39 votes

The Vaccine Hoax is Over – Secret Documents Reveal Shocking Truth

Freedom of Information Act in the UK filed by a doctor there has revealed 30 years of secret official documents showing that government experts have

1. Known the vaccines don’t work
2. Known they cause the diseases they are supposed to prevent
3. Known they are a hazard to children
4. Colluded to lie to the public
5. Worked to prevent safety studies

Those are the same vaccines that are mandated to children in the US.

Educated parents can either get their children out of harm’s way or continue living inside one of the largest most evil lies in history, that vaccines – full of heavy metals, viral diseases, mycoplasma, fecal material, DNA fragments from other species, formaldehyde, polysorbate 80 (a sterilizing agent) – are a miracle of modern medicine.

read more http://www.endalldisease.com/the-vaccine-hoax-is-over-secret...

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
deacon's picture

i would rather

take my chances with the diseases on this planet
the ones naturally occurring,if there are any
i feel there are none that can hurt me,but only make me stronger

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence

Ok Bob-45 and whoever else wants to answer

I have a very simple question for you I would like for you to explain.

Do you think the current understanding of the Adaptive Immune System is fictitious?


Please keep ethics, the government, big Pharma, and every other side issue out of this.

Do you not believe that the human body reacts to antigens and stores this information in memory B and T cells? Do you reject the idea that antigens can be isolated from pathogens and/or synthesized in order to trigger the adaptive immune response?

This is how vaccinations work. The way I see it is that in order to reject vaccinations, one must also reject the theory of the adaptive immune system, unless a radically different theory of immunology is presented. You cannot logically reject one without rejecting the other.

It is the other way around.

In order to ACCEPT the routine administration of multiple vaccinations, you have to reject the Theory of the Adaptive Immune System, which to function properly requires the natural, and repeated exposure to microorganisms in the Environment to strengthen the immune system. The Adaptive Immune System is not designed to cope with the utterly unnatural injection of broad spectrum toxins, and decomposed organic matter, and alien [I do not necessarily mean otherworldly] DNA fragments, etc.

With the disaster of the bogus threat of a Swine Flu Epidemic in 1976 and the Vaccine aggressively promoted by the Federal Government at that time, at least the Public had recourse to Tort action - as well as the right of refusal - which holds such disasters in check. Since then the Laws and the Courts have changed.

Follow the money back to the incomprehensibly large Profits to Corporations - now ironically "immune" to lawsuits - that get funded whenever there is an opportunity for an expensive New Vaccine for a new alleged threat of an epidemic.

Like a scene out of Stephen King's novel "The Cell", the frightened misled sheep line up appreciatively for their Free Vaccine - most of whom don't even know they've been fleeced through taxes and the devaluation of their own money to pay for their Gift from the Government.

Did you bother to read even a portion of the article?

The issue is that the vaccines were known to cause severe adverse reactions like death and brain damage in particular segments of the population who are especially at risk (likely IMHO to be the same segment of the population who are especially at risk from severe adverse complications arising from the disease itself...) and this information was deliberately withheld from medical practitioners and parents.

This is not a side issue it is the main issue, people have a right to informed consent.

I dare you to actually read the paper this article was based on http://www.ecomed.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/3-tomlje....

The author does not argue that all vaccines are bad, in fact some of the important information revealed is that the authorities had knowledge that some vaccines are much worse than others (i.e. caused a lot more death and brain damage etc.) and deliberately did nothing about it in order to protect the reputation of vaccines generally.

You don't have to dare me to do anything.

I read the original posted article. My response wasn't geared so much to the article itself, but to the anti-vaccine crowd that is inevitably drawn into any forum that has the words "VACCINE" and "HOAX."

This paper which you just linked to is excellent.

sorry for my attitude

I just get irritated when people assume that anyone who questions the safety or efficacy of vaccines has no good scientifically based reasons for doing so, or that we are somehow ignorant of the scientific rationale behind vaccination. Perhaps I misinterpreted your sentiments. I guess you could consider me to be a part of the anti-vaccine crowd in that based on the evidence I have seen I have come to the preliminary conclusion that the benefits of vaccination are probably overestimated, and that the risks are likely much greater than authorities would like people to know. As such I personally will not vaccinate myself or my children as I do not think that the potential benefits are worth taking the risks, especially since I cannot sue in civil court if damage is caused because vaccine manufacturer's liability has been removed by congress and I can only seek redress in "vaccine court" where they will claim I do not have the right to a trial by jury.

All or nothing?

Are all vaccines bad or are some safer than others? Do you think age matters at all? Do you believe it's worth the risk of taking a Hepatitis A vaccine prior to traveling to an area where exposure to the disease is likely?

TwelveOhOne's picture

When government removes liability...

You can be fairly certain that they are hiding negative behavior.

For instance, neither can you sue for vaccine-caused issues, nor can you sue your local municipal water supply for the poison they are adding to the water (sodium fluoride) -- I was trying to find the reference to this but it is eluding me, I'm pretty sure it was a federal law enacted in the last 20 years. Likely, one of the links in this article are relevant: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_fluoridation_in_the_Unite...

I love you. I'm sorry. Please forgive me. Thank you.
http://fija.org - Fully Informed Jury Association
http://jsjinc.net - Jin Shin Jyutsu (energy healing)

deacon's picture

obama removed

all liability form pharma,before the vaccines were even introduced
this was telling,to me anyways

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence

Your post is a fallacy

Even if vaccines may work in theory would not mean that the way vaccines are used in practice is automatically all good.

You can reject premise two "current use of vaccines is all good" without even getting into premise 1 "adaptive immune system is sound".

One could 100% be dialed in to the adaptive immune system theory and still believe current vaccine practice to be highly questionable, with zero contradictions.


Freedom - Peace - Prosperity

Exactly! Perfect parallel

with Climate Change debate. We can fully accept the Greenhouse Gas Theory and understand that cutting down trees and burning more oil means more CO2 and thus a slightly warmer atmosphere, but that doesn't mean that we need to believe that catastrophic changes will occur within a few years if we don't enact cap-and-trade.

My daughter was born and had medical complications, causing some damage to portions of her brain and respiratory system. Through the miracles of her care, she shows very few symptoms now, but that doesn't mean that I should be ok with someone putting toxic metals into her bloodstream along with pieces of fatal viruses or even live viruses.

I believe vaccines could work if done right, but why don't we go back and look at how they've been made in the past 100 years and realize the process is a total corporate state with no respect for the rights of life and health of the child.

Best-case scenario, vaccines have prevented about 10% of the infections that would have occurred 100 years ago. The other 90% of the reduction in infections has been due to better medical care and better hygiene. On the flipside, nobody is measuring the capital and human damage associated with 1 in 6 American children having developmental or autoimmune disorders, and this is not occurring in 3rd world countries. In certain ways, the poorest nations are healthier than we are because they dont have vaccines. Fix the problems and don't create new ones.



Did I say "current use of vaccines is all good?"

No I did not.

I'm talking strictly about the science behind them. There is a vocal group that rejects ALL VACCINES. The entire concept of vaccination. This is who my question was geared towards.

This is the exact response I was trying to avoid. You just used a logical fallacy by trying to pin the "current use of all vaccines is all good" argument on me, which I did NOT say.

I am thinking

That "vocal" sometimes "fanatical" group has a family member that has been affected by vaccinations. The numbers are growing exponentially daily making the argument for vaccinations a tough sell.

"Its easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled."
Mark Twain


Well you made up a strawman argument then, because no where did I see a claim that vaccines could never ever work.


Freedom - Peace - Prosperity

Sure vaccines might work for some people sometimes

The issue is that they might also cause some other people to die or have severe adverse reactions like brain damage. I am not so sure that the potential benefits outweigh the known risks particularly since I suspect that people who have adverse reactions to the vaccines are probably the same people who would tend to have adverse reactions to the disease itself. I am also very concerned about the fact that severe complications arising from vaccines are underreported, downplayed, and not properly investigated. I think you should be too.

I agree 100%. But let me be very clear on my stance...

I support the fight against scientific fallacies using superior scientific evidence and theories.

I reject unethical medical practices, such as mass medication and mandatory vaccination, in favor of superior medical ethics.

I do NOT support efforts to fight unethical medical practices using sensationalism, fear-mongering, and pseudoscience. This is a major problem with the vaccine issue. The internet has been flooded with propaganda, sensationalism, and outright lies about vaccines. Look at the source of this article, for instance. Endalldisease.com sensationalizes everything from UFOs to TVs being deadly. This kind of crap is not helping the movement. It is harming the credibility of the people who are fighting the vaccine pushers scientifically and intelligently, like the original author (whose work was manipulated by EndAllDisease).

Sometimes it is impossible to have an intelligent discussion about vaccines in some of these liberty forums because certain people are hopelessly emotional and hysterical and intolerant of dissenting scientific opinion. It's a shame, because if they actually read my comments they would realize that I AGREE WITH THEM regarding many of their concerns.

GCN3030, you and I are on the same page. I was not directing my challenge about the adaptive immune system to you, but some of the other people I have been debating the last few weeks. I was talking to the people who have taken the vaccine debate out of the realm of reality. The people who are rejecting the fundamentals of immunology outright.

In theory the concept is good

But that would be if you have a vaccine for every strain of whatever is out there. Viruses evolve rapidly and the vaccine you receive may be outdated pretty quickly. So in essence, youre receiving a syringe full of toxins that MAY help combat the virus you come across but at what cost? These vaccines are detrimental to the human body so youd be trading one type of sickness for another.

Here's the source web page with documents....

It seems these web sites cite sources to other web sites that they copied their stories from. This is where you can find one of the actual documents they refer to.



Time to draw that line in the sand

December 7, 2012 New York Appeals Court: Federal Government Can Vaccinate Your Children Without Your Consent – Trumps State Laws

ALBANY, N.Y. (CN) – A mother who says public health officials in St. Lawrence County immunized her young daughter without her consent cannot sue, a New York appeals court ruled.

Upon declaration of a public health emergency, the federal Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act pre-empts state tort claims, according to the six-page ruling from the Third Judicial Department of Appellate Division.

“We must presume that Congress fully understood that errors in administering a vaccination program may have physical as well as emotional consequences, and determined that such potential tort liability must give way to the need to promptly and efficiently respond to a pandemic or other public health emergency,” Justice Karen Peters wrote for a five-judge panel.

The St. Lawrence County Public Health Department had arranged a clinic at Lisbon Central School in December 2009 amid a new flu outbreak never previously identified in animals or people.


"Its easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled."
Mark Twain


For others.

"Its easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled."
Mark Twain