Posted on 12/29/2021 4:08:55 PM PST by Boomer
Everything you thought you knew about the infamous “Spanish Flu” outbreak of 1918 is probably wrong.
It turns out that one of the most well-known pandemics from recent history was actually caused by the “vaccines” that were supposedly introduced to stop it – much like how the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “vaccines” of today are spreading more covid.
Dr. Sal Martingano, FICPA, explains that mass vaccination during the Spanish Flu is what actually caused people to die. In fact, the only people who ended up dying during the ordeal were those who got jabbed.
(Excerpt) Read more at newstarget.com ...
Ummm this story sounds like a total historical fabrication.
Another special from “Asia”-——
The Asian Flu I had in the Fall of 1957 hit me hard possibly because I had already had rheumatic fever in 1954 and was sickly a lot as a kid.
Smithsonian says:
The pandemic of 1957-58 ultimately caused 1.1 million deaths worldwide, and it follows the 1918 crisis as the second-most severe influenza outbreak in U.S. history. Some 20 million Americans were infected, and 116,000 died.
I don’t know what sort of BS this is, but it smacks of PSYOPS by the establishment and CERTAINLY isn’t news.
Merits the zot.
Good read. Thanks. On a side note I worked at the Salk Institute for a number of years. Not as a scientist but as part of the building staff keeping the place cool, warm, with electricity, DI water, and other things. On the night shift I was required to do rounds through the labs to make sure nothing was amiss. It was interesting to see all the different experiments going on even though I understood none of it. It was a good job except for the rotating shifts that killed me. Some of the guys handled it fine, others, not so much. I didn’t know it at the time but I had sleep apnea so I could never get a good nights sleep. It was even worse trying to sleep during the day.
Merits the zot.
Oh, I don't think you deserve to be zotted, but do take care in the future eh.
You might by right about the psy-ops though. Anything is possible these days.
If past practice is a predictor, they will turn down your kind offer. The circus must go on.
That may have been the case:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091002132346.htm
Aspirin Misuse May Have Made 1918 Flu Pandemic Worse
October 3, 2009
Infectious Diseases Society of America
Summary:
The devastation of the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic is well known, but a new article suggests a surprising factor in the high death toll: the misuse of aspirin. The article sounds a cautionary note as present day concerns about the novel H1N1 virus run high.
The devastation of the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic is well known, but a new article suggests a surprising factor in the high death toll: the misuse of aspirin. Appearing in the November 1 issue of Clinical Infectious Diseases and available online now, the article sounds a cautionary note as present day concerns about the novel H1N1 virus run high.
High aspirin dosing levels used to treat patients during the 1918-1919 pandemic are now known to cause, in some cases, toxicity and a dangerous build up of fluid in the lungs, which may have contributed to the incidence and severity of symptoms, bacterial infections, and mortality. Additionally, autopsy reports from 1918 are consistent with what we know today about the dangers of aspirin toxicity, as well as the expected viral causes of death.
The motivation behind the improper use of aspirin is a cautionary tale, said author Karen Starko, MD. In 1918, physicians did not fully understand either the dosing or pharmacology of aspirin, yet they were willing to recommend it. Its use was promoted by the drug industry, endorsed by doctors wanting to “do something,” and accepted by families and institutions desperate for hope.
“Understanding these natural forces is important when considering choices in the future,” Dr. Starko said. “Interventions cut both ways. Medicines can save and improve our lives. Yet we must be ever mindful of the importance of dose, of balancing benefits and risks, and of the limitations of our studies.”
How about doing a little common sense researching...
No vaccines? Actually there were...
https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/blog/vaccine-development-spanish-flu
Contrary to what some posters are stating, there were vaccines being researched, developed and administered...
Not saying the article’s theory is correct, but it should not be dismissed due to erroneous comments about no vaccines existing.
https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/blog/vaccine-development-spanish-flu
Here is a YouTube video — short Dave Barry discusses the propaganda and censorship issues that emerged during the Spanish Flu...He wrote a fairly detailed book on the Subject of Spanish Flu, The Great Influenza.
History repeating itself? Who knows, maybe the article’s claims which you posted are not all that far fetched.
From the video, Sedition Act. Over 100,000 informants with badges dispatched to report anyone who criticized the government—subject to up to 20 YEARS IN PRISON for doing so...One Congressman was sentenced to 15 years, and a Wisconsin newspaper was charged...But charges dropped as Pandemic receded. It was dark time back then...
Criticizing government?!?! Where have we been hearing that recently...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaHycjRCBag
I know folks that say “Covid will be with us forever...”.
The “Spanish Flu” was around for 2-3 years. Covid might be here for a similar time frame - but “forever” only in the mind of controlling politicians and the media.
Very interesting! Thank you!
Real vaccines work. This vackseen doesn’t stop the spread. Hence, the difference in spelling.
Yes, that is why they changed the definition; this one is a hoax (for a very real virus).
One question. Who determines what is nonsense? Twitter? Facebook?. I enjoy the critical thinking that others exhibit in pointing out the flaws in these nonsense posts. It is a form of peer review!
One question. Who determines what is nonsense? Twitter? Facebook?. I enjoy the critical thinking that others exhibit in pointing out the flaws in these nonsense posts. It is a form of peer review!
Hadn’t seen this quote. Very pertinent to today. I was just telling my wife, our kids, 27 & 32, have never really known true adversity, besides us limiting what they could have growing up. Thanks for sharing.
Not anti-VIRAL vaccines. Antibiotics not having been developed effective against the secondary bacterial infections, these developed highly ineffective anti-bacterial agents at the time, and this article documents this. Long abandoned to proper anti-bacterial antibiotics... you know, like Azithromycin (AKA Pfizer Brand name Zithromax, effective in treating the nosocomially acquired airborne bacterial infection which grows on the fluid/detritus residue of killed lung lining cells a the growth medium. The medium for what actually kills, bacterial pneumonia.
Not sure if you read what I linked to. I did not claim anti-viral. Some here were simply dismissing the thread post stating there were no vaccines. Yet, history of vaccines website indicates that scientists were working on them and administered them which was part of the premise of the article of the thread.
In case you did not read my link:
https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/blog/vaccine-development-spanish-flu
When people write about the Spanish Influenza pandemic of 1918-19, they usually start with the staggering global death toll, the huge number of people who were infected with the pandemic virus, and the inability of the medical field to do anything to help the infected. And while those factors were hallmarks of the devastating episode, researchers and health workers in the United States and Europe were confidently devising vaccines and immunizing hundreds of thousands of people in what amounted to a medical experiment on the grandest scale. What were the vaccines they came up with? Did they do anything to protect the immunized and halt the spread of the disease?
snip
But as the 1910s progressed and bacteriological methods matured, other researchers presented results that conflicted with Pfeiffer’s findings. They found his organism in healthy individuals and in those suffering from illnesses that clearly were not influenza. Additionally, they looked for Pfeiffer’s bacillus in influenza cases and in many instances did not find it at all. Though many physicians still believed that Pfeiffer had correctly identified the culprit, a growing number of others had begun to doubt his findings.
Those true believers had some reason to be hopeful that a vaccine could prevent influenza as the disease began its second appearance in the United States in early fall 1918. By October 2, 1918, William H. Park, MD, head bacteriologist of the New York City Health Department, was working on a Pfeiffer’s bacteria influenza vaccine. The New York Times reported that Royal S. Copeland, Health Commissioner of New York City, described the vaccine as an influenza preventive and an “application of an old idea to a new disease.” Park was making his vaccine from heat-killed Pfeiffer’s bacilli isolated from ill individuals and testing it on volunteers from Health Department staff (New York Times, October 2, 1918). Three doses were given 48 hours apart. By October 12, he wrote in the New York Medical Journal that he was vaccinating employees from large companies and soldiers in army camps. He hoped to have evidence to demonstrate the effectiveness of the vaccine in a few weeks (Park WH, 1918).
snip
In November, the Newark Evening News reported that 39,000 doses of Leary-Park influenza vaccine had been prepared and that most doses were used. (Timothy Leary was a professor at Tufts University School of Medicine.) Though it was too soon to tell if the vaccine was effective, “...the average person need have no fear of the results of the vaccine. Neurotic and rheumatic individuals, however, appear to be sensitive to the vaccine, while children take it with less disturbance than adults” (Newark Evening News, 1918).
By December 13, 1918, Copeland was not so confident about his department’s vaccine. He told the Times that vaccines made from Pfeiffer’s bacilli appeared to have no effect on influenza prevention. Rather, he was confident that a mixed bacterial vaccine (streptococcal, pneumococcal, staphylococcal, and Pfeiffer’s bacilli) developed by E.C. Rosenow at the Mayo Foundation was an effective preventive. And while he thought that most people in New York had already been exposed to Spanish influenza, he mentioned that he would have Park prepare some of the Rosenow vaccine to immunize people in New York throughout the winter (New York Times, December 13, 1918). Well more than 500,000 doses of Rosenow vaccine were produced (Eyler, 2009).
University of Pittsburgh, Tulane University, and even private physicians were making their own vaccines. Convalescent serum was also used (Boston Post, January 6, 1919; Robertson & Koehler, 1918). The Deseret (UT) Evening News noted on December 14, 1918, that free vaccine was available in communities around the state.
Based on my survey of newspaper and medical journal articles from the time, it is clear that many hundreds of thousands, if not a million or more, doses of vaccines were produced during the pandemic years. (A few years ago I wrote another blog post about Rosenow’s vaccine and other vaccines.)
The Editorial Committee of the American Journal of Public Health tried to put a damper on people’s expectations about the vaccines. They wrote in January 1919 that the causative organism of the current influenza was still unknown, and therefore the vaccines being produced had only a chance at being directed at the right target. They noted that vaccines for secondary infections made some sense, but that all the vaccine being produced must be viewed as experimental. Acknowledging the somewhat ad hoc nature vaccine development in the current crisis, they urged that control groups be used with all the vaccines, and that the differences between control and experimental group be minimized, as to risk of exposure, time of exposure during epidemic, and so on (Editorial Committee of the American Journal of Public Health, 1919).
Certainly none of the vaccines described above prevented viral influenza infection – we know now that influenza is caused by a virus, and none of the vaccines protected against it. But were any of them protective against the bacterial infections that developed secondary to influenza? Vaccinologist Stanley A. Plotkin, MD, thinks they were not. He told us, “The bacterial vaccines developed for Spanish influenza were probably ineffective because at the time it was not known that pneumococcal bacteria come in many, many serotypes and that of the bacterial group they called B. influenzae, only one type is a major pathogen.” In other words, the vaccine developers had little ability to identify, isolate, and produce all the potential disease-causing strains of bacteria circulating at the time. Indeed, today’s pneumococcal vaccine for children protects against 13 serotypes of that bacteria, and the vaccine for adults protects against 23 serotypes.
A 2010 article, however, describes a meta-analysis of bacterial vaccine studies from 1918-19 and suggests a more favorable interpretation. Based on the 13 studies that met inclusion criteria, the authors conclude that some of the vaccines could have reduced the attack rate of pneumonia after viral influenza infection. They suggest that, despite the limited numbers of bacteria strains in the vaccines, vaccination could have led to cross-protection from multiple related strains (Chien, 2010).
It was not until the 1930s that researchers established that influenza was in fact caused by a virus, not a bacterium. Pfeiffer’s influenza bacillus would eventually be named Haemophilus influenzae, the name retaining the legacy of its long-standing, though inaccurate, association with influenza. And today, influenza vaccines – as well as H. influenzae type b vaccines—are widely available to prevent illness.
Enjoy the rest of your day.
Thank YOU for posting the thread article!
Have a nice rest of your day!
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.