The great flu vaccine hoax: new evidence
November 8, 2017
Apparently, the powers-that-be want everyone to take the seasonal flu vaccine out of loyalty and blind faith. Because actual science reveals the hoax.
A new study, published in the PLOS Journal on 10/23, by contributing authors from the Scripps Institute and the University of Pennsylvania, is titled: “A structural explanation for the low effectiveness of the seasonal influenza H3N2 vaccine.”
Oops. Low effectiveness? The public has been taught to believe the vaccine is quite effective.
Here is a key quote from the study: “It is common to use chicken eggs for culturing clinical isolates and for large-scale production of vaccines. However, influenza virus often mutates to adapt to being grown in chicken eggs, which can influence antigenicity and hence vaccine effectiveness.”
Translation: The virus in the vaccine mutates, in the chicken eggs, and therefore the patient’s immune system responds to the wrong version of the flu virus.
Here is another quote: “Our study describes a mechanism [that explains]…the low influenza vaccine effectiveness and reaffirms the urgency for replacing the egg-based production of influenza vaccines.”
It gets worse, far worse.
Here is evidence I have cited for several years now. It comes from a 2013 review:
Dr. Peter Doshi, writing in the online BMJ (British Medical Journal), reveals a monstrosity.
As Doshi states, every year, hundreds of thousands of respiratory samples are taken from flu patients in the US and tested in labs. Here is the kicker: only a small percentage of these samples show the presence of a flu virus.
This means: most of the people in America who are diagnosed by doctors with the flu have no flu virus in their bodies.
So they don’t have the flu.
Therefore, even if you assume the flu vaccine is useful and safe, it couldn’t possibly prevent all those “flu cases” that aren’t flu cases.
The vaccine couldn’t possibly work.
The vaccine isn’t designed to prevent fake flu, unless pigs can fly.
Here’s the exact quote from Peter Doshi’s BMJ review, “Influenza: marketing vaccines by marketing disease” (BMJ 2013; 346:f3037):
“…even the ideal influenza vaccine, matched perfectly to circulating strains of wild influenza and capable of stopping all influenza viruses, can only deal with a small part of the ‘flu’ problem because most ‘flu’ appears to have nothing to do with influenza. Every year, hundreds of thousands of respiratory specimens are tested across the US. Of those tested, on average 16% are found to be influenza positive.
“…It’s no wonder so many people feel that ‘flu shots’ don’t work: for most flus, they can’t.”
Because most diagnosed cases of the flu aren’t the flu.
So even if you’re a true believer in mainstream vaccine theory, you’re on the short end of the stick here. They’re conning your socks off.
There is much more to say about the ineffectiveness and danger of the flu vaccine, but I’ll leave it here for now.
The “experts” and their loyal parishioners, who are worshiping at the altar of the medical cartel, need to pick up their brains, which they checked at the door, and engage in a process called THINKING. I know it’s painful, but it’s very useful.
(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)
The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.
For people like that I simply send them the following information and then tell them I am sorry that they have built their belief system around this “science”. Peer Reviewed Research and the Pharmaceutical Industry
From Dr. Richard Horton, the current editor-in-chief of the Lancet:
The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness.
This link provides the comment section written by Dr. Horton that contains his quote: http://www.thelancet.com/…/PIIS0140-6736%2815%2960696-1…
The next quote is from Dr. Marcia Angell who served as editor-in-chief of the New England Medical Journal:
It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines (like vaccine recommendations). I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of the New England Journal of Medicine.
Dr. Angell’s quote is from her book The Truth About Drug Companies. Dr. Angell has a lecture on pharmaceutical corruption here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDbQNBla6aU
Quote from Arnold Seymour Relman (Harvard Professor of Medicine and Former Editor-in-Chief of the New England Medical Journal:
The medical profession is being bought by the pharmaceutical industry, not only in terms of the practice of medicine, but also in terms of teaching and research. The academic institutions of this country are allowing themselves to be the paid agents of the pharmaceutical industry. I think it’s disgraceful.
According to the WHO approximately 69% of current peer reviewed research is funded by the pharmaceutical industry which means that over 2/3s of the science doctors are relying on to make vaccine recommendations is probably heavily flawed. Since the pharmaceutical industry is engaging in this unethical behavior to protect their bottom line, it is safe to assume that the vast majority of flawed science favors the pro-vax stance.
How the funding bias works straight from a former Pfizer executive:http://vaxxter.com/former-pfizer-executive-says-the…/
Please note the following conclusion from this study: “ To serve its interests, the industry masterfully influences evidence base production, evidence synthesis, understanding of harms issues, cost-effectiveness evaluations, clinical practice guidelines and healthcare professional education and also exerts direct influences on professional decisions and health consumers. There is an urgent need for regulation and other action towards redefining the mission of medicine towards a more objective and patient-, population- and society-benefit direction that is free from conflict of interests. “ http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/…/abstract;jsessionid…