Connect with us

Awareness

Man Spent 8 Years Taking Highly Toxic Drugs Only To Find Out He Was Misdiagnosed With HIV

Avatar

Published

on

“Way too many people are being harmed by unintentional medical error, and it needs to be corrected.” – Dr David Mayer Vice President Of Medstar Health

advertisement - learn more

As many of us know, medical negligence has reached staggering heights – it is indeed one of the leading causes of death in the United States and, according to one study, between 210,000 and 440,000 needless deaths of patients have been reported each year in the USA alone. If tracked in the same manner as real diseases, preventable errors and complications would rank as the third leading cause of death in the United States. This is undoubtably a disaster of epidemic proportions. You only need to do a quick search for “medical negligence” to see how many law firms deal especially in cases where the industry has messed up.

--> Practice Is Everything: Want to become an effective changemaker? Join CETV and get access to exclusive conversations, courses, and original shows that empower you to embody the changemaker this world needs. Click here to learn more!

Our system needs a huge wake up call and those involved need to be held accountable.

I hope that together we can make this happen – at least for just one man to receive justice.

I am about to share with you one of those real life cases of negligence that, I am sure, will leave you as horrified as I was.

Univ of Kentucky3

University Hospital Of Kentucky

How It All Began

When Bobby Russell visited the ER at The University of Kentucky Medical Centre in 2004 for unexplained bleeding, he had no idea that his whole life – in pretty much every way – was about to turn completely upside down.

advertisement - learn more

From that hospital visit, Bobby eventually became diagnosed with HIV and spent the next 8 years taking HAART (highly active antiretroviral therapy) drugs every day, as per the advice from his doctors.

After receiving what is perhaps one of the “worst possible diagnoses,” Bobby felt deeply ashamed and even stopped talking to his entire family. When his friends were told he was HIV positive, they soon stopped calling and Bobby found himself on his own.

Bobby also spent almost a decade thinking that at some stage, he was going to die sooner than he should. Bobby started feeling very ill and became so depressed that, not surprisingly, he seriously contemplated suicide. Before he visited that ER that fateful night in 2004, Bobby had previously had HIV tests which always came back negative.

Bobby Was Told He Was HIV Positive But Doctors Didn’t Actually Have Proof

But here is the real clincher – Bobby was not actually infected with HIV and the hospital and doctors involved had no proof that he was. 

This massive mistake cost Bobby his family, friends, career – and is now risking his health because he took highly toxic medications he simply did not need for almost a decade.

How Did He Find Out He Wasn’t HIV Positive?

Bobby, now a military veteran, ended up being so stressed and sick (who wouldn’t be when you are told you are “probably” going to die from eventual AIDS), that he tried to claim medical benefits for himself, as he was not able to continue working.

When the Veteran’s Administration told him that he would need to provide the proof of a positive diagnosis to receive his benefits, he went to the hospital, for what seemed like a routine request. However, his doctors were unable to provide him with any proof whatsoever. Bobby was gobsmacked – he was told by his doctors back in 2004 that he was HIV positive! How could it be that they didn’t have the proof?

In 2012, Bobby took a new HIV test at the Bluegrass Care Clinic and the results came back negative. Bobby was shocked – and of course started looking into legal action towards all involved so they could be held accountable for this dreadful mistake. I don’t blame him and I am sure you don’t either.

To this day, when the hospitals and doctors involved are contacted regarding Bobby’s story, they say he was “not misdiagnosed,” but cannot provide the proof he was HIV positive. They also won’t comment any further.

article-2409391-1B9662BC000005DC-417_634x343

Bobby Russell Speaking To Lexington News Station About HIs Ordeal

Thinking He Was HIV Positive, Bobby Would Only Have Relationships With Other HIV Positive People

As is quite common with HIV positive people, out of concern for the risk of spreading HIV to others, many seek out partners who have the same diagnosis. Bobby had several relationships with HIV positive people and, ironically (as one lady commented in a Daily Mail article), he risked himself actually becoming HIV positive. Think about that for a moment. Bobby didn’t actually have HIV, but because he was told he did, he thought he was doing the right thing for himself by having relationships with other HIV people – all due to the advice from his doctors. Wow. Horrific, right?

See the video below from the guys at Source Feed about Bobby’s story.

Bobby Now Suing Doctors & Hospital Involved

Bobby is now trying to sue the doctors and hospital involved. He is being represented by Jonathan C. Dailey, a Washington D.C. lawyer, who had this to say about Bobby’s case:

The fact is that the standard-of-care-protocol methodologies for HIV testing were never done,” Dailey said. “By failing to follow the standard protocol, and telling him that he was HIV positive, telling him that he could only have relations with HIV-positives, then that damage has been done. You can’t take that back. That’s the critical part of this case.”

According to their lawsuit, the tests to confirm he had the HIV virus were never carried out by anyone and the other routine tests carried out since his first alleged diagnosis back in 2004 showed either negative or  “indeterminable” results – which Bobby was unaware of until the hospital surrendered his own medical records to him in 2012.

Bobby says the defendants were negligent in misdiagnosing him and negligent in failing to order the appropriate tests for HIV. He now wants a trial by jury and to receive an award for compensatory damages a jury deems appropriate.

The Daily Mail reported him describing how this ordeal has been for him:

“It’s just the most difficult thing I’ve had to deal with my entire life,” he told Lex18. “I feel like I was lied to.”

Speaking to the Lexington Herald Leader, he said: “I feel like I was sentenced to a crime I wasn’t guilty of. I have intentionally put distance between my family and my friends because I thought I was dying, and I didn’t want my family to see me dying. I didn’t want my nieces and nephews see me deteriorating.

I thought I was dying. Emotionally, mentally, it destroyed me. It just destroyed me. In 2009, when things got really bad for me, suicide was a strong option for me.”

 

248175-medical-malpractice

Bobby Wants a Jury To Decide If The Doctors And Hospitals Involved Acted Ethically

Grateful He’s Not HIV Positive But Life Still In Ruins

While it could be said that, indeed, it’s truly wonderful that Bobby is not HIV positive, this new diagnosis hasn’t instantly made his life better. He hasn’t been able to reestablish a good relationship with his family – too much time has passed – and for the past 8 years he has been taking medications that were simply not needed for his body.

Tragically, Bobby today is now at risk of developing other health problems associated with the toxic effects from the HAART medications. These drugs aren’t your average over-the-counter drugs – they are available only by prescription and have clearly listed adverse reactions and side effects. The fact that Bobby took these for almost a decade is very concerning because a non-HIV person should NOT be taking these medications.

Photo © Kevin Tachman 2012

Bobby took handfuls of drugs like these each day. All have extremely toxic side effects for a health person who does not need them.

Today, Bobby is still not well enough to work, and can barely afford to support himself. He needs money to sue  and money to get his health back on track. He needs to start taking supplements which can help repair some of the damage done by these drugs. This is not a case of someone taking some standard over the counter drugs for nearly 9 years – this is almost a decade of taking some of the most extreme medications on the planet.

According to the Aids Pandemic blog, the side effects from HAART are not at all pretty:

While side effects of HAART treatment vary considerably between individuals and the particular medicines making up their therapy, the most common side effects include diarrhea, nausea, and vomiting (‘Side effects’). Lipodystrophy is another common side effect of HAART treatment in which fat is redistributed to other parts of the body (Ammassari 2001). Often in this condition, face and limbs become thin while one’s breasts, stomach and/or neck enlarge. Hyperglycemia and onset of diabetes have also occurred in a significant number of HAART patients. Liver toxicity including liver failure, pancreatitis and neuropathy are other unpleasant and potentially life threatening side effects experienced by some patients. These side effects can amount to such a physical and psychological burden that patients skip doses or stop taking their medications all together which increases the likelihood of drug resistance developing. In fact, about 25% of patients stop therapy within the first year on HAART because of side effects (d’Arminio Monforte 2000). Reconstitution of the immune system, a major goal of HAART treatment, may even carry risks in some patients. A debilitating inflammatory syndrome has recently been linked to HAART treatment (Stoll and Reinhold 2004).

And:

The most frequent toxic effects were gastrointestinal tract intolerance (28.9%), hypersensitivity (18.3%), central nervous system adverse events (17.3%), and hepatic events (11.5%).”[68]

Frightening information, isn’t it, considering Bobby was never HIV positive. He took these drugs for 8 years until he found out he never had HIV in the first place.It is easy to imagine what these drugs may have done to Bobby’s health and what it may take to repair the damage.

lovely-baby

This misdiagnosis ripped away Bobby’s chance of having a child

Bobby Did Not Have Children Due To His HIV Diagnosis

Here is the part of the story that, I can easily admit, made me cry. Before Bobby was misdiagnosed, he was about to have a child with a friend. They had discussed this in great detail and planned to have a baby together. After his HIV diagnosis he knew that this would not be possible.

Now Bobby is 45, and his chances of becoming a father are – as I am sure you can appreciate – pretty slim. How can he support a child without being able to financially support himself? How could he get the adoption services to allow him to adopt a child when they know his story and his financial position?

Bobby had his chance at having his own family ripped away from him that day back in 2004. And I find this unforgivable.

As a mother myself, where every day I experience joyful moments with my daughter, I can’t think of anything worse than not being able to experience this gift – nothing else in life even comes close to the love of your own child – because of a mistake made by the medical industry.

Initial Hearing In Court “Dismissed, “Judge Said “Too Late To Sue”

Bobby was able to present his case last year in Kentucky. During his initial hearing with a judge, Bobby ended up having his case dismissed. Judge Thomas Clark said that according to medical malpractice guidelines in the state, people only have a year to file a lawsuit after the problem occurred. As the misdiagnosis was made in 2004, he therefore said it was “too late to sue.”

But Bobby’s lawyer said “his client couldn’t have had a case until he had his negative test result in his hands.”

Bobby only found out in September 2014 that he was never found to be HIV positive.

It’s clear that he has only known about this problem for less than a year.

Bobby Needs To Appeal – Lets Help Him Fight This In A New Court

I don’t know about you, but I’m personally sick of hearing about people needlessly suffering due to our broken medical system. I am also sick of seeing how rarely this industry is held accountable, with people having their cases thrown out long before proper evidence is provided. I am tired of seeing innocent people having their lives in ruins and it breaks my heart knowing that the only thing holding them back from getting justice and moving forward in their lives is, typically, money.

I want to ask you all to to consider Bobby’s case and try to think about how it would have ruined your life if you too had been given a false HIV diagnosis.

Would you have wanted to commit suicide too, or perhaps may have actually done so? Would you have had your right to have a child of your own ripped away from you? Would your family have possibly deserted you too? Would your health have been seriously harmed due to medications you simply did not need to take?

As I am sure you can appreciate, Bobby needs quite a large amount of funding to help him get his case heard in court. It won’t be easy to fight the powerful system that is the medical industry.

Legal fees can be astronomical if you plan to fight it the whole way through. Bobby also needs to start taking some high quality supplements each month to help him get his health on track, and he has to do this ASAP.

What people also don’t generally know about HAART drugs is that they give patients doses of chemotherapy which, as we know, have some seriously concerning effects. They can actually cause cancer, for one thing. Studies done on rats who were given HAART drugs were shown to produce tumours.

I probably don’t need to spell it out to you that Bobby’s health is still very much in peril.

Here is Bobby’s Gofund Me Campaign, please try and help as much as you can –  even if it’s just $10. We have 12 million readers of CE each month, so we could very quickly get Bobby all the money he needs.

We can’t let another person’s life be destroyed by our twisted medical system.

Thank you for your help.

News reports on Bobby’s story:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2409391/Veteran-Bobby-Russell-wrongly-diagnosed-HIV-positive-9-YEARS-AGO-suing-hospital.html

http://guardianlv.com/2013/09/hiv-misdiagnosis-stirs-man-to-speak-out-a-wake-up-call/

Dive Deeper

These days, it’s not just knowing information and facts that will create change, it’s changing ourselves, how we go about communicating, and re-assessing the underlying stories, ideas and beliefs that form our world. We have to practice these things if we truly want to change. At Collective Evolution and CETV, this is a big part of our mission.

Amongst 100's of hours of exclusive content, we have recently completed two short courses to help you become an effective changemaker, one called Profound Realization and the other called How To Do An Effective Media Detox.

Join CETV, engage with these courses and more here!

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Awareness

New Research Adds Evidence That Weed Killer Glyphosate Disrupts Hormones

Avatar

Published

on

New research is adding worrisome evidence to concerns that the widely used weed killing chemical glyphosate may have the potential to interfere with human hormones.

In a paper published in the journal Chemosphere titled Glyphosate and the key characteristics of an endocrine disruptor: A review, a trio of scientists concluded that glyphosate appears to have eight out of ten key characteristics associated with endocrine disrupting chemicals . The authors cautioned, however, that prospective cohort studies are still needed to more clearly understand the impacts of glyphosate on the human endocrine system.

The authors, Juan Munoz, Tammy Bleak and Gloria Calaf, each affiliated with the University of Tarapacá in Chile, said their paper is the first review to consolidate the mechanistic evidence on glyphosate as an endocrine-disrupting chemical (EDC).

Some of the evidence suggests that Roundup, Monsanto’s well-known glyphosate-based herbicide, can alter the biosynthesis of the sexual hormones, according to the researchers.

EDCs may mimic or interfere with the body’s hormones and are linked with developmental and reproductive problems as well as brain and immune system dysfunction.

The new paper follows publication earlier this year of an assortment of animal studies that indicated glyphosate exposures impact reproductive organs and threaten fertility.

Glyphosate is the world’s most widely used herbicide, sold in 140 countries. Introduced commercially in 1974 by Monsanto Co, the chemical is the active ingredient in popular products such as Roundup and hundreds of other weed killers used by consumers, municipalities, utilities, farmers, golf course operators, and others around the world.

Dana Barr, a professor at Emory University’s Rollins School of Public Health, said the evidence “tends to overwhelmingly indicate that glyphosate has endocrine disrupting properties.”

“It’s not necessarily unexpected since glyphosate has some structural similarities with many other endocrine disrupting pesticides; however, it is more concerning because glyphosate use far surpasses other pesticides,” said Barr, who directs a program within a National Institutes of Health-funded human exposure research center housed at Emory. “Glyphosate is used on so many crops and in so many residential applications such that aggregate and cumulative exposures can be considerable.”

Phil Landrigan, director of the Global Observatory on Pollution and Health, and a professor of biology
at Boston College, said the review pulled together “strong evidence” that glyphosate is an endocrine disruptor.

“The report is consistent with a larger body of literature indicating that glyphosate has a wide range of adverse health effects – findings that overturn Monsanto’s long-standing portrayal of glyphosate as a benign chemical with no negative impacts on human health,” said Landrigan.

EDCs have been a subject of concern since the 1990s after a series of publications suggested that some chemicals commonly used in pesticides, industrial solvents, plastics, detergents, and other substances could have the capacity to disrupt connections between hormones and their receptors.

Scientists generally recognized ten functional properties of agents that alter hormone action, referring to these as ten “key characteristics” of endocrine-disruptors. The ten characteristics are as follows:

EDC’s can:

  • Alter hormone distribution of circulating levels of hormones
  • Induce alterations in hormone metabolism or clearance
  • Alter the fate of hormone-producing or hormone-responsive cells
  • Alter hormone receptor expression
  • Antagonize hormone receptors
  • Interact with or activate hormone receptors
  • Alter signal transduction in hormone-responsive cells
  • Induce epigenetic modifications in hormone-producing or hormone-responsive cells
  • Alter hormone synthesis
  • Alter hormone transport across cell membranes

The authors of the new paper said a review of the mechanistic data showed that glyphosate met all of the key characteristics with the exception of two:  “Regarding glyphosate, there is no evidence associated with the antagonistic capacity of hormonal receptors,” they said. As well, “there is no evidence of its impact on hormonal metabolism or clearance,” according to the authors.

Research over the last few decades has largely focused on links found between glyphosate and cancer, particularly non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL.) In 2015, the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen.

More than 100,000 people have sued Monsanto in the United States alleging exposure to the company’s glyphosate-based herbicides caused them or their loved ones to develop NHL.

The plaintiffs in the nationwide litigation also claim Monsanto has long sought to hide the risks of its herbicides. Monsanto lost three out of three trials and its German owner Bayer AG has spent the last year and a half trying to settle the litigation out of court.

The authors of the new paper took note of the ubiquitous nature of glyphosate, saying “massive use” of the chemical has “led to a wide environmental diffusion,” including rising exposures tied to human consumption of the weed killer through food.

The researchers said that though regulators say the levels of glyphosate residue commonly found in foods are low enough to be safe, they “cannot rule out” a “potential risk” to people consuming foods containing contaminated with the chemical,  particularly grains and other plant-based foods, which often have higher levels than milk, meat or fish products.

U.S. government documents show glyphosate residues have been detected in a range of foods, including organic honey, and granola and crackers.

Canadian government researchers have also reported glyphosate residues in foods. One report issued in 2019 by scientists from Canada’s Agri-Food Laboratories at the Alberta Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry found glyphosate in 197 of 200 samples of honey they examined.

Despite the concerns about glyphosate impacts on human health, including through dietary exposure, U.S. regulators have steadfastly defended the safety of the chemical. The Environmental Protection Agency maintains that it has not found any human health risks from exposure to glyphosate.”

Written by Carey Gillam, research director of U.S. Right to Know, where it was originally posted. 

Dive Deeper

These days, it’s not just knowing information and facts that will create change, it’s changing ourselves, how we go about communicating, and re-assessing the underlying stories, ideas and beliefs that form our world. We have to practice these things if we truly want to change. At Collective Evolution and CETV, this is a big part of our mission.

Amongst 100's of hours of exclusive content, we have recently completed two short courses to help you become an effective changemaker, one called Profound Realization and the other called How To Do An Effective Media Detox.

Join CETV, engage with these courses and more here!

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Positive Association Found Amongst COVID Deaths & Flu Shot Rates Worldwide In Elderly

Avatar

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A recently published paper has found a positive association between COVID-19 deaths and influenza vaccination rates in elderly people worldwide.

  • Reflect On:

    Why does vaccine hesitancy continue to grow worldwide? What's going on? What information/factors are contributing to this hesitancy?

What Happened: A recently published study in PeerJ  by Christian Wehenkel, a Professor at Universidad Juárez del Estado de Durango in Mexico, has found a positive association between COVID-19 deaths and influenza vaccination rates in elderly people worldwide.

According to the study, “The results showed a positive association between COVID-19 deaths and IVR (influenza vaccination rate) of people ≥65 years-old. There is a significant increase in COVID-19 deaths from eastern to western regions in the world. Further exploration is needed to explain these findings, and additional work on this line of research may lead to prevention of deaths associated with COVID-19.”

To determine this association, data sets from 39 countries with more than half a million people were analyzed.

The study was published on October 1st, and two weeks later a note from the publisher appeared atop the paper emphasizing that correlation does not equal causation, and that this paper “should not be taken to suggest that receiving the influenza vaccination results in an increased risk of death for an individual with COVID-19 as there may be confounding factors at play.”

The paper provides evidence from others which have recently been published that ponder if the flu shot could increase ones chance of contracting and dying from COVID-19.

For example, this study published in April of 2020, reported a negative correlation between influenza vaccination rates (IVRs) and COVID-19 related mortality and morbidity. Marín-Hernández, Schwartz & Nixon (2020) also showed epidemiological evidence of an association between higher influenza vaccine uptake by elderly people and lower percentage of COVID-19 deaths in Italy, which directly contradicts the author’s own findings and suggests that the flu shot may help prevent COVID-19 related deaths.

He goes on to mention another study:

In a study analyzing 92,664 clinically and molecularly confirmed COVID-19 cases in Brazil, Fink et al. (2020) reported that patients who received a recent flu vaccine experienced on average 17% lower odds of death. Moreover, Pawlowski et al. (2020) analyzed the immunization records of 137,037 individuals who tested positive in a SARS-CoV-2 PCR. They found that polio, Hemophilus influenzae type-B, measles-mumps-rubella, varicella, pneumococcal conjugate (PCV13), geriatric flu, and hepatitis A/hepatitis B (HepA-HepB) vaccines, which had been administered in the past 1, 2, and 5 years, were associated with decreased SARS-CoV-2 infection rates.

So, its important to mention that correlations between the flu vaccine have also found that it may decrease ones chance of deaths from COVID-19.

But are there studies that have shown an increased chance of death or contracting other respiratory viruses as a result of getting the flu shot? Yes.

That’s also discussed in the paper. For example, he mentions a paper published in 2018:

In a study with 6,120 subjects, Wolff (2020) reported that influenza vaccination was significantly associated with a higher risk of some other respiratory diseases, due to virus interference. In a specific examination of non-influenza viruses, the odds of coronavirus infection (but not the COVID-19 virus) in vaccinated individuals were significantly higher, when compared to unvaccinated individuals (odds ratio = 1.36).

The study above found the flu shot to increase the risk of other coronaviruses among those who had been vaccinated for influenza by 36 percent. The study was conducted prior to COVID-19, so it’s not included and only applies to pre-existing coronaviruses. The study also found an even higher chance of contracting human metapneumovirus amongst those who had received the flu shot.

Below are some more studies regarding the flu shot and viral infections that hint to the same idea.

  • 2018 CDC study (Rikin et al 2018) found that flu shots increase the risk of non-flu acute respiratory illnesses (ARIs), including coronavirus, in children.
  • A 2011 Australian study (Kelly et al 2011) found that flu shots doubled the risk for non-flu viral lung infections.
  • 2012 Hong Kong study (Cowling et al 2012) found that flu shots increase the risk for non-flu respiratory infections by 4.4 times.
  • 2017 study (Mawson et al 2017) found vaccinated children were 5.9 times more likely to suffer pneumonia than their unvaccinated peers.

Why This Is Important: We live in an age where vaccinations are heavily marketed. We’ve seen this with the flu shot time and time again and we are also living in an age where a push for more mandated vaccines seems to be growing.

Dr. Peter Doshi is an associate editor at The BMJ (British Medical Journal) and also an assistant professor of pharmaceutical health services research at the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy. He published a paper in The BMJ titled “Influenza: Marketing Vaccines By Marketing Disease.”  In it,  he points out that the CDC pledges “to base all public health decisions on the highest quality of scientific data, openly and objectively derived,” and how this isn’t the case when it comes to the flu vaccine and its marketing. He stresses that “the vaccine may be less beneficial and less safe than has been claimed, and that “the threat of influenza seems to be overstated.”

This is a touchy subject that dives into medical ethics and the connections that big pharmaceutical companies have with our federal health regulatory agencies and health associations. Vaccines are a multi billion dollar industry.

At a recent World Health Organization conference on vaccine safety, it was expressed that vaccine hesitancy is growing at quite a fast pace, especially among doctors who are now becoming hesitant to recommend certain vaccines on the schedule. You can read more about that and find links to the conference here.

We have to ask ourselves, why is this happening? Is it because people and professionals are becoming aware of certain information that warrants the freedom of choice? Should freedom of choice with regards to what we put in our body always remain? Are we really protecting the “herd” by taking these actions?

In a 2014 analysis in the Oregon Law Review by New York University (NYU) legal scholars Mary Holland and Chase E. Zachary (who also has a Princeton-conferred doctorate in chemistry), the authors show that 60 years of compulsory vaccine policies “have not attained herd immunity for any childhood disease.” It is time, they suggest, to cast aside coercion in favor of voluntary choice.

When it comes to the flu shot, I put more information and science as to why so many people seem to refuse it, in this article if interested.

The University of California is currently being sued for mandating the flu shot for all staff, faculty and students. A judge has prevented them from doing so as a result until a decision has been made. You can read more about that here.

In South Korea, 48 people have now died after receiving the flu shot this season causing a lot of controversy. You can read more about that here.

The Takeaway: There are many concerns with vaccines, and vaccine injury is one of them. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act has paid more than $4 billion to families of vaccine injured children. A 2010 HHS pilot study by the Federal Agency for Health Care Research (AHCR) found that 1 in every 39 vaccines causes injury, a shocking comparison to the claims from the CDC of 1 in every million.

Should these statistics alone warrant the freedom of choice? Should the government have the ability to force us into measures, or would it simply be better for them to present the science, make recommendations and urge people to follow them? When the citizenry is forced and coerced into certain actions, sometimes under the guise of good-will, there always seems to be a tremendous amount of uproar and people who disagree. Why are these people silenced? Why are they censored? Why are they ridiculed? Why don’t independent health organizations receive the same voice and reach that government and state “owned” or organizations do? What’s going on here? Do we really live in a free, open and transparent world or are we simply subjected to massive amounts of perception manipulation?

When it come to the flu shot there is plenty of information on both sides of the coin that point to its effectiveness, and on the other hand there is information that points to the complete opposite. When something is not 100 percent clear, freedom of choice in all places should always remain, in my opinion.

Dive Deeper

These days, it’s not just knowing information and facts that will create change, it’s changing ourselves, how we go about communicating, and re-assessing the underlying stories, ideas and beliefs that form our world. We have to practice these things if we truly want to change. At Collective Evolution and CETV, this is a big part of our mission.

Amongst 100's of hours of exclusive content, we have recently completed two short courses to help you become an effective changemaker, one called Profound Realization and the other called How To Do An Effective Media Detox.

Join CETV, engage with these courses and more here!

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Some South Korean Doctors & Politicians Call To Stop Flu Shots After 48 People Die

Avatar

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    The number of South Koreans who have died after getting flu shots has risen to 48, but health authorities in South Korea have found no link between the vaccine and the deaths.

  • Reflect On:

    Is the flu shot as safe as it's marketed to be?

What Happened: It’s that time of year and flu shot programs are rolling out across the globe. The number of South Koreans who have died after getting the flu shot has now risen to 48 and some South Korean doctors and politicians have called to stop flu shots as a result, according to Reuters. The Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency (KDCA) has decided not to stop the program, and that flu vaccines would continue to be given and will reduce the chance of having simultaneous epidemics in the era of COVID-19.

Health authorities in South Korea have explained that they’ve found no direct link between these deaths and the shots. KDCA Director Jeong Eun-kyung said, “After reviewing death cases so far, it is not the time to suspend a flu vaccination programme since vaccination is very crucial this year, considering…the COVID-19 outbreaks.”

According to Reuters, “Some initial autopsy results from the police and the National Forensic Service showed that 13 people died of cardiovascular, cerebrovascular and other disorders not caused by the vaccination.”

The South Korean government is hopeful to vaccinate approximately 30 million of the country’s 54 million people.

Concerns Some People Have With The Flu Shot: One concern many people seem to have is the worry of a severe adverse reaction.

Dr. Alvin Moss, MD and professor at the West Virginia University School of Medicine emphasizes in this video:

The flu vaccine happens to be the vaccine that causes the most injury in this country. The vaccine injury compensation program, 40 percent of all vaccinations in this country are flu shots, but 60 percent of all the compensations are for the flu vaccine. So a disproportionate number of  vaccine related injuries are the flu shot.

Moss is one of many who believe that the flu vaccine is not as effective as it’s been marketed to be. For example,  A study recently published in Global Advances In Health & Medicine titled “Ascorbate as Prophylaxis and Therapy for COVID-19—Update From Shanghai and U.S. Medical Institutions outlines the following:

Recently outlined A recent consensus statement from a group of renowned infectious disease clinicians observed that vaccine programs have proven ill-suited to the fast-changing viruses underlying these illnesses, with efficacy ranging from 19% to 54% in the past few years.

Dr. Peter Doshi is an associate editor at The BMJ (British Medical Journal)  published a paper in The BMJ titled “Influenza: Marketing Vaccines By Marketing Disease.”  In it,  he points out that the CDC pledges “to base all public health decisions on the highest quality of scientific data, openly and objectively derived,” and how this isn’t the case when it comes to the flu vaccine and its marketing. He stresses that “the vaccine may be less beneficial and less safe than has been claimed, and that “the threat of influenza seems to be overstated.”

These are just a few examples out of many claiming that the flu shot has not really been effective, opposing others that claim it is.  Mercury that’s still present in some flu shots also seems to be a concern.

The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act has paid more than $4 billion to families of vaccine injured children. A 2010 HHS pilot study by the Federal Agency for Health Care Research (AHCR) found that 1 in every 39 vaccines causes injury, a shocking comparison to the claims from the CDC of 1 in every million.

Professor Heidi Larson, a Professor of Anthropology and the Risk and Decision Scientist Director at the Vaccine Confidence Project stated at a World Health Organization (WHO) conference that more doctors are starting to be hesitant when it comes to recommending vaccines.

The other thing that’s a trend, and an issue, is not just confidence in providers but confidence of health care providers, we have a very wobbly health professional frontline that is starting to question vaccines and the safety of vaccines. That’s a huge problem, because to this day any study I’ve seen… still, the most trusted person on any study I’ve seen globally is the health care provider…

This is no secret, and actions against mandates are being taken. The University of California was recently sued for making the flu shot mandatory. That trial will begin soon, and you can read more about it here, and find information regarding the claim that the flu shot can help in the times of COVID-19.

The Takeaway: We are living in an age of extreme censorship of information, no matter how credible or how much evidence is provided, information that goes against the grain always seems to receive a harsh backlash from mainstream media as well as social media outlets. Why is there a digital fact checker patrolling the internet? Should people not have the right to examine information openly and freely and determine for themselves what is and what isn’t?

As far as vaccines are concerned, despite the fact that there are many safety issues the scientific community  is bringing up, a push for vaccine mandates continues and the idea that we are protecting other people is usually the narrative that’s pushed hard. Vaccine skepticism is growing at a fast pace among people of all professions, and people aren’t stupid. There’s a reason why more and more people are starting to question what we’ve been told for years, and those reasons should be acknowledged and openly discussed amongst people on both sides of the coin.

Dive Deeper

These days, it’s not just knowing information and facts that will create change, it’s changing ourselves, how we go about communicating, and re-assessing the underlying stories, ideas and beliefs that form our world. We have to practice these things if we truly want to change. At Collective Evolution and CETV, this is a big part of our mission.

Amongst 100's of hours of exclusive content, we have recently completed two short courses to help you become an effective changemaker, one called Profound Realization and the other called How To Do An Effective Media Detox.

Join CETV, engage with these courses and more here!

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

Due to censorship, please join us on Telegram

We post important content to Telegram daily so we don't have to rely on Facebook.

You have Successfully Subscribed!