…why is cancer on the rise?
In l999, the WHO named the veterinary vaccine adjuvant a grade 3 out of 4 carcinogen, with 4 being the most carcinogenic. The adjuvant identified is aluminum hydroxide, a component of most of the currently used veterinary vaccines.
Adjuvants are not the only way to trans-mutate a body’s genome. Environmental poisons and toxins, viral oncogenes, proteins, drugs, nutritional deficiencies, hormones or mimickers and disruptors of hormones, geophysical forces, ultraviolet radiation and electromagnetic forces can all cause genetic mutation. Protecting one’s DNA from transmutation is a current topic of health interest. Reversing damage done to the DNA an ongoing source of research funding.
Vaccine Induced Tumor
What the research tells us, is that in animals, vaccine adjuvants, in this case aluminum hydroxide, stimulate an inflammatory reaction and therefore create oxidative stress that results in a mutation of the p53 suppressor gene. The p53 suppressor gene is supposed to help the body stop malignancies by suppressing tumor growth. When p53 is doing its correct job, it is a nuclear transcription regulator. The integrity of the genome is guarded by many policemen. However in this case, the result is a loss in translation, so to speak. When a mutation of p53 occurs, malignant tumors results.
Cancers are found in not only in vaccine injection sites, but in other areas of the body not directly the vicinity of the injection site. Documented cases of lymphoma have resulted in patients developing vaccine injection site fibrosarcomas. For more information on cancer and vaccines, read here.
Vaccination is lacking in any scientific evidence for long term safety. In fact, research is starting to show that vaccines produce chronic disease as a trade off for the missing acute disease. The yearly administration of combination vaccines given by veterinary practices all over the world has burdened pet owners with a medical procedure that is not evidence based. In fact, revaccination was the unscientific, unresearched and unwarranted
musings of a roundtable discussion among veterinarian members of the AVMA. We have no information what, if any, role the pharmaceutical companies manufacturing the vaccines may have played in those “musings”.
Lacking any scientific validation, the veterinary medical institutions of our great nation essentially turned veterinary doctors into vaccine pushers.
Many practices still revaccination at yearly or triennial intervals even now, despite recommendations to not vaccinate needlessly coming from the
AVMA, AAHA and the AAFP. Without informed consent and without full disclosure to pet owners, veterinary medical doctors continue to burden pet owners with vaccination reminders and their pets with immune assault.
Furthermore, there is no excuse for vets who vaccinate pets exhibiting symptoms of illness – including allergies, joint disease, irritable bowel symptoms, etc. This practice is in direct violation of the FDA regulations.
Another Tumor at a Vaccine Site
Vaccines have been repeatedly associated with auto antibodies and autoimmune disease, the degenerative diseases, the endocrine diseases, neurotoxicity and seizures, allergies, asthma and the continued evidence of cancer.
Vaccinations, and the resulting chronic diseases it creates, are big business for veterinary clinics. Pharmaceutical companies also benefit; cancer treatment is big business. Cancer diagnosis means expensive drugs, possibly surgery and chemotherapy if treated via conventional medicine.
An important paper was published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, “The Contribution of Cytotoxic Chemotherapy in 5 year Survival in Adult Malignancies”. The objective of the paper was to accurately quantify and assess the benefit of chemotherapy in the treatment of adults with the most common malignant cancers. All three of the authors are oncologists. The meticulous study determined that in Australia, chemotherapy protocols were 2.3% effective and in the United States, they were found to be 2.1% effective.
Chemotherapy is cell poisoning, but isn’t that already accomplished with the injection of the vaccine? The treatment for this disease is often worse
that the disease itself. A study took place among the pet owning clients of cancer victims, the “quantity” of time left for the cancer patient was not as important as the “quality”. Chemotherapy gives you neither.
The treatment of cancer is not likely to be found in conventional medicine. The multilevel, multifactorial causation made complex by the medical industrial complex will not provide the answer. Conventional wisdom will not allow conventional medicine to find an answer to cancer because it would not be profitable to do so. As said by Albert Einstein “We can’t solve problems with the same thinking that created the problems”. Of course, we have to get the medical community to see the problem first. Getting everyone to see that the emperor is not wearing any clothes is a feat in itself. Getting veterinarians to stop a practice that feeds their wallet is another thing altogether.
Dr. Phillip Kass, at the Discussion for the Feline Injection Site Sarcoma Task Force, presented these words of wisdom from Sir Austin Bradford Hill from the l965 Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine:
“Finally in passing from association to causation I believe in “real life” we shall have to consider what flows from that decision. On scientific grounds we should no such thing but in another more practical sense we may surely ask what is involved in our decision. All scientific work is incomplete, whether it is observational or experimental. All scientific work is liable to be upset or modified by advancing knowledge. That does not confer on us a freedom to ignore the knowledge we already have or to postpone the action that it appears to demand at a given time”
Dr. Phillip Kass continues with: “you can’t always wait to have irrefutable scientific evidence before you have to take some sort of action, the vaccine associated sarcoma is a real phenomena and the cost of waiting and doing nothing is much greater than the cost of acting now.”
Well, that is the medical profession of whom I am not brethren. The veterinary profession can and needs to make the decision in this vaccine debacle. To ignore this issue is to commit malpractice. If a member of the profession does not understand this, he should be reminded of the veterinary Hippocratic Oath upon most of our profession was sworn into the profession:
Being admitted to the profession of veterinary medicine, I solemnly swear to use my scientific knowledge and skills for the benefit of society through the protection of animal health, the relief of animal suffering, the conservation of animal resources, the promotion of public health, and the advancement of medical knowledge. I will practice my profession conscientiously, with dignity, and in keeping with the principles of veterinary medical ethics. I accept as a lifelong obligation the continual improvement of my professional knowledge and competence.
Haven’t given my dog any vaccines since 2008. Also, they think the grain in the diet is causing more cancers. Feed your dog a grain free diet!
Sorry Jan that you feel “offense”. The statement is however our reality as vaccine victims. The animals and the children and the other beings vaccinated into disease would hope you continue to research this subject.
Here is a link to an MD Nephrologist that can help you see what is actually happening with vaccines.
http://gaia-health.com/gaia-blog/2011-12-16/suzanne-humphries-doctor-of-nephrology-speaks-passionately-against-vaccines-video/
Also, have a listen to Neurologist Dr. Russell Blaylock for what the vaccines are doing to the brains of vaccine victims.
Having spent 5 years looking into the public health records for the past 200 years, I am still looking to find proof that vaccines are safe, effective or even necessary to offset infectious disease. I am afraid you will find as the rest of us whom went looking that the proof is missing. The medical assumptions are there but not the proof.
Sincerely,
Dr. Jordan
Thank you for the references. I am a PhD scientist who has been involved in cancer research for the majority of my career (including a postdoctoral fellowship in the department of the investigator who discovered the p53 tumor suppressor gene). I don’t think it is unreasonable for me to ask for source information. I do appreciate being able to read the primary literature for myself as just because something is published doesn’t mean it is good science.
The following statement “Vaccinations, and the resulting chronic diseases it creates, are big business for veterinary clinics. Pharmaceutical companies also benefit; cancer treatment is big business. Cancer diagnosis means expensive drugs, possibly surgery and chemotherapy if treated via conventional medicine.” is to me offensive. It suggests a conspiracy in which veterinary health care providers and the pharmaceutical industry are in cahoots to make our beloved pets sick so that they can profit. This is just simply untrue but I doubt that anything I say or experiences I share will change your mind.
I am all for minimal vaccinations – something that is practiced by my veterinarian. But vaccines are an important part of keeping our pets healthy and I feel that a lot of the information out there truely scares folks into thinking that they should not vaccinate their pets EVER.
Jan
Jan you are right – neither side should use scare tactics. We don’t believe that vaccines are an important part of keeping pets healthy in the long term. However, vaccination is a personal decision because there is risk with vaccinating and there is risk without vaccinating. The pet owners live with the consequences, so it is up to them to make a decision based on what risks they are willing to live with.
To quote Harold Buttram MD, “There have never been any safety studies done for any vaccine in use today that would meet the criteria of scientific proof. All we have are epidemiologic studies, which are indicators but not proof in and of themselves.”
It is not unreasonable to ask for references and we are happy to supply them. It does make us wonder why nobody asks for the proof of vaccine safety and efficacy however. You should find most of what you’re looking for through the Feline Sarcoma Task Force…that would be a good start.
Jan, Dr. Jordan has sent some more references for you. I hope this helps.
In 1998 McNeil demonstrated that the adjuvant Rabies vaccines induced mutations on cell cultures at the 18th ACVIM. In 2001 McNeil demonstrated that adjuvant vaccines induced mutations of cell cultures but that non adjuvant vaccines did not. In 1999 the WHO (World Health Organization) in Lyons, France declared that the veterinary vaccine adjuvant was a grade three out of four for being carcinogenic (cancer causing).
Hendrick MJ, Brooks JJ.
Postvaccinal Sarcomas in the Cat: Histology and Immunohistochemistry. Vet Pathol 1994; 31:126-129.
Hendrick MJ, Goldschmidt.
Do Injection Site Reactions Induce Fibrosarcomas in Cats? J Am Vet Med Assoc 1991; 199:968.
Hendrick, MJ, et al.
Commentary: Postvaccinal Sarcomas in Cats. J Natl Cancer Inst 1994; 86:5.
Hendrick, MJ, et al.Comparison of Fibrosarcomas Developed at Vaccination Sites and at Nonvaccination Sites in Cats: 239 cases (1991-1992).
J Am Vet Met Assoc 1994; 205:1425-1429.
Kass PH, et al.
Epidemiological Evidence for a Causal Relation between Vaccinations and Fibrosarcomas Tumor genesis in Cats.
J Am Vet Med Assoc 1993; 203:396-405.Marcy DW, et al. Vaccine Associated Sarcomas in Cats.
Fel Pract 1995; 23:24-27.
Marcy DW, et al.
The Potential Role of Inflammation in the Development of Post¬vaccinal Sarcomas in Cats.
Vet Clin North America 1996; 26:103-109.
Marcy DW.
The Potential Role and Mechanisms of FeLV Vaccine-induced Neoplasms.
Sem Vet Med Surg 1995; 10:234- 238.
Hendrick M.J, et al.
Post-vaccinal Sarcomas in the Cats: Epidemiology and Electron Probe Micro Analytical Identification of Aluminum.
Cancer Res 1992; 52:5391-5394
Read all about it in the p53 tumor suppressor gene by Author David Ollie Published on Nov 4, 2004.
It is no coincidence that human cancers all have virus association and it is no coincidence that all tumors, cancer, have genetic mutations, many with P53 so that currently they are now even looking at P53 antibody in the blood of human cancer patients. We should be able to exploit this in animal medicine as well to further prove, if even more proof is needed, the association of vaccine administration, viral infection, genetic mutation and resulting cancer. [The use of the P53 as biomarker in cancer tracking and vaccine administration.] Cancer Research
Mutational analysis of tumor suppressor gene p53 in feline vaccine site-associated sarcomas
Prashant R. Nambiar , Deborah M. Haines , John A. Ellis , Beverly A. Kidney , Marion L. Jackson
American Journal of Veterinary Research Oct 2000, Vol. 61, No. 10, Pages 1277-1281: 1277-1281.
Abstract | PDF (205 KB) | PDF Plus (222 KB) | Add to Favorites | Related
There are also two studies, one in ferrets18 and one in dogs,19 on the development of presumptive vaccine-associated sarcomas in other species, and the histological appearance of sarcomas in those species was similar to what has been seen in cats, including the presence of aluminum in tissues.18,19 I believe it is a complete story, and I’m confident that there is an association between vaccine administration and sarcoma development in cats.
1. Munday JS, Stedman NL, Richey LJ. Histology and immunohistochemistry of seven ferret vaccination-site fibrosarcomas. Vet Pathol 2003;40:288–293.
2. Vascellari M, Melchiotti E, Bozza MA, et al. Fibrosarcomas at presumed sites of injection in dogs: characteristics and comparison with non-vaccination site fibrosarcomas and feline post-vaccinal fibrosarcomas. J Vet Med A Physiol Pathol Clin Med 2003;50:286–291.
60, 1777-1788, April 1, 2000 Laboratorie de genotoxicologie des tumeurs, Institut Curie, 17248 Paris, France. P53 Antibodies in the Sera of Patients with Various Types of Cancer: a Review Thierry Soussi [Role of Immunogenetics in the Diagnosis of Postvaccinal CAN Pathology Massimo Montinari, Biagio Favoino and Angela Roberto Dept. of Pediatric Surgery, Univer of Bari (Italy)]
________________________________________
June 1, 2005 Vol 226, No.11
Vaccine-Associated Feline Sarcoma
Task Force: Roundtable Discussion
The current understanding and management
of vaccine-associated sarcomas in cat
References
1. AVMA Web site. Vaccine-Associated Feline Sarcoma Task Force. Available at: http://www.avma.org/vafstf/. Accessed Apr 18, 2005.
2. AVMA Web site. Vaccine-Associated Feline Sarcoma Task Force. Vaccines and sarcomas: a concern for cat owners. Available at: http://www.avma.org/vafstf/ownbroch.asp. Accessed Apr 18, 2005.
3. AVMA Web site. Vaccine-Associated Feline Sarcoma Task Force. VAFSTF selected bibliographic references. Available at: http://www.avma.org/vafstf/bibrefs.asp. Accessed Apr 18, 2005.
4. Hendrick MJ, Bergman PJ, Couto CG, et al. Vaccine-associated feline sarcoma symposium. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1998;213:1422–1430.
5. McEntee MC. Treatment decision making for cats with vaccine-associated sarcomas, Part 1 and II. In: Convention notes of the 138th Annual Convention of the American Veterinary Medical Association. Schaumburg, Ill: American Veterinary Medical Association, 2001;447–448.
6. Borjesson D, Madewell BR, McEntee MC, et al. Feline vaccine-associated fibrosarcomas. Vet Cancer Soc Newsl 1999;23:1–11.
7. Morrison WB, Starr RM. Vaccine-associated feline sarcomas. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2001;218:697–702.
8. Kass PH, Barnes WG, Spangler WL, et al. Epidemiologic evidence for a causal relation between vaccination and fibrosarcoma tumorigenesis in cats. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1993;203:396–405.
9. Kass PH, Spangler WL, Hendrick MJ, et al. Multicenter case-control study of risk factors associated with development of vaccine-associated sarcomas in cats. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2003;223:1283–1292.
10. Hendrick MJ, Goldschmidt MH, Shofer FS, et al. Postvaccinal sarcomas in the cat: epidemiology and electron probe microanalytical identification of aluminum. Cancer Res 1992;52:5391–5394.
11. Hill AB. The environment and disease: association or causation, in Proceedings. Royal Soc Med 1965;58:295–300.
12. Esplin DG, Mcgill LD, Meininger AC, et al. Postvaccination sarcomas in cats. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1993;202:1245–1247.
13. Esplin DG. Widespread metastastisis of a fibrosarcoma associated with a vaccination site in a cat. Feline Pract 1995;23(1):13–16.
14. Esplin DG. Metastasizing liposarcoma associated with a vaccination site in a cat. Feline Pract 1996;24(5):20–23.
15. Lester S, Clemett T, Burt A. Vaccine site-associated sarcomas in cats: clinical experience and laboratory review (1982–1993). J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1996;32:91–95.
16. Rudmann DG, Van Alstine WG, Doddy F, et al. Pulmonary and mediastinal metastases of a vaccination-site sarcoma in a cat. Vet Pathol 1996;33:466–469.
17. Sandler I, Teeger M, Best S. Metastatic vaccine associated fibrosarcoma in a 10-year-old cat. Can Vet J 1997;38:374.
18. Munday JS, Stedman NL, Richey LJ. Histology and immunohistochemistry of seven ferret vaccination-site fibrosarcomas. Vet Pathol 2003;40:288–293.
19. Vascellari M, Melchiotti E, Bozza MA, et al. Fibrosarcomas at presumed sites of injection in dogs: characteristics and comparison with non-vaccination site fibrosarcomas and feline post-vaccinal fibrosarcomas. J Vet Med A Physiol Pathol Clin Med 2003;50:286–291.
20. Esplin DG, Mcgill LD. Fibrosarcoma at the site of lufenuron injection in a cat. Vet Cancer Soc Newsl 1999;23:8–9.
21. Martins-Green M, Boudreau N, Bissell MJ. Inflammation is responsible for the development of wound-induced tumors in chickens infected with Rous sarcoma virus. Cancer Res 1994;54:4334–4341.
22. Erlewein DL. Post-vaccinal rabies in a cat. Feline Pract 1981;11(2):16–21.
23. Esh JB, Cunningham JG, Wiktor TJ. Vaccine-induced rabies in four cats. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1982;180:1336–1339.
24. Bellinger DA, Chang J, Bunn TO, et al. Rabies induced in a cat by high-egg-passage Flury strain vaccine. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1983;183:997–998.
25. Coyne MJ, Reeves NCP, Rosen DK. Estimated prevalence of injection-site sarcomas in cats during 1992. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1997;210:249–251.
26. Gobar GM, Kass PH. World Wide Web-based survey of vaccination practices, postvaccinal reactions, and vaccine site-associated sarcomas in cats. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2002;220:1477–1482.
27. Doddy FD, Glickman LT, Glickman NW, et al. Feline fibrosarcomas at vaccination sites and non-vaccination sites. J Comp Pathol 1996;114:165–174.
28. Richards JR, Rodan I, Elston T, et al. 2000 Report of the American Association of Feline Practitioners and Academy of Feline Medicine Advisory Panel on Feline Vaccines. Available at: http://www.aafponline.org/pdf/guidelines_vaccine.pdf. Accessed Apr 18, 2005.
29. Zeiss CJ, Johnson EM, Dubielzig RR. Feline intraocular tumors may arise from transformation of lens epithelium. Vet Pathol 2003;40:355–362.
30. Carew JS, Schmidt JA, Humphrey SA, et al. Growth factor expression and vaccine-associated sarcoma tumorigenicity, in Proceedings. 19th Annu Vet Cancer Soc Conf 1999;11–13.
31. Katayama R, Huelsmeyer MK, Marr AK, et al. Imatinib mesylate inhibits platelet-derived growth factor activity and increases chemosensitivity in feline vaccine-associated sarcoma. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 2004;54:25–33.
32. Massague J. The TGF-beta family of growth and differentiation factors. Cell 1987;49:437–438.
33. Silingardi P, Klein JL, Mesnil M, et al. Growth suppression of transformed BALB/c 3T3 cells by transforming growth factor beta 1 occurs only in the presence of their normal counterparts. Carcinogenesis 1994;15:1181–1185.
34. Turner FC. Sarcomas at sites of subcutaneously implanted Bakelite disks in rats. J Natl Cancer Inst 1941;2:81–83.
35. Brand KG, Johnson KH, Buoen LC. Foreign body tumorigenesis. CRC Crit Rev Toxicol 1976;4:353–394.
36. Sinibaldi K, Rosen H, Liu S, et al. Tumors associated with metallic implants in animals. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1976;118:257-266.
37. Macy DW. The potential role and mechanisms of FeLV vaccine-induced neoplasms. Semin Vet Med Surg (Small Anim) 1995;10:234–237.
38. Macy DW. Vaccine adjuvants. Semin Vet Med Surg (Small Anim) 1997;12:206–211.
39. Macy DW, Chretin J. Local postvaccinal reactions of a recombinant rabies vaccine. Vet Forum 1999;16:44–49.
40. Jelínek F. Postinflammatory sarcoma in cats. Exp Toxicol Pathol 2003;55:167–172.
41. Nieto A, Sánchez A, Martínez E, et al. Immunohistochemical expression of p53, fibroblast growth factor-β, and transforming growth factor-α in feline vaccine-associated sarcomas. Vet Pathol 2003;40:651–658.
42. Burton G, Mason KV. Do postvaccinal sarcomas occur in Australian cats? Aust Vet J 1997;75:102–106.
43. Hershey AE, Sorenmo KU, Hendrick MJ, et al. Prognosis for presumed feline vaccine-associated sarcoma after excision: 61 cases (1986–1996). J Am Vet Med Assoc 2000;216:58–61.
44. Carroll EE, Dubielzig RR, Schultz RD. Cats differ from mink and ferrets in their response to commercial vaccines: a histologic comparison of early vaccine reactions. Vet Pathol 2002;39:216–227.
45. Hennings H, Devor D, Wenk ML, et al. Comparison of two-stage epidermal carcinogenesis initiated by 7,12-dimethybenz(a)-anthracene or N-methyl-N’-nitro-N-nitrosoguanidine in newborn and adult SENCAR and BALB/c mice: effects of tumor promoters and steriodal anti-inflammatory agents on skin of newborn mice in vivo and in vitro. Cancer Res 1981;41:773–779.
46. Shacter E, Weitzman SA. Chronic inflammation and cancer. Oncology (Huntingt) 2002;16:217–226, 229; discussion 230–232.
47. AVMA Web site. Vaccine-Associated Feline Sarcoma Task Force. Vaccine-Associated Feline Sarcoma Task Force guidelines: diagnosis and management of suspected sarcomas. Available at: http://www.avma.org/vafstf/tfguidelines99.asp. Accessed Apr 12, 2005.
48. Davidson EB, Gregory CR, Kass PH. Surgical excision of soft tissue fibrosarcomas in cats. Vet Surg 1997;26:265–269.
49. Kuntz CA. Sarcoma surgery technique debated [lett]. Veterinary Practice News 2001;13(11):5.
50. Hendrick MJ, Shofer FS, Goldschmidt MH, et al. Comparison of fibrosarcomas that developed at vaccination sites and at nonvaccination sites in cats: 239 cases (1991–1992). J Am Vet Med Assoc 1994;205:1425–1429.
51. Barber LG, Sorenmo KU, Cronin KL, et al. Combined doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy for nonresectable feline fibrosarcoma. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 2000;36:416–421.
52. Jeglum KA, deGuzman E, Young KM. Chemotherapy of advanced mammary adenocarcinoma in 14 cats. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1985;187:157–160.
53. Poirier VJ, Thamm DH, Kurzman ID, et al. Liposome-encapsulated doxorubicin (Doxil) and doxorubicin in the treatment of vaccine-associated sarcoma in cats. J Vet Intern Med 2002;16:726–731.
54. Cronin K, Page RL, Spodnick G, et al. Radiation therapy and surgery for fibrosarcoma in 33 cats. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 1998;39:51–56.
55. Kobayashi T, Hauck ML, Dodge R, et al. Preoperative radiotherapy for vaccine associated sarcoma in 92 cats. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2002;43:473–479.
56. Bregazzi VS, LaRue SM, McNiel E, et al. Treatment with a combination of doxorubicin, surgery, and radiation versus surgery and radiation alone for cats with vaccine-associated sarcomas: 25 cases (1995–2000). J Am Vet Med Assoc 2001;218:547–550.
57. Cohen M, Wright JC, Brawner WR, et al. Use of surgery and electron beam irradiation, with or without chemotherapy, for treatment of vaccine-associated sarcomas in cats: 78 cases (1996–2000). J Am Vet Med Assoc 2001;219:1582–1589.
58. Bailey DB, Rassnick KM, Erb HN, et al. Effect of glomerular filtration rate on clearance and myelotoxicity of carboplatin in cats with tumors. Am J Vet Res 2004;65:1502–1507.
59. Williams LE, Banerji N, Klausner JS, et al. Establishment of two vaccine-associated feline sarcoma cell lines and determination of in vitro chemosensitivity to doxorubicin and mitoxantrone. Am J Vet Res 2001;62:1354–1357.
60. Banerji N, Li X, Klausner JS, et al. Evaluation of in vitro chemosensitivity of vaccine-associated feline sarcoma cell lines to vincristine and paclitaxel. Am J Vet Res 2002;63:728–732.
61. Matteucci ML, Anyarambhatla G, Rosner G, et al. Hyperthermia increases accumulation of technetium-99m-labeled liposomes in feline sarcomas. Clin Cancer Res 2000;6:3748–3755.
62. Ray-Coquard I, Ranchere-Vince D, Thiesse P, et al. Evaluation of core needle biopsy as a substitute to open biopsy in the diagnosis of soft-tissue masses. Eur J Cancer 2003;39:2021–2025.
63. McLeod DA, Thrall DE. The combination of surgery and radiation in the treatment of cancer: a review. Vet Surg 1989;18:1–6.
64. O’Sullivan B, Davis AM, Turcotte R, et al. Preoperative versus postoperative radiotherapy in soft-tissue sarcoma of the limbs: a randomized trial. Lancet 2002;359:2235–2241.
65. Zagars GK, Ballo MT, Pisters PWT, et al. Preoperative versus postoperative radiation therapy for soft tissue sarcoma: a retrospective comparative evaluation of disease outcome. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2003;56:482–488.
66. Roko JL, Hardy WD. Feline leukemia virus and other retroviruses. In: Sherding R, ed. The cat: diseases and clinical management. New York: Churchill-Livingston, 1994;263–432.
Inflammation and oxidative damage turned out to be the major factor in the development of these fibrosarcomas, further evidence that it was indeed the inflammatory response that predisposed cats to the cancers from these types of vaccines. The inflammatory reaction and the carcinogenicity of the adjuvant were established. The P53 oncogene is mutated by the aluminum hydroxide adjuvant and the tumor genesis suppression of the oncogene is thwarted.
In 1996 the Vaccine Associated Feline Sarcoma Task Force was first formed and provided over $700,000.00 in funding for research into these emerging cancer phenomena. A paper in 1996 by Burton published in the Australian Veterinary Journal stated that Australia, who did not have Rabies on their island and therefore did not have to vaccinate against rabies and who didn’t have an adjuvant Feline Leukemia Vaccine on the market or in use in Australia, did not see the fibrosarcoma or cancer that was occurring in the cats in the United States. The presence of the adjuvant in vaccines is a clear target ingredient to cancer. The additional factor of contamination in the veterinary vaccines with retroviruses is another inconvenient truth about the safety of any vaccines. They have found retroviruses in the human and the animal vaccines.
website, http://www.treshanley.com/cic/vaccines.html is a site where you can find most of the referenced material that the Feline Vaccine Associated Sarcoma Task Force. It is here that you can access the scientific publications that point out the blue- gray aluminum foreign body that oftentimes marks the presence of the veterinary adjuvant, aluminum hydroxide. Injection site sarcomas are often associated with an inflammatory infiltrate, primarily macrophages, which are frequently reported to contain bluish “foreign material” and may include giant cells. In one
study, aluminum was associated with this inflammation which was associated with the adjuvant. The risk of sarcomas was found to increase with number of vaccines administered.
You will find the information also that the cancer resulting from vaccines is not limited to just cats, but dogs and ferrets. You will find that all kinds of cancers are resulting from the vaccines, not just the fibrosarcoma and not just soft tissue sarcomas and not just at the inoculation site. In a recent AVMA Journal article “Analysis of Prognostic Factors Associated with Injection Site Sarcomas in Cats”, you will see this admission in the results section; “injection site sarcomas with a wide spectrum of histolytic types, including fibrosarcoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, malignant fibrous histiocytoma, extra skeletal osteosarcoma, undifferentiated sarcoma the list goes on. I have seen all of these and more, spindle cell tumors, neurofibrosarcomas, mast cell tumors, round cell tumors of every type, lymphoma, leukemia, myeloblastic lymphomas and all following the vaccination procedure.
Sincerely,
Dr. Jordan
Here is a list of the tumors that can appear after vaccination from the aluminum adjuvants. More cancers can be from vaccines, like Hemangiosarcoma which is a sarcoma of the myeloid, however this is the most commonly found tumors in especially dogs the cats mostly the fibrosarcomas but any of them are possible.
Despite the localized appearance of these tumors, microscopic branches of the tumor extend like fingers into the surrounding healthy tissue. During surgery to remove the tumor, these microscopic branches can remain and contribute to re-growth of the tumor. According to one study, as many as 62 percent of post-vaccinal sarcomas recur within 6 months after surgical removal.
There are several types of injection-site sarcomas:
Fibrosarcoma – a malignant tumor arising from cells called fibroblasts in connective tissue. This is the most common type.
Histiocytoma – a malignant tumor arising from tissue cells called histiocytes
Osteosarcoma – a malignant tumor arising from bone
Chondrosarcoma – a malignant tumor arising from cartilage
Rhabdomyosarcoma – a malignant tumor arising from muscle
Myxosarcoma – a malignant tumor arising from loose connective tissue
Liposarcoma – a malignant tumor arising from fat
Neurofibrosarcoma – a malignant tumor arising from cells called fibroblasts in connective tissue and nerve tissue.
Hemangiopericytoma – a malignant tumor that arises from the pericytes, cells that are located around vessels.
Schwanoma –are tumors of the nerve sheath
Leiomyosarcoma – a tumor arising from smooth muscle.
Nerve sheath tumor – a tumor arising from the deep soft tissue, usually in close proximity of a nerve trunk
Myofibroblastic sarcoma – a malignant soft tissue tumor in which myofibroblasts are quantitatively the predominant cell type.
I have papers that link these to the rabies vaccinations and also to mumbo jumbo whombo combo 5 and 7 way vaccines to Proheart injections as well.
Because the animals are so overly jabbed you must insist that these tumors be cases listed with the USDA and teh FDA as adverse events follwoing vaccination. Other wise you get that “We don’t know where it came from ” response that our AVMA Vaccine Associated Sarcoma Task Force has clearly established is from VACCINES.
Sincerely,
Dr. Jordan
http://www.beritajakarta.com/2008/en/newsview.aspx?idwil=0&id=21589
here is a little dog getting the jab with a rabies vaccine right in the shoulder area where the dogs in this article above are growing tumors-cancer, the size of pot roasts.Someone should go to these countries that start administering repeat vaccinations to the same populations and track the rate of autoimmune disease, cancer, deaths, diabilities and other chronic diseases that also by the way, weaken the immune system and make them more susceptible to disease. When only one rabies vaccine is necessary for life to a mature mammal-we also have to get the bad rabies laws changed. Sickening dogs and cats with unsafe and unecessary repetitive rabies vaccines is only going to endanger the public health of those communities more.
Sincerely,
Dr. Jordan
Can you provide a reference to the published study that shows that vaccine adjuvants cause mutations in the p53 tumor suppressor gene? How was this mutation identified? If the mutation is known then it should be easy to show that it is present in dogs with tumors allegedly caused by vaccine exposure.
At what concentration was aluminum hydroxide determined to be carcinogenic? How does that compare to the dose that a dog would receive in a vaccine? Lots of things are carcinogenic if you give them in a large enough dose, but it needs to be put into context of what is the likely real world exposure.
Why is it that people are so quick to question whether injecting squalene, mercury and aluminum into animals could be problematic, yet we blindly and naively accept vaccines as a proven medical approach when their long-term efficacy and safety in the field has never been proven? This thinking leads us to believe that ‘a little bit of a carcinogenic substance’ – along with foreign animal protein, retroviruses and other stabilizing chemicals – is acceptable.
With respect to possible chemical induction from the aluminum oxide ceramic material, there is plenty of data in the veterinary pathology literature, where fibrosarcomas are especially known to arise in cats at vaccination sites after feline leukemia virus and rabies vaccination. Using electron probe microanalysis, Hendrick and colleagues succeeded in demonstrating that aluminum oxide from the vaccine adjuvant was present in tumor-associated macrophages and suggested that this could be involved in the development of neoplasia.
Kass PH, Barnes WG, Jr, Spangler WL, Chomel BB, Culbertson MR: Epidemiologic evidence for a causal relation between vaccination and fibrosarcoma tumorigenesis in cats. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1993, 203:396-405. [PubMed]
Hendrick MJ, Shofer FS, Goldschmidt MH, Haviland JC, Schelling SH, Engler SJ, Gliatto JM: Comparison of fibrosarcomas that developed at vaccination sites and at nonvaccination sites in cats: 239 cases (1991–1992). J Am Vet Med Assoc 1994, 205:1425-1429. [PubMed]
Hendrick MJ, Goldschmidt MH, Shofer FS, Wang YY, Somlyo AP: Postvaccinal sarcomas in the cat: epidemiology and electron probe microanalytical identification of aluminum. Cancer Res 1992, 52:5391-5394. [PubMed]
If you would like more references, I suggest you contact the author of the article.
Hello;
Yes, those many, many references as you have already been sent and others are the results that came out yearly and for TEN YEARS, so a decade of research provided from the AVMA appointed FELINE VACCINE ASSOCIATED SARCOMA TASK FORCE. I doubt very many have bothered to read the many research papers that task team produced but, not only was the aluminum found in those cancer sites but in other parts of the body-the blue grey aluminum foreign body came from the vaccination. The task force also identified that the aluminum from the vaccinations was turning up in biopsy specimens-the key here is that it is VACCINATED POPULATIONS that are developing these cancers. Also, they uncovered the oxidative damage that vaccinations resulted in, oxidative damage being the promoter of the P53 mutation and loss of tumor surveillance. These tumors in the cats are also in the dogs and ferrets, all from the vaccinations. The smoking gun-the blue grey aluminum foreign body showing up in the body of vaccinated animals the cancer in the vaccinated animals, there is no question. Aluminum also allows neurotoxins; aluminum and mercury as well as neurotropic viruses into the brains of the vaccinated victims. I am sure that the link then to GME in the dogs and to brain cancer in the children should also be investigated. Quite frankly, it appears that we have found our “unknown etiology” for a great deal of the diseases that vaccinated populations suffer, that being the initiator of the chronic inflamatory state and the “never well since vaccination”. All of the cancers listed in the most current piece on adjuvants in Dogs Naturally, I have pictures or cases of the cancer developing in vaccinated animals. Hemangiosarcomas of the spleen affects of post vaccination adverse events usually a vaccinated animal that also was subjected to steroids or chemotherapy-or anesthesia-surgery, some type of immunosuppressive therapy. Spend a little time accessing the ten years worth of research the Task Force has published and open for the public. You will see the vaccine link clearly. Interestingly enough, the onset of the Task Force research was heavily supplemented by vaccine manufacturer’s donations, however as the Task Force made the case against vaccinations, the research money dried up. It is impossible to get research money from those companies that stand to profit from vaccine use that when done, is derogatory towards vaccination. This is also why safety studies are not done, carcinogenic studies are not done, teratogenic studies are not done nor gene impact studies, tracking efficacy or necessity for the vaccines or even removing vaccines that are contaminated with retroviruses. These studies will never be done when the results will show that vaccines are indeed the source of the problem. As well, you will not see the drug industry sponsoring an active surveillance program looking at vaccine performance or vaccine safety or adverse event tracking on these vaccines despite they lack safety studies in the first place, as a matter of fact, nothing will be paid out knowingly that shows the true nature of vaccines and their link to being the etiology of disease. Please look at the work of Dr. Vieira Scheibner from Australia on the information she uncovered about vaccine adjuvants and review the article on Leptospirosis vaccines that was published in Dogs Naturally-you can read for yourself about the adjuvants in the Leptospirosis vaccines in dogs and how they are admitting the poor choice aluminum was. However now they think they can make a “better” vaccine, now they want to use genetically engineered endotoxin.
Sincerely,
Dr. Jordan
LOVE this article! What perfect timing! I just spent a BOAT LOAD of money at the vet for titers but this article solidifies my decisions in life to not vaccinate/over-vaccinate my beloved pets! Thank you! I’m sharing this with all of our clients and friends!