Man Vaccinated Against Polio 28 Years Ago Has Been Shedding Mutated Highly Virulent Form The Whole Time; Other Mutated Strains Found In Sewage Samples The World Over
In yet another example of things turning out not quite the way that they are advertised… It’s come to light that a man vaccinated against polio 28 years ago has actually had an active infection in his gut the whole time, shedding the virus in his stools for the whole 3 decades.
More interestingly (or disturbingly, depending on your mindset), during this time the polio virus mutated from the “safe” version (supposedly severely weakened, or “attenuated”) used in vaccines to a dangerous, extremely virulent form — which he’s been shedding in high quantities into his local environment.
This situation is apparently not as uncommon as one may guess though, as researchers have previously discovered that virulent, dangerous forms of polio derived from vaccines are somewhat common in sewage samples taken in Finland, Slovakia, Estonia, and Israel (and presumably elsewhere as well).
These forms all bear the “signature” of vaccine-derived polio viruses from immunodeficient individuals “iVDPVs” — in other words, they all seem to originate with people who are vaccinated and develop personal resistance to the virus, but not enough so as to wipe the infection out. Instead, the polio virus persists, sets up shop in the guts, and proliferates while mutating back into virulent forms — which are then shed into the environment.
The takeaway of the recent research — fyi, the discovery of the man in question was made by a team from the National Institute for Biological Standards and Control in Potters Bar, Hertfordshire — is summed up thusly: “While maintaining high immunization coverage will likely confer protection against paralytic disease caused by these viruses, significant changes in immunization strategies might be required to effectively stop their occurrence and potential widespread transmission.”
To be clear here — the man in question had the full course of polio vaccinations — this is including 3 doses of weakened live virus at 5, 7, and 12 months old, followed by a booster when he was about 7 years old.
Those interested in the full paper can find it here.
This should serve as yet another wake up call to those that take the rhetoric used by the various medical industries at face value — as with antibiotics, breast cancer screenings, MRIs, etc, the pros and cons are not quite as simple as the industries profiting seem to acknowledge.
While some vaccines seem to have a good deal of utility to me, and I’m not opposed to some of them, their purported efficacy and the associated benefits never seem to match the view from the ground. Of course, considering the current very widespread issue of “lack of reproducibility” amongst most “scientific” studies one has to question the results of many studies showing high degrees of efficacy for many vaccines — fraud and incompetence seem to be endemic in the field, especially when there is a lot of money to be made if certain results are provisioned.
And, as with the overuse of antibiotics, the widespread use of vaccines over the last century raises some further questions — with widespread use all that one is really doing is bringing the eventual close on their period of efficacy closer. I’d be very surprised if many/any antibiotics or vaccines have particular use a century or two from now — based on the current rate of adaption/mutation amongst many microbial or viral pathogens.
Any victories obtained against microbes or viruses were only ever going to be temporary ones — all that has occurred over the last century is that inherent immunological weaknesses have been allowed to build up in the populations of the world, becoming more and more common.
A “disease debt”, if you will. When the tools that we have used to lower the competition level between humans and microbes + viruses begin failing en masse, all of the lives supposedly saved by such technologies will be lost anyways in an enormous tidal wave of disease outbreaks. Was the use of these technologies really for the greater good or was it really just a matter of putting the problem on future populations rather than on one’s immediate self/family?
Keep up to date with all the most interesting green news on the planet by subscribing to our (free) Planetsave newsletter.