Ebola Virus Virulent

Ebola virus disease
BMJ 2014; 349 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g7348 (Published 10 December

2014) Cite this as: BMJ 2014;349:g7348
Re: Ebola virus disease
Ebola disease is so virulent because the virus as a rule entered via a deep puncture
wound: unsterile and contaminated non-disposable injections.
When one contracts natural infectious disease, the causative organism enters via
normal portals of entry, nose and mouth. The natural and beneficial immunising
process starts on that level.
When one injects bacteria and viruses and other foreign and toxic substances, one
bypasses the normal portals of entry and enables the microorganisms and other
substances entry into the blood stream with a direct access to vital organs. Proponents
of vaccination argue that microorganisms in vaccines are not live. They are
inactivated or attenuated, however they revert back to the original or even more
virulent forms when injected (Fenner 1962. The reactivation of animal viruses. BMJ;
July 21: 135-142).
The best illustration of this phenomenon is the classic tetanus disease.
It is a very serious condition because the causative organism, Clostridium tetani, is
introduced into the body via a deep puncture wound, bypassing nose and mouth.
What is injection? A deep puncture wound.
When Clostridium tetani is breathed in or swallowed, it triggers natural immune
response and results in minimal non-specific symptoms, such as a runny nose, cough,
fever and mild diarrhoea. The final result is acquiring natural immunity to
Clostridium tetani toxin and to tetanus disease.
Natural immunity to tetanus has been studied and demonstrated in such countries as
India and Galapagos Islands by Veronesi et al. (1983. Naturally acquired antibodies to
tetanus toxin in humans and animals from the Galapagos Island. J Infect Dis; 147(2):
308-311). They wrote, “Reports from India based in serologic surveys indicate that
40%-80% of the unvaccinated population have antibodies to tetanus toxin in their
blood [7, 10, 14].” And, “All nine animals studied showed antibody to tetanus toxin.”
They also wrote, ”Before the discovery of tetanus toxoid, Tenbroeck and Bauer [1]
reported that they were able to detect antibody to tetanus toxin in the blood of one
third of a group of inhabitants of Peking (Beijing), China. Since then, there have been
many similar reports concerning animals, mainly herbivores [2], and humans living
under poor hygienic conditions [3-5]. Recently, similar reports have been reviewed by
authors in many different countries [3, 5-14].”
Ehrengut et al (1983) found “naturally acquired tetanus antitoxin in the serum of
children and adults in Mali” (Immun Infekt; 11(6): 229-232). They wrote, “Among 48
adults without a history of tetanus immunization, we found with the aid of indirect
hemagglutination test 20 individuals with protective tetanus antibody titters, 23 with
low levels of antitoxin (under 0,1 I.U./ml) and five devoid of tetanus antitoxin…The
data suggest a silent oral immunization by tetanus bacilli thus boosting under
unhygienic conditions the [natural] tetanus immunity with advancing age.”
1
On the other hand, De Moraes Pinto et al. (1995) reported on “Neonatal tetanus
despite immunization and protective antitoxin antibody (J Infect Dis; 171: 1076-
1077). They wrote, “neonatal tetanus (NNT) accounting for up to 50% of all neonatal
deaths [1]. The World Health Organization, in an effort to eradicate NNT, has
recommended the immunization of pregnant women against tetanus with two
injections of tetanus toxoid vaccine together with sterile cord care...However, some
reports of NNT occurring in babies of immunized women have demonstrated the
necessity of more extensive studies on the subject.”
Many researchers defined immune response to tetanus vaccines as anaphylaxis
(Jacobs et al. 1982. Adverse reactions to tetanus toxoid. JAMA; 247(1): 40-42).
The same applies to the introduction of other toxic and infectious substances together
with Ebola virus into the blood stream via unsteriloe and contaminated injections and
is quite obviously relevant to Ebola disease and Ebola vaccine. This is documented in
a number of publications of WHO such as Anonymous (Report of an International
Commission. (Bull WHO; 56(2): 271-293).
Indeed the effect of all injectable vaccines can best be described as anaphylaxis, i.e.
sensitisation resulting in increased susceptibility to the targeted diseases and also to
related and unrelated bacterial and viral infections. Product inserts for all vaccines
recommend to keep appropriate resuscitation equipment and epinephrine ready for
possible anaphylactic reaction.
It’s not just my opinion, that the best way to stop the Ebola virus outbreak is to
administer adequate doses of sodium ascorbate, a non-acidic form of vitamin C,
amply shown efficient in many infectious diseases and conditions (which are
generally aggravated by the underlying scurvy, often subclinical), as demonstrated by
Dr Thomas Levy in his book ”Vitamin C. Infectious diseases and toxins: curing the
incurable”.
In summary, vitamin C is needed to stop the ongoing Ebola outbreak, rather than
Ebola vaccine. Moreover, developing countries should stop playing the Russian
roulette with re-used non-sterile, highly contaminated non-disposable syringes and
needles.
Competing interests: No competing interests
15 January 2015
Dr Viera Scheibner (PhD)
scientist/author retired
n/a
Blackheath NSW Australia
Click to like:
25

Ebola Virus Virulent

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ebola Virus Virulent

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ebola Virus Virulent

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ebola virus disease

BMJ 2014; 349 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g7348 (Published 10 December

Re: Ebola virus disease

You might also like