Admin
Admin
Posts : 8049
Join date : 2012-05-29
Location : Manchester UK
 |  Subject: The Shocking Lack of Evidence Supporting Flu Vaccines  Fri 20 Jul 2012, 09:59 | |
|
The Shocking Lack of Evidence Supporting Flu Vaccines
 The Shocking Lack of Evidence SupportingFlu VaccinesWith the flu season ramping up, many are looking to vaccination as a
“preventive” approach. Those who abstain are often accused of being
uneducated, or worse, socially irresponsible. Nothing could be further
from the truth.As it presently stands, it is not sound medical science, but
primarily economic and political motivation which generates the immense
pressure behind mass participation in the annual ritual of flu
vaccination. It is a heavily guarded secret within the medical establishment
(especially within the corridors of the CDC) that the Cochrane Database
Review, which is the gold standard within the evidence-based medical
model for assessing the effectiveness of common medical interventions,
does not lend unequivocal scientific support to the belief and/or
propaganda that flu vaccines are safe and effective.To the contrary, these authoritative reviews reveal there is a
conspicuous absence of conclusive evidence as to the effectiveness of
influenza vaccines in children under 2, healthy adults, the elderly, and healthcare workers who care for the elderly.What is even more disconcerting is that only one safety study on
inactivated flu vaccines has been performed in children under 2 (the
population most susceptible to adverse reactions), even though in the
USA and Canada current guidelines recommend the vaccination of healthy
children from six months old. Another alarming finding following the global pandemic declared by
the World Health Organization in 2009, is that receipt of the seasonal
flu vaccine among Canadians actually increased the rate of medically attended pandemic H1N1 infection. Vaccines, therefore, may actually decrease resistance to viral infection via their immunosuppressive actions. View study.Can Vaccination Replace Natural Immunity?At the outset it should be acknowledged that there could be no
medical justification for vaccination in the first place if it were not
for the observation that periodic infection from wild type pathogens
confers lasting, natural immunity. In a very real sense periodic
infectious challenges are Nature’s immunizations, without which the very
concept of vaccination would make absolutely no sense. The vaccination process artificially
simulates and co-opts a natural process, generating a broad range of
adverse unintended consequences, many of which have been documented here.
Vaccine proponents would have us believe that natural immunity is
inferior to synthetic immunity, and should be replaced by the latter.
In some cases they even suggest breastfeeding should be delayed during immunizations because it “interferes” with the vaccine efficacy. Sounds
like naked economic incentives have trumped genuine, serious health
concerns for the entire population, especially the very young, the
elderly and the sick.This warped perspective follows from the disingenuous standard
vaccine researchers use to “prove” the “efficacy” of their vaccines.
The chemical kitchen sink is thrown at the immune system in
order to conserve the expensive-to- produce antigen and to generate a
more intense immune response - a process, not unlike what happens when
you kick a beehive. These chemicals include detergents, anti-freeze,
heavy metals, DNA from aborted human fetuses (diploid cells) and other
species, etc. Amazingly, vaccine researchers and manufacturers do not
have to prove the antibodies actually have affinity with the antigens
they are marketed to protect us against, i.e. they do not have to prove
“effectiveness,” only “efficacy.” This semantic trick is at the root
of how the world has been deceived into accepting interventions so
dangerous that their risk, like nuclear power, is underwritten by world
governments, not private insurers who know they would go bankrupt
paying out claims to the injured.Another point that can not be understated is that the trivalent
(3-strained) influenza vaccines are incapable of protecting us against
the wide range of pathogens which produce influenza-like illness:“Over 200 viruses cause influenza and influenza-like illness which
produce the same symptoms (fever, headache, aches and pains, cough and
runny noses). Without laboratory tests, doctors cannot tell the two
illnesses apart. Both last for days and rarely lead to death or serious
illness. At best, vaccines might be effective against only Influenza A
and B, which represent about 10% of all circulating viruses.” It is therefore exceedingly clear that it is a mathematical
impossibility for influenza vaccines to be effective at preventing
wild-circulating strains of influenza. Nutritional support, then,
becomes the most logical and reasonable solution. Immune Status Determines Susceptibility ToInfectionThe fact is that our immune status determines susceptibility. If the
immune system is continually challenged with environmental toxicants,
nutritional deficiencies and/or incompatibilities, chronic stress,
influenza is far more likely to take hold. If your immune system is
strong, many infectious challenges occur, are met with an appropriate
response, and often go unnoticed. In other words, it is not a lack of a
vaccination that causes infection, rather, the inability of the immune
system to function effectively. [Note: In some cases, we may become
infected and the ultimate outcome is that we enjoy even greater
immunity.]While there are a broad spectrum of natural substances
which have been studied for their anti-influenza properties, vitamin D
deserves special consideration due to the fact that it is
indispensable to produce antiviral peptides (e.g. cathelicidin) within
the immune system, and can be supported for pennies a day.A study
published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition in 2010,
revealed that children receiving 1200 IUs of vitamin D a day were at 59%
reduced risk for contracting seasonal Influenza A infection. Moreover
as a secondary outcome, only 2 children in the treatment group versus
12 for the control group, experienced an asthma attack.There are actually a broad range of preventive strategies that are evidence-based, and available without prescription.1) Echinacea2) Elderberry3) American Ginseng4) Green Tea5) Probiotics6) Vitamin DSource:-http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/shocking-lack-evidence-supporting-flu-vaccines
| |
|
Calendar