In 1904 a mandatory vaccination act in Brazil permitted officials to vaccinate citizens by force, if necessary. A riot made the government abandon the program, which led to a smallpox outbreak in 1908. Only then, the public flocked to have their injections, effectively stamping out the disease.

Wouldn't be surprised is the goverment or the vaccine itself spread the disease.

As the last maker of the mumps vaccines were fined a figure in the billions, ~10? For adding antibodies to the test results to make it seem like the vaccines were working, and this was for a period over ten years and they were the sole provider of the mumps vaccine by goverment regulation. I think it was merek.

It was said that the vaccine instead of providing protection were simply giving people mumps.

Stories like this don't seem make mainstream news.

... .

.. ..




CHS here reports on Merck facing another second Court action in the USA for allegedly fraudulently representing its MMR II vaccine worked as claimed when it did not. Full details below.

The problem for the public in the UK, USA and rest of the world is this – they have repeatedly been told by public health officials that numerous studies have shown the MMR vaccine is safe and effective. But here we see that appears not to be true. In fact it is allegedly not true to the extent of being a fraud. If these studies claim to have found the vaccine is effective when it is not how can they possibly have found it to be safe. Answer: they cannot.

Additionally, if this has happened for one pharmaceutical, what other similar practices does Merck engage in with other drug products and vaccines.

Another problem is if as alleged the vaccine is not effective, then the diseases are still circulating but may have become so mild that in many cases children have no symptoms or such mild ones it is not apparent they have the disease concerned at all. So the question is, what purpose do the vaccines serve if the diseases have become so much milder? This process of diseases steadily becoming milder is called attenuation and is well known in medicine. It can be seen at work here: Vaccines Did Not Save Us – 2 Centuries of Official Statistics. It is also recorded in the medical literature. Here are some examples from 1972, 1978, 1998 and 2003 showing rates then of subclinical measles of 30%, 38% and 59%:

The high rate of sero-positivity (54%) amongst unvaccinated children (who were also not attacked by measles) most probably indicates sub-clinical or asymptomatic measles infection. About 30% measles infection are subclinical in nature (1) . Other workers have also come across subclinical cases of measles during their studies viz. Mehta et al..(3) and Deseda Tous et a/..(17) found subclinical measles infection to the rate of 38% and 59% respectively and both of these observations are comparable to the findings of the present study.”

S.D. Kandpal et al. Measles antibody status amongst 9 mths- 5 yrs unvaccinated children Indian J. Prev. Soc. Med Vol. 34 No. 1 & 2 14 Jan-June, 2003

REFERENCES 1. Sharma RS . An Epidemiological study of measles epidemic in District Bhilwara ,Rajasthan. J Corn Dis 1998;20(4): 301-311. 3. Metha N.A, Nanavathi A, Jhala M . Sero-epidemiology of measles in Bombay. Indian J Med Res 1972;60 :661-669. 17. Deseda-Tous, James D, Cherry M. Persistence and degree of antibody liter by type of immune response. Am J Dis Child 1978:132 : 287-290.


For your reading convenience we set out in what follows the text of the claims in the second US Court case [up to the heading “CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS “].

The first US Court case is reported here: Merck Scientists Accuse Company of Mumps Vaccine Fraud that Endangers Public Health – “Protocol 007”

The claims in the new US Court case against Merck in the full .pdf can be read here: Chatom-Lawsuit-Merck.


CHATOM PRIMARY CARE, P.C., on Behalf of Itself And All Others Similarly Situated Plaintiff, v. MERCK & CO., INC., Defendant.


Plaintiff Chatom Primary Care, P.C., on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, brings this action against Merck & Co., Inc. (“Merck or “Defendant”), and alleges as follows, based on information and belief, counsel’s investigation, and a quitarn action filed by Stephen A. Krahling and Joan A. Wlochowski (the “Relators”) captioned Krahling v. Merck & Co., Inc., 2:10-cv-04374-CDJ (E.D. Pa.) (the “Qui Tam Action”): INTRODUCTION

1 Merck is the exclusive supplier of mumps vaccine (including M-M-R II and ProQuad) (collectively, “Mumps Vaccine”) in the U.S.

2 This lawsuit is brought as a proposed class action against Merck for unlawfully monopolizing the U.S. market for Mumps Vaccine by engaging in a decade-long scheme to falsify and misrepresent the true efficacy of its vaccine.

3 Specifically, Merck fraudulently represented and continues to falsely represent in its labeling and elsewhere that its Mumps Vaccine has an efficacy rate of 95 percent or higher. In reality, Merck knows and has taken affirmative steps to conceal –by using improper testing techniques and falsifying test data –that its Mumps Vaccine is, and has been since at least 1999, far less than 95 percent effective.

4 Merck manufactures its Mumps Vaccine using an attenuated virus. An attenuated virus is created when its pathogenicity has been reduced so that it will initiate an immune response without producing the specific disease. Pathogenicity is reduced by “passaging” the virus through a series of cell cultures or animal embryos. With each passage, the virus becomes better at replicating in the host, but loses its ability to replicate in human cells. Eventually, the attenuated virus will be unable to replicate well (or at all) in human cells, and can be used in a vaccine. When this vaccine is administered to a human, the virus in it will be unable to replicate enough to cause illness, but will still provoke an immune response that can protect against future infection.

5 However, Merck knew and understood that the continued passaging of the attenuated virus from which its Mumps Vaccine was created (over forty years ago) had altered the virus and degraded its efficacy.

6 For a variety of reasons, including Merck’s development and quest for approval of a new combination vaccine that contained its Mumps Vaccine, Merck initiated new efficacy testing of its Mumps Vaccine in the late 1990s. As demonstrated below, the goal of this new efficacy testing was to support its original efficacy findings at all costs, including the use of scientifically flawed methodology and falsified test results.

7 First, Merck designed a testing methodology that evaluated its vaccine against a less virulent strain of the mumps virus. After the results failed to yield Merck’s desired efficacy, Merck abandoned the methodology and concealed the study’s findings.

8 Second, Merck designed an even more scientifically flawed methodology, this time incorporating the use of animal antibodies to artificially inflate the results, but it too failed to achieve Merck’s fabricated efficacy rate. Confronted with two failed methodologies, Merck then falsified the test data to guarantee the results it desired. Having reached the desired, albeit falsified, efficacy threshold, Merck submitted these fraudulent results to the Food & Drug Administration (“FDA”) and European Medicines Agency (“EMA”).

if you have any seconds thoughts alls you have to lookup is mercury toxicity and vaccine toxicity or thimerosal. Mercury (thimerosal) is an additive that makes vaccine work, it helps it work for a decade or so and is a catalyst in a medium design to stay in the body. Other heavy metal catalyst are used, such as aluminum. since 2000 many vaccines reduced the use of thimerosal, but I don't believe it's been banned yet.

thimerosal or mercury is the most neurotoxic heavy metal. Hundreds of times more than aluminum and lead. This university of Calgary study/video shows just how toxic.

I suggest films such as "the greater good" but other films on vaccine safety exist.

dietary aluminum isn't that bad, but vaccines bypass the digestion system.

And to top it all off there is new nano-tech needle-free vaccine that is readily available and accessible for use to build new vaccines that don't rely of putting all those chemicals in your bloodstream.

It targets the immune system where it lies, in the skin. It's gets a better immune response without so much vaccine.

/r/history Thread Link -