The influenza virus was first discovered in 1933. By the mid-1940s, scientists had produced a vaccine given with the aim of protecting military personnel against respiratory infection during World War II. In 1960, health officials began recommending influenza vaccines for all adults over sixty-five years of age. By 2010, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) was urging influenza vaccines for nearly everyone—including infants over the age of six months, children, teens, pregnant women, healthy adults and health care workers.1
Influenza (also called flu) is a contagious viral respiratory illness that infects the nose, throat and sometimes lungs. It can cause mild to severe illness, and at times can lead to death. Symptoms may include fever, cough, sore throat, runny or stuffy nose, muscle or body aches, headaches, fatigue, vomiting and diarrhea. More serious complications of influenza include dehydration, bacterial ear and sinus infections, bronchitis and pneumonia. Those at highest risk for influenza complications include persons sixty-five years or older, young children, pregnant women, and anyone with autoimmune, lung, heart, kidney or blood disorders.2
Flu viruses mainly spread when people with influenza cough, sneeze or talk. Tiny droplets of virus can land in the mouths or noses (or possibly be inhaled into the lungs) of people who are nearby. Less often, a person might get the flu by touching a surface or object that has the virus on it and then touching his or her own mouth, nose or, possibly, their eyes. People with the flu are most contagious in the first three to four days, and the illness’s average duration is about one week.3
NOTHING TO BRAG ABOUT
According to the CDC, the best way to prevent seasonal flu is to get vaccinated annually. The agency asserts that the vaccine is particularly important for people who are at high risk of serious influenza complications, including those with chronic health conditions. The CDC also claims that influenza vaccines are both “safe” and “effective,” despite numerous studies showing that flu shots can cause harm—and the government’s own data showing that the vaccines are not very effective.
Take the 2018–2019 flu vaccine, for example. Through February, CDC scientists reported the flu shot’s effectiveness rate to be about average (47 percent),4 but when a tougher strain of influenza virus emerged, it was found to be virtually worthless.5 In fact, the estimated 9 percent effectiveness for that strain dragged the overall effectiveness rate for the season down to 29 percent.5
For other infectious diseases, vaccine scientists generally do not deem a vaccine successful unless it is at least 90 percent effective. So why do they consider the flu shot to be “working well” when it fails more than 50 percent of the time and has not surpassed a 60 percent efficacy rate over the past fourteen years?6 Worse yet, with every passing year, the CDC uses more fear-based marketing to promote universal flu vaccination, unjustifiably claiming the vaccine prevents millions of illnesses and doctor’s visits. Governmental pressure to vaccinate typically begins in late summer and early fall. In addition, health care professionals and, more frequently, the mainstream media start alerting the public as to the “dire” nature of influenza and the importance of getting one’s annual flu shot. For most of us, it is impossible to avoid the advertising campaigns on television and in print. Wherever we go—physicians’ offices, hospitals, pharmacies, schools, grocery and big-box stores, shopping malls and even airports—we are marketed to and often coerced.
The CDC’s website traditionally has stated that about thirty-six thousand Americans die from the flu each year. This figure is commonly accepted and widely reported by the media and the scientific community. For the 2018-2019 U.S. flu season (October 1, 2018 through May 4, 2019), the CDC reported between 37.4 million and 42.9 million flu illnesses; from 17.1 million to 20.1 million medical visits; between 531,000 and 647,000 hospitalizations; and between 36,400 and 61,200 deaths.7
A physician who submitted a “request for correction” to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has written that the data on influenza deaths are “false and misleading.” The writer notes that although the CDC acknowledges a difference between “flu” deaths and “flu-associated” deaths, it uses the terms interchangeably and avoids telling us that the much-publicized figure of thirty-six thousand is not actually an estimate of yearly flu deaths “but an estimate—generated by a [mathematical] model—of flu-associated death.”8 Fraudulently, the CDC is bundling flu and pneumonia deaths together, thus grossly inflating the numbers. The physician also points to “significant statistical incompatibilities between official estimates and national vital statistics data.”8 According to the National Center for Health Statistics, deaths for which the cause is listed as influenza on death certificates number little more than one thousand per year.9
TYPES OF INFLUENZA VACCINES
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has licensed different flu vaccines for use in different age groups to protect against the two main types of influenza virus: types A and B. Traditional flu shots are trivalent (three-component) vaccines that are meant to protect against three viruses: two influenza A viruses (H1N1 and H3N2) and one influenza B virus. A quadrivalent (four-component) vaccine, intended to protect against an additional B virus, is also routinely available.10
Influenza vaccines available in the United States are either inactivated injectable vaccines or live attenuated nasal spray vaccines. The live nasal spray vaccine (FluMist) was withdrawn in 2017–2018 due to its 97 percent failure rate during prior flu seasons. For the 2018–2019 season, however, the CDC recommended a reformulation of FluMist for non-pregnant individuals aged two through forty-nine.10
Because influenza viruses are always changing, vaccine scientists must continually update the vaccine. Every year, public health officials try to predict which viruses are most likely to circulate in the world. This “best-guess” policy is based on early observations of flu activity in the Southern Hemisphere. After assessing which viruses are prevalent there, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the CDC select the viruses and subtypes that will be in the current year’s vaccines in the U.S.2,10
WHAT’S IN THAT VACCINE?
Influenza vaccines are sold by multiple drug companies and contain varying amounts of different ingredients, including adjuvants and preservatives that may cause adverse reactions. Depending on the manufacturer, the vaccines may include flu viruses, chicken egg proteins, genetically engineered (GE) dog kidney cells, GE caterpillar cells, antibiotics, formaldehyde, cetyltrimethylammonium bromide, polysorbate 80, gelatin, squalene oil and thimerosal (a mercury-containing preservative).
While the CDC says these ingredients are safe, Dr. Joseph Mercola warns that all of them may be poisonous, carcinogenic or potentially harmful to the skin and the gastrointestinal, pulmonary, immune and neurological systems. They can also cause allergic reactions in some individuals.10 The safety of the vaccines’ GE components is unknown.11
INFLUENZA VACCINE INJURIES
Before getting a flu shot, you should know that influenza vaccine injury and death claims are the leading types of claims submitted to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP), and the second most frequently compensated. Congress established the NVICP in 1986 to give families of vaccinated children an avenue for vaccine injury compensation, while absolving drug companies from liability for injuries and deaths. To date, the NVICP has compensated a total of six thousand three hundred and fifty-eight claims, paying victims over four billion dollars—and two-thirds of the claims involved flu vaccines.12 As of July 1, 2019, individuals had filed five thousand three hundred and eighty-four NVICP claims for injuries and deaths following influenza vaccination, including one hundred and seventy-two deaths and over fifty-two hundred serious injuries.11 These high numbers take on even more import when one considers HHS’s own admission that less than one percent of all vaccine injuries are ever reported.
Common influenza vaccine reactions include fever, sore throat, cough, nasal congestion, nausea, fatigue, joint and muscle pain, headache, soreness and redness or swelling at the injection site. More serious complications include shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA), shock, brain inflammation, asthma and wheezing, narcolepsy and paralysis, Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS) and death. Influenza vaccine risks are higher if the recipient is sick, is allergic to an ingredient in the vaccine, has a history of GBS or has had a previous vaccine reaction.11
INFLUENZA VACCINATION DURING PREGNANCY
Naturally occurring influenza illness during pregnancy has been associated with an increased risk of autism in the offspring.14 This finding is the reported basis for the CDC’s recommendation that pregnant women get flu vaccines. However, we must remember that the whole purpose of a vaccine is to provoke an inflammatory response. Thus, as one health writer points out, the argument that flu shots in pregnancy will prevent autism is flawed: it ignores the fact that, “by doing so, women are trading a hypothetical risk of inflammation due to possible influenza infection for the virtually guaranteed risk of inflammation due to vaccination” [emphasis in original].15 Moreover, brain inflammation is involved in autism’s pathogenesis.16
Many doctors instruct pregnant women to get two influenza vaccines if their pregnancy spans more than one flu season. In this scenario, the developing fetus would be exposed to a double dose of mercury-containing thimerosal in utero, followed by two more shots in infancy and then annually until death. These recommendations come despite data demonstrating that mercury exposure via maternal transfer, particularly during the first trimester of a woman’s pregnancy, can result in severe damage, including death.17 For children aged six to eight months, the CDC recommends two influenza vaccine doses four or more weeks apart.18
A recent Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. on behalf of the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) forced the FDA to admit, for the first time, the shocking fact that government agencies, including the CDC, are recommending influenza vaccines for pregnant women—during any trimester of pregnancy—even though the FDA has never licensed the vaccines for that purpose and despite zero safety testing for pregnant women in clinical trials.19 Nor has the FDA ever tested or approved thimerosal for use in pregnancy. Seasonal flu vaccine manufacturers’ Safety Data Sheets discuss thimerosal by warning: “Exposure in utero can cause mild to severe mental retardation and motor coordination impairment.”20
During the 2009–2010 influenza season, the FDA and CDC recommended that pregnant women receive two influenza vaccines—a seasonal flu shot and the A-H1N1 “swine flu” vaccine. This combination of two untested flu shots may have resulted in thousands of fetal deaths. The government’s Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) revealed a jump in fetal deaths of 4,250 percent when compared to earlier years.21
Regrettably, no one warned pregnant women about the unknown safety risks of doubling up on flu vaccinations, even though vaccine manufacturers, the FDA and the CDC knew there was a risk. Neither of the flu vaccines given in 2009–2010 was ever tested for safety or efficacy in pregnant women, and each contained twenty-five micrograms of mercury per dose, exceeding the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) safety levels by several-thousand-fold for a developing fetus during the first trimester.
Package inserts of the A-H1N1 vaccine caution: “It is not known whether these vaccines can cause fetal harm when administered to pregnant women or can affect reproduction capacity.”22 However, numerous studies show that influenza vaccines are, in fact, harming pregnant women and their fetuses. For example, the CDC’s own data demonstrated that women who received certain flu shots from 2010 to 2012 had a 7.7-fold greater odds of miscarriage than women who did not receive the vaccines.23 A 2017 Kaiser study of over forty-five thousand women, published in JAMA Pediatrics, showed an elevated risk of birth defects and a 20 percent higher risk of autism in children whose mothers received a first-trimester flu shot.24
A large study utilizing the CDC’s Vaccine Safety Datalink database found no significant differences in illness rates among vaccinated and unvaccinated pregnant women or their children.25 However, other evidence indicates that pregnant women who receive flu vaccines are four times more likely to be hospitalized for influenza-like illness than unvaccinated pregnant women.25 Children who receive trivalent inactivated influenza vaccines are three times more likely to be hospitalized for influenza-related complications than children who do not get the vaccine.26 Studies also show that children who receive influenza vaccines are more likely than non-vaccinated children to develop respiratory infections; specifically, influenza-vaccinated children have a significantly increased risk of developing acute non-influenza respiratory illnesses from rhinoviruses, coxsackieviruses and echoviruses.27
A little-disclosed fact is that influenza vaccines are responsible for spreading disease to other people through a process called shedding. According to the CDC’s website, both children and adults vaccinated with live-attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) “can shed vaccine viruses after receipt of LAIV,” although the CDC also asserts that post-vaccine shedding occurs less than it does following infection with wild-type influenza viruses.28
A study published in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, which analyzed eighteen years of data, found that people who received live-virus influenza vaccines could transmit the disease to people they came in contact with, including pregnant women and those with weak immunity.29 Even more troublesome, these researchers hypothesized that live-virus influenza vaccines could potentially cause a “super virus” if the vaccine strain were to recombine with another viral infection contracted by the vaccinated person.29
Two other groups of people for whom the government “highly recommends” influenza vaccines are the elderly and health care workers. However, studies show that influenza vaccination does not lower influenza-related death rates in the elderly, and policies that mandate influenza vaccination for health care workers on the grounds of protecting patients are not supported by science.30
Individuals over age sixty-five account for more than nine in ten influenza-related deaths. In the 1980s and 1990s, notwithstanding a fourfold increase in the percentage of seniors who received influenza vaccines, CDC epidemiologists found that national influenza-related death rates actually increased.31 Today, because seniors appear to have low immune responses to influenza vaccines, the CDC recommends that the sixty-five-plus age group receive the Fluzone High-Dose influenza vaccine, which contains four times the amount of flu virus antigen as the vaccine previously used for seniors. The FDA approved the Fluzone High-Dose vaccine in December 2009, even though the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) made no indication that it was better than the prior Fluzone formulation. Between 2013 and 2017—when High-Dose Fluzone was widely administered—the flu death rate among Americans over sixty-five years of age jumped 328.6 percent.12
Another falsehood perpetuated by the CDC about flu vaccination is that it reduces all-cause winter mortality for seniors by about 50 percent. This is an astonishing claim, given that only about 5 percent of all winter deaths are attributable to influenza.31 Some CDC researchers admit that extensive selection bias may explain the astounding overestimation of influenza vaccine effectiveness in the elderly.31
Studies cited by authorities to justify mandating influenza vaccines for health care workers are also flawed, driving biased recommendations. Critical reviews show that there is no reliable evidence that vaccinating health care workers against influenza benefits patients.32 Such unethical policies represent nothing less than an act of tyranny, forcing many health care workers to submit just to keep their jobs.
The marketing strategies designed to increase influenza vaccination uptake are equally lacking in integrity and scientific support. According to a revealing BMJ review, officials’ justification of influenza vaccine policies often relies on low-quality studies that fail to substantiate claims of safety and effectiveness.33 The author of the review notes that whereas labs test thousands of people with influenza-like illness every year, only about 16 percent of all respiratory specimens actually test positive for influenza—and influenza vaccines are not designed to protect against the other 84 percent of respiratory illnesses we may mistake for flu.33
Policy-makers say little about the association of influenza vaccines with febrile convulsions in young children and narcolepsy (a sleeping disorder) in adolescents. Australia suspended flu shots in children under age five after discovering that one in every one hundred and ten influenza-vaccinated children was experiencing febrile convulsions; H1N1 influenza vaccination in Finland and Sweden was associated with a spike in narcolepsy among adolescents (about one in fifty-five thousand vaccinated teens).33,34
A study in Lancet Infectious Diseases revealed that annual vaccination of young children against common influenza strains could be counterproductive, preventing them from acquiring more comprehensive immunity and leaving them unprotected against pandemic strains.35 In contrast, people who are naturally exposed to circulating influenza viruses (meaning unvaccinated individuals) are more likely to gain cross-protection against other strains.1
MANDATES AND PROFITS
Sadly, we are seeing an explosion in new vaccine legislation attempting to take away the right to bodily autonomy not only for ourselves, but also for our children. American children who adhere to the CDC’s recommended childhood vaccine schedule receive up to seventy-four doses of sixteen different vaccines from womb to age eighteen. Many of these vaccines—including flu shots—are mandated for school admittance. While vaccine exemptions are available in some states, other states have passed severely restrictive laws that force some parents to homeschooling their children. California, Maine, Mississippi, West Virginia and, most recently, New York deny parents the right to both philosophical and religious exemptions, leaving notoriously difficult-to-obtain medical exemptions as the only way out.
Many of the individuals administering mandated vaccines are not medical doctors, nor are they under the supervision of a medical doctor. For example, it has become increasingly common for pharmacists to administer vaccines. Incomprehensibly, a new law in Oregon makes it possible for dentists to give vaccines to patients of any age during dental check-ups, including annual flu shots as well as the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines.36 Neither pharmacists nor dentists know a patient’s medical history, nor do they examine the patient. Furthermore, pharmacists and dentists are unlikely to monitor, record or report vaccine reactions effectively.
How can we live in a free society, when we are asked to choose between educating our children and forced vaccination? Mandating flu vaccines is particularly reckless given the clear lack of studies demonstrating that the vaccine is either safe or effective. Moreover, the FDA is content to leave testing for safety and effectiveness in the hands of vaccine manufacturers, which is equivalent to letting the fox guard the hen house. And when manufacturers conduct vaccine safety trials, they are not required to use the scientific gold-standard—a placebo-controlled study design. For no other category of drug on the market are companies allowed to get away with this.
Legislators who vote to mandate vaccines receive financial incentives from pharmaceutical companies and other health care industries. (If you want to know how much money your legislators have received from those who profit from vaccines, visit opensecrets.org.) Past CDC directors are also guilty of benefiting from vaccine sales. For example, Brenda Fitzgerald resigned in January 2018 after the media reported her financial conflicts of interest, including sizable investments in both tobacco and health care. The tobacco conflict is relevant to vaccines because new technology uses tobacco leaves to produce influenza vaccines in a much shorter time than compared to conventional production methods; clinical trials have already taken place.37
Is it because vaccines are “big business” that ethics are breached all the time? Analysts expect the global vaccine market to draw total revenues of 59.2 billion U.S. dollars by 2020.38 The global influenza vaccine market is expected to grow at a compound growth rate of 6.37 percent to reach 7.5 billion dollars by 2024, up from 5.2 billion dollars in 2018.39
And it is not just pharmaceutical companies and politicians that profit from the sale of vaccines. Blue Cross/Blue Shield pays your doctor a forty-thousand-dollar bonus for fully vaccinating one hundred patients under the age of two. If your doctor manages to vaccinate two hundred patients fully, their bonus jumps to eighty thousand dollars. But there is a catch—under the insurer’s rules, pediatricians lose the whole bonus unless 63 percent of their patients are fully vaccinated, and that includes the flu vaccine.40
The U.S. government also profits from vaccines. For example, HHS has accumulated 3.8 billion dollars in vaccine tax revenues, which are currently sitting in the Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund. The money in this fund comes from a seventy-five-cent excise tax on all vaccines recommended by the CDC, and is collected to compensate vaccine injury or death claims for covered vaccines. What very few people know is that the government pockets an “administrative fee” of seventeen cents each time it collects the seventy-five-cent tax. According to the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), over 3.4 billion doses of covered vaccines were distributed in the U.S. from 2006 to 2017, which means that the U.S. government made five hundred and seventy-eight million dollars during that time period. And, with your tax dollars, the same government hires the best attorneys available to litigate against families with vaccine-injured children who try to collect from the NVICP.41 The U.S. government is also the largest purchaser of vaccines, spending in excess of five billion taxpayer dollars each year for these products.42
If you want to avoid involuntarily receiving a flu vaccine, do not sign a consent form while in the hospital that says you agree to be given “biogenics/biologics.” If you do, you are consenting to get a flu vaccine even while under anesthesia. And unless you ask for a copy of your medical records, you may never know that you received one.43
The bottom line is that the FDA and CDC exaggerate the successes of flu shots while going to great lengths to conceal their dangers. There can be no denying that influenza vaccines are injuring people, yet our government and many employers mandate the vaccines for school children, teachers, health care workers and military personnel. We can no longer wait for our government to do the right thing—we must stand up and make our voices heard. The history of influenza vaccines has not proven the shots to be safe, effective or necessary.
THIMEROSAL IN FLU VACCINES
The World Health Organization and other agencies that are supposed to protect public health maintain that small doses of the vaccine preservative thimerosal—present in multidose vials of influenza vaccines—are safe, regardless of multiple shots or repeat vaccination. However, many experts have serious concerns about the safety of thimerosal in any amount, especially when considering its additive or synergistic toxicological effects. Thimerosal is approximately 50 percent ethylmercury by weight and has been linked to “attention disorders, speech delays, language delays, Tourette syndrome, misery disorder, seizures, epilepsy, sudden infant death syndrome, narcolepsy, heart disorders, neurological disorders, asthma and allergies.”13 According to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., there are at least one hundred and sixty-five peer-reviewed scientific studies showing an association between thimerosal and neurological injuries alone.13
Due to public outcry, manufacturers reportedly removed thimerosal from childhood vaccines as a “precautionary measure” in 2001. Today, however, all multiuse vials of influenza vaccine still contain the mercury-based preservative. Moreover, ethylmercury is fifty times more toxic than the methylmercury found in fish and twice as persistent in the brain.13 The state of California recognizes thimerosal as a reproductive toxicant that has been found to cause severe mental retardation or malformations in the offspring of mothers who were exposed to the neurotoxicant while pregnant.10
BUILDING NATURAL IMMUNITY IN OUR CHILDREN
The decision not to vaccinate does not mean that parents can be careless about protecting their children from disease. It’s up to parents to provide the kind of diet that will give their child robust natural immunity—and that’s the same kind of diet that will give a child good health overall. Here’s a bucket list of items that will keep your children healthy and strong.
FOODS RICH IN VITAMIN A: Vitamin A is our number one protection against disease; the immune system cannot function without vitamin A. This vitamin protects against colds and flu, and in the case of measles, will protect against side effects such as blindness and seizures. Vitamin A requires vitamins D and K2 as co-factors; vitamin A taken alone can have toxic side effects, but vitamin A taken in the context of a diet containing vitamins D and K2 is highly beneficial, not detrimental. This is good news because the foods that provide us with vitamin A usually also contain vitamins D and K2—foods like butter from grass-fed cows, egg yolks from pastured chickens, aged natural cheese, shellfish and organ meats like liver. In addition to these foods, cod liver oil can provide vitamins A and D on a daily basis. Before the advent of vaccinations, the medical profession knew that the vitamin A in cod liver oil would protect children against all sorts of infections, including measles. Use only cod liver oil containing natural vitamins. (See westonaprice.org/cod-liver-oil/ for more information and product recommendations.)
RAW MILK: Raw milk is a complete, highly digestible food for growing children; it is also a powerful immunity builder. A key component of our immune system is antibodies, such as immunoglobins, which raw milk provides. The raw whey proteins in raw milk are also our best source of glutathione, the body’s key detoxification compound. Studies from Europe indicate that children who drink raw milk have fewer respiratory infections, and less asthma, allergies and skin rashes compared to children who do not consume raw milk. The presence of immune compounds and glutathione explains these results.
FERMENTED FOODS: Fermented foods like raw sauerkraut, homemade kefir and aged raw cheese contain beneficial protective bacteria. Eaten on a daily basis, the bacteria in these foods colonize the intestinal tract where they provide powerful protection against pathogens. Fermented foods are also a great source of vitamin C.
BONE BROTHS: Homemade bone broth contains high levels of glycine, which supports the liver’s detoxification mechanisms. Moms should include broth-making as part of their routine and use it in soups, sauces, stews and gravies.
AVOID PROCESSED FOODS: It’s a difficult thing to do in this age of industrial food production, but parents will confer the great blessing of good health on their children by keeping them away from processed food as much as possible, especially refined sweeteners like sugar, high-fructose corn syrup and agave. Early studies showed that children who eat a lot of sugar get sick more often. Sugar uses up nutrients that the body needs to support the immune system. Vegetable oils are known to depress the immune system, while natural saturated animal fats support the immune system. Cook in animal fats like butter and lard, and give your children butter instead of margarine and spreads. Make your own salad dressing using olive oil rather than purchasing ready-made dressings, which are made with the cheapest oils and loaded with additives.
In short, the recipe for protecting your children from disease and ensuring they will grow up healthy and strong in the process is an old-fashioned, home-prepared diet rich in butter, eggs, cheese and nutrient-dense animal foods like liver and red meat. Fruits and vegetables can serve as vehicles for butter and cream! The addition of raw milk, fermented foods, bone broths and, above all, cod liver oil to your child’s diet will compensate for the occasional junk food that cannot be avoided. This is the Wise Traditions diet—vastly superior than vaccinations for protecting your children from disease throughout their growing years.
1. Miller NZ. Miller’s Review of Critical Vaccine Studies: 400 Important Scientific Papers Summarized for Parents and Researchers. Santa Fe, NM: New Atlantean Press, 2016, p. 64.
2. Influenza disease & vaccine information: find the information you need to make an informed vaccine decision. https://www.nvic.org/Vaccines-and-Diseases/Influenza.aspx.
3. How flu spreads. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/disease/spread.htm.
4. Doyle JD, Chung JR, Kim SS et al. Interim estimates of 2018–19 seasonal influenza vaccine effectiveness—United States, February 2019. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2019;68(6):135-9.
5. Wappes J. Poor late-season protection limited flu vaccine impact for 2018-19. CIDRAP, Jul. 2, 2019. http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2019/07/poor-late-season-protection-limited-flu-vaccine-impact-2018-19.
6. CDC seasonal flu vaccine effectiveness studies. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/vaccines-work/effectivenessstudies.htm.
7. 2018-2019 U.S. flu season: preliminary burden estimates.
8. Stoller K. CDC—influenza deaths: request for correction (RFC). https://aspe.hhs.gov/cdc-%E2%80%94-influenza-deaths-request-correction-rfc.
9. Hammond JR. How the CDC uses fear to increase demand for flu vaccines. Children’s Health Defense, Nov. 8, 2018. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/how-the-cdc-uses-fear-to-increase-demand-for-fluvaccines/.
10. What you need to know about the flu vaccine: what it is, how it works and potential side effects to watch out for. https://articles.mercola.com/flu-shot-side-effects.aspx.
11. Influenza quick facts. https://www.nvic.org/vaccines-and-diseases/influenza/quick-facts.aspx.
12. Soaring elderly flu death: what role did the stronger new flu vaccine play? https://vaccineimpact.com/2019/soaring-elderly-flu-death-what-role-did-the-stronger-new-flu-vaccine-play/print/.
13. Kennedy, Jr. RF. Mercury is not safe in any form: debunking the myths about thimerosal “safety.”
Children’s Health Defense, Feb. 12, 2017. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/what-we-do/mercury-is-not-safe-in-any-form-debunking-the-myths-about-thimerosal-safety/.
14. Miller VM, Zhu Y, Bucher C et al. Gestational flu exposure induces changes in neurochemicals, affiliative hormones and brainstem inflammation, in addition to autism-like behaviors in mice. Brain Behav Immun. 2013;33:153-63.
15. Hammond JR. Why the flu death of a vaccinated girl is NOT reason to get a flu shot. Dec. 12, 2018. https://www.jeremyrhammond.com/2018/12/12/why-the-flu-death-of-a-vaccinated-girl-is-not-reason-to-get-a-flu-shot/.
16. Theoharides TC, Stewart JM, Panagiotidou S, Melamed I. Mast cells, brain inflammation and autism. Eur J Pharmacol. 2016;778:96-102.
17. Brown IA, Austin DW. Maternal transfer of mercury to the developing embryo/fetus: is there a safe level? Toxicol Environ Chem. 2012;94(8).
18. Flu vaccination coverage, United States, 2015–16 influenza season. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/fluvaxview/coverage-1516estimates.htm#estimated.
19. FDA admits that government is recommending untested, unlicensed vaccines for pregnant women. Children’s Health Defense, Feb. 11, 2019. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/fda-admits-that-government-is-recommending-untested-unlicensed-vaccines-for-pregnant-women/.
20. Miller, 2016, p. 71.
21. Goldman GS. Comparison of VAERS fetal-loss reports during three consecutive influenza seasons: was there a synergistic fetal toxicity associated with the two-vaccine 2009/2010 season? Hum Exp Toxicol. 2013;32(5):464-75.
22. Guidelines for vaccinating pregnant women. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pregnancy/hcp-toolkit/guidelines.html.
23. Kennedy, Jr. RF. CDC study shows up to 7.7-fold greater odds of miscarriage after influenza vaccine. Children’s Health Defense, Sept. 19, 2017. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/cdc-study-shows-7-7-fold-greater-odds-miscarriage-influenza-vaccine/.
24. Zerbo O, Qian Y, Yoshida C et al. Association between influenza infection and vaccination during pregnancy and risk of autism spectrum disorder. JAMA Pediatr. 2017;171(1):e163609.
25. Ayoub DM, Yazbak FE. Influenza vaccination during pregnancy: a critical assessment of the recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons. 2006;11(2):41-7.
26. Joshi AY, Iyer VN, Hartz MF et al. Effectiveness of trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine in influenza-related hospitalization in children: a case-control study. Allergy Asthma Proc. 2012;33(2):e23-7.
27. Cowling BJ, Fang VJ, Nishiura H et al. Increased risk of noninfluenza respiratory virus infections associated with receipt of inactivated influenza vaccine. Clin Infect Dis. 2012;54(12):1778-83.
28. Safety of live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV): shedding, transmission, and phenotypic stability of LAIV viruses. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/professionals/acip/2018-2019/background/safety-vaccines.htm#SafetyLAIV.
29. Geier DA, King PG, Geier MR. Influenza vaccine: review of effectiveness of the U.S. immunization program, and policy considerations. Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons. 2006;11(3):69-74.
30. Miller, 2016, p. 80.
31. Simonsen L, Viboud C, Taylor RJ et al. Influenza vaccination and mortality benefits: new insights, new opportunities. Vaccine. 2009;27(45):6300-4.
32. Abramson ZH. What, in fact, is the evidence that vaccinating healthcare workers against seasonal influenza protects their patients? A critical review. Int J Family Med. 2012;2012;205464.
33. Doshi P. Influenza: marketing vaccine by marketing disease. BMJ. 2013;346:f3037.
34. Hammond JR. The CDC claims the flu shot reduces mortality in the elderly. But where’s the evidence? Children’s Health Defense, Dec. 4, 2018. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/the-cdc-claims-the-flu-shot-reduces-mortality-in-the-elderly-but-wheres-theevidence/.
35. Bodewes R, Kreijtz JH, Rimmelzwaan GF. Yearly influenza vaccinations: a double-edged sword? Lancet Infect Dis. 2009;9(12):784-8.
36. Solana K. Oregon passes bill allowing dentists to administer vaccines. ADA News, Apr. 26, 2019.
37. Smokin’ new technology to produce flu vaccines. Children’s Health Defense, Feb. 7, 2018. https://worldmercuryproject.org/news/smokin-new-technology-to-produce-flu-vaccines/.
38. Global vaccine market revenue to reach $59.2 billion by 2020. https://www.rdmag.com/article/2019/05/anti-vaccine-movement-cant-stop-global-vaccine-market-growth.
39. Global $7.54 billion inf luenza vaccine market forecasts to 2024. https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2019/04/02/1795555/0/en/Global-7-54-Billion-Influenza-Vaccine-Market-Forecasts-to-2024.html.
40. Are physicians given financial incentives to vaccinate our children? https://anh-usa.org/are-physicians-given-financial-incentives-to-vaccinate-our-children/.
41. US government profits from vaccines. https://healthfreedomidaho.org/us-govt-profit-vaccines.
42. Government report: $160 million paid so far in 2019 for vaccine injuries and deaths. https://healthimpactnews.com/2019/government-report-160-million-paid-so-far-in-2019-for-vaccine-injuries-and-deaths/.
43. Nurse whistleblower: hospitals vaccinating patients by force without their knowledge. https://healthimpactnews.com/tag/biogenics/.
This article appeared in Wise Traditions in Food, Farming and the Healing Arts, the quarterly journal of the Weston A. Price Foundation, Fall 2019🖨️ Print post
Concetta Newman says
EXCELLENT ARTICLE!!! It is really criminal what the CDC, FDA, BIG PHARMA and Government do to people…..and all because the bottom line is MONEY AND PROFITS. WAKE UP people… they are NOT on your side!! We must advocate for ourselves!
In 1983, First Moscow Medical Institute conducted a clinical study, testing the effectiveness of the Buteyko’s approach in treating children with bronchial asthma. The results were unexpected. the first thing the doctors noticed was that every child who practiced Buteyko Breathing stopped experiencing any cold-like illnesses, including influenza. Another study, conducted in 1995, demonstrated that by the third day of practicing breathing normalization exercises, the patient’s immunity strengthened.
What is influenza, or flu? Simply, it is a virus that attacks people with a weakened immune system. If the immune system is amply strong to fight back the virus, then the flu is nothing to fear.
Although the virus doesn’t discriminate, it is with people who over-breathe that flu has the most success. Hyperventilation lowers immunity, and thus, weakens the body’s disease-fighting ability. This is why those who practice the Buteyko Method diligently are not affected by flu viruses. Once the morning Control Pause stabilizes at 40 seconds, viral infections cannot win battles against your body. Gaining control of your breath, more specifically – learning to breathe less, is the most powerful tool in eliminating the threat of flu.
If a person infected with flu begins to practice Buteyko breathing normalization exercises, then the illness, in most cases, will be over in two to three days. Here you can read how to do it:
People often look for flu vaccines for protection. However, flu viruses often mutate, thus rendering the vaccine useless. For example, if you were vaccinated, and then, in one month, that flu virus transformed into a slightly different virus, the vaccine you received would not protect against the new strain.
In some cases, vaccinations can, of course, save lives. However, let’s not forget that the organism treats a vaccine as, most basically, an allergen. Vaccinating people with a weak immune system, asthmatics included, is risky, sometimes resulting in more harm than good.
What do Control Pauze test numbers look like for healthy people?
Consider the following from a recent university physiology textbook:
“If a person breath-holds after a normal exhalation,
it takes about 40 seconds before breathing commences”
From the textbook Essentials of Exercise Physiology,
McArdle W.D., Katch F.I., Katch V.L. (2nd edition);
Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins, London 2000, p.252.
Hence, the normal breath-holding number (immediately after usual exhalation and after an exhale) is around 40 s. This indicates the normal oxygenation of cells and tissues.
How can we identify the extent of incorrect breathing?
By measuring “the control pause” and pulse. All known publications describe measuring of the control pause quite vaguely. Below is a clearer description:
The control pause should be preferably measured in standard conditions, after a 10 minute breath-equalizing rest.
Sit conveniently. Take a beautiful, correct posture, spread out your shoulders. The stomach will straighten up. Inhale normally, relax the stomach. Involuntary exhalation will come out by itself. As the exhalation is finished, note the position of the second hand visually and hold breath. During the time of measuring, do not follow the hand, just focus on a spot in front of you or shut your eyes. Do not breathe in until it gets difficult, i.e. until diaphragm’s “push” up. Simultaneously, stomach and neck muscles get push too: patients normally describe this condition as a “push in the throat”. Read of the second hand’s position at the “push” point, and continue breathing. Do not inhale deeper than prior to breath-holding.
Thus measured pairs of stable values “control pause – pulse” determine the stage of your disease by the following rule:
– 1-10 secs. CP (pulse 100): severely sick, critically and terminally ill patients, usually hospitalized;
– 10-20 secs. CP (pulse 90): sick patients with health complaints, often on daily medication;
– 20-30 secs. CP (pulse 80): people with average health, usually without serious chronic health problems;
– 40-60 secs. CP (pulse 70): very good health;
– 60 secs + CP with the pulse below 70: robust health, when many chronic diseases are virtually impossible.
If the control pause rises to 90, 120 or 180 seconds, humans acquire a special resistance to hunger, cold, heat, infection, poisons and increased nuclear radiation.
Stability of values is the “repeatability” of such values within the range corresponding to a specific stage of the disease during at least several days.
There are cases of people who have poor results (less than 20 secs.), but who do not suffer from chronic diseases. Such people typically do not have a genetic predisposition to chronic disease. That said, low body O2 always compromises health and fitness, energy levels, and overall quality of life to some degree.
Some people can have abnormally large CP numbers. This can happen in cases of carotid body resections, denervation of respiratory muscles, and near-death experiences. People with sleep apnea and lost or blunted CO2 sensitivity, can also have exaggerated test results.
At the same time, cases of people with normal breathing (and normal body O2 content) who have low results for the CP test are virtually unknown.
Konstantin Pavlovich Buteyko was born in 1923 in the small farming community of Ivanitsa, Ukraine, about 150 kilometers from Kiev. Inheriting his father’s enthusiasm for machines, young Buteyko studied at the Kiev Polytechnic Institute until World War II started and he left to join his country’s armed forces. After his experiences during the war, Buteyko felt compelled to study what he called “the most complicated piece of machinery of all” – the human organism.
Doctor Konstantin Pavlovich Buteyko received his medical degree from the First Medical Institute in Moscow, where he studied from 1946 to 1952. During this period he had a medical practice attending and dealing with severely sick and critically ill patients. A series of events helped him to realize the connection between the respiration and health of patients with hypertension, angina pectoris, asthma, and some other serious diseases. He noticed that with approaching death, patients’ respiration got heavier. By visual observation of patients’ breathing in the hospital, he could predict how many days or hours of life were left. Later he discovered that deliberate acute hyperventilation quickly worsened the health of patients while breathing less caused the elimination of their symptoms. Buteyko also confirmed these findings in his own problem, hypertension. He then decided to devote his life to studying respiration, in general; and CO2 properties, in particular.
After graduation with Honors, in 1952, he joined the Department of Clinical Therapy of the same institute, working as the manager of the Laboratory of Functional Diagnostics in Moscow. Among his concerns were a lack of qualified personnel, inadequate equipment, and financial problems. He then had more time to study western publications about breathing. During these years the Soviet state was developing the unique program of outer space exploration for the first space missions. It was of exceptional importance to know and study the effects of air parameters (air pressure and its composition) on human health.
Hence, Soviet officials were looking for bright young scientists who could lead such projects in physiology and medicine. At the end of the 1950’s, he was chosen to head such a project in Novosibirsk. Due to the importance attached to the project, his laboratory was provided with the best available equipment and best-qualified support.
Obviously, in this research, as, for example, in any similar NASA research, its people and facilities were heavily guarded by Soviet state officials, including KGB agents. The aims of this research included:
– finding optimum air parameters for human functioning during space missions depending on the stage of the flight and initial parameters of astronauts;
– breathing of healthy and sick people and interactions between various diseases and respiration;
– effects of various environmental factors (sleep, sleeping postures, exercise, posture, meals, diets, daily activities, temperature, thermoregulation, emotions, etc.) on breathing, oxygenation, and health.
Thus, in 1960 Buteyko became the manager of another Laboratory of Functional Diagnostics organized at the Institute of Experimental Biology and Medicine in Novosibirsk. Buteyko created in his laboratory a unique diagnostic complex, which included several physiological devices to measure 40 important health parameters in real-time (or with each breath). According to Buteyko and Dyomin, “One such investigation, lasting about 1 hour, produces about 2,000 recordings of 40 main parameters of respiratory and cardiovascular processes, resulting in about 100,000 numbers…” (Buteyko & Dyomin, 1963). These parameters included pulse, EKG, blood pressure, tidal volume, respiratory rate, minute ventilation, arterial and venous blood gases and chemical analysis of the expired air. The complex produced many thousands of measurements per hour, analyzed by a computer. The unique features of this complex were described in the Soviet magazine “Izobretatel’ i ratsionalizator” (Inventor and Efficiency Expert, 1961; Buteyko 1961; Buteyko, 1962). Some characteristics and abilities of this machine were also reported in more than 20 scientific articles written by Buteyko with his colleagues and published in medical, physiological and diagnostic magazines and conference proceedings. These and other scientific publications can be found here: https://www.normalbreathing.org/retraining-refer-russian/
Research with the use of this complex was done from 1960 to 1968. That allowed Buteyko to receive information about physiology and respiration of the human organism in health and disease and relationships between respiration and different factors, including sleep, sleeping postures, exercise, posture, meals, diets, daily activities, temperature, thermoregulation, emotions, etc.
Not only did he brilliantly conduct and complete these studies funded and initiated by the USSR’s Ministry of Aviation and Space Exploration, but he also discovered and practically confirmed the fundamental role of breathing in the development and treatment of various health conditions, including asthma, bronchitis and heart disease. Given the confidential nature of the project, it was normal that many results remained classified for years. (Compare Buteyko situation with the situation of the famous Oxford Professor John Haldane, who was hired in 1920-1930s by British Navy to study air in submarines and whose name then disappeared from the world scientific community.) This, however, was not the case with Buteyko and his colleagues. They had dozens of publications in the open Soviet literature (in Russian) about their research in the 1960s. Moreover, in the 1990s Buteyko and his numerous pupils were able to travel to Western countries and share the word about the Buteyko method and his discoveries.
Unfortunately, his ground-breaking discovery which would question the very basis of traditional medicine was not fully accepted due to a reluctance to change, to go beyond the comfort of stereotypical thinking. He respected this choice; however, felt that his mission on Earth was complete. Professor Buteyko died peacefully, at the age of 80, in Moscow on Friday, 2 May 2003. He will be mourned by millions around the world.
CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORSHIP N 1593627
By the power granted by the Government of the USSR, Agency for Innovations has executed this Certificate of Authorship for: “CO2 in Alveolar Air Detection Method ”
Author (authors): Konstantin Pavlovich Buteyko
Patent Holder: same
Application N 4136914
Priority of invention of October 17, 1986
Registered in the USSR Government Register of Inventions on May 22, 1990
A method for detection of CO2 level in the alveolar air by examination of the respiratory system values, wherein the purpose of method facilitation is achieved by stopwatch timing of the patient-s maximum respiratory capacity after a 5-10 minute rest, and the level of CO2 is detected in accordance with the following formula:
where P is the percentage of CO2 in the alveolar air; P0 is the 3.5 minimum percentage of CO2 in the alveolar air; K=0.05 is the dependency ratio between the level of CO2 and the breath-holding time; and T is the maximum breath-holding time.
For more information about the Buteyko method you can read the following 2 articles:
– Kazarinov V.A. (1990) “The biochemical basis of KP Buteyko’s theory of the diseases of deep respiration”
– V.K. Buteyko, M.M. Buteyko (2005) “The Buteyko theory about a key role of breathing for human health: scientific introduction to the Buteyko therapy for experts”
Thank you for this article! What do you recommend if a pregnant woman gets sick with the flu while pregnant? Any natural remedies that will help?