So What if You Encounter Swine Flu?

Since starting this blog two years ago, I've spent a lot of time writing about the flu vaccine. Regular readers know my feelings on this completely bogus inoculation--it does nothing. My reasoning behind this belief is two-fold: First, the influenza virus is one of the most rapidly mutating viruses on the planet. The difficulty of developing a viable viral vaccine against such rapid mutation is close to impossible--it's not entirely impossible, just a low probability of effectiveness from year to year. We need only to look at the 2007-2008 flu vaccine to confirm my point exactly.

The second point of my reasoning is that I believe that we must encounter the influenza virus head-on from time to time (yearly, every other year, whatever) to develop natural immunity. I believe that each time we get sick with the flu, we are exposed to the latest strain, the latest mutations if you will. This is necessary to keep our immune system up-to-date, much like downloading the latest updates for your virus scan. This provides a degree of protection against new flu strains that arise as a result of their constant mutation.

Case in point: Experts now say that the H1N1 swine flu virus is not a new virus. Instead it's a mutated hybrid of human, pig and bird flu strains; and that it has probably been circulating undetected for years. Somewhere, maybe in Mexico, maybe in Asia, it made the jump from swine to humans. The three most recent flu pandemics--1918, 1957 and 1968--started when a new avian flu virus started infecting people. Experts are saying that the current "triple reassortant virus" as the swine flu is called, is not a rapidly mutating virus--a sample from a patient in Mexico is virtually identical to samples from various U.S. states and other countries.

So again I make my point: It's important to get sick; It's important to encounter new flu strains as they arise; mutations create potentially new bugs, and only by encountering them periodically will we develop recognition of their deadlier cousins in the future.

Swine flu? It can be mild or it can be nasty; but like any other virulent microorganism, the environment is as important as the bug. So swine flu is here. It'll kill some people, but lots of people are surviving it now, and many more will continue to do so. Just take care of yourself. Get lots of rest, stay hydrated, stay away from immune lowering toxins like narcotics, heavy alcohol or loads of pharmaceuticals. And if you smoke...well just know it lowers immunity. And don't freak if you get the flu, or the swine flu; same as usual, sleep, water, nourishing food--you'll be fine.

New Use for Flu Vaccine

At the dawn of a looming bird flu pandemic, researchers say they have found a new use for the standard flu vaccine. Scientists at the National Institute for Infectious Diseases Lazzaro Spallanzani in Rome, have found that some volunteers inoculated against the seasonal influenza virus showed antibody protection from the bird flu. Although preliminary, experts are using these results as a way to step-up yearly influenza vaccinations.

It's no secret how I feel about the flu vaccine--pretty useless as far as I'm concerned; but I will not discount the possibility of cross-over immunity. If, indeed, the annual flu vaccine provides a progressive tolerance to a more virulent viral strain like H5N1 (the nefarious bird flu virus) the more often it is used, then it would certainly warrant mass use. But what I can't ignore is the convenient opportunity to use fear as a foolproof method of mass marketing.

As I point out in my upcoming book, The Six Keys to Optimal Health, public fear is often exploited as a way to pass legislation or sell product. The greater the threat, the more insidious the exploitation. Remember when North Korea had a nuclear bomb pointed at the West Coast? In L.A. it was used to scare locals into buying duct tape, plastic sheeting and other survival gear in the event of a nuclear blast. Now we'd better prepare for--gulp--the bird flu!

No doubt, an infectious pandemic is long overdo; the world hasn't seen a bona fide one since 1968. But didn't we hear the same things about e-bola, hanta virus, and the West Nile virus too? Just think about how many threats we'd have to protect ourselves against every year if we were to allow our fears to get the best of us. We might have to sit through a few more Dustin Hoffman duds at the very least. So why is this one any different?

The truth is that, just as experts believe that each successive flu inoculation adds strength to the vaccinated person's growing immunity, wouldn't it be just a likely that catching the flu every year or so would also add to one's protection? Uh, now let's just think about that for a minute.

One of my strongest arguments in The Six Keys to Optimal Health is to focus on strengthening our internal defenses--the immune system among other things. Only in this way can we increase our chance of surviving any catastrophe. It almost seems counterproductive to rely on the supply of vaccine and antidote for our continued survival; however, I guess it could happen. But I need way more, by way of information, than what we've got now to jump on that train. Until we know more--like does the annual flu vaccine provide protection for a large percentage of people, and can one develop an equal amount of immunity, naturally, through routine exposure and fighting off illness every year--then I'll avoid the flu vaccine for now. Prove its need beyond a reasonable doubt, and you might just see me standing in the flu-line one day, after all.

Darwinian Medicine

Does evolution apply to human health? Why do we so conveniently forget about the evolutionary process when evaluating 21st century health and disease? I mean, I know modern medical science is familiar with the concept, so why throw out evolutionary reason when analyzing today's health issues?

Well here comes a branch of medicine, known as Darwinian medicine, dedicated to applying reason to rationale. Darwinian medicine is not your typical Cartesian philosophy--the one that says the human body is simply a machine, with various parts and systems, much like a clock; and that all processes can be understood by breaking the whole down to it's most basic components--but instead see the human body as evolving through time to environmental factors the way all living organisms do.

A key area of focus in Darwinian medicine is the emergence of modern epidemics like asthma and obesity--modern diseases resulting from changes in the environment which our bodies cannot evolve quickly enough to. And these rapid changes in our environment can also be the result of human activity, and even caused by efforts to eradicate other diseases.

According to Randolph Nesse, a pioneer in the field from the University of Michigan states, "The epidemic of asthma worldwide may be directly related to our very effective world health efforts to eliminate worms from people."

Another scientist explains that improved standards of hygiene could explain why societies in the rich world have become more susceptible to asthma, to allergies and to auto-immune diseases. Our push to eradicate diseases, and especially our attempt to protect ourselves via vaccination might be one cause of lowered resistance to some illnesses. Humans in less developed, poorer societies, "where parasites and microbial infections are high," have lower instances of such ailments, Barnes said.

I've been pushing this idea since I started this blog, especially as it relates to the influenza virus and accompanying vaccine. If the influenza virus is rapidly mutating--that is, changing it's makeup every year--doesn't make sense just to encounter it and develop natural immunity? I mean it isn't tuberculosis, for heaven's sake. Yes, flu kills people--so do aligators. It's not like we haven't evolved in a way to outrun those grisly gators. This is true for microorganisms to. They have been around for milennea, and they'll keep evolving. As living organisms, human beings need to keep up with the times, too.

Flu Vaccine Farce

Well, well, well--you heard it here first: The flu vaccine isn't worth all that much. To be fair, the Centers of Disease Control (CDC) is finally fessing up. Yup, you heard right--CDC officials are admitting that more than 50% of the flu strains we are currently seeing in the U.S. are NOT included in this year's flu vaccine. But you knew that, right? You're a regular reader of this blog, god bless ya!

U.S. officials have reported that the number of states reporting widespread flu activity has increased from 11 to 31 in just one week. The severity of flu strains is often measured by the number of children it kills in any given year. This season the number is at six--low by public health standards--but people are still getting sick by the boatloads. Hmmm...weren't flu vaccinations way up this year? Crazy.

Because the composition of the flu vaccine is decided nine months earlier than it is actually made available to the public--an eternity in light of the influenza virus' ability to mutate--it is often impossible to match exactly the strains that might make their appearance on any given year. To add insult to injury, one influenza expert has disclosed that we are now even seeing some strains developing resistance to Tamiflu, a popular anti-viral used frequently to fight the symptoms of the flu (which is supposed to be prevented through the vaccine--anybody else see a glitch in this reasoning?). According to Dr. Joe Bresee of the CDC's influenza division, "a less-than-ideal virus match between the viruses in the vaccine and those circulating viruses can reduce vaccine effectiveness." OK, thank you; finally, some sense. So why bother?

I know a lot of people who are battling the flu right now. Hang in there; you'll get better. And then you'll develop your own immunity, which will strengthen your system. Of course, that is until next year, when a new strain will then come around and we'll get to do it all over again. Boy, ain't health fun?

Sham of the Century

Pssst. Hey Buddy. Wanna buy a bridge? How about a flu shot? Yeah?...thought so sucker.

Alright, alright, maybe I'm being a little hard--most people don't know. They only know what the authorities tell them.

Get your annual flu shot. Prevent the flu. Save your life. Isn't that the mantra?

Recent reports show that the distribution of flu shots in the U.S. this year is at 103 million--an all time high. Well, I've got some bad news for ya--the flu shot is a scam. No, no--it's not a conspiracy; your doctor really believes in it. And a couple hundred bucks a shot doesn't hurt the believing process, either.

So how is it a scam? First off, it's not 100% protection. That is, you can get a flu shot, and...still get the flu. How's that? Well, according to the Centers of Disease Control (CDC), "It takes about two weeks after vaccination for antibodies to develop in the body and provide protection against influenza virus infection. In the meantime, you are still at risk for getting the flu (emphasis mine)." Furthermore, you can still get the flu due to the variability in flu strains--that is, the current flu vaccine protects (however questionably) against a particular strain, not all of them (also from the CDC; read here). And your protection also depends on the age and health status of the person getting the vaccine (more on this in a second).

Second, the flu virus is one of the most highly mutating organisms there is, so strains change all the time. That's why you have to get a new shot every year (and don't forget, a couple hundred bucks a shot also helps with this category). The bottom line is this: you don't know which flu strain you'll encounter, and even if it's "this year's strain", you still don't have total protection.

Lastly (and this is my favorite one), even though the flu shot is an inactivated virus (i.e. it has been killed), it still has potential side effects, and they are:

• Soreness, redness, or swelling where the shot was given
• Fever (low grade)
• Aches

And if you use the spray mist:

• runny nose
• headache
• sore throat
• cough

And the mist in children:

• runny nose
• wheezing
• headache
• vomiting
• muscle aches
• fever

Call me crazy, but...ain't that the flu?

So let me put this into perspective: You go to your doctor every year and pay good money for a vaccine that doesn't work all that well, only protects you from a small faction of microorganisms that can cause the flu, and which actually causes flu-like symptoms. Uh...can I ask a question? WHY NOT JUST GET THE DAMN FLU?!?!

I know, I know, the authorities tell us that it's for the protection of the elderly, the immunocompromised, and children. However, in the same breath they tell us that the effectiveness of the vaccine is age dependent; and I highly doubt that 20 to 60-year-olds are at the highest risk.

All I can say is this: I've never had a flu shot; I've had the flu plenty of times; I've had the runs, fever, and body aches; and I didn't want to do anything. So I drank lots of water, and I slept a bunch. I got better, and I developed natural immunity--so, ultimately, I got stronger. Hey, listen--if you feel safer with a flu shot, then go ahead. And when you're ready, I've got an excellent multi-level marketing business opportunity for you...and a bridge.

If you want to read more on this sham, here is an excellent piece published in the British Medical Journal.

And comments to that piece from skeptical MDs in the U.K. (read this because this is from the guys who are administering the shots, so perhaps they have some insights you and I do not have--please scroll down to read the comments).

Flu Vaccine Wool Over the Eyes

What do you do when you're a pharmaceutical and vaccine manufacturer, and scientific data shows your product to be useless? You search hard for a rationalization and apply it to your MO in a stepped-up marketing campaign. That's exactly what flu vaccine maker Sanofi Pasteur is doing right now.

You may remember a story I reported in an earlier post in which elderly people who were given the flu shot did not have a lowered risk of dying from the flu. Well, that study didn't sit well with Sanofi Pasteur, so what was their recommendation? Give elderly people a massive dose of flu vaccine. Yeah, yeah, that's the ticket. Give grandma four times the usual dose to boost her immunity (four times the standard is what Sanofi now recommends). Think about it: with that much attenuated virus in your system, you'll no doubt have a measurably high immune response. No doubt. And as an added bonus you'll quadrupel your profits. That's called a win situation. Not win-win--just win...for Sanofi.

The reasons the flu vaccine works poorly remains the same: The influenza virus is a rapidly mutating organism. It's virtually impossible to create a vaccine that will be right-on in any given year. They may get lucky sometimes--every gambler hits paydirt now and again--but there just isn't now, nor will there ever be, an effective flu vaccine.

What makes this story especially frightening is that it's simply another example of a greedy pharmaceutical corporation manipulating the truth for their own end. And this public health BS is being perpetuated by our medical and public health industries. The data is there; the flu vaccine doesn't do much. Instead of making it the poster child of public health marketing, how about more studies? Not only studies done by the manufacturers of the drug itself (preliminary to FDA approval), but third party studies paid for by the manufacturer and regulated by a government agency too. You won't hear me suggest government getting involved very often, but in this case, I think it's crucial.

Unplanned Flu Shot Study

We’ve got an interesting unplanned study underway in the U.S. this flu season. According to recent reports, only one third of Americans have received a flu shot this year. And based on a survey of 4,000 people, only seventeen percent more are planning on getting one. Nice--a fifty-fifty split.

So what’s the study? Well, public health officials at the U.S. Centers of Disease Control (CDC) recommend that 85% of the population (261 million people) get vaccinated against the flu to prevent pandemonium. The flu kills 36,000 people and sends 200,000 to the hospital in the United States annually.

If you’ve listened to my podcast on vaccinations (Dr. Nick Show, Episode 8) then you know all about herd immunity. Herd immunity is the protection an entire population receives from a certain number of the people getting vaccinated. This number is roughly 80-90%. So by 261 million Americans receiving the flu vaccine, we should in theory be “protected” against the devastation promised by the flu. Hmmmm….

Well it ain’t happening this year. Less than fifty percent of the population will be getting the vaccine. So what do you think? Death and pestilence to sweep through the nation? I guess we’ll see. That’ll be the study. If we experience mass devastation, then I’ll concede--I’ll stop bagging on the flu vaccine. But it’ll have to be a significant difference. Not the same numbers we see every year. I’m betting they’ll be pretty close to the same.

As I keep saying: it is nearly impossible to develop a flu vaccine that matches the current strains in the wild. They mutate too quickly. The influenza virus is the true Master of Disguises.

But I’m excited to see the upcoming results. Even though I think that if the pandemic doesn’t happen, public health officials will rationalize it in one way or another; they'll never let go of the flu shot fallacy. However, it’ll pretty much prove things to me. Combine it with last year’s flu vaccine debacle (massive illness despite record numbers of people vaccinated), and the flu shot might just be shot.

Flu Shot Bull Shot

More BS exposed on the flu shot health watch. Despite proponents talking up the countless benefits, seems like research is proving otherwise. The latest study out of Alberta, Canada showed that elderly people getting the flu shot had no lowered risk of dying from the flu. That's right--no lowered risk of dying from the flu. If I'm not mistaken, that's always the reasoning behind the heavy marketing of this bogus vaccine.

Over 700 elderly people were followed, half receiving the flu shot. As it turns out, after adjusting for potential confounders, including functional and socioeconomic factors, no statistical significance was found between death rates of vaccinated versus non-vaccinated people. In other words, just as many flu-vaccinated elderly subjects died as non-vaccinated subjects. Now ain't that a...bleep.

Anyway, that's no surprise to me. I've been pounding out this story for well over a year, and have been screaming foul for the flu shot for as long as I can remember. Plain and simple: The flu shot is bunk! Thank you but no thank you. Even though flu vaccinations among the elderly have gone way up--from 15 to 65 percent--"there has been no commensurate decrease in hospital admissions or all-cause mortality," said one researcher. All this despite previous estimates that "50% of reduction in death from any cause had been noted in elderly people who got a flu shot.

Oh well, I guess even these results won't slow down the flu vaccine propaganda. I'll just keep saying it until it catches on: You've got to get sick! It's the only way your immune system keeps updated and ready to fight tomorrows invaders. The flu shot merely exposes you to a minuscule proportion of existing flu strains. The influenza virus mutates rapidly. Just keep yourself as healthy as you can, and you shouldn't have any problem beating the antigen off those little buggers.

Flu Shot Video

Think I'm making this stuff up? Watch this video showing exactly what I've been saying about the flu shot, the influenza virus and it's rapid mutation rate. Yes, this piece comes with the mainstream twist that the flu shot is good for you. Please see if you pick out the BS. As I always say: truth is a matter of perspective.

Genetically Engineered Pathogens Wisely Under Wraps

You've heard of genetically modified foods? How about genetically modified pathogens? H5N1 to be exact--bird flu, made in the lab. Anybody else get the heebee jeebees from that notion?

The World Health Organization (WHO) released a strongly worded statement today warning against the dangers of the U.S. government-funded pathogenetic engineering information getting into the wrong hands and exposing the world to a potential bioterrorism threat. WHO said it was "deeply concerned about the potential negative consequences" of the study.

"This is not the kind of research that you would want to have out there," WHO's top influenza expert, Dr. Keiji Fukuda, told The Associated Press in a telephone interview.

On the flip side, WHO concerned that all credible scientists should have access to the information. Huh? The U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) last week asked scientists at Erasmus University Medical Center in the Netherlands and the University of Wisconsin-Madison to refrain from publishing full details of their work on how to make the H5N1 virus more easily transmissible between humans.

H5N1 rarely infects humans and usually only those who come into close contact with poultry. But among those infected, up to 60% die, and scientists are closely watching the virus for any signs it is becoming more easily transmissible from human to human.

The WHO and the scientific community are concerned about the steps the NIH has taken toward censorship. Many are concerned that this move will keep important information out of the hands of those who may need it, particularly in Asia where preventing a pandemic is of the utmost importance.

Dr. Fukuda reports that WHO has not yet received copies of either group's research, and he states wisely if not ironically, "I'm hoping that we are privy to as much of the details as possible, but like anybody else one of the questions for us is what kind of information do we need to know."

Exactly--conundrum 101. It's a dangerous venture designing pathogens in the lab, but the information gathered, I am certain, will be valuable if need arises to thwart a pandemic. However, there is always an inherent risk when you play with fire; we should know this in the post-Cold War nuclear era. So with plus comes minus, and our need for knowledge can create the very thing we fear--a bird flu pandemic, in this case, but caused by accident or through malicious intent.

If I told you, though, that we can't escape conflict, would it have meaning? Listen, I've got no problem with the scenario as it exists. The U.S. government funding research to understand H5N1 seems as reasonable as doing so for HIV. Naturally, because of the sensitive nature of the information, it must be classified. It would be a fantasy to think that while we have this powerful knowledge and technique called genetic engineering that we wouldn't use it. I've said time and again, genetic engineering is here to stay. What is important is using it wisely.

Somebody is going to try genetically engineering whatever can be imagined--may as well be under the system that's based in checks and balances (and before you start with the conspiracy stuff, please think of which nation or organization you'd rather have the information). In that regard, I think the U.S. government and NIH have done right by censoring this information. Can't get nuke building info easily--it shouldn't be any different for sensitive pathogenic information. Good job U.S.A.

Pet Cat Catches Swine Flu

This just in: A cat in Iowa has caught the swine flu. I know, I know...but it's true. A 13-year-old cat apparently caught the H1N1 virus from one of the people living in the house, the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) said in a statement. It has recovered and does not appear to have infected anyone or anything else.

Holy feline testicles, Batman--what's this cat doing with the pigs? Apparently nothing--the AVMA website reports that the cat caught the virus from one of the family members of the household. Two of the three family members have been suffering from "flu-like symptoms" before the cat became ill.

Oh my lord, what were they thinking? Had those irresponsible people vaccinated, that helpless cat wouldn't have fallen ill. Just one more reason to push the swine flu vaccine--quick, call Kathleen Sebelius...hold a press conference!

Dr. Ann Garvey, Veterinarian of the Iowa Department of Public Health said, "This is not completely unexpected, as other strains of influenza have been found in cats in the past." Phew! I was getting worried there.

The bad news is dogs and horses are also susceptible to catching the swine flu; but the good news is that ferrets are not. Double phew. I wonder if gerbils are safe.

"Indoor pets that live in close proximity to someone who has been sick are at risk and it is wise to monitor their health to ensure they aren't showing signs of illness," said Dr. David Schmitt, state veterinarian for Iowa. Hmmm...rectal temperature, kitty?

Well, there you have it--just another day in the life of the swine flu hysterics. Meow.

Deadly New Flu Strain Hits Mexico, U.S.

So here we go, what we all knew was coming: A deadly new flu strain--a variant of a swine flu--has moved up from Mexico found its way into the U.S. The never before seen flu strain has reportedly killed 20 people in Mexico and may be responsible for another 40 deaths. Mexico City has gone through a mass quarantine by shutting down schools and canceling public events in an attempt to prevent further transmission. In California, six people have already been infected, although the cases here appear mild so far. Nevertheless, the pig flu is here.

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), tests showed that the virus from 12 of the Mexican patients was the same genetically as a new strain of swine flu, designated H1N1, seen in eight people in California and Texas. This strain is being transmitted human-to-human, which is raising fears of a mass pandemic. Global health authorities, however, are not yet ready to declare it as such.

Analysis of the viral strain shows it to be a combination of swine, avian (bird) and human influenza strains. Typically, humans can catch the swine flu from pigs, but rarely is it transmittable to other humans. Not true of this strain, which is a human variant too--the likely reason for its transmission among humans.

In Mexico, there have been 1,004 reported cases in Mexicali on the border with California. Most of the dead were between 25 and 45 years old, a worrying notion since the typical human flu endangers the very young or the very old. A hallmark of pandemics is that they affect healthy young adults.

The latest word from U.S. authorities is that it is too late to contain the swine flu virus--it's here. On the positive side, the strain seems to be susceptible to the flu drug oseltamivir, otherwise known as Tamiflu.

Well, this is exactly what I've been warning against in my many posts speaking out against flu vaccination. I have always believed that a new flu strain outbreak was imminent; and I believe that people who just bucked up and caught the flu have hopefully been exposed to some elements of the new flu strain. No way to know for sure, but time will tell. It seems a best chance scenario to me anyway, since evolution takes time, and it is therefore possible that those of us who went unvaccinated and were exposed have encountered a degree of immunity to certain aspects of the human portion of this new deadly strain. Like I've said, only time will tell, but I prefer to take my chances with natural immunity (in this case) any day.

Oh well, chickens coming home to roost time. I'll keep you informed.