despite what your doctor says, it is possible to get flu from a flu shot

CAN YOU GET FLU FROM THE FLU VACCINE?
CAN A FLU SHOT GIVE YOU THE FLU?

Do Flu Shots Cause Flu?

Wellcome V0012085

I’m not sure who first said “with friends like this, who needs enemies,” but they must have been thinking about flu vaccines when they said it.  YESTERDAY I showed you how effective (actually ineffective is more descriptive) the H3N2 potion of this year’s flu vaccine is supposed to be according to experts from our own government —- 10%.  That’s right folks, it’s not a misprint.  Get the shot and one out of ten of you who would have otherwise gotten the flu (far fewer those who actually get vaccinated) wind up with the flu.  The question we must ask ourselves is whether this a fluke or a pattern?  Listen to what Sarah Zhang of Wired Magazine said in an article written in October of 2015 (Scientists Found a Flu Vaccine Flaw—Now They Have to Fix It).

“Among flu viruses, H3N2 is the one you should fear the most. It lands the most patients in hospitals. It kills the most people. Oh, and bad news: The flu shot has real trouble fighting it. Last year’s seasonal flu vaccine was particularly weak against H3N2. In fact, that keeps happening, year after year—and no one is really sure why.” 

Clearly it’s a pattern, as well as being the reason that for years we’ve been hearing (usually at the very end of the season after everyone has had their shot) that shucky darns, the vaccine failed to work yet again.  Today I will answer an oft-asked question; do flu shots cause the flu?   The standard line, of course, is no.  The CDC’s website doesn’t mince words in an article called Misconceptions About Seasonal Flu and Flu Vaccines. “Can a flu shot give you the flu? No, a flu shot cannot cause flu illness.”  Back in 2013, USA Today (Can the Flu Vaccine Cause the Flu?) stated that “There’s a belief, popular in the current flu outbreak, that getting vaccinated can actually give you the flu, and many people use it as a reason to avoid the shot. A survey by CVS Pharmacy last year found that about 35% of consumers think it’s true.  Doctors say it’s impossible.  While some people get sick after being vaccinated, it’s not from the vaccine, doctors say.”  But it doesn’t stop there.

Mayo Clinic (Flu Shot: Your Best Bet for Avoiding Influenza) asks the question and then answers it in the way you might expect. “Can the vaccine give me the flu?  No. The flu vaccine can’t give you the flu. But you might develop flu-like symptoms.”  This is a common thread I hear in my clinic.  People are told they don’t officially have the flu; only flu-like symptoms, which is the same thing without a positive test — kind of like your waiter saying, “no we don’t have 7-up,” but then revealing you can get Sprite. 

Harvard Health Publishing (10 Flu Myths: Dispelling Misinformation About the Flu Vaccine, Sickness, Treatment, and Recovery) recently stated, “MYTH: You can catch the flu from the vaccine. The vaccine is made from an inactivated virus that can’t transmit infection. So people who get sick after receiving a flu vaccination were going to get sick anyway. It takes a week or two to get protection from the vaccine. But people assume that because they got sick after getting the vaccine, the shot caused their illness.”  There it is again; trying to explain away the large numbers of people getting the non-flu “flu equivalent” after their FLU SHOT.

WebMD (Can Flu Shots Cause the Flu?) says, “The flu shot is made from dead viruses and cannot “give” you the flu. However, the vaccine can trigger an immune response from your body, so you may have a few mild symptoms, like achy muscles or a low-grade fever.  The nasal flu vaccine, FluMist, is made with a weakened live flu virus. It also cannot give you the flu, but is more likely to cause symptoms such as achy muscles or a low fever.”  How can we know the author of this article is clueless?  Because two years ago the “mist” nasal vaccine was taken off the market because for at least three years prior, it’s effectiveness was so low it could not be measured (effectively zero — HERE).  Livestrong (Flu-Like Symptoms After a Flu Shot) was even more clear on this subject.  “Flu shots contain an inactivated version of the flu virus and cannot cause influenza.”  However, “Receiving a flu shot may cause side effects that are similar to flu symptoms….  Furthermore…. it is still possible to get the flu despite being vaccinated.

A 2015 story for the Sacramento Bee by medical reporter Anna Ibarra (Why You May Feel Sick After Getting the Flu Shot) showed how many promoters of flu shots don’t practice what they preach.  “I have a confession to make. I have opted out of getting a flu shot a few times in my adult life. I know this seems irresponsible of me, especially being a health reporter and all.  But I can explain.  It happened almost as a pattern – I’d get a flu shot, and I’d instantly feel sick. Headaches, stuffy nose, a cough, your typical flu symptoms. I’d ask myself: What was the point of getting the flu shot?  The years I skipped the influenza vaccine: nothing. It was as if the flu shot made me sick. At least that is what I told myself to ease the guilt.  So what is the point of me sharing this blunder? Well, I know I am not the only one who at some point erroneously believed that the seasonal flu vaccine can actually cause the flu illness.”  But maybe the best of the genre comes from Julianna LeMieux, who was writing in the September issue of the American Council on Science and Health (Why the Flu Shot Won’t (and Can’t) Give you the Flu).

It’s that time of year again – time to get the flu shot. In case you are wondering when is the best time to get your flu shot, please read here.  Every year, the medical community emphasizes the importance of getting the flu vaccine. And, every year the same excuses pop up as to why people are not going to do it. But, the one excuse that I simply cannot hear anymore is that the flu shot will give someone the flu. This one drives me crazy because it is simply not possible…. The flu is going to be bad this year and the vaccine seems to be a good match.”

LeMieux is probably a super great individual.  But considering I just showed you that this year’s vaccine is not a good match, her article cannot be considered anything but a glorified propaganda piece.  A commonly used reason to convince you that you should get the flu shot anyway because even if the vaccine is not matched correctly (something that peer-review says happens less than once a decade), some protection is better than none, and what little protection you get will help you survive whatever flu virus you are hit with. 

Not only is this not true (the only flu vaccine that may provide real protection must have the exact — emphasis on exact — genetic variant of the flu virus making the rounds in any given year), I am going to show you that in many cases, the flu vaccine actually increases your chances of getting sick with flu or something that looks so identical that it’s indistinguishable (the plethora of viral infections filed under “flu-like illnesses”). 

NOT ONLY DOES THE FLU VACCINE NOT WORK, IT PREDISPOSES PEOPLE TO FLU

“By the late 1940s a vaccine for influenza had been developed, but there was no evidence that it prevented serious outcomes. Then, in 1957, a new pandemic struck. The “Asian flu” would eventually cause 1-2 million deaths worldwide. A vaccine was manufactured, and millions of doses were administered in the United States in response. The vaccine had no appreciable effect on the trend of the pandemic. By the early 1960s, routine influenza vaccination was generally adopted as a policy, with very little supporting evidence. If the reason for influenza vaccination is that flu is such a serious disease, then the relevant outcomes are whether vaccination improves morbidity and mortality from flu. However, after decades of vaccine use, it is hard to detect any public health impact.”
The authors of the paper (Flu Vaccine for All: A Critical Look at the Evidence) that this cherry-picked quote comes from, Drs. Biondi and Aligne, are both MD’s and Professors of Pediatrics at different universities in New York, describing themselves thusly, “We are pediatricians, and we believe in childhood immunizations.”  However, they are not fans of flu vaccines or the public health campaigns that promote them, usually via fear and public ignorance.  They go on to talk about the CDC’s studies throughout the 1960’s and 1970’s, using the very conclusions found in their own papers to show that our government knew the flu vaccine was worthless as far as preventing morbidity and mortality five decades ago.  Yet despite this, the government’s mantra remains the same; we need to forge ahead with our flu vaccination policy come hell or high water because doggone it (bang shoe on table for effect in Khrushchev fashion) the lives of babies and grandmas are at stake! (Biondi’s paper will take you about five minutes to read, read it.)

Back in 2011, University of Minnesota’s CIDRAP program (Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy) published an article about research found in the Lancet, saying that the “70% to 90% level of protection afforded by seasonal influenza vaccines” should be revised.  Before repeatedly repeating the mantra that yes, these things don’t do what’s always been claimed of them, but they are better than nothing so go ahead and promote them as you always have, the CIDRAP team wrote  “The meta-analysis produced little or no evidence of 70% to 90% efficacy for most population groups….” 

Members of the organization, in fact, debated whether the term “oversold” should be used to describe vaccine efficacy (many were upset that one of the paper’s lead authors, Dr. Michael Osterholm, had used the word to describe our national flu vaccination policies).  What was even more interesting was that despite the pediatricians in the paragraph above revealing that the CDC has known about this unwarranted hype for years, this paper showed that they continued to carry the fraudulently high percentages of efficacy on their huge tax-payer funded site (CDC estimates of effectiveness have since been lowered).

Although I have dealt with it in other posts on some level, here is another fun fact.  Studies continue to show that if you got a flu shot last year, this year’s shot will not only not be effective, it actually increases your chances of contracting the flu — dramatically (HERE).  Two years ago in January, the journal Eurosurvalliance published a study called Interim Estimates of 2014/15 Vaccine Effectiveness Against Influenza A(H3N2) from Canada’s Sentinel Physician Surveillance Network.  Vaccine effectiveness against influenza A (H3N2) among those who received the 2014/2015 influenza vaccine without prior vaccination in 2013/14 was higher than among participants who were vaccinated with the same A (H3N2) vaccine component in both 2013/14 and 2014/15.”  How bad was it?  Negative 15%.  This means that the second consecutive year of getting a flu shot increased your chances of getting the flu by 15% above those who had not been vaccinated.  The same phenomenon was seen in the “Household” study I dealt with yesterday from Clinical Infectious Diseases — only it was much worse; -45%.

I cannot even begin to tell you how many times patients tell me something along these same lines.  The story is always the same.  “Hey Doc, I took a flu shot last year and got the worst case of flu I’ve ever gotten in my life.”  Especially important once you understand that there are about a jillion viruses that can cause the same symptoms as flu, but because they are not actually flu, are classified as “Flu-Like” and not counted in official statistics.  And then the other shoe dropped.  Oxford Academic’s Clinical Infectious Diseases (Increased Risk of Noninfluenza Respiratory Virus Infections Associated With Receipt of Inactivated Influenza Vaccine) revealed back in 2012 that if you had a flu shot, you were five and a half times (550%) more likely to come down with a non-influenza respiratory infection in that same year.

“Participants who received Trivalent Vaccine had higher risk of acute respiratory illness associated with confirmed non-influenza respiratory virus infection.  In the prepandemic period of our study, we did not observe a statistically significant reduction in confirmed seasonal influenza virus infections in the Trivalent Vaccine recipients.  Including two additional confirmed infections when participants did not report acute respiratory illness, Trivalent Vaccine recipients had higher risk of confirmed non-influenza respiratory virus infection.  The phenomenon of virus interference has been well known in virology for over 60 years.”

Did you catch that?  This phenomenon has been recognized since at least the 1950’s.  In other words, while the virus in a flu vaccine may be similar enough to confer some degree of immunity against the flu (truthfully, they need to be identical as we have been seeing), the exact opposite is true more often than not.  The more you ramp up the immune system with very specific viral antigens found in vaccines, the worse the body will react if the virus it is being attacked with is not what was in the vaccine.  And if you remember, match-years — those years when the flu vaccine actually “matches” the virus that is circulating in the public — happen about once every 11 years according to peer-review.  This is not only why we see crappy results with the flu vaccine year after year, but why — thanks to “viral interference” — we routinely see people getting sicker after getting vaccinated against the flu.  And because these illnesses are not actually the flu (even though they pass the smell test), your doctor can sit there and tell you that your shot is doing exactly what it was created and designed to do.

What does this look like in today’s America?  We not only see a steadily eroding immunity against the flu for those who are getting vaccinated on a regular basis (think elderly folks here who often wait in line like teen groupies trying to get into a Justin Beever concert), the last few decades have brought us a veritable EXPLOSION OF AUTOIMMUNITY.  Think of it this way; If you are constantly and purposefully activating the immune system via ALUMINUM-CONTAINING ADJUVANTS whose stated purpose is to do just that, what the heck do you expect is going to happen — especially in a society that is already maximally inflamed — an “INFLAMMATION NATION” if you will?   And what does our medical community do?  They continue telling us that it’s a combination of plain DUMB LUCK and BAD GENETICS.  The reality is that the ABSURD NUMBERS OF VACCINES that our citizens are being serially bombarded with from cradle to grave, radically increase the chances of the body attacking itself (AUTOIMMUNITY), which is why you are starting to actually hear about things like ASIA (Autoimmune/Inflammatory Syndrome Induced by Adjuvants).  But it’s even bigger even than this.

If these sorts of problems were happening once in a blue moon, it would be one thing.  But they aren’t.  They are happening with clock-like regularity.  In fact, as I have shown you on several occasions (HERE, HERE, HERE, and  HERE  are a few) all drug reactions, vaccine reactions included, are only reported to the proper governmental authorities, on average, about 1% of the time.  I’m not making that up folks. 

What it means is that even though the general public is hollering about vaccine-induced problems, our alphabet soup of governmental organizations (CDC, NIH, WHO, etc, etc, etc) continues to tell us how stupid we are for believing such poppycock, and that there is nothing to worry about.  Add to this the fact that we seeing that most studies cannot be reproduced (HERE), and you can see why trying to comfort yourself with “EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE” isn’t working out as planned.  The truth is, when it comes to flu shots, the evidence against continues to mount.  My advice based on research?  Study the issue for yourself, and then run far and run fast.

THE QUEST FOR A BETTER FLU VACCINE
THE UNIVERSAL FLU VACCINE

Universal Flu Vaccine

Wellcome L0021989

One of the most interesting examples of flu vaccine not doing what it is supposed to do occurred in 2014 on the minesweeper, the USS Ardent.  According to the CDC’s  Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report back in October of 2014 (Influenza Outbreak in a Vaccinated Population — USS Ardent, February 2014) said that there were, “25 crew members with influenza-like symptoms…. Nasal swab specimens from 20 of the 25 patients were positive for influenza A, with 18 specimens confirmed as A (H3).”  The thing you have to remember here is that according to this report, this class of minesweeper is, “one of the smallest ships in the U.S. Navy.”  In other words, everyone got sick.

Even though most physicians and public health officials have been forced to admit that flu vaccine efficacy is not anywhere near what’s been officially touted, they continue preaching the wisdom of annual flu vaccinations.  Not surprisingly, one of the ways that the scientific medical community combats citizens questioning their policies is the promise that a universal flu vaccine is right around the corner. For instance, just two short weeks ago, the New England Journal of Medicine carried a scientific paper (Chasing Seasonal Influenza — The Need for a Universal Influenza Vaccine) saying that given enough time and money, would “achieve the ultimate objective of a universal influenza vaccine.

The September issue of PNAS (Increasing the Breadth and Potency of Response to the Seasonal Influenza Virus Vaccine by Immune Complex Immunization) touted this same idea.  Note that they begin by saying exactly what I have been showing you — that matching vaccine to circulating virus is a pipe-dream.  “The main barrier to reduction of morbidity caused by influenza is the absence of a vaccine that elicits broad protection against different virus strains.”  After talking about what they planned to do, they ended the study by telling us that this plan will be, “setting the stage for a universal influenza virus vaccine.”  A simple Google search reveals hundreds of similar articles touting the nearness of the universal vaccine.  Allow me to show you why this “Holy Grail” of vaccines is not something you need to be getting overly excited about.

Before I show you why the Universal Flu Vaccine (UFV) is not quite everything you’ve been led to believe it is, I want you to realize that the concept is nothing new.  In fact, if you head on over to our government’s massive research database at PubMed, you’ll find a whopping 760 studies when you search “Universal Flu Vaccine”.  I’m only going to go back 12 years, but get a load of some of these headlines.

  • 2006:  The August 2006 issue of Popular Science was talking about the UFV in an article called Kryptonite for Flu: A Single-Shot Universal Vaccine Against Any Strain of Flu (they quoted research from Philadelphia’s WISTAR INSTITUTE).

 

  • 2007:  Remember CIDRAP?  In July of 2007 they published an article called Acambis Launches Human Trial of ‘Universal’ Flu Vaccine, saying “Known as ACAM-FLU-A, the vaccine is designed to target all influenza A virus strains, Acambis said in a Jul 17 press release. If successful, the product will mark a major step toward a universal flu vaccine—one that would protect against all strains of both influenza A and B. The majority of laboratory-confirmed flu cases each year in the United States are type.  The trial will also assess the effectiveness of two adjuvants (immune-boosting chemicals): aluminum hydroxide, widely used in licensed vaccines…..”  Don’t you just love PRESS RELEASES?

 

  • 2008:  Almost a decade ago, a January issue of Science Daily (Universal Influenza Vaccine Tested Successfully In Humans) gave its readers some wonderful news (sigh).  “Scientists report the successful conclusion of Phase I trials of the universal flu vaccine in humans. The universal influenza vaccine is intended to provide protection against all ‘A’ strains of the virus that causes human influenza, including pandemic strains. The vaccine was tested at multiple centers in the US and involved 79 healthy volunteers. The trial results demonstrate that [the vaccine] is well tolerated and immunogenic, and no significant side-effects were observed.”  I wonder what happened to this research?  Was it one of the half of all medical studies that ends up in the bin marked INVISIBLE & ABANDONED?

 

  • 2009:   In June of 09, Nancy Schute, writing for USA Today, published an article called Wayne Marasco: A Shot at a Universal Flu Vaccine, which stated, “The man with the unorthodox history recently made a striking discovery: a human antibody that attacks a newfound vulnerability in flu viruses. His finding could be the key to a single, perennial vaccine against all forms of influenza, including swine flu.”  A few short months later, CBS News carried a story called Universal Flu Vaccine May be Available in 5 Years.  “British researchers are reporting their discovery may bring us one step closer to one flu shot that protects against every new strain of the disease.”  What’s interesting is that this article talked about flu being related to a 15 times higher chance of people having a heart attack.  Funny they didn’t mention the study from the Journal of Internal Medicine (Inflammation-Related Effects of Adjuvant Influenza A Vaccination on Platelet Activation and Cardiac Autonomic Function) which concluded “Together with an inflammatory reaction, influenza A vaccine induced platelet activation and sympathovagal imbalance towards adrenergic predominance. Significant correlations were found between CRP levels and HRV parameters, suggesting a pathophysiological link between inflammation and cardiac autonomic regulation. The vaccine-related platelet activation and cardiac autonomic dysfunction may transiently increase the risk of cardiovascular events.”  HRV determines VAGUS NERVE -vs- SYMPATHETIC DOMINANCE, as driven by the flu vaccine. 

 

  • 2010:  As things continued to heat up concerning the UFV, CIDRAP published yet another article revealing that pharmacies were getting ready to cash in (Pharmacy Chains Poised for Universal Flu Vaccination Push).  Cha ching!  Then in September, another press release stated that “Dynavax Technologies Corporation (NASDAQ: DVAX) announced that it has begun to immunize subjects in a Phase 1b clinical trial of its Universal Flu Vaccine.

 

  • 2011:  In January of 2011, the website Fast Company (Universal Flu Vaccine Could Fight Pandemics For Up To Twenty Years) reported that, “A universal flu vaccine – a vaccine that could last decades and offer protection against many different flu virus strains–is being developed. Human trials have started for the universal flu vaccine, which might be available within the next ten years.

 

  • 2012:  Idea dot org (Discovery May Hold Key for Universal Flu Vaccine) stated that, “We might not have a cure for the common cold, but scientists have discovered a potentially powerful new treatment for much more dangerous flu viruses.  Researchers at Scripps Research Institute in La Jolla, Calif., and Crucell Vaccine Institute in the Netherlands say they have discovered a human antibody that protects against essentially all influenza A and B strains. In other words, this finding may portend a universal treatment for nearly all strains of the flu. The Holy Grail of influenza research is to find a mechanism to protect people against essentially all the numerous different strains of influenza viruses. This research is a heartening step forward.” That same year, the Philadelphia Business Journal (Inovio Gets Patent for SynCon Universal Flu Vaccine) let readers know that “The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued a patent this week covering Inovio’s SynCon universal vaccine.

 

  • 2013:  In May of 2013, Disease Daily (Approaching A Universal Flu Vaccine?) asked a rhetorical question and then turned around and answered it (after giving a wide range of excuses why the flu vaccine rarely worked as touted).  “What if we had a vaccine that protected us against all different strains of flu? What if this vaccine protected us for more than one flu season?  Researchers from the National Institute of Allergy and Infections Diseases (part of the National Institutes of Health) are helping us get there.”  By December the Stanford University News (Stanford Researchers Take a Step Toward Developing a ‘Universal’ Flu Vaccine) was wanting everyone to know the good news.  “Stanford researchers report promising steps toward the creation of a universal flu vaccine, one that could be produced more quickly and offer broader protection than the virus-specific inoculants available today.

 

  • 2014:  Quinn Eastman, writing for the Emory University News Center (Key to Universal Flu Vaccine: Embrace the Unfamiliar) wrote, “Vaccine researchers have developed a strategy aimed at generating broadly cross-reactive antibodies against the influenza virus: embrace the unfamiliar.  In recent years, researchers interested in a universal flu vaccine identified a region of the viral hemagglutinin protein called the stem or stalk, which doesn’t mutate and change as much as other regions and could be the basis for a vaccine that is protective against a variety of flu strains.  In an Emory Vaccine Center study, human volunteers immunized against the avian flu virus H5N1 readily developed antibodies against the stem region of the viral hemagglutinin protein. In contrast, those immunized with standard seasonal trivalent vaccines did not, instead developing most of their antibodies against the more variable head region.”   Are you seeing a pattern?  Hype and failure — repeat indefinitely.

 

  • 2015:    The journal of the American Society for Microbiology published a study asking and then answering the same question.  Is It Possible? A Different Approach to Creating a Universal Influenza Vaccine.  “Arguably, the best means to prevent influenza infection is through vaccination, and each year, approximately 40 to 50% of adults in the United States are vaccinated against seasonal influenza viruses. Unfortunately, due to the evolution of the major outer viral surface protein hemagglutinin (HA) through antigenic drift, the annual vaccine components must be frequently updated in order to provide protection against emerging viral strains. Further, these vaccines are unlikely to protect against antigenically divergent strains.  This is an exciting study that furthers our quest for a universal influenza vaccine. Clinical studies demonstrated that influenza VLP vaccines are safe and effective in adults.”  Later that summer CIDRAP told us via an article title that, Recent ‘Universal’ Flu Vaccine Proposals Fell Short. “The quest for a broadly protective or “universal” influenza vaccine suffered a setback recently when the US Biomedical Research and Development Authority (BARDA) determined that industry plans submitted in response to a formal request for proposals (RFP) fell short of the government’s requirements.  We had a number of proposals and unfortunately none of those met our minimum mandatory requirements.

  • 2016:   In a GLAXOSMITHKLINE PROPAGANDA PIECE written for Canada’s The Globe and Mail (Lasting Effects), author Carly Weeks let everyone know that “Unlike vaccines for other illnesses, the influenza shot has to be remade from scratch every year because the viruses in circulation mutate each flu season. But a recent breakthrough by Canadian researchers marks an exciting step some experts say brings us closer to making a universal flu vaccine a reality.

 

  • Early 2017:  the journal Scientific Reports revealed that a research team from University of Nebraska had developed a UFV that “appears to provide broad protection against the flu.” Lead researcher Eric The ultimate goal is to be able to vaccinate once and provide lifelong protection. Our current influenza vaccine programs and technologies reduce influenza infections and hospitalizations by 4.75 percent and 6.9 percent, respectively. There is no doubt that there is a need for more effective vaccine technologies.”   Not a very good rate, and as research has repeatedly and universally shown, these stats are almost certainly overblown / exaggerated, with actual benefits of the flu vaccine being far less than estimated.

 

  • Later in 2017:  Just days before Halloween, Vanderbilt University’s Research News tooted their own horn with an article called Vanderbilt Leads International Effort to Develop Universal Flu Vaccine.  The author, Bill Snyder (not to be confused with the legendary Kansas State University football coach), said “Researchers at Vanderbilt University Medical Center are leading an international effort to develop a universal influenza vaccine that would protect everyone against all strains of the flu anywhere in the world.  Coupled with artificial intelligence driven computer simulation models, they will seek to determine why some people are protected against the flu while others are not.”  It’s interesting that this is the very same question that DR. B.J. PALMER was answering over a century ago (HERE).  Interestingly, on October 3, England’s Oxford University stated via the title of their article that this was, World-First Trial for Universal Flu Vaccine.  Really?  If they went back and re-read the 2007 bullet they would realize that although it sounds impressive, they were at least a decade too late with this claim.

 

  • Even later in 2017:  There have been a rash of articles and news releases in the last week and a half.  The headlines read almost exactly like those of a decade ago.  Unbridled optimism (or should I say unbridled propaganda), with little to show.  The researchers are all touting the same thing — dramatically increased levels of antibodies.  But as Drs. Biondi and Algine showed you earlier, antibody titers and surrogate endpoints don’t matter, improvements in both morbidity and mortality are all that matters.

Besides the “genetic drift” talked about earlier, a chief reason the flu shot is so ineffective is that it only contains three strains of virus.  Doctors try and guess months ahead of time what these may be, and rarely get it right. So, why don’t they just make a concoction with the thousands of potential flu viruses?  It would ramp up the immune system far too much, and at the least, would require a series of annual injections.  And this doesn’t account for the constant genetic change, similar to what’s seen with the common cold (of which has been said a vaccine is impossible).

Do you remember Helen Branswell, whose quote early in this post kind of started things off?  Although she sounded super optimistic, here is what she wrote for the Toronto Star back in August of 2013 (as you read this make sure to recall the 2012 study showing that flu-vaccinated individuals had 5.5X more respiratory infections than the uninoculated public).

“A new study sounds a cautionary note for work that is being done to try to develop vaccines to protect against all subtypes of influenza.  The research describes a phenomenon in which vaccination against one strain of flu actually seems to raise the risk of severe infection following exposure to a related but different strain, an effect called vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease.  The study was published by the journal Science Translational Medicine…  the finding is reminiscent of something that was observed in people in Canada during the 2009 H1N1 pandemic.”

What happened back in 2009 in Canada?   It was an ugly enough situation to garner its own Wikipedia entry (2009 Flu Pandemic in Canada). Researchers determined that something called “Fusion Enhancing” occurred — the phenomenon of people being more likely to get sick from the viruses that are similar to those in the vaccine.  Think about it; three strains of virus in the vaccine, thousands of strains not in the vaccine.  A poker player would fold and wait for the next hand.  If you want to actually see how the government attempted to explain this away, take a look at CIDRAP’s paper titled New Canadian Studies Suggest Seasonal Flu Shot Increased H1N1 Risk.

Dr. Philip Alcabes is a public health official (masters in biochemistry from Berkley, MPH from Columbia, doctorate in infectious-disease epidemiology from Johns Hopkins) who also happens to be a Professor of Community Health at Hunter College of NY.   In a 2013 article on his site (Against Universal Flu Immunization), the good doctor revealed why all of this is going on.  It’s nothing new, as I’ve shown you many times previously that when it comes to BIG PHARMA, safety and effectiveness  are secondary — it’s all about the money.  Think about it this way; the person or team that comes up with a viable UFV will become the next PAUL OFFIT — times 1,000.

“I commented in 2011 on public officials striving to help pharmaceutical companies profit from flu fears. And that’s what we’re seeing again this season — with exaggerated warnings and declarations of flu emergencies. Even though the latest national summary from CDC shows that less than 30% of all influenza-like illness is actually caused by flu this season — and that’s likely an overestimate, since it’s based on testing of more severe cases of acute respiratory illness.  And the surveillance data suggest that the season’s flu outbreak might already be past its peak. Get immunized against flu if you’re worried.  But keep in mind that vaccination against flu is not going to help the public’s health, and it isn’t highly likely to help yours — it’s primarily your contribution to the profits of Sanofi-Pasteur, Novartis, Glaxosmithkline, or Merck.”

HOW DID WE GET TO THIS POINT?

You’ll never be able to answer this question until you wake up to the fact that the flu vaccine is not about health, it’s about money.  Lots of money.  And the money flows not just from the vaccine itself, but from the myriad of health problems created from being repeatedly vaccinated with MERCURY & ALUMINUM adjuvants.   In fact, vaccine injuries were so big a problem for the vaccine industry that a couple years after I graduated from high school in 1984, our government passed legislation completely insulating pharmaceutical companies from vaccine-related lawsuits via something called the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.

If the organization that Congress created (the Office of Special Masters of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims) deems you or your child was injured (or killed) as the direct result of a vaccine, you may be eligible to receive up to $250,000.  Sounds like a lot, but if you’ve got a seriously damaged child, it will be gone in a year, maybe two.  Take it or leave it, because your ability to sue has been removed.  However, they rarely find the vaccine manufacturers guilty, as this would open up a can of worms for industry that would make Pandora’s Box look like Sesame Street.  Rather than me going through the whole sordid affair, take a look at this very cool (and short) “Whiteboard Video”.

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on pinterest
Pinterest
Share on reddit
Reddit

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *