GET FLU JAB - OR BE JAILED: Irish Newspaper Report

[Migrant Dub]

[quote=mothball;2075288]Can you promise that the vaccine is 100% safe?
\quote]

No vaccine can be 100% safe, there are numerous sub groups within any given population that will generate a deliterious reaction to any vaccine. age, sex, health, ethnicity etc etc all have to be taken into consideration when building a vaccine. this is jsut the same as the vaccine will not and can not treat 100% of any population successfully.

[Bowtie]

National Pandemic Influenza Plan also lists the following:

“A number of legal issues may arise from the public health management of pandemic influenza.”

“The World Health Organization has identified and categorised non-pharmaceutical public health interventions as follows:”

» “Measures to increase social distance”
» “Measures for people entering or exiting an infected area within a country”
» “Section 31 [Health Act] gives power to the Minister to make regulations to prevent the spread of an infectious disease and to treat people suffering from infectious disease. The regulations envisaged by the Act include:”
» “Requirement for adults and children to stay in their homes”
» “Requirement for adults and children to submit to examination, vaccination, immunisation”

Health Act section 32 A and B below deals with the entire population not just the infected and uninfected population incarcerated in hospitals and “other places”. It gives the Minister power to order the injection of the entire population (quote: “all adult persons” and “all children”) with a vaccine they believe might immunise against a pandemic “caused by a new influenza strain“. You are probably thinking how could they create a vaccine so fast, doesn’t it take years to prove it is safe? They are prepared to alter the entire population’s immune system and DNA with what would be officially an untested experimental vaccine, are you prepared for that? It’s the law now.

Health Act section 32:
“The Minister may by order declare that-”

“it is necessary, for the purpose of preventing the spread of a particular infectious disease, that all adult persons should submit themselves to a specified measure in relation to their protection or immunisation against such infectious disease”

“The Minister may by order declare that—”

“it is necessary, for the purpose of preventing the spread of a particular infectious disease, that all children should be submitted to a specified measure in relation to their protection or immunisation against that infectious disease”.

Hope that clears it up! heehe

Thanks

Is it just me or does the use of the word should rather than will, give legal room for manoeuvre? God knows I'd be fighting this as far as I could.

[Chief-TP]

if the current viral strain mutates, there is no guarentee that the current vaccine will be able to combat this new strain!

True! But that wont stop them administering it, the swine flu vaccine currently on its way was patented in 2008 before the outbreak by baxter, that says a hell of a lot about whats going on. I posted links earlier to proof and a case thats currently being investigated regarding this, have a look if ya get the chance..

[orbit]

All you people queuing up to go to jail needn't worry, because it's not going to happen. Note, what the Dept of Health actually says (they have sufficient powers) as opposed to what the unnamed source says (on the verge of making it compulsory). Gutter journalism.

[cHeal]

I really don't see the need for vaccinations at all. Swine flu is NOT going to wipe out humanity, it will kill a very small percentage of those that catch it, the rest will recover within days, perhaps without ever knowing they had the disease.

I have no intention of taking any vaccine.

[sarahj]

I really don't see the need for vaccinations at all. Swine flu is NOT going to wipe out humanity, it will kill a very small percentage of those that catch it, the rest will recover within days, perhaps without ever knowing they had the disease.

I have no intention of taking any vaccine.

Ditto.

I think I might have swine flu now. Well it's some sort of cold or flu anyway.

I'm not dead yet.

[The Caped Cod]

I really don't see the need for vaccinations at all. Swine flu is NOT going to wipe out humanity, it will kill a very small percentage of those that catch it, the rest will recover within days, perhaps without ever knowing they had the disease.

I have no intention of taking any vaccine.

Yeah but can't sell shïte loads of crap vaccine with that kind of marketing.

RUN FOR YOUR LIVES, IT'S... the flu?

[Wakeupcall]

I really don't see the need for vaccinations at all. Swine flu is NOT going to wipe out humanity, it will kill a very small percentage of those that catch it, the rest will recover within days, perhaps without ever knowing they had the disease.

I have no intention of taking any vaccine.

The natural immunity we get from contracting the virus will leave us stronger as a race.

[birthday]

if the current viral strain mutates, there is no guarentee that the current vaccine will be able to combat this new strain!

Of course. But it might offer some protection.

[Wakeupcall]

Of course. But it might offer some protection.

Vaccines which have been approved by the responsible government authorities for vaccination against the alleged H1N1 Influenza A Swine Flu have been found to contain nano particles. Vaccine makers have been experimenting with nanoparticles as a way to “turbo charge” vaccines for several years. Now it has come out that the vaccines approved for use in Germany and other European countries contain nanoparticles in a form that reportedly attacks healthy cells and can be deadly.

In 2007 researchers at the Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL) announced in an article in the journal, Nature Biotechnology, that they had developed a “nanoparticle that can deliver vaccines more effectively, with fewer side effects, and at a fraction of the cost of current vaccine technologies.” The article went on to describe the effects of their breakthrough: “At a mere 25 nanometers, these particles are so tiny that once injected, they flow through the skin’s extracellular matrix, making a beeline to the lymph nodes. Within minutes, they’ve reached a concentration of DCs thousands of times greater than in the skin. The immune response can then be extremely strong and effective.” 1

There is only one small problem with vaccines containing nanoparticles—they can be deadly and at the least cause severe irreparable health damage.

Nanoparticles, promoted in the mass media as the new wonder revolution of science, are particles that have been produced vastly smaller than deadly asbestos particles which caused severe lung damage and death before being outlawed. Particles at a nano size, (nm = 0,000000001 Meter) fuse together with the membranes of our body cell membranes and, according to recent studies in China and Japan, continuously destroy cells once introduced into the body. Once they interact with the body’s cellular structure, they cannot be removed. Modern medicine euphemistically terms the phenomenon, a continuing infectious reaction.

Since the asbestos scandal, it has been established that particles in size a millionth of a meter, because of their enormous attractive force, penetrate all cells, destroying all those they come into contact with. Nanoparticles are far smaller than asbestos fibers.

Beijing Tests confirm deadly effects on humans

The fact that WHO, the European Medicines Evaluation Agency, the German Robert Koch Institute and other health bodies today would permit the population to be injected with largely untested novel vaccines containing nanoparticles says more about the powerful pharma lobby in Euiropean politics than it does about the sanity or moral integrity of the civil servants responsible for health of the general public.

The September 2009 issue of the respected European Respiratory Journal, made public on 19 August, and available since 21 August online, contains a peer-reviewed article with the title, “Exposure to nanoparticles is related to pleural effusion, pulmonary fibrosis and granuloma.”

The article describes tests carried out in 2008 at the elite Beijing Chaoyang Hospital on seven young women. All seven, ages 18-47 had been exposed to nanoparticles for 5–13 months in their common workplace. All were admitted to the hospital with shortness of breath and pleural effusions, or excessive fluids surrounding the lungs, inhibiting breathing. None of the seven had ever smoked and none were in any special risk group. Doctors carefully tested for every possibility and confirmed that the lung problems had a common origin—regular inhalation of nanoparticles in their factory. They had been exposed to Polyacrylat nanoparticles.

The tests confirmed the nanoparticles had set off a “super-meltdown” reaction in the patients. Despite all heroic efforts of doctors, two of the seven died from the lung complications. 2

In their report, the scientists concluded something so alarming it is necessary to quote at length:

“Immunological tests, examinations of bacteriology, virology and tumour markers, bronchoscopy, internal thoracoscopy and video-assisted thoracic surgery were performed. Surveys of the workplace, clinical observations and examinations of the patients were conducted. Polyacrylate, consisting of nanoparticles, was confirmed in the workplace. Pathological examinations of patients’ lung tissue displayed nonspecific pulmonary inflammation, pulmonary fibrosis and foreign-body granulomas of pleura. Using transmission electron microscopy, nanoparticles were observed to lodge in the cytoplasm and caryoplasm of pulmonary epithelial and mesothelial cells, but are also located in the chest fluid. These cases arouse concern that long-term exposure to some nanoparticles without protective measures may be related to serious damage to human lungs.“

To date Animal studies and in vitro experiments show that nanoparticles can result in lung damage and other toxicity in animals, but no reports on the clinical toxicity in humans due to nanoparticles prior to the Beijing study had been made.

The Beijing Chaoyang Hospital study has now conclusively confirmed that nanoparticles cause lung damage and other toxicity in humans as well. At this point in time, when two of the approved vaccines planned to be mass distributed in Germany and elsewhere contain nanoparticles, failure of the relevant responsible public health and epidemiology officials to order an immediate emergency freeze on distribution of any vaccine containing nanoparticles can only be considered tantamount to criminal negligence. Hopefully the responsible authorities will react in time to avert a possible human health catastrophe orders of magnitude worse than the worst case of Swine Flu reported to date.

Notes:

1 EPFL, Bioengineering researchers from the EPFL in Lausanne, Switzerland, have developed and patented a nanoparticle that can deliver vaccines more effectively, with fewer side effects, and at a fraction of the cost of current vaccine technologies, accessed in Nanotoxicology | News, Research.

2 Song Y, Li X, Du X, Exposure to nanoparticles is related to pleural effusion, pulmonary fibrosis and granuloma , European Respiratory Journal, 9/2009, 34(3): 559-567.

3 Ibid.

[SIZE="1"][source][/SIZE]