The Great Flu Charade – un-constitutional mandatory vaccinations

I know bullshit when I see it. Consider CNN’s bias, accusatory coverage of a healthcare worker who doesn’t want government-mandated injections:

I have the very strong impression that the annual government-media blitz about flu is nothing but pandering to the medical industrial complex. Somebody is making a killing off the millions of flu shots our government is increasingly requiring people to take.

Prison Planet: Vaccine revolt! Swine flu vaccine support crumbles as flimsy rationale for H1N1 shots becomes apparent

Judge Andrew Napolitano on the constitution perspective on this issue:

Ha! Doctor tells it like it is. (don’t expect him to be invited back):

N.J. Mandatory Flu Shots for Preschoolers Cause Outrage

U.S. military troops will begin getting required swine flu shots in the next week to 10 days

Obama to require everyone to get THREE flu shots (more media scare tactics):

A chink in the armor: CBS: Swine Flu Cases Overestimated? (CBS !?)

Flu Vaccine Brainwashing In Prime Time ABC Show

Nurses got sick from the “swine flu” vaccine in Sweden • UPDATE – 1 suspected death Annika Linde, director of The Swedish Institute for Infectious Disease Control (SMI) manages to spin this into something positive by stating “The vaccine has more side effects than the normal flu vaccine. It is a sign that proves that it gives an effective protection.”

Doctors in Berlin refuse to give “swine flu” jab

Big pharma, government officials and media collude in “biggest profiteering scheme” ever, reports Evelyn Pringle

Here are excerpts from an article on lewrockwell.com:

With a Consumer Reports poll showing nearly 2/3rds of U.S. parents will hold off on having their children vaccinated with the H1N1 late-2009 season flu vaccine, health authorities are likely to resort to scare tactics as they have in past years to induce parents into having their children vaccinated.

. . . .

The U.S. government has ordered 250 million doses of the H1N1 late-2009 flu strain vaccine from five suppliers: MedImmune, a unit of AstraZeneca, Sanofi-Aventis (France), Australia’s CSL, GlaxoSmithKline and Novartis. In past years the CDC ordered over 100 million doses of the seasonal flu vaccine.

Recognizing resistance to flu vaccination, flu shots are not just being offered at clinics this year. There is coercion at schools, hospitals and workplaces to undergo flu vaccination. The military must take the vaccine.

Reported cases of the flu are likely to be on the upswing as human immunity declines with the seasonal tilt of the Earth away from the sun in northern latitudes, thus reducing intensity of vitamin D-producing solar ultraviolet-B radiation. Despite doing the obvious – promoting vitamin D supplements – vaccines are forced onto the public.

. . . .

According to package inserts, none of the current vaccines approved by the FDA have been tested for use among pregnant females or in children below the age of 2 for Medimmune Flumist®, or for injectable vaccines, not below age 18 for CSL (Australia) vaccine; not below age 4 for Novartis (UK-USA) vaccine; not below 6 months of age for Sanofi Pasteur (France) vaccine. However, these vaccines are being widely promoted for use among pregnant women and very young infants.

. . . .

In another misdirection, the Centers for Disease Control continues to advise the public to undergo vaccination for the seasonal flu in addition to the novel H1N1 late-2009 season triple reassortant flu. However, according to the CDC’s own website, 99% of all influenza A viruses currently in circulation (late September 2009) are the late-2009 H1N1 viruses. The seasonal flu strains have virtually disappeared. Seasonal flu shots would be superfluous and even problematic.

Dr. Racaniello asks: “Why would anyone consider receiving this vaccine?” Yet this is being promoted by the CDC and this recommendation is being parroted by the news media.

. . . .

The news media is aiding and abetting the flu hysteria, dramatizing every flu-related death even when there has been no laboratory confirmation that the H1N1 flu strain was involved, and serves as a free publicity agent for vaccine makers. Behind the scenes there must be mumblings to news reporters they are not to print or air negative reports that would cause the public to lose confidence in the nation’s vaccination program.

An ABC News report cites US health officials as saying low vaccination rates “could have dire consequences,” despite the fact this flu outbreak has produced fewer deaths than the typical seasonal flu and did not result in abnormal mortality as it swept through South America during its summer flu season there.

Complicity between vaccine makers, public health authorities and the news media maintains undeserved public confidence in a flu vaccination program that often only offers side effects and no disease prevention or reduction in mortality.

. . . .

Lack of evidence of effectiveness

While older adults are at the greatest risk for dying from the flu, surprisingly there is only one randomized controlled study among older persons (60 years and up) which reported a 33% reduction in flu-like illness and a 56% reduction in circulating viral count. But this means the vaccine was ineffective in most people in regard to preventing symptoms. [Journal American Medical Assn 1994; 272:1661–1665]

Centers for Disease Control officials concede the ability of flu vaccines to generate sufficient antibodies and effectively reduce symptoms and prevent death is only about 30–50% among currently licensed vaccines. [Current Topics Microbiology Immunology 2009; 333:413–29]

Data collected over 33 flu seasons shows flu vaccination reduced the death rate substantially less than expected. [Journal American Medical Assn 2003; 289: 179–86; Archives Internal Medicine 2005; 165: 265–72]

But news reporters must put a positive face on flu vaccination, despite evidence to the contrary.

Mismatched vaccines

Another major problem is that the flu viruses in the vaccines often do not match the flu viruses in circulation in the population. [Vaccine 2008; 26 (Supplement 4): D5–D9]

For example, in 2007 the trivalent flu vaccine (contained 3 strains of the flu) was only 40% protective due to mismatched flu strains. [Cleve Clin J Med. 2008 Dec; 75(12):865–70] The percentage of viruses that were matched to vaccine strains was 5% (3 of 62) in 2004–2005, 5% (2 of 42) in 2005–2006, and 91% (85 of 93) in 2006–2007. [J Infect Dis. 2009 Jan 15; 199(2):159–67]

In the 8 years spanning 1998–2005, flu vaccine mismatch occurred in 4 of those years including both the 2003–04 and 2004–05 consecutive seasons. The nation had no protection beyond natural immunity in many recent flu seasons. Due to flu strain mismatch, 84% of the vaccinees over 75 years of age who received the flu vaccine in 1997–98 were not protected against infection. [J. Medical Virology 61:94–99, 2000] The public is never alerted to this.

A major review encompassing 64 published studies which evaluated the ability of flu vaccines to reduce symptoms or viral count showed overall effectiveness of just 23% during seasons when the flu strain in the vaccine matched the virus in circulation within the population. Effectiveness did not differ from years when vaccines were mismatched. [Lancet 2005; 366:1165–1174]

In the end, the question of whether or not to get a flu shot should be made by patients consulting with their doctors, not by government.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

*