Advertisement

The ugly face of population control

While the Solicitor General and his legal team are trying very hard to convince us that state-mandated contraception under the Reproductive Health Law is not population control, an aggressive vaccination campaign among the poor is reported to be causing an alarming rise in infant mortality in the countryside. Last weekend I listened to reports from family life workers assembled in Cebu City and came home feeling that a terrible crime was being committed against our people in the name of public health by the same government that is supposed to protect and defend their basic right to health.  Family life workers from Laguna in Luzon, from Iloilo in the Visayas, and from Misamis in Mindanao reported similar cases of infants dying after having been vaccinated by local health workers, who never bothered to explain what vaccines they were using. The reports uniformly came from far-flung barangays and involved the poorest of the poor.  In Talisayan, Misamis Oriental, according to one family life worker, the situation has so alarmed the residents that instead of meekly submitting to the health workers, the families decided       fight back.  They decided to require the health workers to execute affidavits certifying that the vaccines  they were administering did not cause infertility or any harm or illness, and that they (the health workers) assumed full responsibility (with their agency) for any side effects or adverse reactions the recipients might suffer as a consequence. This courageous response has put the health workers on the defensive and slowed down the vaccination drive. But it has yet to produce more scientific and medical information about the vaccines being used.  The family life workers in Cebu have decided to use the Talisayan  model in their respective areas. This could have the same salutary effect as in Misamis.  It should encourage  Malacañang to take a second look at its own immunization drive. Malacañang’s vaccination campaign is not new.  But it took on new life after June 2011, when President B. S. Aquino III signed Republic Act 10152, providing for mandatory basic  immunization for infants and children, purportedly for the prevention of tuberculosis, diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis, poliomyelitis, measles, mumps, rubella or German measles, Hepatitis-B, H. Influenza type B (HIB). The law singles out Hepatitis-B, for special treatment. Hepa-B is more common among those who tend to lead promiscuous sex lives. The law requires that every newborn be given the Hepa-B vaccine within 24 hours after birth.  Some doctors find this highly questionable because the newborn derives its immunity from the mother for the first 15 months from birth, and risks no infection unless the mother is infected.   This raises the suspicion that the Hepa-B campaign could be part of the globally-directed population reduction drive. There seems to be quite a link between the emanations from the global population controllers and the policies of the Aquino government.  In 2010, one year before Aquino signed the Mandatory Immunization Act, the billionaire Bill Gates, founder of Microsoft, and one of the leading advocates of eugenics as a means of reducing the global population, told a conference in Long Beach, California that “if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we (could reduce the global population of 6.8 billion people) by perhaps 10 to 15 percent.” This is nothing like earlier proposals of injecting sterilants into the world’s water supply, but it seems doable enough.  A few months before that, at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Gates announced that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation would give $10 billion over the next ten years to develop and deliver new vaccines to children in the developing world. That was three years ago.  Last year, after the Second Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro deleted the phrase “reproductive rights” from its outcome document and dealt a lethal blow to the global anti-life movement, Melinda Gates raised $4 billion in London to meet the “unmet needs” of over 200 million women in at least six developing countries. Then, together with the British government, the USAID, the UN Population Fund, International Planned Parenthood, and other multilateral institutions, Melinda Gates organized the Family Planning Summit in Manila to ensure, among other things, President Aquino’s steamrolling of the RH Law in Congress. At the Supreme Court, where the validity of the RH law is now being debated, the discussions have touched upon abortifacients disguised as contraceptives. This now seems puny compared to the apparent regime of new vaccines.  Not enough information has surfaced about the subject, but last year in India, at least 47,500 children were reported to have been permanently paralyzed after having been injected with anti-polio vaccines.  The Gates Foundation and the World Health Organization, who, together with the vaccine industry, are partners in the Global Alliance for Vaccinations and Immunization, dismissed these cases as pure coincidences. But not the family life workers. In the mid-nineties more than 3.4 million Filipino women were injected with tetanus vaccines. These were later found to contain human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG), a naturally occurring hormone essential for maintaining a pregnancy but which, when introduced into the body coupled with a tetanus toxoid carrier, produces anti-bodies that render a woman incapable of maintaining that pregnancy.  The vaccine was supposed to be against tetanus, which afflicts both men and women, but only women were vaccinated, and only women between age 15 and 45.  It was clearly an anti-fertility measure---an instrument of population control. Now we are hearing more. fstatad@gmail.com
COMMENT DISCLAIMER: Reader comments posted on this Web site are not in any way endorsed by Manila Standard. Comments are views by manilastandard.net readers who exercise their right to free expression and they do not necessarily represent or reflect the position or viewpoint of manilastandard.net. While reserving this publication’s right to delete comments that are deemed offensive, indecent or inconsistent with Manila Standard editorial standards, Manila Standard may not be held liable for any false information posted by readers in this comments section.
AdvertisementGMA-Congress Trivia 1
Advertisement