What Is Coming Through That Needle?

[Guest guest]

What Is Coming Through That Needle?

The Problem of Pathogenic Vaccine Contamination

McRearden

In recent times mankind is experiencing a situation never previously

encountered, that being the threat of release of pathogens intended to kill or

disable large numbers of people. That danger has prompted certain health

agencies to prepare for possible mass vaccination of the populace. The purpose

of this report is to examine the existing scientific evidence of pathogenic

contaminants in vaccines. This summary, while making no claim of being a

complete review of the subject, will point out sufficient examples and

illustrations of contamination with bacteria, viruses, and their components, so

as to enable the reader to make a more informed decision regarding accepting a

vaccination (or forcing others to receive one). It is presented in a format

intended for the public, their physicians, and their agency or governmental

representatives, and may be freely copied in its entirety.

If you as an individual are too busy to read this brief summary in one

sitting, please be aware there is ample evidence in the scientific literature

that serious viruses, bacteria; or components and toxins there from; as well as

foreign animal or cancer-related proteins and DNA are finding their way into the

commercial vaccines intended for humans, pets, and agricultural animals. If you

are interested in the short and long-term health of yourself and those you care

about, or serve as a public servant or medical advisor, you do owe it to

yourself to be informed.

In the production of viral vaccines on a commercial scale, the virus of

concern must be reproduced in large quantities. Viruses cannot survive or

reproduce without being introduced into cells that nourish them, which enables

the viral reproductive activity. In that sense all viruses can be considered

parasitic on other cells. Living cell types commonly used to reproduce viruses

in the lab include monkey kidney cells, chicken embryos, as well as other animal

and human cells. These cells must also be nourished with food, and are most

often fed with a nutrient mix containing in large part, bovine (cow) calf serum

(usually, serum extracted from fetal calf blood). This product can carry many

types of bovine blood-borne viruses, and is one of the primary sources of

vaccine contaminants. A journal article states, " a potential risk associated

with the production and use of biological products is viral contamination. This

contamination may be present in the source material, e.g. human blood, human or

animal tissues, cell banks, or introduced in the manufacturing process through

the use of animal sera... " (1)

Bovine viruses

The viruses and other agents that can contaminate bovine calf serum are

numerous. One of the most prominent is a pestivirus called bovine viral diarrhea

virus (2). More specifically, we see in several scientific journal sources these

types of statements: " contamination of a vaccine as a consequence of infection

of fetal calf serum " (3); " many batches of commercially available serum are

contaminated with viruses such as BVD " [bovine viral diarrhea] (4); " virus was

isolated from 332 of 1,608 (20.6%) lots of raw fetal calf serum obtained

specifically for the Center and 93 of 190 (49%) lots of commercially available

fetal calf serum (5); " agents most frequently detected in CCL's [continuous cell

lines] have been bovine viral diarrhea virus and mycoplasma. Our laboratory has

consistently found that the source of bovine viral diarrhea contamination of

CCLs has been the use of contaminated fetal bovine cell culture enrichment

serum " (6); and finally, " In conclusion, most commercially available bovine sera

are contaminated with BVDV and, although there is no evidence that the virus is

infectious, bovine sera should be screened for this virus.for the development or

production of vaccine. " (7)

Can this virus cause infection or disease in humans? New evidence shows

this is possible, as researchers have found a new strain that was isolated from

human cells, and it is very closely related to the bovine strains (8). One study

finds that an alarming 75% of all laboratory cell lines examined were

contaminated with pestivirus strains; of these, all of the bovine cell lines

were contaminated with one of three possible BVDV strains; cell lines from other

animal sources including primates, sometimes contained one of these BVDV strains

(9).

There is now heightened concern that this virus and others can cross

species lines, creating new strains as they adapt to their new hosts, and this

would include passage of the virus to and from humans. Whether the human strain

of BVDV causes overt illness is uncertain, because physicians may be uninformed

and not even be looking for this virus. It may be useful however, to compare the

infection patterns in cattle. They can be persistently infected at a low level

for their entire life with a non-pathogenic strain of the virus. Under these

conditions, they consistently create and shed virus into the surrounding

environment, which then infects other animals. The virus can nonetheless become

lethal to the animal if it mutates, with the new form also causing " visible cell

damage and death " in cultured conditions (10). The animal succumbs to gradual or

acute deterioration of the gastrointestinal mucous lining, which produces

diarrhea and its eventual demise. However, mutated virus is not always necessary

to provoke debilitating illness and death, and ordinary virus can be isolated

from the cow's pancreas, adrenal glands, and pituitary glands (11); the virus

has also been documented as causing serious pulmonary illness (12). A study

describes an outbreak of disease among goats due to a vaccine contaminated with

a bovine pestivirus; oddly, these animals experienced reproductive failure and

lesions to the central nervous system (13). So, can these disease symptoms in

varied organs and tissues also occur in humans when they carry this virus short

or long-term?

A cursory examination of the literature indicates this may be occurring.

One revealing study tells us " faeces from children under 2 years old who had

gastroenteritis that could not be attributed to recognised enteric pathogens

were examined.for Pestivirus antigens. Such antigens were detected in 30 of 128

episodes of gastroenteritis.The diarrhoeal disease in children excreting

Pestivirus antigens resembled that in other children except that it was more

commonly associated with signs and symptoms of respiratory inflammation. " (14)

There are also concerns regarding a pattern of pestivirus infection in infacts

born with microcephaly, a condition wherein the head or cranial capacity is

unusually small (15, 16).

Scientists from the USDA National Veterinary Services Laboratory describe

the situation quite clearly, and give an indication of the seriousness of the

problem: " The high frequency of virus and antibody detection in individual

animal or small pool samples suggests that any large pool of unscreened sera

will be contaminated. Infection of cell cultures with BVDV can lead to

interference with the growth of other viruses. Vaccine produced on contaminated

cells may in turn be contaminated, leading to seroconversion or disease in the

vaccine. The safety, purity, and efficacy of viral vaccines require BVDV testing

of ingredients, cell substrates and final product. " (17) And here is a similar

statement from a New York Blood Center: " Bovine viral diarrhea virus, whose

small virion size does not allow 100% assurance of its removal by filtration,

may potentially contaminate every lot of commercially produced fetal bovine

serum. " (18)

In reality though, how much of this particular viral contaminant has

trickled into humans? Well, in spite of manufacturers and regulatory agencies

claiming efficacy of their testing procedures, one 2001 study found 13% of human

MMR, polio, or Streptococcus pneumoniae vaccines tested positive for pestivirus

RNA (19). And another researcher observes, " serum antibodies against BVDV have

been detected in approximately 30% of human population who had no contact with

potentially infected animals. " (16) Also, " pestiviruses adapted to human cell

cultures may be harmful because serious BVDV infections in humans have been

frequently suggested.The BVDV persistently infected in cell cultures used for

vaccine productions have been shown to be a source of contamination in live

virus vaccines. It is, therefore, prerequisite to examine pestivirus

contamination in cell cultures to avoid secondary infections in humans as well

as in animals. " (20)

Continuous immortal cell lines

This same scientist brings up another important issue. Because many

medical-use biological products (including vaccines) are now being cultured or

produced on what is called " continuous " cell lines (i.e., these are cell

cultures consisting of " immortal " or cancerous types of cells because they have

no limits on how many times they can divide), there is concern that viral

contamination of these cell lines with a pathogen like bovine viral diarrhea

virus, could spread cancer-promoting material into the human recipient. How

could this happen? Briefly, it works like this. The virus (which in this case

has a single strand of RNA for its genome) is capable of incorporating RNA from

the cells in which it has been cultured, into its own genome. If any contaminant

RNA virus is present in a culture that contains immortal cancerous cells, this

virus can easily mutate to include unwanted oncogenic material, which can then

get passed into the biological product intended for human medical use (16).

Were you aware that biological products, including some common vaccines

(for instance, polio and rabies), are being produced on " continuous " immortal

cell lines? Manufacturers, scientists, and agencies will often assure us that

these cells themselves are not " tumorigenic " , i.e., they do not cause tumors per

se. A closer look however, shows this is not always the case. While lab

culturing may indicate that these types of cells are not immediately changing to

overt tumor cells, it is now well-known in the scientific community that after

these cells have been repeatedly cultured a certain number of times, something

causes them to convert to a cancerous state (21).

This journal article summary addresses the issue in regards to Vero cells,

which is a continuous cell line coming from the African green monkey, and is

commonly used in vaccine production. It states, " One of the current criteria for

evaluating the acceptability of cell lines for use in vaccine production is lack

of tumorigenicity. Vero cells represent an example of a class of cells known as

continuous cell lines. They were derived from African green monkey kidney, and

their growth properties and culture characteristics have many advantages over

other cell substrates for use in vaccine production. We have tested Vero cells

for tumorigenicity in nude mice and in a human muscle organ culture system, and

found a significant increase in their tumorigenic potential with increasing

passage numbers. Cells at passage 232 and higher produced nodules in all nude

mice inoculated. " (22) [The term " passage " in this context means the number of

times a cell line has been cultured].

There is another very important issue reported in studies that is

evidently being largely ignored as regards long-term vaccine effects and safety.

There is obvious evidence that in the lab, continuous immortal cell lines react

differently between one type of animal species and another (21, 23). As an

example, tissue from one species will allow the immortal cell to induce a

cancerous change more quickly, in comparison to tissue from a different species.

These results then beg the following questions. How extensively have these

continuous cell lines been tested on human tissues, and would the results vary

from one type of tissue to another? And what happens over the long term.if an

immortal cell from a vaccine culture makes its way into the final vaccine

product, does it keep dividing in the human body? Another scenario might suggest

the tumor-promoting portion of its DNA inserting into a viral genome, which then

gets injected into the body. what happens at that point?

Furthermore, given the evidence that closely-related animal species (as an

example, various species of monkeys) react differently to immortal cells, do we

also need to consider that any one vaccine intended for all humans might

ultimately react differently among the various races, ethnic groups, and sexes?

And what are the effects of the vaccine contaminants on persons with immune

depression, on the elderly, or on infants?

A letter from the FDA to vaccine manufacturers dated as recently as March

2001 shows that this issue regarding immortal cell lines is still of concern. It

states, " In general, CBER [Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research]

currently views Vero cells as an acceptable substrate for viral vaccines, but

has residual concerns.CBER recommends that all products derived from Vero cells

be free of residual intact Vero cells. If your manufacturing process does not

include a validated filtration step or other validated procedure to clear

residual intact Vero cells from the product, please incorporate such a procedure

into your manufacturing process. " (24) It is now 16 years after the WHO gave a

go-ahead (in 1986) to use continuous cell lines for vaccine production (25), and

yet there are very basic safety questions not resolved by the manufacturers,

agencies, and scientific community, much less the finer details (26, 27). One

1991 study reports: " Cell substrate DNA was shown to be an abundant contaminant

in the clarified preparations of the Sabin type 1, 2 and 3 poliovaccines

produced on a continuous cell line " (28). Another indicates that immortal cell

lines showed 100-times greater number of DNA recombination events compared to

normal cells (29). As one researcher states, " Using neoplastic cell lines as

substrates for vaccine development could inadvertently result in viral-viral or

viral-cellular interactions whose biological consequences are

unclear.viral-viral and viral-cellular interactions can result in the generation

of new retroviruses with pathological consequences. " (30). We note the term

" neoplastic " means the quality of having an abnormal growth characteristic.

There is an even stronger statement dating back to 1990. A scientist in

the field writes, " The present concern is for safety of vaccines made using

transformed or neoplastic mammalian cells that may contain endogenous

contaminating viruses or integrated gene sequences from oncogenic viruses. There

is also concern for use of plasmid vectors employing promoter elements from

oncogenic viruses. The principal concern for safety lies with retention of

residual DNA in the vaccine, especially since induction of cancer is a

single-cell phenomenon, and a single functional unit of foreign DNA integrated

into the host cell genome might serve to induce cell transformation as a single

event or part of a series of multifactorial events. Current proposed standards

for vaccines would permit contamination with up to 100 pg [picograms] of

heterologous DNA per dose. This is equivalent to about 10(8) 'functional

lengths' of DNA. Total safety would seem to require complete absence of DNA from

the product. " (31)

Please note that 10(8) means 10 to the power of 8, or 100,000,000

" functional lengths " of DNA are allowed per dose of vaccine. Is there something

wrong with this picture? How long will the general public be subjected to these

vaccine products that according to this information, are nowhere near safe?

It has taken, for instance, approximately forty years for the scientific

community to finally acknowledge that we have a serious problem as a result of

the contamination of polio vaccines with simian virus 40 (SV40) in the late

1950s-early 1960s. There has been previous evidence of some human brain and

other tumors containing this virus (32, 33), but the medical community has been

slow to acknowledge a definitive link between SV40 and cancer in humans.

However, two independent research teams have recently found this virus present

in 43% of cases of non-Hodgkins lymphoma (34, 35). Another study found it

present in 36% of brain tumors, 16% of healthy blood cell samples, and 22% of

healthy semen samples (36). And strangely, SV40 has now been found to infect

children (37). Considering that children of this era, are not supposed to be

receiving the virus via the vaccine contamination route, this would therefore

imply that SV40 is being transmitted from one human to another, in ways not

previously known.

Other simian viruses may also be contaminating the (Vero) monkey cell

lines used for vaccine production. One example from the literature cites the

contamination presence of SV20, which is a oncogenic simian adenovirus (38).

Simply put, are we in a state of denial that vaccines are ultimately

transmitting viruses, DNA, and proteins into humans from foreign animal sources

(and possibly unhealthy human sources), and that this may be strongly

contributing to the incredible upsurge in cancers and serious chronic diseases?

Are these foreign animal genes altering your DNA? Furthermore, given that viral

presence can sometimes take years to manifest actual disease symptoms, and then

considering the tendencies of health-related agencies and corporations towards

short-term solutions and profits, will we ever truly know the long-term

consequences until it is too late?

Other bovine viruses

Another contaminating virus found in the calf serum used for vaccine

production is bovine polyoma virus (polyoma viruses are strongly associated with

cancer); one pertinent article is titled " Bovine polyoma virus, a frequent

contaminant of calf serum " (39). Other contaminants include a virus from the

parvovirus family (40); another study cites " virus-like particles " and

" mycoplasma-like agents " in 68% and 20% of the samples, respectively (41); and

yet another mentions the presence of infectious bovine rhinotracheitis virus

(aka bovine herpes virus 1), and parainfluenza-3 virus in addition to the common

BVDV (42). An interesting report from 1975 not only affirms the presence of

these viruses in calf serum, and mentions the additional presence of bovine

enterovirus-4, but also tells us that 25% of serum lots that were pre-tested by

the suppliers and " considered to be free of known viral contaminants " were

actually contaminated with bovine viruses (43). It should be obvious that any

bovine blood-borne virus (including serious retroviruses such as bovine leukemia

virus, bovine visna virus, and bovine immunodeficiency virus) could ultimately

end up in human or animal vaccines via the use of calf serum in the

manufacturing process.

Contamination of calf serum with certain bovine herpes viruses, and the

possible implication for human health, deserves a bit of scrutiny. It is known

that bovine herpesvirus-1 replicates easily in a human embryo cell line called

WI-38 (44). It is also known that bovine herpesvirus-4 is quite " persistent " in

calf serum, and has a wide host range, including human cells (45). In fact, this

particular virus strongly replicates in two human embryonic cell lines, WI-38

and MRC-5, enough so to prompt one author to give these details and a warning:

" PCR [polymerase chain reaction] detected a 10,000-times-higher level of BHV-4

[bovine herpesvirus-4] DNA. the supernatant indicated a 100-fold increase of

infectious particles. Since this is the first bovine (human herpes virus 8 and

Epstein-Barr virus related) herpes virus which replicates on human cells in

vitro, the danger of possible human BHV-4 infection should not be ignored. " (46)

The clincher to this possible contamination, is that these same human cell

lines WI-38 and MRC-5 are two of the most common human cell lines used to

manufacture viral vaccines, (for example - rubella, chickenpox, smallpox) and

these cell lines are of course, commonly nurtured with calf serum.

Contaminants from chicken sources

Some viral vaccines are produced by growing the virus in chicken eggs.

Common human vaccines manufactured by this method include influenza, mumps,

measles, yellow fever, and others. Like the vaccines that include bovine-source

materials, those derived from chicken embryo culture are plagued with some very

serious viral contamination problems.

Avian leukosis virus (aka avian leukemia virus or ALV) is a retroviral

pathogen that infects large segments of the modern poultry industry, is present

in commercial chickens and eggs, and thus exposes humans on a consistent basis

(47). An interesting virus in the sense that it can be considered a " parent " , it

easily transforms into a dizzying array of related viruses by hijacking one of

numerous cancer-related gene segments from its host, and inserting it into its

own genome. Furthermore, it has the additional capability of inserting itself

into the host (including human) genome, hiding out so to speak, and causing

cancerous cell transformation from that location. There is now much scientific

literature available that describes the various active mechanisms of this and

other cancer-associated viruses (48). Viruses that originate from the " parent "

avian leukosis virus, include the potent Rous sarcoma virus, Rous-associated

viruses, avian myeloblastosis virus, avian myelocytoma virus, avian

erythroblastosis virus, Fujinami sarcoma virus, etc. One group of researchers

studying the mechanism of ALV writes, " Serial passaging of a retrovirus that

does not carry an oncogene on such cultures leads with a high frequency to the

emergence of new viruses that have transduced oncogenes. " (49). In other words,

given the right growth conditions, ALV can easily transform into other closely

related viruses that are known to be cancer-related.

Just how common is this avian leukosis virus in viral vaccines? The first

evidence of contamination came to light in the 1960s when yellow fever vaccine

was found to contain it (50). Since that time, it is common knowledge in the

industry that this virus (or components thereof) still linger in human and

animal vaccines (51). Indeed, the respected Fields Virology text (year 2001

edition) states, " At the present time, vaccines produced by some of the world's

12 manufacturing institutes are contaminated with avian leukosis virus " (52). One

point that researchers in this field do agree upon, are the presence of ALV,

avian endogenous virus, avian reticuloendotheliosis virus (another poultry

retrovirus), and also an enzyme called reverse transcriptase (a component of

retroviruses) in final vaccine products intended for human use, especially the

mumps, measles, yellow fever, and influenza vaccines (53, 54, 55). What they do

not agree upon are the effects on humans in terms of transmission, infection,

and possible subsequent disease. A recent study coming out of the U.S. CDC

(Centers for Disease Control), which analyzed frozen blood serum samples from

children that had received MMR vaccinations, reports no avian viral presence in

these samples (56).

And yet, we see reports from other researchers that make us question the

results of that study. As is often the case with viruses, some strains will show

particular affinities for certain types of tissues or growth conditions, and ALV

is no exception (57). One researcher makes the effort to explain, " Because of

the difficulty in infecting mammalian cells in vitro with these viruses, it is

generally held that they do not infect humans.Our results show that exposed

poultry workers and subjects with no occupational exposure to these viruses have

antibodies in their sera specifically directed against ALSV [Avian

leucosis/sarcoma viruses]. Further investigation into whether these findings

mean that virus has been integrated into the human genome is needed, to assess

the public health implications of these results. " (58). He also explains in

another article, that given the known behavior of these viruses in mammalian

cellular culture, a blood serum test will not always provide the correct

evidence of viral presence in the human body (47). In other words, does the

virus (or viral antibodies) need to be actively present in the blood stream at

the time of the blood draw? What if the viral particles have retreated into

other tissues? Thus the CDC study mentioned above may not have presented an

accurate assessment of viral presence, or long-term effects from the numerous

ALV-associated " offspring " viruses. Considering that ALV can for example, easily

capture the human " erbB " oncogene (59), and that erbB as well as the oncogene

called myc are strongly associated with common forms of human breast cancer, it

seems that the issue of ALV vaccine contamination would deserve a high level of

attention! (By the way, the general reader should not feel intimidated by the

abbreviations associated with oncogenes.erb refers to " erythroblastosis " , and

myc refers to myelocytomatosis, which are the names of two ALV-associated

offspring viruses). A well-known microbiology text reinforces these concepts by

teaching, " Proto-oncogenes become incorporated into retroviral genomes with

surprising ease. " (60)

Toxin contamination

The unintentional presence of bacterial-source toxins (called " endotoxins "

or " exotoxins " ) in human and veterinary vaccines has been recognized for many

years. Such toxins are originally present in source materials, or are produced

as a result of bacterial infection during the manufacturing process (61, 62).

The various methods used in attempts to eliminate viruses and bacteria from

vaccines are simply not effective in the removal of these problematic toxic

proteins (63). Several observers have expressed concern that the presence of

endotoxin may be a source of severe adverse reactions seen in some individuals

after receiving a vaccine (61, 64). Some vaccines, such as those for diphtheria

and tetanus, are specifically created to induce a protective mechanism in the

body against the bacterial toxin; however, vaccines prepared from bacteria can

contain appreciable and potentially dangerous lingering amounts of toxin,

despite the steps used during manufacture to decrease the toxic potency, as

described in this comment: " Vaccines composed of gram-negative bacteria contain

endotoxin in considerable amounts. This may result in adverse effects after

vaccination of sensitive animals. " (65). It has also been reported that

bacterial toxin contamination residing in calf serum, can cause breaks in the

DNA of human cells (66).

Bacterial contamination - nanobacteria

Nanobacteria is a recently discovered pathogen that infects humans. Now

considered to be the smallest existing bacterial form known to science, it

escapes through common filtering processes, and can easily invade other cells

and cause cell death. Nanobacteria also are classed as " pleomorphic " , that is,

they have the ability the change physical form. A human variety of this pathogen

has been found to cause or be associated with a host of disease conditions, only

a few of which include atherosclerosis, coronary artery / heart disease, kidney

stones and kidney disease, arthritis, MS, alzheimers, some cancers, and other

conditions (67).

Since this species of bacteria is specific to mammals, and must be

lab-cultured in mammalian blood or serum, it is not surprising that this variety

of nanobacterium has been isolated as a contaminant from bovine calf serum,

other mammaliam bio-products, and vaccines. One study reports that 100% of serum

of cattle in a US herd showed antigens to nanobacteria, and cites another report

from Europe that, " more than 80% of commercial bovine serum lots contain

Nanobacterium " (68). Obviously, any vaccines that must incorporate mammalian

products during production (which would include cow, monkey, or human cells,

blood or serum), will be prone to nanobacterial contamination. This was indeed

verified when a group of researchers found that 2 out of 3 lots of inactivated

polio vaccine, and 3 out of 6 lots of veterinary vaccines were contaminated with

nanobacteria. They also point out that the bacteria could be coming from calf

serum and contaminated culture cell lines (69). Any reasoning person with a

basic knowledge of vaccine production can deduce that nanobacteria have

undoubtedly been infecting humans in a fairly widespread manner via vaccination

procedures. One might also wonder whether it has contributed to the current

prevalence of atherosclerosis and generalized heart disease.

Bacterial contamination - mycoplasmas and related forms

If there is any one type of bacterial contamination in vaccines that

warrants particular attention, it would be mycoplasmas. These small organisms

have a structure not characteristic of most forms of bacteria, i.e., they

usually contain a thin outer membrane as compared to the more complex walls of

common bacterial forms. They are described as being capable of slipping through

filtration procedures, and can transfer to other media through the air or via

routine handling in the lab (70). One source states that " less than 10% of

laboratories actually test for infection/contamination regularly " .that

mycoplasmas are " influencing almost every aspect of cell biology " .and that labs

" which do not test for mycoplasma probably harbour contaminated cell lines and

may even have their entire stocks contaminated, as mycoplasma spreads readily

along cell lines via regents and media, the operator and the work surface " (71).

They are resistant to certain types of antibiotics used to kill other bacteria

(70, 72), and are subject to changing form under varying physiological or

biochemical conditions (73).

The journal and industry literature is filled with references to the

problems of mycoplasma contamination in cell cultures and vaccines. Various

studies cite corrupted cell lines ranging in occurrence from 5% to 87% (71, 72,

74, 75, 76), and as we now know, once this pathogen is in the cell culture being

used to make the vaccine, it is liable to end up in the final product (77, 78,

79,80). One author states, " Mycoplasma contaminants can be considered important

not only because of their role as pathogens but also because they may indicate

that insufficient care has been taken during vaccine manufacture or quality

control. " (81). Species of mycoplasmas that have polluted the cell cultures

include Mycoplasma hominis, M. fermentans (implicated in Gulf War illness), M.

arginini, M. hyorhinis, M. orale, M. pirum, M. pneumoniae, and Acholeplasma

laidlawii (75, 76, 82). Any reputable company that sells tissue or cell culture

material, also must test for and sell kits to detect mycoplasmas (72, 75, 76,

83, 84).

Mycoplasmas and associated variant forms have long been associated with

many disease processes, including cancer, chronic illnesses such as chronic

fatigue syndrome, fibromyalgia, arthritis, Gulf War Illness, and many others

(73, 85, 86). It would be impossible to cite all the pertinent references in

this short report, on this vast arena of microbiology that is often ignored by

much of the medical community, sometimes with tragic consequences. Mycoplasmas

without question have the capability of altering cell membranes and their

antigens, disrupting DNA, and altering cellular metabolism both in vitro and in

vivo (70, 71, 72, 73, 86).

Cross-contamination of cell lines

As we recall that all viral vaccines can only be produced with the use of

cells, the purity of the cell lines an important issue. The most famous example

of many cell lines becoming contaminated from outside sources, occurred when the

famous and extremely fastidious HeLa cancer cells started showing up in labs

across the world in the 1960s. The phenomenon is well-documented (87, 88, 89,

90), and is even the subject of an entire book (91). One study from 1976 cited a

litany of contamination in all primary and continuous cell lines that were

examined - many viruses were found, as well as HeLa cells (92). As the years

progress, the reports continue to come in: one from 1984, for instance, tells of

inter- and intra-species cell cross-contamination, that 35% of all cell lines

were corrupted, and that most of these lines were (originally) cells of human

origin (93).

Let's fast-forward to 1999. A study in Germany finds that the problem is

continuing, if not worsening. In a survey of human cell lines, the most common

cross-contaminants came from " classic tumor cell lines " ; that these polluted

lines had been unknowingly used in " several hundred " projects which generated

potentially false reports; and that they considered it a " grave and chronic

problem demanding radical measures " (94).

The situation is such that several scientists were prompted to write a

letter to the respected journal " Nature " in January 2000, calling for immediate

action to institute procedures that would verify the purity of cells used for

research and production of biological products, ensure freedom from mycoplasma,

and include biohazard information (95). (Did I hear that correctly - cells can

be considered a biohazard)? Has anything changed since then to remedy the

situation? There is another report from Jan. 2002, that two major cell lines

used in research projects actually turned out to be HeLa cells (96).

I ask the reader to now recall information from earlier in this report,

that there are proposals being considered to produce vaccines and other

biological products using distinctly cancerous cell lines, including HeLa (25).

Does this seem reasonable, especially since the current lines are already

dangerously tainted with HeLa and possibly other cancerous cells? Please

remember the 100,000,000 allowable pieces of cell-source DNA allowed per dose of

vaccine (and this does not include the viral contaminants). Anyone care for a

small, under-the-skin serving of human cancer-cell-component soup? With maybe a

few monkey cell fragments for garnish, and viruses for flavor?

Additional points to consider

There are several issues the public and medical community may want to be

aware of concerning safe administration of vaccines. The human and animal body

has normal barriers that help to protect against infiltration by foreign agents,

among them are the skin, the respiratory and intestinal mucous linings, and the

blood-brain barrier. The puncture of skin by a needle breaches that barrier. A

group of researchers states, " Virus contamination of bioproducts such as

vaccines, blood products or biological material used in surgery and for

transplantations also is more hazardous because the application of contaminating

virus usually occurs by circumvention of the natural barrier systems of the

body.virus contamination of bioproducts should be considered as a hazard no

matter which method has been used for its detection. " (97). Of even more

concern, is the administration of vaccines nasally (through the nose), or

accidental passage via that route (98). Fields Virology text (2001) says, " The

olfactory tract has long been recognized as an alternative pathway to the CNS

[central nervous system].olfactory neurons.are unprotected by the blood brain

barrier. " While that writer particularly addresses the flavivirus family [i.e.,

" intranasal inoculation of flaviviruses may result in lethal encephalitis "

(99)], this pattern of potential danger may deserve further attention than it

currently receives, especially if there ever is consideration to use a method of

nasal inoculation for mass vaccination of the public or military, and there may

be contaminating viruses or toxins in a vaccine that have an affinity for nerve

cells and tissues.

Mass immunization programs often use jet injectors to save the time and

inconvenience associated with needles and syringes. However, a study published

in July 2001, found that the four injectors tested had the capability of

transferring tiny amounts of fluid and blood (and thus, viruses such as

hepatitis B and C, HIV, etc.) from one recipient to the next (100). Numerous

other articles confirm the danger, and question the safety of these devices,

including one study that reported an outbreak of hepatitis B associated with use

of a jet injector (101, 102).

Some of the newest types of vaccines are called " subunit " and " naked DNA "

vaccines. Without going into the intricacies of their production, they involve

techniques used in genetic engineering. Subunit vaccines generally will insert a

viral or bacterial DNA section into the DNA from yeast, which is allowed to

reproduce in large quantities. The protein intended for inclusion in the vaccine

is then separated from the yeast cells. In the case of naked DNA vaccines, the

viral or DNA gene is first reproduced, then spliced into a plasmid (which is

essentially free DNA, widely used in recombinant technology), reproduced in

bacteria or cells, and then separated from them for inclusion in the vaccine.

Recombinant gene vaccines can also be produced via these methods - for instance,

hepatitis B is now an exclusively recombinant vaccine (103, 104)

One of the major concerns with these methods is the unpredictability and

interaction of the final vaccine product with the proteins or DNA of the host. A

document from the FDA states: " Genetic toxicity: Integration of the plasmid DNA

vaccine into the genome of the vaccinated subjects is an important theoretical

risk to consider in preclinical studies. The concern is that an integrated

vaccine may result in insertional mutagenesis through the activation of

oncogenes or inactivation of tumor suppressor genes. In addition, an integrated

plasmid DNA vaccine may result in chromosomal instability through the induction

of chromosomal breaks or rearrangements. " (105). Another group advises,

" Research findings in gene therapy and vaccine development show that naked/free

nucleic acids constructs are readily taken up by the cells of all species

including human beings. These nucleic acid constructs can become integrated into

the cell's genome and such integration may result in harmful biological effects,

including cancers. " (106). And to reiterate the danger of tumorigenic cell

lines, a researcher says, " More recently, recombinant DNA technology has

expanded beyond bacterial cells to mammalian cells, some of which may also be

tumorigenic. " (107).

It seems obvious that there needs to be a new and open dialog regarding

vaccines among the regulatory agencies, manufacturers, research and medical

community, and the public. Many have been ridiculed for refusing vaccination for

themselves or their children, but considering the occurrences of short-term

adverse events and questionable efficacy (108), possible long-term health

damage, and now also facing the potential of wide-ranging loss of civil

liberties (109), is it so surprising that many are questioning what the actual

benefits are surrounding most vaccination protocols? Are the cases of damaged

children, non-functional adults, the huge increases in cancer rates, immune and

chronic diseases to be simply and blindly accepted by the public as " tolerable

losses " ?

As a citizen with a right to good health, please be advised of the

following issues. Vaccine quality in the U.S. relies for the most part, on

manufacturers reporting to the FDA. Here is a relevant statement from the CDC:

" Manufacturers are required to submit the results of their own tests for

potency, safety, and purity for each vaccine lot to the FDA. They are also

required to submit samples of each vaccine lot to FDA for testing. However, if

the sponsor describes an alternative procedure which provides continued

assurance of safety, purity and potency, CBER may determine that routine

submission of lot release protocols (showing results of applicable tests) and

samples is not necessary. " (110) Yes, this is the scope of the quality-control

protocol that oversees a market worth billions of dollars, yet allowing all

these contaminants into the vaccines.

It may be helpful to have an idea of the scope of the operation to

understand what we are dealing with here. We are advised that " Large-scale cell

culture operations for biotechnology products use millions of litres of complex

media and gases as well as huge quantities of organic and inorganic raw

materials. These raw materials must always be assumed to contain contamination

by adventitious agents " (111). And because there is a potentially large number

of animal and human viruses (or viral segments) that could be entering into the

final vaccine products, it would take a equally large bank of molecular probes,

as well as frequent, wide-spread testing, to screen for presence of these

contaminating agents. This would obviously add time and expense for the

manufacturers. What needs to be decided is this - is the effort and cost

involved in cleaning up these admittedly filthy medical products, worth the

resultant benefit to the public health? And since certain animal products are

necessary for the production of vaccines, it may also be necessary to clean

house at several levels, including the agricultural sector. It is no secret for

instance, that commercial chicken flocks raised for meat and eggs are often

carrying infectious avian leucosis virus, mentioned earlier in this report (112,

113, 114)

For the record, the smallpox vaccine ordered by the U.S. government from

Aventis is being produced on two types of continuous cell lines, the human

embryonic MRC-5 and the green monkey Vero cells (115). We might also be advised

of one researcher's thoughts, that " normal embryo and foreskin cells presumably

represent a state in development which is genetically unstable, rendering them

considerably more susceptible to malignant transformation. " (116). Are remnants

of these types of cells something we want injected into our bodies?

The decision you make in accepting or refusing a vaccination can be a very

personal one, but whatever you decide, do try to be informed of the true

benefits and risks. Nobody should be forced to submit to any medical procedure,

especially one of questionable value.

References / Notes

[items with a PMID number will usually have abstracts available to read.

Go to the PubMed website: http://www4.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi and

enter the accession number into the search box.]

1. Trijzelaar B. Regulatory affairs and biotechnology in Europe: III.

Introduction into good regulatory practice--validation of virus removal and

inactivation. Biotherapy 1993; 6(2):93-102. PMID 8398576.

2. Vilcek S. Identification of pestiviruses contaminating cell lines and

fetal calf sera. Acta Virol 2001 Apr;45(2):81-6. PMID 11719986.

3. Barkema HW, Bartels CJ, van Wuijckhuise L, Hesselink JW, Holzhauer M,

Weber MF, en P, Kock PA, Bruschke CJ, Zimmer GM. Outbreak of bovine virus

diarrhea on Dutch dairy farms induced by a bovine herpesvirus 1 marker vaccine

contaminated with bovine virus diarrhea virus type 2. Tijdschr Diergeneeskd 2001

Mar 15;126(6):158-65. PMID 11285633.

4. Rolleston WB. Bovine serum: reducing the variables through the use of

donor herds. Dev Biol Stand 1999;99:79-86. PMID 10404879.

5. Bolin SR, s PJ, Ridpath JF. Methods for detection and frequency

of contamination of fetal calf serum with bovine viral diarrhea virus and

antibodies against bovine viral diarrhea virus. : J Vet Diagn Invest 1991

Jul;3(3):199-203. PMID 1655059.

6. kson GA, Landgraf JG, Wessman SJ, Koski TA, Moss LM. Detection and

elimination of adventitious agents in continuous cell lines. Dev Biol Stand

1989;70:59-66. PMID 2759356.

7. Yanagi M, Bukh J, Emerson SU, Purcell RH. Contamination of commercially

available fetal bovine sera with bovine viral diarrhea virus genomes:

implications for the study of hepatitis C virus in cell cultures. J Infect Dis

1996 Dec;174(6):1324-7. PMID 8940226.

8. Giangaspero M, Harasawa R, Verhulst A. Genotypic analysis of the

5'-untranslated region of a pestivirus strain isolated from human leucocytes.

Microbiol Immunol 1997;41(10):829-34. PMID 9403511.

9. Harasawa R, Mizusawa H. Demonstration and genotyping of pestivirus RNA

from mammalian cell lines. Microbiol Immunol 1995;39(12):979-85. PMID 8789057.

10. Brock, KV. Pathogenesis of BVDV Infections.

http://www.vetmed.auburn.edu/~brockkv/path.htm and

http://www.vetmed.auburn.edu/~brockkv/terms.htm

11. Stoffregen B, Bolin SR, Ridpath JF, Pohlenz J. Morphologic lesions in

type 2 BVDV infections experimentally induced by strain BVDV2-1373 recovered

from a field case. Vet Microbiol 2000 Nov 15;77(1-2):157-62. PMID 11042409.

12. Meehan JT, Lehmkuhl HD, Cutlip RC, Bolin SR. Acute pulmonary lesions

in sheep experimentally infected with bovine viral diarrhoea virus. J Comp

Pathol 1998 Oct;119(3):277-92. PMID 9807729.

13. Loken T, Krogsrud J, Bjerkas I. Outbreaks of border disease in goats

induced by a pestivirus-contaminated orf vaccine, with virus transmission to

sheep and cattle. J Comp Pathol 1991 Feb;104(2):195-209. PMID 1650802.

14. Yolken R, Dubovi E, Leister F, Reid R, Almeido-Hill J, Santosham M.

Infantile gastroenteritis associated with excretion of pestivirus antigens.

Lancet 1989 Mar 11;1(8637):517-20. PMID 2564059.

15. Potts BJ, Sever JL, Tzan NR, Huddleston D, Elder GA. Possible role of

pestiviruses in microcephaly. Lancet 1987 Apr 25;1(8539):972-3.

16. Harasawa R. Latent Risk in Bovine Serums Used for Biopharmaceutic

Production. http://www.asmusa.org/pcsrc/sum02.htm

17. Levings RL, Wessman SJ. Bovine viral diarrhea virus contamination of

nutrient serum, cell cultures and viral vaccines. Dev Biol Stand 1991;75:177-81.

PMID 1665461.

18. http://www.nybloodcenter.org/PatentsAndLicensing/SDTechnology.htm

19. Giangaspero M, Vacirca G, Harasawa R, Buttner M, Panuccio A, De Giuli

Morghen C, Zanetti A, Belloli A, Verhulst A. Genotypes of pestivirus RNA

detected in live virus vaccines for human use. J Vet Med Sci 2001

Jul;63(7):723-33. PMID 11503899.

20. Harasawa R, Mizusawa H. Detection of Pestiviruses from Mammalian Cell

Cultures by the Polymerase Chain Reaction. Proceedings of 3rd Internet World

Congress on Biomedical Sciences 1996.12.9-20 Riken, Tsukuba, Japan.

http://www.3iwc.riken.go.jp/CONGRESS/SYMPO/SBB0202/AK0111/TIT.HTM

21. Contreras G, Bather R, Furesz J, Becker BC. Activation of metastatic

potential in African green monkey kidney cell lines by prolonged in vitro

culture. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol 1985 Nov;21(11):649-52. PMID 4066602.

22. Levenbook IS, Petricciani JC, Elisberg BL. Tumorigenicity of Vero

cells. J Biol Stand 1984 Oct;12(4):391-8. PMID 6526826.

23. Furesz J, Fanok A, Contreras G, Becker B. Tumorigenicity testing of

various cell substrates for production of biologicals. Dev Biol Stand

1989;70:233-43. PMID 2759351.

24. Letter to Sponsors Using Vero Cells as a Cell Substrate for

Investigational Vaccines. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health

Service, Food and Drug Administration, Division of Vaccines and Related Products

Applications, March 12, 2001. www.fda.gov/cber/ltr/vero031301.htm

25. U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Food

and Drug Administration, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. Evolving

Scientific and Regulatory Perspectives on Cell Substrates for Vaccine

Development. http://www.fda.gov/cber/minutes/0907evolv.txt

26. AM Jr. Developing an approach to evaluate the use of neoplastic

cells as vaccine substrates. Dev Biol (Basel) 2001;106:37-42; discussion 42-3.

PMID 11761251.

27. Purcell DF. Pathogenesis of replication competent retroviruses derived

from mouse cells in immuno suppressed primates: implications for use of

neoplastic cells as vaccine substrates. Dev Biol (Basel) 2001;106:187-98;

discussion 199, 253-63. PMID 11761231.

28. Amosenko FA, Svitkin YV, Popova VD, Terletskaya EN, Timofeev AV,

Elbert LB, Lashkevich VA, Drozdov SG. Use of protamine sulphate for elimination

of substrate DNA in polio vaccines produced on continuous cell lines. Vaccine

1991 Mar;9(3):207-9. PMID 1645900.

29. Thyagarajan B, McCormick-Graham M, Romero DP, C.

Characterization of homologous DNA recombination activity in normal and immortal

mammalian cells. Nucleic Acids Res 1996 Oct 15;24(20):4084-91. PMID 8918816

(full text article available free at this link).

30. Ruscetti SK. Generation of mink cell focus-inducing retroviruses: a

model for understanding how viral-viral and viral-cellular interactions can

result in biological consequences. Dev Biol (Basel) 2001;106:163-7; discussion

167-8, 253-63. PMID 11761228.

31. Hilleman MR. History, precedent, and progress in the development of

mammalian cell culture systems for preparing vaccines: safety considerations

revisited. J Med Virol 1990 May;31(1):5-12. PMID 2198327.

32. Butel JS, Lednicky JA. Cell and molecular biology of simian virus 40:

implications for human infections and disease. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999 Jan

20;91(2):119-34. PMID 9923853.

33. Arrington AS, Lednicky JA, Butel JS. Molecular characterization of

SV40 DNA in multiple samples from a human mesothelioma. Anticancer Res 2000

Mar-Apr;20(2A):879-84. PMID 10810370.

34. Vilchez RA, Madden CR, Kozinetz CA, Halvorson SJ, White ZS, nsen

JL, Finch CJ, Butel JS. Association between simian virus 40 and non-Hodgkin

lymphoma. Lancet 2002 Mar 9;359(9309):817-23. PMID 11897278.

35. Shivapurkar N, Harada K, Reddy J, Scheuermann RH, Xu Y, McKenna RW,

Milchgrub S, Kroft SH, Feng Z, Gazdar AF. Presence of simian virus 40 DNA

sequences in human lymphomas. Lancet 2002 Mar 9;359(9309):851-2. PMID 11897287.

36. Bu X, Zhang X, Zhang X, et Al. A study of simian virus 40 infection

and its origin in human brain tumors. Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi 2000

Feb;21(1):19-21. PMID 11860751.

37. Butel JS, Jafar S, Wong C, Arrington AS, Opekun AR, Finegold MJ, Adam

E. Evidence of SV40 infections in hospitalized children. Hum Pathol 1999

Dec;30(12):1496-502. PMID 10667429.

38. von Mettenheim AE. Studies on simian viruses as possible contaminants

of inactivated virus vaccines. I. Direct and serologic detection of simian

adenovirus SV20. Zentralbl Bakteriol [Orig A] 1975 Jul;232(2-3):131-40. PMID

1179876.

39. Schuurman R, van Steenis B, Sol C. Bovine polyomavirus, a frequent

contaminant of calf serum. Biologicals 1991 Oct;19(4):265-70. PMID 1665699.

40. Nettleton PF, Rweyemamu MM. The association of calf serum with the

contamination of BHK21 clone 13 suspension cells by a parvovirus serologically

related to the minute virus of mice (MVM). Arch Virol 1980;64(4):359-74. PMID

7396725.

41. Fong CK, Gross PA, Hsiung GD, Swack NS. Use of electron microscopy for

detection of viral and other microbial contaminants in bovine sera. J Clin

Microbiol 1975 Feb;1(2):219-24. PMID 51855.

42. kson GA, Bolin SR, Landgraf JG. Viral contamination of fetal

bovine serum used for tissue culture: risks and concerns. Dev Biol Stand

1991;75:173-5. PMID 1665460.

43. Kniazeff AJ, Wopschall LJ, Hopps HE, CS. Detection of bovine

viruses in fetal bovine serum used in cell culture. In Vitro 1975

Nov-Dec;11(6):400-3. PMID 172434.

44. Michalski FJ, Dietz A, Hsiung GD. Growth characteristics of bovine

herpesvirus 1 (infectious bovine rhinotracheitis) in human diploid cell strain

WI-38. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 1976 Feb;151(2):407-10. PMID 175382.

45. Egyed L. Bovine herpesvirus type 4: a special herpesvirus (review

article). Acta Vet Hung 2000;48(4):501-13. PMID 11402667.

46. Egyed L. Replication of bovine herpesvirus type 4 in human cells in

vitro. J Clin Microbiol 1998 Jul;36(7):2109-11. PMID 9650976.

47. ES. Poultry oncogenic retroviruses and humans. Cancer Detect

Prev 1994;18(1):9-30. PMID 8162609.

48. For example, see Nevins JR, " Cell Transformation by Viruses " , in Knipe

DM et al (ed.), 2001. Fields Virology (4th ed), Vol. I, chapter 10, p.245-283.

Lippincott. Also see Joklik WK, " Tumor Viruses " , in Joklik WK et al, 1992.

Zinsser Microbiology (20th ed), chapter 59, p.869-905. Appleton & Lange.

49. Felder MP, Eychene A, Laugier D, Marx M, Dezelee P, Calothy G. Steps

and mechanisms of oncogene transduction by retroviruses. Folia Biol (Praha)

1994;40(5):225-35. PMID 7895853.

50. RJ, Dougherty RM, Biggs PM, Payne LN, Goffe AP, Churchill AE,

Mortimer R. Contaminant viruses in two live virus vaccines produced in chick

cells. J Hyg (Lond) 1966 Mar;64(1):1-7. PMID 4286627.

51. Payne LN, Biggs PM, Chubb RC, Bowden RS. Contamination of egg-adapted

canine distemper vaccine by avian leukosis virus. Vet Rec 1966 Jan 8;78(2):45-8.

PMID 4285488.

52. Knipe DM et al (ed.) 2001. Fields Virology (4th ed), Vol. I, p.1103.

Lippincott.

53. JA, Heneine W. Characterization of endogenous avian leukosis

viruses in chicken embryonic fibroblast substrates used in production of measles

and mumps vaccines. J Virol 2001 Apr;75(8):3605-12. PMID 11264350.

54. Maudru T, Peden KW. Analysis of a coded panel of licensed vaccines by

polymerase chain reaction-based reverse transcriptase assays: a collaborative

study. J Clin Virol 1998 Jul 24;11(1):19-28. PMID 9784140.

55. Tsang SX, Switzer WM, Shanmugam V, JA, Goldsmith C, A,

Fadly A, Thea D, Jaffe H, Folks TM, Heneine W. Evidence of avian leukosis virus

subgroup E and endogenous avian virus in measles and mumps vaccines derived from

chicken cells: investigation of transmission to vaccine recipients. J Virol 1999

Jul;73(7):5843-51. PMID 10364336.

56. Hussain AI, Shanmugam V, Switzer WM, Tsang SX, Fadly A, Thea D,

Helfand R, Bellini WJ, Folks TM, Heneine W. Lack of evidence of endogenous avian

leukosis virus and endogenous avian retrovirus transmission to measles, mumps,

and rubella vaccine recipients. Emerg Infect Dis 2001 Jan-Feb;7(1):66-72. PMID

11266296. Full article text available at

www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol7no1/hussain.htm

57. Arshad SS, Howes K, Barron GS, LM, PH, Payne LN. Tissue

tropism of the HPRS-103 strain of J subgroup avian leukosis virus and of a

derivative acutely transforming virus. Vet Pathol 1997 Mar;34(2):127-37. PMID

9066079.

58. ES, Overby L, Philpot R. Detection of antibodies to avian

leukosis/sarcoma viruses and reticuloendotheliosis viruses in humans by western

blot assay. Cancer Detect Prev 1995;19(6):472-86. PMID 8925516.

59. Raines MA, Maihle NJ, Moscovici C, Crittenden L, Kung HJ. Mechanism of

c-erbB transduction: newly released transducing viruses retain poly(A) tracts of

erbB transcripts and encode C-terminally intact erbB proteins. J Virol 1988

Jul;62(7):2437-43. PMID 2897475.

60. Joklik WK, " Tumor Viruses " , in Joklik WK et al, 1992. Zinsser

Microbiology (20th ed.), chapter 59, p.889. Appleton & Lange.

61. Geier MR, Stanbro H, Merril CR. Endotoxins in commercial vaccines.

Appl Environ Microbiol 1978 Sep;36(3):445-9. PMID 727776.

62. Kreeftenberg JG, Loggen HG, van Ramshorst JD, Beuvery EC. The limulus

amebocyte lysate test micromethod and application in the control of sera and

vaccines. Dev Biol Stand 1977;34:15-20. PMID 838139.

63. Sharma SK. Endotoxin detection and elimination in biotechnology.

Biotechnol Appl Biochem 1986 Feb;8(1):5-22. PMID 3548752.

64. Fumarola D, Panaro A, Palma R, Mazzone A. Endotoxic contamination of

biological products (ribosomal vaccines, viral vaccines and interferon). G

Batteriol Virol Immunol 1979 Jan-Jun;72(1-6):72-7. PMID 95449.

65. Cussler K, Godau H, Gyra H. Investigation of the endotoxin content of

veterinary vaccines. ALTEX 1994;11(5):24-29. PMID 11178403.

66. Whitaker AM, EM. Effect of bacterial toxins in serum on the

chromosomes of WI-38. Dev Biol Stand 1976 Dec 13-15;37:185-90. PMID 801471.

67. See " What are nanobacteria? " at

http://www.nanobaclabs.com/PageDisplay.asp?p1=6578

68. Breitschwerdt EB, Sontakke S, Cannedy A, Hancock SI, Bradley JM.

Infection with Bartonella weissii and detection of Nanobacterium antigens in a

North Carolina beef herd. J Clin Microbiol 2001 Mar;39(3):879-82. PMID 11230398.

Full article text available at

http://jcm.asm.org/cgi/content/full/39/3/879?view=full & pmid=11230398

69. Nanobacteria detected in vaccines. NanoNews 2001 July;1(2). Article

available at http://www.nanobaclabs.com/Files/Newsletter/JulyNANONEWS1.pdf

70. Cell Culture Contamination Example. Mycoplasma.

http://www.unc.edu/depts/tcf/mycoplasma.htm

71. Prasad E, Lim-Fong R. Mycoplasmas.

http://www2.provlab.ab.ca/bugs/biologos/9702mypl.htm

72. Mycoplasma Detection Kit.

http://www.atcc.org/Products/MycoplasmaDetectKit.cfm

73. Mattman LH, 2001. Cell wall deficient forms: stealth pathogens (3rd

ed.). CRC Press.

74. Uphoff CC, Drexler HG. Prevention of mycoplasma contamination in

leukemia-lymphoma cell lines. Hum Cell 2001 Sep;14(3):244-7. PMID 11774744.

75. Mycoplasma Detection and Elimination.

http://www.dsmz.de/mutz/mutzmyco.htm

76. Mycoplasma Detection Kit.

http://www.biovalley.fr/anglais/biology/mob_cc.htm

77. Kojima A, Takahashi T, Kijima M, Ogikubo Y, Tamura Y, Harasawa R.

Detection of mycoplasma DNA in veterinary live virus vaccines by the polymerase

chain reaction. J Vet Med Sci 1996 Oct;58(10):1045-8. PMID 8916012.

78. Kojima A, Takahashi T, Kijima M, Ogikubo Y, Nishimura M, Nishimura S,

Harasawa R, Tamura Y. Detection of Mycoplasma in avian live virus vaccines by

polymerase chain reaction. Biologicals 1997 Dec;25(4):365-71. PMID 9467032.

79. Benisheva T, Sovova V, Ivanov I, Opalchenova G. Comparison of methods

used for detection of mycoplasma contamination in cell cultures, sera, and

live-virus vaccines. Folia Biol (Praha) 1993;39(5):270-6. PMID 8206173.

80. Nicolson GL, Nass M, Nicolson N. Anthrax vaccine: controversy over

safety and efficacy. Antimicrobics and Infectious Disease Newsletter (Elsevier

Science) 2000. Article located at http://www.flatlandbooks.com/anthrax.html

81. Thornton DH. A survey of mycoplasma detection in veterinary vaccines.

Vaccine 1986 Dec;4(4):237-40. PMID 3799018.

82. Kong F, G, Gordon S, Zelynski A, Gilbert GL. Species-specific

PCR for identification of common contaminant mollicutes in cell culture. Appl

Environ Microbiol 2001 Jul;67(7):3195-200. PMID 11425741.

83. Mycoplasma testing by PCR. http://locus.umdnj.edu/nia/qc/myco.html

84. Mycoplasma sp. Reagent Set.

http://www.euroclone.net/mol_biology/mycoplasma.htm

85. Macomber PB. Cancer and cell wall deficient bacteria. Med Hypotheses

1990 May;32(1):1-9. PMID 2190063.

86. Baseman JB, Tully JG. Mycoplasmas: sophisticated, reemerging, and

burdened by their notoriety. Emerg Infect Dis 1997 Jan-Mar;3(1):21-32. PMID

9126441. Full text article available at

http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol3no1/baseman.htm

87. Gartler SM. Apparent Hela cell contamination of human heteroploid cell

lines. Nature 1968 Feb 24;217(5130):750-1. PMID 5641128.

88. Lavappa KS. Survey of ATCC stocks of human cell lines for HeLa

contamination. In Vitro 1978 May;14(5):469-75. PMID 566722.

89. -Rees WA, s DW, Flandermeyer RR. Cross-contamination of

cells in culture. Science 1981 Apr 24;212(4493):446-52. PMID 6451928.

90. Gold M. The cells that would not die. Science 81 1981 April; 29-35.

91. Gold M, 1986. A Conspiracy of Cells: One Woman's Immortal Legacy and

the Medical Scandal It Caused. State University of New York Press.

92. Demidova SA, Tsareva AA, Mikhailova GR, Perekrest VV, Gushchin BV.

Several methodologic problems in the control of cell cultures. Vopr Virusol 1976

May-Jun;(3):371-9. PMID 983006.

93. Hukku B, Halton DM, Mally M, WD Jr. Cell characterization by

use of multiple genetic markers. Adv Exp Med Biol 1984;172:13-31. PMID 6328905.

94. MacLeod RA, Dirks WG, Matsuo Y, Kaufmann M, Milch H, Drexler HG.

Widespread intraspecies cross-contamination of human tumor cell lines arising at

source. Int J Cancer 1999 Nov 12;83(4):555-63. PMID 10508494.

95. Stacey GN. Cell contamination leads to inaccurate data: we must take

action now. Nature 2000 Jan 27;403(6768):356. PMID 10667765.

96. Kniss DA, Xie Y, Li Y, Kumar S, Linton EA, Cohen P, Fan-Havard P,

Redman CW, Sargent IL. ED(27) Trophoblast-like Cells Isolated from

First-trimester Chorionic Villi are Genetically Identical to HeLa Cells Yet

Exhibit a Distinct Phenotype. Placenta 2002 Jan;23(1):32-43. PMID 11869090.

97. Buttner M, Oehmig A, Weiland F, Rziha HJ, Pfaff E. Detection of virus

or virus specific nucleic acid in foodstuff or bioproducts--hazards and risk

assessment. Arch Virol Suppl 1997;13:57-66. PMID 9413526.

98. Monath TP, Cropp CB, on AK. Mode of entry of a neurotropic

arbovirus into the central nervous system. Reinvestigation of an old

controversy. Lab Invest 1983 Apr;48(4):399-410. PMID 6300550.

99. Burke DS, Monath TP, " Flaviviruses " , in Knipe DM et al (ed.), 2001.

Fields Virology (4th ed), Vol. I, chapter 33, p.1057. Lippincott.

100. Hoffman PN, Abuknesha RA, s NJ, D, Lloyd JS. A model to

assess the infection potential of jet injectors used in mass immunisation.

Vaccine 2001 Jul 16;19(28-29):4020-7. PMID 11427278.

101. Canter J, Mackey K, Good LS, o RR, Chin J, Bond WW, Alter MJ,

Horan JM. An outbreak of hepatitis B associated with jet injections in a weight

reduction clinic. Arch Intern Med 1990 Sep;150(9):1923-7. PMID 2393323.

102. Brink PR, van Loon AM, Trommelen JC, Gribnau FW, Smale-Novakova IR.

Virus transmission by subcutaneous jet injection. J Med Microbiol 1985

Dec;20(3):393-7. PMID 4068027.

103. McAleer WJ, Buynak EB, Maigetter RZ, Wampler DE, WJ, Hilleman

MR. Human hepatitis B vaccine from recombinant yeast. Nature 1984 Jan

12-18;307(5947):178-80. PMID 6318124.

104. Hilleman MR. Yeast recombinant hepatitis B vaccine. Infection 1987

Jan-Feb;15(1):3-7. PMID 2437037.

105. Points to Consider on Plasmid DNA Vaccines for Preventive Infectious

Disease Indications. Food and Drug Administration, Center for Biologics

Evaluation and Research, Office of Vaccine Research and Review, December 1996.

Full article available at http://www.fda.gov/cber/gdlns/plasmid.txt

106. Ho M, A, Cummins J, Traavik T. Slipping through the regulatory

net: 'Naked' and 'free' nucleic acids. TWN Biotechnology and Biosafety Series

No. 5, 2001. Available at http://www.twnside.org.sg/title/biod5.htm

107. Petricciani JC. Safety issues relating to the use of mammalian cells

as hosts. Dev Biol Stand 1985;59:149-53. PMID 3891461.

108. A. Dispelling vaccination myths: an internationally

published, referenced report. 1998. Report available at

http://www.unc.edu/~aphillip/www/chf/myths/dvm1.htm For statistics regarding

adverse events, see the link at

http://www.unc.edu/~aphillip/www/chf/myths/dvm11.htm

109. See a discussion of issues surrounding proposed forced smallpox

vaccination at: Fisher, BL. Smallpox and forced vaccination: what every American

needs to know. The Vaccine Reaction, Winter 2002. Article available at

http://www.909shot.com/smallpoxspecialrpt.htm. The entire text of the Model

State Emergency Health Powers Act, currently being considered by the various

U.S. state governments is available at

http://www.publichealthlaw.net/MSEHPA/MSEHPA2.pdf

110. National Vaccine Program Office, Vaccine Fact Sheets: Vaccine Product

Approval Process. Article available at

http://www.cdc.gov/od/nvpo/fs_tableII_doc2.htm

111. Garnick RL. Raw materials as a source of contamination in large-scale

cell culture. Dev Biol Stand 1998;93:21-9. PMID 9737373.

112. Fadly AM, EJ. Isolation and some characteristics of a subgroup

J-like avian leukosis virus associated with myeloid leukosis in meat-type

chickens in the United States. Avian Dis 1999 Jul-Sep;43(3):391-400. PMID

10494407.

113. Grunder AA, Benkel BF, Chambers JR, Sabour MP, Gavora JS, Dickie JW.

Characterization of four endogenous viral genes in semi-congenic lines of meat

chickens. Poult Sci 1999 Jun;78(6):873-7. PMID 10438132.

114. Pham TD, Spencer JL, ES. Detection of avian leukosis virus in

albumen of chicken eggs using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction. J

Virol Methods 1999 Mar;78(1-2):1-11. PMID 10204692.

115. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=25538

116. Kopelovich L. Are all normal diploid human cell strains alike?

Relevance to carcinogenic mechanisms in vitro. Exp Cell Biol 1982;50(5):266-70.

PMID 7141068.

[Guest guest]

Thanks. This is very interesting. Who is McRearden?

What Is Coming Through That Needle?

> What Is Coming Through That Needle?

> The Problem of Pathogenic Vaccine Contamination

> McRearden

>

> In recent times mankind is experiencing a situation never previously

encountered, that being the threat of release of pathogens intended to kill

or disable large numbers of people. That danger has prompted certain health

agencies to prepare for possible mass vaccination of the populace. The

purpose of this report is to examine the existing scientific evidence of

pathogenic contaminants in vaccines. This summary, while making no claim of

being a complete review of the subject, will point out sufficient examples

and illustrations of contamination with bacteria, viruses, and their

components, so as to enable the reader to make a more informed decision

regarding accepting a vaccination (or forcing others to receive one). It is

presented in a format intended for the public, their physicians, and their

agency or governmental representatives, and may be freely copied in its

entirety.

>

> If you as an individual are too busy to read this brief summary in

one sitting, please be aware there is ample evidence in the scientific

literature that serious viruses, bacteria; or components and toxins there

from; as well as foreign animal or cancer-related proteins and DNA are

finding their way into the commercial vaccines intended for humans, pets,

and agricultural animals. If you are interested in the short and long-term

health of yourself and those you care about, or serve as a public servant or

medical advisor, you do owe it to yourself to be informed.

>

> In the production of viral vaccines on a commercial scale, the virus

of concern must be reproduced in large quantities. Viruses cannot survive or

reproduce without being introduced into cells that nourish them, which

enables the viral reproductive activity. In that sense all viruses can be

considered parasitic on other cells. Living cell types commonly used to

reproduce viruses in the lab include monkey kidney cells, chicken embryos,

as well as other animal and human cells. These cells must also be nourished

with food, and are most often fed with a nutrient mix containing in large

part, bovine (cow) calf serum (usually, serum extracted from fetal calf

blood). This product can carry many types of bovine blood-borne viruses, and

is one of the primary sources of vaccine contaminants. A journal article

states, " a potential risk associated with the production and use of

biological products is viral contamination. This contamination may be

present in the source material, e.g. human blood, human or animal tissues,

cell banks, or introduced in the manufacturing process through the use of

animal sera... " (1)

>

> Bovine viruses

>

> The viruses and other agents that can contaminate bovine calf serum

are numerous. One of the most prominent is a pestivirus called bovine viral

diarrhea virus (2). More specifically, we see in several scientific journal

sources these types of statements: " contamination of a vaccine as a

consequence of infection of fetal calf serum " (3); " many batches of

commercially available serum are contaminated with viruses such as BVD "

[bovine viral diarrhea] (4); " virus was isolated from 332 of 1,608 (20.6%)

lots of raw fetal calf serum obtained specifically for the Center and 93 of

190 (49%) lots of commercially available fetal calf serum (5); " agents most

frequently detected in CCL's [continuous cell lines] have been bovine viral

diarrhea virus and mycoplasma. Our laboratory has consistently found that

the source of bovine viral diarrhea contamination of CCLs has been the use

of contaminated fetal bovine cell culture enrichment serum " (6); and finally,

" In conclusion, most commercially available bovine sera are contaminated

with BVDV and, although there is no evidence that the virus is infectious,

bovine sera should be screened for this virus.for the development or

production of vaccine. " (7)

>

> Can this virus cause infection or disease in humans? New evidence

shows this is possible, as researchers have found a new strain that was

isolated from human cells, and it is very closely related to the bovine

strains (8). One study finds that an alarming 75% of all laboratory cell

lines examined were contaminated with pestivirus strains; of these, all of

the bovine cell lines were contaminated with one of three possible BVDV

strains; cell lines from other animal sources including primates, sometimes

contained one of these BVDV strains (9).

>

> There is now heightened concern that this virus and others can cross

species lines, creating new strains as they adapt to their new hosts, and

this would include passage of the virus to and from humans. Whether the

human strain of BVDV causes overt illness is uncertain, because physicians

may be uninformed and not even be looking for this virus. It may be useful

however, to compare the infection patterns in cattle. They can be

persistently infected at a low level for their entire life with a

non-pathogenic strain of the virus. Under these conditions, they

consistently create and shed virus into the surrounding environment, which

then infects other animals. The virus can nonetheless become lethal to the

animal if it mutates, with the new form also causing " visible cell damage

and death " in cultured conditions (10). The animal succumbs to gradual or

acute deterioration of the gastrointestinal mucous lining, which produces

diarrhea and its eventual demise. However, mutated virus is not always

necessary to provoke debilitating illness and death, and ordinary virus can

be isolated from the cow's pancreas, adrenal glands, and pituitary glands

(11); the virus has also been documented as causing serious pulmonary

illness (12). A study describes an outbreak of disease among goats due to a

vaccine contaminated with a bovine pestivirus; oddly, these animals

experienced reproductive failure and lesions to the central nervous system

(13). So, can these disease symptoms in varied organs and tissues also occur

in humans when they carry this virus short or long-term?

>

> A cursory examination of the literature indicates this may be

occurring. One revealing study tells us " faeces from children under 2 years

old who had gastroenteritis that could not be attributed to recognised

enteric pathogens were examined.for Pestivirus antigens. Such antigens were

detected in 30 of 128 episodes of gastroenteritis.The diarrhoeal disease in

children excreting Pestivirus antigens resembled that in other children

except that it was more commonly associated with signs and symptoms of

respiratory inflammation. " (14) There are also concerns regarding a pattern

of pestivirus infection in infacts born with microcephaly, a condition

wherein the head or cranial capacity is unusually small (15, 16).

>

> Scientists from the USDA National Veterinary Services Laboratory

describe the situation quite clearly, and give an indication of the

seriousness of the problem: " The high frequency of virus and antibody

detection in individual animal or small pool samples suggests that any large

pool of unscreened sera will be contaminated. Infection of cell cultures

with BVDV can lead to interference with the growth of other viruses. Vaccine

produced on contaminated cells may in turn be contaminated, leading to

seroconversion or disease in the vaccine. The safety, purity, and efficacy

of viral vaccines require BVDV testing of ingredients, cell substrates and

final product. " (17) And here is a similar statement from a New York Blood

Center: " Bovine viral diarrhea virus, whose small virion size does not allow

100% assurance of its removal by filtration, may potentially contaminate

every lot of commercially produced fetal bovine serum. " (18)

>

> In reality though, how much of this particular viral contaminant has

trickled into humans? Well, in spite of manufacturers and regulatory

agencies claiming efficacy of their testing procedures, one 2001 study found

13% of human MMR, polio, or Streptococcus pneumoniae vaccines tested

positive for pestivirus RNA (19). And another researcher observes, " serum

antibodies against BVDV have been detected in approximately 30% of human

population who had no contact with potentially infected animals. " (16) Also,

" pestiviruses adapted to human cell cultures may be harmful because serious

BVDV infections in humans have been frequently suggested.The BVDV

persistently infected in cell cultures used for vaccine productions have

been shown to be a source of contamination in live virus vaccines. It is,

therefore, prerequisite to examine pestivirus contamination in cell cultures

to avoid secondary infections in humans as well as in animals. " (20)

>

> Continuous immortal cell lines

>

> This same scientist brings up another important issue. Because many

medical-use biological products (including vaccines) are now being cultured

or produced on what is called " continuous " cell lines (i.e., these are cell

cultures consisting of " immortal " or cancerous types of cells because they

have no limits on how many times they can divide), there is concern that

viral contamination of these cell lines with a pathogen like bovine viral

diarrhea virus, could spread cancer-promoting material into the human

recipient. How could this happen? Briefly, it works like this. The virus

(which in this case has a single strand of RNA for its genome) is capable of

incorporating RNA from the cells in which it has been cultured, into its own

genome. If any contaminant RNA virus is present in a culture that contains

immortal cancerous cells, this virus can easily mutate to include unwanted

oncogenic material, which can then get passed into the biological product

intended for human medical use (16).

>

> Were you aware that biological products, including some common

vaccines (for instance, polio and rabies), are being produced on

" continuous " immortal cell lines? Manufacturers, scientists, and agencies

will often assure us that these cells themselves are not " tumorigenic " ,

i.e., they do not cause tumors per se. A closer look however, shows this is

not always the case. While lab culturing may indicate that these types of

cells are not immediately changing to overt tumor cells, it is now

well-known in the scientific community that after these cells have been

repeatedly cultured a certain number of times, something causes them to

convert to a cancerous state (21).

>

> This journal article summary addresses the issue in regards to Vero

cells, which is a continuous cell line coming from the African green monkey,

and is commonly used in vaccine production. It states, " One of the current

criteria for evaluating the acceptability of cell lines for use in vaccine

production is lack of tumorigenicity. Vero cells represent an example of a

class of cells known as continuous cell lines. They were derived from

African green monkey kidney, and their growth properties and culture

characteristics have many advantages over other cell substrates for use in

vaccine production. We have tested Vero cells for tumorigenicity in nude

mice and in a human muscle organ culture system, and found a significant

increase in their tumorigenic potential with increasing passage numbers.

Cells at passage 232 and higher produced nodules in all nude mice

inoculated. " (22) [The term " passage " in this context means the number of

times a cell line has been cultured].

>

> There is another very important issue reported in studies that is

evidently being largely ignored as regards long-term vaccine effects and

safety. There is obvious evidence that in the lab, continuous immortal cell

lines react differently between one type of animal species and another (21,

23). As an example, tissue from one species will allow the immortal cell to

induce a cancerous change more quickly, in comparison to tissue from a

different species. These results then beg the following questions. How

extensively have these continuous cell lines been tested on human tissues,

and would the results vary from one type of tissue to another? And what

happens over the long term.if an immortal cell from a vaccine culture makes

its way into the final vaccine product, does it keep dividing in the human

body? Another scenario might suggest the tumor-promoting portion of its DNA

inserting into a viral genome, which then gets injected into the body. what

happens at that point?

>

> Furthermore, given the evidence that closely-related animal species

(as an example, various species of monkeys) react differently to immortal

cells, do we also need to consider that any one vaccine intended for all

humans might ultimately react differently among the various races, ethnic

groups, and sexes? And what are the effects of the vaccine contaminants on

persons with immune depression, on the elderly, or on infants?

>

> A letter from the FDA to vaccine manufacturers dated as recently as

March 2001 shows that this issue regarding immortal cell lines is still of

concern. It states, " In general, CBER [Center for Biologics Evaluation and

Research] currently views Vero cells as an acceptable substrate for viral

vaccines, but has residual concerns.CBER recommends that all products

derived from Vero cells be free of residual intact Vero cells. If your

manufacturing process does not include a validated filtration step or other

validated procedure to clear residual intact Vero cells from the product,

please incorporate such a procedure into your manufacturing process. " (24) It

is now 16 years after the WHO gave a go-ahead (in 1986) to use continuous

cell lines for vaccine production (25), and yet there are very basic safety

questions not resolved by the manufacturers, agencies, and scientific

community, much less the finer details (26, 27). One 1991 study reports:

" Cell substrate DNA was shown to be an abundant contaminant in the clarified

preparations of the Sabin type 1, 2 and 3 poliovaccines produced on a

continuous cell line " (28). Another indicates that immortal cell lines showed

100-times greater number of DNA recombination events compared to normal

cells (29). As one researcher states, " Using neoplastic cell lines as

substrates for vaccine development could inadvertently result in viral-viral

or viral-cellular interactions whose biological consequences are

unclear.viral-viral and viral-cellular interactions can result in the

generation of new retroviruses with pathological consequences. " (30). We note

the term " neoplastic " means the quality of having an abnormal growth

characteristic.

>

> There is an even stronger statement dating back to 1990. A scientist

in the field writes, " The present concern is for safety of vaccines made

using transformed or neoplastic mammalian cells that may contain endogenous

contaminating viruses or integrated gene sequences from oncogenic viruses.

There is also concern for use of plasmid vectors employing promoter elements

from oncogenic viruses. The principal concern for safety lies with retention

of residual DNA in the vaccine, especially since induction of cancer is a

single-cell phenomenon, and a single functional unit of foreign DNA

integrated into the host cell genome might serve to induce cell

transformation as a single event or part of a series of multifactorial

events. Current proposed standards for vaccines would permit contamination

with up to 100 pg [picograms] of heterologous DNA per dose. This is

equivalent to about 10(8) 'functional lengths' of DNA. Total safety would

seem to require complete absence of DNA from the product. " (31)

>

> Please note that 10(8) means 10 to the power of 8, or 100,000,000

" functional lengths " of DNA are allowed per dose of vaccine. Is there

something wrong with this picture? How long will the general public be

subjected to these vaccine products that according to this information, are

nowhere near safe?

>

> It has taken, for instance, approximately forty years for the

scientific community to finally acknowledge that we have a serious problem

as a result of the contamination of polio vaccines with simian virus 40

(SV40) in the late 1950s-early 1960s. There has been previous evidence of

some human brain and other tumors containing this virus (32, 33), but the

medical community has been slow to acknowledge a definitive link between

SV40 and cancer in humans. However, two independent research teams have

recently found this virus present in 43% of cases of non-Hodgkins lymphoma

(34, 35). Another study found it present in 36% of brain tumors, 16% of

healthy blood cell samples, and 22% of healthy semen samples (36). And

strangely, SV40 has now been found to infect children (37). Considering that

children of this era, are not supposed to be receiving the virus via the

vaccine contamination route, this would therefore imply that SV40 is being

transmitted from one human to another, in ways not previously known.

>

> Other simian viruses may also be contaminating the (Vero) monkey

cell lines used for vaccine production. One example from the literature

cites the contamination presence of SV20, which is a oncogenic simian

adenovirus (38).

>

> Simply put, are we in a state of denial that vaccines are ultimately

transmitting viruses, DNA, and proteins into humans from foreign animal

sources (and possibly unhealthy human sources), and that this may be

strongly contributing to the incredible upsurge in cancers and serious

chronic diseases? Are these foreign animal genes altering your DNA?

Furthermore, given that viral presence can sometimes take years to manifest

actual disease symptoms, and then considering the tendencies of

health-related agencies and corporations towards short-term solutions and

profits, will we ever truly know the long-term consequences until it is too

late?

>

> Other bovine viruses

>

> Another contaminating virus found in the calf serum used for vaccine

production is bovine polyoma virus (polyoma viruses are strongly associated

with cancer); one pertinent article is titled " Bovine polyoma virus, a

frequent contaminant of calf serum " (39). Other contaminants include a virus

from the parvovirus family (40); another study cites " virus-like particles "

and " mycoplasma-like agents " in 68% and 20% of the samples, respectively

(41); and yet another mentions the presence of infectious bovine

rhinotracheitis virus (aka bovine herpes virus 1), and parainfluenza-3 virus

in addition to the common BVDV (42). An interesting report from 1975 not

only affirms the presence of these viruses in calf serum, and mentions the

additional presence of bovine enterovirus-4, but also tells us that 25% of

serum lots that were pre-tested by the suppliers and " considered to be free

of known viral contaminants " were actually contaminated with bovine viruses

(43). It should be obvious that any bovine blood-borne virus (including

serious retroviruses such as bovine leukemia virus, bovine visna virus, and

bovine immunodeficiency virus) could ultimately end up in human or animal

vaccines via the use of calf serum in the manufacturing process.

>

> Contamination of calf serum with certain bovine herpes viruses, and

the possible implication for human health, deserves a bit of scrutiny. It is

known that bovine herpesvirus-1 replicates easily in a human embryo cell

line called WI-38 (44). It is also known that bovine herpesvirus-4 is quite

" persistent " in calf serum, and has a wide host range, including human cells

(45). In fact, this particular virus strongly replicates in two human

embryonic cell lines, WI-38 and MRC-5, enough so to prompt one author to

give these details and a warning: " PCR [polymerase chain reaction] detected

a 10,000-times-higher level of BHV-4 [bovine herpesvirus-4] DNA. the

supernatant indicated a 100-fold increase of infectious particles. Since

this is the first bovine (human herpes virus 8 and Epstein-Barr virus

related) herpes virus which replicates on human cells in vitro, the danger

of possible human BHV-4 infection should not be ignored. " (46)

>

> The clincher to this possible contamination, is that these same

human cell lines WI-38 and MRC-5 are two of the most common human cell lines

used to manufacture viral vaccines, (for example - rubella, chickenpox,

smallpox) and these cell lines are of course, commonly nurtured with calf

serum.

>

> Contaminants from chicken sources

>

> Some viral vaccines are produced by growing the virus in chicken

eggs. Common human vaccines manufactured by this method include influenza,

mumps, measles, yellow fever, and others. Like the vaccines that include

bovine-source materials, those derived from chicken embryo culture are

plagued with some very serious viral contamination problems.

>

> Avian leukosis virus (aka avian leukemia virus or ALV) is a

retroviral pathogen that infects large segments of the modern poultry

industry, is present in commercial chickens and eggs, and thus exposes

humans on a consistent basis (47). An interesting virus in the sense that it

can be considered a " parent " , it easily transforms into a dizzying array of

related viruses by hijacking one of numerous cancer-related gene segments

from its host, and inserting it into its own genome. Furthermore, it has the

additional capability of inserting itself into the host (including human)

genome, hiding out so to speak, and causing cancerous cell transformation

from that location. There is now much scientific literature available that

describes the various active mechanisms of this and other cancer-associated

viruses (48). Viruses that originate from the " parent " avian leukosis virus,

include the potent Rous sarcoma virus, Rous-associated viruses, avian

myeloblastosis virus, avian myelocytoma virus, avian erythroblastosis virus,

Fujinami sarcoma virus, etc. One group of researchers studying the mechanism

of ALV writes, " Serial passaging of a retrovirus that does not carry an

oncogene on such cultures leads with a high frequency to the emergence of

new viruses that have transduced oncogenes. " (49). In other words, given the

right growth conditions, ALV can easily transform into other closely related

viruses that are known to be cancer-related.

>

> Just how common is this avian leukosis virus in viral vaccines? The

first evidence of contamination came to light in the 1960s when yellow fever

vaccine was found to contain it (50). Since that time, it is common

knowledge in the industry that this virus (or components thereof) still

linger in human and animal vaccines (51). Indeed, the respected Fields

Virology text (year 2001 edition) states, " At the present time, vaccines

produced by some of the world's 12 manufacturing institutes are contaminated

with avian leukosis virus " (52). One point that researchers in this field do

agree upon, are the presence of ALV, avian endogenous virus, avian

reticuloendotheliosis virus (another poultry retrovirus), and also an enzyme

called reverse transcriptase (a component of retroviruses) in final vaccine

products intended for human use, especially the mumps, measles, yellow

fever, and influenza vaccines (53, 54, 55). What they do not agree upon are

the effects on humans in terms of transmission, infection, and possible

subsequent disease. A recent study coming out of the U.S. CDC (Centers for

Disease Control), which analyzed frozen blood serum samples from children

that had received MMR vaccinations, reports no avian viral presence in these

samples (56).

>

> And yet, we see reports from other researchers that make us question

the results of that study. As is often the case with viruses, some strains

will show particular affinities for certain types of tissues or growth

conditions, and ALV is no exception (57). One researcher makes the effort to

explain, " Because of the difficulty in infecting mammalian cells in vitro

with these viruses, it is generally held that they do not infect humans.Our

results show that exposed poultry workers and subjects with no occupational

exposure to these viruses have antibodies in their sera specifically

directed against ALSV [Avian leucosis/sarcoma viruses]. Further

investigation into whether these findings mean that virus has been

integrated into the human genome is needed, to assess the public health

implications of these results. " (58). He also explains in another article,

that given the known behavior of these viruses in mammalian cellular

culture, a blood serum test will not always provide the correct evidence of

viral presence in the human body (47). In other words, does the virus (or

viral antibodies) need to be actively present in the blood stream at the

time of the blood draw? What if the viral particles have retreated into

other tissues? Thus the CDC study mentioned above may not have presented an

accurate assessment of viral presence, or long-term effects from the

numerous ALV-associated " offspring " viruses. Considering that ALV can for

example, easily capture the human " erbB " oncogene (59), and that erbB as

well as the oncogene called myc are strongly associated with common forms of

human breast cancer, it seems that the issue of ALV vaccine contamination

would deserve a high level of attention! (By the way, the general reader

should not feel intimidated by the abbreviations associated with

oncogenes.erb refers to " erythroblastosis " , and myc refers to

myelocytomatosis, which are the names of two ALV-associated offspring

viruses). A well-known microbiology text reinforces these concepts by

teaching, " Proto-oncogenes become incorporated into retroviral genomes with

surprising ease. " (60)

>

> Toxin contamination

>

> The unintentional presence of bacterial-source toxins (called

" endotoxins " or " exotoxins " ) in human and veterinary vaccines has been

recognized for many years. Such toxins are originally present in source

materials, or are produced as a result of bacterial infection during the

manufacturing process (61, 62). The various methods used in attempts to

eliminate viruses and bacteria from vaccines are simply not effective in the

removal of these problematic toxic proteins (63). Several observers have

expressed concern that the presence of endotoxin may be a source of severe

adverse reactions seen in some individuals after receiving a vaccine (61,

64). Some vaccines, such as those for diphtheria and tetanus, are

specifically created to induce a protective mechanism in the body against

the bacterial toxin; however, vaccines prepared from bacteria can contain

appreciable and potentially dangerous lingering amounts of toxin, despite

the steps used during manufacture to decrease the toxic potency, as

described in this comment: " Vaccines composed of gram-negative bacteria

contain endotoxin in considerable amounts. This may result in adverse

effects after vaccination of sensitive animals. " (65). It has also been

reported that bacterial toxin contamination residing in calf serum, can

cause breaks in the DNA of human cells (66).

>

> Bacterial contamination - nanobacteria

>

> Nanobacteria is a recently discovered pathogen that infects humans.

Now considered to be the smallest existing bacterial form known to science,

it escapes through common filtering processes, and can easily invade other

cells and cause cell death. Nanobacteria also are classed as " pleomorphic " ,

that is, they have the ability the change physical form. A human variety of

this pathogen has been found to cause or be associated with a host of

disease conditions, only a few of which include atherosclerosis, coronary

artery / heart disease, kidney stones and kidney disease, arthritis, MS,

alzheimers, some cancers, and other conditions (67).

>

> Since this species of bacteria is specific to mammals, and must be

lab-cultured in mammalian blood or serum, it is not surprising that this

variety of nanobacterium has been isolated as a contaminant from bovine calf

serum, other mammaliam bio-products, and vaccines. One study reports that

100% of serum of cattle in a US herd showed antigens to nanobacteria, and

cites another report from Europe that, " more than 80% of commercial bovine

serum lots contain Nanobacterium " (68). Obviously, any vaccines that must

incorporate mammalian products during production (which would include cow,

monkey, or human cells, blood or serum), will be prone to nanobacterial

contamination. This was indeed verified when a group of researchers found

that 2 out of 3 lots of inactivated polio vaccine, and 3 out of 6 lots of

veterinary vaccines were contaminated with nanobacteria. They also point out

that the bacteria could be coming from calf serum and contaminated culture

cell lines (69). Any reasoning person with a basic knowledge of vaccine

production can deduce that nanobacteria have undoubtedly been infecting

humans in a fairly widespread manner via vaccination procedures. One might

also wonder whether it has contributed to the current prevalence of

atherosclerosis and generalized heart disease.

>

> Bacterial contamination - mycoplasmas and related forms

>

> If there is any one type of bacterial contamination in vaccines that

warrants particular attention, it would be mycoplasmas. These small

organisms have a structure not characteristic of most forms of bacteria,

i.e., they usually contain a thin outer membrane as compared to the more

complex walls of common bacterial forms. They are described as being capable

of slipping through filtration procedures, and can transfer to other media

through the air or via routine handling in the lab (70). One source states

that " less than 10% of laboratories actually test for

infection/contamination regularly " .that mycoplasmas are " influencing almost

every aspect of cell biology " .and that labs " which do not test for

mycoplasma probably harbour contaminated cell lines and may even have their

entire stocks contaminated, as mycoplasma spreads readily along cell lines

via regents and media, the operator and the work surface " (71). They are

resistant to certain types of antibiotics used to kill other bacteria (70,

72), and are subject to changing form under varying physiological or

biochemical conditions (73).

>

> The journal and industry literature is filled with references to the

problems of mycoplasma contamination in cell cultures and vaccines. Various

studies cite corrupted cell lines ranging in occurrence from 5% to 87% (71,

72, 74, 75, 76), and as we now know, once this pathogen is in the cell

culture being used to make the vaccine, it is liable to end up in the final

product (77, 78, 79,80). One author states, " Mycoplasma contaminants can be

considered important not only because of their role as pathogens but also

because they may indicate that insufficient care has been taken during

vaccine manufacture or quality control. " (81). Species of mycoplasmas that

have polluted the cell cultures include Mycoplasma hominis, M. fermentans

(implicated in Gulf War illness), M. arginini, M. hyorhinis, M. orale, M.

pirum, M. pneumoniae, and Acholeplasma laidlawii (75, 76, 82). Any reputable

company that sells tissue or cell culture material, also must test for and

sell kits to detect mycoplasmas (72, 75, 76, 83, 84).

>

> Mycoplasmas and associated variant forms have long been associated

with many disease processes, including cancer, chronic illnesses such as

chronic fatigue syndrome, fibromyalgia, arthritis, Gulf War Illness, and

many others (73, 85, 86). It would be impossible to cite all the pertinent

references in this short report, on this vast arena of microbiology that is

often ignored by much of the medical community, sometimes with tragic

consequences. Mycoplasmas without question have the capability of altering

cell membranes and their antigens, disrupting DNA, and altering cellular

metabolism both in vitro and in vivo (70, 71, 72, 73, 86).

>

> Cross-contamination of cell lines

>

> As we recall that all viral vaccines can only be produced with the

use of cells, the purity of the cell lines an important issue. The most

famous example of many cell lines becoming contaminated from outside

sources, occurred when the famous and extremely fastidious HeLa cancer cells

started showing up in labs across the world in the 1960s. The phenomenon is

well-documented (87, 88, 89, 90), and is even the subject of an entire book

(91). One study from 1976 cited a litany of contamination in all primary and

continuous cell lines that were examined - many viruses were found, as well

as HeLa cells (92). As the years progress, the reports continue to come in:

one from 1984, for instance, tells of inter- and intra-species cell

cross-contamination, that 35% of all cell lines were corrupted, and that

most of these lines were (originally) cells of human origin (93).

>

> Let's fast-forward to 1999. A study in Germany finds that the

problem is continuing, if not worsening. In a survey of human cell lines,

the most common cross-contaminants came from " classic tumor cell lines " ;

that these polluted lines had been unknowingly used in " several hundred "

projects which generated potentially false reports; and that they considered

it a " grave and chronic problem demanding radical measures " (94).

>

> The situation is such that several scientists were prompted to write

a letter to the respected journal " Nature " in January 2000, calling for

immediate action to institute procedures that would verify the purity of

cells used for research and production of biological products, ensure

freedom from mycoplasma, and include biohazard information (95). (Did I hear

that correctly - cells can be considered a biohazard)? Has anything changed

since then to remedy the situation? There is another report from Jan. 2002,

that two major cell lines used in research projects actually turned out to

be HeLa cells (96).

>

> I ask the reader to now recall information from earlier in this

report, that there are proposals being considered to produce vaccines and

other biological products using distinctly cancerous cell lines, including

HeLa (25). Does this seem reasonable, especially since the current lines are

already dangerously tainted with HeLa and possibly other cancerous cells?

Please remember the 100,000,000 allowable pieces of cell-source DNA allowed

per dose of vaccine (and this does not include the viral contaminants).

Anyone care for a small, under-the-skin serving of human

cancer-cell-component soup? With maybe a few monkey cell fragments for

garnish, and viruses for flavor?

>

> Additional points to consider

>

> There are several issues the public and medical community may want

to be aware of concerning safe administration of vaccines. The human and

animal body has normal barriers that help to protect against infiltration by

foreign agents, among them are the skin, the respiratory and intestinal

mucous linings, and the blood-brain barrier. The puncture of skin by a

needle breaches that barrier. A group of researchers states, " Virus

contamination of bioproducts such as vaccines, blood products or biological

material used in surgery and for transplantations also is more hazardous

because the application of contaminating virus usually occurs by

circumvention of the natural barrier systems of the body.virus contamination

of bioproducts should be considered as a hazard no matter which method has

been used for its detection. " (97). Of even more concern, is the

administration of vaccines nasally (through the nose), or accidental passage

via that route (98). Fields Virology text (2001) says, " The olfactory tract

has long been recognized as an alternative pathway to the CNS [central

nervous system].olfactory neurons.are unprotected by the blood brain

barrier. " While that writer particularly addresses the flavivirus family

[i.e., " intranasal inoculation of flaviviruses may result in lethal

encephalitis " (99)], this pattern of potential danger may deserve further

attention than it currently receives, especially if there ever is

consideration to use a method of nasal inoculation for mass vaccination of

the public or military, and there may be contaminating viruses or toxins in

a vaccine that have an affinity for nerve cells and tissues.

>

> Mass immunization programs often use jet injectors to save the time

and inconvenience associated with needles and syringes. However, a study

published in July 2001, found that the four injectors tested had the

capability of transferring tiny amounts of fluid and blood (and thus,

viruses such as hepatitis B and C, HIV, etc.) from one recipient to the next

(100). Numerous other articles confirm the danger, and question the safety

of these devices, including one study that reported an outbreak of hepatitis

B associated with use of a jet injector (101, 102).

>

> Some of the newest types of vaccines are called " subunit " and " naked

DNA " vaccines. Without going into the intricacies of their production, they

involve techniques used in genetic engineering. Subunit vaccines generally

will insert a viral or bacterial DNA section into the DNA from yeast, which

is allowed to reproduce in large quantities. The protein intended for

inclusion in the vaccine is then separated from the yeast cells. In the case

of naked DNA vaccines, the viral or DNA gene is first reproduced, then

spliced into a plasmid (which is essentially free DNA, widely used in

recombinant technology), reproduced in bacteria or cells, and then separated

from them for inclusion in the vaccine. Recombinant gene vaccines can also

be produced via these methods - for instance, hepatitis B is now an

exclusively recombinant vaccine (103, 104)

>

> One of the major concerns with these methods is the unpredictability

and interaction of the final vaccine product with the proteins or DNA of the

host. A document from the FDA states: " Genetic toxicity: Integration of the

plasmid DNA vaccine into the genome of the vaccinated subjects is an

important theoretical risk to consider in preclinical studies. The concern

is that an integrated vaccine may result in insertional mutagenesis through

the activation of oncogenes or inactivation of tumor suppressor genes. In

addition, an integrated plasmid DNA vaccine may result in chromosomal

instability through the induction of chromosomal breaks or rearrangements. "

(105). Another group advises, " Research findings in gene therapy and vaccine

development show that naked/free nucleic acids constructs are readily taken

up by the cells of all species including human beings. These nucleic acid

constructs can become integrated into the cell's genome and such integration

may result in harmful biological effects, including cancers. " (106). And to

reiterate the danger of tumorigenic cell lines, a researcher says, " More

recently, recombinant DNA technology has expanded beyond bacterial cells to

mammalian cells, some of which may also be tumorigenic. " (107).

>

> It seems obvious that there needs to be a new and open dialog

regarding vaccines among the regulatory agencies, manufacturers, research

and medical community, and the public. Many have been ridiculed for refusing

vaccination for themselves or their children, but considering the

occurrences of short-term adverse events and questionable efficacy (108),

possible long-term health damage, and now also facing the potential of

wide-ranging loss of civil liberties (109), is it so surprising that many

are questioning what the actual benefits are surrounding most vaccination

protocols? Are the cases of damaged children, non-functional adults, the

huge increases in cancer rates, immune and chronic diseases to be simply and

blindly accepted by the public as " tolerable losses " ?

>

> As a citizen with a right to good health, please be advised of the

following issues. Vaccine quality in the U.S. relies for the most part, on

manufacturers reporting to the FDA. Here is a relevant statement from the

CDC: " Manufacturers are required to submit the results of their own tests

for potency, safety, and purity for each vaccine lot to the FDA. They are

also required to submit samples of each vaccine lot to FDA for testing.

However, if the sponsor describes an alternative procedure which provides

continued assurance of safety, purity and potency, CBER may determine that

routine submission of lot release protocols (showing results of applicable

tests) and samples is not necessary. " (110) Yes, this is the scope of the

quality-control protocol that oversees a market worth billions of dollars,

yet allowing all these contaminants into the vaccines.

>

> It may be helpful to have an idea of the scope of the operation to

understand what we are dealing with here. We are advised that " Large-scale

cell culture operations for biotechnology products use millions of litres of

complex media and gases as well as huge quantities of organic and inorganic

raw materials. These raw materials must always be assumed to contain

contamination by adventitious agents " (111). And because there is a

potentially large number of animal and human viruses (or viral segments)

that could be entering into the final vaccine products, it would take a

equally large bank of molecular probes, as well as frequent, wide-spread

testing, to screen for presence of these contaminating agents. This would

obviously add time and expense for the manufacturers. What needs to be

decided is this - is the effort and cost involved in cleaning up these

admittedly filthy medical products, worth the resultant benefit to the

public health? And since certain animal products are necessary for the

production of vaccines, it may also be necessary to clean house at several

levels, including the agricultural sector. It is no secret for instance,

that commercial chicken flocks raised for meat and eggs are often carrying

infectious avian leucosis virus, mentioned earlier in this report (112, 113,

114)

>

> For the record, the smallpox vaccine ordered by the U.S. government

from Aventis is being produced on two types of continuous cell lines, the

human embryonic MRC-5 and the green monkey Vero cells (115). We might also

be advised of one researcher's thoughts, that " normal embryo and foreskin

cells presumably represent a state in development which is genetically

unstable, rendering them considerably more susceptible to malignant

transformation. " (116). Are remnants of these types of cells something we

want injected into our bodies?

>

> The decision you make in accepting or refusing a vaccination can be

a very personal one, but whatever you decide, do try to be informed of the

true benefits and risks. Nobody should be forced to submit to any medical

procedure, especially one of questionable value.

>

> References / Notes

>

> [items with a PMID number will usually have abstracts available to

read. Go to the PubMed website:

http://www4.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi and enter the accession

number into the search box.]

>

> 1. Trijzelaar B. Regulatory affairs and biotechnology in Europe:

III. Introduction into good regulatory practice--validation of virus removal

and inactivation. Biotherapy 1993; 6(2):93-102. PMID 8398576.

>

> 2. Vilcek S. Identification of pestiviruses contaminating cell lines

and fetal calf sera. Acta Virol 2001 Apr;45(2):81-6. PMID 11719986.

>

> 3. Barkema HW, Bartels CJ, van Wuijckhuise L, Hesselink JW,

Holzhauer M, Weber MF, en P, Kock PA, Bruschke CJ, Zimmer GM. Outbreak

of bovine virus diarrhea on Dutch dairy farms induced by a bovine

herpesvirus 1 marker vaccine contaminated with bovine virus diarrhea virus

type 2. Tijdschr Diergeneeskd 2001 Mar 15;126(6):158-65. PMID 11285633.

>

> 4. Rolleston WB. Bovine serum: reducing the variables through the

use of donor herds. Dev Biol Stand 1999;99:79-86. PMID 10404879.

>

> 5. Bolin SR, s PJ, Ridpath JF. Methods for detection and

frequency of contamination of fetal calf serum with bovine viral diarrhea

virus and antibodies against bovine viral diarrhea virus. : J Vet Diagn

Invest 1991 Jul;3(3):199-203. PMID 1655059.

>

> 6. kson GA, Landgraf JG, Wessman SJ, Koski TA, Moss LM.

Detection and elimination of adventitious agents in continuous cell lines.

Dev Biol Stand 1989;70:59-66. PMID 2759356.

>

> 7. Yanagi M, Bukh J, Emerson SU, Purcell RH. Contamination of

commercially available fetal bovine sera with bovine viral diarrhea virus

genomes: implications for the study of hepatitis C virus in cell cultures. J

Infect Dis 1996 Dec;174(6):1324-7. PMID 8940226.

>

> 8. Giangaspero M, Harasawa R, Verhulst A. Genotypic analysis of the

5'-untranslated region of a pestivirus strain isolated from human

leucocytes. Microbiol Immunol 1997;41(10):829-34. PMID 9403511.

>

> 9. Harasawa R, Mizusawa H. Demonstration and genotyping of

pestivirus RNA from mammalian cell lines. Microbiol Immunol

1995;39(12):979-85. PMID 8789057.

>

> 10. Brock, KV. Pathogenesis of BVDV Infections.

http://www.vetmed.auburn.edu/~brockkv/path.htm and

http://www.vetmed.auburn.edu/~brockkv/terms.htm

>

> 11. Stoffregen B, Bolin SR, Ridpath JF, Pohlenz J. Morphologic

lesions in type 2 BVDV infections experimentally induced by strain

BVDV2-1373 recovered from a field case. Vet Microbiol 2000 Nov

15;77(1-2):157-62. PMID 11042409.

>

> 12. Meehan JT, Lehmkuhl HD, Cutlip RC, Bolin SR. Acute pulmonary

lesions in sheep experimentally infected with bovine viral diarrhoea virus.

J Comp Pathol 1998 Oct;119(3):277-92. PMID 9807729.

>

> 13. Loken T, Krogsrud J, Bjerkas I. Outbreaks of border disease in

goats induced by a pestivirus-contaminated orf vaccine, with virus

transmission to sheep and cattle. J Comp Pathol 1991 Feb;104(2):195-209.

PMID 1650802.

>

> 14. Yolken R, Dubovi E, Leister F, Reid R, Almeido-Hill J, Santosham

M. Infantile gastroenteritis associated with excretion of pestivirus

antigens. Lancet 1989 Mar 11;1(8637):517-20. PMID 2564059.

>

> 15. Potts BJ, Sever JL, Tzan NR, Huddleston D, Elder GA. Possible

role of pestiviruses in microcephaly. Lancet 1987 Apr 25;1(8539):972-3.

>

> 16. Harasawa R. Latent Risk in Bovine Serums Used for

Biopharmaceutic Production. http://www.asmusa.org/pcsrc/sum02.htm

>

> 17. Levings RL, Wessman SJ. Bovine viral diarrhea virus

contamination of nutrient serum, cell cultures and viral vaccines. Dev Biol

Stand 1991;75:177-81. PMID 1665461.

>

> 18.

http://www.nybloodcenter.org/PatentsAndLicensing/SDTechnology.htm

>

> 19. Giangaspero M, Vacirca G, Harasawa R, Buttner M, Panuccio A, De

Giuli Morghen C, Zanetti A, Belloli A, Verhulst A. Genotypes of pestivirus

RNA detected in live virus vaccines for human use. J Vet Med Sci 2001

Jul;63(7):723-33. PMID 11503899.

>

> 20. Harasawa R, Mizusawa H. Detection of Pestiviruses from Mammalian

Cell Cultures by the Polymerase Chain Reaction. Proceedings of 3rd Internet

World Congress on Biomedical Sciences 1996.12.9-20 Riken, Tsukuba, Japan.

http://www.3iwc.riken.go.jp/CONGRESS/SYMPO/SBB0202/AK0111/TIT.HTM

>

> 21. Contreras G, Bather R, Furesz J, Becker BC. Activation of

metastatic potential in African green monkey kidney cell lines by prolonged

in vitro culture. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol 1985 Nov;21(11):649-52. PMID

4066602.

>

> 22. Levenbook IS, Petricciani JC, Elisberg BL. Tumorigenicity of

Vero cells. J Biol Stand 1984 Oct;12(4):391-8. PMID 6526826.

>

> 23. Furesz J, Fanok A, Contreras G, Becker B. Tumorigenicity testing

of various cell substrates for production of biologicals. Dev Biol Stand

1989;70:233-43. PMID 2759351.

>

> 24. Letter to Sponsors Using Vero Cells as a Cell Substrate for

Investigational Vaccines. Department of Health and Human Services, Public

Health Service, Food and Drug Administration, Division of Vaccines and

Related Products Applications, March 12, 2001.

www.fda.gov/cber/ltr/vero031301.htm

>

> 25. U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service,

Food and Drug Administration, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research.

Evolving Scientific and Regulatory Perspectives on Cell Substrates for

Vaccine Development. http://www.fda.gov/cber/minutes/0907evolv.txt

>

> 26. AM Jr. Developing an approach to evaluate the use of

neoplastic cells as vaccine substrates. Dev Biol (Basel) 2001;106:37-42;

discussion 42-3. PMID 11761251.

>

> 27. Purcell DF. Pathogenesis of replication competent retroviruses

derived from mouse cells in immuno suppressed primates: implications for use

of neoplastic cells as vaccine substrates. Dev Biol (Basel) 2001;106:187-98;

discussion 199, 253-63. PMID 11761231.

>

> 28. Amosenko FA, Svitkin YV, Popova VD, Terletskaya EN, Timofeev AV,

Elbert LB, Lashkevich VA, Drozdov SG. Use of protamine sulphate for

elimination of substrate DNA in polio vaccines produced on continuous cell

lines. Vaccine 1991 Mar;9(3):207-9. PMID 1645900.

>

> 29. Thyagarajan B, McCormick-Graham M, Romero DP, C.

Characterization of homologous DNA recombination activity in normal and

immortal mammalian cells. Nucleic Acids Res 1996 Oct 15;24(20):4084-91. PMID

8918816 (full text article available free at this link).

>

> 30. Ruscetti SK. Generation of mink cell focus-inducing

retroviruses: a model for understanding how viral-viral and viral-cellular

interactions can result in biological consequences. Dev Biol (Basel)

2001;106:163-7; discussion 167-8, 253-63. PMID 11761228.

>

> 31. Hilleman MR. History, precedent, and progress in the development

of mammalian cell culture systems for preparing vaccines: safety

considerations revisited. J Med Virol 1990 May;31(1):5-12. PMID 2198327.

>

> 32. Butel JS, Lednicky JA. Cell and molecular biology of simian

virus 40: implications for human infections and disease. J Natl Cancer Inst

1999 Jan 20;91(2):119-34. PMID 9923853.

>

> 33. Arrington AS, Lednicky JA, Butel JS. Molecular characterization

of SV40 DNA in multiple samples from a human mesothelioma. Anticancer Res

2000 Mar-Apr;20(2A):879-84. PMID 10810370.

>

> 34. Vilchez RA, Madden CR, Kozinetz CA, Halvorson SJ, White ZS,

nsen JL, Finch CJ, Butel JS. Association between simian virus 40 and

non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Lancet 2002 Mar 9;359(9309):817-23. PMID 11897278.

>

> 35. Shivapurkar N, Harada K, Reddy J, Scheuermann RH, Xu Y, McKenna

RW, Milchgrub S, Kroft SH, Feng Z, Gazdar AF. Presence of simian virus 40

DNA sequences in human lymphomas. Lancet 2002 Mar 9;359(9309):851-2. PMID

11897287.

>

> 36. Bu X, Zhang X, Zhang X, et Al. A study of simian virus 40

infection and its origin in human brain tumors. Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue

Za Zhi 2000 Feb;21(1):19-21. PMID 11860751.

>

> 37. Butel JS, Jafar S, Wong C, Arrington AS, Opekun AR, Finegold MJ,

Adam E. Evidence of SV40 infections in hospitalized children. Hum Pathol

1999 Dec;30(12):1496-502. PMID 10667429.

>

> 38. von Mettenheim AE. Studies on simian viruses as possible

contaminants of inactivated virus vaccines. I. Direct and serologic

detection of simian adenovirus SV20. Zentralbl Bakteriol [Orig A] 1975

Jul;232(2-3):131-40. PMID 1179876.

>

> 39. Schuurman R, van Steenis B, Sol C. Bovine polyomavirus, a

frequent contaminant of calf serum. Biologicals 1991 Oct;19(4):265-70. PMID

1665699.

>

> 40. Nettleton PF, Rweyemamu MM. The association of calf serum with

the contamination of BHK21 clone 13 suspension cells by a parvovirus

serologically related to the minute virus of mice (MVM). Arch Virol

1980;64(4):359-74. PMID 7396725.

>

> 41. Fong CK, Gross PA, Hsiung GD, Swack NS. Use of electron

microscopy for detection of viral and other microbial contaminants in bovine

sera. J Clin Microbiol 1975 Feb;1(2):219-24. PMID 51855.

>

> 42. kson GA, Bolin SR, Landgraf JG. Viral contamination of fetal

bovine serum used for tissue culture: risks and concerns. Dev Biol Stand

1991;75:173-5. PMID 1665460.

>

> 43. Kniazeff AJ, Wopschall LJ, Hopps HE, CS. Detection of

bovine viruses in fetal bovine serum used in cell culture. In Vitro 1975

Nov-Dec;11(6):400-3. PMID 172434.

>

> 44. Michalski FJ, Dietz A, Hsiung GD. Growth characteristics of

bovine herpesvirus 1 (infectious bovine rhinotracheitis) in human diploid

cell strain WI-38. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 1976 Feb;151(2):407-10. PMID

175382.

>

> 45. Egyed L. Bovine herpesvirus type 4: a special herpesvirus

(review article). Acta Vet Hung 2000;48(4):501-13. PMID 11402667.

>

> 46. Egyed L. Replication of bovine herpesvirus type 4 in human cells

in vitro. J Clin Microbiol 1998 Jul;36(7):2109-11. PMID 9650976.

>

> 47. ES. Poultry oncogenic retroviruses and humans. Cancer

Detect Prev 1994;18(1):9-30. PMID 8162609.

>

> 48. For example, see Nevins JR, " Cell Transformation by Viruses " , in

Knipe DM et al (ed.), 2001. Fields Virology (4th ed), Vol. I, chapter 10,

p.245-283. Lippincott. Also see Joklik WK, " Tumor Viruses " , in Joklik WK et

al, 1992. Zinsser Microbiology (20th ed), chapter 59, p.869-905. Appleton &

Lange.

>

> 49. Felder MP, Eychene A, Laugier D, Marx M, Dezelee P, Calothy G.

Steps and mechanisms of oncogene transduction by retroviruses. Folia Biol

(Praha) 1994;40(5):225-35. PMID 7895853.

>

> 50. RJ, Dougherty RM, Biggs PM, Payne LN, Goffe AP, Churchill

AE, Mortimer R. Contaminant viruses in two live virus vaccines produced in

chick cells. J Hyg (Lond) 1966 Mar;64(1):1-7. PMID 4286627.

>

> 51. Payne LN, Biggs PM, Chubb RC, Bowden RS. Contamination of

egg-adapted canine distemper vaccine by avian leukosis virus. Vet Rec 1966

Jan 8;78(2):45-8. PMID 4285488.

>

> 52. Knipe DM et al (ed.) 2001. Fields Virology (4th ed), Vol. I,

p.1103. Lippincott.

>

> 53. JA, Heneine W. Characterization of endogenous avian

leukosis viruses in chicken embryonic fibroblast substrates used in

production of measles and mumps vaccines. J Virol 2001 Apr;75(8):3605-12.

PMID 11264350.

>

> 54. Maudru T, Peden KW. Analysis of a coded panel of licensed

vaccines by polymerase chain reaction-based reverse transcriptase assays: a

collaborative study. J Clin Virol 1998 Jul 24;11(1):19-28. PMID 9784140.

>

> 55. Tsang SX, Switzer WM, Shanmugam V, JA, Goldsmith C,

A, Fadly A, Thea D, Jaffe H, Folks TM, Heneine W. Evidence of avian

leukosis virus subgroup E and endogenous avian virus in measles and mumps

vaccines derived from chicken cells: investigation of transmission to

vaccine recipients. J Virol 1999 Jul;73(7):5843-51. PMID 10364336.

>

> 56. Hussain AI, Shanmugam V, Switzer WM, Tsang SX, Fadly A, Thea D,

Helfand R, Bellini WJ, Folks TM, Heneine W. Lack of evidence of endogenous

avian leukosis virus and endogenous avian retrovirus transmission to

measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine recipients. Emerg Infect Dis 2001

Jan-Feb;7(1):66-72. PMID 11266296. Full article text available at

www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol7no1/hussain.htm

>

> 57. Arshad SS, Howes K, Barron GS, LM, PH, Payne LN.

Tissue tropism of the HPRS-103 strain of J subgroup avian leukosis virus and

of a derivative acutely transforming virus. Vet Pathol 1997

Mar;34(2):127-37. PMID 9066079.

>

> 58. ES, Overby L, Philpot R. Detection of antibodies to

avian leukosis/sarcoma viruses and reticuloendotheliosis viruses in humans

by western blot assay. Cancer Detect Prev 1995;19(6):472-86. PMID 8925516.

>

> 59. Raines MA, Maihle NJ, Moscovici C, Crittenden L, Kung HJ.

Mechanism of c-erbB transduction: newly released transducing viruses retain

poly(A) tracts of erbB transcripts and encode C-terminally intact erbB

proteins. J Virol 1988 Jul;62(7):2437-43. PMID 2897475.

>

> 60. Joklik WK, " Tumor Viruses " , in Joklik WK et al, 1992. Zinsser

Microbiology (20th ed.), chapter 59, p.889. Appleton & Lange.

>

> 61. Geier MR, Stanbro H, Merril CR. Endotoxins in commercial

vaccines. Appl Environ Microbiol 1978 Sep;36(3):445-9. PMID 727776.

>

> 62. Kreeftenberg JG, Loggen HG, van Ramshorst JD, Beuvery EC. The

limulus amebocyte lysate test micromethod and application in the control of

sera and vaccines. Dev Biol Stand 1977;34:15-20. PMID 838139.

>

> 63. Sharma SK. Endotoxin detection and elimination in biotechnology.

Biotechnol Appl Biochem 1986 Feb;8(1):5-22. PMID 3548752.

>

> 64. Fumarola D, Panaro A, Palma R, Mazzone A. Endotoxic

contamination of biological products (ribosomal vaccines, viral vaccines and

interferon). G Batteriol Virol Immunol 1979 Jan-Jun;72(1-6):72-7. PMID

95449.

>

> 65. Cussler K, Godau H, Gyra H. Investigation of the endotoxin

content of veterinary vaccines. ALTEX 1994;11(5):24-29. PMID 11178403.

>

> 66. Whitaker AM, EM. Effect of bacterial toxins in serum on

the chromosomes of WI-38. Dev Biol Stand 1976 Dec 13-15;37:185-90. PMID

801471.

>

> 67. See " What are nanobacteria? " at

http://www.nanobaclabs.com/PageDisplay.asp?p1=6578

>

> 68. Breitschwerdt EB, Sontakke S, Cannedy A, Hancock SI, Bradley JM.

Infection with Bartonella weissii and detection of Nanobacterium antigens in

a North Carolina beef herd. J Clin Microbiol 2001 Mar;39(3):879-82. PMID

11230398. Full article text available at

http://jcm.asm.org/cgi/content/full/39/3/879?view=full & pmid=11230398

>

> 69. Nanobacteria detected in vaccines. NanoNews 2001 July;1(2).

Article available at

http://www.nanobaclabs.com/Files/Newsletter/JulyNANONEWS1.pdf

>

> 70. Cell Culture Contamination Example. Mycoplasma.

http://www.unc.edu/depts/tcf/mycoplasma.htm

>

> 71. Prasad E, Lim-Fong R. Mycoplasmas.

http://www2.provlab.ab.ca/bugs/biologos/9702mypl.htm

>

> 72. Mycoplasma Detection Kit.

http://www.atcc.org/Products/MycoplasmaDetectKit.cfm

>

> 73. Mattman LH, 2001. Cell wall deficient forms: stealth pathogens

(3rd ed.). CRC Press.

>

> 74. Uphoff CC, Drexler HG. Prevention of mycoplasma contamination in

leukemia-lymphoma cell lines. Hum Cell 2001 Sep;14(3):244-7. PMID 11774744.

>

> 75. Mycoplasma Detection and Elimination.

http://www.dsmz.de/mutz/mutzmyco.htm

>

> 76. Mycoplasma Detection Kit.

http://www.biovalley.fr/anglais/biology/mob_cc.htm

>

> 77. Kojima A, Takahashi T, Kijima M, Ogikubo Y, Tamura Y, Harasawa

R. Detection of mycoplasma DNA in veterinary live virus vaccines by the

polymerase chain reaction. J Vet Med Sci 1996 Oct;58(10):1045-8. PMID

8916012.

>

> 78. Kojima A, Takahashi T, Kijima M, Ogikubo Y, Nishimura M,

Nishimura S, Harasawa R, Tamura Y. Detection of Mycoplasma in avian live

virus vaccines by polymerase chain reaction. Biologicals 1997

Dec;25(4):365-71. PMID 9467032.

>

> 79. Benisheva T, Sovova V, Ivanov I, Opalchenova G. Comparison of

methods used for detection of mycoplasma contamination in cell cultures,

sera, and live-virus vaccines. Folia Biol (Praha) 1993;39(5):270-6. PMID

8206173.

>

> 80. Nicolson GL, Nass M, Nicolson N. Anthrax vaccine: controversy

over safety and efficacy. Antimicrobics and Infectious Disease Newsletter

(Elsevier Science) 2000. Article located at

http://www.flatlandbooks.com/anthrax.html

>

> 81. Thornton DH. A survey of mycoplasma detection in veterinary

vaccines. Vaccine 1986 Dec;4(4):237-40. PMID 3799018.

>

> 82. Kong F, G, Gordon S, Zelynski A, Gilbert GL.

Species-specific PCR for identification of common contaminant mollicutes in

cell culture. Appl Environ Microbiol 2001 Jul;67(7):3195-200. PMID 11425741.

>

> 83. Mycoplasma testing by PCR.

http://locus.umdnj.edu/nia/qc/myco.html

>

> 84. Mycoplasma sp. Reagent Set.

http://www.euroclone.net/mol_biology/mycoplasma.htm

>

> 85. Macomber PB. Cancer and cell wall deficient bacteria. Med

Hypotheses 1990 May;32(1):1-9. PMID 2190063.

>

> 86. Baseman JB, Tully JG. Mycoplasmas: sophisticated, reemerging,

and burdened by their notoriety. Emerg Infect Dis 1997 Jan-Mar;3(1):21-32.

PMID 9126441. Full text article available at

http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol3no1/baseman.htm

>

> 87. Gartler SM. Apparent Hela cell contamination of human

heteroploid cell lines. Nature 1968 Feb 24;217(5130):750-1. PMID 5641128.

>

> 88. Lavappa KS. Survey of ATCC stocks of human cell lines for HeLa

contamination. In Vitro 1978 May;14(5):469-75. PMID 566722.

>

> 89. -Rees WA, s DW, Flandermeyer RR. Cross-contamination

of cells in culture. Science 1981 Apr 24;212(4493):446-52. PMID 6451928.

>

> 90. Gold M. The cells that would not die. Science 81 1981 April;

29-35.

>

> 91. Gold M, 1986. A Conspiracy of Cells: One Woman's Immortal Legacy

and the Medical Scandal It Caused. State University of New York Press.

>

> 92. Demidova SA, Tsareva AA, Mikhailova GR, Perekrest VV, Gushchin

BV. Several methodologic problems in the control of cell cultures. Vopr

Virusol 1976 May-Jun;(3):371-9. PMID 983006.

>

> 93. Hukku B, Halton DM, Mally M, WD Jr. Cell

characterization by use of multiple genetic markers. Adv Exp Med Biol

1984;172:13-31. PMID 6328905.

>

> 94. MacLeod RA, Dirks WG, Matsuo Y, Kaufmann M, Milch H, Drexler HG.

Widespread intraspecies cross-contamination of human tumor cell lines

arising at source. Int J Cancer 1999 Nov 12;83(4):555-63. PMID 10508494.

>

> 95. Stacey GN. Cell contamination leads to inaccurate data: we must

take action now. Nature 2000 Jan 27;403(6768):356. PMID 10667765.

>

> 96. Kniss DA, Xie Y, Li Y, Kumar S, Linton EA, Cohen P, Fan-Havard

P, Redman CW, Sargent IL. ED(27) Trophoblast-like Cells Isolated from

First-trimester Chorionic Villi are Genetically Identical to HeLa Cells Yet

Exhibit a Distinct Phenotype. Placenta 2002 Jan;23(1):32-43. PMID 11869090.

>

> 97. Buttner M, Oehmig A, Weiland F, Rziha HJ, Pfaff E. Detection of

virus or virus specific nucleic acid in foodstuff or bioproducts--hazards

and risk assessment. Arch Virol Suppl 1997;13:57-66. PMID 9413526.

>

> 98. Monath TP, Cropp CB, on AK. Mode of entry of a neurotropic

arbovirus into the central nervous system. Reinvestigation of an old

controversy. Lab Invest 1983 Apr;48(4):399-410. PMID 6300550.

>

> 99. Burke DS, Monath TP, " Flaviviruses " , in Knipe DM et al (ed.),

2001. Fields Virology (4th ed), Vol. I, chapter 33, p.1057. Lippincott.

>

> 100. Hoffman PN, Abuknesha RA, s NJ, D, Lloyd JS. A

model to assess the infection potential of jet injectors used in mass

immunisation. Vaccine 2001 Jul 16;19(28-29):4020-7. PMID 11427278.

>

> 101. Canter J, Mackey K, Good LS, o RR, Chin J, Bond WW, Alter

MJ, Horan JM. An outbreak of hepatitis B associated with jet injections in a

weight reduction clinic. Arch Intern Med 1990 Sep;150(9):1923-7. PMID

2393323.

>

> 102. Brink PR, van Loon AM, Trommelen JC, Gribnau FW, Smale-Novakova

IR. Virus transmission by subcutaneous jet injection. J Med Microbiol 1985

Dec;20(3):393-7. PMID 4068027.

>

> 103. McAleer WJ, Buynak EB, Maigetter RZ, Wampler DE, WJ,

Hilleman MR. Human hepatitis B vaccine from recombinant yeast. Nature 1984

Jan 12-18;307(5947):178-80. PMID 6318124.

>

> 104. Hilleman MR. Yeast recombinant hepatitis B vaccine. Infection

1987 Jan-Feb;15(1):3-7. PMID 2437037.

>

> 105. Points to Consider on Plasmid DNA Vaccines for Preventive

Infectious Disease Indications. Food and Drug Administration, Center for

Biologics Evaluation and Research, Office of Vaccine Research and Review,

December 1996. Full article available at

http://www.fda.gov/cber/gdlns/plasmid.txt

>

> 106. Ho M, A, Cummins J, Traavik T. Slipping through the

regulatory net: 'Naked' and 'free' nucleic acids. TWN Biotechnology and

Biosafety Series No. 5, 2001. Available at

http://www.twnside.org.sg/title/biod5.htm

>

> 107. Petricciani JC. Safety issues relating to the use of mammalian

cells as hosts. Dev Biol Stand 1985;59:149-53. PMID 3891461.

>

> 108. A. Dispelling vaccination myths: an internationally

published, referenced report. 1998. Report available at

http://www.unc.edu/~aphillip/www/chf/myths/dvm1.htm For statistics

regarding adverse events, see the link at

http://www.unc.edu/~aphillip/www/chf/myths/dvm11.htm

>

> 109. See a discussion of issues surrounding proposed forced smallpox

vaccination at: Fisher, BL. Smallpox and forced vaccination: what every

American needs to know. The Vaccine Reaction, Winter 2002. Article available

at http://www.909shot.com/smallpoxspecialrpt.htm. The entire text of the

Model State Emergency Health Powers Act, currently being considered by the

various U.S. state governments is available at

http://www.publichealthlaw.net/MSEHPA/MSEHPA2.pdf

>

> 110. National Vaccine Program Office, Vaccine Fact Sheets: Vaccine

Product Approval Process. Article available at

http://www.cdc.gov/od/nvpo/fs_tableII_doc2.htm

>

> 111. Garnick RL. Raw materials as a source of contamination in

large-scale cell culture. Dev Biol Stand 1998;93:21-9. PMID 9737373.

>

> 112. Fadly AM, EJ. Isolation and some characteristics of a

subgroup J-like avian leukosis virus associated with myeloid leukosis in

meat-type chickens in the United States. Avian Dis 1999

Jul-Sep;43(3):391-400. PMID 10494407.

>

> 113. Grunder AA, Benkel BF, Chambers JR, Sabour MP, Gavora JS,

Dickie JW. Characterization of four endogenous viral genes in semi-congenic

lines of meat chickens. Poult Sci 1999 Jun;78(6):873-7. PMID 10438132.

>

> 114. Pham TD, Spencer JL, ES. Detection of avian leukosis

virus in albumen of chicken eggs using reverse transcription polymerase

chain reaction. J Virol Methods 1999 Mar;78(1-2):1-11. PMID 10204692.

>

> 115. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=25538

>

> 116. Kopelovich L. Are all normal diploid human cell strains alike?

Relevance to carcinogenic mechanisms in vitro. Exp Cell Biol

1982;50(5):266-70. PMID 7141068.

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

This article explained a lot for me. I was under the (wrong) impression

that the only real danger of vaccines were in the preservatives, eg

mercury. Thank you for this.

> What Is Coming Through That Needle?

>

>

> What Is Coming Through That Needle?

> The Problem of Pathogenic Vaccine Contamination

> McRearden

>

> In recent times mankind is experiencing a situation never

> previously

> encountered, that being the threat of release of pathogens intended to

> kill

> or disable large numbers of people. That danger has prompted certain

> health

> agencies to prepare for possible mass vaccination of the populace. The

> purpose of this report is to examine the existing scientific evidence of

> pathogenic contaminants in vaccines. This summary, while making no

> claim of

> being a complete review of the subject, will point out sufficient

> examples

> and illustrations of contamination with bacteria, viruses, and their

> components, so as to enable the reader to make a more informed decision

> regarding accepting a vaccination (or forcing others to receive one).

> It is

> presented in a format intended for the public, their physicians, and

> their

> agency or governmental representatives, and may be freely copied in its

> entirety.

>

> If you as an individual are too busy to read this brief summary in

> one sitting, please be aware there is ample evidence in the scientific

> literature that serious viruses, bacteria; or components and toxins

> there

> from; as well as foreign animal or cancer-related proteins and DNA are

> finding their way into the commercial vaccines intended for humans,

> pets,

> and agricultural animals. If you are interested in the short and

> long-term

> health of yourself and those you care about, or serve as a public

> servant or

> medical advisor, you do owe it to yourself to be informed.

>

> In the production of viral vaccines on a commercial scale, the

> virus

> of concern must be reproduced in large quantities. Viruses cannot

> survive or

> reproduce without being introduced into cells that nourish them, which

> enables the viral reproductive activity. In that sense all viruses can

> be

> considered parasitic on other cells. Living cell types commonly used to

> reproduce viruses in the lab include monkey kidney cells, chicken

> embryos,

> as well as other animal and human cells. These cells must also be

> nourished

> with food, and are most often fed with a nutrient mix containing in

> large

> part, bovine (cow) calf serum (usually, serum extracted from fetal calf

> blood). This product can carry many types of bovine blood-borne

> viruses, and

> is one of the primary sources of vaccine contaminants. A journal article

> states, " a potential risk associated with the production and use of

> biological products is viral contamination. This contamination may be

> present in the source material, e.g. human blood, human or animal

> tissues,

> cell banks, or introduced in the manufacturing process through the use

> of

> animal sera... " (1)

>

> Bovine viruses

>

> The viruses and other agents that can contaminate bovine calf

> serum

> are numerous. One of the most prominent is a pestivirus called bovine

> viral

> diarrhea virus (2). More specifically, we see in several scientific

> journal

> sources these types of statements: " contamination of a vaccine as a

> consequence of infection of fetal calf serum " (3); " many batches of

> commercially available serum are contaminated with viruses such as BVD "

> [bovine viral diarrhea] (4); " virus was isolated from 332 of 1,608

> (20.6%)

> lots of raw fetal calf serum obtained specifically for the Center and

> 93 of

> 190 (49%) lots of commercially available fetal calf serum (5); " agents

> most

> frequently detected in CCL's [continuous cell lines] have been bovine

> viral

> diarrhea virus and mycoplasma. Our laboratory has consistently found

> that

> the source of bovine viral diarrhea contamination of CCLs has been the

> use

> of contaminated fetal bovine cell culture enrichment serum " (6); and

> finally,

> " In conclusion, most commercially available bovine sera are contaminated

> with BVDV and, although there is no evidence that the virus is

> infectious,

> bovine sera should be screened for this virus.for the development or

> production of vaccine. " (7)

>

> Can this virus cause infection or disease in humans? New evidence

> shows this is possible, as researchers have found a new strain that was

> isolated from human cells, and it is very closely related to the bovine

> strains (8). One study finds that an alarming 75% of all laboratory cell

> lines examined were contaminated with pestivirus strains; of these, all

> of

> the bovine cell lines were contaminated with one of three possible BVDV

> strains; cell lines from other animal sources including primates,

> sometimes

> contained one of these BVDV strains (9).

>

> There is now heightened concern that this virus and others can

> cross

> species lines, creating new strains as they adapt to their new hosts,

> and

> this would include passage of the virus to and from humans. Whether the

> human strain of BVDV causes overt illness is uncertain, because

> physicians

> may be uninformed and not even be looking for this virus. It may be

> useful

> however, to compare the infection patterns in cattle. They can be

> persistently infected at a low level for their entire life with a

> non-pathogenic strain of the virus. Under these conditions, they

> consistently create and shed virus into the surrounding environment,

> which

> then infects other animals. The virus can nonetheless become lethal to

> the

> animal if it mutates, with the new form also causing " visible cell

> damage

> and death " in cultured conditions (10). The animal succumbs to gradual

> or

> acute deterioration of the gastrointestinal mucous lining, which

> produces

> diarrhea and its eventual demise. However, mutated virus is not always

> necessary to provoke debilitating illness and death, and ordinary virus

> can

> be isolated from the cow's pancreas, adrenal glands, and pituitary

> glands

> (11); the virus has also been documented as causing serious pulmonary

> illness (12). A study describes an outbreak of disease among goats due

> to a

> vaccine contaminated with a bovine pestivirus; oddly, these animals

> experienced reproductive failure and lesions to the central nervous

> system

> (13). So, can these disease symptoms in varied organs and tissues also

> occur

> in humans when they carry this virus short or long-term?

>

> A cursory examination of the literature indicates this may be

> occurring. One revealing study tells us " faeces from children under 2

> years

> old who had gastroenteritis that could not be attributed to recognised

> enteric pathogens were examined.for Pestivirus antigens. Such antigens

> were

> detected in 30 of 128 episodes of gastroenteritis.The diarrhoeal

> disease in

> children excreting Pestivirus antigens resembled that in other children

> except that it was more commonly associated with signs and symptoms of

> respiratory inflammation. " (14) There are also concerns regarding a

> pattern

> of pestivirus infection in infacts born with microcephaly, a condition

> wherein the head or cranial capacity is unusually small (15, 16).

>

> Scientists from the USDA National Veterinary Services Laboratory

> describe the situation quite clearly, and give an indication of the

> seriousness of the problem: " The high frequency of virus and antibody

> detection in individual animal or small pool samples suggests that any

> large

> pool of unscreened sera will be contaminated. Infection of cell cultures

> with BVDV can lead to interference with the growth of other viruses.

> Vaccine

> produced on contaminated cells may in turn be contaminated, leading to

> seroconversion or disease in the vaccine. The safety, purity, and

> efficacy

> of viral vaccines require BVDV testing of ingredients, cell substrates

> and

> final product. " (17) And here is a similar statement from a New York

> Blood

> Center: " Bovine viral diarrhea virus, whose small virion size does not

> allow

> 100% assurance of its removal by filtration, may potentially contaminate

> every lot of commercially produced fetal bovine serum. " (18)

>

> In reality though, how much of this particular viral contaminant

> has

> trickled into humans? Well, in spite of manufacturers and regulatory

> agencies claiming efficacy of their testing procedures, one 2001 study

> found

> 13% of human MMR, polio, or Streptococcus pneumoniae vaccines tested

> positive for pestivirus RNA (19). And another researcher observes,

> " serum

> antibodies against BVDV have been detected in approximately 30% of human

> population who had no contact with potentially infected animals. " (16)

> Also,

> " pestiviruses adapted to human cell cultures may be harmful because

> serious

> BVDV infections in humans have been frequently suggested.The BVDV

> persistently infected in cell cultures used for vaccine productions have

> been shown to be a source of contamination in live virus vaccines. It

> is,

> therefore, prerequisite to examine pestivirus contamination in cell

> cultures

> to avoid secondary infections in humans as well as in animals. " (20)

>

> Continuous immortal cell lines

>

> This same scientist brings up another important issue. Because

> many

> medical-use biological products (including vaccines) are now being

> cultured

> or produced on what is called " continuous " cell lines (i.e., these are

> cell

> cultures consisting of " immortal " or cancerous types of cells because

> they

> have no limits on how many times they can divide), there is concern that

> viral contamination of these cell lines with a pathogen like bovine

> viral

> diarrhea virus, could spread cancer-promoting material into the human

> recipient. How could this happen? Briefly, it works like this. The virus

> (which in this case has a single strand of RNA for its genome) is

> capable of

> incorporating RNA from the cells in which it has been cultured, into

> its own

> genome. If any contaminant RNA virus is present in a culture that

> contains

> immortal cancerous cells, this virus can easily mutate to include

> unwanted

> oncogenic material, which can then get passed into the biological

> product

> intended for human medical use (16).

>

> Were you aware that biological products, including some common

> vaccines (for instance, polio and rabies), are being produced on

> " continuous " immortal cell lines? Manufacturers, scientists, and

> agencies

> will often assure us that these cells themselves are not " tumorigenic " ,

> i.e., they do not cause tumors per se. A closer look however, shows

> this is

> not always the case. While lab culturing may indicate that these types

> of

> cells are not immediately changing to overt tumor cells, it is now

> well-known in the scientific community that after these cells have been

> repeatedly cultured a certain number of times, something causes them to

> convert to a cancerous state (21).

>

> This journal article summary addresses the issue in regards to

> Vero

> cells, which is a continuous cell line coming from the African green

> monkey,

> and is commonly used in vaccine production. It states, " One of the

> current

> criteria for evaluating the acceptability of cell lines for use in

> vaccine

> production is lack of tumorigenicity. Vero cells represent an example

> of a

> class of cells known as continuous cell lines. They were derived from

> African green monkey kidney, and their growth properties and culture

> characteristics have many advantages over other cell substrates for use

> in

> vaccine production. We have tested Vero cells for tumorigenicity in nude

> mice and in a human muscle organ culture system, and found a significant

> increase in their tumorigenic potential with increasing passage numbers.

> Cells at passage 232 and higher produced nodules in all nude mice

> inoculated. " (22) [The term " passage " in this context means the number of

> times a cell line has been cultured].

>

> There is another very important issue reported in studies that is

> evidently being largely ignored as regards long-term vaccine effects and

> safety. There is obvious evidence that in the lab, continuous immortal

> cell

> lines react differently between one type of animal species and another

> (21,

> 23). As an example, tissue from one species will allow the immortal

> cell to

> induce a cancerous change more quickly, in comparison to tissue from a

> different species. These results then beg the following questions. How

> extensively have these continuous cell lines been tested on human

> tissues,

> and would the results vary from one type of tissue to another? And what

> happens over the long term.if an immortal cell from a vaccine culture

> makes

> its way into the final vaccine product, does it keep dividing in the

> human

> body? Another scenario might suggest the tumor-promoting portion of its

> DNA

> inserting into a viral genome, which then gets injected into the body.

> what

> happens at that point?

>

> Furthermore, given the evidence that closely-related animal

> species

> (as an example, various species of monkeys) react differently to

> immortal

> cells, do we also need to consider that any one vaccine intended for all

> humans might ultimately react differently among the various races,

> ethnic

> groups, and sexes? And what are the effects of the vaccine contaminants

> on

> persons with immune depression, on the elderly, or on infants?

>

> A letter from the FDA to vaccine manufacturers dated as recently

> as

> March 2001 shows that this issue regarding immortal cell lines is still

> of

> concern. It states, " In general, CBER [Center for Biologics Evaluation

> and

> Research] currently views Vero cells as an acceptable substrate for

> viral

> vaccines, but has residual concerns.CBER recommends that all products

> derived from Vero cells be free of residual intact Vero cells. If your

> manufacturing process does not include a validated filtration step or

> other

> validated procedure to clear residual intact Vero cells from the

> product,

> please incorporate such a procedure into your manufacturing

> process. " (24) It

> is now 16 years after the WHO gave a go-ahead (in 1986) to use

> continuous

> cell lines for vaccine production (25), and yet there are very basic

> safety

> questions not resolved by the manufacturers, agencies, and scientific

> community, much less the finer details (26, 27). One 1991 study reports:

> " Cell substrate DNA was shown to be an abundant contaminant in the

> clarified

> preparations of the Sabin type 1, 2 and 3 poliovaccines produced on a

> continuous cell line " (28). Another indicates that immortal cell lines

> showed

> 100-times greater number of DNA recombination events compared to normal

> cells (29). As one researcher states, " Using neoplastic cell lines as

> substrates for vaccine development could inadvertently result in

> viral-viral

> or viral-cellular interactions whose biological consequences are

> unclear.viral-viral and viral-cellular interactions can result in the

> generation of new retroviruses with pathological consequences. " (30). We

> note

> the term " neoplastic " means the quality of having an abnormal growth

> characteristic.

>

> There is an even stronger statement dating back to 1990. A

> scientist

> in the field writes, " The present concern is for safety of vaccines made

> using transformed or neoplastic mammalian cells that may contain

> endogenous

> contaminating viruses or integrated gene sequences from oncogenic

> viruses.

> There is also concern for use of plasmid vectors employing promoter

> elements

> from oncogenic viruses. The principal concern for safety lies with

> retention

> of residual DNA in the vaccine, especially since induction of cancer

> is a

> single-cell phenomenon, and a single functional unit of foreign DNA

> integrated into the host cell genome might serve to induce cell

> transformation as a single event or part of a series of multifactorial

> events. Current proposed standards for vaccines would permit

> contamination

> with up to 100 pg [picograms] of heterologous DNA per dose. This is

> equivalent to about 10(8) 'functional lengths' of DNA. Total safety

> would

> seem to require complete absence of DNA from the product. " (31)

>

> Please note that 10(8) means 10 to the power of 8, or 100,000,000

> " functional lengths " of DNA are allowed per dose of vaccine. Is there

> something wrong with this picture? How long will the general public be

> subjected to these vaccine products that according to this information,

> are

> nowhere near safe?

>

> It has taken, for instance, approximately forty years for the

> scientific community to finally acknowledge that we have a serious

> problem

> as a result of the contamination of polio vaccines with simian virus 40

> (SV40) in the late 1950s-early 1960s. There has been previous evidence

> of

> some human brain and other tumors containing this virus (32, 33), but

> the

> medical community has been slow to acknowledge a definitive link between

> SV40 and cancer in humans. However, two independent research teams have

> recently found this virus present in 43% of cases of non-Hodgkins

> lymphoma

> (34, 35). Another study found it present in 36% of brain tumors, 16% of

> healthy blood cell samples, and 22% of healthy semen samples (36). And

> strangely, SV40 has now been found to infect children (37). Considering

> that

> children of this era, are not supposed to be receiving the virus via the

> vaccine contamination route, this would therefore imply that SV40 is

> being

> transmitted from one human to another, in ways not previously known.

>

> Other simian viruses may also be contaminating the (Vero) monkey

> cell lines used for vaccine production. One example from the literature

> cites the contamination presence of SV20, which is a oncogenic simian

> adenovirus (38).

>

> Simply put, are we in a state of denial that vaccines are

> ultimately

> transmitting viruses, DNA, and proteins into humans from foreign animal

> sources (and possibly unhealthy human sources), and that this may be

> strongly contributing to the incredible upsurge in cancers and serious

> chronic diseases? Are these foreign animal genes altering your DNA?

> Furthermore, given that viral presence can sometimes take years to

> manifest

> actual disease symptoms, and then considering the tendencies of

> health-related agencies and corporations towards short-term solutions

> and

> profits, will we ever truly know the long-term consequences until it is

> too

> late?

>

> Other bovine viruses

>

> Another contaminating virus found in the calf serum used for

> vaccine

> production is bovine polyoma virus (polyoma viruses are strongly

> associated

> with cancer); one pertinent article is titled " Bovine polyoma virus, a

> frequent contaminant of calf serum " (39). Other contaminants include a

> virus

> from the parvovirus family (40); another study cites " virus-like

> particles "

> and " mycoplasma-like agents " in 68% and 20% of the samples, respectively

> (41); and yet another mentions the presence of infectious bovine

> rhinotracheitis virus (aka bovine herpes virus 1), and parainfluenza-3

> virus

> in addition to the common BVDV (42). An interesting report from 1975 not

> only affirms the presence of these viruses in calf serum, and mentions

> the

> additional presence of bovine enterovirus-4, but also tells us that 25%

> of

> serum lots that were pre-tested by the suppliers and " considered to be

> free

> of known viral contaminants " were actually contaminated with bovine

> viruses

> (43). It should be obvious that any bovine blood-borne virus (including

> serious retroviruses such as bovine leukemia virus, bovine visna virus,

> and

> bovine immunodeficiency virus) could ultimately end up in human or

> animal

> vaccines via the use of calf serum in the manufacturing process.

>

> Contamination of calf serum with certain bovine herpes viruses,

> and

> the possible implication for human health, deserves a bit of scrutiny.

> It is

> known that bovine herpesvirus-1 replicates easily in a human embryo cell

> line called WI-38 (44). It is also known that bovine herpesvirus-4 is

> quite

> " persistent " in calf serum, and has a wide host range, including human

> cells

> (45). In fact, this particular virus strongly replicates in two human

> embryonic cell lines, WI-38 and MRC-5, enough so to prompt one author to

> give these details and a warning: " PCR [polymerase chain reaction]

> detected

> a 10,000-times-higher level of BHV-4 [bovine herpesvirus-4] DNA. the

> supernatant indicated a 100-fold increase of infectious particles. Since

> this is the first bovine (human herpes virus 8 and Epstein-Barr virus

> related) herpes virus which replicates on human cells in vitro, the

> danger

> of possible human BHV-4 infection should not be ignored. " (46)

>

> The clincher to this possible contamination, is that these same

> human cell lines WI-38 and MRC-5 are two of the most common human cell

> lines

> used to manufacture viral vaccines, (for example - rubella, chickenpox,

> smallpox) and these cell lines are of course, commonly nurtured with

> calf

> serum.

>

> Contaminants from chicken sources

>

> Some viral vaccines are produced by growing the virus in chicken

> eggs. Common human vaccines manufactured by this method include

> influenza,

> mumps, measles, yellow fever, and others. Like the vaccines that include

> bovine-source materials, those derived from chicken embryo culture are

> plagued with some very serious viral contamination problems.

>

> Avian leukosis virus (aka avian leukemia virus or ALV) is a

> retroviral pathogen that infects large segments of the modern poultry

> industry, is present in commercial chickens and eggs, and thus exposes

> humans on a consistent basis (47). An interesting virus in the sense

> that it

> can be considered a " parent " , it easily transforms into a dizzying

> array of

> related viruses by hijacking one of numerous cancer-related gene

> segments

> from its host, and inserting it into its own genome. Furthermore, it

> has the

> additional capability of inserting itself into the host (including

> human)

> genome, hiding out so to speak, and causing cancerous cell

> transformation

> from that location. There is now much scientific literature available

> that

> describes the various active mechanisms of this and other

> cancer-associated

> viruses (48). Viruses that originate from the " parent " avian leukosis

> virus,

> include the potent Rous sarcoma virus, Rous-associated viruses, avian

> myeloblastosis virus, avian myelocytoma virus, avian erythroblastosis

> virus,

> Fujinami sarcoma virus, etc. One group of researchers studying the

> mechanism

> of ALV writes, " Serial passaging of a retrovirus that does not carry an

> oncogene on such cultures leads with a high frequency to the emergence

> of

> new viruses that have transduced oncogenes. " (49). In other words, given

> the

> right growth conditions, ALV can easily transform into other closely

> related

> viruses that are known to be cancer-related.

>

> Just how common is this avian leukosis virus in viral vaccines?

> The

> first evidence of contamination came to light in the 1960s when yellow

> fever

> vaccine was found to contain it (50). Since that time, it is common

> knowledge in the industry that this virus (or components thereof) still

> linger in human and animal vaccines (51). Indeed, the respected Fields

> Virology text (year 2001 edition) states, " At the present time, vaccines

> produced by some of the world's 12 manufacturing institutes are

> contaminated

> with avian leukosis virus " (52). One point that researchers in this

> field do

> agree upon, are the presence of ALV, avian endogenous virus, avian

> reticuloendotheliosis virus (another poultry retrovirus), and also an

> enzyme

> called reverse transcriptase (a component of retroviruses) in final

> vaccine

> products intended for human use, especially the mumps, measles, yellow

> fever, and influenza vaccines (53, 54, 55). What they do not agree upon

> are

> the effects on humans in terms of transmission, infection, and possible

> subsequent disease. A recent study coming out of the U.S. CDC (Centers

> for

> Disease Control), which analyzed frozen blood serum samples from

> children

> that had received MMR vaccinations, reports no avian viral presence in

> these

> samples (56).

>

> And yet, we see reports from other researchers that make us

> question

> the results of that study. As is often the case with viruses, some

> strains

> will show particular affinities for certain types of tissues or growth

> conditions, and ALV is no exception (57). One researcher makes the

> effort to

> explain, " Because of the difficulty in infecting mammalian cells in

> vitro

> with these viruses, it is generally held that they do not infect

> humans.Our

> results show that exposed poultry workers and subjects with no

> occupational

> exposure to these viruses have antibodies in their sera specifically

> directed against ALSV [Avian leucosis/sarcoma viruses]. Further

> investigation into whether these findings mean that virus has been

> integrated into the human genome is needed, to assess the public health

> implications of these results. " (58). He also explains in another

> article,

> that given the known behavior of these viruses in mammalian cellular

> culture, a blood serum test will not always provide the correct

> evidence of

> viral presence in the human body (47). In other words, does the virus

> (or

> viral antibodies) need to be actively present in the blood stream at the

> time of the blood draw? What if the viral particles have retreated into

> other tissues? Thus the CDC study mentioned above may not have

> presented an

> accurate assessment of viral presence, or long-term effects from the

> numerous ALV-associated " offspring " viruses. Considering that ALV can

> for

> example, easily capture the human " erbB " oncogene (59), and that erbB as

> well as the oncogene called myc are strongly associated with common

> forms of

> human breast cancer, it seems that the issue of ALV vaccine

> contamination

> would deserve a high level of attention! (By the way, the general reader

> should not feel intimidated by the abbreviations associated with

> oncogenes.erb refers to " erythroblastosis " , and myc refers to

> myelocytomatosis, which are the names of two ALV-associated offspring

> viruses). A well-known microbiology text reinforces these concepts by

> teaching, " Proto-oncogenes become incorporated into retroviral genomes

> with

> surprising ease. " (60)

>

> Toxin contamination

>

> The unintentional presence of bacterial-source toxins (called

> " endotoxins " or " exotoxins " ) in human and veterinary vaccines has been

> recognized for many years. Such toxins are originally present in source

> materials, or are produced as a result of bacterial infection during the

> manufacturing process (61, 62). The various methods used in attempts to

> eliminate viruses and bacteria from vaccines are simply not effective

> in the

> removal of these problematic toxic proteins (63). Several observers have

> expressed concern that the presence of endotoxin may be a source of

> severe

> adverse reactions seen in some individuals after receiving a vaccine

> (61,

> 64). Some vaccines, such as those for diphtheria and tetanus, are

> specifically created to induce a protective mechanism in the body

> against

> the bacterial toxin; however, vaccines prepared from bacteria can

> contain

> appreciable and potentially dangerous lingering amounts of toxin,

> despite

> the steps used during manufacture to decrease the toxic potency, as

> described in this comment: " Vaccines composed of gram-negative bacteria

> contain endotoxin in considerable amounts. This may result in adverse

> effects after vaccination of sensitive animals. " (65). It has also been

> reported that bacterial toxin contamination residing in calf serum, can

> cause breaks in the DNA of human cells (66).

>

> Bacterial contamination - nanobacteria

>

> Nanobacteria is a recently discovered pathogen that infects

> humans.

> Now considered to be the smallest existing bacterial form known to

> science,

> it escapes through common filtering processes, and can easily invade

> other

> cells and cause cell death. Nanobacteria also are classed as

> " pleomorphic " ,

> that is, they have the ability the change physical form. A human

> variety of

> this pathogen has been found to cause or be associated with a host of

> disease conditions, only a few of which include atherosclerosis,

> coronary

> artery / heart disease, kidney stones and kidney disease, arthritis, MS,

> alzheimers, some cancers, and other conditions (67).

>

> Since this species of bacteria is specific to mammals, and must be

> lab-cultured in mammalian blood or serum, it is not surprising that this

> variety of nanobacterium has been isolated as a contaminant from bovine

> calf

> serum, other mammaliam bio-products, and vaccines. One study reports

> that

> 100% of serum of cattle in a US herd showed antigens to nanobacteria,

> and

> cites another report from Europe that, " more than 80% of commercial

> bovine

> serum lots contain Nanobacterium " (68). Obviously, any vaccines that

> must

> incorporate mammalian products during production (which would include

> cow,

> monkey, or human cells, blood or serum), will be prone to nanobacterial

> contamination. This was indeed verified when a group of researchers

> found

> that 2 out of 3 lots of inactivated polio vaccine, and 3 out of 6 lots

> of

> veterinary vaccines were contaminated with nanobacteria. They also

> point out

> that the bacteria could be coming from calf serum and contaminated

> culture

> cell lines (69). Any reasoning person with a basic knowledge of vaccine

> production can deduce that nanobacteria have undoubtedly been infecting

> humans in a fairly widespread manner via vaccination procedures. One

> might

> also wonder whether it has contributed to the current prevalence of

> atherosclerosis and generalized heart disease.

>

> Bacterial contamination - mycoplasmas and related forms

>

> If there is any one type of bacterial contamination in vaccines

> that

> warrants particular attention, it would be mycoplasmas. These small

> organisms have a structure not characteristic of most forms of bacteria,

> i.e., they usually contain a thin outer membrane as compared to the more

> complex walls of common bacterial forms. They are described as being

> capable

> of slipping through filtration procedures, and can transfer to other

> media

> through the air or via routine handling in the lab (70). One source

> states

> that " less than 10% of laboratories actually test for

> infection/contamination regularly " .that mycoplasmas are " influencing

> almost

> every aspect of cell biology " .and that labs " which do not test for

> mycoplasma probably harbour contaminated cell lines and may even have

> their

> entire stocks contaminated, as mycoplasma spreads readily along cell

> lines

> via regents and media, the operator and the work surface " (71). They are

> resistant to certain types of antibiotics used to kill other bacteria

> (70,

> 72), and are subject to changing form under varying physiological or

> biochemical conditions (73).

>

> The journal and industry literature is filled with references to

> the

> problems of mycoplasma contamination in cell cultures and vaccines.

> Various

> studies cite corrupted cell lines ranging in occurrence from 5% to 87%

> (71,

> 72, 74, 75, 76), and as we now know, once this pathogen is in the cell

> culture being used to make the vaccine, it is liable to end up in the

> final

> product (77, 78, 79,80). One author states, " Mycoplasma contaminants

> can be

> considered important not only because of their role as pathogens but

> also

> because they may indicate that insufficient care has been taken during

> vaccine manufacture or quality control. " (81). Species of mycoplasmas

> that

> have polluted the cell cultures include Mycoplasma hominis, M.

> fermentans

> (implicated in Gulf War illness), M. arginini, M. hyorhinis, M. orale,

> M.

> pirum, M. pneumoniae, and Acholeplasma laidlawii (75, 76, 82). Any

> reputable

> company that sells tissue or cell culture material, also must test for

> and

> sell kits to detect mycoplasmas (72, 75, 76, 83, 84).

>

> Mycoplasmas and associated variant forms have long been associated

> with many disease processes, including cancer, chronic illnesses such as

> chronic fatigue syndrome, fibromyalgia, arthritis, Gulf War Illness, and

> many others (73, 85, 86). It would be impossible to cite all the

> pertinent

> references in this short report, on this vast arena of microbiology

> that is

> often ignored by much of the medical community, sometimes with tragic

> consequences. Mycoplasmas without question have the capability of

> altering

> cell membranes and their antigens, disrupting DNA, and altering cellular

> metabolism both in vitro and in vivo (70, 71, 72, 73, 86).

>

> Cross-contamination of cell lines

>

> As we recall that all viral vaccines can only be produced with the

> use of cells, the purity of the cell lines an important issue. The most

> famous example of many cell lines becoming contaminated from outside

> sources, occurred when the famous and extremely fastidious HeLa cancer

> cells

> started showing up in labs across the world in the 1960s. The

> phenomenon is

> well-documented (87, 88, 89, 90), and is even the subject of an entire

> book

> (91). One study from 1976 cited a litany of contamination in all

> primary and

> continuous cell lines that were examined - many viruses were found, as

> well

> as HeLa cells (92). As the years progress, the reports continue to come

> in:

> one from 1984, for instance, tells of inter- and intra-species cell

> cross-contamination, that 35% of all cell lines were corrupted, and that

> most of these lines were (originally) cells of human origin (93).

>

> Let's fast-forward to 1999. A study in Germany finds that the

> problem is continuing, if not worsening. In a survey of human cell

> lines,

> the most common cross-contaminants came from " classic tumor cell lines " ;

> that these polluted lines had been unknowingly used in " several hundred "

> projects which generated potentially false reports; and that they

> considered

> it a " grave and chronic problem demanding radical measures " (94).

>

> The situation is such that several scientists were prompted to

> write

> a letter to the respected journal " Nature " in January 2000, calling for

> immediate action to institute procedures that would verify the purity of

> cells used for research and production of biological products, ensure

> freedom from mycoplasma, and include biohazard information (95). (Did I

> hear

> that correctly - cells can be considered a biohazard)? Has anything

> changed

> since then to remedy the situation? There is another report from Jan.

> 2002,

> that two major cell lines used in research projects actually turned out

> to

> be HeLa cells (96).

>

> I ask the reader to now recall information from earlier in this

> report, that there are proposals being considered to produce vaccines

> and

> other biological products using distinctly cancerous cell lines,

> including

> HeLa (25). Does this seem reasonable, especially since the current

> lines are

> already dangerously tainted with HeLa and possibly other cancerous

> cells?

> Please remember the 100,000,000 allowable pieces of cell-source DNA

> allowed

> per dose of vaccine (and this does not include the viral contaminants).

> Anyone care for a small, under-the-skin serving of human

> cancer-cell-component soup? With maybe a few monkey cell fragments for

> garnish, and viruses for flavor?

>

> Additional points to consider

>

> There are several issues the public and medical community may want

> to be aware of concerning safe administration of vaccines. The human and

> animal body has normal barriers that help to protect against

> infiltration by

> foreign agents, among them are the skin, the respiratory and intestinal

> mucous linings, and the blood-brain barrier. The puncture of skin by a

> needle breaches that barrier. A group of researchers states, " Virus

> contamination of bioproducts such as vaccines, blood products or

> biological

> material used in surgery and for transplantations also is more hazardous

> because the application of contaminating virus usually occurs by

> circumvention of the natural barrier systems of the body.virus

> contamination

> of bioproducts should be considered as a hazard no matter which method

> has

> been used for its detection. " (97). Of even more concern, is the

> administration of vaccines nasally (through the nose), or accidental

> passage

> via that route (98). Fields Virology text (2001) says, " The olfactory

> tract

> has long been recognized as an alternative pathway to the CNS [central

> nervous system].olfactory neurons.are unprotected by the blood brain

> barrier. " While that writer particularly addresses the flavivirus family

> [i.e., " intranasal inoculation of flaviviruses may result in lethal

> encephalitis " (99)], this pattern of potential danger may deserve

> further

> attention than it currently receives, especially if there ever is

> consideration to use a method of nasal inoculation for mass vaccination

> of

> the public or military, and there may be contaminating viruses or

> toxins in

> a vaccine that have an affinity for nerve cells and tissues.

>

> Mass immunization programs often use jet injectors to save the

> time

> and inconvenience associated with needles and syringes. However, a study

> published in July 2001, found that the four injectors tested had the

> capability of transferring tiny amounts of fluid and blood (and thus,

> viruses such as hepatitis B and C, HIV, etc.) from one recipient to the

> next

> (100). Numerous other articles confirm the danger, and question the

> safety

> of these devices, including one study that reported an outbreak of

> hepatitis

> B associated with use of a jet injector (101, 102).

>

> Some of the newest types of vaccines are called " subunit " and

> " naked

> DNA " vaccines. Without going into the intricacies of their production,

> they

> involve techniques used in genetic engineering. Subunit vaccines

> generally

> will insert a viral or bacterial DNA section into the DNA from yeast,

> which

> is allowed to reproduce in large quantities. The protein intended for

> inclusion in the vaccine is then separated from the yeast cells. In the

> case

> of naked DNA vaccines, the viral or DNA gene is first reproduced, then

> spliced into a plasmid (which is essentially free DNA, widely used in

> recombinant technology), reproduced in bacteria or cells, and then

> separated

> from them for inclusion in the vaccine. Recombinant gene vaccines can

> also

> be produced via these methods - for instance, hepatitis B is now an

> exclusively recombinant vaccine (103, 104)

>

> One of the major concerns with these methods is the

> unpredictability

> and interaction of the final vaccine product with the proteins or DNA

> of the

> host. A document from the FDA states: " Genetic toxicity: Integration of

> the

> plasmid DNA vaccine into the genome of the vaccinated subjects is an

> important theoretical risk to consider in preclinical studies. The

> concern

> is that an integrated vaccine may result in insertional mutagenesis

> through

> the activation of oncogenes or inactivation of tumor suppressor genes.

> In

> addition, an integrated plasmid DNA vaccine may result in chromosomal

> instability through the induction of chromosomal breaks or

> rearrangements. "

> (105). Another group advises, " Research findings in gene therapy and

> vaccine

> development show that naked/free nucleic acids constructs are readily

> taken

> up by the cells of all species including human beings. These nucleic

> acid

> constructs can become integrated into the cell's genome and such

> integration

> may result in harmful biological effects, including cancers. " (106).

> And to

> reiterate the danger of tumorigenic cell lines, a researcher says, " More

> recently, recombinant DNA technology has expanded beyond bacterial

> cells to

> mammalian cells, some of which may also be tumorigenic. " (107).

>

> It seems obvious that there needs to be a new and open dialog

> regarding vaccines among the regulatory agencies, manufacturers,

> research

> and medical community, and the public. Many have been ridiculed for

> refusing

> vaccination for themselves or their children, but considering the

> occurrences of short-term adverse events and questionable efficacy

> (108),

> possible long-term health damage, and now also facing the potential of

> wide-ranging loss of civil liberties (109), is it so surprising that

> many

> are questioning what the actual benefits are surrounding most

> vaccination

> protocols? Are the cases of damaged children, non-functional adults, the

> huge increases in cancer rates, immune and chronic diseases to be

> simply and

> blindly accepted by the public as " tolerable losses " ?

>

> As a citizen with a right to good health, please be advised of the

> following issues. Vaccine quality in the U.S. relies for the most part,

> on

> manufacturers reporting to the FDA. Here is a relevant statement from

> the

> CDC: " Manufacturers are required to submit the results of their own

> tests

> for potency, safety, and purity for each vaccine lot to the FDA. They

> are

> also required to submit samples of each vaccine lot to FDA for testing.

> However, if the sponsor describes an alternative procedure which

> provides

> continued assurance of safety, purity and potency, CBER may determine

> that

> routine submission of lot release protocols (showing results of

> applicable

> tests) and samples is not necessary. " (110) Yes, this is the scope of

> the

> quality-control protocol that oversees a market worth billions of

> dollars,

> yet allowing all these contaminants into the vaccines.

>

> It may be helpful to have an idea of the scope of the operation to

> understand what we are dealing with here. We are advised that

> " Large-scale

> cell culture operations for biotechnology products use millions of

> litres of

> complex media and gases as well as huge quantities of organic and

> inorganic

> raw materials. These raw materials must always be assumed to contain

> contamination by adventitious agents " (111). And because there is a

> potentially large number of animal and human viruses (or viral segments)

> that could be entering into the final vaccine products, it would take a

> equally large bank of molecular probes, as well as frequent, wide-spread

> testing, to screen for presence of these contaminating agents. This

> would

> obviously add time and expense for the manufacturers. What needs to be

> decided is this - is the effort and cost involved in cleaning up these

> admittedly filthy medical products, worth the resultant benefit to the

> public health? And since certain animal products are necessary for the

> production of vaccines, it may also be necessary to clean house at

> several

> levels, including the agricultural sector. It is no secret for instance,

> that commercial chicken flocks raised for meat and eggs are often

> carrying

> infectious avian leucosis virus, mentioned earlier in this report (112,

> 113,

> 114)

>

> For the record, the smallpox vaccine ordered by the U.S.

> government

> from Aventis is being produced on two types of continuous cell lines,

> the

> human embryonic MRC-5 and the green monkey Vero cells (115). We might

> also

> be advised of one researcher's thoughts, that " normal embryo and

> foreskin

> cells presumably represent a state in development which is genetically

> unstable, rendering them considerably more susceptible to malignant

> transformation. " (116). Are remnants of these types of cells something

> we

> want injected into our bodies?

>

> The decision you make in accepting or refusing a vaccination can

> be

> a very personal one, but whatever you decide, do try to be informed of

> the

> true benefits and risks. Nobody should be forced to submit to any

> medical

> procedure, especially one of questionable value.

>

> References / Notes

>

> [items with a PMID number will usually have abstracts available to

> read. Go to the PubMed website:

> http://www4.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi and enter the accession

> number into the search box.]

>

> 1. Trijzelaar B. Regulatory affairs and biotechnology in Europe:

> III. Introduction into good regulatory practice--validation of virus

> removal

> and inactivation. Biotherapy 1993; 6(2):93-102. PMID 8398576.

>

> 2. Vilcek S. Identification of pestiviruses contaminating cell

> lines

> and fetal calf sera. Acta Virol 2001 Apr;45(2):81-6. PMID 11719986.

>

> 3. Barkema HW, Bartels CJ, van Wuijckhuise L, Hesselink JW,

> Holzhauer M, Weber MF, en P, Kock PA, Bruschke CJ, Zimmer GM.

> Outbreak

> of bovine virus diarrhea on Dutch dairy farms induced by a bovine

> herpesvirus 1 marker vaccine contaminated with bovine virus diarrhea

> virus

> type 2. Tijdschr Diergeneeskd 2001 Mar 15;126(6):158-65. PMID 11285633.

>

> 4. Rolleston WB. Bovine serum: reducing the variables through the

> use of donor herds. Dev Biol Stand 1999;99:79-86. PMID 10404879.

>

> 5. Bolin SR, s PJ, Ridpath JF. Methods for detection and

> frequency of contamination of fetal calf serum with bovine viral

> diarrhea

> virus and antibodies against bovine viral diarrhea virus. : J Vet Diagn

> Invest 1991 Jul;3(3):199-203. PMID 1655059.

>

> 6. kson GA, Landgraf JG, Wessman SJ, Koski TA, Moss LM.

> Detection and elimination of adventitious agents in continuous cell

> lines.

> Dev Biol Stand 1989;70:59-66. PMID 2759356.

>

> 7. Yanagi M, Bukh J, Emerson SU, Purcell RH. Contamination of

> commercially available fetal bovine sera with bovine viral diarrhea

> virus

> genomes: implications for the study of hepatitis C virus in cell

> cultures. J

> Infect Dis 1996 Dec;174(6):1324-7. PMID 8940226.

>

> 8. Giangaspero M, Harasawa R, Verhulst A. Genotypic analysis of

> the

> 5'-untranslated region of a pestivirus strain isolated from human

> leucocytes. Microbiol Immunol 1997;41(10):829-34. PMID 9403511.

>

> 9. Harasawa R, Mizusawa H. Demonstration and genotyping of

> pestivirus RNA from mammalian cell lines. Microbiol Immunol

> 1995;39(12):979-85. PMID 8789057.

>

> 10. Brock, KV. Pathogenesis of BVDV Infections.

> http://www.vetmed.auburn.edu/~brockkv/path.htm and

> http://www.vetmed.auburn.edu/~brockkv/terms.htm

>

> 11. Stoffregen B, Bolin SR, Ridpath JF, Pohlenz J. Morphologic

> lesions in type 2 BVDV infections experimentally induced by strain

> BVDV2-1373 recovered from a field case. Vet Microbiol 2000 Nov

> 15;77(1-2):157-62. PMID 11042409.

>

> 12. Meehan JT, Lehmkuhl HD, Cutlip RC, Bolin SR. Acute pulmonary

> lesions in sheep experimentally infected with bovine viral diarrhoea

> virus.

> J Comp Pathol 1998 Oct;119(3):277-92. PMID 9807729.

>

> 13. Loken T, Krogsrud J, Bjerkas I. Outbreaks of border disease in

> goats induced by a pestivirus-contaminated orf vaccine, with virus

> transmission to sheep and cattle. J Comp Pathol 1991 Feb;104(2):195-209.

> PMID 1650802.

>

> 14. Yolken R, Dubovi E, Leister F, Reid R, Almeido-Hill J,

> Santosham

> M. Infantile gastroenteritis associated with excretion of pestivirus

> antigens. Lancet 1989 Mar 11;1(8637):517-20. PMID 2564059.

>

> 15. Potts BJ, Sever JL, Tzan NR, Huddleston D, Elder GA. Possible

> role of pestiviruses in microcephaly. Lancet 1987 Apr 25;1(8539):972-3.

>

> 16. Harasawa R. Latent Risk in Bovine Serums Used for

> Biopharmaceutic Production. http://www.asmusa.org/pcsrc/sum02.htm

>

> 17. Levings RL, Wessman SJ. Bovine viral diarrhea virus

> contamination of nutrient serum, cell cultures and viral vaccines. Dev

> Biol

> Stand 1991;75:177-81. PMID 1665461.

>

> 18.

> http://www.nybloodcenter.org/PatentsAndLicensing/SDTechnology.htm

>

> 19. Giangaspero M, Vacirca G, Harasawa R, Buttner M, Panuccio A,

> De

> Giuli Morghen C, Zanetti A, Belloli A, Verhulst A. Genotypes of

> pestivirus

> RNA detected in live virus vaccines for human use. J Vet Med Sci 2001

> Jul;63(7):723-33. PMID 11503899.

>

> 20. Harasawa R, Mizusawa H. Detection of Pestiviruses from

> Mammalian

> Cell Cultures by the Polymerase Chain Reaction. Proceedings of 3rd

> Internet

> World Congress on Biomedical Sciences 1996.12.9-20 Riken, Tsukuba,

> Japan.

> http://www.3iwc.riken.go.jp/CONGRESS/SYMPO/SBB0202/AK0111/TIT.HTM

>

> 21. Contreras G, Bather R, Furesz J, Becker BC. Activation of

> metastatic potential in African green monkey kidney cell lines by

> prolonged

> in vitro culture. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol 1985 Nov;21(11):649-52. PMID

> 4066602.

>

> 22. Levenbook IS, Petricciani JC, Elisberg BL. Tumorigenicity of

> Vero cells. J Biol Stand 1984 Oct;12(4):391-8. PMID 6526826.

>

> 23. Furesz J, Fanok A, Contreras G, Becker B. Tumorigenicity

> testing

> of various cell substrates for production of biologicals. Dev Biol Stand

> 1989;70:233-43. PMID 2759351.

>

> 24. Letter to Sponsors Using Vero Cells as a Cell Substrate for

> Investigational Vaccines. Department of Health and Human Services,

> Public

> Health Service, Food and Drug Administration, Division of Vaccines and

> Related Products Applications, March 12, 2001.

> www.fda.gov/cber/ltr/vero031301.htm

>

> 25. U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Public Health

> Service,

> Food and Drug Administration, Center for Biologics Evaluation and

> Research.

> Evolving Scientific and Regulatory Perspectives on Cell Substrates for

> Vaccine Development. http://www.fda.gov/cber/minutes/0907evolv.txt

>

> 26. AM Jr. Developing an approach to evaluate the use of

> neoplastic cells as vaccine substrates. Dev Biol (Basel) 2001;106:37-42;

> discussion 42-3. PMID 11761251.

>

> 27. Purcell DF. Pathogenesis of replication competent retroviruses

> derived from mouse cells in immuno suppressed primates: implications

> for use

> of neoplastic cells as vaccine substrates. Dev Biol (Basel)

> 2001;106:187-98;

> discussion 199, 253-63. PMID 11761231.

>

> 28. Amosenko FA, Svitkin YV, Popova VD, Terletskaya EN, Timofeev

> AV,

> Elbert LB, Lashkevich VA, Drozdov SG. Use of protamine sulphate for

> elimination of substrate DNA in polio vaccines produced on continuous

> cell

> lines. Vaccine 1991 Mar;9(3):207-9. PMID 1645900.

>

> 29. Thyagarajan B, McCormick-Graham M, Romero DP, C.

> Characterization of homologous DNA recombination activity in normal and

> immortal mammalian cells. Nucleic Acids Res 1996 Oct 15;24(20):4084-91.

> PMID

> 8918816 (full text article available free at this link).

>

> 30. Ruscetti SK. Generation of mink cell focus-inducing

> retroviruses: a model for understanding how viral-viral and

> viral-cellular

> interactions can result in biological consequences. Dev Biol (Basel)

> 2001;106:163-7; discussion 167-8, 253-63. PMID 11761228.

>

> 31. Hilleman MR. History, precedent, and progress in the

> development

> of mammalian cell culture systems for preparing vaccines: safety

> considerations revisited. J Med Virol 1990 May;31(1):5-12. PMID 2198327.

>

> 32. Butel JS, Lednicky JA. Cell and molecular biology of simian

> virus 40: implications for human infections and disease. J Natl Cancer

> Inst

> 1999 Jan 20;91(2):119-34. PMID 9923853.

>

> 33. Arrington AS, Lednicky JA, Butel JS. Molecular

> characterization

> of SV40 DNA in multiple samples from a human mesothelioma. Anticancer

> Res

> 2000 Mar-Apr;20(2A):879-84. PMID 10810370.

>

> 34. Vilchez RA, Madden CR, Kozinetz CA, Halvorson SJ, White ZS,

> nsen JL, Finch CJ, Butel JS. Association between simian virus 40

> and

> non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Lancet 2002 Mar 9;359(9309):817-23. PMID 11897278.

>

> 35. Shivapurkar N, Harada K, Reddy J, Scheuermann RH, Xu Y,

> McKenna

> RW, Milchgrub S, Kroft SH, Feng Z, Gazdar AF. Presence of simian virus

> 40

> DNA sequences in human lymphomas. Lancet 2002 Mar 9;359(9309):851-2.

> PMID

> 11897287.

>

> 36. Bu X, Zhang X, Zhang X, et Al. A study of simian virus 40

> infection and its origin in human brain tumors. Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing

> Xue

> Za Zhi 2000 Feb;21(1):19-21. PMID 11860751.

>

> 37. Butel JS, Jafar S, Wong C, Arrington AS, Opekun AR, Finegold

> MJ,

> Adam E. Evidence of SV40 infections in hospitalized children. Hum Pathol

> 1999 Dec;30(12):1496-502. PMID 10667429.

>

> 38. von Mettenheim AE. Studies on simian viruses as possible

> contaminants of inactivated virus vaccines. I. Direct and serologic

> detection of simian adenovirus SV20. Zentralbl Bakteriol [Orig A] 1975

> Jul;232(2-3):131-40. PMID 1179876.

>

> 39. Schuurman R, van Steenis B, Sol C. Bovine polyomavirus, a

> frequent contaminant of calf serum. Biologicals 1991 Oct;19(4):265-70.

> PMID

> 1665699.

>

> 40. Nettleton PF, Rweyemamu MM. The association of calf serum with

> the contamination of BHK21 clone 13 suspension cells by a parvovirus

> serologically related to the minute virus of mice (MVM). Arch Virol

> 1980;64(4):359-74. PMID 7396725.

>

> 41. Fong CK, Gross PA, Hsiung GD, Swack NS. Use of electron

> microscopy for detection of viral and other microbial contaminants in

> bovine

> sera. J Clin Microbiol 1975 Feb;1(2):219-24. PMID 51855.

>

> 42. kson GA, Bolin SR, Landgraf JG. Viral contamination of

> fetal

> bovine serum used for tissue culture: risks and concerns. Dev Biol Stand

> 1991;75:173-5. PMID 1665460.

>

> 43. Kniazeff AJ, Wopschall LJ, Hopps HE, CS. Detection of

> bovine viruses in fetal bovine serum used in cell culture. In Vitro 1975

> Nov-Dec;11(6):400-3. PMID 172434.

>

> 44. Michalski FJ, Dietz A, Hsiung GD. Growth characteristics of

> bovine herpesvirus 1 (infectious bovine rhinotracheitis) in human

> diploid

> cell strain WI-38. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 1976 Feb;151(2):407-10. PMID

> 175382.

>

> 45. Egyed L. Bovine herpesvirus type 4: a special herpesvirus

> (review article). Acta Vet Hung 2000;48(4):501-13. PMID 11402667.

>

> 46. Egyed L. Replication of bovine herpesvirus type 4 in human

> cells

> in vitro. J Clin Microbiol 1998 Jul;36(7):2109-11. PMID 9650976.

>

> 47. ES. Poultry oncogenic retroviruses and humans. Cancer

> Detect Prev 1994;18(1):9-30. PMID 8162609.

>

> 48. For example, see Nevins JR, " Cell Transformation by Viruses " ,

> in

> Knipe DM et al (ed.), 2001. Fields Virology (4th ed), Vol. I, chapter

> 10,

> p.245-283. Lippincott. Also see Joklik WK, " Tumor Viruses " , in Joklik

> WK et

> al, 1992. Zinsser Microbiology (20th ed), chapter 59, p.869-905.

> Appleton &

> Lange.

>

> 49. Felder MP, Eychene A, Laugier D, Marx M, Dezelee P, Calothy G.

> Steps and mechanisms of oncogene transduction by retroviruses. Folia

> Biol

> (Praha) 1994;40(5):225-35. PMID 7895853.

>

> 50. RJ, Dougherty RM, Biggs PM, Payne LN, Goffe AP,

> Churchill

> AE, Mortimer R. Contaminant viruses in two live virus vaccines produced

> in

> chick cells. J Hyg (Lond) 1966 Mar;64(1):1-7. PMID 4286627.

>

> 51. Payne LN, Biggs PM, Chubb RC, Bowden RS. Contamination of

> egg-adapted canine distemper vaccine by avian leukosis virus. Vet Rec

> 1966

> Jan 8;78(2):45-8. PMID 4285488.

>

> 52. Knipe DM et al (ed.) 2001. Fields Virology (4th ed), Vol. I,

> p.1103. Lippincott.

>

> 53. JA, Heneine W. Characterization of endogenous avian

> leukosis viruses in chicken embryonic fibroblast substrates used in

> production of measles and mumps vaccines. J Virol 2001

> Apr;75(8):3605-12.

> PMID 11264350.

>

> 54. Maudru T, Peden KW. Analysis of a coded panel of licensed

> vaccines by polymerase chain reaction-based reverse transcriptase

> assays: a

> collaborative study. J Clin Virol 1998 Jul 24;11(1):19-28. PMID 9784140.

>

> 55. Tsang SX, Switzer WM, Shanmugam V, JA, Goldsmith C,

> A, Fadly A, Thea D, Jaffe H, Folks TM, Heneine W. Evidence of

> avian

> leukosis virus subgroup E and endogenous avian virus in measles and

> mumps

> vaccines derived from chicken cells: investigation of transmission to

> vaccine recipients. J Virol 1999 Jul;73(7):5843-51. PMID 10364336.

>

> 56. Hussain AI, Shanmugam V, Switzer WM, Tsang SX, Fadly A, Thea

> D,

> Helfand R, Bellini WJ, Folks TM, Heneine W. Lack of evidence of

> endogenous

> avian leukosis virus and endogenous avian retrovirus transmission to

> measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine recipients. Emerg Infect Dis 2001

> Jan-Feb;7(1):66-72. PMID 11266296. Full article text available at

> www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol7no1/hussain.htm

>

> 57. Arshad SS, Howes K, Barron GS, LM, PH, Payne LN.

> Tissue tropism of the HPRS-103 strain of J subgroup avian leukosis

> virus and

> of a derivative acutely transforming virus. Vet Pathol 1997

> Mar;34(2):127-37. PMID 9066079.

>

> 58. ES, Overby L, Philpot R. Detection of antibodies to

> avian leukosis/sarcoma viruses and reticuloendotheliosis viruses in

> humans

> by western blot assay. Cancer Detect Prev 1995;19(6):472-86. PMID

> 8925516.

>

> 59. Raines MA, Maihle NJ, Moscovici C, Crittenden L, Kung HJ.

> Mechanism of c-erbB transduction: newly released transducing viruses

> retain

> poly(A) tracts of erbB transcripts and encode C-terminally intact erbB

> proteins. J Virol 1988 Jul;62(7):2437-43. PMID 2897475.

>

> 60. Joklik WK, " Tumor Viruses " , in Joklik WK et al, 1992. Zinsser

> Microbiology (20th ed.), chapter 59, p.889. Appleton & Lange.

>

> 61. Geier MR, Stanbro H, Merril CR. Endotoxins in commercial

> vaccines. Appl Environ Microbiol 1978 Sep;36(3):445-9. PMID 727776.

>

> 62. Kreeftenberg JG, Loggen HG, van Ramshorst JD, Beuvery EC. The

> limulus amebocyte lysate test micromethod and application in the

> control of

> sera and vaccines. Dev Biol Stand 1977;34:15-20. PMID 838139.

>

> 63. Sharma SK. Endotoxin detection and elimination in

> biotechnology.

> Biotechnol Appl Biochem 1986 Feb;8(1):5-22. PMID 3548752.

>

> 64. Fumarola D, Panaro A, Palma R, Mazzone A. Endotoxic

> contamination of biological products (ribosomal vaccines, viral

> vaccines and

> interferon). G Batteriol Virol Immunol 1979 Jan-Jun;72(1-6):72-7. PMID

> 95449.

>

> 65. Cussler K, Godau H, Gyra H. Investigation of the endotoxin

> content of veterinary vaccines. ALTEX 1994;11(5):24-29. PMID 11178403.

>

> 66. Whitaker AM, EM. Effect of bacterial toxins in serum on

> the chromosomes of WI-38. Dev Biol Stand 1976 Dec 13-15;37:185-90. PMID

> 801471.

>

> 67. See " What are nanobacteria? " at

> http://www.nanobaclabs.com/PageDisplay.asp?p1=6578

>

> 68. Breitschwerdt EB, Sontakke S, Cannedy A, Hancock SI, Bradley

> JM.

> Infection with Bartonella weissii and detection of Nanobacterium

> antigens in

> a North Carolina beef herd. J Clin Microbiol 2001 Mar;39(3):879-82. PMID

> 11230398. Full article text available at

> http://jcm.asm.org/cgi/content/full/39/3/879?view=full & pmid=11230398

>

> 69. Nanobacteria detected in vaccines. NanoNews 2001 July;1(2).

> Article available at

> http://www.nanobaclabs.com/Files/Newsletter/JulyNANONEWS1.pdf

>

> 70. Cell Culture Contamination Example. Mycoplasma.

> http://www.unc.edu/depts/tcf/mycoplasma.htm

>

> 71. Prasad E, Lim-Fong R. Mycoplasmas.

> http://www2.provlab.ab.ca/bugs/biologos/9702mypl.htm

>

> 72. Mycoplasma Detection Kit.

> http://www.atcc.org/Products/MycoplasmaDetectKit.cfm

>

> 73. Mattman LH, 2001. Cell wall deficient forms: stealth pathogens

> (3rd ed.). CRC Press.

>

> 74. Uphoff CC, Drexler HG. Prevention of mycoplasma contamination

> in

> leukemia-lymphoma cell lines. Hum Cell 2001 Sep;14(3):244-7. PMID

> 11774744.

>

> 75. Mycoplasma Detection and Elimination.

> http://www.dsmz.de/mutz/mutzmyco.htm

>

> 76. Mycoplasma Detection Kit.

> http://www.biovalley.fr/anglais/biology/mob_cc.htm

>

> 77. Kojima A, Takahashi T, Kijima M, Ogikubo Y, Tamura Y, Harasawa

> R. Detection of mycoplasma DNA in veterinary live virus vaccines by the

> polymerase chain reaction. J Vet Med Sci 1996 Oct;58(10):1045-8. PMID

> 8916012.

>

> 78. Kojima A, Takahashi T, Kijima M, Ogikubo Y, Nishimura M,

> Nishimura S, Harasawa R, Tamura Y. Detection of Mycoplasma in avian live

> virus vaccines by polymerase chain reaction. Biologicals 1997

> Dec;25(4):365-71. PMID 9467032.

>

> 79. Benisheva T, Sovova V, Ivanov I, Opalchenova G. Comparison of

> methods used for detection of mycoplasma contamination in cell cultures,

> sera, and live-virus vaccines. Folia Biol (Praha) 1993;39(5):270-6. PMID

> 8206173.

>

> 80. Nicolson GL, Nass M, Nicolson N. Anthrax vaccine: controversy

> over safety and efficacy. Antimicrobics and Infectious Disease

> Newsletter

> (Elsevier Science) 2000. Article located at

> http://www.flatlandbooks.com/anthrax.html

>

> 81. Thornton DH. A survey of mycoplasma detection in veterinary

> vaccines. Vaccine 1986 Dec;4(4):237-40. PMID 3799018.

>

> 82. Kong F, G, Gordon S, Zelynski A, Gilbert GL.

> Species-specific PCR for identification of common contaminant

> mollicutes in

> cell culture. Appl Environ Microbiol 2001 Jul;67(7):3195-200. PMID

> 11425741.

>

> 83. Mycoplasma testing by PCR.

> http://locus.umdnj.edu/nia/qc/myco.html

>

> 84. Mycoplasma sp. Reagent Set.

> http://www.euroclone.net/mol_biology/mycoplasma.htm

>

> 85. Macomber PB. Cancer and cell wall deficient bacteria. Med

> Hypotheses 1990 May;32(1):1-9. PMID 2190063.

>

> 86. Baseman JB, Tully JG. Mycoplasmas: sophisticated, reemerging,

> and burdened by their notoriety. Emerg Infect Dis 1997 Jan-

> Mar;3(1):21-32.

> PMID 9126441. Full text article available at

> http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol3no1/baseman.htm

>

> 87. Gartler SM. Apparent Hela cell contamination of human

> heteroploid cell lines. Nature 1968 Feb 24;217(5130):750-1. PMID

> 5641128.

>

> 88. Lavappa KS. Survey of ATCC stocks of human cell lines for HeLa

> contamination. In Vitro 1978 May;14(5):469-75. PMID 566722.

>

> 89. -Rees WA, s DW, Flandermeyer RR.

> Cross-contamination

> of cells in culture. Science 1981 Apr 24;212(4493):446-52. PMID 6451928.

>

> 90. Gold M. The cells that would not die. Science 81 1981 April;

> 29-35.

>

> 91. Gold M, 1986. A Conspiracy of Cells: One Woman's Immortal

> Legacy

> and the Medical Scandal It Caused. State University of New York Press.

>

> 92. Demidova SA, Tsareva AA, Mikhailova GR, Perekrest VV, Gushchin

> BV. Several methodologic problems in the control of cell cultures. Vopr

> Virusol 1976 May-Jun;(3):371-9. PMID 983006.

>

> 93. Hukku B, Halton DM, Mally M, WD Jr. Cell

> characterization by use of multiple genetic markers. Adv Exp Med Biol

> 1984;172:13-31. PMID 6328905.

>

> 94. MacLeod RA, Dirks WG, Matsuo Y, Kaufmann M, Milch H, Drexler

> HG.

> Widespread intraspecies cross-contamination of human tumor cell lines

> arising at source. Int J Cancer 1999 Nov 12;83(4):555-63. PMID 10508494.

>

> 95. Stacey GN. Cell contamination leads to inaccurate data: we

> must

> take action now. Nature 2000 Jan 27;403(6768):356. PMID 10667765.

>

> 96. Kniss DA, Xie Y, Li Y, Kumar S, Linton EA, Cohen P, Fan-Havard

> P, Redman CW, Sargent IL. ED(27) Trophoblast-like Cells Isolated from

> First-trimester Chorionic Villi are Genetically Identical to HeLa Cells

> Yet

> Exhibit a Distinct Phenotype. Placenta 2002 Jan;23(1):32-43. PMID

> 11869090.

>

> 97. Buttner M, Oehmig A, Weiland F, Rziha HJ, Pfaff E. Detection

> of

> virus or virus specific nucleic acid in foodstuff or

> bioproducts--hazards

> and risk assessment. Arch Virol Suppl 1997;13:57-66. PMID 9413526.

>

> 98. Monath TP, Cropp CB, on AK. Mode of entry of a

> neurotropic

> arbovirus into the central nervous system. Reinvestigation of an old

> controversy. Lab Invest 1983 Apr;48(4):399-410. PMID 6300550.

>

> 99. Burke DS, Monath TP, " Flaviviruses " , in Knipe DM et al (ed.),

> 2001. Fields Virology (4th ed), Vol. I, chapter 33, p.1057. Lippincott.

>

> 100. Hoffman PN, Abuknesha RA, s NJ, D, Lloyd JS. A

> model to assess the infection potential of jet injectors used in mass

> immunisation. Vaccine 2001 Jul 16;19(28-29):4020-7. PMID 11427278.

>

> 101. Canter J, Mackey K, Good LS, o RR, Chin J, Bond WW,

> Alter

> MJ, Horan JM. An outbreak of hepatitis B associated with jet injections

> in a

> weight reduction clinic. Arch Intern Med 1990 Sep;150(9):1923-7. PMID

> 2393323.

>

> 102. Brink PR, van Loon AM, Trommelen JC, Gribnau FW,

> Smale-Novakova

> IR. Virus transmission by subcutaneous jet injection. J Med Microbiol

> 1985

> Dec;20(3):393-7. PMID 4068027.

>

> 103. McAleer WJ, Buynak EB, Maigetter RZ, Wampler DE, WJ,

> Hilleman MR. Human hepatitis B vaccine from recombinant yeast. Nature

> 1984

> Jan 12-18;307(5947):178-80. PMID 6318124.

>

> 104. Hilleman MR. Yeast recombinant hepatitis B vaccine. Infection

> 1987 Jan-Feb;15(1):3-7. PMID 2437037.

>

> 105. Points to Consider on Plasmid DNA Vaccines for Preventive

> Infectious Disease Indications. Food and Drug Administration, Center for

> Biologics Evaluation and Research, Office of Vaccine Research and

> Review,

> December 1996. Full article available at

> http://www.fda.gov/cber/gdlns/plasmid.txt

>

> 106. Ho M, A, Cummins J, Traavik T. Slipping through the

> regulatory net: 'Naked' and 'free' nucleic acids. TWN Biotechnology and

> Biosafety Series No. 5, 2001. Available at

> http://www.twnside.org.sg/title/biod5.htm

>

> 107. Petricciani JC. Safety issues relating to the use of

> mammalian

> cells as hosts. Dev Biol Stand 1985;59:149-53. PMID 3891461.

>

> 108. A. Dispelling vaccination myths: an internationally

> published, referenced report. 1998. Report available at

> http://www.unc.edu/~aphillip/www/chf/myths/dvm1.htm For statistics

> regarding adverse events, see the link at

> http://www.unc.edu/~aphillip/www/chf/myths/dvm11.htm

>

> 109. See a discussion of issues surrounding proposed forced

> smallpox

> vaccination at: Fisher, BL. Smallpox and forced vaccination: what every

> American needs to know. The Vaccine Reaction, Winter 2002. Article

> available

> at http://www.909shot.com/smallpoxspecialrpt.htm. The entire text of

> the

> Model State Emergency Health Powers Act, currently being considered by

> the

> various U.S. state governments is available at

> http://www.publichealthlaw.net/MSEHPA/MSEHPA2.pdf

>

> 110. National Vaccine Program Office, Vaccine Fact Sheets: Vaccine

> Product Approval Process. Article available at

> http://www.cdc.gov/od/nvpo/fs_tableII_doc2.htm

>

> 111. Garnick RL. Raw materials as a source of contamination in

> large-scale cell culture. Dev Biol Stand 1998;93:21-9. PMID 9737373.

>

> 112. Fadly AM, EJ. Isolation and some characteristics of a

> subgroup J-like avian leukosis virus associated with myeloid leukosis in

> meat-type chickens in the United States. Avian Dis 1999

> Jul-Sep;43(3):391-400. PMID 10494407.

>

> 113. Grunder AA, Benkel BF, Chambers JR, Sabour MP, Gavora JS,

> Dickie JW. Characterization of four endogenous viral genes in

> semi-congenic

> lines of meat chickens. Poult Sci 1999 Jun;78(6):873-7. PMID 10438132.

>

> 114. Pham TD, Spencer JL, ES. Detection of avian leukosis

> virus in albumen of chicken eggs using reverse transcription polymerase

> chain reaction. J Virol Methods 1999 Mar;78(1-2):1-11. PMID 10204692.

>

> 115.

> http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=25538

>

> 116. Kopelovich L. Are all normal diploid human cell strains

> alike?

> Relevance to carcinogenic mechanisms in vitro. Exp Cell Biol

> 1982;50(5):266-70. PMID 7141068.

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Tons dangerous

Just shared that article with my vaccine dangers class last week........in

our lessons on contamination

Its an excellent article

There is tons of problems

All that he mentions - contamination, DNA, RNA, mercury, aluminum and other

adjuvants, the toxins/antigens themselves, even without anything else,

formaldehyde, msg, antibiotics in them and so much more

Sheri

At 10:36 PM 03/21/2004 +0200, you wrote:

>This article explained a lot for me. I was under the (wrong) impression

>that the only real danger of vaccines were in the preservatives, eg

>mercury. Thank you for this.

>>

>> What Is Coming Through That Needle?

>> The Problem of Pathogenic Vaccine Contamination

>> McRearden

>>

>> In recent times mankind is experiencing a situation never

>

--------------------------------------------------------

Sheri Nakken, R.N., MA, Classical Homeopath

Vaccination Information & Choice Network, Nevada City CA & Wales UK

$$ Donations to help in the work - accepted by Paypal account

vaccineinfo@... voicemail US 530-740-0561

(go to http://www.paypal.com) or by mail

Vaccines - http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/vaccine.htm

Vaccine Dangers On-Line course - http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/vaccineclass.htm

Homeopathy On-Line course - http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/homeo.htm

ANY INFO OBTAINED HERE NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS MEDICAL

OR LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION TO VACCINATE IS YOURS AND YOURS ALONE.

******

" Just look at us. Everything is backwards; everything is upside down.

Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy

knowledge, governments destroy freedom, the major media destroy information

and religions destroy spirituality " .... Ellner