by Mike Adams
the Health Ranger
January 17, 2010
The CDC is engaged in a very clever,
statistically devious spin campaign, and nearly every journalist in
the mainstream media has fallen for its ploy. No one has yet
reported what I'm about to reveal here.
It all started with the CDC's recent release of new statistics about
swine flu fatalities, infection rates and vaccination rates.
According to the CDC:
61 million Americans were
vaccinated against swine flu (about 20% of the U.S.
population). The CDC calls this a "success" even though it
means 4 out of 5 people rejected the vaccines.
55 million people "became ill"
from swine flu infections.
246,000 Americans were
hospitalized due to swine flu infections.
11,160 Americans died from the
Base on these statistics, the CDC is now
desperately urging people to get vaccinated because they claim
"the pandemic might come back" and "vaccines
are the best defense."
But here's the part you're NOT being told.
The CDC statistics lie by omission. They do not reveal the single
most important piece of information about H1N1 vaccines:
How many of the people who died from
the swine flu had already been vaccinated?
Many who died had
already been vaccinated
The CDC is intentionally not tracking how many of the dead were
They want you (and mainstream media
journalists) to mistakenly believe that ZERO deaths occurred in
those who were vaccinated. But this is blatantly false. Being
H1N1 swine flu offers absolutely no
reduction in mortality from swine flu infections.
And that means roughly 20% of the 11,160 Americans who died from the
swine flu were probably already vaccinated against swine flu. That
comes to around 2,200 deaths in people who were vaccinated!
How do I know that swine flu vaccines don't reduce infection
mortality? Because I've looked through all the randomized,
double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials that have ever been
conducted on H1N1 vaccines. It didn't take me very long, because the
number of such clinical trials is ZERO.
That's right: There is not a single shred of evidence in
existence today that scientifically supports the myth that H1N1
vaccines reduce mortality from H1N1 infections. The best evidence I
can find on vaccines that target seasonal flu indicates a maximum
mortality reduction effect of somewhere around 1% of those who are
vaccinated. The other 99% have the same mortality rate as people who
were not vaccinated.
So let's give the recent H1N1 vaccines the benefit of the doubt and
let's imagine that they work just as well as other flu vaccines.
That means they would reduce the mortality rate by 1%.
So out of the 2,200 deaths that took
place in 2009 in people who were already vaccinated, the vaccine
potentially may have saved 22 people.
injections add up to bad public health policy
So let's see: 61 million people are injected with a potentially
dangerous vaccine, and the actual number "saved" from the pandemic
is conceivably just 22.
Meanwhile, the number of people harmed
by the vaccine is almost certainly much, much higher than 22. These
vaccines contain nervous system disruptors and inflammatory
chemicals that can cause serious health problems. Some of those
problems won't be evident for years to come... future Alzheimer's
victims, for example, will almost certainly those who received
regular vaccines, I predict.
Injecting 61 million people with a chemical that threatens the
nervous system in order to avoid 22 deaths - and that's the best
case! - is an idiotic public health stance. America would
have been better off doing nothing rather than hyping up a pandemic
in order to sell more vaccines to people who don't need them.
Better yet, what the USA could have done that would have been more
effective is handing out bottles of
Vitamin D to 61 million people.
At no more cost than the vaccines, the
bottles of vitamin D supplements would have saved thousands of lives
and offered tremendously importantly additional benefits such as
preventing cancer and depression, too.
question the CDC does not want you to ask
Through its release of misleading statistics, the CDC wants everyone
to believe that all of the people who died from H1N1 never received
the H1N1 vaccine. That's the implied mythology behind the release of
And yet they never come right out and
say it, do they?
They never say, "None of these deaths
occurred in patients who had been vaccinated against H1N1."
They can't say that because it's simply not true. It would be a lie.
And if that lie were exposed, people might begin to ask questions
like, "Well gee, if some of the people who were killed by the swine
flu were already vaccinated against swine flu, then doesn't that
mean the vaccine doesn't protect us from dying?"
That's the number one question that the CDC absolutely, positively
does not want people to start asking.
So they just gloss over the point and imply that vaccines offer
absolute protection against H1N1 infections. But even the CDC's own
scientists know that's complete bunk. Outright quackery. No vaccine
is 100% effective. In fact, when it comes to influenza, no vaccine
is even 10% effective at reducing mortality. There's not even a
vaccine that's 5% effective. And there's never been a single shred
of credible scientific information that says a flu vaccine is even
So how effective are these vaccines, really? There are a couple
thousand vaccinated dead people whose own deaths help answer that
question: They're not nearly as effective as you've been led to
They may not be effective at all.
numbers - Why vaccines just don't add up
Think about this: 80% of Americans refused to get vaccinated against
swine flu. That's roughly 240 million people.
Most of those 240 million people were probably exposed to the H1N1
virus at some point over the last six months because the virus was
How many of those 240 million people were actually killed by H1N1?
Given the CDC's claimed total of deaths at 11,160, if you take 80%
of that (because that's the percentage who refused to be
vaccinated), you arrive at 8,928.
So roughly 8,900 people died out of 240
million. That's a death rate among the un-vaccinated population of
With a death rate of .0000372, the swine flu killed roughly 1 out of
every 26,700 people who were NOT vaccinated. So even if you skipped
the vaccine, you had a 26,699 out of 26,700 chance of surviving.
Those are pretty good odds. Ridiculously good. You have a 700%
greater chance of being struck by lightning in your lifetime, by the
What it all means is that NOT getting vaccinated against the swine
flu is actually a very reasonable, intelligent strategy for
protecting your health. Mathematically, it is the smarter play.
Because, remember: Some of the dead victims of H1N1 got vaccinated.
In fact, I personally challenge the CDC to release statistics
detailing what percentage of the dead people had previously received
The headline to this article, "Thousands of Americans died from H1N1
even after receiving vaccine shots" is a direct challenge to the
CDC, actually. If the CDC believes this headline is wrong - and that
the number of vaccinated Americans who died from H1N1 is zero - then
why don't they say so on the record?
Because they'd be laughed right out of
the room. Everybody who has been following this with any degree of
intelligence knows that the H1N1 vaccine was a medical joke from the
start. There is no doubt that many of those who died from H1N1 were
The CDC just doesn't want you to know
how many (and they hope you'll assume it's zero).
Where are all
the real journalists?
I find it especially fascinating that the simple question of "How
many of the dead were previously vaccinated?" has never been asked
in print by a single journalist in any mainstream newspaper or
media outline across the country. Not the NY Times, not
WashingtonPost.com, not the WSJ, LA Times or USA Today. (At least,
not that I'm aware of. If you find one that does, let me know and
I'll link to their article!)
Isn't there a single journalist
in the entire industry that has the journalistic courage to
ask this simple question of the CDC?
Why do these mainstream
journalists just reprint the CDC's statistics without asking
a single intelligent question about them?
Why is all the intelligent,
skeptical reporting about H1N1 found only in the alternative
press or independent media sites?
You already know the answer, but I'll
say it anyway:
Because most mainstream media journalists are
just part of the propaganda machine, blindly reprinting
distorted statistics from "authorities" without ever stopping to
question those authorities.
The MSM today, in other words, is often quite pathetic.
Far from the independent media mindset
that used to break big stories like Watergate, today's mainstream
media is little more than a mouthpiece for the corporatocracy
that runs our nation. The MSM serves the financial interests of
the corporations, just as the CDC and WHO do. That's why they're all
spouting the same propaganda with their distorted stories about H1N1
But those who are intelligent enough to ask skeptical questions
about H1N1 already realize what an enormous con the pandemic was.
In the end, it turned out to be a
near-harmless virus that was hyped up by the CDC, WHO and drug
companies in order to sell hundreds of millions of doses of vaccines
that are now about to be dumped down the drain as useless.
Sources for this story include