Ten questions about flu vaccines that doctors and health authorities refuse to answer

by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor http://www.naturalnews.com/027258_vaccines_flu_vaccine.html

Oct 2009

(NaturalNews) Vaccine mythology remains rampant in both western medicine and the mainstream media. To hear the vaccination zealots say it, vaccines are backed by "good science," they've been "proven effective" and they're "perfectly safe."

Oh really? Where's all that good science? As it turns out, there's isn't any. Flu vaccines (including swine flu vaccines) are based entirely on a vaccine mythology that assumes all vaccines work and no vaccines can be scientifically questioned. Anyone who dares question the safety or effectiveness of vaccines is immediately branded a danger to public health and marginalized in the scientific community.

Here are ten questions vaccine-pushing doctors and health authorities absolutely refuse to answer:

#1) Where are the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies proving flu vaccines are both safe and effective?

Answer: There aren't any. (http://www.naturalnews.com/027239_v...)

#2) Where, then, is the so-called "science" backing the idea that flu vaccines work at all?

Answer: Other than "cohort studies," there isn't any. And the cohort studies have been thoroughly debunked. Scientifically speaking, there isn't a scrap of honest evidence showing flu vaccines work at all.

#3) How can methyl mercury (Thimerosal, a preservative used in flu vaccines) be safe for injecting into the human body when mercury is an extremely toxic heavy metal?

Answer: It isn't safe at all. Methyl mercury is a poison. Along with vaccine adjuvants, it explains why so many people suffer autism or other debilitating neurological side effects after being vaccinated.

#4) Why do reports keep surfacing of children and teens suffering debilitating neurological disorders, brain swelling, seizures and even death following flu vaccines or HPV vaccines?

Answer: Because vaccines are dangerous. The vaccine industry routinely dismisses all such accounts -- no matter how many are reported -- as "coincidence."

#5) Why don't doctors recommend vitamin D for flu protection, especially when vitamin D activates the immune response far better than a vaccine? (http://www.naturalnews.com/027231_V...)

Answer: Because vitamin D can't be patented and sold as "medicine." You can make it yourself. If you want more vitamin D, you don't even need a doctor, and doctors tend not to recommend things that put them out of business.

#6) If human beings need flu vaccines to survive, then how did humans survive through all of Earth's history?

Answer: Human genetic code is already wired to automatically defend you against invading microorganisms (as long as you have vitamin D). (http://www.naturalnews.com/027231_V...)

#7) If the flu vaccine offers protection against the flu, then why are the people who often catch the flu the very same people who were vaccinated against it?

Answer: Because those most vulnerable to influenza infections are the very same people who have a poor adaptive response to the vaccines and don't build antibodies. In other words flu vaccines only "work" on people who don't need them. (And even building antibodies doesn't equate to real-world protection from the flu, by the way.)

#8) If the flu vaccine really works, then why was there no huge increase in flu death rates in 2004, the year when flu vaccines were in short supply and vaccination rates dropped by 40%? (http://www.naturalnews.com/027239_v...)

Answer: There was no change in the death rate. You could drop vaccination rates to zero percent and you'd still see no change in the number of people dying from the flu. That's because flu vaccines simply don't work.

#9) How can flu vaccines reduce mortality by 50% (as is claimed) when only about 10% of winter deaths are related to the flu in the first place?

They can't. The 50% statistic is an example of quack medical marketing. If I have a room full of 100 people, then I take the 50 healthiest people and hand them a candy bar, I can't then scientifically claim that "candy bars make people healthy." That's essentially the same logic behind the "50% reduction in mortality" claim of flu vaccines. (http://www.naturalnews.com/027239_v...).

#10) If flu vaccines work so well, then why are drug makers and health authorities so reluctant to subject them to scientific scrutiny with randomized, placebo-controlled studies?

Answer: Although they claim such studies would be "unethical," what's far more unethical is to keep injecting hundreds of millions of people every year with useless, harmful vaccines that aren't backed by a shred of honest evidence.

Vaccine voodoo?

The vaccine industry is about making money, not actually offering immune protection against the flu. Whether people get the flu or not is irrelevant to the bottom-line profits of the drug companies. What matters most is that people continue to take the flu shots, and making that happen depends entirely on pushing the vaccine mythology that infects the minds of doctors and health authorities today.

There was a time when all "good" doctors believed in bloodletting. Sickness was caused by evil spirits, they thought, and releasing pints of blood from the patient would clear the evil spirits and accelerate healing. Any doctor who questioned the science behind bloodletting was called a "denier." All the "good" doctors said, "We know bloodletting works, so we don't need science to back it up."

Today, you hear the exact same thing about vaccines. "We know they work," doctors claim, "so we don't need any real science to back it up." Anyone who questions the safety of flu vaccines (or H1N1 vaccines) is branded a "denier." Anyone who asks for solid scientific evidence supporting the efficacy of vaccines is called a troublemaker. They don't need any evidence. They already know vaccines work.

With that being the case, why bother calling it medicine at all? Why not just call it VOODOO? Why not accompany vaccines with the wave of a magic wand and some shamanic chanting? Maybe doctors should tell their patients to cross their fingers before being injected with a vaccine because "that makes it work better."

Seriously. Everything that doctors accuse "quacks" of doing with homeopathy, or herbs, or energy medicine is now being done by the doctors themselves when it comes to vaccines. They are following the exact same "quackery" they accuse other of pursuing.

This brings me to an important observation about modern medicine: MY quackery is okay, but YOUR quackery isn't!

That's the attitude of vaccine-pushing doctors and health authorities. As long as the quackery is widely agreed upon by the medical masses, then to heck with actual scientific evidence.

Quackery only needs good company, not good science, to be accepted as true.

Why natural medicine is inherently safer

Of course, these vaccine devotees might say, well, you don't have any good evidence to support your anti-viral herbs, or your medicinal teas, or your vitamin D nutrition either. But in saying that, they miss the whole point: Foods, herbs and nutrition are all natural, biocompatible healing elements that have been part of the human experience for as long as humans have roamed this planet. A chemical injection with a sharp needle that pierces the skin, on the other hand, is extremely interventionist. It's unnatural and in many ways quite radical. As such, it demands a higher burden of scientific proof than something that human beings have evolved with over time.

Foods, herbs and natural medicines have been around for millions of years. Vaccines have existed for less than a hundred years, and routine season flu vaccinations have really only been pushed hard for less than twenty years. They have no track record of success. They aren't natural, they aren't compatible with human biology, and they contain extremely toxic substances that clearly do not belong in the human body.

Given such extremes, the burden of proof for both safety and efficacy of vaccines falls onto those who would advocate them. And yet, to this day, no such proof has been offered... or is even pursued. There isn't even a plan in place to someday find out if flu vaccines really work. The whole plan is to just pursue "business as usual" and keep injecting people whether it really works or not.

Vaccine needles would be far more honest if they were shaped like question marks.

Flu vaccines are the voodoo of modern medicine.

Seriously. You would have the same level of protection from the flu if you brought your own personal voodoo doll to the clinic and had them inject that with the vaccine instead of you!

That's an interesting idea, actually. We could really reduce national health care costs if we just administered western medicines to our voodoo dolls instead of our actual bodies. Got cancer? Just poison your voodoo doll with chemotherapy. Side effects are almost non-existent. Need heart bypass surgery? Just have them operate on the doll (it's far less complicated). Want some protection from the winter flu? Just vaccinate the doll. It's quick and painless.

The results would be no worse than what people are experiencing right now. In fact, in most cases they might actually be better.