Toxic Science of Flu Vaccines

(GreenMedInfo.com) The flu shot does not discriminate: children, the elderly, and everyone in between can suffer detreimental effects from this dangerous vaccine.

Progressive Radio Network, October 31, 2016

Joshua Hadfield was a normal, healthy developing child as a toddler. In the midst of the 2010 H1N1 swine flu frenzy and fear mongering about the horrible consequences children face if left unvaccinated, the Hadfield’s had Joshua vaccinated with Glaxo’s Pandermrix influenza vaccine.  Within weeks, Joshua could barely wake up, sleeping up to nineteen hours a day.  Laughter would trigger seizures.

Joshua was diagnosed with narcolepsy, “an incurable, debilitating condition” associated with acute brain damage.[1]  Today we can look back at Pandermrix as a horrible vaccine.  Research indicates that it was associated with a 1400% increase in narcolepsy risk. More recently, a team of Finnish scientists at Finland’s National Institute for Health and Welfare, recorded 800 cases of narcolepsy associated with this vaccine.  Vaccine ingredients other than the engineered viral antigen are most often believed to be the primary culprits to adverse vaccine reactions. The Finnish research, on the other hand, indicated that the vaccine’s altered viral nucleotide likely contributed to the sudden rise in sleeping sickness.[2]

Although Pandermrix was pulled from the market, it should never have been approved and released in the first place.  This is a classic case of regulatory negligence by health officials and the WHO which promulgates flu vaccines around the world.  Like all vaccines, which are now commonly fast tracked through government health regulatory bodies for rapid release upon the public, it should have been tested more thoroughly and more rigorously reviewed.

[Sponsor Links: FREE COLLOIDAL SILVER]

Since the time of Edward Jenner’s primitive inoculation experiments to combat smallpox, and its countless aftermath of deaths throughout the 19^th century, modern vaccine science has failed to learn its lessons. The failure of proper regulatory oversight has resulted in Joshua and other British citizens becoming disabled for life. The British government has paid out over 63 million pounds to cover lawsuits to Pandermrix victims.  Glaxo has never admitted its flu vaccine caused brain damage. And this begs the question as to why it was withdrawn since it was the corporation’s single flagship vaccine against the swine flu.[3]

We shouldn’t become complacent by assuming flu vaccine risks only affect young children. Sarah Behie was 20 years old after receiving the flu shot.  Three weeks later her health deteriorated dramatically. Diagnosed with Guillain-Barre syndrome, a not uncommon adverse effect of influenza vaccination, four years later Sarah remains paralyzed from the waist down, incapable of dressing and feeding herself, and rotting away in hospitals and nursing homes.[4]

Joshua’s and Sarah’s stories are by no means unique. Today tens of thousands of infants, toddlers, children and adults across the nation are increasingly becoming victims of vaccine injuries. No national debate is initiated because regulatory malfeasance within federal health agencies has aligned its self interests with pharmaceutical profits rather than serving the public health.

Flu vaccines are perhaps the most ineffective vaccine on the market.  Repeatedly we are told by health officials that the moral argument for its continued use is for “the greater good,” although this imaginary good has never been defined scientifically. For the present 2016 flu season, the CDC has removed Medimmune’s live attenuated flu vaccine (LAIV) FluMist from the market because it was found to be ineffective.  Or at least this is the rationale stated by the agency. According to the CDC, one third of children’s influenza vaccinations are with live nasal sprays. Yet regardless of how infective and useless FluMist has been, it has remained on the market since 2003, and in 2014 the CDC recommended it as its flu vaccine of choice for children.[5]

Although last year FluMist was only 3% effective, according to an NBC report, the real truth behind its withdrawal is likely more crucial. [6] There is no reason to doubt that the vaccine contributed to more cases of flu infection than it prevented.  And this is a fundamental flaw with all live vaccines, and even killed attenuated ones, that have been shown to “shed” and infect people in contact with the vaccinated persons, especially those with compromised immune systems.

In her investigative report, “The Emerging Risks of Live Virus and Virus Vectored Vaccines,” Barbara Lo Fisher notes that the attenuated virus in the flu vaccine can shed and infect others for months after vaccination.  Both the unvaccinated and the vaccinated are at risk.  The CDC acknowledges this risk and warns

“Persons who care for severely immunosuppressed persons who require a protective environment should not receive LAIV, or should avoid contact with such persons for 7 days after receipt, given the theoretical risk for transmission of the live attenuated vaccine virus.”[7]

At their best, flu vaccines remain around 50-60% effective according to official health statements. However, the World Health Organization’s predictions for 2014-2015 flu strains were a bust. The match was such a failure that the CDC was forced to warn the American public that the vaccine was only 23% effective.[8]  Given that the 2012-2013 flu season was only 27% effective for the 65 years-plus age group, predictive methodologies to determine which flu strains emerge during any given influenza season have more in common with medieval divination than sound science.  For the 1992-1993 and 1997-1998 seasons, the vaccine concoction of flu strains was only 16% effective. Katherine Severyn, who monitors the actual WHO predictions and compares them with CDC claims has stated that, “depending upon the study cited, [flu] vaccine efficacy actually ranges from a low of 0%.” [9]

Dr. David Brownstein has noted that as far back as 1999, the Journal of the American Medical Association reported increased risks of febrile disorders greater than placebo associated with the live vaccine.[10]  According to the FDA’s literature on FluMist, the vaccine was not studied for immunocompromised individuals (yet was still administered to them), and has been associated with acute allergic reactions, asthma, Guillian-Barre, and a high rate of hospitalizations among children under 24 months – largely due to upper respiratory tract infections.  Other adverse effects include pericarditis, congenital and genetic disorders, mitochondrial encephalomyopathy or Leigh Syndrome, meningitis, and others.[11] Given this litany of vaccine dangers, it is highly unlikely the vaccine was removed simply for ineffectiveness. Yet when has the CDC ever been truthful with the public?

The development and promotion of the influenza vaccine was never completely about protecting the public. It has been the least popular vaccine in the US including among healthcare workers. Instead, similar to the mumps vaccine in the MMR, it has been the cash cow for vaccine makers.  Determining the actual severity of any given flu season is burdened by federal intentional confusion to mislead the public.  The CDC’s first line of propaganda defense to enforce flu vaccinations is to exaggerate flu infections as the cause of preventable deaths.   However, validating this claim is near impossible because the CDC does not differentiate deaths caused by influenza infection and deaths due to pneumonia.  On its website, the CDC lumps flu and pneumonia deaths together, currently estimated at 55,227. The large majority of these were pneumonia deaths of elderly patients. Yet in any given year, only 3-18% of suspected influenza infections actually test positive for a Type A or B influenza strain.[12]

Dr. Martin Meltzer, a CDC expert in health economics, has stated “almost nobody dies of the flu” and “deaths [are] associated with flu, but not necessarily caused by flu.”[13]

To date there is only one gold standard clinical trial with the flu vaccine that compares vaccinated vs. unvaccinated, and it is not good news for the CDC and the vaccine makers. This Hong Kong funded double-blind placebo controlled study following the health conditions of vaccinated and unvaccinated children between the ages of 6-15 years for 272 days. The trial concluded the flu vaccine holds no health benefits. In fact, those vaccinated with the flu virus were observed to have a 550% higher risk of contracting non-flu virus respiratory infections. Among the vaccinated children, there were 116 flu cases compared to 88 among the unvaccinated; there were 487 other non-influenza virus infections, including rhinovirus, coxsackie, echovirus and others, among the vaccinated versus 88 with the unvaccinated.  This single study alone poses a scientifically sound warning and rationale for avoiding the vaccine.[14]

It is worth noting that there are approximately 200 distinct viruses that are misdiagnosed as influenza and produce flu-like symptoms. These organisms don’t magically appear during fall and winter – they are always with us. Nevertheless we are more susceptible to flu-like infections during the colder months when there are less daylight hours.

In a later study by Dr. Danuta Skowronski in Canada, individuals with a history of receiving consecutive seasonal flu shots over several years had an increased risk of becoming infected with H1N1 swine flu.  Skowronski commented on his findings that

“policy makers have not yet had a chance to fully digest them [the study’s conclusions] or understand the implications.”

He continued,

“Who knows, frankly? The wise man knows he knows nothing when it comes to influenza, so you always have to be cautious in speculating.”[15]

There is strong evidence suggesting that all vaccine clinical trials carried out by manufacturers fall short of demonstrating vaccine efficacy accurately. And when they are shown to be efficacious, it is frequently in the short term and offer only partial or temporary protection. According to an article in the peer-reviewed Journal of Infectious Diseases, the only way to evaluate vaccines is to scrutinize the epidemiological data obtained from real-life conditions. In other words, researchers simply cannot — or will not — adequately test a vaccine’s effectiveness and immunogenicity prior to its release onto an unsuspecting public.[16]

The Cochrane Collaboration, the world’s foremost group of unbiased researchers, physicians and scientists, has performed a series of meta-analyses on the effectiveness of the influenza vaccine. In 2014 they found that vaccinating adults against influenza did not affect the number of people hospitalized nor decrease lost work.[17] Cochrane researchers stated that their results might be overly optimistic due to the fact that 24 out of 90 studies were funded by the vaccine manufacturers, which tend to produce results favorable to their product.[18]

According to Dr. Tom Jefferson at the Cochrane Collaboration, it makes little sense to keep vaccinating against seasonal influenza based on the evidence.[19] Jefferson has also endorsed more cost-effective and scientifically-proven means of minimizing the transmission of flu, including regular hand washing and wearing masks. There is also substantial peer-reviewed literature supporting the supplementation of Vitamin D.