Article Via:
VaxTruth
Megan Pond
It’s September. Where I
live, September is the month that remains warm, but the evenings often
cool down, warning of the impending weather-change about to come. In
turn this is also when flu shot signs and tables with bored looking
nurses and boxes full of needles join Halloween decorations as they make
their seasonal debut into stores. ”Flu Shots Now Available” signs
begin to dot big box stores’ message boards and cheap signs stuck in the
grass that wave back and forth in the wind. Flu vaccines are a huge
market for these stores. It creates a big source of income at the best
time of the year, so it’s only natural that they would try and advertise
the heck out of them. It often brings me to ask myself, “What are they
more worried about? My health? Or their pocketbook?”
Flu vaccine debates on the internet also make their yearly appearance
and will continue for the next several months. There, I find many
false statements regarding the flu vaccine and influenza itself being
swept throughout cyberspace. Let’s identify some of these myths.
b
Myth #1: There’s No Thimerosal (or Mercury) in the Flu Shot Anymore.
First, I would like to direct you to two articles:
Vaccine Ingredients – A Comprehensive Guide and
Is There Thimerosal in the Flu Vaccine? If
you click on the first link, you can scroll down to the section that
explains a little more about thimerosal and mercury in vaccines. Here’s
a quick summary of the articles’ findings.
According to the CDC, vaccines labeled “thimerosal-free” often have a
little asterisk next to those words which lead you to something like:
“This vaccine has ‘trace’ amounts of thimerosal, which the FDA says is
equivalent to thimerosal-free products.” If we look closer into
“thimerosal-free” vaccines, we will actually find that there is still a
toxic amount of mercury contained in them.
There are two kinds of flu shots given. One contains 25 mcg of
mercury (in the form of thimerosal with is 50% mercury. There is 50mcg
of thimerosal in this flu shot) and is often given as the “regular” flu
shot to those with no special circumstances. The other kind of flu shot
is labeled “thimerasol-free” (containing less than 3mcg of mercury) and
is given to young children and pregnant women.
If we look at “safe” and “un-safe” levels of mercury, per the FDA, we find this:
2 ppb is the
maximum amount of mercury that deems water “safe” for drinking
Anything
over 200 ppb mercury is considered
TOXIC [source - EPA]
After doing some math [you can check my math in the article: Vaccine Ingredients – A Comprehensive Guide], we find this:
There is up to 3
00 ppb mercury is in the
“thimerosal-free” flu vaccine.
There is 25
,000 ppb mercury given in the flu shot containing 25 mcg of thimerosal as a preservative.
No matter how you cut it, flu vaccines contain toxic amounts of
mercury. So yes, the flu vaccines still DOES contain thimerosal. The
claim that there is “no thimerasol” in the flu vaccine is a complete
fallacy, which leads to the next myth.
Myth #2: Sure,
the Flu Vaccine Might Contain Thimerosal, but 25mcg is a Safe Amount.
Pregnant Women Can Even Eat Up to 25 mcg of Mercury Contained in Fish.
I have heard this countless times. First, I would like to point out
that pregnant women do not get the flu vaccine containing thimerosal as a
preservative. They receive the vaccine falsely claiming to be
“thimerosal-free.” It really should be called, “thimerosal decreased,
but still overly toxic.” From the above statement, we have people
running around thinking it’s safe to not only eat 25 mcg of mercury, but
also to inject 25 mcg of thimerosal into their body (thimerosal is 50%
mercury).
There have never been any real studies done on pregnant women and the
effects of eating fish-contained mercury. What information has been
gathered is mainly based on trial and error. Some doctors urge their
pregnant patients to completely steer clear of fish altogether because
of the mercury content, while others advise pregnant women to eat “low
mercury fish” once or twice a week. According to the 2010 Dietary
Guidelines for Americans, eating 8-12 ounces of low mercury fish per
week is safe for pregnant women. The FDA (Federal Drug Administration)
and EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) say up 12 ounces per week is
safe. The Mayo Clinic says to limit albacore tuna, chunk white tuna and
tuna steak to 6 ounces per week.
[source Mayo Clinic]
So then we have to ask:
What is considered low mercury fish?
According to the FDA: shrimp, crab, salmon, pollock, catfish, cod,
tuna, and, tilapia are considered low mercury fish. Tuna contains the
highest amount of mercury in the low mercury fish category.
[source FDA.gov]
Which leads us to:
How much mercury is in fish?
Using tuna as an example, which contains the highest amount of
mercury in the low mercury fish category, we find out it contains
approximately 128 ppb mercury. All of the other low mercury fish are
lower than that. The fish containing the highest amount of mercury,
tilefish, has 1,450 ppb mercury — very understandable that pregnant
women and children are urged to not eat high mercury fish.
[source FDA.gov]
Now we’ll look at how many micrograms of mercury is in a serving of
fish, again using tuna as an example. Three oz. of tuna is considered 1
serving, so that means a pregnant woman can safely eat 1 serving of
tuna 4 times a week, according to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans.
If we look at the current amount of mercury in fish (because it changes
from year to year), we see that there are approximately 13.32mcg of
mercury in 12 ounces of tuna, which equates to 3.33mcg per serving. The
amount of mercury in tuna sits between 12-14mcg per 12 ounces every
year, and has never been recorded as going over 14mcg.
[source EPA]
Therefore, we can safely come to the conclusion that the FDA standard
for mercury consumption in pregnant women is a maximum of 14mcg in one
week, not the 25mcg that floats around on message boards. Consuming
25mcg of mercury in fish would almost double the amount the FDA
considers safe for pregnant women.
I would also like to point out that *INGESTING* mercury is very
different than *INJECTING* it straight into your muscle or blood
stream. Ingesting small amounts of mercury is considered safe because
it goes through a number of natural filtration systems in our body
before it reaches the blood stream. Studies suggest that eating higher
amounts of mercury (anything over 200ppb) can be toxic because a small
amount of mercury is able to reach the blood stream and can cause
neurological disorders, immune disorders, and other significant
problems. A very in-depth study done by the University of Calgary showed
that even small amounts of mercury reaching the brain cannot only halt
neuron growth, but it actually causes the neuron growth to *reverse*.
Neurons are integral cell bodies and nerve processes in our
brains. Unlike other body cells, neurons stop reproducing shortly after
birth. Because of this, some parts of the brain have more neurons at
birth than later in life because neurons die and
cannot be replaced.
[source University of Calgary] [source]
By injecting mercury instead of ingesting it, you are essentially
by-passing your inner filtration systems. All of the mercury in a
vaccine enters the blood stream, which leads straight to the brain.
Remember that toxic amounts of mercury is considered anything over
200ppb, and the amount of mercury in a “thimerosal-free” flu vaccine is
300 to 600 ppb – the vaccine most commonly used contains 50,000 ppb.
When you ingest mercury, the amount that reaches your blood stream is
much less than the actual amount you consumed. When you vaccinate, the
entire amount of mercury reaches your blood stream.
So here’s the point: when we
combine the information from Myth #1 and Myth #2, even the FDA and EPA
standards for INGESTION (over an entire week) of mercury are
significantly lower than the amount in even the “thimerosal-free”
vaccines – which are given all at once – and are outrageously lower than
the 25mcg flu vaccine which, of course, is also given all at once.
Myth
#3: Last Year I Got the Flu and I Threw Up Three Times a Day and was
Constantly in the Bathroom with Diarrhea! There’s No Way I’m Skipping
my Shot This Year!
Many people, after experiencing a rough
weekend of throwing up and diarrhea, come back to work and say they had
an awful flu. This is a common misconception. The “stomach flu” is
different from “the flu” that we vaccinate for. The flu shot is
ineffective against “stomach flu.”
The flu vaccine guards against “the flu.” Flu is short for
Influenza.
Many interchange the word “flu” to also mean “stomach flu,” which in
fact is not a flu at all. Many describe having the flu as being a “cold
from Hell.” Symptoms generally include fever, runny nose, head
congestion, body and muscle aches, fatigue, dry cough, and sore throat.
It’s definitely not fun to have and will often keep you in bed,
depending on how healthy your immune system is. Influenza is caused by a
virus – meaning antibiotics are not affective against killing it. With
the influenza virus – as well as any other virus – you generally have
to “wait it out” and let your body take care of killing the virus.
The “stomach flu” is scientifically called gastroenteritis and is
caused by a virus, parasite, or bacteria. The symptoms include stomach
cramps, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea and is usually caused by eating
contaminated food or drinking contaminated water. Conditions such as
lactose intolerance or food allergies can also cause gastroenteritis.
[source Web MD]
Myth #4: If I Get a Flu Shot, I Won’t Get the Flu! (And My Body Will Be Healthier and Stronger to Boot!)
There are several different strains of influenza that cause a human
to get “the flu.” There are 3 different classifications, or genuses, of
Influenza: Influenza A, Influenza B, and Influenza C. Each genus has
several different serotypes (or several different flus), under each
classification. Influenza A has been shown to affect humans the most
and has 10 known serotypes, and the CDC suspects that there are over 100
different serotypes of Influenza A. Considering that only a small
percentage of people are actually tested in one year to find out what
kind of flu they contracted, it is impossible to know just how many
different serotypes of Influenza there are. Most people that get the
flu don’t go to the doctor or hospital, and even those that are
hospitalized are not commonly tested.
[source Wiki]
According to the CDC:
There are several reasons why someone might get flu-like symptoms even after they have been vaccinated against the flu.
- People may be exposed to an influenza virus shortly before getting
vaccinated or during the two-week period that it takes the body to gain
protection after getting vaccinated. This exposure may result in a
person becoming ill with flu before the vaccine begins to protect them.
- People may become ill from other (non-flu) viruses that circulate
during the flu season, which can also cause flu-like symptoms (such as
rhinovirus).
- A person may be exposed to an influenza virus that is not included
in the seasonal flu vaccine. There are many different influenza viruses
that circulate every year. The flu shot protects against the 3 viruses
that research suggests will be most common. Unfortunately, some people
can remain unprotected from flu despite getting the vaccine. This is
more likely to occur among people that have weakened immune systems.
However, even among people with weakened immune systems, the flu vaccine
can still help prevent influenza complications. [source CDC.gov]
Reports of “getting the flu” after vaccination is common.
Immediately following vaccination, the body’s immune system is
weakened. During that time of weakened immunity, it is common for
someone to more easily contract a flu virus (or any other kind of
virus), even one that the vaccine prevents against considering that it
takes up to 2 weeks for the body to create enough antibodies to prevent
future illness from the strains contained in the vaccine.
So how many strains are contained in this year’s vaccine?
Three. H1N1, H3N2, and an Influenza B serotype called Brisbane.
[source CDC.gov]
How are the strains chosen for the current year’s vaccine?
The most popular strains from the previous year become the blueprint
for the current year’s vaccine. However, according to the CDC, the most
popular strains of influenza change on a yearly basis. My red flag
just went up! If the flu vaccine for this year is made from the
previous year’s most popular strains, and they change yearly, doesn’t
that mean this year’s “most popular strains” will likely be different?
My internal compass says yes. Hence, the vaccine with last year’s most
popular strains will be grossly ineffective this year.
“The viruses used in making seasonal flu vaccines are
chosen each year based on information collected over the previous year
about which influenza viruses are spreading.” [source flushotstogo.com]
One interesting fact about this year’s flu vaccine (2011-2012) is
that it’s EXACTLY the same vaccine as last year’s. Nothing has been
changed, yet the medical community and the government are recommending
that even if you had this vaccine last year, you should still get it
this year because it “wears off” in just a matter of months. HUH?! Flu
vaccines are made exactly the same way as all the other vaccines we give
our children: Inactivated virus, preservatives, chemicals, etc… except
this is the ONLY vaccine they admit lasts for “just a couple of
months.” Shouldn’t that mean that other vaccines are just as
ineffective? We give those to our children and they’re supposed to last
for up to 10 years after the whole series is completed. If I knew how
to raise one eyebrow, I would do that now.
Myth #5: The Flu Vaccine Has Saved Countless Lives.
Influenza vaccines have been around since 1945. Just before the flu
season of 2003-2004 the CDC recommended for the first time that children
younger than 60 months (5 years) and older than 6 months receive an
annual flu vaccination. About this time is when the fad of getting a
flu vaccine became common for not only children under 5, but for
everyone over 5 as well.
[source CDC.gov] [source vaccineinformation.org]
The following is a list of different years and the number of flu associated deaths in children reported to the CDC:
- 1999-2000 -36 deaths [source]
- 2000-2001 -30 deaths [source] 17% decrease
- 2001-2002 – 25 deaths [source] 17% decrease
- 2002-2003 – 29 deaths [source]
16% increase (This is the last year that the flu vaccine was
considered “unsafe” by the CDC for children under 5 – now let’s watch
the increase of deaths after the CDC recommends all children age 6
months to 5 years be vaccinated for Influenza.)
- 2003-2004 – 153 [source] 427% increase
- 2004-2005 — 47 deaths [source] 69% decrease
- 2005-2006 – 46 deaths [source] 3% decrease
- 2006-2007 – 68 deaths [source] 48% increase
- 2007-2008 – 88 deaths [source] 29% increase
- 2008-2009 – 133 deaths [source] 51% increase
- 2009-2010 – 282 deaths [source] 112% increase
- 2010-2011 – 115 deaths [source] 59% decrease
The number of children dying from the flu has risen *drastically*
since the CDC recommended children under 5 receive the flu vaccine.
There has been an average of
67% increase of flu-associated death in children since the CDC recommended children under 5 receive the flu vaccine.
According to research presented at the 105th International Conference of the American Thoracic Society in San Diego,
children who get the flu vaccination have a 3 times greater risk for hospitalization:
They found that children who had received the flu vaccine had three
times the risk of hospitalization, as compared to children who had not
received the vaccine. In asthmatic children, there was a significantly
higher risk of hospitalization in subjects who received the TIV (Stands
for Trivalent Influenza Vaccine – a.k.a. the flu shot), as compared to
those who did not.
[source Sciencedaily.com]
So in essence, parents who vaccinate their children against the flu are
increasing the hospitalization risk for their child!
”The number of deaths attributed to influenza over the
years is always averaged at 36,000 per year in the United States, and
that number is still often used. This number, as many people found out,
was completely false and misleading.
Their claim that 36,000 Americans die from the seasonal flu is
classic deception & fear mongering propaganda. Most of those deaths,
as you can see by the breakdown chart below, resulted from bacterial
pneumonia triggered by the Flu. And the age bracket for most victims is
65 and over. But the Flu itself is relatively innocuous by comparison,
and actual flu death figures are statistically minor. The who base Flu
death averages not on the Influenza totals but on the combined Pneumonia
& Influenza totals are overcoming a serious political challenge:
convincing the public of the urgency to be vaccinated when the crisis is
no longer perceived to be real. Without that advantage of fear, given
all that we have learned about the lack of efficacy & dangers
inherent to the shots, the entire Flu Vaccine Industry might very well
collapse.
INFLUENZA: ACTUAL NUMBER OF DEATHS CATALOGED IN THE US
2002 – 727
2003 – 1,792
2004 – 1,100
2005 – 1,812
PNEUMONIA: ACTUAL NUMBER OF DEATHS CATALOGED IN THE US
2002 – 64,954
2003 – 63,371
2004 – 58,564
2005 – 61,189
PNEUMONIA & INFLUENZA: ACTUAL NUMBER OF DEATHS CATALOGED
2002 – 65,681
2003 – 65,163
2004 – 59,664
2005 – 63,001
The CDC and the World Health Organization (WHO) converts numbers from
the third set; based on yearly fluctuations they arrive at 36,000.”
[Joel Lord in VRM: “One For All” Universal Flu Vaccine – 21st Century Genetic Roulette Part 1; Founder of the VRM]
So when you hear the number of flu related deaths per year, remember
that it’s a complete estimation. The WHO and the CDC take the numbers
of not only those individuals with confirmed influenza cases, but also
those individuals that have not been tested to see whether or not they
had influenza but died from pneumonia. They’re taking a complete guess
and assuming that about half of the individuals that died from pneumonia
developed pneumonia because they contracted influenza as well, which
may or may not be true. You’ll also see that, despite a consecutive
increase of flu vaccinations each year, the number of influenza AND
pneumonia cases remain about the same.
At the end of all of this, we
find that the Flu vaccine is dangerous and essentially ineffective. So
that means we must be doomed to live in a never-ending cycle of possibly
contracting the yearly flu?
Not so. Studies have shown that adequate
amounts of Vitamin D during the flu months (when Vitamin D levels are at
their lowest) can prevent people from contracting influenza up to 100%
of the time!! And even if your Vitamin D levels aren’t as high as they
need to be to completely prevent the flu, even higher than average
levels of Vitamin D can greatly minimize the symptoms of the flu if you
catch it. This is one of the only safe and natural ways to prevent the
flu or lessen flu symptoms.
[ Naturalnews.com][medicalnewstoday.com] [mercola.com] [University of Cambridge Medical Journals]
Along with adequate amounts of Vitamin D, studies show that regular
visits to a chiropractor can have significant affects on immune system
health and development. The Journal of Pediatric, Maternal & Family
Health issued a release on May 04, 2009 with the headline “Flue
Prevention Plan Should Include Chiropractic,” urging people to include
chiropractic during this most recent flu scare. In this report, it
states:
People of all ages are encouraged to add chiropractic to
their strategy for warding off and fighting the flu and its effects
swine flu or otherwise. Spinal adjustments can have a positive effect on
immune function according to a growing number of researchers who are
exploring the common denominators in disease processes, and the role of
the nervous, immune, and hormonal systems in development of immune
related illnesses.
During the Spanish Influenza outbreak in 1918 in Davenport, Iowa, 50
medical doctors cared for 4,953 cases of the Spanish flu, and 274 of
their patients died. In the same city, 150 chiropractic doctors,
including students and faculty of the Palmer School of Chiropractic,
treated 1,635 Spanish Flu patients where only 1 patient died.
Outside Davenport, chiropractors in Iowa cared for 4,735 Spanish Flu
sufferers with only six deaths – one out of 866. In Oklahoma, out of
3,490 flu patients receiving the benefits of chiropractic care, only
seven people died.
National figures for the United States show that 1,142 chiropractic
doctors treated a total of 46,394 flu patients during the 1918 Spanish
Flu outbreak, with a mortality rate of only 54 patients – one out of
every 859, or less than 0.12 percent.
In sharp contrast, the mortality rate from Spanish flu in regular US
hospitals generally ranged from 30 to 40 percent. For one hospital in
New York, the mortality rate was 68 percent!
