(Please note this article is available as a full-colour booklet via the Informed Consent Matters website.)
“I’m not anti-vax, I just want safe vaccines.”
“I’m not against traditional vaccines, it’s the mRNA that’s the problem.”
“Modern medicine is a miracle, but it sometimes goes too far.”
All these kinds of declarations are extremely commonplace within “the truth community”, and are seen as offering a “reasonable” alternative view - not like those crazy cranks who reject all vaccines, who don’t have a proper doctor and use (ugh!) homeopathy - you know the types, those nutjobs who think the earth is flat and the Queen’s a lizard. I mean, they’re obviously insane, but I’m not like them. I'm reasonable, so let’s take a more nuanced, balanced, “reasonable” perspective, shall we?
The issue is, though, just how “reasonable” are these views really, if we equate “reason” with “truth”?
The answer is, not very. The reality is that the conspiracy (and it is certainly that) to attack and undermine global health has been going on for a lot longer than the last three years, and even a lot longer than the last three decades or centuries. In truth (with the truth being notorious for its tendency to be far stranger than fiction), a dark and dangerous force has been hunting humanity for a very long time, and while historically, it’s used more traditional means of attack - wars and famines - now it has a much more lethally effective weapon at its disposal: medicine.
If you want to control, occupy, and ultimately overthrow a nation, the best way to do that, is to strategise your approach in such a way that the nation in question does not realise it is under attack. If you explicitly announce your intentions by being openly hostile, using traditional means of warfare, the occupied nation will obviously notice, and mount a resistance to fight back.
Yet what if you didn’t present yourself as their enemy, but as their friend - as that most trusted and respected social authority of all - a doctor? Can you imagine how much higher your potential body count could be then?
If we trace back the origins of modern medicine (so-called “allopathy”), looking into who was originally behind it and why, we can see that this approach to human health has never been about improving or enhancing health outcomes, but rather - and this is what the evidence we shall explore in this essay shows us - the opposite. Ultimately, modern medicine is about controlling the global population and undermining their potential, so they never become a threat to the ruling classes: and it starts early.
As soon as a baby is born, they are immediately injected with Vitamin K. This infusion, which is not necessary for the average newborn (their Vitamin K levels are low for a reason), comes with a black box warning, meaning it can cause severe and life-threatening reactions. A black box warning is the most stringent warning a medicine can have.
In some countries, including the USA, babies are also injected with the Hepatitis B vaccine within 24 hours of birth - a highly toxic concoction associated with serious health problems, including autoimmune disease, cardiovascular problems, and brain damage. Please note that Hepatitis B primarily affects intravenous drug users and prostitutes.
Even from just these two initial interventions, a baby has already been potentially fundamentally altered, therefore skewing the baseline of what a healthy baby is really like. The parents never got to know, since as soon as their child entered the world, it was interfered with. To imagine that injecting a 7 lb newborn with powerful drugs that include known neurotoxins and come with severe health warnings, would have no effect on that newborn’s development, would be extraordinarily naive. Pregnant women are warned off having a single glass of wine, so sensitive are babies’ brains to trauma and damage, so injecting heavy metals and neurotoxins straight into their flesh? (As for such uninformed rebuttals as, “but testing has shown this is safe!'' - it certainly hasn’t, and we will get to that later.)
The injecting ritual continues unabated with the “routine childhood immunisation schedule” (please do check the current schedule, as every reasonable person I know has been shocked to the core by the sheer number of needles children now receive), where tiny infants are injected with potent cocktails of neurotoxins and carcinogens which are well-known to have the potential to lead to permanent brain injury and personality changes. This is not a conspiracy “theory”, as evidenced by the UK’s Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme, and similar schemes all over the world, that compensate families for irreparable harm done to their children via vaccines (though please note, the scheme will not pay out if vaccines kill your child before the age of two).
Because the vaccine schedule starts so early (at eight weeks old in the UK, and day one of life in the USA), and long before an infant is able to talk, it is hard to gauge to what extent a child has been damaged by vaccines, because we do not have a clear portrait of what they were like without them - which is by design: it used to be the case that children were first vaccinated closer to the age of two, so it was much easier for parents to spot radical health and personality changes.
Hence, the age limit was lowered - not to protect babies, there being no evidence that “earlier is better”, but to “train parents” - to inculcate into them the belief their child needs needles every two months to survive, and would not have made it to their first birthday without them. This also eliminates the “control” - the healthy, unvaccinated child, because the parent barely meets them. Their child only exists unvaccinated for a few short weeks, and in the USA, just a few hours.
So who were they really, or who were they destined to become, before the introduction of potent and potentially damaging chemicals into their body? Have they been damaged? How can we know?
The eminent neurosurgeon, Dr, Andrew Moulden, who dedicated his later career to studying vaccines before he “died suddenly” in mysterious circumstances, stated that all vaccines cause damage in all people who receive them. It is simply a question of to what degree.
The alleged “reasonable” rebuttal to this would be that, yes, of course, vaccines carry some risks as do all medicines, but they’ve saved millions of lives so the risk is worth it.
Actually, there is no evidence vaccines have “saved millions of lives”, beyond PR soundbites from pharmaceutical companies, because no real world experiment has ever been done showing that vaccinated people are less prone to serious illness and death than the unvaccinated.
In fact, the studies that have been done - comparing health outcomes of fully vaccinated, partially vaccinated, and unvaccinated children - always find the same thing: the less vaccinated the child, the healthier they are, with completely unvaccinated children being the healthiest of all.
As the number of vaccinations children routinely receive increases (as it has been doing for many years), the overall health of those children degrades, with more than half of all American children (the USA being the most heavily vaccinated nation on earth) now having at least one chronic health condition. All the chronic health conditions that have exploded in children in recent years - such as autism, ADHD, digestive problems and severe food allergies - are all known and documented potential side effects of vaccines.
It is of note also that vaccinations are not dispensed equally: there are very clear demographic trends regarding which parents vaccinate and which do not, and all over the world, the trend remains the same - the more affluent and well-educated a parent, the less likely they are to vaccinate, with those educated to PhD level the most vaccine-sceptic of all. Those most likely to complete the vaccination schedule on time and in full are high school dropouts.
The most vaccinated state in the USA, Mississippi, is also the poorest - and also has the highest levels of infant mortality. To be clear: social disadvantage such as poverty and poor educational levels correlate strongly with high vaccine uptake, and high vaccine uptake correlates strongly with increased neonatal death. Affluence and education correlate with lower vaccine uptake and better health outcomes, with completely unvaccinated children having the best outcomes overall.
It is therefore the contention of this author that vaccinations are - clearly - not about improving health, but rather, they are designed to facilitate social and class control by entrenching class barriers through the creation of poor health and disability. Vaccinations ensure the playing field can never be level by subduing potential and creating additional barriers to achievement and upward mobility, in the lower social classes in particular.
The reason “health authorities” around the world are so invested in aggressively promoting these concoctions (and often offering them for free) has nothing to do with improving a nation’s health or longevity, but rather, in achieving the real goals of the ruling elites, which relate to population control - something all ruling classes are, by definition, interested in. If you don’t control the population, you will not maintain your powerful position of ruling over them for long, so all “elites” historically have been invested in doing this.
One form of population control the ruling classes are openly committed to is reducing the size of the population. Therefore, they lace vaccines with sterilants, to subdue fertility. It’s common knowledge that they’ve been doing this in highly fecund Africa for many years, but, as a recent documentary focusing on the African sterilising scandal warned, “when they’ve finished with Africa, they’re coming for you”.
The HPV vaccine, offered to all children at age 12-13, is strongly linked with infertility, with a recent study suggesting that 25% of all girls who receive it go on to be permanently sterile. Meanwhile, the Covid injection is increasingly linked with menstrual and fertility issues, including miscarriage, stillbirth, and neonatal death.
Many vaccines contain the potent neurotoxin, aluminium, and the world’s leading expert on the metal has confirmed there is no known safe limit of this highly toxic substance to inject into human beings - let alone tiny infants. Aluminium from vaccines can migrate to the brain, and is increasingly linked with neurological problems including autism spectrum disorder. Many people with this disorder struggle with forming relationships later on, so this is another way in which the birth rate is artificially subdued via iatrogenically induced conditions. Please note millions have been poured into the black hole of “autism is genetic” research, searching in vain for an “autism gene”, but such a gene remains elusive, because - while certain genetic profiles may be predisposed to developing this condition - it requires the requisite environmental insults to develop. Nature may load the gun, but environment pulls the trigger.
Aluminium, however, is not the only dangerous metal contained in vaccines. Despite the protestations of the immensely wealthy vaccine industry to the contrary, some do still contain mercury, and mercury has been known for centuries to cause severe brain damage. The term “mad hatters” comes from the fact that hat makers used to work with mercury, and absorbing this substance over time increasingly poisoned them and sent them mad. You’d have to therefore be a complete lunatic to believe that injecting this substance in any quantity into babies is an acceptable thing to do - and there remains no known safe limit of mercury exposure for human beings. Note that if a parent injected their baby with mercury - even the so-called “trace amounts” the pharmaceutical cartels claim to use - they’d immediately be arrested for child abuse and attempted murder. Just because a man in a white coat performs the injection, does not somehow magically make the injection safe. Poison is poison, it’s not determined by the credentials of the administrator.
However, injection is not the only way the medical cartel gets this corrosive venom into the bodies of healthy children - it also instals it into their teeth, The vast majority of UK adults have at least one mercury-containing amalgam filling, and the average person has three - with many of these put in place in childhood.
This is such a common procedure, it is barely given a second thought by average families, but in reality, filling children’s teeth with neurotoxic metals known to send people mad, is a highly subversive thing to do - the sort of thing one might be tempted to do, if one was a psychopathic ruling class obsessed with maintaining power and control and keeping the masses in a permanent state of subjugation via mind-bending poisons.
It is that last paragraph which encapsulates the true intentions of much of “modern medicine”, and the degrading poisoning ritual continues apace all through childhood, with each undermining intervention presented by stately authority figures as being “for your safety”. Fluoride in water and toothpaste - yet isn’t fluoride a brain decimating poison? Didn’t Hitler add it to water in concentration camps to subdue the prisoners? No, no, don’t worry, it’s just there because it’s “good for your teeth” (it may be in small quantities if applied directly to the teeth, but there is no evidence swallowing it does anything but cause harm).
The bottom line is that human beings are born with tremendous potential - including the potential to realise how brutally persecuted, poisoned, and abused many generations of their ancestors have been - and the ruling classes are terrified of the day they “awaken” en masse and realise this fact. The world’s ruling elites could not possibly maintain their psychopathic control grid and hoarding of all the world’s resources, if all human beings rose into their full potential - so that potential is immediately targeted for destruction starting from day one of life.
Obviously, ruthless maiming maniacs who want to steal your child’s future, don’t tell you that’s what they’re doing. If they explicitly said to you, “we intend to inject your child dozens of times over their childhood with substances known and designed to reduce their IQ, subdue their fertility, and destroy their mind”, you wouldn’t let them. So, they concocted the whole pseudoscience of “vaccination” - and it is a pseudoscience, the very essence of quackery, developed at the same time doctors were typically treating patients with leeches, and dealing with mental health conditions by drilling holes into people’s heads.
Why is vaccination quackery? Because the fundamental founding principle of vaccination - that creating antibodies against an antigen creates lifelong immunity to that antigen - is false, and if there’s one good thing to come out of the Covid pantomime, it’s that the mainstream has finally acknowledged this.
So many people said: “but I’ve had Covid. That means I’ve got antibodies. So I don’t need the Covid vaccination, right?”
And after many decades of saying the exact opposite, the mainstream media and all its obedient nodding-dog “TV doctors”, finally conceded: having antibodies doesn’t necessarily equate to disease immunity.
They’re right, it doesn’t, so if you got the Covid vaccine on the premise antibodies don’t equate to immunity, then you’ve necessarily confirmed that all other vaccines are useless, because that is all they do and that is how they are measured as “effective” in vaccinology - not that they stop someone getting a disease - but that they provoke an antibody response.
Provoking an antibody response tells you very little about a person’s actual health status, and is really ultimately meaningless, to the extent that the test used to see if someone is “immune” to a disease (if they have antibodies) is the same test used to see if they HAVE a disease, e.g. a positive antibody test could be used both as proof that someone is already “immune” to measles and so does not need the measles vaccination, or as proof that somebody currently has an active measles infection.
In reality, a positive antibody test means nothing other than, at some point, someone was exposed to the antigen in question (it doesn’t mean it ever made them ill). It could have been today, or it could have been thirty years ago. It doesn’t mean they have, or had, a disease, nor does it mean they’re immune to it. It just means they were exposed to it. And as if this weren’t enough to completely disqualify vaccinations as “immunising” anybody against anything - vaccines don’t even reliably produce this response in everyone. Some people do not have an antibody response to vaccinations, and as people are almost never tested thereafter to see if the vaccine “took” or not, we have no idea how many people have produced antibodies and how many have not.
This whole idea that antibodies equal immunity was effectively invented out of whole cloth by cynical and devious social engineers, who needed an excuse to inject neurotoxins into infants. No parent in the world would ever have let doctors inject mystery substances into their baby for no reason, so “vaccination” was invented, as a convenient sheen to literally let the medical profession inject whatever they like into babies - because, does the average parent actually have the slightest clue what is in vaccines? Even if they do their due diligence and check, regulatory standards are so lax, that often what is injected into the baby, is not what is listed on the vial - this is particularly so for the neurotoxin aluminium, and amounts in certain vials can far exceed what the manufacturers claim are in them.
The devious deception of mass vaccination as a health measure only became possible after seismic social changes relating to improved nutrition, hygiene, and sanitation resulted in enormous improvements in the health of the populace, and in particular, saw a dramatic reduction in child mortality. If you look carefully, you will see child mortality related to X condition - say measles (please see graph below) - had already drastically declined, before the vaccine for that condition was introduced. Realistically, it was an end to slum overcrowding, improvements in diet, and the introduction of modern plumbing, that eradicated much severe childhood illness. But mainstream history has been skewed to give vaccines the credit, thus successfully indoctrinating most parents into believing their child won’t see their fifth birthday unless constantly injected with “life saving vaccines”. This is cynical science fiction, and as we have seen, unvaccinated children are actually healthier than vaccinated children, and, the more vaccinated a country’s children, the more their overall health declines.
There is also the key issue to consider of whether endeavouring to prevent common childhood infections is in fact a desirable thing to do. The risks these conditions pose to healthy children are extremely small, whereas there is solid evidence to suggest that a history of childhood illnesses such as chicken pox, can be protective against more serious conditions, like cancer, later on. Some theorise that the typical childhood infections are not so much illnesses, as detoxifications - assisting the child to throw off the toxic loads inherited from their parents, hence they lower the risk of toxicity-related conditions like cancer later. Therefore, allowing children to naturally pass through these infections, rather than trying to suppress them with medicines (such as Calpol/Tylenol, which depletes master detoxifying nutrient, glutathione),or prevent them (with vaccines), may be the optimal option.
The phenomenon of “chicken pox parties” shows us that not all children “catch” this condition, even when closely exposed to it and even when their surrounding peers do, and the same is true for the other once-common childhood infections (measles, mumps, and so on). Most children contracted them, but not all of them did. We can theorise this may be because some children are born with heavier toxic loads than others, hence require more detoxifications. There are many ways parents can inadvertently pass toxic loads onto children, and the book Gut and Psychology Syndrome (GAPS) linked at the end of this essay provides much more information on this, and details how risks to children of inherited toxic loads can be minimised.
If, then, childhood illnesses are not generally the mortal threat they have frequently been portrayed to be (and may even have positive ramifications), and if vaccines carry so many serious risks, then why do doctors so often recommend them? Am I suggesting that doctors are all “in on it”, that they’re all ruthless maiming sadists on board with the depopulation and control agenda?
No, of course not. Doctors only know what they are taught, and what they are taught in medical school is often inaccurate and misleading - for instance, the average doctor hasn’t got the slightest idea what is in the vaccines they are injecting into children, nor how those ingredients interact with each other or perform in the body. All they are typically taught in medical school is how to administer a vaccine, along with a hefty dollop of pharmaceutical propaganda regarding how vaccines have “saved millions of lives”, which they simply go on to repeat. Doctors are kept tremendously busy from medical school onwards, and most simply do not have the time or the energy to look into the raw evidence for themselves.
Doctors are also not taught about how so-called safety testing in the vaccine industry actually works, and that safety trials in vaccine development typically do not use an inert placebo. Instead, they use other vaccines, or biologically reactive solutions containing the same adjuvant as the vaccine (such as aluminium), which completely obscure safety issues with the new vaccine being tested. If a new vaccine is shown to be no more dangerous than an existing vaccine, or than a solution containing the same toxic ingredients as the vaccine, that doesn’t show us the vaccine is “safe” - at all - but this is what equates to “safety testing” in vaccinology. Your average doctor knows none of this, and therefore gives vaccines in good faith, sincerely believing they are doing the best thing for a child and that safety concerns with vaccines are nothing more than “anti-vax conspiracy theories”.
Remember: doctors are not scientists. They do not work in research and development. They therefore have no specialist knowledge about vaccines and typically know no more about them than the average member of the general public (that’s why so many doctors took the Covid vaccine, despite the evidence always being overwhelming regarding how dangerous it is - because, just like most of the general public, doctors don’t base their decisions on the science - they do not patiently read through studies, analyse the data, and make an informed choice - they base their decisions on the media. Most people who got the Covid vaccine did so because the TV told them to, and doctors are no exception). .
Doctors are given a hugely inflated social standing and presented as being equivalent to modern day high priests and all-knowing sages (all societies need their God-like heroes, and for a secular society like ours, that’s doctors), not because they are extraordinarily gifted or wise, but for two key two reasons relating to social engineering and control of the masses - one, treating doctors like this leads to puffed up professional arrogance and pride, meaning they instantly shut down questioning and challenge from non-doctors, as they cannot contemplate that a “civilian” member of the public might know more than they do (this makes them excellent obedient order followers and drug pushers for pharma), and two, people are taught to trust these “Gods” implicitly, which means they trust them with their most precious possessions of all - their children.
And as anybody who has worked with children over the long-term, such as veteran teachers, will tell you: children have changed. They are not the same as they were in the 1970s or 1980s.
It used to be unusual for even one child in an entire school to have a severe food allergy. Now, these affect 1 in 13 children, to the extent that certain foods that used to be innocuous childhood staples, like peanut butter, are entirely banned from school premises. Asthma levels and inhaler use have skyrocketed too, but what is the most concerning and radical change is the personality and behavioural issues - just how many children now have special education needs, learning disabilities, and behavioural problems.
The “reasonable” rebuttal to this is always, “these levels haven’t increased, children have always had these problems, but before, they were shut away in institutions. Now we see them more in mainstream society.”
To which I say, where were these institutions? How many were there? Name them? Because so many families of special needs children are desperate for extra support and don’t seem to be able to locate these mythical “institutions”. To deal with the sheer number of damaged children we have now, there would have had to have been thousands of such places, so where are they all? If they closed down, when did they and why?
The reality is that there has been an explosion in children with disabilities and additional needs, and it’s happened exactly in lockstep with the ever increasing vaccination schedule. Many people blithely assume that, where it comes to vaccinations, their children just got what they did and as “they’re fine”, their children will be, too. This, however, is completely false. Those born in the 1950s and ‘60s received around four vaccinations total. Those born in the 1970s and early 80s received around eight. Children today receive over thirty.
This is the “frog in a pot” approach of which the ruling elites are so fond. If they’d immediately targeted healthy children with thirty vaccines back in the fifties, the change would have been so enormous and profound that everyone would have noticed and immediately turned against the concept of vaccination. So, they did it more gradually. Starting with a small number, so keeping the damage and the death small and contained. Gradually increasing, gradually increasing, gradually increasing, until the situation we have now - with over half of all children with chronic illnesses including the now endemic autism - with boys 13 times more likely to be diagnosed with this condition than girls, poor and black boys in particular.
In the 1970s, autism rates were 1 in 10,000 - it was so rare, it was not typically on the syllabus in medical schools, as it was considered the chances of doctors ever encountering an autistic patient were so low.
As of today, the rates are close to 1 in 50.
For such an extraordinary change to occur in such a short period of time, there must be an environmental explanation - something is routinely happening to children now, that was not happening to them then. The “better diagnosing” argument may account for a few extra cases, but not for the catastrophic changes all experienced teachers will tell you they see around them in the nation’s schools. Please note that, by the age of nine, nearly 1 in 4 boys are now classed as having special educational needs.
Children - especially boys - have changed. They have been changed. As we explored earlier on in this essay, the ruling classes are deeply and deviously dedicated to retaining that power and control, and that means relentlessly attacking and engineering those they rule over in order to prevent an uprising.
The biggest threat to corrupt elites has always been, all throughout history, strong young men who will go to war with them and fight to the death to overthrow them. So, it is always this cohort that has been particularly targeted for destruction. Traditionally, the ruling elites cynically orchestrated wars, with the specific intention of drafting all the strongest young men with the most potential, and sending them off to die. World Wars One and Two were ultimately nothing but mass sacrificial rituals to subdue societies and keep them under the heel, by sending off their strongest natural fighters and protectors to perish.
However, engineering and stage-managing wars is a costly and complex endeavour which comes with vast damage to a country’s infrastructure, which then has to be rebuilt at huge expense. So, the ruthless ruling classes changed tack. They realised, there is no need to wait until boys are eighteen years of age to draft them, to destroy their futures with bombs and guns, when you can do it quietly and just as effectively at 18 months of age, with a needle.
Vaccination does not generally kill as effectively as traditional wars do, but for experienced military strategists, this has an additional advantage: if you kill someone in battle, you only take them out of action. But if you severely, yet not fatally, wound them, you take at least two others out too, because they will now be needed to provide round the clock care to the injured party.
Any family with a severely damaged child will tell you, that’s how it is. The entire lives of the parents now revolve around providing round-the-clock care for the child. So, the more vaccine injury that is created - in the shape of severe autism and similar conditions - the more potential fighters are taken out of the battle, redrafted into caring commitments.
These conditions are also good for the economy, because they create a lot of jobs, in terms of all the extra help and support a damaged child - and later adult - requires, as opposed to a healthy one. And of course, sick people are essential for the ultra-lucrative continuation of the pharmaceutical industry, which is heavily invested - like all successful big business is - in customer creation. And that’s what injecting poison into the bodies of healthy people does - it creates sick people who go on to require various pills and potions to survive. These interventions inevitably create more poor health, which requires more “medication”, and so, by the age of 65, half of all people take at least five pharmaceutical medications a day. That’s the business model. It’s not profitable to cure people, it’s profitable to make them sick, addicted, and dependent.
So please return to the opening statements of this article, and ask yourself again if they still really sound that “reasonable”. The nation’s health has never been worse. Children’s futures have never looked more perilous. We are obviously doing something very, very wrong - and it starts on day one of life, with that very first needle.
If you suspect you or your child have been damaged by a vaccine, there are many treatment protocols available, such as the GAPS diet. If you suspect you have been damaged by an aluminium-containing vaccine, such as the HPV or Hepatitis B vaccines, please research the benefits of silica-rich water for removing the aluminium.
Thanks for reading! This site is 100% reader-funded, with no paywalls, adverts, or wealthy corporate backers, meaning your support is what powers this site to keep going. If you would like to make a contribution of any size, please do so through...
Your support is what enables this site to continue to exist, and is enormously appreciated. Thank you.