Gardasil Contaminant Confirmed By Independent Lab

By Norma Erickson

In September 2011, SaneVax Inc. informed the FDA that despite all Merck's statements claimingGardasil contained 'no viral DNA,' Dr. Sin Hang Lee had discovered there were indeed fragments ofHPV-11, HPV-16 and HPV-18 L1 DNA firmly attached to Merck's proprietary aluminum adjuvant in 100% of the samples his laboratory tested. 

The FDA was quick to confirm that Gardasil did indeed contain residual HPV L1 DNA fragments, but that these fragments 'posed no health risk.'

By 2012, Dr. Lee had discovered that these HPV DNA fragments were not only bound to Merck's proprietary aluminum adjuvant, but they had also adopted a non-B conformation, thereby creating anovel (new) chemical compound of unknown toxicity.

Non-B DNA conformations are known to be associated with genetic mutations connected to over 70 serious diseases in human beings including polycystic kidney disease, adrenoleukodystrophy, follicular lymphomas, and spermatogenic failure, just to name a few.

Instead of investigating any potential problems which could be caused by injections of this new chemical compound, HPV vaccine proponents and government health officials chose to try and minimize the impact Dr. Lee's discovery might make on HPV vaccination programs around the globe. Rather than conducting legitimate studies to determine the extent of potential risks, they chose to attack the messenger.

Helen Petousis-Harris PhD, the Director of Immunisation Research and Vaccinology Immunisation Advisory Centre at The University of Auckland, provided a prime example of these tactics in a presentation she gave at a public hearing on HPV vaccine safety in February 2014.

Following are two of the 'concerns' regarding Dr. Lee's research she mentioned during this presentation:

· The tests used were over sensitive, increasing the risk of amplifying irrelevant (junk) DNA

· No one else has replicated his findings

Both of these 'concerns' were put to rest via data presented by Laurent Bélec at the 9thInternational Congress on Autoimmunity on March 26-30, 2014 in Nice, France.

Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection causes cervical cancer, a significant portion of anal, genital and oropharyngeal cancers, genital warts and recurrent respiratory papillomatosis. In June 2006, a prophylactic HPV vaccine (Gardasil®; Merck, NJ, USA) was licensed in the USA, with subsequent approval granted in the European Union. 

Gardasil® is a quadrivalent HPV protein-based vaccine containing genotype-specific L1 capsid proteins of HPV-16, HPV-18, HPV-6 and HPV-11 in the form of virus-like particles as the active ingredient, which are produced by a DNA recombinant technology in yeast. Recently Lee SH showed that Gardasil® contained fragments of HPV-11 or HPV-18 DNA, evidenced by nested PCR, of unknown significance [J Inorg Biochem. 2012 Dec;117:85-92]. 

We herein looked by optimized single PCR in different batches of Gardasil® from France for HPV L1 DNA using MY09/MY11 degenerate and nondegenerate primers, for HPV E2 and E6 DNA genes, and for contaminating Saccharomyces cerevisiae DNA. All amplified amplicons were sequenced and resulting FASTA sequences were analyzed by Genotyping software from NCBI. In-house quantitative single PCR using as external calibrator serial dilutions of HPV-16 DNA extracted from CaSki cell line allowed estimating the load of residual HPV DNA fragments in vaccine ampoules. 

Preliminary data showed the presence of contaminating HPV L1 DNA in all tested different batches of Gardasil® vaccine from France. Our observations confirm independently and extend the previous observations by Lee SH, without using conflicting nested PCR detection possibly subjected to contamination. Persistence in muscle tissue of residual HPV DNA

Not only has another independent laboratory confirmed the findings of Dr. Lee in every Gardasil sample tested from France, this lab used a different and less 'sensitive' methodology to arrive at the same conclusion regarding Gardasil recombinant (genetically engineered) HPV DNA fragment contamination.

Co-authors

L. Belec1, H. Péré1, C. Fayard1.

1Microbiologie, Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France.

It is interesting to note – both Dr. Lee and Prof. Bélec simply indicated the need for further investigation for vaccine safety.

The SaneVax team completely agrees – further investigation is necessary for vaccination safety.

Helen Petousis-Harris couldn't have said it better when she quoted Carl Sagan at the end of her presentation.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Marketing HPV vaccines as cancer preventatives is one of these extraordinary claims requiring extraordinary evidence.

Medical consumers deserved that evidence prior to the institution of mass HPV vaccination programs.

Source: http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog

Chemtrails 3 - Sabia que estamos a ser envenenados todos os dias através do ar?

Children's Cereals: Sugar by the Pound: Executive Summary

A comprehensive analysis by the Environmental Working Group of 1,556 cereals, including 181 marketed for children, shows that most pack in so much sugar that someone eating an average serving of a typical children’s cereal would consume more than 10 pounds of sugar a year from that source alone. And even though researchers have found that children are happy to eat low-sugar cereals, the supermarket cereal aisle offers few such products – and children’s cereals with cartoon characters on the box are among the most highly sweetened of all. EWG also re-reviewed a smaller sample of 84 popular children’s cereals that it had previously evaluated in 2011. This analysis found that while a handful of manufacturers lowered the sugar content of 11 cereals in that sample, the vast majority are still too sweet to be healthy, averaging two teaspoons per serving. One cereal added even more sugar. Not one of the 10 most sweetened cereals on EWG’s 2011 list lowered its sugar content.

Cereals can provide important nutrients that children need during critical times of growth and development – without all the added sugar. Unsweetened whole-grain hot cereals such as oatmeal with fruit on top are a much healthier choice, providing a rich source of naturally occurring vitamins and minerals and no empty calories. The reality, however, is that hot cereals can be less convenient for busy families – although there are many ways to work around this – making the lack of low-sugar cold cereals all the more problematic.

EWG’s analysis shows that of all cereals, those that have cartoon characters on the box indicating they are marketed directly to children are the most heavily loaded with added sugar, making them a significant source of empty calories. A typical serving can contain as much sugar as three Chips Ahoy! or two Keebler Fudge Stripe cookies. EWG found that on average, 34 percent of the calories in children’s cereals come from sugar. For two-thirds of these cereals, a single serving contains more than a third of what experts recommend children consume in an entire day. For 40 cereals, a single serving exceeds 60 percent of the daily amount of sugar suggested by health agencies and organizations. Some contain as many as six different types of sweeteners.

Although the cereal aisle in a typical supermarket looks as if it’s full of choices, EWG found that there are very few low-sugar options – especially among cereals marketed for children. Of the 181 that EWG examined, not one was free of added sugars. EWG also found evidence that promotional labeling on cereal boxes is designed to distract consumers from focusing on the unhealthy sugar content by making claims that the product provides important nutrients, such as “Excellent Source of Vitamin D” or “Good Source of Fiber.” The labels on seven of the 10 most heavily sugared children’s cereals in EWG’s 2011 cereal report currently feature a marketing claim promoting their nutrient content.

The Food and Drug Administration has not yet set a limit on the amount of added sugars allowed in products that make nutritional claims, nor does the agency include a percent Daily Value for sugar on the Nutrition Facts panel required on food products to help inform consumers how much sugar is too much. For saturated fat, it does both.

In contrast, the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Agriculture provided authoritative guidance in the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, recommending that solid fats and added sugar together should constitute no more than about 5-to-15 percent of total calorie intake (USDA and DHHS 2010). Currently, Americans consume 22 teaspoons of sugar a day on average, which amounts to 16 percent of total calorie intake from added sugars alone (NCI 2010; USDA and DHHS 2010). The World Health Organization, the leading international authority on public health, has said since 2003 that sugars should make up less than 10 percent of total energy intake (WHO 2003).

Earlier this year (March 2014), the FDA proposed listing added sugar content in the Nutrition Facts panel (FDA 2014a). This would be a step in the right direction, bringing the required labeling in line with the US Dietary Guidelines and providing consumers with the information they need to reduce sugar consumption. However, the proposed regulations do not update the serving sizes for cereals (FDA 2014b). FDA’s own data show that the average American eats 30 percent more than the amount used to set the labeled serving sizes for the most popular category of cold cereals. This means that on average, people consume even more sugar than the labels would indicate (FDA 2014b).

Cereals are not the only source of added sugar in the American diet, of course. Sugars are added everywhere – from beverages to bread, tomato sauce and salad dressings – contributing to growing waistlines, decayed teeth and a multitude of obesityrelated diseases. The USDA itself calls sugar “the number one food additive” (USDA 2003).

‹ Children's Cereals: Sugar by the Pound

Cereals Contain Far More Sugar than Experts Recommend ›

Source: http://www.ewg.org/research/childrens-cereals-sugar-pound/executive-summary
http://static.ewg.org/reports/2014/cereals/pdf/2014-EWG-Cereals-Report.pdf

White Poison ColorLines, by Shanti Rangwani, Mar 7, 2002

NICE ARTICLE (by Shanti Rangwani) Dear Friends, It's always a pleasure to read truth!

http://www.ncmonline.com/content/ncm/2002/mar/0307milk.html

White Poison ColorLines, by Shanti Rangwani, Mar 7, 2002 Got milk? If not, then thank your lucky stars. Because if you do, medical research shows that you are likely to be plagued by anemia, migraine, bloating, gas, indigestion, asthma, prostate cancer, and a host of potentially fatal allergies--especially if you are a person of color. Ignoring this, the government declares that milk is essential to good health, subsidizes the milk industry to the tune of billions of dollars, and requires milk in its public school lunch programs. 

And celebrity shills sporting milk mustaches tell us that milk is rich in proteins, calcium, and vitamins--and very cool to boot. They forget to tell you about the dangers lurking in that innocuous-looking glass of white. Once criticized only by naturopaths and vegans, now the health effects of milk are being decried by many mainstream doctors. The supposedly hip milk mustache is actually a creamy layer of mucus, live bacteria, and pus. 

Former Chairman of Pediatrics at Johns Hopkins University, Frank Oski, M.D. even has a book called Don't Drink Your Milk which blames every second health problem kids suffer on hormone-ridden commercial milk. Sixty percent of ear infections in kids under six years of age are milk-induced, and milk consumption is the number one cause of iron- deficiency anemia in infants today according to the American Association of Pediatrics. But milk is also a racial issue. Almost 90 percent of African Americans and most Latinos, Asians, and Southern Europeans lack the genes necessary to digest lactose, the primary sugar in milk. 

The milk industry's response is classic: they have launched new campaigns arguing that non- whites can digest milk if they take in small sips during the day. There is a burgeoning industry worth $450 million a year churning out products designed to minimize lactose intolerance. Lactose intolerance is the most common "food allergy," but to call it an allergy is to take a white-centric view that trivializes the fact that most of the world's people are not biologically designed to digest milk. 

Milk does no body good, but for the vast majority of the world's people--people of color--it is a public health disaster. No other animal drinks cow's milk, not even calves once they are weaned. The late Dr. Benjamin Spock, the U.S.'s leading authority on child care, spoke out against feeding "cow's glue" to children, saying it can cause anemia, allergies, and diabetes and in the long term, will set kids up for obesity and heart disease, the number one cause of death in this country. Most of milk's much-vaunted protein is contained in casein-- which is also a raw material for commercial glue. Undigested, it simply sticks to the intestinal walls and blocks nutrient absorption. 

 The mainstream media and the government ignore the medical studies showing that milk is a serious health threat, in part because people of color are the main victims. The institutionalization of racism is highlighted by U.S. Department of Agriculture spokesperson Eilene Kennedy's statement on milk, that the government's recommended food pyramid is intended for "the majority of Americans. It doesn't communicate to all Americans." The USDA continues to require that school lunch programs include milk with every meal, and recommend that we glug milk for calcium, even though Harvard studies show an increase in osteoporosis and bone-breakage in people who consume milk. It says we should drink milk to prevent heart disease (and is echoed by Larry King) even though saturated fat constitutes 55 percent of milk solids. To call lactose intolerance an "allergy" is to take a white- centric view that trivializes the fact that most of the world's people are not biologically designed to digest milk. The dairy lobby perpetrates lies to ensure its profits. It benefits directly from the exaggerated support prices the government shells out for this "health food." The government pays over a billion dollars a year for surplus butter. 

A General Accounting Office (GAO) study concluded that a reduction in the government price support system would have netted consumers savings of $10.4 billion from 1986 to 2001. And the USDA pays inflated prices to purchase dairy products for both the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) and federal school lunch programs--milking the taxpayers and actually getting them to pay for poisoning 26 million school kids. The milk lobby has whipsawed its way into the highest echelons of power. Staffers under Richard Nixon were indicted for accepting $300,000 from the dairy lobby for making milk part of the school lunch program. Dr. Robert Cohen of the Dairy Education Board, a nonprofit organization dedicated to exposing the milk lobby, contends that the dramatic 52 percent rise in asthma deaths among minority kids in New York coincided with the surplus milk, cheese, and butter pumped into them under the USDA's free school lunch and breakfast giveaway programs. The incidence of asthma deaths may be even higher since asthma is not a reportable disease, and asthma deaths are sometimes certified as cardiovascular disease. 

There is also a direct link between milk consumption and prostate cancer among African Americans, who have the highest incidence of this disease in the world. A study in Cancer has shown that men who reported drinking three or more glasses of whole milk daily had a higher risk for prostate cancer than men who reported never drinking whole milk. The controversial Bovine Growth Hormone (BGH)--banned in most countries--is pumped into U.S. milch cows to increase annual yield (50,000 pounds of milk per cow today compared to 2,000 pounds in 1959). Milk from cows treated with BGH is likely to contain pus from their udders since the hormone leads to mastitis, or udder infection. 

BGH use results in a tumor-promoting chemical (IGF-I) that has been implicated in an explosive increase of cancer of the colon, smooth muscle, and breast. The antibiotics dairy farmers use to treat BGH-caused infections in cows appear in their milk and greatly hasten human tolerance to most antibiotics, a potentially life- threatening state of affairs. The Center for Science in the Public Interest reports that 38 percent of milk samples in 10 cities were contaminated with sulfa drugs and other antibiotics. 

A fightback is beginning. Protesters picketed New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani's planned milk promotion campaign with a photo of the mayor wearing a milk mustache over the caption, "Got Prostate Cancer?" Giuliani (who, like his father, has prostate cancer) dropped the campaign. And doctors from the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) persuaded Washington, D.C. Mayor Anthony Williams not to declare May 11 as "Drink Chocolate Milk Day" by presenting evidence that milk is harmful, especially to people of color. The PCRM--composed of some of the leading doctors in the U.S.--has campaigned extensively in the health and consumer press and led a successful legal effort in 1999 to make dairy products optional in the federal food guidelines. 

The campaign was supported by a number of prominent civil rights organizations and leaders, including the Congressional Black Caucus, the NAACP, Martin Luther King, III, Jesse Jackson, Jr., the National Hispanic Medical Association, and former Surgeon General Joycelyn Elders. The dairy lobby remains cozy with most medical practitioners to perpetrate its "drink milk" propaganda. However, not one of the 1,500 papers listed in Medicine that deal with milk points to its goodness--only to the pus, blood, antibiotics, and carcinogens in milk, and the chronic fatigue, anemia, asthma, and autoimmune disorders milk consumption causes. The time has come for the milk industry to face the kind of scrutiny that the tobacco companies face today. Meanwhile, discard the moo juice. 

Source: http://www.notmilk.com/

The calcium supplement problem: As serious as a heart attack

Osteoporosis is not caused by a lack of limestone, oyster shell or bone meal. Heart attack, however, may be caused by supplementation with these exact same "elemental" forms of calcium, according to two meta-analyses published last year in the British Medical Journal.

Back in July of 2011, the British Medical Journal published the results of a high-powered meta-analysis which looked at whether or not calcium supplementation had any effect on cardiovascular disease risk. Indeed, this groundbreaking report, which was based on the results of five clinical trials conducted in the US, Britain and New Zealand, involving over 8,000 people, showed that taking elemental calcium supplements of 500 mg or more increased the relative risk of heart attack by 27%. 

Though the study made international headlines at the time, critics soon took issue with the fact that it involved calcium supplementation without co-administered vitamin D. However, in April of that same year, another meta-analysis published in the same journal showed that even with co-administered D elemental calcium increased the risk of heart attack by 24%, and in addition, the composite of heart attack and stroke by 15% -- in essence, putting those doubts to rest.

The idea that calcium supplementation may be toxic to cardiovascular health is not new, as many in the field of nutrition have long warned against supplementation with elemental calcium; which is to say, calcium from limestone, oyster shell, egg shell and bone meal (hydroxylapatite). 

Despite the growing popularity of elemental calcium supplementation, largely reinforced by conventional health "experts" and organizations like the National Osteoporosis Foundation (whose corporate sponsors include the calcium manufacturers Oscal and Citrical), the habit simply does not make sense. After all, have you ever experienced visceral disgust after accidentally consuming eggshell? If you have, you know your body is "hard-wired" to reject low-quality calcium sources (stones and bones as it were), in favor of getting calcium from food.

Inorganic or "elemental" calcium, when not bound to the natural co-factors, e.g. amino acids, lipids and glyconutrients, found in "food" (which is to say other living beings, e.g. plants and animals), no longer has the intelligent delivery system that enables your body to utilize it in a biologically appropriate manner. Lacking this "delivery system," the calcium may end up going to places you do not want (ectopic calcification), or go to places you do want (e.g. the bones), but in excessive amounts, stimulating unnaturally accelerated cell-division (osteoblasts), resulting in higher bone turn over rates later in life (this is explained in the article below).

Or, the body attempts to disburden itself of this inappropriate calcium and dumps it into the bowel (constipation), or pushes it through the kidneys (stones). Worse, high levels of calcium can accumulate in the blood (hypercalcemia), which can contribute to destabilizing the atherosclerotic plaque through the formation of a brittle calcium cap on the atheroma, can contribute to thrombosis (clot) formation, hypertension (that's why we use calcium channel blockers to lower blood pressure), and perhaps causing arrhythmias/fibrillation and or heart muscle cramping (a rather common, though rarely recognized trigger of 'heart attack'). 

The breasts too are uniquely susceptible to calcification, which is why we use the same x-rays to ascertain bone density that we do to discern pathological microcalcifications in the breast, i.e. x-ray mammography. Due to the fact that the hydroxylapatitate crystals found in malignant breast tissue may act as a cellular 'signaling molecule' or mitogen (inducing cell proliferation), it is possible that certain breast calcifications may be a cause, and not just an effect, of the tumorous lesions ("breast cancer") found there. This may also help to explain why women with the highest bone density (often obtained through massive, lifelong calcium supplementation) have up to 300% higher incidence ofmalignant breast cancer.

"Brain gravel" is also an increasingly prevalent phenomenon, where autoposied patients have been found to have pebble-size calcium deposits distributed throughout their brains, including the pineal gland ('the seat of the soul'). The wide range of existing calcium-associateted pathologies, and their increasing prevalence in calcium-fixated cultures, demand further investigation and explanation. Could one aspect be our cultural fixation on mega-dose calcium supplementation? 

To learn more, read "How Too Much Calcium & Over-Medication Can Break Your Bones"

Fonte: http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog

Geoengenharia - Chemtrails em Lisboa - Metais pesados (alumínio e bário ) sendo pulverizados livremente sob tudo e todos