FLU VACCINE: Interview of Dr Eva Snead by Gary Null

[Guest guest]

17.06.99 FLU VACCINE: Interview of Dr Eva Snead by Gary Null News

 

 

GARY NULL: One of the most outspoken, intelligent and absolutely determined

physicians on public health issues that's Dr Edith Snead. Nice to have you

with us today.

 

DR EVA SNEAD: Nice to be with you. I appreciated all that flattery.

 

GN: Well you deserve it. That's because I wouldn't give it if it's not

deserved. Let's talk quickly, we have about eight minutes to talk about this

latest phenomenon of everybody running out to get their flu shot and they

can do that, IOm not suggesting that they should not do that, that's their

choice but I'd like a different perspective so at least they have something

to counterbalance their existing information. Why don't you share what you

consider the pros and cons of the flu vaccine?

 

ES: Well we have talked about vaccines and that they are all totally unsafe.

Now talking about the flu vaccine itself it's prepared on chicken embryo,

which mean unborn chicken which means that people who are allergic to these

products like egg and chicken can become seriously ill and on the other hand

the injection of these proteins into other humans will render them in a

large percentage allergic to chicken and egg which means that people who

were not allergic before will now become allergic. The other problem is that

all viral vaccines contain not only the particular virus but they also

contain traces of leukaemia virus, cancer producing viruses etc. These are

not completely removable, they exist in the chicken from which these eggs

are taken and although they claim that they are like 98% purified, 2% of

several billion viruses is still an awful lot of cancer and leukaemia

dangers. Another fact is that to separate cells we also may have to use a

pork product which is made from raw pork stomach. This is an enzyme that

separates the cells called pork trypsin and a lot of people who would not

ingest or take pork products for religious reasons are seduced without

knowing it into violating their convictions so there you have in a nutshell

the beginning of why it is not very wise to take influenza vaccines.

 

GN: OK. Why don't you give us some of what you have found in the literature,

some of the problems with the flu vaccine and also they're claiming all this

success. I question whether they can prove the success because you cannot

disprove a negative.

 

ES: That's correct. Imagine, Gary, the gullibility of a public that not only

believes that these companies give them a safe and effective product but

that they give them the credence of a god that two years in advance when

they start making these serums they know which particular kind of influenza

is going to be causing the epidemic two years later. I mean you know these

people have the utter gall to tell people that they can do it because they

can't. This is based on computer predictions and

so on which are totally inaccurate. Now, you may remember the horrible

epidemic of neurologic illness that we had in '76 and although the present

day vaccines don't have that high an incidence even the package insert tells

me that there's a higher incidence of Guillaine Barre which is a sort of

euphemism for a variety of polio in all people under fifty that take the

influenza vaccine. So imagine the risk you are running aside from the

viruses, the cancer, the leukaemia. Two or three years ago there was a rash

of positive HIV and hepatitis patients in Baltimore among people who would

otherwise not be expected to have a positive test. When studied all of these

people had received the influenza vaccine four to six weeks prior and this

was rapidly covered up by the press as you were saying in your beautiful new

article that told that the press in uninquisitive today.

 

GN: Do you have an example of some of the guaranteed safety vaccines that we

have been given over the years only later to find out that the guarantees

were unsupported by any credible science and actually were deleterious?

 

ES: There is no science, credible or otherwise, this is all guess work. I

mean you can't test for something that hasn't happened and you can't test

compared to what? I mean you don't know that there would have been an

epidemic and certainly if you put a certain variety of viruses in the public

then you will find they will say " Oh we were right. Virus A or B, Australian

or South American or whatever you may call it will be endemic this year " .

Well you know you become a self-fulfilling prophesy because you created the

particular problem and not only that but the other thing that is very, very

important that nobody has brought up to my knowledge is about forty years

ago a study was done in England on problems with the nervous

system in new born and unborn foetuses that were aborted and they discovered

that the majority of children who had birth defects in the nervous system

particularly and encephalus had been exposed to the flu virus. Flu virus, of

course, being now in all the vaccines that people are vaccinated. In the

south of Texas we are having a tremendous rash of these particular

neurologic problems. Children born without a brain or part of a brain and

everybody is telling the public " Oh we have not a clue of what could cause

this " . Well, we do have a clue, we're just lying to the public. Why do you

think there's such an interest in getting people to get the flu vaccine. I

realise that this is subjective and giveus subjective answer. Well the

manufacturer makes money. I mean that a very simple thing. They're seen as a

wonderful product because they get the endorsement of government and health

affiliations. He produces serum that costs you basically not that much to

produce. You seduce the public into needing it and you sell millions and

millions of doses so there's an awful lot of money to be made. Now from the

point of view of public health, again there's money and grants to be made. I

mean there are many people employed in persuading the public this problem

exists and persuadingthem that they need it. And then of course, as you well

know, we may suspect that there are other reasons that could be political or

genocidal because the product is administered to large amounts of older

people and as you well know in nursing homes where they receive flu vaccines

there are many, many cases of flu shortly after the vaccination effort which

indicates a total association and from a very crude point of view the

perpetuation of life in older people particularly in nursing homes is not

desirable to those that handle the funds. So of course we cannot prove this

but it certainly presents a seductive hypothesis.

 

GN: Again, that's a little too seductive for my taste. I haven't been able

to make any such association but I would suggest that for them to tell us

that the flu vaccines are both necessary ... I have not seen that they have

either part of that scenario on hand. Dr Eva Snead thank you very much. Nice

to always have you with us.

 

 

 

source: www.whale.to/vaccines.html

 

 

(su " VIA " del 17.06.99)

 

 

 

 

----------

----

 

Designed by Capitolium 1997-1999 - Info on Copyright