Some of the questions that we have been asking for 25 years and that have finally had a parliamentary answer:

(Link to the Final Report)

The safety of vaccinations turns out to be a necessary and fundamental certainty for anyone who wants to vaccinate or vaccinate their child, especially in situations of obligation. There are no studies confirming the safety of vaccines¹.
The Commission has identified several issues that seriously question the effective safety of any vaccine approved for military and civil use (they are the same vaccines) in the Italian territory, already only if individually inoculated_².
The safety of vaccines administered simultaneously or without waiting for the due disposal times of the adjuvants, excipients and contaminants, causes an exponential increase in the risks related to vaccination^3-4-5. The safety of multiple vaccines, contrary to what has been claimed to date by the "medical-political" class, has been questioned by the commission, even going so far as to ask to adopt only monovalent vaccines^6-7.
Any form of risk linked to compulsory medical practice, particularly if carried out on healthy children, cannot and must not be hidden, concealed or minimized, as is the practice followed daily by the State, Institutions and indoctrinated Medical Staff.

Is there any way to prevent a serious and moderate adverse reaction in a healthy child?^8-9-10
 To date, negative responses have been rained down supported by nothing and arbitrarily decided^11-12-13 by those who wanted at all costs to put our families in a critical and uncomfortable situation, in several respects. The Commission noted the importance of clinical pre-vaccination tests to the point of suggesting exclusion from enrollment¹⁴ of the subjects who do not pass these tests, underlining the insufficiency of the medical history form and of the informed consent completed by the military during vaccination administration, believing that the mere compilation of the form cannot be considered as a substitute for the health checks required by the manufacturing companies of vaccines.
Consequently, it is reasonable to think that a 3-month history of a baby, based mainly on the possible familiarity of autoimmune diseases, immune depressions or any pathology that could be a risk factor for vaccination, is nowhere near enough¹⁵.
But, basically, the pre-vaccination tests suggested by the pharmaceutical companies, for our government and for most of its representatives, do not exist.

The commission notes what we've all been screaming for years. The most honest answer that institutions should give is: "we don't know because we don't monitor"^16-17-18 and not only "we hinder spontaneous reporting in every way".
There are too many cases of families devastated by a serious adverse event following vaccination^19-20-21 and not everyone has recognized the damage to their children. For these families it is not only a venial economic recognition, albeit useful in various situations, but the recognition of truth and justice; the admission of guilt by a medical and political class that denies the evidence.
Many of these families had not been adequately informed about the risk / benefit of vaccination practice by their pediatrician or even by the vaccinating doctor. The information is retrieved on the Internet and in books, of course! But it is a responsibility of the Order of Doctors and a specific task of any Doctor who defines himself as such, to make sure that his patient is at least aware of the risks he runs by undergoing a medical practice.
The issue is far more serious than you think. The Commission has highlighted the tendency to monitor adverse reactions within a very short period after vaccination²², associating with this reason the higher frequency of immediate adverse reactions compared to longer-term pathologies that are thus rare, declaring in no uncertain terms that non-acute, but not for this reason not serious, adverse reactions are significantly underestimated.
It is not acceptable that in a state that defines itself as civilized human rights are denied. Not so much for an obligation that harms the freedom of the individual, as for the lack of recognition and the lack of support of people who have developed serious illnesses following a strongly recommended and, today, again mandatory practice.

They imposed an obligation on us at least 9 vaccines to have our children admitted to kindergartens and nursery schools, stressing that the immunized person fulfills the vaccination obligation ..., normally and in any case within the limits of the availability of the National Health Service, with monocomponent or combined vaccines in which the antigen for the infectious disease for which immunization exists is absent.
Leaving aside the mockery that vaccines in one-component formulation are not available and in combined formulation they do not always exclude the disease for which natural immunization has already occurred, we bring to light the damage.
In recent months the mass media have told us and repeated that there is no risk if a naturally immunized child is vaccinated for that same disease. The Commission brutally refutes this claim by stating that:
"... to pursue the safety of the administration of vaccines, with a view to the elimination or at least of the maximum reduction of the risk of negative effects following the use of vaccines in multiple doses, recommends the use of single-dose vaccines, given the concrete possibility that the military, given adulthood, is already immunized against some antigens contained in vaccines in multiple doses. "
"Particular attention is still recommended to the pre-vaccination history and the tests deemed necessary in doubtful cases or for any previous immunization."
For our children, not only is there no possibility of finding single-component vaccines, but there is also no possibility of having antibody tests prescribed to check for previous immunization.

Given the sensitive issue, we believe it is correct to simply report what was written by the Commission and leave the conclusions to the individual:
Scientific studies have shown the neurotoxic effects of Aluminum27 in much lower quantities than those listed above. In this regard, please refer to the following study published in the Journal of Toxicol 2014; 2014: 491316. Doi: 10.1155 / 2014/491316. Epub 2014 Oct 2, entitled "Aluminum-induced entropy in biological systems: implications for neurological disease" by Shaw CA to others. The study also shows that: “Aluminum forms toxic complexes with other elements, such as fluorine, and negatively interacts with mercury, lead and glyphosate. Al has a negative impact on the central nervous system in all the species that have been studied, including humans. AL has a negative impact on the central nervous system in all species that have been studied, including humans. " Furthermore, in accordance with the findings of the commission in reading the dossiers provided by the pharmaceutical companies, it clarifies that humans are increasingly exposed to aluminum from various sources including vaccines. We also refer to the study published in the Journal of Trace Elements in Medicine and Biology at Volume 46, in March 2018, on pages 76-82, entitled: "Aluminum in brain tissue in autism" by Matthew Molda, Dorcas Umar, Andrew Kingc, Christopher Exley28, concerning the presence of aluminum in the brain tissue of children suffering from neurological diseases. The study found that "... The aluminum content in brain tissue in autistic subjects was consistently high. The mean aluminum content (standard deviation) on all 5 individuals for each lobe was 3,82 (5,42), 2,30 (2,00), 2,79 (4,05) and 3,82 ( 5,17) μg / g dry weight for the occipital, frontal, temporal and parietal lobes respectively. These are some of the highest values ​​for aluminum in human brain tissue [so far] recorded and one has to wonder why, for example, the aluminum content of the occipital lobe of a 15-year-old child would be 8,74 (11,59) μg / g dry weight .... ". Although the Commission is aware of the fact that adverse reactions differ between adults and children, it considers it appropriate not to underestimate the overall amount of aluminum administered to the military in the entire vaccine prophylaxis, since in adults the greatest degree of development of the immune and nervous systems at the time of vaccination, and the possible forms of physiological autoimmunity, they can favor the induction of lymphoproliferative type reactions and autoimmune diseases, as shown by the list of undesirable effects, adverse reactions and contraindications, contained in the technical data sheets prepared by the pharmaceutical companies.
Since many of the vaccines used are produced with cultures of cells and animal (chicken embryos) or human (fetal tissues, cell lines) and tissues, this contamination poses serious risks to human health, because it could be responsible for autoimmune reactions against DNA human. In particular, it is appropriate to recall the study from the thiole "Epidemiologic and Molecular Relationship Between Vaccine Manufacture and Autism Spectrum Disorder Prevalence" by Deisher TA, et al. Issues Law Med. 2015, in whose conclusions we read: “Vaccines produced in human fetal cell lines contain unacceptable levels of fetal DNA fragment contaminants. The human genome naturally contains regions susceptible to double strand break formation and insertional DNA mutagenesis. The "Wakefield shock" created a natural experiment that can demonstrate a causal relationship between vaccines manufactured from fetal cell lines and the prevalence of ASD "36. The Commission notes that the study is the result of laboratory analysis carried out on a vaccine included in the list of documentation delivered by AIFA, but in which no mention is made of this component.

Among the various pages of the report, which deserves the complete reading of Annex 1, there are concealments, bad medical practice, total or partial lack of common sense in vaccination practice. The thing that leaves most dismayed is the total absence of communication from the Mass Media, except in very rare cases, of the publication of the final report and its content, effectively omitting the part related to vaccinations.



The questions that Corvelva and the Venetian parents have been asking for 25 years are the same ones that the members of the Commission have asked themselves. We hope that we will not have to wait another 25 years to see the PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE applied.



1. «The individual vaccines administered to the military, which we remember to be the same authorized by AIFA for the civil sector, contain adjuvants, preservatives and contaminants, within the limits of the authorizations for individual marketing. When a drug is authorized it is taken into account individually and the parameters, as well as the criteria, to determine the threshold beyond which a component becomes toxic, are determined by the fact that the drug is taken alone. However, in the present case we are faced with the administration of a vaccine calendar for mandatory prophylaxis, and not a single vaccination, therefore the drugs and their components add up. The verification that this sum still respects the thresholds of the individual vaccine is fundamental, because if it were not so, the military would be exposed to unnecessary risks of immunosuppression and adverse reactions (caused precisely by the foreign components of the active principle and by the active principle itself) »(Page 156)
2. «From the calculations carried out by the Commission it emerged that at the end of the vaccine prophylaxis, the quantity of contaminants taken (calculated as Adjuvants + contaminants + excipients) is between about 8,32 and 8,42 g. However, this value is underestimated because biological contaminants - i.e. viruses, bacteria, mycoplasmas and mycobacteria, as well as fetal human DNA and animal DNA - which come from vaccine culture tissues have not been tested34. In this regard, in the article already in the Commission documents (New Quality-Control Investigations on Vaccines: Micro and Nanocontamination) there is a photo of the contamination of a vaccine with human / animal cells from the culture tissue "(page 164)
3. "(...) the cumulative quantity of the various components of the vaccines exceeds the limit allowed for the marketing authorization of the individual vaccine (...)" (page 152)
4. "In the light of what has emerged in the documents, the Commission finds the need to use more purified vaccines, so that the limit of the components in cumulative quantities falls within the limit allowed for the individual component of each vaccine, in the terms in which the prodromal studies to the individual MAs have recognized them as non-hazardous to health "(page 153)
5. "From the analysis of the prospectuses it emerges that vaccines that have a high content of components in quantitative terms, but also of variety of foreign components, exhibit more adverse reactions" (page 137).
6. "The Commission has found that the prescription of monovalent and single-dose vaccines, apart for the two trivalent MPR and TDP, appears to be respected. For the reasons already expressed in the interim report, and reiterated in the paragraphs above, the single-dose supply of the latter two also conforms to the precautionary principle "(page 184).
7. «As can be seen from the table above, rather than an assessment of the tolerability of each individual element, the choice of carrying out an overall tolerability assessment for the vaccine to be administered may be practicable. This would also highlight the possible intolerance or hypersensitivity to allergens combined with each other "(page 172)
8. "In confirmation of the need to adopt precautions for adverse reactions, it is finally observed that pharmaceutical companies require proportionately greater tests and verifications, the more they contain components unrelated to the active principle" (page 184)
9. "To this end, the Commission suggests that the whole vaccine should be taken into account in the hypersensitivity assessment methodology instead of the individual component in order to verify the effects of the administration of the drug considered in its entirety. The assessment of hypersensitivity to the whole drug could be carried out in analogy to that relating to food intolerances, studying the lymphocyte reaction on the blood of the vaccinated, (...) "(page 184)
10. "There are 22 indications to carry out pre-vaccination tests aimed at excluding the existence of any states of immunosuppression, 7 those that require the preventive evaluation of the efficiency or inefficiency of the immune system, 3 those referring to the need to exclude autoimmune diseases, 9 oncological diseases and, for various reasons, 11 that require a real analysis of the possible immunodeficiency "(page 168)
11. "(...) the hypersensitivity indicated in the registration dossiers and technical attachments to the vaccines, even if only considered individually, confirm the need for pre-vaccination analyzes" (page 152)
12. "On all the vaccines analyzed and included in the military vaccine prophylaxis, in addition to the active ingredient of the vaccine, there are 81 elements for which an assessment of sensitivity or allergy is foreseen" (page 168)
13. "Secondly, the Commission insists on the need to reduce the risk due to the administration procedure, providing that they are entrusted to the national health structure and that at the time of enrollment, the soldiers who fail the pre-vaccination tests are excluded. These tests must detect any changes in the immune system and hypersensitivity "(page 153)
14. "In particular, the pharmaceutical companies request the application of appropriate precautions for the use of the vaccine and, among other things, the verification of the state of health of the vaccinator and the absence of the diseases listed below at the time of vaccination" (p. 166 and later)
15. «In the light of the elements gathered, the Commission confirms that there is a statistically significant association between neoplastic and lymphoproliferative pathologies, and other pathologies (eg autoimmune ones), and the administration of vaccines according to military vaccination prophylaxis. The Commission considers that it cannot exclude the causal link. " (page 154)

16. "The adverse reactions indicated in the registration dossiers and technical annexes to vaccines, even if only individually considered, confirm the need for a personalized risk assessment on vaccine prophylaxis and the need for periodic long-term monitoring of each individual vaccinated." (Page 152) )
17. "Although the Commission is aware of the fact that adverse reactions differ between adults and children, it believes it is right not to underestimate the overall amount of aluminum administered to the military in the entire vaccine prophylaxis, since in adults the greatest degree of development of the immune systems and nervous at the time of vaccination, and the possible forms of physiological autoimmunity, can favor the induction of lymphoproliferative-type reactions and autoimmune diseases, as is shown by the list of undesirable effects, adverse reactions and contraindications, contained in the technical sheets developed by the pharmaceutical companies . In this regard, see the specific paragraph Undesirable effects, adverse reactions and contraindications of this report. "(Page 158)
18. «As already highlighted in the interim report of July, vaccination involves risks in terms of problems of immunosuppression, hyperimmunization, autoimmunity and hypersensitivity. This claim was confirmed by the analysis of public vaccine documents, such as package leaflets and data sheets (see point 4.4 of the SPC provided by AIFA), as summarized in the table below. "(Page 166)
19. «From the analysis of the undesirable effects, of the adverse reactions and of the contraindications, important information emerged. In total, the reactions surveyed amounted to a good 240, with a frequency ranging from 10% to the "unknown frequency". "(Page 172)
20. "It is also worth mentioning that the data transmitted by the manufacturing companies highlight the indication of a series of autoimmune diseases (indicated in bold and with an asterisk in the table) as undesirable effects or adverse reactions to vaccination." (Page 183)
21. "It should be emphasized that the monitoring of adverse reactions is carried out in a very limited period after vaccination, which is why immediate adverse reactions are much more frequent, while rare reactions are related to pathologies longer term and which require a sample of very large population, often not reached in the marketing authorization phase. For this reason, non-acute adverse reactions are significantly underestimated. "(Pages 183-184)