Hilary's Desk

Here's how the story goes. In 2005 Glaxo Smith Kline, amongst other vaccine firms, threatened the UK Government, saying - "You've got to increase the use of ordinary annual flu vaccine in UK, or if a pandemic comes, we won't supply pandemic vaccine!  So there."  Fast forward to 2010. The UK Government wanted to back out on the 2009 H1N1 vaccine contract, but GSK refused.  And I bet they reminded them of that wee discussion in 2005. "Not gonna let you cancel", says GSK. "We'll downgrade your order of H1N1 vaccine from 130 million doses down to 34.8 million doses, but here's the deal:" Continue Reading

From Bobby Cowans Press Relations:  Members of TruthAboutGardasil.org and women around the world are disappointed with the panel of investigators selected to examine alleged violations of guidelines for conducting 'clinical trials', inadequate research, false advertising, along with various moral and ethical concerns in connection with a recent health 'demonstration project' involving HPV vaccines amongst disadvantaged women in India.  Continue Reading

Here’s where their stupid data-mongering went wrong. Because they have repeatedly lied about flu deaths by simple multiplication and adding in deaths from a whole swathe of viruses that have nothing to do with the flu when there is actually only a handful of real flu deaths in the country every year, they weren’t able to admit that actually, the swine flu WAS worse than the ordinary flu. They were hung by the petard of their own lies. Continue Reading

“Demand for jabs puts squeeze on supply” squealed page 2 of the New Zealand Herald. And those of us who have collected these headlines for decades realise that there will be suckers out there who think the news is for real. Even if they know that this is the typical selling technique for all advertising. “Stocks limited” “One per person”. A few discrete enquiries, revealed a few baffled medical practice receptionists, who said that it was pretty much business as usual. The New Zealand Herald – if they keep clippings files, which I doubt – seemingly doesn't remember that just these sorts of headlines have been trotted out with monotonous regularity: 2000: “Early demand exhausts flu vaccine” and “100,000 more flu jabs on the way”; 2004: "Vaccine readied to ward off killer flu strain” 2005 “Bird Flu shots coming in winter” (Yeah, right...) “Crisis talks on flu vaccine” and so the headlines roll on. Continue Reading

This study is the latest marvelous words of wisdom from the medical profession who have decided that the increase in autism can’t possibly ... really .... be due to any specific virus, toxicity or any other moronic idea from people whose kids have regressed after vaccination .... or whose mother's bodies were loaded to the hilt during pregnancy with epigenetic toxins some of which prescribed, administered and approved of by the medical profession… oh no. Heaven forbid… the reason… . Continue Reading

Dear Paul,  Continue Reading

Regarding your article “cash lure to be vaccinated”. 

Either Paul Hutchison has been misinformed, or has misinformed you.

The payment Australian parents receive isn’t a “cash lure”. The key words are “without good reason”.

Any Australian parent who makes an active choice NOT to vaccinate and has a filed objection, receives any of the “incentives” or “payments” related to immunization, that those who chose to vaccinate also receive. To suggest that if you don’t vaccinate, you don’t get the incentives, totally undermines the concept of a right to chose, and democratic right to say no without punitive measures taken against you. Australia has recognized this, but the question is, would Paul Hutchison?

Sincerely,

Hilary Butler.  Continue Reading

The Lancet has retracted the 1998 paper (1). Now, all the pillorying and slandering of Andrew Wakefield will start in earnest. The question is, "How does Richard Horton manage to go to sleep each night?". And here's why.  In 2004, the Lancet "partially" retracted the paper, on the basis that Andrew Wakefield never declared to the Lancet, financial conflicts of interest. When confronted in front of the GMC, with 1997 faxes , and proof of receipt, showing that that required information had indeed been received by the Lancet, Richard Horton said that he had never seen it. Continue Reading

Just when you thought it couldn't get worse for WHO, it has. Perhaps they looked at the amount of money Bill Gates was slinging around at vaccines over the next ten years, and thought..."Well, if he gets that much from selling computers, then think how much we can rake off people who USE his computers, however they use them!!?!!"  Voila. Brilliant... What an idea. Let's tax every email, all internet use, etc, as described neatly, by James Corbett at Global Research. Continue Reading

You know the old saying, “where there’s smoke there’s fire”. In the World Health Organisation’s case, it’s a blazing inferno. Not only is Dr Fukuda fighting for WHO’s reputation through clenched teeth, he appears not to realise just how deep is the hole he’s digging for himself is. What Fukuda also forgets is that not everyone is ignorant to the machinations of drug companies, so let’s take a wee walk down history lane to discuss a few seemingly unrelated events. Remember this from 9 October 2008?  Continue Reading