In June 2018, the Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health published an article Gayle DeLong entitled 'A lowered probability of pregnancy in females in the USA aged 25-29 who received a human papillomavirus vaccine injection'. This is an everyday event - medical science publishing research and evidence about pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines. However it is one the demonstrates the dishonesty of medical science.
"Data revealed that 60% of women who had not received the HPV vaccine had been pregnant at least once, while only 35% of HPV vaccine recipients had ever conceived. The article detailed the statistical analysis as well as offered possible biological mechanisms for the results. Three researchers peer-reviewed the article. When the article first appeared, the editors eagerly promoted it by making it free. By early December 2019, the number of downloads reached close to 24,000."
This is how medical science is supposed to work - if it functioned honestly and openly. But, of course, it doesn't. Young girls, and their parents, who are routinely encouraged by doctors to have the vaccination, are (or at least should be) entitled to know all there is to know about the likely side effects and consequences of any medication. But pharmaceutical medicine does not work this way. It is a business that thrives on enticing patients to take drugs and vaccines, and information about side effects is not good for drug sales.
Medical journals, such as the Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, should publish evidence about every drug and vaccine. This particular research was processed in the normal way, peer reviewed, and published. Then it was withdrawn - and withdrawn without any satisfactory reason being given.
Yet the detail is not important. What we are dealing with is a medical system that does not want patients to know about the serious, life-changing side effects of their drugs and vaccines. If the conventional medical establishment was honest it would look at DeLong's findings, and be sufficiently concerned to look further into the findings. Indeed, on the basis of 'first do no harm', and the precautionary principle, it would suspend use of the vaccine.
None of this is done. Instead, the journal pulls the research. It is important to realise that medical journals survive only on the basis of funding from the pharmaceutical industry. So if drug companies don't like a piece of research, if it might have an effect on profits, it is easier to ensure that the research is pulled rather than to seek to make the vaccine safe, and free of side effects.
So it's not just that pharmaceutical medicine peddles dangerous drugs and vaccines. It is that the pharmaceutical industry has sufficient control over medical journals (a major source of information doctors rely on) to ensure that they don't have to worry about the dangers - neither doctors nor patients will get to know about them.
So our daughters are damaged....
...and the drug companies rake in the profits.
