International Journal of ISSN: 2470-9980IJVV

Vaccines & Vaccination
Conceptual Paper
Volume 2 Issue 3 - 2016
Second Thoughts Concerning Viruses, Vaccines and the HIV/AIDS Hypothesis - Part 2
Robert O Young*
Universal Medical Imaging Group, USA
Received: January 01, 2016 | Published: June 29, 2016
*Corresponding authors: Robert O Young, pH Miracle Inc., 16390 Dia del Sol, Valley Center, California, 92082, USA, Tel: 760 751 8321; Email:

Universal Medical Imaging Group, 12410 Burbank Blvd, Valley Village, California, 91607, USA, Tel: 818 987 6886; Email:

Citation: Young RO (2016) Second Thoughts Concerning Viruses, Vaccines and the HIV/AIDS Hypothesis - Part 2. Int J Vaccines Vaccin 2(3): 00034. DOI: 10.15406/ijvv.2016.02.00034


“In the sciences, people quickly come to regard as their own personal property that which they have learned and had passed on to them at the universities and academies. If however, someone else now comes along with new ideas that contradict the Credo (that has been recited for years and passed on in turn to others) and in fact even threaten to overturn it, then all passions are raised against this threat and no method is left untried to suppress it. People resist it in every way possible: pretending not to have heard about it; speaking disparagingly of it, as if it were not even worth the effort of looking into the matter. And so a new truth can have a long wait before finally being accepted.”-Goethe

Haphazard Beginnings

The greatest danger of the germ theory half-truth is its promulgation and acceptance as the whole truth, thus diverting attention from endogenous factors, primarily host ecology-resistance and susceptibility. Such factors are highly significant if Bechamp and his many followers, including me, are correct. Distraction from host factors has been quite thorough, with the exception of the false notion that the immune system is the “first line of defence” against infectious symptoms.

Louis Pasteur is credited with improving and successfully using the technique of vaccination, a practice blindly begun in 1796 by British physician Edward Jenner. Jenner happened to notice that dairy maids who had contracted the relatively mild disease cowpox did not later contract smallpox. On a hunch, he took pus from the running sores of sick cows and injected it into the blood of an eight-year-old boy. As the story goes, the boy developed cowpox. Several weeks later Jenner inoculated the boy with smallpox, but the disease failed to develop. Upon this single anecdotal event was based the supposition that this practice was safe and effective. The process has changed little to this day except perhaps to have been worsened with additives. Its understanding is still clouded by Pasteur’s theory, and it is as recklessly pursued as it was begun.

Theoretically, vaccination works by introducing a diluted and weakened (attenuated) or “killed” version of the pathogen into the body, causing the immune system’s memory function to prepare for any subsequent contact, which is met with much greater response. It is commonly thought that infectiosity, or germ-virulence, tests are performed on laboratory animals and then vaccines are made which boost the immune system against germs. However, like Jenner’s, the tests are primarily toxicity tests, and vaccines, especially viral ones, activate the immune system primarily in response to injected toxins. Whether the response is to toxins, microforms, or both, it is a misguided approach at best. Bypassing the mucosal barrier and thus the segment of the immune system which is the organism’s interface with the environment, makes such experimentation, and vaccination itself, flawed, unscientific practice ipso facto.

A Toxin Pathway

Bacteria secrete a variety of enzymes (leukocidins, hemolysins, coagulases, hyaluronidases, fibrinolysins), any of which are disruptive in the body. For example, diphtheria toxin is composed of the enzymatic fragment A, which is at the amino end of the molecule, and fragment B at the carboxyl end, which allows entry into host cells. The two fragments are linked by a disulfide bond. Once bound diphtheria accesses the cell cytoplasm, the disulfide bond is broken, releasing fragment A. This enzyme catalyzes the covalent transfer of adenosine diphosphate ribose (ADPR) from nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD) to EF-2. The latter, a ribosomal elongation factor involved in protein synthesis, is thus inactivated. One molecule of diphtheria toxin can kill a cell by ADP-ribosylating more than a million EF-2 molecules. In diluted form this toxin, along with other toxic chemicals and fragments of bacteria, is what is introduced directly into the blood of infants under the guise of a health measure.

Diphtheria toxin creates a layer of dead cells in the throat, on which Corynebacterium diphtheriae outgrows competing bacteria (the diphtheria microform is an intermediate stage of a morbidly evolved microzyma, and competing bacteria also evolve out of sick cells). Subsequent wide dissemination of diphtheria toxin causes the characteristic neural and myocardial dysfunctions. Diphtheria toxin also causes disseminated intravascular coagulation, which activates the various alarm responses of the body. Thus, we know that toxins produce symptoms, but what is it that produces the condition which creates or supports the toxin producer?

Bordetella pertussis is a fascinating organism to study. A certain amount of empiricism, as opposed to logic, is required for success with pertussis. Diagnostic cultures are difficult and sometimes unreliable. Different lots of vaccine, made in the same way from the same strains, sometimes show different properties. Experimental work is not always reproducible from one laboratory to another, but this is common in biological research. The diagnostic culture problems and the unexpected variability in vaccines and in pertussis strains themselves are not easy to explain.

-Charlotte Parker Department of Microbiology, U. of Texas at Austin

Vaccine Recipes

To make a vaccine you need to acquire the disease germ-a toxic bacterium or a live virus. The mumps virus is a sterile, lyophilized preparation of the Jeryl Lynn (B level) strain of mumps virus. It is adapted to, and propagated in, cell cultures of chick embryo, free and stabilized with sorbitol and hydrolyzed gelatin. The rubella virus (Wistar RA 27/3 strain) is grown in human diploid cell cultures. Measles (from Eners’ attenuated Edmonston strain) is grown in cell cultures of chick embryo [1]. The various so-called virus strains are stored by pharmaceutical companies for later culture. Where these stockpiles come from and the specific methods used seem to be guarded secrets, but as Bechamp emphasized, they must originally be obtained from diseased higher organisms, for they are found nowhere else in nature. If protein complexes exist in the viral stores, their replication in culture is simply the behaviour pattern of the repair proteins they are. It is highly likely that toxins accompany these strains as a means of stressing the culture cells.

To make a live vaccine, the microform must be attenuated, or weakened. This is accomplished by serial passage-passing the microform/toxin many times through animal tissues, e.g., monkey kidneys, human diploid cells (the dissected organs of an aborted fetus), chick embryos and calfs [2]. Killed vaccines are prepared with heat or radiation, or else chemically, usually by using the mycotoxin formaldehyde [3].

The weakened microform must be mixed with antibody-boosting and immune-activating adjuncts such as the antibiotics neomycin and streptomycin, as well as stabilizers such as sodium chloride, sodium hydroxide, aluminum hydroxide, aluminum hydrochloride, sorbitol, hydrolyzed gelatin, formaldehyde, and thimerosal (a mercury-based antiseptic).

For example, diphtheria, pertussis and tetanus (DPT) vaccine consists of a combination of tetanus and diphtheria exotoxins with pertussis microforms. Diphtheria toxin is produced by growing Corynebacterium diphtheriae in a medium composed of pig pancreatic hydrolysate of casein. Tetanus toxin is produced by growing Clostridium tetani in a medium composed of pig tryptic digest of casein. Both toxins are combined with formaldehyde, ammonium sulfate (a mycotoxin), and diluted with saline containing thimerosal. They are then adsorbed on aluminum phosphate and combined with a suspension of Bordetella pertussis organisms [4].

The first pertussis (whooping cough) vaccine was created in 1912 by two French bacteriologists, Jules Bordet and Octave Gengou, who wanted to use it on the children of Tunisia. After growing the pertussis bacteria in large pots, they killed them with heat, preserved the mixture with formaldehyde, and injected it into the children.

One change made in the original Bordet/Gengou recipe was to add an “adjuvant.” This material, usually a metal salt, somehow heightens the capacity of the pertussis vaccine to produce antibodies in the host. In 1943 a pioneer American pertussis vaccine researcher, Pearl Kendrick, reported that alum had this adjuvant effect. The vaccine was said to be more protective, and fewer pertussis bacteria had to be included. After her report, alum or alum-based substances were added to the vaccine. Kendrick was also instrumental in having pertussis combined with diphtheria and tetanus vaccines already in use in the 1940s.

The vaccine is made in essentially the same way today as in the time of Bordet and Gengou, although each manufacturer prepares it differently, and the exact processes and formulas are considered trade secrets. Pertussis bacteria are usually grown on a casein hydrolysate medium with yeast dialysate, supplemented with agar and charcoal. The mixture is prepared in vats, then washed, and the bacteria killed with heat and formaldehyde The resulting toxoid is preserved with thimerosal. Other possible ingredients are hydrochloric acid, the adjuvant (usually an aluminum compound), sodium hydroxide, and salt.

In the past, human blood was often added. This is now prohibited by federal law, but manufacturers are still permitted to add blood from “lower animals other than the horse.” The microzymas of horse blood destroy human blood.

The vaccine is stored for a while at near-freezing temperatures, then combined with the diphtheria and tetanus exotoxins and poured into vials for distribution. Ultimately it is shipped to pharmacies, private physicians, and public health clinics, whence it is injected into the blood of infants.

Calf Serum

The precedent of cruelty to animals, promoted, if not set, by Louis Pasteur, is apparently a hallmark of germ theory. It is not better demonstrated than by the following description of the preparation of so-called calf serum dreamt up in the early days of vaccine manufacture, and continuing, as far as I can tell, into the late 1980s, if not to this day:

A calf is strapped down to an operating table. A space on the abdomen of about 12-15 inches is shaved with a razor, then about 100 slashes are cut into the flesh. The seed virus, consisting of a culture of smallpox passed through a solution of glycerine, is rubbed into the wounds.

Made to stand in a headstock so it cannot lick its belly, the calf grows very sick and the wounds become swollen and inflamed. In a few days, as the body reacts to the poison, small blisters appear, scabs form over the wounds and fill with pus. In five to seven days, the wounds are ulcerated, issuing pus and morbid cells. The calf is again strapped to the operating table, and the infested area is washed with warm water. Each scab is scraped off and its contents are pressed out of the sores into a container. An equal amount of glycerine is added to the pus, and the whole is stirred. Once thoroughly mixed, the concoction is passed through a sieve to remove solids such as pieces of flesh, scabs and hair. After being stirred once again, the mixture is put into vials, sealed, and distributed as “pure calf lymph,” commonly known as smallpox vaccine [5].

These aforementioned concoctions are obviously poisonous products of disease. By injecting these products into the blood of school children, physicians, via legal manipulation of health boards and school boards, potentiate illness and ensure that medical products and services will continue to be in high demand.

It is interesting to note that the vaccine given to those considered to be at high risk for hepatitis A (such as highly overactive homosexual males, users of illicit injectable drugs, residents of a community experiencing hepatitis A, hemophiliacs and other recipients of therapeutic blood products), or those testing positive for hepatitis A, is made of immune serum globulin obtained by ethanol fractionation of plasma pooled from hundreds of donors. Considering that microzymas and morbidly evolved microzymas are being transferred from one individual to another, one might conclude that this could have disastrous consequences. (The fact that animal blood and fluids are transferred to humans by vaccination bears no further comment, except to say that Frankenstein would be proud).

It is also very interesting that the vaccine given to those testing positive for hepatitis B is created by cloning the antigen HBsAg in a bed of yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the culminate stage of the morbidly evolved microzyma) and formulated as a suspension of the antigen adsorbed on aluminum hydroxide [6]. Such morbid, poisonous vaccines are given to infants at 2, 4, and 15 months of age. The vaccine is enough to disturb the central balance of the biological terrain and cause an array of symptomologies in anyone, especially an infant. That more people are not quickly poisoned to death by this practice is testimony to the astounding resilience of human physiology.

Vaccination Results

Does the vaccinal approach produce wellness or any health benefit? Kalokerinos & Dettman point out that statistics in England and Wales, presented at the Presidential Address of the British Association for the Advancement of Sciences (Porter, 1971), show that deaths of children under 15 years of age attributed to scarlet fever, diphtheria, whooping cough and measles saw a 90% decline from 1850 to 1940 [7]. Yet, antibiotics and compulsory (i.e., widespread) vaccination against diphtheria were not introduced until 1940. The death rate due to these illnesses dropped from over 6,000 per million children in 1850 to under 1,000 per million children in 1940, a period marked by vastly improved public health, sanitation and nutrition [7].

Along the same lines, an English doctor, D. Powles, observed: “The major contributing factor toward improved health over the past 200 years has been improved nutrition. Nearly 90% of the total decline in the death rate in children between 1860 and 1965 due to whooping cough, scarlet fever, diphtheria and measles occurred before the introduction of antibiotics and widespread immunization against diphtheria” [8]. Also, it has not been well publicized by authorities that infectious epidemics are naturally cyclic in populations. The procedure has generally been to introduce vaccines as the downcurve begins, giving the impression of effectiveness. In addition, there are numerous instances in history of violent outbreaks of illness following near-total immunizations of population groups.

Once I looked into this subject and its history, microzymian principle brought it into focus for me. Since germs evolve out of, or take advantage of, the susceptible state, and are symptoms themselves, drugging or vaccinating susceptible individuals cannot render them immune, and may have the reverse effect. When and if a vaccine works as intended, the result is only to suppress the appearance of a specific set of symptoms, not to prevent disease. Therefore, it is not conferring wellness, nor reducing susceptibility, but simply creating an effect in a highly artificial and dangerous manner, while allowing the disease condition to worsen. Is there a price to pay for this invasive and unscientific approach? In this writer’s view, it is what we’ve got-pandemic degenerative disease, cancer and AIDS, because we are not dealing with the foundational disease, which may then get worse and re-expresses itself in more intense ways.


The November/December 1995 issue of The Vaccine Reaction, Volume 1, No. 5, issued by the National Vaccine Information Center, reveals that Swiss scientists have reported finding the enzyme reverse transcriptase (RT) in the live measles/mumps/rubella (MMR) vaccine. This has been traced to the chicken embryos whose cells are used to create the vaccines. It has reportedly been detected in yellow fever and some influenza vaccines, also prepared in chicken embryo cells. No disease has been attributed to RT in the MMR vaccine, but it is a factor in retroviral disease theory and its presence in this case is a mystery. RT, which is officially said to be produced by many “tumor-producing” viruses, supposedly the retroviruses, catalyzes the transformation of RNA into DNA. However, there is no proof of viral production of tumors-only theory.

I suggest the following process to explain how it gets into the vaccine, based on microzymian principle: Disruption of the embryo cells, by toxins or other means, probably damages their DNA. The response is endogenous microzymian production of repair protein complexes (retroviruses), which in turn produce RT in order to effect repairs. As the toxification process continues, central balance in the embryo cells is disturbed sufficiently and the ensuing endogenous pleomorphic development of upper development forms results in excess fermentations, with corresponding increase in the level of toxins. In order not to “spoil the broth,” however, preservatives are added at a certain point to arrest development.

Experiments with fertile eggs, which I later discovered were described by Bechamp, provide evidence of endogenous microzymian development. I have observed that the hypodermically extracted serum of a fresh egg looks normal under a high powered light microscope. However, when the central balance is disturbed by shaking the egg, which is then allowed to sit for a period of time, extracted serum shows the presence of bacteria, yeasts, and their associated toxins, i.e., acetic, sulfuric and butyric acids. An equally elegant, but even simpler, demonstration is bruising an apple without breaking the skin. Soon the area begins to turn brown and rot from the inside. This is a life process mediated by endogenously developed microforms.

The enzyme that orthodox researchers associate with retroviruses is being found in live vaccines such as MMR and polio. But RT does not cause disease. It is toxins which taint the vaccine, whether produced in culture or introduced as ingredients, that have the potential to interact with each individual’s immune system and DNA and disrupt the body such that various symptoms are produced. This practice of introducing foreign (genetic/viral) proteins directly into the blood may result in morbid pleomorphosis with further potential for toxification. Of course, that is precisely what has been occurring for many years, with the blessing of the allopathic medical system, whose financial health depends on disease.

Another example of unwanted or unpredictable vaccine contaminants: polio vaccines grown on monkey kidney have been identified as a source of simian viral (SV40) and spherical retroviral structures [9]. Such stray protein structures and fragments in vaccines can be regarded as a large, uncontrolled, cross-species genetic experiment in which a gene from one species might be spliced as a repair protein into another.


Though secondary to the failure to address disease, vaccine reaction has become the more common issue because of its immediacy. It results from the aggressive willingness of medical authorities to play Russian roulette with people’s lives. When asked about potential, dangerous reactions, officials reply, “The benefits outweigh the risks”. The simple fact is, there are no benefits, even before we get to the fact that this assertion is based upon statistical information that seems far from complete. According to the U.S. National Vaccine Information Center, more than 54,000 adverse events following vaccination, including convulsions, encephalitis and deaths, were reported to the FDA during a three-year period ending October 1993. However, since the FDA estimates that only 10 percent of doctors report adverse events, the real number could have been extremely high, more than half a million, including 50 or 60,000 serious injuries and 10-11,000 deaths. Connaught Laboratories, a vaccine manufacturer, estimates a 50-fold under-reporting of adverse events.

I can find no accurate statistical estimate for how many deaths and serious injuries are caused by vaccinations each year in the United States. It appears as though the government would rather not release such information, although a federal fund has been set up to cover the millions of dollars in lawsuits that are always pending. Thus, the law has been constructed so that perpetrators of this damaging practice cannot be sued, but continue to profit, while the government shields them with the people’s money.

Perhaps the government feels that with no way to enforce accurate reporting from doctors, it is futile to indulge in a guessing game. From the doctors’ perspective, there is little to gain from reporting, except an inexorable and embarrassing statistical slide toward collision with the truth. Consider these words from Kalokerinos and Dettman 20 years ago: “Moreover, it is disappointing to observe the futility and ineffectiveness of many ‘flu’ vaccines that have been accepted by an unwary public” [10]. In this writer’s opinion, the statement applies to all vaccines.

Taken in the Rear

Montague R. Leverson, M.D., Ph.D., M.A., an American physician, happening to come across some of Professor Bechamp’s writings in New York, became fascinated with his views. Realizing that the dated works anticipated Pasteurian “revelations” in certain important points, he decided to go to France to meet Professor Bechamp, where he heard the story of Pasteur’s plagiarism of the professor’s work directly. In a lecture entitled “Pasteur, the Plagiarist,” delivered at Claridge’s Hotel, London, on May 25, 1911, he outlined briefly Bechamp’s claim to be the first to produce a ferment in a medium containing no albuminoid matter, something thought impossible up to that time. (Ethel Douglas Hume’s book about Bechamp was based on work begun by Leverson, who is also the translator of Bechamp’s masterwork, The Blood).

Understanding microzymian principle, he had this to say about inoculation

When a drug is administered by the mouth, as was beautifully pointed out by Dr. J. Garth Wilkinson, in proceeding along the alimentary canal it encounters along its whole line a series of chemical laboratories, wherein it is analyzed, synthesized, and deleterious matter is prepared for excretion, and finally excreted, or it may be ejected from the stomach, or overcome by an antidote.

But when nature’s coat of mail, the skin, is violated, and the drug inserted beneath the skin, nature’s line of defence is taken in the rear, and rarely can anything be done to hinder or prevent the action of the drug, no matter how injurious, even fatal it may be. All the physicians of the world are incompetent either to foresee its action or to hinder it. Even pure water has been known to act as a violent poison when injected into the bloodstream. How much more dangerous is it, then, to inject poisons known to be such, whether modified in the fanciful manner at present fashionable among vivisectionists or in any other manner. . . . Inoculation should be regarded as malpractice to be tolerated only in case of extreme danger where the educated physician sees no other chance of saving life.

Now the forcing of these inoculations upon individuals by law is one of the worst of tyrannies imaginable, and should be resisted, even to the death of the official who is enforcing it....

The entire fabric of the germ theory of disease rests upon assumptions which not only have not been proved, but which are incapable of proof, and many of them can be proved to be the reverse of truth. The basic one of these unproven assumptions, the credit for which in its present form is wholly due to Pasteur, is the hypothesis that all the so-called infectious and contagious disorders are caused by germs, each disease having its own specific germ, which germs have existed in the air from the beginning of things, and that though the body is closed to these pathogenic germs when in good health, when the vitality is lowered the body becomes susceptible to their inroads.

Dr. Leverson goes on to describe disease as nature’s attempt to eliminate waste, and diseased tissues as being due to improper living. He suggests plenty of fresh air, the best sanitation, scanty clothes, and a scientific study of diet. He saw overeating as the precursor to “an enormous number of diseased conditions” [11].

Vaccine Causes Polio Symptoms

Although Leverson is correct in his criticism of inoculation, even the body’s amazing “coat of mail” sometimes fails to be enough, as oral vaccine also poses danger. In a report on the Internet by Press, we have a statement by Dr. Rebecca Prevots of the Center for Disease Control in Atlanta (Jan. 30, 1977) that almost every case of polio in the United States between 1980 and 1994 was caused by, or related to, the oral vaccine itself, “which consists of a live but weakened virus,” the CDC said. But, they hasten to add, there is a new, safer plan. “This emphasizes the timeliness of the change in policy,” said Prevots. Time is said to pass in a different manner for different personalities, but it still seems a bit of a stretch to apply “timeliness” to a period of 14 years with 133 impacted lives involved.

The new policy is “expected” not to eliminate risk but to cut it in half. In the official oddsmanship game of risk versus benefit, this is tendered as comfort to those yet to be afflicted. It consists of two preliminary killed-virus injections given to infants in the first four months “... to build up their immunity to polio. Then they are given two oral doses of ‘weakened-virus’ vaccine between ages 1 and 6.” One can only hope that these microbists desist from this folly because, in addition to their misplaced belief in germ theory, they do not yet understand that the extent of vaccine risk goes beyond reaction.

Compulsory Vaccination

As Leverson emphasized, people are forced to this abomination by law in many cases, especially schoolchildren. Overcoming this assault on human rights usually requires extreme persistence, courage and a knowledgeable approach. (I don’t recommend his approach, but it is self-defence!) The argument is literally that those at risk for damage must be sacrificed to save millions of others (i.e., “the benefits outweigh the risks)”. But there is no science or even logic to this. If one is vaccinated, theoretically one is safe. If one chooses not to be vaccinated, then she does not threaten vaccinated people, but only those who have chosen that risk. Yet, the responsibility for the decision has been stolen from families under the guise of government responsibility to protect children from parents.

The unvaccinated, threatened by medical authority with the risk of developing a serious “disease,” are not told that said risk is greatly increased by germ theory mentality itself. It’s the medical equivalent of a mob protection racket, and the law has been manipulated to maintain the profitability of ill health produced by this practice. Holistic means of preventing or dealing with these symptoms are not even in the equation.

To summarize, if we consider Bechamp’s thesis that bacteria are evolved forms of anatomical elements called microzymas, that there are specific disease conditions rather than specific diseases, and that the microform is not the antecedent of disease, but arises in it; and if we add to this my thesis that the primitive stage of evolution, viruses, are apathological and created as response to structural breakdown, and that yeast, fungus, mold and their symptogenic poisons produce the symptoms attributed to viruses, is it possible that medical science is misdirected, if not malfeasant, in its intense pursuit of vaccinal answers? Was Bechamp on the right track? Are his many followers, including myself, correct as well? Is this why we cannot make a successful vaccine, and have, in fact, made dangerous and deadly ones?

On a final note of sanity, Edgar Cayce, the renowned psychic who could diagnose illnesses and treatments while in trance, was asked and answered the following question during a diagnostic session:

Q. Can immunization against contagious diseases be set up in any other manner than by inoculations?

A. If an alkalinity is maintained in the system-especially with lettuce, carrots and celery, these in the blood supply will maintain such a condition as to immunize a person. In an alkaline system there is less effect of cold and congestion [12].


  1. Physicians' Desk Reference (PDR) (1997), pp. 1730.
  2. Beale AJ, Vaccines and Antiviral Drugs. In: Topley & Wilson (Eds.), Principles of Bacteriology. Virology and Immunity, pp. 149.
  3. Jegede VA, Vaccine Technology. Encyclopaedia of Chemical Technology, pp. 629.
  4. PDR op. cit., pp. 2650.
  5. Rappaport John (1987) Touching All Bases-Exploring Alternative Theories of AIDS. The Reader (Los Angeles Free Weekly) 9(42): 10.
  6. PDR op. cit., pp. 2656.
  7. Kalokerinos, Dettman op. cit., pp. 13.
  8. Ibid., pp. 12.
  9. Goldberg B (1992) Origin of AIDS. Lancet 357(9249): p. 73.
  10. Kalokerinos, Dettman, op. cit.
  11. Pearson RB (1994) The Dream and Lie of Louis Pasteur. Sumeria Press, Collingwood, Australia, pp. 32-35.
  12. The Cayce readings are on fde at the Association for Research and Enlightenment. Cayce Reading, Virginia Beach, VA.
© 2014-2016 MedCrave Group, All rights reserved. No part of this content may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means as per the standard guidelines of fair use.
Creative Commons License Open Access by MedCrave Group is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Based on a work at
Best viewed in Mozilla Firefox | Google Chrome | Above IE 7.0 version | Opera |Privacy Policy