Are We Sick of the Controversy Yet?

The singular thing on my mind today is, how can a disease be controversial? Either people are sick, or they aren’t sick—right? What could possibly be controversial about sickness? People are sick; you give them comfort and healing.

Yeah, right.

Lyme disease is frequently described as a “controversial” diagnosis, as victims are accused of needing psychiatric intervention instead of real medical care. Alan Barbour wrote an entire unreferenced book on the “controversy” of Lyme disease. Gulf War veterans are caught up in a similar “controversy” over whether they are really sick. Kids are relegated to “The Spectrum” based on certain behaviors—without benefit of first ruling out organic illnesses or brain damage; the controversy being that vaccines couldn’t possibly have a role in one in 48 kids being brain damaged for life.

Think about it. Why would there be controversy surrounding any group of people who are physically suffering? And why does nobody find the controversy, itself, controversial? Doctors are supposed to heal the sick—not tell them that they are imagining their illness. There’s a controversy: doctors who only pretend to do their job.

There are two common threads here that need to be addressed. 1) We are dealing with an epidemic of acquired immune deficiency as the unifying element of “controversial” diseases, and 2) If the “powers that be” were being truthful, there would be no controversy.

The nonprofits would find cures, patients would be treated for their diseases, and we’d put our brain power into intellectual and technological pursuits to advance the well being of humankind. Instead, we’re living the dystopian nightmare. Which one? Take your pick.

As we observed decades ago from the HIV/AIDS crisis and controversy, the government is perfectly content to bury the truth along with the bodies. Now, however, it has become frighteningly clear that they have a vested interest in continuing to do so. Because to acknowledge this new AIDS crisis would expose the government’s thoroughly rotten core. If sick people are controversial, then you can bet that someone has a financial interest in keeping them that way. The rotten truth is that this cancer of our “healthcare” infrastructure is so thoroughly metastasized, that a strong wind would render the whole thing a cloud of dust. On the count of three…everybody blow.

camelsMaybe the situation wouldn’t be so dire if the tobacco industry hadn’t been allowed to run amok for most of the 20th century. Our current situation makes “tobacco science” seem like a walk in the park. Remember how we learned the truth about the dangers of smoking, and of secondhand smoke, and how very addictive cigarettes are? It seems like a no-brainer in retrospect: Sucking the smoke of chemically-laced, burning organic matter into your lungs can’t be healthy. But the industry had gone to extraordinary lengths to manipulate data and use physicians to sell the shit out of a product that no logical human, on his worst day, would conclude to be healthy.

All the time we see new examples of the corruption in the pharmaceutical industry. Just last week the case of Merck’s killing of the elderly with thigh-bone-breaking Fosamax reemerged. Is the opioid epidemic even scandalous any more? Which bad drug is on the class action list this week? When the exposure of the vaccine industry’s abuses and failures finally happens, will we treat it with the same ho-hum indifference that we show for the ever-growing list of Pharma drug crimes? How long until the truth comes out, and we all laugh, and say, “OF COURSE it’s not healthy to inject a bunch of chemicals, along with a stew of immunogenic products, live viruses and unknown contaminants into our babies. Silly us!”

We know, intuitively, that this is not a healthy practice. But in the same way that tobacco science owned the MDs, so does the pharmaceutical industry of today. And with the vaccine schedule spinning out of control—with new vaccines and boosters being constantly added, hundreds of vaccines in the development pipeline, and even adult mandates being considered by lawmakers—the doctors, for the most part, are all-in. They have chosen the side of Corporate Pharma over the well being of the patients they are supposed to serve. They have failed to “first do no harm,” by refusing to recognize the modern parallels to tobacco science and all of its consequences. They feed into the controversies by denying illnesses that can’t be diagnosed through their limited Pharma-provided toolbox.

It was pure coincidence that this blog post by Michael J. Goldberg, MD came out today, as I was contemplating the insanity of any disease being considered controversial:


Oh, wait. They removed the article. No worries: Access it here until it disappears again.  If that doesn’t work, just read my PDF copy.

I recommend reading the entire article, but here is a good chunk to get you started:

“Tens of thousands [sic] families now have children psychiatrically “labeled” as Autistic / PDD, ADD, ADHD, OCD and now even CDD (Childhood Disintegrative Disorder). Psychiatric and Developmental disorders like this have reached epidemic levels in children: Autism alone is now 1:48 (2.1%) and rising. Polio, at its worse [sic], was 1:1500 (.07%) children. Basic medical science teaches there cannot be an epidemic of a developmental or genetic disorder.

“The assumption that ASD behaviors and mannerisms of 2.1% of our children (and climbing) is the result of a mental condition is scientifically untenable. When analyzed from a medical perspective, the presenting dysfunctions/symptoms of most of these children can be explained far more appropriately by the concept of a ‘Phenotype’, that is part of a complex immune, complex viral disease presenting with secondary “Autistic, ADHD, OCD, Anxiety or ODD” symptoms.

“As a practicing pediatrician I have devoted the last 25 years working with ASD labeled children. I have identified through years of observation, blood tests and brain scans, an understandable Phenotype of a medical disease process (complex immune, complex viral), that logically and scientifically explains the mixed collection of symptoms manifested in ASD children including: Chronic “ill” appearance, abnormal sleep patterns, chronic allergies, fine motor issues, coordination issues, hypo/hyper profusion in the temporal and frontal lobes of the brain, and abnormally elevated viral titers including HHV6, Epstein Barr, and CMV. These and other markers, in my professional opinion, are indicative of a medically treatable disease process and not a psychological and/or developmental dysfunction.”

Remember the part about the viruses, as I now segue into some facts about the Lyme disease aspect of this new acquired immune deficiency epidemic.


“Lyme disease” was redefined in 1994 to exclude the chronic, neurologic, immune deficiency cases. Yes, this is a fact, borne out by the evidence of the perpetrators’ own research and patents.


Multiple research groups have published reports confirming that in the majority of victims the disease is not autoimmune, but rather, one that blunts the immune response. Even the Lyme Crooks now admit that late Lyme is an immunosuppression disease.


The fungal-type antigens that are shed by borrelia do the same thing other fungal-type antigens do when they are injected into a human. They cause an initial septic event, and to prevent death from sepsis, the immune system becomes “tolerized” to the types of antigens that caused the infection. That means permanent immunosuppression, and it’s why the Lyme vaccine, LYMErix, failed, causing the same disease as Lyme from a tick bite.


(As an aside: That’s also why other, similar, vaccines have failed. Tuberculosis, HIV, brucella. The organisms are bearers of fungal-type antigens. You can’t take the fungal-type (triacylated) bits and call them a vaccine, because they do the opposite of what a vaccine is supposed to do.)


Nicole Baumgarth‘s group at UC Davis showed us how Lyme causes tolerance to spread to immune receptors for other types of antigens. For the chronically ill Lyme victims, there’s almost no chance of testing positive on an antibody test for Lyme disease—particularly when the CDC-designed-and-sanctioned diagnostic standard is like playing antibody bingo. And since most of the diagnostic tests used by doctors are antibody tests, the sicker you are, the lower your chance of being diagnosed with anything. Congratulations! You are the proud owner of a Medically Unexplained Syndrome, otherwise known as post-sepsis!


Richard Hotchkiss of Washington University in St. Louis has published extensively about the phenomenon of post-sepsis. If you understand anything about HIV/AIDS, it’s easy to see the similarities (although HIV is a T cell disease and Lyme affects B cells); it’s not the causative pathogen itself that produces chronic illness, but the fallout from the immunosuppression: reactivated herpesviruses (Epstein Barr, CMV, HHV-6, etc.) and opportunistics of all kinds. Remember what Michael J. Goldberg, MD, said regarding the “autistic” kids who he treats?

“…abnormally elevated viral titers including HHV6, Epstein Barr, and CMV.”

So, kids with post-sepsis AIDS and/or brain damage from live, neurotropic vaccine viruses are controversial because they represent the harsh reality that vaccines do, indeed, cause this thing we call “autism.”
Tick bite post-sepsis victims are controversial because they represent all of the failed fungal vaccines, plus a subset of the population who should not be administered live virus vaccines.


Pharma likes to trot out the immunosuppressed cancer kids as their prime example of protecting the vulnerable from “vaccine-preventable” diseases. Let me be clear: no child should have to battle cancer, ever. But neither should kids be forced to endure the medical and psych abuse that comes with the manufactured controversy of Lyme disease. I’m offended on multiple levels by the implications of pitting one group of sick kids against another purely for the manipulation of the public perception of the value and efficacy of vaccines.

Military Veterans are controversial because they represent unwitting test subjects, adult victims of over-vaccination and chemically induced immunosuppression, with the worst cases having traumatic brain injury (also immunosuppressive) on top of it all. They are controversial because the government is obligated to pay for the medical care that’s needed to address the immunosuppression disease that the government caused, but subsequently denies.

People who question a diagnosis of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome or Fibromyalgia, or fight for recognition of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME) are controversial because, despite having been dumped into buckets that are labeled “psychiatric,” they know there is something physically, medically, terribly wrong, and they’re being lied to, instead of being properly treated. Oftentimes they are simply Lyme or Gulf War Illness victims who have been recategorized for being too controversial.

What does all of this really mean? Let me ask you.

If large groups of the population are not producing disease-fighting antibodies, for lack of a functioning immune system, how can vaccines work?

I’ll answer: They cannot.

How can “herd immunity” even be considered possible, then?

It cannot. 

Furthermore, since vaccines may be contaminated with fungal-type antigens (ask the WHO), shouldn’t this fact be part of informed consent? Would people willingly put their children at risk if they knew that such contamination can cause immunosuppression and lead to their children being brain-damaged from the live, neurotropic viruses in vaccines?

Since live vaccine viruses can shed for weeks or months, shouldn’t the victims of denied immunosuppression diseases be warned to take the same precautions as cancer patients around recently vaccinated individuals? Would that be too complicated and costly for an industry that relies on everyone being prescribed the same vaccines?

Would that cut too deeply into their profits?

Since temporary immunosuppression can be caused by something as mundane as a viral infection or sun exposure, should doctors check kids’ immune status before administering vaccines?

Since newborn babies are known to have immature immune systems, should they receive any vaccines at all on day one? Should they be checked for congenital infections such as CMV, which is well known to cause hearing, vision, and developmental problems that may not be evident until much later?

What will be the tipping point for risk versus benefit? If people have to be mandated by law to inject their children with products whose manufacturers bear zero liability in the event of injury, shouldn’t we parents entertain a modicum of suspicion for the safety of our children? Are we witnessing the second coming of tobacco science? Tell me: is this not controversial? 

While we languish, waiting for vaccine science to face the same scrutiny as tobacco science, the problem is compounding. We are losing our children to industry. We are losing ourselves to chronic illness that consumes our lives and distracts us from taking a stand. But we must take a stand now, and it must be rooted in this knowledge:

You can’t have a disease if it is a threat to the vaccine paradigm. Period. 

You may only be immunosuppressed from HIV, or one of the Pharma trifecta of chemo, steroids, or MAB drugs such as Humira or Stelara. Any other form of immunosuppression is a direct assault on their business model and is not allowed.

You are not allowed to be immunosuppressed from a vaccine (MenB, LYMErix, measles virus), a vaccine’s contaminants, a fungal infection, Lyme or other vector-borne diseases, congenital Lyme, chronic mold exposure, chemical exposure such as DEET or anti-nerve agent, post-sepsis from any infection not leaving a massive, gaping wound, or even a transient viral infection. Merely talking about immunosuppression will cause controversy to rain down on you like a flock of geese caught in a jet turbine.


Controversy is blaming victims for their disease and not offering any kind of help whatsoever. Controversy is lying about disease mechanisms to protect corporate profits. Controversy is maiming and killing children without remorse. Controversy is the revolving door marked “Vaccine Cronies Enter Here” between Pharma and the CDC. And Controversy is one of the most prominent Lyme nonprofits being run by a vice chairman of Credit Suisse, one of the main players in the subprime lending crisis, and arguably in cahoots with the banksters behind the American Lyme Disease Foundation (ALDF), the propaganda and marketing arm of the Lyme Cryme.


Controversy is a sickness all its own.

Categories: Immunosuppression Diseases, Lyme Disease, Vaccines

6 replies

  1. Thank you for assembling these facts in your candid way. Most of us including medical professionals come to this information because of our own illness or someone close to us. Many times I would mention in conversation prior to actually knowing the subject of ‘growing autism numbers’ to my dismay would be shut down with statements similar to, “They were there all along just not recognized and labeled” or “The population is growing (in general) that is why it seems like a lot more.” These are medical people not associated with the pharmaceutical industry that perpetrated this belief as fact! A few years ago I forwarded information about Autism and Lyme to a friend whose granddaughter has autism and was met with resistance. Now that was a shock, since so many articles I came upon researching Lyme included something about Autism. I am hoping the “numbers of parents or anyone effected with either will cause a revolution. After all Lyme cover up controversy is not the only lie Americans or other world citizens have been told.


  2. Turns out they were messing with spirochetes and tolerance back in the day, and mention Eric Traub’s similar experiments in the 1930s. Didn’t Tuskegee start in 1932?

    Click to access brjexppathol00356-0068.pdf

    Liked by 1 person

    • “Traub (1938) produced tolerance by infecting embryonic mice with lymphocytic choriomeningitits virus, and his work has been confirmed by Hotchkin (1958).
      “In most experiments in which deliberate attempts to induce tolerance have been made, a single manifestation of the specific immune response such as suppression of antibody formation or hypersensitivity [the 2 kinds of Lyme, immunosuppression or bad knee – added by KMD] phenomenon of the delayed type was chosen as a criterion, in terms of which the results were interpreted… ”

      Click to access brjexppathol00356-0068.pdf


    • Tuskegee went 40yrs before whistleblower end mid-70’s…Lyme started then, just not named till early 80’s. The intentional Epidemic is why I call this…Tuskegee 2…only logical choice for what’s been happening since 1975, we Are the Experiment

      Liked by 1 person

  3. “You can’t have a disease if it is a threat to the vaccine paradigm. Period.”

    Wouldnt it be great if people with “MD” after their names knew how to read?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: