alerted me. I thought, OK,
we base the whole principle of vaccination by saying
" By vaccinating your children, we will immunize them. "
If immunity is not just antibodies
and that vaccination only affects antibodies, there is a problem.
A: Hummm
T: Do you see? First small alarm that lights up on my dashboard.
And then I even found some studies, an interesting study in particular,
and you'll see, we'll come back to it a little later in the investigation ...
I found a particularly interesting study that showed that
when a body is exposed to a virus strain, actually in the environment often
there are multiple virus strains of the same type.
When we talk about the flu for example, there is a strain called H3N1,
there is another called H5N1, there is another H7N1,
and every year it changes. It evolves.
So, we always have a time lag behind viruses that mutate constantly.
And what was shown through the study that I quote,
is that finally patients who are vaccinated against H3N1 for example,
and people who are immune to H3N1 because they had it before,
so that is: people who are vaccinated versus people who have developed a natural immunity against H3N1.
Well, if people vaccinated against H3N1 are then exposed to H5N1,
another virus strain, well, they will be massively infected.
While people who have been exposed to H3N1 naturally,
that is to say it is not simply via the injection of a vaccine,
but because they have encountered H3N1 in their environment,
then when they are exposed to H5N1, they are much more immune.
And this study concludes that ultimately the immunity
that we call heterosubtypic immunity - heterosubtypic, we speak of a type -.
This means that it is an immunity when you encounter a virus strain,
that is, when you are naturally immunized,
then you are not only immune to this virus strain,
but against all the strains that may come.
A: Yes,
T: Whereas when you're immunized through vaccines,
this study shows that you are specifically immune to this strain, and that instead,
you decrease your body's ability to adapt to new strains of the same type later on.
You see, it's a bit like you're hyper-specializing.
A: Ummm. You can not do much anymore.
A: Ummm. You can not do much anymore.
A: You become weaker
T: Exactly. Your system is hyper focused.
And besides, it was in the same sense of a video that I made last November
which went in the same direction.
It was called "Why I do not believe in vaccines anymore", and it had generated a lot of reactions,
which made me say "Ouh!! the reactions are strong, there is something there! "
And in fact what I was just saying in that video, the title was a bit provocative,
it was simply to say that the immune system is much more than the question of antibodies and antigens.
The immune system to make it simple, I'm not going to give an immunology course,
I don't claim I can, I do not have the skills,
but overall, we now distinguish three parts of the immune system:
there is the part of the immune system that is found on the surface of all the mucous membranes:
on the surface of your skin, your intestines, your bronchi.
It is called the mucosal immune system.
Then, there is the immune system that is specific to the blood. This one is antigens and antibodies.
This is called the humoral immune system.
And then there is the immune system specific to the cell.
And more and more, during the research that is currently being done on what is called the intestinal microbiota. (it's very common at the moment as a research subject),
we realize that the intestines, the microbiota, all the bacteria that are on the surface,
this mucosal immune system represents the essence of our immunity.
I found a study that is quoted in your documents that said
"Because of its various functions, the lining of the intestine is known as the body's largest immunological environment. "
T: And that's what made a doctor named Jacques Kalmar say:
T: And that's what made a doctor named Jacques Kalmar say:
"Finally, we could compare the immune system to a piano keyboard. And the antigen-antibody part is just one key. " one key.
A: Okay. And the vaccines only stimulate that one ?
T: Exactly! It's as if you had a piano keyboard in front of you and you only played one key
And you say "I took care of the immunity! I made the partition! " But you can't!
A: There is no connection between the mucous membranes and the blood?
T: What will get through the mucous membranes will then reach the blood,
but mucosal immunity has its integrity, it is a system as such.
And actually, your question is good, further in the studies I will show you that even
when we stimulate a part of immunity we do it to the detriment of others.
when we stimulate a part of immunity we do it to the detriment of others.
when we stimulate a part of immunity we do it to the detriment of others.
T: if humoral immunity is stimulated for example, so antigen-antibody immunity,
cellular immunity and mucosal immunity are going to be diminishing.
That's one of the difficulties ... That's the first thing that caught my attention.
And you see the first conclusion ... - It was my first step,
you see, before I started this series of studies, I thought
"We will begin to go a little bit deeper."
And I thought
" OK ! So we are actually selling the vaccination and saying that the vaccination is immunization ... "
What does vaccination do? Vaccination raises the levels of antibodies.
Moreover, it is said that vaccination is successful by measuring antibody levels.
And as we associate level of antibodies and immunity, you are told that it immunizes you.
No ! The proof says it is false.
So I thought, "OK, if vaccination does not mean immunization,
there is already a bias in vaccine theory and in the approach to vaccination."
This was my first point.
Then I asked other questions.
I think you actually understood now what was the first thing to alert me,
that's what I'll call a trick in a way,
that is to say, high antibodies and immunization have been associated.
While I show you that this is not the case.
A: Ummm
T: And once we had paired the two, as soon as we saw a vaccine raise the antibodies we said
"Hop! The person is immune. " Okay ? The vaccine raised the antibodies actually
but to pair high antibodies and immunization is quite questionable and it is far from being absolutely true ...
T: Well that was misleading. So that ... Tic ... A sign saying
"Oh ... We have to dig deeper." I do not say it's systematic,
I say that there are cases that suffer in which
there is no such pairing between immunization and antibody elevation.
And finally, one and the other are not systematically correlated.
Then there's one question that I was really interested in,
it is the notion of free and informed choice.
You know, normally, it should be like that when it comes to health.
T: You are always told "Parents and individuals make free and informed choices."
T: You are always told "Parents and individuals make free and informed choices."
And when it comes to medical information, the people who give us the medical information are the doctors.
And I was interested a little bit in the medicine program.
Overall, what is taught to young doctors is that there is a vaccination program,
vaccination has saved millions, billions, hundreds of billions of people
so there is no question to ask.
Actually ! Questioning vaccination, asking questions, I'm not saying ...
"Vaccination, I do not want it!" Or anything! No !
Just asking questions is a crime.
It's just totally absurd. What I was told was,
you need to be a moron to dare question vaccination in our time.
With this, for me, we are in religious thinking
A: Yes, yes
T: We are completely in a religious process.
A: And you do not think that if there was danger, we would know?
Finally there is a moment where ... we would share it, where ... there would be something ...
T: In the United States, a vigilance system was created called VAERS,
Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System.
This is a reporting system on adverse effects of vaccines, okay?
In France, there is none. In France, there is the French Health Products Safety Agency,
but there is nothing specific about vaccines.
In the United States, they have VAERS, so if they have created a specific system, it means there are problems.
A: And in France there is not, no ??
T: No, there is no specific reporting system.
And concerning VAERS, I quote a study, I will quote it word for word, it says:
"Adverse events due to drugs and vaccines are common but not widely reported.
Although about 25% of patients experience an adverse event due to drugs and vaccines,
less than 0.3% of all adverse events are caused by medicine,
and 1 to 13% of serious events are reported to the Food and Drug Administration, the FDA.
Likewise, less than 1% of adverse reactions due to vaccines are reported. "
How do you want to be positive about the danger level of vaccines
if you do not have a reporting system that works?
A: Ummm.
T: Second, when I spoke to you about free and informed choice, the information is given by doctors.
We will come back to it, I will be forced at one point of my investigation to tell you about conflicts of interest.
I know this is a tricky subject, I'm not going to make a big deal out of it, but I'll have to talk about it.
And I will show you that most of the professional training of doctors
is provided by the same laboratories that produce the vaccines.
So I say that there is a conflict somewhere,
in which doctors are certainly victims too,
but in terms of free and informed choices, we already have a bad start.
And then, as a joke, we can put a small image,
but I often remember that in the 60's, Camel cigarette brand
liked to advertise that 60% of doctors
recommended Camel cigarettes over other cigarettes,
saying that Camel cigarettes were healthier than others.
It just means that we can be wrong even if we have a white coat.
And when we realize that we do not have an effective vigilance system,
less than 1% with adverse effects of vaccines would be reported in the United States ...
A: Yes it's ridiculous, it's nothing!
T: ... While they have a specific system, they have VAERS, something we do not have in France.
So, then my investigation was motivated by the fact, you may have heard about it,
on January 1, 2018, there was a real problem in France around this issue of vaccines.
A: Yes, 8 more?
T: Exactly, we went from 3 compulsory vaccines and added 8 more, so 11 compulsory vaccines,
many of which are said hexavalent, that is to say in a single shoot, you get 6 vaccines.
So, the question that I automatically ask myself is "Is this harmless? " And especially
"Do you have the right to ask the question or not without going for a charlatan or a conspiracy theorist? "
Because overall, that's it.
So I am giving you some points now, I tell you why I got here.
We will go in more detail later.
I came across an Arte documentary that had been released in 2007,
it was a long time ago, it can be found on the web. You have the link.
A: OK
T: It's the interview of a professor, a German forensic doctor called Professor Randolf Penning.
And that's what he says: he says that "In 25 years of career, he autopsied"
- I am reading the text, you have it in the video -
"In 25 years of career, he autopsied more than 10,000 bodies and he suddenly saw a multiplication
of cases of cerebral edema in infants like he had never seen before." And so he says
"In 2002, we proceeded within a month,
to examine several bodies of children who had been vaccinated some time ago. "
They had been vaccinated - he said afterwards - with a vaccine, a new vaccine, which is called Hexavac®
which was the first hexavalent vaccine to be introduced on the market.
This is the first one where there are 6 vaccines in 1.
So he says, "We did look at children who had been vaccinated some time ago.
We observed that the brain was very stiff.
For us, it is a sign of a possible death by asphyxiation.
Neither our institute nor the criminal police thought it could be a homicide."
These children had not been deliberately asphyxiated.
"Nevertheless the deaths were suspicious. Out of 120 examined children,
Six of them died the same day or the day after the vaccination.
This multiplication of cases has alerted us. There are about 300 forensic doctors in Germany and we all know each other.
I spoke with some of my colleagues, who had observed such cases.
According to them, everything seemed to indicate that there is a link between
hexavalent vaccine and deaths occurring the same day or within 48 hours of vaccination. "
This will lead to the withdrawal of the Hexavac® hexavalent vaccine.
And besides ... So you see, you still say we play with things, wait I see your objection coming,
Alex laughs
T: I'll tell you about an Italian report that came out a few months ago
in which we are told that there is no valid study,
they have found no evidence of a scientific study that says
"Hexavalent vaccines are safe."
They have nothing. It's empty. We made the same mistake as we did with pesticides.
I do not know if you know a researcher named Gilles-Éric Séralini?
A: No
T: He's a guy who worked on pesticides and showed that in fact,
there was an incredible cumulative effect in pesticides.
That is to say, if you have a pesticide that has a particular effect, another one that has a different effect,
and if you put the two together, the effect is not one plus one, it's 3, it's 4, it's 5.
A: 1 + 1 = 3?
T: It's a cumulative effect. And by the way,
it made him say that the famous phrase of Paracelsus, a scientist of the Middle Ages who said
"The dose makes the poison" was no longer valid with cumulative effects.
In cumulative effects, the doses interact with each other in ways that can not be controlled.
A: And there are no tests that were done with the 6 together?
Or all 3 together? The two together?
T: There ... you allow me to go a little ahead. That will be the subject ...
A: Okay, great.
T: ... In an episode or two. But I'll show you that no, we have nothing, we have nothing.
A:it's crazy anyway!
T: Yes it's crazy, we are playing Russian roulette. And for example, in 2013 in the United States, the same!
They introduced some hexavalent products. So it was not even hexavalent,
it was tetravalent, quadrivalent (and quinquevalent I think), so finally 5, 3.
A: OK
T: And the National Academy of Medicine - you'll find the report in there - they say
"The key elements of the entire program, including number, frequency, timing,
the order and age of administration of the vaccines have not been systematically examined by valid scientific studies."
That's their conclusion. They say "we have no evidence"
A: So it's all random...
T: It's all random. The problem is that ...
So, I know it's not recognized as an evidence by the scientific community.
But I'm very interested in what the parents say.
Because, especially with the advent of the Internet, there are forums
and I know that scientists do not like forums
because they consider that when the people are engaged in science,
somewhere, it is ridiculous.
I do not mean that, but it's something that I felt very pregnant.
I went to check a little bit inside the forums and ...
when you read the forums, you realize that there is really a problem.
There is something going on with the children's brains that is not good.
I have the numbers, I have studies that show that currently, 6 out of 20 children in the United States so...
.. (Thierry calculates)
that's about 30% of children in the United States under ten years of age that experience epileptic seizures.
Epileptic seizure means that the central nervous system is affected.
You do not have an epileptic seizure just like that.
This is not a seasonal allergy problem.
We are in front of a phenomenon that directly affects the central nervous system.
There are parents who say that something is happening with their children,
the first warning signals started in 89.
In the United States, 1989 coincides with a change in vaccination policy.
The United States is the country with the most vaccines in the world, even more than France.
A: And before 89, nothing was happening with vaccines or it was lighter?
T: It was lighter, it was lighter. A: Okay
T: There has been a gradual evolution, we will go into details.
T: There has been a gradual evolution, we will go into details.
And for example I found a study that is in there.
A: Yes
T: So in there, there is 3 or 4. I'm not going to overwhelm people with thousands of studies,
for me, one is already enough to alert and to say
"We will go a little further". As for this epileptic seizure story, we will come back to it.
A: Yes
T: A study called "The risk of seizures after receiving a whole-cell vaccine against pertussis, measles, mumps and rubella. "
The conclusion of this study states
"There is a significantly higher risk of epileptic seizures on the day of DTP vaccination,
Diphtheria Tetanus Polio, and within 8 to 14 days after Measles Mumps Rubella MMR vaccine injection »
We will talk about it, we will do a specific part about the MMR.
A: Great
T: So the same, free and informed consent ...
Where is the information for parents?
A: It is true that we are not told a lot about what is inside and isn't.
T: Yes, we'll take care of it right away. So…
A: Yes all of a sudden, all of this makes it more interesting, the debate should take place.
T: So what keeps coming up, often, you could have asked me the question, I was expecting it,
but all the time, it is said, "Yes, but wait Thierry, there are great epidemics that have been stopped by vaccination."
A: And it's true that I have the impression that there has been a before and after on many diseases like smallpox or polio.
T: Yeah
A: And it's true that for me, in my head, they almost do not exist anymore!
T: They almost do not exist anymore
A: What makes ...? What are the factors that enter in play, if vaccines do not work?
T: I was interested, if you want we'll talk about smallpox, we'll talk about polio later.
Actually smallpox ... Smallpox is a disease that killed a lot, in the 17th and in the 18th century,
beware, in the 17th and 18th century, it was a disease that killed a lot of people.
A: It's a fact
T: It's a fact. And indeed smallpox has globally disappeared,
I think the last case was recorded in Ethiopia in 1976 and since then we have not heard about it.
And in fact, to give you a little history, in fact in the 1780s,
there was a doctor in England, whose name is Dr. Jenner,
who noticed that the farmers who milked cows who had smallpox,
cows with bovine smallpox were less prone to smallpox epidemics.
So he thought that maybe the exposure to a low virus dose would develop specific immunity.
So he took his son and one of his friends as test subjects.
And at the time, well, they went strong! He took infected tissues,
and he made a small incision in the skin of his son and the other child and put the infected cattle tissues in contact with the blood.
A: And so what happened?
T: And his son died, at the age of 20, of tuberculosis, we will see that there is a link between the two ... Anecdote aside,
from that point we started developing vaccines, so that in 1853,
vaccines were introduced in England, the smallpox vaccine,
it was the first vaccine in the history of mankind. We had never done a vaccine before.
Moreover, there was a high stake around the vaccine issue from the start, since in 1857,
you were put in jail if you did not get vaccinated.
Then what's interesting is, between 1857 and 1859, there was an explosion of smallpox cases in England.
So much so that there is a city in England called Leicester,
I put you the link in the studies, there is a city called Leicester, where, faced with this explosion of smallpox,
a Health Committee in Leicester said
"Listen, clearly the vaccination does not work, we will do it another way. We decide to do differently"
They practiced a policy of isolation, that is to say, they took people who were infected,
they did not vaccinate them, but they quarantined them and were in contact only with people
who had developed natural immunity to smallpox.
And mortality levels in Leicester have collapsed.
There was a lot less death from smallpox.
And besides you have a study there, that I did put in the complete documents, to which everybody has access,
which comes from a book by a member of the City Council of Leicester and the Health Council, who was called J.T.BIGGS.
His book was released in 1912, called "Sanitation vs. Vaccination"
And it actually shows, taking different examples,
that the higher the standard of living in cities and countries, the less death rates from smallpox.
He took, for example, the case of Japan, which at the time was an extremely poor country.
A: Oh yes?
T: Compared to England.
And in which sanitation levels, especially in the cities, were relatively poor,
and at that time, very high mortality level.
After, he takes three cities of England, London Glasgow and Sheffield,
Sheffield is a much richer and much healthier city than London for example or Glasgow,
and the same, still the death rates are decreasing.
In the army normally, it is a setting where
living conditions were still the best anyway at the time,
and well, similar, still lower death rates.
And Leicester, where we do not vaccinate anymore, death rates were still lower.
It is challenging anyway. I do not know what you think about it.
A: So simply put, the more hygiene, the fewer the cases, and in fact, less spreading.
T: And if in addition we practice the policy of isolation, well that would tend to do it.
A: Okay.
T: Now you will tell me "wait, these are old books, old numbers, we do not know where we are at the moment! "
A: It was in 1977 no?
T: Oh no no no ... 1912.
A: 1912. It was recent also it's not .. but ...
T: But ...
Laughs
T: Smallpox has been eradicated ... the last case of smallpox was reported in 1976 in Ethiopia.
A: Okay
T: And it turns out that in 1979, there was a WHO commission,
called the World Commission for the Certification of Smallpox Eradication,
which has been put in place, and which has produced a final report published in 1979.
It is available online, I have the link, everyone has the link, everyone can go read it, it is amazing.
I will give you the pages on which I take these selected pieces.
"Eradication campaigns based entirely or essentially
on mass vaccination were successful in a few countries,
but failed in most cases."
Really ??? Oh, we were told it was the vaccination against smallpox that ... ???
no !??! "Failed in most cases. "
A: It's crazy!
T: "In India, 5 years after a national eradication campaign started in 1962,
the number of notifications was greater than it had ever been.
We go from 50,000 cases to 85,000 cases. They vaccinate people, and there is an explosion of smallpox cases!
A: There is something wrong!
T: "It would have been extremely expensive and logistically difficult,
if not impossible, to achieve much higher levels of coverage.
With the means available, it was absolutely necessary to change strategy. "
They are talking about a change of strategy. Page 32 of the final report.
"When the smallpox cases were isolated in an place where
they only had contact with people who were vaccinated or previously infected
(so who had developed natural immunity),
the transmission chain was broken.
By immediately identifying and isolating sick people,
there was an obstacle in the chain of transmission." Page 22.
"The campaign in India revealed the limits of a strategy focused only
on mass vaccination in a country as large and densely populated as India,
even when vaccination coverage reached 90%, an objective that is difficult to achieve.
On the other hand, when active surveillance and effective containment programs
(we find the strategy of Leicester) went into full action,
India was able to achieve eradication in a relatively short time."
Eradication came only with this condition.
And we quote again page 42 "In Java, despite all the measures
(the measures were mass vaccination, eh)
smallpox proved extraordinarily difficult to eradicate, despite vaccination rates exceeding 90%.
Until effective screening and surveillance structures were fully in place. "
A: Wow! OK !!!
T: It comes to break a little bit all the theories we knew!
A: Yes!
T: And look, they add, in 1977 already, the spokesman of the World Health Organization, called Mr Tomiche,
in an article in Le Monde of 27/12/1977. He says :
"Strategically, the abandonment of mass vaccination,
the abandonment of mass vaccination in favor of the so-called Surveillance Endeavor approach is of paramount importance.
With this type of approach, it was possible to prevent transmission,
even when the incidence of variola was high and immunization rates were low.
The method consists of the prompt detection of new cases,
followed by the search for all possible contacts and their isolation in order to stop the transmission. "
I tell you now ... where are the wonderful results of the vaccine policy against smallpox? There are none!
A: It's crazy, it's like a collapsing cloud !!
T: It's not vaccination! Smallpox has indeed been eradicated.
It is not mass vaccination that has eradicated smallpox.
So I'm going to make a very short summary.
I found myself facing a trick in which we were pairing high levels of antibodies and immunization.
A: Yes, where we oversimplified this whole process
T: Yes. A correlation was passed for causation.
A: Yes
T: Scientifically speaking, that kind of thing, it annoys me! It does not work!
Second, we have systems of vigilance and monitoring because we are told
"Yes, vaccine problems? there are none, there is no problem and so on."
And we have no system to check it! There is nothing ! It's empty.
Right away, you say to yourself, still there is a problem.
Less than 1% of vaccine problems in the United States while they have a system that works and is set up.
Then we have a training of doctors that for me is really problematic.
There are alarm signals, especially with the new hexavalent vaccines,
through testimonials of forensic doctors, through testimonials from parents, through studies on epilepsy,
and I'm going to cite a lot of others, there are many more in there ...
And then we get interested a little bit in the mythology that we have drawn up in regard to the great pandemics of the past centuries
A: And the results are not there in fact?!
T: They are not convincing! It's enough to ask questions.
So I would like, anyway, I wanted, just after, to look a little bit what vaccines contain
A: Oh yes! Very interesting. Let's go ?
T: Let's go right now ...
For more infomation >> NBA Live 19 FR | COMMENT FONCTIONNE LE SYSTÈME DE HYPE ? - Duration: 2:21. 
For more infomation >> Am facut un an de YouTube. - Duration: 2:15. 
For more infomation >> Pilar García Muñiz, nueva presentadora de 'Informe semanal' - Duration: 2:04. 
For more infomation >> Elogiada por uns, sátira de Adnet a Bolsonaro bate recorde de rejeição no YouTube - Duration: 3:15. 
For more infomation >> Comment CRÉER 1 PAGE de VENTE qui VEND ? Kevin HANOT - WOLFEO - Duration: 37:43. 
For more infomation >> Atriz de Chiquititas comemora seus 15 anos com festa recheada de famosos. Confira! - Duration: 3:43. 
For more infomation >> "No es definitivo": ¿Famosa pareja al borde de la reconciliación? - Duration: 3:50. 
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét