Category : Vaccine Safety

Home/Archive by Category" Vaccine Safety"

The Bonvie Blog: Flu Vaccination

The flu vaccination: a shot in the dark that misses by a mile


By now the flu-shot propaganda machine is in full swing.

The truth is we can’t go anywhere after summer folds its tent without being bombarded with a pitch to get one of these jabs.

So, should you?

Will that needle poke be the extra insurance you need to stay flu-free throughout the holiday season and the winter months ahead?

Before you run out for that shot, however, there are some things you should know – a bit of flu vaccine history that you won’t be hearing from the CDC, the CVS, your local health department and most especially Big Pharma.

To listen to CDC experts talk about it, skipping your yearly influenza vaccine is as risky as crossing the Grand Canyon on a tightrope. And if you’re pregnant, or a bit on the older side, it’s even more dangerous to go flu-shot-free!

But where, exactly, is the “proof” that this mass campaign to get everyone inoculated is keeping us healthy? That’s what a pair of professors – pro-vaccine pediatricians, no less – at the University of Rochester wanted to find out.

Drs. Eric Biondi, and Andrew Aligne (who is also the Director of the Hoekelman Center at the University), took a good long look at the record of flu vaccines over the past century. And what they found is more than enough to give you reason to pause before you roll up your sleeve.

The proof goes ‘poof’

You wouldn’t know it by the big flu-shot push that revs up every year, but the fact that there’s no real proof to support this extensive (and expensive) campaign is out there in peer-reviewed and published data… much of it straight from the CDC itself.

As Drs. Biondi and Aligne relate the facts, in 1960, for the very first time, annual flu shots were recommended by federal health authorities. That was despite having over a decade (starting in the late 1940s) of experience that hadn’t produced a shred of evidence showing that vaccinating the general public for the flu was keeping people healthy or saving lives.

That ‘flu shots for all’ mandate came on the heels of the 1957 Asian flu pandemic, in which millions of doses of vaccines were given in the U.S. – later found to have “no appreciable effect” in stemming the tide of illness or death. The theory back then was that the immunization campaign’s failure was simply a case of “too little, too late.” If more people were vaccinated in a timely way, the idea went, then the shot would surely work better.

But that plan also turned out to be a dud.flu

In 1964 the head epidemiologist at the CDC published a paper in which he “reluctantly concluded that there is little progress to be reported.” Should widespread influenza shots “be continued without better evidence” to justify the cost, he asked?

A few years later in 1968 CDC officials decided to look at the effectiveness of flu vaccines with a gold-standard, randomized double-blind trial. The goal was to find out if all these vaccines now being given out to Americans were indeed saving lives. And, as they wrote, “despite extensive use…” that promise “has never been demonstrated.”

But it was the 1976 “Swine Flu Fiasco” (as it was dubbed by The New York Times), that should have been the swan song for the widespread public acceptance of a yearly flu jab.

Not only didn’t a pandemic materialize, but the shot to prevent it appeared to trigger an epidemic of the paralyzing vaccine side effect known as Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS), in which the body attacks its own nerves. (Interestingly, before Pharma would release any vials of flu vaccine that year it demanded that the feds protect drug makers against any claims of adverse reactions from the shots – what’s known today as the Office of Special Masters of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims (a.k.a. the “vaccine injury court”).

Another big analysis by the CDC a year later determined that flu-outbreak control had been “generally ineffective.” And in 1995 the FDA took a stab at validating all the hoopla over influenza vaccination. It concluded that there is a “paucity of randomized trials,” and of the existing research, the agency found “serious methodological flaws in many existing flu-vaccine studies.”

Okay, so that was then – the dark ages of medical knowledge. In the more recent past scientists learned how to make a better flu shot, right?

Well, apparently not.

A CDC placebo-controlled trial in 2000 couldn’t find a benefit “in most years” for a shot versus good old placebo. In 2005 the authors of a 33-season study discovered that despite the fact that shots given to seniors had quadrupled, the estimated death rate was “probably very close to what would have occurred had no vaccine been available.”

But it’s obvious that, proof or no proof, not only is this yearly ritual firmly entrenched in mainstream healthcare practices, but any professional who dares to question it is taking a big chance.

Last year, for example, Dr. Daniel Neides, then medical director and chief operating officer of the Cleveland Clinic Wellness Institute was accused of “fear mongering” and spreading “dangerous information” when he mentioned in his blog that some flu vaccines contain mercury and formaldehyde, which can add up to a “constant toxic burden.”

Needless to say, Dr. Neides is no longer with that organization.

Of course, you could argue that even a smidgen of protection is worthwhile, but that’s another flu-shot theory that doesn’t hold water considering the risks involved, which range from agonizing shoulder pain known as SIRVA (shoulder injuries related to vaccine administration), to allergic reactions, headache, fever and nausea (the last three considered “common side effects” by the CDC).

And along with the “toxic burden” Dr. Neides referred to, you should know that there are more settlements out of the vaccine injury court for flu shots than any other inoculation, with the most reported one being for GBS.

Certainly having the flu is no walk in the park, and yes, it can result in serious, even deadly, complications in some people.

All of which is why keeping your body well-equipped to fight it with proper sleeping habits, a daily dose of vitamin D – along with other immune-boosting supplements, nutrient-dense foods, and frequent hand washing – will do more to keep you flu-free than anything Big Pharma has yet to offer up.

Linda and Bill Bonvie are regular bloggers for Citizens for Health and the co-authors of Badditives: The 13 Most Harmful Food Additives in Your Diet – and How to Avoid Them.

Vaccine Alternative: Prevent Disease, No Pricks




Another Choice for Immunization?

New video series shows how to protect against disease with No Pricks

Washington, DC – We attended a conference recently and learned about an emerging new alternative in disease protection called “HP” – short for “HomeoProphylaxis”. Around here we like to refer to it simply as a “Smart Choice”, because with all the debate around vaccines and questions regarding their safety, an alternative free from such concerns is most welcome.

The “Smart Choice” is being used by millions worldwide – no surprise, given it is non-toxic and highly effective. Fortunately the organizers of the conference filmed it for a series of presentation videos and have made each available to CFH supporters at a reduced rate – $13.95 vs. the usual $39.95. There are also several presenters, including leading U.S. vaccine rights attorney Alan Phillips, and leading medical researcher Neil Z. Miller, who share some little known and eye-opening facts vaccine science and law.

To learn more and see a preview of all the speakers, click on the screen image below or visit the HP WORLDWIDE CHOICE STORE. To get your Citizens for Health discount, enter the promo code CITIZENS35 when you make a purchase before February 14. A bonus: 10% of what you spend is donated to CFH!

We think we can all agree we’re due for a Smart Choice – now it looks like we have one, and another way to preserve our health freedom.

Please take a moment to share this information with anyone interested in an alternative to vaccines – spread the word on health freedom!

homeoprophylaxis preview[For access to HP, or if you’re a healthcare provider and want to add HP to your practice, please contact Cilla Whatcott by visiting Program access is also available through]

Just the (Vaxx) Facts Ma’am! Get the Truth About Vaccine Choice in an All-Day Internet Radio Marathon

Greetings Health Freedom Champions!

Our friends and allies at the Natural Solutions Foundation have asked us to spread the word about a day-long event dedicated to the truth about vaccine choice and to giving you the tools and information you need to make informed decisions about maintaining the health and wellness of you and your family.

On May 1, 2015 Veterans Truth Network and American Freedom Network will join forces with the Natural Solutions Foundation to present MayDay! Vaccine Truth Internet Talk Radio Marathon. (It will also be streamed live on American Freedom Radio,, thanks to Danny Romero).

Take advantage of the Natural Solutions Foundation’s Health Freedom Portal to listen, chat and share. Join CFH Chair Jim Turner and other leaders in the fight for health freedom such as Rima Laibow, MD; Sherrie Tenpenny, DO; and many others. Following the event an ebook will be available that will contain articles and audio files as well as the entire bibliography.

Current Schedule for MayDay! Vaccine Truth Marathon

Friday, May 1, 2015 8:00 AM to Midnight, all times Eastern:

8:00 Introduction; 8:30 Susan’s Story; 9:00 Walter Kyle; 9:30 Freda Burell, N. Erikson; 10:30 Sarah Shoen, MD; 11:30 April Boden; 12:30 Michael Innes; 1:30 Adam Crabb; 2:30 Sherrie Tenpenny; 3:30 Viera Schreibner; 4:30 Catherine Frompoitch; 5:30 Tim Bolen; 6:00 Lawyer’s Hour; 7:00 Vinny Eastwood; 8:00 Desiree Rover; 9:00 Susanne Posel; 10:00 Mike Adams; 11:00 Round table

Tune in from 8:00AM to midnight!

Then use those insights to take action! Check out this list of state bills threatening your health freedom regarding vaccinations. Make your voice heard NOW!

Bookmark, so you can check on updates as more amazing experts are added to the schedule.

Vaccinations and the Current Measles Outbreak

According to the Centers for Disease Control, 140 people from 7 states contracted measles between late December 2014 and Feb 27 2015. The outbreak is believed to have been caused by a traveler who became infected overseas with measles, then visited an amusement park in California, exposing dozens of others.

While no deaths have been attributed to the outbreak, media is fueling fear about an epidemic.

childhood-vaccination-book_Our chiropractor friend, Dr. Tedd Koren, DC — author of Childhood Vaccination — recently wrote an article discussing what is behind the current measles outbreak, how dangerous the disease is, and whether vaccinations do more harm than good.

In support of choice and the interest of providing the public with important information often overlooked by mainstream media, we think it is important to bring this article to your attention. Click here to read the article and become better informed about the growing concern over measles and vaccines.

GOP Debate Spotlights Vaccination Safety, Choice

Contact: Vaccine Safety Council of Minnesota / Nancy Hokkanen 952-831-3777

Lives ruined, “Gardasil Girls” abandoned by CDC, manufacturers & media

ST. PAUL, MN – Vaccine consumers were shortchanged yet again by media’s selective reporting of Rep. Michele Bachmann’s HPV vaccine comments from last week’s Tea Party debate. Whatever one’s opinion of Republican Presidential candidate Bachmann, the seriousness of vaccine injury was lost to many journalists’ indulgences in bias, jingoism and ignorance.

The Minneapolis Star Tribune found demagoguery irresistible, inaccurately titling its editorial “Bachmann’s foolish attack on vaccines.” The subhead, “Congresswoman’s fear-mongering put politics over health,” was unintentionally ironic, especially given the Strib’s consistent failure to investigate many readers’ vaccine injuries and legitimate product safety concerns.

In 2006 the HPV vaccine was recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. A few years later the U.S. Centers for Disease Control stated, “As of June 22, 2011… VAERS [the federal Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System] received a total of 18,727 reports of adverse events following Gardasil® vaccination.” A total of 2,799 adverse events were classified as “Serious,” including encephalopathy (brain damage). 98 deaths have been reported.

In 2009 CBS News quoted Dr. Scott Ratner, whose wife is also a physician, saying one of their daughters became severely ill after a shot of Gardasil: “My daughter went from a varsity lacrosse player at Choate to a chronically ill, steroid-dependent patient with autoimmune myofasciitis.”

Girls injured by HPV vaccines have little recourse – medical treatments are few and vaccine injury research is minimal. Teenaged victims have taken their stories to Facebook and YouTube. Websites like list victims’ symptoms and photos. A documentary on HPV vaccine injury, “One More Girl,” is currently being filmed by ThinkExist Productions.

Glossed over in most media is possible influence peddling by Governor Rick Perry’s former chief of staff Mike Toomey, who went to work for Merck, the manufacturer of the Gardasil HPV vaccine. The legislative group Women In Government was courted by HPV vaccine manufacturers; a subsequent 2007 Minnesota HPV vaccine bill sponsored by WIG attendees was defeated.

The Washington Post did run “Perry’s Financial Ties to Merck Run Deep” on 9/14/11, but concluded with this tepid caveat: “[S]ome experts have said they are concerned that there is insufficient evidence about how long Gardasil’s protection will last, whether serious side effects will emerge and whether a reduction in infections will necessarily translate into fewer cancers.”

Despite these unanswered questions, a bill to allow 12-year-olds to get the HPV vaccine without parents’ consent is on the desk of California Governor Jerry Brown. Yet few media outlets have reported on the myriad negative implications of this usurpation of parental health care rights.

Media’s repeated failure to investigate vaccine safety issues is perhaps best summarized this week in an insightful analysis by Alison Bass, a Brandeis and Mount Holyoke journalism professor, science writer, Pulitzer Prize nominee, and author of the book “Side Effects”:

“I wish the media would use this opportunity to explore the public health ramifications of allowing a drug manufacturer to aggressively target the wrong population for an expensive and possibly unnecessary vaccine.”


Continue Reading

The Censorship of Autism Treatment

by Kim Stagliano, Author “All I Can Handle. I’m No Mother Teresa.”

Last Thursday afternoon, The General Medical Council in London, England announced its decisions in the disciplinary hearing of Dr. Andrew Wakefield, Professor Simon Murch and Professor John Walker-Smith. The ruling was not in their favor.

There will likely be other posts here at HuffPost explaining the legal machinations of the GMC hearings and science behind the original The Lancet paper, now retracted. Be sure to look for David Kirby’s post on the topic. If you’re interested, you can read an eye witness account of the proceedings from Martin Walker, who has followed the GMC hearing from the start.

To understand the bigger picture, I highly recommend Mark Blaxill’s Age of Autism post on the current scientific environment for autism research in general in which he says, “The deep and profound censorship occurring around autism science reaches depths that few casual observers can imagine. I have proof.” HERE

I’d like to provide the voice of an autism Mom, hoarse from yelling into the wind for a cumulative total of thirty seven years. You see, I have three daughters with autism, ages 15, 13 and 9. Autism isn’t an abstract battle ground to me. I don’t write about autism to gather virtual high fives from a like minded community or to protect an industry or my own turf. My family eats, sleeps, breathes and ultimately, will die, with autism overshadowing every move we make.

When did autism go from a rare diagnosis to a disorder that affects 1 in 110 children but still warrants little to no medical care outside of psychiatric drugs and behavioral therapy? An autism diagnosis can erase a person’s ability to get solid medical care. If you brought your six year old to a hospital in the throes of a seizure, the neurologists would run tests and look for the cause. When I brought my six year old, I was told, “She has autism. She has different circuitry.” And then when I requested tests, I was told, “We’re just not that aggressive with autism.” My child has a brain and a gut and an immune system just like any other child. Why does her autism negate that?

Fortunately, there are doctors like Andrew Wakefield and others, most of whom prefer to keep a low profile as you can imagine, who can look past the behavioral diagnosis to the thrashing or sobbing child and his haggard Mom, exhausted from cleaning up bathroom accidents or cajoling a grapefruit sized BM from her anguished child every few days.

There is joy all over the Internet, back slapping and “Isn’t it grand!” that Dr. Wakefield and his colleagues have been brought down so publicly. At the same time, autism is chewing through our country at breakneck speed. 1 in 250 became 1 in 166 which increased to 1 in 150 and is now 1 in 110 with no signs of abating. Schools and families are bearing the brunt of the battle today. Tomorrow, as the children become young adults and “age out” of school, you, the average Huffington Post reader, will be partially responsible for them via your taxes. The finger pointing in Connecticut, where I live, has already begun. A recent newspaper article began with, “Why is the district being punished for having too many white autistic kids?”

I implore you to consider the patients. Remember the children, young adults and older persons with autism for whom GI disorders and other medical conditions are a very real problem.

We need a thousand doctors like Andrew Wakefield, who are willing to risk their careers and reputations in order to find out what is happening to our children and how to heal them. That’s what physician scientists do after all. Help and heal.

Vaccination Without Doctor Approval In a US Hospital

By S. Humphries, MD
January 22, 2010
original link with references

H1N1 and seasonal influenza vaccines are now being given to sick hospital patients with or without their doctor’s consent. This is being done despite there being no data on the safety of doing so.

I am a licensed, board-certified nephrologist, otherwise known as a kidney specialist, working in a large, city-based hospital. Because I rarely admit patients to the hospital other than for specific procedures, such as a kidney biopsy, I only recently became aware of my hospital’s policy regarding flu shots for sick people. Waking up to this new rule made me realize that Big Pharma is getting closer and closer to bypassing doctors completely to deliver direct patient “care”.

We have an elaborate electronic charting system at our hospital. All of the medications and procedure orders are placed into the patient’s record by doctors and nurses so that every person has access to all that is happening with the patient. A few weeks ago, I arrived to see my first patient of the day, a patient with a kidney ailment that leaks protein and usually progresses to complete kidney shutdown. When I opened her electronic chart, I expected my section to be empty. Instead, I saw an order for an influenza vaccine with my name on it. Even more shocking was that the order was highlighted bright blue, meaning, the shot had already been given. I thought perhaps I had opened the wrong chart or some sort of mistake had been made. But it was the right file; her name in the upper left hand corner. And my electronic signature was on the page after the order. My patient, with kidney failure and an autoimmune disorder had been given a flu shot without my consent.

I was informed that according to a hospital policy that had been in effect since 2007, a pharmacist is permitted to visit a patient and offer them a flu vaccine. If the patient agrees, the RN is instructed to administer the shot and document the event in the chart. The attending physician’s signature stamp is used to complete the order. No one called to ask, “By the way, your patient wants a flu shot; can we give her one?” I’m not sure what was said to her, but she obviously agreed, and I didn’t need to be involved. The pharmacist had written an order for an injectable substance that I considered toxic and inappropriate for my patient, and it was administered by the RN before I even got to the floor.

My dissatisfaction eventually made it to the Chief of Internal Medicine who challenged me to produce peer-reviewed journal articles in support of my objection. There were dozens of case reports of kidney disease or small blood vessel inflammation following influenza vaccination. In fact, one paper cited 16 patients in its written report(1). Under-reporting of adverse vaccine reactions is a known phenomenon. The National Vaccine Information Center estimates that only about two percent of adverse vaccine reactions ever get reported. It would follow that written and published case reports found in medical journals represent a miniscule sampling of the totality of vaccine injury cases. These implications should evoke at least some curiosity on the part of doctors and health care advocates.

The peer-reviewed literature was delivered to the department head. His initial response was to suggest that future vaccination orders be signed off by another physician so I didn’t have to be involved with the process of a nurse giving a “routine” flu shot. But the point had been missed; flu shots should not be given to sick patients.

I was challenging “routine orders” that had been in place since 2007. The defense for supporting the policy was that no side effects had been reported since the standing order had been instituted. I wondered to myself and then later inquired: How do you know that is true? Is it because nobody filed a formal report? If a patient became more ill after the shot, did you consider his condition to be a side effect of the vaccine, or was it simply called an unfortunate complication to the patient’s current illness? What if the patient was discharged from the hospital but readmitted several weeks later. Was the reason logged simply as a progression of his existing disease…or was the cause an overlooked, delayed side effect of the vaccination? If vaccine reactions are not considered as part of a patient’s differential diagnosis, how do you know? Without taking a vaccine history when considering a timeline of events, how could anybody possibly make the connection between a vaccine and a subsequent illness? How does anyone else know for that matter – that there were no side effects from the “routine” administration of flu shots, ordered by a pharmacist and given by a nurse, without doctor consent? The truth is, there is no real tracking and reporting system in place. And nobody is enthused about trying to start one. What has essentially happened is that the guards have all been told to go home and nobody is thinking to even look for the wolf.

I am sure there are thousands of unreported cases of kidney failure – and a wide range of other serious health conditions – because doctors fail to ask a very simple question as part of the admission evaluation: “When was your last vaccine?” And few doctors suspect any connection because the party line screams, “Vaccines are safe, effective and harmless. They keep people healthy and prevent infection.” If nobody looks, vaccine-related side effects and complications won’t be found.

There was a law passed in 1986, the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Act, that made vaccine manufacturers and administering physicians immune from legal recourse in the event of a vaccine injury. This has given manufacturers a dangerously long leash and has enabled them to push vaccines through FDA approval with little need to create a safe product. Now drug companies have extended their reach into the hospital right past doctors, and put the power to vaccinate in the hands of pharmacists and executive committees, allowing them to make decisions about what is best for a patient.