The end of last year was masked with sadness for Belgium parents Raphaël Sirjacobs & Béatrice Dupont, as their nine week old daughter Stacy Sirjacobs lost her fight for life. Stacy died just one week after her first vaccinations and left her twin sister Lesly behind. Devastated by their loss their parents are convinced that vaccines and hospital failures were the cause of their beautiful daughters death.
Stacy and Lesly were born one month premature by Caesarean section and spent the next four days in an incubator. Stacy needed resuscitation at birth.
Following medical advice parents Sirjacobs and Dupont decided to have the twins vaccinated. Stacy was slightly unwell with a cold on the day of her vaccinations but doctors assured her parents that it was safe to give her the vaccinations.
(It is worth noting that there is a history of Sudden Infant Death and allergies in the family. The twins were being prescribed a milk supplement due to a milk allergy at the time Stacy became ill)
The twins received Prevenar, a vaccine against meningitis and pneumonia, Infanrix Hexa, a six in one vaccination for diphtheria, tetanus, polio, pertussis, hepatitis B and Haemophilus type B, and finally the Rotarix, a preventive vaccine for gastroenteritis.
This means that these tiny vulnerable babies received a staggering nine vaccines in one day, vaccines that may have caused one of them to die.
A week after her vaccinations Stacy became unwell with a fever of 39.9 degrees C. Her parents decided to administer Perdolan to lower her fever. As their daughter was still very poorly they called the hospital who advised them to bring their daughter in.
The medical staff diagnosed Stacy with a slight chest infection and infection in her blood and told her parents not to worry as this was “not serious”. Stacy was then given medication and put on a drip feed and kept in for observation.
Stacy’s father informed me that all links to the vaccines were strongly denied.
Despite Stacy having a heartbeat of 200 to 230 beats per minute the pediatrician told her parents that she was fine and that she was probably suffering from gastroenteritis (an illness that this little girl had been vaccinated against!).
The worried couple decided not to leave their daughter and remained by her bedside. During the evening they informed the nurse that their daughter had diarrhea but to their astonishment, they were told that the baby had been changed and they were to let her get some sleep and change her when she woke up.
During the night, Stacy continued to suffer ‘abnormal diarrhea’, and despite frantic pleas from her parents the nurse refused to do anything, even though by this time Stacy was restless and in obvious distress. Stacy’s father says that they reported to nursing staff that Stacy was covered in small red spots and had difficulty breathing.
According to Stacy’s father, Stacy’s medical records states that at 19.45 a doctor telephoned his brother to ask his permission to do a lumbar puncture and put Stacy on the antibiotic Ampire, while they were awaiting the results. Authorization was denied …
Stacy died a short time later.
Stacy’s father says: (translated from French by Google translate)
“The nurse 23h phone to the pediatrician to inform him that the little Stacy is worse, this one happens to 11:45 p.m. ET begins to make attempts at resuscitation. He informed at the time the parents that the baby is not breathing on their own, and asks them to leave the room. Would follow three hours, during which everything is sought to revive the girl, who is declared dead at 3am. But in fact, the heart stopped beating Stacy at midnight.
The pediatrician then began to explain to parents that the little one died of sepsis and meningitis, while in order to make such a diagnosis, it would have had to do a lumbar puncture which was not performed, or that would have required at least one blood culture or stool, the results will not be known until 3 or 4 days”.
Stacy’s death was recorded as: Meningitis.
It is interesting and extremely sad that this little girl died of an illness that she was vaccinated against just one week before she died. It is obvious from the information that I have from the father that this tiny vulnerable baby was left to suffer in considerable pain, dirty and in distress, whilst the pleas of her parents were ignored.
Vaccinations are administered to a child based on the age of the child from the day that they are born. Due to the advances in medicine, babies are being saved at an earlier and earlier stage in their development. We know that Stacy was born at approx one month premature, which means that she was given her eight week old vaccinations at just a month old; she was also unwell at the time she was vaccinated. It is my opinion that her small immature immune system could not cope with the onslaught of deadly toxins and chemicals that are in our vaccines today.
Stacy’s devastated parents are so outraged by what they have discovered since their baby’s death, that they are now asking the world to join them in a worldwide protest. They want the world to hold a global event in memory of Stacy and the many hundreds of children that have been killed or injured by vaccinations worldwide. They feel that vaccine deaths are being covered up and ask the citizens of the world to stand united for one day against vaccine damage. They say:
We are the parents of Stacy, who died a week after HER first vaccines; we are organizing a global event in honor of Stacy, Nova and all other vaccine victims worldwide. We are summoning every citizen of every country to take to the streets in their own cities, towns and villages: things must now change!
Remember to invite local journalists, the media and any victims or parents of victims prepared to tell their story. Make placards, banners and signs: UNCENSORED VACCINE INFORMATION, FREEDOM OF CHOICE!
The event is to be held on the January 20th 2012. If it is not possible for you to attend one of the many protests that are being held, then perhaps you could go along to your local church and light a candle to register your protest at what is happening around the world.
Sirjacobs and Dupont are right; something radical does need to be done to make the authorities listen to parents
Vaccine deaths are being reported around the world at an alarming rate. In May 2010 The Times of India (2) reported that 128 deaths had occurred during the previous year and the figure appeared to be rising with each year. Their report suggested that the Indian government was covering up vaccine deaths. Arun Ram reporting for the Times wrote:
“The government tries to pass on every death as unrelated to vaccine. It sometimes merely does a culture of the vaccine in question. Just because a vaccine is not found to be contaminated, it doesn’t mean the vaccine has not caused the death,” says Dr Puliyel.
In March 2011 Neil Z miller (3) wrote that in the USA more than 2,000 babies died after receiving pneumococcal and Hib vaccines and yet nothing whatsoever was done. He reported that whilst these vaccines were suspended in Japan after just four deaths, the news of over 2000 deaths in the USA was barely even reported. According to Miller Paul Offit had called the Japanese authorities foolish, saying that the babies probably died of SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome). In fact he passed their deaths off as anything he could, except the vaccines that is. Miller wrote:
According to Paul Offit, media spokesperson for the vaccine industry, “the Japanese Ministry of Health was foolish to suspend the Hib and pneumococcal programs.” Offit thinks the deaths were probably caused by SIDS, or underlying conditions, or another cause – anything except the vaccines. Often, children get sick and die by chance.
Actually, Paul Offit could be right, many of the vaccinated babies could be dying as a result of SIDS because in May 2011 an interesting article hit the internet by storm stating that a study published in the Journal of Human and Experimental Toxicology found that the countries that administered the highest number of vaccines during the first year of life experienced higher infant mortality rates. (4)
This is not new because studies have been stating that vaccines were causing children to die for many years.
The Pourcyrous study (5) was the first study to examine the impact of multi-vaccinations on the immature brain. It is clear from the results of this study that the more vaccines a child has, the larger impact the vaccines have on the child’s brain. Massroor Pourcyrous, MD, Sheldon B. Korones, MD, Kristopher L. Arheart PhD, Henrietta S. Bada, MD studied 239 preterm infants who were given either a single vaccine or multiple vaccines, their results are as follows:
Abnormal elevation of CRP level occurred in 85% of infants administered multiple vaccines and up to 70% of those given a single vaccine. Overall, 16% of infants had vaccine-associated cardiorespiratory events within 48 hours postimmunization. In logistic regression analysis, abnormal CRP values were associated with multiple vaccines (OR, 15.77; 95% CI 5.10-48.77) and severe intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) (OR, 2.28; 95% CI 1.02-5.13). Cardiorespiratory events were associated marginally with receipt of multiple injections (OR, 3.62; 95% CI 0.99-13.25) and significantly with gastroesophageal reflux (GER) (OR, 4.76; 95% CI 1.22-18.52).
This study has had so much impact that it has now being quoted in papers and books on adverse reactions to vaccines and SIDS worldwide.
As today saw the news that yet another vaccine is to be added to babies vaccine schedule, the Meningitis B vaccine (6), we to ask ourselves how many Stacy’s will it take before action is taken?
This article has been written in memory of Stacy Sirjacobs and the many hundreds of babies who have lost their life after receiving what the governments tell us are ‘safe vaccines’.
1. Citizen Action for Uncensored Vaccine Information and Freedom of Vaccination Choice – 20th January 2012 http://sanevax.org/citizen-action-for-uncensored-vaccine-information-and-free...
2. Daily Paul reporting on The Times of India article written by Ron Paul http://www.dailypaul.com/166249/128-kids-died-after-vaccine-in-2010-govt-cant...
3. Neil Z Miller http://ebookcashstreams.com/HotNewsBlog/2011/03/2000-babies-died-in-the-unite...
4. New Study: More Vaccines Increase Infant Mortality Rates http://het.sagepub.com/content/early/2011/05/04/0960327111407644
5. The Pourcyrous Study The Journal of Pediatrics http://www.jpeds.com/article/S0022-3476%2807%2900185-0/abstract
6. Daily Mail – New vaccine against deadly meningitis B ‘will be available in the spring’ by Jenny Hope http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2088176/New-vaccine-deadly-meningit...
befurther, the amount of vaccines given to that baby in one day may have been the cause of death but in your article there are mitigating circumstances that may also have contributed to the childs death. So in effect one cannot say precisely what the cause truly was. Below is an article taken from your post but it doesn't appear to convey opposition to vaccinations per se.
Perception differs from one person to another. There is only one reality.
"Perhaps therein lies the problem as I see it. Here's my example, and no, it's not the Daily Mail (your example:)"
"Most side effects from vaccination are mild."
The English academic Francis Galton, often described as the father of eugenics, wrote a novel based on the idea 100 years ago that has only just been published for the first time.
Dr Matthew Sweet, who has written an introduction to the book, titled Kantsaywhere, explains that there is a "direct link between Galton's ideas and many of the things that we continue to enjoy today" such as the welfare state, the NHS, the IQ test or even the NHS.
He says that these ideas are "rooted in the Galtonean idea" of measuring the population, looking at its health and subsequently seeing how it can be improved.
SIR FRANCIS GALTON, FATHER OF EUGENICS: “It must be introduced into the national conscience, like a new religion. It has, indeed, strong claims to become an orthodox religious, tenet of the future, for eugenics co-operate with the workings of nature by securing that humanity shall be represented by the fittest races…. I see no impossibility in Eugenics becoming a religious dogma among mankind.” (Eugenics: Its Definition Scope and Aims, 1904)
GEORGE BERNARD SHAW (In response to Galton’s 1904 paper): I agree with the paper, and go so far as to say that there is now no reasonable excuse for refusing to face the fact that nothing but a eugenic religion can save our civilization from the fate that has overtaken all previous civilizations. Charles B. Davenport, head of the Eugenics Records Office and director of the Cold Springs Harbor Laboratory, wrote a 1916 booklet also given as a lecture, entitled “Eugenics as a Religion” which included a 12 point creed. Further, the American Eugenics Society ran a sermon contest in 1926 paying prizes to religious leaders who best incorporated the tenets of the new religion in their Sunday sermons. BERTRAND RUSSELL: “Scientific societies are as yet in their infancy. . . . It is to be expected that advances in physiology and psychology will give governments much more control over individual mentality than they now have even in totalitarian countries. Fitche laid it down that education should aim at destroying free will, so that, after pupils have left school, they shall be incapable, throughout the rest of their lives, of thinking or acting otherwise than as their schoolmasters would have wished. . . . Diet, injections, and injunctions will combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable, and any serious criticism of the powers that be will become psychologically impossible.” (Impact of Science on Society, Page 50)
GEORGE BERNARD SHAW (In response to Galton’s 1904 paper): I agree with the paper, and go so far as to say that there is now no reasonable excuse for refusing to face the fact that nothing but a eugenic religion can save our civilization from the fate that has overtaken all previous civilizations.
Charles B. Davenport, head of the Eugenics Records Office and director of the Cold Springs Harbor Laboratory, wrote a 1916 booklet also given as a lecture, entitled “Eugenics as a Religion” which included a 12 point creed. Further, the American Eugenics Society ran a sermon contest in 1926 paying prizes to religious leaders who best incorporated the tenets of the new religion in their Sunday sermons.
BERTRAND RUSSELL: “Scientific societies are as yet in their infancy. . . . It is to be expected that advances in physiology and psychology will give governments much more control over individual mentality than they now have even in totalitarian countries. Fitche laid it down that education should aim at destroying free will, so that, after pupils have left school, they shall be incapable, throughout the rest of their lives, of thinking or acting otherwise than as their schoolmasters would have wished. . . . Diet, injections, and injunctions will combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable, and any serious criticism of the powers that be will become psychologically impossible.” (Impact of Science on Society, Page 50)
ON BREEDING IMPERFECTIONS IN MANKIND
"With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilised men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed, and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilised societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man itself, hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.
The aid which we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly an incidental result of the instinct of sympathy, which was originally acquired as part of the instincts, but subsequently rendered, in the manner previously indicated, more tender and more widely diffused. Nor could we check our sympathy, even at the urging of hard reason, without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature. The surgeon may harden him self whilst performing an operation, for he knows that he is acting for the good of his patient; but if we were intentionally to neglect the weak and helpless, it could only be for a contingent benefit, with an overwhelming present evil. We must therefore bear the undoubtedly bad effects of the weak surviving and propagating their kind; but there appears to be at least one check in steady action, namely that the weaker and inferior members of society do not marry so freely as the sound; and this check might be indefinitely increased by the weak in body or mind refraining from marriage."
The noted poet, eugenics advocate and supposed great Supreme Court Justice, Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote the majority opinion in which he stated: ”The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes,” and he then concluded, “Three generations of imbeciles are enough.” Holmes declared that it was proper for the state to compel sterilizations for those who were deemed “socially inadequate.” After the trial was over and the sterilization had taken place it was proven that the charge of three generations of feeblemindedness in the Buck family was a total fabrication!
Population control is not a mere eastern innovation but has an impressive pedigree among the sages of the West. In fact, up until the early 20th century, it was politically fashionable for liberals to talk about decreasing the surplus population. 20th century advocates of population control would often draw on the social theories of men like of Sir Francis Galton and Thomas Malthus who, a century earlier, had argued that the poor were draining the world’s recourses. (One of Malthus’s solutions was to reduce the surplus population by introducing policies specifically designed to bring death to large numbers of peasants. For example, he encouraged poor people to move near swamps, so that they would catch diseases and begin dying off.)
"Perhaps not, they are non-producers after all, aren't they? enough said."
FEDERALJACK) Below are quotes from the founder of planned parenthood herself Margaret Sanger. After reading these tell me again that planned parenthood isn’t a eugenics based organization filled with people who are truly racist and inhuman to the core.
Editor of The Birth Control Review from 1917 to 1938.
Founder of Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion provider in the world.
Her goal in life:
Sanger admitted her entire life’s purpose was to promote birth control. An Autobiography, p. 194
Helped to establish the research bureau that financed “the pill,” she contributed toward the work of the German doctor who developed the IUD. “Ernst Graefenberg and His Ring,” Mt. Sinai Journal of Medicine, July-Aug. 1975, p. 345, in Margaret Sanger: Father of Modern Society, by Elasah Drogin
Sanger espoused the thinking of eugenicists — similar to Darwin’s “survival of the fittest” — but related the concept to human society, saying the genetic makeup of the poor, and minorities, for example, was inferior. Pivot of Civilization, by Margaret Sanger, 1922, p. 80
On mandatory sterilization of the poor:
One of Sanger’s greatest influences, sexologist/eugenicist Dr. Havelock Ellis (with whom she had an affair, leading to her divorce from her first husband), urged mandatory sterilization of the poor as a prerequisite to receiving any public aid. The Problem of Race Regeneration, by Havelock Ellis, p. 65, inMargaret Sanger: Father of Modern Society, p. 18. Ellis believed that any sex was acceptable, as long as it hurt no one. The Sage of Sex, A Life of Havelock Ellis, by Arthur Calder-Marshall, p. 88
On eradicating ‘bad stocks’:
The goal of eugenicists is “to prevent the multiplication of bad stocks,” wrote Dr. Ernst Rudin in the April 1933 Birth Control Review(of which Sanger was editor). Another article exhorted Americans to “restrict the propagation of those physically, mentally and socially inadequate.”
On blacks, immigrants and indigents:
“…human weeds,’ ‘reckless breeders,’ ‘spawning… human beings who never should have been born.” Margaret Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, referring to immigrants and poor people
On sterilization & racial purification:
Sanger believed that, for the purpose of racial “purification,” couples should be rewarded who chose sterilization. Birth Control in America, The Career of Margaret Sanger, by David Kennedy, p. 117, quoting a 1923 Sanger speech.
On the right of married couples to bear children:
Couples should be required to submit applications to have a child, she wrote in her “Plan for Peace.” Birth Control Review, April 1932
On the purpose of birth control:
The purpose in promoting birth control was “to create a race of thoroughbreds,” she wrote in the Birth Control Review, Nov. 1921 (p. 2)
On the rights of the handicapped and mentally ill, and racial minorities:
“More children from the fit, less from the unfit — that is the chief aim of birth control.” Birth Control Review, May 1919, p. 12
On religious convictions regarding sex outside of marriage:
“This book aims to answer the needs expressed in thousands on thousands of letters to me in the solution of marriage problems… Knowledge of sex truths frankly and plainly presented cannot possibly injure healthy, normal, young minds. Concealment, suppression, futile attempts to veil the unveilable – these work injury, as they seldom succeed and only render those who indulge in them ridiculous. For myself, I have full confidence in the cleanliness, the open-mindedness, the promise of the younger generation.” Margaret Sanger, Happiness in Marriage (Bretano’s, New York, 1927)
On the extermination of blacks:
“We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population,” she said, “if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.” Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America, by Linda Gordon
On respecting the rights of the mentally ill:
In her “Plan for Peace,” Sanger outlined her strategy for eradication of those she deemed “feebleminded.” Among the steps included in her evil scheme were immigration restrictions; compulsory sterilization; segregation to a lifetime of farm work; etc. Birth Control Review, April 1932, p. 107
A woman’s physical satisfaction was more important than any marriage vow, Sanger believed. Birth Control in America, p. 11
On marital sex:
“The marriage bed is the most degenerating influence in the social order,” Sanger said. (p. 23) [Quite the opposite of God's view on the matter: "Marriage is honorable in all, and the bed undefiled; but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge." (Hebrews 13:4)
"Criminal' abortions arise from a perverted sex relationship under the stress of economic necessity, and their greatest frequency is among married women." The Woman Rebel - No Gods, No Masters, May 1914, Vol. 1, No. 3.
On the YMCA and YWCA:
"...brothels of the Spirit and morgues of Freedom!"), The Woman Rebel - No Gods, No Masters, May 1914, Vol. 1, No. 3.
On the Catholic Church's view of contraception:
"...enforce SUBJUGATION by TURNING WOMAN INTO A MERE INCUBATOR." The Woman Rebel - No Gods, No Masters, May 1914, Vol. 1, No. 3.
"I cannot refrain from saying that women must come to recognize there is some function of womanhood other than being a child-bearing machine." What Every Girl Should Know, by Margaret Sanger (Max Maisel, Publisher, 1915) [Jesus said: "Daughters of Jerusalem, weep... for your children. For, behold, the days are coming, in which they shall say, Blessed (happy) are the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the breasts which never gave suck." (Luke 23:24)]
“The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.” Margaret Sanger, Women and the New Race (Eugenics Publ. Co., 1920, 1923)
The research found a fall in coverage that described disabled people in sympathetic and deserving terms and an increase in the number of articles focussing on disability benefit fraud, which was the theme typically mentioned by focus groups.
The report, entitled ‘Bad News for Disabled People: how newspapers are reporting disability’, analysed 2,276 print articles in a variety of tabloid and broadsheet newspapers and also analysed findings from focus groups. The research was conducted by the Strathclyde Centre for Disability Research and Glasgow Media Group, and commissioned by Inclusion London. It provides compelling evidence for use by disabled people in making a case for more balanced media coverage and for changes in both government policy and in how policies are communicated and impact.
The report found:
The Rockefeller Foundation is still a sponsor of such programs but is now more covert in its operations. As a philanthropic enterprise it masquerade's as the public relations front for the United Nations' drastic depopulation efforts. You can Google 'Agenda 21' for more on the UN's global depopulation plan. For example, in the 1970's the Rockefeller's vaccination programs in South America sterilized women and induced natural abortions until being found out and made very public by very astute medical personnel in those countries. Just a year or two ago the Gates Foundation was handed the baton in a public gesture from the Rockefeller's to more modernize global vaccination programs and put a computer age contemporary face on the depopulation effort. Bill Gates has since publicly made some very disturbing comments concerning his visions of fewer people burdening the global system.
In 1932, the British-led Galton eugenics movement chose the Rockefellers' Dr. Rudin as the president of their worldwide Eugenics Federation. The movement called for the killing or sterilization of people whose heredity made them a public burden. So, very early on the elite globalist not only projected future population growth, but were willing to do whatever it might take to preserve the standards they set for living with disregard for their fellow human beings. The Galton Institute still thrives today as a think tank and is filled with its own inbreed elite leaders and pathological thinking.
Hitler had high praise for the eugenics programs and when he took over Germany the Rockefeller-Rudin Eugenics Federation became a department under the Nazi state. Hitler appointed Rudin head of the Racial Hygiene Society. Rudin and his staff of heredity experts were then overseen by SS Chief Heinrich Himmler.
With completed research in their files and Hitler's plan for the future, the first occurrence of purposefully putting sodium fluoride into drinking water took place in the German ghettos of the early 1930's, and shortly afterwords the infamous prison camps of the 30's and 40's. The camp commanders could care less about sodium fluoride's 'supposed' effect on children's teeth. Instead, their reason for adding high amounts sodium fluoride to the drinking water was to sterilize humans and chemically force those held captive into a calm docile 'sheeple' submission and declining state of health. In effect, controlling everyone through mass-medication. By this method they could subdue the population in whole areas without the masses knowing any better. Sodium fluoride also affected the functioning of the pineal gland and Hitler's scientists figured out how to best use this technology to meet their needs.
The various negative effects of fluoride on humans was also already known within the United States by 1939. Gerald Cox an industry researcher who was financed by the Alcoa Company and the Mellon Institute first recommended fluoridation of water in America. Point to remember is that fluoride is a toxic waste product of the aluminum and fertilizer industry and ALCOA had tons of it which needed disposing of. It was toxic waste until ALCOA could sell it, then it 'legally' became a product.
Under the Nazis, the German chemical company I.G. Farben and the Rockefeller's Standard Oil of New Jersey were in essence a single company because of hundreds of previous cartel arrangements. I.G. Farben was led, up until 1937, by the Warburg family, who was also a Rockefeller partner in banking. Following the German invasion of Poland in 1939, Rockefeller's Standard Oil pledged to keep the merger with I.G. Farben even if the United States entered the war. This business arrangement was exposed in 1942 by Sen. Harry Truman's investigating committee. President Roosevelt took hundreds of legal measures during the war to stop the Rockefeller - Farben cartel from supplying the Nazi war machine.
Famous families in recent politics also held hands with Hitler, one being the Bush family who supplied steel to the Germans. Prescott Bush and his Thyssen Steel company were federally charged under the 'Trading With the Enemy Act'. But through behind the scenes maneuvering it was swept under the carpet to be hidden and forgotten. Funny how the media forgets history when it chooses to.
At the end of the Second World War, the United States Government sent Charles Eliot Perkins, a research worker in chemistry, biochemistry, physiology and pathology, to take charge of the many I.G.Farben chemical plants in Germany. In his book 'The Truth about Water Fluoridation', Perkins wrote in a letter to the Lee Foundation for Nutritional Research,
"The German chemists worked out a very ingenious and far-reaching plan of mass control that was submitted to and adopted by the German General Staff. This plan was to control the population of any given area through mass medication of drinking water supplies . . .
In this scheme of mass control, 'sodium fluoride' occupied a prominent place. . . However, and I want to make this very definite, the real reason behind water fluoridation is not to benefit children's teeth . . .
The real purpose behind water fluoridation is to reduce the resistance of the masses to domination and control and loss of liberty . . . Repeated doses of infinitesimal amounts of fluorine will in time gradually reduce the individual's power to resist domination by slowly poisoning and narco-tizing this area of the brain tissue, and make him submissive to the will of those who wish to govern him . . .
I was told of this entire scheme by a German chemist who was an official of the great Farben chemical industries and was prominent in the Nazi movement at the time . . . I say this with all the earnestness and sincerity of a scientist who has spend nearly 20 years researching in chemistry, biochemistry, physiology, and pathology of fluorine . . .
Any person who drinks artificially fluoridated water for a period of one year or more will never again be the same person, mentally or physically."
Inconsistency in access to 'low clinical value' treatments leads to postcode lotteries, the Quality, Innovation, Productivity and Prevention Right Care Team said.
Tony Blair has defended Labour’s controversial mass immigration policy by claiming that Britain cannot succeed unless it opens its borders to more people from different backgrounds.
The former prime minister said it was 'right’ that the country was made up of different cultures and faiths mixing together.
Mr Blair added that migrants had made Britain 'stronger’ and said those calling for greater curbs on foreigners entering the country were wrong.
His comments come just days after official figures revealed that the population is expected to soar by the equivalent of a city the size of Leeds every year for the next decade.
A defiant Mr Blair insisted his party’s policy on immigration was the right one. He said: 'It’s been a very positive thing and there is no way for a country like Britain to succeed in the future unless it is open to people of different colours, faiths and cultures.’
Under Labour, up to 5.5million people born outside the UK arrived as long-term migrants.
Between 1997 and 2010, around 2.3million left the country, meaning the UK population increased by around 3.2million as a direct result of foreign migrants.
Yet it is still logical. Just like the vaccine manufacturers , state that HPV vaccines "prevent cancer" yet they have no long term studies that test the hypothesis they state as fact.
Writing in JAMA, the team led by Dr Maura Gillison, said their findings should influence research into the existing HPV vaccines and how effective they could be in preventing oral cancers.
"Vaccine efficacy against oral HPV infection is unknown, and therefore vaccination cannot currently be recommended for the primary prevention of oropharyngeal cancer.
"Given an analysis of US cancer registry data recently projected that the number of HPV-positive oropharyngeal cancers diagnosed each year will surpass that of invasive cervical cancers by the year 2020, perhaps such vaccine trials are warranted."
Jessica Harris, health information manager at Cancer Research UK, said: "As we learn how common HPV infections in the mouth are, and how they are passed on, we can understand more about who is most at risk and how people can reduce the risk of HPV-related cancers.
"Although there isn't yet any evidence to show whether HPV vaccination is effective at preventing oral HPV infections, results like these are vital to help inform prevention programmes in the future."
Logic is valid. All by itself. It makes sense. Otherwise it is not logical.