A new paper recently published a paper in the Journal of Trace Elements in Medicine and Biology calls into question the safety of aluminum adjuvants in vaccines.
Why have there been no studies by regulatory agencies in conjunction with independent scientists to see where vaccine ingredients travel to in the body after the are injected? Why no appropriate safety testing for the aluminum vaccine adjuvant?
What Happened: A group of scientists from multiple countries recently published a paper in the Journal of Trace Elements in Medicine and Biology titled “The role of aluminum adjuvants in vaccines raises issues that deserve independent, rigorous and honest science.” In their publication, they provide evidence for their position that “the safety of aluminium-based vaccine adjuvants, like that of any environmental factor presenting a risk of neurotoxicity and to which the young child is exposed, must be seriously evaluated without further delay, particularly at a time when the CDC is announcing a still increasing prevalence of autism spectrum disorders, of 1 child in 54 in the USA.”
The publication goes on to address concerns it has with another paper that was published a year prior, emphasizing that the authors of that specific publication, JP Goullé & L Grangeot-Keros,
Described general knowledge on aluminum (Al) exposure, kinetics and toxicity but made very little effort to delineate the scientific questions specifically related to Al adjuvants in vaccines. Instead of representing the bulk of their review, the subject of Al adjuvants covered no more than one third of the 3 page-text. Numerous important papers on the topic were omitted, i.e. 20 years of scientific publications in clinical, post-mortem, in vitro and in vivo experimental studies published by independent research teams, worldwide experts in this topic, were simply omitted.
Why This Is Important: This isn’t the only paper that raise concerns about the role of aluminum in vaccines. Many people claim that the amount of aluminum we take in from other sources is greater than the aluminum in vaccines, but fail to realize that the aluminum we take into our body from vaccines may not exit our body. Professor Christopher Shaw from the University of British Columbia in Canada explains that injected aluminum doesn’t come into the same methods of excretion as the aluminum we take in from food, for example. When we inject aluminum, it stays in the body, it may cross the blood brain barrier, enter into cells and various organs in the body.
When you inject aluminum, it goes into a different compartment of your body. It doesn’t come into that same mechanism of excretion. So, and of course it can’t because that’s the whole idea of aluminum adjuvants, aluminum adjuvants are meant to stick around and allow that antigen to be presented over and over and over again persistently, otherwise you wouldn’t put an adjuvant in in the first place. It can’t be inert, because if it were inert it couldn’t do the things it does. It can’t be excreted because again it couldn’t provide that prolonged exposure of the antigen to your immune system. – Dr. Christopher Shaw – Canadian neuroscientist and professor of ophthalmology at the University of British Columbia (source)
In 2018, shaw published a paper in the Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry that found almost 100 percent of the intramuscularly injected aluminum in mice as vaccine adjuvants was absorbed into the systemic circulation and traveled to different sites in the body such as the brain, the joints, and the spleen where it accumulated and was retained for years post-vaccination. (source)
A study published in BioMed Central (also cited in the study above) in 2013 found more cause for concern:
Intramuscular injection of alum-containing vaccine was associated with the appearance of aluminum deposits in distant organs, such as spleen and brain where they were still detected one year after injection. Both fluorescent materials injected into muscle translocated to draining lymph nodes (DLNs) and thereafter were detected associated with phagocytes in blood and spleen. Particles linearly accumulated in the brain up to the six-month endpoint; they were first found in perivascular CD11b+ cells and then in microglia and other neural cells. DLN ablation dramatically reduced the biodistribution. Cerebral translocation was not observed after direct intravenous injection, but significantly increased in mice with chronically altered blood-brain-barrier. Loss/gain-of-function experiments consistently implicated CCL2 in systemic diffusion of Al-Rho particles captured by monocyte-lineage cells and in their subsequent neurodelivery. Stereotactic particle injection pointed out brain retention as a factor of progressive particle accumulation…
The study went on to conclude that “continuously escalating doses of this poorly biodegradable adjuvant in the population may become insidiously unsafe.”
These authors followed up and published a study study in 2015 tah emphasized:
Evidence that aluminum-coated particles phagocytozed in the injected muscle and its draining lymph nodes can disseminate within phagocytes throughout the body and slowly accumulate in the brain further suggests that alum safety should be evaluated in the long term.
A paper published in 2018 discovered high amounts of aluminum in the brain tissue of people with autism. That particular paper has now been downloaded more than 1 million times.
The particular paper cited above was published by Dr. Christopher Exley.
Exley was also one of the authors on the main paper cited at the beginning of this article. Here is a very interesting interview with him if you’re interested. He’s considered to be one of the world’s leading experts in aluminum toxicology, if not the world’s leading expert. You can find out more about his research and what he’s up to by visiting his Instagram page.
The point is, this topic is hot right now, as it should be, and it seems that our federal health regulatory agencies continue to ignore the concerns being made and the studies being published. Below is an important clip from Dr. Larry Palevsky, a board-certified Paediatrician currently practicing in New York talking about aluminum and how it differs in adjuvant form.
The video is important because in the 90’s, Dr. Antonietta Gatti discovered the relationship between micro- and nano-particles as well as a great number of pathologies: cardiovascular diseases, many forms of cancer, multiple neurological diseases, and autoimmune diseases. She’s taken part in many international research projects, including the pathologies induced by depleted uranium, waste incineration, food polluted with inorganic particles, and more.
She is also a selected expert of the FAO/WHO for the safety in nanotechnological food, and a Member of the NANOTOX Cluster of the European Commission and the author of a book titled “Nanopathology: the health impact of nanoparticles,” and on the Editorial Board of Journal of Biomaterials Applications and a member of the CPCM of the Italian Ministry of Defense.
Furthermore, her and her husband Dr. Stefano Montanari founded a laboratory called Nano-diagnostics for the evaluation of the pathological tissues of patients, it’s presently at the University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Italy.
A few years ago the Italian police raided their home, the police took all digital assets that were owned by the the two nanopathologists, including laptops, computers, and flash-drives, basically years of work and research.
Because Gatti and Montanari had taken their research of nanodust and nanoparticles, from in-vivo (performed in a living organism) and in-vitro (performed in a test tube) to what unseen contamination might reside in vaccines in 2016, they came under the microscope of the United States, European, and Italian authorities. They had touched the third rail of medicine. They had crossed the no-go zone with the purported crime being scientific research and discovery. By finding nano-contamination in random vaccines, Gatti and Montanari revealed, for the first time, what no one knew: Vaccines had more than aluminum salts adjuvants, Polysorbate-80, and other inorganic chemicals in them, they also harbored stainless steel, tungsten, copper, and other metals and rare elements that don’t belong in shots given to fetuses, pregnant women, newborns, babies and toddlers developing their lungs, immune and nervous systems.
The scientists published their work in January of 2017, titled, New Quality‐Control Investigations on Vaccines: Micro‐ and Nanocontamination. If science wasn’t plagued by corruption, an investigation should have started, healthcare agencies would have become involved and vaccine safety policies would have come under intense scrutiny, but that never happened.
More Important Notes:
Dr. Martin Howell Friede, Coordinator of Initiative For Vaccine Research at the World Health Organization, brought up the topic of vaccine adjuvants like aluminum at a WHO conference. In certain vaccines, without these adjuvants the vaccine simply doesn’t work. Dr. Friede mentioned that there are clinical studies that blame adjuvants for adverse events seen as a result of administering vaccines, and how people in general often blame adverse reactions to vaccines being the result of the vaccine adjuvant. He mentioned aluminum specifically.
He showed concern given the fact that “without adjuvants, we are not going to have the next generation of vaccines.”
He also stated that:
When we add an adjuvant, it’s because it is essential. We do not add adjuvants to vaccines because we want to do so, but when we add them it adds to the complexity. And I give courses every year on ‘how do you develop vaccines’ and ‘how do you make vaccines’ and the first lesson is, while you are making your vaccine, if you can avoid using an adjuvant, please do so. Lesson two is, if you’re going to use an adjuvant, use one that has a history of safety, and lesson three is, if you’re not going to do that, think very carefully.
You can read more about that conference and find a link to it here.
So, does the aluminum adjuvant in vaccines have a “history of safety?”
According to a study published as far back as 2011 in Current Medical Chemistry
Aluminum is an experimentally demonstrated neurotoxin and the most commonly used vaccine adjuvant. Despite almost 90 years of widespread use of aluminum adjuvants, medical science’s understanding about their mechanisms of action is still remarkably poor. There is also a concerning scarcity of data on toxicology and pharmacokinetics of these compounds. In spite of this, the notion that aluminum in vaccines is safe appears to be widely accepted. Experimental research, however, clearly shows that aluminum adjuvants have a potential to induce serious immunological disorders in humans. (source)
The Takeaway: When it comes to vaccine safety, why does mainstream media constantly point fingers and call those who have concerns “anti-vax conspiracy theorists?” Why don’t they ever address the science and concerns being raised that paint vaccines in a light that they’ve never been painted in? What’s going on here? Why are the safety concerns addressed by many scientists and doctors always ignored and never addressed/countered? Would more rigorous safety testing of our vaccines not be in the best interests of everybody? Who would ever oppose that and why?
Collective Evolution is one of the world’s fastest-growing conscious media and education companies providing news and tools to raise collective consciousness. Get inside access to Collective Evolution by becoming a member of CETV.
Stream content 24/7 and enjoy mind-expanding interviews, original shows, documentaries and guided programs.
Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and help conscious media thrive!
This content was originally published here.