Newsweek Op-Ed Absurdly Lies That Vaccination Entails No Health Risks

by Dec 6, 2018Health & Vaccines213 comments

A Newsweek propaganda piece absurdly lies that vaccination entails no health risks -- and that anyone who knows better has no "faith in science".

There’s a Newsweek opinion article making the rounds on social media this week that shamelessly lies to readers by communicating the message that getting vaccinated does not come with any health risks.

The very title of the piece reveals that it’s nothing more than mindless vaccine propaganda: “The Anti Vaxxer Movement Is Growing—We Need to Restore Faith in Science”.

Newsweek vaccine propaganda

A screenshot of the Newsweek propaganda piece lying that vaccination entails no risk.

“Anti Vaxxer”, of course, is the media’s derogatory label for anyone who dares to question public vaccine policy. Anytime you see this label being tossed out, you can know with 100% certainty that what you are reading is not a science-based discussion, but pure propaganda.

One would think that doing a modicum of research into why more and more people are refusing vaccines for themselves or their children would be a requirement for writing an article about it. But not when the purpose is to advocate public vaccine policy instead of properly informing the public so they can make a truly informed choice!

So, to fill anyone in who isn’t already in the know: the problem is emphatically not that people are losing their faith in science. On the contrary, it’s that they recognize that what public health officials and propaganda rags like Newsweek say science says about vaccines and what science actually says are two completely different and mutually incompatible things.

They recognize that, when it comes to vaccines, the mainstream media prefers to do public policy advocacy instead of journalism.

What the author, Barbara Rath, really means is that there is a need for public vaccine policy advocates to restore faith in public vaccine policy.

But she doesn’t want to do that by doing the science and finding safer and more effective ways of preventing disease.

Instead, she wants to do that by straight up lying to people about vaccine safety.

We can see this by reading just the first two sentences of the article: “The anti-vaxx movement has been gaining momentum in countries across the globe. In a world of post truth politics, more and more parents are buying into the belief that vaccines come with health risks.”

So there you have it. The implication, of course, is that vaccines don’t come with health risks—which is an utterly stupid and recklessly irresponsible lie.

Seriously, how insulting to our intelligence can these pro-vaxxers—to borrow their derogatory label—be?

How stupid do they think we are?

Notice that, by definition, an “anti-vaxxer” is someone believes that there are health risks associated with vaccination.

As an illustration of just how idiotic this article is, by that definition, the vaccine manufacturers themselves are “anti-vaxxers” since they include package inserts with all their vaccine products warning consumers of the known associated health risks.

For examples, Merck’s product insert for its measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine includes the following warnings:

For mothers, contraindications to vaccination include pregnancy, as “the possible effects of the vaccine on fetal development are unknown” since there are “no adequate studies” into that question. “However,” Merck appropriately adds, “it would be prudent to assume that the vaccine strain of virus is also capable of inducing adverse fetal effects.” The vaccine-strain mumps virus “has been shown to infect the placenta and fetus”. Studies have shown that the vaccine-strain of rubella virus can be transmitted to infants through the breast milk. Whether this is also true of the measles and mumps viruses “is not known”. Merck advises that “pregnancy should be avoided for 3 months following vaccination” and that “Caution should be exercised when M-M-R II is administered to a nursing woman.” The vaccine also “has not been evaluated for carcinogenic or mutagenic potential, or potential to impair fertility.” Among those who should not receive it are children who are hypersensitive to any of the vaccine’s components, including gelatin and eggs, the latter because the live viruses are propagated in chick embryo cell cultures. The rubella portion of the vaccine is propagated in “human diploid lung fibroblasts”; specifically, WI-38 (ATCC®CCL-75TM), which contaminates the vaccine with human DNA from an aborted female fetus. (This has raised some concern over “ethical problems” at the Vatican; specifically about “cooperation in evil” and the “unjust” practice of forcing parents “to act against their conscience”.) Another ingredient is “fetal bovine serum”. Another is “recombinant human albumin”; specifically, Recombumin® Prime, a product of Novozyems Biopharma US Inc. This is a genetically engineered protein (“recombinant” means it was made by dicing and splicing genetic material). The product was developed because of concerns that using the blood protein albumin from humans or cattle carries the risk of blood-borne contaminants like mycoplasma, prions, or viruses. (This has happened. In March 2010, the rotavirus vaccine Rotarix, manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline, was found to have been contaminated with a pig virus after it was administered to a million children.) Possible adverse reactions to the vaccine include:

  • Fever
  • Snycope (fainting)
  • Headache
  • Dizziness
  • Vasculitis (a condition in which the immune system mistakenly attacks the blood vessels, causing inflammation that can lead to serious problems, including aneurysms)
  • Pancreatitis (inflammation of the pancreas that occurs when the digestive enzymes it produces begin digesting the pancreas itself)
  • Diarrhea
  • Vomiting
  • Parotitis (inflammation of the parotid glands)
  • Nausea
  • Diabetes mellitus (diabetes)
  • Thrombocytopenia (a disorder in which there is an abnormally low amount of platelets, which help blood to clot)
  • Anaphylaxis (a life-threatening allergic reaction that can cause cardiac and respiratory arrest)
  • Arthritis (joint inflammation)
  • Arthralgia (joint pain)
  • Myalgia (muscle pain)
  • Encephalitis (inflammation of the brain, which can cause permanent brain damage or death)
  • Guillain-Barré syndrome (an autoimmune disorder in which the immune system attacks the peripheral nervous system, which can result in paralysis or death)
  • Febrile seizures (convulsions brought on by fever)
  • Afebrile seizures (convulsions without fever, which may indicate epilepsy)
  • Pneumonia
  • Measles-like rash
  • Death

But we’re supposed to believe that anyone who knows that vaccination is a medical intervention entailing risk is somehow anti-science!

The insults to our intelligence don’t stop there, of course. You can probably guess what the very next sentence in the Newsweek propaganda piece is about….

That’s right, you guessed it! The supposedly “debunked” link between vaccines and autism! Rath writes, “Many still believe the MMR (measles, mumps and rubella) vaccine is linked with autism, despite numerous scientific studies debunking this myth.”

Of course, “anti-vaxxer” parents know that the claim that science has disproven the hypothesis that vaccines can cause autism at least in a subpopulation of genetically susceptible individuals is a Big Lie.

The “anti-vaxxers” understand that, in reality, the number of studies examining the hypothesis that the CDC’s routine childhood vaccine schedule might be contributing to the autism epidemic is zero.

Zero!

In fact, the body of studies the pro-vaxxers are referring to when they state their Big Lie has only considered one vaccine on the CDC’s schedule (the MMR) and one vaccine ingredient (Thimerosal, which by weight is about half ethylmercury, a known neurotoxin).

“Anti-vaxxers” also understand that the hypothesis is not only biologically plausible, but that those studies weren’t designed to test it.

Rath’s motive is illuminated further down the page, where she opines that “Restoring trust in vaccines and immunization requires innovative solutions….”

Notice that she’s dropped the pretense of restoring faith in science and just stated flatly that it’s faith in public vaccine policy that she’s really after—and these are two mutually incompatible aims.

She speaks of “the widening communication gap between patients and healthcare professionals.”

There is indeed such a communication gap. This is because the patients are doing their own research and thinking for themselves and most healthcare professionals simply are not.

The most fundamental communication gap, though, is that between what the public is told science says and what science actually says.

Of course, the aim of this Newsweek article isn’t to educate people about the science, but to advocate public vaccine policy. In fact, the whole purpose of the article is to promote a new mobile app developed by the Vienna Vaccine Safety Initiative, of which the author is co-founder and chair.

The app is called VaccApp, and as we can deduce from Rath’s implicit lie that getting vaccinated doesn’t come with any health risks, it isn’t designed to properly inform people about the science, but only to give them information to persuade them to follow the CDC’s vaccine recommendations.

In other words, we can glean from this Newsweek article that the VaccApp is less than worthless and you should not use it because it’s obviously going to be an untrustworthy source for information about whether or not to vaccinate.

If you want to be able to make a truly informed choice about whether to vaccinate, you need to know what science really says, as opposed to what you’re being told by mainstream propaganda outlets, who are just serving the function outlined by Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky in their book Manufacturing Consent. (That is, they are doing public policy advocacy to manufacture consent for the CDC’s vaccine recommendations, not journalism.)

The simple fact of the matter, as this mindless Newsweek piece so amply demonstrates, is that there is no serious discussion of the vaccine issue in the mainstream media.

So, if you’re not already on my mailing list, get real journalism on the vaccine issue by clicking here and entering your name and email address to sign up for my newsletter and download a free report explaining why the words “FDA approved” don’t mean much especially when it comes to how vaccines get to market.

Did you find value in this content? If so and you have the means, please consider supporting my independent journalism.

About Jeremy R. Hammond

About Jeremy R. Hammond

I am an independent journalist, political analyst, publisher and editor of Foreign Policy Journal, book author, and writing coach.

My writings empower readers with the knowledge they need to see through state propaganda intended to manufacture their consent for criminal government policies.

By recognizing when we are being lied to and why, we can fight effectively for liberty, peace, and justice, in order to create a better world for ourselves, our children, and future generations of humanity.

Please join my growing community of readers!

 

Download my free report 5 Horrifying Facts about the FDA Vaccine Approval Process.

Download my free report 5 Horrifying Facts about the FDA Vaccine Approval Process.

Related Articles

213 Comments

  1. john vieira

    This is just one small sample of the “willing to be a psychopath” and leading people down the garden path without doing any research…

    Reply
    • sabelmouse

      interesting article on veterans today, Diary of an Israeli Shill, exactly what we encounter online regarding all sorts of issues, including vaccinations.

      Reply
  2. Mark Merrill

    Go to your doctor’s office or a local pharmacist to protect your health issues and your family.. meantime, the MSM (media) will be someday prosecuted and imprisoned for scaring the general public.

    Reply
    • Jeremy R. Hammond

      One of the ways my wife and I have improved our own health has been to just stop listening to doctors. In our experience, most are so ignorant that they do more harm than good, and the few that are good doctors are incapable of helping you anyway due to the restrictions imposed on them by government regulations and the insurance system.

      Reply
      • sabelmouse

        yup!

      • Sparkle Plenty

        There are some good enlightened doctors, but they are few and far in between. Many of them woke up when issues directly impacted them or their family members.

  3. JoeFarmer

    “A Newsweek propaganda piece absurdly lies that vaccination entails no health risks…”

    Where exactly does Ms. Rath say that? Or are you relying entirely on a suite of logical fallacies in your lousy story?

    Reply
    • Jeremy R. Hammond

      Where exactly does Ms. Rath say that?

      I identify where she lies in my article. I suggest you read it.

      Reply
      • JoeFarmer

        So you’re relying on the logical fallacies. Thanks for clearing that up.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        So you’re relying on the logical fallacies. Thanks for clearing that up.

        It’s not enough to claim I’ve made logical fallacies.

        You have to actually identify one.

        I judge by the fact that you’ve twice now claimed they exist while failing to identify even one that you’re incapable of doing so.

      • Sparkle Plenty

        JoeFarmer is a well known biotech chemical industry PR asset on social media who has recently thrown in with the big pharma PR troll network that often has more agenda driven PR operatives on these threads than real authentic commenters. Interacting with him or his co-workers is a waste of time. All they bring is their nasty to conversations.

      • One Other Person is Typing

        Oh great, Sparkle Plenty. You’ll have no problem providing evidence then. I mean, since it’s well known and all.

      • Sparkle Plenty

        All the evidence anyone needs is contained in farmer’s posting history on Disqus. A peek at yours shows that you have proved my point. Right on cue too.

      • One Other Person is Typing

        Hmm…*looks at farmer’s posting history*

        No paycheque. No internal instruction sheets. No testable falsifiable definition that applies whether or not someone agrees with you/him.

        *looks at my posting history.*

        Nope, none of those there either.

        Post the paycheque since it’s your claim that you made yourself.

      • Sparkle Plenty

        The discussion is about the bogus PR scripted Newsweek piece. I don’t care if you are blind to the PR ruse you are a part of, because you are off topic and wasting bandwidth with your scripted BS.

      • One Other Person is Typing

        That would have far more effect if you had evidence for scripted. And you are the one who brought the paid thing up; if you didn’t think it was relevant to this piece then all you had to do was not mention it.

        Since you have mentioned, it you clearly think it was on-topic. So again: What evidence do you have? This should be easy since everyone knows.

      • Sparkle Plenty

        As I said. The discussion is about the bogus PR scripted Newsweek piece. I don’t care if you are blind to the PR ruse you are a part of, because you are off topic and wasting bandwidth with your scripted BS.

      • AutismDadd

        One Other Person is Shilling

      • AutismDadd

        Says JoePharmer’s coworker .

      • AutismDadd

        That’s JoePharmer

      • AutismDadd

        JoePharmer is a pretty pathetic Shill. His drive by stupid couldn’t convince a junkie to shoot up. Many are block and ban worthy.

  4. Judith

    Since vaccine companies have no liability – it seems they are allowed to get away with murder literally.

    The first vaccine Corvelva a scientific research group, thoroughly tested was Infanrix Hexa – a six-in-one vaccine manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) that is *supposed* to contain the following antigens: tetanus, diphtheria and pertussis toxoids; inactivated poliomyelitis viral strains 1-2-3; and hepatitis B surface antigen. Shockingly, Corvelva found NONE of these antigens in the vaccine, meaning, that NO antibodies to the intended antigens will be created.

    And it gets worse. In addition to no vaccine antigens, they found the following:

    traces of 65 chemical cross-contaminants from other manufacturing lines;

    chemical toxins;

    unrecognizable macromolecules;

    various free bacterial peptides that are potential allergens and are capable of inducing autoimmune reactions.

    These findings could bring justice to parents who lost their children in 2009 when 36 children died and more than 1,700 were injured in a “clinical trial” – the nice name for human experimentation.” They also found:

    1. Priorix Tetra, GlaxoSmithKline – NOT CONFORMING
    2. Infanrix hexa, GlaxoSmithKline – NOT CONFORMING
    3. Measles live vaccine B.P., Poonawalla Group – NOT CONFORMING
    4. PolioInfanrix, GlaxoSmithKline – NOT CONFORMING
    5. Vivotif, PaxVax – NOT CONFORMING

    Yep the HSS and CDC are doing their job alright

    https://www.corvelva.it/…/vaccingate-5-of-7-vaccines…

    Reply
  5. nrbrk

    RESEARCH: Hepatitis B vaccine can lead to brain-damaging effects

    Latest research findings reveal a scary connection between brain damage and the hepatitis B vaccine.

    Neonatal exposure to hepatitis B vaccines is associated with neurobehavioral deficits and brain damage in rodent models. This is a pretty scary reality. But, to better understand the “how,” the researchers conducted a new study, recently published in the peer-reviewed journal Cytokine.

    https://www.naturalhealth365.com/hepatitis-b-vaccine-dangers-2774.html

    Reply
  6. nrbrk

    “I have over 13,000 children in my pediatric practice and I have to say, as unpopular as this observation might be, my unvaccinated children are by far the healthiest,” says Dr. Paul Thomas, a Dartmouth-trained pediatrician and addiction specialist who has been practicing medicine for 30 years. “I’ve had a team compiling data for a research study that is now undergoing peer review—some of which is published in my new book, ’The Vaccine-Friendly Plan.’

    The data is surprising and counter-intuitive, perhaps, but it shows very clearly that the incidence of chronic disease and brain abnormalities in the entirely unvaccinated children in my practice, even those with siblings with autism, is much much lower than in children following the CDC’s recommended schedule.”

    — Dr. Paul Thomas, pediatrician

    Reply
  7. nrbrk

    José Peralta, First Dominican-American Elected to New York State Senate, Dies …from Flu Shot Received at His Own Flu Shot Clinic!

    Peralta’s wife said he was complaining that it felt like his head was about to explode—that’s encephalitis, the brain swelling inside the skull with no place to go.

    Now imagine that happening to an infant, with no ability to communicate. That’s why infants cry for entire days after vaccination—encephalitis.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/22/nyregion/jose-peralta-dominican-american-senator-dead.html

    Reply
  8. nrbrk

    GOT KIDS? DON’T GIVE THEM THE FLU VACCINE UNLESS YOU WANT THEM TO END UP IN THE HOSPITAL.

    NIH STUDY: Effectiveness of Trivalent Inactivated Influenza Vaccine in Influenza-Related Hospitalization in Children: A Case-Control Study.

    “A case-control analysis was performed with the cases and the controls being the subjects who did and did not required hospitalization with the influenza illness, respectively. There were 261 subjects with laboratory-confirmed influenza from 1996 to 2006. There was an overall trend toward higher rates of hospitalization in subjects who got the TIV when compared with the ones who did not get the TIV (odds ratio [OR], 3.67; CI, 1.6, 8.4)

    …there was a significant association between hospitalization in asthmatic subjects and TIV (p = 0.001). TIV did not provide any protection against hospitalization in pediatric subjects, especially children with asthma. On the contrary, we found a threefold increased risk of hospitalization in subjects who did get the TIV vaccine.”

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22525386

    Reply
    • Acleron

      Strange that you left off the final part of the abstract.

      This may be a reflection not only of vaccine effectiveness but also the population of children who are more likely to get the vaccine.

      Reply
  9. nrbrk

    Attacking Ourselves: Top Doctors Reveal Vaccines Turn Our Immune System Against Us

    “Yehuda Shoenfeld, the Israeli clinician has spent more than three decades studying the human immune system and is at the pinnacle of his profession.

    You might say he is more foundation than fringe in his specialty; he wrote the textbooks: The Mosaic of Autoimmunity, Autoantibodies, Diagnostic Criteria in Autoimmune Diseases, Infection and Autoimmunity, Cancer and Autoimmunity—the list is 25 titles long and some of them are cornerstones of clinical practice.

    Hardly surprising that Shoenfeld has been called the “Godfather of Autoimmunology”—the study of the immune system turned on itself in a wide array of diseases from type 1 diabetes to ulcerative colitis and multiple sclerosis.

    But something strange is happening in the world of immunology lately and a small evidence of it is that the Godfather of Autoimmunology is pointing to vaccines – specifically, some of their ingredients including the toxic metal aluminum – as a significant contributor to the growing global epidemic of autoimmune diseases.”

    http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/attacking-ourselves-top-doctors-reveal-vaccines-turn-our-immune-system-against-us

    Reply
    • Acleron

      Scientists at the pinnacle of their profession do not have papers retracted. Shoenfeld has two retracted.

      Reply
      • Acleron

        That case supports my argument. Once malfeasance in science is shown, the penalties are severe. Because we rely on trust, probably overmuch, we feel betrayed whenever such a case occurs. When Kajstura was shown to have altered data the roof fell down.

        If only such draconian measures were applied in other walks of life.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        That case supports my argument.

        The premise of your argument was that “Scientists at the pinnacle of their profession do not have papers retracted.”

        That is false, as that case shows.

        A case that shows that your premise is false does not support your argument.

      • Acleron

        In a strict temporal sense I suppose you are correct but neither are at the pinnacle of their profession now they have had papers retracted. At all levels of science having a paper retracted is usually career death.

      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        In a strict temporal sense I suppose you are correct…

        It isn’t true in any one particular “sense” that your statement was false. It was just plain false.

      • Acleron

        Yet neither of those are at the pinnacle. Including Schoenfeld who you claimed was at the top.

      • Acleron

        yes, sorry, it was @nrbrk

    • tomonthebay

      Greenmedinfo as a source? How pathetic.

      Reply
      • Jeremy R. Hammond

        You’ve just violated the terms of use of the comments section. Additional violations may result in loss of commenting priveleges.

      • tomonthebay

        Oh dear.

Share your thoughts.

Pin It on Pinterest

Shares
Share This