Time for the Flu Vaccine? Think Again

[Guest guest]

from the Natural Health Newsletter Randall Neustaedter OMD

 

Time for the Flu Vaccine? Think Again

 

The flu vaccine gets the most-useless-vaccine-of-all-time award. Now

the CDC is recommending the vaccine for children under two years old and

all adults over 50. Don't fall for it. Read the flu chapter from the

new edition of my book, The Vaccine Guide, (North Atlantic Books 800

337-2665) which will be available at bookstores by late October.

 

Flu Vaccine

 

Everyone knows about the flu and the flu vaccine.

 

What people do not know is that flu vaccines are nearly useless in

preventing flu, they will cause the flu, and they often result in

nervous system damage that can take years for the body to repair. Other

nations chuckle at Americans' infatuation with the flu vaccine. The

joke would indeed be funny, if it weren't for the damaging effects

caused by the vaccine.

 

The history of the flu vaccine reads like one stumbling fiasco after

another. Take an example. Ever wonder how the particular viruses are

chosen for next year's vaccine? The answer could be drawn from a 1930s

film noir of Shanghai villainy.

 

Scientists kill migrating ducks in Asia, culture the viruses and put

those in next year's vaccine, because they have seen an association

between bird and pig viruses and the following year's human flu epidemics.

 

Perhaps this desperate guesswork is responsible for so many years when

the flu vaccine's viruses had nothing in common with circulating

viruses. According to a CDC report of the 1994-1995 flu season, 87

percent of type A influenza virus samples were not similar to the year's

vaccine, and 76 percent of type B virus were not similar to the virus in

that year's vaccine. During the 1992-1993 season, 84 percent of samples

for the predominant type A virus were not similar to the virus in the vaccine.

 

Here is a list of the most common side effects of the flu vaccine as

stated by the CDC - fever, fatigue, muscle aches, and headache. Sound familiar?

 

The primary targeted population for flu vaccine is the elderly, yet the

vaccine is notoriously ineffective in preventing disease in that

population. According to the CDC, the effectiveness of flu vaccine in

preventing illness among elderly persons residing in nursing homes is

30-40 percent (CDC, 2001b).

 

Other studies have shown an even lower efficacy of 0-36 percent

(averaging 21 percent). The CDC proudly notes that for those elderly

persons living outside of nursing homes, flu vaccine is 30-70 percent

effective in preventing hospitalization for pneumonia and influenza.

 

Yet the Department of Human and Health Services found that, with or

without a flu shot, pneumonia and influenza hospitalization rates for

the elderly are less than one percent during the influenza season.

Regardless of vaccination status, 99 percent of the elderly recover from

the flu without being hospitalized. The ineffectiveness of flu shots in

the elderly led the CDC in 2000 to begin recommending the shots for all

persons age 50 years and older. The rationale being that one third of

Americans have a risk factor or chronic disease that puts them at risk

of increased morbidity from the flu.

 

Annual flu vaccination is recommended for those individuals with asthma

and other chronic respiratory and cardiovascular disorders. However,

those people with impaired immune systems are the most likely to suffer

adverse autoimmune reactions.

 

Children are the next frontier for the lucrative flu vaccine campaign.

Vaccination is currently recommended for children over six months of age

with high-risk medical conditions, but is not recommended for healthy children.

 

Experts in the field suggest that parents of children age six months to

two years " be informed that their children are at risk for serious

complications of influenza, and allowed to make individual informed

decisions regarding influenza immunization for their children " (Neuzil

et al., 2001).

 

This statement was made by Marie Griffin (and others), the same author

who was implicated in the flawed study that supposedly exonerated the

pertussis vaccine of nervous system damage. She is also a paid

consultant to one of the world's largest vaccine manufacturers,

Burroughs Wellcome.

 

The children's market is the next big hope for vaccine campaigners.

 

A 1998 working group began investigations to not only support, but also

to " recommend " flu vaccine for young children.

 

The next big change in flu vaccines will be the introduction of a live

intranasal flu vaccine, a dose that is actually sprayed into the nose.

This vaccine has already been tested on young children. Live intranasal

vaccine was found 93 percent effective in preventing influenza in

children age one to six years old (Belshe et al., 1998).

 

Unanswered questions about the live vaccine include the possibility of

transmitting other, more dangerous viruses through the vaccine, the

possibility of enhanced replication of the attenuated virus in

individuals with compromised immune systems, and the possibility of

bacterial superinfection if the replicating live virus disrupts nasal

membranes (Subbarao, 2000). This vaccine waits in the wings for its

chance as the next big gun in the vaccine arsenal aimed at our children.

 

Guillain-Barr* Syndrome

 

In 1976 the flu vaccine was dealt a near fatal blow when reports

appeared that the vaccine caused Guillain-Barr* syndrome (GBS), an

autoimmune nervous system reaction characterized by unstable gait, loss

of sensation, and loss of muscle control.

 

A mass vaccination program was mounted that year by the US Government,

and 45 million Americans received the swine flu vaccine. Statistical

studies have confirmed a causal relationship between the vaccine and

GBS. During that year the rate of GBS in Ohio was 13.3 per 1,000,000 in

vaccine recipients compared to 2.6 per 1,000,000 in nonrecipients (Marks

& Halpin, 1980).

 

A follow-up study also showed a significantly increased incidence of GBS

during the first 6 weeks following receipt of the vaccine in patients

residing in two other states. The rate of GBS was 8.6 per million

vaccinees in Michigan and 9.7 per million vaccinees in Minnesota

(Safranek et al., 1991). This episode, which became known as the swine

flu catastrophe, left doctors extremely reluctant to administer flu

vaccine, and shattered the public trust in the flu vaccine campaign.

 

The association between GBS and flu shots was not unique to the swine

flu. Earlier reports had also summarized cases of nervous system

disorders occurring soon after the flu vaccine (Flewett & Hoult, 1958;

Horner, 1958). More recently, an increased risk for GBS occurring in

patients during the six weeks following the flu vaccine was revealed in

the 1992-1993 and the 1993-1994 flu seasons (Lasky et al., 1998).

 

Pregnancy

 

One of the most bizarre twists on the flu vaccine saga is the CDC

recommendation of 2001 that all pregnant women receive the vaccine in

their second or third trimester. This recommendation even has doctors

confused, since the vaccine remains a category C drug (unknown risk for

pregnancy). No adequate studies have been conducted to monitor safety

of the vaccine for mother and fetus. The only studies of adverse

effects in pregnancy were conducted in the 1970s (Heinonen et al., 1973;

Sumaya & Gibbs, 1979).

 

Some flu vaccines still contain mercury as a preservative, despite a

1998 FDA instruction to remove mercury from all drugs. According to the

CDC, two groups are most vulnerable to methylmercury *the fetus and

children ages 14 and younger.

 

An article published in the American Journal of Epidemiology in 1999

stated, " the greatest susceptibility to methylmercury neurotoxicity

occurs during late gestation "

 

(Grandjean et al., 1999). How did CDC committee members determine that

flu vaccines were safe for pregnant women? They did not. The

committee, despite its own recommendation, states, " additional data are

needed to confirm the safety of vaccination during pregnancy " (CDC, 2001b).

 

 

Flu Facts - Flu vaccine manufacturers are notoriously inaccurate at

predicting the appropriate viruses to use in an individual year's

vaccine, rendering the vaccine ineffective.

 

- Flu vaccine is relatively ineffective in those patients most at risk

of flu complications.

 

- The vaccine has caused GBS in recipients during several different flu seasons.

 

- Those most at risk of flu complications probably share a higher risk

of adverse reactions to the flu vaccine as well.

 

 

***

 

Randall Neustaedter OMD, LAc Classical Medicine Center 1779 Woodside Rd

#201C, Redwood City, CA 94061 650 299-9170 www.cure-guide.com email:

 

randalln Author of The Vaccine Guide, North Atlantic

Books

[Guest guest]

I dont usually post much but I like to read the interesting and

informative news here. I have read the posts on the flu and I must

speak out here. I have been a nurse for many years and I totally

disagree with you. Have you had a full blown case of the flu? Have

you watched a baby die in its mother's arms from the flu? Have you

watched your parent die in their fever ridden sleep from the flu? I

have and it isnt fun. The government may not have all the answers but

scientists are working hard to save the lives of loved ones or your

own. Now I do know this. Many people get the flu vaccination and they

do not get the flu, a very few have the vaccination and suffer

adverse effects. Nothing is perfect but lets not get paranoid either.

Let me say here and now, you do NOT get the flu from the vaccination,

you get adverse effects but it isnt the flu. It is a small percentage

who will suffer anything more than a sore arm or a little achy

muscles. I repeat: a small percentage. Do I reccomend flu vacs?

Absolutely! I remind my family every year it is time to get the flu

vac. I think alternative medicine is great but I see no reason for

not taking medicine when it can help also. BTW, alternative healing

choices also have adverse effects. If you dont choose to take it, ok.

But please dont talk against it because I have seen too many die from

the flu, way more than I have seen have adverse effects from the

vaccine. Sha

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

, WildMouse <wildmouse@i...>

wrote:

> from the Natural Health Newsletter Randall Neustaedter OMD

>

> Time for the Flu Vaccine? Think Again

>

> The flu vaccine gets the most-useless-vaccine-of-all-time award.

Now

> the CDC is recommending the vaccine for children under two years

old and

> all adults over 50. Don't fall for it. Read the flu chapter from

the

> new edition of my book, The Vaccine Guide, (North Atlantic Books 800

> 337-2665) which will be available at bookstores by late October.

>

> Flu Vaccine

>

> Everyone knows about the flu and the flu vaccine.

>

> What people do not know is that flu vaccines are nearly useless in

> preventing flu, they will cause the flu, and they often result in

> nervous system damage that can take years for the body to repair.

Other

> nations chuckle at Americans' infatuation with the flu vaccine. The

> joke would indeed be funny, if it weren't for the damaging effects

> caused by the vaccine.

>

> The history of the flu vaccine reads like one stumbling fiasco after

> another. Take an example. Ever wonder how the particular viruses

are

> chosen for next year's vaccine? The answer could be drawn from a

1930s

> film noir of Shanghai villainy.

>

> Scientists kill migrating ducks in Asia, culture the viruses and put

> those in next year's vaccine, because they have seen an association

> between bird and pig viruses and the following year's human flu

epidemics.

>

> Perhaps this desperate guesswork is responsible for so many years

when

> the flu vaccine's viruses had nothing in common with circulating

> viruses. According to a CDC report of the 1994-1995 flu season, 87

> percent of type A influenza virus samples were not similar to the

year's

> vaccine, and 76 percent of type B virus were not similar to the

virus in

> that year's vaccine. During the 1992-1993 season, 84 percent of

samples

> for the predominant type A virus were not similar to the virus in

the vaccine.

>

> Here is a list of the most common side effects of the flu vaccine as

> stated by the CDC - fever, fatigue, muscle aches, and headache.

Sound familiar?

>

> The primary targeted population for flu vaccine is the elderly, yet

the

> vaccine is notoriously ineffective in preventing disease in that

> population. According to the CDC, the effectiveness of flu vaccine

in

> preventing illness among elderly persons residing in nursing homes

is

> 30-40 percent (CDC, 2001b).

>

> Other studies have shown an even lower efficacy of 0-36 percent

> (averaging 21 percent). The CDC proudly notes that for those

elderly

> persons living outside of nursing homes, flu vaccine is 30-70

percent

> effective in preventing hospitalization for pneumonia and influenza.

>

> Yet the Department of Human and Health Services found that, with or

> without a flu shot, pneumonia and influenza hospitalization rates

for

> the elderly are less than one percent during the influenza season.

> Regardless of vaccination status, 99 percent of the elderly recover

from

> the flu without being hospitalized. The ineffectiveness of flu

shots in

> the elderly led the CDC in 2000 to begin recommending the shots for

all

> persons age 50 years and older. The rationale being that one third

of

> Americans have a risk factor or chronic disease that puts them at

risk

> of increased morbidity from the flu.

>

> Annual flu vaccination is recommended for those individuals with

asthma

> and other chronic respiratory and cardiovascular disorders.

However,

> those people with impaired immune systems are the most likely to

suffer

> adverse autoimmune reactions.

>

> Children are the next frontier for the lucrative flu vaccine

campaign.

> Vaccination is currently recommended for children over six months

of age

> with high-risk medical conditions, but is not recommended for

healthy children.

>

> Experts in the field suggest that parents of children age six

months to

> two years " be informed that their children are at risk for serious

> complications of influenza, and allowed to make individual informed

> decisions regarding influenza immunization for their children "

(Neuzil

> et al., 2001).

>

> This statement was made by Marie Griffin (and others), the same

author

> who was implicated in the flawed study that supposedly exonerated

the

> pertussis vaccine of nervous system damage. She is also a paid

> consultant to one of the world's largest vaccine manufacturers,

> Burroughs Wellcome.

>

> The children's market is the next big hope for vaccine campaigners.

>

> A 1998 working group began investigations to not only support, but

also

> to " recommend " flu vaccine for young children.

>

> The next big change in flu vaccines will be the introduction of a

live

> intranasal flu vaccine, a dose that is actually sprayed into the

nose.

> This vaccine has already been tested on young children. Live

intranasal

> vaccine was found 93 percent effective in preventing influenza in

> children age one to six years old (Belshe et al., 1998).

>

> Unanswered questions about the live vaccine include the possibility

of

> transmitting other, more dangerous viruses through the vaccine, the

> possibility of enhanced replication of the attenuated virus in

> individuals with compromised immune systems, and the possibility of

> bacterial superinfection if the replicating live virus disrupts

nasal

> membranes (Subbarao, 2000). This vaccine waits in the wings for its

> chance as the next big gun in the vaccine arsenal aimed at our

children.

>

> Guillain-Barr* Syndrome

>

> In 1976 the flu vaccine was dealt a near fatal blow when reports

> appeared that the vaccine caused Guillain-Barr* syndrome (GBS), an

> autoimmune nervous system reaction characterized by unstable gait,

loss

> of sensation, and loss of muscle control.

>

> A mass vaccination program was mounted that year by the US

Government,

> and 45 million Americans received the swine flu vaccine.

Statistical

> studies have confirmed a causal relationship between the vaccine and

> GBS. During that year the rate of GBS in Ohio was 13.3 per

1,000,000 in

> vaccine recipients compared to 2.6 per 1,000,000 in nonrecipients

(Marks

> & Halpin, 1980).

>

> A follow-up study also showed a significantly increased incidence

of GBS

> during the first 6 weeks following receipt of the vaccine in

patients

> residing in two other states. The rate of GBS was 8.6 per million

> vaccinees in Michigan and 9.7 per million vaccinees in Minnesota

> (Safranek et al., 1991). This episode, which became known as the

swine

> flu catastrophe, left doctors extremely reluctant to administer flu

> vaccine, and shattered the public trust in the flu vaccine campaign.

>

> The association between GBS and flu shots was not unique to the

swine

> flu. Earlier reports had also summarized cases of nervous system

> disorders occurring soon after the flu vaccine (Flewett & Hoult,

1958;

> Horner, 1958). More recently, an increased risk for GBS occurring

in

> patients during the six weeks following the flu vaccine was

revealed in

> the 1992-1993 and the 1993-1994 flu seasons (Lasky et al., 1998).

>

> Pregnancy

>

> One of the most bizarre twists on the flu vaccine saga is the CDC

> recommendation of 2001 that all pregnant women receive the vaccine

in

> their second or third trimester. This recommendation even has

doctors

> confused, since the vaccine remains a category C drug (unknown risk

for

> pregnancy). No adequate studies have been conducted to monitor

safety

> of the vaccine for mother and fetus. The only studies of adverse

> effects in pregnancy were conducted in the 1970s (Heinonen et al.,

1973;

> Sumaya & Gibbs, 1979).

>

> Some flu vaccines still contain mercury as a preservative, despite a

> 1998 FDA instruction to remove mercury from all drugs. According

to the

> CDC, two groups are most vulnerable to methylmercury *the fetus and

> children ages 14 and younger.

>

> An article published in the American Journal of Epidemiology in 1999

> stated, " the greatest susceptibility to methylmercury neurotoxicity

> occurs during late gestation "

>

> (Grandjean et al., 1999). How did CDC committee members determine

that

> flu vaccines were safe for pregnant women? They did not. The

> committee, despite its own recommendation, states, " additional data

are

> needed to confirm the safety of vaccination during pregnancy " (CDC,

2001b).

>

>

> Flu Facts - Flu vaccine manufacturers are notoriously inaccurate at

> predicting the appropriate viruses to use in an individual year's

> vaccine, rendering the vaccine ineffective.

>

> - Flu vaccine is relatively ineffective in those patients most at

risk

> of flu complications.

>

> - The vaccine has caused GBS in recipients during several different

flu seasons.

>

> - Those most at risk of flu complications probably share a higher

risk

> of adverse reactions to the flu vaccine as well.

>

>

> ***

>

> Randall Neustaedter OMD, LAc Classical Medicine Center 1779

Woodside Rd

> #201C, Redwood City, CA 94061 650 299-9170 www.cure-guide.com email:

>

> randalln@c... Author of The Vaccine Guide, North Atlantic

> Books

[Guest guest]

Hi,

 

My neighbor was forced by his employer to get both the flu shot and

pneumonia shot. Guess what? Within a few days he had a bad flu and was

still sick and starting to feel worse after 6 weeks! It was moving into

his chest and trying to become pneumonia. It wasn't until I gave him

some zinc and homeopathic remedies that he started to feel better. If

that is just " adverse affects " then how exactly is that better than just

getting the flu? I don't understand that. But at least he just got the

a bad flu from the shot - my cousin ended up in the hospital dying with

Gullian Barre disease. He was extremely lucky to have even lived but he

had to learn how to walk again and many other things after spending

months and months in the hospital trying to get well enough to even sit

up in bed.

 

I guess my question is (to the world - not anyone in particular) why not

just use zinc, vitamins and homeopathics when you do happen to get sick?

Injecting viruses into the body is not a solution. Take good care of

yourself and you won't get sick but if you do, treat with homeopathics

and natural things. There are absolutely NO side effects to any

homeopathics that are available to you over the counter. They do not

interact with prescription drugs and can not hurt you (or a child), even

if you took 100 pills at a time.

 

I have seen first hand all the damages that vaccinations can and do

cause. I KNOW they are harmful and wouldn't take another one if you

held a gun to my head. I don't give them to my daughter and never will.

Vaccines are a hoax. Why are flu deaths UP since the 70's if the shot

works so good?? I'll tell you why - because the strain of a disease

that you get from the shot is far more virulent than the natural strain

you may or may not of gotten in the first place AND it was injected

directly into the blood stream with a long needle. Not the same as

catching a cold from touchy a germy doorknob.

 

http://www.intelihealth.com/IH/ihtIH/EMIHC000/333/333/359861.html

 

Ever had to watch your once healthy child transform from normal and

happy to sick and dying or dead within hours from getting a vaccine?

Too many parents have and it is way past time for people to stop just

accepting everything that the MDs say and find out the facts for

themselves.

 

http://www.autismtoday.com/

 

Ever been accused of hurting your child because the MDs had no other way

to explain the injuries they sustained without admitting they were

caused by the vaccinations? Alan Yurko went to prison for that reason.

He is innocent - it was the vaccinations that killed his child.

 

http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/

 

Besides, even if there were valid medical theories behind vaccinations,

why are there so many contaminants in them? Why are they full of

mercury and formaldehyde and gelatin and really gross things from dead

animal and human fetuses??? Do we really need those things in our

bodies? NO! I say if they want people to take them (and they want them

to actually work!) then they need to redo the formulas and the ways they

make them. What about the SV-40 monkey virus that has contaminated the

polio vaccine? Do I want that in my kids body? I think not.

 

http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/package_inserts.htm

 

Why do they give us the shots and vaccinations if they are so bad for

us? That answer should be obvious. GREED. Pure and simple greed. How

hard it that to believe? Come on...

 

See these web sites below for more information - info the MD is NOT

going to give you no matter how nicely you ask.... or how loudly you protest...

 

 

http://www.whale.to/

 

http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/vaccine.htm

 

http://66.70.140.217/vaccines.html

 

 

I hope everyone takes the time to check out these websites. If you are

relying ONLY on what the MDs tell you, you do NOT have enough

information to be making an informed choice.

 

Peace,

 

Mouse