Category: Vaccines

The Problem With Autism Acceptance Week

This week is ‘Autism Acceptance Week’, and this is being promoted all over Twitter. Despite not following any irritating autism promotion, neurodiversity, etc accounts, such as the National Autistic Society (who I can’t stick for a number of reasons), I have been seeing ‘Autism Acceptance’ tweets all over the platform. So it seems Elon Musk, despite unbanning some good accounts, is helping to promote the normalisation and glamorisation of autism via ‘Autism Acceptance Week’.

The premise of autism acceptance week is very simple: it is that autism is a natural human variation and actually there’s nothing wrong with it, the only problem is society doesn’t accept it. As readers of this page will probably know by now the author has an autism diagnosis. It’s always very funny to me that woke people in general will say ‘listen to autistic people’ as part of promoting the neurodiversity narrative but the moment I say that I believe it’s vaccine-injury and that it’s miserable they try to shut me up (not going to happen). Or they accuse me of not being autistic, despite the fact I have a diagnosis so I am an actual genuine gold star autist. Honestly I got my diagnosis a year ago and the best thing about it is being able to tell the wokie dope neurodiversity fuckers that I have one so I am a real autist and I still think that they talk shit. But I digress.

Let’s start by looking at some of the examples of autism promotion on Twitter on the #AutismAcceptanceWeek hashtag on Twitter that serve as examples of autism glamorisation.

Response: How can severely ill children & adults with seizures, non verbal and with severe gastroenterological symptoms be ‘ambitious and creative’?

Response: I picked this one as I find it interesting that they appropriated the ‘Authentic Self’ language from transgenderism. And if transgenderism is created by big pharma (it is) what does that say about autism?

Response: I don’t even know how to respond to this, other than to say the Greeks and the Romans did a lot of medical shit, where’s their descriptions of regressive autism? If it’s perfectly normal, I’m sure some upper class Greek or Roman would have had it happen to their child at some point.

Response: I can’t even respond to this except by throwing things. Do I even need to explain how this is grossly offensive to those of us suffering?

Response: There seems to an aversion to talking about those people who have to live in care homes because their autism is so bad. For some reason. Perhaps because it doesn’t fit the narrative?

And finally, someone accused me of not being autistic because I disagree with their glamourisation narrative, which is the only argument these people actually have. I then got blocked. If I wasn’t autistic I’d probably be skipping in the fields blissfully unaware of all this neurodiversity nonsense, because it wouldn’t affect my life. And I probably wouldn’t be arguing on Twitter because I would have things like an actual sex life. So there you go.

Here’s the screenshot from my notifications for posterity:

(Twitter brings out the worst in me. I swear.)

Now for the serious bit. Neurodiversity is extremely easy to debunk. Everyone agrees that severe anxiety, sensory issues and gastroenterological symptoms are a bad thing. Yet when you put the label ‘autism’ on those things, they are magically good? Blatant nonsense. Some neurodiversity promoters (who are not always autistic themselves, by the way) like to talk about the ‘special talents’ of autistic people, or what I call the ‘autistic savant’ trope. Some of the neurodiversity brigade then object to this and claim that autistic people aren’t actually savants.

But the whole concept of neurodiversity is based upon the ‘autistic savant’ trope, whether they admit it or not. In order to make the case that autism is actually a good thing, you need to be able to point to something objective that makes autism actually good. As I said, you can’t point to, say, gastroenterological symptoms and try to glamourise those, because everyone would (rightly) think you were insane. So you have to pick something else. Which means the only fall back is the autistic savant trope – that autistic people have some sort of unique intelligence due to their special interests.

Claiming neurodiversity is good on this basis is also a catastrophic failure, of course. The most obvious reason it is a failure is it ignores the vast majority of autistic people, 78% of whom don’t work, many of whom are non-verbal in care homes because their autism is so severe. These people’s suffering is never mentioned by the neurodiversity activists. They clearly are not contributing to humanity with their special talents. When you have to erase 80% of a thing to make the other 20% of a thing look good, you are clearly off to a non starter.

But even in the case of high-functioning autism, this argument is nonsense, because absolutely everything an autistic person has done in their lives would be easier if they didn’t have autism. For example, if an autistic person lucks out and gets offered a job, it would have been much easier to get a job without autism. Even something as simple as holding eye contact in a job interview has to be forced and managed if you are autistic whereas a normal person would do it automatically. And that is very simple, straightforward, and easy to understand example. If I had to explain how many times sensory issues and anxiety have prevented me from doing things that I could have achieved, or destroyed my enjoyment of things, we would be here all day.

Unfortunately, for psychological reasons, the ‘neurodiversity’ narrative is appealing to some people with autism. This is because it allows them to psychologically compensate for what they cannot have because of autism (healthy sexual relationships, for example, or peace of mind due to horrific anxiety and sensory issues) by flipping the script and claiming that their autism actually gives them a deeper understanding of the world or makes them special.

Non-autistic people often promote it on the level of ‘be kind’, or naively believe it’s just about ‘diversity’. In some cases, they have been misled by propaganda, and believe in the ‘autistic savant’ trope. This is why stuff like The Big Bang Theory is so destructive as it portrays this very narrow view of autism as being ‘savant with a PhD who is maybe just a bit weird and has problems getting laid, and oh by the way is extremely witty and cutting’. (I have a pet conspiracy theory that TBBT is actually some form of big pharma propaganda.)

Or perhaps, people believe that autistic people may as well believe neurodiversity than see the truth of how bad we have it. They don’t believe our lives are actually good, and there is no way in hell they would be us, but they will let us blather on about how special we are and nod along because they think it may ease our psychological burdens. Clayton Atreus, a paraplegic who later committed suicide, highlights this phenomena.

You’ll notice that I haven’t mentioned the vaccine-autism link in this argument. That’s because everything above does not require the vaccine-autism link. Autism could be 100% genetic, and neurodiversity would still be nonsense.

Here’s the antivaxxer bit.

We need some antivaxxer counter propaganda, to oppose this godawful narrative that is glamourising the horrors of autism. I propose ‘Autism is Unacceptable Week’, where we highlight the facts that the neurodiversity brigade want you to ignore.

For example:

Circuit Boards and Hammers: Thoughts on Vaccination Abolition

Introduction

Vaccination is touted as the biggest success of modern medicine. Fundamentally, it it seen as a victory over nature, where the powers of man’s inventiveness have conquered the evils of disease. Unfortunately, such ‘victories’ over nature are more hubris than reality.

Vaccination as Victory over Nature?

“Let us not, however, flatter ourselves overmuch on account of our human victories over nature. For each such victory nature takes its revenge on us. Each victory, it is true, in the first place brings about the results we expected, but in the second and third places it has quite different, unforeseen effects which only too often cancel the first.”

Friedrich Engels

The official narrative on vaccination is as follows.

In the past, human beings died of preventable diseases because the pathogens that they were exposed to were inherently extremely deadly. This mass death could not have been significantly prevented by factors such as better living conditions or diet, even if those would have had a positive effect. It wasn’t until the introduction of vaccination, starting with Edward Jenner’s smallpox vaccine, that the mass death caused by disease began to subside. The introduction of mass vaccination for diseases like polio, measles, etc. in the 20th century saved millions of lives. The further development of vaccination to encompass influenza, rotavirus, etc., are a positive development for humanity and we should try to develop vaccines for all human diseases. This includes things like HIV and RSV. mRNA vaccines, as developed for Covid-19, are a new and highly promising step forward in the development of the technology. Vaccines are safe and effective outside of very rare cases of anaphylaxis. Taking any vaccine that you are offered is the best thing that you can do for your health.

So, what are the problems of this official narrative? There is data from alternative sources demonstrating that at least some of these claims are clearly false. For example: measles vaccination was only introduced after measles mortality had massively declined and thus vaccination could not have been responsible for the decline. Newer vaccinations, such as the Gardasil vaccine, have clearly unfavourable risk-benefit profiles, to the extent that some countries have stopped using it, or do not include it on official vaccine schedules.

However, I would like to go beyond this and state that there is a problem with the whole concept of vaccination. I use an analogy to illustrate the point. As it is a Computer Age analogy, hopefully, it should be understood by those most technology obsessed invokers of the Cult of Vaccination:

Vaccination is like trying to fix a circuit board with a hammer.

The reality is the human immune system is extremely complex and multifaceted. It has been developed by millions of years of Mother Nature to protect us from disease. It does that job superbly well, so long as the environment supports it, that is, that it is not undermined through poor living conditions, exposure to toxic chemicals, and poor diet.

To give an idea of how complex the immune system actually is, we can look at the scientific literature. This article gives this description of immune response:

Immune cells sense infection and other environmental cues through a variety of extracellular and intracellular receptors. Ligation of these receptors leads to signaling cascades consisting of many dynamic processes including signal‐induced protein binding, phosphorylation, degradation, and nuclear localization. These signaling events lead to changes in gene expression, and subsequently to the production of both effector proteins required to combat infection and proteins involved in regulation of the ensuing, potentially host‐damaging, response. The number of molecular players or variables involved in any such activity can vary from hundreds to thousands, making immune responses immensely complex. This complexity is amplified by the multiscalar nature of the immune system, as these signaling and transcriptional responses occur in the context of diverse and dynamic cell–cell interactions.

Vaccination is essentially trying to ‘hack’ this extremely complex system through the extremely crude method of antigen and adjuvant injection. Vaccination sees the natural immune system as ‘insert A = get B’ or ‘insert needle = get antibodies = protection against disease’. The complex cascades of multiple interlinking factors are not present in this equation. Nor are factors such as route of exposure, and that injection of a dead/attenuated pathogen is a fundamentally different mechanism to the natural exposure which would be through, for example, aerosol. And here I am talking only of what we know or can surmise, because there is a large number of things about the immune response that we probably do not know.

There are certainly some individuals who are pushing vaccination for sinister motivations. An excellent example is Bill Gates, who is interested in vaccination as a means of depopulation. But the system of vaccination could not have gained such success in society without a massive degree of hubris on the part of scientists, governments, and everyone else in society who is going along with the vaccination narrative. Instead of being driven by the specific desire to do evil, they are blinded by the hubris of a victory that is impossible.

This hubris, of course, comes back around to us when we see massive levels of vaccination injury in our population. It is difficult to estimate how much vaccine injury there is in our population, given that all information about vaccine injury is suppressed. But there is enough evidence to link vaccination to a large number of health problems including autism, anxiety and mental health problems, autoimmune diseases, heart problems, brain inflammation, narcolepsy, and multiple other conditions.

A Note on the mRNA ‘Vaccines’

I trust nature more than I trust scientists like Dr. Anthony Fauci.

Dr. Andrew Wakefield

In some respects, the mRNA ‘vaccines’ do not belong here, as they are not vaccines by the actual definition of the term, however they are promoted as vaccines by the establishment.

The hubris discussion, however, is even more relevant when it comes to the mRNA concoctions. The hubris of traditional vaccination was bad enough, with the direct injection of an antigen and adjuvant, expecting the ‘hacking’ of the immune system to function effectively to create the antigen and not to have adverse long term reactions. The mRNA injections, on the other hand, mess with this system in an even deeper and more intrusive – and more dangerous – way by making the body produce the spike protein itself. This kind of immune hacking has caused disastrous consequences, with spike protein running rampant in the body and causing myocarditis, pericarditis, blood clots, and neurological injury, along with a massive amount of ‘sudden death‘ that is otherwise unexplained. The mRNA experiment is portrayed as, and considered to be by insane scientists, a ‘way cool’ experiment where they get to play God.

Conclusion

The concept of vaccination has always been a fundamentally flawed method to prevent disease. Instead of having to endure natural exposure to the pathogen, vaccination allows human beings to ‘cheat’ the process of gaining natural immunity through infection. In this way, ‘victory’ over disease can be declared. The price of this hubris is a skyrocketing of chronic illness.

Note: I was inspired to write this article by Toby Rogers and his piece on ‘Why I’m an Abolitionist’. This article is a massive expansion of something I dropped in the comments over at the uTobian substack.

Infertility and Toxins (Part 1): The Inculcation of Infertility

Image of Michael Yeadon with the quote "I am not saying that if you take these vaccines that it will cause infertility, but I will say that none of the manufacturers should give you any assurances whatsoever that it won't."

Introduction

Infertility is a significant issue in Western societies. This two part article will explore the issue of how modern life causes infertility among both men and women, and then how actors concerned with profit, such as Big Pharma, seek to exploit this inculcated infertility. It will also discuss how this increased reliance on Pharma for a natural function drives into other agendas such as transhumanism.

The Decline In Human Fertility

In this article I will be focusing on the Western world as people there would be the main consumers of fertility based big pharma products, such as IVF or surrogacy. This should not be construed as believing that the fertility issues faced by women in developing countries – such as those deliberately invoked by the WHO – are unimportant.

There is significant evidence of birth rate decline in the Western world. Some of this can be put down to social factors (access to contraception for example). However, there are also physical factors at work. According to the CDC, 12% of women in America have issues conceiving. Sperm counts have also been on the decline for years with a total decline of 50-60% since 1973.

Does Aluminium Cause Infertility?

Aluminium has no productive role within the human body, and because the aluminium on Earth was bound up with silica compounds for our entire history, the human body does not have defense mechanisms against it. Human activity as unleashed aluminium on the environment, and so we suffer from every day exposures from air, food, water, cosmetics, and vaccination. Any amount of aluminium harms the body. Aluminium has inflammatory effects as well as causing neurological injury and cancer. But can it also cause infertility?

Aluminium is present in high quantities in human sperm. A study ‘Aluminium Content of Human Semen‘ found that the levels of aluminium in the sperm were on average 339 μg/L. Men with a low sperm count in the study also had higher levels of aluminium suggesting possible causation.

The aluminium in DNA-rich sperm heads is stained blue by lumogallion.

Do Phthalates Cause Infertility?

Phthalates are a product that are in a large number of plastics:

Phthalates are a group of chemicals used to make plastics more durable. Phthalates are in hundreds of products, such as vinyl flooring, lubricating oils, and personal-care products (soaps, shampoos, hair sprays).

CDC

Their effects on fertility come from the fact that they can mimic estrogen in the human body. In terms of fertility, this can negatively affect men and there have been several studies on this topic. The below review lists some of these studies.

Recent studies have showed that exposure to some phthalates results in profound and irreversible changes in the development of reproductive tract (Foster et al., 2001, Sharpe, 2001) especially in males, rising the possibility that phthalate exposures could be the leading cause of the reproductive disorders in humans (Ablake et al., 2004, Ema et al., 2003, Foster et al., 2000, Latini et al., 2004a, Latini et al., 2004b, Moore et al., 2001, Mylchreest et al., 1998, Parks et al., 2000, Wilson et al., 2004). In particular, prenatal exposure to these environmental chemicals, by interfering with the androgen signaling pathway seems to cause permanent adverse effects on reproductive development in male rats (Carruthers and Foster, 2005, Kai et al., 2005, Lehmann et al., 2004, Thompson et al., 2004).

Phthalate Exposure and Male Infertility

Regarding women’s fertility, a study looked at the effects of phthalates on success of IVF, and found to was less likely to be successful if the woman had a higher concentration of phthalates in the body.

Is Infertility Linked to Vaccination?

There is evidence that vaccination can negatively affect fertility. One vaccine where this issue has been examined is Gardasil, sold as a preventative for cervical cancer. There is a strong correlation between the introduction of the Gardasil vaccine and a decline in the fertility of the age groups exposed to that vaccine.

Graph showing a decline in birthrate in the US per 1000 after the introduction of Gardasil: 19% drop in birthrate between 2007 and 2018.

Clinical trial researchers for Merck, Gardasil’s manufacturer, reported an explosion of reproductive injuries among the 20,000 trial volunteers. An astronomical 15% – 17% of trial participants experienced a range of reproductive harms, including premature ovarian failure.

Is Gardasil Vaccine linked to Record Birth Rate Declines?

Gardasil contains extremely high levels of aluminium, but also many other ingredients that are negative for human health, such as L-histidine, polysorbate 80 and sodium borate. These substances are listed as possible causes of female infertility. There is also evidence that the Gardasil vaccine can cause anti-phospholipid syndrome, an autoimmune disease that can affect the reproductive organs.

Is Infertility Linked to Covid-19 ‘Vaccination’?

There have been many speculations early on in the Covid-19 ‘vaccine’ rollout that the jab would cause infertility. For example, Dr. Judy Mikovits was one of the first people to draw attention to this, especially the issue of possible autoimmune to a protein crucial in pregnancy, Syncytin-1. Unfortunately, more and more evidence is stacking up that the Covid-19 ‘vaccinations’ do indeed cause infertility.

Steve Kirsch’s analysis of VAERS shows that one of the most elevated adverse events after ‘vaccination’ in comparison with other injections is menstrual problems.

Table showing that heavy menstrual bleeding, shortened menstrual cycle, menstrual disorder, painful periods, irregular menstruation are highly escalated adverse events.

If a medical intervention can affect a woman’s menstruation, it can obviously affect the ability to conceive.

There have also been reports of an extremely high number of miscarriages, spontaneous abortion, and fetal demise post roll out of this experimental ‘vaccination’. Dr. Jessica Rose has pointed to the fact that there have been over 4,000 miscarriages reported to VAERS as of June 2022.

Meanwhile, an Israeli study showed some issues with male fertility after ‘vaccination’.

Post day 150, sperm concentration was -15.9% vs baseline, lower even than in the 75-120 day period. Average time post vaxx for T3 collection was 174 +/- 26.8 days so we’re talking about 6 months post vaxx with NO recovery in sperm concentration.

Pfizer Vaccine Effects on Total Motile Count in Sperm Donors

More recently, birth statistics have shown a significant decline in a large number of Western countries, and that decline is holding firm and not rebounding to pre-Covid levels. A good visual example is this decline in Sweden, from the El Gato Malo substack:

Graph showing Sweden's live births in 2022 are around 100 lower on average than previous years.

Synthetic Sex Identities and Sterilisation

No discussion of infertility would be complete without the discussion of the deliberate infliction of infertility via the use of puberty blockers, wrong-sex hormone dosage, and ‘transgender’ surgery. This inculcation of infertility affects a small but growing number of the population.

‘Puberty blockers’, medically known as GnRH agonists, stop the production of sex hormones. Since the ‘Dutch protocol’ began in 1996, the drugs have increasingly been used to facilitate ‘gender transition’ of children. The drugs prevent the child from going through puberty, meaning that there is no development of the gonads. This leads to infertility for obvious reasons, as the correct sex hormone is never present to lead to fertility. Incorrect hormones can also cause reproductive harms, for example, testosterone dosage in women who identify as men causes atrophy in the female reproductive organs. ‘Transgender’ surgery, such as hysterectomy, oophorectomy, and orchiectomy (castration) also create permanent sterilisation in those that receive these surgeries.

Conclusion

Multiple toxins, that are created by modern industrial society, reduce human fertility to a significant extent. This article merely covers some of the ways in which this happens. This opens up new markets for Big Pharma and other actors, which will be explored in Part 2.