I make it all up.

Right to a point.

I use data accepted by ALL and do the maths.

I find it apalling that no one is shouting like me of the deaths to more than a million healthy infants many immediately after toxic vaccines when non toxic vaccines exist.

This study 2010 with monkeys is not perfect and I am not here to tear down the study which others do so well.

However the increase in HEAD size (nothing to do with any other things) is an increase of head size from 84800 to 87400 in 8 weeks compared with a zero increase for the controls.

Even assuming some of this is normal growth it also shows some abnormal swelling as well and this is disturbing.

If the toxic vaccines are directly causing this then, yes, a check of the results is needed and possibly withing 4 days of the toxic insult and not 8 weeks would add clarity to this investigation and its findings against mercury vaccines.

While the addition of toxic vaccines was historically happening the number of convictions for child abuse curiously went up 20 fold. This is either a measure of the increasing violence or perspicacity of the police or a sign of something very rotten in the state of denmark and every other western country.

Since the recognition of SIDS the death rate has been around 1 sudden death per thousand.

This means 2 000 deaths per year in the UK.

Probably 10 000 deaths per year in USA.

This has been going on with different numbers since 1969 and today sadly we still get reduced but significant sudden deaths.

As the babies are healthy before death we have to assume some sort of toxic death in a common sense world.

There are many such toxins and some are new and increasing and others are being reduced or eliminated.

I think a reasonable figure for summing up these deaths for every country around the world would exceed 1 million.

In addition there is strong pressure today to find causes of deaths other than SIDS.

On one blog my comment that Harry Clark died within 6 hours of an organomercury vaccine elicited the response it was SIDS. None of the Clark family that died after vaccines was or ever will be diagnosed as SIDS. This gives for me missed numbers of cases.

Is an organomercury vaccine toxic? Well in 1970 they were shown by simple tests to be toxic even when diluted 100 fold.

What tests today would you do to check for toxicity? What tests are done for example on the millions of organomercury H1N1 vaccines not used in France and resting in a SECRET repository where few people are aware of.

Why can’t we see toxicity studies on these vaccines today? Why aren’t we informed where this repository is? Is secrecy and throwing out messengers of bad news the trademarks of tyrants?

And of course vaccines are NOT the only cause of SIDS.

We are all painfully aware that NO ONE officially knows why a SIDS baby dies. But they most certainly die when othwise in PERFECT HEALTH of the diagnosis is INVALID.

More than a million infants have died otherwise healthy after following the vaccine regimes.

@johnfryer, could you please be more explicit with this statement, such as would be in the form of literature citations?

This 2010 research shows even in very small animal groups that with blinded procedures we get an increase of head size from 84800 to 87400 in 8 weeks while those not vaccinated remain essentially the same size.

No john, the unexposed group (n=2, by the way) resulted in a significant decrease in amygdala size; that is not normal. The exposed group resulted in, what certainly appears to be, normal brain growth. Could you do yourself a service and actually read the study before commenting? I already know the torturous and outright false interpretations by those with a vested interest in ‘vaccine damage’.

My own research into falsely imprisoned parents always shows this head size increase over and above the normal. Figures of 50 to 90 per cent head increase can only mean colossal damage to the brain.

Would you be so kind as to share this research with the rest of us and how you reached this conclusion?

I have to say that this research is going over what has been known for a very long time, that vaccines with organomercury are toxic and one way this shows is by an insult to the brain causing inflammation in EVERY animal receiving the thimerosal.

Again, that is an erroneous conclusion of the study and I would appreciate it if you could show me the part that supports your statement? Ethylmercury requires orders of magnitude higher exposure than what was found in paediatric vaccines in order for toxicity to occur. But please feel free to demonstrate how the former vaccine schedule in the U.S. had toxic amounts of mercury.

…and frankly if the standards are this low for doing the study in the first place, I hate to think what their standards for the treatment of the animals are.

The comments here dismiss vaccine harm of any kind (both by the vaccine or the toxic content) and therefore subject infants to vaccines without consideration for harm.

More than a million infants have died otherwise healthy after following the vaccine regimes.

We have no accepted reason for this short of harm from repeat vaccines and anaaphylaxis now research more than a hundred years ago.

This 2010 research shows even in very small animal groups that with blinded procedures we get an increase of head size from 84800 to 87400 in 8 weeks while those not vaccinated remain essentially the same size.

My own research into falsely imprisoned parents always shows this head size increase over and above the normal. Figures of 50 to 90 per cent head increase can only mean colossal damage to the brain.

Here the increase for just the few animals is disturbing even using Steven’s analogy of results in animal experiments will be all over the place.

While animals may totally recover from a 5 per cent head size increase those that increase by 50 per cent as happens will not recover so easily.

I have to say that this research is going over what has been known for a very long time, that vaccines with organomercury are toxic and one way this shows is by an insult to the brain causing inflammation in EVERY animal receiving the thimerosal.

That’s an excellent question, and one for which no one here seems to have an answer.

In my field, there are certainly vanity journals and they will publish just about anything. Can anyone comment knowledgeably about the prestige of this journal? Is this a low-credibility/low prestige journal?

I’m not fond of case studies, but they have a place — but this seems to go far beyond that. How on earth do you milk a study for multiple publications with fewer than 15 participants?