Discussion in 'Other Health News and Research' started by natasa778, Jul 13, 2012.
And of course the lovely Science Media Centre is on the case:
This scenario makes the whole story potentially much more scary.
Aaby's findings in Guinea Bissau tell us that something very similar may well be happening in humans (WHO simply refuses to follow up or give publicity to these findings). This podcast is no longer available but outline gives some basic info on the findings http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00x4013
Live vaccinevirus can stay in the body like wild virusses can and the next vaccination can contain another virusstrain.
Futhermore there can be traces of different strains in a vaccine and these strains could multiply in the host.
Note that the SMC is of course funded by Pfizer, the manufacturers of one of the vaccines in question, and by most other leading western vaccine manufacturers (inc GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Sanofi):
The SMC claim to be impartial in their influence over UK press reporting of scientific issues, arguing that they are funded by a wide range of industrial interests and not just by one company. However, they are funded by all the leading multinationals who have interests in the press reporting of science which affects their industry (they are also funded by 5 of the top 6 pesticide manufacters, for example), and in relation to any controversial scientific issues which affect those interests the SMC clearly report those issues with a bias to defend the interests of those corporations.
The SMC's pro-industrial stance in the control of the meda reporting of science is of course entirely consistent with the stated aims of those (like director Fiona Fox) who control the SMC. Bizarre though it may sound, the UK's press reporting of scientific issues is controlled by this small group of former Revolutionary Communist Party members, who 20 years ago set out their new post-Marxist infiltrationist philosophy, arguing that the public denial of any human suffering resulting from scientific and industrial development was justified by the greater good resulting from scientific progress.
I also wonder who is behind, or what drives Discovery Mag nowdays. Their 'coverage' of scientific issues in the past few years amounts to nothing more than blatant pro-industry damage control, including the comments they let through (I tried posting a very polite comment several times, but no way jose, they didn't like the taste). The only comments they let through are the ones congratulating them on damage control etc. Incredible stuff, has as to be seen to be believed!
But viruses mutate and recombine on their own all the time. Sexual reproduction among us higher life forms does the same thing--it mixes up genes.
Do tell about the Science Media Centre. Never heard of it, nor its origins as a revolutionary cell.
Here, IreneF, you can read about SMC director Fiona Fox and her friends at Living Marxism (the same people now write for the magazine Spiked):
Well, now I see that the profile on Fiona Fox is missing, but this is the link to the SMC profile:
Interesting. They hardly seem like actual Communists.
Bizarre. Reds working hand in hand with the multinats to suppress the masses, supposedly for the greater good.
Hi, IreneF. They no longer are Communists. They are right-wing libertarians who align themselves with corporate power and ridicule anyone who questions the safety, or wisdom of putting into use, "advances" in science and technology.
Here's part of what Wikipedia has to say about the point of view of the editors of Spiked and the writers they publish:
The magazine focuses on issues of freedom and state control, science and technology. It seeks to counter positions such as multiculturalism, environmentalism and what they see as a recent trend in Western foreign policy: humanitarian intervention.
Spiked claims that it opposes all forms of censorship, by the state or otherwise. Its writers call for a repeal of libel, hate speech and incitement laws. They have criticised laws targeted at paedophiles. Spiked also regularly critique risk society; animal rights; political correctness; and environmentalism. As regards the latter, a particular Spiked target has been what they see as "exaggerated" and "hysterical" interpretations of the scientific consensus on global warming.
You'd have to read all the material at lobbywatch.org to understand how bizarre this group (I don't mind calling it a cult) is. Denial of the Rwandan genocide, a campaign against breastfeeding, etc.
Ideology trumps common sense.
You can also try a Google Site Search
Separate names with a comma.