“Slight bleeding does occur in at least 10 per cent” of Jet Injections

Jet Injectors = Jet Infectors

June 22, 2016

In March of 1958, an article rapidly circulated within newspapers announcing the innovation of a needleless inoculating device. The article, written by columnist Dr. Herman Bundesen a distinguished member of the Chicago medical community, was supposed to foretell of an innovative medical break-through that would forever change the way vaccines were administered.

Dr. Herman Bundesen

Dr. Herman Bundesen

Unbeknownst to Dr. Bundesen, his article disclosed a major fact about mass jet injector vaccination campaigns. “Slight bleeding does occur in at least 10 per cent of those inoculated with the instrument.”

During the development and introduction of the multiple-use nozzle jet injector, made-up of all reusable parts, scientists knew that in AT LEAST 10 percent of the injections there would be SLIGHT BLEEDING. Moreover, here is evidence that scientists observed and recorded the number of bleeders following jet injections. Until now this bit of information has been suppressed.

Apply this information to later mass inoculation programs where hundreds of patients were lined-up single file. AT LEAST 10 percent bleed.

Apply this to our military personnel who where expeditiously herded through assembly-line inoculations. AT LEAST 10 percent bleed.

Despite the blatant admission to the presence of blood, the article goes on to state “no sterilization is necessary.” The hype of the device left many ignorant to the risk of blood contamination between recipients.

After further investigation, Dr. Bundesen was citing Dr. Abram Benenson’s 1959 article, Mass Immunization By Jet Injection.

1958 Connellsville PA
Here is the article in its entirety:

The Daily Courier
Connellsville, Pennsylvania
Tuesday, March 4, 1958
pg. 13

Four New Discoveries Mark Medical Advance
By Herman N. Bundesen, M.D.

THE advances that are made continually in medicine are really quite amazing, even to a doctor. That’s why I like to keep you informed, once each month, about what is new in the medical field.

Scientists have now developed a multiple dose jet injector which permits speedy administration of Salk polio vaccine in mass inoculation programs.

New Instrument
The new instrument, which has no needle, can inoculate patients as quickly as one every four to six seconds. The jet injection is relatively safe, although slight bleeding does occur in at least 10 per cent of those inoculated with the instrument.

It does away with the fear many patients have of a needle, and no sterilization is necessary.

© Shaun Brown and Jet Infectors, 2016 – 2018
Fair Use Notice (17 U.S.C. § 107)

Improper Military Jet Injector Vaccinations – Part 7

June 19, 2016


Through this series, we have presented concrete evidence of improper mass vaccination campaigns throughout every U.S. military training center, depot, and recruit center across four decades of use. We have conclusively demonstrated the statements made by Robert Harrington to the FDA were outright lies. Vaccinations throughout the U.S. military were, in fact, conducted improperly, and upon numerous instances instructions, procedures, and training were disregarded.

Originally we had set-out to ask: If jet injector procedures were not followed would blood contamination be more likely and occur more frequently? Would the problem be exacerbated and perpetual?

Herein, we have learned from the Army’s 1970 Medical Department Handbook of Basic Nursing that “improper injection technique will injure the recipient’s skin.” This manual also instructs the vaccinator to count, “1001, 1002, 1003,” before moving the jet injector. If the jet injector is not held still or kept for the full three seconds excessive bleeding will result, as documented in the image below. A third warning in the book states that a laceration or bleeding at the injection site is indicative of either a defective operation of the device, faulty maintenance, or an improper injection technique by the vaccinator. These repetitive warnings are to give the vaccinator a heightened awareness to prevent bleeding.

jet injector not held long enough
(Army Medical Department Handbook of Basic Nursing, 1970)

Indeed, if procedures were not followed the risk of bleeding would be even greater than the blood contamination already occurring from the inherent design faults.

So where are the photos capturing bloody arms and bloody nozzles, critics ask. The likelihood of such bloody photographs being published within military yearbooks would be few and far between. Moreover, even if such images were presented skeptics and naysayers would accuse me, and anyone else, of photoshopping.

Case in point, here is an image capturing a conspicuous pigment at the site of injection. The recruit is displaying his jet injection for the camera. Notice the circular imprint upon his flesh from the firm pressure of the nozzle. Located within the circle is the injection site that recently penetrated his skin. Also within this circle is a darker pigment that contrasts drastically from the sheen of the recruit’s flesh. No one will ever know for certain the exact nature of this darker pigment. Yet at the same time, this cannot be ruled-out as not being blood.

1981 Navy RTC San Diego company 934

(Navy RTC San Diego company 934, 1981)

1981 Navy RTC San Diego company 934 - close-up
Regardless, the lack of any published bloody vaccination photographs is not dispositive when the remaining body of evidence, including thousands of personal testimonies, implicates jet injectors were frequently contaminated with blood.


UPDATE: Since the original publication of this article, archival footage had surfaced of military recruits receiving mass jet injections whereupon a droplet of blood appears immediately following the vaccination. 1963 Film Captured Bleeding During Mass Military Jet Injections


  • (Army Medical Department Handbook of Basic Nursing, 1970) Army Medical Department Handbook of Basic Nursing. Jet Hypodermic Injection Apparatus, Automatic. Department of the Army. November 1970. pp. 395-398.



© Shaun Brown and Jet Infectors, 2016 – 2018
Fair Use Notice (17 U.S.C. § 107)

Flawed VA Studies on Hepatitis C Risk Factors

Jet Injectors = Jet Infectors

June 4, 2016

The VA often cites VBA Fast Letter 211 (04-13)  when concerns of jet injector transmission arise. “Despite the lack of any scientific evidence to document transmission of HCV with airgun injectors, it is biologically plausible.” This document also purported, “The large majority of HCV infections can be accounted for by known modes of transmission, primarily transfusion of blood products before 1992, and injection drug use.”

Herein the Fast Letter alludes to VA Cooperative Study 488, where 78% of HCV veterans studied were found to have either the risk of blood transfusions or injection drug use.

However, VA Cooperative Study 488, by Dominitz and colleagues (2005), only assessed 52 veterans with HCV antibodies. This small sample of veterans has been used by the VA to guide the public health policy of the 174,000 veterans within VHA (Department of Veterans Affairs, 2014), the estimated 42,000 veterans unknowingly living with Hep C, and the estimated 58% of the veterans in this cohort who do not utilize VHA care. [This percentage comes from a 2014 Congressional Research Report which stated, “As a proportion of the total veteran population, the VA-enrolled veterans have increased from 20% in FY2001 to 42% in FY2014” (Bagalman, 2014)].

In so doing, the VA has attributed the etiological causes for over 287,000 veterans positive with hepatitis C antibodies (Department of Veterans Affairs, 2010) based on a study that only assessed 52 veterans with hepatitis C antibodies. Herein the sample size of the study is only two-thousandths of a percent (0.02%) of the population.

VA Cooperative Study 488 is also grossly outdated. The study sampled veterans in 2001 at which time the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) had roughly 100,000 veterans with hepatitis C in their system. This figure is estimated from Butt and colleagues (2007) who reported by 2003 VHA had 113,927 veterans with HCV in their care. By 2014, the VA reported over 174,000 veterans with HCV within VHA. Therefore, from 2001 to 2014 we can estimate the number of hepatitis C veterans within VHA’s system rose by over 74,000 people, or rather by 74 percent. There is no guarantee that the risk factors for these additional veterans, who were new patients within the VHA system, are reliably represented in that study.
VA Cooperative Study 488 is a unique study that properly assessed the prevalence of hepatitis C antibodies amongst a random sample of veterans. In this study, veterans were randomly selected and then assessed on whether or not they had hepatitis C antibodies. However, this is the limits to this study. Assessing the etiological causes of only 52 veterans with hepatitis C antibodies, as VA Cooperative Study 488 did, is a weak claim in identifying the risk factors for a larger population. This is evidenced based upon the data, which reported spending more than 48 hours in jail posed a greater risk for hepatitis C than military service (which included combat duty and jet injections).

Despite the VA’s denunciation of jet injectors, the administration admitted “It is possible that if transmission of hepatitis C did occur via the use of jet injectors, it happened in isolated circumstances, or on a small scale. Such events would be difficult to detect in a population-based prevalence study like VA Cooperative Study 488” (Department of Veterans Affairs, 2006).

Briggs and colleagues (2001) also conducted a study to assess the prevalence of and risk factors for hepatitis C within a VA Medical Center. The study found 185 veterans, or rather 17.9 percent of the sample, had hepatitis C.  Their study purported,

History of vaccine in combat or vaccination with an air gun [another name for a jet injector] did not correlate with HCV status (data not shown).  However, these questions were added to the questionnaire during the conduct of the study and information was available from only 211 respondents.

The researchers explicitly disclosed that not all of the sampled veterans received the same questionnaire consisting of the question to evaluate for jet injectors.  In fact, the researchers stated only 211 veterans or rather 20.4 percent or rather one-fifth of the sampled population received an updated questionnaire.  Yet regardless of this inconsistency the researchers ultimately denounced an association between hepatitis C and jet injector vaccinations within their study.

Here the VA has relied upon invalidated research to obfuscate the jet injector / hepatitis C nexus. When in fact, validated Research Demonstrates Military Jet Injections Were a Risk Factor for Hepatitis C Veterans.


  • (Bagalman, 2014) Bagalman E. The Number of Veterans That Use VA Health Care Services: A fact sheet. Congressional Research Service. 3 June 2014.
  • (Briggs et al., 2001) Briggs ME, Baker C, Hall R, Gaziano JM, Gagnon D, Bzowej N, and TL Wright. Prevalence and risk factor for hepatitis C virus infection in an urban Veterans Administration medical center. Hepatology 2001, 34:1200-1205.
  • (Butt et al., 2007) Butt AA, Justice AC, Skanderson M, Rigsby MO, Good CB, Kwoh CK. Rate and predictors of treatment prescription for hepatitis C. Gut. 2007;56(3):385-389.
  • (Department of Veterans Affairs, 2006) Department of Veterans Affairs, VA Hepatitis C Prevalence Study Results and VA Hepatitis C Program Actions: Summary. 25 September 2006. Accessed at: https://web.archive.org/web/20070816025640/http://www.hepatitis.va.gov/vahep?page=prtop01-rs-01.
  • (Department of Veterans Affairs, 2010) Department of Veterans Affairs, State of Care for Veterans with Chronic Hepatitis C. November 2010. Accessed at: http://www.hepatitis.va.gov/pdf/HCV-State-of-Care-2010.pdf.
  • (Department of Veterans Affairs, 2014) Department of Veterans Affairs. State of Care for Veterans with Hepatitis C. September 2014. Accessed at: http://www.hepatitis.va.gov/pdf/HCV-State-of-Care-2014.pdf.
  • (Dominitz et al., 2005) Dominitz JA, Boyko EJ, Koepsell TD, Heagerty PJ, Maynard C, Sporleder JL, Stenhouse A, Kling MA, Hrushesky W, Zeilman C, Sontag S, Shah N, Ona F, Anand B, Subik M, Imperiale TF, Nakhle S, Ho SB, Bini EJ, Lockhart B, Ahmad J, Sasaki A, van der Linden B, Toro D, Martinez-Souss J, Huilgol V, Eisen S, Young KA. Elevated prevalence of hepatitis C infection in users of United States veterans medical centers. Hepatology. 2005 Jan;41(1):88-96.



© Shaun Brown and Jet Infectors, 2016 – 2018
Fair Use Notice (17 U.S.C. § 107)