No never-vaccinated
controls
[back] Medical study ploys
Placebos
[There has never been (that anyone has found) any vaccine
study done using 100% unvaccinated children as controls. They know it
would show up their vaccine to be unsafe and/or useless, and that
Unvaccinated children are
healthier as
Dan Olmsted found in the Amish.
The cover story: it would be unethical to leave a control group of
children unprotected against vaccine-preventable disease
(Orac quote).
There are tens of thousands of unvaccinated kids around to study.]
See:
Healthy trial babies
only Inadequate safety
studies
Leicester Placebos
See: DPT Mouse tests
Mouse toxicity test
Kendrick mouse test
Hist test
[2012 Oct] Vaccine Research Conflicts of
Interest: Vaxxed & Unvaxxed Kids Not Compared Conflicts of interest
are rampant in vaccine research. How and why they exist are the topic of a
journal article reviewed here. This is why research that could prove that
vaccines are safe hasn’t been done.
[2010 Nov] A VACCINE
CHALLENGE TO MAINSTREAM RESEARCHERS---HAS A TRUE CONTROLLED STUDY ON A VACCINE
EVER BEEN DONE? By JON RAPPOPORT Here is my assertion: this kind of
controlled study on vaccines has never been done. It has never been done for
any vaccine anywhere, at any time. And I have no reason to believe it will ever
be done.
[Swine flu vax 2009 Aug] Injecting
one thing for testing and then adding adjuvant later
[2007]
SEEKING THE TRUTH ABOUT THE NEVER-VACCINATED by Sandy
Gottstein
[2009 Feb]
Unvaccinated Children Madness By J.B. Handley
One final point: the mainstream will never do a study of unvaccinated
kids. They already fear what it will show, and the results for them would likely
be cataclysmic. Their best bet is to invent reasons the study can't be done.
Quotes
"One of the flaws in studies of vaccines is that there are no
true placebo groups. The vaccine is tested in one group of immunized children and is
compared to another group of immunized children."--Peter
Baratosy
Anyone analyzing the “vaccine safety studies” done by
vaccine makers and vaccine proponents can see that they were purposely designed
to show safety by omitting people in the study who truly reflected the
population being vaccinated and who were, by all standards of science, at risk
of harm by the vaccines.
They do studies that use as placebo controls people injected
with a vaccine adjuvant. Placebos are supposed to be completely inert. The
evidence shows that the greatest danger from vaccines is from the vaccine
adjuvant — so, how can they use adjuvant-injected people as controls? Yet, all
of their studies used such vaccinated controls — this is blatantly manipulated,
and they know it.
The studies that are quoted endlessly by these elite members
of academia and government agencies and used to close the door on the vaccine
connection to neurodevelopmental problems are purposefully designed so as to
suggest no link between vaccines and any complication.
This falsified research is protected by academia, the media,
and government agencies. Yet, they have the audacity to stand in judgment of
Wakefield. This is not to say that Wakefield should be free of scrutiny — all
researchers should be carefully scrutinized for bias.
[2011 Jan] Big Pharma
Vilified Researcher for Threatening Vaccine Program By Russell L. Blaylock, M.D.
Allowing other than sterile saline to be used as the placebo
in short-term vaccine adverse-reaction studies to suppress
the relative incidence rates to the point that these relative
adverse-event rates show “no statistically significant” increase
over the “placebo” (that, in some cases, has been allowed
to be an experimental vaccine or the vaccine formulation
without the biological antigens).
Permitting vaccine safety studies to be restricted to a few
days or, at most, a few of months even though some severe
adverse outcomes do not begin to emerge until several
years after vaccination (e.g., childhood MS 4 years after
vaccination).
Consenting to reductions in the size and number of persons
in the phase-III clinical trials that not only reduce the vaccine
makers costs but also reduce the risk that the study
will find the rare but deadly adverse effects that a vaccine
may have.
Allowing surrogate endpoints (e.g., the reactivity of the patient’s
blood to animal anti-sera) for specific antibodies to
be used to assess vaccine efficacy instead of requiring
comprehensive testing to establish both general and specific
immunity in those vaccinated that is comparable to
the immunity found in those who have had the disease.
Recommending widespread use of new vaccines long before
the long-term (at least 10-year) outcomes can be assessed
in the trial population, and
Licensing vaccines and recommending their “universal”
use in populations that have near-zero risk of contracting a
disease (e.g., the hepatitis B vaccine in young children or
the HPV vaccine in non-sexually-active children) or where
the clinical cases of the disease occur at low rate and are
virtually absent in most demographic segments of U.S.
population (e.g., the rotavirus vaccine).
Key realities about autism, vaccines,
vaccine-injury compensation, Thimerosal, and autism-related research----Gary
S. Goldman, Ph.D & P.G. King PhD