Disinformed Consent ~ by Shawn Siegel

We are living in the age of disinformed consent. Parents assume their doctors and their public health authorities are providing them with all relevant vaccine information, and nothing could be further from the truth.

Obviously, if vaccines can kill and cause serious and debilitating lifelong damage – which they can, and do – the vaccine administrator must provide that information to the client, in unambiguous fashion, regardless of the estimated size of the risk. It’s an ethical mandate that must be fulfilled, but it never is. There is a fundamental reason: medical schools don’t teach the history and nature of vaccine damage and death; nor do nursing and pharmacy schools. Yet doctors, nurses, and, these days, pharmacists, are the very ones who administer vaccines, and upon whom we rely for full information. Somewhere there is made a conscious decision to exclude the reality of serious vaccine damage from the curricula.

Most of the many doctors who have witnessed vaccine damage – thankfully, not all – lack the professional integrity to follow up with curiosity, let alone research. This is the most troubling of the array of vaccine contradictions; trained to observe, they nevertheless appear blind to even the possibility of causal relation.

There is a reason the CDC didn’t announce to the American public in 1999 the direct correlation between the amount of mercury in vaccines and the incidence of speech and learning disorders and autism it found in its own in-house study: a conscious, intolerable decision. (1)

There’s a reason Dr. Viera Scheibner’s cotwatch studies, which decades ago found a compelling link between vaccinations given to infants and the incidence of cot death – SIDS – is never mentioned by public health officials: a conscious decision. (2)

There is a reason the CDC never mentions that it was the radical changes they made to the definition and diagnosis of polio, right after the vaccine was introduced, that eliminated most cases of the disease, not the vaccine: a conscious decision to manipulate the public in their vaccine decisions. Nor do they mention that once the vaccine was licensed, the CDC pulled all remaining diagnoses close to the vest, disallowing for automatic inclusion in annual polio statistics cases reported by private medical practices or local public health departments, and declaring that only they, the CDC, after ostensible thorough review and lab analysis, could officially validate a case. (3)

There is a reason that, concomitant with the diagnostic and labeling changes made, a radical change was made as well to the definition of a polio epidemic, from 20 cases in 100,000 to 35, potentially cutting almost in half the likelihood that any subsequent outbreaks would be so labeled – a change that seems totally haphazard, except for the effect of painting polio as somehow and suddenly less severe, or less contagious, or more contained: a conscious decision, to boost the illusion of vaccine effectiveness. (3)

There’s a reason the mainstream media in general will give no meaningful column space to truthful information about vaccine pitfalls and dangers: the conscious decision of the publishers.

There is a reason the vaccine industry does not discuss the fact that for years adjuvants like those used in most vaccines have been injected into lab animals to trigger rheumatoid arthritis and other autoimmune diseases: a conscious decision to keep the public ignorant of the ethical dilemma of then recommending their use for injection into newborns, infants, and toddlers, as a macabre tradeoff for acute, temporary diseases. This same adjuvantal effect in humans has been established by immunologists, as well. (4) (5)

There is a reason that every doctor or scientist who has ever spoken out publicly against vaccines has been branded a quack, regardless of their unblemished reputation up to that point: a conscious campaign to maintain the myth of vaccine safety, effectiveness and necessity.

Page 1 of 3 | Next page