Flu Vaccine Clinical Trial - News & Information (Please add information)

[Chips]

In the statement that follows below, of which I was just made aware, the CDC admits that there are ongoing studies of adjuvanted vaccine. Since it's the CDC, I assume it means studies within the United States (i.e., Colorado), as opposed to the UK trials. Either way, it is almost certainly squalene.

So, except for finding the actual clinical trial results, there is little doubt at this time that squalene is being tested in 3- to 8-yr olds as we speak. Though autoimmune disease is listed as one of the "Other General Reactions" on the parental permission form for the trial, the tests will obviously not last the ten or twelve years it would take to truly detect it. They will likely last only long enough to determine the efficacy of the provided immunity against "novel" h1n1 flu, possibly only weeks, or a month or two. The "at this time" phraseology in the CDC statement leaves the door open for inclusion of adjuvant in the waning months of 2009, certainly in 2010.

So, the more accurate answer (below) from the CDC, rather than "No", should have been, "It has not been ruled out".

From the CDC (I'll add the URL later, when I'm forwarded it from the folks who alerted me):

Q: Will the 2009 H1N1 vaccines that are currently recommended contain adjuvants?

A: No. According to current federal plans, only unadjuvanted vaccines will be used in the United States during the 2009 flu season. This includes all of the 2009 H1N1 and seasonal influenza vaccines that will be available for children and adults in both the injectable and nasal spray formulations. None of these influenza vaccines will contain adjuvants.

2009 H1N1 vaccines with adjuvants are being studied to determine if they are safe and effective. Experts will review these data when they are available.  There is no plan at this time to recommend a 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccine with an adjuvant.

[Satyagraha]

Chips - there was a CDC press conference earlier this summer, where Dr. Anne Schuchat, the spokeperson for CDC on H1N1 said that they were not 'ruling out' the use of adjuvants; that although the FDA has banned the use of adjuvants in the US, the would make an exception for 'emergency' situations.

Translation: Yes, we're going to use adjuvants.

Reason? They don't have enough H1N1 antigen to make all the vaccine doses they want to get out to the world. The 'emergency' is a smokescreen. This was designed to be an emergency, so they can use the adjuvants, and work around the laws that are there to protect us.  They are all bastards - they don't care about any of us. Remember - this is a "mild flu". Why give everyone adjuvants that they KNOW will do harm?

Because their intent is to do HARM.  

BTW - I can't find the specific press conference, but here's a link to all of them - you can check the ones prior to August... it may take a little time and a lot of patience to find it; you'll be listening to masters of doublespeak:

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=H1N1+CDC+press+conference&search_type=&aq=f

[sociostudent]

Got a call from my kid's school, they're having a meeting tomorrow evening with the public health district about H1N1. I'm taking a video camera and will ask them straight-up about the ingredients of the vaccine, specifically aluminum hydroxide (alum) or mf59/ASO3 (Squalene), and take the Emergency Powers Act or whatever it was from 2006 and show them the CDC documents where they do not rule out the use of adjuvants in the shots under "emergency" situations. Wish me luck!

[Satyagraha]

Got a call from my kid's school, they're having a meeting tomorrow evening with the public health district about H1N1. I'm taking a video camera and will ask them straight-up about the ingredients of the vaccine, specifically aluminum hydroxide (alum) or mf59/ASO3 (Squalene), and take the Emergency Powers Act or whatever it was from 2006 and show them the CDC documents where they do not rule out the use of adjuvants in the shots under "emergency" situations. Wish me luck!

EXCELLENT!!! I can't wait to see what you get for answers! Get a friend to bring a second videocam (if possible) for backup.

[trailhound]

sociostudent wrote

Got a call from my kid's school, they're having a meeting tomorrow evening with the public health district about H1N1. I'm taking a video camera and will ask them straight-up about the ingredients of the vaccine, specifically aluminum hydroxide (alum) or mf59/ASO3 (Squalene), and take the Emergency Powers Act or whatever it was from 2006 and show them the CDC documents where they do not rule out the use of adjuvants in the shots under "emergency" situations. Wish me luck!

 Good Luck! Hopefully you will get follow up questions...

[Chips]

Good luck, socio! Give 'em hell (information)! Bear in mind that, even for a non-emergency situation, the CDC has NOT ruled out adjuvanting the vaccine.

Train o' thought...

First, I realized after reviewing the question/response on the CDC website, that the question was loaded... Q: Will the 2009 H1N1 vaccines that are currently recommended contain adjuvants?

The question should have been simply, Will the 2009 H1N1 vaccines contain adjuvants?, because what is current today can change tomorrow. The correct answer would still have been, it hasn't been ruled out.

Another salient point which might help get the attention of all those receiving this information for the first time, is degree of risk in vaccines. Everyone can identify with the feeling of reading the potential vaccine side effects on the insert and thinking, so what are the chances?... 1 in 1,000,000?... 1 in 1,000?... it won't be me. But the manufacturers don't tell us. They know, all right, because their trials determine their lists of side effects, and they are intimate with the statistics. But they don't tell us. They should be legally mandated to reveal that information on the insert, or, in the case of a trial, on the consent forms, with fines and prison sentences resulting if the risk probabilities are falsified.

From Vaccine-A, and Gulf War Illness stats from vets' websites, the following:
About 700,000 troops served in the Gulf War.
Around 175,000 ultimately developed Gulf War Illness.
Let's be conservative and say that 25,000 or so legitimately developed GWI from causes other than injection with squalene adjuvanted anthrax vaccine.
Let's be conservative again, and say that all 700,000 troops received the squalene adjuvant. This is almost certainly high, maybe considerably - the FDA found the adjuvant in only certain lots of the vaccine. This is a number I am seeking.

Our conservative conservative estimate, then, is 150,000/700,000, or just over 21% of the troops who received squalene adjuvanted anthrax vaccine developed autoimmune disease (GWI). The individual risk increases as the number of troops who actually received the adjuvant decreases.

I think 1/1,000 is a realistic figure for what the average Joe or Jane assumes is the risk of side effect. Our conservative conservative estimate of the risk of developing autoimmune disease if injected with squalene adjuvant, then, is 2,100 times greater than the assumed risk, likely higher.

This is a no-brainer. No one should get the vaccine. At what point do we change "risk" to "certainty"? Even for those who may say, as indeed does the author of Vaccine-A, that there is the possibility that squalene adjuvant in flu vaccine won't have the same deleterious effect it has in anthrax vaccine, no one has moral license to test, unless the potential vaccine recipient is given ALL the information, including the damning studies, and then consents. Good luck finding volunteers if they've truly been given all the information.

And, hopefully, good luck finding takers for the vaccine, once they've been given all the information.

[Satyagraha]

Note: This is a second Sanofi Pasteur trial posted to this thread. The other trial has a different clinical trial Identifier:
View of NCT00944073 on 2009_07_30
ClinicalTrials Identifier: NCT00944073
Updated: 2009_07_30
Descriptive Information
Brief title Peds Sanofi H1N1 Influenza Vaccine Administered at Two Dose Levels
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=126983.msg825433#msg825433



Sanofi Pasteur, TIV + H1N1, Pediatric Population
This study is ongoing, but not recruiting participants.
First Received: July 21, 2009   Last Updated: September 24, 2009   History of Changes
http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00943202

Sponsored by: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)
Information provided by: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00943202

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to assess the safety and immune response (body's defense against disease) to an experimental H1N1 influenza vaccine against the 2009 H1N1 virus. This study will help determine how and when the H1N1 flu shot should be given with the seasonal flu shot to make it most effective. The 650 participants will be divided into the following age groups: infants from 6 months-36 months old, children 36 months-9 years old, and adolescents 10-17 years old. Each age group will have 200 children. There are 4 treatment groups in each age level. Study procedures include: medical history, targeted physical exam based on history, maintaining a memory aid, and blood sample collection. Participants will be involved in the study for about 8 months.



Study Type:     Interventional
Study Design:    Prevention, Randomized, Open Label, Parallel Assignment, Safety/Efficacy Study
Official Title:    Effect of Administration of Licensed TIV Vaccine on the Safety and Immunogenicity of an Unadjuvanted Sanofi Pasteur H1N1 Influenza Vaccine in Previously Primed Infants and Toddlers (Greater Than or Equal to 6 - <36 Months), Children (Greater Than or Equal to 36 Months - 9 Years), and Adolescents (10 - 17 Years)


Resource links provided by NLM:

MedlinePlus related topics: Flu
Drug Information available for: Fluvirin Influenza Vaccines
U.S. FDA Resources

Further study details as provided by National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID):

Primary Outcome Measures:

    * Immunogenicity: proportion of subjects, stratified by age, with 4-fold or greater hemagglutination inhibition assay (HAI) antibody titer increases against the influenza H1N1 2009 virus 21 days following the first dose of H1N1 vaccine. [ Time Frame: Day 21. ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    * Safety: occurrence of vaccine-associated serious adverse events (SAEs). [ Time Frame: Throughout the course of the study. ] [ Designated as safety issue: Yes ]
    * Safety: occurrence of solicited local and systemic adverse events (AEs). [ Time Frame: Within 8 days post vaccination (Day 0-7). ] [ Designated as safety issue: Yes ]
    * Immunogenicity: proportion of subjects, stratified by age, achieving a serum hemagglutination inhibition assay (HAI) antibody titer of 1:40 or greater against the influenza H1N1 2009 virus 21 days following the first dose of vaccine. [ Time Frame: Day 21. ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]


Secondary Outcome Measures:

    * Immunogenicity: proportion of subjects, stratified by age, with 4-fold or greater hemagglutination inhibition assay (HAI) antibody titer increases against trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV) 21 days following the last vaccination. [ Time Frame: Day 42: Groups 2 and 3. Day 63: Groups 1 and 4. ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    * Immunogenicity: proportion of subjects, stratified by age, achieving a serum hemagglutination inhibition assay (HAI) antibody titer of 1:40 or greater against trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV) 21 days following the last vaccination. [ Time Frame: Day 42: Groups 2 and 3. Day 63: Groups 1 and 4. ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    * Immunogenicity: proportion of subjects, stratified by age, achieving a serum hemagglutination inhibition assay (HAI) antibody titer of 1:40 or greater against the influenza H1N1 2009 virus 21 days following the second dose of H1N1 vaccine. [ Time Frame: Day 42 or Day 63 (Group 4). ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    * Immunogenicity: proportion of subjects, stratified by age, with 4-fold or greater hemagglutination inhibition assay (HAI) antibody titer increases against the influenza H1N1 2009 virus 21 days following the second dose of H1N1 vaccine. [ Time Frame: Day 42 or Day 63 (Group 4). ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]


Estimated Enrollment:    650
Study Start Date: August 2009
Estimated Study Completion Date: June 2010
Estimated Primary Completion Date: June 2010 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure)



Detailed Description:

Recently, a novel swine-origin influenza A/H1N1 virus was identified as a significant cause of febrile respiratory illnesses in Mexico and the United States. It rapidly spread to many countries around the world, prompting the World Health Organization (WHO) to declare a pandemic on June 11, 2009. Data from several cohorts in different age groups that received licensed trivalent seasonal influenza vaccines suggest that these vaccines are unlikely to provide protection against the new virus. In addition, adults are more likely to have measurable levels of serum hemagglutination inhibition assay (HAI) or neutralizing antibody than are children. These data indicate the need to develop vaccines against the new H1N1 strain and suggest that different vaccine strategies (e.g., number of doses, need for adjuvant) may be appropriate for persons in different age groups. If the novel influenza H1N1 2009 virus continues to circulate, it is possible that it will co-circulate with the non-pandemic seasonal influenza strains. In this situation, it might be beneficial to co-administer an H1N1 vaccine concurrent with the seasonal inactivated influenza vaccine. This protocol will explore if vaccination with the 2009-2010 licensed seasonal trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV) has an effect on antibody response to the novel influenza H1N1 2009 virus. This protocol will also examine if receiving the H1N1 vaccine either concurrent with, prior to, or following the seasonal influenza vaccine affects the antibody response to the seasonal influenza vaccine. This is a randomized Phase II study in infants, toddlers, children and adolescents. This study is designed to investigate the safety, reactogenicity, and immunogenicity of an inactivated influenza H1N1 virus vaccine when given concurrent with seasonal TIV, or sequentially with (before or after) seasonal influenza vaccine. Primary objectives are: safety, to assess the safety of the unadjuvanted, inactivated H1N1 vaccine when administered either concurrent with, prior to, or following licensed seasonal influenza vaccination; and immunogenicity, to assess the effect of TIV administration on antibody response to unadjuvanted, inactivated H1N1 vaccine as assessed by HAI, stratified by age of recipient. The secondary objective is: immunogenicity, to assess the effect of H1N1 vaccine administration on antibody response to TIV as assessed by HAI, stratified by age of recipient.

Subjects will be randomized into 4 groups, stratified by age (150 subjects per group with 50 subjects per age stratum: greater than or equal to 6-<36 months, greater than or equal to 36 months-9 years, and 10-17 years), to receive two 15 mcg doses of inactivated influenza H1N1 vaccine at Days 0 and 21 followed by TIV on Day 42 (Group 1), two 15 mcg doses of H1N1 vaccine of which the first dose is administered concurrently with TIV (Group 2), two 15 mcg doses of H1N1 vaccine of which the second dose is administered concurrently with TIV (Group 3), or TIV administered on Day 0 followed by two 15 mcg doses of H1N1 vaccine on Days 21 and 42 (Group 4). Following immunization, safety will be measured by assessment of adverse events for 21 days following the last vaccination (Day 42 for those who do not receive the second dose), serious adverse events and new-onset chronic medical conditions for 8 months post first vaccination (Day 201 for Groups 2 and 3 or Day 222 for Groups 1 and 4), and reactogenicity to the vaccines for 8 days following each vaccination (Day 0-7). Immunogenicity testing will include HAI and neutralizing antibody testing prior to vaccination, on the day of each vaccination (Days 0, 21 and 42) and 21 days following the third vaccination (Day 63).
  Eligibility

Ages Eligible for Study:      6 Months to 17 Years
Genders Eligible for Study:      Both
Accepts Healthy Volunteers:      Yes
Criteria

Inclusion Criteria:

    * Are males or non-pregnant females aged 6 months to 17 years, inclusive.
    * All subjects 6 months to 9 years must be "primed".
    * Subjects of child-bearing potential must agree to practice adequate contraception that may include, but is not limited to, abstinence, barrier methods such as condoms, diaphragms, spermicides, intrauterine devices, and licensed hormonal methods during the study for at least 30 days following the last vaccination.
    * The subject must be in good health, as determined by axillary (<10 years of age) or oral temperature (axillary temperature <100 degrees Fahrenheit or oral temperature <101 degrees Fahrenheit), medical history, and targeted physical examination based on medical history.
    * Subject and/or parent(s)/legal guardian(s) must be willing and able to comply with planned study procedures and be available for all study visits.
    * Subject and/or parent(s)/legal guardian(s) must provide written informed consent prior to initiation of any study procedures, and subject may provide written assent as appropriate.

Exclusion Criteria:

    * Have a known allergy to eggs or other components of the vaccine (including gelatin, formaldehyde, octoxinol, thimerosal and chicken protein).
    * Have a positive urine or serum pregnancy test within 24 hours prior to vaccination or are breastfeeding.
    * Have immunosuppression as a result of an underlying illness or treatment, or use of anticancer chemotherapy or radiation therapy (cytotoxic) within the preceding 36 months.
    * Have an active neoplastic disease or a history of any hematologic malignancy.
    * Have long term use of glucocorticoids including oral, parenteral or high-dose inhaled steroids (>800 mcg/day of beclomethasone dipropionate or equivalent) within the preceding 6 months. (Nasal and topical steroids are allowed.)
    * Have a diagnosis of schizophrenia, bipolar disease, or other major psychiatric diagnosis or major depression.
    * Have been hospitalized for psychiatric illness, history of suicide attempt, or confinement for danger to self or others.
    * Are receiving any psychiatric drugs (aripiprazole, clozapine, ziprasidone, haloperidol, molindone, loxapine, thioridazine, thiothixene, pimozide, fluphenazine, risperidone, mesoridazine, quetiapine, trifluoperazine, chlorprothixene, chlorpromazine, perphenazine, trifluopromazine, olanzapine, carbamazepine, divalproex sodium, lithium carbonate or lithium citrate) or any drugs for treatment of depression.
    * Have a history of receiving immunoglobulin or other blood product within the 3 months prior to vaccination in this study.
    * Received an experimental agent (vaccine, drug, biologic, device, blood product, or medication) within 1 month prior to vaccination in this study or expect to receive an experimental agent during the study period (prior to Day 180 after the last vaccination).
    * Have received any live licensed vaccines within 4 weeks or inactivated licensed vaccines within 2 weeks prior to vaccination in this study or plan receipt of such vaccines within 21 days following the last vaccination.

This is inclusive of routine childhood immunizations provided outside the scope of this study. The initiation of this protocol does not take precedence over routine immunizations.

    * Has received a licensed 2009-2010 seasonal influenza vaccine.
    * Have an acute or chronic medical condition that, in the opinion of the investigator, would render vaccination unsafe, or would interfere with the evaluation of responses.
    * Have a history of severe reactions following previous immunization with influenza virus vaccines.
    * Have an acute illness, including an axillary temperature greater than 100 degrees Fahrenheit or an oral temperature greater than or equal to 101 degrees Fahrenheit, within 3 days prior to vaccination.
    * Have any condition that would, in the opinion of the site investigator, place them at an unacceptable risk of injury or render them unable to meet the requirements of the protocol.
    * Participated in a novel influenza H1N1 2009 vaccine study in the past two years or have a history of novel influenza H1N1 2009 infection prior to enrollment.
    * Have known active human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), Hepatitis B or Hepatitis C infection.
    * Have a history of alcohol or drug abuse.
    * Plan to travel outside of North America in the time between the first vaccination and 63 days following the first vaccination.
    * Have a history of Guillain-Barré Syndrome.
    * Have any condition that the investigator believes may interfere with successful completion of the study.

 Contacts and Locations
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00943202

Locations
United States, Georgia
Emory University
Atlanta, Georgia, United States, 30322
United States, Iowa
University of Iowa
Iowa City, Iowa, United States, 52242
United States, Missouri
Saint Louis University
St. Louis, Missouri, United States, 63110-0250
United States, Ohio
Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center
Cincinnati, Ohio, United States, 45229-3039
United States, Texas
The University of Texas Medical Branch
Galveston, Texas, United States, 77555
Baylor College of Medicine
Houston, Texas, United States, 77030
Sponsors and Collaborators
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)
  More Information

No publications provided

Responsible Party:    HHS/NIAID/DMID ( Robert Johnson )
Study ID Numbers:    09-0047
Study First Received:    July 21, 2009
Last Updated:    September 24, 2009
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:    NCT00943202     History of Changes
Health Authority:    United States: Institutional Review Board;   United States: Food and Drug Administration;   United States: Federal Government

Keywords provided by National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID):
H1N1, influenza A viruses, TIV, vaccine, infants, children

Additional relevant MeSH terms:
Virus Diseases
RNA Virus Infections
Respiratory Tract Diseases
   Respiratory Tract Infections
Influenza, Human
Orthomyxoviridae Infections

ClinicalTrials.gov processed this record on September 29, 2009[/color]

[Satyagraha]

Note; I'm still looking for the Novartis clinical trial for children ... not yet found.

[trailhound]

 I know that alot of people were out sick at emory university in the weeks after the voluntary trial vacs. Whether its coincidence or not i cant be sure, but there was a notable flux of folks home sick.

[Chips]

I keep trying to access the Novartis database as well. Dynamite. Two heads are better than one.

Yesterday there was a youtube video of a Fox interview with a Dr. Holtorf, re the h1n1 vaccine, in which he authoritatively mentioned squalene as an ingredient. I contacted his office and am hoping for a call back from him, to pick his brain.

The doctor also blew the mind of the host by saying on national TV that no, he definitely would not give the vaccine to his kids; that the vaccine was very dangerous, filled with all kinds of unsavory stuff. He also said if you had a choice between regular season flu and swine flu, choose swine. It's milder.

[Satyagraha]

Chips - I think we're all set... I found the us Govt site for all clinical trials with links to the studies.
I'm in the process of formatting and will get the links added soon...

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=137716.0

I think registering with the clinical trials.gov program is required for FDA approval.

[sociostudent]

I keep trying to access the Novartis database as well. Dynamite. Two heads are better than one.

Yesterday there was a youtube video of a Fox interview with a Dr. Holtorf, re the h1n1 vaccine, in which he authoritatively mentioned squalene as an ingredient. I contacted his office and am hoping for a call back from him, to pick his brain.

The doctor also blew the mind of the host by saying on national TV that no, he definitely would not give the vaccine to his kids; that the vaccine was very dangerous, filled with all kinds of unsavory stuff. He also said if you had a choice between regular season flu and swine flu, choose swine. It's milder.

FOX news, about 3:00 CST--Shepherd Smith just completely disemboweled the nurse from New York leading the nurses' protests. She didn't know her vaccine science, didn't mention the adjuvants in the vaccine, only mercury. (What makes adjuvants so freakin hard to understand and remember by these nurses?) She also failed to mention the PREPA, and when Smith asked her for evidence that the H1N1 shot isn't peaches and cream, she had NO SCIENCE to back herself up....it was embarrassing to watch for all non-vaxers. If she had only been a prison planet forum member, she'd know (from reading all of our posts--with references to well-cited articles in medical journals-- that have to do with the H1N1 shot) what to say, and how to blast a hole through their propaganda machine (then again, FOX news wouldn't have agreed to have such a well-educated opponent on to talk about it

[Satyagraha]

FOX news, about 3:00 CST--Shepherd Smith just completely disemboweled the nurse from New York leading the nurses' protests. She didn't know her vaccine science, didn't mention the adjuvants in the vaccine, only mercury. (What makes adjuvants so freakin hard to understand and remember by these nurses?) She also failed to mention the PREPA, and when Smith asked her for evidence that the H1N1 shot isn't peaches and cream, she had NO SCIENCE to back herself up....it was embarrassing to watch for all non-vaxers. If she had only been a prison planet forum member, she'd know (from reading all of our posts--with references to well-cited articles in medical journals-- that have to do with the H1N1 shot) what to say, and how to blast a hole through their propaganda machine (then again, FOX news wouldn't have agreed to have such a well-educated opponent on to talk about it

So we can be certain that WHOEVER decided that that particular nurse should represent the group protesting - knowing that she was ill-prepared to be questioned about it - CHOSE her so she would fail. She, at the very least, should have known her own limitations. This stinks of a setup. Wonder what the real story behind it is....

[sociostudent]

So we can be certain that WHOEVER decided that that particular nurse should represent the group protesting - knowing that she was ill-prepared to be questioned about it - CHOSE her so she would fail. She, at the very least, should have known her own limitations. This stinks of a setup. Wonder what the real story behind it is....

He went so far as to call the CDC "a bunch of good people who are watching out for us" (LOL), and her "irreponsible" for telling people not to get the shot--it was obviously set up to make all us dissenters shut up and feel bad about saying the shot is bad....they're probably going to start saying "non-vaxers aren't usually crazy, but the ones who don't want THIS shot are crazy, and even maybe dangerous to 'responsible parents' who might not get the vaccine based on their irresponsible comments...it's a new form of terrorism" or some stupid crap like that.

[Satyagraha]

He went so far as to call the CDC "a bunch of good people who are watching out for us" (LOL), and her "irreponsible" for telling people not to get the shot--it was obviously set up to make all us dissenters shut up and feel bad about saying the shot is bad....they're probably going to start saying "non-vaxers aren't usually crazy, but the ones who don't want THIS shot are crazy, and even dangerous to 'responsible parents' who might not get the vaccine based on their irresponsible comments...it's a new form of terrorism" or some stupid crap like that.

We need to start a thread strictly to follow the aftermath of the H1N1 vaccines... a place to track all the 'results'... I think it will be long and sad.

[Chips]

A Sherlock Holmes cap for ya, Pilikia! The government site looks like quite a haul. I'll have some time with it tomorrow, but a cursory glance already spotted one AS03 adjuvanted trial. The consistent mention we've all found in the last few days of trials involving adjuvants erases any doubt there may have been to the validity of the Novartis parental permission form.

What I don't like is the increasing number of news stories suggesting an upcoming vaccine mandate. It's 20%, folks. If we vaccinate 50 million kids, we've have just given 10 million of them lives of debilitation. That thread you've suggested will be long, indeed. Many of them won't experience onset of symptoms for 8 or 10 years. I wish the good doctor would call so that I can find out whether his definitive mention on Fox News of squalene in the h1n1 vaccine was a slip of the tongue or based on evidence for which he can provide a link.

[Chips]

Pilikia - hey, thanks again for the find. For whatever reason, the Colorado Novartis study is not listed. The following 25 studies include adjuvant, all of which, I believe, contain squalene. So we're now seeking the results of more than one completed United States trial.


United States (these are IN ADDITION to individual States listed below):
Recruiting  Sanofi H1N1 Influenza Vaccine Administered at Different Dose Levels With and Without AS03 Adjuvant in Healthy Adult and Elderly Populations Condition:  Influenza
Interventions:  Biological: AS03;   Biological: Inactivated H1N1 Vaccine
Phase:  Phase II
 
Not yet recruiting  A Study of Different Formulations of an Adjuvanted A/H1N1 Pandemic Vaccine in Healthy Adults and the Elderly Conditions:  Influenza;   Swine-origin A/H1N1 Influenza
Interventions:  Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 influenza vaccine with adjuvant;   Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 influenza vaccine;   Biological: Normal saline solution
Phase:  Phase II

Not yet recruiting  CSL H1N1 Influenza Vaccine Administered at Different Dose Levels With and Without AS03 Adjuvant in Healthy Adult and Elderly Populations Condition:  Influenza
Interventions:  Biological: AS03;   Biological: Inactivated H1N1 Vaccine
Phase:  Phase II

Active, not recruiting  Study of Different Formulations of an Intramuscular A/H5N1 Inactivated, Split Virion Influenza Adjuvanted Vaccine Conditions:  Influenza;   Orthomyxoviridae Infections
Interventions:  Biological: Monovalent subvirion H5N1 influenza vaccine;   Biological: Physiological saline
Phase:  Phase I

California:
Not yet recruiting  A Study of Different Formulations of an Adjuvanted A/H1N1 Pandemic Vaccine in Healthy Adults and the Elderly Conditions:  Influenza;   Swine-origin A/H1N1 Influenza
Interventions:  Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 influenza vaccine with adjuvant;   Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 influenza vaccine;   Biological: Normal saline solution
Phase:  Phase II

Recruiting  Sanofi H1N1 Influenza Vaccine Administered at Different Dose Levels With and Without AS03 Adjuvant in Healthy Adult and Elderly Populations Condition:  Influenza
Interventions:  Biological: AS03;   Biological: Inactivated H1N1 Vaccine
Phase:  Phase II

Active, not recruiting  Study of Different Formulations of an Intramuscular A/H5N1 Inactivated, Split Virion Influenza Adjuvanted Vaccine Conditions:  Influenza;   Orthomyxoviridae Infections
Interventions:  Biological: Monovalent subvirion H5N1 influenza vaccine;   Biological: Physiological saline
Phase:  Phase I

Florida:
Not yet recruiting  A Study of Different Formulations of an Adjuvanted A/H1N1 Pandemic Vaccine in Healthy Adults and the Elderly Conditions:  Influenza;   Swine-origin A/H1N1 Influenza
Interventions:  Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 influenza vaccine with adjuvant;   Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 influenza vaccine;   Biological: Normal saline solution
Phase:  Phase II

Active, not recruiting  Study of Different Formulations of an Intramuscular A/H5N1 Inactivated, Split Virion Influenza Adjuvanted Vaccine Conditions:  Influenza;   Orthomyxoviridae Infections
Interventions:  Biological: Monovalent subvirion H5N1 influenza vaccine;   Biological: Physiological saline
Phase:  Phase I

Georgia:
Recruiting  Sanofi H1N1 Influenza Vaccine Administered at Different Dose Levels With and Without AS03 Adjuvant in Healthy Adult and Elderly Populations Condition:  Influenza
Interventions:  Biological: AS03;   Biological: Inactivated H1N1 Vaccine
Phase:  Phase II

Iowa:
Recruiting  Sanofi H1N1 Influenza Vaccine Administered at Different Dose Levels With and Without AS03 Adjuvant in Healthy Adult and Elderly Populations Condition:  Influenza
Interventions:  Biological: AS03;   Biological: Inactivated H1N1 Vaccine
Phase:  Phase II

Maryland:
Recruiting  Sanofi H1N1 Influenza Vaccine Administered at Different Dose Levels With and Without AS03 Adjuvant in Healthy Adult and Elderly Populations Condition:  Influenza
Interventions:  Biological: AS03;   Biological: Inactivated H1N1 Vaccine
Phase:  Phase II

Missouri:
Not yet recruiting  A Study of Different Formulations of an Adjuvanted A/H1N1 Pandemic Vaccine in Healthy Adults and the Elderly Conditions:  Influenza;   Swine-origin A/H1N1 Influenza
Interventions:  Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 influenza vaccine with adjuvant;   Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 influenza vaccine;   Biological: Normal saline solution
Phase:  Phase II

Active, not recruiting  Study of Different Formulations of an Intramuscular A/H5N1 Inactivated, Split Virion Influenza Adjuvanted Vaccine Conditions:  Influenza;   Orthomyxoviridae Infections
Interventions:  Biological: Monovalent subvirion H5N1 influenza vaccine;   Biological: Physiological saline
Phase:  Phase I

New York:
Not yet recruiting  A Study of Different Formulations of an Adjuvanted A/H1N1 Pandemic Vaccine in Healthy Adults and the Elderly Conditions:  Influenza;   Swine-origin A/H1N1 Influenza
Interventions:  Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 influenza vaccine with adjuvant;   Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 influenza vaccine;   Biological: Normal saline solution
Phase:  Phase II

North Carolina:
Active, not recruiting  A Study of Different Formulations of an A/H1N1 Pandemic Vaccine in Healthy Adults and the Elderly Conditions:  Influenza;   Swine-origin A/H1N1 Influenza
Interventions:  Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 Influenza vaccine (7.5 µg of HA);   Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 Influenza vaccine (15 µg of HA);   Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 Influenza vaccine (30 µg of HA);   Biological: Normal saline solution (placebo)
Phase:  Phase II

Ohio:
Not yet recruiting  A Study of Different Formulations of an Adjuvanted A/H1N1 Pandemic Vaccine in Healthy Adults and the Elderly Conditions:  Influenza;   Swine-origin A/H1N1 Influenza
Interventions:  Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 influenza vaccine with adjuvant;   Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 influenza vaccine;   Biological: Normal saline solution
Phase:  Phase II

Active, not recruiting  Study of Different Formulations of an Intramuscular A/H5N1 Inactivated, Split Virion Influenza Adjuvanted Vaccine Conditions:  Influenza;   Orthomyxoviridae Infections
Interventions:  Biological: Monovalent subvirion H5N1 influenza vaccine;   Biological: Physiological saline
Phase:  Phase I

Pennsylvania:
Not yet recruiting  A Study of Different Formulations of an Adjuvanted A/H1N1 Pandemic Vaccine in Healthy Adults and the Elderly Conditions:  Influenza;   Swine-origin A/H1N1 Influenza
Interventions:  Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 influenza vaccine with adjuvant;   Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 influenza vaccine;   Biological: Normal saline solution
Phase:  Phase II

Rhode Island:
Not yet recruiting  A Study of Different Formulations of an Adjuvanted A/H1N1 Pandemic Vaccine in Healthy Adults and the Elderly Conditions:  Influenza;   Swine-origin A/H1N1 Influenza
Interventions:  Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 influenza vaccine with adjuvant;   Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 influenza vaccine;   Biological: Normal saline solution
Phase:  Phase II

Tennessee:
Not yet recruiting  CSL H1N1 Influenza Vaccine Administered at Different Dose Levels With and Without AS03 Adjuvant in Healthy Adult and Elderly Populations Condition:  Influenza
Interventions:  Biological: AS03;   Biological: Inactivated H1N1 Vaccine
Phase:  Phase II

Not yet recruiting  A Study of Different Formulations of an Adjuvanted A/H1N1 Pandemic Vaccine in Healthy Adults and the Elderly Conditions:  Influenza;   Swine-origin A/H1N1 Influenza
Interventions:  Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 influenza vaccine with adjuvant;   Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 influenza vaccine;   Biological: Normal saline solution
Phase:  Phase II

Active, not recruiting  Study of Different Formulations of an Intramuscular A/H5N1 Inactivated, Split Virion Influenza Adjuvanted Vaccine Conditions:  Influenza;   Orthomyxoviridae Infections
Interventions:  Biological: Monovalent subvirion H5N1 influenza vaccine;   Biological: Physiological saline
Phase:  Phase I

Utah:
Not yet recruiting  A Study of Different Formulations of an Adjuvanted A/H1N1 Pandemic Vaccine in Healthy Adults and the Elderly Conditions:  Influenza;   Swine-origin A/H1N1 Influenza
Interventions:  Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 influenza vaccine with adjuvant;   Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 influenza vaccine;   Biological: Normal saline solution
Phase:  Phase II

Washington:
Recruiting  Sanofi H1N1 Influenza Vaccine Administered at Different Dose Levels With and Without AS03 Adjuvant in Healthy Adult and Elderly Populations Condition:  Influenza
Interventions:  Biological: AS03;   Biological: Inactivated H1N1 Vaccine
Phase:  Phase II

[Satyagraha]

Chips... I'm putting a spreadsheet together to identify such things as age groups, adjuvant/non-adjuvant, time frames, pharmaceuticals involved, sponsors, etc. So that will be up later today. Should help identify exactly what's happening across all 68 (so far) studies in the US database. I'll add study locations now that you mention it.

[Mike Philbin]

quick 21% mention

21% of 300 million comes to a figure 63 MILLION that's gonna be close to the minimum 50 million accepted cull from the NWO in this phase

where did I hear that 50 million figure? was it Quayle on the show today? might have been.

[grapecrusher1]

Hey Team,
I'm in discussion with Dr. Niman over at flutracker forum and am looking for solid evidence of H1N1 vaccine adjuvant use (squalene/MF-59/AS03, or other).  I have combed through the net and really cant come up with anything definitive, just conjecture from the usual uncredible suspects.  Falling short of that is there a link for the adjuvant trials I see noted above?

Here is a recent balance article I thought was good (NYT):

http://www.gadsdentimes.com/article/20090922/ZNYT04/909223019?Title=Benefit-and-Doubt-in-Vaccine-Additive

[Satyagraha]

Here's a link to the current studies in the govt. database:

You can clearly see in the Index; the lines in bright red*** indicate studies with adjuvanted vaccines:
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=137716.0

(***as opposed to 'maroon')

[grapecrusher1]

gracias

[sociostudent]

http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/vaccination/vaccine_safety_qa.htm

"Will the 2009 H1N1 vaccines that are currently recommended contain adjuvants?
No. According to current federal plans, only unadjuvanted vaccines will be used in the United States during the 2009 flu season. This includes all of the 2009 H1N1 and seasonal influenza vaccines that will be available for children and adults in both the injectable and nasal spray formulations. None of these influenza vaccines will contain adjuvants.

2009 H1N1 vaccines with adjuvants are being studied to determine if they are safe and effective. Experts will review these data when they are available.  There is no plan at this time to recommend a 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccine with an adjuvant."

Ok, so a few months ago, there were HUGE plans to put adjuvants in, now they're saying there isn't...so wtf?

[Chips]

Yo socio - the wording of both the question and the answer is purposefully deceptive. It's like a Woody Allen movie, and the subtitles read: we have no plans at this time to include adjuvants, but they have not been ruled out - if our experts determine from test results that they are safe and recommend using them, we will add them to the vaccine.

So basically if the "experts" decide tomorrow that the available test results suggest strongly enough that the adjuvants are safe, the manufacturers will start mixing them into the concoctions on Saturday - assuming they haven't already.

grapecrusher1: Pilikia's given you what is now tons of proof that they are testing squalene adjuvant usage as we speak. The other part of the equation is the CDC stated policy of: test; analayze; add if safe. 'Course, you also have to consider that in 1976 they switched to an untested version of the swine flu vaccine the day before the vaccination campaign got off the ground (as admitted by the then-director of the CDC), and proceeded to administer it to 40 million Americans.

We're not sure exactly how long the manufacturers will wait after initial trial injections before making their recommendations to the CDC. I've got feelers out for that information, but to my knowledge they will not wait, for instance, the full 13 months that is the monitoring period for participants in at least one of the ongoing studies. Trying to accurately determine whether and when they've put the adjuvant in the vaccine is the focus, second only to warning folks about the realities of the terrible consequences of injected squalene.

Pilikia - yeah, the nwo must be thrilled with this win/win situation. Not only do they reap the benefits of the billions of public dollars spent on the vaccine ingredients, but they get the added satisfaction of watching as millions just kind of wither on the vine, rather than die.

[Satyagraha]

And so we have a new thread for the flu pandemic:

Death by H1N1 Vaccine: Cases cited
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=138060.msg830586#msg830586

[bigron]

Vaccines’ Dark Inferno

What is not on insert labels?



By Richard Gale and Dr Gary Null
 
Global Research, September 29, 2009
Progressive Radio Network - 2009-09-28
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=15452



The vast majority of scientists, physicians, nurses and public health educators’ trust that the ingredients in a vaccine have been individually and synergistically proven safe and effective. The public believes these vaccines, aside from their specified virus(es), are sterile solutions, free from undesirable contaminants not listed on the manufacturer’s package inserts.  When the pediatrician injects a vaccine into the muscle of a child, the public has unquestioning faith that this is the case.  In other words, we want to believe that vaccines have been generated under perfect conditions for the safety of children and ourselves.

 

Our investigation shows that most people do not know what is actually in a vaccine: the active ingredients listed on product labels, inert ingredients, and, most important, the hidden ingredients. Even more remote is taking the time to actually study the subject matter, review the scientific literature and discover the truth for oneself.  To our amazement, that truth was easy to find. But it is a truth that will scare the hell out of you.

 

Similar to eating veal parmesan, what would happen if a video were placed on your table and used as a living reality recipe instead of the actual meal. This video unfolds before your eyes every step in that little creature’s life, from the veal’s birth to the parmesan on your plate. You witness how this veal was starved of its natural nutrients, kept in a tiny stall, grossly malnourished and deformed, filled with drugs—antibiotics—diseased and suffering complete privations until finally slaughtered, sliced, cooked and served on your plate.  Would your appetite be the same? Would you still desire the parmesan? Conveniently we rarely ask the questions, where does our food come from? How and where was it grown? What was sprayed on it prior to our consumption? Therefore, we are going to re-record something that even most top health educators and opinion leaders on vaccines are unaware of.  That is, what goes into the making of vaccines and what is hidden from you that should give you a moment’s of pause?  Then ask yourself, do you want vaccines in your body? 

 

To give us the most in depth, honest, scholarly and objective examination about  the methods by which vaccines and their hidden ingredients are prepared we turn to the award-winning British investigative medical journalist, Janine Roberts, who paints an entirely different picture about the darker inferno in vaccines that do not appear on product labels. This is the same Janine Roberts who brought to the world’s attention blood diamonds, genocide in the Congo and the destruction of aboriginal cultures by the Australian government.

 

Roberts’ account of conversations between high level members from the World Health Organizatioin (WHO), federal health agencies, and expert vaccine scientists, who determine whether or not a certain vaccine will be approved or not, is horrid.  Her investigations are based on official meeting documents and her attendance at emergency vaccine meetings, and confirm that our world’s vaccine and health experts agree there is no solution in sight to resolve the potential and uncertain threats posed by these hidden ingredients.(1) 

 

The story begins with the vaccine industrial complex’s attempt to reduce vaccine manufacturing costs by seeking government approval to use cancerous cell lines in the development of vaccines. Vaccine industry’s rationale is that cancerous cells are “immortal.” Current vaccine methodology relies on animal cells, such as fertilized hen embryos and monkey kidneys, that die quickly in culture. Using cancerous cell lines are also much cheaper than relying on the purchase of animals, especially monkeys, that need to be sacrificed for vaccine substrates.

 

Roberts records two separate meetings—a meeting of the Vaccine and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee on November 9, 1998, and a subsequent gathering of the Evolving Scientific and Regulatory Perspective Workshop less than a year later. The conversations were conducted at a scientific level between top officials and expert scientists from the FDA, Centers for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), the National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), the WHO and others, each providing evidence and/or confirmation that all vaccines are dangerously contaminated. 

 
Conversations focused primarily on the influenza, MMR and yellow fever vaccines, which rely on fertilized chicken eggs for their culturing viruses. Fertilized chicken eggs, while ideally suited for culturing certain viruses for vaccines, such as the influenza and MMR vaccines, are also living incubators for large numbers of known and unknown viruses in the animal kingdom. While these do not transmit from their animal host to humans naturally, they nevertheless are sequential genetic codes, which when injected into the human body, have the potential for any number of unpredictable adverse effects by interfering or merging with the codes of human cells.  Vaccine research is at best a primitive science because it is injecting into the blood stream foreign substances, chemical and genetic, that would otherwise not enter the body naturally. When we include into the equation the enormous amount of known and unknown genetic material and foreign proteins that vaccines introduce into the body, and then consider the rapid increase in epidemics raging across the American population—adult diabetes in children, large numbers of various inflammatory and immune deficiency diseases, asthma and new allergies, severe gastro-intestinal disorders (eg., leaky gut syndrome and Crohn’s Disease), chronic fatigue syndrome, and many different neurological disorders (eg., autism, ADD and ADHD, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, etc.)—we must step back and reconsider their causes. We should avoid the kind of faith the vaccine industrial complex has in its determinist, reductionist perspective of genetic materialism to find these answers without taking into account the bombardment of toxic chemicals such as vaccine adjuvants and preservatives, extraneous genetic material, and pathogenic organisms and foreign genetic fragments that we assault our bodies from shortly after birth into old age.

 

For some time, it was known that the enzyme reverse transcriptase (RT) was present in final vaccine solutions. RT has been used to this day as an indicator that there is a presence of a retrovirus. During the meeting’s proceedings, the WHO decided to withhold public announcement of such genetic contamination, in this case concerning the MMR vaccine, and made the decision to not remove it from the market and, in the meantime, continue safety studies at various laboratories.

 

Roberts reports that Dr. Arifa Khan from the FDA confirmed:

The RT activity in the vaccine was associated with retrovirus particles from two separate viral strains: Avian Leuokosis Virus (ALV) and Equine Arteritis Virus (EAV). The former was especially disturbing because ALV is a leukemia cancer, and Dr. Khan stated: “There was a theoretical possibility that the virus [ALV] could… infect the [human] cell.”  In summary, this means the ALV genetic code could integrate with human DNA, hence causing some kind of cancer.

The FDA’s reassurance that the ALV RT activity was safe is based on laboratory observations that there was no viral-human DNA merger activity for “a full 48 hours’.  This kind of assurance is almost nonsensical and flies in the face of scientific reasoning since cancers can take years to develop!

 

As a side note, reverse transcriptase activity is one of the stalwarts of the HIV/AIDS hypothesis. An article, “Serious Questions Regarding the Safety and Efficacy of the Influenza Vaccine” published by Canada’s Vaccine Risk Awareness Network reports that some studies, and even some vaccine package inserts, “indicate that vaccinations increase HIV viral replication.”(2)  This means all vaccines stimulate a strong suppressive effect on the immune system. Under stress conditions, viruses turn hyperactive and increase their ability to replicate.

 

The other risk stated by the FDA official was the possibility of the ALV sequence merging with the measles virus, hence creating a completely new, mutant and dangerous virus. (This could also apply equally to the H1N1 swine flu and any other flu vaccines). As an aside, the world renown British geneticist Dr. Mae-Wan Ho from the Institute of Science in Society wrote that, “Vaccines themselves can be dangerous, especially live, attenuated viral vaccines or the new recombinant nucleic acid vaccines, they have the potential to generate virulent viruses by recombination and the recombinant nucleic acids could cause autoimmune disease.”(3)

 

During the meeting, Dr. Andrew Lewis, then head of the DNA Virus Laboratory in the Division of Viral Products confirmed that “All the egg-based vaccines are contaminated…. These fertilized chicken eggs are susceptible to a wide variety of viruses.” The participants also realized that only a very small fraction of these small contaminants have been identified and there are likely hundreds more to be discovered.

 

Roberts found a 2001 CDC report showing that RT investigative studies for both the ALV and EAV retroviruses were conducted in 100 patients receiving the MMR vaccine. They found undesirable “RT activity in all measles vaccine lots from different manufacturers tested.”  Their conclusion is that “this occurrence is not sporadic and that vaccine recipients may be universally exposed to these [chicken] retroviral particles.” In a separate National Institutes of Health transcript of a meeting, Dr. Conroy of the World Health Organization stated that EAV viruses are found in all fertilized chicken eggs. There appears to be little change in the scientific protocol for making the influenza, MMR and yellow fever vaccines. The current release of intramuscular H1N1 vaccines for the global market relies on the use of fertilized chicken embryos. These include each of the approved vaccines by CSL, Medimmune, Novartis and Sanofi-Pasteur, as well as GlaxoSmithKlines if and when it is approved in the US.

 

A late meeting of the FDA’s Scientific and Regulatory Perspective Workshop, without the press, was convened on September 7, 1999 in Washington DC, and attended by “representatives from all the largest public health institutions in the West.”  The following are summaries of key points and statements raised during this meeting as recorded in Janine Roberts invaluable book Fear of the Invisible.

 

·         It was reconfirmed that vaccines are “widely contaminated by viral and DNA genetic code fragments, many viruses and proteins. There was expressed concern that these may also contain prions (tiny proteins responsible for incurable diseases and neurological disorders in both humans and animals) and oncogenes (a gene that turns normal cells into cancerous ones). One attendee, Dr. Goldberg,  stated, “There are countless thousands of undiscovered viruses, proteins and similar particles. We have only identified a very small part of the microbial world—and we can only test for those we have identified. Thus the vaccine cultures could contain many unknown particles.”


·         Dr. Andrew Lewis of the FDA said that a brand-new monkey-human mutant virus was created during the course of creating an adenovirus vaccine with adenvovirus-SV40 hybrid viruses. Dr. Lewis also worried that “foreign cellular DNA” common in childhood vaccines could include “viral oncogenes” capable of causing cancer.

 

·         The scientists presented a question to themselves as to whether or not an attenuated vaccine strain could revert into a variant virus capable of replicating so fast that it would cause AIDS. They agreed that they were unable to answer this question.

 

·         On the question whether or not mutation events could occur in children after vaccination, the answer was that “Recombination among a variety of viruses [contaminant viruses] and cells co-infected in tissue culture is not uncommon.” What this basically means is that because it is  “not uncommon” for genetic codes of both contaminant viruses and living cells to recombine and create mutations in laboratory cultures, it can certainly occur in a child’s body after vaccination.

 

·         Dr. Hana Golding, Chief of CBER’s Laboratory of Retrovirus Research, raised the fear that although DNA fragment contaminants in vaccines may be thought to be dead, they could remain active and dangerous. This meant that the codes of these contaminants could combine in vaccines and create new mutant strains of pathogens.

 

·         Dr. Leonard Hayflick, a virologist at both Stanford and the University of California at San Francisco raised a concern that the common primary culture used for making vaccines with animals and bird embryos has created a situation where it is “apparent that these cells contained many unwanted viruses, some of which were lethal to humans.” This was especially worrisome of those vaccines, such as polio, which still relies on monkey kidney cells that have contributed to widespread death and illness.


 

·         One of the UK’s leading vaccine expert, Dr. Phil Minor from the National Institute of Biological Standards and Control, noted that some cases of polio vaccine are polluted with more monkey virus, SV40, than actual poliovirus. Although the uninitiated who are not informed about-closed door vaccine science have been led to assume that SV40 was no longer in polio vaccines at the time of this meeting, the conversations confirmed that it was still in use. This is another example of deception at high levels within the vaccine industrial complex and high government health officials to withhold information that directly impacts the health and well being of citizens.

 

·         Dr. Rebecca Sheets from the CBER’s laboratory responsible for monitoring vaccine safety stated the national health organizations had no control over how vaccines were made. In short, they could make recommendations but the vaccine industrial complex was free to act as it choose.

 

·         It is impossible to remove DNA contaminants from vaccines. Although weight limits for contaminating DNA were set by the FDA as far back as 1986, vaccine makers have never been able to reach that goal. The CDC decided to limit their weight recommendation to cancerous cell lines and then increase the other DNA contamination allowance one hundred-fold.  However, these limits are only “recommendations” and, therefore, the FDA is unable to enforce them. Vaccine manufacturers continue to have the freedom to take scientific measures to reduce contaminants only if they wish.

 

Remember, this level of contamination (10 nanograms) only applies to a single vaccine. Children today are inoculated with many vaccines before entering school, each with unique DNA and viral contaminants due to the specific cell substrates used for a given vaccine. This toxic genetic soup is what then flows through a vaccinated person’s body.

 

 

·         One government health official stated, “I chaired the committee that licensed the chickenpox vaccine, and it [residual DNA] was actually an issue that we considered at that time. We looked among recipients of the vaccine for evidence of an autoimmune response associated with the DNA included in that vaccine…… Actually, we didn’t look, we asked the company to look and they did not find one.”  Well, of course, only such assurances can be convincing if in fact the company conducted the study, for which there was no compulsory reason to. Clearly, what the official is saying is that health authorities do not possess any study documents that such a study actually exists. 

 

 

·         Can vaccine DNA contamination cause cancer or autoimmune disease?  A meeting participant responded, “when you consider that almost every one of these vaccines is injected right into the tissue… I think you couldn’t do much more to get the DNA expressed [to get contaminating DNA taken up by human cells] than to inject it into a muscle in the way it’s being done.”

 

 

·         Again CBER’s Dr. Rebecca Sheets: “I think that the vast majority of licensed vaccines, US licensed vaccines, have not been tested for residual DNA.”

 

 

·         A more frightening question was raised as to whether it was known if there has been any presence of foamy virus. Foamy virus (HFV in human form and its more widespread parent SFV from monkeys), although not infectious, is a deadly carcinogen. To the participants’ knowledge, they did not know whether any laboratory has ever searched for it in vaccine preparations.

 

 

·         The meeting confirmed that a particular cell, “which under many conditions is neoplastic [tumor causing]” has been licensed for the production of both injectible and oral polio vaccines in the US, Thailand, Belgium and France.  Therefore, these vaccines carry the high risk of containing cancer-causing oncogenes.

 

In order to appreciate the magnitude of the contamination problem in vaccine products, it is important to understand that vaccine filtration needs to allow the targeted virus’s passage to remain for vaccine use. Other  particles and pathogens—DNA and RNA fragments from other organisms (and pathogens) in the manufacturing process, cellular substrates, and viral proteins--smaller than the vaccine’s virus will remain in the vaccine.

 

What the content of these meetings tells us is best expressed by one of the leading attendants at the meeting, Dr. Minor stated, “So even today then you have to bear in mind that a large amount of vaccine that’s made is made on really quite crude materials, from an adventitious agent point of view. It’s not a trivial usage. In fact, when considering what vaccines are actually made on these days, they are quite primitive in some respects.”  Janine Roberts summarizes her investigations succinctly,

“In other words, the vaccines we give our children are liquids filled with a host of unknown particles, most of which came from the cells of non-humans: from chickens, monkeys and even from cancer cells. Truly we do not know what we are doing or what are the long-term consequences. All that is known for sure is that vaccines are a very cheap form of public medicine often provided by governments to assure the public that they really do care for the safety of our children.”

The conclusion that can be drawn from these meetings convened by our national and international health officials in vaccine science and safety is that vaccines are virtually genetic experiments, capability of causing mass cellular destruction, being injected into the world’s population, especially children. There remain so many unanswered questions about vaccine science. This includes the forthcoming swine flu vaccines that will include the contaminants mentioned above, if we take any of these meeting attendees’ words to heart.

 

If we are to express any awe and wonder it should be towards our body’s natural immune system and its ability to defend itself from the onslaught of vaccine brews. It is not vaccination that is a miracle of science, as the vaccine industrial complex, government health authorities and their congregations of believers are too eager to proclaim. In fact, the real miracle is the body’s ability to protect itself, in most cases, from the invasion of vaccines. Yet, even this statement is now turning suspect given the dramatic rise in multiple illnesses and inflammatory conditions across the age spectrum.

 

As with all living systems, whether it be a natural habitat in the wild, the planet’s climate system to support life, or the body’s immune system, a tipping point is eventually reached. Today, with the majority of the public still buying into the false promises of vaccination’s efficacy and safety, the vaccine industrial complex remains an extraordinarily lucrative business. More and more vaccines are now being developed for a wide variety of diseases and infections— Chlamydia, herpes simplex type 2, West Nile virus, Epstein-Barr virus, and others—that will only add to the overload of vaccines already recommended, especially to children who are officially recommended to receive 36 separate vaccinations by the time they reach 18 months of age. As these new genetic poisons are added to the national health agencies’ recommended vaccination schedule, a tipping point may be reached that will result in a more serious pandemic, a pandemic of Vaccine Disease, manifesting in myriad illnesses dependent upon each vaccinated person’s genetic predisposition and the robustness of the immune system, than any epidemic threat posed by wild infectious pathogens, including the H1N1 swine flu, that could unfold in our so-called developed, hygienic society.

 

 

Richard Gale is the Executive Producer of the Progressive Radio Network and a former Senior Research Analyst in the genomic industry. Dr. Gary Null is the host of the nation’s longest running public radio program on nutrition and natural health and a multi-award-winning director of progressive documentary films, including Vaccine Nation and Autism: Made in the USA.

 

 

Notes

(1) The following quotes and events were taken from Roberts, Janine. Fear of the Invisible: How Scared Should We Be of Viruses and Vaccines, HIV and AIDS Impact Investigative Media Productions: Bristol UK, 2009; and from an interview with Janine Roberts. The Gary Null Show.  The Progressive Radio Network and WNYE-New York on August 19, 2009.

 

(2) “Serious Questions Regarding the Safety and Efficacy of the Influenza Vaccine” Vaccine Risk Awareness Network.  http://vran.org/about-vaccines/specific-vaccines/influenza-vaccine-flu-shot/influenza-nursing-home-deaths/

 

(3) Ho, Mae-Wan, Cummins, Joe. “The vaccines are far more deadly than the swine flu”. Global Research. August 21, 2009.  http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=mae+wan+ho+global+research&aq=o&oq=&aqi=g10

 

 
 

[Chips]

bigron - thank you.

[Satyagraha]

All Current H1N1 Clinical Trials: Index

This lists all current H1N1 clinical trials registered with the US government.
  
The status of each study will get updated in this index as the trials progress, and I'll post the study results when available.

Status: Not yet Recruiting, Recruiting, Enrolling by Invitation,
           Active-recruiting, Active-not recruiting,
           Suspended, Completed, Completed (results available)


 
 This map is interactive at the source: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results/map?term=H1N1



1 Not yet recruiting Safety and Efficacy of an H1N1 Influenza Vaccine in People With Asthma Study Link
Biological: H1N1 vaccine high dose;   Biological: H1N1 vaccine low dose


2 Not yet recruiting CSL H1N1 Influenza Vaccine Administered at Different Dose Levels With and Without AS03 Adjuvant in Healthy Adult and Elderly Populations Study Link
Biological: AS03;   Biological: Inactivated H1N1 Vaccine


3 Recruiting Sanofi H1N1 Influenza Vaccine Administered at Different Dose Levels With and Without AS03 Adjuvant in Healthy Adult and Elderly Populations Study Link
Biological: AS03;   Biological: Inactivated H1N1 Vaccine


4 Active, not recruiting Sanofi H1N1 + TIV - Adults and Elderly Study Link
Biological: Inactivated H1N1 Vaccine;   Drug: Placebo;   Biological: TIV


5 Active, not recruiting Sanofi H1N1 Influenza Vaccine Administered at Two Dose Levels in Adult and Elderly Populations Study Link
Biological: Inactivated H1N1 Vaccine


6 Recruiting H1N1 Vaccine in Pregnant WomenStudy Link
Biological: Inactivated H1N1 Vaccine


7 Recruiting Swine Flu (Novel Influenza A H1N1) Vaccine Study Study Link
Biological: Baxter Novel Influenza A H1N1 Whole Virus Vaccine;  
Biological: GlaxoSmithKline Novel Influenza A H1N1 Split Virion Vaccine


8 Active, not recruiting Peds Sanofi H1N1 Influenza Vaccine Administered at Two Dose Levels Study Link
Biological: Inactivated H1N1 Vaccine


9 Active, not recruiting CSL H1N1 Influenza Vaccine Administered at Two Dose Levels in Adult and Elderly Populations Study Link
Biological: Inactivated H1N1 Vaccine


10 Active, not recruiting Sanofi Pasteur, TIV + H1N1, Pediatric Population Study Link
Biological: Inactivated H1N1 Vaccine;  
Biological: Trivalent Inactivated Influenza Vaccine


11 Not yet recruiting A Study of Different Formulations of an Adjuvanted A/H1N1 Pandemic Vaccine in Healthy Adults and the Elderly Study Link
Influenza;   Swine-origin A/H1N1 Influenza
Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 influenza vaccine with adjuvant;  
Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 influenza vaccine;  
Biological: Normal saline solution


12 Active, not recruiting A Study of Different Formulations of an A/H1N1 Pandemic Vaccine in Healthy Adults and the Elderly Study Link
Influenza;   Swine-origin A/H1N1 Influenza
Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 Influenza vaccine (7.5 µg of HA);  
Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 Influenza vaccine (15 µg of HA);  
Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 Influenza vaccine (30 µg of HA);  
Biological: Normal saline solution (placebo)


13 Recruiting A Study of Swine-origin A/H1N1 Influenza Vaccines in Healthy Europeans Children Aged 6 to 35 Months Study Link
Influenza;   Swine-origin A/H1N1 Influenza
Biological: Swine A/H1N1 influenza vaccine (split virion, inactivated);  
Biological: Swine A/H1N1 influenza vaccine (split virion, inactivated + Adjuvant);  
Biological: Swine A/H1N1 influenza vaccine (split virion, inactivated + adjuvant)


14 Active, not recruiting A Study of Inactivated Swine-Origin A/H1N1 Influenza Vaccines in Healthy European Subjects Aged 3 to 17 Years Study Link
Influenza;   Swine-origin A/H1N1 Influenza
Biological: Swine A/H1N1 influenza vaccine (split virion, inactivated);  
Biological: Swine A/H1N1 influenza vaccine (split virion, inactivated + Adjuvant)


15 Active, not recruiting Novel Influenza A/H1N1 Split- Virion Vaccine in Healthy Population Aged 3 Years and Older Study Link
Biological: split-virion, non-adjuvanted H1N1 vaccine of 30 μg;  
Biological: Experimental: split-virion, adjuvanted H1N1 vaccine of 7.5 μg;  
Biological: Experimental: split-virion, adjuvanted H1N1 vaccine of 15 μg;  
Biological: Experimental: split-virion, adjuvanted H1N1 vaccine of 30 μg;  
Biological: Experimental: split-virion, non-adjuvanted H1N1 vaccine of 15 μg;  
Biological: Placebo Comparator: Placebo control


16 Active, not recruiting A Study of Different Formulations of an A/H1N1 Pandemic Vaccine in Healthy Children Aged 6 Months to 9 Years Study Link
Biological: Monovalent Subvirion A/H1N1 Influenza vaccine;  
Biological: Normal saline solution (placebo)


17 Active, not recruiting A Study of Swine-origin A/H1N1 Influenza Vaccines in Healthy European Adults and the Elderly Study Link
Biological: Swine A/H1N1 influenza vaccine (split virion, inactivated)


18 Enrolling by invitation A Clinical Trial With Influenza A/H1N1 Vaccines Study Link
Influenza
Biological: split-virion, adjuvanted H1N1 vaccine of 7.5 μg per dose;  
Biological: split-virion, adjuvanted H1N1 vaccine of 15 μg per dose;  
Biological: split-virion, non-adjuvanted H1N1 vaccine of 15 μg per dose;  
Biological: split-virion, non-adjuvanted H1N1 vaccine of 30 μg per dose;  
Biological: whole-virion, adjuvanted H1N1 vaccine of 5 μg per dose;  
Biological: whole-virion, adjuvanted H1N1 vaccine of 10 μg per dose;  
Biological: placebo control


19 Active, not recruiting A Clinical Trial of CSL's 2009 H1N1 Influenza Vaccine (CSL425) in Healthy Adults Study Link
Biological: CSL's 2009 H1N1 Influenza Vaccine (CSL425)


20 Active, not recruiting A Clinical Trial of CSL's 2009 H1N1 Influenza Vaccine (CSL425) in Healthy Children Study Link
Biological: CSL's 2009 H1N1 Influenza Vaccine (CSL425)


21 Recruiting Immunogenicity, Safety and Tolerability of Two Doses of Adjuvanted and Non-adjuvanted Swine Origin A/H1N1 Monovalent Influenza Vaccine in Healthy Subjects 18 or More Years of Age Study Link
Biological: Monovalent A/H1N1 influenza vaccine


22 Active, not recruiting Immunogenicity, Safety and Tolerability of Two Doses of Adjuvanted and Non-adjuvanted Swine Origin A/H1N1 Monovalent Influenza Vaccine in Healthy Subjects 18 or More Years of Age Study Link
Biological: Monovalent A/H1N1 influenza vaccine


23 Recruiting Immunogenicity, Safety and Tolerability of Two Doses of Adjuvanted and Non-adjuvanted Swine Origin A/H1N1 Monovalent Influenza Vaccine in Healthy Subjects From 6 Months to 17 Years of Age Study Link
Biological: Monovalent A/H1N1 influenza vaccine


24 Not yet recruiting Immunogenicity, Safety and Tolerability of Two Doses of Adjuvanted and Non-adjuvanted Swine Origin A/H1N1 Monovalent Influenza Vaccine (Egg-Derived) in Healthy Subjects From 6 Months to 17 Years of Age Study Link
Biological: Monovalent A/H1N1 influenza vaccine


25 Not yet recruiting Safety and Immunogenicity of H1N1 Vaccine With Trivalent Inactivated Seasonal Influenza Vaccine in Adults Study Link
Biological: Seasonal trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV);  
Biological: GSK2340274A;  
Biological: GSK2340273A;  
Biological: Saline placebo


26 Recruiting A/H1N1 Immunogenicity and Safety in Infants, Children and Adolescents Study Link
Biological: H1N1 pandemic influenza vaccine (whole virion, Vero Cell-derived, inactivated)


27 Recruiting Antiviral Therapy for Influenza A H1N1 Study Link


28 Recruiting A/H1N1 Immunogenicity and Safety in Adults Study Link
Biological: H1N1 pandemic influenza vaccine (whole virion, Vero Cell-derived, inactivated)


29 Recruiting Safety and Immunogenicity of A/H1N1v Vaccines in Healthy Adults Study Link
Biological: MF59 H1N1 vaccine;  
Biological: Plain H1N1 vaccine


30 Not yet recruiting Safety, Immunogenicity, and Relative Efficacy of H1N1 Vaccines in Adults Aged 18 Years and Older Study Link
Biological: GSK2340274A;  
Biological: GSK2340273A


31 Active, not recruiting A Clinical Trial of CSL's 2009 H1N1 Influenza Vaccine (CSL425) in Healthy Adults in the USA Study Link
Biological: CSL's 2009 H1N1 Influenza Vaccine (CSL425);  
Biological: Placebo


32 Recruiting A Clinical Trial of CSL's 2009 H1N1 Influenza Vaccine (CSL425) in a Healthy Pediatric Population in the USA Study Link
Biological: CSL's 2009 H1N1 Influenza Vaccine (CSL425);   Biological: Placebo


33 Recruiting A Pilot Study for Collection of Anti-Influenza A H1N1 (Swine Flu) Hyper-Immune Plasma Study Link (Note: Although related to H1N1, this is not a vaccine trial).


34 Not yet recruiting Safety and Immunogenicity of A/H1N1-SOIV (Swine Flu) Vaccine With and Without Adjuvant in Non-Elderly and Elderly Adults Study Link
Biological: Adjuvanted and un-adjuvanted influenza vaccines


35 Not yet recruiting Safety and Immunogenicity of A/H1N1-SOIV (Swine Flu) Vaccine With and Without Adjuvant in Children (3 to < 9 Years) Study Link
Biological: Adjuvanted and un-adjuvanted influenza vaccines


36 Not yet recruiting Observational Study to Assess Safety of H1N1 Pandemic Influenza Vaccine Study Link
Biological: H1N1 Pandemic Influenza Vaccine (whole virion, Vero Cell-derived, inactivated)


37 Recruiting Safety and Immunogenicity of A/H1N1-SOIV (Swine Flu) Vaccine With and Without Adjuvant in Children, Adolescents and Adults (3 to 64 Years) Study Link
Biological: Adjuvanted and un-adjuvanted influenza vaccines


38 Recruiting Chinese Medicinal Herbs Treatment on Novel Influenza A (H1N1) : Multi-centre, Prospective, Randomized Controlled Study Study Link
(Note: Although related to H1N1, this is not a vaccine trial).


39 Not yet recruiting Chinese Medicinal Herbs Treatment on Novel Influenza A (H1N1)Pneumonia: Multi-centre, Prospective, Randomized Controlled Study Study Link
(Note: Although related to H1N1, this is not a vaccine trial).


40 Not yet recruiting A Clinical Trial Comparing Oseltamivir With Placebo And Zanamivir With Control As The First Line Treatment For Human Swine Influenza (H1N1) Infection During The Pandemic Influenza in Hong Kong Study Link
(Note: Although related to H1N1, this is not a vaccine trial).


41 Not yet recruiting Safety and Immunogenicity of H1N1 Vaccines in Adults Aged 18 Years and Older Study Link
Biological: Saline placebo;  
Biological: GSK2340274A;  
Biological: GSK2340273A


42 Not yet recruiting Safety and Immunogenicity of H1N1 Vaccines in Children Aged 6 Months to Less Than 9 Years of Age Study Link


43 Active, not recruiting Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Phase I Dose-Escalation Study of Single Dose GHB01L1 in Healthy Volunteers Study Link
Biological: GHB01L1


44 Completed: (Results available) Interferon as a Mucosal Adjuvant for Influenza Vaccine Given Intranasally Study Link
Posted here: http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=137716.msg829129#msg829129
Biological: Trivalent inactivated influenza virus vaccine (2006-2007 formulation);  
Biological: Type 1 interferon Has Results Interferon as a Mucosal Adjuvant for Influenza Vaccine Given Intranasally
Biological: Trivalent inactivated influenza virus vaccine (2006-2007 formulation);   Biological: Type 1 interferon


45 Not yet recruiting STIP: Statin Trial for Influenza Patients Study Link
Drug: Rosuvastatin (crestor);  
Drug: Placebo
(Note: Not an H1N1 Vaccine trial)


46 Completed Safety and Immunogenicity of FluLaval™ TR and Fluarix® (Influenza Vaccines) in Young and Older Adults Study Link
Biological: Influenza vaccine (A/H3N2, A/H1N1, and B strains);   Biological: Fluarix
Posted here: http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=137716.msg829628#msg829628


47 Recruiting VRC 308: An Open-Label Phase I Study of the Safety and Immunogenicity of an Investigational H1 DNA Influenza Vaccine, VRC-FLUDNA057-00-VP, in Healthy Adults 18-70 Years Old Study Link
Biological: VRC-FLUDNA057-00-VP


48 Recruiting Safety and Immunogenicity Study of GSK Biologicals' Pandemic Influenza Candidate Vaccine (GSK2340272A) Study Link
Biological: Pandemic influenza vaccine GSK2340272A


49 Completed Trial to Assess Safety, Tolerability, and Immunogenicity of Influenza Virus Vaccine, Trivalent, Types A & B, Live Cold-Adapted (FluMist) and Measles, Mumps, Rubella, and Varicella Vaccines Administered Concurrently to Healthy Children Study Link
Biological: FluMist;   Other: Placebo
Posted here: http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=137716.msg829662#msg829662


50 Recruiting A Study on Emergence of Resistance With Tamiflu (Oseltamivir) in Patients With Seasonal Influenza Study Link
Drug: Tamiflu (oseltamivir)
(Note: Not an H1N1 vaccine study: they are studying Tamiflu)


51 Suspended Prospective Evaluation of the Fluid Rapid Influenza Test Study Link
Influenza
Device: fluID Rapid Influenza Test
(Note: Not an H1N1 vaccine study: diagnostic study)


52 Recruiting Direct and Indirect Benefits of Influenza Vaccination in Schools and Households Study Link
Biological: Trivalent live attenuated seasonal influenza vaccine;  
Biological: Monovalent live attenuated pandemic influenza vaccine;  
Biological: Saline
(Note: Not an H1N1 vaccine study: they are studying the symptoms of flu - no meds)


53 Not yet recruiting Mechanisms of Severe Acute Influenza Consortium (MOSAIC) Study Link


54 Recruiting Safety, Immunogenicity Study of GSK Biologicals' Pandemic Influenza Candidate Vaccine (GSK2340272A) Study Link
Biological: Pandemic influenza vaccine GSK2340272A


55 Active, not recruiting Study of Different Formulations of an Intramuscular A/H5N1 Inactivated, Split Virion Influenza Adjuvanted Vaccine Study Link
Biological: Monovalent subvirion H5N1 influenza vaccine;  
Biological: Physiological saline


56 Completed Phase IV Clinical Trial of an Influenza Split Vaccine Anflu Study Link
Biological: seasonal split influenza vaccine


57 Completed Trial to Assess Safety, Tolerability and Immunogenicity of Influenza Virus Vaccine, Trivalent, Types A and B, Live Cold-Adapted (CAIV-T) in Healthy Children Study Link
Biological: CAIV-T


58 Active, not recruiting A Study to Evaluate the Safety of MEDI3414 in Adults Study Link
Biological: MEDI3414;   Other: Placebo


59 Active, not recruiting A Study to Evaluate the Safety of MEDI3414 in Children Study Link
Biological: MEDI3414;  
Other: Placebo


60 Completed The Efficacy of Influenza Vaccination in Patients With Coronary Artery Diseases Study Link
Coronary Artery Diseases;   Myocardial Infarction;   Stable Angina
Biological: influenza vaccine;  
Biological: placebo for influenza vaccine
Biological: Fluviral


61 Completed - Has Results A Randomized Study to Compare the Safety and Immunogenicity of Fluviral® Made With New Versus Aged Bulk Study Link
Biological: Fluviral


62 Completed Immunogenicity, Safety and Tolerability of CSL Limited Inactivated Influenza Vaccine in Adults Study Link
Influenza
Biological: CSL Trivalent Inactivated Influenza Vaccine - Thimerosal-free;  
Biological: CSL Trivalent Inactivated Influenza Vaccine with Thimerosal;  
Biological: Placebo with Thimerosal

63 Suspended High Dose Influenza in Immunosuppressed Subjects Study Link
Biological: TIV;  
Biological: rHAO Trivalent Influenza Vaccine
(Note: Study on cancer patients w/9x vaccine dosage - suspended; no reasons provided for suspension)


64 Completed Immunogenicity and Safety of an Adjuvanted Inactivated Subunit Influenza Vaccine to Those of a Non-Adjuvanted Inactivated Subunit Influenza Vaccine, When Administered to Adults Affected by Chronic Diseases Study Link
Influenza Disease
Biological: Adjuvanted influenza vaccine
(Note: Study completed: but no results posted, no locations for testing, no end date for the study!)


65 Completed Safety and Immunogenicity Study of Hib-MenCY-TT Vaccine Compared to Licensed Hib Conjugate Vaccine Study Link
(Note: Not an H1N1 Vaccine Trial, although H1N1 is referenced.)


66 Active, not recruiting A Prospective Study to Evaluate the Safety of a Trivalent Vaccine of New 6:2 Influenza Virus Reassortants (on HIV-infected Children) Study Link
Biological: FluMist;  
Biological: Placebo


67 Recruiting Influenza Vaccine in HIV Infected Children Study Link
Viral-Confirmed Influenza Illness
Biological: Trivalent sub-unit influenza vaccine;  
Biological: Saline, 0.5ml


68 Suspended Comparison of Fluid Rapid Influenza and BinaxNOW Influenza A & B Study Link
(Note: Not an H1N1 Vaccine Trial)


Here is a spreadsheet view of all of the H1N1 Clinical Trials listed in the Index above. Note that I did not include any trials that did not include H1N1 vaccine in testing. (As in tests for Tamiflu, or for injection devices. )

Summary of H1N1 Clinical Trials:

[Satyagraha]

This link has been updated with the spreadsheet info - a summary of all studies; with details about which ones are run with adjuvanted vaccines, which are for kids, where the studies are being conducted, etc....

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=138294.0

[Satyagraha]

http://www.infowars.com/evidence-of-thimerosal-h1n1-virus-in-seasonal-vaccination/

Evidence of Thimerosal, H1N1 Virus in Seasonal Vaccination
   
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
September 23, 2009

An Infowars reader has sent a vaccine insert that proves Fluzone contains thimerosal, the deadly antiseptic and antifungal agent. “Thimerosal is a very effective preservative that has been used since the 1930s to prevent contamination in some multi-dose vials of vaccines,” according to the Centers for Disease Control.

“In 1977, a Russian study found that adults exposed to ethylmercury, the form of mercury in thimerosal, suffered brain damage years later,” writes Dawn Prate for Natural News. “Studies on thimerosal poisoning also describe tubular necrosis and nervous system injury, including obtundation, coma and death. As a result of these findings, Russia banned thimerosal from children’s vaccines in 1980. Denmark, Austria, Japan, Great Britain and all the Scandinavian countries have also banned the preservative.”




According to a number of researchers, thimerosal is responsible for a dramatic increase in autism and other neurological disorders. There is also a link between thimerosal and speech delays, attention-deficit disorder, hyperactivity and autism. The Institute of Medicine conducted a study on thimerosal and concluded that the link between thimerosal and neurodevelopmental disorders was biologically plausible and called for the removal of thimerosal to “reduce mercury exposure of infants and children as much as possible.”

“Fluzone vaccine is indicated for active immunization in people 6 months of age and older against influenza disease caused by influenza virus subtypes A and type B contained in the seasonal influenza vaccine,” reports Medical News Today. “Fluzone vaccine is the only vaccine licensed in the United States for children as young as 6 months of age through adults.”

In other words, if you are buying into the government and corporate media hype about the flu and permit your children to get a seasonal vaccine, they are getting thimerosal. “Sanofi Pasteur expects to supply over 50 million doses of Fluzone vaccine to the U.S. for the 2009-2010 season.” Sanofi Pasteur produces approximately 40 percent of the influenza vaccines distributed worldwide, and in the U.S. Fluzone vaccine accounts for more than 45 percent of the influenza vaccines distributed each year.

Finally, the insert indicates Fluzone contains the H1N1 virus.

[trailhound]

Awesome work pilikia! You should get a check for getting this together. 

[Satyagraha]

Awesome work pilikia! You should get a check for getting this together. 

Thanks LD... a trip to hell in reading those studies. The kids with HIV as the test group in Soweto So. Africa (#67) is disturbing to say the least. And there's only ONE study with pregnant women... and they have 'suspended' one study run on people with multiple chronic conditions; no reasons provided. There's a lot more information to dig out on these studies. Ironically, the most well-documented study is the one being run in Iran. (Perhaps the least influenced by the big pharma cartel?.. not sure.)

[Chips]

Pilikia wrote, "In other words, if you are buying into the government and corporate media hype about the flu and permit your children to get a seasonal vaccine, they are getting thimerosal."

...This is not strictly true, since only the multi-dose vials contain thimerosal. Anyone thinking for whatever reason that they need a flu shot, for themselves or a child, should insist on a single-dose vial or syringe. I would personally also advise them simply not to get it. Cutting off your nose to spite your face, I believe it's called.

I'm concetrating on the adjuvants. When will they add them (assuming they haven't already), and how do we know?

[Satyagraha]

Pilikia wrote quoted Infowars report which read, "In other words, if you are buying into the government and corporate media hype about the flu and permit your children to get a seasonal vaccine, they are getting thimerosal."

...This is not strictly true, since only the multi-dose vials contain thimerosal. Anyone thinking for whatever reason that they need a flu shot, for themselves or a child, should insist on a single-dose vial or syringe. I would personally also advise them simply not to get it. Cutting off your nose to spite your face, I believe it's called.

I'm concetrating on the adjuvants. When will they add them (assuming they haven't already), and how do we know?

Fixed. I don't have any specific info about thimerosol; haven't been following that particular bit of nastiness...
On adjuvants; they are currently testing them in the clinical trials - and my guess is that they've already been manufactured, packaged and are in transit to the clinics where they'll be dispensed.

[Chips]

Adjuvants, adjuvants, adjuvants...

The "contraindications" listed on the vaccine inserts are pretty straightforward - if you have any of the listed allergies or conditions, it is in essence advised that you do not take the vaccine.

"Warnings and precautions" is more amorphous. We are cautioned to make the decision to be vaccinated after "careful consideration of the potential benefits and risks" if (in the case of the insert posted on this thread) we experienced Guillain-Barre syndrome after previous vaccination for influenza. Do they provide us the actual risks (literal probability, based on their own statistics)? I doubt it, but I don't know. There is a reference, "(5.1)", following that statement, ostensibly referring elsewhere on the insert, where one would hope to find said risk more definitively explained. For our decision to be FULLY informed, they should provide said probabilities.

"Adverse reactions" is interesting. There are probabilities of > or = (greater than or equal to) 10% listed for the "most common" local and systemic reactions. What does that mean? 11%? 90%? What's up? We don't deserve to know? I wonder what the "least common" adverse reactions are. Just to make a point, what if 9% of vaccine recipients died?

The adjuvants are another story; they will be touted as beneficial - a means by which immunity is enhanced. I am researching the history of adjuvants other than squalene-based, but the squalene, should they use it, and assuming they haven't already included it, is a potential train wreck. I've already stated my own conservative estimate of 21% of recipients of squalene adjuvant developing lifelong, debilitating autoimmune disease, based on, among other evidence, a congressional study stating that out of the 700,000 troops that served in the first Gulf War, 175,000 developed Gulf War Illness, and assuming because of a preponderance of evidence that the vast majority of them received (squalene) adjuvanted anthrax vaccine. Truth is, the squalene was in only some of the vaccine lots (as determined by the FDA); not all the troops received it. The Army, paid by your and my tax dollars, will not even admit they put the squalene in the vaccine, let alone reveal how many troops actually received it. If only half the troops received the squalene in the shots, the probability of resultant autoimmune disease jumps to 42%, and so forth. We don't know. Though unlikely, it could be 100%, changing "risk" to "certainty". We don't know.

[Chips]

Check out the Influenza Vaccine Information form:

http://labvirus.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/08-cdc-h1n1vaxrecord.pdf

This is still not absolute proof that adjuvant - or adjuvant with squalene - will be included, but it's certainly one more step in that direction.

[sociostudent]

Check out the Influenza Vaccine Information form:

http://labvirus.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/08-cdc-h1n1vaxrecord.pdf

This is still not absolute proof that adjuvant - or adjuvant with squalene - will be included, but it's certainly one more step in that direction.

Like we've tried to convey, the adjuvants seem to have been taken out of the H1N1 "swine flu" shots, at least for the ones available in the U.S.--HOWEVER, the PREPA Act still covers the pharmaceutical co.'s and govt.'s asses later if they "decide they need to use the adjuvants to stretch the supply"...So vigilance is key with this issue.

Also, they have a buttload of clinical trials going on that use the adjuvants. See pilikia's posts.

[Chips]

Like we've tried to convey, the adjuvants seem to have been taken out of the H1N1 "swine flu" shots, at least for the ones available in the U.S.--HOWEVER, the PREPA Act still covers the pharmaceutical co.'s and govt.'s asses later if they "decide they need to use the adjuvants to stretch the supply"...So vigilance is key with this issue.

Also, they have a buttload of clinical trials going on that use the adjuvants. See pilikia's posts.

- From Pilikia's last post in this thread, yesterday...

Fixed. I don't have any specific info about thimerosol; haven't been following that particular bit of nastiness...
On adjuvants; they are currently testing them in the clinical trials - and my guess is that they've already been manufactured, packaged and are in transit to the clinics where they'll be dispensed.

Yours is the first post I've seen that suggests in any way that adjuvants have been taken out of the 2009 h1n1 vaccine. Nor have I seen any definitive mention that they were going in; just assumptions, including my own. Yes there are many clinical trials using adjuvants, some already complete, just as there is a CDC statement that, in essence, adjuvants will be used if "the experts" recommend it after they analyze the trial results. We don't know how long the manufacturers will wait before they pass along test results - it may already have happened.

The unfortunate fact that the CDC admitted that in the 1976 swine flu vaccination campaign they at the last minute substituted an untested vaccine precludes trusting what they say, anyway. So if they say they haven't put it in, it's not necessarily the truth; and if they say they have put it in, there'd be little reason to doubt it. It's a lose/lose situation.

[sociostudent]

- From Pilikia's last post in this thread, yesterday...

Yours is the first post I've seen that suggests in any way that adjuvants have been taken out of the 2009 h1n1 vaccine. Nor have I seen any definitive mention that they were going in; just assumptions, including my own. Yes there are many clinical trials using adjuvants, some already complete, just as there is a CDC statement that, in essence, adjuvants will be used if "the experts" recommend it after they analyze the trial results. We don't know how long the manufacturers will wait before they pass along test results - it may already have happened.

The unfortunate fact that the CDC admitted that in the 1976 swine flu vaccination campaign they at the last minute substituted an untested vaccine precludes trusting what they say, anyway. So if they say they haven't put it in, it's not necessarily the truth; and if they say they have put it in, there'd be little reason to doubt it. It's a lose/lose situation.

Agreed...I'm just trying to calm myself down about it and reassure myself that this isn't going to be forcibly injected into me or my kid this fall.

I guess deep down inside I know they'll sneak it in at the last minute or something, similar to the 1976 hoax.

[Satyagraha]

Like we've tried to convey, the adjuvants seem to have been taken out of the H1N1 "swine flu" shots, at least for the ones available in the U.S.--HOWEVER, the PREPA Act still covers the pharmaceutical co.'s and govt.'s asses later if they "decide they need to use the adjuvants to stretch the supply"...So vigilance is key with this issue.

Also, they have a buttload of clinical trials going on that use the adjuvants. See pilikia's posts.

Socio - check this out - wdyt? My sense is that they don't know what to tell those of us who ask questions (and include links in email etc... they're not prepared for this...

I have been discussing this with a neurologist at a major medical center in Boston - a neuro who is on staff at the MS Clinic (read: autoimmune disorder MS).

Here's the most recent email exchange on the issue of adjuvants in the H1N1 vaccine:

.... I am wondering what Dr. X's recommendation is with regard to the H1N1 vaccine. I'm reluctant to take it, since reading the published 'preliminary' studies in the NEJM, it seems they will likely include adjuvants in the recipe, Squalene for example, which will BOOST the immune response in the body, and enable them to use less antigen for each dose of the vaccine. Makes sense if you're running low on vaccine, however, for people with autoimmune disorders, this can be quite dangerous.

Although Squalene is banned in the US by the FDA, the CDC (Dr. Schuchat) mentioned that in an 'emergency', the use of Squalene or other adjuvants will be allowed. Well, I expect that since we're in a level 6 pandemic (according to the WHO), that constitutes an emergency, and we can expect to find squalene, or some other adjuvant in the vaccine. I also noted that thimerosol is in the vaccines being studied in the two preliminary results reports in the latest issue of the NEJM.

snipped response..... _____________________

To respond to your question, the H1N1 vaccine is a new entity and we are not sure how patients with MS will respond to it. Your points about autoimmune reactivity are well founded. Until we get more experience with the vaccine, we will not know. Despite the "additives" to the vaccine, some specialists believe that the risk probably is no greater than the regular flu vaccine (nmss.org).

On the other hand, I look at it from a practical stand point. From all reports, there will be a shortage of the vaccine, and therefore a rationing to individuals at high risk. Those who will have a chance to receive the vaccine will be the elderly, young, potentially health-care workers, and those with significant disability (particularly pulmonary problems). I suspect that several MS patients will not "qualify" given the shortage we expect.

---------------------------------------------------

So, skirting the question with the 'short supply' answer... and "several MS patients"?? There are hundreds in this clinic. Also positioning it as 'you may be one of the lucky few who "have a chance" to take the vaccinations' is laughable if it weren't so pathetic. 

Clearly these guys are not sure how to handle these questions, because the obvious answer is DON'T TAKE THE SHOT. I'll continue this email discussion - he did not answer my question about mandated vaccinations under threat of fines and quarantine in Mass. I found this response from a healthcare provider to be lacking to say the least. The PR from the medical center in question has made their position quite clear; you should take the vaccinations - so for the MSClinic doctors to go against the hospital's official policy is risky.  Hippocrates is rolling in his grave.