With governments in the apparent need to celebrate the wonders of the experimental Covid-19 vaccines, the pressure to censor any science on vaccine safety gets stronger by the day. We republish an article, letter and video from an outraged French medical journalist. In 2017, when France decided to extend mandatory vaccination from 3 to 11 vaccines, the issue of aluminium toxicity of vaccine adjuvants became a major argument in opposing the government’s decision. Over 1 million French citizens signed petitions and open letters expressing their concerns on this question and asking the authorities to fund more studies on aluminium. Polls estimated that 40% of the French population were vaccine hesitant and the general opinion was that the government should drop the principle of mandatory vaccination all together. The work of prof. Chris Exley of Keele University became crucial in this debate and was widely shared. ‘L’ALU TOTAL’ the video produced by the author of this letter got millions of views and did an incredible job at getting the public to question vaccine safety and aluminium toxicity.
The article has a strong French touch with its clear ‘franc parler’. Don’t miss the video – it’s uniquely entertaining and informative! (and Prof. Exley also enjoyed it very much).
To learn more about the dangers of aluminium, follow Prof. Exley’s blog on “The Hippocratic Post”
‘Autopsy Of A Scientific Assassination’
As we know, studying the toxicity of an industrial product is not the best way to boost a career. You even tend to make a few enemies. In the very specific case of aluminium toxicity, it’s even worse : you’ll alienate all the industries: agri-food sector, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, drinking water treatment services, to name but a few. So you have to be highly motivated to tackle the project (for example, in England, in 1995, there were 25 research groups on the dangers of aluminium. In 2019, there was only one: Professor Chris Exley’s team).
We live in the aluminium age
We drink, eat and breathe aluminium every day. And as if that were not enough, it is injected directly into our bodies! This has dramatic consequences for our health, much more than previously thought. And nothing can prove otherwise.
Let’s remember that aluminium is neurotoxic, carcinogenic, mutagenic, and is suspected of causing neurodevelopmental disorders in young children (including autism), neurodegenerative disorders in older people (aluminium is now used in research to cause Alzheimer’s in mice, autoimmune disorders and allergies. It is also capable of inhibiting 200 important biological functions, such as mitochondrial functions, impairing neurotransmission and synaptic functions, damaging the blood-brain barrier, and causing oxidative stress. So when the world’s leading expert on aluminium tells you that “without aluminium, there would be no Alzheimer’s “, it would be rational to take him seriously, especially as his work could literally change the future of public health… and for a very low price, at that.
The undisputed expert on aluminium toxicity is Chris Exley, Professor of Inorganic Biochemistry at Keele University in England. He has been passionate about this very special metal for almost 40 years and has published more than 200 studies on the subject in the best scientific journals. Thanks to his hard work, we are able to understand the extent and severity of the problems this ecotoxin is causing to our health and the environment.
Today, Prof. Exley’s research has been stopped dead in its tracks: faultless on the scientific front, he is being attacked on funding sources.
Keele University has removed access to his website, which compiles all of his work, as well as his sources of funding. This is a death warrant for his research.
This is how scientific assassination is carried out nowadays.
The same strategy has been endlessly repeated by industrialists : when a product is accused of being toxic, the industry creates a false controversy and sows doubt in the public mind.
Opposing each researcher-whistleblower with other “denying” researchers linked to the industry, countering each alarming study with a bogus study or a “missile study” full of ad hominem attacks… Their aim is to delay the emergence of threatening knowledge as long as possible, by multiplying information that is not backed up by consistent scientific knowledge. For example, the systematic use of aluminium placebos in clinical trials to assess the safety of aluminium vaccines is an inadmissible bias.
Maintaining an illusion of scientific debate delays awareness and political decisions but in the meantime people are injured.
Health authorities started a factory of ignorance
Obviously, the health authorities play a crucial role in this factory of doubt, which encourages ignorance (absence of studies) and false information (biased studies). As the IGAS report on the Mediator affair in France pointed out, artificially generated doubt “systematically benefits the companies “. It is not uncommon for a biased study financed by the industry to get more weight than all the other independent studies together. For example, the WHO used a single study, funded by the aluminium lobby himself, to set the DHT (Tolerable Weekly Intake) of the metal… supposedly to guarantee its safety (not only are the doses used problematic, but this conception of toxicology (“the dose makes the poison”) is completely outdated and it is now well known that the factor of chronicity as well as that of the toxicity of low doses, windows of susceptibility and, in certain cases, the toxicity specific to particles, are all extremely important factors to take into account).
But the industrialists went further and as Plato already said in his Apology of Socrates: “they wanted to associate a maximum of citizens with their crimes”.
What better way to guarantee the cooperation of the authorities responsible to protect us than with a blood pact? The emblematic example of this aberration is of course the question of vaccines. In the case of compulsory vaccination, it is the State that is held responsible for the inevitable accidents: it therefore has no interest whatsoever in having these accidents identified, recorded, analysed and compensated. Thus, our pharmacovigilance systems are officially ineffective and any attempt to automate or improve the system is nipped in the bud, as evidenced by a very disturbing article in the NY Times about the impossible surveillance of “anti-covid vaccines”.
The health authorities therefore hardly fund any research that might reveal a health scandal involving them: studying the safety of vaccines and their components is therefore considered heresy in the religious sense of the term. And this is how ignorance is manufactured.
And in the meantime people get the short end of the stick.
Crowdfunding : a solution
So the public has had enough: why can’t we decide for ourselves what to study? After all, this is the 21st century! And with the development of the Internet, a new method of funding has taken off: crowdfunding.
Thousands of anonymous people can make a donation to a project that interests them, directly on dedicated platforms. This is how research on thorny subjects, lacking in public funding, has been able to make phenomenal progress via participatory funding from this anonymous crowd.
Aluminium is one of those subjects that are of increasing concern to the public. Prof. Exley has attracted the attention of wealthy patrons like CMSRI (The Children’s Medical Safety Research Institute funds research into the toxicity of aluminium, not only in vaccines but also in the environment as a whole, in relation to various diseases. It is therefore de facto considered an anti-vaccine organisation… Even though it also funds research on Alzheimer’s [unrelated to vaccines]) but also of private individuals who see him as one of the few people capable of answering their questions about the link between aluminium and various diseases. In spite of the lack of public funding, Keele’s team has produced major studies with faultless expertise in scientific journals. On some blogs, and recently in the mainstream press, he has become a marked man.
The question of funding
In France, the vaccine injured victims of the E3M association had to go on hunger strike in order to get the ANSM to fund a single study on the pharmacodynamics of aluminium adjuvants! This research observed that the injected aluminium particles could indeed enter the brains of the tested mice, which was enough in itself to raise a big red flag.
In England, faced with the authorities’ refusal to fund Prof. Exley’s research, citizens decided to take action by opening a crowdfunding account on the GoFundMe site. Sadly, in April 2019, the site put an end to this funding campaign by unfairly closing this account. Fortunately donors could still make their donations via the Keele University website.
The research was able to progress and several very important studies were published between 2018 and 2020 on the issues of adjuvants, Alzheimer’s disease and multiple sclerosis.
Professor Chris Exley’s team has developed a specific protocol for analysing aluminium in the human brain. Thanks to donations, he was able to access various brain banks to analyse samples from people with Alzheimer’s, autism and multiple sclerosis, comparing their aluminium content with that of healthy brains (26).
” We have confirmed previous conclusions that the aluminium content of brain tissue in Alzheimer’s disease, autism spectrum disorder and multiple sclerosis is significantly elevated. ”
Confirmation of the toxicity of aluminium additives
– Aluminium is a silent visitor: from a biological point of view, the body has not developed any specific process for its elimination, as it has with other toxic metals.
– At the end of 2017, one of his studies, downloaded more than a million times, sent shockwaves through the scientific community: the analysis of five autistic brains revealed the presence of aluminium particles located in the cerebral microglia, the brain’s immune cells (intra-cellular aluminium), at extremely high levels.
This observation is consistent with all the work done on aluminium adjuvants. The origin of this particulate aluminium is most probably vaccine-related and even if this study does not say so and is not designed to demonstrate causality, others today are able to demonstrate this biological plausibility. The least we can do is to continue the research… not silence it!
– The team also confirms the capture of adjuvants (particulate aluminium) by macrophages as described by the French research team of Professors Gherardi and Authier.
– Adjuvants captured by macrophages have access to the infant’s brain, notably because they are not filtered by the kidneys (unlike soluble aluminium).
No Aluminium, no Alzheimer’s
– Without aluminium, there would be no Alzheimer’s disease. Aluminium is then found in ionic form, soluble Al3+, outside the neurones. This aluminium has accumulated in the brain throughout life, mainly through food and drink, until it reaches a ‘critical threshold’ (around 3 micrograms/gr dry weight) considered pathological.
– These studies on Alzheimer’s observe a specific association between aluminium and 2 markers of Alzheimer’s disease: senile plaques and neurofibrillary tangles. In the hereditary form of Alzheimer’s, a strong association is found between aluminium and beta-amyloid proteins (observed in Colombian and English cohorts). The aluminium levels found in these brains are the highest ever observed.
– Brains with no neurological disorders contained significantly less aluminium than those with sporadic Alzheimer’s disease (p=0.0006), hereditary Alzheimer’s disease (P=0.0020), autism (P=0.0123) and multiple sclerosis (P<0.0001).
In June 2019, the Guardian published a first article directly attacking this dangerous ‘anti-vaccine’ professor. A fine example of the factory of doubt.
Faced with the world specialist in aluminium, the journalist opposes Paul Offit, inventor of a vaccine against the Rotavirus, opposed to the use of vitamins… but not DDT! Mr Offit knows absolutely nothing about the complex subject of injected aluminium: in 2013, he even claimed that aluminium was essential for the development of infants…
“Aluminium is considered an essential metal (…) It is found in all tissues and is believed to play an important role in the development of the foetus.“ So belief will never replace science.
In 2019, this Guardian article had no effect, and Chris Exley was able to continue his work. As I explain in my long video on the subject, it is impossible to demonstrate the safety of aluminium adjuvants in infants. Unable to win on the science front, the companies decided to focus on personal attacks.
Silencing Science: Instructions for Use
The thorn in the side of industry has been identified: crowdfunding. It’s modern, it’s democratic, and it’s therefore dangerous. The strategy is simple, and has already worked against victims’ associations: label funders and researchers “anti-vaccine”. This label justifies all censorship and all abuses, particularly in the current context where all the wildest hopes have been placed in this type of medicine.
For it is well known that to study the safety of vaccines is to be anti-vaccine. And to denounce BPA in baby bottles… is to be anti-baby bottle?
In April 2020, the lawyer Robert Kennedy Jr, known for his environmental fights and his victory over Monsanto, tried to make a small donation of 15,000 dollars to Professor Exley. The donation was refused by Keele University on the grounds that the lawyer was “anti-vaccine” and that it could damage the University’s relationship “with funders and partners” by “generating potentially negative media coverage”…
At the same time, the University has accepted a £9 million donation from an online betting company… Surely, promoting addictive behaviours is far less dangerous, politically speaking. And so much classier for academic research!
One of the authorised ‘funders’ of Keele University.
But they were just getting started, and the Guardian launched the latest attack. At the beginning of February, the newspaper was outraged that an odious “anti-vaccine” researcher could work thanks to crowdfunding. A copy and paste of the 2019 article, quoting several big names in the factory of ignorance, each of them stuffed with conflicts of interest… was there any scientific references to back their claims ? None, of course.
In the current context, the article achieved its goal. The University reacted immediately and suspended the team’s website, which compiled all of their research – a site used by the university’s students – and above all provided access to all funding.
Any reason given? The lack of control over donations to support Professor Exley’s research. The Dean of the University has therefore decided that “the University will no longer provide facilities for soliciting or permitting charitable donations to support research into the inorganic biochemistry of aluminium and its links to neurodegenerative diseases. This includes donations from individuals, groups, charities and foundations and the use of all university facilities. Only funding from industry or government is permitted. In other words, Chris Exley’s group has been told to vacate the premises by August!
Today, all ongoing research by Prof. Exley’s team has been stopped. The research on aluminium adjuvants, as well as the research on the link between ingested aluminium and Alzheimer’s disease… The craziest thing is that two thirds of this research has absolutely nothing to do with vaccines. Yet they are lumped together in the “anti-vaccine” catch-all bag.
So working on Alzheimer’s is… “anti-vaccine”?
In his recently published book, Chris Exley explains that if the Alzheimer’s epidemic is indeed caused by an accumulation of aluminium in the brain, then there is a cure. The natural antidote to aluminium, silicic acid, the very thing that prevented the 3rd most abundant metal in the earth’s crust from entering the cycle of life. And this remedy is very simple: silicon-rich mineral water such as Volvic, Spritzer or Fiji…
“In just 12 weeks, drinking 1.5 litres a day of Spritzer improved the cognitive functions of 3 of the 15 Alzheimer’s patients who took part in the study. In the other 12, there was no worsening. I challenge anyone to give me a study of an anti-Alzheimer’s drug that achieves a 20% improvement in cognitive function in 3 months. “
Enough to make the Alzheimer’s market collapse – $818 billion worldwide… and perhaps to make this veritable epidemic – 35 million people worldwide – disappear in the long term. So obviously, when such huge profits are at stake – not to mention the potential health scandal – science must be silenced.
It’s a bit like saying there are treatments for Sars-cov-2. Can you imagine? Large-scale experimentation on the population with a novel technology of RNA or DNA injections would not be allowed and would probably even be considered… a crime against humanity, contrary to the Nuremberg Code or the Oviedo Convention.
As a conclusion
I carefully read your two articles published by The Guardian, targeting the laboratory of Professor Chris Exley. Today, you managed to destroy the team that was about to put an end to the Alzheimer’s epidemic, to unveil the secret mechanism of the aluminium particles in certain vaccines, and that was studying the toxicity of this metal on the living.
Are you even aware that this ecotoxin from industrial pollution destroys fauna and flora through its extraction as well as the acid rain it causes? That it is now polluting our soil, our air, our water and our food? You, who write almost exclusively about preserving the environment and animals: how ironic!
Did you know that the research teams studying the toxicity of aluminium on human health (neurotoxicity, cancers, autoimmunity, etc.) can be counted on the fingers of one hand? Liquidated, one after the other, by people serving industrial interests, sometimes without knowing it.
Do you really think that the Oxford Vaccine Group, which you oppose to Prof. Exley, is an objective authority when it actively participates in the vaccine industry, currently producing an anti-covid “vaccine” with AstraZeneca? You are pitting aluminium experts against people who have absolutely no knowledge in this field and who have major conflicts of interest (Prof. Andrew Pollard, who violently criticizes Prof. Exley in the February 2021 article, is working on the Oxford/AstraZeneca covid vaccine). This is not acceptable.
Can you see that the term “anti-vaccine” is not a scientific argument, that it is the tool of industrial propaganda to discredit, censor and destroy any inconvenient research, even if this research has no link with vaccination ?
Good intentions are not enough. One must also be aware that the road to hell is paved with them. When science is murdered, years are lost for public health, billions are gained by the industry, and more and more victims will not have benefited from the knowledge accumulated thanks to our money, our commitment and our time.
You have done a great service to the murderers you denounce in your articles.
Ignorance is forgivable, but the refusal to know is not.
Please read our Re-publishing Guidelines.