There is no reason for anyone to get flu shot unless they have severely compromised immune system. But the elephant in the room is the CDC 'recommendation' for COVID vaccine getting into children vaccination requirements.
Agreed - everyone mUst resist and fight for the children!! But also, IMHO from living with a chronic autoimmune disease (MS) for the last 21 years, all of my research, one medical professional's honest recommendation, and now espEcially... the emergence of the horrific truths surrounding the pharmaceutical industry and their so-called "life-saving drugs", and our medical system...NOone should get ANY shot, so-called vaccine, EVER. Full stop. More harm than good is what's being invited into your system in the end. ThAT's the pharmaceutical design. Allow your God-given immune system to fight as it was intended.
Early on in my diagnosis, I was lucky to have one honest medical professional advise me to stay AWAY from vaccines. Compromised immune systems will espEcially fall prey to the "pharmaceutical design".❣️
Also...there are enough compliant and relatively uninformed parents who will get a flu shot for their kids and not realize the covid vax is now part of it. After all, the goobermint told them to get it.
By part of it, do you mean both in the same shot? Like 2 in 1? I don't think they have combined them in the same shot...yet. I think it is still a la carte here in the USA at least.
There is no reason for anyone WITH a severely compromised immune system to get a 'flu shot either. Vaccines supposedly work by stimulating your immune system. Consequently if your immune system is weak, the vaccine will have little or no effect.
Well, the problem is when you try to enroll your child in a school and the form says she must have these vaccines .... schools say they must follow the CDC 'recommendations' and the child can not attend school if she's missing a vaccine. I personally will home school if I am faced with a choice but many will not have the luxury. So I guess you are not crazy, just not informed :-)
Well, which highlights another major problem in our society. I know plenty of single parents that find ways to do it. It's not as difficult as it seems.
But that does not mitigate the question. I guess that parent has to make some sacrifices. I realize that we call "sacrificing for our kids" typically entails both parents having lucrative careers, of which I can give you a never-ending set of examples, including my immediate extended family members. But either way it's a sacrifice, either for the parent, or of the child. Think about it that way.
There are resources, starting with the Homeschool Legal Defense Association to help.
There are also co-ops to assist with the other stuff. Either way, excuses do not solve the problem, when people send their kids to public schools, you see the results, a destroyed society.
"State public health systems use the schedule to determine which vaccines to require for children to enter schools. Yes, some states have more stringent requirements than others. Some states allow for ‘opt-outs,’ but in the end, most states follow the CDC guidelines. The ACIP functionally establishes ‘standard of care’ in this area.”
Not this time. Even our uber Lefty Governor here in Michigan has confirmed no mandated jab for kids will be enforced, and though I didn't actually count, at least a dozen (R) governors across the country joined in and said not in my state.
Flu shot is the biggest scam there is besides these new covid shots and of course the HPV. No one needs a flu shot, and certainly not immune compromised since they are more likely to be injured by one and they are likely immune compromised BECAUSE of shots. Each consecutive flu shot has diminishing returns as well. metadata studies show us this. No one needs a flu shot, they need good food, immune support with elderberry, vitamins like A and D, C, E, and B's, and now we know drugs like HCQ and ivermectin work against the flu.
The best vax is your own immune system. Pharma vax only gives you a head start. People with deficient immune function don't benefit from infection or vax. Learn to protect your immune health and you'll be fine. We do many things to degrade ourselves.
There's a lot of good reasons to not get it: it only has some benefit if it's made for whatever flu will be circulating but that's a (educated?) guess. It can also make your symptoms worse, sorry I don't have the reference but I'm sure we all know of people who claim this and there is evidence to explain it as being so.
It's not that simple. Immunity is highly variable. Some pathogens are more dangerous than others, and some people are more resistant than others. Plagues never kill everyone. We want to be like the survivors. But that doesn't help the fatalities.
Some people have just enough immune strength to be right on the edge of survival or defeat. A vax can give them the edge they need. Some people have strong immunity and most pathogens don't affect them badly. They don't need that vax. Some pathogens replicate faster than even strong immune systems can keep up with. That vax might give them benefits.
The problem this time was the medical industrial complex became so thoroughly corrupted it was difficult to get honest advice of our real needs. Doctors don't profit from our health, but run very profitable businesses catering to our sickness. Those who want to improve their survival need to learn to protect their own health. You are more interested in your health than anyone else.
I wouldn't get any current vaccines. However, I leave open that if there were a virus for example that was very contagious and killed 50% of the people, I may opt for it. But if the vaccine also killed 50% of the people, then it's hard to say.
I recall reading about why in USA in the 80s the agreement was signed with Pharma to eliminate liability for all childhood vaccines. The theory was Pharma wouldn't make any if they didn't have liability (That's telling enough!) But nonetheless there is a possibility that we may actually need one in the future and the powers that be wanted to make sure pharma companies were around and ready to do so if we needed for an emergency. Whether the intentions were actually good or not for public health, it sure has backfired. Pharma has run away with the store and everything else. They are despicable without a moral cell in their bodies.
The liability waiver was a terrible idea that removed market forces from the equation, and eventually erased whatever concern for human health existed at that time among big drug companies.
Do you want to survive in a world where half of everyone you know, including your children, are dead, and whatever controls they institute will be immeasurably worse than what we've seen over the past three years? Think the worst of every place on earth, combined.
Most vaccines don't work very well, and vaccines developed over two days (a Pfizer boast) should not even be given to cockroaches, much less test animals, much less humans. Robert Kennedy argues that in no instance do the benefits outweigh the risks.
BTW the weeks from concept to patient is now the norm moving forward, as the "stakeholders" have decided that mRNA is safe and effective. Period. End of story. Next up, small molecule drugs and untested surgeries. We are channeling Dr. Mengele as best we can.
Whenever the weekly "CDC Community Level" goes up to "medium" or "high," Dept of Defense employees have to provide a Wuhan test that week. It's not over yet, sadly.
Most people have no idea what's in most things. That's okay. Communities develop knowledge in people who do understand, and advise the rest of us. The problems arise when we find reasons to distrust those experts, as we have with the medical industrial complex the last two years. We need to reestablish that trust, or learn to advise ourselves.
Interesting. And just a quick note regarding the vaccine developments too depressing to discuss. I hear you and understand, Eugyppius. But please know that as a parent your voice has been so helpful in beating back social pressure and assisting in my ability to articulate the valid concerns about the “vaccines.” I know for a fact that my influence and example in my social circle has given other parents the courage to avoid vaccinating their children. And for those that did so anyway, almost no one I know is keen on the boosters. So while your work may not yet impact the corrupt vaccine decision makers, it is an important component of opening minds and may be literally saving lives.
Finally, please see Jordan Schachtel’s piece regarding why the “vaccines” have been added to the US child immunization schedules. It is all about granting permanent legal immunity to Pfizer and Moderna, and all injuries will now be under the purview of the federal government.
You're right, it's all about the liability. That's a huge incentive for the pharmaceutical companies and plausibly why, despite the FDA approving Comirnaty last year, it was not commercially available in the US (until very recently I think). They were waiting for it to get on the childhood schedule and thus providing immunity from liability at all ages. I really really wish they would repeal that law or rule or whatever it is.
The False God of Central Planning: The Mysterious Reappearance of the Flu, Natural vs Vaccine-Induced Immunity, the Inability of the Vaccines to Control the Virus, and Other Extraordinary Lessons About the End of the Pandemic
This I think is what Ivor Cummins talked about as well in regards to the flu.
But if you talk to those who are one with the narrative, they think it is all based on the behavior-based measures they adhered to during the pandemic. They believe lockdowns, masks, distancing, etc. were what stifled the flu which is ridiculous in my opinion.
Flu is different from covid yet they have the same symptoms also shared with numerous other afflictions. Still these medical geniuses are telling us to go out and get a flu shot...like clockwork. So what gives? Why do I need a flu shot if there is NO FLU ANYMORE? Not buying any of this for a second. I haven't had and never will have any mRNA gene altering injections and have had no flu shots in 50 years. Do I get the flu every year? NO. Maybe I get something fluish every 10-15 years. This virology and flu crap is all nonsense anyway. You get sick because your body needs to purge toxins from itself or you have deficiencies of vitamins/minerals or you have stressed yourself into a stupor.
Whoa, this jumps out at me: "Lockdowns probably helped SARS-2 to gain prominence, by wiping out some of its less contagious competitors, including spring rhinoviruses."
So lockdowns DO work for certain kinds of respiratory viruses, just not SARS-Cov-19?
seems like they're useless against rhinovirus, don't do much about SARS-2, but have some effect on RSV, adenoviruses, etc. it's hard to know exactly what aspect of measures were successful here. my own theory is that RSV (one of the worst affected by containment measures) actually depends heavily on hospitals for transmission, and was maybe hurt very badly by isolation procedures.
I could see school closure impacting RSV, but all you do is “rob Peter to pay Paul” - that is, if annually “x” kids get RSV, and we close school a year, then next year 2x get RSV and you truly strain the healthcare system which was setup to manage x not 2x. Maybe.
"Officials at the 187-bed children’s hospital are now considering setting up a field hospital outside of the hospital’s main facilities in the event the surge of cases gets worse, he said."
FWIW, my sister is a pediatrician at a hospital in Kentucky and says that pre-covid era, they would sent up tents every RSV season to handle the intake.
So I'm not sure I buy this newfound panic over RSV.
For the sake of discussion, I can be agnostic as to whether lockdowns can affect some of these viruses. But I shudder to think of the implications. If that is true, then lockdowns MAY be justified under some circumstances. If they are justified under some circumstances, well, we all know what happens. Bureaucrats will always use them.
nah, lockdowns are a bad idea regardless. to the extent they work, your immune resistance is declining the whole time. put another way, the virus is getting more infectious, gaining more potential energy, the longer you spend in lockdown. eventually, you'll be so immunologically naive that the measures don't work and everyone gets (more) sick (than they would've) anyway, and worse, they all get sick at once.
Yes, but this is applying logic and reason to the case. I have not seen any logical argument from the German bureaucracy in the last 2 years, so why do you think they will suddenly act reasonable in the future?
Unless at least some of the most prominent lockdowners are seriously held accountable (meaning: jailed) for the harm they have done, I fear this measure is now one of the accepted "tools" government can use for the common good.
Even more so if a claim can be made that lockdowns did indeed work against some viruses - because how should they know before if it could not maybe work against a new variant? Better try it every "tool" than be accused of not doing enough.
Brian Mowry recently wrote about a related topic, the hygiene hypothesis and recent denialism of same. You can scroll down to the section titled The Toll of Viral Safetyism and read from there.
Some fascinating discussion about how we may be shooting ourselves in the foot by artificially suppressing common diseases.
Well-said, Eugyppius. Lockdowns do more harm than good regardless, and are never justified. Short term gain for long term pain, means that in the long run they end up being all pain and no gain on balance.
In epidemiology it is long known to isolate the ill people as an effective measure to limit transmission - depending also on the mode of transmission). Lockdowns try to isolate everybody from everybody and this cannot be helpful as this will automatically do more harm than good (at least as long as less than 50% of a population are ill simultaneously).
The finding of a natural maximum threshold of the fraction of infected is a very interesting an new find. Congratulations! Need to think about it more...
And even then, the best it did was delay them a bit, and then came back with a vengeance, so when the kids who hadn't been exposed for a while finally did get RSV, it was worse than usual. That happened last year in several countries, including NZ and the southern USA. And it is happening again now in the USA as well.
Airborne viruses don't care about normal isolation. Moving to the arctic might help, but staying in your closet, you're still breathing the same air, and same airborne pathogens, as everybody else.
Some viruses are primarily transmitted in mucous droplets expelled from infected people by coughing or sneezing. They spread based on their velocity, but are limited by gravity to a few feet. Staying in your closet will protect you from those,
Please show me the proof that airborne viruses exist. Thank you. Please prove how they are transmitted. Thanks again. Where are the studies that prove any of this beyond big pharma lies?
Gorgo is correct. You, David, cannot prove the mechanism of contagion, nor demonstrate -- using actual Science and logic -- that viruses exist. You sound lazy, not informed.
"Some viruses are primarily transmitted in mucous droplets expelled from infected people by coughing or sneezing."
I'd like to read the study that supports this conclusion. It seems a bit too convenient a solution to the problem of a mask's filtering capacity being inadequate to block a particle as small as a virus.
Viruses are much smaller than the fabric of even the best masks. But you put a million of them on a droplet of mucous and most masks will snag it. Then you get it on your hands and wipe your nose and you get them anyway, so it takes more than just a good mask. Thousands of reports and texts describe this. Any search engine will point you to them.
your original comment seemed to be about transmission and the "primary" method of infection, now I don't understand your point at all. Virus particles are measured in nanometers, stay in the air for hours, snot dries out... I only asked for a link to the study you used as a source for your point.
1) How far back does this type of surveillance for flu go? If we had 100 years of data and never saw this before, that would be notable. If we only have been doing this 10-20 years it may be that we are observing something that is a semi regular event
2) Week or so back when I picked your brain on Germanys surveillance and asked how many tests on sick people don’t come back with a result, IIRC you said 40%? So we have ability to match to 60% of potential viruses out there is how I understand it.
My question for the missing 40% (or whatever number it winds up being), are these simply viruses we haven’t IDed yet and therefore don’t have a PCR test set to match? Or, are these just people with bacterial, fungal, other non viral infections? (I assume mix of both)
as for 1), the online data goes back about a decade, but the flu surveillance programs are older than that, and you could go to the library and dig up older data if you wanted, I imagine. there are also specific studies on the seasonality, transmissibility, etc. of different respiratory viruses, conducted by various researchers, going back quite a long time. altogether, the data on the seasonality of different viruses feels pretty robust.
on 2), yes, in the German statistics it varies, but a spot check shows about 40% don't come back positive for anything. while we've identified the most common viruses, I'd guess there are a bunch of rarer ones that have escaped notice and cause a nontrivial number of infections. some of the studies suggest this too. there are also as you say bacteria and fungal infections. moreover, a substantial number of people have likely cleared the virus that caused their symptoms by the time they're swabbed, or the swab is bad.
Oct 22, 2022·edited Oct 22, 2022Liked by eugyppius
This is an excellent aanlysis of the data which I find conclusively persuasive, thank you.
It isn't clear in the article, and perhaps many don't understand, but Influenza A&B are NOT coronas. That doesn't change anything in the analysis, it's just something of which people need to know and keep in mind.
I suspect the next analagous analysis we might need is for the raised incidence of cancer cases and excess deaths which are, UNpersuasively, being attributed also to lockdowns!
I don't disagree with you. I just, seemingly, disagree with you regarding the explanation for the disappearance of Influenza. If you would care to elucidate why, we could discuss it. As it is, you provide no reasoning or data to refute the hypothesis - and we are trying hard to stay with the scientific method!
The same reason why viral pneumonia disappeared, and TB.
Why do you think? I thought it was obvious to everyone by now, particularly those reading here.
I think the issue is that people have absolulely no idea the depths and breadth of the evil that continues to surround us, as it's inconceivable to them.
And BTW, if you think that ANY of what has happened, according to the narrative, has any basis in science, other than the death aspects of the injections, then you're very far off the path of truth on this. Just sayin'.
I grieves me at how many "awake" people that I know seem to think that we're simply in the midst of yet another economic cycle. I'm stunned and perplexed.
Again, this is because people truly have no idea who's really calling the shots in this world.
Once again, the same people behind the last couple of years were the ones behind 9-11, but Americans are too smart to see that, the visible, so I'm deluding myself that they'll see the invisible. THAT'S why we're screwed. And the owner of 7 even told us plainly, on video record, that he/they "made the decision to bring it down." But again, we Americans are too smart to be fooled by the perps telling us directly, themselves, on video record, just as they did re: this "pandemic."
Yuri Bezemnov was 100% correct, once demoralized, you can literally show people the reality, the truth, and they'll refuse to believe it.
I believe the flu was most impacted by the lack of travel. Traditionally the United States and many other countries build a FLU vaccine based on the top FLU in circulation in Asia, 6 to 8 months before the annual FLU season. We never tried shutting down human mobility like this before. It really needs to be looked at closer.
seasonal flu has recurred regularly since at least 1918. travel in the early 20th century, well through the 1950s, was comparatively very low, but this never bothered the flu before.
I like your data and hypothesis. Much better than any data I can find in Australia because here they don’t show the number of tests, they only report the positives for sentinel testing. I think Yukon has a point. Here in Australia one state Western Australia basically had no-COVID, no flu and no lockdown. They were effectively isolated from Australia and the rest of the world with both international and interstate travel bans but otherwise free to do as they pleased. Once they all got jabbed opened up again. Immediate Omicron and then winter flu. This would be a great case study if anyone has access to good data from the state. New Zealand would also be good case study.
Just read your reply to Lincoln Microphone. I’ll have a look at he deaths from Influenza in <4 y.o. might be a clue there. Thanks for an excellent article 👍
I agree that the lack of travel is a factor. I would imagine that the flu has evolved to take advantage of the seasonal changes in the different hemispheres to continuously propagate and evolve annually. The travel ban allowed the more transmissible coronavirus to outcompete it for a couple of years. If we continued to stop travel, I’m sure a more persistent flu strain would evolve that would be less dependent on seasonal variations.
I don't know how competition could be a factor, aside from either competitor killing the patient before they can spread. We can, and often do, have multiple infections simultaneously.
I don't know exactly either, except that attacking and outcompeting would have different mechanisms of action. I would be interested to hear about those mechanisms. Competing for cellular resources, perhaps.
Competition between microbial species is a big thing in the microbiome, for example.
Interesting, there may be concurrence, but do you know this study on coinfection?
From all the people I know who got tested during pandemic, all but one were tested ONLY for Covid. One can only find what is loiked for. The only one who tested also for influenza was positive for both, Covid and influenza.
Get the comparative number of tests done would also be interesting.
Mullis' position on his own test is that it's useless for this purpose. Is that what you stated? If so, I apologize. I didn't get that tho.
No other test is helpful for identifying something called "Covid" either.
You discussed "people testing positive for Covid," how can that be if the test, and all others, is useless for that purpose?
Let's start there.
Otherwise, I don't think it was hostile in the least. It was succinct, I'm sorry that you can't take any criticism as such, I've really enjoyed your articles, but validating a bogus set of circumstances, which underlies the entire "lie," does not propel anyone towards liberty much less truth.
Happy to engage, but if you're going to get all emotional, forget it. I did not think that you were so thin-skinned if you're so put off by the critical nature of what I wrote.
People need to quit validating that "Covid" can even be distinguished from the common cold much if we're to make progress in this war.
I'm open to hearing an answer to the question that I posed above, and to what you implied if not outright stated in your piece.
Oct 21, 2022·edited Oct 21, 2022Liked by eugyppius
I'm not too happy about influenza and the hCov's disappearance. You're generally speaking much better off with the devil you know, than the devil you don't know. With influenza we seem to have seen strains forced into extinction, heaven knows how much genetic diversity the hCov's have lost during these social distancing experiments.
The different respiratory viruses interfere with each other, but I think they're all to some degree "domesticated": They can survive in our population because they don't provoke an overly aggressive immune response. They don't provoke an aggressive immune response, because they lost epitopes associated with virulence. At least I would expect this to be true for the hCov's.
Now comes SARS-COV-2, it invades the human ecosystem but finds that it is already home to viruses adjusted to the niche. With some help from our social distancing experiments its competitors are decimated, SARS-COV-2 takes their place and now emerges a state-shift: Just as a jellyfish dominated ocean generates the kind of conditions that make it difficult for bony fish to reestablish themselves, other respiratory viruses may struggle to recover from the human social distancing experiment and the subsequent rise to dominance of SARS-COV-2.
I think Omicron's loss of virulence is not yet a product of immune buildup against virulence associated epitopes in our population. Rather it's a side-effect of its adjustment to mice, the species in which it developed its new version of Spike that proved to have higher ACE2 affinity and escape the human immune response against pre-Omicron versions. Overly high mortality rates don't benefit a virus like this, so to survive in mice which have less built up immunity due to their shorter lifespan, it had to bring down its virulence.
And so as Omicron adjusts to humans again, you see virulence go up again with successive iterations. The big question I don't have an answer to is whether SARS-COV-2 has traits that lead to intrinsic virulence, that can't be lost without producing a big transmission disadvantage, or whether it can eventually become a relatively benign virus like the hCov's.
Fauci explained this phenomenon in 2010 when swine made all other respiratory viruses disappear. People should not be incredulous.
We've all seen those Jurassic park movies where the (movie-depicted) invincible dinosaurs take over as the predators in an ecosystem. Viruses move, live, and die much faster than this. It's really not surprising.
I'm still never getting a flu shot.
me neither.
There is no reason for anyone to get flu shot unless they have severely compromised immune system. But the elephant in the room is the CDC 'recommendation' for COVID vaccine getting into children vaccination requirements.
We MUST resist!
@eugyppius - PLEASE HELP
No reason unless one expect to be dead within a year. Flu shots only seem helpful the first year, and detrimental in subsequent years.
Not even that. Maybe helpful for some people, not for most.
And Thimerserol isn't good for anyone.
Agreed - everyone mUst resist and fight for the children!! But also, IMHO from living with a chronic autoimmune disease (MS) for the last 21 years, all of my research, one medical professional's honest recommendation, and now espEcially... the emergence of the horrific truths surrounding the pharmaceutical industry and their so-called "life-saving drugs", and our medical system...NOone should get ANY shot, so-called vaccine, EVER. Full stop. More harm than good is what's being invited into your system in the end. ThAT's the pharmaceutical design. Allow your God-given immune system to fight as it was intended.
Early on in my diagnosis, I was lucky to have one honest medical professional advise me to stay AWAY from vaccines. Compromised immune systems will espEcially fall prey to the "pharmaceutical design".❣️
Please do try the following.
2 tablespoons of pure, cold pressed, virgin olive oil.
First thing in the morning. Before any tea or coffee.
2 tablespoons the very last thing at night.
Simple test for real genuine olive oil. When you swallow it should grab you in the throat like rough moonshine.
For that reason make sure to have a glass of juice of your choice to wash the olive oil down.
Also add Kefir to your morning routine. There are flavoured versions about.
But start off with the regular unflavoured version.
Very very good for gut health. More understanding regarding gut health is emerging daily. A small glass full every morning will help you.
Please do give both of these a try, for at least a month.
I'm sure you will notice a benefit.
It’s my belief that only those afraid to die worry about such things.
Also...there are enough compliant and relatively uninformed parents who will get a flu shot for their kids and not realize the covid vax is now part of it. After all, the goobermint told them to get it.
By part of it, do you mean both in the same shot? Like 2 in 1? I don't think they have combined them in the same shot...yet. I think it is still a la carte here in the USA at least.
Ajax, I would not trust that the Wuhan concoction *wasn't* in the regular flu shot. Call me a conspiracy theorist if you wish. :)
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2204399
The cited study used a test-negative case-control design, which makes me question the results:
The conundrum of the test-negative case-control design
https://jestre.substack.com/p/the-conundrum-of-the-test-negative
Indeed. And it doesn't look at the other side of the ledger either, the harms from the jab itself.
There is no reason for anyone WITH a severely compromised immune system to get a 'flu shot either. Vaccines supposedly work by stimulating your immune system. Consequently if your immune system is weak, the vaccine will have little or no effect.
If I were compromised, I would not take any jab. I am convinced the flu jab is likely the cause of flu for s lot of people, and other issues as well.
Well, the problem is when you try to enroll your child in a school and the form says she must have these vaccines .... schools say they must follow the CDC 'recommendations' and the child can not attend school if she's missing a vaccine. I personally will home school if I am faced with a choice but many will not have the luxury. So I guess you are not crazy, just not informed :-)
Because not everybody can afford private school, maybe?
And because kids need to be with other kids to form properly (at least psychologically)?
See response to John.
Because they are a single parent with a job?
Well, which highlights another major problem in our society. I know plenty of single parents that find ways to do it. It's not as difficult as it seems.
But that does not mitigate the question. I guess that parent has to make some sacrifices. I realize that we call "sacrificing for our kids" typically entails both parents having lucrative careers, of which I can give you a never-ending set of examples, including my immediate extended family members. But either way it's a sacrifice, either for the parent, or of the child. Think about it that way.
There are resources, starting with the Homeschool Legal Defense Association to help.
There are also co-ops to assist with the other stuff. Either way, excuses do not solve the problem, when people send their kids to public schools, you see the results, a destroyed society.
"State public health systems use the schedule to determine which vaccines to require for children to enter schools. Yes, some states have more stringent requirements than others. Some states allow for ‘opt-outs,’ but in the end, most states follow the CDC guidelines. The ACIP functionally establishes ‘standard of care’ in this area.”
Not this time. Even our uber Lefty Governor here in Michigan has confirmed no mandated jab for kids will be enforced, and though I didn't actually count, at least a dozen (R) governors across the country joined in and said not in my state.
Wow, Whitmer said that???
The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices
Flu shot is the biggest scam there is besides these new covid shots and of course the HPV. No one needs a flu shot, and certainly not immune compromised since they are more likely to be injured by one and they are likely immune compromised BECAUSE of shots. Each consecutive flu shot has diminishing returns as well. metadata studies show us this. No one needs a flu shot, they need good food, immune support with elderberry, vitamins like A and D, C, E, and B's, and now we know drugs like HCQ and ivermectin work against the flu.
When China Joe's illegal mandates decimate our military and our health care, it becomes clear your post is irrelevant antics with semantics.
Our local hospital system absolutely requires flu shots as a term of employment.
Hopefully there will be consequences for that soon!
Big staffing issues?
The best vax is your own immune system. Pharma vax only gives you a head start. People with deficient immune function don't benefit from infection or vax. Learn to protect your immune health and you'll be fine. We do many things to degrade ourselves.
There's a lot of good reasons to not get it: it only has some benefit if it's made for whatever flu will be circulating but that's a (educated?) guess. It can also make your symptoms worse, sorry I don't have the reference but I'm sure we all know of people who claim this and there is evidence to explain it as being so.
You have to either work for Pfizer or have a death wish to take any fucking vaccine.
It's not that simple. Immunity is highly variable. Some pathogens are more dangerous than others, and some people are more resistant than others. Plagues never kill everyone. We want to be like the survivors. But that doesn't help the fatalities.
Some people have just enough immune strength to be right on the edge of survival or defeat. A vax can give them the edge they need. Some people have strong immunity and most pathogens don't affect them badly. They don't need that vax. Some pathogens replicate faster than even strong immune systems can keep up with. That vax might give them benefits.
The problem this time was the medical industrial complex became so thoroughly corrupted it was difficult to get honest advice of our real needs. Doctors don't profit from our health, but run very profitable businesses catering to our sickness. Those who want to improve their survival need to learn to protect their own health. You are more interested in your health than anyone else.
I wouldn't get any current vaccines. However, I leave open that if there were a virus for example that was very contagious and killed 50% of the people, I may opt for it. But if the vaccine also killed 50% of the people, then it's hard to say.
I recall reading about why in USA in the 80s the agreement was signed with Pharma to eliminate liability for all childhood vaccines. The theory was Pharma wouldn't make any if they didn't have liability (That's telling enough!) But nonetheless there is a possibility that we may actually need one in the future and the powers that be wanted to make sure pharma companies were around and ready to do so if we needed for an emergency. Whether the intentions were actually good or not for public health, it sure has backfired. Pharma has run away with the store and everything else. They are despicable without a moral cell in their bodies.
The liability waiver was a terrible idea that removed market forces from the equation, and eventually erased whatever concern for human health existed at that time among big drug companies.
Do you want to survive in a world where half of everyone you know, including your children, are dead, and whatever controls they institute will be immeasurably worse than what we've seen over the past three years? Think the worst of every place on earth, combined.
Most vaccines don't work very well, and vaccines developed over two days (a Pfizer boast) should not even be given to cockroaches, much less test animals, much less humans. Robert Kennedy argues that in no instance do the benefits outweigh the risks.
BTW the weeks from concept to patient is now the norm moving forward, as the "stakeholders" have decided that mRNA is safe and effective. Period. End of story. Next up, small molecule drugs and untested surgeries. We are channeling Dr. Mengele as best we can.
Good points.
pfizer didn't require the "vaccine" as a condition of employment.
you could opt for weekly testing
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/04/vaccine-mandate-pfizer-will-require-covid-shot-or-testing-for-us-employees-.html
Whenever the weekly "CDC Community Level" goes up to "medium" or "high," Dept of Defense employees have to provide a Wuhan test that week. It's not over yet, sadly.
You now have no idea what will be in any injection - So you're well advised to assume the worst! Mick from Hooe (UK) Unjabbed to live longer!
Most people have no idea what's in most things. That's okay. Communities develop knowledge in people who do understand, and advise the rest of us. The problems arise when we find reasons to distrust those experts, as we have with the medical industrial complex the last two years. We need to reestablish that trust, or learn to advise ourselves.
My last one was in 2019. Now that I spent time reading about efficacy, etc., wish I hadn't ever gotten any.
Interesting. And just a quick note regarding the vaccine developments too depressing to discuss. I hear you and understand, Eugyppius. But please know that as a parent your voice has been so helpful in beating back social pressure and assisting in my ability to articulate the valid concerns about the “vaccines.” I know for a fact that my influence and example in my social circle has given other parents the courage to avoid vaccinating their children. And for those that did so anyway, almost no one I know is keen on the boosters. So while your work may not yet impact the corrupt vaccine decision makers, it is an important component of opening minds and may be literally saving lives.
Finally, please see Jordan Schachtel’s piece regarding why the “vaccines” have been added to the US child immunization schedules. It is all about granting permanent legal immunity to Pfizer and Moderna, and all injuries will now be under the purview of the federal government.
https://dossier.substack.com/p/the-cdc-will-vote-thursday-to-permanently
You're right, it's all about the liability. That's a huge incentive for the pharmaceutical companies and plausibly why, despite the FDA approving Comirnaty last year, it was not commercially available in the US (until very recently I think). They were waiting for it to get on the childhood schedule and thus providing immunity from liability at all ages. I really really wish they would repeal that law or rule or whatever it is.
The False God of Central Planning: The Mysterious Reappearance of the Flu, Natural vs Vaccine-Induced Immunity, the Inability of the Vaccines to Control the Virus, and Other Extraordinary Lessons About the End of the Pandemic
https://www.juliusruechel.com/2022/01/the-false-god-of-central-planning.html
Beat me to it! Julius Reuchel was talking about this a while ago.
This I think is what Ivor Cummins talked about as well in regards to the flu.
But if you talk to those who are one with the narrative, they think it is all based on the behavior-based measures they adhered to during the pandemic. They believe lockdowns, masks, distancing, etc. were what stifled the flu which is ridiculous in my opinion.
Flu is different from covid yet they have the same symptoms also shared with numerous other afflictions. Still these medical geniuses are telling us to go out and get a flu shot...like clockwork. So what gives? Why do I need a flu shot if there is NO FLU ANYMORE? Not buying any of this for a second. I haven't had and never will have any mRNA gene altering injections and have had no flu shots in 50 years. Do I get the flu every year? NO. Maybe I get something fluish every 10-15 years. This virology and flu crap is all nonsense anyway. You get sick because your body needs to purge toxins from itself or you have deficiencies of vitamins/minerals or you have stressed yourself into a stupor.
Whoa, this jumps out at me: "Lockdowns probably helped SARS-2 to gain prominence, by wiping out some of its less contagious competitors, including spring rhinoviruses."
So lockdowns DO work for certain kinds of respiratory viruses, just not SARS-Cov-19?
seems like they're useless against rhinovirus, don't do much about SARS-2, but have some effect on RSV, adenoviruses, etc. it's hard to know exactly what aspect of measures were successful here. my own theory is that RSV (one of the worst affected by containment measures) actually depends heavily on hospitals for transmission, and was maybe hurt very badly by isolation procedures.
I could see school closure impacting RSV, but all you do is “rob Peter to pay Paul” - that is, if annually “x” kids get RSV, and we close school a year, then next year 2x get RSV and you truly strain the healthcare system which was setup to manage x not 2x. Maybe.
And right on cue:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/a-surge-in-pediatric-respiratory-viruses-is-straining-hospitals/ar-AA13dQ6w
"Officials at the 187-bed children’s hospital are now considering setting up a field hospital outside of the hospital’s main facilities in the event the surge of cases gets worse, he said."
FWIW, my sister is a pediatrician at a hospital in Kentucky and says that pre-covid era, they would sent up tents every RSV season to handle the intake.
So I'm not sure I buy this newfound panic over RSV.
For the sake of discussion, I can be agnostic as to whether lockdowns can affect some of these viruses. But I shudder to think of the implications. If that is true, then lockdowns MAY be justified under some circumstances. If they are justified under some circumstances, well, we all know what happens. Bureaucrats will always use them.
nah, lockdowns are a bad idea regardless. to the extent they work, your immune resistance is declining the whole time. put another way, the virus is getting more infectious, gaining more potential energy, the longer you spend in lockdown. eventually, you'll be so immunologically naive that the measures don't work and everyone gets (more) sick (than they would've) anyway, and worse, they all get sick at once.
Yes, but this is applying logic and reason to the case. I have not seen any logical argument from the German bureaucracy in the last 2 years, so why do you think they will suddenly act reasonable in the future?
Unless at least some of the most prominent lockdowners are seriously held accountable (meaning: jailed) for the harm they have done, I fear this measure is now one of the accepted "tools" government can use for the common good.
Even more so if a claim can be made that lockdowns did indeed work against some viruses - because how should they know before if it could not maybe work against a new variant? Better try it every "tool" than be accused of not doing enough.
Brian Mowry recently wrote about a related topic, the hygiene hypothesis and recent denialism of same. You can scroll down to the section titled The Toll of Viral Safetyism and read from there.
Some fascinating discussion about how we may be shooting ourselves in the foot by artificially suppressing common diseases.
https://unglossed.substack.com/p/immune-debt-denialism
Well-said, Eugyppius. Lockdowns do more harm than good regardless, and are never justified. Short term gain for long term pain, means that in the long run they end up being all pain and no gain on balance.
No, because lockdowns increase all kinds of deaths - including deaths that occur at home due to fear, isolation, substance abuse, etc.
In epidemiology it is long known to isolate the ill people as an effective measure to limit transmission - depending also on the mode of transmission). Lockdowns try to isolate everybody from everybody and this cannot be helpful as this will automatically do more harm than good (at least as long as less than 50% of a population are ill simultaneously).
The finding of a natural maximum threshold of the fraction of infected is a very interesting an new find. Congratulations! Need to think about it more...
And even then, the best it did was delay them a bit, and then came back with a vengeance, so when the kids who hadn't been exposed for a while finally did get RSV, it was worse than usual. That happened last year in several countries, including NZ and the southern USA. And it is happening again now in the USA as well.
There were no lockdowns in 2009 and the same thing happened.
Airborne viruses don't care about normal isolation. Moving to the arctic might help, but staying in your closet, you're still breathing the same air, and same airborne pathogens, as everybody else.
Some viruses are primarily transmitted in mucous droplets expelled from infected people by coughing or sneezing. They spread based on their velocity, but are limited by gravity to a few feet. Staying in your closet will protect you from those,
Please show me the proof that airborne viruses exist. Thank you. Please prove how they are transmitted. Thanks again. Where are the studies that prove any of this beyond big pharma lies?
Substantial proof exists for anyone who wants it.
Gorgo is correct. You, David, cannot prove the mechanism of contagion, nor demonstrate -- using actual Science and logic -- that viruses exist. You sound lazy, not informed.
Yes, I'm too lazy to educate those who like being uninformed. There's a lot of that these days.
you're too lazy to substantiate your own claim.
"Some viruses are primarily transmitted in mucous droplets expelled from infected people by coughing or sneezing."
I'd like to read the study that supports this conclusion. It seems a bit too convenient a solution to the problem of a mask's filtering capacity being inadequate to block a particle as small as a virus.
Viruses are much smaller than the fabric of even the best masks. But you put a million of them on a droplet of mucous and most masks will snag it. Then you get it on your hands and wipe your nose and you get them anyway, so it takes more than just a good mask. Thousands of reports and texts describe this. Any search engine will point you to them.
your original comment seemed to be about transmission and the "primary" method of infection, now I don't understand your point at all. Virus particles are measured in nanometers, stay in the air for hours, snot dries out... I only asked for a link to the study you used as a source for your point.
The protein envelope of a virus also dries out. But until they dry out, viruses and virus-laden droplets are contagious. Abundant literature explains.
When influenza returns it will hit with a vengeance, as immune systems will not have been trained for several years.
When? There were many articles which shows flu never disappeared.
First I found quickly: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8617795/amp/More-Britons-killed-flu-pneumonia-coronavirus-seven-weeks.html
Look at the date...
Thanks for the good article.
Immediate questions:
1) How far back does this type of surveillance for flu go? If we had 100 years of data and never saw this before, that would be notable. If we only have been doing this 10-20 years it may be that we are observing something that is a semi regular event
2) Week or so back when I picked your brain on Germanys surveillance and asked how many tests on sick people don’t come back with a result, IIRC you said 40%? So we have ability to match to 60% of potential viruses out there is how I understand it.
My question for the missing 40% (or whatever number it winds up being), are these simply viruses we haven’t IDed yet and therefore don’t have a PCR test set to match? Or, are these just people with bacterial, fungal, other non viral infections? (I assume mix of both)
as for 1), the online data goes back about a decade, but the flu surveillance programs are older than that, and you could go to the library and dig up older data if you wanted, I imagine. there are also specific studies on the seasonality, transmissibility, etc. of different respiratory viruses, conducted by various researchers, going back quite a long time. altogether, the data on the seasonality of different viruses feels pretty robust.
on 2), yes, in the German statistics it varies, but a spot check shows about 40% don't come back positive for anything. while we've identified the most common viruses, I'd guess there are a bunch of rarer ones that have escaped notice and cause a nontrivial number of infections. some of the studies suggest this too. there are also as you say bacteria and fungal infections. moreover, a substantial number of people have likely cleared the virus that caused their symptoms by the time they're swabbed, or the swab is bad.
This is an excellent aanlysis of the data which I find conclusively persuasive, thank you.
It isn't clear in the article, and perhaps many don't understand, but Influenza A&B are NOT coronas. That doesn't change anything in the analysis, it's just something of which people need to know and keep in mind.
I suspect the next analagous analysis we might need is for the raised incidence of cancer cases and excess deaths which are, UNpersuasively, being attributed also to lockdowns!
I don't disagree with you. I just, seemingly, disagree with you regarding the explanation for the disappearance of Influenza. If you would care to elucidate why, we could discuss it. As it is, you provide no reasoning or data to refute the hypothesis - and we are trying hard to stay with the scientific method!
The same reason why viral pneumonia disappeared, and TB.
Why do you think? I thought it was obvious to everyone by now, particularly those reading here.
I think the issue is that people have absolulely no idea the depths and breadth of the evil that continues to surround us, as it's inconceivable to them.
And BTW, if you think that ANY of what has happened, according to the narrative, has any basis in science, other than the death aspects of the injections, then you're very far off the path of truth on this. Just sayin'.
I grieves me at how many "awake" people that I know seem to think that we're simply in the midst of yet another economic cycle. I'm stunned and perplexed.
Again, this is because people truly have no idea who's really calling the shots in this world.
Once again, the same people behind the last couple of years were the ones behind 9-11, but Americans are too smart to see that, the visible, so I'm deluding myself that they'll see the invisible. THAT'S why we're screwed. And the owner of 7 even told us plainly, on video record, that he/they "made the decision to bring it down." But again, we Americans are too smart to be fooled by the perps telling us directly, themselves, on video record, just as they did re: this "pandemic."
Yuri Bezemnov was 100% correct, once demoralized, you can literally show people the reality, the truth, and they'll refuse to believe it.
I believe the flu was most impacted by the lack of travel. Traditionally the United States and many other countries build a FLU vaccine based on the top FLU in circulation in Asia, 6 to 8 months before the annual FLU season. We never tried shutting down human mobility like this before. It really needs to be looked at closer.
seasonal flu has recurred regularly since at least 1918. travel in the early 20th century, well through the 1950s, was comparatively very low, but this never bothered the flu before.
I like your data and hypothesis. Much better than any data I can find in Australia because here they don’t show the number of tests, they only report the positives for sentinel testing. I think Yukon has a point. Here in Australia one state Western Australia basically had no-COVID, no flu and no lockdown. They were effectively isolated from Australia and the rest of the world with both international and interstate travel bans but otherwise free to do as they pleased. Once they all got jabbed opened up again. Immediate Omicron and then winter flu. This would be a great case study if anyone has access to good data from the state. New Zealand would also be good case study.
Just read your reply to Lincoln Microphone. I’ll have a look at he deaths from Influenza in <4 y.o. might be a clue there. Thanks for an excellent article 👍
I agree that the lack of travel is a factor. I would imagine that the flu has evolved to take advantage of the seasonal changes in the different hemispheres to continuously propagate and evolve annually. The travel ban allowed the more transmissible coronavirus to outcompete it for a couple of years. If we continued to stop travel, I’m sure a more persistent flu strain would evolve that would be less dependent on seasonal variations.
Pathogens don't only attack humans, but also other pathogens. It's possible sars2 attacks flu and cold viruses. Our environment is always complex.
That is a very interesting observation.
Attack, or outcompete? Academic, but interesting to me.
I don't know how competition could be a factor, aside from either competitor killing the patient before they can spread. We can, and often do, have multiple infections simultaneously.
I don't know exactly either, except that attacking and outcompeting would have different mechanisms of action. I would be interested to hear about those mechanisms. Competing for cellular resources, perhaps.
Competition between microbial species is a big thing in the microbiome, for example.
Interesting, there may be concurrence, but do you know this study on coinfection?
From all the people I know who got tested during pandemic, all but one were tested ONLY for Covid. One can only find what is loiked for. The only one who tested also for influenza was positive for both, Covid and influenza.
Get the comparative number of tests done would also be interesting.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jmv.26163
all the flu surveillance swabs all tested for all surveyed viruses. i.e., they can and sometimes do find coinfections.
Mullis‘s position on PCR tests is basically identical to my own, which is why I don’t understand hostile comments like this.
Mullis' position on his own test is that it's useless for this purpose. Is that what you stated? If so, I apologize. I didn't get that tho.
No other test is helpful for identifying something called "Covid" either.
You discussed "people testing positive for Covid," how can that be if the test, and all others, is useless for that purpose?
Let's start there.
Otherwise, I don't think it was hostile in the least. It was succinct, I'm sorry that you can't take any criticism as such, I've really enjoyed your articles, but validating a bogus set of circumstances, which underlies the entire "lie," does not propel anyone towards liberty much less truth.
Happy to engage, but if you're going to get all emotional, forget it. I did not think that you were so thin-skinned if you're so put off by the critical nature of what I wrote.
People need to quit validating that "Covid" can even be distinguished from the common cold much if we're to make progress in this war.
I'm open to hearing an answer to the question that I posed above, and to what you implied if not outright stated in your piece.
I'm disappointed that you never replied. Just sayin'.
I'm not too happy about influenza and the hCov's disappearance. You're generally speaking much better off with the devil you know, than the devil you don't know. With influenza we seem to have seen strains forced into extinction, heaven knows how much genetic diversity the hCov's have lost during these social distancing experiments.
The different respiratory viruses interfere with each other, but I think they're all to some degree "domesticated": They can survive in our population because they don't provoke an overly aggressive immune response. They don't provoke an aggressive immune response, because they lost epitopes associated with virulence. At least I would expect this to be true for the hCov's.
Now comes SARS-COV-2, it invades the human ecosystem but finds that it is already home to viruses adjusted to the niche. With some help from our social distancing experiments its competitors are decimated, SARS-COV-2 takes their place and now emerges a state-shift: Just as a jellyfish dominated ocean generates the kind of conditions that make it difficult for bony fish to reestablish themselves, other respiratory viruses may struggle to recover from the human social distancing experiment and the subsequent rise to dominance of SARS-COV-2.
I think Omicron's loss of virulence is not yet a product of immune buildup against virulence associated epitopes in our population. Rather it's a side-effect of its adjustment to mice, the species in which it developed its new version of Spike that proved to have higher ACE2 affinity and escape the human immune response against pre-Omicron versions. Overly high mortality rates don't benefit a virus like this, so to survive in mice which have less built up immunity due to their shorter lifespan, it had to bring down its virulence.
And so as Omicron adjusts to humans again, you see virulence go up again with successive iterations. The big question I don't have an answer to is whether SARS-COV-2 has traits that lead to intrinsic virulence, that can't be lost without producing a big transmission disadvantage, or whether it can eventually become a relatively benign virus like the hCov's.
I'm going to have to wait a bit to read this...the intro almost left me in tears...
Fauci explained this phenomenon in 2010 when swine made all other respiratory viruses disappear. People should not be incredulous.
We've all seen those Jurassic park movies where the (movie-depicted) invincible dinosaurs take over as the predators in an ecosystem. Viruses move, live, and die much faster than this. It's really not surprising.
Um, what? The Swine Flu was in 1976-1977. Swine Flu II?
There was also an H1N1 swine flu pandemic in 2009/10. It's easily forgotten.
Not forgotten by me. Two of my friends had to be life flighted to a big hospital. Incidentally, they had both had their flu shots.
My wife was also hospitalized, she was 22 at the time.