Author Topic: Covid-19 and the Art of Brainwashing – Part I, Randy Engel (Read 678 times)

Nadir · « **on:** October 01, 2021, 05:04:31 PM »

Covid-19 and the Art of Brainwashing – Part I
Guest Contributor September 29, 2021 No Comments

By: Randy Engel
Part I: The Dangers of Government Falsehoods: Background on Government Propaganda Machines
Introduction
The danger of government lies, and the implications of official deception of whole peoples and nations, could not be more relevant than it is today when our God given natural rights and our Constitutional freedoms are systematically being ground into the dust under the guise of protecting the “public health” from Covid-19.
In his 1928 classic Propaganda, Sigmund Freud’s nephew, Edward L. Bernays ^[1] explains approvingly of how governments, powerful corporations, and foundations are capable of manipulating and regimenting the public mind in all areas of life including war, politics, business, education, and medical science.
According to Professor Mark Crispin Miller,^[2] who wrote a new introduction to the Bernays masterpiece in 2004:

Quote

“Bernays (1891-1995) pioneered the scientific techniques of shaping and manipulating public opinion, which is called ‘engineering of consent.’ During World War I, he was an integral part – along with Walter Lippmann – of the U.S. Committee on Public Information (CPI), a powerful propaganda machine that advertised and sold the war to the American people as one that would ‘Make the World Safe for Democracy.’ The marketing strategies for all future wars would be based on the CPI model.”^[3]

The Existence of an Invisible Government
Writing in the 1920s, Bernays, an Austrian-American Jєω, “the father of public relations,” gleefully acknowledged the reality of “invisible governors,” who rule the world and bring organization out of chaos to society:^[4]

Quote

The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.
We are governed, our minds molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. …
Our invisible governors are, in many cases, unaware of the identity of their fellow members in the inner cabinet.
They govern us by their qualities of natural leadership. Their ability to supply needed ideas, and by their key position in the social structure. …^[5]

Of course, the most important factor Bernays initially leaves out is MONEY. After all, today’s contenders for domination in the nєω ωσrℓ∂ σr∂єr – like Bill Gates or George Soros or Mark Zuckerberg – would be just another Tom, Dick, or Harry without their billions.
Later, however, Bernays does admit that “the invisible government tends to be concentrated in the hands of the few because of the expense of manipulating the social machinery which controls the opinions and habits of the masses.”^[6]
WWI Created New Propaganda Techniques
Bernays claims that:

Quote

It was, of course, the astounding success of propaganda during the war that opened the eyes of the intelligent few in all departments of life to the possibilities of regimenting the public mind. The American government and numerous patriotic agencies developed a technique which, to most persons accustomed to bidding for public acceptance, was new. They not only appealed to the individual by means of every approach – visual, graphic, and auditory – to support the national endeavor, but they also secured the cooperation of the key men in every group – persons whose mere word carried authority to hundreds or thousands or hundreds of thousands of followers. They thus automatically gained the support of fraternal, religious, commercial, patriotic, social, and local groups whose members took their opinions from their accustomed leaders and spokesmen, or from the periodical publications which they were accustomed to read and believe. At the same time, the manipulators of patriotic opinion made use of the mental clichés and the emotional habits of the public to produce mass reactions against the alleged atrocities, the terror, and the tyranny of the enemy. IT WAS ONLY NATURAL, AFTER THE WAR ENDED, THAT INTELLIGENT PERSONS SHOULD ASK THEMSELVES WHETHER IT WAS POSSIBLE TO APPLY A SIMILAR TECHNIQUE TO THE PROBLEMS OF PEACE (emphasis added).^[7]

Interestingly, Bernays states that the new dictatorship is not limited to government matters but embraces dictators in all fields of life including that of fashion. For example, he notes that Paris fashion leaders set the mode of the short skirt [worn by bob-haired flappers] for which, twenty years ago, any woman would simply be arrested and thrown into jail by the New York City police, and the entire women’s clothing industry, capitalized at hundreds of millions of dollars, must be reorganized to conform to their dictum.^[8]

Nadir · « **Reply #1 on:** October 01, 2021, 05:07:20 PM »

In his chapter, “The Psychology of Public Relations,” Bernays asks, “If we understand the mechanism and motives of the group mind, is it not possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without their knowing about it?”^[9]
Within certain limits and up to a certain point, Bernays answers in the affirmative.
Citing the earlier studies of Wilfred Trotter and Gustave Le Bon on group psychology, which established that the “collective mind” differs from the “individual mind” or “consciousness,” Bernays affirms that “the group mind does not think in the strict sense of the word. In place of thoughts, it has impulses, habits, and emotions. In making up its mind, its first impulse is usually to follow the example of a trusted leader.”^[10]
“But when the example of the leader is not at hand and the herd must think for itself, it does so by means of clichés, pat words, or images which stand for a whole group of ideas and experiences,” says Bernays.^[11] “By playing upon an old cliché, or manipulating a new one, the propagandist can sometimes swing a whole mass of group emotions,” he says, adding that, “Usually, the individual mind will succuмb to the will of the crowd.”^[12]
Before Bernays moves on to explain how propaganda functions in specific departments of group activity including business, politics, education, social work, and the media, he states:

Quote

I have tried to explain the place of propaganda in modern American life and something of the methods by which it operates – to tell the why, the what, the who and the how of the invisible government which dictates our thoughts, directs our feelings, and controls our actions.

A Different View of Government Propaganda
In war, Truth is the first casualty^[13]
In 1928, the same year Bernays’ Propaganda was published, pacifist British MP, Arthur Ponsonby, issued his anti-propaganda classic Falsehood in War Time – Containing An Assortment of Lies Circulated Throughout The Nations During the Great War.^[14] The modest-size book, available as a free PDF online, highlights major lies that were inflicted upon the hapless wartime civilian populations of the Allied Forces (Russia, France, Britain, and the United States) against the Central Powers (Germany, Austria-Hungary, Turkey, and Bulgaria) during the First World War.
Ponsonby acknowledges in his introduction that falsehood is a recognized and extremely useful weapon in warfare, and every country used it quite deliberately including the Allied Forces and the Central Powers 1) to deceive its own people, 2) to attract neutrals 3) and to mislead the enemy. ^[15]
According to Ponsonby:

Quote

The ignorant and innocent masses in each country are unaware at the time that they are being misled, and when it is all over, only here and there are the falsehoods discovered and exposed. As it is all past history, and the desired effect has been produced by the stories and statements, no one troubles to investigate the facts and establish the truth.^[16]

Ponsonby, however, does take the trouble to enumerate a number of British, French, American, and other Allied and Central Powers official wartime falsehoods including a number of atrocity fabrications like:

The Belgian Baby Without Hands – That German soldiers were cutting off the hands of babies and children (and eating the parts), and impaling them on bayonets; and violating Belgium nuns, were popular themes of Allied propaganda.^[17] When the reports were questioned by British members of Parliament, (and in the case of the violation of Catholic nuns investigated by the Vatican), no evidence was ever produced to support the charges against “the Huns.”
The Crucifixion of a Canadian (or an American or a young naked girl) sometimes on a barn door – These reports were backed up by fellow soldiers even though there were no eyewitnesses. In the case of the Canadian officer said to be crucified near the Belgium town of Ypres, U.S. Army Commander General Peyton C. March later denied the story. However, on April 12, 1919, the U.S. magazine, Nation, published a letter from Royal West Kent Private E. Loader, who declared he had witnessed the crucifixion of the Canadian soldier. The letter was subsequently repudiated by Captain E. N. Bennett who wrote to the Nation, informing its editors that there was no such private on the rolls of the Royal West Kents, and that the 2^nd Battalion was in India during the entire war.^[18]
The Corpse Factory – On April 16, 1917, the British Times reported that Germany was chemically treating the dead bodies of its soldiers (and enemy soldiers) to 1) distill glycerin for the manufacture of munitions, 2) to provide fat for lubricating oils 3) and was grinding human bones into powder for mixing with pigs’ food and making fertilizer.^[19]

To make sure the lie gained world-wide traction, the Crown and Parliament, both of which were well aware that the propaganda reports were ludicrous and absolutely false, remained silent, even when informed that the “Corpse Factories” were, in fact, factories for the disposal of dead carcasses of horses and other animals found on the battlefield.^[20]
It was not until December of 1925 that the truth of the matter was finally admitted by Sir Austen Chamberlain KG^[21], the half-brother of Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, who put the final nail in the propaganda coffin when he bluntly stated, “there was never any foundation for it [the rumour].”^[22]
The Sinking of the Lusitania
Ponsonby’s report on the tragic sinking of the RMS Lusitania, a British ocean liner on route from New York City to Liverpool, England on May7, 1915, is especially instructive since the event provided “the necessary lever at last to bring America into the war.”^[23] Americans were told that a German U-boat had torpedoed a defenseless passenger ship flying the American flag and bearing only civilian passengers and an ordinary cargo.
Unfortunately, the “ordinary cargo,” consisted of thousands of cases of small arms ammunition, shrapnel shells, and brass percussion fuses weighing about 173 tons. The ship, which had been secretly financed by the British Admiralty and fitted for military service including gun mounts installed on her decks,^[24] sank in a record 18 minutes killing 1,198 passengers and crew including 124 Americans.
Had the Lusitania only carried “ordinary cargo,” it is estimated that time and circuмstances would have permitted many of these victims to have survived and reach the Irish shore at Kinsale, instead of being blown to bits by the second ammunition explosion.^[25]
However, the British and American propaganda Lusitania campaign that followed ensured that all the blame fell upon Germany, and on April 6, 1917, the United States declared war on Germany.
The reader will note that when Progressivist U.S. Senator Robert “Fighting Bob” La Follette (1906-1925) stated that the Lusitania carried munitions, he was threatened with expulsion from the U.S. Senate. The threat was withdrawn when Mr. Dudley Field Malone, collector at the port of NYC, confirmed that the ship carried a large munition cargo consigned to the British Government, saying he would testify in favor of Senator La Follette.^[26] However, the Wilson administration refused to permit the publication of the facts.^[27]
U.S. Government Opens Propaganda Office
As noted earlier, the U.S. Committee on Public Information (CPI) patterned itself after the British Crewe House propaganda machine headed by Alfred C.W. Harmsworth, later Alfred Lord Northcliffe, a British journalist and legendary newspaper magnate.^[28]
The CPI, also known as the Creel Committee, named after its chairman, journalist George Creel, was the United States Government’s first official Office of Wartime Propaganda Machine.
“The frenzy with which the whole propaganda was conducted in America surpassed anything we experienced here [Britain],” Ponsonby says.^[29]
Some atrocity fabrications, like the Germans giving poisoned candy to children to eat and live hand-grenades to play with, were so outrageous that General John Pershing, General of the Armies, who served as Commander of the American Expeditionary Forces on the Western Front during the Great War, issued a cablegram that instructed the U.S. War Department to publicly disavow these stories which had no basis in fact.^[30]
Similarly, Admiral William S. Sims, Commander of all U.S. Naval Forces in Europe, repudiated hideous U.S. news stories and movies promoted by the CPI against German submarine commanders. In a statement published by the New York Tribune in April 1923, Sims stated that “There exists no authentic report of cruelties ever having been committed by the commander or the crew of a German submarine. The Press reports about cruelties were only meant for propaganda purposes.”^[31]
WWI War Ends, But Government Propaganda Machine Continues
Unfortunately, as Bernays points out, why should Government kill a good thing for itself?
And Ponsonby prophetically states, “… of course, we know that such clever propagandists are equally clever in dealing with us after the event as in dealing with the enemy at the time.”^[32]
The CPI’s successor in WWII was the Office of War Information (OWI) promulgated by Executive Order 9182 under the Franklin D. Roosevelt Administration on June 13, 1942. The various propaganda departments of the OWI included the Foreign Information Service, Bureau of Intelligence, Psychological Warfare Branch, Book and Magazine Bureau, Extensive Surveys Division, Bureau of Public Inquiries, Bureau of Motion Pictures, and the Propaganda Intelligence Section, etc.[33]
The OWI was officially terminated on September 15, 1945, but was succeeded through the years till the present day by a litany of federal propaganda departments including the United States Information Service, the Office of Strategic Services, and the Central Intelligence Agency.^[34]
Ponsonby’s final observations that:

Quote

War is fought in this fog of falsehood, a great deal of it undiscovered and accepted as truth. The fog arises from fear and is fed by panic (bold added). Any attempt to doubt or deny even the most fantastic story has to be condemned at once as unpatriotic, if not traitorous. This allows a free field for the rapid spread of lies.^[35]
In wartime, failure to lie is negligence, the doubting of a lie a misdemeanor, the declaration of the truth a crime (bold added).^[36]
In future wars we have now to look forward to a new and far more efficient instrument of propaganda – the Government control of broadcasting. Whereas, therefore, in the past we have used the word “broadcast” symbolically as meaning the efforts of the Press and individual reporters, in the future, we must use the word literally, since falsehood can now be circulated UNIVERSALLY, SCIENTIFICALLY, AND AUTHORITATIVELY (caps and bold added).^[37]
There are some who object to war because of immorality, there are some who shrink from the arbitrament of arms because of its increased cruelty and barbarity; there are a growing number who protest this method, at the outset known to be unsuccessful, of attempting to settle international disputes because of its imbecility and futility. But there is not a living soul in any country who does not deeply resent having his passions roused, his indignation inflamed, his patriotism exploited, and his highest ideals desecrated by CONCEALMENT, SUBTERFUGE, FRAUD, FALSEHOOD, TRICKERY, AND DELIBERATE LYING ON THE PART OF THOSE IN WHOM HE IS TAUGHT TO REPOSE CONFIDENCE AND TO WHOM HE IS ENJOINED TO PAY RESPECT (caps and bold added).^[38]

Nadir · « **Reply #2 on:** October 01, 2021, 05:09:16 PM »

The Current Battle for Our Humanity
I don’t think the reader can find a better description of the current Government debacle surrounding the Coronavirus (Covid-19) “pandemic” than Ponsonby’s warning made almost 100 years ago.
The nature of the current war in America and the world, being orchestrated by the reigning Technological and Pharmaceutical Oligarchies of the so-called nєω ωσrℓ∂ σr∂єr is much different than previous wars we have fought. And the implications of failing to defeat the enemy are much greater because we are fighting the ultimate battle for God, family, and nation.
Indeed, what is at stake is what it means to be HUMAN!
(To be Continued)

^[1] Edward Bernays, Propaganda,  Horace Liveright Publishing,  NY., 1928. Original copy available online at https://archive.org/details/BernaysPropaganda/mode/2up.
^[2] Mark Crispin Miller is Professor of Media, Culture and Communication at New York University. See https://markcrispinmiller.com. The 2004 edition of Propaganda with Miller’s introduction, which this writer used,  is available at Amazon.com[/iurl]. As Miller notes, “Propaganda mainly tells us that Bernays’ true métier [job or occupation] was to help giant players with their various sales and image problems.” [/font][/size][/color]
^[3] Bernays, Propaganda,  commentary by Miller on back cover
^[4] Ibid., p. 17.
^[5] Ibid., p. 37.
^[6] Ibid., p. 63.
^[7] Ibid., p. 54-55.
^[8] Ibid., p..61.
^[9] Ibid., p. 71.
^[10] Ibid., p. 73.
^[11] Ibid., p. 74.
^[12] Ibid.
^[13] See In war, truth is the first casualty. – Quote (yourdictionary.com).
^[14] PDF available at Falsehood In Wartime (World War 1) : Arthur Ponsonby : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive. This article uses the 1928 E.P. Dutton & Co., Inc., New York edition.
^[15] Ibid., p.13
^[16] Ibid.
^[17] Ibid., pp. 78-82
^[18] Ibid., pp. 91-93.
^[19] Ibid., pp. 102-113.
^[20] Ibid., p. 105.
^[21] The oldest British Order of Chivalry
^[22] Ibid., pp.111-112.
^[23] Ibid., pp. 121-125.
^[24] See Remember the Lusitania: 3 pieces of World War I propaganda | National Museum of American History.
^[25] Ponsonby, pp. 102-113.
^[26] Ibid., pp. 122-123.
^[27] Ibid., p. 122.
^[28] See Secrets of Crewe House – Wikisource, the free online library.
^[29] Ponsonby, p. 183
^[30] Ibid., p.183
^[31] Ibid., p. 185
^[32] Ibid., p.17.
^[33] See United States Office of War Information – Wikipedia.
^[34] Ibid.
^[35] Ponsonby, p.25-26.
^[36] Ibid., p.27.
^[37] Ibid., pp. 27-28.
^[38] Ibid., p. 29.

Cera · « **Reply #3 on:** October 01, 2021, 06:35:43 PM »

Great posts Nadir. Thanks!

Viva Cristo Rey · « **Reply #4 on:** October 03, 2021, 11:12:21 AM »

Thank you, Nadir. My husband and I were listening to audio about how they are brainwashing the youth via music and movies.

Emile · « **Reply #5 on:** October 27, 2021, 02:10:16 PM »

Covid-19 and the Art of Brainwashing – Part II
Guest Contributor October 4, 2021 No Comments

By: Randy Engel
The Salk Vaccine and Covid-19 – Lessons Never Learned:
The Early Race to Conquer Polio
Introduction
There’s a short 16^th century adage – “Live and Learn.” But if the current Covid-19 deadly vaccine fiasco is any indication of what Americans have come to know about the dangers of government and private foundation control of medicine, it is clear they either never learned anything from the “Salk Polio Vaccine Cover-Up,” or, what is perhaps more likely, they never even heard of this tragic tale of medical science and vaccine politics gone awry.
In Part I of this series, I discussed the use of official lies and government propaganda techniques as described by Edward Bernays and Arthur Ponsonby following the end of the World War I.
In Parts II and III of this study, I apply Bernays’ and Ponsonby’s findings on the role of propaganda, aka “public relations,” to the molding and controlling of the public mind, to the specific case of the Salk polio vaccine cover-up in the 1950s.
This retroactive study is largely based on Dr. Herbert Ratner’s classic Child and Family trilogy: “An Untold Vaccine Story,” published in 1980.^[1] I trust it will provide a valuable context with which to reevaluate the use and abuse of Covid-19 experimental “vaccines” that are currently flooding the United States and the world, especially those directed at infants and children.
But first, let us begin with some important background material on poliomyelitis, also known as infantile paralysis, and the history of the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis, better known as the National Foundation/March of Dimes.
The Historic Trajectory  of Poliomyelitis
From the time of the Egyptian pharaohs until the turn of the 20^th century, the crippling disease of poliomyelitis (infantile paralysis) has haunted humanity, albeit as a low incidence disease, and  never on the scale of either the Bubonic Plague of the mid-14^th century or the Spanish Flu (1918-1920).
In the 19^th century, with the worldwide improvement of public sanitation, sewage disposal, the availability of clean water supplies in large urban areas, and a renewed interest in public health, the incidence of “polio” declined.^[2] In addition, there has always been a high degree of acquired immunity in humans to the poliovirus, and there are many natural factors that prevent the occurrence of the actual disease (as opposed to the infection).
At the turn of the 20^th century, there were sporadic episodes of polio breakouts in Europe and the United States, which led to a new and expanded interest in the field of virology.
Creation of the Georgia Warm Springs Foundation
The Manhattan-based Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research – an arm of the Rockefeller medical monopoly and drug syndicate^[3] – established its virology department in 1922, and quickly became a major player in U.S. polio politics.

But, by far, the most important national powerhouse in virology and polio vaccine development was the Georgia Warm Springs Foundation established by Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1927. Roosevelt was stricken with polio six years earlier, one year after running for Vice President on the Democratic ticket.
With himself as President, his future law partner, attorney Basil “Doc” O’Connor  as Treasurer, and Louis Howe, Roosevelt’s political advisor as trustee of the Warm Springs Foundation, Roosevelt set his political ambitions aside for a short while and concentrated on finding treatments and a cure for the crippling disease. At the time, polio was not a major national health concern for American citizens, the U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) or the National Institute of Health (NIH).
However, the fortunes of the Warm Springs Foundation changed dramatically when Roosevelt entered the White House in 1933. Overnight, the Foundation became “the President’s charity.” Now under the leadership of  “Doc” O’Connor, the President’s office, raw political patronage and the services of the United States Post Office were all  put at the service of the multi-million dollar Warm Springs Foundation, where “charitable contributions” and Democratic “payola” were progressively blurred.
The coast-to-coast Presidential Birthday Parties held on the 30^th of January every year (Roosevelt’s birthday) turned the nation’s health spotlight on polio and made the foundation (and the disease) a household name. Initially, funds from these elaborate balls were used to update and expand the Warm Springs’ polio treatment facilities and services, and to hire and train medical staff. Later, the Wall Street-dominated Board of Trustees created an independent President’s Birthday Ball Commission to distribute funding for research into the causes, treatment, and prevention of paralytic polio.^[4] The research director for the Commission was Dr. Paul de Kruif, a world leader in bacteriology, but not virology or immunology, formerly associated with the Rockefeller Institute.^[5]
The Deadly Brodie and Kolmer Vaccines
In 1935, the Warm Springs Birthday Ball Commission awarded two key grants in the field of polio vaccine research.
One grant of $65,000 went to support the experimental polio vaccine of  Dr. Maurice Brodie of New York University. Brodie’s work was sponsored by Dr. William Hallock Park, Director of the New York City Health Department Research Laboratories. Brodie had been lured to the United States from Canada by Dr. Paul de Kruif, Secretary of the Warm Springs Foundation, with the promise of financial aid to purchase hundreds of rhesus monkeys needed for Brodie’s research.
Brodie harvested the monkeys’ infected spinal cords in order to obtain a sufficient level of live virus to produce an inactivated vaccine. The virus was suspended in a  formalin solution  – a 31%  dilution of formaldehyde^[6] –  to kill the virus. Theoretically speaking, the resultant inactivated and benign virus that was directly injected into the bloodstream would induce antibodies and grant the patient a degree of immunity from polio.
Unfortunately, in field tests held during the summer of 1935, some 9,000 children received the Brodie vaccine before it was discovered that it was not only ineffective, it also produced severe allergic reactions. The USPHS  reported that at least one child died and three more were paralyzed with polio after receiving the Brodie vaccine.^[7]
John Kolmer, who began his polio research in 1932, was at the time one of the nation’s leading microbiologists. In the summer of 1934, he injected a vaccine that he had developed from a weakened [but not killed] poliovirus into 10,000 children in the U.S. and Canada.
Kolmer’s inadequately tested attenuated poliovirus vaccine was a  “witch’s brew” concocted with monkey nerve tissue and an assortment of chemicals and then refrigerated to attenuate the mixture. It killed six children and paralyzed ten.^[8]
At a meeting of the American Public Health Association held in November 1935 in St. Louis, with Kolmer and Brodie as speakers, a federal health official named James Leake attacked Brodie, and called Kolmer “a murderer.”^[9]
Both vaccines were immediately pulled from distribution; the careers of Brodie and Kolmer were in ruins; the reputations of both the Warm Springs Foundation and its President’s Ball Commission were harmed beyond repair; and the search for a “safe” and “effective” polio vaccine was set back for several decades.
Basil O’Connor Creates the NFIP
After the Brodie-Kolmer debacle, public support for the Warm Springs Foundation and the FDR’s President’s Ball Commission fell precipitously.
Basil O’Connor realized that it was time to divorce the foundation from overt Democratic politics and to establish a more independent and self-sustaining national “volunteer health organization.”
On September 23, 1937, President Roosevelt announced the creation of the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis (NFIP), and appointed O’Connor its first president. Its declared mission was to eradicate polio from the face of the earth.
However, while polio was the top priority for the NFIP, with the exception of sporadic geographical seasonal outbreaks which disappeared as quickly as they appeared, polio remained a low incidence disease in the U.S. By the 1950s, for every known case of paralytic polio there were 1000 cases of subclinical polio infection with a high degree of natural immunity among the general population.
And because it was a low incidence disease, measuring the benefits of a particular experimental polio vaccine was secondary to measuring the risk associated with that vaccine.
Nevertheless, such was the power of the NFIP fear-mongering propaganda machine, that no valid criticism of its research, programs, or policies ever seemed to dampen the American public’s enthusiasm, loyalty, and voluntary financial donations for the NFIP.
In 1954, the annual budget of the NFIP rose from $20 million in 1945 to $60 million, the equivalent of over $600 million today.
After all, a million-dollar charity, promoted by a President of the United States, didn’t have to go far to attract influential social and political window dressing of all kinds, including a bevy of Wall Street and corporate officials who sat on its Board of Directors.
It is perhaps one of those quirks of history that the new foundation became the most powerful voluntary health agency in the United States, and “Doc” O’Connor, a lawyer by profession, the most powerful man in American medicine.
Role of Public Relations on Public Health Policies

FDR with Basil O’Connor
Basil O’Connor understood, from the beginning, the importance of a large, well-funded public relations department. The NFIP’s continued financial success depended on funds generated by a steady stream of good publicity.
O’Connor recruited the best Madison Avenue advertising and public relations people money could buy. They in turn constantly sought to update and refine the NFIP’s public image, especially when unfavorable press, charges of misappropriation of funds, or scandal within the organization threatened that image.
As an adjunct to the foundation’s public relations department, O’Connor hired historians to record the charity’s activities, psychologists to plan their fund-raising activities, and statisticians to plot money curves.^[10]
Unfortunately, in the end, public relations became the be all and the end all of a successful program, even when it meant putting the lives and limbs of children at risk. Every failure was pawned off on the gullible and fearful public as a success – a charge that was amply demonstrated by the failure of the NFIP’s little known multi-million dollar gamma globulin-polio vaccine program that preceded the Salk Vaccine scandal by a decade.
The NFIP’s Monopoly on Polio Research
By the 1950s, the NFIP enjoyed a virtual monopoly on polio vaccine research. There was no competition from federal agencies whose priorities were cancer and heart disease. The USPHS and NIH appeared to let the foundation go its own way, if for no other reason than the NFIP appeared to be getting so little return on its polio research investments.^[11]
In terms of its medical research policies, the NFIP employed saturation support to the general field of virology together with the specialized field of polio research. There was hardly a top virologist in the nation who was not receiving some financial support, in the form of research grants, from the foundation. The nation’s top medical universities were so conditioned to receiving generous NFIP research grants and stipends for their faculty to engage in polio research and vaccine development that they now counted on them as part of their regular operating budgets.^[12]
The Hammon Pilot Program
Among the best known polio research centers in the U.S. was the Department of Epidemiology and Microbiology at the University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health, headed by Dr. William Hammon.^[13]
Hammon was a proponent of passive immunization using the blood fraction, gamma globulins (GG), to transfer specific antibodies to the virus on a temporary basis during the polio season. His primary objective was not to prevent polio infection, but to prevent the virus’s pathogenic effects on the nervous system, that is, the clinical disease. As it happens, he was also an outspoken critic of Dr. Jonas Salk’s “inactivated polio vaccine” – Salk being Hammon’s natural rival at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine.^[14]
In 1950, the NFIP’s Committee on Immunization, that included Salk and Sabin and the eminent Dr. John Franklin Enders,^[15] rejected Hammon’s proposal for a massive field trial of immune globulin with a placebo control on the basis that more animal and human data was needed before embarking on an “expensive, complicated, and potentially harmful  clinical trial.”^[16]
There was also another potential problem, one of public relations, a field in which the NFIP excelled like no other voluntary health association. The burning issue was whether or not Americans were ready to surrender their healthy children by the hundreds of thousands to test a polio vaccine that was, according to medical experts, untested and “potentially harmful?”^[17] To ensure that parents would indeed “volunteer” their children to this noble endeavor, the NFIP would need to develop a sophisticated marketing program to promote the Hammon experiment and to ward off any parental anxieties, which it would successfully do. Further, as Hammon would shortly discover much to his amazement, local doctors who would be expected to administer the experimental polio shot viewed their participation in the trials as a “professional duty and a form of public health activism” – an attitude that would prove disastrous in the years ahead.^[18]
NFIP Changes Its Mind
In any case, in July 1951, the tide turned in Hammon’s favor when researchers Dr. Dorothy Horstmann of Yale School of Medicine and Dr. David Bodian of Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine clinically verified that passively transferred antibodies protected against lethal poliovirus infections in monkeys. Bodian also confirmed that the GG monkey immunizations were effective against all three polio virus strains.^[19]
That year, a small scale pilot study to test Hammon’s GG vaccine on 5,000 children was approved and funded by the NFIP. The initial trial site was  Provo, Utah, and the surrounding area, which was experiencing a high number of polio cases in the summer of 1951. Within a three-day period, 5,758 children, ages 2 to 8, were inoculated at five locations with encouraging but not conclusive results.^[20]
Pressure on the NFIP to find a safe and effective vaccine had become almost unsurmountable when polio hit its peak in the U.S. in 1952 with almost 57,000 cases, 21,000 of them paralytic.^[21] For the NFIP it was Hammon or bust!
Following Hannon’s initial Provo trial, additional vaccine campaigns were held in Texas, Iowa, and Nebraska for a total of 54,772 official inoculations. The results showed a significant, albeit temporary, 80% reduction in the total number of paralytic poliomyelitis owing to the GG.^[22] Unannounced, was the fact that GG trial data had been seriously compromised by illicit, multiple shots to the same children (to improve the odds that the patient received the GG and not a placebo), and by local physicians who independently administered GG obtained from pharmaceutical houses to their young patients.
However, Hammon and his associates did acknowledge the multiple limitations of GG passive immunization on the nation’s potential pool of 46 million children and adolescents. First, the GG vaccine  was  very painful and gave only a short and limited immunity up to five weeks, thus annual reinjections were required. Secondly, the onset of polio outbreaks was unpredictable. And most importantly, the cost of GG was extremely high and its availability severely limited nationwide.^[23]
By May 1953, Hammon was forced to admit that “the circuмstances under which it [GG] is effective are definitely limited and not yet completely defined, and furthermore the agent is in short supply.” He argued strongly against the use of GG in any mass, communitywide application stating that it was a wasteful endeavor.^[24] In the end, the GG protocol was limited to institutional breakouts and summer camps.^[25]
Nevertheless, NFIP President Basil O’Connor followed the usual public relations script and hailed Hammon’s accomplishment as the greatest step forward in conquering the disease to date. In 1953, the NFIP invested $5.5 million in the Hammon GG project and was expected to spend $19 million the following year.^[26]
The latter investment was questioned, however, when a  NFIP panel of 17 polio experts assembled to review data on the effectiveness of the 1953 GG program. In a report published in early 1954, the panel concluded that the 1953  mass inoculation trials had failed to produce demonstrably beneficial results, aka, the GG vaccine was not effective.^[27] The USPHS and the United Nations աօʀʟd ɦɛaʟtɦ օʀɢaռiʐatɨօռ reached the same conclusion after studying the 1953 trials data^[28]
Thus after eating up millions of dollars in dimes of the NFIP, the most that could be said about the Hammon GG vaccine was that it did not kill anyone.
Unfortunately, the same could not be said of O’Connor’s next medical  misadventure – the Salk vaccine(s) – that was anxiously waiting in the wings of the NFPI while the NFIP’s public relations quietly put the Hammon GG vaccine out to pasture. In retrospect, the Salk vaccine turned out to be the ideal diversionary tactic the NFIP needed to take the public eye off the Hammon fiasco.
[To be continued…]

^[1] Part II of this series is based on a lengthy series of reports by Dr. Herbert Ratner (1907-1997) editor of Child and Family, and the Health Commissioner of Oak Park, Illinois for 25 years, on the development of the faulty and dangerous Salk vaccine(s). “The Salk Vaccine – An Untold Story,” was published in 1980. See Dr. Herbert Ratner, MD (whale.to); Polio Perspectives—–Edda West — 10/20/2001 (whale.to).
The complete references for the Ratner series are:
“An Untold Vaccine Story,” Child and Family, 1980, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 191-213.
“An Untold Vaccine Story,” Child and Family, 1980, Vol. 19, No. 4,  pp. 259-285.
“An Untold Vaccine Story,” Child and Family, 1980, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 50-75.
“AIDS and Polio Vaccines,” Child and Family, 1988, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp. 134-158.
^[2] See comments by Edda West concerning the increased  vulnerability of the upper classes to polio due to less opportunities for acquiring herd immunity enjoyed by the lower classes and to the rejection of breast -feeding by upper class women at Polio Perspectives—–Edda West — 10/20/2001 (whale.to).
^[3] See Eustace Mullins, Murder by Injection, 1988, National Council for Medical Research, Staunton, VA, 24401.
^[4] Randy Engel, The McHugh Chronicles, 1997, p. 42.
^[5] Paul A. Offit, M.D., The Cutter Incident, Yale University press, 2005, p.21.
^[6] Other sources indicate a dilution rate of only 10%.
^[7] Richard Carter, Break-through: The Saga of Jonas Salk, Trident Press, NY, 1966, p.23.
^[8] See Jane E. Smith, Patenting the Sun: Polio and the Salk Vaccine, Wm. Morrow and Co., NY, 1990, p.72.  Smith reported three cases of paralysis associated with the Kolmer vaccine, but the final figure was at least 10.
^[9] See The tragic story of a Canadian vaccine trailblazer – Macleans.ca.
^[10] Smith, p. 80.
^[11] Dr. Herbert Ratner, “The Present Status of the Polio Vaccines, 1960,” Part II, Child and Family, National Commission on Human Life, Reproduction, and Rhythm, Box 508, Oak Park, IL 60303, 1980, Vol. 19, No. 3., p. 250.
^[12] Ibid.
^[13] Dr. Charles R. Rinaldo, Jr., “Passive Immunization Against Poliomyelitis – The Hammon Gamma Globulin Field Trials, 1951-1953,” AJPH, May 2005 at https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2004.040790.
^[14] Rinaldo.
^[15] Ibid. In 1949, Enders, Thomas Huckle Weller, and Frederick Chapman Robbins reported successful in vitro culture of an animal virus—poliovirus. The three received the 1954 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine “for their discovery of the ability of poliomyelitis viruses to grow in cultures of various types of tissue.
^[16] Ibid.
^[17] Stephen E. Mawdsley, PhD. “The Gamma Globulin for Polio Clinical Trials: Victims of Marketing Success,” published by the Centre for the Social History of Health and Healthcare, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland and funded by the Wellcome Trust. Text available at Microsoft Word – SM Amended Main Docuмent CMAJ FINAL PRINT.doc (strath.ac.uk) .
^[18] Ibid.
^[19] Rinaldo.
^[20] Ibid.
^[21] Ibid.
^[22] Ibid.
^[23] Each lot of GG was obtained from the fractionation of a pool of at least 1000 units of blood plasma or serum, an expensive and time-consuming process. The largest supplier of GG was the Red Cross  which depended on voluntary donors.
^[24] Rinaldo.
^[25] Ibid.
^[26] Ibid.
^[27] Ibid.
^[28] Mawdsley.

Emile · « **Reply #6 on:** October 27, 2021, 02:15:00 PM »

Covid-19 and the Art of Brainwashing – Part III
Guest Contributor October 11, 2021 No Comments

Dr. Jonas Salk at work in the Virus Research Laboratory at the University of Pittsburgh Medical School, circa 1953.
By Randy Engel
The Origins of the Salk Vaccine Scandal
The National Foundation/March of Dimes Timetable for the Salk Vaccine(s)
As noted in Part II, Dr. Jonas Salk was only one of the many polio researchers funded by the NFIP, now better known as the National Foundation/March of Dimes (NF).
In 1948, the NF established the Virus Research Laboratory at the University of Pittsburgh and began funding Jonas Salk’s research on an “inactivated” or “killed” polio vaccine.^[1] It was also funding Dr. Albert Sabin’s work at the University of Cincinnati on a “live” or “attenuated” oral polio vaccine which was greatly favored by virologists at the time.^[2]
In 1949, Salk began his unpublicized research on the technical problems associated with a killed vaccine using formaldehyde as the killing agent. The following year he began tissue-culture production of the polio virus. By 1951, the NF was investing $200,000 a year to promote Salk’s research program.^[3]
Much of the initial laboratory investment of time and resources were devoted to polio virus typing. There were three serotypes of poliovirus – 1, 2, and 3. Type 1 causes about 85% of paralytic cases; type 2 represents only about 3% of paralytic cases; and type 3 causes about 12% of paralytic cases. Any effective polio vaccine needed to be “trivalent,” that is, effective against the three different strains.^[4]
Salk’s Various Polio Vaccine “Recipes”
Thanks to the research efforts of Dr. Paul Offit, author of The Cutter Incident (2005) we know today what was kept highly secret in Salk’s time, that is, the major ingredients that went into various Salk vaccine “recipes.”
According to Offit, in order to combat type 1, the primary cause of paralytic polio, Salk selected one of the most virulent and dangerous strains – the Mahoney strain – for its potential effectiveness. But this “benefit” was offset by the fact that his “killed vaccine,” using formaldehyde to inactivate the Mahoney virus, did contain small amounts of live particles of the deadly virus.^[5] The remaining weaker strains – MEF-1 strain for type 2 virus and the Saukett [Sarkett] strain for type 3 virus appeared to be easier to inactivate.^[6]
Although Salk touted that his polio vaccine as “one of the simplest biological preparations to make,”^[7] in fact, it turned out to be “one of the most complex biological preparations ever to be made.”^[8]
Starting in 1952, Salk was able to carry out quasi secret vaccine trials, including the use of the Mahony strain, on his first human guinea pigs – not himself or his children – but the children at the D.T. Watson Home for Crippled Children [Watson Institute] which was home to a number of young polio patients, and the Polk State School for the Mentally Retarded (established in 1897).^[9]
As reported by Offit, the vaccines administered at the Watson Home containing type I or type 3 did not produce any polio antibodies. Only the vaccine containing type 2 virus induced polio antibodies.^[10] In other words, this particular Salk vaccine recipe was most affective against the least dangerous polio virus.
Salk was more successful at the Polk State School where the retarded children were given a different vaccine containing mineral oil as an adjuvant that enhanced immune response. This particular recipe produced antibodies to all three types of polio virus.^[11]
On January 23, 1953, while continuing his testing in the Pittsburgh area, Salk revealed the preliminary data of his polio vaccine to a Round-table Conference of the NF held in Hershey, Pennsylvania.
During that same spring and fall of 1953, Salk continued testing in the Pittsburgh area among family groups and volunteers including himself and his own family members.
In the fall of 1953, O’Connor began NF negotiations with the drug manufacturers for the production of the Salk Vaccine for large scale trials despite strong opposition from Dr. Sabin, and Drs. John R. Paul and Joseph L. Melnick of Yale.^[12]And on February 1954, ignoring all warning signs, the NF committed $7.5 million to national trials of Salk Vaccine and $9 million in purchase guarantees to the vaccine manufacturers. This meant they had the financial risk taken out of vaccine research and development.
The pharmaceutical companies that were enticed to make the vaccine for the field trial were Parke-Davis, Detroit; Eli Lilly, Indianapolis; Wyeth Laboratories, Marietta, PA; Pitman-Moore, Zionville, IN; and Cutter Laboratories, Berkeley.^[13]
1954 Field Test Used a Modified Salk Recipe
As reported by Offit, the modified Salk vaccine used in the 1954 field testing no longer contained mineral oil, and it was made using monkey kidney [not testicular] cells. Also, an anti-bacteria adjuvant, Merthiolate was added, which Offit does not mention in his book, but which was to play a critical role in the suppression of the effectiveness of Salk’s 1954 vaccine – making it “safer” but less “potent” and “effective.”
Other changes by Salk included a more diluted formaldehyde, and an increase in the “cooking” temperature used for the inactivation process. It was at about this point that Salk publicly enunciated his “straight-line theory” on deactivation which, according to Offit “defined the relationship between the quality of infectious virus and the length of time that the virus was treated with formaldehyde.”^[14] According to Salk’s theory, “for all practical purposes, treatment for nine days would completely inactivate the polio virus.”^[15]
But what if Salk’s “straight-line theory,” did not hold up especially in the case of virulent strains of the polio virus like the Mahony virus? What “if instead of a straight-line, the line curved back toward the baseline” indicating that the live virus was not entirely inactivated and continued to be present in the vaccine?
Unfortunately, this turned out to be the case when fellow researchers tried to duplicate Salk’s inactivation procedures to the letter. They discovered that the polio virus had not been thoroughly inactivated but remained in sufficient amounts to paralyze laboratory monkeys.
Among the researchers that challenged Salk’s inactivation measures using formaldehyde were Dr. Albert Milzer^[16] of the Michael Reese Hospital in Chicago, and virologist Sven Gard of the Karolinska Institute in Sweden. The latter indicated that his studies showed that inactivation by formaldehyde treatment for necessarily longer periods of cooking time – up to 12 weeks – did not run the course of a [straight-line] reaction but started to curve, meaning the vaccine was capable of also paralyzing human beings. ^[17] But the warnings for extreme caution were ignored by Salk and the NF.
Salk consistently responded to his critics by alleging that researchers like Milzer and Gard failed to follow his exactmethods of inactivation:

Quote

… we can state flatly that the vaccine as prepared by us is devoid of any infective virus and that no human being has been, or ever will, in any field trials, be inoculated with any material that has the remotest suspicion attached to it.^[18]

Early Manufacturing Problems With the 1954 Vaccine
As noted earlier, it was the NF, and not the U.S. government, that was in charge of performing the first large scale field testing of the continuously modified Salk vaccine.
Amazingly, even before the start of 1954 trials, the NF was already well aware that two of the more experienced manufacturers of the Salk’s “killed vaccine,” Parke-Davis and Eli Lilly, were having difficulty in completely inactivating the dangerous live viruses using Salk’s protocol.^[19]
As docuмented by Dr. Ratner:

Quote

Dr. Salk here [above statement on safety of his vaccine] and through the whole subsequent course of the Salk vaccine dispute keeps insisting on the infallible ability of his laboratory to assure a vaccine devoid of any infective virus. This infallibility is belied by the 1954 testing of field trial Salk vaccine for the presence of live virus. Dr. Salk’s laboratory was one of three laboratories testing for live virus in the vaccine. In five instances (Lilly lot 301, Parke Davis lots 501 and 504, and Wyeth lots 207 and 208), Salk’s laboratory failed to find live virus either by monkey test or tissue culture test though virus was found with these tests by the manufacturer and/or NIH. This confirms other evidence that Dr. Salk did not in fact know whether the vaccine prepared by him – so called ‘properly prepared vaccine’ – contained live virus or not. Because of this, his many publications … claiming persistence of antibodies stimulated by his ‘killed’ vaccine, are invalid.^[20]

The unfortunate and immediate whistle blower, at this critical juncture, was William Workman, Director of the Laboratory of Biologics Control.

On March 22, 1954, just weeks before the field trial was to begin, Workman sent Jonas Salk a letter recommending the field test be postponed until the safety of the vaccine could be insured.^[21] Panic ensued at the NF and an emergency meeting was called between NF President O’Connor and Dr. Thomas Rivers, chief scientific advisor to the NF, and high level NIH officials including Dr. James Shannon, Assistant Director  of the NIH and Dr. Victor Haas, Workman’s boss, who was head of the National Microbiological Institute.^[22]
Although both Shannon and Haas opposed the passing of the vaccine that the latter considered “dangerous,” after heated negotiations, the will of the NF prevailed over the safety of the nation’s children. The only saving proviso that the NIH mandated was that “companies had to make eleven consecutive lots of vaccine that passed safety tests before their manufacturing methods could be accepted with confidence.”^[23] As it turned out, only Parke-Davis and Eli Lilly eventually met this requirement in the production of the 1954 field trial vaccine. Later, both Shannon and Haas would come to regret their decision to cave into the demands of the NF.
And so it was that on April 26, 1954, all warnings were put aside by the USPHS and the NIH under pressure from the NF, and the single field trial testing of the Salk vaccine began. The cost to the NF was $7.5 million. The inoculation program introduced in the U.S., Canada, and Finland was “the largest, most comprehensive test of a medical procedure ever performed.”^[24] The actual figure of candidates who received the 1954 Salk vaccine was 420,000.^[25]
More Red Flags Raised at the NIH
That very same summer, sample batches of the Salk Vaccine were making their way swimmingly through various U.S. medical research government check points in anticipation of the upcoming 1955 nation-wide campaign, the vaccine once again ran into a serious blockade at the NIH’s Laboratory of Biologics Control (LBC).
Veteran virologist and epidemiologist, Dr. Bernice Eddy was assigned the advanced task of evaluating batches of the Salk vaccine being manufactured by Parke-Davis and Eli Lilly and three other pharmaceutical houses including the Cutter Laboratories, who had already been approved by the NF.
Disaster struck when Eddy discovered that one [eventually three] of the Cutter batches contained the deadly Mahony virus which had resulted in 18 test monkeys being paralyzed not immunized. She initially thought the problem lay in the manufacturing process rather than in the Salk protocol itself.
Eddy quickly passed the information on to her immediate superior, William Workman, head of the LBC, who was already well aware of the problem. Workman, in turn, informed Dr. William H. Sebrell, Jr., Director of the NIH, of Eddy’s findings.^[26] Whoever else was informed of Eddy’s discovery is unknown, but we know for certain it was not anyone outside the NF/USPHS/NIH/Salk loop including public health officials and the general public.
In the meantime, the LBC staff continued their intensive investigation through November of 1954.^[27]
As for the fate of the whistle blower and recently widowed and mother of three, Bernice Eddy, instead of being promoted for her critical discovery, was demoted, and returned to her previous job researching flu viruses. But she would later inadvertently sock it to the NF again, when in 1958-1960, she discovered the Simian Virus 40 (SV) found in monkeys and present in the “inactivated” Salk vaccine, was shown to induce cancerous tumors when injected into hamsters.^[28]
Fraudulent 1954 Field Trial Evaluation
The evaluation of the 1954 field trial was carried out by Salk’s mentor, Dr. Thomas Francis, at the University of Michigan Polio Evaluation Center, Ann Arbor.
Unfortunately, the entire effort as recorded in the summary and final reports was fraudulent due to a clever redefinition and reclassification of the disease (indeed a new disease was created), and the manipulation and altering of statistics, as detailed by Dr. Bernard G. Greenberg at a panel exposition on the status of polio vaccines that took place at the 120^thannual meeting of the Illinois state Medical Society in Chicago on May 26, 1960.^[29]
The “Francis Report” Upholds the Salk Vaccine
On April 12, 1955, at an audience at the University of Michigan’s Rackham Auditorium packed with hundreds of national and international reporters and TV cameramen, government officials, and National Foundation/March of Dimes officers including Basil O’Connor, Dr. Thomas Francis presented The Francis Report – An Evaluation of the 1954 Field Trial of Poliomyelitis Vaccine [Salk Vaccine] Summary Report. The key word in the title is “summary.” The report contained no hard data. That would not be forthcoming for another two years.^[30]
Nevertheless, Francis pontificated that the Salk Vaccine field trial of April 1954, which had been shrouded in secrecy, was a great success, and that the vaccine was “safe, effective, and potent.” Francis informed the media and NF guests that the Salk vaccine was 60 to 70 percent effective in preventing infection with type 1 poliovirus, the most prevalent strain, and at least 90 percent effective against types 2 and 3.^[31]
However, much to Francis’ shock, when Salk took the microphone to address the audience, he took exception to Francis’ statement on the effectiveness of his vaccine. Salk publicly challenged Francis’ findings and declared that any failures encountered in the 1954 trial were not his fault. He said the failures were caused by Merthiolate, a mercury-based antiseptic that had been added to the batches of vaccine, against Salk’s wishes, at the express orders of the Laboratory of Biologics Control.”^[32]
Thus, we have Salk admitting that Merthiolate destroyed the antigen-production of the type 1 virus, the type that causes most paralytic polio. In hindsight, however, the Merthiolate may have saved the lives of many children by destroying the deadly Mahoney virus and making the vaccine “safe,” but ineffective, in preventing paralytic polio.
By way of compensation, Salk went on to explain that he had reformulated a new and improved (Merthiolate-free) vaccine that might well be 100 percent effective.^[33]
Unfortunately, in the frenzy of the day, no one, including any public health official, or attending physician, or reporter appeared to have been the least curious so as to ask Salk for more details on his new second-stage vaccine, or to inquire if additional field studies and testing of the “new and improved” vaccine were required before it was licensed for nationwide distribution.
Instead, “Doc” O’Connor saved the day for the Salk vaccine by declaring that the NF/MOD had finally conquered polio. Media chaos prevailed. The world was elated and fell to its knees in gratitude to Salk and the NF.
Salk Vaccine Licensed for Nationwide Distribution
Less than three hours later, on that same day, August 12, 1955, the federal Vaccine Licensing Advisory Committee, officially approved the “Salk Vaccine” for nationwide distribution. Committee members, with the exception of NF members, were oblivious to the dangers of the vaccine as discovered by Workman and Eddy and the small numbers of NIH officials to whom they had communicated the presence of  “live” virus in the “dead” Salk virus vaccine.
Oveta Culp Hobby, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, signed the licenses granting permission for five pharmaceutical companies to manufacture and distribute the Salk polio vaccine. As reported by Offit, over the next two weeks, forty lots of the vaccine containing about five million doses would be distributed to public health facilities across the nation by the Cutter Labs, Eli Lilly, Parke-Davis, Wyeth Labs, and Pitman-Moore.^[34]
But which “Salk Vaccine” did the Public Health Service Advisory Committee believe it was approving and distributing? The 1954 vaccine used in the earlier field trial or the new reformulated Salk vaccine of 1955?
The question is not rhetorical since, as Dr. Ratner pointed out, the “Salk Vaccine” was not one product, but a series of different vaccine preparations made on the same basic principle.^[35]
Of course, we know the answer now. It was Salk’s newly formulated, never fully tested, vaccine.
The Timetable for the 1955 Salk Vaccine
Unfortunately, the timetable for the reformulation of the Salk vaccine, even today, is still shrouded in mystery.
First, we don’t know how or when Salk first learned that his 1954 Merthiolate polio vaccine was not effective or potent against paralytic polio due to the alleged interference of Merthiolate, thus necessitating an immediate and drastic reformulation of his 1954 “vaccine recipe.”
Presumably, Salk would have begun his reformulation experimentation sometime between the end of the April 1954 field trial using the Merthiolate Salk vaccine, and November of 1954, when Salk formally notified the NF’s Vaccine and Immunization Committee of problems in his original vaccine “recipe” due to the Merthiolate. He said that the addition of Merthiolate was added against his wishes, at the insistence of the U.S. Laboratory of Biological Control (LBC), as a precaution against bacterial contamination.
The creation of Salk’s new “reformulated” vaccine, minus Merthiolate, involved a different Formalin inactivation process. Salk, however, continued to use the virulent wild strain of the polio virus – the Mahoney strain – in unknown [unstandardized] amounts.^[36]
Thus it was that 1955, “The Year of the Salk Vaccine,” became “the most distressing year in the history of twentieth century American medicine.”^[37]  It was also a year of withholding vital information on the Salk vaccine from physicians, public health officers, and the public.^[38]
What follows are the details of the massive cover-up by government officials and NF officials that followed in the wake of the first “Cutter Lab” deaths, which were, in fact, “Salk vaccine” deaths.

^[1] Salk believed the future of polio vaccine research lay in the development of a killed virus preparation even though it was known early on that polio is one of the most difficult viruses to inactivate with formalin. Unlike the live vaccine, which contained living polio organisms, the killed vaccine contained dead or inactivated, non-infectious viruses which did not multiply, but which were nevertheless capable of producing antigens to stimulate the production of antibodies that would offer protection from the disease. Thus, immunity could be achieved without infection. In the past, the great obstacle to the development of any killed vaccine had proven to be the difficulty, if not impossibility, of producing a product that was completely free of live viruses (i.e., safe), yet still potent (i.e., effective). Because, if even a small residue of the virulent strains used in the preparation of the vaccine remained, the vaccinated person would then become a walking time bomb; that is, he would become a source of infection to household and community contacts. Further, there were difficulties related to achieving potency and long-term immunity, as well as finding a single killed vaccine that was effective against all three strains (types) of polio. On the other hand, Salk and a number of his colleagues believed the future of polio vaccine research lay in the development of a killed virus preparation.
According to Dr. Harold Cox, the quantitative requirements for an effective killed polio virus vaccine produced by existing tissue culture methods at the time was known as early as 1934. Cox stated the principle that you have to have at least 100 million particles per dose for an effective killed vaccine – the exception being the Rocky Mountain spotted fever vaccine. The Salk vaccine never achieved this number of particles.
^[2] Sabin and the majority of his colleagues opposed the Salk vaccine. Sabin favored the “live” vaccine that mimicked nature more closely by introducing a mild form of the disease into the environment where people pick it up and then develop an immunity to more virulent forms. This approach followed the lines of the classic principles of immunology by provoking an infection with a harmless strain of the virus to prepare the body for an attack by a more virulent strain. The case for the development of a live polio vaccine for humans was bolstered by experience gained from veterinary medicine where researchers had found living viral vaccines to be superior, cost less, and were easier to administer.
^[3] Offit, p.31.
^[4] There are two basic patterns of polio infection. There is a minor illness which does not involve the central nervous system (CNS), sometimes called abortive poliomyelitis, and a major illness involving the CNS, which may be paralytic or nonparalytic. In most people with a normal immune system, a poliovirus infection is asymptomatic. The virus enters the central nervous system in about 1 percent of infections. About one to five in 1000 cases progress to paralytic disease, in which the muscles become weak, floppy and poorly controlled, and, finally, completely paralyzed; this condition is known as acute flaccid paralysis.
^[5] Offit, p. 34
^[6] Ibid.
^[7] Ratner, Child and Family. Vol. 19, No.4, p. 274.
^[8] Ibid.
^[9] Salk used a one paragraph consent form which reads: “I have been informed that Dr. Jonas E. Salk …with the financial support of the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis, Inc., has inaugurated in the D. T. Watson Home … a project for test purposes in connection with a study of infantile paralysis, its causes, remedies, and prevention…. It is proposed to inject into children a poliomyelitis vaccine that has previously been injected into animals without subsequent harm…. To assist in this project I hereby consent that the preparations above mentioned may be injected into my child.” See http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/159990. Informed consent means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.
^[10] Offit, pp. 35-36.
^[11] Ibid., p. 36.
^[12] On October 9, 1958, Dr. Melnick submitted a report to the National Foundation/March of Dimes titled Epidemic Poliomyelitis Among Vaccinated Children in Israel. Melnick docuмented the severe type 1 poliovirus epidemic that occurred among multi-vaccinated Israeli children injected with the Salk vaccine. The NF kept the report “restricted” and it never saw the light of day.
^[13] Offit, 45.
^[14] Ibid., p. 41
^[15] Ibid.
^[16] See Child and Family, Vol 19, NO. 4., p. 274.  In November 1953, Milzer stated that although his laboratory very rigidly followed the conditions of formalin inactivation as outlined by Salk, the staff were not consistently completely inactivating the virus with formalin. He advised caution so that the tragic consequences that have accompanied poliomyelitis vaccine research in the past not be repeated.
^[17] Offit, p.43.
^[18] Ratner, Child and Family, Vol. 19, No. 4, p. 274.
^[19] Offit, p. 48.
^[20] Ibid.
^[21] Offit, pp.48-49.
^[22] Ibid., 49.
^[23] Ibid.
^[24] Ibid
^[25] Ibid., p. 53.
^[26] NIH Director Sebrell is reported to have simply ignored Eddy’s warnings in the summer of 1954, and did not report her findings to the U.S. government’s Vaccine Licensing Advisory Committee. It beggars belief, however, that Sebrell would not have, prior to the start of the national campaign, informed Basil O’Connor at the NF/MOD and/or Dr. Jonas Salk directly, that some Cutter batches (and possibly other manufacture’s products) currently being tested at the LBC for the national campaign were contaminated with live, unattenuated polio virus and were dangerous.
^[27] “Bernice Eddy, PhD (1903-1989) Alliance for Human Research Protection,” September 27, 2014, at Bernice Eddy, PhD (1903–1989) – Alliance for Human Research Protection (ahrp.org). Note that Dr. Ratner learned of Eddy’s discovery in 1960.
^[28] Details on the Simian Virus 40 are found in Child and Family, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp. 134-138.
^[29] See statistician Dr. Bernard Greenberg’s presentation in Child and Family, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 199-205. Dr. Greenberg had also testified before the Subcommittee of the U.S. House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce in June 1955.
^[30] Evaluation of the Field Trial of Poliomyelitis Vaccine, Final Report. Poliomyelitis Vaccine Evaluation Center, Dept. Epidem., Sch. Publ. Hlth., Univ. Mich., Ann Arbor, April 1957, pp. 1-563.
^[31] Howard Markel, M.D., Ph.D, “April 12, 1955 — Tommy Francis and the Salk Vaccine,” New England Journal of Medicine, April 7, 2005, p. 1409. Dr. Markel is associated with the Univ. of Michigan Medical School at Ann Arbor.
^[32] Ibid.
^[33] Ibid., p. 52.
^[34] Ibid., p. 65.
^[35] Ratner, “The Devil’s Advocate and the Salk Vaccine Program: 1955,” Child and Family, Vol. 20, No.2, p.140. Here, Ratner was simply restating what Dr. Francis had himself explained at his April 1955 conference.
^[36] In September 1956, New York State Health Department investigators reported that there was a 600-fold variation in the potency of the commercial Salk vaccine on the market.
^[37] Ratner, Vol. 20, No.1, p. 50.
^[38] Ibid.

Cera · « **Reply #7 on:** October 28, 2021, 11:22:30 AM »

Great info. Thanks for posting.

Nadir · « **Reply #8 on:** November 22, 2021, 05:41:51 AM »

Covid-19 and the Art of Brainwashing – Part IV
Guest Contributor October 20, 2021 No Comments

From left to right: Dr. William Workman, NIH secretary; Dr. Jonas Salk, developer of the polio vaccine; Dr. W.H. Sebrell, Jr., director of the NIH; and Dr. James Shannon, associate director of the NIH, May 26, 1955. (AP Photo/William J. Smith)
By Randy Engel
The Salk Vaccine and Covid-19 – Lessons Never Learned : “The Salk Vaccine is Safe and Effective”
Reports of Paralysis and Death Begin
On April 25, 1955, the first reported case of paralysis from the Salk vaccine came into the NIH’s Laboratory of Biologics Control (LBC).
NIH Secretary, Dr. William Workman was informed that an inoculated infant in Chicago had become paralyzed. The next day, April 26, five additional cases were reported – all cases involving the Cutter manufacturers. Workman called his superiors, and a frantic emergency meeting was convened that very night attended by top-level NIH officials including Victor Haas, James Shannon, and Alexander Langmuir of the Communicable Disease Center (CDC) in Atlanta.^[1] Langmuir and Workman wanted the Cutter-produced vaccine pulled at once, but their opinion was overridden by those who wanted to wait for more information.
The final verdict was left to the U.S. Surgeon General, Leonard A. Scheele. who decided to get additional input from six experienced polio researchers including Dr. Thomas Francis, who had conducted the 1954 field trial.^[2] The consensus appeared to be that Scheele should do something short of calling the whole national vaccine program off, “but short of what?” was the burning question. Interestingly, Salk was not consulted. He learned of the crisis later from the National Foundation/March of Dimes. ^[3]
On April 27, Scheele asked Cutter officials to withdraw all of the lots of their vaccine, not only those known to contain live virus. Cutter immediately agreed to a total recall which took place on April 28, but by this time 300,000 youngsters had been inoculated with the Cutter manufactured vaccine in six western states. By way of damage control, Scheele held a Washington D.C. news conference at which he announced that the withdrawal was just a “safety precaution.” He lied again when he stated that the parents of children inoculated in the spring had no cause for alarm.^[4] That same day, Scheele called upon the Epidemic Intelligence Service (EIS), founded at the NIH in 1951, to investigate the Cutter/Salk incident.
What the EIS discovered from their initial investigation was that the disease caused by the contaminated vaccine was more deadly than the disease caused by natural polio virus, due to the use of the virulent Mahoney polio strain.
By April 29, within two days of the Cutter recall, the death count had risen to eleven, with fourteen [later 260] cases of paralysis. Among the earliest children to die was two-year-old Eugene Davis, grandson of the renowned surgeon Alton Ochsner.^[5] The Cutter/Salk vaccine had become the center of a man-made polio epidemic.^[6]
Another secret high ranking NIH meeting was called, chaired by NIH director William Sebrell, to discover what Cutter Labs had done wrong in the manufacturing process of the Salk vaccine. Among those in attendance were Workman, Langmuir, Salk, Shannon, and whistle blower Bernice Eddy. After a day of analysis and discussion there was no evidence-based explanation as to why the contamination occurred. That explanation, however, would come the next day, April 30, when presentations were made by scientists from the pharmaceutical companies involved in the manufacturing process – Cutter, Parke-Davis, Eli Lilly, Wyeth, and later Merck, Sharpe & Dohme.^[7] Their combined report upturned the myth that Cutter was the only manufacturer having live virus in their company’s vaccine lots. All, however, had similar problems.
In addition, Bill McLean, representing Parke-Davis, stated that Salk’s “straight line theory” of deactivation was not validated by their laboratory experience. This statement was confirmed by the Merck, Sharp & Dohme representative who stated that the polio virus could be inactivated fairly easily in relatively small quantities, aka a few hundred or thousand doses, but for large commercial quantities tallying in the millions, the rate of inactivation changed.^[8]
Additional secret meetings were held at the NIH on May 5 and 6, 1955.
Obviously, Basil O’Connor at the NF was against suspending the inoculation program. According to Scheele, O’Connor applied relentless pressure on him, stating, “He called me at all hours of the night. And he threatened to have me fired.”^[9]
Nevertheless, on May 7, Scheele was forced by mounting paralytic cases to call a “temporary” halt to the manufacturing and distribution of all Salk vaccine (possibly for as long as a month), in the United States as well Great Britain, Sweden, West Germany, and South Africa – which amounted to some 3.9 million doses being withheld.^[10]
On May 8, the Surgeon General went on national television to explain that the withdrawal of the vaccine, pending further investigation, was due to specific manufacturing problems of one company [Cutter] – when in fact, all of the manufacturers had trouble inactivating the live polio virus. He also failed to inform the public that the government’s safety tests were found to be unreliable.
Scheele’s parting words for that day were, “The Public Health Service has every faith that, within the ever-narrowing limits of human fallibility, the Salk vaccine is safe and effective.”^[11]
No doubt, Scheele was walking a fine line.^[12] If he had told the American public the whole truth, Americans might start questioning why a flawed and inadequately tested vaccine was ever licensed by the U.S. Public Health Service in the first place!^[13]
The tragedy was, of course, as Edward Bernays had discovered in 1928, “Why should Government kill a good thing for itself?” Once government cover-ups begin, it’s almost impossible for them not to continue.
Wyeth Disaster Hushed Up
Evidence that the Wyeth Laboratories also distributed contaminated Salk vaccine is docuмented in an August 1955 report titled, “The Wyeth Problem: An Epidemiological Analysis of the Occurrence of Poliomyelitis in Association with Certain Lots of Wyeth Vaccine.”^[14] The authors of the report, Neal Nathanson and Alexander Langmuir confirmed there were more than thirty cases of paralytic polio including one death resulting from the contamination of three of the four Wyeth lots. Although, the final report was sent to the Directors of all of the NIH agencies and the CDC and Surgeon General offices that were involved in the vaccine investigation, Offit states that:

Quote

It [The Wyeth Problem] was never released to the media, never shown to polio researchers, never shown to the National Foundation, never shown to polio vaccine advisors, never distributed to health care professionals, never published in medical journals, and never made available to defense attorneys in subsequent lawsuits against Cutter Laboratories.^[15]

It was not until the Cutter Case went to trial in November 1957 that the cover-up by Wyeth and government health officials of “the Wyeth Problem,” was accidently revealed by Howard Shaughnessy from the Illinois Health Department who testified under oath that Cutter was not alone in having difficulty in producing a true “killed,” vaccine. He then named Wyeth labs. ^[16]
Jonas Salk did not take the witness stand at the Cutter trial but gave a deposition to Attorney Melvin Belli. Salk put the total blame on Cutter. In his deposition, Salk denied what every knowledgeable person knew to be true – that the inactivation process was “an industry-wide problem.”^[17]
Salk later recalled a face-to-face confrontation with John Enders who, at one of the NIH May 1955 meetings, told him, “It is quack medicine to pretend that this is a killed vaccine when you know it has live virus in it. Every batch has live virus in it.” Salk said it was the only time in his life when he felt suicidal.^[18]
USPHS Issues New Manufacturing Protocols
The month of May, 1955, was not so merry for Jonas Salk, the National Foundation, and federal officials connected to the Salk vaccine national campaign.
The USPHS initiated new modifications related to the manufacturing process including extra filtration,^[19] and an adjustment in the Formalin temperature and acidity rate. A search for a safer strain of virus to replace the deadly virulent Mahoney strain would soon be undertaken. The USPHS also mandated the reporting by manufacturers to government health offices of live virus found in any lots of the vaccine, and other safety complications.
On May 14, 1955, 1 million doses of polio vaccine were released by the federal government under the new protocols on the belief that the Salk vaccine was better than nothing until something better came along, thus sidestepping the medical principle, “primum non nocere” (“first do no harm”).
Two weeks later, the national vaccination program was fully restored, but the debates on the safety and potency of the Salk vaccine continued behind closed doors. Legitimate concerns by questioning public health officials were silenced by a continuous flood of media reiterations assuring the clueless public that the vaccine was safe and effective.^[20]
On June 9, 1955, Surgeon General Scheele released the first of two official White Papers, which disputed Salk’s “straight line” inactivation theory; condemned the haste with which the March of Dimes (aka, Basil O’Connor) rushed the vaccine to market, including the 1954 Francis stage show produced by the NF, and the inadequacy of manufacturers’ reports to government agencies concerning inactivation problems.^[21] The first White Paper confirmed that all of the manufacturers of the vaccine had difficulties inactivating polio virus.^[22]
Congressional Hearings on Polio Vaccines

Congressman Percy Priest
That same month, from June 22 – June 23, 1955, a subcommittee of the U.S. House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce headed by Congressman Percy Priest (D-TN)^[23] investigated the entire polio vaccine controversy, including the Government’s handling of the Salk program and the safety of the Salk vaccine. Input was obtained from fifteen medical and scientific experts including Jonas Salk, Albert Sabin, John Enders, Tom Francis, and James Shannon. Basil O’Connor defended Salk and the NF.
Nobel Prize winner, Dr. Wendell M. Stanley testified to the fact that secrecy, and the restriction of pertinent data to a small handful of selected physicians, were associated with all stages of the Salk vaccine’s development.^[24]

Of special note is the unanimous opinion of experts testifying before the Priest Congressional hearings that the highly virulent Mahoney polio virus strain, which remained a component of the “improved” Salk vaccine, be replaced since with it the Salk vaccine was not only a threat to inoculated persons but also caused inoculated persons themselves to become a source of infection to household and community contacts (emphasis added).[25]

Mass Epidemics Spread to Major U.S. Cities

Populated urban areas in Illinois, Idaho, Iowa, Maryland, Minnesota and Massachusetts were among the hardest hit states during the summer of 1955 and through the summer of 1959. These epidemics occurred after the wide-scale use of the Salk vaccine and were characterized by an uncommon early seasonal onset.[26]

As with the Covid-19 propaganda machine today, various offices in the USPHS cleverly tried to convince Americans that the main culprit in the new polio epidemic was the unvaccinated. But this kind of “double talk” didn’t fly. As Ratner reasoned: “If the Salk vaccine is to take credit for the decline from 1955-1957, how can those individuals who were vaccinated several years ago contribute to the increase in 1958 and1959? Are not these persons still vaccinated?”[27] …“Could it be that the vaccine has been only a temporary stopgap and that the effect is now wearing off because the vaccinated individuals are not maintaining their antibody status through subclinical exposure and booster doses?” Ratner asks.[28]

In the fall of 1955, Dr. Alexander Langmuir (Chief of the Polio Surveillance Department of the USPHS) had predicted that by 1957 there would be less than 100 cases of paralytic polio in the United States. Four years and 300 million doses of Salk vaccine later, we had in 1959 approximately 6,000 cases of paralytic polio, 1,000 of which were in persons who had received three and more shots of the Salk vaccine.[29]

Of special interest was the violent outbreak of type 3 paralytic polio in Massachusetts in the summer of 1959, some 4,000 in which there were more cases of paralytic polio in Salk vaccine triple vaccinates than the unvaccinated. That is, there was a lower incident of paralytic polio in the unvaccinated group.[30]

This raised the question that continues to be with us today in connection with the Covid virus – Do low antigen vaccines desensitize the vaccinate as to make him more susceptible to the virus? In which case, are public health officials doing more harm than good?[31]

Heads Roll at the HEW and NIH

Not surprisingly, by July of 1955, heads began to roll at the federal agencies involved in the Salk scandal. Oveta Culp Hobby, Secretary of HEW resigned; Dr. William Sebrell, Director of the NIH “retired” at the age of 54; and top officials at the National Microbiological Institute and Laboratory of Biologics including William Workman were fired, and the latter agency reorganized as the Division of Biologics Standards.

USPHS Continue to Back Salk Vaccine

Despite ongoing evidence that the Salk vaccine was neither safe nor potent (effective), during the week of November 14-18, 1955, at the meetings of the American Public Health Association in Kansas City, the USPHS, a formerly highly respected agency, released two favorable reports on the current Salk vaccine – one on the 15th stressing the effectiveness of the vaccine and a second report presented by Dr. Scheele on the 17th stressing the safety of the vaccine.

Neither of the reports were true.[32] “… the deceptions, self-deceptions, subterfuges, half-truths and double talk which backers of the vaccine employed in their attempts to keep the Salk vaccine viable [continued] throughout 1955 and thereafter.”[33]

As Dr. Ratner explains:

The Salk vaccine, then, which we were encouraged to believe is both highly effective and safe on the basis of recent reports, turns out to be, when highly effective, a vaccine that is no longer on the market, and when safe, a vaccine that has yet to make its appearance and clinically prove its effectiveness.[34]

In November of 1955, the USPHS reached a “compromise” on the production of the Salk vaccine which was allowed to continue. However, as noted by Dr. Ratner, faulty batches of the vaccine already on the market were not forced to be withdrawn by the manufacturers.[35] On the contrary, in May 1957, the largest producer of the Salk vaccine in the U.S. was still in possession of several million dollars worth of defective polio vaccine that did not pass the minimum potency requirements of the USPHS. To accommodate the manufacturer and assure subsequent profits, the Division of Biologics Standards “reinterpreted” the minimum requirement so that the warehoused vaccine could be, and was, sold on the open commercial market.[36]

West German Government Confirms Salk Catastrophe

In the April 6, 1956, a 423-page report titled, “An Evaluation of the Protective Immunization Against Poliomyelitis,”[37] was issued by the Scientific Committee of the President of the Ministry of Health of the Federal German Republic. The devastating critical analysis of the 1954 Francis Report and the 1955 Salk vaccine was prepared by seven top West German medical advisors, and published in Munchener Medizinische Wochenschrift. Unfortunately, the report was later suppressed by the West German Minister of the Interior under pressure from the U.S. National Foundation/March of Dimes who sent Dr. Thomas Francis, Jr. and Robert F. Korn, authors of the pro-Salk Francis Report to Germany to “silence” the opposition.[38]

Here is a summary of the West German study’s conclusion:

So far it is hardly possible to gain insight into the extent of the immunization catastrophe of 1955 in the United States. It may be considered certain that the officially ascertained 200 cases which was caused directly or indirectly by the vaccination constitute minimum figures…. It can hardly be estimated how many of the 1,359 cases among vaccinated persons must be regarded as failures of the vaccine and how many were infected by the vaccine. A careful study of the epidemiologic course of polio in the United States for 1955 yields indications of grave significance. In numerous states of the U.S.A., typical early epidemicsdeveloped with the immunization in the spring of 1955 (Italics added)…. “The vaccinations of the year 1955 cannot be exclusively traced back to the failure of one manufacturing firm.”[39]

The authors of the report concluded that the “mass inoculation in the United States in 1955 resulted in what possibly was the greatest ‘catastrophe’ in the history of protective inoculations.”[40]

Shortly after the West German report was issued, two Major Generals of the Occupation, who knew less than zilch of the dangers of the Salk vaccine, reported to the New York Times from Frankfurt, Germany, that the Salk vaccine was “safe and effective.”[41]

Note that West Germany was not the only nation to be concerned about the safety and potency of the Salk vaccine. England cancelled its vaccine program in July 1955; All European nations with the exception of Denmark [even though it found live Mahony virus in the Salk vaccine],discontinued their inoculation programs; and Canada moved its vaccine program to the early part of 1956.[42]

In the U.S., Dr. David E. Price, acting chief of the USPHS, who admitted to not reading the West German report, nevertheless told the Chicago Sunday Tribune on April 15, 1956, that there was “overwhelming evidence” that the Salk vaccine was “safe and effective.”[43]

Thus it was that the U.S. government became the standard bearer of the “BIG LIE” – that the 1955 Salk vaccine was both safe and effective.

As for the National Foundation/March of Dimes, according to Dr. James A. Shannon, Director of the NIH in the fall of 1966 “the decision of the Foundation to throw its resources behind the development of an inactivated vaccine markedly increased the difficulty and greatly protracted the time required to develop the generally accepted polio vaccine (Sabin) we have today.”[44]

But, not to worry. Having successfully managed “The Great Polio Coverup,” the Foundation began to lay plans for its “Great Transition” from polio to eugenics. During the late 1950s and early 1960s, the Foundation prepared to launch a new and unprecedented national crusade against “birth defects” – and those who have them! The new campaign signaled the start of a 25-year-old war between National Foundation/March of Dimes and the U.S. Prolife Movement which this writer has docuмented in The McHugh Chronicles (1997).[45]

___________________________

[1] Richard Carter, Breakthrough: The Saga of Jonas Salk, Pocket Books, 1967, p. 298.

[2] Offit, p. 68.

[3] Carter, p. 301.

[4] Ibid., p. 304.

[5] Offit, p. 81.

[6] Ibid., p. 87.

[7] It is uncertain if Pitman-Moore was represented at this time. Merck, Sharp & Dohme were newcomers.

[8] Ibid., pp. 95-97.

[9] Ibid., p. 99.

[10] Ibid., p. 98.

[11] Carter, p. 314.

[12] Ibid., p. 99.

[13] Carter, p. 307.

[14] Offit, pp. 102-103.

[15] Ibid.

[16] Ibid., pp. 140-141. See Gottsdanker v. Cutter Laboratories, District Court of Appeal of the State of California, First Appellate District, 1 Civ.18,413 and 18, 414, November 20, 1957-January 31, 1958. Melvin Belli represented polio victim Anna Gottsdanker who testified at the trial. Cutter was represented by Wallace Sedgwick. Cutter was accused of negligence in the production and testing of the Salk vaccine and charged with a breach of warranty – that is, the Salk vaccine was not a “killed” or “inactivated” polio vaccine. Cutter was exonerated on the first count, but made to pay liability damages of $125,000, because live virus found in the “killed” vaccine.

[17] Ibid., p. 137.

[18] Carter, pp. 311-312.

[19] According to Dr. Harold Cox, the addition of a second filtration as an idea pulled out of thin air, since it is the “absolute gospel” that any time you introduce another filtration step, you lose antigen.

[20] Ratner, Child and Family, Vol. 20, NO.1, p. 53-54.

[21] Carter, pp. 322-323.

[22] Offit, p. 140.

[23] Salk Vaccine Hearings, 84th Congress, 1st session, on H.R. 5599, [and other bills and joint resolutions], May 6 and 13, 1955.

[24] Ratner, Child and Family, Vol. 19, No. 4, p. 274.

[25] Ratner, Child and Family, Vol. 20, NO1, pp. 57-58.

[26] Ibid., p. 278.

[27] Ibid., p. 200.

[28] Ibid.

[29] Ratner, Vol. 19, No. 3, p. 191-194.

[30] Poliomyelitis :Massachusetts 1959. A mimeographed report of the Mass. State Health Dept, pp. 1-8

[31] The question surrounding the dangers of low potency vaccines was raised by Dr. Harold Cox at the Chicago meeting on the Salk vaccine held on May 26, 1960. The term ADE – antibody disease enhancement has been used in connection with Covid to identify this phenomenon.

[32] Ratner, Child and Family, “Poliomyelitis Vaccine,”1956, pp. 281-285.

[33] Ratner, Child and Family, Vol. 20, NO1, p.50-51.

[34] Ratner, Child and Family, “Poliomyelitis Vaccine,”1956, p. 283.

[35] Ratner, Child and Family, Vol. 19, No. 3, p. 209.

[36] Ibid. The reinterpretation of the standards regulations on vaccine potency was issued by Murray R., Director, Division of Biologics Standards on May 17, 1957. (p.213).

[37] Prepared by the following members of the Committee – H. Eyer (Bonn), H. Herken (Berlin), F. Horing (Berlin), H. Pette (Hamburg), G. Seiffert (Munich), E. Traub ( Tubingen), and G. Weber (Munich). See Child and Family, Vol. 20, No. 1, p.55-56.

[38] Ibid.

[39] Ratner, Child and Family, Vol. 19. No. 4., p. 273.

[40] Ratner, Child and Family, Vol. 20, No. 1, p.57.

[41] Ibid., pp. 56-57.

[42] Ibid., p. 62.

[43] Ibid. p. 57.

[44] For the complete text of Shannon’s statement see Child and Family, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 70-75.

[45] Randy Engel, The McHugh Chronicles, 1997. Available from .

Author Topic: Covid-19 and the Art of Brainwashing – Part I, Randy Engel (Read 678 times)

Nadir

Covid-19 and the Art of Brainwashing – Part I, Randy Engel

Nadir

Re: Covid-19 and the Art of Brainwashing – Part I, Randy Engel

Nadir

Re: Covid-19 and the Art of Brainwashing – Part I, Randy Engel

Cera

Re: Covid-19 and the Art of Brainwashing – Part I, Randy Engel

Viva Cristo Rey

Re: Covid-19 and the Art of Brainwashing – Part I, Randy Engel

Emile

Re: Covid-19 and the Art of Brainwashing – Part I, Randy Engel

Emile

Re: Covid-19 and the Art of Brainwashing – Part I, Randy Engel

Cera

Re: Covid-19 and the Art of Brainwashing – Part I, Randy Engel

Nadir

Re: Covid-19 and the Art of Brainwashing – Part I, Randy Engel