“You may choose to look the other way, but you can never say again that you did not know.”

— William Wilberforce

Front Page » Media » Editorial Bias » Brazil Study Raises Major Doubts About Zika-Microcephaly Link
Editorial Bias
Text size:

Brazil Study Raises Major Doubts About Zika-Microcephaly Link

two research scientists looking at computer screen

It seems like the science is being rushed…

On Sept. 16, 2016, NBC News published an article by Maggie Fox titled “This Study Removes Any Doubt Zika Virus Causes Birth Defect”.1  The words “removes any doubt” are so strong, so conclusive sounding that one cannot help but be drawn to the article and the study on which it is based.

During the past nine months, however, I have written so much about Zika2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that I was tempted to overlook Ms. Fox’s piece and take a short break from covering the issue, but I could not do it. The potential consequences of so many aspects of the Zika issue, including the rush to develop a Zika vaccine and the expansion of toxic pesticide spraying campaigns in the U.S., Puerto Rico and other countries to kill the mosquitoes believed to carry the virus, are just too serious to sidestep an article by a major mainstream news source that conveys a woefully inaccurate and potentially dangerous message.

When you read Ms. Fox’s article, one of the first things you notice is the lack of detail about the referenced study. For example, there is no mention of the size of the study other than to say that it was “comprehensive” and that it included “all infants born with microcephaly at eight public hospitals in the northeastern Brazil region hit hardest by Zika from January to May of this year.”1 Ms. Fox writes that “80 percent of the women who had babies with microcephaly tested positive for Zika virus infection, compared to 64 percent of women whose babies had normal-sized heads.”1

The impression you get is that the study, led by Thália Velho Barreto de Araújo, PhD of the Federal University of Pernambuco in Recife, Brazil1 and published in the The Lancet on Sept. 15, 2016,26  was a very large one consisting of thousands of pregnant mothers and their babies—something on the scale of the Colombian study of 11,944 pregnant women with Zika done earlier this year. In that study, supported by the Colombian National Institute of Health and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and published in The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) on June 15, 2016,27 there were no cases of infants born with microcephaly.28 

So, how many cases of pregnant women and their newborn babies were in the study undertaken by Dr. Velho Barreto de Araújo and her team of 26 researchers? A grand total of 94, including 32 infants diagnosed with microcephaly and 62 infants without microcephaly. The 62 infants without microcephaly served as the control group. Of the 32 cases of microcephaly, 24 of 30 mothers had been determined to have the Zika virus. Of the 62 cases without microcephaly, 39 of 61 mothers had Zika.

This is the study that Ms. Fox believes removes any doubt that Zika is the cause of the microcephaly cases in Brazil? A study that looks at 32 cases of microcephaly and a control group of 62 cases without microcephaly? If this is the study that proves a causal relationship between Zika and microcephaly, then what about the Colombian study of nearly 12,000 pregnant women  in which there were no infants born with microcephaly? Which study carries more weight, and who decides which is the more definitive work?

The fact that 80 percent of the women who gave birth to babies with microcephaly had Zika appears to be significant, but it is much less so when you understand that figure was derived from 24 out of 30 mothers. That is a puny study and, even then, the best one can say is that there appears to be a correlation. Correlation does not prove causation.

Then, let’s examine the control group. Is it not significant that 39 of 61 women (64 percent) who gave birth to babies without microcephaly were infected with Zika? Doesn’t that, in and of itself, provide sufficient reason to raise serious doubts about the hypothesis that Zika is the sole cause of microcephaly in babies whose mothers were infected with Zika?

Note that even the authors of the study acknowledge that their study is a “preliminary analysis” and that it has “limitations inherent” to such an analysis.27 Note also the primary motivation given by the authors for conducting the study:

The management team decided to perform the analysis mainly because the microcephaly epidemic is deemed a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. There was a sense of urgency in finding the answer to the main study question—i.e., the association between Zika virus infection and microcephaly. Although our sample size had 82% power to demonstrate an association, we are aware that interim analysis can overestimate the strength of an association, so the magnitude needs to be treated with some caution. The case-control study will continue to investigate the current and alternative hypotheses as well as the role of cofactors, and provide final estimates.27 

There is an air of political expediency behind this explanation. You get the sense that what is driving this and other Zika studies is government pressure to find an answer to the cause of the apparent upward spike in microcephaly cases in Brazil during the past year. It seems like the science is being rushed (and thus possibly compromised) in order to help quickly allay public concerns, and even fears, about a sudden and mysterious rise in this visually disturbing and neurologically catastrophic birth defect.

The authors themselves caution that they may be overestimating the “association” between Zika and microcephaly, and that they will continue to explore other possible causes or “cofactors” for microcephaly. In short, if you take the time to carefully read the Velho Barreto de Araújo team’s study, it is clear that it does not remove any doubt about Zika being the cause of microcephaly. On the contrary, it raises doubts.


References:

1 Fox M. This Study Removes Any Doubt Zika Virus Causes Birth DefectNBC News Sept. 16, 2016.
2 Cáceres M. Jumping the Gun on the Zika-Microcephaly ConnectionThe Vaccine Reaction Jan. 25, 2016.
3 
Cáceres M. Tdap Vaccinations for All Pregnant Women in Brazil Mandated in Late 2014. The Vaccine Reaction Feb. 1, 2016.
4 
Cáceres M. Report Raises Questions About Microcephaly “Epidemic” in Brazil and Link to Zika. The Vaccine Reaction Feb. 3, 2016.
5 Cáceres M. Viruses, Always the Easy Scapegoat. The Vaccine Reaction Feb. 3, 2016.
6 Cáceres M. The Zika-Microcephaly Theory’s Got Big Problems. The Vaccine Reaction Feb. 10, 2016.
7 Cáceres M. Pyriproxyfen Suspected of Causing Microcephaly in Brazil. The Vaccine Reaction Feb. 12, 2016.
8 Cáceres M. Brazil at Odds With WHO and CDC on Zika-Microcephaly Link. The Vaccine Reaction Feb. 18, 2016.
9 Cáceres M. Associated Press: Causal Link Between Zika and Microcephaly Unproven. The Vaccine Reaction Feb. 19, 2016.
10 Cáceres M. Poliovirus and Zika: What’s Past is Prologue. The Vaccine Reaction Feb. 24, 2016.
11 Cáceres M. Our Fixation With Polio and Zika. The Vaccine Reaction Mar. 3, 2016.
12 Cáceres M. Dr. Frieden’s Zika Letter: A False Alarm? The Vaccine Reaction Apr. 6, 2016.
13 Cáceres M. Brazilian Study Unable to Determine Causal Link Between Zika and Brain Disorders. The Vaccine Reaction Apr. 14, 2016.
14 Cáceres M. The Scientific Logic Behind Zika: A Tall Tale. The Vaccine Reaction Apr. 20, 2016.
15 Cáceres M. America’s Own Overlooked Microcephaly Epidemic. The Vaccine Reaction Apr. 22, 2016.
16 Cáceres M. There’s Measles and Zika. Then There is Autism. The Vaccine Reaction Apr. 3o 2016.
17 Cáceres M. Birth of the Zika Industry. The Vaccine Reaction May 14, 2016.
18 Cáceres M. New York Aerial Sprays Altosid and VectoBac Pesticides to Combat Zika. The Vaccine Reaction May 23, 2016.
19 Cáceres M. Microcephaly Cases in Brazil Vastly Overestimated. The Vaccine Reaction May 28, 2016.
20 Cáceres M. So What About the Other Pregnant Honduran Woman Who Didn’t Have Zika? The Vaccine Reaction June 2 2016.
21 Cáceres M. New Report Questions Causal Link Between Zika and MicrocephalyThe Vaccine Reaction Jun 29, 2016.
22 Cáceres M. So What Became of the $1.9 Billion for Zika? The Vaccine Reaction Aug. 17, 2016.
23 Cáceres M. Controversial Pesticide Naled Sprayed Over Miami to Combat ZikaThe Vaccine Reaction Aug. 22, 2016.
24 Cáceres M. Naled May Be DDT and Zika May Be Polio All Over Again. The Vaccine Reaction Aug. 29, 2016.
25 Cáceres M. CDC Bets Farm on Zika Based on Conclusion of Rasmussen, Jamieson, Honein & Petersen Paper. The Vaccine Reaction Sept. 10, 2016.
26 Velho Barreto de Araújo T, Cunha Rodrigues L, Arraes de Alencar Ximenes R, de Barros Miranda-Filho D, Ramos Montarroyos U, Lopes de Melo AP, Valongueiro S,  Pessoa Militão de Albuquerque MF, Vieira Souza W, Braga C, Pinto Brandão Filho S, Tenório Cordeiro M, Vazquez E, Di Cavalcanti Souza Cruz D, Maierovitch Pessanha Henriques C, Albuquerque Bezerra LC, da Silva Castanha PM, Dhalia R, Torres Azevedo Marques-Júnior E, Turchi Martelli, CM. 
Association between Zika virus infection and microcephaly in Brazil, January to May, 2016: preliminary report of a case-control study. The Lancet Sept. 15, 2016.
27 Pacheco O,  Beltrán, M, Nelson CA, Valencia D, Tolosa, N, Farr SL, Padilla AV, Tong VT, Cuevas EL, Espinosa-Bode A, Pardo L, Rico A, Reefhuis J, González M, Mercado M, Chaparro P, Martínez Duran M, Rao CY, Muñoz MM, Powers AM, Cuéllar C, Helfand R, Huguett C, Jamieson DJ, Honein MA, Ospina Martínez ML. Zika Virus Disease in Colombia—Preliminary ReportThe New England Journal of Medicine June 15, 2016.
28 Bar-Yam Y, Evans D, Parens R, Morales AJ, Nijhout F. Is Zika the cause of Microcephaly? Status Report June 22, 2016. New England Complex Systems Institute.

10 Responses to Brazil Study Raises Major Doubts About Zika-Microcephaly Link

  1. Vivian Reply

    October 23, 2016 at 11:22 am

    I don’t know what it will take for people to wake up. I feel we must be reaching some sort of critical mass where this rapacious attack on us gets stopped. We are not units to be milked for profit using our health as a cheap currency. This is utterly disgraceful and the fact so many people are still napping? I just dont understand it. So many journalists just happy to write articles for Big Pharma. How can all this be ignored and how can the general public be so blind, so gullible and so downright dim? My sister says the answer to that last question is really just a simple equation. “Mind controlling, mass media TV + fluoridated water (intellect suppressant) + any kind of authority figure telling you “it’s safe!” = compliant, mind controlled human slave, too confused to think straight and willing to kill their own children in order not to rock the boat and because thinking has become too hard now”.

  2. Redpill1 Reply

    September 21, 2016 at 8:32 am

    Has anyone read that piece of CDC propaganda at the Daily Beast:
    TIN FOIL HATS-Zika’s Making Some People Sick. It’s Making Other People Crazy. Is Zika a form of government mind control? Did it come from the Illuminati? Are vaccines actually causing microcephaly? Nope, nope, nope. by:Samantha Allen

    This article and I use the world lightly is about what you would expect from a high school students science report. Although it would get an F for making claims without substantiating them with data. I’m debating if I should send my response to the blog because DB has no comment board. They probably wouldn’t post it anyway. So here’s my response to Ms. Allen:

    “The Zika virus is real”
    She says tin foil hat people are saying there is no Zika virus. There has never been any dispute that the virus is real. When you start off an article with a lie it only goes downhill from there. What people continue to say is there is no scientific studies to confirm that it’s dangerous.

    “And it definitely didn’t come from the Rockefeller’s.”
    This is a clear indication of the dumbing down of the America population. NO one said the virus came from the Rockefeller’s. She either has taken things out of content or is outright lying. Allen got this off of a twitter feed or the good Dr. Smith sent this to her.
    This is where the Rockefeller Foundation comes into play:
    http://www.globalresearch.ca/who-owns-the-zika-virus/5505323

    “It really does cause microcephaly and other birth defects.”
    No, it really doesn’t. There is NO scientific data that confirms or proves that ZIKA causes either of those. Only in the Medical Reality manufacturing plant of the CDC does it. In her hit piece where is the proof? Where are the REAL studies? Because I looked at the CDC studies and I’m still waiting for a REAL one. Dr. Smith, a Public Health Official will go along with whatever lie the CDC tells her to put out there. Even she doesn’t provide any studies. Since the article is woefully lacking on facts and saturated with the typical CDC unsubstantiated mumble jumble double talk & continuing tales of doom and gloom-it’s meaningless. CDC always has the answer to the many minor outbreaks of childhood illness, flues, Ebola(that one fell flat) and now Zika. The solution from the CDC is always 1. Congress give the CDC more money so we can provided all the Research & Development companies with a grant to study ZIKA but only to give the results that we want. If these companies want to continue to suck at the CDC teat they have to play the game. 2. Vaccines! Bet you didn’t see that coming did you. CDC wants another Vaccine and why not? Vaccines are the solution for EVERYTHING: hangnail, hangovers, dandruff, athletes feet, gas ,dirt under the fingernail syndrome, Alzheimer, dementia, cancer-just not for those billion dollar payout from Congress to fight those illnesses that the CDC swore to the moon they needed funds for to fight and create VACCINES for. Vaccines like: Ebola(continues to make people sick when they take it) HIV (where’s this one) AIDS (this one is probably with the HIV) SARS, ASIAN FLU, BIRD FLU, SWINE FLU, H1N1,(all of the upper respiratory vaccine, because they are live vaccine actually infect the people with those viruses and make them carriers-CDC also admits they have mutated) MERS (a nice little infection created in hospitals) WEST NILE (another virus that CDC needed to spend money on to find a treatment-where is it?).

    Now the CDC wants billions for Zika and to prove their point they are spraying parts of the country with a pesticide that has been banned in Europe because it degrades into cancer:
    Naled the chemical being sprayed has been banned in the European Union. Dr. Elvia Melendez-Ackerman-environmental biologist University of Puerto Rico’s Rio Piedras campus, “People don’t know all the risks. This degrades into a carcinogen. It’s in the EPA documents.” Pregnant women should avoid the area. Northwest Center for Alternatives to Pesticides factsheet on Naled, studies have shown that exposure of pregnant animals for just three days during brain development resulted in 15% smaller brains in their babies. Naled also happens to be 20 times more toxic when exposure occurs due to inhalation of Naled contaminated air versus ingestion. Symptoms can range from fatigue, headaches and nausea to diarrhea. Resident of Puerto Rico have been actively protesting the spraying telling the government they are not concerned about Zika.

    But Ms Allen-It’s sound like the CDC is righteous with her so it’s OK to spray the populace with this toxin. It’s OK for her to post the CDC propaganda and lies because she is paid to do so. It’s OK for her to mock others who have simply done due diligence to the available information and have not been spoonfed lies.

    I’ve not read where anyone has said that Rockerfellers’ created the virus, I’ve read where they own the patent as you can clearly see here. Also one of the first study frequently cited is this from 1947:
    ZIKA VIRUS: A REPORT ON THREE CASES OF HUMAN INFECTION DURING AN EPIDEMIC OF
    JAUNDICE IN NIGERIA BY F. N. MACNAMARA*
    Acting Director, Virus Research Institute, Yaba, Nigeria
    ttp://trstmh.oxfordjournals.org/content/48/2/139.full.pdf+html?sid=864a5093-2f7f-4f0b-ba6d-30030da79028
    http://www.globalresearch.ca/who-owns-the-zika-virus/5505323

    Since she has forgotten to post substantiating studies that confirm that ZIKA cause birth defects I will provide her with opposing view.

    *New figures from Brazil’s Health Ministry show that the Zika virus outbreak has not caused as many confirmed cases of a rare brain defect as first feared .
    Researchers have been looking at 4,180 suspected cases of microcephaly reported since October. On Wednesday, officials said they had done a more intense analysis of more than 700 of those cases, confirming 270 cases and ruling out 462 others-http://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2016-01-27/brazil-270-of-4-120-suspected-microcephaly-cases-confirmed

    *Microcephaly in northeastern Brazil: a review of 16,208 births between 2012 and 2015
    This paper was submitted to the Bulletin of the World Health Organization on 29 January 2016 and was posted to the Zika open site on 4 February 2016, according to the protocol for public health emergencies for international concern as described in Christopher Dye et al. (http://dx.doi.org/10.2471/BLT.16.170860).

    *Zika Virus Outbreak on Yap Island, Federated States of Micronesia
    N Engl J Med 2009; 360:2536-2543June 11, 2009DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa0805715

    *“New doubts on Zika as cause of microcephaly.” ScienceDaily, 24 June 2016.
    Source: New England Complex Systems Institute
    “Brazil’s microcephaly epidemic continues to pose a mystery — if Zika is the culprit, why are there no similar epidemics in other countries also hit hard by the virus? In Brazil, the microcephaly rate soared with more than 1,500 confirmed cases. But in Colombia, a recent study of nearly 12,000 pregnant women infected with Zika found zero microcephaly cases. If Zika is to blame for microcephaly, where are the missing cases?”

    *New doubts on Zika as cause of microcephaly: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/06/160624150813.htm

    *Brazilian Study Unable to Determine Causal Link Between Zika and Brain Disorders
    http://www.thevaccinereaction.org/2016/04/brazilian-study-unable-to-determine-causal-link-between-zika-and-brain-disorders/

    *Proof that even Brazil said it was the larvicide:
    https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=pt&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.abrasco.org.br%2Fsite%2F2016%2F02%2Fnota-tecnica-sobre-microcefalia-e-doencas-vetoriais-relacionadas-ao-aedes-aegypti-os-perigos-das-abordagens-com-larvicidas-e-nebulizacoes-quimicas-fumace%2F

    *ELAMC Report
    First, there was report by the Latin American Collaborative Study of Congenital Malformations (ECLAMC). The authors of the report, researchers Jorge Lopez-Camelo and Ieda Maria Orioli, wrote in their summary that they were unconvinced of the Zika-microcephaly connection in Brazil.

    In summary, when we ask ourselves if there is a microcephaly epidemic in Brazil, or if there is a causal relationship between maternal infection with the [Zika virus] and children born with microcephaly, we face problems in all epidemiological steps to clarify the Rumor.
    Lopez-Camelo JS, Orioli IM. ECLAMC Final Document. Nature Dec. 30, 2015.

    *MPF Report
    Then there was the report by Médicos de Pueblos Fumigados (Physicians in the Crop-Sprayed Villages), or MPF, of Argentina which linked the microcephaly cases in Brazil to the pyridine-based pesticide Pyriproxyfen, not Zika. According to the report:

    A dramatic increase of congenital malformations, especially microcephaly in newborns, was detected and quickly linked to the Zika virus by the Brazilian Ministry of Health. However, they fail to recognise that in the area where most sick persons live, a chemical larvicide producing malformations in mosquitoes has been applied for 18 months, and that this poison (pyriproxyfen) is applied by the State on drinking water used by the affected population.
    Avila Vazquez M and Team REDUAS. REPORT from Physicians in the Crop-Sprayed Villages regarding Dengue-Zika, microcephaly, and mass-spraying with chemical poisons. Red Universitaria de Ambiente y Salud Feb. 3, 2016.

    The report (above)cited an association of doctors and health researchers in Brazil called the Asociación Brasileña de Salud Colectiva (Brazilian Association for Collective Health), or ABRASCO, which confirmed that the widespread use of chemicals in Brazil was “contaminating the environment as well as people,” and that the fumigation strategy was a “commercial manoeuvre” by the international chemical industry “deeply integrated into Latin American ministries of health as well as WHO and [the Pan American Health Organization].”
    Avila Vazquez M and Team REDUAS. REPORT from Physicians in the Crop-Sprayed Villages regarding Dengue-Zika, microcephaly, and mass-spraying with chemical poisons. Red Universitaria de Ambiente y Salud Feb. 3, 2016.
    17 Robinson C. Argentine and Brazilian doctors suspect mosquito insecticide as cause of microcephaly. Ecologist Feb. 10, 2016.
    18 Robinson C. Zika or Insecticide Pyriproxyfen Behind Microcephaly Cases? The Freedom Articles 2016.
    19 Reis V. Nota técnica sobre microcefalia e doenças vetoriais relacionadas ao Aedes aegypti: os perigos das abordagens com larvicidas e nebulizações químicas–fumacê. ABRASCO.org Feb. 2, 2016.

    *Brito Study
    A small study involving 151 patients who tested positive for Zika was performed by neurologist Maria Lucia Brito Ferreira, MD of Restoration Hospital in Recife, Brazil. Only six, or four percent, of the patients developed neurologic symptoms consistent with autoimmune disorders affecting the central nervous system. That means that 96 percent of the patients did not experience brain problems.20 According to Dr. Brito:

    Much more research will need to be done to explore whether there is a causal link between Zika and these brain problems.
    Zika Virus May Now Be Tied to Another Brain Disease. American Academy of Neurology (press release) April 2016.

    *NECSI Report
    On June 22, 2016, New England Complex Systems Institute (NECSI) of Cambridge, MA issued a report raising questions about a causal link between the Zika and microcephaly. The report cited a Colombian study of 11,944 pregnant women which found no cases of microcephaly. That study was supported by the Colombian National Institute of Health and the CDC. According to NECSI:

    In light of this evidence, NECSI says the cause of microcephaly in Brazil should be reconsidered. One possibility that has been raised is the pesticide pyriproxyfen, which is applied to drinking water in some parts of Brazil to kill the larvae of the mosquitos that transmit Zika.
    Zika Virus May Now Be Tied to Another Brain Disease. American Academy of Neurology (press release) April 2016.
    Cáceres M. New Report Questions Causal Link Between Zika and Microcephaly. The Vaccine Reaction June 30, 2016.
    New doubts on Zika as cause of microcephaly. Science Daily June 24, 2016.

    *Brazilian Study
    An article was published in the The BMJ (originally known as the British Medical Journal) on Aug. 11, 2016 titled “Brazil to Investigate If Other Factors Act With Zika to Cause Congenital Defects.” In it, author Cláudia Collucci writes:

    … scientists in Brazil have been puzzled by the fact that cases of congenital Zika syndrome have clustered in the north east part of the country, and that the expected surge in cases elsewhere in the country has not happened. … Of the 1749 confirmed cases of microcephaly or other central nervous system birth defects, 85% were concentrated in the north east…

    Collucci quotes Fatima Marinho, who is the coordinator of epidemiological analysis and information at the Brazilian Ministry of Health, as saying:

    We started to think that in this area [northeast] maybe something more than Zika is causing this intensity and severity.
    Collucci C. Brazil to investigate if other factors act with Zika to cause congenital defects. The BMJ Aug. 11, 2016.

    “The Brazilians appear to sense that blaming the Zika virus for the supposed spike in microcephaly cases during the past year doesn’t add up. Why would there be such a huge concentration of microcephaly in one region of the country when Zika can be found throughout Brazil?

    The Brazilian government, unlike the CDC, may finally be waking up to the likely possibility of environmental factors being the cause. Brazil’s northeast region is the fastest economically developing area of the country. Enforcement of environmental regulations—when they exist at all—is lax. Lots of industrial and agricultural chemicals are used. Lots of pesticides, larvicides, and herbicides, including the highly toxic Agent Orange.

    Remember all those Agent Orange babies in Vietnam?
    *Perlman C. Amazon facing new threat: Agent Orange. The Guardian July 14, 2011.
    *Covert A. Brazilian Ranchers Using Agent Orange to Illegally Clear Out Rainforests. Gizmodo July 6, 2011.
    *Newton J. Four decades after Agent Orange – heartbreaking pictures show even now babies in Vietnam are being born with horrific defects. Daily Mail Apr. 29, 2014.”

    Unfortunately she don’t look old enough to remember that CDC/Government lie that continue to this day to kill and has maimed thousands of US military personnel, in country children and AO has been found in the semen of military personnel who children were born with medical issues, who served in VietNam. One of the more shameful episodes manufactured by the CDC -government.

    CDC study: Rasmussen SA, Jamieson DJ, Honein MA, Petersen LR. Zika Virus and Birth Defects—Reviewing the Evidence for Causality. N Engl J Med 2016; 374:1981-1987.

    Zika Virus and Birth Defects — Reviewing the Evidence for Causality.

    The paper: Zika Virus and Birth Defects — Reviewing the Evidence for Causality http://www(dot)nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsr1604338
    says:
    1.Zika infections are rare. Birth defects are rare. So: if you have both than ZIKA must cause birth defects.
    2. Number of other causes of birth defects researched: 0
    3. Traveling to an area with Zika infection than having a deformed baby is also proof. Whether the Mom was diagnosed with Zika or not.
    4. Number of other possible causes of deformed babies investigated: 0
    5. The study also cites two limited small studies of Zika as proof . One study was of 72 pregnant women with Zika. 12 appeared to have fetal abnormalities. Some findings lacked postnatal confirmation. They don’t say “how many”.

    ***The second study looked at a Zika outbreak in French Polynesia.
    1. Number of babies born each year with microcephaly: 2
    2. Number of babies born that year with microcephaly: 8
    3. Number of other possible causes of microcephaly investigated: 0
    4. An increase from 2 to 8 babies born with microcephaly was cited as evidence showing Zika causes birth defects.
    http://www(dot)who.int/emergencies/zika-virus/situation-report-26-02-2016.pdf.

    SUMMARY OF BOTH STUDY’S PROTOCOLS OR LACK OF:
    – Zika was confirmed as the cause without looking into whether that country started any new pesticide programs.
    -Zika was confirmed as the cause without looking into whether that country changed their diagnosis of microcephaly. (FYI-they did)
    – Zika was confirmed as the cause without looking at whether more babies were diagnosed simply because doctors were told to look for it. (FYI-there were)
    – The entire paper cites ZERO SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH that proves Zika causes birth defects.
    – You will not find what you are looking for WHEN ALL THE STUDIES AND RESEARCH ARE SPECIFICALLY LOOKING FOR A ZIKA CONNECTION.
    -And none of them are looking into other factors for a possible cause.
    *****ZIKA IS THE ONLY ANSWER THEY WANT TO FIND.*****

    This is what the American scientific community has digressed to. A stunning fall from integrity.

    The Tin Foil hats she so smugly mocked & posted at the beginning of her high school level science report-yea, people do wear them because it reflects the Stupid that people like her & others project, back onto them.

  3. Sick of the lies Reply

    September 20, 2016 at 11:06 pm

    Maggie Fox’s articles are always a joke…except they’re not funny. It’s disgusting how easy it evidently is to have a column. None of the media knows how to research or do investigative work anymore. Guess you don’t need a degree to do the work, you just have to know how to make stuff up. Shameful disgrace!!

  4. Marene Mayer Reply

    September 20, 2016 at 10:19 pm

    It is just very SAD to me that so many people believe what is “reported” without doing research on this Virus previously…and you all above Prove that – thank you!! We have to keep trying to Open Peoples eyes..and realizing not everything the Gov. Reports is Accurate. No different from the Aids Virus. I know now the Aids “Virus” and all other Viruses can be controlled with Proper Ph Balance Vit. C and Viral Herbal Combinations. Viruses “hide” in the body and are brought “OUT” during Stress…….just like Shingles. So lesson to all…….Recognize your Stresses …..and do PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE…….it pays off …….been there …..done that.

  5. Ginko Reply

    September 20, 2016 at 10:51 am

    Great work! Incredible the lies that can be told if people believe that it is ‘scientific’.

  6. Linda Abernethy Reply

    September 20, 2016 at 7:11 am

    The madding crowd of sheeple just keep running over the cliff AND they want to take the rest of us with them-all for the “greater good”. Remember, “never let a crisis go to waste”, even if the crisis must be created.

  7. Greg Rittenhouse Reply

    September 20, 2016 at 5:37 am

    Facts are an amazing thing. In a country that touts “evidence based medicine”, when big money is involved, facts seem to become non essential.

  8. Cypher Reply

    September 19, 2016 at 11:01 pm

    If you’re fighting with anyone either online or a friend/family member, show them this:

    Zika is a hoax. Its not new. It was discovered in the 1940. Microcephaly is also not new. There over 25000 cases of microcephaly
    in the USA alone each year:

    “Microcephaly may result from any insult that disturbs early brain growth…Annually, approximately 25,000 infants in the United States will be diagnosed with microcephaly…”

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19752457

    Discovered in the 1940s:
    http://www.who.int/emergencies/zika-virus/timeline/en/

    Proof that even Brazil said it was the larvicide:

    https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=pt&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.abrasco.org.br%2Fsite%2F2016%2F02%2Fnota-tecnica-sobre-microcefalia-e-doencas-vetoriais-relacionadas-ao-aedes-aegypti-os-perigos-das-abordagens-com-larvicidas-e-nebulizacoes-quimicas-fumace%2F

  9. Redpill1 Reply

    September 19, 2016 at 6:45 pm

    I think everyone who has information that opposes the “official story” should continue to post, write articles and comment on other articles when it comes to this juiced up medical psy-op. The CDC will try and milk it until they get that 1.9 Billion and push thru their mandated vaccine program. People need to know and the more opposing information that is out there the more people will read it.

  10. Gianna Childers Reply

    September 19, 2016 at 10:24 am

    And exactly how many of the mothers of the babies born with microcephaly obediently received the new Tdap shot DURING early pregnancy????? Nothing mentioneD here, I read an article that said 100% of the cases DID have a mother who received the ‘manditory’ vaccine….WHY THE HELL ARE WE AS A NATION NOT OUTRAGED AND SPEAKING OUT ABOUT THIS!!! Ohhhh right, I forgot….they WANT to kill us slowly by scientific experimentation…as long as they get rich by selling a load of crap to an unsuspecting gullible people.

    S H A M E O N T H E M

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>