Dear Health Protection Scotland
I would like to directly challenge you after you asserted in a newspaper article in the Scotsman, by Richard Bath, that my organisation was ‘persuing a reckless cause’ that would lead to the deaths of babies and mothers from swine flu, due to my organisation heading protests against the untested vaccine.
There is NO PROOF for your assertion that my organisation would do any such thing and ample proof that you, Health Protection Scotland, are being reckless with the lives of thousands of unborn infants and their mothers.
According to this NHS training pack for immunisers, here:
http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:RbuvyWzwBe4J:www.nes.scot.nhs.uk/hai/pandemic_flu/documents/H1N1v1.003-08-09.pdf+Celvapan+data+sheet&cd=8&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&client=firefox-a
both vaccines, Pandemrix and Celvapan HAVE NOT BEEN EVALUATED for side-effects or contraindications so it is basically a big experiment and you have no idea if the patient you are injecting is contraindicated or what type of side-effects they might experience. It has also NOT been tested on pregnant women so to recommend it for pregnant women is irresponsible, particularly when the Pandemrix version contains mercury which has been detected in evalated levels in autistic children (Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons Volume 8 Number 3 Fall 2003) and Merck, a vaccine manufacturer, say thimerosal can cause ‘considerable damage to health and may even be lethal’ –
http://www.vce.org/mercury/thimerosal-usp.pdf
My question would be why you are injecting a potentially lethal substance into a pregnant woman?
Another study found that even tiny injections of thimerosal can cause autism – ‘As a result of the present findings, in combination with the brain pathology observed in patients diagnosed with autism, the present study helps to support the possible biological plausibility for how low-dose exposure to mercury from thimerosal-containing vaccines may be associated with autism’ – (Induction of metallothionein in mouse cerebellum and cerebrum with low-dose thimerosal injection, Cell Biology and Toxicology, 0742-2091 (Print) 1573-6822 (Online), 9 April 2009).
The Journal of Pediatric Infectious Diseases also said that governments should bring in laws that prevent the use of thimerosal in vaccines – (Journal of Pediatric Infectious Diseases, Volume 4, Number 3 / 2009) and in many other countries in the world, H1N1 vaccine is NOT recommended for pregnant women. In fact, a data sheet for Afluria H1N1 vaccine shows that the vaccine SHOULD NOT BE USED IN PREGNANT OR NURSING MOTHERS and has not been tested in such groups:
Pregnancy Category C: Animal reproduction studies have not been conducted with Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine or AFLURIA. It is also not known whether these vaccines can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman or can affect reproduction capacity. Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine should be given to a pregnant woman only if clearly needed.
Neither Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine nor AFLURIA has been evaluated in nursing mothers. It is not known whether Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine or AFLURIA is excreted in human milk. Because many drugs are excreted in human milk, caution should be exercised when Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine is administered to a nursing woman.’
http://www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/UCM182401.pdf
Although this brand is not being used in the UK, they are all very similar H1N1 vaccines.
According to a 10 November government document, plans are in place to mandate H1N1 vaccine and exclude unvaccinated children from school –
http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/briefings/snsc-05164.pdf
This is a violation of human rights and since the drug is clearly experimental, admitted in the NHS document, it is against the nuremburg code. The first directive of the nuremburg code states that:
‘The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonable to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.’ – (http://ohsr.od.nih.gov/guidelines/nuremberg.html).
So even suggesting that vaccines could be coerced is illegal.
The JCVI meeting minutes for 18 February 2009 said that they would only introduce influenza vaccines for pregnant women if it was cost effective and reduced respiratory disease in neonates:
‘the vaccination of pregnant women was only likely to be cost-effective if there was evidence to suggest that vaccination in the late stages of pregnancy reduced influenza in neonates.’ – http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod_consum_dh/groups/dh_digitalassets/@dh/@ab/documents/digitalasset/dh_097411.pdf
So in actual fact, they introduced a vaccine that had NO EVIDENCE of reducing disease in newborns and were only interested in introducing it if it made enough money. It seems money is more important to this government than the health and wellbeing of mothers and their babies.
A report in Le Parisen newspaper in France told of a mother who lost her baby at term after being vaccinated and the baby had H1N1 in his tissues (Le Parisien, 14 December 2009) and another report in a Swedish paper told of a previously healthy mother who had a brain haemorrhage after vaccination and her baby had to be delivered two months early – http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/article6283276.ab
There are dozens of women in the UK writing to the newspapers with similar stories, so you, Health Protection Scotland, are endangering the lives of many, and all for an illness that is as mild as normal flu. If you look at NHS choices flu and swine flu pages, you will see the symptoms are exactly the same:
http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Flu/Pages/Symptoms.aspx
http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/pandemic-flu/Pages/Symptoms.aspx
Doctors are NOT taking swabs for this so they have no idea if the person actually has H1N1 or not and the person gets diagnosed over the phone without even being seen just to boost up swine flu notifications to encourage sales of your untested vaccine and misdiagnoses over the phone line have actually led to children dying of meningitis.
This for an illness that has killed far less than regular flu. One in three people get cancer, yet you don’t scream from the roof tops about how everyone is going to die in the same way you have done with swine flu.
You are highly irresponsible and put money, profit and government agenda ahead of the health of mothers and their babies.
You should be ashamed of yourself,
Joanna Karpasea-Jones
Vaccine Awareness Network UK.
THIS LETTER HAS BEEN SENT TO HEALTH PROTECTION SCOTLAND, THE SCOTTISH HEALTH MINISTER AND THE SCOTSMAN NEWSPAPER. NEITHER THE MINISTER NOR HEALTH PROTECTION SCOTLAND HAVE REPLIED AND TO MY KNOWLEDGE THE NEWSPAPER HAS NOT PRINTED MY REBUTTAL – 23/12/09.
