Are there studies that tested for vaccine side effects by using a "true" placebo? My mother insists that the "placebos" used contain all the inactive ingredients in the vaccine and so they don’t count.
Ada Drinkwater, Wife mother grandmother great grandmother
Your mother is on the right track because she is thinking in terms of the vaccines on the CDC childhood schedule. Those are the ones about which most of us are the most concerned. There are a few other vaccines that are studied with a true, inert placebo. But when people only rush to point out that one fact, they are ignoring the heart of the matter. It is not dengue fever or cholera vaccine that we are mandating.
Vaccine manufacturers have a special pass on how they study vaccines as contrasted with how they study other drugs. And since the Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, they also have no liability for harm caused by their products. So I suppose they figure that they are doing us a huge favor to study childhood vaccines at all. As it stands, the studies they do perform often make little sense in terms of actually discovering whether a vaccine is safe.
As long as they, along with the CDC, WHO, etc. have made their own rules, it is easy for them to go through the motions & give some appearance of care. But when we are actually looking & exercising common sense, anyone should be able to see: It’s plainly unethical to release an inadequately tested product just because the industry itself has created the rule, for example, about denying a useful product to a test group. A lot of people are available who clearly DO NOT WANT their “useful” product! So it would not have to be denying anyone anything. A placebo used to be an inert substance. Not it is a “comparator” and could be most anything. And most vaccine ingredients aren’t “inactive”.
They could just test a vaccinated group against a homogeneous group with no placebo of any kind & then follow both groups long term. Instead of that, they give maybe the aluminum adjuvant as a so-called placebo. Give it on the untested assumption that it is safe. (Even Dr. Plotkin agreed in his deposition that it hadn’t been tested; just long used) They only watch the pot for 4-5 days, or 6 weeks like with Gardasil, & then seemingly do their best to ignore everything that develops after that. They did use some sort of saline placebo in testing Gardasil. But in the end they combined the results with the other, active “placebo” to dilute the results in favor of the vaccine – maybe all that will soon be sorted out in the ongoing lawsuit against Merck for fraud.
The ethics of testing against an adjuvant or another vaccine, neither of which has ever been proven safe in its own right, is just that much more of that bovine excretion of which we often speak. Someone tests that way just so he could say “Oh lookie here, this new one isn’t any worse than that old one!” Well, just for the record, what we want & expect is for both injected substances to be safe! Imagine that!
Supposedly the excuse for sloppy testing of vaccines goes back to the industry’s original sob story to the government which resulted in that 1986 …Injury Act. They made a huge case for their being vital to our national defense if we were ever attacked with biological weapons. Well, ok. But it would be one thing to allow them to fast track vaccines in a national emergency. It is still another to have allowed them to do that all this time for the ordinary, every-day vaccines given to our infants! The provision in the law for national defense should have been stipulated to only kick in when a threat is detected.
James Robert Deal
Real Estate Attorney & Real Estate Managing Broker
PO Box 2276 Lynnwood WA 98036
Law Office Line: 425-771-1110
Broker Line: 425-774-6611
KW Everett Office Line: 425-212-2007
I help buyers, sellers, brokers. Flat fee payable at closing.
Property search: JamesRobertDeal.com