SWINE FLU VACCINE: LICENSED AND UNTESTED

SWINE FLU VACCINE OCT 2009:
LICENSED AND UNTESTED
http://www.thedoctorwithin.com/swine/swine-flu-vaccine.php

- Tim O'Shea 29 Sep 09

This has been a big week for swine flu vaccines. With the money machine in full swing to get the untested swine flu vaccine out to the public ASAP, it's hard to keep up with the level of deception in mainstream media. But we'll give it a try.

ASSOCIATED PRESS 22 SEP 09
On 22 Sep 09, Associated Press ran the story
"Govt: 1 swine flu shot enough for older kids" wherein they buried the lead: National Institutes of Health now wants to give four separate flu shots to kids younger than 9 years old. Two of the shots will be the brand new untested swine flu vaccines, and the other two will be the 'regular' flu shot.
Before we look at the direct misstatements of fact in that AP article, let's read it at face value. Here is some of the new 'information': [3]
National Institutes of Health director Fauci and CDC's Dr Schuchat do proclaim:
- children 9 and younger will need 2 flu shots and 2 swine flu shots
- everybody else will need 1 of each
- swine flu vaccine will be ready in October
- we'll have 251 million doses
- swine flu targets young children, which is why they need 2 shots
- they can get both shots the same day, one in each arm
- NIH has studies involving 600 children
- children 10 and older showed protection from the new vaccine
- younger children didn't show protection, since they don't have a mature immune system
- a second dose is necessary to 'rev up' the immune system

For a study in modern propaganda techniques, the reader is directed to the entire AP article:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090921/ap_on_he_me/us_med_swine_flu
This article epitomizes a modern fact of media: the days of investigative reporting are long gone. The article is nothing more but a dressed up, watered down version of the NIH's own article [4] which came out the same day
"Early Results: In Children, 2009 H1N1 Influenza Vaccine" www.nih.gov/news/health/sep2009/niaid-21.htm

Associated Press offers not one bit of independent research, commentary, criticism, or analysis. Except for deliberately omitting some of the glaring lack of science in the NIH article, all that AP does is to try and give a junior-high parroting of the high points from their master's voice.

The AP article obediently adopts the NIH's new pet word "protection" across the board: "Protection kicks in for older children within eight to 10 days of the shot..." Only a tested and proven vaccine could even hope to provide protection. The clinical trials on swine flu vaccine are less than a month old, and won't be completed until April 2010. The only thing these shots are protecting at this point is an experiment on the live population.

Trying to make believe that giving a 6 month old infant 4 flu shots would be 'normal' Fauci: "...the very young often need 2 doses of vaccine against regular winter flu." Really? Why has he never shared that secret with anyone before now? CDC has never recommended 2 flu shots for children.

Flu shots were added to the vaccine Schedule back in 2005, beginning at 6 months of age, and yearly thereafter. [1] One shot. What is Fauci trying to pretend? He then bumbles on...

"this is very good news for the vaccination program." Why would we care what is or isn't good news for the vaccination program? At $1 billion per shot approved, I guess it would be good news for the vaccination program. What does that have to do with the health of our kids? Another graduate of the Josef Goebbels school of social graces: always be upbeat...

CDC's Schuchat, another towering medical genius, obviously off her meds, then pipes in "it will be OK for kids to get one shot in each arm on the same visit." Excuse me, Dr Mengele? Did you remember in first quarter med school when you learned that both arms were attached to the same body, sharing the same systemic circulation? Exactly what clinical trials confirm this personal hallucination of yours? And this is the principal representative of our CDC?

The AP article plods bravely on: ...The new swine flu seems no more deadly than regular winter flu, which every year kills 36,000 Americans and hospitalizes 200,000. But there's an important difference: This H1N1 strain sickens younger people more frequently... [3]

There are no references for these sweeping statements in the AP article - again, it is attempting to be summarizing NIH's article. What new swine flu are they talking about? What disease? See the original Swine Flu chapter [1] at www.thedoctorwithin.com for that discussion.

FLU DEATHS STATS
Next item, the figure of 36,000 deaths from flu is an old CDC sales technique that has been employed unchanged for the past 20 years. Actual figures, according to CDC's own documents [5] put the true figure at closer to 500 per year:

www.cdc.gov/nchs/datawh/statab/unpubd/mortabs/gmwki10.htm

As we thoroughly explore in the full day vaccine seminar, there is no way that 36,000 people die from flu every year in this country, not by any stretch, although this figure is rampantly misquoted in every media. The sales job here is that the new chimera we call swine flu will be no greater threat than regular flu has been all these years, so it will be easy for the vaccine to control it, the same way as flu is controlled by flu shots. That's the perception they're going for here. But even if their own figures were accurate, they admit that there has been no change in annual flu deaths in the past 20 years, even though we started mandating flu shots in 2005. So what good have vaccines done? This is supposed to be an endorsement for the new swine flu shots?

NIH: PRELIMINARY SLEIGHT OF HAND
Let's continue with the AP article: "To determine the right child dose, the NIH set up studies involving 600 children, from babies to teenagers." [3]

That is actually true. At present there are 5 separate swine flu vaccine trials being done on sample sizes of about 600 children. [2] But AP's next statement is a deliberate misrepresentation: "About 76 percent of 10- to 17-year-olds showed strong protection after one H1N1 shot."

Looking at the actual studies themselves [2] we learn that they won't be finished until April 2010! So what is Fauci talking about here? Answer: preliminary findings based on a select group of 25 children !! But you can't find that fact out in the irresponsible AP whitewash promo. No, for that fact you have to go to the NIH site, and actually read the article that AP is supposed to be reporting on: Early Results: In Children, 2009 H1N1 Influenza Vaccine Works Like Seasonal Flu Vaccine -- 21 Sep 09. [4]

Easy to see misrepresentation right here -- the AP article leads us to believe these high numbers were conclusive final evidence from complete studies. 76% favorable response would be a gratifying long term result in any major study, but we find out that is only after 10 days, looking at only 25 children within the entire sample of 600 subjects. [4]

Again, don't miss the point: these high numbers of "protection" are preliminary findings only. The formal studies, which are the only ones being done in the whole world to test the safety and efficacy of the new swine flu vaccines, these studies have just begun last month, August 2009. Preliminary findings are meaningless in formal science. That's why they design the entire study, and await the final outcome before making conclusions.

Here we see one of the most disconcerting and insidious characteristics of the new swine flu sales program: enlisting mainstream media to deliberately portray preliminary findings as definitive, conclusive scientific results. This only happens in the world of marketing. Real scientists are embarrassed by it.

The NIH report is further compromised in its own second paragraph wherein it quotes Fauci prematurely ejaculating these minor preliminary findings into an overblown sales pitch for a completely untested experimental vaccine, immediately making policy statements based on this tiny amount of skewed information:

It seems likely that the H1N1 flu vaccine will require just one 15-microgram dose for children 10 to 17 years of age.

Oh, does it really seem likely, Tony? Does it indeed? Well we're certainly grateful to have someone like you at the helm, someone whose instincts and feelings we can trust without actually carrying out the complete clinical trials themselves.

INFANTS ARE NOT MINIATURE ADULTS
One final important revelation about the AP article, and perhaps the agenda of the Director of the NIH:

"Younger children simply don't have as mature an immune system," Fauci explained. "So a first dose of vaccine against a flu strain they've never experienced acts as an introduction for their immune system, and a booster shortly thereafter revs up that immune response." [4]

Wow. Let's take a breath here, or maybe a cocktail. For the first time in history we have the director of the National Institutes of Health enunciating in a public worldwide forum one of the principal reasons why young children should not be vaccinated at all: they don't have a mature immune system. Absolutely true. No child is born with an intact immune system. That very complex biological symphony of interrelated allergic responses, antibodies, antigens, self-recognition, cell response, etc -- about which we still have only the most fragmented and vaguest knowledge -- struggles its way into existence during the early years of the child's life. It needs no help, no interference, no enormous experimental toxic load, especially one so politically contrived, in its fight to survive.

True to his training, Fauci immediately sidetracks us from that fact of nature to a landmark illusion of American pseudo-science: pretending that a flu shot in a 6 month old is a gentle natural gradual normal immune-building stimulus that will coax the infant immune system into being: "...an introduction to their immune system..." Each flu shot contains 30x the adult safe level of mercury, according to FDA's own toxicity index.

Fauci then absurdly follows that falsehood with a sublimely idiotic non-sequitur: the subsequent booster shot 'revs up the immune system'. Revs up the immune system. Jesus wept.

This is not the president of Harley Davidson talking here, my friends. This is the director of the branch of government that is in charge of providing funding for all the medical research done in this country, controlling an industry that is in excess of $1.2 trillion annually. And this is his perception of the normal development of an infant's immune system: an engine that needs to be 'revved up'. This is the individual who controls policies and input and decisions on what substances will be mandated into your child's bloodstream.
Revs up the immune system.

SWINE FLU VACCINE CLINICAL TRIALS
There are actually five similar clinical trials on the new swine flu vaccine, being carried out in various locations, all having just begun, all scheduled to be complete in about 6 months: spring of 2010. [2] And yet the AP article has just informed us that the swine flu vaccine will be available in less than one month - October 2009! Untested.

Going now to the recent published report (15 Sep 09) of one of the five swine flu vaccine clinical trials, the one by Sanofi Pasteur ( http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00944073 ) [6] we learn that their trial began in August 2009 and will go until April 2010. The sample size is 650 children.

These children are all receiving doses of an H1N1 vaccine, although whether it's all the same strain is never addressed. They just refer to it as the 2009 H1N1 virus, whatever that may be. As we learned in the Swine Flu chapter at www.thedoctorwithin.com there are dozens of strains of H1N1 virus, none of which has ever been proven to be the cause of any disease in humans. Including swine flu. So even though this fact is uncontested, what is certain is that the swine flu vaccines will all contain derivatives of some H1N1 virus. And that's what all of America will be getting.

IMAGINARY DISEASE
Now let's ruminate on that fact for one second here and not gloss over it. Swine flu as a disease has never been proven to exist. Caught up in the media-driven hysteria of global pandemic, thousands of cases of something in several countries have been counted as swine flu for the past 5 months without any conclusive testing that verifies all these people have the same disease. Three months ago the specter of H1N1 was raised, with no verifiable proof it was a virus that all the cases had in common. But if we have to make a vaccine, we need a pathogen, and this was the best theory they could come up with: H1N1.

After another month, with no conclusive testing of the dozens of strains of H1N1 that exist, the claim was suddenly made that swine flu was being caused by a "novel" H1N1 virus, suggesting they found a brand new strain of disease-causing flu virus... No proof of testing on how they supposedly discovered that one novel strain was ever offered or brought forth, or even asked for, from any scientific quarter. At the same time the CDC continued to maintain on their website that a positive test for swine flu was merely the presence of any Influenza A virus, of which there are hundreds of strains.

Again, there is no solid proof whatsoever that all these thousands of cases being counted in all the various countries during the past 5 months -- there is no evidence that it wasn't just plain old flu. All of it.

It was almost as though we are watching the birth of a religion here -- unsubstantiated claims, vacillating science, relentless hype from irresponsible media trying to stay ahead of the curve, government bureaucrat officials falling all over themselves to magnify the potential of the global threat, lest anyone accuse them of down-playing the possible horrors of the coming pandemic, followed by hundreds of millions in contracts being awarded to several vaccine manufacturers to create 251 million doses.

WASHINGTON SURPRISE: UNRESTRICTED MERCURY IN NEW VAX

A few days after the Associated Press article, another shocking bit of information came: the new swine flu vaccines will contain high levels of mercury! Washington state Health Secretary Salecky announced [2 ] that the state of Washington just lifted allowable limits of thimerosal in the new swine flu vaccines, with no new levels set.

http://www.doh.wa.gov/cfh/immunize/providers/h1n1-thimerosal.htm

The announcement was masterfully phrased, obviously the work of professional Bernays-type publicists:
"Lifting mercury limits for H1N1 vaccine will give pregnant women and parents or guardians of children under three the option of getting the vaccine if they want it."

Couching the issue in terms of availability to poor pregnant women sidesteps the obvious: it would also give these women the option of exposing themselves and their unborn children to unrestricted levels of the third most lethal neurotoxin known to man: organic mercury. Perhaps realities like that don't make for good promo copy.

All this for a disease that has never been proven to exist, and has been admitted by the CDC to be generally mild and self-limiting.

The Washington state declaration was helpful in that it quoted from one of the 5 swine flu vax manufacturers - Sanofi Pasteur - from their 15 Sep 09 announcement [6] that their new swine flu vaccination had just been licensed by the FDA. Even though the wording is confusing, reading Sanofi's entire statement does give one the impression that their brand new swine flu vaccine, which was in clinical trials for only 5 weeks, has actually been approved by the FDA for general use.

This is in line with CDC's well published expectation to have the vaccines available by October 2009.

Sanofi states that the clinical trial just began on August 6. Now remember - none of the clinical trials is scheduled to be completed until April 2010. Which begs the questions:

- Why are vaccines being licensed at the very beginning of the clinical trials?
- If they're brand new vaccines, why do they have thimerosal at all, let alone unrestricted levels?

Something's not right here.

Perhaps we can gain some insight from the tone of Sanofi's honcho:

"Obtaining FDA licensure of this vaccine for A (H1N1) pandemic response is a key milestone that will enable Sanofi Pasteur to provide a licensed vaccine to the U.S. government to support pandemic immunization efforts," said Wayne Pisano, President and Chief Executive Officer of Sanofi Pasteur.

Sanofi is now referring to their vaccine as the Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine. This is the latest incarnation, or at least the newest name for the swine flu vaccines. No more 'novel,' no more just plain H1N1 vaccine - by putting H1N1 in parentheses after Influenza A, Sanofi is trying to create the illusion that H1N1 is the same thing as Influenza A virus.

We explained this completely in the swine flu chapter [7] - hundreds of strains of Influenza A, and dozens of strains of H1N1. The pretense here is that by meticulous testing they have identified the exact strain that has caused all these deaths and cases of swine flu in all these countries during the past 5 months.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

The spectre of thimerosal having been raised portends the possibility, indeed the likelihood, that the vaccine manufacturers who have just been awarded these huge contracts to rush a vaccine onto the market -- that the new vaccines will not be new at all, but rather old stockpiled vaccines that have been sitting around for years: either old flu vaccines or Avian flu vaccines, or whatever. Virtually anything with a fragment of any flu virus might qualify.
Again, if the vaccines are going to be brand new, created right now at this time, why would they have to contain thimerosal at all? If these are brand new batches, why not just leave it out? There are thimerosal-free vaccines, and have been for years.

Even Salecky notes this in her statement. So why add this neurotoxin to a vaccine that we're going to be giving 2 shots of to a 6 month old infant, especially now when the connection with autism has been so clearly documented?

For years, the 'regular' flu shots contained 25 mcg of mercury, which is 30 times the adult safe level. That was bad enough that we have been doing it since 2006. And now we have just learned that there will be even higher levels of thimerosal in the new vaccines....?

The practice of trotting out old vaccines, giving them a new promo package, and re-marketing them is not new. We did the same exact thing back in 2002 with the smallpox vaccine hoax. [8] At that time a vaccine manufacturer dug up 90 million doses of old smallpox vaccines that had been sitting around in storage since 1971. With no new clinical trials, the old vaccines were 'tested' by Aventis, the company who had just received four hundred million dollars to produce a smallpox vaccine overnight, and found to be "still good."

Remember this: batches of vaccines do have expiration dates, but they are never thrown away. Vaccine manufacturers are the packrats of the drug industry in that regard. Just never know when any of these old vaccine batches might come in handy.

NEW OR RECONDITIONED?
A working hypothesis at the present time is that faced with the "emergency" to get swine flu vaccines out immediately in order to stem the tide of the so-called global pandemic, manufacturers will be digging through their cupboards to see if they have any old stuff they can sell now just by changing the name and a little tweaking.

Historically it generally takes a year or more to create, test, and approve a brand new vaccine. If this one's being forced into existence after one month by sheer political expediency, the manufacturers are likely going to try every trick in the book. Remember, Sanofi is the same company who got the hundred million dollar contract to produce avian flu vaccine back in 2005, which they never delivered on. [ 9] So why on earth would they not try to sell any expired inventory as swine flu stock? Time is money.

Another company, Baxter, was recently caught by the Czech government for doing exactly that: selling unlicensed avian flu vaccine as swine flu vaccine. That was a major worldwide scandal, in all the news in September 2009. [10]

When the Czech government pre-tested the vaccine on ferrets before giving it to humans, all the ferrets died! That was earlier this month. Again, why wouldn't Sanofi or any of the others try the exact same ruse?

Not surprising that about 25% of Sanofi's recent statement on swine flu [6] is directed to their investors as a disclaimer about the way they are marketing the vaccine. The economics of politics, exemplified in both the swine flu disaster of 1976 and also the smallpox vaccine scam of 2001.

In both instances the excuse was offered by the FDA that there was no time to test the vaccine because of the 'imminent danger' of the 'pandemic.' And so the vaccines were rushed through the approval process without completing the clinical trials. All politics, no science. In 1976, hundreds of people died from that mistake. In 2001, they took the easy way out - after the $3 billion was spent they scrapped the whole smallpox vaccine program.

Remember?

It's eerie. This identical urgency over today's swine flu program is being stoked almost daily by inflammatory, largely unfounded news stories, all directed toward the same outcome: there simply isn't time to test these new vaccines. So let's just get them out there to the children and pregnant women such as they are. We'll sort of the details later.

Like toxicity, lethal side effects, permanent neurological damage, autism, etc.

MANDATORY VACCINES?
Almost as bad as the promotion of an untested vaccine for a nonexistent disease is all this internet noise making hysterical claims about subtextual Machiavellian aspects of the swine flu program. Like the stories predicting mandatory swine flu vaccination which evoke Third Reich policies of quarantining any objectors in stadiums or mass detention centers (which actually is law in this country at present, part of the Homeland Security Act), etc. ...

In reality all this is completely unnecessary. There's no need to make swine flu vaccine mandatory. No vaccine in history has been supported and promoted by such an enormous, well-crafted, incessant global media blitz. And of course it's working: most people can't wait to get the new vaccine.

In the midst of everything we do not know, one fact is certain: without hyperbole or sensationalism, the new swine flu vaccine coming next month - unidentified, untested and untried - will be the most dangerous immunological experiment on this country's children in the past 30 years.

CLICK HERE to buy Dr. O'Shea's current vaccine textbook, The Sanctity of Human Blood, 13th Edition.
copyright MMIX thedoctorwithin

REFERENCES
1. O'Shea, T - The sanctity of human blood 13th ed.
2. Salecky M - STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH DECLARATION OF OUTBREAK AND VACCINE SHORTAGE AND SUSPENSION OF LIMITS 23 Sep 09
3. Neergaard, L NEERGAARD - Associated Press - Mon Sep 21, 2009
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090921/ap_on_he_me/us_med_swine_flu
4. National Institutes of Health
"Early Results: In Children, 2009 H1N1 Influenza Vaccine"
www.nih.gov/news/health/sep2009/niaid-21.htm
5. Centers for Diseases Control site
www.cdc.gov/nchs/datawh/statab/unpubd/mortabs/gmwki10.htm
6. Sanofi Pasteur, http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00944073
7. Swine flu: global pandemic www.thedoctorwithin.com
8. Weiss, R - Smallpox vaccine turns up Washington Post 27 Mar 2002.
9. Kaufman, M - Swiss Firm May Cede Bird Flu Drug Rights
Washington Post October 19, 2005
10. Branswell, H - Baxter: Product contained live bird flu virus
THE CANADIAN PRESS Toronto Sun September 28, 2009