Just two weeks after receiving a vaccination, Daniel Ramirez died after being hospitalized for paralysis.
The connection between vaccination and paralysis has been known since the 40’s and 50’s and was written about in The Lancet by Stephen Mawdsley in an article titled, “Polio Provocation: Solving a Mystery With the Help of History.” Mawdsley states:
“The application of epidemiological surveillance and statistical methods enabled researchers to trace the steady rise in polio incidence along with the expansion of immunization programs for diphtheria, pertussis, and tetanus. A report that emerged from Guy’s and Evelina Hospitals, London, in 1950, found that 17 cases of polio paralysis developed in the limb injected with pertussis or tetanus inoculations. Results published by Australian doctor Bertram McCloskey also showed a strong association between injections and polio paralysis. Meanwhile, in the USA, public health researchers in New York and Pennsylvania reached similar conclusions. Clinical evidence, derived from across three continents, had established a theory that required attention.”
So what happened to this theory that piercing the skin during injection drives the polio virus into deep tissue where it then enters the central nervous system where it ultimately leads to paralysis and even death?
The theory was essentially proven in 1998 in an article titled, “Mechanism of Injury-Provoked Poliomyelitis,” in the Journal of Virology. Researchers state:
“Skeletal muscle injury is known to predispose its sufferers to neurological complications of concurrent poliovirus infections. This phenomenon, labeled ‘provocation poliomyelitis,’ continues to cause numerous cases of childhood paralysis due to the administration of unnecessary injections to children in areas where poliovirus is endemic. Recently, it has been reported that intramuscular injections may also increase the likelihood of vaccine-associated paralytic poliomyelitis in recipients of live attenuated poliovirus vaccines. We have studied this important risk factor for paralytic polio in an animal system for poliomyelitis and have determined the pathogenic mechanism linking intramuscular injections and provocation poliomyelitis. Skeletal muscle injury induces retrograde axonal transport of poliovirus and thereby facilitates viral invasion of the central nervous system and the progression of spinal cord damage. The pathogenic mechanism of provocation poliomyelitis may differ from that of polio acquired in the absence of predisposing factors.”
The virus associated with the recent hospitalizations is Enterovirus D68, which is not polio per se, but is very similar and is in the same family of enteroviruses. Doctor Alan S. Cunningham, MD, a retired pediatrician wrote about his fear of the possibility of provocation of a polio-like virus due to vaccination in The BMJ in 2015:
“Since August 2, 2014, our Centers for Disease Control has received reports of 107 cases of ‘acute flaccid myelitis’ (AFM), a polio-like illness in children in 34 states. During the same interval there have been 1153 cases of respiratory illnesses associated with enterovirus D-68 (CIDRAP News 1/16/15. CDC update 1/15/15. Catherine Saint Louis, NY Times 1/13/15). AFM affects motor neurons in spinal cord gray matter, resulting in asymmetrical limb weakness; 34% of patients have cranial nerve motor dysfunction. Median age of patients is 7.6 years/range: 5 months-20 years (MMWR 63: 1243–January 9, 2015). So far only one child has fully recovered. EV-D68 is a suspected cause but, thus far, no viruses have been found in the spinal fluid of patients, and only a minority have had an antecedent illness associated with EV-D68. Case-control studies are planned to look for clues, but presently AFM is a mystery disease of unknown cause. It is taboo to suggest a role for vaccines, but some old-timers remember “provocation poliomyelitis” or “provocation paralysis.” This is paralytic polio following intramuscular injections, typically with vaccines. PP was most convincingly documented by Austin Bradford Hill and J. Knowelden during the 1949 British polio epidemic when the risk of paralytic polio was increased 20-fold among children who had received the DPT injection (BMJ 2:1–July 1, 1950). Similar observations were made by Greenberg and colleagues in New York City; their literature review cited suspected cases as far back as 1921 (Am J Public Health 42:142–Feb.1952). I first became aware of PP 10 years ago while browsing through “Krugman’s Infectious Disease of Children” (page 128 of the 2004 edition). AFM may result from a direct virus attack on the spinal cord, or by an immune attack triggered by a virus, or by something else. If a polio-like virus is circulating in the U.S., the possibility of its provocation by one or more vaccines has to be considered.”
Polio provocation resurfaced in the 80’s when vaccination programs in developing countries increased in tandem with more children becoming paralyzed.
The US government chose to continue vaccinating and stated,
“any possible doubts, whether or not well founded, about the safety of the vaccine cannot be allowed to exist in view of the need to assure that the vaccine will continue to be used to the maximum extent consistent with the nation’s public health objectives.”
This is important information to consider for MSIDS patients, since our immune systems are compromised and viruses often play a role in our illness, we need to consider the very probable connection with provoked viruses by vaccines along with our other tick borne infections.
For more information on vaccines, please read: https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2015/06/19/a-word-on-vaccines/
https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2015/08/12/connecting-dots-mycoplasma/ Written by the Office of Medical and Scientific Justice and substantiating this further: http://www.whale.to/vaccine/cantwell2.html “One factor common to all the troops is that they were given experimental and potentially dangerous drugs and vaccines employed to protect them against Iraqi chemical and biowarfare agents. As early as December 1990, there were warnings about using our servicemen as medical guinea pigs. In an unprecedented legal decision, the FDA allowed the Pentagon to give unapproved drugs and vaccines without requiring consent of the soldiers. Claiming security reasons, the Pentagon also refused to identify the types or the number of drugs and injections they forced the troops to take… Soldiers who rejected the injections were given them forcibly. Physicians who refused to cooperate with the military’s experimental vaccine program were treated harshly.”