Flu season

"US data on influenza deaths are false and misleading. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) acknowledges a difference between flu death and flu associated death yet uses the terms interchangeably. Additionally, there are significant statistical incompatibilities between official estimates and national vital statistics data. Compounding these problems is a marketing of fear—a CDC communications strategy in which medical experts "predict dire outcomes" during flu seasons.

The CDC website states what has become commonly accepted and widely reported in the lay and scientific press: annually "about 36 000 [Americans] die from flu" ( www.cdc.gov/flu/about/disease.htm ) and "influenza/pneumonia" is the seventh leading cause of death in the United States ( www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/lcod.htm ). But why are flu and pneumonia bundled together? Is the relationship so strong or unique to warrant characterizing them as a single cause of death? David Rosenthal, director of Harvard University Health Services, said, "People don't necessarily die, per se, of the [flu] virus—the viraemia. What they die of is a secondary pneumonia. So many of these pneumonias are not viral pneumonias but secondary [pneumonias]." But Dr Rosenthal agreed that the flu/pneumonia relationship was not unique. For instance, a recent study (JAMA 2004;292: 1955-60[Abstract/Free Full Text]) found that stomach acid suppressing drugs are associated with a higher risk of community acquired pneumonia, but such drugs and pneumonia are not compiled as a single statistic. CDC states that the historic 1968-9 "Hong Kong flu" pandemic killed 34 000 Americans. At the same time, CDC claims 36 000 Americans annually die from flu. What is going on?

Meanwhile, according to the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), "influenza and pneumonia" took 62 034 lives in 2001—61 777 of which were attributed to pneumonia and 257 to flu, and in only 18 cases was flu virus positively identified. Between 1979 and 2002, NCHS data show an average 1348 flu deaths per year (range 257 to 3006). The NCHS data would be compatible with CDC mortality estimates if about half of the deaths classed by the NCHS as pneumonia were actually flu initiated secondary pneumonias. But the NCHS criteria indicate otherwise: "Cause-of-death statistics are based solely on the underlying cause of death... defined by WHO as `the disease or injury which initiated the train of events leading directly to death.'" In a written statement, CDC media relations responded to the diverse statistics: "Typically, influenza causes death when the infection leads to severe medical complications." And as most such cases "are never tested for virus infection...CDC considers these [NCHS] figures to be a very substantial undercounting of the true number of deaths from influenza. Therefore, the CDC uses indirect modelling methods to estimate the number of deaths associated with influenza." CDC's model calculated an average annual 36 155 deaths from influenza associated underlying respiratory and circulatory causes (JAMA 2003;289: 179-86[Abstract/Free Full Text]). Less than a quarter of these (8097) were described as flu or flu associated underlying pneumonia deaths. Thus the much publicised figure of 36 000 is not an estimate of yearly flu deaths, as widely reported in both the lay and scientific press, but an estimate—generated by a model—of flu-associated death. William Thompson of the CDC's National Immunization Program (NIP), and lead author of the CDC's 2003 JAMA article, explained that "influenza-associated mortality" is "a statistical association between deaths and viral data available." He said that an association does not imply an underlying cause of death: "Based on modelling, we think it's associated. I don't know that we would say that it's the underlying cause of death." Yet this stance is incompatible with the CDC assertion that the flu kills 36 000 people a year—a misrepresentation that is yet to be publicly corrected. Before 2003 CDC said that 20 000 influenza-associated deaths occurred each year. The new figure of 36 000 reported in the January 2003 JAMA paper is an estimate of influenza-associated mortality over the 1990s. Keiji Fukuda, a flu researcher and a co-author of the paper, has been quoted as offering two possible causes for this 80% increase: "One is that the number of people older than 65 is growing larger...The second possible reason is the type of virus that predominated in the 1990s [was more virulent]." However, the 65-plus population grew just 12% between 1990 and 2000. And if flu virus was truly more virulent over the 1990s, one would expect more deaths. But flu deaths recorded by the NCHS were on average 30% lower in the 1990s than the 1980s.

At the 2004 "National Influenza Vaccine Summit," co-sponsored by CDC and the American Medical Association, Glen Nowak, associate director for communications at the NIP, spoke on using the media to boost demand for the vaccine. One step of a "Seven-Step `Recipe' for Generating Interest in, and Demand for, Flu (or any other) Vaccination" occurs when "medical experts and public health authorities publicly...state concern and alarm (and predict dire outcomes)—and urge influenza vaccination" ( www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/36/2004_flu_nowak.pdf ). Another step entails "continued reports...that influenza is causing severe illness and/or affecting lots of people, helping foster the perception that many people are susceptible to a bad case of influenza." Preceding the summit, demand had been low early into the 2003 flu season. "At that point, the manufacturers were telling us that they weren't receiving a lot of orders for vaccine for use in November or even December," recalled Dr Nowak on National Public Radio. "It really did look like we needed to do something to encourage people to get a flu shot." If flu is in fact not a major cause of death, this public relations approach is surely exaggerated. Moreover, by arbitrarily linking flu with pneumonia, current data are statistically biased. Until corrected and until unbiased statistics are developed, the chances for sound discussion and public health policy are limited."

aspe.hhs.gov/cdc-%E2%80%94-influenza-deaths-request-correction-rfc?fbclid=IwAR2GHEbf_pHE_qkJ1Ep5f_jVJwDDmzGm3NL4FnhSOBNXteeiEsU9SOpheJk

mrsb04 wrote: Hal
IMHO as a front line health professional ITP will not kill you but ‘flu could.
It’s a bigger picture than just protecting oneself. None vaccinated people could asymptomatically carry the flu virus and pass it on to someone else who then becomes critically ill and dies

Right. There are good reasons why healthcare workers are required to get Flu shots and related vaccinations.

I remember when I was young and worked in a Restaurant. Dealt with people all day, every day. Never got sick once, not even a little. It amazed me at the time. One would think the opposite experience would have occurred - lots of sick times. Never had a Flu shot then. Outside of that time period, get the Flu occasionally.

At the time, I theorized the possibility of briefly coming into contact with someone with a new Flu virus strain. Then develop antibodies to the new strain before the virus becomes pervasive. Later encountering others with the Flu in large quantities and having the antibodies available to not get sick.

The reasons apply to everyone in a risk category not just health professionals.

My thought - if you don't like what is out there call it fake news
Flu death, flu associated death - what's the difference? Toe-may-toe, toe-mah-toe - it's all the same.
A flu associated/related death would not have happened had it not been for the person having the flu, period.
A young child in Florida, a woman in Kentucky have already died in October due to what, flu or flu related - does it really matter, their lives are lost too early and why?

I moved this down here so we didn't hijack Maria's thread with flu shot stuff.
Okay.

MelA wrote: My thought - if you don't like what is out there call it fake news
Flu death, flu associated death - what's the difference? Toe-may-toe, toe-mah-toe - it's all the same.
A flu associated/related death would not have happened had it not been for the person having the flu, period.
A young child in Florida, a woman in Kentucky have already died in October due to what, flu or flu related - does it really matter, their lives are lost too early and why?

1. Did you notice the link I posted to that article? It was hhs.gov/cdc It doesn't get any better than that. It can't be fake news if it's coming from Health and Human Services.
2. The point is that they are counting all non-flu related pneumonia/respiratory deaths in with the total flu count.
3. A Senator just died from the flu shot. This is not the first death I've heard of this year.
www.nytimes.com/2018/11/22/nyregion/jose-peralta-dominican-american-senator-dead.html?fbclid=IwAR2jjKN16NS6lTC9H3z3efR8vsfQ3SjdrqQizXMxrHF0VP67Qx-AF-Htb_E

This young woman died despite getting a flu shot:
abcnews.go.com/Health/newlywed-dies-sepsis-flu/story?id=28253815

I know you guys think I'm nuts but follow along for a minute. I noticed a few years ago that things we are told do NOT line up with the truth/facts. Not at all. When you start researching, you find some very interesting things. Like this:

We see this commercial on TV about the whooping cough vaccine. All family members are encouraged to get it to protect newborn babies.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5qfwk1bC_Q

But here's the thing. The pertussis vaccine only prevents symptoms. It does not stop a person from contracting and spreading the illness. That is a fairly well-known fact. The CDC knows it but I'll bet most doctors do not. But the CDC keeps pushing it. Why? It actually places the baby in more danger because anyone who gets the vaccine can become an asymptomatic carrier. If Grandma is coughing, she won't go around the baby. But if she gets the vaccine and contracts whooping cough, she won't know it and can spread it to the baby. Credible sources below. All it takes are some critical thinking skills to see what is going on. Again, what we are told does NOT line up with the truth. This is only one example.

www.bu.edu/sph/2017/09/21/resurgence-of-whooping-cough-may-owe-to-vaccines-inability-to-prevent-infections/

www.pnas.org/content/early/2013/11/20/1314688110

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/24216286/%E2%80%AC/

wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/6/5/00-0512_article

www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/06/150624071018.htm?fbclid=IwAR0udChwCFJxgsvr_gFHlWZ8qEL_6FscEO_A8-cDgec_gyH4-tVVnjT0_OE

web.archive.org/web/20131130004447/https://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm376937.htm

www.theadvocate.com/new_orleans/news/education/article_7f291346-e835-11e8-a7d7-fb581bf6221e.html

Oh, I wonder what happened. Sandi, did you get permission from the moderator to move these posts

Not to throw wrenches, but I would like to add a comment. Seems the situation on Flu shots may get more complicated, soon, in regards to Parkinson's disease. Here is an article on this. It is anti-climatic, but informative on some very good evidence on the disease.

"Flu jabs and Parkinson’s disease"
scienceofparkinsons.com/2017/06/06/flu-jabs-and-parkinsons-disease/

I moved it out of Maria's thread because I didn't want her posts to be consumed with this.

Counter argument:
"Al salts (hydroxide and phosphate) are the most commonly used vaccine adjuvants and, until recently, the only adjuvants licensed for use in the USA [79–89]. In the absence of Al, according to their manufacturers, antigenic components of most vaccines (with the exception of live attenuated vaccines) fail to elicit the desired level of immune response [66, 80]. Although Al is neurotoxic, it is claimed by proponents that the concentrations at which Al is used in the vaccines do not represent a health hazard [19]. For that reason, vaccine trials often treat an Al adjuvant-containing injection as a harmless “placebo” (a comparison benchmark or control treatment) or they use another Al-containing vaccine to treat a “control group,” despite evidence that Al in vaccine-relevant exposures is universally toxic to humans and animals [9, 90, 91]. Its use in a supposed “placebo” or in any “control” treatment in vaccine trials is indefensible [95]. It is precisely analogous to comparing fire A against fire B, to make the argument that since A is no hotter than B, A is therefore not a fire.

During the last decade, studies on animal models and humans have shown that Al adjuvants by themselves cause autoimmune and inflammatory conditions [19, 79–81, 90, 95–103]. The animal models show that subcutaneous injections of Al hydroxide induced apoptotic neuronal death and decreased motor function in mice [2, 37–39] and sheep [43]. In newborn mice they were associated with weight increases, behavioral changes, and increased anxiety [2]. All these findings plausibly implicate Al adjuvants in pediatric vaccines as causal factors contributing to increased rates of autism spectrum disorders in countries where multiple doses are almost universally administered [9]. Also, as shown by Goldman and Miller in studies published in 2011 and 2012, strong correlations between infant mortality rates and the number of doses of vaccines administered also suggest deleterious impact of multiple exposures to their components.
Follow-up experiments focusing on Al adjuvants in mice by Khan et al. [106] have shown that the adjuvants do not stay localized in the muscle tissue upon intramuscular injection. The particles can travel to the spleen and brain where they can be detected up to a year after the injection. Such findings refute the notion that adjuvant nanoparticles remain localized and act through a “depot effect.” On the contrary, the Al from vaccine adjuvants does cross the blood-brain and blood-cerebrospinal fluid barriers and incites deleterious immunoinflammatory responses in neural tissues [1–3, 9]. Tracking experiments in mice reveal that some Al hydroxide nanoparticles escape the injected muscle inside immune system cells such as macrophages, which travel to regional draining lymph nodes, where it can exit to the bloodstream gaining access to all organ systems, including the brain. As Khan et al. [106] have warned, repeated doses of Al hydroxide are “insidiously unsafe,” especially in closely spaced challenges presented to an infant or a person with damaged or immature blood brain or cerebrospinal fluid barriers [2]. Given macrophages acting as highly mobile “Trojan horses” [107], the Khan et al. warning suggests that cumulative Al from repeated doses in vaccines can produce the cognitive deficits associated with long-term encephalopathies and degenerative dementias in humans [40, 99].

The latest research by Luján et al. [43] described a severe neurodegenerative syndrome in commercial sheep linked to the repetitive inoculation of Al-containing vaccines. In particular, the “sheep adjuvant syndrome” mimics in many aspects human neurological diseases linked to Al adjuvants. Moreover, the outcomes in sheep were first identified following a mass-vaccination campaign against blue tongue and have now been successfully reproduced under experimental conditions following administration of Al-containing vaccines. Notably, the adverse chronic phase of this syndrome affects 50–70% of the treated flocks and up to 100% of the animals within a given flock. The disorder is made worse by cold weather conditions, suggesting synergy with other stress producing factors. The disorder is characterized by severe neurobehavioral outcomes—restlessness, compulsive wool biting, generalized weakness, muscle tremors, loss of response to stimuli, ataxia, tetraplegia, stupor, inflammatory lesions in the brain and the presence of Al in the CNS tissues, coma, and death [43]. These findings confirm and extend those of Khan et al. [106] who demonstrated the ability of Al adjuvants to cross the BBB, and they show that Al in the brain can trigger severe long-term neurological damage. The findings by Luján et al. [43] and Khan et al. [106] also show how and why reported adverse reactions following vaccinations are most commonly neurological and neuropsychiatric."
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4202242/

"Background:

Recent studies suggest that influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) may wane over the course of an influenza season, leading to suboptimal VE during late influenza seasons.
Methods:

We examined the association between influenza VE and time since vaccination among patients ≥9 years old with medically-attended acute respiratory illness in the US Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network using data pooled from the 2011-12 through 2014-15 influenza seasons. We used multivariate logistic regression with PCR-confirmed influenza infection as the outcome and vaccination status defined by days between vaccination and symptom onset as the predictor. Models were adjusted for calendar time and other potential confounding factors.
Results:

We observed decreasing VE with increasing time since vaccination for influenza A(H3N2) (p=0.004), influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 (p=0.01), and influenza B viruses (p=0.04). Maximum VE was observed shortly after vaccination, followed by a decline in VE of about 7% (absolute) per month for influenza A(H3N2) and influenza B and 6% - 11% per month for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses. VE remained greater than zero for at least six months for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and influenza B and at least five months for influenza A(H3N2) viruses. Decline in VE was more pronounced among patients with prior season influenza vaccination. A similar pattern of increasing influenza risk with increasing time since vaccination was seen in analyses limited to vaccinees.
Conclusions:

We observed decreasing influenza vaccine protection with increasing time since vaccination across influenza types/subtypes. This association is consistent with intraseason waning of host immunity, but bias or residual confounding could explain these findings."
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28039340?fbclid=IwAR32ddufRLMR7F10GQ8hyDRO65JFqNGZn-DTEnKo7YEEQlMfirh1QAUK9xU

Sandi, how do we know Peralta died from the flu shot?
PS permission granted to move things around

He believed that his symptoms were related to the flu shot. His wife also strongly suspects it. That's all I know, but it's not unheard of.

I've had some conversations lately with people who work at nursing homes and assisted living facilities. Quite a few have said that so many deaths occur around flu shot time that they call it 'thinning the herd'. I also had a conversation with a social worker. Her job is to be a ward for hundreds of seniors who have no family. Part of her duty is to sign off on the flu shot. She said that she started to notice many elderly people dying after the shot that had been doing well. She decided that she cannot, in good conscience, sign off any longer. She was going to tell her supervisor knowing full well that she would more than likely lose her job.

As I said above, what we are told does not line up with the facts.

I wanted to keep your thread just about your son and you.

Personally I would want a better reason than "he believed" & "strongly suspects". It's like trying to prove that my PN is due to having been given Cipro a number of times - can't prove it.

I strongly suspect & believe my ITP started due to the gamma globulin injection I received a few days before symptoms appeared, can I prove it?, no I can't but my hematologist feels that is that case. And neither can this man nor his wife prove his symptoms were from a flu shot or that his death was caused by a flu shot.

I'd like to know how the social worker will feel when one or more of her patients/clients [old folks] dies of complications of the flu after she refused to let them have one. Nursing homes of all places are a germ factory, flu/c-diff/colds/bugs of all sorts make the rounds in those places!!

I agree Mel..from what I understand he died from sepsis. He had the flu shot and thought his symptoms were related to that. I read one article where it states his wife said he had been poorly for a couple of weeks. One has to question why he didn't get himself checked out.

3. A Senator just died from the flu shot.
The article doesn't say he died from the injection that I could see - so this statement is not true and it isn't right to say that & cause panic among people!

This article says he died from sepsis - IMHO had he gone to the doctor sooner instead of ignoring that he was sick maybe, just maybe, he could have been treated and maybe, just maybe, not died. Who knows.
nypost.com/2018/11/23/new-york-state-senator-jose-peraltas-cause-of-death-revealed/
Says sepsis but that more tests need to be done. May he rest in peace.

I can remember when the flu was just the flu. No vaccines for that when I was a kid, and we didn't even give it a thought. The same thing when my kids were growing up; no fear and I never gave it a thought. It has slowly become this huge thing that always equals death and the vaccine is pushed everywhere you go. It would be one thing if it were actually effective and had no risks, but the studies I'm seeing do not support efficacy or safety. I have tons of them. I'd post them, but no one would look at them anyway. I have studies that show that getting the flu shot causes a person to be more at risk for other respiratory illnesses (including pneumonia). This is one reason:

Original Antigenic Sin
A poorly-matched influenza vaccine may cause illness (and increase risk of influenza illness) by a phenomenon in immunology known as “original antigenic sin” (OAS). First discovered in 1960, OAS is well known and firmly established. Its described in any immunology textbook. OAS occurs in this scenario:

1) There is an illness with pathogen strain #1. The immune system learns and remembers how to make antibodies for strain #1. Pathogen can be virus, bacteria etc.
2) There is a second illness with strain #2, of the same pathogen. For example dengue virus is well known to cause OAS (dengue has 4 strains).
3) During the second illness, the immune system responds as if strain #1 is attacking, because it “remembers” strain #1. The problem is that the antibodies for strain #1 are not effective against strain #2 (the antibodies are not a good fit). The result is a defective (and delayed) immune response. The illness from strain #2 is therefore much worse. In fact, it can be life threatening (this happens with dengue).

OAS is why a first dengue illness is mild, but a second case of dengue (involving a different dengue strain) can be very severe and long lasting. A second dengue infection can be fatal due to OAS.

By receiving an influenza vaccine that is poorly matched to circulating strains, the immune system is improperly trained. Improper immune training is worse than no training at all. The OAS phenomenon may explain the results of the Bridges study.

The studies I posted above about the pertussis vaccine should be a huge red flag. It's pushed on everyone but the CDC knows full well that it does not prevent transmission of whooping cough. That is a huge thing!

Here are some facts that most people do not know:

1. Prior to 1986, vaccine injury and death was so common that manufacturer's were getting sued left and right. They threatened to stop making vaccines, but Ronald Reagan passed a bill that took all liability away from manufacturers; the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. People now have to file a suit with the federal government. The program is funded by a charge tacked on to every vaccine. The program has paid out at least four billion dollars to date. After liability was removed, the vaccine schedule exploded. There are over 150 more in the pipeline. What other company on earth bears no liability for their own product?

2. The CDC owns at least 20 vaccine patents. (No conflict of interest there)

3. Safety studies are not conducted properly. Nearly every clinical trial for vaccines does not use an inert placebo. They use another vaccine or the adjuvants to compare adverse reactions. It's always been done this way. The theory is that if one is 'assumed' to be safe, the other will be 'assumed' to be safe, even if a new adjuvant is used. That's our science.

4. Pediatricians get very large bonuses for having a high percentage of patients fully vaccinated by the age of two.

5. Jonas Salk did not save the world from polio. His vaccine caused 40,000 cases of polio and killed 10 children.

6. The Sabin polio vaccine was contaminated with a cancer-causing monkey virus (SV-40) and given to millions of children in the late 50's to early 60's. Animal viruses are still in vaccines.

We believe what we are told without question. Why? I started questioning five years ago when I found out that babies were given a Hep B at birth. Why on earth would a baby need a vaccine for an illness that is transmitted through sex and dirty needles? That vaccine was only studied for safety in infants for five days. I've put a lot of time into researching this (five years). I have collected many, many studies from the British Medical Journal, the Journal of Toxicology, the NIH, The Lancet, etc. There are many things that are eye-opening, and the biggest thing is that our bodies are attacking themselves which is supported in the literature.

You're right, I don't know for sure why that Senator died. It's sad. But I won't discount the vaccine as a cause. Sepsis can also be a result of SIRS (Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome) and vaccines are inflammatory. They wouldn't work if they weren't. Efficacy is already poor so the adjuvants keep getting stronger. We'll never know what happened because the media is silent about this (notice all of the constant commercials). All deaths are tragic, but not all can be prevented. We can produce 600 vaccines and still not prevent it. The problem is that we have no informed consent and that is a pretty big thing. Also, everyone needs to be able to retain the right to say no because if vaccines are mandated, we're going down a pretty scary path. They are classified as 'biologics' now.

Way too long so not reading it. Did skim though.

I found this:
"Sepsis is the systemic response to infection and is defined as the presence of SIRS in addition to a documented or presumed infection. Severe sepsis meets the aforementioned criteria and is associated with organ dysfunction, hypoperfusion, or hypotension. May 7, 2018"

My point was: To post that someone died from a flu shot when there is no proof of that being the cause of death is totally wrong!! My thought was that you were trying to force your opinion of never being given vaccines. I really wish you would put this effort of yours into finding the cure of pancreatic cancer or alzheimers or something.

Melinda:
If I didn't have highly credible studies to back up what I'm saying here, I wouldn't be saying any of it. The problem is that no one wants to even consider the possibility of anything I'm saying. This isn't just my opinion; it's based on facts. From my observation, vaccines are the leading cause of coincidence.

You and I will forever butt heads on this subject - that is why I am not commenting except to say [again]:
It was wrong to sensationalize the death of the senator by saying he died from a flu shot when there is no proof of that.
That was and still is my point.

There is a huge possibility that some inconsiderate $@%$& will go to the grocery store while ill with the flu and sneeze or cough as I am pushing my cart by him/her and give me the flu therefore I will continue to get flu shots!! People need to consider for themselves not by sensationalism that is posted here, whether a flu shot is for them or not. And if "The problem is that no one wants to even consider the possibility of anything I'm saying" maybe you should stop trying to beat a dead horse.

Sandi wrote: I can remember when the flu was just the flu. No vaccines for that when I was a kid, and we didn't even give it a thought. The same thing when my kids were growing up; no fear and I never gave it a thought. It has slowly become this huge thing that always equals death and the vaccine is pushed everywhere you go.

Oh my! Your knowledge of history is sadly lacking. There have been mass deaths from flu. The flu pandemic of 1918 killed many, many millions of people. The pandemic of 1957 killed a few million too. In 1968 at least a million died. We don't see those numbers dying now, maybe, just maybe, because of the vaccines.

Melinda - I did not sensationalize that. Both he and his wife believed that his symptoms were due to the flu shot. I've spent a lot of time researching in the past few years and I know that it's possible. There is so much to learn about vaccine adjuvants, reactions and the immune system. You don't have to believe me, but it baffles me that people believe vaccines are 100% safe. They are no different than a drug.

The history of diseases and vaccines is very interesting. Research reveals things like this:

"The high case-fatality rate—especially among young adults—during the 1918–1919 influenza pandemic is incompletely understood. Although late deaths showed bacterial pneumonia, early deaths exhibited extremely “wet,” sometimes hemorrhagic lungs. The hypothesis presented herein is that aspirin contributed to the incidence and severity of viral pathology, bacterial infection, and death, because physicians of the day were unaware that the regimens (8.0–31.2 g per day) produce levels associated with hyperventilation and pulmonary edema in 33% and 3% of recipients, respectively. Recently, pulmonary edema was found at autopsy in 46% of 26 salicylate-intoxicated adults. Experimentally, salicylates increase lung fluid and protein levels and impair mucociliary clearance. In 1918, the US Surgeon General, the US Navy, and the Journal of the American Medical Association recommended use of aspirin just before the October death spike. If these recommendations were followed, and if pulmonary edema occurred in 3% of persons, a significant proportion of the deaths may be attributable to aspirin."

academic.oup.com/cid/article/49/9/1405/301441
Oxford Academic Clinical Infectious Diseases

Not only that, but sanitation, nutrition, sewage, water, hygiene and medical care have all greatly improved since then. I haven't looked into the 1957 and 1968 flu epidemics, but I do know about the 1976 swine flu scare. The vaccine caused more problems (Guillain Barre) than the flu did.

Sandi wrote: Melinda - I did not sensationalize that. Both he and his wife believed that his symptoms were due to the flu shot.

You believe what you want to Sandi - without proof you stated that the senator had died from the flu shot - that is so wrong for you to do that in order to scare people into believing what you want them to believe, that a flu shot is bad & evil.

Who says here that vaccines are 100% safe - NOTHING is 100% safe for heavens sake.

Melinda - All I'm trying to do is nudge people to look into this. When you do, you find horrible things that you never knew before. Money is the root of all evil and corruption runs deep.

We all tend to have severe cognitive dissonance when it comes to things like this. Again, I will bring up the pertussis vaccine. They know it DOES NOT WORK but keep pushing it on anyone who will be around a newborn. I posted excellent links above about that (from the NIH and CDC). It should have made some eyes pop out. Not a peep. That would surely make me want to start researching. Vaccines are based on a theory which became a profitable belief system.

Before anyone makes the decision to get a vaccine, the insert should be read. There are contraindications that even doctors are not aware of. My GP proved that when he tried to push Shingrix on me. People need to stay on top of possible risks.

This was recently added as a contraindication to the MMR. I can guarantee you that many pediatricians did not get the memo.
"Has a parent, brother, or sister with a history of immune system problems."
www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/vis/vis-statements/mmr.html?fbclid=IwAR11rLbRgqHik0E9LSBRK72B1cSFjI2hQ_Ze4q5acwEdoe3CjI8ZxVPgBAQ

Sandi, it doesn't seem to me to be a clear contraindication, it is in the list of things to mention to your doctor. In the same category "has ever had a condition that makes them bruise or bleed easily."

The list of contraindications and precautions is here:
www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/mmr/hcp/recommendations.html

And "it" is here - many sick and I'm starting to hear of deaths due to complications from the flu.

Maria - I was referring to the immune system problems rather than the bleeding. The link that I posted is an update from this year. There are studies showing that vaccines can trigger autoimmune disorders. If there is a family history of autoimmunity, caution should be used.

"In addition, many of those reactions are mild and self-limited. Nevertheless, we should be cautious, especially not only in cases with previous post-vaccination phenomena and those with allergies but also in individuals who are prone to develop autoimmune diseases, such as those with a family history of autoimmunity or with known autoantibodies, and in genetic predisposed individuals. In such subsets, the potential benefit of vaccination should be weighed against its potential risk.

In the 2015, Soriano et al. supposed that four groups of individuals are at risk: (1) patients with prior post-vaccination autoimmune phenomena, such as patients who showed initial clinical manifestations (fever, arthralgia) after dose vaccination; (2) immunosuppressed patients with autoimmune conditions: indeed, live vaccines including BCG, MMR vaccines, and vaccines against herpes zoster, and yellow fever are generally contraindicated in these patients due to the risk of an uncontrolled viral replication [163]; (3) patients with a history of allergic reactions: the vaccine components include potential allergens such as animal-derived proteins like egg (present in yellow fever, influenza, and MMR vaccines), adjuvants like aluminum (present in HPV, HNI, and HBV and vaccines) and thimerosal (HPV vaccine), antibiotics like gentamycin, neomycin, streptomycin, polymyxin B, and stabilizers like gelatin (present in varicella, and MMR vaccines) and lactose; (4) patients who are prone to develop autoimmunity, including patients having a family history of autoimmune diseases; asymptomatic carriers of autoantibodies, such as high levels of anti-citrullinated protein antibodies (ACPA) in RA, anti-mitochondrial antibodies (AMA) in primary biliary cirrhosis, anti-thyroid antibodies in Hashimoto’s thyroiditis, and anti-dsDNA in SLE [164]; carrying certain genetic profiles, including patients with polymorphisms associated with the insulin gene, the thyroglobulin gene and the thyroid-stimulating hormone receptor gene."

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5607155/

Melinda - Unfortunately, people are going to die of the flu, vaccine or not. The efficacy of the flu vaccine is usually so low (admitted by the CDC) that I'm not sure it even does much. I'm just trying to point out that it does not come without risks.

"AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:

Influenza vaccines have a modest effect in reducing influenza symptoms and working days lost. There is no evidence that they affect complications, such as pneumonia, or transmission.WARNING: This review includes 15 out of 36 trials funded by industry (four had no funding declaration). An earlier systematic review of 274 influenza vaccine studies published up to 2007 found industry funded studies were published in more prestigious journals and cited more than other studies independently from methodological quality and size. Studies funded from public sources were significantly less likely to report conclusions favorable to the vaccines. The review showed that reliable evidence on influenza vaccines is thin but there is evidence of widespread manipulation of conclusions and spurious notoriety of the studies. The content and conclusions of this review should be interpreted in light of this finding."
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20614424?fbclid=IwAR0LEFOfQw93Cxe82oeOruZ6H5nvedZbCwTUviTXpniQtXhGBgKDVxU7vBY

Just an update for anyone wondering about guidance for getting the flu shot after IVIg: I spoke with my son's pediatrician, who said that 4.5 months after the last IVIg should mean that there is no effect on the efficacy of the flu shot. It is apparently only the live vaccines that should be delayed by 8-11 months (this matches what I've seen online, including here: primaryimmune.org/resource/vaccination-and-ivig ). My husband and I got our flu shots yesterday (to zero side effects so far) and we're taking our son to the pediatrician on Monday.
If anyone is (still) considering getting a flu shot but is concerned about thimerosal, we found single dose quadrivalent flu shots at Walgreens, at no extra cost (thimerosal is present in most multi-dose vials). (Having said that, apparently we ingest much more mercury through eating produce alone than what is contained in a flu shot, so the difference in mercury exposure is negligible.)

I'm glad that you got the single dose vaccine instead of the multi-vial. It's a bit better. Ingestion is not the same as injection though. I have quite a few studies that show that injection results in the adjuvants being deposited in body tissue, including the brain. The body can filter most toxins that are ingested.

I came across this article yesterday. Wow. I have known for some time that retroviruses contaminated vaccines but have not found solid evidence to confirm that until now. I have also known that the cell lines used to make vaccines have become tumorogenic, but didn't have that evidence either. This is straight from the FDA.

"Virus-based vaccines are made in living cells (cell substrates). Some manufacturers are investigating the use of new cell lines to make vaccines. The continual growth of cell lines ensures that there is a consistent supply of the same cells that can yield high quantities of the vaccine.

In some cases the cell lines that are used might be tumorigenic, that is, they form tumors when injected into rodents. Some of these tumor-forming cell lines may contain cancer-causing viruses that are not actively reproducing. Such viruses are hard to detect using standard methods. These latent, or "quiet," viruses pose a potential threat, since they might become active under vaccine manufacturing conditions. Therefore, to ensure the safety of vaccines, our laboratory is investigating ways to activate latent viruses in cell lines and to detect the activated viruses, as well as other unknown viruses, using new technologies. We will then adapt our findings to detect viruses in the same types of cell substrates that are used to produce vaccines. We are also trying to identify specific biological processes that reflect virus activity.

These methods will enable FDA scientists to help manufacturers to determine whether their specific cell substrate is safe to use for vaccine production. The methods our laboratory are developing and testing will help to ensure the production of safe and effective vaccines in two ways: 1) FDA will be able to develop testing guidelines for manufacturers who use new cell substrates for producing vaccines; and 2) FDA will publish the new methods it develops in peer-reviewed scientific journals, thus making them readily accessible to all manufacturers.

We are also evaluating the risk of retrovirus infections in humans. (Retroviruses are RNA viruses that use an enzyme called reverse transcriptase (RT) to replicate; RNA is the de-coded form of DNA). Simian foamy virus (SFV) can be transmitted from nonhuman primates (e.g., monkeys) to humans. Although there is no evidence that SFV causes disease, the virus can remain in a lifelong quiet state in the DNA after infection. Moreover, two individuals in Africa were recently found to be infected with both HIV-1 and SFV. Therefore, it is important to determine if SFV poses a threat to human health and to understand how the virus spreads in order to create strategies for controlling human infections. Such work will also help FDA to develop a new policy regarding blood donation by individuals working with nonhuman primates and implementing formal safety guidelines for people working with SFV-infected animals. We are also investigating the consequences of dual SFV and HIV-1 infection in the monkey model.

Detection of latent viruses in cell substrates for vaccine safety. The urgent demand for vaccines against emerging diseases has necessitated the use of novel cell substrates. These include tumorigenic cells such as MDCK and CHO cells (for influenza virus vaccines), 293 and PER.C6 cells (for adenovirus-vectored HIV-1 and other vaccines), and tumor-derived cells such as HeLa cells (for HIV-1 vaccines).

The use of tumorigenic and tumor-derived cells is a major safety concern due to the potential presence of viruses such as retroviruses and oncogenic DNA viruses that could be associated with tumorigencity, Therefore, detection of persistent, latent DNA viruses, and endogenous retroviruses in vaccine cell substrates is important for vaccine safety, particularly in the development of live viral vaccines, where there are no or minimal virus inactivation and removal steps during vaccine manufacturing.

Chemical induction is a rigorous method for evaluating the presence of endogenous retroviruses as well as some latent DNA viruses that have the potential to become active and produce infectious virus. This approach has been extensively used for mouse cells. We have optimized virus induction conditions in mouse cells using a standardized, highly sensitive, single-tube fluorescent PCR enhanced reverse transcriptase (STF-PERT) assay. We have further determined optimum conditions for activating latent DNA virus from a human cell line. We have extended the assay to develop a stepwise approach to induce and detect endogenous retroviruses and latent DNA viruses during evaluation of cell substrates for vaccine safety.

The chemical induction algorithm developed using these positive control cell lines can be used to evaluate the safety of novel vaccine cell substrates for new vaccines. We are now investigating emerging technologies for broad virus detection to identify novel, induced and other unknown viruses. Additionally, we are investigating potential biomarkers for virus induction

In vitro and in vivo investigations to address retrovirus concerns in biologics. Simian foamy viruses (SFVs) are highly prevalent in all nonhuman primates (NHPs) and can infect humans by cross-species transmission. Although there is no evidence yet of disease with SFV, infectious virus persists in the host DNA. Therefore, we are trying to understand SFV latency and activation and factors involved in virus transmission, which will be important for managing SFV infections in humans.

We are also investigating potential interactions of SFV and SIV in the monkey model to predict the outcome of SFV and HIV-1 dual-infections in human cases, reported in Africa. Furthermore, our blood transfusion studies in monkeys regarding the risk of SFV transmission from infected blood donors to recipients will contribute to blood donation policy-making decisions."

www.fda.gov/biologicsbloodvaccines/scienceresearch/biologicsresearchareas/ucm127327.htm?fbclid=IwAR1s80rGI6RG902C_fBjMcu3BCEToAhnh4H3TJ_VfOlbs0iR0uAeIjxtZvE

Retrovirus - "A type of virus that uses RNA as its genetic material. After infecting a cell, a retrovirus uses an enzyme called reverse transcriptase to convert its RNA into DNA. The retrovirus then integrates its viral DNA into the DNA of the host cell, which allows the retrovirus to replicate. HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, is a retrovirus."

This is suddenly a problem? It's been going on for years!