Death by Flu, The Big Lie Crumbles
By David M. Burd
For many years the public has been cajoled, coerced, and conned into taking a seasonal flu shot, with the first week in December deemed to be National Vaccination Week, while various other years the shot is promoted ahead of time as in September with the 2009-2010 H1N1 Swine Flu contrived panic.
All these years we've been told there are 36,000 U.S. flu deaths each year, straight from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control's leading shills, and endlessly parroted by the national media (taking big advertising dollars from the CDC to promote the party line).
Well, quietly and with no fanfare last August 2010, small obscure stories appeared in various media health sections that the CDC's Weekly Morbidity and Mortality Report (the MMWR) had revised its annual 36,000 deaths by flu down to a range of 3,000 to 49,000 flu-associated deaths. And earlier this year the CDC website (if you dig hard for it) also put it in writing.
But, that's not the end of it. CDC makes it abundantly clear these 3K to 49K "flu-associated" deaths are not actually counted, but are instead estimates generated from computer models that hypothetically link such as pneumonia deaths to those theoretically having a prior case of influenza (with the influenza long gone).
So what is the U.S. actual count of "flu-associated" deaths for the 2011 seasonal flu season now over?
Quoting the MMWR of May 14, 2011 (the last Flu report of the season): "This season, 105 laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated pediatric deaths have been reported to CDC." And further when adults are also included: "From October 3, 2010 – May 21, 2011, 16,410 laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated hospitalizations and 311 laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated deaths were reported to CDC."
Subtracting 105 from 311 we see a documented count of 206 adult flu-associated deaths. It will be interesting to see what CDC's computer-model finally conjures up as the final 2010-2011 "flu-associated" death tally.
A comparison to our neighbor Canada is in order. Canadian officials also cajole their citizens to get their FREE seasonal flu shot, but by mid-January 2011 Canada health officials were quoted (in various news outlets) as disappointed that only about 25% of all Canadians had indeed taken the shot while speculating the public was leery after their own H1N1 debacle last year, thus it's doubtful more stepped up after mid-January.
The U.S. and Canada officials both go out of their way to count exactly the pediatric flu-associated toll of their respective countries. We've already noted the U.S. 105 pediatric deaths, with historically 75% of these deaths associated with "comorbidities" meaning the kids had severely comprised health before coming down with flu. This compares to a grand total of six (6) paediatric deaths for Canada recorded on their Fluwatch website weekly reports but Canadian officials distinctly note in their report of May 21, 2011 "All (6) cases had underlying comorbidities." Thus for the 2010-2011 Flu Season, we can see 26 flu-associated U.S. kid deaths (without comorbidities) compared to zero (0) Canadian kids (without comorbidities).
It would be reasonable to guess the majority of Canadian parents (themselves rejecting the flu shot) did not subject their kids to something they wouldn't take themselves, and particularly knowing the Australian calamity of last year when Aussie kids overwhelmed hospitals with dire and deadly flu-shot reactions.
Summing up, while Americans are coerced, cajoled, or required in school and health institutions to undergo the dangers of flu shots, our Canadian neighbors overwhelmingly reject them, and the last five years Canada has averaged but a single (non-comorbidity) flu-associated pediatric death, while the U.S. toll rises ever higher. To top it all off, in mid-May my favorite large supermarket (Harris Teeter) was promoting FREE Flu Shots - just to get rid of the huge stock many Americans seem to be, thankfully, now spurning.
Why American health officials ignore Canada's success can only be speculated, but it is perfectly clear flu shots are as dangerous as the mindset of the CDC
David M. Burd is a Medical Technology Consultant.
Dadnumberone, There is an abundance of evidence by many medical professionals that do indeed refute the benefit of vaccines you have faith in.
An example is Dr. Suzanne Humphries (just google her name), and there are countless more now joined by Dr. Humphries.
What essentially minimizes "childhood diseases" with transient and/or insignificant symptoms (but not 100% eliminates all possible damage) is excellent nutrition begun at birth by breastfeeding, and by otherwise proper nutrition through childhood. The most dangerous approach is too much reliance on so many prescribed drugs and immunizations by vaccine injections.
Start with Suzanne Humphries --- then try Boyd Haley, Hilary Butler, Russell Blaylock, and organizations such as NVIC and VRAN (google them).
Posted by: david burd | June 10, 2011 at 11:51 AM
I am not a fan of any common dogma. Too many have proved to be totally wrong. But I also don't understand a totally unsubstantiated fear of vaccines. Vaccines save lives. Nobody can deny that Polio and Small Pox killed and crippled millions in the past, and are now gone. Therefore, MILLIONS of lives have been saved.
Your flu data may be correct, and it wouldn't surprise me if it is. (I remember when we were told that 1 million children were abducted each year back in the 1980s, which was totally false.) But do you deny that vaccines have saved and continue to save millions of lives?
Posted by: DadNumberOne | June 09, 2011 at 12:11 PM
Trends in Recorded Influenza Mortality: United States,
1900–2004
Peter Doshi, AM
"A 2005 US National Institutes of Health study of over 30 influenza seasons could not correlate increasing vaccination coverage after 1980 with declining mortality rates in any age group."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2374803/
http://otorrinobrasilia.com/h1n1/mortality_us_1900_2004.pd
f
Posted by: Rachael | June 05, 2011 at 05:32 PM
I never take the flu shot since the health agencies have NO clue as the whatKind of Flu is coming
Posted by: Jackie Boulet | June 05, 2011 at 01:35 PM
Rachael, Your documenting the CDC's 7-step recipe to manipulate/fear-monger is a damning example of a government agency out-of-control, a book-end to John's UK example.
Over 15 years of rationally documenting, testifying, and protesting the lies and manipulations by CDC et al. have failed to reverse the vaccination gangsters destroying America's families.
It seems we've come to the point of a blend of civil disobedience, commitment to signing exemptions for schools, and home schooling - with all this only made possible by the internet entities such as AoA.
david burd
Posted by: david burd | June 05, 2011 at 12:32 PM
So either the death rate stays the same regardless of vaccination rate which proves the vaccine does not work, or the CDC is blatantly lying about the death rate which proves they have no way to make any claim about whether the flu shot works or not. Either way they're lying.
Posted by: keith | June 05, 2011 at 11:50 AM
Peter Doshi, a graduate student in the History, Anthropology, and Science, Technology and Society Program at MIT calculates an 18-fold decrease in influenza deaths between the 1940s and 1990s, a trend that began far before the introduction of widespread vaccination.
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2008/pandemic-0411.html
Posted by: Rachael | June 05, 2011 at 10:43 AM
What is the evidence of benefit from influenza vaccines, especially among the general population? Influenza vaccination has traditionally been recommended for those people said to be in a “high risk” group—or those with elevated risk of severe complications of the disease. If so, what evidence is there to support the increasing range of risk groups from year to year?
Read more: Vaccination Creep and Questions of Democracy:
will influenza vaccination remain voluntary? Peter Doshi http://www.dmi.unipg.it/~mamone/sci-dem/nuocontri_1/doshi4.htm
Posted by: Rachael | June 05, 2011 at 09:58 AM
Cynthia, Karen S
Two interesting points here. One is that 5 years ago the UK Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation floated the idea that because flu vaccination wasn't very effective in elderly people, they should vaccinate children to protect elderly people. This went down like a lead balloon, and no progress was made - probably because it had actually leaked out what they were trying to do.
The other point is yes, they never seem to give any figures for flu mortality in vaccinated vs unvaccinated although they have two large populations. When I queried the vaccination status of the small number of those who had died from Donaldson et al, BMJ did not publish my letter.
John
Posted by: John Stone | June 05, 2011 at 05:40 AM
Cynthia,
Yes, you're right. And another reason that the 36,000 figure looks absurd is that it remains the same from year to year, even as the percentage of people vaccinated changes. How can they claim that the vaccine saves lives if the number of deaths doesn't change?
Actually, they did recently revise the number of deaths downward, but it sounded more like a correction than a downward trend.
Posted by: Karen S. | June 05, 2011 at 12:55 AM
Note my post last year regarding the UK figures. The truth was revealed late on Christmas Eve 2009 when Donaldson et al published the real UK mortality figures for flu rather than the usual scary and baseless projections. In fact, for the previous 4 years they had had only an average of 33 deaths (when they had been claiming 12,000).
http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/01/sir-liams-skeleton-the-uk-department-of-health-fabricates-flu-deaths-to-boost-vaccination.html
Posted by: John Stone | June 04, 2011 at 03:21 AM
Think about it. If the 36,000 number was correct, that would mean that 360,000 people would have died from the flu in only the last 10 years. The more this number is used, the more it looks absurd.
Think about something else: if only 25-30% of adults (true in US too) are opting for the flu vaccine, then the children who are 95-100% vaccinated for all recommended diseases, are 75% over-vaccinated, if they were to have a choice. In other words, we (society) choose to fully vaccinate our children, but we (adults) only choose it 25% of the time.
Think about this: Flu vaccine started with only senior citizens. They chose it about 40% of the time. The recommended age was lowered over time. As the total population is concerned, vaccine rates went up, but it did not translate into 40% of all adults, as was probably planned. So it is no wonder that the flu vaccine is now recommended for everyone age 6 months to dead.
Posted by: Cynthia Cournoyer | June 03, 2011 at 08:29 PM
Rachael, I clicked on the link you provided but it came up as not accessible. Seeing this stratagem in writing as you describe is very important.
So, please email me direct at [email protected] to communicate about this.
thanks, david burd
Posted by: david burd | June 03, 2011 at 07:45 PM
The Seven-Step Recipe for Generating Interest in, and Demand for, Flu (or any other) Vaccination
http://drtenpenny.com/flu_season.aspx
I noticed the previous link I posted to the CDC site didn't open. You can access it through Dr Sherri Tenpenny's site above.
Posted by: Rachael | June 03, 2011 at 07:42 PM
Flu vaccine propaganda has been in the works for a long time, that is how to promote flu vaccines for healthy people who don't really need them. Here's the CDC's 7 step recipe for generating interest and demand for the flu vaccine.
http://www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/36/200...
Daily newspaper reports should contain:
New Message - Outbreak/Disease Widespread
New Message - Could be a bad/serious flu season
New Message - Vaccine does not have the same viral strain as circulating flu virus
New Message - Child death reported from flu
New Message - Adult/elderly death reported from flu
New Message - Flu kills 36,000 people per year
New Message - Frequency of influenza stories by week
Posted by: Rachael | June 03, 2011 at 06:45 PM
I was so frustrated this past flu season because my kids got it after a recent visit to our local library. It is this viral shedding that caused my already low weight PDD-NOS child to lose weight. She was sick for a full week. :(
Her vaccination with a full thimerisol flu shot at 10 months of age is what caused her issues and now she get to deal with having the illness as well. They get you coming and going, just makes me so mad....
Posted by: RN Mommy | June 03, 2011 at 02:24 PM
Amy in Idaho,
You may or may not have seen this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yJLm4fxwSo&feature=related
Mind the foul language on this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zON_QZAYx5A
Tell it like it is.
Posted by: Media Scholar | June 03, 2011 at 12:56 PM
Amy in Idaho
Yes, Janine's book has never got the coverage it deserved. I remember her as a highly regarded investigative journalist in the 80s and 90s, but Fear of the Invisible was completely ignored on its publication. To get more than a flavour of it I recommend a visit to her website:
http://www.fearoftheinvisible.com/
John
Posted by: John Stone | June 03, 2011 at 11:13 AM
I'm currently reading the book "Fear of the Invisible - How Scared Should We Be of Viruses and Vaccines, HIV and AIDS?" by Janine Roberts. I'm only 100 pages in but I recommend it highly, just to get a REALLY good overview of how vaccines are made. I don't see how anyone can read this and still think that vaccinations are a good idea.
Posted by: Amy in Idaho | June 03, 2011 at 10:53 AM
I'll never forget the first time I got a flu shot in college because they were giving them away for free. I barely ever get sick, may be once a year. 2 days after getting that shot, I was never-ever so sick in my life! In bed for nearly 2 weeks, lost 10 pounds and nearly missed my finals! Never again.
We only got the shot for our son at our ped's urging. Stupid, stupid, stupid us. You can imagine what happened...
Posted by: Kevin | June 03, 2011 at 09:53 AM
Media Scholar, Thanks for your input.
I could have mentioned specifics on the toxicities of the flu vaccine including the 25 micrograms of mercury content in bulk-dose batches, and the frequent contamination of many vaccine batches as displayed last year by the Australian children rushed to hospitals after their flu-shot jabs.
My June 2, 2010 post here on AoA also identified a respiratory treatment drug called ribavirin now commonly used in U.S. Also called Virazole it was invented as a cell-killing cancer chemotherapy (but never used as such) with its cell-killing design always causing deadly hemolytic anemia (red blood cells self-destructing).
We are in full agreement, the flu shot itself causes countless illness conditions (and/or autism and many permanent disabilities), thence many to hospitals, thence some of these become iatrogenic deaths - caused by such as ribavirin.
thanks, David Burd
Posted by: david burd | June 03, 2011 at 07:41 AM
The big issues with Influenza vaccine are, contrary to public perception building efforts, most contain Thimerosal, cause Guillian-Barre Syndrome, and people vaccinated with it shed the viral component, making a disgusting, completely unnecessary swill of sickness for totally innocent mild-mannered by-standers to get ill from for at least three weeks post-vaccination.
The Thimerosal is well-known to cause neurological disorder and the fake influenza illnesses created by mass influenza vaccination marketeers certainly destroy efforts to control health care costs by adding millions of Americans to sick bay, either recuperating at home or at hospital, or dead in the city morgue.
Scientists know it's a bad idea to put undigested things like viral matter into the human body. Vaccine enthusiasts also know this. Yet neither seem to be willing to accept the truth that real Americans would never brown nose the vaccine industry to obtain favor and placement in a seat at a table somewhere on a committee that does little more than fret about the prospects of America's fast growing unvaccinated population.
The dirty birds are the ones vaccinated. This fact is scientifically proven.
Posted by: Media Scholar | June 03, 2011 at 06:58 AM