'Leaky' experiments
A paper designed to show that ‘leaky’ vaccines may increase the virulence of Mareks disease in chickens is full of holes.
The Read and Nair study does not hold water. Both its design and execution are full of holes.
In order to show vaccine escape researchers exposed vaccinated (using turkey herpes virus) and unvaccinated chickens to 5 different cell cultures, thought to be of different virulence. The most virulent caused the unvaccinated to die within 10 days with no sentinel birds (unchallenged, unvaccinated) dying, while the vaccinated survived for 30 days or more, allowing for more transmission and the death of sentinels.
Firstly the experiment on their terms;
Unvaccinated chicks should have been injected with a placebo, preferably everything in the vaccine apart from the live ‘virus’, so a cell culture made from sick animals but not turkey herpes.
The virus is allegedly highly contagious and is infectious from dust and feathers. However exposure of chicks to the virus was not demonstrated this way, but by the ‘intra-abdominal route’, that is a relatively large amount of fluid was injected directly into their small abdomens, which is not, do I need to add, how chicks are ever exposed to viruses? Is is unclear why some of the same day old chicks received twice as much as others.
The unvaccinated chicks did not die as claimed. They were ‘humanely’ slaughtered before they allegedly were going to die of the infection. It is patently false and misleading to claim that they ‘died’. The symptoms indicating chicks were supposedly about to die were; disorientation, reluctance to feed, reluctance to move, reduced weight gain and the onset of paralysis and are therefore open to considerable subjective interpretation. There should have been a group of chicks cooped together, some injected with the cell culture and some not, to show the robustness of the researchers ability to diagnose disease from non-specific symptoms caused by the conditions of the experiment. This is crucial to the credibility of the study.
The experiment was not blinded. Unconscious and conscious bias exists in all of us which is why billions are spent blinding both subjects and researchers. The vaccinated and unvaccinated were enclosed in separate clearly labelled coops and sentinel birds within them also tagged. The researchers would be expecting and therefore observed onset of symptoms in the unvaccinated group leading to requisite culling. A small study had previously been done in which they claim that a rapid onset phase of the disease existed. In the same way symptoms leading to culling in the sentinels would not have been expected once all test birds had all been killed and removed from the coop leaving the sentinels alone. Once the sentinels in the vaccinated group, where the experiment continued beyond 10 days, tested positive they were placed in isolators to prevent them from infecting others. This would have a huge impact on why they failed to thrive and showed other non-specific symptoms. The sentinels in the unvaccinated group, even though the test birds had been culled should also have been placed in isolators. The blinding of the entire study, vaccinated and unvaccinated, and which birds were the sentinels is crucial to the credibility of the study.
The findings at post-mortem are ‘broadly’ in keeping with what is expected from a Marek’s disease death ie enlarged spleen and lymphoid changes. These findings are also in keeping with many other diseases. Taking cells from another species (ducks in this case) and other toxins used to culture viruses and injecting them directly into the abdomen of chicks is also highly likely to show these observations. The addition of a control group injected intra-abdominally with the challenge contents minus the live virus is essential for the credibility of the study. The pathologist must be blinded to which birds are vaccinated, unvaccinated, challenge control or sentinel.
Sentinels caged in both groups became infected. However the PCR is not suitable to show infection in birds, dust or feathers as the sequences amplified have never been shown to come from inside a virus and therefore have no diagnostic specificity. The same amount of genetic material can also give wide ranging number of cycles so PCR can not be used to denote ‘viral’ load. The genetic sequences observed in the so called shedding are of unknown origin and are just as likely to have been produced by the organism itself in response to trauma.
Secondly the experiment on my terms;
To quote Florence Nightingale ‘Disease is an adjective not a noun-substantive’. ‘Disease’ describes a state of being caused by obvious factors in the life of the subject. The increased incidence of so called Mareks’ disease in farmed chickens- a collection of common symptoms including onset of paralysis, disorientation, reluctance to feed, reluctance to move and reduced weight gain- shows no evidence of being caused by a ‘virus’, rather it is the result of the cramped conditions in which, intelligent, sentient beings with highly evolved social structures are imprisoned, and the increasing number of toxic injections, also known as vaccines, that they are subjected to.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/pmc/articles/PMC4516275/
🐒