Doctors speak out about H1N1 Vaccine Dangers

Filmed at the National Vaccine Information Center 4th International Public Conference on Vaccinations
Reston, Virginia
October 2009

Avoid close contact with anyone given the “flu mist” which is a nasal spray that contains live viruses.  Recipients may shed live viruses for up to three weeks following treatment.

A public service announcement of BrassCheckTV.

7 responses to “Doctors speak out about H1N1 Vaccine Dangers

  1. Please read this (just a hint):

    Then ask any true scientific immunologist to do a search about polysaccharides (which is the non antigenic, non toxic molecule obtained from a cultivated bacteria by centrifugation).

    This therapy principle was developed (and published) in the fifties by a small Argentine clinic laboratory in Rio Cuarto, a rural medium size city in the Córdoba province. They gathered twenty years medical practice with a number of bacteria: Brucella, Pseudomona, Staphiloccocus, etc. and then tried to venture at the regular commercial way in Buenos Aires. They failed.

    I worked with them in the early seventies as a promoter before they were crushed by the Big Pharma in a violent period of my country (a bomb was planted at the home of the dean of the national Medicine Faculty who started to produce cheap antibiotics). All their accumulated experience went lost; I went out for some years and lost any connection. All I know is that some international laboratory bought the certificates and buried them.
    From time to time polysaccharides are “rediscovered” by some doctor who publish a small report on his own (positive) experience which goes unnoticed in the midst of a battle “full of sound and fury” but without sense.

    As I’m not a MD, I lack the authoritative voice to speak out loud. But I know (from what I had to study back then and from my own lived experience) how effective, cheap and risk-free this therapy is.

    The search for a “silver bullet” anti viral is expensive and futile. Instead, polysaccharides are able to provide an effective defense enhancer against the opportunistic bacterial infections that profits from the”door opened” by the virus.
    In some cases polysaccharides can even defeat an infection resistant to antibiotics (as I experienced myself in a violent case with staphylococcus). But, as I said, I’m nobody; I just must shut up and see all this nonsense go on and on.

    • wow, that’s fascinating, Bob… I’m gonna run this by Shiv Chopra to see what he’s got on it. He’s the former head of Health Canada, which is similar to the US Food and Drug Administration. He exposed how the agency was becoming captured by Big Pharma and lost his job.


  2. I’m amazed by your fast answer at so late at night! (wait a minute, now I think you must be a farther westerner than myself, ha!).

    But, mostly, I’m wholehearted grateful for your open minded reading. Sometimes people doesn’t believe from a lay person. They think that it can’t be true because “if it is a true scientific development it couldn’t go unnoticed”. But this is the way the science works at the hands of private interests.
    Sometimes I doubt myself because of the few relevant information in the web.

    But I know what I saw with my own eyes so many years ago. Polysaccharides are powerful stimulating of antibodies and (if carefully depurated) completely non toxic. The people involved in the clinical investigation (conducted according to the protocols) is now dead, and this weights on my heart.

    To make the things worst there is some degree of confusion in the isolated testimonies I found at the web.
    Sometimes they talk about “lipid-polysaccharides”. This means they worked with bacterial toxins (which resides in the lipids) instead of the purified polysaccharides.
    Others (as in Germany) works with polysaccharides as an homeopathic dilution, which they aren’t (and, by the way, links them with “pseudo-science” bad fame).

    I doubted a lot to speak out about this. From my own experience, scientists don’t like when lay people talk about a field they vaguely know in a “theoretical sense”. Just because big laboratories aren’t interested in an inexpensive, easy to get (almost any doctor with a centrifuge machine can do it) resource they can’t claim a patent on.

    I hope Mr. Chopra would be as open-minded as you are and together we can do something positive to get out of this bitter argument. Not to speak of the manipulation of people’s fears and the waste of public funds. My best.

    • Here is Dr. Chopra’s response:

      Yes, I am aware of it. I too spoke at the same NVIC conference in Washington although I am not shown in this video.

      About bacterial polysaccarhides, my view is the same as what I said on my website about any foreign proteins being employed as vaccines (antigens) which when injected into people could induce auto-immune disease. In other words, proteins, polysaccarhides and lipids can conjugate to some other foreign or one’s intrinsic protein and thus initiate and promote an existing auto-immune disorder, such as autism. In essence, it means that injecting any vaccine made from foreign proteins, polysaccarhides or lipids are similarly harmful to health.

      The reason I skipped this information on my website is because this level of detail would be too complex to explain in lay language.

      Shiv Chopra

  3. Dear Rady:

    I thank you and Dr. Chopra for taking me into consideration. I read Dr. Chopra’s stance about vaccines in general in his blog. I found his concerns worthy of consideration with some nuances.
    For example: while most people can fully agree to avoid the inoculation with bacterial vaccines in children under two years (because their immunological system is still immature), I find a tad radical to say the same about polysaccharides in regular healthy adults.

    In any case, I found the recommendation of polysaccharides by the CDC a step in a less risky direction. Of course I can’t speak for this particular one provided by Merck (btw: I found they use Thimerosal too). I just can add that the principle behind the use of polysaccharides is precisely to neutralize the specific antigenic reaction promoted by bacterial proteins, so to induce the host’s system to produce more general antibodies.

    But, if Dr. Chopra finds “similarly harmful” injecting polysaccharides as well as lipids I must be completely wrong. I remember to be rid of lipids as the main concern of my former employers, because otherwise, it could be lethal when injecting polysaccharides from Pseudomona, for instance.

    I can’t say any more as a lay. I understand the importance for you to count with Dr. Chopra’s presence and I don’t want to cause a detrimental public controversy in your blog.

    I thank you again for your warmly reception to my thoughts and you’re welcome to e-mail me to my private address. Yours, as always.


  4. Pingback: COTO Report Tops 100,000 Visitors « COTO Report

  5. Pingback: COTO Report Tops 100,000 Visitors « COTO Report

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s