Re: Re: THE DANGEROUS IMPURITIES OF VACCINES

[Guest guest]

Like I have mentioned before unfortunatly their are no two children with ASD that are the same. We are all great parents and stronger parents for our kids. As we all know one thing might be the trigger for Autism, and another thing might trigger the Autism in another child. Autism is the final product, as you said, regardless of how our kids got ASD. I don't want it to seem that I don't read and keep myself informed because like all of you, I also read articles and research etc. I didnt mean to stir up a contriversy at all. I do have caution on what is put in my son's body and I feel very blessed that my son has great doctors. I also am proud to know people in this group with different or similar situations as me.

To: sList Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2008 5:56:22 AMSubject: Re: THE DANGEROUS IMPURITIES OF VACCINES

Yes it is all understandably very confusing with all theconflicting info out there. Yes many of us accept the fact that autismprobably has genetic underpinnings, like most diseases by the way. Butfor example your son has a deletion on Chromosome 16 and that has beenlinked autism. What they did not tell you is that the reason they say"linked" and not "caused" is that there are lots of people with thesame deletion who DO NOT have autism. That is why there are those ofus who believe that genetics are the nail andenvironment/ toxins/vaccines (may be different for each child) are thehammer. Autism is the final product. You can have a hammer and a nailand not have a building. They have to go together in just the rightfashion to make it happen. For example for other diseases we knowabout genetic predisposition - breast cancer. But what makes somepeople with the same genetic predisposition never

develop the disease?When these types of questions are answered then we will know what toavoid if anything. For me, I choose to try to eliminate toxins from myfamilies' lives in the form of food, chemicals etc. and yes that doesinclude having caution in what is injected into their bodies. I am notanti vaccine. But I am for informed CHOICE and for making vaccinesmore safe in their makeup and schedule of delivery. It is notmedically necessary to inject a child with 4 or more viruses on thesame day. That is so that the "herd" can get immunized moreefficiently. And they are adding more and more vaccines all the time.I just think it is time to take pause and take a look. Not all littlebodies are the same. Just my humble opinion.>> That was a very informative article. When I went to the NationalInstitute of Heath (NIH) in Mayland, they explained to me that bychance the mutations my husband and I have is why my son Tyler has agenetic condition. They also explained that his deletion of cromosone16 (a piece is missing) has been linked to Autism. What am I supposeto believe? I am NOT saying at all that vaccines have not AFFECTEDsome of our kids. BUT there is so many articles and research out there.> > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __> > To: sList@ yahoogroups. com> Sent: Friday, December 19, 2008 12:11:11 PM> Subject: THE DANGEROUS IMPURITIES OF VACCINES> >

> http://www.sparks- of-light. org> > Scroll down to > THE DANGEROUS IMPURITIES OF VACCINES.> > FROM CHAPTER 7 OF "FEAR OF THE INVISIBLE" > by Janine , investigative journalist.> > They started with the Measles, Mumps and Rubella vaccine (MMR). Oneof the first speakers on it was Dr Arifa Khan from the top Americangovernment health and safety organization, the Food and Drugs Agency(FDA), and what she had to report was very troubling. > > She commenced: 'Today I would like to present an update on thereverse transcriptase [RT] activity that is present in chicken cellderived vaccines.' My attention was immediately grabbed. I knew thatthe mumps and measles components of the MMR vaccine are grown infertilised chicken eggs, as are also the Flu and Yellow Fevervaccines.. The rubella

virus for MMR is produced differently - inartificially grown cells taken originally from an aborted human foetus. > > Dr, Khan explained she was reporting the result of a just concludedand little-known two-year investigation into the safety of MMR headedby the World Health Organisation. She explained that this study wasinitiated in 1996 after the discovery in MMR of RT. an enzyme linkedto retroviruses as well as cells. In the back corridors of virologythis had immediately caused alarm as some retroviruses were thought tocause cancers - as well as AIDS - for HIV is said to be a retrovirus.WHO had then quietly organised MMR safety studies at variouslaboratories to see 'whether this RT activity was associated with aretroviral particle, and even more importantly, whether thisretrovirus particle could infect and replicate in human cells.' > > What they then discovered confirmed their

worse fears. Dr Khancontinued: 'The RT activity is found to be associated with retroviralparticles of two distinct avian endogenous retroviral familiesdesignated as EAV and ALV.' Now ALV stands for Avian Leukosis Virus.It is associated with a cancer found in wild birds, so definitely wasnot wanted in the vaccines. Khan added that they had found anotherpossible danger; 'There was a theoretical possibility that the viruscould . infect the [human] cell' thus integrating its genetic code'into the human DNA' and cause cancer. The only reassurance she couldgive was that her team had watched vaccine cultures for a full '48hours', and, in that time period, no merger of viral and human DNA hadbeen observed. I thought this far too short a period to guaranteesafety - but read on.> > Dr Khan then warned; 'there is a possibility that there could alsobe potentialpseudotype s (between) . the measles

vaccine virus and theretroviral sequences' - meaning there was a risk that bird virusesmight combine with the measles virus in the vaccine to create newdangerous mutant viruses, They had not seen it happen, but it couldhappen.> > She acknowledged much longer term studies were needed than 48 hours,but acknowledged that such studies of measles vaccine cultures werevery difficult: 'because the measles vaccine virus itself lyses[kills] the culture in about three to four days.' This had preventedthem from looking to see what might be the consequences fromlonger-term contamination in the vaccinated.> > So far, she added, they had only managed to analyse a small part ofthe retrovirus contamination in the vaccines. 'Our ongoing studies aredirected towards doing similar analysis' of other retroviral geneticcodes found in the vaccine preparations. ' It seemed they had foundonly part

of these virus's genetic codes. And she added that she hadlearnt, 'about 20 years ago similar RT activity was reported' in thevaccine. Apparently at that time nothing had been done about it, andthe public were not told. She concluded by explaining what the WorldHealth Organisation (WHO) had decided to do about this chickenleucosis virus (ALV) contamination. It would take the risk of quietlyallowing MMR vaccine production to continue in retrovirus contaminatedeggs, because; 'You cannot get ALV free flocks in places where you aremaking yellow fever vaccine.' > > Dr , head of the DNA Virus Laboratory in the Division ofViral Products, then warned. 'All the egg-based vaccines arecontaminated' including 'influenza, yellow fever and smallpoxvaccines, as well as the vaccine for horses against encephalomyelitisvirus' for 'these fertilised chicken eggs were susceptible to a widevariety

of viruses.' .....> > The latest information I could find about the retroviralcontamination of the MMR vaccine is in a 2001 scientific paper. Thisreported some 100 MMR recipients were tested to see if they possessedantibodies against two types of retroviruses identified by Dr Khan andothers. When the selected antibody was not found, this interpreted asmeaning that these children had not been infected. But the authorswent on to say: 'The finding of RT activity in all measles vaccinelots from different manufacturers tested suggests that this occurrenceis not sporadic and that vaccine recipients may be universally exposedto these [chicken] retroviral particles'. (4,5,7,14). They thenconcluded: 'Despite these reassuring data, the presence of avianretroviral particles in chick embryo fibroblast-derived vaccines [likeMMR] raises questions about the suitability of primary chicken cellsubstrates

for vaccine production.' They thus recommended consideringstopping> production in fertilized eggs, and growing the vaccine virusesinstead on 'RT-negative cells from different species, such as onimmortalized [cancerous] or diploid [laboratory grown] mammaliancells.' .....> > All the largest public health institutions in the Western World wereat this workshop, including the World Health Organisation whoserepresentative co-chaired it. The UK government's vaccine safetyorganisations had a top-level representative in Dr Philip Minor. Nopress apparently were present - but the importance of the meetingmeant that it was taped to ensure an accurate record. > > Dr Bill Egan, the Acting Director of the Office of Vaccines at theCenter for Biologics opened the meeting thus.'I think we need toremind ourselves that viruses can propagate only in live cells, andthis of course holds true

for whole viral vaccines. They can only beproduced in cells [substrates] . We have only to think back to thefinding of SV40 in poliovirus vaccines to realize the extent of therisk that any cell substrate may pose, and there is still great needfor concern. we have been given the task of identifying these concerns.'> The scientists present then told of viral and DNA genetic codefragments, as well as proteins,that contaminate the vaccines. Theymentioned particularly their worry that among these might be dangerousprions or oncogenes. > > Other vaccines had been found contaminated with monkey viruses. Dr of the FDA reported: 'humans were immunized withadenovirus vaccines that contained adenovirus-SV40 hybrid viruses.' Inother words, a brand-new monkey-human mutant virus had been created inthe vaccine. Dr. Ben Berkhout exclaimed at hearing this: 'That's theone I would like to

focus on today, Is [there a danger of] thepotential reversion of an attenuated vaccine strain to a virus variantthat can replicate fast and can potentially cause AIDS?'> > This was a startling question. Could the viruses in our most commonchildhood vaccines be so affected by contaminating DNA that thevaccines would give our children AIDS? Were such mutation events rare?Apparently they were not. Another doctor stated. 'Recombination amonga variety of viruses and cells co-infected in tissue culture is notuncommon. This is an issue that certainly will need furtherconsideration. ' In other words, vaccine incubators cause virusmutation. The next speaker dealt with the 'foreign cellular DNA' theyhad found to contaminate our childhood vaccines. Dr ofthe CDER and FDA worried that this might well include 'viraloncogenes' - in other words, it might cause cancer.> > but none

of this was to be made public, and until now it hasremained secret...!> > some references.. ..> > VIC (Vaccine Injury Coalition)> Autism is 1 in 67 children today and it's impossible to have agenetic epidemic! > Please learn from our mistake and educate BEFORE you vaccinate!> For more information visit www.vacinfo. org or call >