Could Pet Vaccines Be Responsible for Ailments in Our Beloved Pets?

Before we delve into the potential connection between vaccines and pet illnesses, it’s essential to grasp the intricate process behind vaccine production and why they might be linked to the rising health issues in our cherished animal companions. Vaccine manufacturers assert that by introducing weakened forms of diseases and associated antigens, which trigger immune responses, these vaccines fortify our pets’ ability to combat actual diseases should they ever encounter them.

To develop these vaccines, virologists are tasked with cultivating the pathogens in a laboratory setting. They mix the so-called ‘disease’ with adjuvants, antigens, and other components, including preservatives, to improve their stability, solubility, consistency, and extend their shelf life.

There are primarily two categories of pet vaccines:

1. ‘Modified-live’ (MLV) vaccines
2. ‘Killed’ vaccines

These categories are differentiated based on how the vaccine is produced and whether the pathogen used is cultured in animal or cell tissues, either remaining “active” or rendered lifeless.

Modified-Live Vaccines

Proponents of modified-live, or attenuated, vaccines argue that these vaccines are derived from the “naturally occurring pathogen,” albeit modified to stimulate an immune response without causing the actual disease. The modification process involves weakening the pathogens within a laboratory environment and combining them with other components.

In live vaccines, the pathogen is cultivated either in animal tissue or cell tissue cultures, such as those grown in petri dishes. Various types of cells are employed for these cultures, including cancer cells, embryonic cells, or kidney cells. While kidney cells have a limited lifespan and can be used around 30 times before becoming unusable for modified-live vaccines, cancer cells, due to their perpetual growth, are often preferred.

The mediums used for pathogen growth in modified-live vaccines encompass a range of animal tissues, such as chick embryos, bovine serum, human fetal lung tissue (obtained from the abortion industry), monkey kidney tissue, porcine tissue, eggs, and insect proteins.

However, there’s a risk of contamination associated with these growth mediums. For instance, eggs, bovine, and porcine tissue may contain glyphosate, a substance classified as ‘hazardous’ (refer to the data sheet). Furthermore, the FDA has confirmed that a significant portion of U.S. livestock is fed GMO feed, potentially affecting the safety of the vaccines.

Ironically, after administering these ‘live vaccines’ to your pet, the “modified virus” begins to grow and replicate within your pet’s cells. What’s often undisclosed is that secondary mutations from these modified-live vaccines can lead to a reversion to virulence, essentially causing the original disease.

Maintaining the potency of these ‘live vaccines’ demands stringent temperature control from production to injection, and they necessitate skilled handling. Unfortunately, external conditions and financial constraints don’t always favor the consistent production of these vaccines.

The prevalence of modified-live vaccines is primarily attributed to their cost-effectiveness in laboratory cultivation and their purported ability to provide longer-lasting immunity compared to killed inactivated viruses. These modified-live vaccines are often administered to pets under the guise of ‘core’ or essential vaccinations, including:

Modified-Live Canine ‘Core’ Vaccines:

• Canine Distemper Virus (CDV)
• Canine Adenovirus Type 2 (CAV-2)
• Canine Parvovirus (CPV-2)

Modified-Live Feline ‘Core’ Vaccines:

• Feline Panleukopenia Virus (FPV)
• Feline Calicivirus (FCV)
• Feline HerpesVirus (FHV)

Inactivated (Killed) Vaccines

In contrast to modified-live vaccines, inactivated vaccines contain pathogens that are considered too hazardous for use in a live vaccine. For instance, when it comes to rabies, the only safe option is an inactivated vaccine, as a modified-live rabies vaccine could result in immediate fatality.

Creating an “inactivated” or “killed” vaccine involves growing the virus or a related strain in a tissue culture and then rendering it lifeless using formaldehyde or other chemical agents. While viruses require host cells for replication, virologists take steps to ensure that the killed virus cannot attach to a cell, making it unable to grow and reproduce within your pet’s body.

Inactivated vaccines house pathogens that are essentially incapable of replication, rendering them inactive because the microorganism has been rendered lifeless. Nevertheless, these vaccines are designed to retain key “viral components” that assist the body in generating antibodies against the virus.

Virologists contend that inactivated pathogens necessitate more adjuvants, substances that enhance the body’s immune response, particularly histamine production. In comparison to live-active vaccines, killed vaccines typically contain higher quantities of adjuvants, effectively making a lifeless virus a more substantial challenge for your pet’s immune system to combat.

Heavy metals and squalene are commonly employed adjuvants aimed at stimulating histamine responses. Notably, rabies and Leptosporosis vaccines, categorized as “killed vaccines” with elevated levels of heavy metals, are associated with a higher incidence of adverse reactions.

Mercury: Thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative, is present in nearly all vaccines. Mercury, classified as a heavy metal, can provoke severe adverse reactions in pets, including breathing difficulties, digestive issues, kidney damage, strokes, and nervous system impairment, often manifesting as seizures.

Squalene: Squalene, a compound derived from shark liver oil, is utilized as a booster in vaccinations, posing risks not only to pets but also to shark populations and, consequently, ocean health. Sharks, being apex predators, accumulate significant levels of heavy metals, and consuming shark byproducts increases the potential for heavy metal toxicity in vaccinated pets.

Manufacturers have discovered that vaccines produce higher antibody titers (blood antibody levels) in the presence of squalene. Additionally, squalene aids in the solubilization and stabilization of vaccine components, facilitating the blending of the vaccine formula.

It’s crucial to note that squalene is a metabolic precursor to cholesterol and should be avoided in pets with elevated cholesterol levels or cardiovascular issues. Elevated blood cholesterol synthesis increases the risk of atherosclerosis, raising the potential for heart attacks or strokes. Pets with high liver enzyme levels in their bloodwork should especially steer clear of vaccines containing squalene, as it can accumulate in the liver and lead to acute toxic hepatitis. Animal studies also suggest that squalene may contribute to pneumonia, an infection causing inflammation in the lung air sacs.

Aluminum Salts: Aluminum, a highly toxic heavy metal, can trigger inflammation in the brain and central nervous system (encephalitis), as well as renal (kidney) and liver failure. It has the potential to induce anaphylaxis, a life-threatening allergic reaction, along with symptoms such as diarrhea and vomiting. Furthermore, aluminum salts disrupt nucleic acids, enzyme function, protein synthesis, and cell membrane permeability.

Bacteria-Based Lipopolysaccharides: Bacteria-based lipopolysaccharides serve as a protective barrier, safeguarding the vaccine from breakdown by bile salts in your pet’s gastrointestinal tract. However, these lipopolysaccharides, components of the outer membrane of gram-negative bacteria, can provoke a cytokine release when activated. Cytokines, when suddenly triggered by toxin overload (as in vaccination), can lead to inflammation.

Antibiotics: Antibiotics (gentamicin, amphotericin B, neomycin, polymyxin-B), included in vaccines as a precaution against bacterial contamination during manufacturing, indiscriminately kill bacteria, including beneficial ones in your pet’s system. The depletion of beneficial bacteria disrupts a healthy microbiome, resulting in lowered immunoglobulin A (IgA) production, which diminishes protection and weakens your pet’s natural defense mechanisms.

Phenoxyethanol: Phenoxyethanol, employed as a preservative, has been classified as “toxic when used near the mouth.” Exposure to phenoxyethanol has been linked to severe, life-threatening allergic reactions and nervous system issues.

Borax (Sodium Borate): Sodium borate, commonly known as borax, has earned recognition as a “Substance of Very High Concern” by the European Chemicals Agency. Often employed as a buffering agent in vaccines, its primary function is to help maintain the appropriate pH balance. However, it’s worth noting that borax has been associated with decreased fertility in studies conducted on dogs and rats.

Formaldehyde: Formaldehyde plays a pivotal role in vaccines as both a stabilizer and an attenuating agent. It is important to be aware that formaldehyde carries the classification of a carcinogen. According to reputable sources such as cancer.gov and The World Health Organization, formaldehyde is linked to the development of myeloid leukemia and rare cancers, including those affecting the paranasal sinuses, nasal cavity, and nasopharynx. This chemical compound comes with a hazardous profile, marked by its potential toxicity when swallowed or in contact with the skin, its capacity to induce severe skin burns and eye damage, the potential for triggering allergic skin reactions, its inhalation toxicity, its suspected role in causing genetic defects, and its association with cancer.

Polysorbate 80 (Tween 80): Polysorbate 80, derived from chemical compounds resulting from sugar alcohol dehydration and fatty acids, serves a dual purpose in vaccines. It functions as an emulsifier, facilitating the blending of oil and water components, and as a surfactant, contributing to the stabilization of the vaccine formulation.

However, it is essential to be mindful of the fact that Polysorbate 80 can impact the blood-brain barrier (BBB) by inhibiting reflux pumps. This alteration in BBB function potentially enables the transportation of vaccine components, including the contained disease, preservatives, and adjuvants (including heavy metals), to your pet’s brain. This change in permeability raises concerns about the potential risks associated with these vaccine components accessing the central nervous system.

Exploring the Additional Components of Vaccines

It is crucial to recognize that many vaccine additives are considered safe due to their natural origins. This perspective aligns with the preference for whole plant medicine over standardized plant medicine. When an isolated chemical compound is extracted from its natural source, it loses the chemical bonds and components that once provided a buffering effect. Furthermore, the isolation process can create new toxic chemical bonds, rendering the compound potentially harmful.

As Dr. Len Horowitz has pointed out, the assertion that vaccines are entirely safe and effective represents a contentious claim.

Methods of Vaccine Administration

Needle Injection Needle injections remain the most widely recommended and administered form of vaccination. Vaccine manufacturers argue that needle injection offers superior effectiveness compared to oral and intranasal methods because it delivers the vaccine directly into the bloodstream, eliciting a robust antibody response. However, it is essential to consider that needle injections introduce the vaccine’s toxins (adjuvants) and preservatives directly into the bloodstream, circumventing the body’s natural defenses and its ability to break down and eliminate toxins as needed. This approach of injecting diseases directly into the bloodstream bypasses the usual warning and preparatory mechanisms that the body would employ when encountering a disease through natural exposure.

Intranasal

In the case of intranasal vaccination, a spray or drops are administered into the nasal passages, allowing the dog or cat to inhale the vaccine. Proponents of intranasal vaccines argue that this method mimics “natural” disease exposure because inhalation stimulates the nasal mucosa, which serves as the first line of defense against infections. However, it is important to note that during intranasal vaccination, your pet inhales not only the disease but also preservatives and adjuvants (toxins). Moreover, the intranasal approach releases the vaccine into the surrounding environment.

While oral and needle-injected vaccines may lead to the gradual buildup of vaccine components in bodily fluids over time, intranasal applications pose an immediate airborne risk to other nearby pets and humans, including the veterinarian administering the vaccine. In fact, the use of intranasal Bordetella vaccines has been associated with the spread of kennel cough.

Oral

Oral vaccines are formulated as tablets, providing a convenient option for manufacturing, distribution, and administration. However, it is important to note that not all vaccines offer an oral tablet alternative. According to Dr. Jean Dodds, if your pet requires the Bordetella vaccine, the oral administration is considered less harmful and is recommended over injection and intranasal methods.

Booster Shots

Booster shots, which involve additional vaccine doses administered after the initial vaccination, are typically recommended on an annual basis by veterinarians. However, it’s important to note that there is limited scientific or clinical evidence to support their effectiveness. Moreover, virologists and immunologists do not consistently advocate for booster shots. The comprehension of the immune system and antibodies still harbors significant gaps, but it’s well-established that the body possesses immune memory, which obviates the necessity for regular reminders in the form of boosters.

The practice of administering booster shots can also be viewed as a revenue-driven strategy within the veterinary industry. Encouraging pet owners to bring their pets in for yearly wellness visits generates revenue, as boosters are often a part of these visits. Without the enticement of booster shots, pet owners may not frequent veterinary clinics as frequently, potentially hindering the financial sustainability of these establishments.

It’s essential to recognize that the actual duration of vaccine-induced immunity for pets is typically considered to be lifelong. Once a pet has been properly immunized, the immunity generally endures for a lifetime. Repeatedly administering vaccines does not enhance preventive measures but rather elevates the risk of adverse effects, such as the development of cancer.

Vaccination and Associated Chronic Conditions

It’s crucial to acknowledge that many pet owners have reported a myriad of imbalances and diseases in their animals following vaccinations. A significant contributor to these health issues is ‘Iatrogenic Disease,’ a term encompassing medically-induced diseases or those triggered by medical interventions. This broad category encompasses adverse drug effects, harmful drug combinations, prolonged drug use, and vaccinosis, among others. Unless a pet has been kept away from mainstream veterinary practices, many animals are susceptible to Iatrogenic Disease, which essentially disrupts their healthy physiological balance. The range of conditions arising from this medical intervention is extensive, including hair loss, fungal infections, strokes, Cushing syndrome, aplastic anemia, thyroid irregularities, liver toxicity, cartilage deterioration, birth defects, and behavioral alterations, to name just a few.

The following health issues have been scientifically associated with vaccinations or injections. However, it’s worth considering who defines what is considered ‘scientific’ and the lack of comprehensive reporting by veterinarians. The reporting parameters themselves may be designed to impede rigorous scientific inquiry and the full disclosure of adverse effects. The incidence of Iatrogenic Disease is on the rise, both in household pets and in cattle, with a common denominator being veterinary intervention.

Autoimmune Disorders

Vaccination efforts aimed at stimulating the immune system can lead to an overstimulated response. In some cases, the immune system, confused by the vaccine’s influence, may turn against the body’s own tissues, leading to autoimmune disorders. These disorders can affect various parts of the body, including muscles, joints, bowel, liver, thyroid, kidney, blood, skin, mucous membranes, eyes, and other tissues. Thyroid dysfunction, such as hypothyroidism and hyperthyroidism, is a common consequence of vaccination, as the thyroid attempts to compensate for forced antibody responses.

Nervous System Disorders

Chronic encephalitis, inflammation of the brain and central nervous system, underlies many behavioral problems in canines, including aggression. Encephalitis can result from vaccination reactions or be triggered by autoimmune diseases, often initiated by vaccines. The increase in the administration of vaccinations and injections has paralleled the rising prevalence of aggression and behavioral disorders in pets.

Sudden aggressive behavior is particularly common following rabies vaccinations. The heavy metal adjuvants present in the rabies vaccine can exacerbate existing issues related to mercury and aluminum accumulation in the brain and liver. An overloaded liver can contribute to heightened irritability, and with an inflamed nervous system and toxic overload, seizures may occur following vaccination.

Cardiovascular Issues

Introduction of toxins into the bloodstream can either cause or exacerbate atherosclerosis, increasing the risk of strokes and heart attacks that may result in reduced longevity or even death.

Cancer

Vaccines have been linked to the formation of tumors in cats and dogs, often at the injection site. In cases where pets already have cancer, vaccinations can promote metastasis or further cancer growth. This issue has become prevalent to the extent that veterinarians are now advised to administer vaccinations in the legs to facilitate amputation should a tumor develop.

Alopecia

Hair loss at the vaccination site is a common occurrence in pets, and in some cases, the hair fails to regrow. Severe hair loss or patches of missing hair throughout the body can also occur.

Transient Infections

Pets may experience disease episodes for which they were vaccinated, as they are essentially being injected with a form of the disease. For example, aggressive behavior observed in pets following rabies vaccination can mimic the behaviors associated with full-blown ‘rabies,’ including consuming inedible objects. Pets may test positive for the disease without exhibiting symptoms, leading to long-term infected carrier states, which can be perplexing for determining their health status.

Questioning the Effectiveness and Long-Term Impact of Vaccinations and Injections

Vaccines and injections often adopt a one-size-fits-all approach, neglecting the individuality of pets. They are administered in identical dosages to pets of varying sizes, each with unique genetics, body chemistry, and lifestyles.

Unfortunately, there is typically no provision for different dosing or tailoring vaccines to specific needs. Different breeds may exhibit genetic predispositions to various sensitivities, vaccinosis, thyroid disorders, and other illnesses that can be aggravated by vaccines. For geriatric pets whose bodily systems may be slowing down, vaccines and injections can easily overwhelm their already taxed systems, yet veterinarians often continue to administer them.

Pets leading unhealthy lifestyles, marked by a lack of exercise and a diet devoid of whole foods, face greater risks than those living healthily. The liver plays a crucial role in processing everything a pet consumes, and animals with already compromised livers due to an unhealthy lifestyle and a kibble-based diet can become severely ill or even succumb to the contents of a vaccine.

Even healthy pets, equipped with robust immune systems capable of naturally fighting off diseases, are compelled to undergo vaccinations and booster shots regardless of their existing health. Pet owners are often pressured from the beginning to vaccinate their perfectly healthy puppies or kittens with “core vaccines” or non-core injections, with little consideration for the iatrogenic diseases they may induce or their potential to compromise health.

Thankfully, there are alternatives to traditional vaccines in the form of titers. Titers involve taking blood samples to test for antibodies prior to vaccination, helping determine whether your pet already possesses the necessary antibodies to combat diseases, rendering vaccination unnecessary as per your veterinarian’s requirements. Regrettably, titers can be expensive and are seldom offered or discussed with pet owners as a viable alternative. In many cases, veterinarians may be hesitant to recommend or provide them because doing so could challenge the prevailing vaccine and injection business model and disrupt the lucrative booster shot industry.

It’s important to note that titers, while valuable, are not always 100% accurate. Pets that do not pass titer tests may still possess sufficient immunity against diseases.

Combining Vaccines

Vaccine combinations, often referred to as combos, offer a cost-effective approach for veterinarians by administering multiple vaccines in a single shot, irrespective of an individual pet’s specific needs. For instance, a pet owner may only want a vaccine that is legally mandated, but they may find themselves compelled to accept a combo shot containing three vaccines. In cases where vaccinations or injections are deemed necessary, holistic veterinarians typically discourage the administration of multiple vaccines simultaneously and often have protocols in place to safeguard animals against potential adverse reactions.

Despite the well-documented adverse effects and long-term health consequences for pets, the mainstream veterinary industry continues to promote and administer combo vaccines to healthy animals, thereby heightening their susceptibility to disease, toxicity, and unpleasant side effects.

Certain breeds of dogs, both miniature and large, are particularly sensitive to vaccinations, a factor not always taken into account by veterinarians before administering vaccines. Ultimately, all pets subjected to vaccination are at some degree of risk. Below is a list of breeds that mainstream veterinarians have identified as having an elevated susceptibility to problems associated with vaccines:

• Akita
• American Eskimo
• Black Labrador Retrievers
• Chihuahua
• Cocker Spaniel
• Fox Terrier
• Greyhounds
• Harlequin Great Danes
• Jack Russell Terrier
• Springer Spaniel
• Weimaraner

The Controversy Surrounding Virus Identification

When exploring the implications of vaccinations on your pet’s well-being, it’s imperative to address the contentious issue of viruses, even if it may be a challenging and uncomfortable topic.

The term “virus” traces its origins to Latin, signifying ‘poison’ or ‘poisonous substance.’ Equally, Sanskrit provides us with “visam,” meaning ‘venom’ or ‘poison,’ as well as “vish,” which translates to ‘poisonous.’ In recent years, a significant revelation has emerged that casts doubt on much, if not all, of virology as we know it. Contrary to popular belief, it appears that virologists have not been isolating or purifying viruses to understand their nature, mutations, growth patterns within and outside the body, and more. Instead, the reality seems to be quite the opposite.

Numerous Freedom of Information responses from institutions worldwide, spanning from the United States to India, Republic of South Africa, New Zealand, Australia, the United Kingdom, and beyond, along with emails from Germany’s Robert Koch Institut (RKI) and several “virus isolation authors,” have failed to produce records of SARS-COV-2 isolation or purification, anywhere, at any time.

Virologists have, in essence, been complicit in fostering dubious scientific practices and fraud. This includes the controversial blending of patient samples (containing various genetic materials but unproven to contain any alleged “virus”) with transfected monkey kidney cells, fetal bovine serum, and toxic drugs. These concoctions are then claimed to be “isolates” and distributed internationally for critical research, including vaccine and test development. This practice raises serious questions about the integrity of “virus isolation” in research.

The review provided earlier on how laboratories manufacture modified live vaccines and killed vaccines for the veterinary industry underscores the questionable practices within virology. These practices involve the use of substances like dead cancer cells or insect proteins as a growth medium, coupled with ingredients such as mercury, formaldehyde, or derivatives thereof. These elements do not substantiate the existence of viruses but rather reveal the use of contaminants knowingly injected into a healthy body, leading to illness and poisoning of a once-healthy terrain.

To this day, virologists have failed to demonstrate the purification of any virus, including rabies, without adding a medley of ingredients to achieve the desired results they wish to showcase to the world. Subsequently, they present the cure in the form of injections, vaccines, or pills. This extensive marketing campaign, driven by a few major corporations and fueled by mainstream media, has perpetuated the illusion that health can only be attained through the pharmaceutical industry.

In essence, this raises serious doubts about the applicability of germ theory to definitively identify the cause of diseases or illnesses in the body. Dr. Stefan Lanka’s work illustrates that he can obtain identical results using the same cocktail of ingredients employed in laboratories without the need to introduce a ‘virus’ strain. This suggests that it is not the germs themselves but rather the mixture of ingredients or toxins employed by the pharmaceutical cartel in their ‘medicines’ that may be the underlying issue.

What is perhaps most telling is that no published scientific paper has ever demonstrated that particles conforming to the definition of viruses have been directly isolated and purified from any tissues or bodily fluids of sick humans or animals. The conventional definition of “isolation,” which refers to the separation of one thing from all others, has reportedly never been achieved in virology’s history.

Dr. Stefan Lanka emphasizes that density gradient centrifugation, recognized as the scientifically required standard technique for demonstrating the existence of a virus, has never been employed in experiments aimed at establishing the presence of pathogenic viruses. Consequently, the search for pathogenic agents remains inconclusive.

In a recent video chat, Dr. Sam Bailey echoed these concerns by asking why virologists have not provided scientific papers that adhere to the scientific method, employ valid controls, and utilize methodologies sufficient to demonstrate the existence of a virus if viruses indeed exist.

Viruses: The Myth of Rapid Mutation

The conventional wisdom surrounding viruses, or what virology identifies as such, suggests that they are in a constant state of mutation, evolving at an astonishing pace. This rapid mutation supposedly poses a formidable challenge for research, development, production, and administration of effective vaccines.

However, as previously discussed in the debate surrounding viruses, particles purportedly isolated through purification have not been demonstrated to be replication-competent, infectious, or disease-causing. Consequently, they cannot be conclusively labeled as viruses. Moreover, the “evidence” of viruses often relies on genetic information and animal experiments conducted with insufficient controls.

After receiving vaccinations, pets may exhibit symptoms of “virus shedding,” a term used to describe the release of the alleged virus from the body. In reality, shedding does not occur as commonly believed. What transpires is that your pet’s body endeavors to eliminate the medically induced toxins or, in worst-case scenarios, contends with “secondary mutation,” primarily stemming from the growth medium used in vaccines.

Your pet’s innate defense mechanisms are effectively bypassed when a cocktail of toxins is directly injected into the bloodstream and organs. In response, the body enters a state of crisis management, prompting various systems, including the respiratory, skin, ears, and eyes, to assist in expelling these toxins. This is an effort to survive the toxic overload.

Symptoms serve as visible indicators that your pet’s terrain is compromised, signaling a diseased state. Suppressing these symptoms through the use of antibiotics, steroids, and other medications merely drives the toxins deeper into the cells, exacerbating the problem. It’s worth noting that the veterinary industry categorizes animals as “geriatric” around 6 or 7 years of age, a classification that hinges not on age but on the presence of iatrogenic disease caused by the prolonged exposure to injected poisons.

Neglecting the body’s innate healing abilities and its intelligence to self-cure when provided with the necessary resources hinders recovery. By suppressing symptoms and compounding the toxic burden with additional substances like flea tablets, pet owners inadvertently contribute to the existing state of disease. The veterinary industry’s practice of suppressing symptoms rather than addressing the root causes of illness perpetuates this cycle.

Dr. Tom Cowan underscores a fundamental distinction between exosomes and what are traditionally referred to as viruses. Exosomes are pieces of tissue or cells that result from certain processes within the tissue or cell, often associated with illness. These particles share identical size, shape, and composition with what are termed viruses. However, exosomes do not replicate as the concept of viruses suggests, they are not infectious, they do not cause disease, nor do they code for any proteins, as far as current knowledge indicates. These significant distinctions challenge the conventional definition of viruses. Moreover, even with exosomes, there is no definitive assurance that the cellular debris observed under electron microscopy precisely mirrors the shape and morphology of so-called viruses or functions the same way in a living tissue system within humans or animals.

Absence of Placebo Studies

Dr. Pitcairn highlights a critical issue within the realm of vaccine research: the lack of studies comparing vaccines with a saline-only placebo. While placebo studies do exist, they often employ other vaccines as comparators, rather than saline, which complicates the pursuit of truth and fails to adhere to scientific principles.

Notably absent are comprehensive studies involving properly controlled groups, especially those comprising successive generations of unvaccinated cats and dogs, contrasted with their vaccinated counterparts. The establishment of well-controlled experiments would serve to ascertain the efficacy of man-made vaccines and injections in comparison to the natural healing processes inherent in the animal kingdom.

The initiation of genuine scientific inquiry, replacing pseudoscientific practices, would cast a revealing spotlight on the numerous inconsistencies in prevailing theories and solutions. It would raise profound questions regarding the necessity of vaccines, their potential contributions to or causation of diseases, their efficacy, long-term health consequences, and conclusively demonstrate that their harm outweighs their benefits.

Ethical Dilemmas Surrounding Pet Reaction Reporting

Vaccine proponents assert that they administer viruses or diseases to pets in a form that won’t harm them, yet pets endure vaccine-related injuries daily. The manipulation of statistics is evident, as incidents deemed “correlated” with vaccine administration are strictly those occurring within 24 hours after injection. Adverse reactions transpiring in the 25th hour or later fall outside these criteria, escaping classification as vaccine injuries. Furthermore, pets experiencing vaccinosis within 24 hours of the allotted timeframe often go unreported, a situation influenced by both pet owners’ and veterinarians’ reluctance to admit liability.

For pets grappling with chronic issues arising after the 24-hour window or even months later, pet owners are typically told there isn’t sufficient evidence to establish causation. This approach blatantly disregards the realities of iatrogenic disease. Mainstream veterinarians frequently stifle discussions on the subject before they can commence. Reporting and statistical information are meticulously controlled to hinder most pet owners from comprehending or questioning the underlying dynamics. Consequently, there is an alarming lack of accountability for the suffering of sentient beings.

Vaccines and Their Impact on Genetic Evolution

Vaccines wield the power to disrupt the body’s innate disease-fighting mechanisms, subjecting healthy pets to the introduction of harmful toxins. These vaccinations, administered to pets who inherently possess good health, not only compromise their natural defenses but also undermine the microbiomes passed down through generations. It is this interplay of genes and the preservation of a robust, healthy terrain that has ensured the survival of our canine and feline species. Essential maternal coding, transmitted from mothers to offspring, has been instrumental in sustaining animal generations, both before the advent of vaccines and in cases where interference by humans is minimal.

The widespread administration of vaccines poses a grave risk to the domesticated canine and feline species. Mass vaccination threatens to eradicate populations endowed with naturally robust terrains, which could otherwise serve as valuable breeding stock, passing down their inherited healthy genetics to successive generations. Instead, our beloved pets are continually subjected to unnecessary vaccinations targeting spurious viruses, resulting in chronic illness, disease, anxiety, aggression, or even premature death.

Contemplating Contagion

The concept of contagion, as conventionally understood, lacks a solid foundation. It’s akin to the principles of Yin and Yang, or the interplay of hot and cold, good and evil. If we entertain the notion that malevolent germs in the air are responsible for contagious diseases, we must also acknowledge the existence of benevolent germs in the air that promote health and are equally contagious.

Nature operates on a principle of balance, invariably producing both sides of the spectrum. While nobody regards good health as contagious, it is, by its very nature, a state of being. Consequently, if health is not contagious, how can disease or poor health be deemed contagious? Furthermore, if you firmly believe that illness is contagious, when does your cat or dog catch good health?

Numerous factors contribute to pets falling ill. Consider their daily exposure to household chemicals, not to mention the iatrogenic diseases inflicted upon them by the pet industry. Yet, the onset of illness or a disruption within the body, owing to exposure to toxins, typically unfolds in a gradual or sudden manner. If you fail to attend to your pet’s well-being, these toxins gradually infiltrate or accumulate, prompting the body to initiate detoxification.

The body employs its innate intelligence to commence the detoxification process in the most effective manner, whether in a flock, herd, pack, or family unit. Hormonal signaling comes into play when one or more members of the group necessitate detoxification. It mirrors tribal survival, particularly among animals that live, hunt, and thrive as part of a collective. Your pet’s instinctual behaviors still align with these ancient survival mechanisms. If any of the animals require detoxification, the hormonal system triggers signaling throughout the group to commence the detoxification process, both at the individual and collective levels, ensuring survival.

The pace and success of the detoxification process are contingent on the health status of each animal. Some members of the group or family unit may remain unaffected or exhibit only mild symptoms because their internal terrain is healthier, or their toxin exposure was minimal.

A practical analogy for this phenomenon is menstruation. One woman’s hormonal signals can synchronize the menstrual cycles of the women around her. This is driven by hormonal signaling, not contagion, and the group experiences menstruation concurrently. Within the group, there may be exceptions to the synchronicity, such as younger, pregnant, or older women whose hormonal rhythms differ.

Just as health and disease are not contagious, menstruation is not contagious. In cases where illness spreads within a group, it is a reflection of the need for detoxification and the resulting triggering of this process—an imperative for group or tribal survival. When there is mortality within the group, it underscores the principle of survival of the fittest, ensuring the propagation of the strongest genetic traits. If an entire herd, for instance, falls ill and succumbs, it necessitates an investigation into the type of toxin they were exposed to.

Questions Surrounding Rabies, Polio, and Smallpox

The realm of contagion and viruses as causative agents of disease has long been shrouded in uncertainty, prompting a surge in research aimed at uncovering the true nature of viruses, challenging preconceived notions and revealing their limitations.

Rabies: The authenticity of a virus as the root cause of rabies remains unsubstantiated. The available data on this subject is somewhat vague, and no concrete evidence has surfaced to definitively attribute rabies to a virus. To illustrate this point, experiments involved preserving the brains and spinal cords of bats and rabbits in a sterile glycerine and saline solution, maintained at a temperature of 5-10 degrees Celsius. This solution, when needed, was combined with a concoction of putrid organ meat, created from a mixture of normal saline solution and approximately 10% bat brain components, including the cerebrum, cerebellum, medulla, and spinal cord. This poisonous mixture was then directly injected into the subdural space, intracerebrally, directly into the brains of unsuspecting animals, causing paralysis and death, thereby mimicking the effects of rabid bites. For a comprehensive understanding, you can refer to Dr. Sam Bailey’s presentation or explore the controversial history of Louis Pasteur’s unethical rabies experiments.

Dr. Tom Cowan, in a video presentation, delves into Sebastion Powell’s discourse regarding what have traditionally been considered viruses. A brief overview of select diseases is presented below:

Measles: The distinction between various diseases, such as syphilis, measles, chickenpox, smallpox, or skin afflictions resulting from exposure to toxins, was challenging due to the absence of distinct symptoms. In Ender’s measles experiment, detailed in his trial publications available online, he reduced nutrient solution, introduced cell-destroying antibiotics into his cell culture, and then introduced the supposedly infected fluid. The cell destruction resulting from antibiotics was misinterpreted as evidence of the presence of the measles virus. Overlooked in Ender’s publications were instances of cell death without any apparent “infection.”

Polio: A definitive connection between a virus and polio has not been established. Symptoms such as leg atrophy or muscle wasting, although associated with polio by the CDC, are non-specific and can be attributed to various other conditions, including malnutrition, vitamin B1 deficiency, scurvy, and lead or arsenic poisoning.

Smallpox: The smallpox vaccine administration was linked to adverse reactions, particularly tuberculosis (TB), as evidenced by findings from India reported in the Lancet.

Dr. Tom Cowan underscores a pertinent observation: the creation of fear and the fabrication of epidemics often involve consolidating various symptoms into a single disease, dubbed “disease X.” Conversely, when authorities aim to conclude an epidemic or pandemic, they revert to classifying symptoms as individual diseases. An illustrative example is the case of the plague, a collection of ailments categorized under a single umbrella term that persisted over a span of 400 years.

Exploring the Causes of Animal Health Issues

This article touches on various aspects related to animal health, but it doesn’t delve deeply into the substantial impact of Iatrogenic disease. Numerous factors contribute to whether an animal experiences good health or falls into a state of illness.

From the moment of birth, crucial factors come into play. These include whether the animal has been raised naturally, whether its parents received vaccinations or were subjected to toxin injections, and the type of diet it’s been fed, whether it’s conventional kibble or a wholesome raw food diet. Additionally, the methods employed for managing fleas and parasites, such as chemical-based treatments, introduce neurotoxins that can affect the overall health of the animal. These factors collectively influence the body’s systems and defenses, leading to either a robust, ailment-free terrain or an unhealthy one that is susceptible to disease.

In the words of Florence Nightingale, “There are no specific diseases, only specific disease conditions. All diseases, at some point in their course, involve a recurring process—an attempt by nature to remedy a process of poisoning or decay that occurred weeks, months, or sometimes years earlier, often going unnoticed.”

A diseased terrain can result from poor nutrition or the gradual accumulation of toxins, or even sudden poisoning.

To reduce your pet’s daily exposure to toxic chemicals, you can take certain steps.

So, where do we go from here?

Caring for your pet’s health has never been easier, especially when you grasp the fundamental concept that your pet can be either healthy or diseased. Disease can stem from various sources, such as toxin exposure (Toxemia) or suboptimal dietary choices that create nutritional deficiencies and disrupt metabolic processes.

It’s important to recognize that all vaccines contain elements that are toxic to your pet’s body. Given that virologists have not definitively isolated viruses, it raises questions about the rationale behind injecting animals and what exactly we’re trying to protect them from. Pets today are facing more health challenges than ever, and vaccines introduce heavy metal toxins into their bloodstream alongside the alleged viral component, which is concocted from a blend of mediums.

These toxins, when combined with inappropriate diets like kibble (which can be viewed as a slow poison), perpetuate a state of chronic disease. The pharmaceutical industry profits from pet owners’ hard-earned money.

To embark on a journey towards your pet’s recovery and well-being, start by transitioning them back to a state of health. Clean up their diet, detoxify their system, introduce real food, minimize the use of everyday chemicals, opt for natural flea treatments, and incorporate herbs and medicinal mushrooms into their regimen to support the healing process.

Conduct Your Own Research

Instead of engaging in fruitless debates, let’s put these claims to the test through precise, scientific experiments that can unequivocally determine whether the existence of pathogenic human viruses holds true. To initiate this process, we propose the following experiment, which serves as an initial step in settling the question of whether such entities truly exist. Click here to delve deeper into this experiment and contribute to the “Settling The Virus Debate” Statement.

If this concept is new to you, it’s essential to embark on your own research journey. Here are some valuable resources to get you started:

1. “Settling The Virus Debate” Statement
2. Dr. Sam Bailey & Project Veritas
3. “A Farewell to Virology”
4. Pasture’s Work on Rabies
5. “The Dream Lie of Louis Pasteur”
6. “Virology on Trial” (Parts 1 to 8) – No Evidence of Contagion
7. “Good-Bye Germ Theory: Ending a Century of Medical Fraud”
8. Facts About Contagion
9. “Contagion: A Fairy Story”

These resources will empower you to explore this topic further and form your own informed perspective.

In lieu of a conclusion

In place of a traditional conclusion, it’s essential to reflect on the information presented and consider its implications. The topics discussed in this document challenge conventional beliefs about vaccines, viruses, and pet health. While these perspectives may be controversial and raise questions about established medical practices, they also emphasize the importance of conducting thorough research, questioning assumptions, and exploring alternative viewpoints. The goal is to encourage critical thinking and informed decision-making when it comes to the health and well-being of our pets. Ultimately, the responsibility lies with pet owners to make choices that align with their values, beliefs, and understanding of the available evidence.