Sunday, 16 August 2009

Neurologists concerned over safety of swine flu vaccine

A warning that the new swine flu jab is linked to a deadly nerve disease has been sent by the Government to senior neurologists in a confidential letter.
The letter from the Health Protection Agency, the official body that oversees public health, has been leaked to The Mail on Sunday, leading to demands to know why the information has not been given to the public before the vaccination of millions of people, including children, begins.

It tells the neurologists that they must be alert for an increase in a brain disorder called Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS), which could be triggered by the vaccine.
GBS attacks the lining of the nerves, causing paralysis and inability to breathe, and can be fatal.

The letter, sent to about 600 neurologists on July 29, is the first sign that there is concern at the highest levels that the vaccine itself could cause serious complications.

Read more at link: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1206807/Swine-flu-jab-link-killer-nerve-disease-Leaked-letter-reveals-concern-neurologists-25-deaths-America.html



Monday, 10 August 2009

More of the same

Children with seasonal flu should not be given antivirals such as Tamiflu because harmful side effects outweigh relatively meager benefits, according to a study released Monday.

In some children Tamiflu caused nausea and vomiting, which can lead to dehydration and other complications, researchers reported.

The study did not cover the current outbreak of swine flu, but its conclusions suggest that antivirals may not significantly reduce the length of illness or prevent complications in children infected with the new A(H1N1) virus, the researchers said.

Carl Henegan, a doctor at John Radcliffe Hospital in Oxford and co-author of the study, said the current British practice of giving Tamiflu for mild illness was "an inappropriate strategy."

"The downside of the harms outweigh the one-day reduction in symptomatic benefits," he said.

The research showed that antivirals oseltamivir and zanamivir shortened the duration of seasonal flu by up to a day and a half.

But the drugs had little or no effect on asthma flare-ups, increased ear infections or the need for antibiotics.

Tamiflu, the brand name for oseltamivir, was also linked to an increased risk of vomiting. Zanamivir is marketed under the name Relenza.

The study, published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ), comes 10 days after Britain's Health Protection Agency (HPA) reported that more than half of 248 students given Tamiflu after a classmate fell ill with swine flu suffered side-effects such as nausea, insomnia and nightmares.

Most of the students did not have the flu when they were given the drug.

In the BMJ study, led by David Mant of Oxford University, researchers reviewed four earlier clinical trials -- two with Relenza and two with Tamiflu -- for influenza treatment covering 1,766 children 12 or younger. More half had confirmed cases of type A flu.

They also reviewed three other trials in which the drugs were given to children who had been exposed to the virus but showed no symptoms.

Such "proactive" use resulted in only an eight percent reduction in the incidence of influenza.

None of the trials tested the efficacy of anti-virals against the new strain of swine flu that has swept across the globe since April, infecting hundreds of thousands and claiming more than 1,100 lives.

Swiss pharmaceutical company Roche, the patent holder of Tamiflu, suggested that the symptoms described in the study might been due in part to the flu itself and not the medication.

"According the WHO, 50 percent of patients with the flu (swine or seasonal) have nausea symptoms or digestive problems caused by the illness," a Roche spokesman told AFP.

"Clinical studies on children treated with Tamiflu have shown secondary effects such as nausea, but these have been moderate and it is extremely rare that treatment must be halted as a consequence," the spokesman said.

Tamiflu can be prescribed from the age of one year old.


http://www.physorg.com/news169111819.html

Tamiflu "harmful to children"

Tamiflu 'harmful to children'

http://itn.co.uk/b728f6439934ee482493dce11cb1ad6b.html

Experts say children should not be given the swine flu drug Tamiflu because the negative effects could outweigh the benefits.

The Department of Health is under pressure to hold an urgent rethink of its current policy.

The study found that Tamiflu caused vomiting in some children, which can lead to dehydration and complications.

The drug also had little or no effect on asthma flare-ups, ear infections or the likelihood of a youngster needing antibiotics.

Dr Carl Henegan, a GP and expert from the John Radcliffe Hospital in Oxford, said the current policy of giving Tamiflu for mild illness was an "inappropriate strategy".

He added: "The downside of the harms outweigh the one-day reduction in symptomatic benefits."

The study comes little over a week after other research found that children given Tamiflu preventatively reported side-effects including nausea and nightmares.

Here's a link to the article in the Telegraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/swine-flu/6004313/Children-should-not-be-given-Tamiflu-Oxford-researchers.html

Popular flu drugs have modest effect.
http://www.medpagetoday.com/Pulmonary/URIstheFlu/15439





Sunday, 9 August 2009

Looks like i'm not alone on the vaccine issue :)

Children could be given untested swine flu vaccine

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1205267/Children-given-untested-swine-flu-vaccine.html

The swine flu vaccine which will be offered to 12 million children in the UK may not have been tested on infants by the time the first batches arrive.

Pharmaceutical companies manufacturing the jabs do not have any paediatric safety data for the drugs, which could be distributed to children in the autumn.

The first consignment of the vaccine is due to arrive at the end of this month but drugs firms have only just begun trials on adults.

Trials on children may not start for a few weeks.

Children are thought to be most at risk of developing a serious form of the H1N1 virus and also help to spread swine flu. It is expected they will be among the first to be vaccinated, along with health professionals, pregnant women and people with underlying health conditions.

However, the European Medicines Agency (EMEA), which will license the vaccines, said approval could be granted before the results of these trials are known.

Dr Tom Jefferson, of the vaccines section of the Cochrane Collaboration, an independent group that reviews research, said he feared there would be safety issues with the jab and had doubts it would work. He added: ‘Governments have a duty of care, and therefore a duty to provide vaccines which are proven to be safe and effective.’

During the last swine flu outbreak in the US in 1976, a vaccine caused 25 deaths – more than the virus itself. Dr Jefferson said a repeat of that ‘was possible’.

GP Dr Richard Halvorsen, author of The Truth About Vaccines, said that there was a ‘worrying trend’ to introduce jabs for children without good data. He said that in this case there was no pressing need for one.

However, microbiologist Professor Hugh Pennington said flu vaccines in general had an excellent safety record.

The EMEA admitted it could authorise the vaccine before the results of trials are known but if it did it would issue a warning it had not been tested on a specific group.

GlaxoSmithKline said it had conducted paediatric trials on the bird flu vaccine, on which the swine flu jab is based. A trial for children is planned within the next month.

The Department of Health said it would not be using the vaccine until ‘we are satisfied it is safe.’









Fever is our friend


"Give me a fever, and I can cure any illness" -- Hippocrates

Fever is an unusually high body temperature, a thermometer is used to measure the body temperature, temperatures varies when taken in different part of the body, if it is taken in the rectum/anus the temperature is generally one degree higher than if the temperature is taken under the arm, on a degree lower. Pyrogen is a substance that induces fever or rise in the body temperature. Fever is not a disease but symptoms of another sickness. During a fever, the body requires extra energy, which it generates by muscular activity in the form of shivering and by metabolizing (chemically breaking down) proteins, carbohydrates, vitamins, and minerals at a faster rate than normal.

Body Temperature if there is fever:

  • 100°Fahrenheit (37.8° C), taken orally, indicates a mild fever.

  • 100° to 103°F (37.8° to 39.4°C) taken orally, indicates a moderate fever.

  • 104°F (40°C) taken orally, indicates a high fever.

  • 110°F. (43.3°C), this is the uppermost limit of the human body, this kind of fever is extremely rare.


Types of Fever

  • Continued Fever - the temperature remains above normal for long period of time.

  • Intermittent Fever - type of fever wherein body temperature periodically rises and falls.

  • Relapsing Fever - type that recurs sometimes a number of times, several days after the temperature has returned to normal.


Stages of Fever:

  • In the first stage of fever also known as the invasion period the patient will experience chill, loss of appetite, and headache. Chill occurs, occurs because of the tightening of blood vessels near the skin.

  • In the next stage, the body is hot and flushed, the skin dry, and the pulse and respiration are rapid. The patient will experience thirst and he/she will feel restless. In high fever, delirium and convulsions may occur.

  • In the final stage before returning to normal, the temperature falls, breathing and pulse slow down, and the skin becomes moist. The patient often sweats.


Other than fever, other factors that can affect the body temperature are:

  • Time of the day - body temperature normally fluctuates over the day, with the lowest levels at 4a.m and the highest at 6 p.m. That's why a normal body temperature of 37.5°C (99.5°F) is considered a fever in the morning, but just normal body temperature in the afternoon.

  • Menstrual cycle is another factor that can affect body temperature. When the woman is ovulating her body temperature is higher that when she is not ovulating.

  • Psychological factors - when a person is experiencing tension, his/her body temperature rises.

  • Body temperature also rises even after few hours after a heavy workout (muscle are working to burn fats) and after eating.


Fever is not a disease in itself -- it's an important part of the healing process.


A study published in the February 2004 Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology found that children who ran a fever during their first year were less likely to develop allergies later in childhood than children who did not have fever.

More importantly, according to the AAP, a fever can help your child's body fight off infection. Many illness-causing microbes do best at the body's normal temperature. A fever raises the temperature beyond which certain microbes need to reproduce. A fever also kicks your immune system into high gear, spurring the rapid production of bug-clobbering white blood cells. A small but growing body of research shows that letting a fever run its course may reduce the length and severity of such illnesses as colds and flu.

As for the concern among parents that fevers can have harmful effects, these instances are very rare. The brain has an internal regulatory mechanism that prevents fevers caused by infections from getting higher than 105 or 106 degrees. Body temperature must get above 108 degrees to cause damage. Temperatures this high are caused only by exceptional circumstances, such as central nervous system disorders or heatstroke.


Additional Facts About Fevers

  • Fevers need to be treated only if they are causing discomfort (and usually a fever has to be above 102 or 103 degrees before making a child uncomfortable).

  • Treating a fever usually doesn't bring the body temperature back to normal -- just down 2 or 3 degrees.

  • Only 4 percent of children have fever seizures -- marked by a momentary loss of consciousness, eyes rolling back, shaking, twitching, or stiffening -- and when seizures do occur they cause no permanent harm.

  • How your child looks is more important than the exact reading on the thermometer.


The body has several ways to maintain normal body temperature. The organs involved in helping with temperature regulation include the brain, skin, muscle, and blood vessels. The body responds to changes in temperature by:

  • increasing or decreasing sweat production.

  • moving blood away from, or closer to, the surface of the skin.

  • getting rid of, or holding on to, water in the body.

  • naturally wanting to seek a cooler or warmer environment.

When you have a fever, the body works the same way to control the temperature, but it resets its thermostat at a higher temperature. The temperature increases for a number of reasons:

  • Chemicals, called cytokines and mediators, are produced in the body in response to an invasion from a microorganism, malignancy, or other intruder.

  • The body is making more macrophages, which are cells that go to combat when intruders are present in the body. These cells actually "eat-up" the invading organism.

  • The body is busily trying to produce natural antibodies, which fight infection. These antibodies will recognize the infection next time it tries to invade.

  • Many bacteria are enclosed in an overcoat-like membrane. When this membrane is disrupted or broken, the contents that escape can be toxic to the body and stimulate the brain to raise the temperature.


How did fever come to be seen as so dangerous a condition that we put our child's well being at risk in order to suppress the temperature?


Let's first consider the functions of fever and how it works. The two functions of fever are:

  1. To stimulate the immune system.

  2. To create an inhospitable environment for invading organisms. That is, to turn up the heat high enough that the invading microbes cannot live.


The Benefits of Fever

  • More antibodies -- cells trained to specifically attack the exact type of invader that your body is presently suffering from -- produced more specific to that bug than any pharmaceutical.

  • More white blood cells (the good guys) produced, circulating, mobilizing and armed to fight off the invading bugs specific to the general category of invader.

  • More interferon produced (another immune system good guy, which blocks spread of viruses to healthy cells).

  • Walling off of iron, which bacteria feed on.

  • Increased temperature, which directly kills microbes. (Most bacteria and viruses actually grow better at temperatures lower than the human body, which is why they like our cool noses in the winter.) Parents, it's not your kids begging for fever-reducing drugs; it's the germs.


Treating Fever the Naturopathic Way

Naturopathic treatment is to support a fever, unless it rises too high or too quickly. A fever of 102 degrees F to 103 degrees F is considered the optimal defense against microbes. Temperatures like these also heal the body most effectively. Supporting a fever means to work with it. For example, one effect of fever is to slow down peristalsis, which is movement of food through the gut.

To support a fever, naturopathic physicians recommend either fasting or eating foods such as broths and water till the fever breaks. Fever is also best supported with rest. Even when the child appears sleepy on the outside, the body is working quite hard to carry out all the functions described above.

Exercise and activity both distract body energy from these vitally important immune system processes. Naturopaths look at acute disease as the body's attempt to cure. Therefore, it is best to support the body's defenses; not suppress them by exercising or working at these times.

Naturopathic physicians compare the fear of fever symptoms to the fear of your car's engine light. To suppress a fever is like asking your mechanic to disconnect the engine light, rather than asking him or her to identify and fix the problem that caused the light to come on in the first place. Parents should ask themselves how they can approach their children's symptoms as logically as they approach their cars: do we really want to suppress our warning signals?

In the case of fever, the warning signal is much more of an aid to conquering illness, rather than as a source of damage in itself.

Also, there's a concern that breaking the fever is the wrong move in some circumstances. That's how the body fights off viruses, the telomeres don't function above 101 degrees, and the immune system clears the infection. By improperly reducing his fever too much, you can potentially allow the virus to propagate to deadly levels. Even high levels can be a problem, as the body will deposit the viral remains into the lungs, causing pneumonia.

That's why aspirin is typically counterindicated, because it's so effective in fighting fever that it can be deadly to an ill person. A fair number of people link the 1918 Flu to the newly prolific use of aspirin teas and similar medications. That's why it was so deadly, because folks were drinking aspiring teas as a preventative measure, so when they did get an infection, by the time they noticed the symptoms, they were packed to the gills with the virus.



How the immune system works:

http://health.howstuffworks.com/immune-system1.htm


HPA advice on anti-pyretics contradicts NICE guidelines

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/extract/339/jul28_3/b3050

Julius Wagner-Jauregg won the Nobel prize in 1927 for developing an effective treatment for syphilis which entailed deliberately infecting patients with malaria. This research suggests that fever may be a beneficial response to infection. The 2007 guideline from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) on feverish illness in children under 5 reviewed the sparse evidence on using antipyretic medicines, which seems to indicate that artificially lowering a fever may reduce the immune response and prolong illness. NICE therefore recommended, "Do not routinely give antipyretic drugs to a child with fever with the sole aim of reducing body temperature."1

A small trial on the use of antipyretics in an intensive care unit was stopped because mortality was 16% in the treated group and 1% in the untreated group.2

The existing evidence suggests that antipyretics should be avoided in patients with pandemic flu,3 yet the Health Protection Agency (HPA) . . . [Full text of this article]


Same goes for NSAIDS

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/extract/338/jun15_1/b2345

The potentially harmful effects of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are rarely discussed in the treatment of A/H1N1 flu, which has caused high death rates in Mexico.1 2

Severe and fatal cases, including sudden death, are characterised by severe sepsis with multi-organ failure with findings such as fever, leucocytosis, leucopenia, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), liver impairment, renal failure, rhabdomyolysis, and hypotension.2 NSAIDs may aggravate these syndromes, leading to multi-organ failure.3

Since the flu pandemics of the 20th century salicylates have been linked to Reye’s syndrome and their use restricted in children. But NSAIDs such as diclofenac, mefenamic acid, and ibuprofen are still used as antipyretics in many countries, albeit less often than aspirin. Since the use of diclofenac and mefenamic acid was restricted in children in Japan in 2000, the case fatality of so called flu associated encephalopathy has fallen dramatically.4

Reanalysing the World Health Organization’s data on A/H1N1 flu,2 I . . . [Full text of this article]


Also this from the British Medical Journal

ttp://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/338/jun15_1/b2345#216974

In 2000, Plaisance et al proved that the use of paracetamol increased viral shedding and significantly prolonged the duration of influenza. (1)

In 1992, (2)Shalabi et al, showed that acetaminophen seriously inhibits polymorphonuclear leukocytes, and scavenges available HOCl... paralysing the MPT-H2)2-Cl- antimicrobial system of PMNs and inhibited superoxide anion generation as well as degranulation of PMNs. Given, as Shalabi says, that PMN's play a crucial role in fighting bacterial, viral and parasitic infections, why is paracetamol used during infectious fevers?

Four years later, Shalabi et al again pointed out that the higher the temperature, the more severely acetaminophen inhibited bacterial activity of PMNs. (3)

The medical literature since 1975 is replete with articles showing that reducing fever during many different infections increases both complications and mortality.

Even WHO admits this. (4)

So why does every single country recommend paracetamol (acetaminophen) for routine treatment of any influenza, or indeed, any infection at all?

Meanwhile back in the UK in 2004 (5), Eccles et al state that: "Despite the lack of clinical data on the safety and efficacy of analgesics for the treatment of colds and flu symptoms a case can be made that these medicines are safe and effective for treatment of these common illnesses."

Perhaps the question should also be asked as to why any deaths, potentially augmented, or even caused by the use of antipyretics inhibitting parts of the immune system... are then used to justify the roll-out of a vaccine?


Another one from same page

Dear Sir,

The silence following previous queries, is resounding.

Yet, we continue to read stories like this, daily, from all around the world:

"The Ministry of Health says expectant mums who get symptoms should stay home and limit contact with others especially if they are ill, drink plenty of fluids, call their GP or healthline for advice and treat fever straight away with paracetamol." (1)

so it's natural to then read:

"... the mother-of-two Alma Palmer had been sent home from hospital with paracetamol, a day before collapsing and being airlifted to the mainland.

"I am angry with the hospital," her grandfather Roderick Geesu was quoted as saying. "She went to the hospital and instead of giving her a thorough check-up they gave her a packet of Panadol (paracetamol)." (2)

No doubt the experts will say that OF COURSE all deaths had been taking paracetamol. Standard protocol. "So of course paracetamol has NOTHING to do with the deaths."

Right????

Like Dr Johnson says, when will large scale randomised trials begin?

Why is it, that standard advice flies in the face of both medical literature, principles of immunology, and common sense?

Where is the evidence based science to justify such routine pronouncements? And "coincidental" dismissals?


When Medical Attention is Warranted

  • Infants less than 1-month-old, with a temperature greater than 100.4 degrees F. Seek care right away for fever in this age group. While waiting for care, breastfeed as often as the baby desires. The mother's milk has antibodies made right at the breast as it encounters pathogens in the baby's mouth.

  • Infants from 1-month to 3-months-old, with a temperature greater than 100.4 degrees F, if they appear ill. Again, breastfeed on demand while waiting for care.

  • Children between 3 months and 36 months, with a temperature above 102.2 degrees F, if they appear ill.

  • Anyone with a temperature over 104.5 degrees F.

  • For children not in the above three categories, bed rest and fluids will support the fever and allow it to do the job that your child needs it to do.


Story Time :)


MURDER IN THE MEDICINE CABINET

The Deadliest Killer of the 20th Century, With More Deaths Than All the World Wars, Lurks Right Inside Your House, and Threatens to Take You and Your Family. The Story No One Told You.


In 1918, a virulent, never seen before, form of influenza seemed to suddenly appear. It seemed to kill within hours,


and spread around the world within days. It seemed to appear simultaneously all around the world. Its spread was faster than any then known means of human travel.

In 2004, the Centers for Disease Control and the World Health Organization warned of repeats of such a rapid and deadly pandemic, through such variants of influenza as SARS and Bird Flu. But without knowing what caused the 1918 pandemic or how it spread, how can the CDC or WHO make such a claim? Unless they already know something they are not telling.

As yet no one has been able to identify the actual medical cause of the 1918 Flu, with only a few samples of a "bird-like" virus taken from only several cadaver tissue samples. But no sample is complete. And those are only one or two samples from among the estimated 20 to 40 million people who seemed to die mysteriously almost overnight. The 1918 Flu spread faster and was more deadly, killing more people than even the Plague and Black Death of the middle ages. Why does no one talk about it?

And even if the viral cause were identified, no one can explain the lightning fast spread of the disease. Maybe it wasn't a disease after all. Many researchers have even looked at some world-wide phenomena, such as extra-terrestrial biology filtering into the atmosphere from outer space. Or maybe, the jet stream spreading disease-laden dust from Asia all around the world in a matter of days. In an area of investigation where there seems to be no real facts and less logic, any "fringe theory" or "outre logic" is just as valid as any other. Maybe something about the 1918 Flu is being covered up. Something that we are not supposed to know.

Actually, there is another rather simple mundane solution to the medical mystery. There did exist in 1918 a then new technical invention by which the "disease" was spread almost at the speed of light. The "1918 Flu" was spread around the world almost instantaneously by telephone. Of course, that claim needs an explanation, and proof.

In the 1890's an American chemist made an improvement on an old home folk remedy called Willow or Aspen Tea. It seemed to relieve the pains of old-age gout, arthritis and other assorted pains. But the evil tasting tea containing acetylsalicylic acid was so strong that it caused many people to have nausea and vomiting, along with the pain relief if they could tolerate drinking the tea. This potion was later neutralized, synthesized and buffered, and then sold to the German Bayer company as a pain reliever.

I have researched the source and history of the name Aspirin and found no reasonable explanation has ever been found. I have found, instead, that the German Bayer company, in order to sell to both the American and European markets, used a name familiar in both markets. In America the common folk remedy form was called "Aspen Tea" made from boiling willow bark from the Aspen tree family. In Europe, the same home remedy was called "Spirain Tea" made from boiling the leaves of the common European shrub Spirae.

Both preparations were found to contain large amounts of natural acetylsalicylic acid, but unbuffered. Combining the common home-remedy folklore names Aspen and Spirain comes up with the Euro-American brand name Aspirin. My research is the sole source for the information about that unique derivation of the brand name.

The reason for the deep confusion and lack of any clear history about the trade name is that for almost a decade from 1905 to about 1915, the use of the trade name, and the source of the name Aspirin, was tied up in international courts. In the late 1890's when Aspirin became available as an easy to use "pop a pill" replacement to the sour tasting Aspen or Spirain Teas, many people used it to relieve the pain of joint arthritis. Many users also discovered, quite by accident, a unique side effect. If you had a fever when you took the Aspirin, it also made the fever suddenly go away. What a discovery! It appeared to be a cure for the the common cold and flu.

By 1905 many other drug companies were making acetylsalicylic acid preparations and calling it Aspirin, but they were selling it as a common cold remedy. Bayer took these other companies to court and sued over illegal use of their trademark. Many people believe that Bayer lost the decision and lost control of the name Aspirin. Most believe that Aspirin is now a generic name such as Kleenex, Scotch Tape or Xerox. Not so. It was an odd court decision and a confusing compromise. By 1915 it was decided in court that Bayer had the exclusive use of the tradename Aspirin, if it were sold as a pain-relieving analgesic.

The court also found that the other companies could also use the name Aspirin, if in their ads and packaging, they claimed that their product was an anti-febril agent or a fever reducer. This odd court decision is still in use today. You can still buy Bayer aspirin to relieve pain, and on the store shelf right next to it is Nyquil, Aleve, Tylenol, Motrin, Bufferin, Anacin and a whole long list of others, all containing aspirin or aspirin-like compounds and claiming to be treatments for Colds, Flu and Fever. Reducing fever was not in Bayer's original patent claim. Bayer didn't know in 1895 of the use of aspirin as a fever reducer and had not put that in their original trademark application.

And how does that strange court decision fit into the rapid spread of the 1918 Flu? The primary defense which the human body has, to stop the spread of viral infections is to produce a fever. The fever is not a symptom of disease, but is actually the body's primary anti-viral immune system. The fever stops the telomeres on the ends of viral RNA from making copies of itself.

The telomeres are like a zipper which unzips and separates the new RNA copy within miliseconds, but the telomeres are temperature sensitive and won't unzip at temperatures above 101F. Thus the high temperature of the fever, stops the flu virus from dividing and spreading. It is an immune system response which only mammals have developed to prevent the spread of viral flu infections, which mostly 99% come from the more ancient dinosaur-like earth life forms called birds. Almost all influenza is a form of "Avian Flu." A few influenza forms come from other dinosaur-like life forms, the modern reptiles, but these are usually classified as very rare tropical diseases, since that is where most reptiles live.

The doctors in the early 1900's didn't know about that, and even today few if any doctors are aware that fever is not a symptom of disease, but is the primary and only way for the human body to stop viral infections. If you stop or reduce the fever, viruses are allowed to divide and spread uncontrolled throughout the body. I have already described this process in detail in my articles posted in the Brother Jonathan Gazette in 2003, so I won't go into detail here. Do a search on "SARS" on the Gazette and you'll find the articles.

Normally the progress of a flu is that a virus enters the mucous membrane lining of the lungs, enters cells, then makes many copies of itself, which causes the cell to expand to such an degree that it bursts open. The new viruses then cloak themselves with a coating taken from the old damaged cell wall, thus hiding themselves from the human body's own T-cell antibody immune defense system. To the body's immune system the new viruses simply appear to be pieces of the body's own lung tissue.

By creating a fever, the viral infection is slowed down sufficiently so that the body's T cells can find the swollen infected lung cells, surround them and metabolize (literally eat) the damaged cell with strong acids which also breaks down the RNA viruses into basic amino acids. This effectively "kills" the viruses so that they can't reproduce. But viruses are not living things, and you can't kill something that's not alive. All the body can do is destroy or dissolve the RNA amino acid chain which makes up the virus.

Not knowing this, most doctors treat the flu with aspirin or fever reducers, as a palliative treatment to ease the aches, pains, and delerium fever effects. The result is that within hours, the fever goes down and the patient feels much better. What neither the patient nor the doctor knows is that with only a normal 98.6F body temperature, the viruses are allowed to reproduce unchecked. Within 72 hours, the viruses have grown from one or two virus bodies to millions or billions. The body is now completely overwhelmed. But while taking aspirin or cold medications, there are no symptoms or warnings of what is yet to come.

As a last resort the body tries to quickly flush the infection of billions of viruses from the lungs with massive amounts of T-cells, and fluid in the lungs to "cough out" the virus. This is called viral pneumonia. Soon within hours the patient is in the hospital. The doctors try to treat the now 105 degree fever with more anti-febril aspirins, or related medications to "treat the fever." Then within another 24 hours the patient, suffocating and gasping for breath, is dead.

You should note that the original infection did cause a mild fever, aches and pains, which the patient "self-medicated" with over-the-counter products. For the next several days, the patient seemed to have no symptoms, but was actually growing billions of copies of influenza virus in his lungs. Then days later, the patient and doctor seem to see a sudden rapid case of viral flu infection that is now overwhelming the body. Is that what really happened?

What caused the patient's death? Was it the original flu virus, or was it the use of Aspirin to lower the flu fever which then shutdown the patient's own immune system response? Obviously, the latter. So how did this cause the massive rapid spread of the 1918 Flu?

The Bayer court case had just been settled, and many companies other than Bayer, could now legally market aspirin to treat colds and fever. But then "The Great War to End all War" was on, and most aspirin products were going directly to the front lines in France to treat the soldiers in the diseased hell hole trenches of WWI.

The World War I medics knew that aspirin could quickly reduce a fever. If a soldier had a fever, the docs gave aspirin. Magically the fever went down, the soldier felt better and quickly went back to the fighting. Then three days later, the same soldier was back, now with severe pneumonia and died almost overnight.

No doctors then made the connection between aspirin and pneumonia death, since the trenches were filled with many other seemingly related diseases such as diphtheria or tuberculosis. Death and dying on the front line was common, so no investigation was done. Aspirin seemed to be a god-send since it allowed sick soldiers to swiftly get right back into the fighting.

After the Armistice of November 11, 1918 the fighting stopped and the soldiers went home. The soldiers around the world announced the good news to their families back home. Most of the low-ranked doughboys had to wait till they got back to their homebase in Kansas, or wherever, to call home. They couldn't afford the costly trans-Atlantic deep sea cable phone rates. But when the troop arrived in Kansas, the call from sergeant Tom was something like:

"Hey mom, I'm coming home. I'll see yu and dad next Tuesday in Chattanooga. How's everybody? Oh, Aunt Esther has a fever? Hey tell her to take some aspirin. Yeah, that stuff in the medicine cabinet for treatin' the aches and pains. Tell Esther, we used it in France. Works right away and the fever is gone. OK see yu Tuesday...."

So what does Esther do? She tries the aspirin, but the old Bayer label only says its for "aches and pains" and says nothing about fevers. She takes it and magically the fever is gone, and she feels much better, almost cured. She's so much better, she gets out the horse and buggy to go see her sister, Lucy in Mt Carmel, where Lucy and the kids are down with the fever. Mt. Carmel has no telephones and even no roads, only the buggy path to reach the outside world. But within hours of sergeant Tom's phone call home, by word of mouth, everybody in rural Mt. Carmel is now taking aspirin to treat fevers. Since the new information came from a soldier, from the US Army and the government, it must be true!

Within a week of the 1918 Armistice, by newfangled telephone, trans-oceanic telephone cables, and even the experimental ship-to-shore shortwave radios using Morse code, the message was flashed around the world -- "Have a fever? Take Aspirin. It worked in France, it'll work for you." That message spread at nearly the speed of light over millions of telephone lines all around the world. The news of the "miracle cure" even spread by word of mouth within a day or so, even to places with no phones nor roads.

Mysteriously, a week later, doctors round the world now had hundreds of sick and dying patients. Nobody could figure out why. The patients themselves never reported that just the week before they did have a mild fever. But it was so mild that when they took some aspirin, it simply went away. Nobody made the connection. The doctors only saw, by November 24, 1918 thousands of very sick patients with high fevers, lungs filled with fluid, and swift overnight death.

The medical profession had never seen anything like it before, nor since. It seemed to occur simultaneously all around the world and even reaching into such out of the way places like Mt. Carmel with no telephones nor roads. How could such a massive fast-spreading killer disease exist? It didn't. It wasn't a disease. It was a new use for an old home folk remedy which everybody already had in their medicine cabinet, Bayer Aspirin to reduce fever.

The medical profession, at a complete loss to explain it, simply called it the "Spanish Flu" or the "1918 Flu" or many similar names. It was a mystery with no known source, so it was assigned many place names. So far, nobody has been able to prove any single pathogen was responsible. And even if they did, they still can't explain how it seemed to spread world-wide at almost the speed of light, clear around the world within a week.

To this day there is no explanation. But, now you know. The "disease" was not a single pathogen, but many of the hundreds of similar types of flu which are always existing at any time around the world. What was different in November 1918 was the many hundreds of thousands of almost simultaneous phone calls from the millions of returning sergeant Toms saying, "...tell Aunt Esther to take the aspirin. It worked in France. It'll work for her..." Nobody traced the spread of the 1918 Flu to sergeant Tom. Nobody made the connection.

That very same source of disease still exists today. What is different today is that cold and flu products are sold and used all year long. This results in an estimated one million deaths from mysterious viral pneumonia reported every year, but also all around the year. In 1918, the new use of aspirin for treating colds and flu all started at the same time in November, thus creating the false impression of a sudden massive onset of a new disease. Even today SARS is not a disease. It is the improper use of a brand new high-tech flu fighter called Tamiflu. The FDA approved the use of Tamiflu several years ago. In 2003 it began to be used world-wide. But how is it used?

Many millions of people around the world still self-treat their own colds and flu with over-the-counter meds containing aspirin. Those are the most commonly sold medications in the world. The patient's mild fever quickly goes away. They forget about ever having felt sick. Then several days later the patient sees the doctor and now has a high fever, bad cough and fluid-filled lungs. The doctor, using the new CDC and WHO guidelines, treats the hospitalized "flu" patient with the new high-tech Tamiflu. But how often and at what dosage?

The doctors do what they've always done for the past 100 years. Tell the nurse to stick a thermometer in the patient's mouth, increase the Tamiflu dosage by 10cc's every hour until the fever starts to drop. Then maintain that dosage level until the patient dies. Then blame the death on some new highly contagious lethal virus. Nothing new here. It's the same old story, since 1918.

The only thing different is that they give it a new name like SARS, or Bird Flu or whatever sounds nifty and high-tech. Even today, each year about one million people world-wide die from the very same "disease" which first appeared in the fall of 1918. Has medicine, in the last 100 years, turned this "contagion" from Pandemic by Phone, into Illness by Internet? Is it the rapid and continuous spread of misinformation that is still killing millions?

Marshall Smith
Editor, BroJon Gazette

http://www.brojon.org/frontpage/murdermedicine1.html

I dont doubt that asprin contributed to a lot of the deaths but i dont think all of them - surely a lot of the poor wouldnt have been able to afford it?

Saturday, 8 August 2009

House - gotta love that man :D


Couldnt resist this lol :D