Corruption in Maryland Gardasil Vaccine Policies Exposed by Pro-Vaccine Parent
Josh Mazer, a resident of Maryland who supports a "robust vaccine policy" doesn't approve of all vaccines being used. He considers vaccines "instrumental in promoting the public welfare", but he's now a critic of Merck's HPV vaccine Gardasil. He objected to the aggressive statewide strategy to promote and market the vaccine to public schools.
Source
After some investigating of the large public campaign for mass vaccination, which includes local health departments trying to get 11 and 12 year old children to receive the vaccine, he has changed his tune. This came about as a result of a public school nurse in January 2018 telling him about being "forced" to market the vaccine to 11 and 12 year old kids.
Various agencies in Maryland have issued letters that outline the policy, which the nurse showed Mazer. One is from Maryland Department of Health, and the other from Montgomery County Schools. The DOH letter was sent to every school superintendent in Maryland, alleging a "critical public health issue of under-vaccination Maryland’s adolescents against Human Papillomavirus (HPV)". It continues stating:
"14 million people get infected ... each year posing a significant public health risk ... it is imperative ... for age-eligible children to… complete the HPV vaccination series while obtaining school- entry required vaccinations."
Mazer contacted the Dr. Jinlene Chan of the DOH that signed the letter to get more information about the alleged "critical public health issue". He wanted to know how safe and effective it was. But she told him she couldn't help provide that information. How can someone in the health sector be giving out information that they can't even answer question about? Something was off.
Next, Mazer contacted Ken Lin Tai, director of the Cancer Control and Prevention unit at the Department of Health. This second doctor who was promoting a vaccine for health reasons also couldn't provide any documentation that supported the claims of the letter. Eventually Mazer met with Dr. Howard Haft, deputy director of the Maryland Department of Health, who told him the data comes from the CDC.
To get the data from the source, he filed a Public Information Act request with the Prevention and Health Promotion Administration in April 2018. With the data, he found out the health department has received $91.6 million for the past 6 years from non-profit organizations that are funded by big pharma, all to promote the HPV vaccine. The DOH and schools are being bought off in order to buy vaccines to administer to children.
To find out if anyone outside this payoff scheme was aware of any "critical public health issue", Mazer contact Dr. Pete Doshi, assistant professor of pharmaceutical health services research at the University of Maryland. But this doctor was unaware any real health crisis with HPV "under vaccination". He learned that 98% of the HPV goes out the body naturally within a few years. The rate of HPV cases was in decline in Maryland for years before the HPV vaccine came out, and that the vaccine was never proven to prevent cancer while only protecting against 9 out of over 200 HPV strains.
Those promoting the "necessity" of an HPV vaccine don't even know why it's needed, and are simply engaging in a fear-based campaign. The fear mongering of the dangers is used to over sell the vaccine and it's alleged benefits. As Mazer put it, the "entire effort seems to be more a sales campaign than a disease prevention program."
The harms of the vaccines aren't talked about, only the fear of harm from HPV. But these harms are demonstrated in many cases, such as the death of Christina Tarsell of Sparks, Maryland in 2008 after receiving her 3rd HPV vaccine. In 2017 the U.S. Court of Federal Claims decided the series of shots caused her fatal arrhythmia.
Given the risks of the HPV vaccine, the public health officials owe it to the citizenry to inform them of the dangers. The failure to disclose the information of vaccine injury and even death from the HPV vaccine is a violation of moral and ethical requirements the health industry is supposed to have in place in order to get medical consent.
The health industry is being paid off to promote a risky vaccine with demonstrated ill effects by embarking on a fear mongering campaign to frighten people into accepting the vaccine. This just makes more shots given and increases the profits for big pharma who funds the push for the vaccine. If that isn't corruption, I don't know how to categorize it.
Thank you for your time and attention. Peace.
If you appreciate and value the content, please consider: Upvoting, Sharing or Reblogging below.
me for more content to come!
My goal is to share knowledge, truth and moral understanding in order to help change the world for the better. If you appreciate and value what I do, please consider supporting me as a Steem Witness by voting for me at the bottom of the Witness page.
There is only fear mongering that’s all they have left. They don’t have legitimate science behind them, they don’t have good ingredients behind them and they don’t have a good track record. They make a killing now that they can’t be sued so their main goal is marketing, I mean educating people to the severe deathly consequences of not getting their chemical concoctions.
I won't lie, I used to think Americans who didn't want their kids vaccinated were nuts, because of the epidemics we've had here. Thank God for the informationwar that's cleared my thinking
Thank you for keeping an open mind. Most people don’t until it’s too late; be it a vaccine injured child or someone in their family. Many of us aren’t against the concept of vaccines we are against their awful ingredients and lack of true scientific rigor in studying them.
Got a background in science mate? Do you understand what scientific rigor is? Or have you watched a few too many youtube videos and decided you are truly woke?
The real science behind vaccines has been settled for decades, their ingredients are largely safe and their risks are tiny compared to their benefits. If you're anti-vaccine in 2018 then you're either selling something or you've been listening too much to someone who is.
Please point me to a vaccine that has undergone a double blind study with a control group of unvaccinated versus those vaccinated with the health outcomes. This is what I refer to when I dispute its scientific validity.
Link me to a paper as well as independently verified evidence of such.
The science has not been settled. It’s been bought and propagandized there is a very large difference.
I want vaccines to legitimately work but that is not the case. They can find adjuvants that are not poisonous or vaccines that actually work unlike the flu shot. They are just lazy and interested in only profits.
Ones ‘background’ is just a conventional sense that only those who have paid money to formally study something are eligible to voice their opinions. That’s a complete farce. In the Information Age we are in it is possible to do ones research. Don’t also repeat the same tired statement of only reading falsities. There are some of us who read both sides of an argument to form an opinion, we don’t participate in the echo chamber the way others do.
And finally the whole purpose and concept of ‘science’ is to continually test and retest information. It’s sheer ignorance to just say ‘it’s settled, there is nothing else to learn.’ That’s akin to the same zealotry as religion. There is close to nothing that is absolutely settled. To improve as a species we need to continually look at past information and test it. Not doing so is the same as Gallileo being ostracized for speaking against the ‘knowledge’ of the days that the sun revolves around the earth. It’s a shame that this zealotry has just changed shape into ‘science’ and not religion.
None... you can't have a control group because it would be unethical. If you think most of science or most of medicine is supported by double-blind control group studies then you're just showing your ignorance.
Show me adjuvant that's poisonous at the doses given.
Looking around on the internet is not 'research', research is sitting in a lab and actually conducting research lol. Not even I have done true published research on vaccines. But education is a matter of more than just cherry-picking the information you want to believe in. So yes we live in an information age. An age where there is so much information you can literally choose the reality you want to live in and just look at the information that supports that reality. The aspect of a formal education that you're so clearly missing is the part where you're sat down and taught how to assess information, data and claims objectively.
If you think science is an echo chamber then you're, again, showing your ignorance. Science is a brutal field. People make and break decade long careers by disagreeing with eachother. This is why when they do come to a consensus it's all the more incredible. Because there's no valid argument left. If there was someone would grab hold of it and make a career off looking into it.
I said the science is settled because it is. This doesn't mean people aren't reassessing it... i think you're confusing the word 'settled' with the word' proven'.
I'm not even going to bother going on more but one thing is clear. You're running headlong into about every misconception about 'science', 'research' and 'evidence' that is the hallmark of the anti-vax and anti-science (be it anti-GMO or anti-climate change or flat earth) bandwagon. You're understanding of what science is, how it works and how to interpret it is so critically flawed that your conclusions are worse than worthless.
If you're interested in criticizing a field and being taken seriously, go into the field. Maybe if you get a formal education, you'll start to see the value of not relying solely on youtube conspiracy videos. If you want to start try the book "Bad Science"
You seem to have the elitist attitude of the ‘educated.’ I haven’t said anything about my experience and nor should I need to but I can assure you it’s much different than you assume. You are residing headlong in the echo chamber; because you’re a ‘medical student’ your opinion and thought on the subjects is correct. This is the shame that we live in. You drip arrogance with how you talk and that’s unfortunate. You assume that my position is inferior. That’s ok, you remain shadowed in your tower.
My points are quite valid and shared by many who keep an open mind.
It’s amusing that they say it’s unethical to study a group of unvaccinated individuals health outcomes versus ones that are vaccinated. Where is the ethics violation? You are not harming someone who chooses not to vaccinate so it’s unethical to show that the vaccines are harming those who get them?
The Stanford prison experiment was an ethics violation. Comparing non vaccinated to vaccinated is absolutely not an unethical situation. Can you explain your point of view for its ethics?
I'm not even going to pretend I think we're equal. That's a joke. But it's not about formal education or being a medical student. It's about being able to look at things objectively, that's a skill that can be gained with or without the ivory tower.
Your points are shared mostly by stoners and "woke" middle-upper class white women.
You asked for a double-blind control trial mate... that's not simply studying 'a group of unvaccinated individuals'... how do you not get that? Those studies have been done, they're just retroactive chart reviews and population studies. We have that data, it's one of the biggest sets of data that show that things like herd immunity work, but require thresholds of vaccination near 92-95%.
The study you've asked for means you need to take people, split them into two groups and then administer injections to each group. One group gets a vaccination one group gets a placebo. That means people don't know if they have or haven't been vaccinated. Which means they don't know their risks, nor do their schools or families or friends. This is the first ethical issue, but it's not even the biggest.
The biggest ethical issue is that to do that above you'd have to ask people to forgo the protection a vaccination can offer in order to participate in the trial. Now the only group of people who'd consider doing that are anti-vaxers but they probably won't be too happy knowing 50% of them will get the vaccination. So we're back to the normal population of normal people who aren't batshit crazy.
Research cannot be done in such a way as to risk or cause harm to patients or participants (unless you practice on yourself). This is why so many trials are cut short. Once it's clear which of two methods being tested are clearly superior it's unethical to continue the trial... because you're denying half your trial arm the best possible medical care.
Now I'm done lecturing. This information is year one of any science degree. If you'd really done your research you'd know this. Since you so clearly despise formal education go to coursera, or Khan achademy or just wikipedia and look up HOW research is conducted.
Hi @krnel,
Think you might like this one...(see the clause on Big Pharma & vaccines)
The Declaration of Congressional Incompetence, September 1, 2018
Enjoy!
My granddaughter took this vaccine and thank God no negative side effects yet that we know of.
This post was upvoted and resteemed by @thethreehugs. Thank you for your support of @familyprotection
People are having their faith turned against them by "Authority figures" left and right lately. Anyone, including these doctors and researchers, who tells you they can predict the future and have a way to save you if you pay cash needs to be met with skepticism.
It looks like you are going to keep doing this work my good man because I think it's going to take a while to get enough people talking, please keep it up 100%
Yup, gotta keep putting out the info for people to come across ;)
Curated for #informationwar (by @wakeupnd)
Our purpose is to encourage posts discussing Information War, Propaganda, Disinformation and other false narratives. We currently have over 8,000 Steem Power and 20+ people following the curation trail to support our mission.
Join our discord and chat with 250+ fellow Informationwar Activists.
Join our brand new reddit! and start sharing your Steemit posts directly to The_IW, via the share button on your Steemit post!!!
Connect with fellow Informationwar writers in our Roll Call! InformationWar - Leadership/Contributing Writers/Supporters: Roll Call
Ways you can help the @informationwar
ALL vaccines are risky - all risk, no benefits - that's eugenics for you...
http://www.frot.co.nz/design/health/vaccination/
www.frot.co.nz
It's quite amazing how we survived as a species, before big pharma emerged, isn't it..?
With 30% child mortality rates and life expectancies between 35 and 55 depending on location. Survived is different to thrived mate.
.....good nutrition is the primary driver to health, not vaccinations. (or any other pharma product)
You're 100% right, followed by good exercise and good living and a thousand other things. Funnily enough none of it is a silver bullet and none of it is very effective against communicable disease.
Ya think? lol
Where'd you cherry pick that from lol... I'm sorry but if you can't spot the flaws in this data it's not even worth the time speaking to you.
If you'd like a hint try looking up why multiple variables are generally not condensed into a single plot...
....I'm not worthy...I'm not worthy...
Youre probably just not bright
We've had the HPV vaccine being implemented widely here in Australia... no adverse outcomes and a massive drop in cervical cancer rates. You can fight and fight and spread this bullshit as much as you want, but the reality is this anti-vax scare trend will drop off soon. When it does, those of you who jumped so hard on this bandwagon will be left looking like the scientifically illiterate plebs you truly are.
it's a real problem if they have information and are not disclosing it and that public health systems are being used essentially as profit centers for Merck
here is the product insert for Gardasil
http://www.rho.org/files/rb3/Gardasil_Package_Insert_Merck_2009.pdf
Did you read it? It doesn't exactly support your conspiracy
Did you read it? It
Doesn't exactly support
Your conspiracy
- tfcoates
I'm a bot. I detect haiku.
keep up the good work noble bot.
Yes I did, what is my conspiracy and how did that not support it?
Vaccine harms outweight benefits. Show me the part where thats supported in the insert
where did I claim that this particular vaccine was more beneficial than harmful?