Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Flu Misinformation and Coronavirus Fears: My Letter to Dr. Sanjay Gupta
Children's Health Defense ^ | May 9, 2020 | Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Posted on 11/27/2022 7:12:55 PM PST by Qiviut

[CHD note: this article was originally published on April 16, 2020.]

Dear Sanjay,

Last week, your CNN producer, Matthew Reynard, notified me that CNN is featuring me in a documentary about “vaccine misinformation”. As usual, Mr. Reynard did not point out a single factual assertion by me that was incorrect (I carefully source all of my statements about vaccines to government databases or peer-reviewed publications). CNN uses the term “vaccine misinformation” as a euphemism for any statement that departs from the Government / Pharma orthodoxy that all vaccines are safe, necessary, and effective for all people.

I respectfully point out that CNN and particularly you, Sanjay, are today among the most prolific broadcasters of ‘vaccine misinformation.’

I have always admired you, Sanjay. Your obvious talents aside, you seem to be genuinely compassionate and to value integrity. Earlier in your career, you showed a courageous willingness to challenge Big Pharma’s vaccine orthodoxies. However, I respectfully point out that CNN and particularly you, Sanjay, are today among the most prolific broadcasters of “vaccine misinformation”. Over the last several years, I cannot recall seeing a single substantial CNN segment on vaccines that did not include easily verified factual misstatements. CNN’s recent special, “Pandemic”, was a showcase of erroneous assertions about the flu vaccine. Since I don’t like to think that you deliberately mislead the public—particularly about critical public health choices—I have taken the time to point out some of your most frequent errors.

I hope you will take time to read this. This critique has special relevance during the current coronavirus crisis, not to mention its important implications for the roles of government and press in a democracy. CNN and other media outlets treat CDC, NIH, and WHO pronouncements as infallible truths. In fact, regulatory capture has made these agencies subsidiaries of Big Pharma, and the lies that CDC has been telling us about flu are now muddying the debate over coronavirus.

Furthermore, of the mere 257 cases that could reasonably be blamed on the flu in CDC’s mortality data, only 7 percent were laboratory confirmed cases of influenza.

1. CNN assertion: In your annual flu shot promotions, you routinely parrot CDC’s estimates of overall flu deaths which have ranged in recent years from 36,000 for the 1990-1991 flu season to 80,000 for the 2017-2018 flu season.

Fact: The HHS’s mortality and morbidity data—available on the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) website—show that CDC’s (and CNN’s) annual estimates are off by orders of magnitude.

NCHS data report the average number of mortalities attributable to influenza on death certificates is little more than 1,000. CDC devises its inflated estimate by deliberately conflating flu deaths with pneumonia deaths. This device is deceitful since most of these fatalities are unrelated to the flu (and therefore, impervious to flu vaccines). In 2005, the British Medical Journal (BMJ) Editor, Dr. Peter Doshi, published a comprehensive rebuke of CDC’s annual ritual of exaggerating flu mortalities entitled “Dissecting CDC’s Deception: Are US Flu Death Figures More PR Than Science?” Doshi accuses the CDC of purposefully inflating flu deaths to frighten the public into purchasing vaccines. To illustrate CDC’s chicanery, Doshi observed that CDC’s announced number of reported pneumonia and influenza deaths in 2001 at 62,034. Yet less than half of one percent of those were actually attributed to influenza. Furthermore, of the mere 257 cases that could reasonably be blamed on the flu in CDC’s mortality data, only 7 percent were laboratory confirmed cases of influenza. That’s 18 lab confirmed influenza cases out of 62,034 “pneumonia and influenza” deaths—or just 0.03 percent, according to HHS’s own National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS).

Subtracting pneumonia, the true number of influenza-associated deaths from 1979 to 2002 averaged 1,348, according to the NCHS data. CNN routinely reports figures forty times this number.

Dr. Doshi charges the CDC with deliberately lying about annual flu deaths to “[work] in manufacturers’ interest by conducting campaigns to increase flu vaccination”. He warns that “by arbitrarily linking flu with pneumonia, current data are statistically biased.”

By faithfully parroting CDC inflated numbers—with no due diligence—CNN has made itself complicit in this annual charade, making it difficult now to accurately assess the relative risk of COVID-19 as compared to flu and, therefore, rationally measure an appropriate response.

… 2010 meta-analysis of published influenza vaccine studies found that the influenza vaccination has no effect on hospitalization, and that there is no evidence that vaccines prevent viral transmission or complications.

2. CNN assertion: CNN routinely promotes the flu shot for everyone older than 6 months, proclaiming that the best way to protect against serious cases of the ailment “is to get a flu shot”.

Fact: In reality, there is absolutely no scientific basis for the CDC’s assertion that the influenza vaccine is the most effective way to prevent the flu.

The Cochrane Collaboration’s comprehensive 2010 meta-analysis of published influenza vaccine studies found that the influenza vaccination has “no effect” on hospitalization, and that there is “no evidence that vaccines prevent viral transmission or complications.”

The Cochrane Researchers concluded in 2010 that the scientific evidence “seem[s] to discourage the utilization of vaccination against influenza in healthy adults as a routine public health measure.” 

Four years later, Cochrane published a follow-up meta-review including dozens of more recent scientific studies and again concluded bluntly that the body of scientific data provides “no evidence for the utilization of vaccination against influenza in healthy adults as a routine public health measure.”

In other words, despite CNN’s relentless hectoring, there is no scientific evidence that all the billions of dollars America spends on influenza vaccination each year actually provides any health benefit, much less a net economic benefit—apart from the financial windfall to the four pharmaceutical companies that manufacture these vaccines—and who happen to be among CNN’s top advertisers.

…[a study published in PNAS] found that influenza vaccination actually increased transmission of the virus, with vaccinated individuals shedding more than six times as much aerosolized virus in their breath than unvaccinated individuals.

3. CNN assertion: You and CNN frequently parrot CDC’s claim that a flu shot reduces the chances that an individual will transmit the flu to others. Pandemic repeated this assertion. CNN offers this supposed benefit as the justification for school vaccine mandates.

Fact: However, in their 2010 systematic meta review of the literature, the Cochrane researchers found “no evidence that vaccines prevent viral transmission or complications”.

Even more worrisome, a study from January 18, 2018, in the Journal of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of AmericaPNAS, found that influenza vaccination actually increased transmission of the virus, with vaccinated individuals shedding more than six times as much aerosolized virus in their breath than unvaccinated individuals.

Those scientists were not altogether surprised by this finding explaining that “certain types of prior immunity”—in this case, the kind of immunity conferred by the vaccine as opposed to naturally acquired immunity— “promote lung inflammation, airway closure, and aerosol generation.” They conclude that, “If confirmed, this observation, together with recent literature suggesting reduced protection with annual vaccination, would have implications for influenza vaccination recommendations and policies.”

4. CNN assertion: CNN frequently repeats CDC’s advice that children should get the flu shot, which you assure CNN’s audience has been proven safe.

Fact: A 2012 Cochrane review looking at studies of influenza vaccination in healthy children found no safety studies in children under age two, and declared that safety studies were “urgently required”.

Every influenza vaccine package insert contains warnings about the lack of safety studies in pregnant women and nursing mothers.

5. CNN assertion: CNN also promotes CDC’s recommendation that all pregnant women get a flu shot.

Fact: CDC recommends the flu shot for pregnant women despite the fact that every influenza vaccine package insert contains warnings about the lack of safety studies in pregnant women and nursing mothers.

The CDC’s current recommendation that all pregnant women receive flu shots is a dangerous proposition according to California Institute of Technology Professor Paul Patterson, a neuroscientists whose research has included immune activation during pregnancy. In his research, Dr. Patterson reported that any immune activation during pregnancy, whether from an infection or a vaccine, can cause damage in the developing fetal brain and an increase risk of autism.

In 2008, Scientific American Mind quoted Patterson criticizing the CDC’s policy of administering flu vaccines during pregnancy. “I don’t think they have considered this risk,” he said. “In fact, I know they have not considered this risk.” Patterson elaborated, “If you take it seriously and vaccinate everybody, then what is going to happen? Researchers cannot yet predict how often a prenatal immune response might lead to fetal brain damage, but even if it happens less than 1 percent of the time, vaccinating an entire population of pregnant women could affect thousands of children.”

Research by Goldman in 2013 documented a 11 fold increase in fetal loss reports following the 2009-2010 pandemic flu season when pregnant women received two flu vaccines during pregnancy, the seasonal flu vaccine and the H1N1 vaccine.

In a study published in the British Medical Journal in 2014, Giuseppe Traversa and colleagues assessed maternal, fetal and neonatal outcomes of women given the influenza A/H1N1 vaccine. The outcomes of more than 86,000 pregnancies revealed that vaccinated women had significantly higher rates of gestational diabetes and eclampsia. Eclampsia is the development of seizures in a woman with severe toxemia, a condition characterized by high blood pressure and protein loss in the urine. Eclampsia is fatal in 2 percent of women and can result in long-term health problems in those who survive. Fetal complications, including neurological damage and death, are also common. Both gestational diabetes and eclampsia are related to inflammation and immune dysregulation, making the connection to the immune stimulation of the flu vaccine very plausible.

A 2014 Cochrane review found that the number of randomized, placebo-controlled trials examining the safety and effectiveness of vaccinating pregnant women waszero.  The independent review states, “The only evidence available comes from observational studies with modest methodological quality. On this basis, vaccination shows very limited effects.”

A 2016 study by Chambers et al. found a moderately elevated risk for birth defects among children born to mothers who received one flu vaccine during the 2010-2014 flu seasons.

2017 CDC study links miscarriage to flu vaccines, particularly in the first trimester. Pregnant women vaccinated in the 2010/2011 and 2011/2012 flu seasons had two times greater odds of having a miscarriage within 28 days of receiving the vaccine. In women who had received the H1N1 vaccine in the previous flu season, the odds of having a miscarriage within 28 days were 7.7 times greater than in women who did not receive a flu shot during their pregnancy.

Another study published in 2017 found an elevated risk of autism spectrum disorders in children whose mothers had a first trimester flu shot. Flu vaccine administration is documented to cause an inflammatory response in pregnant women. Recent research found inflammation during pregnancy is associated with the development of autism spectrum disorders.

One of the largest studies to date was conducted in 2004 by CDC scientists from the Vaccine Safety Datalink workgroup in approximately 50,000 pregnant women over five flu seasons. The researchers found no difference in the risk for developing influenza or similar illnesses between those who received the influenza vaccine during pregnancy and those who did not. Hospital admissions for influenza or pneumonia for women in the study population were quite rare and no women died of respiratory illness during pregnancy.

A 2019 article by Alberto Donzelli in Human Vaccination & Immunotherapeutics, asks the question, Influenza vaccination for all pregnant women?” and argues, “So far the less biased evidence does not favour it”. Donelli found that public health recommendations on flu shots during pregnancy had systematically overestimated “the vaccine effectiveness and safety”—and that the published science showed “an excess of local adverse effects and a tendency for serious adverse events with uncertain or very limited protection against influenza”. Donzelli observes that flu vaccine trials in Africa and Asia have shown excessive infection and deaths in infants associated with flu shots during pregnancy.

Furthermore, about 1/3 of U.S. flu shots still contain bolus doses of thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative. Thimerosal’s material safety data sheet (MSDS) and Thimerosal’s label both advise against its use during pregnancy, pointing out that Thimerosal has never been shown to be safe and that it causes mutations in mammals. Thimerosal is recognized as a reproductive toxicant in the state of California Outlined below is a review by the California Environment Protection Agency regarding the use of thimerosal as it relates to Proposition 65 in California.

In 2001 the National Academies of Science, Institute of Medicine reviewed the safety of thimerosal in vaccines. The committee recommended that “full consideration be given by appropriate professional societies and government agencies to removing thimerosal from vaccines administered to infants, children, or pregnant women in the United States.” The CDC has failed to act on that recommendation despite the fact that they were the ones who convened the IOM’s review of thimerosal.

Although the vaccination rate for elderly people had increased by as much as 67 percent from 1989 to 1997, there was no evidence that vaccination reduced hospitalizations or deaths. On the contrary, mortality and hospitalization rates continued to increase rather than decline.

6. CNN assertion: CNN urges seniors to get their flu shots. CDC credits the vaccine with a dramatic reduction in influenza-related deaths among the elderly.

Fact: The scientific community has thoroughly debunked CDC’s claims that the flu shot reduces death among seniors.

Researchers from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) ridicule CDC’s mortality claims in a study published in April 2005 in Archives of Internal Medicine (now JAMA Internal Medicine). Those NIH researchers pointed out that, despite a dramatic increase in vaccination coverage among people aged 65 or older—from at most 20 percent before 1980 to 65 percent in 2001—pneumonia and influenza mortality rates “rose substantially during this period”.

The lead author of the 2005 NIH study, Lone Simonsen, was also coauthor with W. Paul Glezen of a 2006 commentary in the International Journal of Epidemiology that reiterated the problems with the CDC’s claims. “Although the vaccination rate for elderly people had increased by as much as 67 percent from 1989 to 1997, there was no evidence that vaccination reduced hospitalizations or deaths. On the contrary, “mortality and hospitalization rates continued to increase rather than decline”.

The 2005 NIH study authors commented that this result was “surprising” since vaccination was supposed to be “highly effective at reducing influenza-related mortality”—an assumption underlying CDC policy that “has never been studied in clinical trials”.

Similarly, a 2008 review in Virology Journal, observes that contrary to the CDC’s claims of a great beneficial effect on mortality, “influenza mortality and hospitalization rates for older Americans significantly increased in the 80s and 90s, during the same time that influenza vaccination rates for elderly Americans dramatically increased.”

In a 2013 BMJ commentary, Dr. Doshi asked, “what evidence is there that influenza vaccines reduce deaths of older people—the reason the policy was originally created? Virtually none…” This means that influenza vaccines are approved for use in older people despite any clinical trials demonstrating a reduction in serious outcomes.”

Perhaps most perplexing,” Doshi added, “is officials’ lack of interest in the absence of good quality evidence.”

7. CNN assertion: You frequently inform the CNN audience that “the flu vaccine is safe, and significant side effects are very rare.”

Fact: Actual injury rates are impossible to determine since flu shots are exempt from pre-and-post-marketing placebo studies required of other medicines, and because HHS’s post-marketing surveillance system, the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System [VAERS], captures “fewer than 1% of vaccine injuries” according to a 2010 HHS-funded study. Nevertheless, some alarming metrics ought to give you pause when you offer these assurances to millions of viewers; Flu vaccines account for nearly ¼ of payouts for injuries by the Vaccine Injury Compensation Fund (VICA). The Vaccine Court has paid out nearly $1 billion for injuries and deaths caused by flu shots.

GSK’s vaccine, Flulaval lists, on its manufacturing inserts, over 45 chronic diseases and adverse reactions that FDA believes may be linked to the vaccine. These include a long menu of immune system, allergic, musculoskeletal, psychiatric, respiratory, skin, vascular, and neurological diseases including seizure, paralysis, and syncope.

Australian data link the influenza vaccine during the 2009 – 2010 flu season to a 1-in-110 risk in children of having febrile convulsions. The pandemic H1N1 influenza vaccine in Europe was associated with a 1-in-55,000 risk of developing narcolepsy. CDC acknowledges that the Pandemrix flu vaccine is associated with an “increased risk of narcolepsy”.

A 2015 meta-analysis published in the journal Vaccine has acknowledged “a small but statistically significant association between influenza vaccines, particularly the pandemic ones, and Guillen-Barre Syndrome (GBS)”.

A 2004 study in the Journal of the American Medical Association, JAMA, noted that GBS was “the most frequent neurological condition reported after influenza vaccination to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS)”.

The 2010 Cochrane meta-analysis chided that the post-mortality studies found that a statistically significant association between the influenza vaccine and GBS “demonstrate the danger of commencing a large vaccination campaign without adequate harms assessment.”

… the flu shot increases the risks from coronavirus by 36%.

8. CNN assertion: On March 5, 2020, you and Anderson Cooper did a “Town Hall” segment, “Corona Facts and Fears”, in which you fervently urged listeners to get the flu shot as the best way to keep healthy during the coronavirus pandemic. According to Anderson, “If you are concerned about coronavirus, you should get a flu shot”.

Fact: However, the only study we have been able to find assessing flu shots and coronavirus is a January 2020 US Pentagon study that found that the flu shot INCREASES the risks from coronavirus by 36%. “Receiving influenza vaccination may increase the risk of other respiratory viruses, a phenomenon known as “virus interference…’vaccine derived’ virus interference was significantly associated with coronavirus…”

Many studies suggest the flu vaccine increases vulnerability to both flu infections and the remaining 85% -93% of non-flu respiratory infections.

9. CNN assertion: Sanjay, I’ve watched your video assuring the public that getting the flu shot cannot increase one’s chances of getting the flu.

Fact: While that assertion has some meager support from a very small number of studies, the overwhelming weight of published science suggests that getting an annual flu shot can actually increase your risk of both flu and flu-like illnesses.

Only about 7 percent to 15 percent of what are called “influenza-like illnesses” are actually caused by influenza viruses. Many studies suggest the flu vaccine increases vulnerability to both flu infections and the remaining 85% -93% of non-flu respiratory infections.

A 2011 study of healthy Australian children published in the Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal found that seasonal flu shots increase the risk of flu by 73% and doubled the risk of non-flu respiratory infections.

Similarly, another 2012 randomized controlled trial published in Clinical Infectious Diseases found that influenza-vaccinated children had no significantly lessened risk from influenza and also a higher risk of infection from non-influenza viruses.

Furthermore, the flu vaccine depletes capacity to fight off future flu infections. In April 2010, a study (by Skowronek, et al) published in the journal PLoS Medicine reported the “unexpected” finding from four epidemiologic studies in Canada that receipt of the influenza vaccine for the 2008 – 2009 season, while apparently effective in reducing the risk of illness due to the seasonal flu, was associated with an increased risk of illness due to the pandemic influenza A (H1N1) “swine flu” virus during the spring and summer of 2009. The scientists suggested that this finding could be due to the difference in the way the vaccine affects the immune system compared with natural infection.

Under this hypothesis, repeated vaccination “effectively blocks the more robust, complex, and cross-protective immunity afforded by prior infection.”

When unvaccinated people are infected with the seasonal influenza virus, they often develop a robust cell-mediated immunity that not only protects against that strain of the virus but is also cross-protective against other strains.

People who’ve annually received the influenza vaccine, on the other hand, “may have lost multiple opportunities for infection-induced cross-immunity.” This is because the vaccine is designed to stimulate a strong antibody response, or humoral immunity, but does not confer the same kind of robust cell-mediated immunity as natural infection.

NIH researchers in their 2005 study also acknowledged the superior effectiveness of naturally acquired immunity at reducing mortality, pointing out that senior citizens who contracted the H3N2 influenza pandemic infection demonstrated a robust immunity in subsequent flu seasons when compared to vaccinated individuals. The sharp decline in influenza-related deaths among people aged 65 to 74 years in the years immediately after the 1968 flu pandemicwas most likely due to the acquisition of natural immunity to these viruses (from natural infections).

Another study published in 2011 in the Journal of Virology confirmed that annual influenza vaccination indeed hampers the development of a robust cell-mediated immunity. Annual vaccination for influenza, the authors concluded, “may render young children who have not previously been infected with an influenza virus more susceptible to infection with a pandemic influenza virus of a novel subtype.”

A 2018 CDC study found there was an increase of acute respiratory infections caused by non-influenza respiratory pathogens following influenza vaccination compared to unvaccinated children during the same period. The authors recommended that potential mechanisms for this association warrant further investigation.

While most studies have looked at only one or two flu seasons, a CDC-funded study published in September 2014 in Clinical Infectious Diseases considered the long-term effects of repeated annual vaccination by looking at five years of vaccination data.

The CDC researchers found that the more that people had been vaccinated in prior years, the less effective the vaccine is at preventing the most recent season’s dominant H3N2 virus.

As they put it, “vaccine-induced protection was greatest for individuals not vaccinated during the prior 5 years.”

Essentially, the immune system remembers the original infection and puts out a rapid defense against it, at the expense of developing a new but more appropriate response specifically to the currently infecting strain.

The CDC scientists warned that their data “raises relevant questions about the potential interference of repeated annual influenza vaccination and possible residual protection from previous season vaccination”; the authors called for further studies.

10. CNN assertion: One final observation about a different vaccine; In CNN’s regular promotion of measles vaccines, CNN and Sanjay frequently claim that natural measles mortalities are 1-2 in 1000. Those estimates seem calculated to frighten people into taking a measles shot and to drive MMR mandates.

Fact: CDC’s 1963 mortality and morbidity data show that prior to the introduction of the measles vaccine, improvements in nutrition and hygeine had already driven US measles mortality in U.S. to 400 per year, a population ratio of 1/500,000 and a death-case ratio of 1 in 10,000about the same risk of dying from a lightning strike. Most of those mortalities were among malnourished children, many of whom suffered from intellectual disabilities. The best evidence suggests that measles mortalities would have continued to drop with the introduction of food stamps, W.I.C, and other childhood nutritional programs passed during the War on Poverty after 1964 to relieve hunger in impoverished communities.

 

Conclusion

In their 2010 meta-analysis, the Cochrane researchers accused the CDC of deliberately misrepresenting the science in order to support their universal influenza vaccination recommendation. Nevertheless, CNN continually broadcasts CDC pronouncements as gospel and, ironically, ridicules those of us who actually read the science as “purveyors of ‘vaccine misinformation’”. 

Multiple comprehensive federal investigations and whistleblower declarations have documented the corrupt relationship between the CDC’s Vaccine Branch and the four vaccine makers: Merck, Pfizer, Sanofi, and GSK. These include a 2000 report by the US Congress Government Oversight Committee, a 2009 report by the Federal HHS Inspector General, a 2014 letter by David Wright, Director of HHS Office of Research Integrity, and a 2011 letter to Carmen S. Villar, chief of staff for Tom Frieden, from an organization of CDC scientists calling itself “SPIDER”.

In 2014, CDC’s senior vaccine safety scientist, Dr. William Thompson, a 17-year CDC veteran who continues to work for CDC, confessed in a series of depositions, and public and private statements, that his CDC bosses in CDC’s Immunization Branch had systematically ordered him and other researchers to destroy data and falsify study outcomes to hide CDC research linking vaccines to the exploding epidemic of childhood chronic diseases including autism. Doesn’t the abundant evidence of corruption at the Federal health agencies amplify CNN’s obligation to treat government pronouncements with skepticism?

[The CDC] stressed that it was especially important to inspire “concern, anxiety, and worry” among young, healthy adults who don’t regard the flu with sufficient dread.

At a 2004 workshop for the Institute of Medicine, CDC unveiled a blueprint for the agency’s annual campaigns of fear and deception in a PowerPoint entitled “‘Recipe’ for Fostering Public Interest and High Vaccine Demand”. CDC’s in-house P.R. flack Glen Nowak explained that it was necessary to use fear marketing to sell vaccines. CDC’s campaign called for encouraging television medical experts (like Sanjay and Elizabeth Cohen) to “state concern and alarm” about “and predict dire outcomes” from the flu season. To inspire the necessary terror, the CDC planned to encourage its tame journalists to describe each season as “very severe”, “more severe than last or past years”, and “deadly”. CDC’s press flacks stressed that it was especially important to inspire “concern, anxiety, and worry” among young, healthy adults who don’t regard the flu with sufficient dread.

As the CDC bluntly stated it, “Health literacy is a growing problem”. In other words, the CDC considers it to be a problem that people are increasingly doing their own research and becoming more adept at educating themselves about health-related issues; Why? Because people who do their own research, read the science, and make informed choices rather than blindly following the CDC’s recommendations are less likely to get the flu shot.

Drug companies”, Dr. Doshi observes, “have long known that to sell some products, you would have to first sell people on the disease.” Only, in the case of the influenza vaccine, Doshi adds, “the salesmen are public health officials”. These public health officials have, in turn, transformed trusted journalists and television doctors into Pharma marketing reps.

CNN likes to portray CDC’s annual flu shot campaigns as an important public health ritual. The peer-reviewed science exposes CDC’s campaigns as a mercantile propaganda project that is costly and may be injuring public health. CNN can fault CDC officials as the source of its “vaccine misinformation”. But this is a weak gesture. “People in power lie”, my father once told me. The function of journalism is to apply scrutiny and skepticism to the pronouncements of government officials and powerful corporations.

Finally, Sanjay, you and Anderson Cooper often comment with dismay on the monumental tragedy, for our democracy, of having a president who habitually lies. But presidents come and go; the more enduring tragedy, arguably, is that we cannot trust our news media to tell us the truth about vital health issues when advertising dollars are at stake. You scratch your head and wonder how all those Trump supporters don’t share your indignation at President Trump’s mendacity. One answer is that they are disheartened by once-trusted media outlets who have also set the precedent of routinely lying and violating the public trust, wounding in the process our democracy, public faith in critical institutions, and the health of our children.

Sincerely,

Robert F. Kennedy Jr
President, Children’s Health Defense

P.S. Just as a reminder, here is a 60 Minutes program from over 30 years ago. This is what journalism looked like before Pharma purchased the media.

60 Minutes: Swine Flu (1976)


TOPICS: Conspiracy; Health/Medicine; Weird Stuff
KEYWORDS: 2020; antivaxxcult; childrensfakedefense; crazypeopleonfr; farleftpropaganda; flushot; gupta; leftwingsource; misinformation; nutcase; oldnews; qtard; rfkjr; tldr; whypostthiscrap
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-38 next last
It is now flu season and flu shots are being pushed, as they are every year, including for pregnant women and kids.

This article was originally published in April 2020 - RFK Jr. "brings the receipts" regarding flu shot facts & data. You might be surprised at what the public is being told as truth by the usual media suspects to sell them on flu shots - then again, after the COVID shot debacle, maybe not. The article is worth repeating.

1 posted on 11/27/2022 7:12:55 PM PST by Qiviut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Jane Long; ransomnote; bitt; lightman; metmom; Tilted Irish Kilt; drSteve78; All

Ping


2 posted on 11/27/2022 7:13:46 PM PST by Qiviut (I'm not out of control, I'm just not in their control. $hot $hills: Sod Off)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Qiviut

bookmark.


3 posted on 11/27/2022 7:26:47 PM PST by dadfly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Qiviut

Will definitely read later


4 posted on 11/27/2022 7:31:40 PM PST by FormerFRLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Qiviut

I’ve had it up to my back teeth with vaccine pushers. They have to be some of the most odious people on the planet.


5 posted on 11/27/2022 7:42:15 PM PST by surroundedbyblue (Proud to be an Infidel & a deplorable. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Qiviut

Bkmk


6 posted on 11/27/2022 7:46:49 PM PST by sauropod (Fascists also buy Comcast cable packages" - Olby - Wanna buy mine?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Qiviut

‘As the CDC bluntly stated it, “Health literacy is a growing problem”. ... Why? Because people who do their own research, read the science, and make informed choices rather than blindly following the CDC’s recommendations are less likely to get the flu shot.’

yup.


7 posted on 11/27/2022 7:49:01 PM PST by dadfly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Qiviut

Isn’t this years flu shot a mRNA product ?


8 posted on 11/27/2022 7:52:01 PM PST by George from New England
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: surroundedbyblue

If you feel that way BEFORE you read the article .... whew, you’ll really be calling them names after you read it.


9 posted on 11/27/2022 7:52:14 PM PST by Qiviut (I'm not out of control, I'm just not in their control. $hot $hills: Sod Off)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Qiviut

I already got my flu shot but thanks for the reminder.


10 posted on 11/27/2022 7:54:35 PM PST by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: George from New England

There is some question about that - they may still be in trials. For sure, you need to ask if it’s an mRNA product & if so, hard pass.


11 posted on 11/27/2022 7:55:15 PM PST by Qiviut (I'm not out of control, I'm just not in their control. $hot $hills: Sod Off)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: plain talk

You’re welcome.

A little info that might come in handy:

Diagnosing and Managing Influenza and Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) Infections in Adults
https://covid19criticalcare.com/treatment-protocols/flu-rsv-treatment/


12 posted on 11/27/2022 8:00:20 PM PST by Qiviut (I'm not out of control, I'm just not in their control. $hot $hills: Sod Off)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: George from New England

Saw this - thought you might be interested:

Experimental flu vaccine, developed using mRNA, seen as potential game changer
https://www.statnews.com/2022/11/24/experimental-flu-vaccine-developed-using-mrna-seen-as-potential-game-changer/

“This would not be a vaccine that would block all flu infections, nor would it replace the need for an annual flu shot. Instead, it would prime the immune system to better respond to new flu viruses, lowering the risk of hospitalization, death, and social disruption.”

Towards the end of the article:

“Reactogenicity is in some ways an Achilles heel right now for mRNA vaccines, and there is a lot of concern about that potential trade-off between immunogenicity and reactogenicity,” Cobey said.

Hensley agreed the size of the dose needed for people could be an issue. In the animal experiments, a dose of 50 micrograms — 2.5 micrograms per flu virus targeted — was used. To put that in context, that is the size of the Moderna Covid booster, which targets two Covid strains. The Pfizer-BioNTech bivalent booster contains 30 micrograms of antigen.


13 posted on 11/27/2022 8:15:03 PM PST by Qiviut (I'm not out of control, I'm just not in their control. $hot $hills: Sod Off)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: George from New England

This is what I was really looking for (Dr. Flowers on GETTR):

chrisflowersmd
@chrisflowersmd
·
Nov 25
How do you know whether your flu shot is the dangerous mRNA one? DO NOT TAKE ‘recombinant’ vaccine. If you want an old school flu vax, then take the attenuated one ONLY. Remember though that flu jabs in best years are only 10-20% effective


14 posted on 11/27/2022 8:21:20 PM PST by Qiviut (I'm not out of control, I'm just not in their control. $hot $hills: Sod Off)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: George from New England

Isn’t this years flu shot a mRNA product ?

excellent question....Jabbed equals GMO.


15 posted on 11/27/2022 8:34:32 PM PST by drSteve78 (Je suis Deplorable STILL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Qiviut
CDC:

America:

If only somebody:


16 posted on 11/27/2022 8:42:15 PM PST by conservativeimage (Do not be tricked into throwing the first punch. Make sure your security cameras are running.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Qiviut

BFL


17 posted on 11/27/2022 9:06:30 PM PST by The FIGHTIN Illini (We're quickly running out of time to prepare.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: null and void; aragorn; EnigmaticAnomaly; kalee; Kale; AZ .44 MAG; Baynative; bgill; bitt; ...

p


18 posted on 11/27/2022 9:55:22 PM PST by bitt (<img src=' 'width=50%>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Qiviut

Great read.

Thanks!

I used to get flu shots but quit after the wuhan shots debacle.

All medical recommendations are pretty much a hard sell now. I better be able to find well sourced articles like this to justify them.
Thanks, CDC and medical tyrants! You blew it pretty much forever!


19 posted on 11/28/2022 4:12:08 AM PST by Adder (ALL Democrats are the enemy. NO QUARTER!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Qiviut

The ‘official’ drug pushers simply will not stop.


20 posted on 11/28/2022 4:28:22 AM PST by iontheball
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-38 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson