mock-up swine flu vaccine evidence

[Guest guest]

Some people have been wondering what is the " mock-up " vaccine being mentioned in

regards to the new swine flu vaccines. In Europe, the licensing agency is

allowing evidence from clinical trials on H5N1 vaccines in lieu of clinical

trials with swine H1N1 vaccine. That is what the term " mock-up " means in this

context. This is an entirely different flu virus than swine H1N1, with

different infection characteristics.

Please see the evidence below (at the stars), in this document from the UK's

Health Protection Agency.

http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1245138053330

HEALTH PROTECTION AGENCY BOARD MEETING

24 June 2009

Novel A(H1N1) Influenza Vaccine Development

3.18 The regulatory framework for licensing these vaccines is complex and is not

yet completely clear. The EMEA has developed a fast track procedure for

licensing pandemic vaccines under WHO Phase 6 conditions. This is based on

manufacturers submitting in advance of a pandemic, a 'mock-up' dossier that

describes in detail the pandemic vaccine that they would make, backed up by

clinical experience and data with a version of the vaccine based on an existing

strain. Several manufacturers (including GSK and Baxter) have had mock-up

dossiers approved **using data from their experience with H5 vaccine

candidates.**

___________

Also, here is evidence from that document that speaks to another problem

regarding flu vaccines. Up until now, the testing materials that are used to

determine how effectively the vaccine induces antibodies, have never been

standardized from one company to another:

5.1.3 It is vital that the immunogenicity analyses are carried out using

standardized serological assays so that the results are directly comparable.

[snip]

5.3 Provision of Reference Materials: As discussed in 4.2, preparation and

distribution of reagents for measuring and standardizing the potency of the new

vaccines will be an important activity in the coming months. In addition

reference materials will be needed to standardize measurement of immune

responses against the vaccines.

_________________

These issues show some of the admitted scientific weaknesses in the safety and

immunogenicity evidence that is being brought to the table regarding the

upcoming H1N1 swine flu vaccines.

Best wishes, Char

[Guest guest]

> If you read through Char's posts you will see that she never posts

anything

> about Rife. I would like to know whether Char uses any kind of Rife device

> whatsoever. Char has stated that she disagrees with the thesis that germs

> cause disease therefore a Rife device is not useful in curing anyone. If

> Char could clarify this for me I would appreciate it.

>

> Randy

Hi Randy,

You must be confusing me with someone else. I don't recall ever stating

that germs cannot cause disease, or that Rife types of devices are not

useful as regards effects on pathogens. I have been involved with the Rife

community since 1997; and I have used what are loosely called Rife devices

(even though they may not be the same as original Rife devices) since that

time. I developed a theory about frequencies related to the DNA of

pathogens beginning in late 1998, published about it in 1999, and received a

patent on the method in 2007. I contribute to Rife discussions quite

heavily, including technical matters to some extent, especially at the Rife

forum. So surely you are mistaking me for someone else.

When there is something about a vaccine that could cause acute or chronic

conditions, and if there is even a possibility that the condition can be

affected by use of the technologies we use, I will post about it. And that

includes background information that people might need to be well-informed.

I make more than usual effort to make sure the information I post is from

reliable sources, and attempt to avoid speculation whenever possible.

So, my three posts a few days ago were not about being " anti-vaccine " . They

*were* about passing along information that could be useful to people

wanting to make an informed decision about a particular vaccine, or vaccine

formulation, in order to avoid the potential complication(s) such a vaccine

might initiate. Or for people who have had such complications, it could

give them (or their health care provider) more information about what could

have happened, and possible clues how they might want to proceed, using Rife

technologies or otherwise.

Best wishes,

Char

[Guest guest]

> If you read through Char's posts you will see that she never posts

anything

> about Rife. I would like to know whether Char uses any kind of Rife device

> whatsoever. Char has stated that she disagrees with the thesis that germs

> cause disease therefore a Rife device is not useful in curing anyone. If

> Char could clarify this for me I would appreciate it.

>

> Randy

Hi Randy,

You must be confusing me with someone else. I don't recall ever stating

that germs cannot cause disease, or that Rife types of devices are not

useful as regards effects on pathogens. I have been involved with the Rife

community since 1997; and I have used what are loosely called Rife devices

(even though they may not be the same as original Rife devices) since that

time. I developed a theory about frequencies related to the DNA of

pathogens beginning in late 1998, published about it in 1999, and received a

patent on the method in 2007. I contribute to Rife discussions quite

heavily, including technical matters to some extent, especially at the Rife

forum. So surely you are mistaking me for someone else.

When there is something about a vaccine that could cause acute or chronic

conditions, and if there is even a possibility that the condition can be

affected by use of the technologies we use, I will post about it. And that

includes background information that people might need to be well-informed.

I make more than usual effort to make sure the information I post is from

reliable sources, and attempt to avoid speculation whenever possible.

So, my three posts a few days ago were not about being " anti-vaccine " . They

*were* about passing along information that could be useful to people

wanting to make an informed decision about a particular vaccine, or vaccine

formulation, in order to avoid the potential complication(s) such a vaccine

might initiate. Or for people who have had such complications, it could

give them (or their health care provider) more information about what could

have happened, and possible clues how they might want to proceed, using Rife

technologies or otherwise.

Best wishes,

Char

[Guest guest]

> If you read through Char's posts you will see that she never posts

anything

> about Rife. I would like to know whether Char uses any kind of Rife device

> whatsoever. Char has stated that she disagrees with the thesis that germs

> cause disease therefore a Rife device is not useful in curing anyone. If

> Char could clarify this for me I would appreciate it.

>

> Randy

Hi Randy,

You must be confusing me with someone else. I don't recall ever stating

that germs cannot cause disease, or that Rife types of devices are not

useful as regards effects on pathogens. I have been involved with the Rife

community since 1997; and I have used what are loosely called Rife devices

(even though they may not be the same as original Rife devices) since that

time. I developed a theory about frequencies related to the DNA of

pathogens beginning in late 1998, published about it in 1999, and received a

patent on the method in 2007. I contribute to Rife discussions quite

heavily, including technical matters to some extent, especially at the Rife

forum. So surely you are mistaking me for someone else.

When there is something about a vaccine that could cause acute or chronic

conditions, and if there is even a possibility that the condition can be

affected by use of the technologies we use, I will post about it. And that

includes background information that people might need to be well-informed.

I make more than usual effort to make sure the information I post is from

reliable sources, and attempt to avoid speculation whenever possible.

So, my three posts a few days ago were not about being " anti-vaccine " . They

*were* about passing along information that could be useful to people

wanting to make an informed decision about a particular vaccine, or vaccine

formulation, in order to avoid the potential complication(s) such a vaccine

might initiate. Or for people who have had such complications, it could

give them (or their health care provider) more information about what could

have happened, and possible clues how they might want to proceed, using Rife

technologies or otherwise.

Best wishes,

Char

[Guest guest]

Char,I apologize. I did confuse you with someone else whose name I won't mention. And I apologize to the group as well. It appears that everyone else is happy to receive any kind of health information even if it is off topic. Next time I will simply delete those messages which are not of interest to me.

Randy

 

> If you read through Char's posts you will see that she never posts

anything

> about Rife. I would like to know whether Char uses any kind of Rife device

> whatsoever. Char has stated that she disagrees with the thesis that germs

> cause disease therefore a Rife device is not useful in curing anyone. If

> Char could clarify this for me I would appreciate it.

>

> Randy

Hi Randy,

You must be confusing me with someone else. I don't recall ever stating

that germs cannot cause disease, or that Rife types of devices are not

useful as regards effects on pathogens. I have been involved with the Rife

community since 1997; and I have used what are loosely called Rife devices

(even though they may not be the same as original Rife devices) since that

time. I developed a theory about frequencies related to the DNA of

pathogens beginning in late 1998, published about it in 1999, and received a

patent on the method in 2007. I contribute to Rife discussions quite

heavily, including technical matters to some extent, especially at the Rife

forum. So surely you are mistaking me for someone else.

When there is something about a vaccine that could cause acute or chronic

conditions, and if there is even a possibility that the condition can be

affected by use of the technologies we use, I will post about it. And that

includes background information that people might need to be well-informed.

I make more than usual effort to make sure the information I post is from

reliable sources, and attempt to avoid speculation whenever possible.

So, my three posts a few days ago were not about being " anti-vaccine " . They

*were* about passing along information that could be useful to people

wanting to make an informed decision about a particular vaccine, or vaccine

formulation, in order to avoid the potential complication(s) such a vaccine

might initiate. Or for people who have had such complications, it could

give them (or their health care provider) more information about what could

have happened, and possible clues how they might want to proceed, using Rife

technologies or otherwise.

Best wishes,

Char

[Guest guest]

Char,I apologize. I did confuse you with someone else whose name I won't mention. And I apologize to the group as well. It appears that everyone else is happy to receive any kind of health information even if it is off topic. Next time I will simply delete those messages which are not of interest to me.

Randy

 

> If you read through Char's posts you will see that she never posts

anything

> about Rife. I would like to know whether Char uses any kind of Rife device

> whatsoever. Char has stated that she disagrees with the thesis that germs

> cause disease therefore a Rife device is not useful in curing anyone. If

> Char could clarify this for me I would appreciate it.

>

> Randy

Hi Randy,

You must be confusing me with someone else. I don't recall ever stating

that germs cannot cause disease, or that Rife types of devices are not

useful as regards effects on pathogens. I have been involved with the Rife

community since 1997; and I have used what are loosely called Rife devices

(even though they may not be the same as original Rife devices) since that

time. I developed a theory about frequencies related to the DNA of

pathogens beginning in late 1998, published about it in 1999, and received a

patent on the method in 2007. I contribute to Rife discussions quite

heavily, including technical matters to some extent, especially at the Rife

forum. So surely you are mistaking me for someone else.

When there is something about a vaccine that could cause acute or chronic

conditions, and if there is even a possibility that the condition can be

affected by use of the technologies we use, I will post about it. And that

includes background information that people might need to be well-informed.

I make more than usual effort to make sure the information I post is from

reliable sources, and attempt to avoid speculation whenever possible.

So, my three posts a few days ago were not about being " anti-vaccine " . They

*were* about passing along information that could be useful to people

wanting to make an informed decision about a particular vaccine, or vaccine

formulation, in order to avoid the potential complication(s) such a vaccine

might initiate. Or for people who have had such complications, it could

give them (or their health care provider) more information about what could

have happened, and possible clues how they might want to proceed, using Rife

technologies or otherwise.

Best wishes,

Char