Leading World Bank Demographer: Vaccination Campaigns Part Of Population Reduction Policy

Leading World Bank Demographer: Vaccination Campaigns Part Of Population Reduction Policy

explosivereports.com

On October 2nd a retired demographer at the World Bank admitted that vaccination campaigns are an integral part of the World Bank’s population policies. John F. May, the Bank’s leading demographer from 1992 to 2012, told the French web journal Sens Public (and in turn transcribed by the think-tank May works for) that vaccination campaigns, especially in so-called “high-fertility countries”, are means to achieve population reduction in those countries. May:

“The means used to implement population policies are “policy levers” or targeted actions such as vaccination campaigns...

(visit the link for the full news article)

I have to admit, this is one area of 'conspiracy' I have avoided in many ways, for it's implications are hard to face.

That stated, this article links to many documents, one such being the following PDF and the agenda of population reduction/control is very real-

www.earth.columbia.edu...

“We find that, after accounting for an income effect, reducing fertility may result in significantly lower disease prevalence over the long (economic) term than would a standard S-I-R epidemiological model predict, and might even be an effective strategy for eradicating some infectious diseases. Such a solution would make Malthus proud”, Bonds writes.

“(…) the new model, which accounts for an economic effect, predicts that a reduction in fertility may be significantly more effective than a vaccine. It also illustrates that a sustained vaccination policy would be more likely to eradicate a disease if done in conjunction with decreased reproduction.”

The article also links to this PDF-

www.hsph.harvard.edu...

““(…) the birth of a child in the poorest parts of the world represents not only a new infection opportunity for a disease, but also an increase in the probability of infection for the rest of the susceptible host population. Thus, epidemiological theory predicts that a reduction in the birth rate can significantly lower the prevalence of childhood diseases.”

So by working to decrease the birth rate will work to reduce poverty and disease, or so their theory goes.

Quite literally, they are advocating control of people's birth rates (ie, population reduction) in the name of stopping poverty and disease!

Who gives them the right to play God? Will they be using these population reduction policies on their own children?



explosivereports.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply to post by Wonderer2012


S&F!!!

Notice how they call the birth of a child an"infection"?

Now all one needs to do is look up Eugenics, GMO's, Agenda 21 and I am sure there are more I can't think of off the top of my head, but the puzzle starts to take shape!!!

Originally posted by seeker1963
reply to post by Wonderer2012

 

S&F!!!

Notice how they call the birth of a child an"infection"?

Now all one needs to do is look up Eugenics, GMO's, Agenda 21 and I am sure there are more I can't think of off the top of my head, but the puzzle starts to take shape!!!

edit on 4-10-2012 by seeker1963 because: spelling

Wow, as a species, we are literally under attack! There's so much going on already I don't know if I could take researching more into the things you suggest but I guess it is important.

On reading some of those links seemingly a lot of research goes into the idea of literal population control- which is essentially deciding who lives and who dies.

What has happened!?

It hurts me to see my own government engaging in terroristic activities. Who will suffer? The little kids...

reply to post by PatriotAct

It hurts me to see my own government engaging in terroristic activities. Who will suffer? The little kids

Your right! But more importantly, who is allowing the government to do this to our children??

Those of us who believe that our government knows better than we do!!! Look at the CULT called the Republicans and Democrats!

All they care about is whether or not their party wins or is in control! People are waking up, but unfortunately, I don't think we have any time left..........

high birthrates linked to poverty are hardly news.

One of het reasons for high birthrates is historically high mortality rates - but now that medicine & lifestyle/hygene has lowered mortality in many parts of the world - even poor ones - the social need to high birthrates has not caught up with the fact of lower mortality rates - and more kids surviving means moer mouths to feed, and usually more poverty. In some cases this is exacerbated by low educational levels.

You can punt it up as an evil conspiracy all you like, but you can't change the facts of the matter.

www.iser.essex.ac.uk...

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


At least someone is still sane on this website.

Star for you.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
high birthrates linked to poverty are hardly news.

One of het reasons for high birthrates is historically high mortality rates - but now that medicine & lifestyle/hygene has lowered mortality in many parts of the world - even poor ones - the social need to high birthrates has not caught up with the fact of lower mortality rates - and more kids surviving means moer mouths to feed, and usually more poverty. In some cases this is exacerbated by low educational levels.

You can punt it up as an evil conspiracy all you like, but you can't change the facts of the matter.

www.iser.essex.ac.uk...

So the answer is to reduce fertility and birth rates?

Do you agree people have the right to decide such policies on countries on the other side of the world?

reply to post by Wonderer2012


I'm not agreeing that its the best way to do things.... especially if the people who receive the Vaccines dont know what the Vaccine is for but I do agree with the Theory!

All I've seen over many years is birth after birth after birth in these poorer areas when the kids can hardly make it past the age of 5 years so i struggle to understand why they keep having these kids???

It's not a very long and nice life being born where disease is rife and food is scarce!!

At the very least they should be given free condoms to wear or just not be having sex in the first place at such low times.... instead they just keep at it like Rabbits without a thought for the future of the kid.

reply to post by Wonderer2012


IMO the answer is to give people knowledge and the opportunity to make their own choices - historically we find that when people are given knowledge and opportunity they generally do want to control their own fertility.

Unfortunately a lot of people see birthrates as a "resource" to power - "outbreeding" whoever they see as "them" - and of course saying that "they" are outbreeding "us", so any atempt to control our fertility is treachery to "us" (whoever it is "us" and "them" are - I'm sure you can come up with examples).

So there are powerful traditional, social and "moral" pressures around the issue of fertility that can restrict any apparent freedom of choice, and IMO these need to me addressed too, or else "freedom to chose" can be illusory.

am I missing something ?

they vaccinate people to kill them ?

reply to post by syrinx high priest


No, they lower the mortality rate and help increase the standards of living. This naturally tends to lower the population.

People who are concerned that their child may not make it to adulthood will naturally have many. It's instinctual. The hope is that at least one of them makes it to age and successfully reproduces.

Most of the people in this thread are simply not making the connections, and being misled by a lack of context in the article. It has an agenda, and it's to fool you.

reply to post by moniesisfun


txs, I was wondering how improving reistance to deadly diseases brought DOWN the population, but it makes sense now

cheers

reply to post by Wonderer2012


China has had mandatory population control for decades

I fail to see what all the fuss is about in the OP

Poorer countries who are at risk of disease are targeted for control of fertility to reduce and minimise the transfer of disease to the remaining healthy population.

What is the problem with that?

Originally posted by TruthxIsxInxThexMist
reply to post by Wonderer2012

 

I'm not agreeing that its the best way to do things.... especially if the people who receive the Vaccines dont know what the Vaccine is for but I do agree with the Theory!

All I've seen over many years is birth after birth after birth in these poorer areas when the kids can hardly make it past the age of 5 years so i struggle to understand why they keep having these kids???

It's not a very long and nice life being born where disease is rife and food is scarce!!

At the very least they should be given free condoms to wear or just not be having sex in the first place at such low times.... instead they just keep at it like Rabbits without a thought for the future of the kid.

edit on 4-10-2012 by TruthxIsxInxThexMist because: (no reason given)

As a theory, yes.

But it goes back to the wider conspiracy, why are people in Africa so poor and starving in the first place?

Africa is the richest continent in the world for resources, yet it is plundered by more developed nations and has been for centuries. Where do African dictators get their guns from to keep the people claiming their natural resources? Divide and Conquer in Africa is on epic proportions. If you were studying the theory of Divide and Conquer, look to what has happened to Africa. It's tragic.

So it seems wrong on so many levels to discuss how to reduce the populations in these countries through 'vaccination' when the problems are caused by the nations deciding these policies in the first place!

Diseases of poverty and children as disease vectors in third world countries affects us how....? Wouldn't the diseases themselves be an effective way to reduce population? It isn't as if these people have the means to travel around the globe, spreading what they've got.

Wouldn't it be more honorable, more moral, and more sane, to have educational programs in those countries, and offer them free sterilization, once they have a certain amount of children?

Imagine that, if we were actually honest with people for once, and offer them a way out of poverty and starvation by explaining how smaller families equals more resources for the people who are actually alive! And then, offer them the option of eliminating their ability to have more children.

However, I do believe there is a more sinister reason for using vaccines, which in themselves can be a most effect disease vector, and the types of diseases they spread can eliminate quite a few people, and none would be the wiser.

It is all well and good to talk about third world countries such as Africa, but ask yourselves why the last 4 years have seen an explosion of vaccine pushing of all types in this country, for all ages. Are we not included in this population reduction policy?

Originally posted by FissionSurplus
Diseases of poverty and children as disease vectors in third world countries affects us how....? Wouldn't the diseases themselves be an effective way to reduce population? It isn't as if these people have the means to travel around the globe, spreading what they've got.

Nope. If that were the case, there wouldn't be an issue. Obviously something must be done.

Wouldn't it be more honorable, more moral, and more sane, to have educational programs in those countries, and offer them free sterilization, once they have a certain amount of children?

Why are you under the impression this isn't already being done? It is in many areas.

Imagine that, if we were actually honest with people for once, and offer them a way out of poverty and starvation by explaining how smaller families equals more resources for the people who are actually alive! And then, offer them the option of eliminating their ability to have more children.

We do.

However, I do believe there is a more sinister reason for using vaccines, which in themselves can be a most effect disease vector, and the types of diseases they spread can eliminate quite a few people, and none would be the wiser.

It is all well and good to talk about third world countries such as Africa, but ask yourselves why the last 4 years have seen an explosion of vaccine pushing of all types in this country, for all ages. Are we not included in this population reduction policy?

This is a good point. I'm not going to say that there is no evil conspiracy 100%. We have talked about various bugs getting out and harming people in other threads. Maybe something sinister is going on, but the reasoning presented in this thread simply doesn't prove it at all.

Originally posted by moniesisfun

Originally posted by FissionSurplus

However, I do believe there is a more sinister reason for using vaccines, which in themselves can be a most effect disease vector, and the types of diseases they spread can eliminate quite a few people, and none would be the wiser.

It is all well and good to talk about third world countries such as Africa, but ask yourselves why the last 4 years have seen an explosion of vaccine pushing of all types in this country, for all ages. Are we not included in this population reduction policy?

This is a good point. I'm not going to say that there is no evil conspiracy 100%. We have talked about various bugs getting out and harming people in other threads. Maybe something sinister is going on, but the reasoning presented in this thread simply doesn't prove it at all.

there is no evidence whatsoever of vaccines being used to kill people,or sterilise them or any other nefarious purpose the nigerian "scare" and the older one in Mexico, Philipines & a couple of other places (IIRC) were shown to be hoaxes ages ago.

People who say that vaccines are used to spread something are right - they spread LIFE. Those who say they "might" be part of some grand conspiracy are speculating without evidence, and making mischief for reasons only they can tell you.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


You're pretty sure of yourself.

I'm not so sure of you.

The absolutes are a bit too extreme for my taste.

I'll just leave it at that.

Nah, screw it. I'ma stand on this one.

Try this for starters. It only took like one freaking minute to disprove your absolute rubbish:

LInk