So why do you think they keep hyping up this jab?

This question I will answer in the next blog but first some main stream coverage of the bad science behind it

Flu Jab that costs £115m a year does not cut death rate in elderly


30th August 2008
Having a flu jab does not cut the death rate among the elderly, claim researchers.
They say vaccination has a virtually non-existent effect on the risk of dying prematurely and that previous studies have ‘ exaggerated’ the apparent benefits.
A study of 700 pensioners suffering pneumonia, a complication of flu, suggested those who had taken the jab were indeed less likely to die than those who were unvaccinated.
But closer analysis showed those who were vaccinated were healthier and more likely to look after themselves in the first place – which means they were less at risk of dying from flu-related complications.
The study looked at data on 700 Canadians aged 65 and over. Half had taken the vaccine and half had not, but they were all admitted to hospital for pneumonia.
Researchers from the University of Alberta found 12 per cent of patients died after a hospital stay of eight days on average.
Those who had been vaccinated were half as likely to die as unvaccinatedpatients – a finding consistent-with the benefits shown in previous studies.
However, researchers then examined the patients’ clinical records, and factors including age, sex, smoking, frailty and socioeconomic status.
After these were taken into account, the relative risk of death was reduced by a ‘statistically nonsignificant’ amount, says the study published yesterday in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine.
Dr Dean Eurich, of the university’s school of public health, said it was ‘implausible’ that vaccination was halving the mortality rate among flu victims.
Researchers suggested previous studies had not considered sufficiently that vaccinated patients who survived were probably healthier and better able to combat flulike complications than unvaccinated ones who died.
But it is difficult to prove the so-called ‘healthy-user’ effect, they said. Dr Sumit Majumdar, associate professor in the university’s faculty of medicine and dentistry, said: ‘It is seen in what doctors often refer to as their “good patients”.’ They are well-informed about their health and look after themselves, ‘and quite religiously get vaccinated each year so as to stay healthy’.
He advised those with respiratory or immune diseases to still get vaccinated, along with those taking care of the elderly.
A Department of Health spokesman said: ‘Studies show flu vaccines give about 70 to 80 per cent protection against flu infection. That is why it is recommended to those aged over 65 and those in an at-risk group.’
Dr Majumdar advised people with respiratory or immune diseases to still get vaccinated, along with those taking care of elderly people.
‘But you also need to take care of yourself’ he added ‘because flu vaccine is not as effective as people have been thinking it is.’
The researchers claim that ‘clearly inflated and erroneous’ findings of the benefits of flu jabs from previous studies have done patients a disservice by stifling efforts at finding better vaccines, especially for the elderly.
In November, the jab’s co-inventor Australian biochemist Dr Graeme Laver told the Daily Mail the jab did not guarantee protection.
He said ‘I have never been very impressed with its efficacy.
‘It is better than nothing and I wouldn’t want to advise people not to take it, but you can’t rely on it doing any good.’
A UK Health Protection Agency study also suggested that flu jabs did not reduce hospital admissions from respiratory infections.
Plans to extend the flu jab programme to adults aged 50 to 65 and children under the age of two were given the thumbs down by three-quarters of GPs polled earlier this year.
However, a Department of Health spokesman said: ‘Studies show that flu vaccines give about 70 to 80 per cent protection against flu infection.
‘That is why it is recommended to those aged over 65 and those in an at risk group.
‘In the elderly, protection against infection may be less, but there is good evidence showing that immunisation reduces the incidence of bronchopneumonia, hospital admissions and mortality. Many countries support flu vaccination programmes. Uptake in older people in the UK is relatively high, being close to the 75 per cent target of the World Health Organization.’
So it seems the World Health Organisation is behind the push. Now that doesn’t surprise me as it is a partner of the UN (otherwise known as our soon to be world government).
This will actaully get quite sinister in part 2 of this blog and I direct you towards reading a document published by the UN called Biodiversity Assessment 1996. I am having trouble finding it anymore as it seems to have been removed from the record for good reason. If anyone can find this please advise me.
In this document you will find reference to population reduction
of humans. This will be the start point of a shocking new blog to come
Advertisements

6 Responses to “So why do you think they keep hyping up this jab?”

  1. closed Says:

    Only Junkies know the truth about the flu shots and drugs. That my dear is the politicans. A barbed needle with a flu shot can kill someone fast. Medicade makes money and so does Medicare. Rich bastards dont care.

  2. Hadenough Says:

    Please delete double comment–yahoo error–Sorry

    And, Yes, indeed. Who can really know how many secret groups may at this very moment be posing a threat greater than any of us might imagine?

  3. Hadenough Says:

    With advanced technology and a smaller world of porous borders, the ability to unleash mass sickness, death, and destruction today has reached a far greater order of magnitude.

    But Terrorist aren’t the only ones.
    Our Governments do have a hand in germicide. Why???
    Any whistle blower is put down harshly when it comes to medicines. Why? Why shouldn’t we know the truth about drugs? Why the cover-up??? Its about power and money and a corrupt one world society. There is no getting around that.

    That is a page in itself

  4. Hadenough Says:

    It has been proved with the basic flu shot in studies–there is no indication they do any good. The statics remain the same. Just as many get it and just as many don’t.

    The journal Emerging Infectious Diseases “Optimists once imagined that serious infectious disease threats would by now be conquered.” The magazine adds, however, that “infectious diseases have continued to emerge and reemerge.” Nature magazine , notes the consequences: “About 15 million . . . annual deaths worldwide are estimated to be related directly to infectious diseases

    Reuters Alert Net warned of the continuing appearance of new flu viruses, adding that these “pose a continuing and potentially growing pandemic threat.” The Wall Street Journal said: “The bird-flu virus currently active in Asia is known as H5N1 and was first spotted in Hong Kong’s poultry markets in 1997. It is unusual for its virulence—it kills as many as 80% of those who catch it.” The virus can reportedly infect people who come in close contact with infected animals. And the shot shows no improvement in numbers.

    People have often used ways to spread dicease too. (germicide)
    History–THE Mongols were besieging the fortified Genoese trading post of Kaffa, now called Feodosiya, in the Crimea. Decimated by the mysterious disease themselves, the Mongols called off their attack. But before withdrawing, they made a deadly parting shot. Using giant catapults, they hurled the still-warm bodies of plague victims over the city walls. When a few of the Genoese defenders later boarded their galleys to escape the now plague-ridden town, they spread the disease to every port they visited.

    Microbes do not vanish from the planet just because science had invented drugs and vaccines. Far from being defeated, well-known killer microbes returned with a vengeance! In addition, other deadly microbes surfaced-microbes previously unknown to doctors. Thus, microbes both old and new are on the rampage, threatening, afflicting, or killing countless millions of people worldwide.

    THIS century could well be called the age of chemistry. Man-made chemical compounds have changed our lives. Our homes, offices, and factories are filled with aerosols, artificial sweeteners, cosmetics, dyes, inks, paints, pesticides, pharmaceuticals, plastics, refrigerants, synthetic fabrics—the list could fill volumes.

    To satisfy the world’s demand for these products, the annual global production of chemicals, according to the World Health Organization (WHO), amounts to about $1.5 trillion. WHO reports that some 100,000 chemicals are now on the market and that from 1,000 to 2,000 new ones are added each year.

    However, this flood of chemicals invites questions regarding how they affect the environment as well as our own health. Clearly, we are sailing into uncharted waters. “We are all part of an experimental generation, and the full effects will not be known for decades to come,”.

    More Chemicals, More Risks
    According to the United Nations Environment Programme, each year some 100 tons of mercury, 3,800 tons of lead, 3,600 tons of phosphates, and 60,000 tons of detergents enter the Mediterranean Sea as a result of human activities. Understandably, the sea is in crisis. But it is not alone. In fact, the United Nations declared 1998 the International Year of the Ocean. Worldwide, all oceans are in trouble, particularly because of pollution.

    Biological and Chemical THREATS
    Aggressive nations that are too poor to develop nuclear arsenals may turn to medium-range missiles armed with poison gas or with biological weapons. These have been dubbed the poor man’s nukes. In fact, many analysts fear that such devices may also become the weapons of choice for terrorist groups.

  5. PICASSO Says:

    I remember those trucks . and the kids that rode their bikes as fast as they could behind in the cloud huffing and puffing in DDT 😦

  6. kathleen p Says:

    Anything World health advocates makes me suspicious… I am a registered nurse, and used to get flu shots for myself and my two girls. That was before I became “enlightened”… The flu vaccine is manufactored in different lots, geographically, according to predictions of what flu strain seems to be headed in a particular direction. There are many flu strains and all can’t be put in a single vaccine. That is why some people seem to get the flu even tho that got the vaccine. Many think they get the flu because of the vaccine.. not so.
    I no longer get it for myself or my daughters because I don’t trust the experts in this area. I also tend to rely on my gut feelings..and as for the flu vaccine.. my gut sends me a loud NO message.

    When I was young, 9 or 10 years old, in the summer, the city trucks would come thru all the neighborhoods, spraying for mosquitos… with clouds and clouds of DDT. We kids thought it was great fun to follow the trucks, playing in the smoke…..and unknowingly breathing in lg amts of DDT. I still remember how it smells……

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: