Novartis flu vaccine suspended in Italy after deaths

The Telegraph
by Denise Roland

Two batches of a flu vaccine manufactured by Swiss drug giant Novartis have been suspended in Italy following the death of three people shortly after they had received the jab.

Two women aged 87 and 79 and a 68-year-old man from southern Italy died following jabs of the Fluad vaccine earlier this month. Another man, 92, is seriously ill in hospital.

Italian health officials stressed that the suspension was a precautionary measure and urged calm, while Novartis said there was no evidence the vaccine shot had caused the deaths.

The Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA) insisted vaccines were “a precious resource and irreplaceable for the prevention of seasonal flu”.

Sergio Pecorelli, the head of AIFA, added that 8,000 people die of seasonal flu each year. “We have to have faith in vaccines,” he said.

A Novartis spokesman that a review of the two batches in question had shown they conformed to “all production and quality standards” and that the drug maker was working closely with Italian health officials to carry out further tests.

The Fluad vaccine was approved in 1997 and more than 65m doses have been distributed to date. The vaccine has a “robust safety history”, the spokesman added.

Fluad is not used in the UK’s flu vaccination programme, nor licensed for use in Britain, a spokesman for Public Health England said.

“There are no implications for the safety of flu vaccines licensed and used in the UK, and we advise people to have the annual influenza vaccine as recommended,” he added.

Novartis is in the process of selling its flu vaccine division to Australian drugmaker CSL. The deal, which valued the business at $275m (£176m), is expected to close in the second half of 2015. The Swiss drugmaker is also offloading the remainder of its vaccines business to Britain’s GlaxoSmithKline, as part of a three-way deal agreed earlier this year.

Look Out, Flu Shot Resistors: The “FLUgitive” Propaganda Campaign Aims to Shame You Into Getting Jabbed

Truthstream Media
by Daisy Luther

This is from the “Believe-It-or-Not-This-Isn’t-Satire” files.

If you don’t get lined up for this year’s lethal injection – ahem – I mean flu shot – you just might get a push from a well-meaning (but brainwashed) friend or neighbor. A national campaign has begun with the intention to shame and peer pressure everyone to get the flu shot.

The campaign was created by Sanofi-Pasteur, the company who makes…you guessed it…a flu vaccine called Fluzone, approved by our good friends at the FDA in 2011. (They also collaborate with the notable eugenicists of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.) You can find out more about the FLUgitive campaign on Facebook.

#FLUgitives live in every town in America; they could be hiding in your workplace, your gym, the grocery store, or even in your own home. Each year in the U.S., 1 in 5 people, or up to 20 percent of the population, gets the flu and an estimated 226,000 people are hospitalized from influenza-related complications. But since the single most important thing adults can do to help prevent spreading the flu is to get their annual flu vaccination, these #FLUgitives should not wait. #FLUgitives are encouraged to come out of hiding, round up other #FLUgitives and turn themselves in to their healthcare provider to learn about the seriousness of influenza and their available vaccine options.


“Because flu season can begin as early as October and last through May, the best prevention for those planning to get their annual flu shot is to get it as early as possible in the season, allowing your body time to build up its immunity,” said Carlos E. Picone, M.D., F.C.C.P., Vice-Chair of the Department of Internal Medicine at Sibley Memorial Hospital in Washington, D.C.


Research has shown that social influences are a primary factor in the adoption of health behaviors. The FLUgitives campaign leverages the positive power of social peer influence to drive more people to help protect themselves against the flu by getting vaccinated and features four #FLUgitives whom everyone might know – or may even relate to themselves. (source)

Check out the mocking video campaign below for your recommended daily allowance of offensive and insulting propaganda.

The Fitness Fanatic

Convinced that exercise and all-protein diet is the key to staying healthy, this gym rat dreads getting the flu vaccine because nothing can get in the way of his workout. Putting his beloved biceps on the back burner is not an option. With big protection and a tiny needle, the Fluzone Intradermal vaccine only goes skin deep so no one has to mess with “lightening” and “thunder” unless they really have to.

The Turbo Mom

A modern day Superwoman, this suburban warrior balances caring for her kids, husband, home and pets on top of a busy job. But her hectic schedule leaves little time for anything else. Fluzone Intradermal vaccine is right on top of that – it’s a simple and quick way to get the protection she needs without missing a beat.

The Latest and Greatest Guy

A self-proclaimed gadget loving playboy, this FLUgitive always wants the newest version of everything.

He should ask about Fluzone Intradermal vaccine- it’s a smart, fast and efficient technology, just like his gadgets.

The Scaredy Cat

This constant worrier is on edge about pretty much everything.

But since his fear of getting sick outweighs his fear of getting a flu shot, Fluzone Intradermal vaccine is right up his alley. It uses a next-generation device to quickly help deliver vaccine just under the skin’s surface, so he can find something else to worry about for a change.

There’s even a dubious little app that allows you to load your photo and see how bad you will look if you don’t get your flu shot. No, I’m not kidding.

Notably, one type of FLUgitive is not represented in the videos – those of us who avoid the shot because we know better. Do your research and make your decision – don’t base it on biased propaganda presented by those who profit from the vaccine.

Magic trick: promoting diseases that don’t exist

No More Fake News
by Jon Rappoport

The disease/treatment/profit machine requires more and more diseases, even if they aren’t real.

Here is an unspoken but largely accepted medical notion of what a disease is:

A group of physical symptoms shared by many people, which has a single cause.

For example, take the flu. Wikipedia lists the common symptoms: chills, fever, muscle pains, headache, coughing. For each type of flu, there is single virus announced as the cause. E.g., Swine Flu; H1N1 virus.

Drug companies develop medicines and vaccines to kill the virus or prevent it from gaining a foothold in the body. They sell the drugs and vaccines. Profits soar. Nice and neat.

Of course, many doctors don’t bother to test patients to see if they have a disease like seasonal flu. It’s too time consuming to take a blood sample and send it to a lab and wait for the results.

So the doctor makes an eyeball diagnosis based on symptoms and the season of the year.

As I explained in my previous article, “What happens when only 16% of flu patients have the flu?”, a cursory investigation of this practice can lead to embarrassing results.

Every year, many blood samples from patients are, in fact, sent to labs, and only a small fraction of these “flu cases” turn out to reveal any flu virus at all.

But this fact is blithely ignored.

You have hundreds of thousands of people in the US who display the general “flu symptoms,” but it turns out most of them don’t have the flu. They have a variety of other problems.

But admitting this is bad for business. How can drug companies justify making flu drugs and vaccines when most “flu cases” don’t have the flu?

The solution? Fake it. Pretend all people diagnosed with the flu actually have it.

Bottom line? Just because you have a group of people who have the same general symptoms…that doesn’t mean they have the same disease…and it doesn’t mean the same germ is causing their symptoms.

Consider Autism. If you were to Google “Diagnostic Criteria for 299.00 Autistic Disorder,” at autreat.com you would read through a whole menu of behaviors. These behaviors are, in fact, the definition of Autism. They are the entire definition.

There is NO cause listed. There is no single cause. No germ or fungus or mold or errant gene or neurological defect.

So in this instance, the medical cartel pretends they already somehow know Autism (the collection of behaviors) is a single disease, and “they will eventually find the single cause.”

But again, just because you have a great many children who have the same GENERAL symptoms (behaviors)…that doesn’t mean they have the same disease…that doesn’t mean the cause of disease is the same across the board.

Nowhere in the definition of Autism will you find a single cause or any sort of bottom-line physical explanation. You will only find lists of behaviors.

So…how do they know Autism (or each sub-category in the so-called spectrum) is a single disease?

THEY DON’T KNOW.

YES, the children are suffering. YES, they have serious problems. Yes, they are not like other children. YES. But is Autism a single disease? Is it even a spectrum of different types of “developmental disorder,” as advertised? No persuasive evidence exists to affirm that.

I chose Autism for a special reason: the vaccine connection.

I’ll try to boil it down. The medical bosses assert that vaccines COULD NOT be the cause of Autism. On what basis do they say this?

Follow closely. There are diagnosed cases of Autism where the child did not receive any vaccines. Or the child didn’t receive any vaccine containing the neurotoxin mercury.

And since vaccines are demonstrably not the cause IN EVERY CASE OF AUTISM, vaccines are not the cause at all.

You might want to read that last sentence again.

Single cause of a single disease means: the cause is the same in every case of the disease.

This is how the medical bureaucrats refute vaccines as the cause of Autism. This is their “proof.”

“Okay. We know (pretend) Autism is a single disease. So it has to have one cause across the board, in every case. Let’s see. Can we find any diagnosed cases where the child didn’t receive vaccines with mercury in them? Yes. We can. All right, end of story. Vaccines couldn’t cause Autism.”

But is Autism (or any sub-type of Autism) a single disease? Is there any convincing proof? Is there a single cause in all cases?

No. If there were, you would find it in the official definition of Autism, and it isn’t there.

At this point, people repeat familiar medical-propaganda slogans: “We’re on the cusp of a breakthrough in finding a genetic cause.” “We’re closer than ever.” “It could turn out to be a virus.” “It might relate to early childhood infections.” “Its roots are neurological, and these days we understand that system at a deeper level than ever before.” “We’re seeing similar patterns in brain scans.”

All supposition. All speculation.

No reason under the sun to accept the idea that what is called Autism is one thing with one cause.

In many cases of what is called Autism, we are looking at vaccine damage, pure and simple. Then CALL IT VACCINE DAMAGE, NOT AUTISM.

In other cases, the cause would be chemical poisoning from a variety of non-vaccine sources. SO CALL IT CHEMICAL POISONING, NOT AUTISM.

In other cases, a severe oxygen deficit. CALL IT OXYGEN DEFICIT.

In other cases, major nutrient deficiencies. CALL IT NUTRITIONAL DEFICIENCY.

In other cases, all four of these. CALL IT ALL FOUR OF THESE.

Call “it” what it is found to be, in that given child.

Look into the life and body of each unique child.

Stop using the generalized label, Autism.

Ah, but if that happened, doctors would be forced to do things they aren’t trained to do. And drug companies, the last time I looked, don’t have a safe and effective drug to reverse vaccine damage.

These companies wouldn’t be able to make billions on a drug aimed at some single mythical cause for “Autism.”

If Autism isn’t one disease with one cause, there is no single way to treat all children diagnosed with Autism.

The diagnosis itself is a misnomer and a deception. The label is a deception. A lie.

“Then what’s wrong with my child?” a parent says. “If it isn’t Autism, what is it?”

The answer could only come with a truly honest and competent and skillful examination of the child. That unique child.

Holding out for one grand solution to a problem that isn’t one general problem is doomed.

Many children are waiting for a successful universal treatment that will never come.

There are reports that, in some of cases of “Autism,” hyperbaric oxygen has shown good results.

But what about cases where the real problem is severe nutritional deficit?

It comes down to this: do parents want a solution to what their unique child is really suffering from? If so, then someone has to discover what that is. And then that practitioner has to come up with an answer that truly helps.

Calling all children who have similar generalized symptoms “Autistic” doesn’t help.

But it does provide an avenue of profit for drug companies. Their paid researchers can announce “breakthroughs” and “partial answers” and come in behind that with new drugs.

And then they can even say, “We’ve found the cause,” when they haven’t. They can market a whole raft of drugs that “alleviate the cause.” And make billions of $$, while children still suffer.

Here’s a real-life illustration. The parents of a young boy are at their wit’s end because he has withdrawn from the world. He can’t communicate. His physical coordination is lacking. He has other problems.

The doctor says: Autism.

But another doctor, someone who practices medicine but also has human instincts and a genuine desire to go the distance and help that boy, investigates.

And he finds several crucial things. The boy, who has never had vaccines, has severe nutritional deficiencies. On top of that, he’s extremely sensitive and reactive to certain artificial colors and dyes in processed foods. He has bowel problems, debilitating gastrointestinal infections. He almost strangled on the umbilical chord at birth.

Suppose the the doctor can prepare a comprehensive non-drug program to correct these problems. And after a time, the boy begins to emerge from his isolation. Into the world.

Did he have Autism?

This is like asking whether the victim of an automobile accident had Broken Bone Syndrome.

There is a simplicity at the bottom of all this. When the doctor says, “Your son has VCR$#S or some other label, the parent can say, “Do you have a treatment that will correct the situation?”

If the answer right now is no, there is no reason to buy the label and walk down the tortuous path the label implies.

If later on, the doctor says yes, we definitely do have a cure, then the parent can look at it through a high-power magnifying glass of intelligence and justified skepticism, to find the fine print, and understand what the doctor is really talking about.

Is he telling the truth? Is he lying? Does the supposed cure have such dire adverse effects the child is merely trading one set of crises for another? Are the new crises just masking the old ones?

Here is the rule: if someone claims that a cluster of symptoms adds up to a disease label for many people with that cluster, but the doctor has in his hands no cause for the cluster, there is no reason to assume the label means anything.

Yet still, the parent says, “All right, but the doctor said my son is Autistic. What am I supposed to do?”

Yes, and the doctor probably also says Autism is a neurological disorder and much research is underway, and the prospects are looking better…

But does the doctor have the cause of Autism? Does he have a treatment that really works? Is the parent in better shape by assuming her boy has “Autism,” whatever that is supposed to mean? Is the boy helped in any way by this?

Or is the mother of that child simply assuaged and relieved, because the doctor has put a label on her child who, up to now, was a troubling mystery?

I know people are going to write me with alt. solutions for Autism. They are going to assume there is such a thing (across the board) as Autism and it has a single cause, and there is a brilliant treatment for all of it.

To them I would suggest reading this article again and thinking about what it actually means.

People are also going to say, “But Autism researchers are making progress. They may not have the single cause yet, but they’re getting closer.”

Really? They SAY they’re getting closer. That’s different. What do you expect them to assert? They’re getting farther away?

Related:  What happens when only 16% of flu patients have the flu?

TriHealth ‘fires’ workers without flu shots

From the Trenches World Report

Health system TriHealth had a message for 150 employees Wednesday: We really mean it this time.

The 150 workers who didn’t get the required flu shots by the Nov. 16 deadline received termination notices the day before Thanksgiving.

To keep their jobs, they need a flu shot by Dec. 3.

“The flu vaccine still is the best way to protect our employees and our patients against the flu,” spokesman Joe Kelley said.

TriHealth required all 10,800 employees to get flu shots. This is the third year it’s issued terminations for failure to get vaccinations.

TriHealth operates Good Samaritan and Bethesda North hospitals, the Queen City Physicians and Group Health Associates doctors groups and Hospice of Cincinnati.

It has offered the shots for free since Oct. 1 and will continue to offer them through Dec. 3.

Several of the region’s biggest health systems also require flu shots. Insurers and employers often recommend them to fight off the flu, but health systems are increasingly adamant in an effort to protect patients.

Some have gone even further.

Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center in previous years has restricted access to patient rooms for everyone except families during flu season.

One example was the 2009 outbreak of the H1N1 flu virus.

Vancouver researcher finds flu shot is linked to H1N1 illness

The Vancouver Sun

A strange vaccine-related phenomenon spotted in Canada at the start of the 2009 flu pandemic may well have been real, a new study suggests.

Researchers, led by Vancouver’s Dr. Danuta Skowronski, an influenza expert at the B.C. Centre for Disease Control, noticed in the early weeks of the pandemic that people who got a flu shot for the 2008-09 winter seemed to be more likely to get infected with the pandemic virus than people who hadn’t received a flu shot.

Five studies done in several provinces showed the same unsettling results. But initially research outside Canada did not, and the effect was dismissed as a “Canadian problem,” a problem with the flu vaccine used in Canada.

But a new study suggests the findings were real.

Skowronski and a group of researchers have recreated the event in ferrets. Their findings were presented Sun-day at the Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, a major international infectious diseases conference taking place in San Francisco.

Skowronski, who outlined the work at a webcast press conference, worked with 32 ferrets, giving half the 2008 seasonal flu shot and the rest a placebo injection. The work was blinded, meaning the researchers didn’t know which ferrets received which shot. Later, all the ferrets were infected with the pandemic H1N1 virus.

The ferrets in the vaccine group became significantly sicker than the other animals, though all recovered.

“The findings are consistent with the increased risk that we saw in the human studies,” Skowronski said.

The reason is unclear and Skowronski urged other research groups to take up the question. She said it’s important to get to the root before the next pandemic. But in the meantime, Skow-ronski insisted the findings should not deter people from getting flu shots.

Related: More H1N1 Vaccine Recalled

Doctors Now ‘Firing’ Patients Who Reject Vaccination

Natural Society, Feb. 16, 2012

For many years government and health officials have been trying to push vaccination on the people. While childhood vaccine exemption rateshave been increasing, we have been seeing an overall increase in the amount of people receiving the flu shot each year. There have even been numerous occasions where legislators and others have called for mandatory vaccinations that could affect health care workers in particular. In fact, many pediatricians are so angry with their patients who refuse vaccination that they are ‘firing’ patients and their families, refusing to play their role as doctor.

That’s right, pediatricians are refusing to help parents — and their families — if they aren’t ‘responsible’ enough to vaccinate their children. One study of Connecticut pediatricians found that some 30 percent of 133 doctors said they they refused to help a family due to vaccine refusal. Another survey of 909 Midwestern pediatricians found that 21 percent dismissed a family due to vaccine refusal.

While doctors are trained and told to ‘sell’ these vaccines, many people are becoming aware of vaccine dangers and risks. One study found that more than 1 in 10 parents are straying away from the traditional vaccine schedule, with the number to increase exponentially over the next few years. For doctors to refuse care for those making a decision for their own health is irresponsible to say the least.

Full story