By Rus­sell Blay­lock, M.D.

What expe­ri­ence and his­tory teach is this — that people and gov­ern­ments never have learned any­thing from his­tory or acted on prin­ci­ples deduced from it.” G.W.F. Hegel

I have been fol­lowing the evolving “pan­demic” of H1N1 influenza begin­ning with the orig­inal dis­covery of the infec­tion in Mexico in March of this year. In the course of this study I have tried to uti­lize as my sources high-quality, peer-reviewed jour­nals, data from the CDC and accepted text­books of virology.

As with all such studies one has to inte­grate and cor­re­late pre­vious expe­ri­ences with epi­demics and pan­demics. As you will see, a great deal of my mate­rial comes from offi­cial sources, such as the Center for Dis­ease Con­trol and Pre­ven­tion, the National Insti­tutes of Health, the National Insti­tutes of Allergy and Infec­tious Dis­eases and the New Eng­land Journal of Med­i­cine. Thus my dis­tracters cannot claim that I am using mate­rial that is not within the mainstream.

Preg­nant Women NOT at Spe­cial Risk from Swine Flu

In the begin­ning, even before it was declared a level 6 pan­demic by the World Health Orga­ni­za­tion (WHO), a group of “sci­en­tists” were sounding the alarm that this might indeed be the ter­ri­fying, deadly pan­demic they had been expecting for over half a century.

Nat­u­rally, the vac­cine man­u­fac­turers were doing all they could to fuel this fear and they were qui­etly making deals with WHO to be among the com­pa­nies selected to man­u­fac­ture the “pan­demic” vac­cine for the world. Being anointed by WHO would guar­antee tens of bil­lions in profits.

As the infec­tion began to spread into the United States and then the rest of the world, its pecu­liar nature became obvious. Those born before 1950 seem to have a high degree of resis­tance to the infec­tion and the dis­ease seems slightly more path­o­genic (dis­ease causing) among those aged 25 to 49. Early on the offi­cial sources declared that preg­nant women were at a spe­cial risk as com­pared to the sea­sonal flu.¹ As we shall see later, this was a grand lie.

Ini­tial Studies Show H1N1 NOT Dan­gerous or Highly Contagious

Once the pan­demic had been declared, virol­o­gists tested the potency of this virus using a con­ven­tional method, that is, infecting fer­rets with the virus.² What they found was that the H1N1 virus was no more path­o­genic than the ordi­nary sea­sonal flu, even though it did pen­e­trate slightly deeper into the lungs. It in no way matched the patho­genecity of the 1917 – 1918 H1N1 virus. It also did not infect other tis­sues, and espe­cially impor­tant, it did not infect the brain.

Next, they wanted to test the ability of the virus to spread among the pop­u­la­tion. The results of their tests were con­flicting, but the best evi­dence indi­cated that the virus did not spread to others very well. In fact, an unpub­lished study by the CDC found that when one member of a family con­tracted the H1N1 virus, other mem­bers of the family were infected only 10% of the time — a very low communicability.

This was later con­firmed in a study of the expe­ri­ence of New York State, in which only 6.9% of the pop­u­la­tion con­tracted the virus, far below the 50% pre­dicted by the President’s Council of Advi­sors on Sci­ence and Tech­nology.³ It is instruc­tive to note that during the 1917 – 18 Swine flu epi­demic the world infec­tion rate was only 20%.⁴

They also pre­dicted that 1.8 mil­lion people would need hos­pi­tal­iza­tion and 300,000 would end up in the inten­sive care units (ICU). Fur­ther, they pre­dicted that hos­pi­tals would be over­whelmed and that ICU units would not have enough beds to care for the sick and dying. Incred­ibly, they pre­dicted that 90,000 people would die.

Much Fear Mongering

Not sat­is­fied, they up the ante on fear mon­gering by ped­dling the idea that preg­nant women were espe­cially in danger as were small chil­dren. We were told daily that young, healthy people were dying, not just those with under­lying med­ical con­di­tions, such as heart dis­ease, dia­betes, cancer and other immune sup­pres­sive dis­eases. The Min­ister of Fear (the CDC) was working over­time ped­dling doom and gloom, knowing that fright­ened people do not make rational deci­sions — nothing sells vac­cines like panic.

These same dire pre­dic­tions were extended to Aus­tralia and New Zealand, which began to show an increase in their reported cases of H1N1 and asso­ci­ated hos­pi­tal­iza­tions as they entered their fall and winter. Recently, two major arti­cles were released in the New Eng­land Journal of Med­i­cine, which ana­lyzed the Amer­ican hos­pi­tal­iza­tion expe­ri­ence⁵ and the Australian/New Zealand ICU expe­ri­ence⁶. I will ana­lyze these very inter­esting studies.

There is a dra­matic dis­con­nect between what the sci­ence is dis­cov­ering about this flu virus and what is being broad­cast over the media out­lets. As you will see, this is a very mild flu virus infec­tion for 99.9% of the population.

Aus­tralian and New Zealand Expe­ri­ence Prove U.S. is Wrong

As I stated, the coun­tries in the southern hemi­sphere have already gone through their fall and winter, that is the sea­sons of peak flu infec­tions. Epi­demi­ol­o­gists and virol­o­gists have been sur­prised at how mild this flu pan­demic has been in the Southern Hemi­sphere, with rel­a­tively few deaths and few hos­pi­tal­iza­tions in most areas.

The study reported in the New Eng­land Journal of Med­i­cine on October 8, 2009, called the AZIC study, ana­lyzed all ICU admis­sions in New Zealand and Aus­tralia, looking at a number of fac­tors.⁶ Here is what they found.

ICU Hos­pi­tal­iza­tions

Out of a pop­u­la­tion of 25 mil­lion people, 722 were admitted to the inten­sive care unit (ICU) with a con­firmed diag­nosis of H1N1 influenza. Overall, 856 people were admitted with a flu virus, but 11.3% were a type A flu that was not sub­typed and 4.3% were sea­sonal flu.

They also ana­lyzed the number of people admitted with viral pneu­monia and found the fol­lowing:

Number of People Admitted to the Hos­pital each Year with Viral Pneu­monia⁵

• 57 people in 2005
• 33 people in 2006
• 69 people in 2007
• 69 people in 2008
• 37 people in 2009

So we see that in 2009 they had 32 fewer people admitted with actual viral pneu­monia. The CDC and other public health agents of fear like to imply that mass num­bers of people are dying from “flu”, that is, actual influenza viral pneu­monia, when in fact, most are dying from other com­pli­ca­tions sec­ondary to under­lying health prob­lems — either diag­nosed or undi­ag­nosed.
They also found that the average person’s risk of ending up in the ICU was one in 35,714 or about three thou­sandths of one per­cent (0.00285%), an incred­ibly low risk. When they looked at actual admis­sion to the ICU, they found that it was people aged 25 to 49 who made up the largest number admitted. Infants from birth to age 1 year had the higher admis­sion per pop­u­la­tion, and had a high mor­tality rate.

Majority of Chil­dren Respond POORLY to Flu Vaccine

It is inter­esting to note that babies this age respond poorly to either the sea­sonal flu vac­cine or the H1N1 vac­cine. One of the largest studies ever done, found that chil­dren below the age of 2 years received no pro­tec­tion at all from the sea­sonal flu vac­cine.⁷

The recently com­pleted study on the effec­tive­ness of the new H1N1 vac­cine reported by the National Insti­tute of Allergy and Infec­tious Dis­ease found that 75% of small chil­dren below age 35 months received no pro­tec­tion from the H1N1 vac­cine and that 65% of chil­dren between the ages of 3 years and 9 years received no pro­tec­tion from the vac­cine.⁸

Flu Vac­cine DOUBLES Risk of Get­ting H1N1

It is also impor­tant to view this in the face of the new unpub­lished Cana­dian study of 12 mil­lion people that found get­ting the sea­sonal flu vac­cine, as rec­om­mended by the CDC and NIH, dou­bles one’s risk of devel­oping the H1N1 infec­tion. It would also make the infec­tion much more serious. So much for expert advice from the government.

Obese at Six Times Higher Risk from H1N1 Complications

As stated, most author­i­ties agree that the H1N1 variant virus is quite mild as far as flu viruses go. The vast majority of people (99.99%) are having very brief and mild ill­nesses from this virus.

Keep in mind that when I am dis­cussing num­bers and risk, this does not intend to under­state the dev­as­ta­tion expe­ri­enced by the people who are expe­ri­encing serious ill­ness or even death.

Any death is a tragedy.

What we are dis­cussing here is — is the risk from this virus sig­nif­i­cant enough to jus­tify dra­conian mea­sures by the gov­ern­ment and med­ical com­mu­nity? Should we imple­ment mass vac­ci­na­tions with a vac­cine that is essen­tially an exper­i­mental vac­cine, poorly tested and of ques­tion­able benefit?

The study also looked at the health risk of the people admitted to the ICU, but unfor­tu­nately did not look at the under­lying health prob­lems of those who died. We get a hint, since the Amer­ican study did note that it was those over age 65 who were most likely to die, and that 100% of these indi­vidual had under­lying health prob­lems before they were infected.

One of the real sur­prises from this study, and the Amer­ican study, was that one of the more pow­erful risk fac­tors for being admitted to the ICU and of dying was obe­sity. Obese people are admitted 6x more often than those of normal weight. As we shall see, obe­sity played a sig­nif­i­cant role in the risk to chil­dren and preg­nant women as well, some­thing that has never been dis­cussed by the media, the CDC or the public health officials.

This study found that 32.7% of those admitted to the ICU had asthma or other chronic pul­monary dis­ease, far higher than the gen­eral pop­u­la­tion. The Aus­tralian and New Zealand study also had a large number of abo­rig­inal patients and those from the Torres Strait. It is known that nutrient defi­cien­cies are common in both pop­u­la­tions, which means an impaired immune system.

Obe­sity is asso­ci­ated with a high inci­dence of insulin resis­tance and meta­bolic syn­drome, both of which would increase one’s risk of having a serious infec­tion, even to viruses that are mildly path­o­genic. (mild viruses).

H1N1 Vac­cine is NOT Made the Same as Reg­ular Flu Vaccine!!

I am really upset at the insis­tence by the CDC, med­ical doc­tors and the media that all preg­nant women should be vac­ci­nated by this exper­i­mental vac­cine. The media repeats the man­u­fac­turers’ mantra that this vac­cine is pro­duced exactly like the sea­sonal flu, when in fact it is not. Yes, they use chicken eggs, but the rest has been fast tracked and many short­cuts on safety pro­ce­dures have been allowed.

There are 250,000 preg­nant women in Aus­tralia and New Zealand com­bined. Only 66 preg­nant women were admitted to the ICU, an inci­dence of 1 preg­nant woman per 3,800 preg­nant women or a risk of .03%.⁶ Put another way, a preg­nant woman in these two coun­tries can feel com­fort­able to know that there is a 99.97% chance that she will not get sick enough to end up in the ICU.

Preg­nant Women NOT at Increased Risk, Obese Women Are!!

So, why did even 66 preg­nant women end up in the ICU? As we shall see in the Amer­ican study⁵, a sig­nif­i­cant number of these preg­nant women were either obese or mor­bidly obese and most had under­lying med­ical prob­lems. The Australian/New Zealand study⁶ found that one of the major risk fac­tors for preg­nant women was indeed being obese and that obe­sity was asso­ci­ated with a high risk of under­lying med­ical disorders.

They also found that death from H1N1 infec­tion cor­re­lated best with increasing age, con­trary to what the media says. They con­cluded the study with the fol­lowing statement:

“ The pro­por­tion of patients who died in the hos­pital in our study is no higher than that pre­vi­ously reported among patients with sea­sonal influenza A who were admitted to the ICU.” ⁶

In fact, they report that of those infected with the H1N1 variant virus who were sick enough to be admitted to the ICU, 84.5 % went home and 14.3% died and that of those admitted with sea­sonal flu 72.9% were dis­charged and 16.2% died. That is, more died from the sea­sonal flu.

Recent NEJM Study of the Amer­ican Experience

In the same Oct, 8^th issue of the New Eng­land Journal of Med­i­cine they reported on the Amer­ican expe­ri­ence with the H1N1 variant virus.⁵ The study looked at data from 24 states with wide­spread influenza infec­tion from April through June 2009. Remember, unlike most flu epi­demics in the United States, this epi­demic began early and by the end of Sep­tember it was begin­ning to peak, with late October being the date it may begin to decline.

The study exam­ined 13,217 cases of infec­tion involving 1082 people who were hos­pi­tal­ized. Here is what they found:

Under­lying Med­ical Conditions

Of the total hos­pi­tal­ized patients:

• 60% of chil­dren had under­lying med­ical conditions
• 83% of adults had under­lying med­ical conditions

They also found that 32% of patients had at least 2 med­ical con­di­tions that would put them at risk. We are con­stantly told that it is the young adult aged 25 to 49 who is at the greatest risk. Note that 83% of these people had under­lying med­ical con­di­tions. This means that in truth only 292 “healthy” people out of 1082 in 24 states were sick enough to enter the hos­pital — that is 292 healthy people out of tens of mil­lions of people, not much of a risk if you do not have an under­lying chronic med­ical problem.

Under­lying Med­ical Con­di­tions Risk Factor for H1N1 Deaths

When they looked at people over age 65 years of age, that is, the folks who are most likely to die in the hos­pital, 100% had under­lying med­ical con­di­tions — all of them. So, there was not one healthy person over age 65 who has died out of 24 states combined.

What about the chil­dren, a spe­cial target of the fear mon­gering media and gov­ern­ment agen­cies? This study found that 60% had under­lying med­ical con­di­tions and that 30% were either obese or mor­bidly obese.

A pre­vious CDC study states that 2/3 of chil­dren who died had neu­ro­log­ical dis­or­ders or res­pi­ra­tory dis­eases such as asthma.³ If we take the 60% figure, that means out of the 84 chil­dren reported to have died by October 24^th, 2009, only 34 chil­dren con­sid­ered healthy in a nation of 301 mil­lion people really died, not 84. It is also instruc­tive to note that according to CDC fig­ures, the sea­sonal flu last year killed 116 chil­dren.⁹

Remember, that is, 34 so-called healthy chil­dren out of a nation of 40 mil­lion chil­dren. In 2003 it was reported by the CDC that 90 chil­dren died from sea­sonal flu com­pli­ca­tions. Iron­i­cally, as shown by Neil Z. Miller in his excel­lent book — Vac­cine Safety Manuel — once the flu vac­cine was given to small chil­dren the death rate from flu increased 7-fold.¹⁰ Not sur­prising, since the mer­cury in the vac­cine sup­presses immunity.

Pedi­atric Flu Deaths by Year Made WORSE by Flu Vaccine

1999 — — 29 deaths

2000 — — 19 deaths

2001 — — 13 deaths

2002 — — 12 deaths

2003 — — 90 deaths (Year of mass vac­ci­na­tions of chil­dren under age 5 years)

2006 — 78 deaths

2007 — — 88 deaths

2008 – 116 deaths (40.9% vac­ci­nated at age 6 months to 23 months)¹¹

Par­ents should also keep in mind that this study, as well as the Australian/New Zealand Study found that child­hood obe­sity played a major role in a child’s risk of being admitted to the ICU or dying. This is another dra­matic demon­stra­tion as to the danger of obe­sity in chil­dren and that all par­ents should avoid MSG (all food-based exci­to­toxin addi­tives), excess sugar and excess high glycemic car­bo­hy­drates in their children’s diets. This goes for preg­nant moms as well.

Every Parent Needs to Know Other Vac­cines INCREASE Risk of H1N1

One major factor being left out of all dis­cus­sion of these vac­cines, espe­cially those for small chil­dren and babies, is the effect of other vac­ci­na­tions on presently cir­cu­lating viral infec­tions such as the H1N1 variant virus. It is known that sev­eral of the vac­cines are pow­er­fully immune sup­pressing. For example, the measles, mumps and rubella virus are all immune sup­pressing, as seen with the MMR vac­cine, a live virus vac­cine.^{12, 13}

This means that when a child receives the MMR vac­cine, for about two to five weeks after­wards their immune system is sup­pressed, making them highly sus­cep­tible to catching viruses and bac­te­rial infec­tions cir­cu­lating through the pop­u­la­tion. Very few mothers are ever told this, even though it is well accepted in the med­ical literature.

In fact, it is known that the Hib vac­cine for haemophilus influenzae is an immune sup­pressing vac­cine and that vac­ci­nated chil­dren are at a higher risk of devel­oping haemophilus influenzae menin­gitis for at least one week after receiving the vac­cine.^10,14 These small chil­dren receive both of these vaccines.

According to the vac­cine schedule rec­om­mended by the CDC and used by most states, a child will receive their MMR vac­cine and Hib vac­cine at one year of age and both are immune suppressing.

At age 2 to 4 months, they will receive a Hib vac­cine. There­fore at age 2 to 4 months, and again at age one year, they are at an extreme risk of serious infec­tious com­pli­ca­tions caused by vaccine-induced immune sup­pres­sion. The New Zealand/Australian study found that the highest death in the young was from birth to age 12 months, the very time they were get­ting these immune-suppressing vac­cines.⁶

The so-called healthy chil­dren and babies that have ended up in the hos­pital and have died may in fact be the vic­tims of immune sup­pres­sion caused by their rou­tine child­hood vac­cines. We may never know because the med­ical elite will never record such data or con­duct the nec­es­sary studies. Recall also that the sea­sonal flu vac­cine, which is rec­om­mended for all babies 6 months to 35 months, is also immune sup­pressing because of the mercury-containing thimerosal in the vac­cine.¹⁵

If par­ents allow their chil­dren to be vac­ci­nated according to the CDC rec­om­men­da­tions, that is 2 sea­sonal flu vac­cines and 2 swine flu vac­cines as well as a pneu­mo­coccal vac­cine, that will increase the number of vac­cines a child will have by age 6 years to 41. This amounts to an enor­mous amount of alu­minum and mer­cury as well as intense brain inflam­ma­tion trig­gered by vaccine-induced microglial acti­va­tion.¹⁶

Risk of Serious Ill­ness from the H1N1 Mutant Virus

Their survey of 24 states found that a total of 67 patients out of tens of mil­lions of people ended up in the ICU. That is, only 6% of the people admitted to the hos­pital were so sick as to need inten­sive treat­ments. Of these 67 patients, 19 died (25%) and of these 67% had obvious under­lying long-term med­ical ill­nesses. This means that only 6 patients out of tens of mil­lions of people in 24 states that were con­sid­ered “healthy” before their infec­tion, had died. Is this jus­ti­fi­ca­tion for a mass vac­ci­na­tion campaign?

Of the 1082 hos­pi­tal­ized patients, 93% were even­tu­ally dis­charged recov­ered and only 7% died, a very low death rate. Their analysis of these cases con­cluded that those who died fell in three categories:

They were older patients

Antiviral med­ica­tions were started 48 hours after the onset of the illness

There was no cor­re­la­tion to having had sea­sonal vaccines

The last item is espe­cially inter­esting because they assume that having had sea­sonal flu vac­cine would have offered some pro­tec­tion — it offered none.

What they did find was that none who died had been given antiviral med­ica­tions (Tam­iflu or Relenza) within 48 hours of get­ting sick. Those given the antiviral med­ica­tions within the golden 48-hour period rarely died. Relenza is far safer than Tam­iflu. This was the only factor found to cor­re­late with sur­vival of severely ill ICU patients.

What about the Danger to Preg­nant Women? The Amer­ican Experience

Our media is inun­dating the public with scare sto­ries of the danger this virus poses to preg­nant women. Most of us visu­alize the preg­nant woman as being healthy, young and without under­lying med­ical dis­eases. The study is quite revealing, but omits some very impor­tant factors.

We are told that preg­nant women are 6x more likely to end up in the hos­pital than the gen­eral pop­u­la­tion. This figure is derived from the fact that it was esti­mated that preg­nant women had a 7% greater chance of requiring hos­pital admis­sion than did the gen­eral public at 1% (Even this is a far higher number than their own studies indi­cate — actu­ally it is a very small frac­tion of 1%).

Dr. Michael Bronze, a pro­fessor of internal med­i­cine at the Uni­ver­sity of Okla­homa Health Sci­ences Center, writing for emed­i­cine medscape.com (WebMD), states that the risk of a preg­nant women being hos­pi­tal­ized with the H1N1 infec­tion is 0.32 per 100,000 preg­nant women (which is 1 in 300,000 preg­nant women).¹⁷ One can safely say, based on the Australian/New Zealand expe­ri­ence (at the peak of their flu season) and the Amer­ican data some­where in the middle of their flu season, that preg­nant women have about a 99.97% chance they will not become so sick as to require hos­pital care at any level.

The death rate of preg­nant women who were admitted to the ICU was 7.7%, a fairly low figure for infec­tious ICU patients. Remember, most patients admitted to the hos­pital are admitted for hydra­tion and are not that ill in terms of the infec­tion itself.

Smoking and Obe­sity Increase Risk of H1N!

Now, most of us assume that these preg­nant women are per­fectly healthy as men­tioned above, but the data shows some­thing quite dif­ferent. They found that greater than 30% of the preg­nant women were either obese or mor­bidly obese, as did the Australian/New Zealand study. Of these, 60% had under­lying med­ical con­di­tions that put them at greater risk of over­whelming infec­tions — both viral and bacterial.

It is unfor­tu­nate that they did not enter any infor­ma­tion on smoking, either by the mother or by anyone living in the house­hold. It is known that smoking greatly increases ones risk of severe com­pli­ca­tions from any flu virus.^18,19 This is for sev­eral rea­sons. One, smokers eat a much poorer diet than non-smokers.

Second, smoking destroys the cilia in the bronchial pas­sage­ways that are essen­tial for clearing mucus and debris — thus increasing the risk of devel­oping pneu­monia.²⁰ Finally, nico­tine is a very pow­erful immune sup­pres­sant.²¹ The com­bined effect of all three is enough to land anyone in the ICU during even a mild flu season. Like­wise, chronic smokers have low mag­ne­sium levels, which increase their risk of devel­oping bron­chiospasm that is resis­tant to normal drug treat­ments.^{22 – 24}

They also failed to record pos­sible illegal drug use, how many were living at poverty levels and how many were on pre­scrip­tion drugs known to sup­press immu­nity or deplete nutri­ents essen­tial for immune func­tion. And, one must keep in mind, at this age, (age range of 15 to 39 years) many would have had numerous child­hood vac­cines and booster vaccines.

This was also not con­sid­ered for obvious rea­sons. So, some crit­ical infor­ma­tion we all need to eval­uate this “pan­demic” is being excluded or pur­posely kept from us.

Bac­te­rial Pneu­monia and Swine Flu

The Amer­ican study found that of the people admitted to the hos­pital, 40% were found to have X-ray evi­dence of pneu­monia. Of these, 66% had pre-existing med­ical con­di­tions, such as asthma, chronic obstruc­tive pul­monary dis­ease (COPD), immuno­sup­pres­sion for trans­plants or cancer or neu­ro­logic disorder.

We are not told how many were smokers or lived with smokers, again, some­thing that puts people at great risk of having severe reac­tions to any infec­tion. Smokers have much higher bac­te­rial pneu­monia rates every year. The CDC esti­mates that smokers have a 200% increased risk of flu virus com­pli­ca­tions as com­pared to nonsmokers.

The CDC released in the Sep­tember 29 issue of the MMWR an analysis of the lung tissue from 77 fatal cases of H1N1 infec­tion.²⁵ Of these, 29% had a sec­ondary bac­te­rial infec­tion — pneu­monia. This is an impor­tant study because the media and the CDC are telling adults they need to get a pneu­mo­coccal vac­cine and that par­ents need to have their chil­dren vac­ci­nated with the pneu­mo­coccal vac­cine as well.

This adult study found that only half of the pneu­mo­nias were due to Strep­to­coccus pneu­mo­niae, the organism used in the vac­cine. Half of the cases were due to other strains of strep­to­coccus, staphlo­coccus or H. Influenza. Some 18% of the people had mul­tiple organism cul­tured from their lungs.

It is impor­tant to note that they found that all of these autop­sied patients had pre­vious, serious med­ical prob­lems prior to becoming infected with H1N1 variant and that not all bac­teria were exam­ined, meaning that even those with Strep pneu­mo­niae could have had mul­tiple infec­tions, for which the vac­cines would have offered no protection.

Par­ents should also know that the vast majority of pneu­mo­nias found in these infected chil­dren were not due to Strep pneu­mo­niae, but rather Staph aureus. Again, the pneu­mo­coccal vac­cine would have offered these chil­dren no protection.

Preg­nant Women Given Vac­cine Have Babies with More Health Problems

It has always been a prin­ciple of med­i­cine that one should not vac­ci­nate preg­nant women, except in extreme cases, because the risk to the baby is too high. Recently, we have seen two exam­ples of vio­la­tion of this policy. When the HPV vac­cine Gar­dasil was first released the CDC and the man­u­fac­turer (Merck Phar­ma­ceu­tical Com­pany) rec­om­mended that it be given to preg­nant women.

Shortly after begin­ning this dan­gerous prac­tice it was ordered halted because a number of women were losing their babies and babies were being born with major mal­for­ma­tions.²⁶

It is known that stim­u­lating a woman’s immune system during midterm and later term preg­nancy sig­nif­i­cantly increases the risk that her baby will develop autism during child­hood and schiz­o­phrenia some­time during the teenage years and after­ward.²⁷

Com­pelling sci­en­tific evi­dence also shows an increased risk of seizures in the baby and later as an adult.²⁸ In fact, a number of neu­rode­vel­op­mental and behav­ioral prob­lems can occur in babies born to women immuno­log­i­cally stim­u­lated during preg­nancy.^{29 – 32}

It is true that serious flu infec­tions or E. coli infec­tions during preg­nancy are a major risk for all these com­pli­ca­tions, but a woman’s risk of becoming infected, as we have seen, is a very small frac­tion of 1 %, yet they are calling for all preg­nant women to be vac­ci­nated with at least three vac­cines, two of which con­tain mer­cury. There is also evi­dence to show that a large number of these women will gain no pro­tec­tion from the vaccine.

Dr. Bronze, quoted above, notes that animal studies have shown that vac­cines harm unborn babies and that no safety studies have been done in humans. A recent study done by Dr. Laura Hewitson, a pro­fessor of obstet­rics at the Uni­ver­sity of Pitts­burg Med­ical Center, found that a single vac­cine used in human babies, when used in new­born mon­keys, caused sig­nif­i­cant abnor­mal­i­ties in brain­stem devel­op­ment.³³ This mass vac­ci­na­tion pro­gram for H1N1 variant virus will be the largest exper­i­ment on preg­nant women in his­tory and could end as a mon­u­mental disaster.

How Many Cases are Really Swine Flu?

CBS, to their credit, con­ducted a three-month long inves­ti­ga­tion that indi­cates that we have all been hood­winked by the gov­ern­mental “pro­tec­tion” agency called euphemisti­cally, the Center for Dis­ease Con­trol and Pre­ven­tion.³⁴

What they tried to learn from the CDC was just what per­centage of the “flu cases” were in fact H1N1. The CDC did all they could to pro­tect this infor­ma­tion and only after filing a Freedom of Infor­ma­tion request and waiting 2 months did they finally release the data. Now we know why they wanted it pro­tected and why they stopped testing for the H1N1 virus in late July.

The data revealed that in fact very few cases reported as swine flu were in fact H1N1 variant virus. CBS exam­ined the data in all 50 states. What they found, for example, was that in Georgia only 2% of reported cases were H1N1 (97% neg­a­tive for H1N1); in Alaska only 1% of reported cases were H1N1 (93% neg­a­tive for flu and 5% sea­sonal flu) and in Cal­i­fornia only 2% of reported cases were H1N1 with 12% being other flu viruses and 86% neg­a­tive for flu.

A recent release from the CDC found that their survey reported that of 12,943 spec­i­mens tested from around the country, only 26.3% of cases tested pos­i­tive for H1N1 variant virus, but that 99.8% of the spec­i­mens tested pos­i­tive for some type of other flu virus, most of which were reg­ular sea­sonal flu.

The CDC has now changed all data reporting on the flu effects. They did this by stop­ping viral typing and sub­typing and rolled back all pre­vious num­bers based on prior data. The new system for col­lecting data now started on August 30^th, 2009.

The only reason I can imagine they did this is that the prior data was clearly demon­strating that the H1N1 variant virus was causing a very mild ill­ness in most people (99.99%) with fewer hos­pi­tal­iza­tions, fewer cases of pneu­monia and fewer deaths for all ages and groups than the prior sea­sonal flu in past years. This was true for the United States and the Southern Hemi­sphere, which has gone though the worst of its flu season.

Now that they are no longer typing the virus, they can attribute all cases of pneu­monia, hos­pi­tal­iza­tions and deaths to H1N1, even though the majority of cases appear to be from a long list of other causes. In fact, they can clas­sify many cases of pri­mary pneu­monia as caused by H1N1.

Actu­ally LESS Flu Deaths this Year

One must always keep in mind that the CDC has told us that 36,000 people die every year from influenza and influenza-related com­pli­ca­tions. Thus far, we have seen (accepting their data) about 900 deaths and 21,829 cases of pneumonia.

This is far below the 36,000 figure. In fact, per­haps we should be breathing a sigh of relief that 35,000 fewer people have died this year from flu-related dis­or­ders. This would go down on record as the fewest flu-related deaths in recorded history.

In fact, world­wide, according to CDC and WHO data, far fewer people have died form H1N1 than any sea­sonal flu in the past. This graph from the CDC ^[1] showing the “Pneu­monia and Influenza Mor­tality for 122 US Cities” also show that, so far, this year’s flu mor­tality is far below that of 2008.

^[2]

In fact, world­wide, according to CDC and WHO data, far fewer people have died form H1N1 than any sea­sonal flu in the past. So, one must ask, why is the gov­ern­ment and their hand­maidens, the media, fueling this panic men­tality? Why are we once again talking about manda­tory vac­ci­na­tion for every man woman and child in the nation?

And I can assure you that soon we will hear an announce­ment that the adju­vant MF-59 or ASO3 (squa­lene) will be needed to save lives.

Now, if the CBS data forced from the files of the CDC is cor­rect, why are so many people dying from this flu? The answer is that no greater number are dying now, for any age group, sex or state of preg­nancy than have died in any pre­vious flu outbreak.

By sta­tis­tical slight of hand they have cre­ated this pan­demic and con­tinue to do so. One cannot fore­tell the future, but based on the data now avail­able from the United States, Canada, Europe and the Southern hemi­sphere, there is no jus­ti­fi­ca­tion for the fear mon­gering by the media and gov­ern­ment agencies.

It is accepted that the cog­ni­tive por­tions of the human brain work less well under two con­di­tions — fear and anger. Those who have sur­vived deadly sit­u­a­tions or who make their living sur­viving such sit­u­a­tions tell us that con­trol­ling our fear is the most impor­tant thing in sur­vival. More people have died from making poor deci­sions while over­whelmed by fear than have died as a result of the sit­u­a­tion itself.

I am reminded of the poor elderly person who died sev­eral years back waiting in a very long line for a flu vac­cine in the swel­tering heat. It seems she passed out and struck her head on the hard asphalt.

She was standing in that line for hours because the CDC announced that that year’s flu was going to be espe­cially deadly for the elderly and there was a shortage of vac­cine. As it turned out, that year they picked the wrong virus to make the vac­cine — so it was not only a dan­gerous vac­cine, it would have given her no pro­tec­tion. But then, the vac­cine man­u­fac­tures got their blood money.

What Do They Not Know About This Vaccine?

Insur­ance com­pa­nies in Aus­tralia would not insure doc­tors who gave the vac­cine because it was a fast tracked vac­cine and there­fore exper­i­mental. They felt that the danger of com­pli­ca­tions was far too high to risk insuring the doc­tors. Unlike doc­tors in America, they did not have a spe­cial law that Con­gress would pass to insu­late them from lia­bility should severe com­pli­ca­tions arise from the vaccine.

It is also of spe­cial interest to note that tens of mil­lions of babies were vac­ci­nated with the Hepatitis B vac­cine (pro­viding no pro­tec­tion to the babies) only to learn later that it is linked to a 310% increased risk of devel­oping mul­tiple scle­rosis.³⁶ One has to ask — What else do they not know about this vaccine?

Well, it turns out a lot.

Years after it was added to the rec­om­mended vac­cine schedule, it was linked to a ter­ri­fying dis­order called macrophagic myofascitis, which in chil­dren is asso­ci­ated with a severe dementia-like illness.

Then we have the case of the Gar­dasil vac­cine. Mil­lions of young girls were vac­ci­nated and within sev­eral months preg­nant women were losing their babies, babies were being born deformed, sev­eral of these very young girls died and a growing number have had serious reac­tions to the vac­cine. Once again we have to ask — What else do they not know about this vaccine?

Vac­cine Safety Testing Only Done for ONE Week

Now we are being told that this new fast tracked, poorly tested vac­cine is very safe and effec­tive. The results of the testing on this vac­cine were reported in the New Eng­land Journal of Med­i­cine.³⁹ It is instruc­tive to learn that the tests for safety and to assess com­pli­ca­tions lasted only 7 days after the vac­cine, an incred­ibly short period of follow-up. Gul­lian Barre paral­ysis can occur even months after a vac­cine as can seizures, behav­ioral prob­lems and neu­rode­vel­op­mental dis­or­ders in children.

It is inter­esting to note that the authors of the safety study for our swine flu vac­cine were all employees of the maker of the vac­cine CSL Bio­ther­a­peu­tics and eight held equity interest in the com­pany.³⁹ This admis­sion is part of the dis­clo­sure policy of the New Eng­land Journal of Med­i­cine.

It is always impor­tant to keep in mind when you hear about this vac­cine being safe and pro­duced just like the sea­sonal flu vac­cine — What else do they not know about this vac­cine that they will dis­cover months, years or even decades later. Once injected with the vac­cine and you develop a com­pli­ca­tion there will be little that can be done to treat the life-long degen­er­a­tive dis­order it pro­duces. You will just be a sad story on 60 minutes.

---

Ref­er­ences ^[3]

1. CDC, Novel influenza A (H1N1) virus infec­tions in three preg­nant women — United States, April — May, 2009. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep May 15, 2009; 58: (18): 497 – 500.

2. Maines TR et al. Trans­mis­sion and patho­gen­esis of swine-origin 2009 A(H1N1) influenza viruses in fer­rets and mice. Sci­ence 2009;325: 484 – 487.

3. CDC report: http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/surveillance.htm ^[4].

4. Strauss JH, Strauss EG, Viruses and Human Dis­ease. Aca­d­emic Press, San Diego, 2002, p153.

5. Jain S, et al. Hos­pi­tal­ized patients with 2009 H1N1 influenza in the United States, April-June 2009. NEJM 2009;361 Oct 8, 2009 (10.1056/NEJM oa0906695).

6. The ANZIC influenza inves­ti­ga­tors. Crit­ical care ser­vices and 2009 H1N1 influenza in Aus­tralia and New Zealand. NEJM, 2009; 361: Oct 8, 2009 (10.56/NEJMoa0908481).

7. The Cochrane Col­lab­o­ra­tion: Cochrane Data­base of Sys­tem­atic Reviews, 2006 (1). Article number CD004879. In this review that ana­lyzed 51 studies involving more than 260,000 chil­dren and found that below age 2 years, the sea­sonal flu vac­cine offered no pro­tec­tion and those older than 2 years, only 33 to 36% had pro­tec­tive anti­body response. (See Neil Z. Miller. The Vac­cine Safety Manuel for more information).

8. NIH News: http://www3.niaid.nih.gov/news/newsreleases/2009/H1N1pedvax.htm ^[5].

9. CDC: 2009 – 2010 Influenza Season Week 41 ending October 17, 2009. http://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/ ^[6]

10. Neil Z. Miller. The Vac­cine Safety Manual. New Atlantan Press, Santa Fe, 2008, p97. This mate­rial also comes from the CDC.

11. MMWR. Influenza Vac­ci­na­tion Cov­erage Among Chil­dren and Adults — – United States, 2008 — 09 Influenza Season. Oct 9, 2009/58 (39); 1091 – 1095.

12. Nanan R, et al. Measles virus infec­tion causes tran­sient deple­tion of acti­vated T cells from periph­eral cir­cu­la­tion. J. Clin­ical Virology 1999; 12; 201 – 210.

13. Schneider-Schaulies J et al. Receptor inter­ac­tions, tro­pism, and mech­a­nisms involved in mor­bil­livirus induced immunomod­u­la­tion. Advances Virus Research 2008; 71: 173 – 205.

14. Mawas F et al. Sup­pres­sion and mod­u­la­tion of cel­lular and humoral immune responses to Heae­mophilus influenzae type B (HiB) con­ju­gate vac­cine in hib-diptheria-tetanus toxoids-acellular per­tussis com­bi­na­tion vac­cines: a study in a rat model. J Infec­tious Dis­eases 2005; 191: 58 – 64.

15. Pol­lard KM, et al. Effects of mer­cury on the immune system. Metals and Ions in Bio­log­ical Sys­tems 1997; 34: 421 – 440.

16. Blay­lock RL and Stru­necka A. Immune-glutamatergic dys­func­tion as a cen­tral mech­a­nism of the autism spec­trum dis­or­ders. Cur­rent Med­i­c­inal Chem­istry 2009; 16: 157 – 170.

17. Bronze MS. H1N1 Influenza (Swine Flu). http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1673658-print ^[7].

18. Rob­bins CS et al. Cig­a­rette smoking impacts immune inflam­ma­tory responses to influenza in mice. Amer­ican J Res­pi­ra­tory Crit­ical Care Med­i­cine 2006; 174; 1342 – 1351.

19. Rob­bins CS et al. Cig­a­rette smoke decreases pul­monary den­dritic cells and impacts antiviral immune respon­sive­ness. Amer­ican J Res­pi­ra­tory Cel­lular Mol­e­c­ular Biology 2004;30: 201 – 211.

20. Arcavi L et al. Cig­a­rette smoking and infec­tion. Archives of Internal Med­i­cine 2004; 164: 2206 – 2216.

21. Nouri-Shirazi M and Guinet E. Evi­dence for the immuno­sup­pres­sive role of nico­tine on human den­dritic cell func­tions. Immunology

22. Unkiewicz-Winiarcyk A et al. Cal­cium, mag­ne­sium, iron, zinc and copper con­cen­tra­tion in the hair of tobacco smokers. Biology Trace Ele­ment Research 2009; 128: 152 – 160.

23. Bloch H et al. Intra­venous mag­ne­sium sul­fate as an adjunct in the treat­ment of acute asthma. Chest 1995; 107: 1576 – 1581.

24. Bhatt SP et al. Serum mag­ne­sium is an inde­pen­dent pre­dictor of fre­quent read­mis­sions due to acute exac­er­ba­tion of chronic obstruc­tive pul­monary dis­ease. Res­pi­ra­tory Med­i­cine 2008; 102: 999-1003.

25. MMWR (CDC): Sep­tember 29, issue

26. FDA http://www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/UCM111285.pdf ^[8].

27. Smith SEP et al. Maternal immune acti­va­tion alters fetal brain devel­op­ment through interleukin-6. Journal of Neu­ro­science 2007; 27: 10695 – 10702.

28. Galic MA et al. Post­natal inflam­ma­tion increases seizure sus­cep­ti­bility in adults rats. Journal of Neu­ro­science 2008; 28: 6904 – 6913.

29. Buka SL et al. Maternal cytokine levels during preg­nancy and adult psy­chosis. Brain Behavior and Immu­nity 2001; 15: 411 – 420.

30. Ozawa K et al. Immune acti­va­tion during preg­nancy in mice leads to dopamin­ergic hyper­func­tion and cog­ni­tive impair­ment in the off­spring: a neu­rode­vel­op­mental animal model of schiz­o­phrenia. Bio­log­ical Psy­chi­atry 2006; 59: 546 – 554.

31. Meyer U et al. Immuno­log­ical stress at the maternal-foetal inter­face: a link between neu­rode­vel­op­ment and adult psy­chopathology. Brain Behavior and Immunology 2006;; 20: 378 – 388.

32. Blay­lock RL. The danger of exces­sive vac­ci­na­tion during brain devel­op­ment: the case for a link to autism spec­trum dis­or­ders (ASD). Med­ical Ver­itas 2008; 5: 1727 – 1741.

33. Hewitson L et al. Delayed acqui­si­tion of neonatal reflexes in new­born pri­mates receiving a thimerosal-containing hepatitis B vac­cine: Influ­ence of ges­ta­tional age and birth weight. Neu­ro­tox­i­cology 2009; (epub ahead of print)

34. Attkisson S. Swine Flu Cases Over­es­ti­mated? CBS news exclu­sive: Study of state results finds H1N1 not as preva­lent as feared. Oct, 21, 2009. CBS News: htpp://cbsnews.com/stories/2009/10/21/cbsnews_investigat..

35. CDC: 2009 – 2010 Influenza Season Week 41 ending October 17, 2009. http://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/ ^[6]

36. Hernan MA et al. Recom­bi­nant hepatitis B vac­cine and the risk of mul­tiple scle­rosis: a prospec­tive study. Neu­rology 2004; 63: 838 – 842.

37. Gher­ardi RK et al. Macrophagic myofascitis lesions assess long-term per­sis­tence of vaccine-derived alu­minum hydroxide in muscle. Brain 2001; 124: 1821 – 1831.

38. Cou­ette M et al. Long-term per­sis­tence of vaccine-derived alu­minum hydroxide is asso­ci­ated with chronic cog­ni­tive dys­func­tion. J Inorg Bio­chem­istry 2009; 103; 1571 – 1578.

39. Green­berg ME at al. Response after one dose of a mono­va­lent influenza A (H1N1) vaccine-preliminary report. NEJM 2009:361: article number 10.1056/NEJMoa0907413.

About Rus­sell Blay­lock, M.D. ^[9]:

Dr. Blay­lock is a board cer­ti­fied neu­ro­sur­geon, author and lec­turer. For the past 25 years he has prac­ticed neu­ro­surgery in addi­tion to having a nutri­tional prac­tice. He recently retired from both prac­tices to devote full time to nutri­tional studies and research.

Dr. Blay­lock has written and illus­trated three books. The first book was on the sub­ject of exci­to­toxins, Exci­to­toxins: The Taste That Kills, and how they are related to dis­eases of the ner­vous system.

His second book, Health and Nutri­tion Secrets That Can Save Your Life, covers the common basis of all dis­eases, nutri­tional pro­tec­tion against dis­eases of aging, pro­tec­tion against heavy metal tox­i­city, the flu­o­ride debate, pes­ti­cide and her­bi­cide tox­i­city, exci­to­toxin update, the vac­cine con­tro­versy, pro­tec­tion against heart attacks and strokes.

His third book, Nat­ural Strate­gies for Cancer Patients, was released in April, 2003 and dis­cusses the ways to defeat cancer, enhance the effec­tive­ness of con­ven­tional treat­ments and pre­vent com­pli­ca­tions asso­ci­ated with these treatments.

In addi­tion, he has written and illus­trated three chap­ters in med­ical text­books, written a booklet on nutri­tional pro­tec­tion against bio­log­ical ter­rorism and written and illus­trated a booklet on mul­tiple scle­rosis. He has written over 30 sci­en­tific papers in peer-reviewed jour­nals on a number of subjects.

Since the pub­li­ca­tion of his first book he has been a guest on numerous national and inter­na­tional syn­di­cated radio programs.

Visit Dr. Blaylock’s web­site at www.russellblaylockmd.com ^[9]