The second half of Kennedy’s introduction to ‘Plague of Corruption’.
Here in the second half of the foreword, Kennedy continues to describe scientists who fell foul of the official narrative.
Firstly, he discusses Rachel Carson and her seminal book ‘Silent Spring’ published in 1962 whose contents awakened a generation of citizens to the dangers of harmful synthetic pesticides and which became a blueprint from which sprang the ecological movement. Couched in rich, descriptive prose mixed with detailed scientific information, the book was made accessible to the general public and caused a revolution in the collective consciousness. Carson focused on the negative effects of Monsanto’s DDT which was being promoted as an effective way to stop disease being spread through body lice and malaria. She also highlighted many counter-productive practices implemented by government sanctioned pesticide programs. For example, indiscriminate and ineffectively targeted spraying of crops negatively affects bird populations who are poisoned by the pesticides. #80% of birds include insects in their diet. 96% of North American bird species feed insects to their young. According to an article in Science Daily from 2018, worldwide birds eat 400 to 500 million tons of insects annually and play an essential role in keeping plant-eating insects under control.# So by reducing the bird population by indiscriminate crop spraying, the insect population will increase!
The reaction of vested interests was intense, thorough and comprehensive. From the media, editorial comments lambasted Carson’s character and research with articles in popular publications with the highest circulation at the time such as Time, Life and Newsweek and many others. Further attacks came from the American Medical Association (AMA), Monsanto and other chemical companies, all of whom in unison debunked her work and personality. Carson was labeled a ‘spinster’ which was a euphemism for a lesbian at the time. But yet again, despite this onslaught, truth prevailed. In the year after ‘Silent Spring’ was published President John F. Kennedy instructed his Science Advisory Committee to investigate Carson’s research. The subsequent report totally vindicated her work. Kennedy had not jumped on the band wagon of the accepted narrative that was repeated by the United States Department of Agriculture (ASDA) who it is believed were in cahoots with Monsanto. He had preferred to take the view of independent scientists. Robert F. Kennedy states that he is very proud of his uncle , President John F. Kennedy for uncovering the truth of the situation. Carson’s work was instrumental in the creation of the US Environmental Protection Agency which banned the use of DDT in 1972. #The currrent EPA homepage states that the impact that ‘Silent Spring’ had on environmentalism was similar and comparable in impact to the catalytic effect that the famous novel ‘Uncle Tom’s Cabin’ had on the abolitionist movement. A relevant tangent here is ownership of media in the US. Currently, 90% of the media is controlled by just six corporations managed by 232 media executives. So, any concerted, joint campaign could be organized and orchestrated very quickly so that all the media are singing from the same hymn sheet within a matter of days to hypnotize the public with their latest spin. Rather like the mantra ‘Weapons of Mass Destruction’ that constantly bombarded our ears from all media quarters in 2003 regarding the Iraq Invasion. The subsequent Chilcot Inquiry and report stated that Saddam Hussein posed ‘no imminent threat’ at the time of the invasion. However, I digress somewhat. Back to the text!
Kennedy then goes on to analyse a incident in 1955 that has been referred to as one of the worst biological disasters in American history . During The Cutter incident an estimated 120,000 children were vaccinated with a tainted polio vaccine which resulted in 40,000 of them getting sick with symptoms of polio such as fever, headaches vomiting and muscle pains. What is worse is that 200 children were left paralysed and ten died. (Statistics from ‘The Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. 2006). All this was avoidable. In 1954, Dr Bernice Eddy one of the most senior female scientists in NIH history had been charged with the responsibility of testing the safety of national vaccines including the Salk polio vaccine. The vaccine was supposed to be inactivated or killed but it still contained the live virus.
For laymen, such as myself, a bit of explanation could be useful here. The whole point of a vaccine is to introduce a virus into the body in order to activate the immune system and strengthen in to better combat future infections. However, introducing a live virus to those whose aren’t in reasonable health or have a weak immune system could be counter-productive resulting in illness. Therefore the virus can be inactivated or killed before introduction into the body so that the immune system is indeed triggered to respond but is not overwhelmed and their is no live element which could risk causing illness. So, children and the elderly are administered vaccines with inactivated or killed viruses in them. An ‘attenuated’ virus is a weakened form that would still have more potency than a killed virus but a robust immune system could combat it without being compromised. The latter type of vaccines would be administered to adults with robust immune systems.
During her quality control research, Eddy injected laboratory monkeys with the Salk polio vaccine. The macaques were paralysed because the vaccine contained residual live polio virus. The manufacturing process carried out by the company producing the vaccine – the Cutter Institute – was flawed and had not inactivated the live polio virus. Eddy immediately reported the results of her experiments to her manager but was ignored and the findings went no further, hence the 1955 disaster.
Things got subsequently worse. In 1961 Eddy discovered that a cancer-causing monkey virus, SV40, had contaminated 98,000,000 Salk polio vaccines! Yes, that’s not a typo. 98 million! Eddy injected laboratory hamsters with the vaccine and the animals sprouted cancerous tumours. What was Eddy’s reward for finding out such life-and-death information? Promotion? Honours? Recognition? Having ’embarrassed’ scientists working on the vaccine, Eddy was banned from her research and transferred to another department. Again, the vital information was hushed up and went no further.
Eddy had tried to voice her opinions, share her findings and get the truth out there. She had given a talk at the New York Cancer Society in 1960 and mentioned SV40 and its carcenogenic nature. She wanted her disturbing findings to be published but the powers that be that led the NIH blocked her efforts and effectively silenced her.
In the baby boom generation when the tainted vaccines were administered there was an explosion of cancers. Skin cancers increased by 70 %, lymphoma and prostrate by 66% and brain cancer by 34%. Co-incidence? Not according to research carried out in 1996 which sounds like conclusive evidence. SV-40 is regularly used nowadays in research globally because it is so carcinogenic in animals.
As for Eddy, she was forbidden from talking publicly, refused access to her laboratory and her laboratory animals were destroyed. This treatment has now become the normal tactics for dealing with dissidents by Federal vaccine authorities.
The next victim documented to draw swords with the medical status quo again like Eddy was one of their own high ranking stalwart scientists. To wit, Dr. John Anthony Morris worked at the National Institute of Health and the Food and Drug Administration for over three decades. As past of the US Department of Health and Human Services, the NIH is responsible for medical research. The FDA among many other duties is responsible for monitoring and approving drugs. Relevant tangent. # I was very surprised to learn that the FDA does not independently test drugs that are being presented for approval but instead relies on the tests carried out by the drug companies themselves on their product. Certainly, FDA scientists do review the safety test results provided by the applying drug companies but surely this can’t be as effective and safe as the FDA doing their own independent tests? As a virologist and bacteriologist, Morris’s particular remit was monitoring flu vaccines. Morris did not mince his words but informed his superiors of his concerns stating that he had no confidence in the flu vaccination . Moreover, he felt the vaccine was dangerous and could result in neurological damage. Furthermore, he could provide no concrete evidence that the flu vaccine for swine flu was effective in preventing flu. He felt the mass vaccination project was based on a fear campaign and baseless claims produced by the pharmaceutical manufacturers who were set to make a fortune from such mass vaccination. Morris was told to keep silent. However, when adverse effects were reported from members of the public who had taken the vaccine including cases of Guillain-Barre, Morris went public stating he didn’t believe the Swine flu to be dangerous or that it could spread from human to human. #When concerns are raised by a whistleblower with a high profile job and a lot to lose, it seems to add credence to what that person is trying to convey to the public rather than the information coming from someone outside of the organisation with nothing to lose and being possibly motivated by sour grapes.#
The establishment’s retribution was swift. Morris’ research findings away, he was stopped gaining access to this laboratory whose staff were reassigned and they fought his efforts to publicize his findings, eventually sacking him. However, Morris was indeed vindicated when the Swine flu vaccination was discontinued but only after 49 million people had been vaccinated. Of these, 500 people contracted Guillain-Barre of whom 200 were paralysed and 33 had died. Only after these casualties was the vaccine was scrapped in 1976. A further sad irony of the tragedy, was that, according to the media, the incidence of swine flu was seven times greater among those who had been vaccinated compared to those who hadn’t received the shot.