Mexicaanse griep op basisschool Amsterdam

The revised FDA warning states, “People with the flu, particularly children, may be at an increased risk of self-injury and confusion shortly after taking Tamiflu and should be closely monitored for signs of unusual behavior.”

WHAT DO WE REALLY KNOW?

With the track record of mainstream media during the past several years regarding panics and pandemics, there is precious little reliable information available to us. The first and most important question that must be addressed has to do with the newly reported numbers. Thousands of people get the flu each day and recover from it, and some people who are already sick may die from it. But suddenly here we have media alleging that a novel flu virus causing a brand new disease is afoot. So the only critical issue when reporting these new cases must be: were the patients cultured for the new disease?

And secondly, cultured for what?

Here is the first jumping off point - departure from reality: within just one week of the 'outbreak' the media had begun its daily tally sheet of numbers infected and numbers dead, which will establish the scorecard pattern we're so familiar with in tracking any disaster. What are they counting? There is no screening test for the disease!

* No culture protocols,
* no titer amounts,
* no incubation periods set,

and what is most important, no specific pathogen has been identified. Without a specific pathogen, there is no epidemic.

H1N1 is a family of viruses, dozens of viruses. So the national media is stating all these numbers of cases of the disease when there is no verifiable method for specifically identifying the disease. The cases are being diagnosed by symptoms. This is precisely what happened with the nonexistent Avian flu of 4 years ago. 5 If we're diagnosing by symptoms only, then any case of any flu can be counted. And that's exactly what is happening here.

Did anyone think it rather odd that the first cases of swine flu were coming from Third World areas of Mexico where even basic medical services are often lacking, let alone a sophisticated screening test for a brand new disease, a procedure which would take months to create, even in the most modern of clinical settings? So once again we ask, without a screening procedure, what are they counting, in Mexico, in Texas, wherever? And exactly what distinguishes these new cases that are being hourly hawked by every single media service in the known world, what sets these cases apart from ordinary flu cases?

The other question no one is asking is this: what was the incidence of flu in these Mexican towns the same time last year? How about last month? Do you see - without a very specific viral screening test, the numbers mean nothing, except as fuel to the media fire.

So going just this far, it doesn't take much reasoning to grasp that we're being set up here. Unfortunately this is much farther than the majority of the unlettered public will question it.

But we're just getting started with the inconsistencies. What about the pathogen itself?

H1N1 - A FAMILY OF VIRUSES

Let's start at the beginning. In classical pathology, influenza is a disease that is associated with a family of viruses known as orthomyxoviruses. Within this group we have

Influenza A

Influenza B

and Influenza C viruses.

What separates viruses into these 3 groups is the type of antigen present in the virus. 7

Now, within the Influenza A category is a smaller grouping called the H1N1 viruses. There are dozens and dozens of strains of H1N1. The CDC has tested over 50 different strains of H1N1. 9

Let's just stop there. For an infectious disease to be identified and characterized, it must be proven to be caused by a specific single pathogen.

Now in the recent 2009 outbreak, they just realized that they shot themselves in the foot by calling it swine flu in the first week . Since there was no epidemic in 1976, and since obviously no pathogen was ever correctly identified, in light of the ensuing vaccine debacle, it's quite clear that swine flu never existed.

So, irrespective of the pig farmers, it was a marketing mistake to associate the new disease with that past swine flu disease, which proved to be nonexistent. By admitting the virus has never been isolated in a pig, they just confessed to the fundamental error of the 1976 vaccine program: that there was no such thing as swine flu.

So where does that leave us? To call the new disease H1N1 flu is also meaningless, for 2 reasons

- the original Mexican cases were not cultured

- there are dozens of strains of H1N1

So what are all these people coming down with and dying from? Simple: the flu! There is no proof otherwise of any novel pathogen, H1N1 or whatever, introducing any new disease. It's all allegation, conjecture, smoke and mirrors, and marketing. The new cases have nothing in common except diagnosis - and that's being done by symptoms, not by testing.

THE ELUSIVE MYTHIC SCREENING TEST

Once again, during the first month of the marketing of swine flu, there was no screening test in place whatsoever that could be used to verify diagnosis. So that meant that any case of any kind of flu was being counted as swine flu. First it was hundreds, and soon it was thousands of cases being counted with no clinical testing at all. A little background is in order here:

Remember, 3 subcategories of influenza virus:

* Influenza A
* Influenza B
* Influenza C

As part of the hundreds of Influenza A viruses, what is continually omitted from media is that there are virtually dozens of strains of H1N1, most of which have never been studied. No specific strain of H1N1 has ever been linked to the new swine flu. When Obama came out with his concession to the hog farmers to start referring to the disease as the H1N1 disease, we learned 2 new facts:

1. This new swine flu virus had never been found in swine

2. With dozens of H1N1 strains, it was impossible to verify whether all these people being counted as having swine flu actually do have the same new disease

The deception goes even deeper. There is no standardized test for H1N1 in general, let alone the specific strain we're calling swine flu. So during the entire first month of the hysteria about swine flu, the cases were being diagnosed BY SYMPTOMS ONLY. If the diagnosis is by symptoms only then there is no way to differentiate swine flu from regular old fashioned flu.

Now the kicker. By the end of May 2009 the CDC finally claimed they had a test for swine flu, which was described both on the CDC website as well as by calling them on the phone. But guess what criterion was a positive diagnosis for swine flu: a simple positive test for Influenza A! Any type of Influenza A, out of hundreds of strains. Not even as specific as H1N1, of which there are only dozens of strains. Don't believe it? Call CDC, or look on their site. Anyone testing positive for Influenza A may be counted as having swine flu!

So to reiterate, for the first month or so there was no screening test at all for swine flu. But a little detail like that didn't stop the media from their daily tally. When a test was finally put into place, the best they could come up with was nothing more than the old Influenza A test, which was not even as specific as an H1N1 test would be. If one existed. .

The agenda is clear here: the marketing of vaccines and drugs. It was a obviously a concerted effort to prepare people for the importance of getting the next flu shot in the Fall of 2009. Indeed, on 20 May 09, Associated Press actually admitted as much: there would be a combo vax by the end of the year that would be good for

* Swine flu
* Avian flu
* Regular flu.

A pretty good trick considering that two of the three don't even exist, and also that the flu vaccine we have been using for the last 5 years has had absolutely no effect on the numbers of people who are getting the flu or dying from flu in this country.

This is the hype we can expect to hear until flu season 2009. The only variable will be how hysterical they decide to get.