Who's Here

source: American Chronical
by: Christina England

That is right, the American public are being encouraged by the FDA and CDC to inject their tiny babies aged 2 months, with a vaccine, that has been identified as being listed as a Category C drug. This devastating news was exposed by Richard Gale and Dr Gary Null in their article CDC Vote in Favor of a Flu Vaccination Assault on Americans Health

The article says:-

"The study investigated 90 approved drugs in the US (and let us make no mistake vaccines are drugs! In fact, the flu vaccine is listed as a Category C drug; which means there are no adequate safety studies to determine whether flu vaccination adversely affects pregnant mothers and their fetuses.) and discovered that 60 percent vaccination of the 900 papers were unpublished and some were concealed from the federal regulatory agencies. Forty to sixty percent omitted clinical details or changed their final their final analysis. Among the pharmaceutical industry alone, 94 percent were unpublished and 86 percent of the university studies sponsored by drug makers remained unpublished."

This article was written by trusted authors and is proof that not only the Americans but the public worldwide, are to be force fed (if this vaccine becomes mandatory as planned) a category C drug. Well, that is, of course if we listen to the advice given to us by the FDA, CDC and the JCVI this year. The groups that are currently being targeted with this Category C drug are the elderly, persons with health disorders which include Asthma, heart and lung disease and those with lowered immune systems, pregnant women and vulnerable babies many of whom are premature.

Category C drugs seen listed on Wikipedia include

Ketamine - a sedative



In an article Medications Considered Safe for Use During Pregnancy it gives us information directly from the FDA stating:-

"The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) created the following rating system in 1979 to categorize the potential risk to the fetus for a given drug.

Category A: Controlled human studies have demonstrated no fetal risk

Category B Animal studies indicate no fetal risk, but no human studies OR adverse effects in animals , but not in well- controlled human studies

Category C: No adequate human or animal studies, OR adverse fetal effects in animal studies, but no available human data.

Category D: Evidence of fetal risk, but benefits outweigh risks.

Category X:Evidence of fetal risk. Risks outweigh any benefits.

Unfortunately this system oversimplifies the issues relevant to prescribing a medication to a pregnant patient. For example, the FDA system does not adequately address the risk of not treating a disease versus the risks of the medication, and there is a tendency to assume that a category B drug is safer for human use than a category C drug when there may be no human studies available to support the assumption. In addition the system is not easy to apply to combination prescription drugs with many active ingredients and the potential for drug interactions. Despite its shortcomings the FDA rating system (and others like it) will most likely continue to be used as a rapid "first screen" on the the potential risk to the fetus for a given drug".

Bearing this in mind and also what are being advised on this advice site which also gives us advice directly from the FDA, which is-

Pregnancy and Medications

"Category C - drugs that are more likely to cause problems for the mother or fetus. Also includes drugs for which safety studies have not been finished. The majority of these drugs do not have safety studies in progress. These drugs often come with a warning that they should be used only if the benefits of taking them outweigh the risks. This is something a woman would need to carefully discuss with her doctor. These drugs include prochlorperzaine (Compazine), Sudafed, fluconazole (Diflucan), and ciprofloxacin (Cipro). Some antidepressants are also included in this group."

Let us now take a look at the advice being given to us about the use of 'any drugs' (prescription or otherwise) in pregnancy and what they can do to the developing fetus. I have decided that as I was discussing such a strong and serious subject that I would use this advice that I have found on the Merck website as I felt it was an apt and appropriate place to begin.

"More than 90% of pregnant women take prescription or nonprescription (over-the-counter) drugs or use social drugs (such as tobacco and alcohol) or illicit drugs at some time during pregnancy. In general, drugs, unless absolutely necessary, should not be used during pregnancy because many can harm the fetus. About 2 to 3% of all birth defects result from the use of drugs other than alcohol.

Sometimes drugs are essential for the health of the pregnant woman and the fetus. In such cases, a woman should talk with her doctor or other health care practitioner about the risks and benefits of taking the drugs. Before taking any drug (including over-the-counter drugs) or dietary supplement (including medicinal herbs), a pregnant woman should consult her health care practitioner. A health care practitioner may recommend that a woman take certain vitamins and minerals during pregnancy.

Drugs taken by a pregnant woman reach the fetus primarily by crossing the placenta, the same route taken by oxygen and nutrients, which are needed for the fetus's growth and development. Drugs that a pregnant woman takes during pregnancy can affect the fetus in several ways:

They can act directly on the fetus, causing damage, abnormal development (leading to birth defects), or death.

They can alter the function of the placenta, usually by causing blood vessels to narrow (constrict) and thus reducing the supply of oxygen and nutrients to the fetus from the mother. Sometimes the result is a baby that is underweight and underdeveloped.

They can cause the muscles of the uterus to contract forcefully, indirectly injuring the fetus by reducing its blood supply or triggering preterm labor and delivery."

I thought the images on this site to be a particularly potent reminder of the harm the use of drugs in pregnancy can cause. The mention of death and defects on this site is a stark reminder to any pregnant mother that drugs and pregnancy are not a good idea.

Now I am going to bring your attention to a Merck Press Release, yes, I did say Merck and this is the same Merck that we have seen advising against the use of drugs in pregnancy. This press release is entitled Merck & Co., Inc. Obtains Exclusive U.S. Marketing Rights for AFLURIA®, Seasonal Influenza Vaccine from CSL Biotherapies and was on the Merck site last year.

Yes that is right, it does read the 'Flu Vaccine', a vaccine that is listed and as a Category C drug!

Here Merck say:-

"With the addition of seasonal flu vaccine, Merck will market eight of the 10 vaccines on the recommended immunization schedule for adults in the U.S!"

This evidence proves that Merck, the company recommending that giving a pregnant women drugs during pregnancy is dangerous, is the same Merck that is also manufacturing the flu vaccination, which has now been listed as a Category C drug. If this was not bad enough, Merck is also one of the companies that was found to be adding Mercury to their flu vaccine as this article highlights Mercury in Flu shots The article begins:-





To my mind the article should be called 'MERCK FOR MERCURY'

The article reads;-

"Without mercury, flu vaccines are less effective than one cup of herbal tea. With mercury, the vaccine is very effective at killing nerve cells and more effective than one cup of herbal tea in preventing the flu. In fact almost as many vaccinated people get the flu as the normal population...."

"Mercury kills nerve cells. When the nerve cells in the brain are die, the result is attention deficit, autism, behavioral disorders, bipolar, brain tumors and cancer, decreased intelligence, hyperactivity and memory problems. Flu doesn't cause any of these things. Before mercury was added to flu vaccines all of these conditions were very rare...."

"Immediately after we started adding mercury to the vaccines, the number of reports claiming children were developing asthma post vaccine increased several hundred-fold. The current odds are 13 out of every 100 children vaccinated with anything containing mercury will report asthmatic symptoms within thirty days. Once reported, these symptoms rarely remit. One out of eight children being vaccinated for flu will develop asthma, asthma-like symptoms and cystic fibrosis that remains with them for life. That's the current odds. This would make a very good court case except for one thing. "M" is immune to lawsuits for their flu vaccines thanks to the FDA. You can't sue "M" for any side effect of their flu vaccine - no matter how gross their negligence. Here's a sample of what happens because they add mercury to their flu vaccines and that's grossly negligent and should be criminal. But it isn't."

Ok so let us now look at what Mercury does to the growing fetus.

An article Mercury Threat to Fetus Raised by Guy Gugliotta in the Washington Post says:-

"A new government analysis nearly doubled the estimate of the number of newborn children at risk for health problems because of unsafe mercury levels in their blood. Environmental Protection Agency scientists said yesterday that new research had shown that 630,000 U.S. newborns had unsafe levels of mercury in their blood in 1999-2000.

The key factor in the revised estimates is research showing differences in mercury levels in the blood of pregnant women and their unborn children. In a Jan. 26 presentation at EPA's National Forum on Contaminants in Fish, in San Diego, EPA biochemist Kathryn R. Mahaffey said researchers in the last few years had shown that mercury levels in a fetus's umbilical cord blood are 70 percent higher than those in the mother's blood.

"We have long known that the effects of methyl mercury on the fetal nervous system are more serious" than on adults, Mahaffey said in a telephone interview yesterday. "But we did not routinely measure [umbilical] cord blood. We had thought that the mother and the fetus had the same level."

Jane Houlihan, a vice president of the Environmental Working Group, noted that the study "for the first time . . . calculated the number based on children's blood levels, not mothers'. The EPA analysis is showing that even if even if the mother is below the danger zone, she can give birth to a baby that's over the limit."

Mercury, a heavy metal, is a highly toxic substance that can seriously damage neurological tissue.

Poisoning can lead to learning disabilities, lower intelligence and overall sluggishness. Fetuses, infants and young children are especially vulnerable. Recent advisories from EPA and the Food and Drug Administration have cautioned pregnant women on the dangers of eating tuna and other large predatory fish and shellfish, whose tissues absorb elevated levels of mercury.

EPA has said the largest U.S. sources of mercury contamination are coal-fired power plants, whose annual atmospheric emissions contain 48 tons of mercury. Much of it drifts into the ocean.

The Bush administration is proposing a new regulation requiring power plants to cut mercury emissions 29 percent by 2007 and 70 percent by 2018. Environmental advocates say the industry can achieve significantly deeper reductions.

Mahaffey, a top scientist in EPA's Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances, said she began developing her new estimates of the number of infants at risk by studying research published last year from New Jersey and Maine. The information helped her revise the formula used to extract data from a survey conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in 1999-2000 on mercury levels in pregnant women's blood.

The new formula showed that one out of six pregnant women had mercury levels in their blood of at least 3.5 parts per billion, sufficient for levels in the fetus to reach or surpass the EPA's safety threshold of 5.8 parts per billion. In 1999-2000, the last year for which government data are available, this meant that 630,000 children were at risk instead of the original estimate of 320,000."

I have no idea if these results include the children whose mothers were vaccinated with a flu vaccination during pregnancy but if not these figures will be just the tip of a very big iceberg especially if the USA Government gets it's way and this vaccine becomes mandatory for 2010.

Add To FacebookTwit ThisAdd To RedditDigg ThisStumble ThisFav This With TechnoratiBuzz It


Post a Comment


Thank you for visiting 'Do Not Inject Me'

The purpose of this site is to bring to your attention the dangers of all vaccines, pharmaceutical drugs and some of the severe effects they can have on you as a human being.

Along the way we hope to provide you with health articles regarding alternative and natural remedies, and that you find the information presented here a great resource in empowering you to become a more active and healthier being.

Say No!

Say No!
There was an error in this gadget

Natural News

Dr. Mercola

Vac Truth

Christina England