Ours is no longer the Information Age. Since ghost written op-ed cut-and-paste techniques took over the arena of the written word more than a decade ago, we now live in the Information Overload Age. The Public Relations empire described in The Doors of Perception has perfected the inculcation of assigned opinions onto the public consciousness.
Their clients - the global corporations - maintain entire divisions of staff whose task it is to flood the information superhighway with one neatly written prt-a-manger piece after another, one false 'grassroots' site after another, one subsidized 'authoritative' junk science article after another, all with the unified purpose of creating conventional wisdom in any area involving huge economics. Wikipedia is one small example, posing as a public forum with its "open editing" but in reality strictly censored by editors hired to ensure that the public is properly guided. Such sites are obviously unreliable as sources.
The phony sites are not that hard to spot if one just takes a second look. Things to look for include slick-looking homepage, no depth to the site, articles all very short and to the point, written in the same mono-dimensional style, absolutely no references, no contact info, with predictably uniform points of view on any subject relating to the Big Four:
- health and medicine
- oil and utilities
- war and national security
- food and nutrition.
Same thing in the news media. The flood of news-ready articles coming in daily from the corporate think-tanks is so tempting - an article may appear under a nonexistent author's name as hard news, or else a columnist can just easily pop one of them in and submit it under his byline. I'm a little busy today... plus it's as good as what I would have written anyway, so...
This happens every day. V for Vendetta wasn't even close. More than $12 billion annually is spent in this PR industry - the Science of Misdirection. For a more complete look at how organized media really works, refer to The Doors of Perception.
This is the sea of mud in place today that we all face when trying to obtain accurate knowledge in any area of vital importance. The bias of academics, the cleverly posed slogans and mantras that pass for information - a web search turns up hundreds of articles that share the same homogeneous opinion, each claiming authority. It is working better than great.
The power of such a system is exemplified very clearly in the field of vaccines, and 'what everybody thinks' about them. In the past year, the industry's efforts seem to have redoubled, for no apparent reason. We can think of it as the result of a typical marketing blitz, a periodic surge. Organized medicine can always use a few more billions.
Here are some of the common falsehoods which most people believe, which can easily be unseated, and which are manifestly detrimental to human health and immunity:
- The child must be vaccinated to attend school
- Outbreaks of old fashioned diseases occur mainly in the unvaccinated
- Vaccines promote immunity in the child
- Vaccines are safe
- Vaccine do not cause brain injury
- If we stop vaccinating, old diseases will return
- Germs cause disease
- The unvaccinated are a reservoir for disease
- The unvaccinated do not contribute to herd immunity
- Herd immunity is conferred by vaccines
- The unvaccinated are getting a free ride
- Vaccine exemption laws weaken the society
Because of ceaseless programming, not only do most people - even semi-intelligent ones - subscribe to the above myths, but worse, they seem willing to have laws passed which will legislate these scientifically untenable positions onto the rest of us.
Case in point: the 2011 legal catastrophe in Washington state, where the governor just rammed a bill through the state legislature that has eliminated the philosophical exemption to vaccination in that state. The real issue wasn't even the debate over whether or not vaccines are safe. Rather, it's a constitutional right that the citizens of Washington just lost, and most of them are happy about it!
Ever since vaccines have been mandated in the US, it is the parents who have always had the right to decide whether or not their child will participate. It takes months of agonizing research in most cases to de-program oneself of a lifetime of conditioning, and then a modest amount of moral fiber to actually take the initiative to sign the exemption paper and free up the child's formative immune system from being an experimental petri dish for whatever neurotoxins the FDA decides to mandate that year. And now people want to say - no, parents don't have that right. It is the government who should have total jurisdiction over the bloodstream of its citizens. Even though the vaccine decisions are made by bureaucrats, not doctors. This is not a dramatization, but an accurate account of what just took place in WA state.  Sailing through with such little opposition, it is likely other states will follow suit in the near future.
With such enormous effort required to break free of the common conditioning, the chances for the infant's unmodified immune system to be allowed to develop are becoming slimmer as time goes by. People don't read - really read, at the level of rational discourse and abstract thought, enough to find out the facts. Vaccines alter DNA. That is incontrovertible; the manufacturers state it. And vaccines are also immunosuppressive and neurotoxic in the infant, who is not born with an intact immune system, or a complete central nervous system.
Deficiencies of immunity and neurological formation, as well as DNA alteration will certainly handicap vaccinated humans in the long term, preventing them from replicating the strongest progeny possible. Multiply that trend by a dozen generations: epigenetic de-evolution. Social Darwinism. Or looking at it through the other end of the telescope, Natural Selection will now favor the Survival of the Correctly Informed. Nature will be obeyed.
Useless Vaccine Example: HPV
It was inevitable. In the post 9-11 marketing frenzy questing for more and more bugs and diseases to make vaccines against, what could be a more promising candidate than the second highest cause of death in the US? Cancer of the cervix has been on a gradual upswing during the past 3 decades, now affecting some 12,000 American women, 4,000 of whom die each year. In the 1970s, herpes simplex virus was proposed as a possible cause, but that hypothesis was soon abandoned after epidemiological studies proved inconclusive. In the 1980s the next candidate suggested as the missing link was human papilloma virus. 
HPV and Cancer
Now in any cancer, we're talking about a normal cell that mutated and then began to make copies of itself, unchecked. The creators of the HVP/cancer mythology are pretending that the HPV came along, attacked some normal cells and mutated those cells and caused them to begin replicating themselves out of control - cancer. And that this is happening on a mass scale even though we just discovered it. And worse, that a vaccine can neutralize that type of attack on normal cervix cells. Scientifically, what they're proposing is ludicrous.
Few scientists have a better grasp of the proposed virus/cancer model than Berkeley's Peter Duesberg PhD. In tracing the history of the HPV/ cervical cancer story, Duesberg explains why HPV is such an unlikely cause of any cancer:
"no set of viral genes is consistently present or expressed in human cervical cancers.  ... HPV does not replicate in the cancer cells."
So if the mutated cervical cancer cells are not mutating because of abnormal viral genes being spliced into a normal cell, how could HPV be causing this cancer? Duesberg again:
"the "hit-and-run" mechanism of viral carcinogenesis was proposed. It holds that neither the complete [virus], nor even a part of it, needs to be present in the tumor. Obviously, this is an unfalsifiable, but also an unprovable, hypothesis. 
All that has ever been shown is that HPV is sometimes present in cervical cancer tissue, but it's also present in half the normal population. There is a total lack of evidence that cervical cancer appears in women with HPV more often than in women without it.  And yet this will be the focus of the vaccine: to pretend to eliminate this ubiquitous virus from the body.
The New HPV Vaccine
The HPV vaccine had been in the Merck pipeline for years, finally getting FDA approval in 2006.  Merck's HPV vaccine is called Gardasil. What's in it? According to Merck's own data, the vaccine is made from "virus-like particles" from four strains of HPV. ( p1984.) With no clinical studies proving it, HPV is cited by Merck in the Physicians Desk Reference as the cause of "over 70%" of cervical cancer cases. The market that Merck decided on was 12 year old girls, the thinking being that since HPV is sexually transmissible, might as well get it at the start. It may be given now to 9 year olds. 
Extravagant Demands on Credibility
With other vaccines for viral diseases, such as MMR, hepatitis B, and polio, what has never made sense scientifically is that the vaccines do not contain the original wild virus that occurs in nature and supposedly causes the disease. Instead the vaccine contains a man-made mutation of the natural virus that is claimed to be able to confer immunity by triggering the body to produce antibodies to the original disease. So that was bad enough. But what they're asking us to believe about HPV is simply a flight of fancy. 
...The vaccine's "safety and efficacy not been evaluated over 26" years of age. (2007 PDR  p 1987)
Oh, OK. Well, guess we better give it to the young girls then... So why is the shot routinely given also to boys?
Side Effects of HPV Vaccine
Let's start with the ones cited by the manufacturer:
- nausea, vomiting and diarrhea
- Pelvic Inflammatory Disease
- upper respiratory infection
- 2007 Physicians Desk Reference 
Additional side effects discovered later include loss of consciousness, loss of vision and seizures. (Lopes, ) And oh yes, paralysis. The British media began to report still other effects of Gardasil, like the 30 deaths, which American media never mention. 
An additional symptom from the HPV shot is Guillain Barre syndrome, an autoimmune condition resulting in paralysis. There have been several such cases both in the UK and the US, including a high profile case in Oct 2008 of a 12 year old British girl who collapsed 2 days after the HPV shot and was subsequently paralyzed from the waist down.  Her first symptoms came on within 30 minutes.
Can the vaccine itself cause cancer? That's a fair question - we're talking about a vaccine that they're claiming prevents cancer by imitating a pathogen that itself causes cancer, right? So wouldn't we want to be fairly secure that this vaccine wouldn't cause cancer? Here's what the manufacturer states:
Gardasil .. "... not been evaluated for carcinogenicity or impairment of fertility." (2007  p1986 )
Wonderful. They want to vaccinate all American 12-year-olds with a vaccine for cancer and they don't even know for sure whether or not it causes cancer, or makes the recipients infertile. Yeah, sign my kids up for that one, both boys and girls. Curiously, the HPV vaccine is not recommended for pregnancy because of its effects on the fetus , but menarche is no problem...?
Again, the whole story of HPV vaccine is much more twisted than we're representing here. The reader is invited to follow up the above cited sources.  Rarely has such a calculated, systematic misrepresentation of fact been attempted in which data is so obviously manipulated, issues so deliberately obscured, and financial interests so obsequiously served. With the uncertainty about the safety and efficacy of the HPV vaccine, the certainty of the side effects, the prodigious economic upside to global dissemination irrespective of its scientific merits, the absence of long-term studies, and the ludicrous "religious/ethical" smokescreen designed to distract us from the underlying scientific issues, is this really a vaccine you want to try out on your little 12 yr old girl?