Flu Vaccines Sold by Marketing Fear of Disease: BMJ Report

by Heidi Stevenson Gaia-Health.com

Influenza vaccines are killers, life destroyers, and provide little or no benefit. The evidence is clear. A report published in the BMJ clarifies how these facts are ignored by health agencies. To get around them, they simply push fear of disease well past the point of absurdity. But the CDC and other health agencies have no other way to sell the unsellable. 

The British Medical Journal (BMJ), one of the world’s most highly revered scientific medical publications, has published an article that condemns influenza vaccines and their marketing. The last sentence reads:
It’s no wonder so many people feel that "flu shots" don’t work: for most flus, they can’t.[1]

Influenza vaccines don’t work as advertised. Nonetheless, they’re heavily marketed by governmental agencies through one consistent tactic: fear. Dr. Doshi describes how influenza vaccinations are sold:
[I]nfluenza is a serious disease, we are all at risk of complications from influenza, the flu shot is virtually risk free, and vaccination saves lives.

In other words, he’s saying that the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), which supposedly exists for the benefit of the people’s health, is selling influenza vaccines by trying to scare people into it. It’s pure fear mongering and as we’ll see later, outright lies, to market flu vaccines. He goes on to state that looking through the CDC’s vaccine-marketing lens gives the impression that:
...the lack of influenza vaccine availability for all 315 million US citizens seems to border on the unethical. Yet across the country, mandatory influenza vaccination policies have cropped up, particularly in healthcare facilities, precisely because not everyone wants the vaccination, and compulsion appears the only way to achieve high vaccination rates. 

Dr. Doshi is telling us that a combination of fear mongering and force are now being used to compel people to accept forced drugging by vaccination. Then, he states:
Closer examination of influenza vaccine policies shows that although proponents employ the rhetoric of science, the studies underlying the policy are often of low quality, and do not substantiate officials’ claims. 

The science supporting influenza vaccines is poor. Surely the CDC must know this. After all, it’s their job to know! So, the fact that they use junk science to support a massive program of vaccination clearly demonstrates an utter lack of faith towards the people. There can be no explanation for this dereliction of duty other than having sold out to the manufacturers and the medical system itself.

By the way, those quotes all comes from the first paragraph of Dr. Doshi’s report. Because they’re all provocative statements, it’s imperative that he support them—and that he does, with clarity and force.

Who’s at risk?
When the flu vaccine was originally recommended in the United States in 1960, only adults age 65 or older were considered at risk if they got the flu. Now, the CDC calls for everyone age 6 months or more is considered "at risk". If the CDC is believed, then the entire population is now as weak as only those over 65 were about 50 years ago.

Does the influenza vaccine save lives?
The CDC wants us all to believe that flu vaccines save lives. However, as Dr. Doshi points out, the evidence does not support the claim. The so-called evidence cited by the CDC consistently contains flaws so severe that they should be discounted completely. He points out one study that appears to show a huge improvement in the odds of death from influenza. But, the study was done outside the influenza season, a time that he refers to as, "when it is hard to imagine the vaccine could bring any benefit." Even the authors found the results implausible, stating that their result:
...is simply implausible, and likely the product of the "healthy-user effect". 

Dr. Doshi points out that this same bias is present in many studies. Further, he points out that the CDC itself acknowledges this particular bias in studies. Of course, they buried the admission deep inside a 68 page document:
These studies have been challenged because of concerns that they have not controlled adequately for differences in the propensity for healthier persons to be more likely than less healthy persons to receive vaccination.[2]

This point is only one flaw in the studies cited by the CDC. Also significant is that the CDC completely ignores studies that do not support their chosen vaccination program. They do not admit that the evidence simply does not support their claim that lives are saved.

Is the flu vaccine safe?
The CDC claims that the influenza vaccine is safe. The reality has proven to be the complete opposite. The National Institutes for Health (NIH) actively promoted a video by their director, Anthony S. Fauci, in which he claims:
[T]he track record [of the H1N1 vaccine] for serious adverse events is very good. It’s very, very, very rare that you ever see anything that’s associated with the vaccine that’s a serious event. 

This same swine flu vaccine resulted in these massive adverse effects:

• It was suspended by Australia in children under 5 years because of febrile convulsions. 1 in 110 children were affected.
• It caused narcolepsy, a life-devastating neurological illness, in hundreds of adolescents in Europe. 1 in 55,000 adolescents lost their futures to narcolepsy as a direct result of this vaccine.[3]
• Just recently, the UK has admitted that it caused narcolepsy.[4]

Is this a legitimate review?
With so much junk science being passed off for the purpose of selling products, it’s always a fair question to ask if the authors are legit. In this case, of course, the question is a bit different. Why would this author write this paper?

Dr. Peter Doshi is a post-doctoral fellow at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, which is generally considered to be one of the world’s finest. His career is ahead of him, but this paper may have derailed it. We’ve seen what’s been done to the career of Dr. Andrew Wakefield, who was already a world-renowned researcher with impeccable credentials. Dr. Doshi cannot be unaware of that, so the only conclusion to be drawn is that he feels conscience-bound to tell the truth and to inform people of the fact that influenza vaccines are both dangerous and, if not entirely ineffective, certainly they provide only minuscule benefit.

Dr. Doshi has eviscerated both the claims in support of influenza vaccination and the inherent character of our health regulatory agencies. So, will we see any change in the health regulation agencies’ push to vaccinate every human and animal on the face of the earth?

Not a chance. The CDC and virtually all the other so-called health agencies ceased to be protectors of people’s health decades ago, and likely never were. They are nothing but a marketing front for Big Pharma and Big Medicine.

Sources:
[1] Influenza: marketing vaccine by marketing disease; British Medical Journal; Peter Doshi; 346 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f3037.

[2] Prevention and control of influenza with vaccines: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), 2010.

[3] Swine Flu Vaccine Caused Narcolepsy in Thousands: BMJ Claim

[4] U.K. gov makes U-turn on link between GSK vaccine and narcolepsy

Congress Says The CDC Can't Be Trusted On Ebola

WASHINGTON -- Members of Congress took the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to task at a hearing on Ebola Friday, hammering the agency over how it has handled the virus's presence in the United States.


The hearing came a day after Craig Spencer, a doctor in New York City, tested positive for Ebola, becoming the first confirmed case in the state. Only three other people have been diagnosed with the disease in the U.S., including Thomas Eric Duncan, who contracted Ebola in Liberia, and two nurses who cared for Duncan after he became ill in this country. Both nurses were declared disease-free this week. The CDC has tightened its guidelines for health care workers treating Ebola patients following criticism that the nurses got infected because the original guidelines were insufficient. No health care workers in the United States have gotten sick since the new guidelines were issued, the CDC notes, and the protocol may soon be strengthened again.


Nevertheless, many members of Congress declared that the government's response to Ebola has been a failure.


Asked outside of Friday's hearing whether the CDC's response has been appropriate, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) told The Huffington Post: "If you believe, as I do, part of the role of the CDC is to provide accurate, timely, complete, thorough information to the public, the answer would be no. Their information hasn't been all that much better than what I could have provided, and I didn't go to medical school for four years."


Earlier this month, CDC Director Tom Frieden said that a travel ban to countries battling Ebola would make the outbreak worse. Medical experts reiterated that point on Friday.
Rep. Blake Farenthold (R-Texas) nonetheless told HuffPost that he supports a travel ban for the affected countries, with some exceptions, such as for medical personnel. He said that Spencer "should have been monitored much more closely. I don't think he was careful enough, I don't think I would have ridden the subway." When speaking about the CDC's response, Farenthold remarked, "If you screw up, admit it, take the blame and move forward."


Democrats also had some criticism for the agency. Rep. Gerry Connolly (D- Va.) told HuffPost, "I think they have some real catch-up to do in re-establishing their credibility."
Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.), addressing Health and Human Services Assistant Secretary Nicole Lurie as well as other medical and military experts testifying about the U.S. response, predicted that the experts would be wrong in their recommendations, particularly where travel is concerned.
"I don't think it helps to say 'we've got an aggressive thing on the ground, everything is good.' Because I've got a feeling you’re going to come back and give us a whole different story," said Lynch, who advocated for not only monitoring travelers from West Africa for 21 days after they return, but quarantining them in West Africa for an additional 21 days before they can fly to the United States.


The officials told Lynch that such a plan would be impractical because people can simply take roundabout routes home. They also said that an extensive quarantine would make it much harder to recruit desperately needed health care workers to fight the outbreak at the source.
"It would go against our ability to fight Ebola in West Africa," said Rabih Torbay, a vice president at International Medical Corps, which helps bring doctors into the disease zone.
During the hearing, Rep. John Mica (R-Fla.) fumed at Lurie and argued that the United States had proven to be unprepared for Ebola.


"Are you in charge of being prepared? OK, then I think you need to turn your resignation in," said Mica, waving a report on preparedness at Lurie. The report did not concern Lurie's agency, but rather efforts by the Department of Homeland Security.
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) suggested during the hearing that America had lost trust in the scientists and medical officials. "We trust the military more than the CDC on this," he said.
But at least one member said the CDC was doing a great job -- Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.), whose district includes the hospital caring for the latest U.S. Ebola patient. She said that she is "proud" of the CDC's response as she's observed it in New York.

Foreigners with risk of Ebola infection are "safe"; Unvaccinated children in the USA "Public Health Threat"??? US Gov. States

(NaturalNews) Right now is the perfect time to point out the gross contradiction in the U.S. government's policies on supposedly preventing the spread of communicable disease. Across the board, children who are unvaccinated against diseases that don't even exist in America anymore - such as polio -- are loudly condemned as "a threat to public health" and often barred from attending public school.




The logic goes like this: An unvaccinated child might easily catch polio and then spread it to other children. Therefore, that child should be barred from attending public school.

But all the logic gets reversed when it comes to ebola and the U.S. southern border. Suddenly, anyone who says the border should be controlled so that ebola-infected illegal immigrants can't enter the United States are called "alarmists" or "racists." Apparently, the idea that an ebola-infected illegal alien might expose others to ebola is now politically incorrect.




Never mind the fact that border agents are catching border crossers who recently came from ebola-infected countries. As reported by Top Right News: [1]



Agents are reporting that they have caught hundreds of illegal aliens crossing our Southern border from African Ebola "hot zones" over the past several months, the majority of them from Liberia... DHS figures indicate that 112 individuals were caught illegally crossing into the United States from Guinea, 231 from Liberia, and another 145 from Sierra Leone, the three Ebola "hot spots". This represents a 95% increase over 2013, before the Ebola crisis heated up.

Ebola is now more common in America than polio

What's even more fascinating about all this is that ebola is now more common in America than polio! There hasn't been a single case of polio since the late 1970's, yet health authorities push polio vaccines with a kind of frantic paranoia that, for some reason, is utterly abandoned the moment we talk about communicable diseases marching into the United States across our open borders.

In summary, the outlandish official position on all this from the U.S. government is as follows:







• Children who are not vaccinated against diseases that don't even exist in American -- such as polio -- should be barred from attending public school, but potential carriers of ebola and other diseases should be welcomed to illegally enter the country regardless of what infectious diseases they carry.







• An illegal alien child with a communicable disease shall be called a "refugee." But an American child with a communicable disease shall be called "a threat to public health."







• U.S. citizens who carry disease should be isolated from others, but non-U.S. citizens who enter the country illegally shall be transported by the government to be deposited on the streets in large U.S. cities across the country.



Just today, Texas Governor Rick Perry called for "fully staffed quarantine stations" at all points where people enter the country. As CNN reports: [2]



Texas Gov. Rick Perry on Monday called for the federal government to enhance screening procedures at points of entry into the United States to check if someone might have Ebola. The procedures would include gathering more information about people coming from affected areas and, perhaps, taking temperatures, he said.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/047149_ebola_outbreak_illegal_immigration_public_health.html#ixzz3FOl6ueGd