1. Pete Tar

    Pete Tar Moderator Staff Member

    People in Australia are freaking out about the proposed trail of a GMO cholera vaccine, mainly due to misunderstanding the language used.



    The 'environment' just means the human organisms being monitored and their possible interaction with their surroundings. It does not mean putting it into the air or water supply.

    They are trying to develop a single-dose cholera treatment.


    The initial reaction to this was outrage that they were going to aerially spray the population,

    eg...
    More GMO Nightmares: Australia to Trial Forcible Vaccination Through the Release of Aerosol GMO Vaccine
    The article by
    Dave Mihalovic is a Naturopathic Doctor who specializes in vaccine research, cancer prevention and a natural approach to treatment.

    goes on to talk about West Nile virus spraying and the history of other aerosoled releases despite the Paxvax trial mentioning no such thing. It seems to be the main source of the initial misunderstanding.


    Now that has mostly reduced to being offended about Aussies being 'experimented' on...




    which, whether misguided or not, is at least not misrepresenting the initial proposal anymore.

    It still has the fear buzzwords 'GMO', 'cholera', and 'vaccine', so people will be easily riled.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. David Fraser

    David Fraser Senior Member

    Your definition of environment is slightly incorrect. It does mean environment in the wider sense due to the possiblity of some of the vaccine been excreted.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. Pete Tar

    Pete Tar Moderator Staff Member

    Thanks, I meant to ask anyone that knows for the proper definition in this context.

    Mine was just a basic guess.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Pete Tar

    Pete Tar Moderator Staff Member

     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. MikeC

    MikeC Senior Member

    The trial request document for Australia is here - it doesn't seem to be cut-and-paste-able, but the actual GM's carried out are listed.

    -mercury resistant
    -toxin suppression (x 2)
     
  6. Pete Tar

    Pete Tar Moderator Staff Member

    I think that's the same as the first link I posted, just in PDF form.
     
  7. Pete Tar

    Pete Tar Moderator Staff Member

    The link to the sensationilist article has been changed to a more sane one (unless I pasted the wrong link in the first place), though the objections still seem based on imisunderstanding the trial...
    .


    Here are two links to the original article


    http://beforeitsnews.com/eu/2013/11...heir-own-government-from-the-air-2541604.html

    http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/salud/salud_vacunas172.htm


    And here is a Q/A which I missed

     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2013
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Lisa P

    Lisa P Active Member

    The vaccine was approved and a license issued on 10th April 2014.
    http://www.ogtr.gov.au/internet/ogt...10ECBCA257CD1000D2AD1/$File/dir126notific.pdf

    However there are some rubbish news articles doing the rounds again.

    The fact is the Vaccine was to be given as a drink not sprayed from a plane as the article below suggests.

    In this case the author appears to be Tami Canal from March Against Monsanto.
    The article provides this link to the government website it is a shame Tami didn't read it.
    DIR 126 is down in the lower right hand corner where it may be missed.
    http://www.ogtr.gov.au/internet/ogtr/publishing.nsf/Content/home-1



    I thought it might be good to bump this post as I am feeling very frustrated seeing this hoax popping up in lots of different places. There is a March scheduled for late May 2016 so that could be a possible reason for the regurgitation.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Hofnarr

    Hofnarr Member

    The word Environment is a pretty bad choice. No wonder CT's are jumping on this, its just too easy to misunderstand, especially without further reading.

    not to mention "guinea pigs"...
     
  10. Dan Wilson

    Dan Wilson Active Member

    Even if this bacteria were to get out into the environment, what would be the concern? A bacteria like this likely would not hold any advantage over wild type cholera species meaning it would be out-competed pretty fast and it is not even harmful to humans. Am I missing something in the objections?
     
  11. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Moderator Staff Member

    The phrase "genetic modification". Two words that extinguish rational thought.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. JRBids

    JRBids Senior Member

    Don't forget it has "Vax" in the name!
     
  13. Jay Reynolds

    Jay Reynolds Senior Member