From Polio to “SARS-COV-2:” Repeating the Vaccine Mistakes of the Past

“We’re never gonna learn about how safe the vaccine is until we start giving it. That’s just the way it goes.”

Dr. Eric Rubin on the FDA panel deciding on whether to give the “SARS-COV-2”  vaccines approval for 5-11-year-olds

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/scottmorefield/2021/10/26/fda-panel-member-were-never-gonna-learn-about-how-safe-the-vaccine-is-until-we-start-giving-it-n2598090

“That’s just the way it goes.” Just accept it. We need to give ourselves and our children unproven experimental toxins injected directly into the bloodstream for a “virus” never scientifically proven to exist so that the researchers can see how “safe” this practice ultimately is. It’s not like we have decades of rushed vaccine efforts leading to injury and death to look back upon in order to see that this is a dangerous and disastrous path.

Published 1900. https://archive.org/details/vaccinationcurse00peeb

Oh wait, that’s exactly what we have. While I could go back pretty far to outline the knowledge the scientific community had about the dangers of vaccination, the Salk/Sabin Polio vaccine campaign of the 1950’s and 60’s offers a compelling parallel to what is occurring with the “SARS-COV-2” mass vaccination campaign today.

Let’s start with excerpts from a letter by virologist Thomas Rivers (yep, that same one who watered-down Koch’s Postulates in 1937) regarding the Polio vaccine by Jonas Salk:

VACCINE FOR POLIOMYELITIS

To the Editor:–For many years I have followed the work of a number of investigators who were attempting to develop an effective vaccine for the prevention of paralytic poliomyelitis.
In the March 28, 1953, issue of The Journal in a paper entitled “Studies in Human Subjects on Active Immunization Against Poliomyelitis: 1. A Preliminary Report of Experiments in Progress,” Dr. Jonas E. Salk pointed out how the contributions of numerous investigators have resolved many of the basic problems leading to the reasonable expectation that a vaccine for poliomyelitis may now be achieved.

I have been kept informed of the progress of these investigations, and it seems to me that the recent paper by Dr. Salk provides substantial evidence that a practical vaccine against human paralytic poliomyelitis can be achieved by the use of virus propagated in tissue culture, rendered noninfectious by treatment with a solution of formaldehyde, and administered in the form of a mineral oil emulsion. It is evident that any investigator who possesses a promising preparation for the prevention of a human disease is faced with a decision either to conduct innumerable small-scale studies with relatively few subjects, in an effort to develop more effective preparations before widespread application, or to employ the experimental preparation in large numbers of human subjects even though the preparation may not yet possess all of the refinements ultimately desired. The temptation will be great to urge that the experimental vaccine studied by Dr. Salk be prepared for immediate widespread use. Such enthusiasm, however, should be tempered not only by the realization of what we do know but, perhaps even more, by what we do not know.

Because of the social as well as the scientific problems created by Dr. Salk’s work, I suggested that the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis meet with Dr. Salk to consider the future course of his work.”

“At this meeting, it was our privilege to hear from Dr. Salk a full and detailed account of the studies he has carried out to date. As a result of the critical evaluation that followed, this group recommended that (1) before large-scale field trials are initiated, additional studies involving increasing numbers of persons be undertaken to extend the experience already accumulated; (2) such studies be limited to Allegheny County, Pennsylvania; (3) such studies be stopped for that part of the summer of 1953 during which poliomyelitis might be prevalent in order to avoid instances of poliomyelitis occurring shortly after vaccination being erroneously attributed to the immunization procedure; and (4) these investigations be resumed on an ever-increasing scale after the poliomyelitis season is passed and that they be conducted in a sufficient number of communities to permit a controlled evaluation of the effectiveness of this preparation during the summer of 1954. There is every indication that the preparation in question is as safe as any other vaccine now widely used against diseases other than poliomyelitis. However, only by gradual extension in ever-increâsing groups of persons and in a systematic fashion as herein indicated can this be established with the certainty required before testing the validity of the experimental vaccine against poliomyelitis under epidemic circumstances.

This letter is written with the knowledge and approval of the persons who attended the special meeting to consider this problem. The opinions herein expressed are conveyed to you in the hope that every assistance will be given to Dr. Salk so that it may be determined whether the preparation that he has developed is the long-sought, practical means for the control of human paralytic poliomyelitis. In conclusion I would like to emphasize Dr. Salk’s own statement that, while the results obtained in his studies “can be regarded as encouraging, they should not be interpreted to indicate that a practical vaccine is now at hand.”

Thomas M. Rivers, M.D.
Director, Hospital of the Rockefeller
Institute for Medical Research
New York 21.

doi:10.1001/jama.1953.02940140068025

Jonas Salk doing the eye-ball vaccine quality control test. “Yep, looks good to me.”

It seemed that Thomas Rivers, while enthusiastic about the prospect of Salk’s Polio vaccine, also had some concerns about its safety and efficacy, especially regarding what was not known about the effects the tissue-cultured concoction would have on the general populace. Even Salk himself attempted to tamper down expectations. What did these two men know that the rest of the scientific community ignored?

Sadly, even with the increased vaccine precautions outlined above, things went horribly wrong with the Salk (and later Sabin) Polio vaccine. The first evidence that Rivers was right to have concerns (however genuine they truly were) come from the Cutter Incident in 1955:

The Cutter Incident: How America’s First Polio Vaccine Led to a Growing Vaccine Crisis

“In April 1955 more than 200,000 children in five Western and mid-Western USA states received a polio vaccine in which the process of inactivating the live virus proved to be defective. Within days there were reports of paralysis and within a month the first mass vaccination programme against polio had to be abandoned. Subsequent investigations revealed that the vaccine, manufactured by the California-based family firm of Cutter Laboratories, had caused 40,000 cases of polio, leaving 200 children with varying degrees of paralysis and killing 10.”

“The Cutter incident led to the replacement of Salk’s formaldehyde-treated vaccine with Sabin’s attenuated strain. Though Sabin’s vaccine had the advantages of being administered orally and of fostering wider ‘contact immunity’, it could also be re-activated by passage through the gut, resulting in occasional cases of polio (still causing paralysis in six to eight children every year in the 1980s and 1990s, when a modified Salk vaccine was re-introduced). As Offit observes, ‘ironically, the Cutter incident—by creating the perception among scientists and the public that Salk’s vaccine was dangerous —led in part to the development of a polio vaccine that was more dangerous’.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1383764/

According to the history books, the Cutter Incident occurred because the Polio “virus” inactivation procedures were not followed correctly by Cutter Laboratories. Due to this misstep, “live virus” vaccines were injected into the unsuspecting victims which caused many cases of paralysis and even death. No consideration was given to the fact that it was the toxic ingredients of the vaccine made from emulsified monkey kidneys and formaldehyde (along with who knows what else) that was to blame for the severe reactions. Thus, the vaccination campaign continued unquestioned for another 8 years.

It wasn’t until 1963 that the concerns about the dangers of the Polio vaccines were once again raised in the form of the SV40 contamination:

Immunization Safety Review: SV40 Contamination of Polio Vaccine and Cancer

“Some of the polio vaccine administered from 1955–1963 was contaminated with a virus, called simian virus 40 (SV40). The virus came from the monkey kidney cell cultures used to produce the vaccine. Most, but not all, of the contamination was in the inactivated polio vaccine (IPV). Once the contamination was recognized, steps were taken to eliminate it from future vaccines. Researchers have long wondered about the effects of the contaminated vaccine on people who received it. Although SV40 has biological properties consistent with a cancer-causing virus, it has not been conclusively established whether it might have caused cancer in humans. Studies of groups of people who received polio vaccine during 1955–1963 provide evidence of no increased cancer risk. However, because these epidemiologic studies are sufficiently flawed, the Institute of Medicine’s Immunization Safety Review Committee concluded that the evidence was inadequate to conclude whether or not the contaminated polio vaccine caused cancer. In light of the biological evidence supporting the theory that SV40-contamination of polio vaccines could contribute to human cancers, the committee recommends continued public health attention in the form of policy analysis, communication, and targeted biological research.”

SV40 Contamination of Polio Vaccine

“The tissue cultures used to grow poliovirus for the vaccines in question came from kidneys of rhesus and cynomolgus macaques.2 In 1960, Sweet and Hilleman (1960) reported that these tissues could be infected with SV40, a pre- viously unknown virus that commonly infects rhesus macaques. SV40 is a member of the polyomav~rus family3. Soon after its discovery, SV40 was shown to be able to produce tumors in hamsters and to transform human cells in culture (Eddy et al., 1961, 1962; Girardi et al., 1962; Koprowski et al., 1962; Shein and Enders, 1962a,b). Testing confirmed that some of the tissue cultures used in producing inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) and oral polio vaccine (OPV) were contaminated with SV40. In 1961, the U.S. government established requirements for testing to verify that all new lots of polio vaccine are free of SV40 (Egan, 2002). Potentially contaminated vaccine from previously approved lots of IPV was not recalled, however, and might have been used until 1963.

Current formulations of IPV and OPV available in the United States are required by the FDA to be free of SV40. The IPV produced today uses poliovirus grown on Vero cells, a continuous line of green monkey kidney cells. OPV is no longer produced in the United States, but as the recommended vaccine to control polio outbreaks, a stockpile of OPV is available for these purposes (CDC, 2000). The OPV was produced in the United States in monkeys raised in colonies free from SV40 or grown in Vero cells and was screened for viruses, including SV40 (Sutter et al., 1999).

IPV administered between 1955 and 1963 to about 98 million children and adults is assumed to be the primary source of human exposure to SV40 in the United States. In addition, experimental lots of OPV contaminated with SV40 are known to have been administered to about 10,000 people participating in clinical trials between 1959 and 1961. Tests of stored samples of the IPV that had been administered in the United States from May through July in 1955 found varied levels of SV40 contamination, with some vaccine showing no contamination (Fraumeni et al., 1963). From these data, Shah and Nathanson (1976) estimated that 10% to 30% of IPV contained live SV40 and that similar percentages of the approximately 98 million Americans who had been vaccinated by 1961 were exposed to SV40.”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25057632/

Will we allow this to happen all over again to our children?

For 8 years, the ignorant people fearful of a “virus” never scientifically proven to exist nor cause disease, lined up for experimental injections that caused harm to hundreds of thousands (a very likely undercount). With the discovery of SV40 contaminating the vaccines, it was clear that the tissue-culture technique which led to the creation of unpurified toxic concoctions was to blame for the various severe reactions. Still, the long-term effects were unknown at the time. Eventually, the Polio vaccines became associated not only with the symptoms of disease they were supposed to protect against but also an increased future cancer risk. Sounds pretty familiar to what is sadly happening today.

The early incidents with the Polio vaccine are not the only instances of these experimental medical interventions causing harm. A quick look at the CDC’s very own list of historical vaccine safety concerns presents an alarming picture of a repeating pattern of mistakes with various “viruses” and vaccines:

Swine Flu Vaccine and Guillain-Barre Syndrome – 1976

“In 1976 there was a small increased risk of a serious neurological disorder called Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) following vaccination with a swine flu vaccine. The increased risk was approximately 1 additional case of GBS for every 100,000 people who got the swine flu vaccine. When over 40 million people were vaccinated against swine flu, federal health officials decided that the possibility of an association of GBS with the vaccine, however small, necessitated stopping immunization until the issue could be explored.”

Hepatitis B Vaccine and Multiple Sclerosis – 1998

“In 1998, some research caused concern that hepatitis B vaccination might be linked with multiple sclerosis (MS), a progressive nerve disease.”

Rotavirus Vaccine and Intussusception 1998-1999

“In 1998, the FDA approved RotaShield vaccine, the first vaccine to prevent rotavirus gastroenteritis. Shortly after it was licensed, some infants developed intussusception (rare type of bowel obstruction that occurs when the bowel folds in on itself) after being vaccinated. At first, it was not clear if the vaccine or some other factor was causing the bowel obstructions. CDC quickly recommended that use of the vaccine be suspended and immediately started two emergency investigations to find out if receiving RotaShield vaccine was causing some of the cases of intussusception.

The results of the investigations showed that RotaShield vaccine caused intussusception in some healthy infants younger than 12 months of age who normally would be at low risk for this condition.”

GBS and Meningococcal Vaccine – 2005 – 2008

“There were concerns that the meningococcal vaccine Menactra caused a serious neurological disorder called Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS). Between 2005 and 2008, there were a number of youth who reported GBS after receiving Menactra.”

HiB Vaccine Recall – 2007

“In 2007, Merck & Company, Inc. voluntarily recalled 1.2 million doses of Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) vaccines due to concerns about potential contamination with bacteria called B. cereus. The recall was a precaution, and after careful review, no evidence of B. cereus infection was found in recipients of recalled Hib vaccines.”

H1N1 Influenza Vaccine and Narcolepsy – 2009 – 2010

“An increased risk of narcolepsy (a chronic sleep disorder) was found following vaccination with Pandemrix, a monovalent 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccine that was used in several European countries during the H1N1 influenza pandemic. This risk was initially found in Finland, and then some other European countries also detected an association.”

Porcine Circovirus and Rotavirus Vaccines – 2010

“Porcine circovirus (PCV) is a common virus found in pigs. In 2010, it was discovered that both rotavirus vaccines licensed in the U.S.- Rotarix and RotaTeq- contained PCV type 1. PCV1 is not known to cause disease in animals or humans. In fact, PCV is common in healthy pigs, and humans are routinely exposed to the virus by eating pork. Safety monitoring of both vaccines has not shown any reason for concern about PCV.”

HPV Vaccine Recall – 2013

“In 2013, Merck & Company, Inc. recalled one batch of Gardasil, a human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine. The recall was a precaution following an error in the manufacturing process. The company had concerns that a small number of vials might have contained glass particles due to breakage.”

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/concerns-history.html

How many times must we repeat our mistakes until we learn from the past?

Keep in mind that this list is what the CDC actually admits to even though they claim their own researchers/studies found no evidence in some of the cases. They fail to mention obvious vaccine concerns such as the association between the MMR vaccine and autism, the oral polio vaccine and increased cases of paralysis in third world countries, and the HPV vaccine and its association to cervical cancer. However, even without those admittances, the CDC timeline is a very disturbing picture of a history of repeated mistakes which exposed otherwise “virus-free” people to dangerous and deadly side effects.

In Summary:

  • According to a 1953 letter by virologist Thomas Rivers (of the revised Koch’s Postulates fame), the work of Jonas Salk provided evidence that a vaccine against poliomyelitis could be achieved by the use of “virus” propagated in tissue culture, rendered noninfectious by treatment with a solution of formaldehyde, and administered in the form of a mineral oil emulsion
  • He warned that the temptation would be great to bypass innumerable small-scale studies with relatively few subjects, in an effort to develop more effective preparations before widespread application, and to employ the experimental preparation in large numbers of human subjects even though the preparation may not yet possess all of the refinements ultimately desired
  • Rivers stated that such enthusiasm should be tempered “not only by the realization of what we do know but, perhaps even more, by what we do not know
  • Due to the social as well as the scientific problems created by Dr. Salk’s work, Rivers set up a meeting between the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis with Dr. Salk to consider the future course of his work
  • The group recommended four guidelines:
    1. Before large-scale field trials are initiated, additional studies involving increasing numbers of persons be undertaken to extend the experience already accumulated
    2. The studies should be limited to Allegheny County, Pennsylvania
    3. Studies should be stopped during the summer of 1953 when polio might be prevalent in order to avoid instances of polio occurring shortly after vaccination being attributed to the immunization procedure
    4. These investigations be resumed on an ever-increasing scale after the poliomyelitis season is passed and that they be conducted in a sufficient number of communities to permit a controlled evaluation of the effectiveness of this preparation during the summer of 1954
  • Rivers claimed that only by gradual extension in ever-increâsing groups of persons and in a systematic fashion can safety/efficacy be established with the certainty required before testing the validity of the experimental vaccine against polio under epidemic circumstances
  • In conclusion, Rivers emphasized Dr. Salk’s own statement that, while the results obtained in his studies “can be regarded as encouraging, they should not be interpreted to indicate that a practical vaccine is now at hand.”
  • In April 1955 more than 200,000 children in five states received a “defective” polio vaccine
  • It was later revealed that this incident had caused 40,000 cases of polio, leaving 200 children with varying degrees of paralysis and killing 10
  • The Cutter incident led to Salk’s vaccine being abandoned and replaced by Albert Sabin’s oral vaccine
  • However, the oral vaccine could be “re-activated” by passage through the gut, which resulted in cases of polio causing paralysis in six to eight children every year in the 1980s and 1990s, when a modified Salk vaccine was re-introduced
  • Some of the polio vaccines administered from 1955–1963 were contaminated with a “virus,” called “simian virus 40” (SV40)
  • The “virus” was said to be from the monkey kidney cell cultures used to produce the vaccine
  • Researchers have long wondered about the effects of the contaminated vaccine on people who received it
  • Epidemiological studies claiming that there was no increased cancer risk were determined to be sufficiently flawed by the Institute of Medicine’s Immunization Safety Review Committee
  • They concluded that the evidence was inadequate to conclude whether or not the contaminated polio vaccine caused cancer
  • There is biological evidence supporting the theory that SV40-contamination of polio vaccines could contribute to human cancers
  • The tissue cultures used to grow poliovirus for the vaccines in question came from kidneys of rhesus and cynomolgus macaques which were said to contain the “virus”
  • It is claimed that SV40 was shown to be able to produce tumors in hamsters and to transform human cells in culture
  • Testing confirmed that some of the tissue cultures used in producing inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) and oral polio vaccine (OPV) were contaminated with SV40
  • Even though the government established SV40 screening requirements in 1961, potentially contaminated vaccine from previously approved lots of IPV were not recalled and might have been used until 1963
  • The IPV produced today uses poliovirus grown on Vero cells (also said to harbor monkey “viruses”), a continuous line of green monkey kidney cells
  • OPV is no longer produced in the United States (yet it is still used in other parts of the world), but as the recommended vaccine to control polio outbreaks, a stockpile of OPV is available for these purposes
  • IPV administered between 1955 and 1963 to about 98 million children and adults is assumed to be the primary source of human exposure to SV40 in the United States
  • Experimental lots of OPV contaminated with SV40 were known to have been administered to about 10,000 people participating in clinical trials between 1959 and 1961
  • Shah and Nathanson (1976) estimated that 10% to 30% of IPV contained live SV40 and that similar percentages of the approximately 98 million Americans who had been vaccinated by 1961 were exposed to SV40
  • In 1976, there was an increased risk of a serious neurological disorder called Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) following vaccination with a swine flu vaccine which led to the halting of the vaccine campaign
  • In 1998, some research caused concern that hepatitis B vaccination might be linked with multiple sclerosis
  • In 1998, the rotavirus vaccine caused infants to develop intussusception (rare type of bowel obstruction that occurs when the bowel folds in on itself) after being vaccinated
  • From 2005 – 2008, there were concerns that the meningococcal vaccine Menactra caused a serious neurological disorder called Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) in the youth
  • In 2007, Merck & Company, Inc. voluntarily recalled 1.2 million doses of Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) vaccines due to concerns about potential contamination with bacteria called B. cereus
  • From 2009 – 2010, an increased risk of narcolepsy (a chronic sleep disorder) was found following vaccination with Pandemrix, a monovalent 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccine
  • In 2010, Porcine circovirus (PCV), a common “virus” found in pigs, was discovered in both rotavirus vaccines licensed in the U.S.- Rotarix and RotaTeq
  • In 2013, Merck & Company, Inc. recalled one batch of Gardasil, a human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine due to concerns that a small number of vials might have contained glass particles due to breakage
“That’s just the way it goes.”

That brings us back to today where we have a rushed mass vaccination campaign for an experimental mRNA gene therapy that began while “in season” on a large-scale population with limited safety/efficacy data. Reports from VAERS are proving that the “vaccines” themselves are highly dangerous. Warning labels have already been added to the Pfizer, Moderna, J&J, and AstraZeneca vaccines for serious and potentially lethal reactions such as anaphylaxis, blood clots, myocarditis, and Guillain-Barre Syndrome. Meanwhile, like the Polio “virus” before it, there is no purified/isolated “SARS-COV-2” proven pathogenic causing disease. Unknown toxins are being haphazardly injected into an ignorant population that has been subjected to a successful FEAR campaign bolstered by inaccurate PCR results. What potential horrors await those injected once we look back at this event a few years down the road?

It’s becoming ever-increasingly clear that we are incapable of learning from the past.

Leave a comment

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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

%d bloggers like this: