ANIMAL RESEARCH  T A K E S  LIVES
- Humans and Animals BOTH Suffer

contents | Chapter 5 index | index

'FLU

Though medical "progress" has not yet produced a cure for the common cold at least eight pages of ARSL are devoted to listing the deadly diseases its publishers purport were eradicated through vaccination.  Influenza is strangely absent.  Investigating the efficiency or otherwise of the 'flu vaccine has revealed the same pattern of shifty dealings, graft, cover-ups and lies as heretobefore.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration vaccines expert Dr J.A. Morris, specialising in 'flu vaccine with the FDA's Bureau of Biologics, is acclaimed as the world's most knowledgeable person on 'flu vaccine.  In the 1970s Dr Morris fell from grace for refusing to endorse the mass vaccination programme against swine 'flu, asserting that there would be no epidemic and warning that the vaccine could result in serious neurological damage.  Fired from his job for this diplomatic blunder he was however later proved correct, the predicted swine 'flu epidemic never materialised, the vaccination campaign took place and it caused Guillain-Barre syndrome - a type of paralysis that resulted in a federal compensation system being set up for the victims in which over four hundred million U.S. dollars were reportedly paid out in lawsuits.

Bitterly criticising the "close relationship which exists between the drug companies and government agency scientists" and "the large number of FDA officials who have left to join the pharmaceutical companies they used to regulate", Dr Morris went on:

"You have a situation in which scientists working on vaccine research are also Government regulators."¹

Dr Morris made many studies of 'flu vaccine always concluding that it was useless.  Reporting a survey carried out in a home for the elderly he reported that those who received the vaccine were worse off on contracting the relevant virus.  This is borne out in Lancet, January 6 1979, pages 33-36 which gives the results of a survey of Australian schoolboys given the 'flu shot which concluded that those who were vaccinated with the new variant after receiving the previous year's vaccine were no better off after their post vaccination encounter with the strain concerned.  That they were in fact slightly worse of, as there were twice as many cases as those who did not have the updated version.

Similarly in Great Britain the 'flu vaccine was disastrous.  In Birmingham where GPs reported it could be harmful, the vaccine caused twice as much respiratory illness and visits to the doctor among 600 aged patients given the vaccine, compared with a control group who were not.  Reports criticised the medical profession for continuing to administer the vaccine when the evidence showed it did more harm than good.

In Australia the following extract from a letter criticising 'flu vaccine was published in the Australian, June 23 1979:

"No successful product exists and trials of those available have not disclosed any advantage in use."

It was authored by the Medical Superintendent of Toowoomba General Hospital, Toowoomba, Queensland, Dr D.A. O'Rourke.  This letter is extremely interesting as it exposes that the Commonwealth Serum Laboratories (CSL) which advocates the use of the 'flu vaccine is a government QANGO.  Dr O'Rourke goes on:

"The Commonwealth Serum Laboratories is a QANGO.  In it the Government mixes business with pleasure.  Like so many government institutions purified by their incorporation as a financial enterprise, it is not only unimpeachable, but avuncular and oracular.  The press obviously regards the CSL as an unbiased government spokesman on health matters.  Yet it commercially manufactures, for profit, many products - including 'flu vaccine."

Despite this letter, and despite the death, illness and tragedy that ensued from the mass swine 'flu vaccinations in the U.S.A., the CSL still advised people to have their 'flu shots.  In Australia various doctors criticised the justification for continuing the vaccinations, calling instead for a totally new type of research to acquire the knowledge needed for mitigating the vast amount of illness resulting annually as a result of the vaccination.

"In the course of a vaccination trial that took place in France on October 1st, 1981, Professor Mercie, former director of the glamorous Pasteur Institute, was asked why the Institute kept producing and selling its anti-'flu vaccine despite its recognized worthlessness.  Professor Mercie's candid reply: 'Because it helps financing the Institute's research'."
(Hans Ruesch, Naked Empress.)

"The mad vehemence of modern medicine is nowhere more evident than in the yearly influenza vaccine farce..."
(Robert S. Mendelsohn, M.D., Confessions of a Medical Heretic.)

(References: Democrat and Chronicle, New York, April 1987.; Doctors A. Kalokerinos and G. Dettmann, Vaccines Vital or Vulnerable.; P. Rattigan, Blood Poison (Vaccination Explained).  And other freely available material.)

Footnote
1. This shady state of affairs was brought under the spotlight recently by Professor Bill Inman who heads the Drug Safety Research Unit at Southampton University, U.K. who criticised the Committee for the Safety of Medicines (which advises the government on the granting of licences to new drugs):

"The committee relies heavily on the drug companies for safety information and most of its members are linked to the industry as consultants or receivers of research grants.  In a move to make the Committee independent - that is without links with the industry... THERE WOULD BE NO-ONE TO SIT ON THE COMMITTEE."

<< previous page | next page >>

contents | Chapter 5 index | index