Sat Mar 23, 2024 11:33 pm by globalturbo
Flashback: Rockefeller Anti-Fertility Vaccines Exposed
Posted on October 31, 2012 | 1 Comment
Jurriaan Maessen
ExplosiveReports.Com
October 31, 2012
In the course of August and September 2010, I wrote several
articles for Infowars on the Rockefeller Foundation’s admitted funding
and developing of anti-fertility vaccines intended for “mass-scale
distribution.” As the soft-kill depopulation agenda accelerates it seems
all the more relevant to re-post these articles as one.
1- Rockefeller Foundation Developed Vaccines For “Mass-Scale” Fertility Reduction
In its 1968 yearly report,
the Rockefeller Foundation acknowledged funding the development of
so-called “anti-fertility vaccines” and their implementation on a
mass-scale. From page 51 onward we read:
“(…) several types of drugs are known to diminish male fertility, but
those that have been tested have serious problems of toxicity. Very
little work is in progress on immunological methods, such as vaccines,
to reduce fertility, and much more research is required if a solution is
to be found here.”
The possibility of using vaccines to reduce male fertility was
something that needed to be investigated further, according to the
Rockefeller Foundation, because both the oral pill and the IUD were not
suitable for mass-scale distribution:
“We are faced with the danger that within a few years these two
“modern” methods, for which such high hopes have been held, will in fact
turn out to be impracticable on a mass scale.”
“A semipermanent or renewable subcutaneous implant of these hormones
has been suggested, but whether or not the same difficulties would
result has not been determined.”
Saying that research thus-far had been too low-grade to produce any substantial results, the report was adamant:
“The Foundation will endeavour to assist in filling this important gap in several ways:
1- “Seeking out or encouraging the development of, and providing
partial support to, a few centres of excellence in universities and
research institutions in the United States and abroad in which the
methods and points of view of molecular biology are teamed with the more
traditional approaches of histology, embryology,and endocrinology in
research pertinent to development of fertility control methods;”
2- “Supporting research of individual investigators, oriented toward
development of contraceptive methods or of basic information on human
reproduction relevant to such developments;”
3- “Encouraging, by making research funds available, as well as by
other means, established and beginning investigators to turn their
attention to aspects of research in reproductive biology that have
implications for human fertility and its control;”
4- “Encouraging more biology and biochemistry students to elect
careers in reproductive biology and human fertility control, through
support of research and teaching programs in departments of zoology,
biology, and biochemistry.”
The list goes on and on. Motivation for these activities, according to the RF?
“There are an estimated five million women among America’s poverty
and near-poverty groups who need birth control service (…). The
unchecked fertility of the indigent does much to perpetuate poverty,
undereducation, and underemployment, not only in urban slums, but also
in depressed rural areas.”
It wasn’t long before all the Foundation’s efforts began to have effect. In its annual report of 1988, The RF was happy to report the progress made by the Foundation’s Population Division in the field of anti-fertility vaccines:
“India’s National Institute of Immunology successfully completed in
1988 the first phase of trials with three versions of an anti-fertility
vaccine for women. Sponsored by the government of India and supported by
the Foundation, the trials established that with each of the tested
vaccines, at least one year of protection against pregnancy could be
expected, based on the levels of antibodies formed in response to the
immunization schedule.”
In its 1997 review of anti-fertility vaccines, Indian based International Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology didn’t forget to acknowledge its main benefactor:
“The work on LHRH and HCG vaccines was supported by research grants of The Rockefeller Foundation, (…).”
In the 1990s the work on anti-fertility vaccines went in overdrive,
especially in third-world nations, as did the funding provided by the
deep pockets of the Rockefeller Foundation. At the same time, the
target-population of the globalists- women- began to stir uncomfortably
with all this out-in-the-open talk of population reduction and vaccines
as a means to achieve it.
Betsy Hartman, Director of the Population and Development Program at
Hampshire College, Massachusetts and “someone who believes strongly in
women’s right to safe, voluntary birth control and abortion”, is no
supporter of the anti-fertility vaccine, as brought into being by the
Rockefeller Foundation. She explains in her essay Population control in the new world order:
“Although one vaccine has been tested on only 180 women in India, it
is being billed there as ‘safe, devoid of any side effects and
completely reversible’. The scientific community knows very well that
such assertions are false – for instance, many questions still remain
about the vaccine’s long-term impact on the immune system and menstrual
cycle. There is also evidence on film of women being denied information
about the vaccine in clinical trials. Nevertheless, the vaccine is being
prepared for large-scale use.”
The Women’s Global Network for Reproductive Rights based in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, quoted “a leading contraceptive researcher as saying:
“Immunological birth control methods will be an ‘antigenic weapon’
against the reproductive process, which left unchecked, threatens to
swamp the world.”
Animal rights activist ms. Sonya Ghosh also expressed concerns about the Rockefeller-funded anti-fertility vaccine and its implementation:
“Instead of giving individual women more options to prevent pregnancy
and protect against AIDs and sexually transmitted diseases, the anti
fertility vaccine is designed to be easily administered to large numbers
of women using the least resources. If administered to illiterate
populations the issues of user control and informed consent are further
cause for concern.”
To avoid such debates, the Foundation has in the last couple of
decades consorted to its long-practised and highly successful methods of
either outright lying through its teeth or using deceptive language to
hide the fact that it continues to work tirelessly toward its
long-stated mission.
2- Global Distribution of Rockefeller-Funded Anti-Fertility Vaccine Coordinated by WHO
In addition to the recent PrisonPlanet-exclusive Rockefeller Foundation Developed Vaccines For “Mass-Scale” Fertility Reduction-
which outlines the Rockefeller Foundation’s efforts in the 1960s
funding research into so-called “anti-fertility vaccines”- another
series of documents has surfaced, proving beyond any doubt that the UN
Population Fund, World Bank and World Health Organization picked up on
it, further developing it under responsibility of a “Task Force on
Vaccines for Fertility Regulation”.
Just four years after the Rockefeller Foundation launched massive
funding-operations into anti-fertility vaccines, the Task Force was
created under auspices of the World Health Organization, World Bank and
UN Population Fund. Its mission, according to one of its members, to support:
“basic and clinical research on the development of birth control
vaccines directed against the gametes or the preimplantation embryo.
These studies have involved the use of advanced procedures in peptide
chemistry, hybridoma technology and molecular genetics as well as the
evaluation of a number of novel approaches in general vaccinology. As a
result of this international, collaborative effort, a prototype anti-HCG
vaccine is now undergoing clinical testing, raising the prospect that a
totally new family planning method may be available before the end of
the current decade.”
In regards to the scope of the Task Force’s jurisdiction, the Biotechnology and Development Monitor reported:
“The Task Force acts as a global coordinating body for anti-fertility
vaccine R&D in the various working groups and supports research on
different approaches, such as anti-sperm and anti-ovum vaccines and
vaccines designed to neutralize the biological functions of hCG. The
Task Force has succeeded in developing a prototype of an
anti-hCG-vaccine.”
One of the Task Force members, P.D. Griffin, outlined the purpose and trajectory of these Fertility Regulating Vaccines. Griffin:
“The Task Force has continued to coordinate its research activities
with other vaccine development programmes within WHO and with other
international and national programmes engaged in the development of
fertility regulating vaccines.”
Griffin also admitted to the fact that one of the purposes of the
vaccines is the implementation in developing countries. Griffin:
“If vaccines could be developed which could safely and effectively
inhibit fertility, without producing unacceptable side effects, they
would be an attractive addition to the present armamentarium of
fertility regulating methods and would be likely to have a significant
impact on family planning programmes.”
Also, one of the advantages of the FRVs over “currently available
methods of fertility regulation” the Task Force states, is the following
(179):
“low manufacturing cost and ease of delivery within existing health services.”
Already in 1978, the WHO’s Task Force (then called Task Force on Immunological Methods for Fertility Regulation) underlined the usefulness of these vaccines in regards to the possibility of “large scale synthesis and manufacture” of the vaccine:
“The potential advantages of an immunological approach to fertility
regulation can be summarized as follows: (a) the possibility of
infrequent administration, possibly by paramedical personnel; (b) the
use of antigens or antigen fragments, which are not pharmacologically
active; and (c) in the case of antigens of known chemical structure,
there is the possibility of large-scale synthesis and manufacture of
vaccine at relatively low cost.”
In 1976, the WHO Expanded Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction published a report, stating:
“In 1972 the Organization (…) expanded its programme of research in
human reproduction to provide an international focus for an intensified
effort to improve existing methods of fertility regulation, to develop
new methods and to assist national authorities in devising the best ways
of providing them on a continuing basis. The programme is closely
integrated with other WHO research on the delivery of family planning
care by health services, which in turn feeds into WHO’s technical
assistance programme to governments at the service level.”
Although the term “Anti-Fertility Vaccine”, coined by the Rockefeller
Foundation, was replaced by the more bureaucratic sounding “Fertility
Regulating Vaccine (FRV), the programme was obviously the same. Besides,
the time-line shows conclusively that the WHO, UN Population Fund and
World Bank continued on a path outlined by the Rockefellers in the late
1960s. By extension, it proves that all these organization are perfectly
interlocked, best captured under the header “Scientific Dictatorship”.
The relationship between the WHO and the Rockefeller Foundation is
intense. In the 1986 bulletin of the World Health Organization,
this relationship is being described in some detail. While researching
the effectiveness of “gossypol” as an “antifertility agent”, the
bulletin states:
“The Rockefeller Foundation has supported limited clinical trials in
China and smallscale clinical studies in Brazil and Austria. The dose
administered in the current Chinese trial has been reduced from 20 mg to
10-15 mg/day during the loading phase in order to see if severe
oligospermia rather than consistent azoospermia would be adequate for an
acceptable, non-toxic and reversible effect. Meanwhile, both the WHO
human reproduction programme and the Rockefeller Foundation are
supporting animal studies to better define the mechanism of action of
gossypol.”
In August of 1992, a series of meetings was held
in Geneva, Switzerland, regarding “fertility regulating vaccines”.
According to the document Fertility Regulating Vaccines (classified by
the WHO with a limited distribution) present at those meetings were
scientists and clinicians from all over the globe, including then
biomedical researcher of the American Agency for International
development, and current research-chief of USAID, Mr. Jeff Spieler.
In 1986 Mr. Spieler declared:
“A new approach to fertility regulation is the development of
vaccines directed against human substances required for reproduction.
Potential candidates for immunological interference include reproductive
hormones, ovum and sperm antigens, and antigens derived from embryonic
or fetal tissue.(…). An antifertility vaccine must be capable of safely
and effectively inhibiting a human substance, which would need somehow
to be rendered antigenic. A fertility-regulating vaccine, moreover,
would have to produce and sustain effective immunity in at least 95% of
the vaccinated population, a level of protection rarely achieved even
with the most successful viral and bacterial vaccines. But while these
challenges looked insuperable just a few years ago, recent advances in
biotechnology- particularly in the fields of molecular biology, genetic
engineering and monoclonal antibody production- are bringing
antifertility vaccines into the realm of the feasible.”
“Vaccines interfering with sperm function and fertilization could be
available for human testing by the early 1990s”, Spieler wrote.
In order for widespread use of these vaccines, Spieler writes, the
vaccine must conquer “variations in individual responses to immunization
with fertility-regulating vaccines”.
“Research”, he goes on to say,”is also needed in the field of “basic
vaccinology”, to find the best carrier proteins, adjuvants, vehicles and
delivery systems.”
In the 1992 document, the problem of “variations in individual responses” is also discussed:
“Because of the genetic diversity of human populations”, states the
document, “immune responses to vaccines often show marked differences
from one individual to another in terms of magnitude and duration. These
differences may be partly or even completely overcome with
appropriately engineered FRVs (Fertility Regulating Vaccines) and by
improvements in our understanding of what is required to develop and
control the immune response elicited by different vaccines.”
The picture emerging from these facts is clear. The WHO, as a global
coordinating body, has since the early 1970s continued the development
of the Rockefeller-funded “anti-fertility vaccine”. What also is
becoming clear, is that extensive research has been done to the delivery
systems in which these anti-fertility components can be buried, such as
regular anti-viral vaccines. It’s a mass-scale anti-fertilization
programme with the aim of reducing the world’s population: a dream long
cherished by the global elite.
3- On Top of Vaccines, Rockefeller Foundation Presents Anti-Fertility Substance Gossypol for “Widespread Use”
It seems there is no limit to the Rockefeller Foundation’s ambitions
to introduce anti-fertility compounds into either existing
“health-services”, such as vaccines, or- as appears to be the case now-
average consumer-products.
The 1985 Rockefeller Foundation’s annual report
underlined its ongoing dedication towards finding good use for the
anti-fertility substance “gossypol”, or C30H30O8 – as the description
reads.
Indeed, gossypol, a toxic polyphenol derived from the cotton plant,
was identified early on in the Foundation’s research as an effective
sterilant. The question was, how to implement or integrate the toxic
substance into crops.
“Another long-term interest of the Foundation has been gossypol, a
compound that has been shown to have an antifertility effect in men, By
the end of 1985, the Foundation had made grants totaling approximately
$1.6 million in an effort to support and stimulate scientific
investigations on the safety and efficacy of gossypol.”
In the 1986 Rockefeller Foundation annual report,
the organization admits funding research into the use of
fertility-reducing compounds in relation to food for “widespread use”:
“Male contraceptive studies are focused on gossypol, a natural
substance extracted from the cotton plant, and identified by Chinese
researchers as having an anti-fertility effect on men. Before widespread
use can be recommended, further investigation is needed to see if
lowering the dosage can eliminate undesirable side-effects without
reducing its effectiveness as a contraceptive. The Foundation supported
research on gossypol’s safety, reversibility and efficacy in seven
different 1986 grants.”
In the RF’s 1988 annual report, gossypol as a contraceptive was also elaborated upon (page 22):
“Gossypol, a natural substance found in the cotton plant, continues
to show promise as an oral contraceptive for men. Because it suppresses
sperm production without affecting sex hormone levels, it is unique
among the experimental approaches to fertility control in men.
Foundation-funded scientists worldwide have assembled an aray of
information about how gossypol works, and studies continue on a wide
variety of its clinical applications. Dose reduction is being
investigated to reduce health risks associated with the use of
gossypol.”
The following year, according to the annual report,
funds were allocated to several research institutions to see how this
“dose reduction” could best be accomplished without interfering with the
ant-fertility effects of gossypol.
(1988- $ 400,000, in addition to remaining funds from prior year
appropriations) To support research on gossypol, its safety,
reversibility, and efficacy as a contraceptive for use by men (…).”
Mention is made on money allocated to the University of Texas, “for a study of gossypol’s effects on DNA replication (…).”
The last mention of gossypol in the Foundation’s annals we find in the 1994 annual report,
where funds were appropriated to the University of Innsbruck of Austria
“for a study at the Institute of Physiology on the molecular action of
gossypol at the cellular level.”
It seems that the funded scientists have indeed found a way of
“lowering the dosage” of gossypol, circumventing the toxicity of the
substance, so as to suppress or even eliminate these “undesirable
side-effects”, which include: low blood potassium levels, fatigue,
muscle weakness and even paralysis. If these effects could be eliminated
without reducing the anti-fertility effects, the Foundation figured, it
would be a highly effective and almost undetectable sterilant.
Although overtly, research into and development of gossypol as an
anti-fertility compound was abandoned in the late 1990s, the cottonseed
containing the substance was especially selected for mass distribution
in the beginning of the current decade. Around 2006 a media-campaign was
launched, saying the cottonseed could help defeat hunger and poverty.
In 2006, NatureNews reported
that RNA interference (or RNAi) was the way to go. On the one hand it
would “cut the gossypol content in cottonseeds by 98%, while leaving the
chemical defenses of the rest of the plant intact.” Furthermore, the
article quoted Dr. Deborah P. Delmer, the Rockefeller Foundation’s
associate director of food security, who was quick to bury any concern:
“Deborah Delmer, associate director of the Rockefeller Foundation in
New York City and an expert in agricultural food safety, points out that
a benefit of using RNAi technology is that it turns off a gene process
rather than switching on a novel function. “So instead of introducing a
new foreign protein, you’re just shutting down one process,” Delmer
says. “In that sense, I think that the safety concerns should be far
less than other GM technologies.”
A 2006, National Geographic article Toxin-Free Cottonseed Engineered; Could Feed Millions Study Says, quotes the director of the Laboratory for Crop Transformation (Texas A&M Universtity), Keerti Singh Rathore as saying:
“A gossypol-free cottonseed would significantly contribute to human
nutrition and health, particularly in developing countries, and help
meet the requirements of the predicted 50 percent increase in the world
population in the next 50 years.”
“Rathore’s study”, states the article, “represents the first
substantiated case where gossypol was reduced via genetic engineering
that targets the genes that make the toxin.”
I bring into recollection the statement made by the Rockefeller Foundation in its 1986 annual report, which reads:
“Before widespread use can be recommended, further investigation is
needed to see if lowering the dosage can eliminate undesirable
side-effects without reducing its effectiveness as a contraceptive.”
In the 1997 Foundational report,
Rathore is mentioned (page 68). A postdoctoral fellowship-grant was
given to a certain E. Chandrakanth “for advanced study in plant
molecular biology under the direction of Keerti S. Rathore, Laboratory for Crop Transformation, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas.”
Compromising connections, in other words, for someone who claimed
academic objectivity in regards to gossypol and its sterilizing effects.
Rathore explained the workings of RNAi in a 2006 issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
“Cottonseed toxicity due to gossypol is a long-standing problem”,
Rathore said, “and people have tried to fix it but haven’t been able to
through traditional plant breeding. My area of research is plant
transgenics, so I thought about using some molecular approaches to
address this problem.”
Rathore also mentioned the desired main funder of his work without actually saying the name:
“we are trying to find some partners and will probably be looking at
charitable foundations to help us out in terms of doing all kinds of
testing that is required before a genetically engineered plant is
approved for food or feed. We are in the very early stages and have a
lot of ideas in mind, but we need to pursue those. Hopefully, we can
find some sort of partnership that will allow us to do them.”
He also expressed the final adaptation of the cottonseed for widespread use is something of the long term:
“(…) right now there are many hurdles when you are dealing with a
genetically modified plant. But I think in the next 15 or 20 years a lot
of these regulations that we have to satisfy will be eliminated or
reduced substantially.”
The Foundation, as is evident from the statements of Rockefeller’s
own Deborah Delmer, is more than interested. Even worse, through the
process of readying gossypol for mass-distribution in food, the
fulfillment of their longstanding goal of sterilizing the populous into
oblivion comes into view.
4- Rockefeller Foundation Conceptualized “Anti-Hormone” Vaccine in the 1920s and 30s, Reports Reveal
Rockefeller Foundation minion Max Mason, who acted as president in
the mid-1930s, on multiple occasions expressed his master’s desire for
an “anti-hormone” that would reduce fertility worldwide. Now keep in
mind, this is more than 35 years before the Foundation actually
mentioned funding “anti-fertility vaccines” in subsequent annual reports
from 1969 onward.
Having traveled far beyond the realm of rumor and speculation,
research into the admitted funding of anti-fertility vaccines has
uncovered more and more sinister revelations along the way.
By the mid-1930s, Mason of the Rockefeller Foundation thought that
“the ultimate solution of the problem [of birth control] may well lie in
the studies of endocrinology, particularly antihormones.” The Foundation’s 1934 annual report states:
“The Rockefeller Foundation has decided to concentrate its present
effort in the natural sciences on the field of modern experimental
biology, with special interest in such topics as endocrinology,
nutrition, genetics, embryology, problems centering about the
reproductive process, psychobiology, general and cellular physiology,
biophysics, and biochemistry.”
“(…) research work is being conducted on the physiology of
reproduction in the monkey. This work was begun at the Johns Hopkins
University in 1921, and since 1923 has been continued at the University
of Rochester. It involves observational and experimental studies of the
reproductive cycle in certain species of the higher primates, in which
this cycle closely resembles that of the human species. The effect of
the various interrelated reproductive hormones is being studied.”
In the annual report of the previous year
(1933), the Foundation stresses the fact that work on the reproductive
hormones of primates serves to experiment on man in the future:
“(…) much work has been done in the formulation and solution of basic
problems in the general biology and physiology of sex in organisms
other than man. It was essential that this fundamental work on infra-man
pave the way for that on man.”
In the book Discipling Reproduction
by Adele E. Clarke, the roots of Rockefeller-funded “anti-hormones” is
being described in some detail, pointing out that the family’s ambitions
to control man’s fertility date back even further than the 1930s.
Clarke writes:
“On a cold morning in 1921, George Washington Corner, a physician and
fledgling reproductive scientist, awoke in Baltimore to discover that
it was snowing.”
“By 1929”, Clarke writes a bit further on, “Corner had mapped out the
hormonal action of progesterone, an essential actor in the menstrual
cycle and subsequently an actor in birth control pills.”
The 1935 Rockefeller Foundation annual report acknowledges funding Dr. Corner’s research:
“To the University of Rochester, for research on the physiology of
reproduction under the direction of Dr. G. W. Corner during the
threeyear period beginning July 1, 1935, and ending June 30, 1938, there
has been appropriated the sum of $9,900. Dr. Corner’s activities are
concentrated on a study of the oestrus cycle, using monkeys as the
experimental animals. A colony of about thirty monkeys has been
maintained, and experiments have furnished information on the normal
histology of the reproductive cycle, the time of ovulation, the relation
of ovulation to menstruation and other anatomically detectable
correlations of the oestrus cycle. Work is continuing on two main lines:
normal sex reproduction in the monkey, including the histology of ovary
and uterus, and, secondly, the effects of the ovarian hormone.”
Again, never forget that the Foundation in 1933 stated outright that
“It was essential that this fundamental work on infra-man pave the way
for that on man.”
Another essential problem which arises, of course, is how exactly the
funding-mechanism worked by which Corner’s research could be made ready
for mass-consumption. Clarke mentions that officially the National
Research Council, an arm of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), was
the institute responsible for the task of doing so. More specific: the
Committee for Research in Problems of Sex (CRPS):
“The NRC itself was founded in 1916 as an agency to inventory research toward enhanced military preparedness.”
“The NRC”, states the author, “was a prestigious organization from
its inception, thanks to its early association with the NAS, the
Carnegie Corporation, and the Rockefeller Foundation. Kohler (1991:109)
has argued that the NRC essentially served as an intermediary between
the foundations and scientists in the interwar years.(…). The NRC/CRPS
itself was funded almost exclusively by Rockefeller monies, initially
through the Bureau of Social Hygiene and, after 1931, through the
Rockefeller Foundation.”
On the subject of so-called “current immunological contraceptive research”, Clarke channels Rockefeller-president Max Mason:
“Other lines of current immunological contraceptive research continue
to seek what, during the 1930s, Max Mason of the Rockefeller Foundation
called “anti-hormones”: vaccines to block hormones needed for very
early pregnancy and a vaccine to block the hormone needed for the
surface of the egg to function properly.”
In a February 1934 “progress report” written by Warren Weaver
(director of the Natural Sciences Division of the Rockefeller
Foundation) once again underlined the endgame:
“Can man gain an intelligent control of his own power? Can we develop
so sound and extensive a genetics that we can hope to breed, in the
future, superior men? Can we obtain enough knowledge of physiology and
psychobiology of sex so that man can bring this pervasive, highly
important, and dangerous aspect of life under rational control?”
The same Warren Weaver wrote a “biographical Memoir”
in honor of his friend Max Mason, revealing some more interesting
facts. Weaver, who describes himself as a great personal friend of
Mason, gives a general description of him as Rockefeller-minion:
“He had by that time developed a consuming interest in behavioral
research, and particularly in the possibility that the physical
sciences, working with and through the biological sciences, could shed
new and revealing light on the normal and abnormal behavior of
individuals, and ultimately on the social behavior of groups of men.”
Here we have it. The blueprint for sterilizing vaccines has been
first conceptualized way back in the 1920s and 1930s by social
scientists of the Rockefeller Foundation. Although later the eugenic
language (“anti-fertility vaccine”) was polished up with the help of
some linguistic plastic surgery producing the term “immunological
contraceptive”, the ultimate goal remains the same.
Thanks to: http://explosivereports.com
and: http://2012indyinfo.com
Posted on October 31, 2012 | 1 Comment
Jurriaan Maessen
ExplosiveReports.Com
October 31, 2012
In the course of August and September 2010, I wrote several
articles for Infowars on the Rockefeller Foundation’s admitted funding
and developing of anti-fertility vaccines intended for “mass-scale
distribution.” As the soft-kill depopulation agenda accelerates it seems
all the more relevant to re-post these articles as one.
1- Rockefeller Foundation Developed Vaccines For “Mass-Scale” Fertility Reduction
In its 1968 yearly report,
the Rockefeller Foundation acknowledged funding the development of
so-called “anti-fertility vaccines” and their implementation on a
mass-scale. From page 51 onward we read:
“(…) several types of drugs are known to diminish male fertility, but
those that have been tested have serious problems of toxicity. Very
little work is in progress on immunological methods, such as vaccines,
to reduce fertility, and much more research is required if a solution is
to be found here.”
The possibility of using vaccines to reduce male fertility was
something that needed to be investigated further, according to the
Rockefeller Foundation, because both the oral pill and the IUD were not
suitable for mass-scale distribution:
“We are faced with the danger that within a few years these two
“modern” methods, for which such high hopes have been held, will in fact
turn out to be impracticable on a mass scale.”
“A semipermanent or renewable subcutaneous implant of these hormones
has been suggested, but whether or not the same difficulties would
result has not been determined.”
Saying that research thus-far had been too low-grade to produce any substantial results, the report was adamant:
“The Foundation will endeavour to assist in filling this important gap in several ways:
1- “Seeking out or encouraging the development of, and providing
partial support to, a few centres of excellence in universities and
research institutions in the United States and abroad in which the
methods and points of view of molecular biology are teamed with the more
traditional approaches of histology, embryology,and endocrinology in
research pertinent to development of fertility control methods;”
2- “Supporting research of individual investigators, oriented toward
development of contraceptive methods or of basic information on human
reproduction relevant to such developments;”
3- “Encouraging, by making research funds available, as well as by
other means, established and beginning investigators to turn their
attention to aspects of research in reproductive biology that have
implications for human fertility and its control;”
4- “Encouraging more biology and biochemistry students to elect
careers in reproductive biology and human fertility control, through
support of research and teaching programs in departments of zoology,
biology, and biochemistry.”
The list goes on and on. Motivation for these activities, according to the RF?
“There are an estimated five million women among America’s poverty
and near-poverty groups who need birth control service (…). The
unchecked fertility of the indigent does much to perpetuate poverty,
undereducation, and underemployment, not only in urban slums, but also
in depressed rural areas.”
It wasn’t long before all the Foundation’s efforts began to have effect. In its annual report of 1988, The RF was happy to report the progress made by the Foundation’s Population Division in the field of anti-fertility vaccines:
“India’s National Institute of Immunology successfully completed in
1988 the first phase of trials with three versions of an anti-fertility
vaccine for women. Sponsored by the government of India and supported by
the Foundation, the trials established that with each of the tested
vaccines, at least one year of protection against pregnancy could be
expected, based on the levels of antibodies formed in response to the
immunization schedule.”
In its 1997 review of anti-fertility vaccines, Indian based International Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology didn’t forget to acknowledge its main benefactor:
“The work on LHRH and HCG vaccines was supported by research grants of The Rockefeller Foundation, (…).”
In the 1990s the work on anti-fertility vaccines went in overdrive,
especially in third-world nations, as did the funding provided by the
deep pockets of the Rockefeller Foundation. At the same time, the
target-population of the globalists- women- began to stir uncomfortably
with all this out-in-the-open talk of population reduction and vaccines
as a means to achieve it.
Betsy Hartman, Director of the Population and Development Program at
Hampshire College, Massachusetts and “someone who believes strongly in
women’s right to safe, voluntary birth control and abortion”, is no
supporter of the anti-fertility vaccine, as brought into being by the
Rockefeller Foundation. She explains in her essay Population control in the new world order:
“Although one vaccine has been tested on only 180 women in India, it
is being billed there as ‘safe, devoid of any side effects and
completely reversible’. The scientific community knows very well that
such assertions are false – for instance, many questions still remain
about the vaccine’s long-term impact on the immune system and menstrual
cycle. There is also evidence on film of women being denied information
about the vaccine in clinical trials. Nevertheless, the vaccine is being
prepared for large-scale use.”
The Women’s Global Network for Reproductive Rights based in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, quoted “a leading contraceptive researcher as saying:
“Immunological birth control methods will be an ‘antigenic weapon’
against the reproductive process, which left unchecked, threatens to
swamp the world.”
Animal rights activist ms. Sonya Ghosh also expressed concerns about the Rockefeller-funded anti-fertility vaccine and its implementation:
“Instead of giving individual women more options to prevent pregnancy
and protect against AIDs and sexually transmitted diseases, the anti
fertility vaccine is designed to be easily administered to large numbers
of women using the least resources. If administered to illiterate
populations the issues of user control and informed consent are further
cause for concern.”
To avoid such debates, the Foundation has in the last couple of
decades consorted to its long-practised and highly successful methods of
either outright lying through its teeth or using deceptive language to
hide the fact that it continues to work tirelessly toward its
long-stated mission.
2- Global Distribution of Rockefeller-Funded Anti-Fertility Vaccine Coordinated by WHO
In addition to the recent PrisonPlanet-exclusive Rockefeller Foundation Developed Vaccines For “Mass-Scale” Fertility Reduction-
which outlines the Rockefeller Foundation’s efforts in the 1960s
funding research into so-called “anti-fertility vaccines”- another
series of documents has surfaced, proving beyond any doubt that the UN
Population Fund, World Bank and World Health Organization picked up on
it, further developing it under responsibility of a “Task Force on
Vaccines for Fertility Regulation”.
Just four years after the Rockefeller Foundation launched massive
funding-operations into anti-fertility vaccines, the Task Force was
created under auspices of the World Health Organization, World Bank and
UN Population Fund. Its mission, according to one of its members, to support:
“basic and clinical research on the development of birth control
vaccines directed against the gametes or the preimplantation embryo.
These studies have involved the use of advanced procedures in peptide
chemistry, hybridoma technology and molecular genetics as well as the
evaluation of a number of novel approaches in general vaccinology. As a
result of this international, collaborative effort, a prototype anti-HCG
vaccine is now undergoing clinical testing, raising the prospect that a
totally new family planning method may be available before the end of
the current decade.”
In regards to the scope of the Task Force’s jurisdiction, the Biotechnology and Development Monitor reported:
“The Task Force acts as a global coordinating body for anti-fertility
vaccine R&D in the various working groups and supports research on
different approaches, such as anti-sperm and anti-ovum vaccines and
vaccines designed to neutralize the biological functions of hCG. The
Task Force has succeeded in developing a prototype of an
anti-hCG-vaccine.”
One of the Task Force members, P.D. Griffin, outlined the purpose and trajectory of these Fertility Regulating Vaccines. Griffin:
“The Task Force has continued to coordinate its research activities
with other vaccine development programmes within WHO and with other
international and national programmes engaged in the development of
fertility regulating vaccines.”
Griffin also admitted to the fact that one of the purposes of the
vaccines is the implementation in developing countries. Griffin:
“If vaccines could be developed which could safely and effectively
inhibit fertility, without producing unacceptable side effects, they
would be an attractive addition to the present armamentarium of
fertility regulating methods and would be likely to have a significant
impact on family planning programmes.”
Also, one of the advantages of the FRVs over “currently available
methods of fertility regulation” the Task Force states, is the following
(179):
“low manufacturing cost and ease of delivery within existing health services.”
Already in 1978, the WHO’s Task Force (then called Task Force on Immunological Methods for Fertility Regulation) underlined the usefulness of these vaccines in regards to the possibility of “large scale synthesis and manufacture” of the vaccine:
“The potential advantages of an immunological approach to fertility
regulation can be summarized as follows: (a) the possibility of
infrequent administration, possibly by paramedical personnel; (b) the
use of antigens or antigen fragments, which are not pharmacologically
active; and (c) in the case of antigens of known chemical structure,
there is the possibility of large-scale synthesis and manufacture of
vaccine at relatively low cost.”
In 1976, the WHO Expanded Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction published a report, stating:
“In 1972 the Organization (…) expanded its programme of research in
human reproduction to provide an international focus for an intensified
effort to improve existing methods of fertility regulation, to develop
new methods and to assist national authorities in devising the best ways
of providing them on a continuing basis. The programme is closely
integrated with other WHO research on the delivery of family planning
care by health services, which in turn feeds into WHO’s technical
assistance programme to governments at the service level.”
Although the term “Anti-Fertility Vaccine”, coined by the Rockefeller
Foundation, was replaced by the more bureaucratic sounding “Fertility
Regulating Vaccine (FRV), the programme was obviously the same. Besides,
the time-line shows conclusively that the WHO, UN Population Fund and
World Bank continued on a path outlined by the Rockefellers in the late
1960s. By extension, it proves that all these organization are perfectly
interlocked, best captured under the header “Scientific Dictatorship”.
The relationship between the WHO and the Rockefeller Foundation is
intense. In the 1986 bulletin of the World Health Organization,
this relationship is being described in some detail. While researching
the effectiveness of “gossypol” as an “antifertility agent”, the
bulletin states:
“The Rockefeller Foundation has supported limited clinical trials in
China and smallscale clinical studies in Brazil and Austria. The dose
administered in the current Chinese trial has been reduced from 20 mg to
10-15 mg/day during the loading phase in order to see if severe
oligospermia rather than consistent azoospermia would be adequate for an
acceptable, non-toxic and reversible effect. Meanwhile, both the WHO
human reproduction programme and the Rockefeller Foundation are
supporting animal studies to better define the mechanism of action of
gossypol.”
In August of 1992, a series of meetings was held
in Geneva, Switzerland, regarding “fertility regulating vaccines”.
According to the document Fertility Regulating Vaccines (classified by
the WHO with a limited distribution) present at those meetings were
scientists and clinicians from all over the globe, including then
biomedical researcher of the American Agency for International
development, and current research-chief of USAID, Mr. Jeff Spieler.
In 1986 Mr. Spieler declared:
“A new approach to fertility regulation is the development of
vaccines directed against human substances required for reproduction.
Potential candidates for immunological interference include reproductive
hormones, ovum and sperm antigens, and antigens derived from embryonic
or fetal tissue.(…). An antifertility vaccine must be capable of safely
and effectively inhibiting a human substance, which would need somehow
to be rendered antigenic. A fertility-regulating vaccine, moreover,
would have to produce and sustain effective immunity in at least 95% of
the vaccinated population, a level of protection rarely achieved even
with the most successful viral and bacterial vaccines. But while these
challenges looked insuperable just a few years ago, recent advances in
biotechnology- particularly in the fields of molecular biology, genetic
engineering and monoclonal antibody production- are bringing
antifertility vaccines into the realm of the feasible.”
“Vaccines interfering with sperm function and fertilization could be
available for human testing by the early 1990s”, Spieler wrote.
In order for widespread use of these vaccines, Spieler writes, the
vaccine must conquer “variations in individual responses to immunization
with fertility-regulating vaccines”.
“Research”, he goes on to say,”is also needed in the field of “basic
vaccinology”, to find the best carrier proteins, adjuvants, vehicles and
delivery systems.”
In the 1992 document, the problem of “variations in individual responses” is also discussed:
“Because of the genetic diversity of human populations”, states the
document, “immune responses to vaccines often show marked differences
from one individual to another in terms of magnitude and duration. These
differences may be partly or even completely overcome with
appropriately engineered FRVs (Fertility Regulating Vaccines) and by
improvements in our understanding of what is required to develop and
control the immune response elicited by different vaccines.”
The picture emerging from these facts is clear. The WHO, as a global
coordinating body, has since the early 1970s continued the development
of the Rockefeller-funded “anti-fertility vaccine”. What also is
becoming clear, is that extensive research has been done to the delivery
systems in which these anti-fertility components can be buried, such as
regular anti-viral vaccines. It’s a mass-scale anti-fertilization
programme with the aim of reducing the world’s population: a dream long
cherished by the global elite.
3- On Top of Vaccines, Rockefeller Foundation Presents Anti-Fertility Substance Gossypol for “Widespread Use”
It seems there is no limit to the Rockefeller Foundation’s ambitions
to introduce anti-fertility compounds into either existing
“health-services”, such as vaccines, or- as appears to be the case now-
average consumer-products.
The 1985 Rockefeller Foundation’s annual report
underlined its ongoing dedication towards finding good use for the
anti-fertility substance “gossypol”, or C30H30O8 – as the description
reads.
Indeed, gossypol, a toxic polyphenol derived from the cotton plant,
was identified early on in the Foundation’s research as an effective
sterilant. The question was, how to implement or integrate the toxic
substance into crops.
“Another long-term interest of the Foundation has been gossypol, a
compound that has been shown to have an antifertility effect in men, By
the end of 1985, the Foundation had made grants totaling approximately
$1.6 million in an effort to support and stimulate scientific
investigations on the safety and efficacy of gossypol.”
In the 1986 Rockefeller Foundation annual report,
the organization admits funding research into the use of
fertility-reducing compounds in relation to food for “widespread use”:
“Male contraceptive studies are focused on gossypol, a natural
substance extracted from the cotton plant, and identified by Chinese
researchers as having an anti-fertility effect on men. Before widespread
use can be recommended, further investigation is needed to see if
lowering the dosage can eliminate undesirable side-effects without
reducing its effectiveness as a contraceptive. The Foundation supported
research on gossypol’s safety, reversibility and efficacy in seven
different 1986 grants.”
In the RF’s 1988 annual report, gossypol as a contraceptive was also elaborated upon (page 22):
“Gossypol, a natural substance found in the cotton plant, continues
to show promise as an oral contraceptive for men. Because it suppresses
sperm production without affecting sex hormone levels, it is unique
among the experimental approaches to fertility control in men.
Foundation-funded scientists worldwide have assembled an aray of
information about how gossypol works, and studies continue on a wide
variety of its clinical applications. Dose reduction is being
investigated to reduce health risks associated with the use of
gossypol.”
The following year, according to the annual report,
funds were allocated to several research institutions to see how this
“dose reduction” could best be accomplished without interfering with the
ant-fertility effects of gossypol.
(1988- $ 400,000, in addition to remaining funds from prior year
appropriations) To support research on gossypol, its safety,
reversibility, and efficacy as a contraceptive for use by men (…).”
Mention is made on money allocated to the University of Texas, “for a study of gossypol’s effects on DNA replication (…).”
The last mention of gossypol in the Foundation’s annals we find in the 1994 annual report,
where funds were appropriated to the University of Innsbruck of Austria
“for a study at the Institute of Physiology on the molecular action of
gossypol at the cellular level.”
It seems that the funded scientists have indeed found a way of
“lowering the dosage” of gossypol, circumventing the toxicity of the
substance, so as to suppress or even eliminate these “undesirable
side-effects”, which include: low blood potassium levels, fatigue,
muscle weakness and even paralysis. If these effects could be eliminated
without reducing the anti-fertility effects, the Foundation figured, it
would be a highly effective and almost undetectable sterilant.
Although overtly, research into and development of gossypol as an
anti-fertility compound was abandoned in the late 1990s, the cottonseed
containing the substance was especially selected for mass distribution
in the beginning of the current decade. Around 2006 a media-campaign was
launched, saying the cottonseed could help defeat hunger and poverty.
In 2006, NatureNews reported
that RNA interference (or RNAi) was the way to go. On the one hand it
would “cut the gossypol content in cottonseeds by 98%, while leaving the
chemical defenses of the rest of the plant intact.” Furthermore, the
article quoted Dr. Deborah P. Delmer, the Rockefeller Foundation’s
associate director of food security, who was quick to bury any concern:
“Deborah Delmer, associate director of the Rockefeller Foundation in
New York City and an expert in agricultural food safety, points out that
a benefit of using RNAi technology is that it turns off a gene process
rather than switching on a novel function. “So instead of introducing a
new foreign protein, you’re just shutting down one process,” Delmer
says. “In that sense, I think that the safety concerns should be far
less than other GM technologies.”
A 2006, National Geographic article Toxin-Free Cottonseed Engineered; Could Feed Millions Study Says, quotes the director of the Laboratory for Crop Transformation (Texas A&M Universtity), Keerti Singh Rathore as saying:
“A gossypol-free cottonseed would significantly contribute to human
nutrition and health, particularly in developing countries, and help
meet the requirements of the predicted 50 percent increase in the world
population in the next 50 years.”
“Rathore’s study”, states the article, “represents the first
substantiated case where gossypol was reduced via genetic engineering
that targets the genes that make the toxin.”
I bring into recollection the statement made by the Rockefeller Foundation in its 1986 annual report, which reads:
“Before widespread use can be recommended, further investigation is
needed to see if lowering the dosage can eliminate undesirable
side-effects without reducing its effectiveness as a contraceptive.”
In the 1997 Foundational report,
Rathore is mentioned (page 68). A postdoctoral fellowship-grant was
given to a certain E. Chandrakanth “for advanced study in plant
molecular biology under the direction of Keerti S. Rathore, Laboratory for Crop Transformation, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas.”
Compromising connections, in other words, for someone who claimed
academic objectivity in regards to gossypol and its sterilizing effects.
Rathore explained the workings of RNAi in a 2006 issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
“Cottonseed toxicity due to gossypol is a long-standing problem”,
Rathore said, “and people have tried to fix it but haven’t been able to
through traditional plant breeding. My area of research is plant
transgenics, so I thought about using some molecular approaches to
address this problem.”
Rathore also mentioned the desired main funder of his work without actually saying the name:
“we are trying to find some partners and will probably be looking at
charitable foundations to help us out in terms of doing all kinds of
testing that is required before a genetically engineered plant is
approved for food or feed. We are in the very early stages and have a
lot of ideas in mind, but we need to pursue those. Hopefully, we can
find some sort of partnership that will allow us to do them.”
He also expressed the final adaptation of the cottonseed for widespread use is something of the long term:
“(…) right now there are many hurdles when you are dealing with a
genetically modified plant. But I think in the next 15 or 20 years a lot
of these regulations that we have to satisfy will be eliminated or
reduced substantially.”
The Foundation, as is evident from the statements of Rockefeller’s
own Deborah Delmer, is more than interested. Even worse, through the
process of readying gossypol for mass-distribution in food, the
fulfillment of their longstanding goal of sterilizing the populous into
oblivion comes into view.
4- Rockefeller Foundation Conceptualized “Anti-Hormone” Vaccine in the 1920s and 30s, Reports Reveal
Rockefeller Foundation minion Max Mason, who acted as president in
the mid-1930s, on multiple occasions expressed his master’s desire for
an “anti-hormone” that would reduce fertility worldwide. Now keep in
mind, this is more than 35 years before the Foundation actually
mentioned funding “anti-fertility vaccines” in subsequent annual reports
from 1969 onward.
Having traveled far beyond the realm of rumor and speculation,
research into the admitted funding of anti-fertility vaccines has
uncovered more and more sinister revelations along the way.
By the mid-1930s, Mason of the Rockefeller Foundation thought that
“the ultimate solution of the problem [of birth control] may well lie in
the studies of endocrinology, particularly antihormones.” The Foundation’s 1934 annual report states:
“The Rockefeller Foundation has decided to concentrate its present
effort in the natural sciences on the field of modern experimental
biology, with special interest in such topics as endocrinology,
nutrition, genetics, embryology, problems centering about the
reproductive process, psychobiology, general and cellular physiology,
biophysics, and biochemistry.”
“(…) research work is being conducted on the physiology of
reproduction in the monkey. This work was begun at the Johns Hopkins
University in 1921, and since 1923 has been continued at the University
of Rochester. It involves observational and experimental studies of the
reproductive cycle in certain species of the higher primates, in which
this cycle closely resembles that of the human species. The effect of
the various interrelated reproductive hormones is being studied.”
In the annual report of the previous year
(1933), the Foundation stresses the fact that work on the reproductive
hormones of primates serves to experiment on man in the future:
“(…) much work has been done in the formulation and solution of basic
problems in the general biology and physiology of sex in organisms
other than man. It was essential that this fundamental work on infra-man
pave the way for that on man.”
In the book Discipling Reproduction
by Adele E. Clarke, the roots of Rockefeller-funded “anti-hormones” is
being described in some detail, pointing out that the family’s ambitions
to control man’s fertility date back even further than the 1930s.
Clarke writes:
“On a cold morning in 1921, George Washington Corner, a physician and
fledgling reproductive scientist, awoke in Baltimore to discover that
it was snowing.”
“By 1929”, Clarke writes a bit further on, “Corner had mapped out the
hormonal action of progesterone, an essential actor in the menstrual
cycle and subsequently an actor in birth control pills.”
The 1935 Rockefeller Foundation annual report acknowledges funding Dr. Corner’s research:
“To the University of Rochester, for research on the physiology of
reproduction under the direction of Dr. G. W. Corner during the
threeyear period beginning July 1, 1935, and ending June 30, 1938, there
has been appropriated the sum of $9,900. Dr. Corner’s activities are
concentrated on a study of the oestrus cycle, using monkeys as the
experimental animals. A colony of about thirty monkeys has been
maintained, and experiments have furnished information on the normal
histology of the reproductive cycle, the time of ovulation, the relation
of ovulation to menstruation and other anatomically detectable
correlations of the oestrus cycle. Work is continuing on two main lines:
normal sex reproduction in the monkey, including the histology of ovary
and uterus, and, secondly, the effects of the ovarian hormone.”
Again, never forget that the Foundation in 1933 stated outright that
“It was essential that this fundamental work on infra-man pave the way
for that on man.”
Another essential problem which arises, of course, is how exactly the
funding-mechanism worked by which Corner’s research could be made ready
for mass-consumption. Clarke mentions that officially the National
Research Council, an arm of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), was
the institute responsible for the task of doing so. More specific: the
Committee for Research in Problems of Sex (CRPS):
“The NRC itself was founded in 1916 as an agency to inventory research toward enhanced military preparedness.”
“The NRC”, states the author, “was a prestigious organization from
its inception, thanks to its early association with the NAS, the
Carnegie Corporation, and the Rockefeller Foundation. Kohler (1991:109)
has argued that the NRC essentially served as an intermediary between
the foundations and scientists in the interwar years.(…). The NRC/CRPS
itself was funded almost exclusively by Rockefeller monies, initially
through the Bureau of Social Hygiene and, after 1931, through the
Rockefeller Foundation.”
On the subject of so-called “current immunological contraceptive research”, Clarke channels Rockefeller-president Max Mason:
“Other lines of current immunological contraceptive research continue
to seek what, during the 1930s, Max Mason of the Rockefeller Foundation
called “anti-hormones”: vaccines to block hormones needed for very
early pregnancy and a vaccine to block the hormone needed for the
surface of the egg to function properly.”
In a February 1934 “progress report” written by Warren Weaver
(director of the Natural Sciences Division of the Rockefeller
Foundation) once again underlined the endgame:
“Can man gain an intelligent control of his own power? Can we develop
so sound and extensive a genetics that we can hope to breed, in the
future, superior men? Can we obtain enough knowledge of physiology and
psychobiology of sex so that man can bring this pervasive, highly
important, and dangerous aspect of life under rational control?”
The same Warren Weaver wrote a “biographical Memoir”
in honor of his friend Max Mason, revealing some more interesting
facts. Weaver, who describes himself as a great personal friend of
Mason, gives a general description of him as Rockefeller-minion:
“He had by that time developed a consuming interest in behavioral
research, and particularly in the possibility that the physical
sciences, working with and through the biological sciences, could shed
new and revealing light on the normal and abnormal behavior of
individuals, and ultimately on the social behavior of groups of men.”
Here we have it. The blueprint for sterilizing vaccines has been
first conceptualized way back in the 1920s and 1930s by social
scientists of the Rockefeller Foundation. Although later the eugenic
language (“anti-fertility vaccine”) was polished up with the help of
some linguistic plastic surgery producing the term “immunological
contraceptive”, the ultimate goal remains the same.
Thanks to: http://explosivereports.com
and: http://2012indyinfo.com
