From Natural News

Tuesday, July 14, 2009 by: S. L. Baker, features writer

(NaturalNews) At the 105th International Conference of the American Thoracic Society recently held in San Diego, researchers presented a study showing that the flu vaccine – widely touted as a “must have” for children with chronic illnesses – isn’t effective in preventing influenza-related hospitalizations in children, especially ones with asthma. But here’s the most damning evidence that flu shots aren’t the safe, helpful vaccine the Centers for Disease Control ( CDC) and other government agencies claim: the researchers also found that children who get the flu vaccine are more at risk for hospitalization than their peers who do not get the vaccine.
Scientist Avni Joshi, M.D., of the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, told the meeting, “The concerns that vaccinationmay be associated with asthma exacerbations have been disproved with multiple studies in the past, but the vaccine’s effectiveness has not been well-established. This study was aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of the TIV (trivalent inactivated flu vaccine in children overall, as well as the children with asthma, to prevent influenza-related hospitalization.”

Paradoxically, he then presented the results that appeared to show the vaccine did cause health problems serious enough to result in children being admitted to hospitals for care.

The children were harmed by influenzavaccines

To see if the vaccine actually reduced the number of hospitalizations for all children, especially those with asthma, over eight consecutive flu seasons, Dr. Joshi and his research team conducted a cohort study of 263 children. All the youngsters had been evaluated at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota between the ages of six months to 18 years and each had had laboratory-confirmed flu between 1996 to 2006. The scientists documented which of the children had been vaccinated against the flu, and those that had not received the flu jab. The kids’ asthma status was also noted along with records of and who did and did not require hospitalization.

Then the investigators checked the records for each child research subject to see who had been vaccinated before experiencing a flu-related episode that lead to a hospitalization during that illness. The results showed that youngsters who had received the flu vaccine had three times the risk of hospitalization, as compared to children who had not received the vaccine. For kids with asthma, there was even a higher risk of hospitalization in subjects who received theflu shot. No other measured factors, which included insurance coverage or severity of asthma, was found to impact the risk of hospitalization.

So does this raise a red flag against vaccinating children, especially those who are asthmatic, against the flu? Incredibly, despite the findings of his own study, Dr. Joshi refused to find fault with the flu shot. “While these findings do raise questions about the efficacy of the vaccine, they do not in fact implicate it as a cause of hospitalizations,” Dr. Joshi said in a statement to the media. “More studies are needed to assess not only the immunogenicity, but also the efficacy of different influenza vaccines in asthmatic subjects.”

The CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) continue to recommend annual influenza vaccination for all children aged six months to 18 years. Moreover, the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program (3rd revision) pushes annual flu vaccination of asthmatic children older than six months. However, as reported last fall in Natural News (http://www.naturalnews.com/024624.html) there’s little evidence flu shots work for youngsters. . A large study reported in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews of 260,000 children between 23 month and six discovered that the flu vaccine is no more effective that a placebo.

for more information :< /B>
http://www.thoracic.org/sections/pu…
http://www.naturalnews.com/026271.html

From Natural News

Tuesday, July 14, 2009 by: Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor

(NaturalNews) Two shocking bits of news about the H1N1 swine flu virus emerged this week. The first is that the widely-circulating swine flu virus may be a lot more dangerous than people have so far been told: It appears to resemble the 1918 pandemic virus in the fact that it is capable of embedding itself deep in lung tissue and causing deadly infections. This is very different from the more common “seasonal flu” which does not replicate in the lungs.

Explaining this concept, lead researcher Yoshihiro Kawaoka of the University of Wisconsin wrote in the journalNature: “When we conducted the experiments in ferrets and monkeys, the seasonal virus did not replicate in the lungs… The H1N1 virus replicates significantly better in the lungs.”

As Reuters reports, Kawaoka also added, “There is a misunderstanding about this virus… There is clear evidence the virus is different than seasonal influenza.”

The 1918 influenza pandemic killed at least 40 million people globally (and probably many more). Also remember: That was a time when obesity was extremely rare. Today, obesity is alarmingly common among first-world nations, and obesity is now suspected of making a person highly susceptible to swine flu fatalities (http://www.naturalnews.com/026602_p…).

World Health Organization gets aggressive with vaccination recommendations

Meanwhile, the World Health Organization — always a trusty friend of Big Pharma — has announced that swine flu is “unstoppable” and is now directing all the nations of the world to vaccinate their citizens against the H1N1 influenza strain. This is essentially an order for global mandatoryvaccinations.

And yet, at the same time the WHO is recommending mass global vaccinations against the swine flu, it also states on its own website that such vaccines have never been proven safe. In its own words (http://www.who.int/csr/disease/swin…):

[Emphasis added] “Since new technologies are involved in the production of some pandemic vaccines, which have not yet been extensively evaluated for their safety in certain population groups, it is very important to implement post-marketing surveillance of the highest possible quality. In addition, rapid sharing of the results of immunogenicity and post-marketing safety and effectiveness studies among the international community will be essential for allowing countries to make necessary adjustments to their vaccination policies.”

In other words: Use the people as guinea pigs and see who dies first!

It’s not difficult to decode the WHO’s language in this case. The vaccines aren’t safe, so they’re recommending that people given the vaccines be watched closely to see what happens (who dies).

And just to make sure more people die, the WHO is also recommending such vaccines use “live attenuated influenza.”

As stated on the WHO’s website:

“In view of the anticipated limited vaccine availability at global level and the potential need to protect against “drifted” strains of virus, SAGE recommended that promoting production and use of vaccines such as those that are formulated with oil-in-water adjuvants and live attenuated influenza vaccines was important.”

Inject yourself with live attenuated influenza!

What, exactly, is “live attenuated influenza?” It means live viruses that have been weakened, but may still pose a danger to human health.

Big Pharma, of course, is more than happy to comply with this order… they’re getting paid billions to make the live influenza vaccines, after all. Notably, Baxter Pharmaceuticals has already been caught inserting live avian flu viruses in vaccine materials, and other drug companies are only too happy to follow suit. (http://www.naturalnews.com/025760.html)

But why, you ask, would governments want to inject their populations with live attenuated influenza DNA? And why would the World Health Organization aggressively promote such a measure, especially since the number of swine flu fatalities so far is exceedingly small?

There are numerous theories on that. I don’t claim to know the right answer, but here are some of the theories being talked about by people in the know (people who aren’t fooled by Big Government / Big Pharma propaganda):

The population control theory: The swine flu was engineered in a lab, then released in Mexico City precisely to cause a public reaction where people and lawmakers would demand global vaccinations. Those vaccines, in turn, would be intentionally laced with live virus samples designed to kill a large number of people and reduce the global population. All the deaths, of course, could be blamed on the virus; and the drug companies would get rich in the process!

The Big Pharma profit theory: Swine flu vaccines are being pushed globally in order to funnel more profits into the hands of the drug companies. And the more people get sick from the “live attenuated viruses” in the vaccines, the more repeat business the drug companies make from sick patients!

The chemtrail / vaccine binary poison theory: Chemtrails have exposed the populations in major world cities to the first half of a binary poison. The mandatory swine flu vaccines will complete the binary recipe, poisoning people with another seemingly innocent cocktail of chemicals that just happen to combine with the chemtrail poisons and result in widespread death.

The do-gooder theory: [This is a favorite theory of doctors, drug company reps and public health authorities.] All those conspiracy theories are bunk. These vaccines are being forced onto you for your own good by an industry that cares about people and only has your best interests in mind. Profits and power have nothing to do with it. Your government is trying to protect you, didn’t you know?

Walking virus incubators

Ninety-nine percent of the U.S. population believes the do-gooder theory, and they will gladly allow themselves to be injected with anything the government recommends (especially if people start dropping dead this fall and the population can be scared into lining up for swine flu shots). The upshot of all this is that ninety-nine percent of the people will then be carrying live “attenuated” swine flu genetic materials in their blood, creating the perfect opportunity for further recombining with seasonal flu.

Global mandatory swine flu vaccinations will, in fact, create a population of infected swine flu carriers. Some of them will die in the 48 hours following the injections. Most will manage to survive the shots and go on to become carriers of swine flu genetic material. With their immune systems weakened by vaccine chemicals and processed, nutrient-depleted junk foods, they will serve as walking incubation vessels for the next sweeping strain of influenza.

And no matter what happens, Big Pharma makes money! The more people die, the more power the government is able to grab through vaccine mandates, forced quarantines, declarations of Martial Law and other similar measures. A pandemic is the perfect opportunity to destroy whatever remaining freedoms the American people still cling to.

My advice? Be prepared to protect yourself from the coming wave of gunpoint medicine (forced vaccinations). Both your health and your freedoms may soon be at stake. Keep reading NaturalNews for more information on how to protect yourself from not only swine flu (which is easy), but also your own government’s ill-conceived swine flu vaccination mandates (more difficult).

As this situation unfolds through the fall of 2009, we’ll post more information about what you can do to protect your health freedoms from the global pharmaceutical machine that wants to inject you with “live attenuated influenza.”

Sources for this story include:

World Health Organization:
http://www.who.int/csr/disease/swin…

Reuters: “New Flu Unstoppable” http://www.reuters.com/article/topN…

Reutes: “New Flu Resembles 1918 Virus”
http://www.reuters.com/article/heal…

Thursday, July 02, 2009 by: Sherry Baker, Health Sciences Editor

From Natural News

(NaturalNews) Chemotherapy drugs used in standard cancer treatments are associated with a huge list of side effects, from hair loss and nausea to nerve pain, sexual problems and mouth sores. Now a new study from the Research on Adverse Drug Events and Reports (RADAR) pharmacovigilance program at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine has identified another side effect caused by a commonly used chemotherapy drug — death.

A startling number of women have died from a severe allergic reaction after being injected with Cremophor-based paclitaxel, a solvent-administered taxane chemotherapy. What makes this extra tragic is that the researchers found some of the dead women had already been treated for early stage breast cancer and could well have been cured — if the chemo prescribed to prevent a theoretical recurrence ofcancer in the future had not killed them.

The report, presented at the 45th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology held recently in Orlando, Florida, found there were 287 unique cases of hypersensitivity reactions submitted to the FDA’s Adverse Event Report System between 1997 and 2007 in patients who received the solvent-laced chemo drug. Of these, an alarming 38 percent, 109, died. Because adverse event reports usually only document from one to 10 percent of the actual incidence of serious side effects, the number of hypersensitivity reactions as well as deaths is probably much greater.

The severe allergic reactions are believed to be caused by the chemical solvent used to dissolve some chemo drugsbefore they can be injected into the blood stream. Two of the women who died from an allergic reaction had early-stage breast cancer, which had already been surgically removed. They were being subjected to the Cremophor-containing paclitaxel to supposedly keep the cancer from returning.

Although both of these patients were given additional drugs before the chemotherapy to reduce the risk of hypersensitivity reactions, they still died. In fact, RADAR researchers found that 22 percent of all the deaths from the chemo drug occurred in patients who had been pre-treated with medications to prevent hypersensitivity reactions. Another 15 percent of these chemo patients experienced life-threatening respiratory arrest.

“The deaths of women with early-stage breast cancer are particularly disturbing because without the adverse reaction, they could have likely had 40 years of life ahead of them,” study leader Charles Bennett, M.D., RADAR program coordinator and a professor of hematology/oncology at Northwestern’s Feinberg School, stated in a media release.

“Patients receiving Cremophor-based paclitaxel should be given medications to prevent hypersensitivity reactions, but what is sobering, as the study has shown and as the black-box warning indicates, women suffer anaphylaxis despite receiving steroid premedication,” he added. “Physicians may also want to consider exploring other alternative chemotherapy options that do not include Cremophor.”

Cremophor-containing paclitaxel has been associated with a wide range of hypersensitivity reactions, ranging from mild skin irritations to cardiac collapse. “The results of our review suggest that physicians should be vigilant in monitoring the safety of their patients undergoing chemotherapy treatment,” said Dr. Bennett, who also is the A.C. Buehler Professor in Economics and Aging at the Feinberg School and a member of the Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University.

For more information:
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/…
http://www.oncolink.com/treatment/a…

Sources:

From Dr. Mercola

Sources: