Replies

(from the article):" Zika has only recently been scientifically linked to microcephaly and birth defects. Much more research is necessary to confirm the link,
understand its scope, and determine the actual rate of defect development in infected babies."

"Much more research is necessary to confirm the link,.."
Agreed, more research is needed as the previously known Zika was found in 1947 to exist in Africa , and there is no record of microcephaly and birth defects associated with it at that time.
The only known effect was a "bulls-eye" rash on the victim , whether on the expectant mother, female, or male, and even the rash only showed up in 30% of the victims.
On the other hand, the onerous effects of microcephaly and birth defects were first found in Brazil,in an agricultural area known for high usage of insecticides and herbicides.
Viri are, by their very nature, simple in genetic construct, and are susceptible to be easily mutated.
It is quite possible that the Zika virus, currently associated with microcephaly and birth defects could be a localized mutant variant,
having been altered by exposure to insecticides and herbicides, either singly exposed, or used in systematic combinations.
Agreed , more information is needed as to the risk of exposure, comparison of the South American with the original source, and methods of transmission.

Something is fishy in the Amazon. Zika has been around since the 40s. All of the sudden women start having babies with shrunken heads.?.? Either this is a cover up of vaccination induced microcephaly, or it is genetic modification to implement the world goal of dropping the population by 90%.