The War on Health: Concerning Infant Mortality Rates

MISSISSIPPI DECLARES STATE OF EMERGENCY OVER RISING INFANT MORTALITY RATES
The war on health, with a special focus on the concerning infant mortality rates, and the first thing to acknowledge is that the trends and observations for children (aged 0-14 years) that have been reviewed over various literature confirm that the health of the young population is deteriorating. And unfortunately, until now, the sharp decline in children’s immune systems was not capturing the attention of the so-called experts and public health authorities.
Therefore, many are now proffering that, to rescue children’s health, this issue needs to be viewed as an emergency. In light of this declared emergency, then policies for any poorly investigated drugs or vaccines with serious risks for harmful side effects could be halted until safety and effectiveness are demonstrated (or disproved) through analysis by independent parties. Thankfully, this mentality is being implemented in the status quo, as recently Mississippi state officials have declared a public health emergency due to the highest infant mortality rate in the past decade. Newborns in the state of Mississippi are experiencing congen-ital malformations, low birth weight, and sudden infant death syndrome, as well as premature births in their mothers.
THERE IS A NEED TO INVESTIGATE DRUGS AND VACCINES IN DEALING WITH INFANT MORTALITY
Now, I just alluded to the fact that part of what is plausible about declaring a state of emergency regarding increasing infant mortality rates is that a declared emergency, could well necessitate the implementation of policies that require any poorly investigated drugs or vaccines with serious risks for harmful side effects to be halted until safety and effectiveness are demonstrated (or disproved) through analysis by independent parties.
Well, let’s then address where the communicated need to focus on drugs and vaccines comes from in light of the infant mortality rate. For many years, the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) has added more and more shots to the childhood immunization schedule. In the 1980s, children received around two dozen doses; today, the official schedule calls for approximately 72 doses by age 18 (when counting each dose of multi-dose vaccines and annual flu shots). This aggressive schedule is the most extensive in the world.
However, neither the CDC nor the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has ever conducted studies on the safety of giving all these vaccines in combination according to the schedule. Each vaccine is tested in isolation in short-term trials for licensure, but the cumulative impact of administering all CDC-recommended vaccines to a child has never been studied.
This gap in safety research has been flagged by experts for decades. The prestigious Institute of Medicine (now the National Academy of Medicine) urged the CDC to investigate the cumulative effects of the childhood vaccine schedule in reports published in 2002, 2005, and 2013. In those reports, panels of scientists raised concerns that simultaneous or back-to-back vaccinations might pose risks that wouldn’t be apparent in single-vaccine trials. Yet the CDC ignored these recommendations, undertaking none of the comprehensive safety studies requested by its own advisors. The lawsuit calls this pattern “deliberate ignorance,” noting that the agency offers no explanation for disregarding its most prestigious scientific adviser for over 20 years.
However, while all of this is happening, American children have been getting sicker: chronic health conditions such as asthma, allergies, autoimmune disorders, developmental delays, and autism have surged in the past several decades. As such, seeing that the ballooning of the vaccine schedule from 24 to 72+ doses has occurred parallel with the increase in notable group of illnesses, such as autism diagnoses exploding from 1 in 150 children to 1 in 31, and over half of American kids now suffering from some form of chronic illness, this has thus been the most notable correlation, as far as environmental factors as concerned.
Now, of course, some will be quick to point out that correlation does not equal causation (although I believe the numbers contradict that logic at this point) — HOWEVER, the core issue remains that no one in authority (such as the CDC leadership) has rigorously investigated whether this massive increase in pharmaceutical interventions in early childhood could be contributing to these poor health outcomes, and especially rising infant mortality rate. INSTEAD, any concern about “too many, too soon” has been met with the refrain that vaccines are safe and that questions are unwarranted. As far back as 1984, federal policy was explicitly oriented to “not allow” safety doubts about vaccines to persist, lest vaccination uptake decline. In essence, the public was told to provide proof of harm — even though the very agency in charge refused to actively look for that harm.
And so, a declared emergency now puts the onus on the state to view and investigate drugs and pharmaceuticals as one of the sources of the problem, and this is an incredibly necessary paradigm shift in how pharmaceuticals have been viewed in American society. And perhaps to emphasise this need for a paradigm shift even further, I would like to show you this jarring excerpt from CBS News, where (in trying to make sense of the rising infant mortality rates in Mississippi), their medical contributor – instead of pointing to the obvious, being the many vaccines and other pharmaceutical interventions infants have been taking without tests on their cumulative impact – well she says the problem resides with a combination of health care access as well as social challenges.
I’d like to point out that women were giving birth to healthy babies in their homes years before the advances we see in medicine or even the availability of many hospitals – and this includes in rural places as well. And so, while access to state of the art hospitals is a reasonable expectation in the modern context, I do not think the lack of such access suffices as a root cause of rising infant mortality rates – and is thus a driver of the problem at best.
INFANT DEATHS LINKED TO TRANSGENERATIONAL MRNA “VACCINE” FATAL ADVERSE EVENTS
Which brings us to this question: If we are saying that infants are barely making it to their first birthday, which means 12 months of life, then someone could ask: How much of this has to do with pharmaceuticals as opposed to say, overall quality of health and life – or even a combination of health care access as well as social challenges, like the people over at CBS seem to suggest. In other words, we need to address the question of how much of pharmaceutical products are being ingested by infants for us to warrant them being a source of concern uniquely tied to rising infant mortality rates? And to address this, I would like to bring our collective attention to the CDC’s own website.
If you go to the page titled “Vaccines & Immunizations”, and look under “Vaccines By Age”, when you count the vaccines listen from birth all the way to 12 to 23 months, infants are recommended to have the following: It begins with 2 vaccines at birth, then 6 from one through to two months, 5 at four months, 7 at six months, 1 at seven through to eleven months; and then 9 vaccines at twelve to twenty three months – which brings it to a total of approximately 30 vaccines (depending on how many are taken between months 12 – 23). So, clearly infants are being bombarded with many jabs, for an age group that does not yet even have a body mature enough to metabolise a lot of what is being injected into their bodies. And so, evidently, there is a significant number of pharmaceutical products being ingested by infants for us to warrant them being a source of concern uniquely tied to rising infant mortality rates.
But, this is not even the most concerning part, because it would seem, infants do not even have to be inoculated themselves to deal with the adverse effects of vaccines. More specifically, the CDC’s own data shows babies born are now dying at a 77% excess rate — years after mass vaccination of childbearing women. The 30-year decline in infant mortality collapsed in 2021, immediately following the mRNA injection campaign. The excess infant death causes mirror those observed in vaccinated adults, thus suggesting a transfer of mRNA “vaccine” genetic material to offspring! In other words, the mRNA vaccines created a transgenerational crisis, where children are dying who were never injected, but whose mothers were.
THE THALIDOMIDE SCANDAL: PHARMACEUTICALS HAVE A HISTORY OF HARMING INFANTS & MOTHERS
Now, even as we discuss the health concerns observed especially in the generation born after the introduction of the Covid Vaccine, it is important that we never forget pharmaceuticals have a wide and dark history of harming infants and mothers, which brings us to the global Tha-li-domide scandal.
Thalidomide, which worldwide maimed an estimated 20,000 babies and killed almost 100,000, was widely used between 1958 and 1962 and was marketed as a wonder drug against morning sickness for pregnant women. Most of the women who took the drug suffered from miscarriages or stillbirths that were not documented as potential Thalidomide victims. The few surviving babies were severely deformed or died later in infancy. And like the Covid jabs – the morning sickness drug was not once tested for fetal safety; while its wide usage then conveniently made the drug companies millions.
Then, after Thalidomide was discovered to be the cause of the fetal slaughter, there was no criminal trial that resulted in accountability or conviction and many health ministers and health leaders refused a public inquiry. Blame was passed back and forth until almost every one involved in the scandal grew old or passed on. The one criminal trial held was with the German scientists who concocted the drug; but that trial was ultimately terminated without a judgment. The court cited the difficulty in determining the individual culpability of the accused, concluding that their guilt would be considered minor (which was strange, considering the global harmful impact of thalidomide). But, still to this day, nobody was held accountable for Thalidomide – while restorative justice measures have included, in Australia, an apology from Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to survivors of the Thalidomide scandal.
But, I say this to say that the pharmaceutical industry has a notorious history of harming infants and mothers, and people tend not to know a lot about this because there are little to no criminal persecutions of the relevant actors. And so, what we are seeing today in light of rising infant mortality rates are the diabolical (and yet) audacious actions of a pharmaceutical industry that has been allowed to get away with murder and culpability in harm.
THE CENTURY-LONG EVIDENCE OF VACCINE-INDUCED SUDDEN INFANT DEATH SYNDROME
But, it also does not take medical or scientific gymnastics to make a case for investigating pharmaceuticals in the modern, post-thalidomide context when we can also easily see a similarity in the relationship between infant death rates plus pharmaceuticals AND the relationship between sudden infant death syndrome, also called SIDS plus pharmaceuticals – especially since the creation of the diphtheria, pertussis, and tetanus (DPT) vaccine, which has been associated with those deaths. For example, in 2014, unmarked mass graves belonging to Irish orphans were discovered which belonged to a group of 2,051 children upon whom an early diphtheria vaccine was covertly tested in the 1930s.
Likewise, as detailed by Sir Graham Wilson, in the early 1900s, there were over a dozen cases in the medical literature (and likely far more that weren’t documented) where groups of children received an incorrectly prepared diphtheria vaccine, and collectively, thousands became severely ill, with hundreds suffering an agonizing death. A wave of deaths hence followed DPT vaccine’s adoption, which like those following the COVID vaccines, became a “mysterious syndrome,” initially being called “crib death” and then “Sudden Infant Death Syndrome” (SIDS). In turn, a few doctors saw this and spoke out against it. For instance, Dr Paul Thomans argues that historical data indicates that in the United States 97% of SIDS cases take place less than one week after a vaccine regiment.
THE CAUSAL LINK BETWEEN VACCINES AND INFANT MORTALITY
There is also a notable causal relationship between vaccines and infant deaths – beyond the vaguely named sudden infant death syndrome. For some context, in 1957, Archie Kalokerinos M.D., desiring to serve the people, requested to be stationed in the neglected rural Aboriginal communities, as their infant mortality rate was 10% (whereas it was 2% in the surrounding white communities). Many diseases were rampant there (pneumonia, severe ear infections, severe infant irritability, and a frequent inability to feed the afflicted children), but were ignored and blamed on the said-to-be uncivilised habits of the mothers.
BUT, then Dr Archie realised these deaths were due to severe nutritional deficiencies and quickly saved many lives (e.g., by injecting IV vitamin C or giving zinc). However, the infant death rate climbed to 50% following an infant vaccination campaign. And this came with an alarming discovery: Dr Archie realised that in the same way infections depleted vitamin C, vaccines actually did the same! Additionally, he also discovered that vaccinating a child who was currently ill was frequently lethal (which, to varying degrees, has also been reported throughout the medical literature). But, thankfully, in learning this Dr Archie rapidly stopped the vaccination deaths with injected vitamin C. In fact, later, he used vitamin C even to treat many other conditions too (e.g., otherwise fatal measles cases).
Similar to the hidden evidence of the causal link between vaccines and sudden infant death syndrome, not only is one of the most frequent complications of vaccination neurological injury, but ever since the smallpox vaccine hit the market over two centuries ago, severe and unusual injuries have ALSO been reported throughout the medical literature. BUT… rather than disclose these injuries to the public, the medical profession chose to conceal them under the ERRONEOUS belief that the public good of vaccination justified hiding anything which would create vaccine hesitancy.
For example, a 1982 NBC news program revealed that many parents were having children develop “post-pertussis ence-phalo-pathy” after taking the DPT vaccine. But, for some reason, most doctors refused to report this, even though medical knowledge about severe reactions to the whooping cough vaccine went back as far as to the early 1930s, while report after report had been published in medical journals since then. For instance, in 1948, two American doctors reported on case histories of many children who had been brain damaged or died from DPT vaccines in Boston. The following year, another doctor surveyed pediatricians across the country and found still more. [PAUSE] Well, those studies have progressively been less discussed, in a world where pharmaceutical companies captured the media, and as a result, this orchestrated a selective amnesia when it comes to the history of vaccines.
RISING INFANT MORTALITY RATES TAKE PLACE PARALLEL TO ATTACKS ON MOTHERHOOD
Then, finally, it bears mentioning that the rising infant mortality rate takes place parallel to attacks on motherhood. We’ve seen it time and again, from the glossy magazine covers glorifying “child-free” living to the snide late-night jokes about “breeders” and “stay-at-home moms.” It’s no longer subtle. The war on motherhood is loud and broadcast 24/7 across every major platform. And make no mistake—this is NOT just about personal choice. It’s a coordinated cultural campaign in an effort to devalue life and being a mother. In fact, in August 2024, the United States surgeon general issued an official public health advisory that parenting was bad for your health. And just days before the 2024 Election Day, the Los Angeles Times ran the headline, “It’s almost shameful to want to have children.”
This was a coordinated effort to make people devalue life and especially the life of children, so that when they are dying at alarming rates, it was merely supposed to be an abstractly unfortunate incident to those who still cared, but not enough to warrant a declared health emergency, likely one that will have great consequences in exposing the diabolical role of pharmaceuticals. It’s the same anti-life playbook behind forced DNR orders and the brain death phenomenon, used to justify people dying without much probe.
Written By Lindokuhle Mabaso