Polio vaccine causes cancer – a myth pushed by anti-vaccine religion

Apparently, the “polio vaccine causes cancer” zombie meme has been reanimated by the antivaccination cult. Lacking evidence for their beliefs, retreading old debunked memes is their standard operating procedure. And once again, I’m seeing it.

The interesting thing about social media (Facebook, Twitter, blogs, Google, Reddit) is that it’s fairly easy to push pseudoscientific beliefs. The first problem is that many people read the headlines, and never the underlying discussion. If it can be said in 200 characters, or a misleading infographic, many individuals will share that across the internet as a “fact”. So, if you see a claim that “Polio vaccines infected 98 million Americans with a cancer virus,” many people will immediately see that an accept it without much criticism.

Of course, this leads to a second problem. To refute anti-vaccine claims take a lot more than 200 characters. The refutation is often complex, nuanced and highly scientific, and may take 2000 words or more to send that claim into orbit. It’s highly emotional to claim a vaccine can cause cancer. On the other hand, to say it is not isn’t emotional–it’s coldly logical. And takes a lot of words.

And the third problem is that is that social media fallacies have multiple lives, so when someone reads one of these memes a year from now, they think “yeah, this is great information”, and pass it along as if it’s the Truth™. Killing zombie anti-vaccine tropes and memes are just as difficult as killing zombies in real life, or at least, on a TV show. Debunking these anti-vaccine fake facts is a full-time job. Sadly, even after a thorough debunking, someone will call us a paid shill, ignore the evidence, and repeat the trope.

I need to create a bot that automatically refutes every repeated trope. In lieu of that, let’s just discuss the myth. And refute it once again.

Polio vaccine causes cancer – the myth

According to the anti-vaccine religion, the central story is that the CDC admitted that 98 million Americans received the polio vaccine during an 8-year span when it was contaminated with a cancer virusOther websites essentially repeat the same nonsense. And it’s in the lyrics of a rap song (seriously, the stuff people send me continues to amaze).

The first article is authored by Dave Mihalovic, who is a naturopathic doctor (typically someone who eschews science-based medicine in favor of pseudosciences like homeopathy and acupuncture). He also claims to be a “vaccine researcher.”

If Mihalovic were a vaccine researcher, wouldn’t he have a robust list of peer-reviewed articles with his name attached? Well, he has published exactly zero PubMed-indexed articles about vaccines. He actually hasn’t published anything about any medical science anywhere. His claim to being a vaccine researcher rings rather hollow.

What Mihalovic probably means is his research included a few hours on Google and thinks he’s now as smart as anyone who actually has a bachelor’s and doctoral degree in immunology, virology, biochemistry, epidemiology, or some other biomedical science that matters to real vaccine research. Of course, a real “vaccine researcher” has a decade or two or three of real scientific research in a real world class laboratory.

Mihalovic is as much a vaccine researcher as I am an Oscar-winning screenwriter. Please note that I am not a screenwriter, let alone an Oscar-winning one. However, I could say that I write screenplays. I could claim that I am Steven Spielberg’s best buddy. But it would take you about 47 nanoseconds to find that there is no evidence of my being a screenwriter. Or that I am friends with Spielberg.

Similarly, I found no evidence that Mihalovic is or was a real vaccine researcher.  Of course, Mihalovic thinks he’s as brilliant as a real scientific vaccine researcher, but he has zero credibility as one

Nevertheless, let’s get back to what these vaccine deniers are claiming regarding the trope that the polio vaccine causes cancer:

  • Polio vaccines were contaminated with the SV40 virus (known as simian virus 40, a polyomavirus that is found in both monkeys and humans),
  • SV40 causes cancer,
  • And, the CDC admits that 98 million Americans are at significant risk of SV40 infection and thus cancer.

So are you now scared? If you are older than 50, according to Mihalovic and others in the anti-vaccine religion, including one wannabe rapper, you are carrying a virus that will give you some cancer. And this anti-vaccine zombie trope keeps coming back to life, making it even scarier.

The Real Science

As I said, responding to the myth of “polio vaccine causes cancer” takes much more time. As a scientific skeptic, with, I hope, above-average critical thinking skills, I can smash the myth into tiny little pieces.

The fact is that of the three parts of the myth mentioned in the previous section, only the first one is partially true, and the rest are complete nonsense. None are supported by real scientific or historical evidence. But like most pseudoscience, they are based on some tiny piece of science and eventually over-exaggerated with logical fallacies, misleading terminology, and outright untruths.

Jonas Salk, hero of the war against preventable diseases.
Jonas Salk, the hero of the war against preventable diseases.

Here are the evidence-based facts, using real scientific and historical information, which anyone can read themselves to get the accurate story:

  • The groundbreaking and lifesaving polio vaccines developed separately by Jonas Salk (injected, inactivated virus, vaccine) and Albert Sabin (oral, live virus, vaccine), have been used since the 1950s. Immunization against polio went back and forth between the two versions of the vaccine, although since the early 1980’s, the USA uses the Salk version of the vaccine almost exclusively.
  • The vaccines were developed in the early 1950’s and were produced using VERO green monkey kidney cell lines. Typically, viruses used in vaccines need to be “grown” in a cell line, because viruses cannot replicate themselves without hijacking a normal cell, and reproduce using that cell’s machinery. I know that the anti-vaccine religion thinks that viruses are grown magically, and you can just grab a handful of them, throw them in a blender with a dash of mercury, aborted babies, and aluminum – voila, you have a vaccine. Sorry, it’s not that easy.
  • In 1959, microbiologist Maurice Hilleman found a monkey virus in both vaccines — it was the 40th simian virus (SV) to be discovered by scientists, so it was given the moniker of SV40 (creativity in naming viruses isn’t important even today). Back in the 1950’s, we didn’t have the technology that we do now to screen for contaminants in the growth medium, so the SV40 virus had contaminated the VERO line well before the beginning of production of vaccines. Not all of the VERO cells in culture were contaminated, although the exact proportion is unknown.
  • Salk’s inactivated virus vaccine, which was treated with formaldehyde (only a tiny amount remains in the vaccine, and let’s not spend time arguing about “danger” of formaldehyde in vaccines), had very small amounts or possibly none of the SV40 virus. On the other hand, Sabin’s live oral vaccine was heavily contaminated with SV40, because there was no treatment made to the vaccine to inactivate the polio virus.
  • Worried about the potential effects the virus could have on humans, researchers injected it into hamsters, finding that nearly all of them developed massive cancerous tumors. But, as I’ve said on numerous occasions, primary research should be examined carefully before accepting that it has any type of applicability to human health. And causing cancer in rodents does not necessarily have clinical significance for humans.
  • Upon further review of the initial studies, it was observed hamsters that ingested SV40, instead of being injected with it, didn’t develop any cancers. In other words, Sabin’s live oral vaccine (which actually had a higher burden of SV40 than the injected, inactivated virus Salk vaccine) could not cause any cancer. Additional studies showed that children who were given Sabin’s vaccine did not develop antibodies to SV40; apparently, the virus quickly and safely passed through the child’s digestive system, never causing an SV40 infection.
  • On the other hand, Salk’s vaccine, which contained very little or no SV40, but was given by injection, there was evidence that some of these children might have been infected with SV40.
  • Furthermore, recent studies have shown no credible evidence (here, here, here and here) that those children who received SV40 contaminated vaccines had an increased incidence of cancer versus unvaccinated children. No plausible evidence suggests that SV40 has ever caused cancer in humans (pdf). A meta-review of published research from the 1960’s to 2004 showed no evidence that supported any causal link between SV40 and any cancer. A review of cancers thought to be most associated with SV40 found no evidence to support causality between the virus and cancer. So even if SV40 entered into the bodies of individuals who received the polio vaccine, there is little evidence supporting a causal link between the virus and any cancer.
  • And polio vaccines have been SV40 free since 1963 in most advanced countries, although Soviet bloc vaccines were contaminated until the 1980’s.


I don’t know how many bullet points I need to make, but unless someone wants to deny history, basic science, and mountains of data accumulated over the past few decades, one simply cannot make a valid claim that the polio vaccine currently or has ever caused a single case of “cancer.” I will admit that it is biologically plausible that contaminated polio vaccine could cause cancer – however, subsequent research and the vast wealth of evidence states that it is unlikely, if not impossible, that there was any link.

Predictably, the information spread by the “polio causes cancer” articles pushed by the anti-vaccine religion is wrong on so many levels. We know that not all polio vaccines were contaminated. We know the SV40 virus in the oral vaccine merely passed through the digestive tract without infecting any cells (the first step for SV40 to actually cause cancer). We also know, as established by numerous peer-reviewed articles, that SV40 probably does not cause any kind of cancer in humans.

Even if a tiny percentage of individuals who contract SV40 that leads to cancer, it’s at such a low rate that it would be impossible to detect unless we check tens of millions of patients.

Lastly, and most importantly, the claim that “98 million” might catch cancer from the polio vaccine sounds like an incredibly scary story. The number is ultimately inaccurate, a tactic employed the anti-vaccine religion whenever it suits their needs to establish dangers of vaccines. In other words, facts be damned, let’s say whatever sounds truly spine-chilling.

The real scientific facts are before the SV40 virus was removed from the vaccine, around 98 million children got one of the two forms of the polio vaccine. However, eliminating those who got the oral vaccine, which, as we have established, did not infect children with the SV40 virus, approximately 10-30 million Americans were immunized with the Salk vaccine that probably didn’t contain the  SV40 virus. Finally, even if all of these children were infected with SV40, there is little evidence that establishes causality for cancer.


The TL;DR Review of “polio vaccine causes cancer”

  1. The SV40 virus contaminated some polio vaccine cultures.
  2. Not all polio vaccines from the 1950’s through 1963 were contaminated by the SV40 virus.
  3. Those who took the oral vaccine just passed the SV40 virus through their digestive tract.
  4. Certainly, not 98 million children were infected with SV40.
  5. SV40 was eliminated from polio vaccine production after 1963, so the SV40 risk is 0.
  6. SV40 is associated with lots of cancers, but there is no evidence that it causes cancer. None.
  7. Let’s remember the most important point–polio vaccines have saved and will save many many lives. And we have irrefutable evidence for it.

The problem with these alternative facts from the antivaccination cult is that if you just looked at the headlines for those articles, you’re probably terribly concerned that giving the polio vaccine to your children puts them at risk of cancers.

Or that somehow worse information about vaccines is being suppressed by the CDC, FDA, and Illuminati. But the facts are that the CDC and FDA have been transparent about this story for 50 years, and have invested substantial sums of money into researching it. And that research has found nothing there.

When raising children, we’re all terribly concerned about how to protect them. I’m sure that most parents would be happiest if we could cover our children in bubble wrap with a satellite tracker and air purifier installed. As a father of three daughters, I also wish I could hire Navy SEALS to protect them 24 hours a day.

But of all the things that cause parents to worry, polio vaccines are not one of them. Because if you could take a time machine to the early 1950’s, you’d have real worries – devastating polio epidemics that randomly chose towns and villages to attack every summer.

Editor’s note: This article was originally published way back in August 2014. It has been revised for updating, copyediting, fixing broken links, cleaning up formatting issues, and giving it a new coat of paint. Also, it’s important to refresh and push out this article every time the zombie trope comes back to life.


Please help me out by sharing this article. Also, please comment below, whether it's positive or negative. Of course, if you find spelling errors, tell me!

There are two ways you can help support this blog. First, you can use Patreon by clicking on the link below. It allows you to set up a monthly donation, which will go a long way to supporting the Skeptical Raptor
Become a Patron!

Finally, you can also purchase anything on Amazon, and a small portion of each purchase goes to this website. Just click below, and shop for everything.

The Original Skeptical Raptor
Chief Executive Officer at SkepticalRaptor
Lifetime lover of science, especially biomedical research. Spent years in academics, business development, research, and traveling the world shilling for Big Pharma. I love sports, mostly college basketball and football, hockey, and baseball. I enjoy great food and intelligent conversation. And a delicious morning coffee!

108 Replies to “Polio vaccine causes cancer – a myth pushed by anti-vaccine religion”

    1. Funny, your link ls to four papers which, in their conclusions, clearly state that they are not conclusive and their assessment merely “suggest” an issue.

      That’s nothing. Is that all you got.

    1. I’ll explain it for you. The NIH (National Institutes of Health), unlike the FDA is UNAFFECTED by Corporate Bigwigs. So they have no allegiences, except to the truth.

    2. Let me help you….

      CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that there may be an…………….further investigations are clearly justified.

      It says that they have no conclusive evidence and further research was needed. That research was done and we are all OK. Looks pretty clear to me.

  1. Near the end, the article makes this claim: “A review of cancers thought to be most associated with SV40 found no evidence to support causality.”

    This statement is hyperlinked and leads to an abstract that includes the following statements, which not only do not support this claim, they appear to directly contradict it:

    “Simian virus 40 (SV40) has been detected in human tumors in over 40 different laboratories. Many of these reports linked SV40 to human mesotheliomas. The Vaccine Safety Committee of the Institute of Medicine (IOM), National Academy of Sciences, USA, recently reviewed the evidence associating polio vaccines and/or SV40 with human tumors. The IOM conclusions about polio vaccines and human cancer were: (1) ‘the evidence is inadequate to accept OR REJECT [emphasis added] a causal relation between SV40-containing polio vaccines and cancer’… (2) ‘the biological evidence is of MODERATE STRENGTH [emphasis added] that SV40 exposure from the polio vaccines is related to SV40 infection in humans’.

    “…Concerning SV40, the IOM concluded that (1) ‘the evidence is STRONG [emphasis added] that SV40 is a transforming virus; (2) the evidence is of MODERATE STRENGTH [emphasis added] that SV40 exposure could lead to cancer in humans under natural conditions’ (IOM, 2002). Similar conclusions were reached at an International consensus meeting on SV40 and human tumors held at the University of Chicago in 2001. …three independent scientific panels have all agreed that there is COMPELLING EVIDENCE [emphasis added] that SV40 is present in some human cancers and that SV40 could contribute to the pathogenesis of some of them…”

    By what sort of technicality does “moderate strength” evidence and “compelling evidence” become “no evidence”?

    1. I agree, the author shows a lack of understanding in how scientific results are presented. It is almost always impossible to find a definitive causative link. Instead, we often rate the strength of the possibility that there is causation. As with any cancer, some people that are exposed get cancer and others that have the same or even more exposure do not (e.g., smoking). Viruses have been linked to several cancers, particualrly lymphomas and leukemias. No one thinks this was intentional, it happened at a time when we didn’t have a way to screen the cells used to make the vaccine. Unfortunately, there are a lot of people that want everyone to believe vaccines are infallible. The probable truth is that it saved a lot of people from dying or being paralized with polio, but some percentage of people (likely small) got infected with SV40 and many years later developed certain types of cancer.

      1. “…but some percentage of people (likely small) got infected with SV40 and many years later developed certain types of cancer.”


        It freely propagates in the human populations.

        ps. There are no control groups.

  2. I completely agree with @Solfeggio:disqus This “anti-vaccine” crowd that you speak of and Naturopathic doctor that “probably eschews” information, are the very people that believe in educating themselves to make the wisest and safest decisions for their children and families. And rightfully so. We are of this mindset now a days that if you question a “government” representative, a scientist, or doctor that your out of line and one of those “wack jobs”.

    First of all, your resources for the information you presented on the SV-40 infected Polio vaccines are all .gov websites. Frankly that makes me very skeptical right off the bat. Most of those studies are funded by vaccine companies and are extremely biased. I mean what would happen if it were true and what would be the governments responsibility. Do you think they want to risk having that happen?

    Secondly, when you say none of these claims are based in Science, do you mean like how they said for 30 years there was no SCIENTIFIC proof that smoking caused cancer? Of course, after millions of people died from lung cancer and smoking caused diseases, they finally decided to change the message and admit that smoking actually causes cancer.

    Scientifically the drug Lipitor lowers cholesterol, but it can also cause dementia and other devastating diseases of the brain. Although something might scientifically cure one thing, it doesn’t mean it is safe, and cannot cause another thing. Unfortunately, money and power clouds the judgement of many of the people claiming these drugs and vaccinations are safe when in actuality they don’t know the long term danger. It is no coincidence that cancer is rising dramatically, along with Alzheimers, Parkinson’s, MS, and Autism.
    It is the very people you make fun of that are concerned about these things because they choose not to turn a blind eye and just say yes sir and yes ma’m.

    1. you do realize that all the idiots who claimed that smoking was “safe” were all paid off by the tobacco companies. Just as those few so-called “scientists” who discount the huge amount of Climate Change evidence are paid off by the koch bros.

      vaccines don’t generate profits. It takes decades of work to develop each one. If doctors really wanted to make money they would let everyone get sick.

      The one in a million possible ‘vaccine harmed’ case is unfortunate but it’s hardly a reason to allow thousands of children get sick and possible die. Vaccines increase the odds of survival. Considering that I was born right in the middle of a polio outbreak, a few years before that vaccine was officially available, I’m lucky my mother was INTELLIGENT enough to take me to the doctor as soon as the vaccine was out. I was spare THAT horror.

      1. I do realize the tobacco companies were payed off, and that is in fact the very point I was making. I was comparing the ignorance of those who claimed smoking was “safe”to the situation at hand with the pharmaceutical companies that develop vaccines. The very studies that are done to prove vaccine’s safety are often biased and funded by the vaccine companies. To quote the very respected Robert Sears, MD (who is pro vaccine BTW), in his book entitled ‘The Vaccine Book, Making the Right decision for your child’, “The primary drawback to most of this research is that virtually all of it is funded by the vaccine manufacturers or researchers who receive funding from them or by various governments (British, Danish, and U.S.) that would be held liable if mercury was found to be a problem. That creates an inherent and unavoidable bias in this research.” In this quote he was referring to the bias that has clouded a lot of the research done surrounding the dangers of Mercury in vaccinations, but this very problem remains true with many of the other studies surrounding vaccines.

        Here is further proof of the bias of current research. Since you probably didn’t catch US Congressman Bill Posey’s (also Pro vaccine) speech on the floor of the US House of Representatives, You can catch it here at this link. He was quoting CDC whistle blower Dr. Bill Thompson who said that they (CDC) destroyed documents in order to conceal their own studies findings. Don’t take my word for it. Watch here: http://www.c-span.org/video/?327309-1/us-house-morning-hour&live= FORWARD TO: 1:02:25

        If you are naive enough to believe that their isn’t bias and corrupt politics going on, or that there isn’t a profit being made with vaccines, I feel very sorry for you. If you would like to do more research on the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Report System and how grossly under reported they are, begin Here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2255353/

        I do believe that vaccines have served a purpose over the years. That being said, I don’t believe that we should mindlessly be giving them at the age and in the amount that we currently are. According to the CDC’s normal vaccine schedule we are giving 49 doses of 14 vaccines by the time the child is 6 years of age (http://www.nvic.org/Downloads/49-Doses-PosterB.aspx). A child at the ages of newborn and 2-3 years old has not even had a chance to develop an immune system, and to bombard their system with foreign chemicals and partial or live viruses, is not backed by Science. It is not ethical and it is not safe!

        1. There’s actual EVIDENCE that proves those supporting the tobacco co. and climate deniers are lying. AND that they have been paid off by corporate scumbags. There’s no evidence that scientists working on vaccines for decades are living some kind of “high life” or that they aren’t doing real, honest science.

          why delaying vaccines in babies in not such a swell idea:


          The bottom line for a parent is to find a real, qualified doctor and ask them all these questions. I suggest finding a doctor way before you try to have kids. If you can’t have a serious discussion with such a doctor, find another one. Keep looking. And I don’t mean find someone who just agrees with your wacko conspiracy theories. I mean one who will be brutally honest with you about the facts.

          Only people with healthy immune systems should get vaccines. You can only know and understand your child’s state if you are working with a qualified, professional doctor.
          Being a parent is not for the sloppy

        2. Wait what? A 2-3 year doesn’t have a developed immune system?


          That’s rich. Do you know a child encounters billions of antigens every fucking day? Based on your ignorance, that child wouldn’t make it to 1 hour old.

          Really. Go get an education. You’re embarrassing yourself.

          1. Yep you heard me! A newborn, up until toddler, does not have a fully (emphasis on the FULLY, and I should have made this clear in my statement above so that you could understand.) developed immune system. Newborns rely on their mother’s (through breast milk) for immune support and the ability to fight off bacteria and viruses.

            BUT then I would imagine you are one of those people who would argue the importance of breast feeding in relation to the development of a healthy and fully functioning immune system.

            “The adaptive immune system is functional at birth, but it has not gained the experience necessary for optimal memory responses. Although this formation of memory occurs throughout life, the most rapid gain in immunologic experience is between birth and three years of age. Each infectious exposure leads to training of the cells so that a response to a second exposure to the same infection is more rapid and greater in magnitude.(IDF Patient & Family Handbook for Primary Immunodeficiency Diseases FIFTH EDITION Copyright 2013 by Immune Deficiency Foundation, USA)

            I have an education. Clearly yours hasn’t taught you to think for yourself.

          2. I remember the day my son was born, even though he was born 2 months premature, he was VERY alert looking around the room, almost as if to say, “Wow, where am I”. Since my wife was a bit out of it, they gave me some papers to sign for him to get his Hepatitis Vaccine. I told the nurse, no I don’t agree with giving him the Hepatitis Vaccine this early in his life, he’s a Premie. We’ll wait thank you. She insisted, “It’s Hospital Policy”. So I asked her, “Why”. … “Oh, to protect him against Hepatitis”. So I probed. “Isn’t hepatitis a sexually transmitted disease?”, “Well yes, for when he’s older” she said, to which I stated, “Don’t vaccines only last around 7 to 8 years?… I don’t think he’ll be Sexually active when he’s 8” … No Thanks! A couple of hours later, I went home, took a shower and returned 3 hours later. They scrambled to get my wife to sign the papers (she says she doesn’t even remember signing anything) so they could give him the shots before I returned. By the time I had returned he was in ICU from a bad reaction to the Vaccine. Later we found out he’s HIGHLY allergic to eggs, the medium that the vaccine was grown in. The alertness that I saw in him, didn’t return until he was around 3 years old, but it was too late, he had already developed Autism, and today at 11 is STILL non-verbal. But I know, I know. The fact that Autism rates have EXPLODED from 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 63 during the time that they both lowered the age kids get these vaccines from 2 years old, to the day they’re born while at the same time doubling the number of vaccines. That’s just all a CRAZY coinkydink … I know. It has NOTHING to do with it.

            1. Thanks for your anecdotal life story containing no relevant scientific data. It would be more beneficial if you noted that the method of diagnosis for ‘autism’ has broadened so dramatically under the ‘ASD’ umbrella, that it includes ADD/ADHD and related attention deficit disorders which were never even diagnosed in the 80s. The diagnosis rates are around 1 in 150 (not 1 in 63)… for the entire autism spectrum. This is up from 1 in 2000 (not 1 in 10,000) in the 1980s… when the only autism related diagnosis were made with severely autistic children. So no, the rates have really not changed at all. Please educate yourself or simply do not post on the internet instead of making rubbish up in your mind to justify your point of view on vaccines.

            2. I’m friends with the woman who is in charge of the Broward County Special Needs program. She told me when they first started the program 35 years ago, they had a total of 25 “Special Needs” kids. Today that number is over 5000. So while the Special Needs Population in the school has gone up 20 fold, The population in Broward has gone up 4 fold during the same period. While she said that the majority are in fact Autism, they don’t delineate between who is diagnosed with what, so I’m afraid your theory just doesn’t hold water. I have no idea how old you are, maybe your an old fool or just a young snot nosed kid, but I’m almost 50 and when I was in school I NEVER saw anyone with Autism. Ever. I was extremely active in school BTW, being voted Class President once in Middle School and twice in High School. My son was the first person I ever met who had Autism or anything like it. He’s 11 now, can only talk via his iPad and sometimes acts like a 3 year old. He still wears Diapers and can rarely walk more than a couple of miles before needing me to carry him. As for educating myself, I collect medical journals especially those from the 17, 18 & 1900’s. I also taught myself Latin so I can read the medical journals from the Roman Era. People these days think the doctors of old were fools, but I can tell you that they were extremely brilliant people, many of whom kept meticulous records of how patients reacted to their medications, almost all of which were based in Herbology and Natural Medicines like Iodine. I’ve probably read more books in my life than the average person reads in 10 lifetimes. Also, it’s true that In 1983 the DSM did not recognize PDD-NOS or Asperger’s syndrome, and
              the criteria for autistic disorder were much more restrictive. Personally, I don’t agree with adding Asperger’s Syndrome to Autism, I think it’s a completely different disease. (Which is why the rate was 1 in 10,000 back then) but even after the definition was expanded in 1989, the rates were still only about 1 in 2500 during the 90’s and as they kept adding more and more vaccines to the linup of these kids, the rates kept going higher and higher. That 1 in 150 rate, hasn’t been true since 2002. According to the CDC the rate is 1 in 68 http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/data.html

            3. More anecdotes drawn from your personal experiences.

              Ok so the current incidence rate is around 1 in 68, not 1 in 150. But you again mention 1 in 10,000, it was actually 5 times more prevalent than that in the early 80s, or around 1 in 2000 as I mentioned.

              You blame immunisations… how about we look at the average ages of new parents/mothers over time? The average age of a new mother reached 30 for the first time just last year.. in the early 1900s it was closer to 20.

              Or how about we look at how prevalent fertility/IVF treatments are now…

              Or what about all the recreational drugs people take now vs then?

              Or the food we eat….

              There are far too many aspects of modern life that have changed over time. Jumping to conclusions in a test environment with so many variables that also apply is foolish.

              This is why the doctors from the 17/18/1900s you seem to revere were in fact not brilliant.

            4. You act as if all these immunizations are a product of rational scientific debate, yet they CLEARLY are not. A newborn baby these days gets a Hepatitis B Vaccine the day they are born. What inspired this when there were only 25 in cases of Newborns in the U.S. with the disease? The primary reason that the CDC recommended hepatitis B vaccination for
              all newborns in the United States in 1991 is because public health
              officials and doctors could not persuade adults in high risk groups
              (primarily IV drug abusers and persons with multiple sexual partners) to
              get the vaccine.
              So in other words, because they couldn’t get the dope fiends and the whores to get the vaccine, they decided to give it to Babies. POLITICAL reasons, not scientific. The vaccine had never even been tested on babies before the mandate!

            5. No, you never saw a kid with autism when you were a kid b/c they were locked away.

            6. You led the witness, that is the nurse, to say that Hep B is an STD. In point of fact, it’s that and so much more! It was also YOU, not the nurse, who said vaccines only last 7-8 years. That is untrue. Hep B gives long-term, at least 20 years, immunity. Nor is there any egg protein in Hep B vaccine. A two -month preemie would likely be in the NICU for being preemie. I’m sorry your child has autism, but it had nothing to do with that Hep B vaccine. You’re right about that.

            7. While it’s true that the newer ones are not grown in Egg Solutions, the same wasn’t true 11 years ago. Also, While it was generally believed that the Hep B Vaccine lasted 8 to 10 years (at the time he was given the shot which is why the nurse didn’t dispute what I said), they now know that it can actually lasts up to 15 years. Again, why give the kids the Hep B vaccine at birth, when they don’t need it until they’re around 15 and up.. right around the time that the Hep B wears off? I’ll tell you why, it was a political payoff to the drug companies by the Politicians. It has ZERO medical basis.

            8. You don’t know what you’re talking about. Hep B was never grown in egg culture. The old stuff was plasma (blood) derived. Production of that vaccine was discontinued in 1990. In 1986, the newer recombinant DNA vaccine was developed. It is not grown in eggs, either.

              The nurse didn’t dispute you because she didn’t want to get in an argument with you when she knew you wouldn’t be convinced. Hepatitis B, the disease is so much more than an STD, as I said previously. Hep B virus is 50-100X more infectious than the AIDS virus. Any blood exposure can transmit Hep B, e.g. bites, dental work (which is why dental workers all get Hep B vaccine), sharing toothbrushes and razors, etc.

              Your article references the old Hep B vaccine, and it says this: “The authors concluded that hepatitis B vaccination protects strongly against infection for at least 15 years. . . . Loss of anti-HBs does not necessarily mean loss of immunity, as the immunologic memory induced by the HBV vaccine persists even as anti-HBs decline. Further follow-up is therefore needed to determine if and when booster vaccinations are necessary in the general population. ” That was in 2005. Ten years later, no boosters are recommended.

        3. Problem is Sarah, is that these Drug Companies have the biggest advertising budget, the biggest budget the pay off the politicians, the biggest budget to donate to the “right” schools … all of which means that their viewpoint is the only one that matters. Do people here REALLY think any viewpoint other than what these companies want us to hear will ever be heard on 20/20 or on USA Today? It will NEVER happen! I was reading an article the other day on USA Today about Dr. Burzinsky, and they had a very nice very fancy timeline. They start off with the line,
          “USA TODAY investigation finds experts questioning
          why Houston doctor is allowed to continue to offer his alternative
          cancer treatment with antineoplastons.” and it goes downhill from there, calling him a Quack. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/11/15/stanislaw-burzynski-cancer-controversy/2994561/
          They go on to say that he’s never proven his therapies, yet they ignore an FDA-supervised study of treatments for lethal childhood brainstem gliomas that goes on to show that with Chemo and Radiation, only 1 of 107 patients lived, vs utilizing Dr. Burzinsky’s non toxic antineoplastons treatment, 11 of 40 patients or 27.5% were cured! http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/06/11/burzynski-the-movie.aspx
          USA Today didn’t know this? Come on! They knew EXACTLY what they were doing, they were doing a hit job sponsored by the drug companies that have the most to lose from his antineoplastons hitting the mainstream… They don’t want to lose their meal ticket. Cancer is a TRILLION Dollar industry in the U.S.A Alone. Those here think they will do nothing to protect that? They’re kidding themselves and want to drag the rest of us down.

          1. USA Today isn’t going to take self-serving lies and propaganda from k00ksites like Merde-ola and Burzinsky’s PR people at face value or as fact. No legitimate journalist is. That is why all the alt-med stories end up on conspiracy k00ksites such as Gnatural Gnus, Merde-ola, InfoWarts, David Icke, Ague of Autizmz, VacTroof, etc.

            What they want to see are the results of Dr. Urine’s clinical trials showing safety and efficacy of his idiocy. It seems Dr. Burr can’t seem to come up with them.

            1. What does your link to a Reuters story about Pfizer’s business performance have to do with Dr. Urine?
              Are you illiterate?

              Has Dr. Urine ever completed a single clinical trial for his magic anti-neo-snakeoil? If so, where is it listed? Has he ever produced any evidence, other than his say-so, that his magic has the least effect on cancer?
              Hint – The answer is – “No.”

            2. sorry referred to the wrong article. OK, you want “Peer Reviewed Studies”. There are quite a few, but let’s go over something first. Horse Urine is used for many women’s Hormone medications, so it’s already an established medical precedent. Also, If you check the statistics, pontine glioma, which is a tumor located in the pons, is pretty much fatal. It is uncommon for a child with a
              tumor in this location to live longer than 12 to 14 months after
              According to a peer reviewed study of “Dr. Urine’s” Antineoplastons, 6% of the patients survived over 15 years! Keep in mind that 100% of patients on standard chemo during the same period died.

              Another study shows the progression of children with Primary Brain Tumors, with 107, utilizing conventional, FDA Approved treatments. None made it to 1 year. Of the 61 enrolled in Burzinsky’s treatements, 25% made it past 10 years

              I could offer dozens more that he’s done over the past 2 decades, but I’m tired of spoon feeding you. I’m sure you can read all on your own.

      2. Truth is most infectious disease was already on it’s way out WAY before any of these vaccines were introduced. Why? First Doctor’s started telling moms to give their kids Cod Liver Oil. Back then it was made full of Probiotics and Vitamin A and that stuff supercharged the Immune system (only company that still makes it that way is “Green Pastures”. Next, State Run FDA’s (we didn’t have a federal one back then) Started getting on the ball and shutting down dirty farms, where all the disease was coming from. Cows had to be cleaned with Iodine before milking. Inspectors started coming in and making sure everything was clean. Dirty food was taken off the market. As you can see by the following chart, Vaccine Manufacturer’s claims that “they” saved us is a load of BS. http://www.trackingvaccinations.com/allfiles/usa-decline-graph.jpg

        1. oh, THAT old nonsense.
          it’s always “amazing” that diseases are “on their way out” JUST at the same time vaccines are available.

          pssst: vaccines are not developed all that the same time, ya know

          ..keep telling yourself your little stories.

          1. I take it you didn’t bother to take a look at the chart that I attached. Funny, that chart is straight off the Governments own data, but I know how this works, you ignore science when it conflicts with your “beliefs”. Truth doesn’t care if you accept it, it simply is. Measles is a perfect example. In 1900, we were at around 15 death’s per 100,000, by 1963 when the Measles vaccine was introduced, it was down to LESS than 1 per 300,000. In the past 10 years there’s been about 100 measles deaths… All but 1 from the Vaccine, so today the Vaccine is more deadly than the disease. It’s people like you that make it so easy for the establishment to cover things up like Laetrile. You’re so willing to accept any pseudo science they offer up in the name of progress.

            1. I only care about facts and you have none.

              here’s a fact I know about you: you would be perfectly happy to see people die and have life-long injuries from preventable diseases.

              shame on you

            2. http://bit.ly/1S4uE4U “The study most cited by the CDC disproving the autism /mercury link was
              conducted by Danish researcher Poul Thorsen, now a fugitive under
              indictment in the U.S. for fraud. He spent millions of CDC money on an
              extravagant lifestyle for himself while giving the CDC the answers they
              Then again, what do you expect from an industry where the Chairman of the Board of one of their biggest was a convicted Nazi Murderer. http://bit.ly/1Lvk4lg

            3. You consider the Baltimore Jewish Times a “Gossip Site”? OK, how about the Huffington Post… http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-f-kennedy-jr/central-figure-in-cdc-vac_b_494303.html
              Or how about the Federal Office of the Inspector General for Health & Human Services … Is HE Legit enough for you? http://oig.hhs.gov/fraud/fugitives/profiles.asp

              The bigger picture is that these are the kinds of people that we’re trusting to do the research. Liars and Thieves!

            4. Iv’e seen some fairly “iffy” articles on huff-post, so, yeah, sometimes it does the gossip thing.

              Anyway, the point is that if it’s not a peer reviewed study with FACTS and EVIDENCE I don’t give a rat’s ass about it.

              the idea that every researcher and scientist is some EVIL (pinky finger against the corner of one’s mouth) dictator insisting on blackmailing the Earth for “MILLIONS” is as ridiculous as it gets

              you and your wacko conspiracy theories are very funny – until it encourages some ignorant moron to allow a child to die or be injured from a PREVENTABLE disease.

              shame on you

            5. The cancer drugs that would have had to complete with Laetrille are made by the SAME COMPANIES, so you’re saying that, “With Vaccines they’re honest, but with Cancer Medication’s they’re dishonest????”

            6. vaccines basically don’t generate profit. I won’t bother to link to articles because everyone can do a simple search on their own.

              vaccines are effective. That’s a fact.

              one of the “least effective” vaccines is the shingles vaccines which appears to be about 50%

              As someone who has gotten shingles last year that’s STILL better than nothing.

              Plus, people are working on a more effective shingles vaccine. Yeah science.

              if you have a problem with Laetrille then contact the company dealing with that drug. But a drug is not a vaccine. It’s very telling that you can’t seem to understand the difference.

              vaccines only help a person’s immune system do what comes naturally. It’s not voodoo.

            7. ROFLOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You’ve GOT to be fucking kidding me! Other than Banks, Big Pharma is the most profitable business in the world! http://www.forbes.com/sites/liyanchen/2014/05/13/best-of-the-biggest-how-profitable-are-the-worlds-largest-companies/
              They AVERAGE 19%. Hell, Pfizer’s Net margin in 2014 was a mind blowing 42% Profit Margin!
              The main reason their profits are so high? Vaccine sales are up 44% http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/28/us-pfizer-results-idUSKCN0Q216O20150728#MFBiEfdsYFo0B8C0.97

              Also, you’re missing the point I was making about Laetrille. Laetrille was already illegal in the U.S. in the 1970’s when the Government asked Sloan Kettering to test it. However, they ALREADY KNEW the answer they wanted. When Sloan Kettering first had some very positive news about Laetrille, they all went to Washington to meet with the FDA, and while in that meeting, the FDA called in some of the top guys from the big three Pharmaceutical Companies. The SAME companies that produce these vaccines. Those guys wanted this squashed because they saw it as a threat to their business. You can’t patent Laetrille because it’s an extract of Apricot seeds, and in the Pharma business, if it’s not patentable, they’re simply not interested. Why? You can only have a monopoly on Patented products, and with a Monopoly you can charge whatever price you want… Hence the highest profitability of almost any business in the world.

            8. stop boring me with this obsession over Laetrille

              I don’t care. THIS site is about vaccines

            9. It’s the same people! The same people who LIED while people DIED just so they could make a buck. But now I’m supposed to believe everything they say about Vaccines? So Cecilia, if your husband is stealing money from your bank account and cheating on you, but then asks you to sign a contract on blind faith, do you trust him? Or do you tell him, “You lying sack of shit, I wouldn’t trust you as far as I can throw you”. Same here Cecilia, Same here!

            10. why would you assume I’d be stupid enough have a shared bank account?

              And why do I have to assume the researchers working decades on vaccines are at the same time working on some stupid drug?

              or that they have anything to do with the business end of a company?

            11. Laetrile is such a 1970s scam.
              What next, Pyramid Power? That was popular at the same time laetrile was all the rage in the National Enquirer.

            12. If Second Opinion: Laetrile At Sloan-Kettering wasn’t true, don’t you think a year after this documentary came out, Sloan-Kettering wouldn’t be suing anyone involved in the production of this thing? Wow you really do believe EVERYTHING these multi-Billion dollar corporations tell you to believe don’t you?

              Or are you just like the then head of the FDA when asked, “why wouldn’t you want this, we could save so many lives?” His response was “Why would anyone buy a new $75,000.00 anti cancer drug, when you could buy Laetrile in Mexico for 75 cents?” More concerned about jobs and money than the people’s lives that it costs.

            13. A RubeTube video? Really? A RubeTube video?
              I don’t think any rational adult cares what some knucklehead says on a RubeTube video. Ya’ know, RubeTube has vids declaring that the Lizard People are real and merely shapeshifting to hide themselves, Sasquatch is alive and well and vacationing in Cabo, aliens are anal probing every 5th granny, etc.

              See if you can produce a citation for that FDA director response.
              Bet you can’t.

              This is what the alt-med loons have got to – reanimation of 1970s scams. Pathetic. Try to be a little more original.

            14. I showed you the TRAILER you dumb ass! The Actual Documentary is for sale on Amazon, http://www.amazon.com/Second-Opinion-Laetrile-At-Sloan-Kettering/dp/B00IITS8PO … let me say the next part slowly so you understand.


              In the USA, if you SLANDER Someone, “which means you tell a lie about them”, you can sue them. If that someone that you’re suing is making ALL KINDS OF MONEY off the lie, you can get the courts to redirect those profits to YOU…. Problem is they HAVE TO BE LYING!!! Obviously they’re not because Sloan-Kettering hasn’t taken ANY legal action.

            15. And I take it you didn’t even read your own chart, Juan.
              To save others the effort of looking, I’ll just point out that it was about disease mortality, and not incidence.
              Simply put, it has nothing to do with whether diseases were “on their way out”, but how that with advances in medical practice and treatments, someone was less likely to die from them than they were in the past.
              As for your “perfect example” of measles, the data all show that kids were continuing to catch it at the rates they always have (95% by the age of 15). So it was not “on it’s way out” at all – only when the vaccine was introduced was it brought down to the point where it was no longer endemic in the USA.

            16. There have been no documented deaths from measles vaccine, and only one documented case, EVER, of transmission by way of a recently vaccinated person to another, e.g. the notorious “shedding” that AVs get all worked up about.

            17. Of course it is, just look at who Juan references – Barbara Low Fisher, anti-vaccine liar extraordinaire.

              Next he’ll begin telling us how dangerous and deadly Thimerosal is and back it with cites to Robert Kennedy, Jr. – demented anti-vaccinationist with an unhealthy fixation on the mercury in Thimerosal containing pediatric vaccines (which were eliminated 14 years ago.)

          1. What are you talking about… Chart shows mortality “Per 100,000” What else is relevant? Exactly HOW is that misleading? Most people don’t care if their kid gets sick from a disease, that happens all the time. What they care about is if their kid dies from the disease.

            1. You must be new to this “discussion,” or at least pretending to be new with your new sock account.

              Hey, I wonder if we could determine effectiveness of a vaccine by looking at, oh I don’t know, number of CASES OF THE ACTUAL DISEASE?

    2. Cancer isn’t rising dramatically. Scientists discovered evidence that smoking increased the risk of cancer in the late 1940s, and began a push to have smoking regulated. Yes, there are some “scientists” who deny climate change, smoking causes cancer, evolution, HIV causes AIDS, etc. Some are outside of their areas of expertise. Some are paid off by the denier side. Or some just have a core dogma that can’t be changed.

      Your comments are without any validity. But you’re free to express your ignorance in any way you want here.

      1. “Paid Off by the Denier Side” … So let me get this straight. Cancer drugs sell for Tens of THOUSANDS per treatment, sometimes Millions per treatment, while products like Latrille sells for 75 cents a dose, but you think it’s the all natural crowd with the cash and funding to fund the “Denier Side” ??? ROFLOL!!!!!

  3. Hi, thanks for compiling an article on this issue.

    However, I think your points would be more effective if you adopted a less biased tone. Just speaking of rhetoric alone now, but when you say things flippantly like the “anti-vaccination “cult” thinks viruses grow “magically, and so forth, it makes a reader like myself wary of the information you are trying to put out.

    I think this debate is an important one to have, and when Ibread tone like that in almost every paragraph, if not sentence, it reminds me too much of those pseudo-skeptics who are vigilantly using ad hominems to stop a healthy discourse.

    In my experience, the few people I know that you might lump into a cult are actually way more educated on the subject than your average citizen who delegates his reason to external Authority. And if you were read the opposing view to this dogma, you would find it not so tainted by the constant appeal to cast opposition in the most derogatory tone. You would find information presented. It is fine to contest information, and to cite sources, but your overall “voice” in this piece appears dubious, if only by its rhetoric or fallacious reasoning.

    It is a tragedy how language is shattered by politics and agendas so now the very word “skeptic”, something I was proud to consider myself one time, is no longer a word one can trust in its meaning. I used to read Skeptic magazine, listen to Skeptoid podcasts, until I found a curious pattern in these supposed skeptics. One would think they might be skeptical about much, but oddly enough, they tend to be skeptical only along a predictable path.

    I do not imagine Skeptic or a Michael Shermer would ever use their skeptical minds to focus on the controversial issues of our time and curiously display a contrarian view. A skeptics
    View? Even on those controversial issues that will soon be explicit empirical history soon. In much the way “conspiracy theorist” is a wesponized term meant to marginalize those who disagree with the Official Truth, so too has “skeptic” been debased.

    I presume you mean well, but your tone implies the opposite. In the end, I only hope that you continue to research and think for yourself, and with intellectual honesty. I think a problem of our era is a mistrust of information generally, and for good reason. Without invoking all the reasons why, I think it is healthy for a vigorous debate so that Truth can be revealed.

    And if you are writing from the heart, and if you are so enchanted by our collective social consensus, And you believe these words you have written, at least make your piece “seem” like it isn’t blatant propaganda or incredibly slanted. That way, you will at least be effective in making your claims. But perhaps, your tone and derogatory opinion of your dissidents, cannot stand well without the framing you devise. Perhaps your vexation is the proof readers need that they should be wary in reading your claims and take that as an invitation to consult those you would be your detractors.

    But sincerely, thanks for taking the time to write. To present your viewpoint. It is always good to write. It is even better a thing to write earnestly. I wish you good luck.

    1. You do make a point that I have taken under consideration many times. Here’s the thing–there are dozens of “skeptic” websites that are civil. And that’s fine, they serve a point.

      My desire is to be controversial, harsh, and mocking. I don’t desire to vanilla. I desire to make people think, even if I have to be harsh.

      The facts are, I only talk about topics where the evidence is overwhelmingly on my side. There’s no argument that evolution is a fact. That climate change is a fact. That GMOs are safe is a fact. That vaccines are relatively safe and very effective is a fact. These are supported by mountains of evidence.

      You are coming from the point of view that I express an opinion. Hell no. I loathe opinions. I express the best case that science provides, except without all of that nonsense nuance that science tends to use. Because I’m not talking about what may or may not cause Alzheimer’s diseases (we have no clue, so almost anything is an opinion). I’m talking about saving children’s lives with a measles vaccine.

      I speak with the voice that I enjoy–snarkiness. If you don’t like, I understand. But, inside of that snark is 100% evidence. That’s it.

      One more thing. I know a lot of people don’t write like me. But they either re-word my stuff to meet the audience of their blog. Or they link to here, sometimes with a warning. 🙂 I’m OK with that.

      Actually, one more thing. This blog is probably in the top 20-30 of “skeptic” blogs out there. Out of hundreds of thousands. I’m OK with that.

      In summary, I hope you continue to read this blog. But understand that you’re not talking to a vanilla writer who thinks that diplomacy is useful. I’ll let others with that skill set do what they do best.

          1. No shit! It’s exhausting. I’m very glad you’re here shredding them as needed! In this case, being a dick is a good thing! I do what I can, but it isn’t easy responding to the same tired bs and anti-vax talking points over and over.

      1. Except that you conveniently ignore things like the fact that the 60’s Polio Vaccine DID in fact cause a ton of childhood brain tumors and cancer in the 70’s. There’s not even a reason for me to provide a link to the Governments Data on this because it’s already been provided and you conveniently ignore it and act as if the person providing the information is an idiot. As for the Vaccine companies not living the high life??? What?? They make BILLIONS. Their CEO’s make MILLIONS. Hell, the Chairman of Bayer up until 1960 something was a Convicted Nazi War Criminal… Same for BASF, 2 of the largest Chemical and Pharmaceutical companies in the world! But oh, they’re so trustworthy right? Please!!

  4. Even on this article refuting the asinine “vaccine = cancer” conspiracy theories, there are commenters ignorant of statistics or scientific method that are sure it is true. Willful ignorance is just as dangerous as any disease.

  5. I hope this virus is not passed down to children. I remember being so happy not to have to get a shot so we drank it. Poisoned as a child

  6. I had this oral vaccine as well as my sister. We both have brain tumors in our mid 50s. Mine atypical so not good. I find that a little coincidental

      1. I had this vaccine as well as my sister. We both had brain tumors in mid 50s. I would call that proof it was contaminated. Mine is grade 2. so cancer. I would say this is not a myth but true fact. Gov needs to be held responsible for not doing job

        1. Sorry for your and your sister’s health problems. But out of all the things people experience in their lives, including genetic predisposition, what makes you think that your tumors are a result of SV40 infection?

          1. Of course government studies will say that. They are the ones that spread the virus. They covered it up for years and when they discovered the virus caused tumors and cancer they put the scientist that proved it out of business and kept using the remainder of the vaccine. We both had the vaccine and my neurosurgeon said there was a relation. It also explained why so many cancers of first responders of 9/11. The virus needs something to set it of to trigger cancer. There was asbestos everywhere so that was the trigger.

            1. Nothing personal, but there is not a single thing that you just said that is at all supported or supportable. There has been no connection or credible evidence that the children who received SV40 contaminated vaccines had an increased incidence of cancer as unvaccinated children. No plausible evidence suggests that SV40 has ever caused cancer in humans.

              From a respected scientific blogger: A meta review of published research from the 1960s to 2004 showed no evidence that supported any causal link between SV40 and any cancer. A review of cancers thought to be most associated with SV40 found no evidence to support causality.

              Understand that there is no conspiracy, and that if a scientist outside the US, or one who wanted to make a name for themselves could find a link between SV40 and cancer, they would publish that paper in a heartbeat, and in a top-tier journal.

            2. Sorry just going by what a neurosurgeon said that was writing a book on it. You must work for the government.

            3. Ahhh, a neurosurgeon writing a book. Now who could that be? I assume he’s going to be giving that book away for free, right? I mean, we wouldn’t want any accusations of conflict of interest, would we?

              Ok, so besides some quack neurosurgeon writing a book, can you point me to any recent studies showing any connection between SV40 and cancer?

            4. Hell no, the government wouldn’t fund it. Conventional chemo and radiation doesn’t work if you have sv40 virus. That’s why the first responders in 9/11 died from cancer. After they came in contact with asbestos they got cancer and most were found to also have sv40 virus. The virus alone doesn’t cause cancer but when you come in contact with another carcinogen it make it impossible to treat.

            5. Bellasue has some interesting tales to tell.. check the comments.
              I like the one where she explains how Obama miscalculated his chemtrail mix as he was combatting global warming ..now all those little metal bits are dropping on us.

            6. There was a kid at St Judes. When he died he tested positive for sv40. They wouldn’t let the parents try alternative treatments and the chemo and radiation won’t be effective if you have sv40. So he died and they ran every test available. What was crazy was neither parent had sv40 m3eaning he had to have gotten it from a recent vaccine.

            7. St. Jude*
              So SV40 is heritable and “they” wouldn’t let the parents try alternatives. Hmmm, not even a decent Lifetime movie script.

            8. What’s your point?
              From http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(03)12157-5/fulltext:

              Our results indicate that SV40 is not involved in lymphoma in patients from southern Europe. One explanation of this discrepancy concerns differences in the geographical origin of tumour samples—ie, Italy and Spain in this study and southwestern USA in other reports.2, 3 Geographic variability cannot be ascribed to differences in the contamination of poliovaccines, since contaminated lots were distributed in the USA and southern Europe over a similar period. A second hypothesis concerns differences in the SV40 detection techniques. Conceivably, extensive screening for 3′ -regions of large T antigen and sequencing of all positive amplimers might have rendered our approach more selective for SV40 infection. Since our assays allow detection of 10 copies of SV40 genome in 200000 human genome equivalents, we can rule out clonal SV40 infection of the tumour population.1 Moreover, since our assay sensitivity is 2 logs higher than required for detecting other lymphoma-related viruses, and since SV40-induced lymphomagenesis in rodents entails the presence of SV40 in all tumour cells,3, 4 viral loads inferior to our sensitivity threshold are unlikely to be of pathogenetic relevance.

            9. And what of this? “”Simian virus 40 is present in most United States human mesotheliomas, but it is rarely present in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.” Chest 116, No. 6 Suppl 1999, pp. 470S-473S.
              Rizzo, P; Carbone, M; Fisher, S G; Matker, C; Swinnen, L J ; Powers, A ; Di Resta, I; Alkan, S; Pass, H I; Fisher, R IFrom Abstract:Simian virus 40 (SV40) causes mesotheliomas, osteosarcomas, ependymomas, choroid plexus tumors, and lymphomas in hamsters. In humans, SV40 has been detected in tumors of the first four types. Using the polymerase chain reaction (PCR), we tested 29 non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas (intermediate and high”


            10. “there is a link” is one of the sentences invented not to admit something without a study that will be only approved when the medical maffia wants.
              The SAME expression could cause FDA to close your research as it could be used to approve poison, if the money goes to the proper pockets.

            11. Proof? Something to back up your ridiculous claims?

              And by the way, the ability to replicate an experiment is kind of a key thing in this science stuff. So, if nobody is able to replicate the results, they’re generally dismissed.

            12. National Institutes of Health:
              Our analysis indicates increased rates of ependymomas (37%), osteogenic
              sarcomas (26%), other bone tumors (34%) and mesothelioma (90%) among
              those in the exposed as compared to the unexposed birth cohort

      2. Lame ass archive? lol.
        If we delete all the fake paid medical articles you’d also only have a “lame ass” archive, which you’d use lammierly to prove points.

      3. https://youtu.be/nGXzLuxwqQs If you think they ONLY did this with laetrile, I have a bridge to sell you.
        These guys have the money and the power to tell you exactly what they want you to hear and nothing else. All the CDC would have to do is a study of those kids that didn’t get vaccines vs those who did, then they would know if the vaccines are causing Autism. Truth is they DON’T want to know, so they don’t do the study.

    1. From that same archive:
      Some evidence suggests that receipt of SV40-contaminated polio vaccine may increase risk of cancer. However, the majority of studies done in the U.S. and Europe which compare persons who received SV40-contaminated polio vaccine with those who did not have shown no causal relationship between receipt of SV40-contaminated polio vaccine and cancer.

      1. That just means “they were not able to replicate it” which doesn’t mean the genius putting it there doesn’t know a way to activate it when needed.
        Also, the point is not even if it works, but the level of impurity considering the aseptic and controlled lab where those things cow from.
        The contamination could EASILY mean that many other studies made in that laboratory are not to trust, since the results could just be contamination.

        AND that lab is the one the US department trusted for such a delicate task (or the accidental shipping of live virus recently?)

        1. With all due respect, wtf are you talking about? Are you mad? Are you implying that SV40 contamination of vaccines pre-1963 was some deliberate government conspiracy, and they have a secret way to “activate” the viruses and have been waiting 50+ years to do it???

          I just want to make sure I have that right before I really reply.

    2. And this comment will never be answered because the ones posting this article are also paid.
      Maybe when the web archive is deleted as well this comment will be replied to, with something like “there is no proof of that, that link is dead”.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.