Nanopatch Vaccine in the Mail
“We know that vaccines do not prevent disease, they GIVE the disease. As the vaccine industry becomes the main source of income for Pharma they will create disease they can vaccinate for because that is what makes them money. If you die while they make money then all the better. Did Bayer care when they shipped HIV contaminated Factor VIII around the world… no.“ — Dr. Rebecca Carley, M.D.
By CHRISTINA ENGLAND | VACTRUTH.com | OCTOBER 16, 2012
In 2010, UK newspaper The Independent on Sunday reported that a collaborative research study undertaken by researchers from the Georgia Institute of Technology and Emory University in Atlanta had detailed a new way to deliver painless effective vaccines.  Reporting on a study published in the online journal Nature Medicine, The Independent wrote that Mark Prausnitz, a professor at the Georgia Tech School of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, had stated:
“We have shown that a dissolving microneedle patch can vaccinate against influenza at least as well, and probably better than, a traditional hypodermic needle.”
The Independent continued:
“The study’s lead author, Sean Sullivan, explained, ‘we envision people getting the patch in the mail or at a pharmacy and then self-administering it at home, because the microneedles on the patch dissolve away into the skin, there would be no dangerous sharp needles left over.’”
The Independent’s report appeared shortly after a study was published in the online edition of MBio, titled ‘Local Response to Microneedle-Based Influenza Immunization in the Skin’.  The report stated that Microneedle (MN) patches, provided a novel method of vaccine delivery to the skin, with the objective of targeting the large network of resident antigen-presenting cells to induce an efficient immune response.
Researchers believed that vaccinating patients using a skin patch could be beneficial to high-risk individuals such as infants, the elderly and the immune-compromised, stating:
“Alternate routes of vaccination to the conventional intramuscular delivery have been found to produce enhanced immune responses, and in humans, a nasally administered live attenuated influenza vaccine has also proven to be effective. However, this vaccine is approved only for healthy individuals 2 through 49 years of age, which excludes those at highest risk for developing influenza-related complications, such as infants, elderly persons, and immunocompromised individuals.”
You may be wondering why I am writing on news reported in 2010. Well, far from being dead and buried, this scary prospect could soon become a reality. An era in which vaccinations arrive in the post could be nearer than you think.
POSTAL VACCINES ARE JUST AROUND THE CORNER
It was recently reported that Merck had agreed to work hand in hand with pharmaceutical company Vaxxas, Brisbane Australia, to help them develop their latest Nanopatch flu vaccine. According to Bloomberg Businessweek, Vaxxas had made an announcement stating that Merck, the manufacturer of the HPV vaccine Gardasil, had not only agreed to pay an undisclosed fee up front, to help fund research evaluating the Nanopatch, but had also agreed to make additional payments tied in to the development of the vaccine’s technology. 
Bloomberg Busineesweek reported that the Nanopatch should be ready to test on humans within the next two years, stating:
“Vaxxas plans to test the Nanopatch on humans within two years after tests on mice found it could protect them against flu with 1 percent of the antigen used in needle-administered shots, said co-inventor Mark Kendall, a professor of biomedical engineering at the University of Queensland. The deal with Whitehouse Station, New Jersey-based Merck will fund “several” scientists to conduct the research.”
ARE 10,000 NEEDLES REALLY BETTER THAN ONE?
According to Bloomberg, the micro patches are designed to deliver the vaccine to the immune cells just below the skin’s surface via approximately 10,000 projections, which are contained on the one centimeter patch. According to the report, this vaccine could potentially be self-administered, either on the arm or the shoulder, producing a protective immune response in a few seconds. Mark Kendall told reporters:
“It wouldn’t need to be refrigerated and, if mass-produced, may cost less than $1. In the event of a flu pandemic, it might be mailed to people.”
The Nanopatch Influenza Vaccination Team has been achieving accolades of excellence for their invention of the Nanopatch since 2010. They were finalists in the Australian Museum’s Eureka prizes. 
The team also received US $16.3 million investment to help them develop the Nanopatch in 2011. The Asian Scientist reported:
“The investment is led by OneVentures, with co-investors Brandon Capital, the Medical Research Commercialization Fund (MRCF), and US-based HealthCare Ventures.”
WHAT DO THE EXPERTS SAY?
So, just how safe would it be to mail these vaccines to the public for self-administration? In my opinion, vaccines arriving by post could potentially be very dangerous, especially in the UK, where all of the mail is delivered through letterboxes on the front door. If small children or pets ingested them, this could surely be life-threatening. Also, is the public fully equipped to deal with adverse reactions?
I asked two professionals, Dr. Rebecca Carley, M.D., a Court-Qualified Expert in VIDS and Legal Abuse Syndrome, and Dr. Kenneth Paul Stoller, M.D., FACHM, and the President of the International Hyperbaric Medical Association, for their opinions.
Interestingly, Dr. Carley had also researched the subject and shared many of my own concerns. She gave a factual, thought-provoking response, which included her own research.
I felt her answer to my questions needed to be given in full. She states that, in her opinion, the research being used to launch this vaccine is fraudulent. She gives strong examples to support this. She said:
“My primary problem with the article  that claims this patch approach to vaccination is a huge leap forward has to do with problems in the research itself.
First of all, this “patch vaccine” article states that the patch is made of silicon wafers coated with gold, then coated with methycellulose and “dried vaccine” (i.e., dried virus). The mouse study used Fluvax 2008, a trivalent combo of 3 viral strains: H1N1, H3N2, and a type B flu virus from Florida. Interestingly, on page 11 of the article it is stated that mice CANNOT BE INFECTED WITH THESE HUMAN STRAINS OF INFLUENZA…yet on page 9 it is stated that serum IgG antibodies to these strains that mice cannot be infected with were measured. If the viruses cannot infect the mice, how can they cause an immune response? This makes no sense.
They injected the mice with “mouse adapted influenza virus A/Pueuto Rico” proving they are playing with the flu virus to make a strain that CAN infect mice. They claim that inoculation with this virus using a patch protected the mice by causing less weight loss that the mice who received no patch. All 5 mice in each group were “challenged” with 4 times the lethal dose of the mouse flu virus. How were they “challenged”? This is not mentioned. Direct inoculation is the best way to cause an infection, which is why vaccines are insane to begin with (be they injected by a poisoned syringe or a patch with “10,000 tiny projections”).
The patches were placed on the “inner ear lobes” of the mice. On page 15 of the study, it states that the ear tissue was soaked for 10-20 minutes in a solution of DMSO, which readily crosses tissue membranes before immunostaining was done. In my opinion, this is a fraud designed to alter the results to make them more significant. 
On page 13, it mentions that the “microprojections” can be retained in the skin, but alleges that they will be “sloughed off” (no proof they will be sloughed off however).
We know that vaccines do not prevent disease, they GIVE the disease. In this article, they claim they do not need adjuvants, do not need to be refrigerated (so can be mailed to people), can use less virus, and will be easier for people who do not like needles. The article you sent me was from Bloomberg Business week; therefore, it is intended to attract investors. But the “science” is extremely questionable, in my opinion.
I believe that, given the in-depth research she has outlined, she is one hundred percent correct.
DANGEROUS LESSONS WE’VE LEARNED
Dr. Stoller was also unimpressed with idea of vaccine patches being mailed to the public. Like Dr. Carley, he believes that this is yet more Big Pharma fraud to make money. He said:
“Vaccine is a medical intervention. What would people say if in a magazine there was something about helping you with you blood sugar and there was an insulin patch. Would that be okay?
From Pharma’s point of view, it would be okay if they thought they could get away with it.
When a lab-created flu vaccine (and when I say lab-created, the evidence that the last swine flu outbreak was lab-created was uncontested) was released in a poor section of Mexico City, why was there no inquiry as to why or how that took place?
When Baxter put Bird flu virus in the seasonal virus vaccine they were shipping to Eastern and Central Europe, why was that just chalked up to a minor mistake? That was no mistake.
As the vaccine industry becomes the main source of income for Pharma they will create disease they can vaccinate for because that is what makes them money. If you die while they make money then all the better. Did Bayer care when they shipped HIV contaminated Factor VIII around the world… no.
Enough already. But Pharma buys academic institutions, they buy politicians, they buy the local governments, they bleed out federal agencies….. what a freaking mess!”
Dr. Carley and Dr. Stoller say it all. Both professionals give excellent examples of fraudulent behavior that is being committed by the pharmaceutical industries. Bearing this in mind, the best thing that anyone can do if they receive a Nanopatch with their mail is to wrap it up securely, to protect wildlife, and put it out with the garbage.
- Independent on Sunday- Health in the Future: Mail Order dissolvable vaccine patches http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-in-the-future-mailorder-dissolvable-vaccine-patches-2031808.html#
- MBio – Local Response to Microneedle-Based Influenza Immunization in the Skin Maria del Pilar Martinet alhttp://mbio.asm.org/content/3/2/e00012-12.full
- Bloomberg Businessweek – Merck Acquires Licence for Experimental Skin Patch Immunizationhttp://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-10-08/merck-acquires-license-for-experimental-skin-patch-immunization
- The Australian Museum – Research by an Interdisciplinary Team
Nanopatch Influenza Vaccination Team http://eureka.australianmuseum.net.au/4730DC80-59C8-11DF-A6AE005056B06558?DISPLAYENTRY=true
- Asian Scientist – Needle-Free Vaccine Delivery System, Nanopatch, Gets US$16.3 Million Investmenthttp://www.asianscientist.com/tech-pharma/needle-free-vaccine-delivery-system-nanopatch-vaxxas/
- Potent Immunity to Low Doses of Influenza Vaccine by Probabilistic Guided Micro-Targeted Skin Delivery in a Mouse Modelhttp://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.001026
- DMSO Background Literature
Science Daily – Painless Needles? Self-Adminstered Skin Patches for Vaccines Under Development http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101119204431.htm
Christina England is a UK journalist and an author with a Higher National Diploma in Journalism and Media. She is studying for a BA Hons degree in English Literature and Humanities. Read More…