I came across this post, when researching articles that shed light on strengthening one’s natural immunity. I think there is a lot to be said about taking steps to build up our cells. I especially liked this post due to using a topical Glutathione cream over the past couple of months, and being happy with the results. So here’s some sound advice for strengthening one’s natural immunity.
You’ve probably seen antioxidant labels on foods and supplements, but what does it mean exactly and what is the best antioxidant to choose? Antioxidant means it prevents oxidation, a process that happens to all cells in nature, including those in the human body. Oxidation happens when oxygen interacts with cells and it’s what makes an apple turn brown, metal rust, or food go rotten. In the body oxidation is a normal part of cell turnover. However, a small minority of oxidized cells become problematic “free radicals” that set off a chain reaction of damage, causing cells to mutate and behave abnormally. Free radicals reach us through pesticides, air pollution, cigarette smoke, excess alcohol, sunburn, junk foods, etc.
The defense? Antioxidants. And our most powerful antioxidant is one the body makes called glutathione. To stay a step ahead of modern civilization we need to avoid free radicals as much as possible, eat an antioxidant-rich diet, and make sure our body is sufficient in glutathione.
The best source of antioxidants in the diet are colorful fresh fruits and vegetables. Since different plants contain different types of antioxidants, it’s important to eat a wide variety. Many supplements are also geared toward shoring up your body’s antioxidant supply.
Glutathione: The master antioxidant
Glutathione is such a powerful antioxidant it is called the master antioxidant. Glutathione protects cells from free radicals, is important for detoxification, and supports immune health. Many people with autoimmune conditions find plenty of glutathione is necessary to prevent or dampen autoimmune flares.
Low glutathione raises your risk for:
Autoimmune disease and autoimmune flares
Chemical sensitivities
Heavy metal sensitivities
Inflammatory disorders
Intestinal permeability (leaky gut)
Other immune issues
Stress lowers glutathione levels
When we are healthy, when life is mellow, and when we eat a whole foods organic diet and avoid the use of toxic products, our bodies make sufficient glutathione. However, chronic stress depletes glutathione levels. This stress can come from toxins, poor diet, lack of sleep, smoking, excess sugar, and other stressors. Glutathione levels also decrease naturally as a result of aging.
Straight glutathione is not effective taken orally. Good deliveries of glutathione include a liposomal cream, nebulizer, suppository, or IV drip. However, S-acetyl glutathione is a newer form of glutathione that can be quite effective in helping to manage autoimmune disease when taken orally.
Glutathione recycling raises glutathione inside the cells
You can also raise glutathione levels inside the cells by taking certain precursor nutrients. This will help protect the cells’ mitochondria, which produce energy. Recycling glutathione means taking glutathione that has already been used and rebuilding it so it’s ready for action again. Good glutathione recycling will help you better manage an autoimmune disease and leaky gut.
The compounds that have been shown to support glutathione recycling include:
N-acetyl-cysteine
Alpha-lipoic acid
L-glutamine
Selenium
Cordyceps
Gotu kola
Milk thistle
Boosting your antioxidant status and glutathione levels can play a profound role in managing autoimmune disease, inflammation, chemical sensitivities, food sensitivities, etc.
To learn more about how to increase your antioxidant and glutathione support, contact my office for advice.
The fact that the peak age for SIDS is 2–4 months, which coincides with the introduction of 11 shots containing 16 vaccines (within the US immunization schedule), is so obvious a cause for concern, that even the CDC has been compelled to address the seeming ‘coincidence’ directly:
Unsurprisingly, the CDC, whose pro-vaccine agenda is glaringly oblivious to the 100+ documented serious, unintended adverse effects of vaccines as evidenced in the biomedical literature, claims extensive research they commissioned has found vaccines do not cause SIDS. Despite the CDC’s dismissal, infant mortality rates are highest among countries that administer the most vaccines within the most vulnerable developmental window of infanthood. A 2011 study published in Human & Experimental Toxicology, for instance, observed that “The US childhood immunization schedule specifies 26 vaccine doses for infants aged less than 1 year—the most in the world—yet 33 nations have lower IMRs [infant mortality rates].” They found that across the 34 nations analyzed “a high statistically significant correlation between increasing number of vaccine doses and increasing infant mortality rates, with r = 0.992 (p = 0.0009).”
Also, a recent study published in Vaccine titled, “Co-administration of live measles and yellow fever vaccines and inactivated pentavalent vaccines is associated with increased mortality compared with measles and yellow fever vaccines only” found multiple infant vaccines dramatically increased the risk of mortality in a trial conducted in the West African country of Guinea-Bissau…
Paris, 23 June 2013: A three hour discussion was held during which various medical professionals, politicians, and health authorities had the opportunity to openly debate serious concerns about the HPV vaccines Gardasil and Cervarix.
Dr. Philippe de Chazournes recently sponsored an open letter to the French Minister of Health calling for the establishment of a parliamentary mission to investigate various aspects of HPV vaccination campaigns. (more information here) Over 200 medical professionals signed the letter confirming their agreement with the stated concerns about the safety, efficacy, and necessity of using Gardasil and Cervarix in national cervical cancer prevention programs.
Michele Rivasi, MEP, chaired roundtable discussions pertaining to the questions raised in Dr. de Chazournes’ letter to the French Health Ministry.
Stakeholders representing both sides of the debate were invited to attend as well as members of the French Parliament, representatives from Sanofi-Pasteur MSD, and national health authorities. Drs. G. Delepine, N. Delepine, A. Siary, Cl-Michal Teitelbaum, JP Hamon, and Mr. Coletti were in attendance along with many other interested parties.
The topics open for discussion are as follows:
What is the justification for HPV vaccination programs?
What is the risk/benefit profile of Gardasil and Cervarix?
What place do HPV vaccines have in cervical cancer prevention strategies, and at what cost?
Gardasil: Cervical Cancer or Political Cancer?
What is the level of ’ethical care’ in the new ’cancer plan’?
Member of the European Parliament, Michéle Rivasi, opened the meeting with the following speech, eloquently stating the actions necessary to protect the public health as well as public health funding.
To paraphrase her words, these vaccines are unnecessary, dangerous to many, and certainly a huge drain on precious public health funds. To halt HPV vaccination programs, pending intense investigation and proof of stated purpose could very well be the salvation of our young people.
Presentation by Michele Rivasi, European Ecology MEP
Translation by Helen Kimball Brook
It is an honor for me to receive Dr. Philippe de Chazournes today in the Parisian offices of the European Parliament. Dr. de Chazournes has fought long and hard as spokesperson for doctors in the current scandal linked to the Gardasil vaccine, the famous Sanofi-Pasteur MSD vaccine against certain strains of the human papillomavirus which can cause cancer. A large number of doctors have signed his open letter to Marisol Touraine, French Minister of Social Affairs, expressing their fears around the idea of doubling the vaccination rate of young girls with a vaccine whose effectiveness is scientifically controversial. Some of them are here today and I thank them for being here. They are demanding a parliamentary mission to clarify this question. Last April, I personally made a public demand for a moratorium, i.e. an end to mass vaccination with this vaccine until in-depth research can be performed on its benefits, risks and effectiveness.
Vaccine safety, as a general rule, is being increasingly questioned. Between 2005 and 2010, the proportion of French people in favour or very in favour of vaccination dropped from 90% to 60% (2013 INPES Peretti-Watel health barometer). The percentage of French people between the ages of 18 and 75 who are anti-vaccination increased from 8.5% in 2005 to 38.2% in 2010. In 2005, 58% of doctors questioned the usefulness of vaccines administered to children while 31% of doctors were expressing doubts about vaccine safety. These figures must surely have increased since then.
Alongside this dramatic slump in confidence, research carried out worldwide – here in France by R. – K. Gherardi and F.-J. Authier, in Canada by C. Shaw and L. Tomljenovic, in North America by S. Seneff and S.-H. Lee, in Israel by Y. Shoenfeld and in the UK by C. Exley and others – blames the toxicity of the aluminium salts used as adjuvants in vaccines.
The injection of these aluminium salts could be the cause of the considerable and unexplained increase in the number of pathologies reported because they migrate through the body until they reach and accumulate in the brain. In certain predisposed individuals, very serious adverse effects have been observed following vaccination: death, convulsions, fainting, autistic disorders, Guillain-Barre syndrome, transverse myelitis, facial paralysis, chronic fatigue syndrome, autoimmune diseases, pulmonary embolisms, macrophagic myofasciitis, pancreatitis and others.
It was the work of E3M, an organisation formed by macrophagic Myofasciitis victims, which encouraged me to bring this subject up within the European Parliament. Macrophagic myofasciitis is a little known but extremely disabling disease caused by the aluminium salts in vaccines.
Without being totally against the actual principle of vaccination, I feel that it is absolutely essential for specification of our vaccine policy to reflect the greatest of transparency and that the voices of vaccine victims be heard so that appropriate responses may be given and solutions found: in particular, urgent and abundant research financing and provision of a basic vaccine which is aluminium-free.
I therefore invited scientists and specialists in this area to come speak to us about their work on Gardasil during a press conference held at the Parisian offices of the European Parliament, last April.
Over the last seven years, nearly two million young women between the ages of 13 and 26 have received at least one dose of this vaccine, 65% of which is reimbursed by the French Social Security… but its effectiveness has still not been proven. Since then, an increasing number of young girls have been claiming that it has made them ill and the matter is becoming an issue Europe-wide.
Marisol Touraine, French Health Minister, has nonetheless just re-affirmed her attachment to this vaccination by confirming the 2014 recommendations which advise “all young girls between the ages of 11 and 14” to get the HPV vaccine. The message was apparently not heard.
Worse still, in early May, EMA (European Medicines Agency) experts recommended that the Gardasil HPV vaccine indication be lowered to age 9 for prevention of anal cancer and pre-cancerous anal lesions. One of the arguments used for this was that there are 6,800 new anal cancers in Europe every year. This feels to me like an attempt to find new justifications for the overall recommendation of Gardasil.
The French government needs to save 50 billion Euros over the next three years and ten of those billions must be saved in Health Insurance. Widespread administration of Gardasil would cost 926 million Euros (i.e. 9.3% of the needed health insurance savings) over three to four years, this for the catch-up campaign alone.
To stop this plan would be a genuine move for public health: this vaccination is worthless, clearly dangerous and a financial black hole. It serves no purpose for the European Medicines Agency to rush to the aid of Gardasil by recommending its use in the prevention of anal cancer (which causes fewer than 200 deaths every year in France, which is 0.11% of all cancer deaths).
What does Europe want? How is it that we ask the member States to reduce their deficits while simultaneously inciting them to spend more and more for the greater good of the pharmaceutical industry? How is it possible that we ask the French (and Europeans because the situation is exactly the same in many countries) to “tighten their belts” while asking them to hand over such large gifts to Big Pharma at the same time?
We must ask ourselves these questions and continue to fight against the health scandals of today and tomorrow by demanding absolute transparency in these highly sensitive issues.
The SaneVax Team would like to thank all of the participants in this debate. We sincerely hope every country in the world holds similar events. If HPV vaccines are as safe and effective as advertised, public scrutiny should be no problem.
Until such time as open and honest scientific debates are allowed in every country, medical consumers need to remember – RESEARCH BEFORE CONSENT – you can’t unvaccinate.
The 2013-2014 flu season has seen multiple lawsuits started for violating the rights of healthcare workers in refusing employment based on mandatory flu vaccinations. Now, according to a new report published by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), the stage may be setting for mandatory flu vaccines as a condition for employment in other job sectors outside of healthcare facilities, such as food service, education, community and social services, personal care, cleaning and maintenance, and even real estate.
The increase in mandatory flu vaccines for healthcare workers began in 2012, with the implementation of Obamacare, which links federal reimbursement of Medicare and Medicaid funding to the percentage of healthcare workers vaccinated for the seasonal flu.
As we have mentioned in many other places, vaccines are products that cannot survive in a truly free market where freedom of choice exists because many people don’t want them. Medical leaders, backed by government authority, must mandate vaccines for the vaccine market to survive. They would like you to believe that they are smarter than the majority of the American public, and that those who refuse vaccines are simply uneducated and “unscientific,” but the facts actually show that there are more vaccine refusers among those with a higher education than there are among those less educated. (See: More Educated Parents Less Likely To Vaccinate and Feed Children Sugar and GMO Foods.)
Bordeaux: On September 18, 2013, Judge Patrick Mairé handed down a decision stating Gardasil was 50% responsible for the permanent injury of a French teenager who had received two injections of the HPV vaccine. The other 50% was attributed to a genetic pre-disposition for autoimmune disorders. Judge Mairé presides over lawsuits filed with a regional branch of the CRCI in France, which is the equivalent of the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) court in the United States.
Marie –Océane’s parents, Jean-Jacques and Yveline Bourguignon, have granted permission for their daughter’s story to be published hoping they can help make people aware of the potential risks involved with HPV vaccinations. They do not want anyone else to go through what they have experienced without knowing of the possibility in advance.
In 2010, Marie-Océane Bourguignon, age 15, received two injections of Gardasil® the first on October 11th and the second on December 13th. Two weeks after the first injection, she experienced sensory and motor problems in the upper limbs, lasting approximately two weeks before spontaneously and gradually regressing.
Three months after the second injection, on the 13th of March 2011, Mlle. Bourguignon was hospitalized at Centre Hospitalier de Dax for deterioration in her general health, cerebral-vestibular disturbances and sensory-motor impairment (ataxia, vertigo). On March 15, 2011, an MRI of her brain revealed lesions in the white matter.
The initial diagnosis was that she was suffering from either multiple sclerosis or acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM). After multiple subsequent hospitalizations, it was determined that Marie had developed multiple sclerosis, a chronic, typically progressive disease involving damage to the sheaths of nerve cells in the brain and spinal cord, whose symptoms may include numbness, impairment of speech and of muscular coordination, blurred vision, and severe fatigue. Marie-Océane will live with this condition for the rest of her life.
Consequently, her parents filed for compensation on her behalf with CRCI, Regional Medical Injury Arbitration and Compensation Tribunal in Bordeaux on January 28, 2012. The decision was handed down on September 18, 2013.
The decision handed down by Judge Mairé was kindly translated into English by Helen Kimball-Brooke and is printed below in its entirety. The Bourguignon family had been successful. They could have accepted the compensation award from the French vaccine compensation program and gone on to live their lives.
But this family knew they were not the only ones to have had their lives turned upside down after using the HPV vaccine, Gardasil. They knew that the decision by CRCI would not be widely publicized in order to warn other families about the potential risks involved with the use of HPV vaccines.
Consequently, they decided to turn down the award and take their case to a traditional criminal court where the outcome of the adjudication could be made public. They decided that a just decision for their family was simply not good enough. They wanted justice for all victims of adverse events after Gardasil. They wanted to have the opportunity to warn others about the potential risks involved with consenting to the use of HPV vaccines. They wanted the opportunity to let the public be aware of the fact that HPV vaccines can be quite dangerous for some individuals.
The Decision Handed Down by the French Vaccine Injury Court:
CRCI
REGIONAL MEDICAL INJURY
ARBITRATION AND COMPENSATION
TRIBUNAL
NOTICE
(Article L.1142-8 of the French Public Health Code)
Case: Marie-Océane Bourguignon
File Number: 12.033.C.000071
THE AQUITAINE REGION MEDICAL INJURY, IATROGENIC AILMENT AND NOSOCOMIAL INFECTION ARBITRATION AND COMPENSATION TRIBUNAL, HELD IN BORDEAUX ON THE 18TH SEPTEMBER 2013 AND FORMED TO REACH AN AMICABLE SETTLEMENT
Considering the French public health code, articles L. 1142-1 to L. 1142-24, D. 1142-1 to D. 1142-3 and R. 1142-13 to R. 1142-18 in particular; modified French Law no. 2002-303 of the 4th March 2002, regarding patients’ rights and the quality of the health system; also considering the French Order of the 4th March 2003 regarding the documentary evidence to be included in a compensation request lodged with a regional medical injury, iatrogenic ailment and nosocomial infection arbitration and compensation tribunal,
Considering the compensation request lodged with the secretariat of the Tribunal on the 28th of January 2012 and deemed to be complete the same day, by Mr. Jean-Jacques Bourguignon and Mrs. Yveline Bourguignon, née Cazaux, acting as the legal representatives for their daughter Marie-Océane Bourguignon, born on the 10th of June 1995, a claim then renewed on the 26th of July 2013 in the names of Mme. Marie-Océane Bourguignon and as indirect victims, Mr. and Mrs. Bourguignon, who are hereby suing:
– Dr. Fabienne Chatelet
– SNC Sanofi-Pasteur MSD, 8 rue Jonas Salk, 69007, Lyon 07, insured by Marsh S.A.
Considering the various items of evidence included in the file,
Considering that Dr. François Rouanet, neurologist, and Dr. Larbi Benali, medical examiner, specialist in compensation for injury, had been appointed by the presiding judge as co-examiners on the 31st of May 2012,
Considering the medical examination report submitted on the 26th of June 2013,
Considering the statement submitted by Attorney Coubris on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Bourguignon,
Considering the statement submitted by Attorney Annie Berland on behalf of Dr. Chatelet,
Considering the statement submitted by Attorney Cécile Derycke on behalf of Sanofi-Pasteur,
Considering the following which was presented during the hearing
The case presentation report by Judge Patrick Mairé, presiding judge, the reports by Drs. Rouanet and Benali, along with the observations made by Attorney Coubris representing Mlle. Océane Bourguignon and her parents, Attorney Annie Berland representing Dr. Chatelet and Attorney Cécile Derycke representing Sanofi-Pasteur.
The tribunal pronounced on:
1. The circumstances:
In 2010, Marie-Océane Bourguignon, age 15 at the time, received two injections of Gardasil ®, a vaccine used to prevent cervical cancer, the first on the 11th of October and the second on the 13th of December that year. The vaccines were administered by her regular doctor, Dr. Fabienne Chatelet.
Two weeks after the first injection, she experienced sensory and motor problems in the upper limbs, lasting approximately two weeks before spontaneously and gradually regressing.
Three months after the second injection, on the 13th of March 2011, Mlle. Bourguignon was hospitalized at Centre Hospitalier de Dax, the main hospital in Dax, France, for deterioration in her general health, cerebral-vestibular disturbances and sensory-motor impairment (ataxia, vertigo).
She was successfully treated with steroids.
An MRI of the brain was performed on the 15th of March 2011 and revealed lesions in the white matter.
The initial diagnosis was that she was suffering from either multiple sclerosis or acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM).
Mlle. Bourguignon was later hospitalized on several occasions for the same cerebral-vestibular episodes and progressive flare-ups of inflammation until multiple sclerosis was finally diagnosed after she responded well to treatment with Tysabri ®.
On the day of the medical examination, Mlle. Bourguignon had not recovered her health due to the progressive nature of her pathology.
Mlle. Bourguignon does not display any neurological deficiency or functional disability but she is unable to walk more than 1 km. She takes mild analgesics for headaches and abdominal pains. She complains that she has difficulty concentrating and suffers from vertigo.
She feels that Sanofi Pasteur MSD should compensate her for the injury sustained which she attributes to the two injections of Gardasil ® she received.
2. On the Jurisdiction:
Considering that Mlle. Bourguignon’s illness restricts her to life-long clinical and radiological supervision as well as a constant feeling of anxiety regarding the expected course of her disease, it is clear that Mlle. Bourguignon experiences particularly serious deterioration in her quality of life, including financial problems, and this justifies the jurisdiction of the tribunal.
3. On the Substance:
3.1. Responsibility of Dr. Chatelet
It is clear from the two medical examination reports and the information which the examiners provided to the tribunal that before administering the second injection, Dr. Chatelet performed a full clinical examination of Mlle. Bourguignon and did not observe any residual neurological disorder from the reaction which occurred immediately after the first injection. She could legitimately have attributed these sensory and motor disorders to an epicondylitis, particularly since the vaccine package insert did not include any mention of the type of reaction her patient had displayed.
There are therefore no grounds for claiming that she is responsible for any fault especially as the plaintiff does not reproach her for anything.
3.2. Responsibility of Sanofi-Pasteur
The two medical examiners were unable to agree on the diagnosis of the first inflammatory episode so they submitted their reports separately. Dr. Rouanet felt that it was not possible to specify with certainty whether the first episode could be attributed to a flare-up of multiple sclerosis or to acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM). Dr. Benali on the other hand felt that the first episode was a kind of pediatric ADEM. Aside from the failure to agree on this point, which had no medical or legal impact on the case, the two medical examiners did agree on the fact that this first episode represented the beginning of a vaccine-induced neurological demyelinating inflammatory cascade.
They both concluded categorically that the neurological disorders presented by Mlle Bourguignon had been triggered by the immune decompensation of an unknown prior condition, a decompensation secondary to the vaccination process which led to the initial vaccine-induced acute demyelination, the prodromal physio-pathological substrate for a secondary multiple sclerosis, which is the currently accepted diagnosis.
The medical examiners were unable to establish a direct causal link with GARDASIL ®, stating “that there are no scientific grounds to incriminate GARDASIL ® as the only causal factor for the demyelinating inflammatory pathologies of the central nervous system.”
They did however feel that “the vaccine-induced demyelinating inflammatory cascade from which the plaintiff suffers presents all the objective characteristics of medical and legal imputability.
They concluded, after completing a conscientious examination of all the items in the file and substantiating their observations with information from scientific literature, that there is a definite causal link between the first injection of the vaccine and the onset of an acute inflammatory reaction in the central nervous system which then later, after the second injection, led to decompensation of a latent immune process.
They felt that total imputability of the observed damage to the vaccination could be assessed at 50%.
It was not up to the Tribunal to make a general pronouncement on whether the vaccine was defective since a discussion of the public health benefits and risks of the vaccine in question was not on the agenda but it was however expected to determine whether, given the defective nature of the doses administered, the facts before it represented serious, specific and corroborating evidence regarding both Mlle Bourguignon’s personal situation and the specific circumstances (French Court of Appeal, 1st civil, 10 July 2013. Appeal # 12-21314).
In the case in point, the medical examiners had observed that Mlle Bourguignon presented with a family history of genetic vulnerability making her susceptible to the potential onset of a dysfunctional immune demyelination of the central nervous system.
Her sensory and motor disorders were triggered two weeks after the first injection and then regressed. Later, two months after the second injection, a cerebral-vestibular syndrome and a sensory-motor condition appeared.
According to the medical examiners, given the substrate of the central nervous system, the vaccination as an immunity stimulator played a role in the onset of the dysfunctional immune and inflammatory cascade. Stimulation of the immune system by the antigens in vaccines can indeed trigger an autoimmune pathology when there is a genetic predisposition against a particular hormonal and environmental background.
What stands out from the two reports therefore is that there is specific and corroborating serious evidence based not only on chronological sequence but also on factors specific to Mlle Bourguignon. This is sufficient to establish the link between the two injections of Gardasil which Mlle. Bourguignon received and the onset of her multiple sclerosis.
The patient was not informed of the possibility of such a risk and was therefore not granted the safety she could lawfully have expected. The vaccine package insert does not mention the risk of central nervous system inflammation while this risk has been scientifically established by medical experts and was known at the time of vaccine authorization. This is an unusual risk inherent in the vaccination act itself, which does not always result in multiple sclerosis but in the case in point, the risk was real, and due to a predisposition, multiple sclerosis was triggered.
The manufacturer is therefore deemed responsible as per articles 1386-1 and 1386-4 of the French Civil Code.
Sanofi Pasteur MSD’s insurance company must therefore make an offer of compensation for the injury caused.
4. The Injury:
Mlle. Bourguignon has not recovered her health.
The injury, with the exception of her two-year absence from school, was totally and properly assessed as is by the medical examiners. The examiners formally excluded any temporary aesthetic injury.
According to the examiners, 50% of the injury sustained was due to a pre-existing condition.
Judgment:
Article 1: Sanofi-Pasteur MSD’s insurance company, Marsh S.A. must make Mlle. Bourguignon an offer of compensation amounting to 50% of her claims as specified below:
– Temporary Total Functional Disability: 73 days from 13th March to 2nd September 2011, dates as specified by the medical examiners.
– Temporary Partial Functional Disability:
Category IV: 41 days from the 22nd March to the 1st April 2011, then later from the 9th April 2011 to the 8th May 2011.
Category III: 10 days from the 27th May to the 5th June 2011
Category II: 62 days from the 1st March to the 18th August 2011, then later from the 3rd September 2011 to the 30th October 2012 which was the day of the medical examination.
– Assistance of an Unskilled Third Party Assistant (her mother):
3 hours per day during the periods of category IV temporary functional disability,
2 hours per day during the periods of category III temporary functional disability,
1 hour per day during the periods of category II temporary functional disability.
– Permanent Functional Disability at the minimum rate of 5%
– Absence from School: loss of two academic years
– Suffering experienced: assessed at the minimum rate of 4/7
Article 2: If Mlle. Marie-Océane Bourguignon does not receive an offer within four months from receipt of this notice, it will be her responsibility to request ONIAM (Office National d’Indemnisation des Accidents Médicaux, the French National Medical Injury Compensation Authority) to come up with an alternative offer.
Article 3: This notice will be sent to all interested parties, to ONIAM and to the lawyers and insurance companies concerned, by registered letter with acknowledgement of receipt.
A copy will be sent to Mlle. Marie-Océane Bourguignon’s medical team within her local Social Security unit.
Presiding Judge
Patrick Mairé
(A special thanks from the SaneVax Team to Helen Kimball-Brooke for providing the translation of this document.)
Marie –Océane, thank you to you and your parents in leading the way for so many other families affected by Gardasil/Silgard/Cervarix injuries. It is great news that French authorities have granted an award for the difficulties, and congratulations for taking the next step with a criminal court. How considerate and gracious of your family to think of others at such a challenging time, and make efforts to get the word out to other families so they do not incur these same difficulties.
Your actions speak highly of you, and I have included a video clip as a little gift. I find that uplifting entertainment is good for the soul. I hope you and your family enjoy the following clip.
I find the best heath advice for children often comes from their mom. We know them best. Who is going to pray, study, care and help children most – their parents. Take a few moments, and hear what these mother warriors have to say.
On May 22, two conferences were held at the National Assembly on the subject of aluminum adjuvants in vaccines and the safety of HPV vaccines. (View the announcement here.)
Organized by E3M and hosted by Virginia Belle, the morning conference was entitled, “Aluminum and Vaccines: International Expertise Demands Action.” (View schedule here.) Scientists and medical professionals from various countries around the world were invited to present their research in an open forum to members of the French Parliament and French National Health Authorities with journalists and television cameras present.
Professors Romain Gherardi and Jerome Authier informed the audience of the preliminary results of their research which was funded by MSNA (the French Medicines Agency) which indicated a causal link between aluminum adjuvants and adverse events experienced after vaccination stating:
We injected normal mice, without any particular background, with either PBS as a control serum, or the hepatitis B vaccine, Engerix. We did cognitive and motor testing at various intervals. We have the results of the first two times. At 45 days, there is no difference between the control group and the vaccinated group. By contrast, at 135 days (4 ½ months), three tests are significantly altered in the vaccinated mice only. What are these tests? Tests of anxiety, decreased activity, decreased stamina (including motor endurance), that is to say a series of symptoms resembling that exactly described by patients of chronic macrophagic myofasciitis.
Dr. Sin Hang Lee, described his Gardasil research to date, stating:
I have tested 16 samples of the HPV vaccine Gardasil, each of different lot number, from 9 countries, and found that they all contained fragments of residual HPV DNA, namely viral DNA which was used to manufacture the HPV vaccine antigens by a genetic engineering technology.
Furthermore, the viral DNA fragments in a non-B conformation were firmly bound to the aluminum adjuvant in the vaccine by ligand exchange, an inadvertently created chemical compound containing viral DNA which can be transfected into the host cells, namely the human phagocytes and macrophages.
Based on established research, this viral DNA can activate the innate immune system of the macrophages to generate and release cytokines, including tumor necrosis factor in the vaccine recipients.
In certain genetically predisposed individuals, the level of tumor necrosis factor may be high enough to cause hypotension, fainting, tachycardia, unexpected sudden death and acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, namely adverse reactions which have been documented following Gardasil vaccination.
Professor Belec, head of the Laboratory of Virology, Hospital European Georges Pompidou, confirmed the work of Dr. Lee on Gardasil, stating:
We found residual viral DNA fragments, which should not be there. This is true residual contamination, probably related to the manufacturing process. Between 200 and 400 fragments of residual DNA in Gardasil. This is not normal.
What is the meaning? I do not know. Dr. Lee showed us in his work that this fragment was associated with aluminum hydroxyphosphate. This is not any normal way.
This is but a sample of the information presented during the conferences held in Paris on the 22nd of May. The schedule for the day with a list of speakers is available here. All 16 presentations and the two very informative debates can be viewed in their entirety on the OPECST site.
At the conclusion of the morning session as a direct result of having the opportunity to hear both sides of the vaccine debate, the parliamentarians who were present (Jean-Louis Roumegas Danielle Auroi, Laurence Cohen, Jean Lassalle, and Sophie Errante) called upon the French government to:
Massively support rapid research so that the consequences of the accumulation of aluminum in the brain are established quickly and comprehensively
Make vaccines available without aluminum adjuvants
Not promote any campaign of mass vaccination with vaccines containing aluminum, as research has not provided satisfactory answers to safety questions
Recognize the group Action on Health
For the first time in France, open public debates have been held with arguments being heard from both vaccine promoters and vaccine safety advocates. These historic events need to be duplicated in every country around the globe.
Dr. Izard, himself a victim of macrophagic myofaciitis, stated it quite succinctly during his presentation when he said:
Pending the results of this work, the precautionary principle should apply. The population must have access to vaccines without aluminum adjuvants. The widespread vaccination against HPV should be put under immediate moratorium.
Senator and co-chair of the debate sponsored by OPECST, Corinne Bouchoux, proposed research be funded to discover treatment protocols for those suffering adverse events post-vaccination.
The debates in France were about more than HPV vaccines, but one has to remember HPV vaccines are a prime example of what can go wrong with a hastily instituted vaccination program.
As a society, we are injecting a healthy population of young people hoping that eliminating one of the risk factors for the development of cancer will make an impact on the disease prevalence – albeit decades down the road. Contamination with a new chemical compound that has completely unknown health consequences has been discovered and documented by two separate independent laboratories. Said contamination has been swept under the FDA/CDC carpet. Victims of adverse events are told it is all in their mind, coincidence, etc…
HPV vaccines are not the first time this type of scenario has played out. The time has come to stop discrediting those who discover something not quite right with any particular vaccine. The time has come to look at their findings and investigate to see if there is indeed a problem.
The time has come for government health authorities to meet the survivors of adverse reactions after HPV vaccinations face to face. The time has come to acknowledge vaccine injuries and find out how and why they happen. The time has come for open scientific investigation and debate.
Given all of the facts, perhaps more governments would choose precaution over promotion. Given all of the facts, perhaps more governments would choose science over psychosomatic.
Given all of the facts, medical consumers would actually be allowed to exercise their right to make informed choices.
Take advantage of the links below, when informing friends, and family about the truth behind vaccines. 
Discussion Guide: An in-depth overview of the vaccine controversy, discussion guide, next steps for getting involved with vaccine safety issues
Sign Up Sheet for guests at your screening
Movie Fact Check: A list of references to support the facts in the film
