8 Damn Good Reasons Not to Get the Flu Shot

By JEFFRY J. AUFDERHEIDE | VACTRUTH | FEBRUARY 4, 2013

Every year the mainstream media war drum beats for you to get vaccinated against the flu. They rarely discuss anything but the benefits of the vaccine.

Why?

Maybe it is because many people are already skeptical about the flu vaccine.

I’m going to be very up front with you here. You rarely hear about the adverse reactions or about the toxic chemicals being injected into you. My goal is to get you to investigate vaccines more closely. Here are eight reasons to question the flu shot.

Let’s begin…

REASON #1: NEUROTOXIC INGREDIENTS

A common urban myth is that the mercury has been taken out of vaccines. This is not true.

Several of the flu vaccines contain a neurotoxic ingredient called thimerosal (mercury). Each one of the flu vaccines listed below contains 25 micrograms of mercury. [1] The vaccines are:

  • Afluria CSL (Limited for Merck)
  • FluLaval (GlaxoSmithKline)
  • Fluvirin (Novartis)
  • Fluzone (Sanofi Pasteur)

Keep in mind you are being told conflicting stories.

After parents and scientists discovered that mercury was present in the vaccines, they had concerns about the substance causing neurological problems in children.

Organizations such as the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Centers for Disease Control have told you mercury in the vaccines isn’t bad for us, but as a precaution, it will be taken out of the vaccines.

Now the same organizations are telling parents if mercury isn’t kept it in the vaccines, millions will suffer. Why? Removing the mercury from vaccines would cause a major disruption in the manufacturing and supply of vaccines.[2]

Much of the evidence on the toxicity of thimerosal was swept under the rug at a secret meeting held by the Centers for Disease Control in Simpsonwood, Georgia. I’d like to invite you to read a few quotes from the meeting. I think you will see why the Centers for Disease Control wants to keep the lid on thimerosal.

Here are three important quotes from the Simpsonwood Document:

…the number of dose related relationships [between mercury and autism] are linear and statistically significant. You can play with this all you want. They are linear. They are statistically significant.” – Dr. William Weil, American Academy of Pediatrics. Simpsonwood, GA, June 7, 2000

“Forgive this personal comment, but I got called out at eight o’clock for an emergency call and my daughter-in-law delivered a son by c-section. Our first male in the line of the next generation and I do not want that grandson to get a Thimerosal containing vaccine until we know better what is going on. It will probably take a long time. In the meantime, and I know there are probably implications for this internationally, but in the meanwhile I think I want that grandson to only be given Thimerosal-free vaccines.” – Dr. Robert Johnson, Immunologist, University of Colorado, Simpsonwood, GA, June 7, 2000

But there is now the point at which the research results have to be handled, and even if this committee decides that there is no association and that information gets out, the work has been done and through the freedom of information that will be taken by others and will be used in other ways beyond the control of this group. And I am very concerned about that as I suspect that it is already too late to do anything regardless of any professional body and what they say…My mandate as I sit here in this group is to make sure at the end of the day that 100,000,000 are immunized with DTP, Hepatitis B and if possible Hib, this year, next year and for many years to come, and that will have to be with thimerosal containing vaccines unless a miracle occurs and an alternative is found quickly and is tried and found to be safe.” – Dr. John Clements, World Health Organization, Simpsonwood, GA, June 7, 2000 [3]

We at VacTruth encourage you to investigate what is being injected into your child.

 REASON #2: 4250% INCREASE IN FETAL DEATHS REPORTED

Speaking of mercury being unsafe — if you’re pregnant, beware of doctors using aggressive fear tactics pushing you to get vaccinated. Here’s why…

On September 27, 2012, the Human and Environmental Toxicology Journal (HET) published a study by Dr. Gary Goldman reporting a 4,250 percent increase in the number of miscarriages and stillbirths reported to VAERS in the 2009/2010 flu season. [4]

That year the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) had recommended the double-dosing pregnant mothers with two flu shots spiked with mercury.

In his abstract, Goldman said:

“The aim of this study was to compare the number of inactivated-influenza vaccine–related spontaneous abortion and stillbirth (SB) reports in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database during three consecutive flu seasons beginning 2008/2009 and assess the relative fetal death reports associated with the two-vaccine 2009/2010 season.” [4]

How can injecting these filthy vaccines into pregnant mothers be remotely safe?

 REASON #3: VACCINE-INDUCED NARCOLEPSY

Do you recall the vaccine-frenzied media telling us to get our flu shots during the H1N1 pandemic? What they didn’t tell you are the possible long-term side effects of those vaccines that are now being revealed.

Recent news about the flu vaccine suspects one of the experimental vaccines causing narcolepsy in about 800 European children. [5]

Specifically, two studies in Finland directly point the finger at the vaccine. [6, 7]

The conclusion of one study states:

“We observed a 17-fold increase in the annual incidence of narcolepsy in 2010 as compared to previous years in children aged under 17 years of age. A common feature in the history of our 54 newly diagnosed childhood narcoleptic patients was that 50 children had received an adjuvanted pandemic influenza vaccine (Pandemrix) within 8 months before the onset of symptoms. In most cases, the development of symptoms was fast. We consider it likely that Pandemrix vaccination contributed to the increased incidence of narcolepsy in Finland…” [7]

The children’s misfortune is they now have to deal with an illness that all but destroys their once normal life. Do you think the pharmaceutical companies will take any responsibility?

 REASON #4: “THEY ARE PROTECTED” … FROM YOU!

I’m not sure about other countries, but in the United States, if your child is harmed by a vaccine, there is little action you can take legally.

The 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act was passed was to protect pharmaceutical companies from anyone claiming a vaccine injured their child. Under this law, no parent can sue a vaccine manufacturer. [8]

If you decide to vaccinate your children, you do so at your own risk. No vaccine manufacturer is liable for your child’s vaccine-related injury or death from a recommended vaccine, regardless if the FDA or CDC helped get an untested flu vaccine approved.

 REASON #5: IF YOU GET VACCINATED, YOU SHED THE VIRUS

If getting injected with neurotoxins or suffering from narcolepsy isn’t enough, expect to shed the flu virus and likely infect others if you decide to get the nasal spray vaccine.

Information from the Centers for Disease Control website indicates “that both children and adults vaccinated with live-attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) can shed vaccine viruses after vaccination, although in lower amounts than occur typically with shedding of wild-type influenza viruses.” [9]

In one study of children in a daycare setting, 80% of vaccine recipients shed one or more virus strains for an average of 7.5 days. [9]

 REASON #6: IF YOU GET THE FLU VACCINE, EXPECT TO GET THE FLU

This might be a shock to you – if you investigate the vaccine carefully enough, you’ll discover that getting vaccinated can actually predispose you to getting the flu!

One particular study surprised researchers when they discovered “a significant positive association between the seasonal influenza vaccine and lab confirmed pH1N1 was observed.” [10]

As anecdotal evidence, you may or may not have seen what happened to television host Piers Morgan. If you didn’t, here is the condensed version.

Piers Morgan went on the Dr. Oz television show to get injected with the toxic flu vaccine in front of a live audience. Days later he came down with the flu. [11]

Did the flu vaccine cause him to get the flu? You can decide for yourself on this one.

 REASON #7: EVERY YEAR THE EXPERTS GUESS

Do you know how the flu strain is picked to put into the vaccine every year? The “experts” guess.

Every year, the influenza viruses in the seasonal flu vaccine are selected through calculations about what flu viruses are most likely to cause illness in the coming season. The FDA, acting in concert with the CDC, decides what vaccine strains for influenza vaccines to be sold in the U.S. [12]

What happens if the virus mutates or the “experts” guess incorrectly? Please see Reason #1…

 REASON #8: THE CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL’S RECIPE FOR GENERATING FEAR

Many people believe the Centers for Disease Control is beyond using propaganda ploys. You might get a different impression from the information I’m about to share with you. It may seem as if the CDC fears you into getting vaccinated, much like doctors do.

What do I mean and where is this recipe?

Some years ago, the associate director for communications for the national immunization program, Glen Nowak, made a presentation entitled Planning for the 2004-05 Influenza Vaccination Season: A Communication Situation Analysis.

I am going to include the entire “recipe” so you can see the complexity of the propaganda being regularly used on you to get vaccinated.

The slide on page 27 of the presentation reads:

“Recipe” that Fosters Higher Interest and Demand for Influenza Vaccine

1. Influenza’s arrival coincides with immunization “season” (i.e., when people can take action)

2. Dominant strain and/or initial cases of disease are:

–Associated with severe illness and/or outcomes

–Occur among people for whom influenza is not generally perceived to cause serious complications (e.g., children, healthy adults, healthy seniors)

–In cities and communities with significant media outlets (e.g., daily newspapers, major TV stations)

3. Medical experts and public health authorities publicly (e.g., via media) state concern and alarm (and predict dire outcomes)–and urge influenza vaccination.

4. The combination of ‘2’ and ‘3’ result in:

A. Significant media interest and attention

B. Framing of the flu season in terms that motivate behavior (e.g., as “very severe,” “more severe than last or past years,” “deadly”)

C. Continued reports (e.g., from health officials and media) that influenza is causing severe illness and/or affecting lots of people–helping foster the perception that many people are susceptible to a bad case of influenza.

6. Visible/tangible examples of the seriousness of the illness (e.g., pictures of children, families of those affected coming forward) and people getting vaccinated (the first to motivate, the latter to reinforce)

7. References to, and discussions, of pandemic influenza– along with continued reference to the importance of vaccination.” [13]

The message is extremely familiar. You see it played out every year on the news channels. To be clear, what you just read is a recipe to sell more of Big Pharma’s toxic vaccines.

References

1. http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/thi-table.htm

2. http://vactruth.com/2012/12/23/mercury-in-vaccines/

3. http://www.putchildrenfirst.org/chapter2.html

4. http://het.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/09/12/0960327112455067.abstract?rss=1

5. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/22/us-narcolepsy…

6. http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0033536#close

7. http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi/10.1371/journal.pone.0033723

8. http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/index.html

9. http://www.cdc.gov/flu/professionals/acip/laiv-shed.htm

10. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22001885

11. http://www.infowars.com/piers-morgan-falls-ill-days-after-receiving-flu-vaccine/

12. http://www.cdc.gov/flu/professionals/vaccination/virusqa.htm

13. http://www.scribd.com/doc/19212191/2004flunowak

Reduce Two Leading Childhood Diseases by 50% or More without Vaccines

By JEFFREY J. AUFDERHEIDE | VACTRUTH | JANUARY 4, 2012

It’s not black magic or some out-of-date belief—just good old-fashioned common sense.

Better hygiene, sanitation, and organic food are the foundations for good health. But to what degree could one of those elements (hygiene, for example) have an effect on decreasing a disease? I think finding the answer to this question and considering the evidence is valuable for parents who are considering vaccinating their children.

Why?

Mainstream health officials at the Centers for Disease Control and other such agencies in the United States use emotionally charged language to declare that vaccines—not better sanitation or hygiene— saved the world from deadly diseases.

It is for this reason that I must warn you: Those who push vaccines often trivialize or underestimate the information I am going to share with you. It completely destroys what they have been told for many years.

If you’re interested in learning more, read on.

The Gold Standard

The big secret vaccine peddlers avoid like the plague is, one amazingly simple act reduced two diseases by 50% or more. The most vital point to remember: The decrease in morbidity of—or the rate of incidence of a disease—those affected by the diseases had nothing to do with vaccines!

To get our answer, we turn to Karachi, Pakistan.

In 2002, a randomized controlled trial (a gold standard of scientific research) was performed by Dr. Stephen P. Luby in Karachi, Pakistan. The goal of the study was to assess the impact of hand washing and bathing with soap in settings where infectious diseases are leading causes of childhood disease and death. [1–3]

It is known as the Karachi Health Soap Study.

It’s noteworthy to keep in mind that the variable studied was hand washing—not improved sanitation (waste water treatment), clean drinking water, better food or storage, or even vaccines. In Karachi, sewage contaminates the drinking water and feces contaminates the environment. This is what makes the study so radically powerful!

If you want to see an overview of what was done, read on.

The Power of Simplicity and Education

Here are the some relevant facts you should know about the Karachi Health Soap Study[3]:

  • 25 neighborhoods were either given an antibacterial soap (containing 1.2% triclocarban) or plain soap.
  • 11 neighborhoods were the control. In other words, no hygiene promotion occurred, and no soap was dispensed in these neighborhoods.
  • Both the antibacterial soap and plain soap looked and smelled identical.
  • Both types of soap were packaged identically in generic white wrappers. Neither the fieldworkers nor the families knew whether the soaps were antibacterial or plain.
  • Fieldworkers reviewed with the families the health problems that resulted from contaminated hands and provided them with specific hand-washing instructions.
  • Fieldworkers encouraged households to wash their hands after defecation, after cleaning an infant who had defecated, before preparing food, before eating, and before feeding infants.
  • Fieldworkers encouraged participants to bathe once a day with soap and water.

Here’s what happened next…

Dramatic Decrease in Diseases

Remember my warning in the beginning of the article about the information being dismissed? As you will see, the results are very dramatic.

As noted by the study, in the first 6 months not much change or variation (only 6%) was noted between the different groups. In the graph below, the biggest change came in the second half of the year.

karachi-statistics

The results of the study were analyzed after 51 weeks.

  • Primary diarrhea outcomes in children younger than 15 years by intervention group
    • Antibacterial soap: 47% fewer incidences of diarrhea than control group
    • Plain soap: 52% fewer incidences of diarrhea than control group
  • Primary respiratory outcomes in children younger than 15 years by intervention group
    • Antibacterial soap: 45% fewer incidences of pneumonia than control group
    • Plain soap: 50% fewer incidences of pneumonia than control group

It is essential to reemphasize, the World Health Organization lists pneumonia (lower-respiratory infection) and diarrhea as the number 1 and number 2 diseases, which kill more than 3.5 million children worldwide each year. [3–5]

This seems to be in harmony with the principle that Antoine Bechamp—and even Weston Price—wrote about many years ago: The health of the host is everything. The disease is nothing. [6]

Considering that the people in the Karachi study drank the same water, ate the same foods, had the same indoor plumbing (or lack thereof), etc., a significant question has to be asked. If simple hand washing can decrease the morbidity of diarrhea and pneumonia by 50% or more, what happens when better sanitation facilities, food storage, and quality of food are introduced?

Even more important, I’d think there would be comparative data on the effectiveness of hand washing and vaccines. But if that were to happen—given the safety track record of soap versus vaccines—the entire vaccine program would receive a severe death blow.

What we know is when the standard of living increases, mortality and morbidity rates fall.

As an example, mortality rates (not morbidity) in the United States decreased prior to the introduction of vaccines (notice there was not a vaccine for scarlet fever).

united-states-mortality-rates

What could cause such an intense drop in mortality rates? It obviously wasn’t the vaccines. If vaccines caused a 50% drop in morbidity or mortality rate of a disease within a 6-month period, the media would broadcast it all over the news, singing the praises and benefits of getting injected.

The irony of this study is that the Centers for Disease Control provided some funding and reviewed the data. Here’s an excerpt from the study:

The balance of the funding was provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Inclusion of soap trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by CDC or the Department of Health and Human Services. These data were presented in part at the International Conference on Emerging Infectious Diseases, Atlanta, GA, USA, in February, 2004. [3]

So, now you know that some people at the Centers for Disease Control know. But here’s the clincher.

Vaccine Pushers

The Centers for Disease Control recommend the following vaccines in the United States to prevent the very same diseases discussed above.

For diarrhea: RotaTeq® (RV5) and Rotarix® (RV1). [7]

For pneumonia: Pneumococcal, haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib), pertussis (whooping cough), varicella (chickenpox), measles, and influenza (flu) vaccine. [8]

Does the Centers for Disease Control mention washing hands as a means of prevention? Sure—in passing.

They say something to the effect that good hygiene is important, but is not enough to control the spread of the disease. They recommend vaccines.

handwashing-karachi-e1356757852356Then again, you might want to consider why the CDC is so adamant about recommending vaccines. For example, this is from an article on Mercola.com:

Dr. Paul Offit of the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia earned millions of dollars as part of a $182-million sale by the hospital of its worldwide royalty interest in the Merck Rotateq vaccine … The high price placed on the patents raises concerns over Offit’s use of his former position on the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) to help create the market for rotavirus vaccine— effectively, to vote himself rich. [9]

Could the deep ties to the pharmaceutical companies be the reason the CDC puts more emphasis on vaccines? Considering the evidence presented in the Karachi Health Soap Study, which would you choose—better hygiene or a vaccine?

Conclusion

What’s the moral of the story?

The data revealed by Stephen P. Luby in the Karachi Health Soap Study is nothing short of spectacular. Children who washed their hands and skin with plain soap had 52% less diarrhea and 50% less pneumonia. Good hygiene has a significant impact on decreasing disease, and I think it is something we take for granted in the United States.

Please remember this point: If better nutrition and sanitation were added as components of this or a future study, I suspect that Karachi, Pakistan, would see a more dramatic drop in diseases, much like in the United States—and I would highly encourage such efforts.

Just imagine the implications of a comparative study being performed between hygiene practices and vaccines for decreasing disease. What do you think the outcome would be? My money would be on hygiene practices being the clear winner.

Here’s the shocking reality.

You hold in your hands the real power and master key to good health. It doesn’t come through the tip of a needle.

References

  1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randomized_controlled_trial
  2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levels_of_evidence
  3. Luby, Stephen P., Mubina Agboatwalla, Daniel R. Feikin, John Painter, Ward Billhimer, Arshad Altaf, and Robert M. Hoekstra.“Effect of Handwashing on Child Health: A Randomised Controlled Trial.” The Lancet 366, no. 9481 (July 16, 2005): 225–233. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)66912-7. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16023513
  4. WHO Pneumonia Fact Sheet: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs331/en/
  5. WHO Diarrhoeal Fact Sheet: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs330/en/
  6. http://www.naturalnews.com/030384_Louis_Pasteur_disease.html
  7. http://www.cdc.gov/rotavirus/about/prevention.html
  8. http://www.cdc.gov/Features/Pneumonia/
  9. http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2009/06/25/vaccine-doctor-given-at-least-30-million-dollars-to-push-vaccines.aspx

U.S. Universities and Big Pharma Conduct Illegal Human Experiments in Africa

People’s Constitution
November 9, 2011

A new policy brief faults prominent institutions and drug companies like Pfizer, Columbia University, Johns Hopkins University, and Population Council, for their involvement in unethical and illegal human experimentation in Africa.

The report is titled “Non-Consensual Research in Africa: The Outsourcing of Tuskegee” in reference to the illegal human experiment conducted in Tuskegee, Alabama, between 1932 and 1972 by the US Public Health Service. In that experiment, some 600 impoverished African-American men were observed in a study on the progression of untreated syphilis. Some of the men were intentionally infected with the disease and all of them were denied the cure. Regrettably, the report notes, no one was held accountable for this crime against humanity.

The new report details human experiments led by US researchers and drug companies on Africans who are typically undereducated, poor, and lack full understanding of their rights. The human subjects often are led to believe that they are receiving medical treatment from governmental health services or health ministries.

These practices hearken back to the appalling experiments carried out by US researchers in Guatemala in the 1940s where hundreds of Guatemalans were deliberately infected with sexually transmitted diseases without information or consent. President Obama formally apologized to Guatemala for these experiments last year.

Human experimentation in the United States is regulated by the Office of Research Integrity and various Ethical Research Institutional Boards. Many African countries lack these institutions. Even when they exist, they lack independence and are controlled by corrupt government officials.

In one experiment on HIV sponsored by Gilead Sciences, the Centers for Disease Control, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and operated by Family Health International, Cameroonian subjects were given details about the experiment in English even though many spoke only French and were illiterate. Five women were allegedly infected with HIV in the experiment but were not given antiretroviral drugs.

In another experiment in Nigeria led by Pfizer physicians, researchers injected children with an antibiotic called Trovan during a meningitis outbreak without providing their families with informed consent forms that fully disclose the side effects and purpose of the experiment. Eleven children died and many were left paralyzed.

In South Africa and Namibia, mothers with HIV/AIDS are routinely sterilized without their informed consent. Countries that perform these procedures are known to receive funding in the form of grants and incentives from USAID and other aid organizations.

The report explains that US researchers and drug companies violate the laws and protocols of the Declaration at Helsinki (1964) and the Belmont Report which provide ethical guidelines on human experimentation.

Moreover, the results of unethical and fraudulent experiments are laundered in the United States and Europe through the peer-review system. Many of the “peers” who review these experiments are themselves involved in the same unethical conduct. Others are concerned about the possibility of professional alienation if they speak out.

The authors make several demands so that these practices are ended. They include holding congressional hearings so that the matter is brought to the public’s attention and enacting new legislation to ensure that drugs are not approved by the FDA unless the research on which they are based comply with ethical research principles.