創建者
There needs to be an open, rational discussion about vaccination, infectious diseases and health. After all, don’t all of us want our children to be healthy and safe from unnecessary harm?
疫苗、感染病和健康需要開放和理性的討論。畢竟，我們所有的人都希望我們的孩子健康和安全，不遭受不必要的傷害。
If we want to protect the health of all children, we cannot continue to ignore the signs that public health policies making mandatory use of multiple vaccines in early childhood as our nation’s No. 1 disease prevention strategy have gotten to the point where we have no idea how children’s lives are being sacrificed in the name of “the greater good.”
如果你想保護所有孩子的健康，我們就不能繼續忽略一些訊號，公共衛生政策讓早期兒童接受多種疫苗注射，並把這個作為國家頭號疾病預防措施。這些做法讓我們不知道孩子們的生命是如何為“更大的利益”而犧牲的。
From my point of view, there can be little doubt that we need to review the safety and effectiveness of the current vaccination program in the U.S., and that this review needs to include methodologically sound investigative studies that are not compromised by conflicts of interest within industry and government. If we don’t do that now, we may not be able to stop further damage to the health of future generations.
從我的觀點來看，幾乎沒有人懷疑我們應該對美國現有疫苗項目的安全和有效性進行評估，以及這項評估所需要的包含方法論上可靠度的調查研究，且該研究不應受醫藥行業和政府之間的利益衝突影響。如果我們現在不這麼做，我們不可能阻止對子孫後代的進一步傷害。
Vaccine History is Shameful
疫苗的歷史是見不得人的
Many are aware of the unethical and manipulative marketing of today’s vaccines. But the roots of the greed-based marketing — battling over markets, patents, intellectual property, profits, “turf” and prestige — could be seen 20 years ago with the Children’s Vaccine Initiative (CVI).
很多人都了解當今的疫苗不道德的及操控性的市場營銷。但是基於貪婪的市場營銷 — 市場、病人、專利、知識產權、利潤、“勢力範圍”和聲望 — 這些在二十年前兒童疫苗推廣（CVI）項目中就可以看到。
The CVI was founded in 1990 after the World Children’s Summit in New York City by the Rockefeller Foundation, United Nations Development Program (UNDP), United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF), the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO) with an overarching goal of vaccinating all the children in the world with vaccines endorsed by the WHO and governments.
CVI由洛克菲勒基金會、聯合國開發計劃署(UNDP)、聯合國國際兒童緊急基金 (UNICEF)、世界銀行(UNICEF)和世界衛生組織(WHO)在世界兒童峰會後於1990年成立於紐約，成立的主要目標是讓世界上所有的兒童注射由WHO和政府支持的疫苗。
Reportedly, CVI has been marked by a rivalry for leadership between the World Health Organization (WHO), UNICEF and the U.S. The CVI was created as a means for UNICEF to fund research and development of vaccines for distribution globally without directly giving money to WHO.
據報導，CVI以世界衛生組織(WHO)、UNICEF和美國之間的領導關係競爭為顯著特征。CVI是UNICEF為疫苗全球性傳播而贊助研究和開發疫苗的方法，不直接向WHO提供資金。
There were difficulties inherent in coordinating the efforts of different governments and public-private partnerships. Also, there were questions about vaccine production itself, such as would the ability of drug companies and governments to quickly produce large quantities of vaccines end up compromising the quality of vaccines?
在協調政府和公私合作夥伴的各種關係的行動上也存在著困難。還有，疫苗生產本身也存在問題，比如說，製藥公司和政府有能力快速生產大批量的疫苗而不產生任何質量問題嗎？
According to the book, “The Politics of International Health: The Children’s Vaccine Initiative and the Struggle to Develop Vaccines for the Third World,” the U.S. Department of Defense was a cooperative partner with CVI “The Army, unlike the public sector generally, worked closely with private pharmaceutical companies to make sure that the vaccines it needs were actually produced. It could not afford to leave decisions to the marketplace.”
根據《國際健康政治：兒童疫苗倡議和為第三世界開發疫苗的鬥爭》一書，美國國防部是CVI的合作夥伴“軍隊，與公共部門不同，他們和私有製藥公司合作以確保可以生產實際需要的疫苗。這不能根據市場情況來做決定。”
Overseas Vaccine Disasters
海外疫苗災難
Increasingly, Big Pharma produces, tests and sells its vaccines in poorer, undeveloped countries — sometimes with disastrous results. This is what happened with Gardasil, a Merck vaccine against the human papilloma virus (HPV), which is linked to venereal warts and cervical cancer. As reported by Counterpunch:
越來越多的大型製藥公司測試和銷售疫苗到貧窮和落後的國家 — 這有時會產生災難性的後果。加德西疫苗就是很好的例子，它是默克公司生產的抗人乳瘤病毒(HPV)疫苗，但它與性病疣和宮頸癌發生相關聯。Counterpunch報導：
“Merck attempted to cast the vaccine as lifesaving — even in poor countries with much more pressing disease risks — but Pap smear tests are equally effective in preventing [through detection]cervical cancer and cost much less. Nor are the vaccines clearly safe. [In 2015], judges in India’s Supreme Court demanded answers after children died during a trial of Gardasil and Cervarix, GlaxoSmithKline’s counterpart vaccine.”
“默克公司試圖把疫苗描繪成救命藥 — 即使在有更緊迫疾病威脅的貧困國家— 但是宮頸巴氏塗片檢查 [透過檢查]來預防宮頸癌的方法同樣有效，並且花費更低。那些疫苗也不是絕對安全。[2015年]，印度最高法院的法官要求對使用加德西疫苗和卉妍康疫苗（葛蘭素史克公司生產的同類疫苗）後死亡的兒童做出解釋。”
Young tribal girls as young as 9 were given Gardasil and Cervarix HPV vaccines with no informed consent or even awareness that they were participating in an experimental vaccine trial. The study was funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
年紀在九歲的部落中的女孩也注射了加德西疫苗和卉妍康HPV疫苗，他們沒有知情同意書或也沒有意識到正在參與一項疫苗試驗。這項研究由蓋茲基金會資助。
The pharmaceutical industry likes overseas clinical trials because regulations are less strict and sometimes nonexistent, and product liability lawsuits involving personal injury are unlikely. In fact, trial participants often welcome the test drugs thinking they are being given important or needed medical care.
醫藥行業喜歡在海外進行臨床試驗，因為那裡監管更加寬松，甚至不存在，涉及人身傷害的產品責任訴訟不太可能發生。實際上，臨床試驗的參與者會歡迎藥物測試，他們認為正被給予重要的或所需的醫療護理。
Clinical trial participants in foreign countries, especially those who live in poverty with little education or access to medical care, are also “drug-naïve” — they have not used the antibiotics, statins, psychiatric and GERD medications so common in industrialized countries. Clinical trials require that participants have a “washout” period to ensure any drug residues in their bodies do not confound the trial results, and subjects in poor countries have no drugs to “wash out.”
在海外醫療試驗的參與者，特別是那些貧困沒有受過教育或者無法得到醫療護理的人，也是“藥物清白的”— 他們還沒有用過發達國家普遍存在的抗生素、他汀類藥物、精神類藥物和胃食管反流病藥物。臨床試驗要求受試者有一個“清除”期，用以確保人體內的其他的藥物殘留不會幹擾試驗結果，貧困國家的受試者沒有這樣的殘留去“清除”。
Many medical ethicists also question whether trials of pharmaceutical products should be conducted on people who don’t need them or won’t receive them after the trial. If the drug (or vaccine) will not be available free or for a reasonable cost for a significant time afterward, the trial itself is unethical in that it is “exporting the risk of research to those who will, in the end, not be able to afford the resulting medical products,” say ethicists.
很多醫學倫理家質疑是否應該對不需要或試驗後不會使用這些藥物的人進行試驗。如果藥物（或疫苗）在之後的很長一段時間不免費或者以合理的價格銷售，那麼試驗本身就是不道德的。因為它“把風險轉移到最終不會負擔這些醫療產品的人身上，”醫療倫理家這麼說。
And informed consent? Some ethicists have argued that videotapes of informed consent statements by trial participants would protect them much better than the current written consent forms being used because of language barriers and the fact that some trial participants in impoverished countries cannot read.
那知情同意呢？與現有書面形式的知情同意相比，一些倫理家宣稱臨床實驗者的錄像帶版本的知情聲明會更好地保護他們，其原因是語言障礙和一些貧困的國家的參與者不識字的事實。
Big Pharma Conflicts of Interest Abound
大型製藥公司的利益衝突無所不在
Mainstream media are financially linked to Big Pharma through drug ads (estimated to account for as much as 72 percent of commercials) and through allowing drug company representatives to serve as board members. Here is how Organic Consumers Association (OCA) describes the conflicts:
主流媒體透過藥物廣告（據估計藥物廣告占全部廣告的72%）和跟醫藥代表來擔任董事會成員的方式，與大型製藥公司有了金錢上的關係。以下是有機消費者協會（OCA）描述的利益衝突：
“There are brazen and unhidden conflicts of interest between mainstream media and vaccine makers which color reporting and discourage safety questions. ‘According to a 2009 study by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, with the exception of CBS, every major media outlet in the United States shares at least one board member with at least one drug company,’ reports Mike Papantonio, of the ‘America’s Lawyer’ TV show. ‘These board members wake up, they go to a meeting at Merck or Pfizer, and then they have their driver take them over to a meeting at a TV station,’ says Papantonio.”
“在主流媒體和疫苗製造商之間有厚顏無恥且隱藏的利益衝突，這讓疫苗製造商篡改報告和掩蓋安全問題。‘根據2009年公正和准確報告的一篇文章，除了CBS，美國每一家主流媒體的站點都有至少一名來自一家製藥公司的董事會成員，’Mike Papantonio在‘美國律師’電視節目報導。‘董事會成員出門後就會去默克或者輝瑞公司的會議，然後讓他們的司機載他們到電視臺開會’，Papantonio說。”
The government is also in the vaccine “biz.” Vaccine safety activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. reported that the CDC owns more than 20 different vaccine patents and sells $4.1 billion in vaccines each year, noting that those patents create a significant undisclosed conflict of interest when it comes to the agency’s involvement in vaccine safety. It is a case of the fox guarding the henhouse.
政府也加入了疫苗的“商業活動”。疫苗安全家Robert F. Kennedy Jr.報導，CDC擁有超過20項不同的專利，每年賣出41億美金的疫苗，請注意到，當涉及到該機構的疫苗安全性時，這些專利存在一個重大的非公開的利益衝突。這就像讓狐狸看守雞舍一樣。
The New York Times reported that most experts who served on Centers for Disease Control and Prevention advisory panels to evaluate flu and cervical cancer vaccines had potential conflicts that were never resolved. The vaccine industry also “gives millions to the Academy of Pediatrics for conferences, grants, medical education classes and even helped build their headquarters,” according to a CBS investigative report.
紐約時報報導，大多數為美國疾病控制和預防中心咨詢組服務的、對流感和宮頸癌疫苗評估的專家有從未解決的潛在利益衝突問題。疫苗行業也“給美國兒科協會百萬美金用於會議、捐款、醫學教育課程以及幫助建立他們的總部，”CBS調查研究報導。
Unscientific ‘Conclusions’ Reached by News Outlets
新聞媒體得到的非科學 ‘結論’
Almost all news sites parrot the Big Vax party line in shocking abdication of journalistic ethics. For example, no news outlet would declare “all drugs safe” because they clearly are not, yet they obligingly declare “all vaccines safe,” which insults the public’s intelligence. In addition to published reports of vaccine injuries, there are many reports of vaccines recalled for safety issues.
令人震驚的是，幾乎所有的新聞網站都證明了他們已放棄了新聞倫理操守。比如，幾乎沒有新聞媒體宣稱“所有的藥物是安全的”，很顯然它們不是，但他們會乖乖地宣布“所有的疫苗是安全的”，這對公眾的理解力造成了侵害。除了已經公布的疫苗造成的損傷外，很多疫苗由於安全問題已被召回。
No, all vaccines are not “safe” and every pharmaceutical product carries a risk of injury or death that can be greater for some people than others.
不，不是所有的疫苗都是“安全的”，每一種製藥產品都有損傷或者致死的風險，這些風險對某部分人來說是偏高的。
To get a clearer understanding of the many safety concerns raised by vaccine researchers, get a copy of Neil Z. Miller’s book, “Miller’s Review of Critical Vaccine Studies: 400 Important Scientific Papers Summarized for Parents and Researchers.” In it, he reviews the vaccine safety and efficacy concerns raised by 400 peer-reviewed published studies.
為了更清晰地理解疫苗研究人員提出的安全性問題，可以閱讀Neil Z. Miller的書，《米勒對重要疫苗研究的綜述：為父母和研究人員總結的400份重要的學術論文》。在該書中，他審閱了400份同行評審的有關疫苗安全性和有效性爭議的文章。
Imagine a news outlet blaming motor vehicle accidents in which the motorist fell asleep and harmed others on the motorist’s refusal to take stimulants for sleepiness. As outrageous as that would be, headlines from respected news sites do exactly that when they blame disease outbreaks on “anti-vaxxers.”
設想一個新聞媒體批判機動車事故，在這個事故中司機睡著了致使他人受傷，媒體批判司機拒絕為嗜睡服用興奮劑。令人吃驚的是，那些權威新聞網站的頭條新聞經常這麼報導，他們把疾病暴發歸因於那些“對抗疫苗的人”。
As scientists and reporters with integrity know, causation can almost never be claimed; the preferred terms are “linked, “associated” and “correlated.” “Anti-vaccine activists spark a state’s worst measles outbreak in decades,” trumpeted The Washington Post in May. “Anti-vaxxers brought their war to Minnesota — then came measles,” screamed Wired.
當誠實的科學家和記者知道這些後，不會去聲明因果關係，他們優先考慮的詞匯是“有關係”、“相關”、和“有聯繫”。“反疫苗積極人士引發了數十年來最嚴重的麻疹暴發，”華盛頓郵報5月大肆宣傳。“反疫苗人士把他們的活動帶到了明尼蘇達州 — 然後麻疹就來了”，《連線雜誌》報導。
“Attempts by anti-vaccine activists to influence the Somali parents of Minnesota have ended with a measles outbreak that has made dozens of kids sick,” declared The Daily Beast. “Anti-vaccine groups blamed in Minnesota measles outbreak,” charged CNN. Conveniently ignored is the fact that the CDC maintains a Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) that in February revealed 416 deaths from measles vaccines MEA, MER, MM, MMR or MMRV.
“反疫苗積極人士試圖影響在明尼蘇達州居住的索馬裡夫婦，但最終以麻疹全面暴發結束，導致很多兒童生病。”《每日野獸網》報導。“明尼蘇達的麻疹暴發被歸結到反疫苗組織身上”，CNN報導。通常被忽略的事實是CDC運作著一個疫苗負面報導系統（VAERS），在二月份披露了416起麻疹疫苗MEA、MER、MM、MMR或MMRV導致的死亡事故。
The Science is Ignored
科學性被忽視
Earlier this year, Kennedy, chairman of the World Mercury Project, actor Robert De Niro and others held a press conference at the National Press Club in Washington D.C., calling for an open and honest discussion about vaccine safety. Appearing in a video was the late Dr. Bernadine Healy, who was the first female director of the National Institutes of Health, serving from 1991 until 1993.
今年早些時候，世界汞項目主席Kennedy、演員Robert De Niro還有其他人在華盛頓特區的國家新聞俱樂部發布了記者招待會，呼籲對疫苗安全問題進行公開和誠實地討論。在影片中出現的是已故的Bernadine Healy博士，她是美國國家衛生研究院的第一任女導演，她的任期是1991年到1993年。
She was also professor of medicine at Johns Hopkins University, professor and dean of the College of Medicine and Public Health at Ohio State University and president of the American Red Cross and the American Heart Association. In the video, Healy expresses concern that no government attempts have been made to see if a population of susceptible people exists for whom vaccines are risky.
她還是約翰霍普金斯大學的醫學教授、俄亥俄州立大學醫學院和公共衛生學院教授和院長、美國紅十字會和美國心臟協會會長。在影片中，Healy表達了她的擔心，因為政府沒有努力去發現是否有存在受疫苗風險威脅的易感人群。
She said she did not believe “the public would lose faith in vaccines” if such a population were found, a fear she said was expressed at the Institute of Medicine. She also lamented how animal studies which suggest vaccine links to neurological damage have been ignored. One such study was savaged by pro-vaccine scientists. As reported by OCA:
她說如果發現了這群人，她不相信“公眾會對疫苗失去信心”，她在美國醫學研究員表達了這樣的擔心。她還感到遺憾的是，那些表明疫苗與神經性損傷的動物實驗被忽視了。其中一項研究被支持疫苗的科學家強烈抨擊。OCA報導：
“A 2010 paper published in Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis, a quarterly peer-reviewed scientific journal covering neuroscience, found that ‘rhesus macaque infants receiving the complete U.S. childhood vaccine schedule’ did not ‘undergo the maturational changes over time in amygdala volume that was observed in unexposed animals.’ Pro-vaccine scientists pounced. Not enough monkeys were used to establish a scientific finding, said one scientist. Opposite findings about the amygdala have been reached, which invalidate the study, said another scientist.
One angry scientist was even willing to discredit the monkey study by claiming that monkeys are not a valid model for human disease — thus annulling millions of experiments including the ones on which human drugs are approved! Of course, many in the animal welfare community have questioned the validity of animal ‘models.’”
“神經科學雜誌是同行評審的涵蓋神經科學的季度性發表的期刊，2010年發表在上面的一篇文章發現‘接受了完整的美國兒童疫苗計劃的獼猴嬰兒’沒有‘經歷大腦中杏仁核體積的成熟的變化，而未接受疫苗的動物都會有這種變化。’支持疫苗的科學家都對結果進行攻擊。一位科學家說，並沒有足夠的猴子用來證明這項發現。另一位科學家說，關於杏仁核的結果已經證實了該發現是無效。一位氣憤的科學家甚至想透過說明猴子不是人類疾病的有效模型來詆毀猴子的研究 — 從而廢止了百萬美金的試驗，包括那些批准人類藥物的試驗。當然，動物福利界也會質疑動物‘模型’的有效性。”
‘Vaccine Court’ Protects Vaccine Makers’ Interests, Not the Public
‘疫苗法庭’保護的是疫苗製造商而非公眾的利益
The U.S. Court of Federal Claims in Washington D.C. handles contested vaccine injury and death cases in what has become known as “vaccine court.” The vaccine injury compensation program (VICP) is a “no-fault” alternative to the traditional civil court lawsuit and was established in 1986 after a string of high-profile lawsuits by parents of vaccine injured children had hauled vaccine manufacturers into court to have their cases heard in front of juries.
美國聯邦法院在華盛頓特區被稱為“疫苗法院”的地方處理了有爭議性的疫苗致傷和致死的案件。疫苗傷害賠償計劃（VICP）是傳統民事法院訴訟的一種“無過失”替代方案，它成立於1986年，這之前它經歷過一系列的訴訟，父母因兒童注射疫苗而受傷，他們把疫苗生產商告上法庭，同時讓法官聽審案件。
At the time, parents were suing vaccine manufacturers after their children were brain injured or died following federally recommended and state mandated DPT (diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus) vaccines, or children were left paralyzed by live oral polio vaccinations (OPV).
當時，在他們的孩子在注射了聯邦政府推薦和州政府授權的DPT疫苗（白喉、百日咳、破傷風）受傷或死亡後，或者孩子們在口服活脊髓灰質炎疫苗後而癱瘓，父母們把疫苗製造商告上了法庭。
Several DPT injury lawsuits against the vaccine makers in the 1970s and early 1980s resulted in multimillion-dollar jury verdicts. At that point, vaccine manufacturers threatened to stop producing DPT, MMR and oral polio (the only childhood vaccines at the time) if civil litigation were allowed to continue.
在二十世紀七十年代和八十年代初，幾起DPT引起傷害起訴疫苗製造商的案件導致了百萬美元的陪審團判決。那時，疫苗生產商威脅說如果民事訴訟繼續的話，他們要停止生產DPT、MMR和口服脊髓灰質炎疫苗（這些是當時唯一的兒童疫苗）。
Common sense would have dictated that such lawsuits were a sign that vaccine manufacturers needed to raise safety standards and produce less toxic vaccines. Instead, Congress buckled to industry pressure and gave vaccine manufacturers the legal protection they demanded through the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act.
常識本應該告訴我們，這種訴訟標誌著疫苗生產商需要提高安全標準並生產毒性低的疫苗。相反地，國會會屈服於行業壓力，並提供給疫苗製造商他們需要的法律保護，即透過了《國家兒童疫苗傷害法案》。
As a result, vaccine makers have no incentive to produce the safest vaccines possible, especially when many childhood vaccines are state mandated for school attendance and 2 out of 3 vaccine injured children are turned away from the VICP with no compensation.
因此，疫苗生產商沒有動力去生產足夠安全的疫苗，特別是當很多兒童疫苗被列為入學規定條件之後。有三分之二的疫苗受傷兒童從疫苗傷害賠償計劃（VICP）中離開且沒有任何賠償。
Vaccine Court Cases Are Usually Dismissed and Seldom Publicized
疫苗起訴案件經常被駁回，且很少被公開
Many Americans do not even realize the vaccine court exists because the Department of Health & Human Services does not publicize the existence of a federal vaccine injury compensation program and few VICP claims are ever disclosed, let alone publicized. In fact, two-thirds of claims received are dismissed.
很多美國人甚至意識不到起訴疫苗的案件的存在，因為衛生與公眾服務部沒有公布聯邦政府的疫苗傷害賠償計劃，而且很少對VICP的起訴進行披露，更不用說把這些訊息大眾化了。實際上，三分之二的起訴被駁回了。
The desire for secrecy on the part of public health officials is understandable. If Americans were routinely informed of the vaccine injury and death claims processed through the VICP, public doubts about vaccine safety would escalate. Still, disturbing vaccine-related injuries have surfaced, often though legal firms, according to Opednews:
公共衛生官員對這些事情的保密需求是可以理解的。如果美國人被經常告知透過VICP處理的疫苗導致傷害和死亡的案件，大眾對疫苗安全的懷疑就會升級。盡管如此，令人不安的疫苗受傷案件經常會透過法律公司出現在大眾視野，根據Opednews報導：
“In 2011, in a report in the Pace Environmental Law Review, the researchers identified 83 NVICP cases in which victims demonstrated evidence of autism (though the cases often emphasized other injuries) resulting in more than $96.7 million in settlements. In addition to 32 cases which included the presence of autism-like symptoms, there were 51 cases interviewed by the researchers in which parents said their child’s vaccine injury led to “an autism diagnosis, autistic features or autistic-like behaviors.”
“2011年，在《環境法評論》的一份報告中，研究人員確認了83個NVICP的案例，證據表明這些案例中的受害人患有自閉症（盡管這些案例經常會強調其他的症狀），並導致了9670多萬美金的理賠。除了32例表現出自閉症的案例外，還有51例患者接受了調查，父母跟研究人員說他們的孩子注射疫苗後被診斷出‘自閉症’、‘自閉症症狀’或‘自閉症行為’。”
“In another case, petitioners claim that within 48 hours after their baby received a DPT vaccine, he began to seizure and an MRI subsequently revealed suspicious black lesions. Like many children with seizure disorders he needed around the clock care and supervision. Eight years after a claim was filed, the boy received $7 million for a lifetime of medical care from the NVICP.”
“在另一個案件中，起訴人宣稱在他們的寶寶在收到DPT疫苗後開始發作癲癇，隨後MRI檢查到有可疑的黑色病變。就像很多有癲癇病的孩子一樣，他需要全天候的照顧和監護。在起訴後的八年，這名男孩從NVICP收到了700萬美金，這是他的終生醫療服務的費用。”
In yet another case, described by Opednews, a 2-month-old baby girl “started to have seizures, abnormal breathing [and]irregular heartbeats” hours after receiving a the same, routine DPT vaccine. In the following six years, the girl suffered from cognitive delays, cerebral palsy, encephalopathy and seizures.
在Opednews描繪的另一個案例中，一位2個月大的女嬰在注射完常規的DPT疫苗後“開始抽搐，伴有異常呼吸和不規律的心跳”。在接下來的六年中，這名女童經受了認知遲緩、腦癱、腦病變和癲癇等病症。
Mercury Is Not the Only Vaccine Risk
汞項目不是唯一的疫苗風險來源
While Kennedy focuses on the potential role of thimerosal in vaccine damage, researchers have presented a number of other potential mechanisms of vaccine harm, including the long-acknowledged ability of vaccines to cause brain inflammation (encephalitis/encephalopathy), the toxic effects of aluminum adjuvants and other toxic vaccine ingredients, and the hazards of immune overstimulation by virtually any means.
當Kennedy關注噻汞撒（藥名）到疫苗中有潛在傷害性的成分時，研究人員還提出其他因注射疫苗而帶來損傷的可能性機制，包括已經被長時間認可的疫苗引起大腦發炎的能力（腦炎/腦病變），鋁佐劑和其他疫苗中的毒性成分，以及用其他方式給免疫系統過度刺激後帶來的傷害。
For example, pertussis toxin and live measles virus can cause brain inflammation and permanent brain damage — regardless of thimerosal. Moreover, vaccine safety is not simply a matter of proving or disproving the link between vaccines in general and autism specifically.
比如，先拋開噻汞撒不說，百日咳毒素和活麻疹病毒可以引起腦部炎症和永久性腦損傷。還有，疫苗安全性問題不是證明或者推翻疫苗和自閉症之間關聯性這麼簡單。
There are many other, potentially severe side effects, including immune system dysfunction, that can lead to or exacerbate any number of health problems. Veterinary scientists have even noted increasing rates of autoimmune problems in dogs following vaccination.
還有其他潛在的嚴重的副作用可以導致或加劇其他健康問題，這些副作用包括免疫系統失調。獸醫學家注意到，在接種疫苗後，犬類的自發性免疫性疾病發病率不斷提高。
Research has shown an increase in death following receipt of inactivated vaccines suggesting vaccine adjuvants can also be culprits. Aluminum adjuvants might be a factor, but it appears inactivated vaccines may also program your immune system in a way that decreases your body’s ability to fight off disease later.
研究發現，在接受滅活疫苗注射後死亡率上升的現象表明疫苗佐劑也可能是導致傷害的元凶。鋁佐劑可能是其中之一，但是滅活的疫苗也可能以後對你的免疫系統進行編程，從而降低身體抵抗疾病的能力。
Moreover, the gut-brain axis and the compelling synergy between compromised gut flora and autism can be triggered by vaccines. The potential for DNA fragments and retroviral contaminants in vaccines to produce an exaggerated and potentially lethal immune response is also possible and underreported. Clearly the presentation of vaccines as “always safe” and the vilification of vaccine activists comes out the greed-based vaccine business model.
此外，腸道-大腦軸線和受損腸道菌群和自閉症之間的協同作用可以由疫苗觸發。疫苗中的DNA片段和逆轉錄病毒的汙染物有可能產生致命的免疫系統反應，這些反應也是被低估的。顯然，疫苗被認為“始終是安全的”以及對反對疫苗活躍人士的詆毀是源於以貪婪為基礎的商業模式。
原文:
翻譯:Yaxi
校正:Uma
本文出處網址: https://www.golden-ages.org/2018/06/20180602-02/
轉載內容請保持內容完整並附上本文出處網址