GAVI: Selling Eugenics with a Philanthropic Twist

February 11, 2013

11 Feb (NEW DELHI) – According to estimates by the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI), the Haemophilus influenzae virus type b (Hib) kills more than 370,000 children worldwide each year – 20 percent of those deaths in India alone.  But a vaccine injures or kills 100 children for every child it claims to save, why would anyone trust the vaccine – or its promoters?

In a population that has tripled since 1960, it’s hard to imagine In a country that has If we divide India’s 1.2 billion population by GAVI’s over-inflated estimates, Indian babies have a 1 in 16,216 chance of being afflicted by the virus:

1.2 BILLION ÷ 74,000 = 16,216

The National Safety Counsel (NSC) reports that those odds are somewhere between the lifetime risk of dying from exposure to natural heat (1 in 13,217) and a cataclysmic storm (1 in 29,196), which should not be confused with drowning in a flood (1 in 558,896).   This also means that the risk from GAVI’s vaccine is probably closer to the NSC’s odds of being poisoned by noxious substances (1 in 126); odds that are consistent with adverse drug reactions (ADRs) that – if tracked like real diseases – would rank between the fourth and sixth leading cause of death in the United States.

Nevertheless, under the leadership of Microsoft Founder Bill Gates, GAVI inflated these odds and donated $165 million (£110m; €135m) to vaccinate 10 million children in 10 of India’s 28 states.

But when two studies reported more cases of pneumonia among vaccinated children – and no significant efficacy in radiologically-confirmed pneumonia or meningitis – India’s pediatricians were alarmed.

GAVI – A PHILANTHROPIC PRETEXT

Claiming to be funded by “governments committed to GAVI’s mission of saving children’s lives,” GAVI uses the pretext of philanthropy to promote a vaccine that not only costs 100 times more than comparable vaccines, but also kills and injures more children than the diseases it is ostensibly designed to prevent.

Led by Gates and the usual suspects, GAVI’s mission is to “guarantee equal access to vaccines.”  Since forty-three percent of GAVI vaccines are produced by pharmaceutical companies based in emerging markets, GAVI’s business model is designed not to save lives, but to increase business for the vaccine industry in countries not yet affected by pharmaceutical weapons.

To understand GAVI’s true objectives, consider Gates’ stated objectives:

“The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent…” (680 million ~ ONE BILLION people)

How exactly does one save lives by eliminating a billion people?

Gates’ apologists’ claim that “If you lower childhood mortality, people have less kids and the rate goes down” – down to something presumably closer to the UN-approved 2.2 offspring per household.  But aside from Bill and Melinda Gates, it’s hard to imagine three billion couples chatting about child mortality and Haemophilus influenzae virus type b when Cupid strikes.

As the vaccine industry’s top cheerleader, Gates isn’t expected to consider the virtues and cultures that value children more than progressive Western cultures, where sterilization, contraception, vaccines and abortion are projected to exterminate the French, Italians and the English by the end of this century.  But rather than encouraging the French to produce more children, Western countries facing extinction appear to be using vaccines to level the playing field by killing tomorrow’s enemies and economic competitors before conception.

CORPORATE MOTIVES

Like any criminal enterprise, one must consider motives:

  • Since 2009, the pharmaceutical industry has paid $10 billion to settle thousands of criminal and civil complaints related to the illegal marketing of drugs that kill or injure 2-4 million Americans ANNUALLY.

(Coincidentally, this number corresponds with Gates’ 10~15 percent.)

Clearly, the drug industry has not changed since 1977, when researchers first documented these motives.  But even if Gates’ is just a well-intentioned fool, his statements betray his intent not to protect growing populations, but to reduce them eugenically.

DEFENDING VACCINE COMPANIES

Shortly after reporting the deaths of children who succumbed a few hours after receiving GAVI’s Hib vaccine, the pediatricians who raised the alarm were predictably characterized as “anti-vaccine lobbyists” – as if an evil cartel of billionaire goat farmers, herbalists were paying doctors to spread lies about Gates, GAVI and the lifesaving (albeit population-reducing) vaccine industry.

There’s also no reason to believe that doctors who defend vaccines are unaffected by pharmaceutically-funded global politics (i.e. UNICEF, WHO, UN).  In the Unites States alone, the drug industry has paid at least $760 million to doctors who are willing to unnecessarily prescribe tests, drugs, and vaccines to healthy asymptomatic patients.

One doctor describes those politics in the film The Science of Panic (2011):

“In early 2000 I was invited to a conference in India…  They told us about a dispensary in the city of Nagpur where they treated AIDS patients: all men, all suffering end-stage tuberculosis who weighed 40 kilos (90 pounds) at most.  It was a tragic sight.   And because they were all seropositive, they wanted to give them AZT.

“That same afternoon, we were escorted to Delhi for a reception put on by the Indian Ministry of Health.  There I had the chance to talk with the second-in-command at the Ministry of Health.  I told him about our visit to the dispensary and expressed how shocked I was.  And he told me, ‘Doctor, I understand, but you have to understand us too:  If we told the World Health Organization in Geneva that there were 10,000 cases of tuberculosis in Nagpur, they’ll tell us that’s nothing new.  But if we tell them there are 10,000 cases of AIDS, they’ll send us millions of dollars.’”

(1:00:47) – Etienne de Harven, MD
Professor Emeritus (Pathology)
University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada

There is no better way to understand the issues than by reading the arguments.  Only when compared to the clarity presented by Dr. Puliyel and others can the muddled message of Gates and the vaccine industry be fully appreciated:

http://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.c3508?tab=responses

See also Dr. Puliyel’s video presentation (2011)

Tags: , , , , , ,

You must be logged in to comment

Log in