Flu Truth Elsewhere Hidden by Media, U.S. Health Leaders
By David Burd
Let me start with the Big Lies. An organization called Families Fighting Flu has for months been running radio ads citing 1,200 U.S. children die from the flu each year, but even the CDC admits on its Fluview website less than 100 American kids (under age 16) died last flu season from "flu-associated" illness, with most already having severely compromised chronic health conditions (Yet, even 100 pediatric flu-associated pediatric deaths indicts U.S. flu protocols as next door Canada last year had but six pediatric flu-associated deaths, all associated with severe prior health conditions).
The second Big Lie run for over 15 years was the CDC publicizing 36,000 Americans died each year from the flu, but last Spring CDC finally admitted their annual flu-associated deaths were vastly overestimated so now it's down around an annual 3,000+ flu-associated deaths. Thus, CDC admits it has been off by a factor of twelve (12) for 15 years, yet mainstream media gives them a free pass and also ignores mortality is associated with flu, almost never a direct cause.
American's mass media and Health Leaders are currently, touting virtually everybody get flu shots, including 6-month old babies getting two doses, the first at 6 months, the second four weeks later. But, "down under" Australia and New Zealand are at the end of their flu season, with their populace very leery of taking flu shots ("jabs" in their parlance) after last year's mass-poisoning by the jabs to Aussie children. Their flu-associated morbidity/mortality numbers reveal (again) without equivocation the uselessness (and toxicity) of toxin-laden flu shots - and, as usual, are simply ignored by U.S. leaders sticking with their obsession of injecting toxins into human flesh.
Hold onto your hat, here's flu truth with their flu season essentially over: Australia totals 14 "flu-associated" deaths," New Zealand totals zero. There have been no recorded pediatric deaths in Australia and obviously none in New Zealand. Using their combined population of 27 million the flu-associated mortality rate comes to one death per two million people.
Meanwhile, if CDC's lowest annual flu-associated death toll of 3,000 is used, the U.S. mortality rate will be close to 20 per two million people, a rate twenty times that of medically-comparable countries such as Australia and New Zealand. AND, along with their common folks declining flu jabs, the Aussie medical professionals by a large majority also refuse the flu jab they are pressured (but not required) to take.
Moreover, this gigantic mortality disparity has gone on for many years, and still Americans are kept ignorant, and brainwashed every year to "get your flu shot" that by any objective measure not only is a complete failure in preventing flu, but in my view actually initiates illness, too many times finally resulting in iatrogenic-based mortality (i.e. a medical treatments actually causing morbidity or mortality).
Equally damning are U.S. CDC and NIH Leaders' attitudes ignoring the vast health benefits of nutrition and adequate Vitamin D (depleted in the darkest Fall and Winter months) despite an abundance of studies that show virtually nobody with robust Vitamin D levels comes down with Winter flu and associated colds.
David Burd began his career as the first generation of "rocket scientists," from Northwestern University in 1965, with a degree in Mechanical Engineering and Astronautical Sciences, with mankind soon bound for the moon. His most recent work includes fifteen years consulting in patent related surgical application of energy, springing from being a patent examiner at the US Patent Office in Surgery Art.
Thanks, David, by mentioning the New Zealand and Australian statistics. A bit off topic, but did you hear that an NZ team has "won" the rights to do an influenza study in New Zealand? How it spreads and how flu jabs can "prevent" it from spreading?
Now the hapless folk in NZ are anxiously wondering what type of flu is going to be released in that country to support the researchers in their quest...
Posted by: JK | October 06, 2011 at 02:54 AM
My God Barry ,what you said about the mercury settling at
the bottom of the vial is a horrific possibility.
vial also have more contamination as they go into the vial
as much as ten times to get the vaccine out,more germs can enter with the needle/air/from the rubber surface of the vial.So the last person/child will get more murcury and more
germs injected into their tissue.Pharma did not want to do individual vaccines,financially(increased sickness creation) is more profitable to have toxin filled multi-dose vials.
Posted by: oneVoice | October 05, 2011 at 11:25 AM
This is a good example how fear mongering works and how they manipulate the numbers. Thank you for exploring this issue and also for sharing the link to lewrockwell.com/miller
Posted by: oneVoice | October 05, 2011 at 11:02 AM
Jeff C, thanks also for asking for source material. Here's an excellent piece by Dr. Donald Miller, Jr. (a classmate of mine 45 years ago!), an outstanding cardiac surgeon in Seattle, and the author or many health-oriented articles (the article 3+ years old, so he also mentions the 36,000 mortality figure cited by CDC).
You will see Dr. Miller cites U.S. "national vital statistics" in his article that truthfully cite U.S. flu-deaths of about 1,000 a year (yet, again pneumonias are typically the actual cause).
Posted by: david burd | October 05, 2011 at 08:43 AM
David - Thanks for the great article. I'm fascinated that the CDC has dropped the flu death estimates from 36,000 to 3,000, particularly since they did it in the midst of the massive flu vaccine campaign of the last few years. Did they give any explanation for why they were off by so much, did they come clean about their bogus "excess deaths" methodology? I wonder if the debunking of the flu death totals at sites like AoA, Natutal News, Vaccination News, and others had anything to do with it.
I'll search around, but if you have a link it would be appreciated.
Posted by: Jeff C | October 05, 2011 at 12:29 AM
Vaccines to big pharma, are like hurricanes to the construction industry. They both leave complete devastation in their wake, but that devastation can be incredibly profitable to anyone poised to step forward for the clean up.
Vaccines are the most important tool in big pharmas effort to maintain a strong customer base. Their second biggest tool is the media that THEY own, which they use quite effectively to keep the masses misinformed.
There are numerous examples of this, but one of the plainest in my view is above recommendation to administer flu shots to babies at 6 months of age, and then again four weeks later.
That recommendation is insane! A flu shot contains at least 25 micrograms of mercury, and according to EPA guidelines (.1mcg/kg of body weight per day), you would need to weigh 550 pounds to 'ingest' 25 micrograms of mercury at "a level not likely to cause harm".
But it actually gets even worse than that. If a multi-dose vial was used but not shaken after each use, then the mercury will settle to the bottom of the vial. So the child who receives the last dose in that vial, could potentially receive from 125 up to 250 mcg in a single dose.
Injecting 25 micrograms of mercury into a 6 month old defies all common sense. But the very real possibility of injecting 250 micrograms into a 6 month old baby is morally reprehensible.
This is not new, in fact it's been known for years. Yet not one "main stream media" outlet has ever questioned why this is being allowed to happen.
Posted by: Barry | October 04, 2011 at 11:42 PM
vaccine-explorer, thanks for your suggestion; here's the Aussie url. Also, going to Canada's Fluwatch website and their weekly reports provides other countries' flu reporting.
best regards, David Burd
Posted by: david burd | October 04, 2011 at 05:31 PM
In his book "The Great White Hoax" Robert Catalano writes:
If medical statistics were compiled by statisticians who had no interest in the outcome, the drug industry would topple into the dust.
Posted by: Sandy | October 04, 2011 at 04:00 PM
Imagine if there were a flu court...whereby the burden of proof was on the CDC to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that each person in fact died from the flu? Maybe then they wouldn't have time to call and bully parents into getting shots for their kids?
Posted by: Penny | October 04, 2011 at 03:01 PM
Just to mention that real annual flu mortality for England & Wales (pop ~55m) in the years 2005-8 averaged out at 33 a year: this embarrassing information was posted by the Chief Medical Officer, Sir Liam Donaldson, in BMJ Rapid Responses late Christmas Eve 2009.
Remarkably, BMJ even published a version of my response in the hard copy of the journal and I got a listing in PubMed for it!
Posted by: John Stone | October 04, 2011 at 10:48 AM
"Moreover, this gigantic mortality disparity has gone on for many years, and still Americans are kept ignorant, and brainwashed every year to "get your flu shot"..."
Unfortunately, the tobacco industry .. for decades .. kept the American people "ignorant and brainwashed" regarding the link between cigarettes and cancer.
The tobacco industry could not have succeeded in misleading the public for so long were it not for the compliance of public health officials and the medical profession that aided and abetted them.
So, it should surprise no one that the pharma industry is not worried about squandering so much time, money and energy .. aggessively "marketing the idea" by posting "get your annual flu shots today" .. in local pharmacies and major consumer outlets as a "convenience" for shoppers.
Posted by: Bob Moffitt | October 04, 2011 at 09:22 AM
great article, especially tying in the aussie figures. I'd add that this year's flu formulation is identical to last years and the cdc admits the flu vaccine wears off in as little as 6 months...so even if your kid had 2 flu vaccine doses last year, they still have to get another one this year. these shots simply don't work.
Posted by: sarah | October 04, 2011 at 08:33 AM
David, links proving your points are really useful in such an article.
Posted by: Vaccine.Explorer | October 04, 2011 at 07:30 AM
There is another very important factor in avoiding flu - hand washing, see for example this paper: http://www.infectiousdiseasenews.com/article/82838.aspx
Polish authorities showed in 2010 a TV spot about the necessity of washing hands in order to avoid spreading flu, see here: http://wsse-poznan.pl/?p=5009
So obvious, so easy, so effective.
Posted by: Marc | October 04, 2011 at 05:59 AM