Doctors Strike And Death Rate Falls

Dr Mendelsohn MD

How truly deadly the “Church” is comes into stark relief whenever there’s a doctors strike.

In 1976 in Bogota, Columbia there was a fifty-two-day period in which doctors disappeared altogether except for emergency care. The “National Catholic Reporter” described the string of unusual side effects from the strike. The death rate went down thirty-five percent. A spokesperson for the National Mortician Association said, It might be a coincidence, but it is a fact.

An eighteen percent drop in the death rate occurred in Los Angeles County in 1976 when doctors there went on strike to protest soaring malpractice insurance premiums. Dr. Milton Roemer, a professor of Health Care Administration at UCLA, surveyed seventeen major hospitals and found that sixty percent fewer operations were performed. When the strike ended and the medical machines started grinding again, the death rate went right back up to where it had been before the strike.

The same thing happened in Israel in 1973 when doctors reduced their daily patient contact from 65,000 to 7,000. The strike lasted a month. According to the Jerusalem Burial Society, the Israeli death rate dropped fifty percent during that month. There had not been such a profound decrease in mortality since the last doctors strike twenty years before!”

Source =

The Curse Causeless Shall Not Come


This author may very well go to jail for disclosing the facts contained in this booklet. You will read about a very serious subject: Cancer.

What you will read is the First Person account of how this author was cured of a malignant cancer of the descending colon by a simple dietary procedure. It is expected that this very book will be used against this author to establish legally the fact that he is practicing medicine without a license. He may be ordered by some Court to discontinue the future distribution of this book. Why? Cancer treatment, dear reader, is a major part of the multi-bill ion- dollar drug industry. You are being told, and it is now being subtly suggested to you by the many doctor type TV shows, that the American Cancer Society and the American Medical Association are leaving no stones unturned in an all out effort to “find the cause of cancer.” But at the very same time, every possible force and pressure is being applied to prevent doctors from using known and effective cancer cures. Instead, they are only permitted, by AMA agreement and government coercion through the Federal Food and Drug Administration, to treat cancer by means that they know are futile: Chemotherapy, cobalt radiation, and finally, the delaying tactic of surgery. Perhaps you think this is strong language! If the author dared, it would be even stronger: MURDER ONE.

The author’s grandfather died of colon cancer. The author’s father died of a cancer-related heart attack. His sister has cancer and has taken the Medical approach and is currently suffering from a series of unnecessary operations as her cancer strikes in first one place and then the other. None of these cancer victims were ever told by their Marcus Welby-type doctors that there are alternative choices; that there are valid and effective cancer cures that do not involve such radical surgery, expensive drugs and radiation. Any doctor who happens to stumble upon an effective treatment, or who develops one after years of research, may well be thrown into jail, harassed by the Courts in AMA initiated lawsuits, or driven out of the country.

It is widely known that cancer can be cured in Mexico, but unfortunately by the time the average cancer patient learns of such treatment, if indeed he ever does, the practitioners of the AMA have taken the last of his savings and insurance. With no money left, the patient is found to be “terminal” and sent home to die. For whatever good it may accomplish, and on behalf of the pitiful cancer patients now longing for the relief of death, this booklet is being published.

Nord W. Davis, Jr.

Back To Front – What came first, the sugar problem, or the depression?

ChooseLife : It is clear to me, that those on higher sugars are more prone to mental health disorders – Sugar intake – Whitehall Study/ Therefore, it is almost certain, that those needing antidepressants, will be more likely to also be closer to diabetes/sugar dis-regulation, than those on lower simple sugar diets, higher magnesium/greens/Omega3 et al.

Oxygen and sugar share the same space in blood, hence, when that blood is also being shared with a growing baby, as is the focus below, it is no wonder that struggle for space may become more fragile and a narrower range can be tolerated.

BMJ Study:

Antidepressant use during pregnancy and the risk of gestational diabetes mellitus: a nested case–control study

The following article reflects on this situation and has a give away snippet, which shows the culprit in the piece (ChooseLife’s opinion):

Antidepressants linked to higher gestational diabetes risk

” Gestational diabetes, a type of diabetes that can develop during pregnancy in women, can increase the risk of certain complications for both the mother and baby, including risks of high blood pressure for the expectant mother, needing a cesarean section delivery, having low blood sugar for the baby and developing type 2 diabetes later in life for the baby.

After analyzing that data and taking a close look at antidepressant exposure, the researchers found that specifically venlafaxine and amitriptyline were associated with a 27% and 52% increased risk of gestational diabetes.

While the risk was greatest for those two antidepressants, the researchers also found that gestational diabetes risk increased with the longer any antidepressant was taken.”

ChooseLife : If only these people of science were allowed to put 2 and 2 together. The use of Antidepressants is almost certainly a sign of longer term sugar problems, which turn everyday struggles into unbearable burdens, to unfortunate individuals with less robust Liver and/or Pancreatic function. Prolonged Low Blood Sugar/Hypoglycemia is a precursive condition to Diabetes, known to cause Mental Health dysfunction.

What is Spleen Qi Deficiency?

By Emma Suttie, D.Ac, AP

The spleen is my favourite organ in the body. As an acupuncturist, I am not really supposed to play favourites, saying you love one organ more than the others is like a parent declaring that they love one of their children more, but I feel like I have a special connection with the spleen. I talk about it a lot and I seem to write about it even more. It is a hard working and often under appreciated little organ, so it is my duty, and my privilege to give it some much needed love and attention.

The spleen is an organ that doesn’t really get discussed very much in relation to the other organs of the body. I think its role in Western medicine is perhaps seen as less ‘vital’ than the other organs, but the role of the spleen in Western medicine is very different than its role in Chinese medicine.

The Spleen In Western Medicine

In Western medicine the spleen is part of the immune system and the largest organ in the lymphatic system. It is where red blood cells are recycled and where white blood cells, called lymphocytes, are stored. It is possible to live without a spleen. You can lacerate or rupture your spleen in a car accident or playing contact sports (or via any severe physical trauma) and the spleen may have to be repaired or removed completely (called a splenectomy). Although it is possible to live without a spleen because other organs overcompensate and take over many of its important functions, it makes a person more susceptible to infections and ultimately compromises their immune system.

The Spleen In Chinese Medicine

This lovely image is from and designed by Patricia Callison

The spleen has a fundamental role in Chinese medicine. It, paired with the stomach, are the main organs of digestion and are responsible for digestion and distribution of food and nutrients throughout the body. The spleen extracts qi from the food we eat that is used by the body to build immunity (wei qi), keep things moving freely (stagnation leads to disease), the proper functioning of the other organs and helps to regulate mental functions and emotions.

Why Our Culture Is Hard On The Spleen

It is very common in our culture to have a deficiency of the spleen. Because the spleen is the main organ of not only digestion, but processing, it is responsible for processing the food and drink that we consume, as well as all of the stimulus that comes in through our sense organs. We are a culture that values doing many things at once. The more productive we can be, the more we are praised at our jobs and in life. This philosophy is contrary to the health of the spleen. In Chinese medicine, to keep the spleen healthy, it is important to do one thing at a time, and as mindfully as possible. The idea is that the spleen is then able to use all of its energies to process one thing, rather than having to process many things at once, which wipes out its energy stores, or spleen qi. Examples of doing many things at once are eating (taking in food/drink) while watching TV (taking in stimulus). Or eating while sitting at your computer working. These are commonplace in a culture where everyone has too much to do and is always short on time. This is one of the biggest reasons that so many people suffer with a deficiency of their spleen qi. So, do one thing at a time. If you are going to eat, just eat. Really concentrate and be mindful about what you are doing. Enjoy and savour your food, this will not only help your spleen, but lead you to be more relaxed and help you digest more efficiently too.

A Strong And Balanced Spleen

People with strong and balanced spleen energy have the following characteristics:

  • responsible
  • practical
  • hard working
  • strong
  • like to nurture themselves and others
  • active
  • stable
  • excellent endurance
  • good appetites
  • good, healthy digestions
  • strong limbs
  • are orderly and careful
  • often very creative
  • have fertile imaginations

A Spleen Imbalance

People with an imbalance of their spleen often display the following characteristics:

  • chronically tired
  • a feeling of being “stuck” in their lives
  • physical and/or mental stagnation
  • weak digestion (lots of digestive issues)
  • poor appetite
  • diminished sense of taste
  • loose stools
  • abdominal bloating and tenderness
  • masses in the abdomen
  • weight problems (either overweight without overeating or underweight without the ability to gain)

Spleen Qi Deficiency

A deficiency of spleen qi can be caused by many things. Eating a poor diet of mostly refined, highly processed foods where the body is not receiving enough nourishment is certainly common, especially in industrialized nations where foods tend to be overly processed and many people make poor food choices. Another cause is simply our hectic lifestyles. As I mentioned above, we are a culture of multitasking, and this is particularly hard on the tiny organ that is responsible for doing all the processing. If it is constantly overloaded, then it will become exhausted, leading to spleen qi deficiency. Another cause, and this is also extremely common, is the emotional aspect of the spleen. In Chinese medicine, every organ is associated with an emotion. An excess of that emotion can damage the related organ, and likewise, when the organ is out of balance, it can have a strong effect on the corresponding emotion. The emotion of the spleen in worry/over thinking. If there is one emotion that I see more than any other in clinic, it is WORRY. An excess of worry and over thinking, as well as having a hard time just shutting off your brain, is damaging to the spleen. And we do that so much in our society. The pressures on us are enormous, and people are simply overworked and overstressed. So, poor nutrition, multitasking and a propensity to worry are all part of our culture, and all are affecting our poor, overworked spleens. It’s no wonder spleen qi deficiency is so common.

Here are some symptoms of spleen qi deficiency so you know what to look for:

  • weakness of the whole body
  • fatigue
  • loose stools with undigested food
  • a pale tongue with a thin white coat and teeth marks on the sides
  • a weak pulse
  • weakness of the arms and legs
  • weak muscles
  • prolapse of organs (such as hemorrhoids, uterus, bladder, intestines)

The symptoms above all point to a spleen imbalance. There is good news though. There is wonderful nutritional therapy for deficient spleen qi, and as many Chinese doctors have known for centuries, food is the best medicine.

The Thermal Nature Of Foods In Chinese Medicine

When we talk about nutritional therapy in Chinese medicine, which is an important modality, we talk about the thermal nature of foods. This can be a bit of a difficult concept to understand at first, but once it’s explained, it actually starts to make a lot of sense. Thermal nature is not just how physically cold or hot a food is as a result of cooking. In Chinese medicine, all foods are seen to have a fundamentally thermal nature, either warming, cooling or neutral, and these are important to know as they have a direct effect on the body. In the context of Chinese medicine it is also important to know the thermal nature of your body, which is measured by the relative yin and yang energies it encompasses. For example, if a person comes to you with a red face, bloodshot eyes, outbursts of anger and is shouting, it is pretty safe to determine that that person has an excess of yang energy and thus, should eat cooling foods and stay away from warming ones until the balance of yin and yang is reestablished. Every organ also, has a temperature that it prefers, so it is good to know all these things when thinking about food therapy in terms of health and disease.

Food Therapy For Spleen Qi Deficiency

With foods thermal nature in mind, the spleen likes to be warm and dry. So if you have spleen qi deficiency, you want to eat foods that are warming, or at least neutral to help build the spleens energy. Cold foods should be avoided as they weaken digestion. Also, foods that are cold in temperature take more energy for the spleen to digest and are seen to extinguish the digestive fire. The flavour associated with the spleen is sweet, so as a rule, sweet foods are prescribed to correct a deficiency.

One of the best foods to build spleen qi is cooked white rice, often eaten in the form of congee or jook. Congee is essentially a porridge made of overcooked rice and water. You may add other ingredients depending on your condition and taste. For spleen qi deficiency or any weakness of the spleen, warming ingredients would be appropriate. See the list below.

Beneficial Spleen Foods


  • pumpkin
  • yam
  • black beans
  • garbanzo beans
  • carrot
  • parsnip
  • squash
  • peas
  • sweet potato
  • onion
  • leek


  • black pepper
  • ginger
  • nutmeg
  • cinnamon
  • fennel
  • garlic

Sweeteners (in small amounts)

  • barley malt
  • rice syrup
  • molasses
  • cherries
  • dates

Animal Products (if the deficiency is severe)

  • mackerel
  • tuna
  • halibut
  • anchovy
  • beef
  • beef liver or kidney
  • turkey
  • chicken
  • lamb
  • butter

Chewing foods well is also important when spleen energy is weak. This helps to break down foods before they get to the spleen and means the spleen has less work to do and conserve its energy. Eating things like soups are beneficial because they are cooked until soft and are less work for the spleen to digest. And finally, the preparation of food is also a factor in helping to build up spleen qi. Eating on the run and eating out mean that you are not taking the time and intention to mindfully prepare the foods that you are eating. To prepare foods with care infuses them with healing energies that the whole body, and especially the spleen, needs. So take the time to prepare the foods that you are eating with love, your spleen will appreciate it. 🙂

Re-printed with kind permission of

Full Article Link = What is Spleen Qi Deficiency? ChineseMedicineLiving

Sugar intake from sweet food and beverages, common mental disorder and depression: prospective findings from the Whitehall II study

Anika KnüppelMartin J. ShipleyClare H. Llewellyn, and Eric J. Brunner

Intake of sweet food, beverages and added sugars has been linked with depressive symptoms in several populations. Aim of this study was to investigate systematically cross-sectional and prospective associations between sweet food/beverage intake, common mental disorder (CMD) and depression and to examine the role of reverse causation (influence of mood on intake) as potential explanation for the observed linkage. We analysed repeated measures (23,245 person-observations) from the Whitehall II study using random effects regression.

Diet was assessed using food frequency questionnaires, mood using validated questionnaires. Cross-sectional analyses showed positive associations.

In prospective analyses, men in the highest tertile of sugar intake from sweet food/beverages had a 23% increased odds of incident CMD after 5 years (95% CI: 1.02, 1.48) independent of health behaviours, socio-demographic and diet-related factors, adiposity and other diseases.

The odds of recurrent depression were increased in the highest tertile for both sexes, but not statistically significant when diet-related factors were included in the model (OR 1.47; 95% CI: 0.98, 2.22). Neither CMD nor depression predicted intake changes.

Our research confirms an adverse effect of sugar intake from sweet food/beverage on long-term psychological health and suggests that lower intake of sugar may be associated with better psychological health.

Published Online : July 27th 2017

ChooseLife : This is the beginning post in a research stream I will undertake, to demonstrate the multi faceted path of destruction simple sugars may wreak, on susceptible individuals mental and physical health. Many years ago I read Moreless responding to a question on the general cause of Depression, just four words, which at the time did not click for me, but does now “prolonged low blood sugar“, the thought streams back to Carey Reams exceptional interview on Blood Sugars available here = Dr Carey Reams Interview on Hypoglycemia

An aluminium adjuvant in a vaccine is an acute exposure to aluminium

Author : ChristopherExley

1. Introduction

Aluminium salts are common adjuvants in vaccines given to children. Their physical, chemical and biological properties have recently been reviewed [1]. However, a debate continues as to whether neonate and infant exposure to aluminium through vaccination is biologically significant with respect to their exposure to aluminium through other routes and especially diet. For example, paediatricians, responsible for administering the vaccine schedule for children, seem in particular, to be uninformed about the properties of aluminium adjuvants and their mode of action in vaccines. This apparent ignorance of the published scientific literature is unexpected in those charged with the wellbeing of neonates and infants and especially in the light of Janeway’s description of alum adjuvant as ‘the immunologist’s dirty little secret’ [2]. Paediatricians such as recently (07/04/2019) Andrew Pollard in The Sunday Times, have a habit of reverting to pure ‘baby talk’ when for example; describing how much aluminium is present in an infant vaccine. They use terms such as ‘minuscule’ and ‘teeny-weeny’ to tell anyone, who asks, how little aluminium there is in a vaccine. They usually then proceed to compare the amount of aluminium in a vaccine with the amount of aluminium in (an adult’s) diet. There are, of course, more accurate, understandable ways to inform parents and other interested parties how much aluminium is present in a vaccine, and I shall endeavour to achieve this herein. An appreciation of how much aluminium is present in a single injection of a vaccine is critical to understanding how aluminium adjuvants are effective in stimulating the immune response.

2. How much aluminium is found in vaccines?

Currently about 20 childhood vaccines include an aluminium adjuvant. Vaccine industry literature (for example; expresses the aluminium content of an individual vaccine as an amount (weight) of aluminium (not aluminium salt) per unit volume of a vaccine (usually 0.5 mL). Industry does this to account for the fact that there are no strict molecular weights for the polymeric aluminium salts that are used as adjuvants in vaccinations. They prepare acid digests of the adjuvants and measure their total aluminium using ICP MS. This is not explained in the literature they provide with vaccines and can cause confusion for some as the actual weight of hydrated aluminium salt (e.g. aluminium oxyhydroxide, aluminium hydroxyphosphate and aluminium hydroxyphosphatesulphate) in any vaccine preparation is actually approximately ten fold higher. The aluminium salt is the major component of a vaccine (after water) and its high content is why vaccine preparations are invariably cloudy in appearance [1]. As an example, GlaxoSmithKline’s Infanrix Hexa vaccine is reported by the manufacturer to contain 0.82 mg of aluminium per vaccine (0.5 mL). Thus, the weight of aluminium salt in this vaccine is approximately 8 mg, which is approximately ten times the weight of all of the other components of the vaccine when combined. An aluminium-adjuvanted vaccine is essentially a very high concentration of an aluminium salt (8 mg/0.5 mL or 16 mg/mL or 16 g/L) in which just μg of other vaccine components including antigens and other excipients are occluded.

3. Is the amount of aluminium in a vaccine ‘minuscule’?

Generally, in the United Kingdom the first dose of Infanrix Hexa vaccine is injected into muscle when an infant is 8 weeks old. All 8 mg of the aluminium salt (or 0.82 mg of aluminium) will immediately be systemic; it is inside the infant’s body. The repercussions of this being that the injected aluminium may only leave the body through its excretion in either the infant’s urine or sweat. What is the immediate biological response to this exposure to aluminium adjuvant? Aluminium is described as a silent visitor to the human body. What this means is that in the evolution of life on Earth and latterly human evolution, no historic signature is found as evidence for previous exposure to aluminium [3]. By way of comparison with another toxic and non-essential metal, if the adjuvant used in a vaccine was composed of a cadmium salt its injection would immediately initiate a counter-response by the body in an attempt to remove the toxicant. Proteins known to bind and help in the detoxification of cadmium are produced and this is a sure sign that biochemistry had previously encountered non-essential cadmium and selected it out of essential biochemical pathways. Such restorative attempts at detoxification are not triggered for biologically available aluminium and so the ‘processing’ of aluminium adjuvant at the injection site of a vaccine is completely adventitious and one might suggest, random and chaotic. The latter because the fate of aluminium in the body, unlike essential and other non-essential metals, is not subject to any form of homeostasis. Myriad chemical and biological processes will initiate the slow redistribution of the injected aluminium throughout the infant’s body. These steps will involve the processes of disaggregation, dissolution, complexation, precipitation, distribution, cellular uptake and translocation. The description of each one of these processes is an essay in itself and we have addressed them all in many complementary publications [1]. An important and vaccination-specific distinction to make at this point and to carry forward to the following discussion is that aluminium injected into muscle as an adjuvant in a vaccine potentially has uninterrupted access to the infant brain. This is because there is no prerequisite for its passage via the liver, the most prominent organ of detoxification in humans.

We asked if 0.82 mg of systemically available aluminium administered as a single dose in a vaccine is, as some paediatricians would suggest, a minuscule amount of aluminium, for example, as compared to aluminium in the diet. Infants receiving Infanrix Hexa vaccine at 8 weeks of age are concurrently either being breast or formula fed. Data show that the former is likely to result in an 8 week old infant ingesting up to 0.1 mg of aluminium each day [4,5]. On the day an infant receives 8 mg of an aluminium salt, or 0.82 mg of aluminium, in a vaccine it will also ingest 0.1 mg of aluminium in breast milk. However, what proportion of this 0.1 mg of dietary aluminium will be absorbed across the infant gut? Previous research has asked a similar question [6]. The reality is that data for the absorption of aluminium across the infant gut do not presently exist and one has to apply gastrointestinal absorption data obtained for adults. The oft-cited value for adults is that less than 0.1% of ingested aluminium in diet is actually absorbed [7]. The infant gut at 8 weeks is incomplete [8] and is likely to be much more permeable to dietary aluminium, perhaps as much as 100 times more permeable. Applying such clearly conditional criteria it can be estimated that 10% of ingested aluminium or 0.01 mg/day of aluminium in breast milk is absorbed across the infant gastrointestinal tract. However, the blood carrying nutrients and toxins that have been absorbed from the gut, to the rest of the body must first pass through the liver, the major detoxification system of the body. Data on the efficiency of the liver in removing aluminium from the blood is, at best, incomplete in adults [9] and completely unknown in infants. If it is estimated that the liver is 75% efficient in this respect for adults then it is probably only 50% efficient in an infant. When these various conditional factors are accounted for it can be estimated that an infant’s exposure to systemically available aluminium from breast-feeding is approximately 0.005 mg of aluminium each day. In essence during the first 8 weeks or 56 days of life, breast-feeding ostensibly drip feeds an infant with a combined total of 0.28 mg of systemically available aluminium. On day 56 the infant receives a single dose of 0.82 mg of aluminium in the Infanrix Hexa vaccine, a dose equivalent to 3 times the amount of aluminium the infant received during the entire 55 days of life prior to its vaccination. It is well known, if highly unfortunate, that infant formulas are heavily contaminated with aluminium [10,11] and in a worst-case scenario an infant only being formula-fed from birth might be exposed to 0.030 mg of aluminium each day up to vaccination on day 56. Even in this worst-case scenario, the exposure to systemically available aluminium on vaccination day is 25 times higher through the vaccine than through the diet.

4. Acute versus chronic exposure to aluminium

Breast or formula feeding in an infant is a chronic exposure to aluminium. The infant is exposed to a small but continuous supply of systemically available aluminium, aluminium that has the potential to be stored in the infant’s body and excreted from the infant’s body in the urine. Perhaps, at no point during continuous chronic (drip feed) exposure in infancy (0–12 months of age) does the concentration of aluminium in any one physiological compartment increase to bring about overt toxicity. How does dietary exposure to aluminium in infants compare to exposure through vaccination, for example, a single Infanrix Hexa vaccine at 8 weeks of age? The concentration of aluminium (not aluminium salt) in an Infanrix Hexa vaccine upon its injection into muscle is, according to the manufacturer, 0.82 mg/0.5 mL or 1.64 mg/mL or 1.64 g/L or approximately 60 mmol/L. This is the concentration of total systemically available aluminium immediately present at the injection site of the vaccine and available to bring about biological effect. Aluminium adjuvants are not inert depots at the vaccine injection site; they are sources of biologically reactive aluminium [1]. This concentration of total aluminium at the injection site of a vaccine can be put into context by examining the cellular toxicity of aluminium [12] and specifically as identified in recent scientific publications. We can ask the question if we would expect this concentration of aluminium to produce biological effects including cell death at the vaccine injection site. A relevant cell to investigate are lymphocytes and research has demonstrated significant genotoxicity in lymphocytes exposed to only 0.020 mmol/L total aluminium [13]. Similarly, in another study using lymphocytes 0.6 mmol/L total aluminium resulted in significant immunosuppression in both T and B-lymphocytes [14]. Clearly, we would expect profound effects on lymphocytes at the injection site of a vaccine where the total aluminium concentration is 60 mmol/L. Macrophages, a characteristically robust cell, are susceptible to aluminium toxicity demonstrating 50% cell death at a total aluminium concentration of 10 mmol/L [15]. Other more sensitive cell lines would include neuroblastoma where cell viability is reduced by 50% by less than 1 mmol/L total aluminium [16] and similarly for primary hippocampal neurons exposed to only 0.05 mmol/L total aluminium [17]. The concentration of systemically available aluminium immediately present at the injection site of a vaccine is very high in comparison to studies on cell cytotoxicity in the scientific literature. It is an acute exposure to aluminium and it results in significant cytotoxicity including necrotic cell death [1]. The resulting tissue inflammation is the characteristic red mark on the skin at the injection point. This acute toxicity in the immediate vicinity of the injection site underlies the success of aluminium salts as adjuvants in vaccinations [1]. However, while some cells, both present at and infiltrating the injection site, are compromised and especially immediately, other cells act to remedy the situation by taking up aluminium adjuvant into their cytoplasm [18]. This action reduces the concentration of biologically reactive (toxic) aluminium at the injection site and locks away potentially cytotoxic aluminium in intracellular vesicles. Herein may be the real issue linking aluminium adjuvants and severe adverse events following a vaccine. These aluminium-loaded cells remain viable for days, potentially weeks, which means that they can transport their cargo of aluminium anywhere in the body including the infant brain. The recruitment of systemic cells including macrophages to the central nervous system is a widely documented phenomenon [19]. There is now a viable mechanism for the accelerated loading of an infant’s brain with aluminium and evidence to support such a mechanism was demonstrated in our recent paper on aluminium in brain tissue in autism [20].

5. Conclusion: is the amount of aluminium in a vaccine ‘minuscule’?

Simply by looking at just one dose of a vaccine given at 8 weeks of age it is abundantly clear that science does not support this contention, as espoused regularly by many infant paediatricians. In fact, just a single dose of Infanrix Hexa vaccine represents a severe acute exposure to systemically available aluminium. A single dose of this vaccine is equivalent to the exposure to aluminium that an infant would receive from 150 days breast-feeding. It is equivalent to 25 times the daily dose of aluminium received from the most contaminated of infant formulas. It is pertinent to emphasise that an infant would receive a further two doses of this vaccine during the aforementioned 150 day period. It is also highly relevant that other aluminium adjuvanted vaccines, for example Prevenar 13 ( and Men B ( are also part of the infant vaccine schedule for this same period. In the United Kingdom it is not uncommon for an infant to receive all three of these aluminium adjuvanted vaccines on the same day. A combined daily exposure of 1.445 mg of aluminium (according to the manufacturer’s data), equivalent to 260 days exposure to aluminium through breast feeding. Exposure to aluminium through a vaccine is, in comparison to diet, an acute exposure and an infant’s physiology will respond differently to exposure to a high concentration of aluminium over a very short time period. The latter, acute versus chronic exposure, while not yet being taken into account in infant vaccination programmes, must now be considered to help to ensure that future vaccination schedules are safe. Currently the EMA and the FDA limit the aluminium content of a vaccine to 1.25 mg (See for example, This limit is based upon the aluminium adjuvant’s efficacy in inducing antibody titres. Perhaps now is the time to revise this limit based upon additional factors of vaccine safety.

Full Paper :