RSS
Home
CBS report exposes apparent CDC (Centers for Disease Control) fraud regarding H1N1 influenza
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) states on their main influenza web page (in October 2009) that flu activity is increasing in the United States, with most states reporting "widespread influenza activity." The CDC announcement states that "So far, most flu is 2009 H1N1 flu (sometimes called swine flu)."
However, a three-month-long investigation by CBS News which accessed state-by-state test results, revealed much different facts. The CBS News study found that H1N1 flu cases are much less prevalent than implied by the CDC statements. CBS states: "If you've been diagnosed "probable" or "presumed" 2009 H1N1 or "swine flu" in recent months, you may be surprised to know this: odds are you didn't have H1N1 flu. In fact, you probably didn't have flu at all."
CBS News and the CDC are blatantly contradicting one another. To understand how this happened, a brief history of the CDC response to swine flu must be explored. In late July 2009 the CDC advised states to halt testing for H1N1 flu, and the CDC also stopped counting individual cases. The CDC rationale for this policy, according to CBS News, was that testing for H1N1 was a waste of resources because it was already confirmed as an epidemic. Thus, most people who visited their physician with flu-like symptoms since late July were assumed to have H1N1, with no testing needed according to the CDC.
Before beginning their investigation, CBS News asked the CDC for state-by-state test results obtained prior to their halting of testing and tracking H1N1 cases in late July. The CDC did not respond to the request, so CBS News contacted all 50 states directly, asking for their statistics on state lab-confirmed H1N1 prior to the halt of individual testing and counting in July. CBS announced the results as follows:
"The results reveal a pattern that surprised a number of health care professionals we consulted. The vast majority of cases were negative for H1N1 as well as seasonal flu, despite the fact that many states were specifically testing patients deemed to be most likely to have H1N1 flu, based on symptoms and risk factors, such as travel to Mexico."
The data showed that only between 3% and 17% of cases of flu-like symptoms were associated with any flu virus. In California and Georgia, for example, only 2% of those tested actually had the H1N1 swine flu virus, which directly contradicts the CDC claim that most cases are swine flu. The CDC chose to stop testing in July even though at the time data showed that H1N1 cases were relatively rare. Since the CDC has no evidence to support their claim of H1N1 becoming widespread (they stopped testing while it was shown not to be that prevalent) and CBS discovered extensive evidence to contradict the CDC claim, it appears that the CDC has fabricated information to generate fears of H1N1 influenza and support the declaration by the World Health Organization of a pandemic. With President Obama now joining this seemingly fabricated drama by declaring a national emergency connected with swine flu, Americans are left wondering if anything their leaders tell them can be trusted.
These surprising facts also give reason to question how medical professionals associate illnesses with microbes. Many different microbes appear to be found in people with a similar constellation of symptoms. How do doctors know that those viruses or bacteria are the actual cause of illness? Could it be that stress and other factors create toxicity in the body and disrupt cellular energy flow, leading to a breakdown and detoxification process that activates available microbes to play a symbiotic role in the breakdown and removal of cellular waste? Microbiologists who focus on pleomorphism have often posited that microbes and cells transform in response to the biological environment, and thus viruses and bacteria are not the basic causes of illnesses. From an alternative naturopathic natural hygiene perspective, the activity of these microbes is merely a symptom of underlying ill health and actually part of nature's attempt to restore balance. Since correlation does not equal causation, the association of illnesses with microbes found in the body after the inception of the illness is one of conjecture, not a proven causal mechanism.
Since doctors don't seem to be able to isolate the cause(s) of illnesses how can they intelligently claim to offer vaccines that will prevent illness? How credible is the data reported by the CDC and drug companies concerning vaccines and other pharmaceutical products if the CDC is visibly making false claims about the prevalence of people with "flu-like" illness symptoms actually having flu viruses detectable in their body? To understand a disease or illness process one must be able to examine the process as it unfolds, beginning before the onset of the illness. Since medical researchers rarely ever attempt to do such a comprehensive study, most of their conclusions are based on a very limited snapshot of the illness process. The scientific process guides those seeking progress to investigate multiple hypotheses and recognize that any currently accepted theory can be disproven, but never proven to the exclusion of additional information that could offer a better or more comprehensive explanation of things. With many CDC and FDA officials having conflicts of interest involving their relationships to pharmaceutical companies, it is no surprise that the scientific method gets ignored and current theories are treated as gospel while critics are attacked as heretics.
Related Articles:
Add a Comment
