People are flat out crazy.
Ok, I will be a little nicer, People are flat out crazy when they are scared.
And that is exactly what is going on with Measles. When this whole thing hit I didn't think much about it to be honest. It's the Measles, a rash. The CDC's definition is "Measles is an illness characterized by a generalized rash lasting ≥3 days, a temp of ≥101°F, cough, coryza, and/or conjunctivitis.” -CDC So I was never scared about it, my grandparents had measles, in fact the CDC says that anyone born before 1957 is immune, why? Because everyone got it. It was a right of passage, a normal childhood disease, just like chicken pox. But then the tidal wave started, and it hasn't stopped. The media is going absolutely insane with this. Scaring the crap out of everyone. But that is what the media always does, so I also didn't put much thought in to it. But by the beginning of the week it started to become more clear to me. And if you follow me on social media you will notice that I have almost completely dedicated this week to posting about measles. I have posted nearly a 100 different articles on why you shouldn't be scared of the measles, why herd immunity doesn't exist in this county, why the MMR vaccine doesn't work, and why the risk outweighs the benefits of getting the shot. But like I said it started to make more sense to me. Why the media would devote so much attention, strike so much fear in to people. Why articles like this would be put out...
Jail 'anti-vax' parents. USA Today.
Measles Can Kill, And It's Spreading. Sue Parents Who Didn't Vaccinate? Absolutely.
Dr. Manny: Should Obama make vaccines mandatory for all children?
They are making a grab at your rights. Bottom line. Like I said, this became crystal clear to me in the beginning of the week. Like I posted in a previous blog, Big Pharma or The Pharma Cartel is losing their grip,
A 2014 AP-GfK survey found that only 51 percent of Americans were confident that vaccines are safe and effective. I would say that is losing their grip. So what better way to make sure everyone gets their shots than a media hyped outbreak, strike some fear and everyone runs and gets their shots right? That is old hat for Big Pharma just look at the flu every year. And if you don't believe that corporations control and influence your media, than you can stop reading right now, go sit in front of your TV and drink your fluoridated water. Big Pharma is the largest of these corporations, and guess what? They don't pick sides, it doesn't matter if it's Fox News or CNN, it's all for the kids! But it seems that model is not enough for Big Pharma this time around. Having over 95% of kids in the US is not enough, they want it all, greedy right? So how are they going to do that? They are going to take away your rights.
You might be thinking well how does a Pharmaceutical company make law changes? They're not in government! And you would be wrong, they basically are. Politicians are puppets. Again if you don't believe it go watch more TV, or better yet listen to some talk radio. So they are coming for your rights, and you should be scared. Not scared of measles, but of getting your rights taken away. What kind of country would we live in where you couldn't decide what is injected in to your child? Now even if you are pro-vaccine, I want you to really think about that for a second. And don't give me the answer, "Well if it makes it safer for our kids, than yea I'm all for it". Because that is exactly what they want you to say, you see the law makers and pharmaceutical companies are going to paint themselves as heroes. That is exactly how they will get you to vote away your rights. I can see the headline now, "Every Kid in America is Now Safe!". Please, 49 shots in the first 12 years...Safe? But think about just how insane this sounds, you have no choice or right as a parent to prevent the government from sticking a needle in to your child and injecting them with viruses, not too mention heavy metals, chemicals, and aborted fetal tissue. Is this ringing a bell yet? If not, that's ok, the Super Bowl is on this Sunday. Yay! I will leave you with one quote from Dr. Manny Alvarez who wrote the FoxNews article I posted above...
"It is not for the parent, or consumer advocate to offer an opinion that prevents a child from receiving a vaccination." -Dr. Manny Alvarez (FoxNews Channel's Senior Managing Editor for Health News)
Are You Scared Yet?
Obviously Measles is an extremely hot topic right now. And I am sick and tired of seeing the misinformation and blatant lies in the media. But instead of me ranting about it I want to introduce you to my guest speaker today. And I will let her do the talking and provide the research.
Meet Dr Viera Scheibner (PhD)...
Dr Viera Scheibner is Principal Research Scientist (Retired) with a doctorate in Natural Sciences from Comenius University in Bratislava. After an eminent scientific career in micropalaeontology during which she published 3 books and some 90 scientific papers in refereed scientific journals in Australia and overseas, she studied babies’ breathing patterns with the Cotwatch breathing monitor developed by her late husband Leif Karlsson in the mid 1980s. Babies had alarms after vaccination, indicating stress. This introduced her to the subject of vaccination. She then started systematically studying orthodox medical papers dealing with vaccination issues. To this day she has collected and studied more than 100000 pages of medical papers.
Despite such extensive research of orthodox medical papers published on vaccines over the past 100 years, she established that there is no scientific evidence that these injections of highly noxious substances prevent diseases, quite to the contrary, that they increase susceptibility to the diseases which the vaccines are supposed to prevent and also to a host of related and unrelated viral and bacterial infections. Vaccines are involved in a great number of modern ills of childhood such as immunoreactive diseases (asthma, allergies), autoimmune diseases (diabetes, multiple sclerosis, lupus erythematosis), cancers, leukaemia, degenerative diseases of bone and cartilage, behavioural and learning problems, to mention just the most important conditions.
Her research into vaccination has culminated so far in two books and a number of shorter and longer individual papers published in a variety of scientific and medical publications. She has also conducted frequent international lecture tours to present the results of her research to parents, health and medical professionals and anyone else who is interested. She has also provided a great number of expert witness reports for court cases relating to deaths and injuries caused by vaccines, such as so-called “shaken baby” syndrome.
And now her article which I found to be a great accumulation of research and studies. This is a little lengthy but I think it is extremely valuable. This article was originally posted on vaccinationcouncil.org.
Measles vaccine introduction
Measles vaccination in the US and many other countries started in the early 1960s, at the time when measles was naturally abating and was heading for the 18 year low. That’s why the vaccine seemingly lowered the incidence; however, this was only coincidental with the natural dynamics of measles.
As one of many examples involving all infectious diseases of childhood against which vaccines have been developed, ever since any measles vaccines have been introduced and used in mass proportions, reports of outbreaks and epidemics of measles in even 100% vaccinated populations started filling pages in medical journals.
Reports of serious reactions including deaths also appeared with increasing frequency. They are the subject of a separate essay.
Atypical measles – a new phenomenon only in the vaccinated
It is less well known to the general public that vaccinated children started developing an especially vicious form of measles, due to the altered host immune response caused by the deleterious effect of the measles vaccines. It resisted all orthodox treatment and carried a high mortality rate.
It has become known as atypical measles. (AMS)
Rauh and Schmidt (1965) described nine cases of AMS which occurred in 1963 during a measles epidemic in Cincinnati. The authors followed 386 children who had received three doses of killed measles virus vaccine in 1961. Of these 386 children, 125 had been exposed to measles and 54 developed it [i.e. measles].
The new, atypical measles, occurring in the vaccinated was characterised by high fever, unusual rash and pneumonia, often with history of vaccination with killed measles vaccine.
Rauh and Schmidt (1965) concluded that, “It is obvious that three injections of killed vaccine had not protected a large percentage of children against measles when exposed within a period of two-and-a-half years after immunization”.
Fulginiti (1967) also described the occurrence of atypical measles in ten children who had received inactivated (killed) measles virus vaccine five to six years previously.
Nichols (1979) wrote that atypical measles is generally thought to be a hypersensitivity response to natural measles infection in individuals who have previously received killed measles vaccine, although several investigators have reported AMS-like illness in children who had been vaccinated only with live measles vaccine.
He wrote that during a measles epidemic in 1974-1975 in Northern California, a number of physicians reported laboratory-confirmed measles in patients who had signs and symptoms, compatible with AMS…”We developed case criteria on the basis of serology and rash distribution and morphology. In typical measles a maculopapular rash occurs first at the hairline, progresses caudally, is concentrated on the face and trunk, and is often accompanied by Koplik’s spots. In AMS the rash Is morphologically a mixture of maculopapular, petechial, vesicular, and urticarial components. It usually begins and is concentrated primarily on the extremities, progresses cephalad, and is not accompanied by Koplik’s spots. Cases were classified as AMS if patients had 1) a rash with the distribution and morphology characteristic of AMS, and 2) a fourfold or greater rise in titer of complement-fixing measles antibody or a convalescent titer of 256”.
Continuing measles outbreaks signal increasing incidence comparable with the prevaccine era.
In the meantime, outbreaks of measles in vaccinated children have continued and intensified to this day. Contemporary observations of the ineffectiveness of vaccination indicate to me that the incidence of measles has increased and has not continued decreasing as it did for some 100 years before any type of measles vaccination was introduced.
Conrad et al. (1971) published about the dynamics of measles in the US in the last four years and conceded that measles was on the increase and that “eradication, if possible, now seems far in the future”.
Barratta et al. (1970) investigated an outbreak in Florida from December 1968 to February 1969 and found little difference in the incidence of measles in vaccinated and unvaccinated children.
Right through the 1980s, measles outbreaks in fully vaccinated children have continued all over the US and all other countries with high vaccination rates all over the world.
Robertson et al. (1992) wrote that in 1985 and 1986. 152 measles outbreaks in US school-age children occurred among persons who had previously received measles vaccine. “Every 2-3 years, there is an upsurge of measles irrespective of vaccination compliance”.
To cap it all: the largely unvaccinated Amish (they claim religious exemption) had not reported a single case of measles between 1970 and December 1987, for 18 years (Sutter et al. 1991). It is quite likely that a similar situation would have applied to outside communities without any vaccination and that measles vaccination had actually kept measles alive and kicking. According to Hedrich (1933), there is a variety of dynamics of measles occurrence, from 2-3 years to up to 18 years, as later also witnessed by the unvaccinated Amish.
MMWR (2009) reported that the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) had reminded physicians about the importance of immunization against measles in response to outbreaks of the disease in the US. 64 cases of measles were noted between January 1 and April 15 2008.
“Measles outbreaks in Africa threatens gains” reported by Voice of America, July 9, 2010. “…nearly 90,000 cases of measles have occurred in Sub-Saharan Africa since June 2009, including about 1,400 deaths”.
Shi et al. (2011) reported on measles incidence rate and a phylogenetic study of contemporary genotype H1 measles strains in China, calling for a new vaccine, since the incidence of measles in China has increased over the last decade.
A widespread outbreak of measles was reported across Europe during European Immunization Week (April 25, 2011). Some 6,500 cases of measles were reported in 30 countries according to WHO’s press release.
MMWR Wkly Rep 2012; 61: 253-257 reported a quadruple increase in the incidence of measles in 2011. Even though the absolute numbers appear small, the actual numbers were no doubt in my mind much higher. The outbreaks were blamed on imported measles cases. [Isn’t the vaccine supposed to protect the vaccinated when in contact with someone with measles?]
Instead of discontinuing vaccination with obviously ineffective and dangerous vaccines, re-vaccination, meaning further doses of the ineffective measles vaccines and the development of new vaccines are being recommended.
Linnemann et al. (1973) concluded that measles vaccines were not provoking a proper immunological response in vaccinated children.
Black et al. (1984) summarized data on the ineffectiveness of re-vaccination published by several authors, who demonstrated that “antibody titer in re-immunised children may fall after several months to very low levels, and that children vaccinated twice may still experience clinically recognizable measles, although in a much milder form ”. They concluded that, “this state in which a child is immunologically sensitized, but not immune to infection, we shall call inadequate immunity.”
Unfounded optimism for measles eradication in the US by 1 October 1982
Despite the obvious lack of success with measles vaccination, in October 1978, the Secretary of the Department of Health, Joseph A Califano Jr. announced, “We are launching an effort that seeks to free the United States from measles by 1 October 1982″.
Predictably, this unrealistic plan fell flatly on its face: after 1982 the US was hit repeatedly by major and even more sustained epidemics of measles, mostly in fully vaccinated populations. First, the blame was laid upon the “ineffective, formalin-inactivated (‘killed’) measles vaccine, administered to hundreds of thousands of children from 1963 to 1967″. However, outbreaks and epidemics of measles continued occurring even when this first vaccine was replaced with two doses of ‘live’ measles virus vaccines and the age of administration was changed.
These warnings have not been heeded. As the Swiss doctors wrote (Albonico et al. 1990), “we have lost the common sense and wisdom that used to prevail in the approach to childhood diseases. Too often, instead of reinforcing the organism’s defences, fever and symptoms are relentlessly suppressed. This is not always without consequences”.
Destruction of transplacentally-transmitted immunity by vaccination
Many researchers warned straight after the introduction of measles vaccine in the US that the generations of children born to mothers who were vaccinated in childhood will be born with poor or no transplacentally-transmitted immunity and will contract measles and other diseases too early in life.
Lennon and Black (1986) demonstrated that “haemaglutinin-inhibiting and neutralizing antibody titers are lower in women young enough to have been immunized by vaccination than older women”. The same applied to whooping cough. It explains why so many babies before vaccination age develop these diseases, and most particularly the much publicised whooping cough.
Deranged cholesterol due to measles vaccination
Soon after measles mass vaccination started, concerns about increased cholesterol levels and deranged ratio of high-density to low-density lipids in young children started filling pages in the medical press.
Vikari et al. (1979. Effect of measles and measles vaccine on serum cholesterol. Lancet; February 10: 326) quoted Drs Matthews and Feery (1978) who “…reported that immunisation with influenza vaccine seemed to be followed by an increase in serum-total-cholesterol and by a decrease in HDL cholesterol. They suggested that immunisation with viral antigens or natural virus infection might contribute to variation in lipid levels”.
And, “We have measured serum-total-cholesterol in 97 children (average age 2 years) before and 6 weeks after measles vaccination (Rimevax, R.I.T. Belgium) and in serial serum samples of 27 measles patients (average age 4 years). Children were fed ad libitum. Antibody titres were assayed by haemagglutination inhibition and serum-cholesterol was measured with the method of Leppilnen. Samples from the same child were measured in the same series”.
“Five children showed exceptionally high relative increase (more than or equal to 40%) of serum-cholesterol after vaccination, although the absolute values remained within normal limits. No correlations were observed between the initial cholesterol values or changes in cholesterol values and measles antibody responses. After 8 and 10 months the relative increase of serum-cholesterol was still recorded in two children. After natural measles infection the mean serum-cholesterol was low in the specimens collected 1-7 days after the onset of symptoms…”
Vikari et al. (1979) then concluded, “Our data show that natural measles decreases serum-cholesterol values in the acute phase of the disease. This accords with the observations of Lees et al., who showed that experimental infection with sandfly virus infection decreased serum-cholesterol values for at least 10 days. Whether the same kind of decrease of cholesterol level occurs also after measles vaccination and, possibly, after other virus vaccinations needs to be clarified. Our observations support the view presented by Matthews and Feery (1978) that natural virus infection or immunisation with viral antigens induces changes in serum-lipid levels in man”.
Bell et al. (2012) wrote, “In a large population-based sample of Australian school children we found a higher frequency of abnormal lipid profiles when compared to American data. In addition, many children have levels outside reported healthy norms for Australian children. Research tracking lipid profiles of Australian children to adulthood is needed to understand the association of these levels with future cardiovascular risk”.
In her 72-page doctoral thesis, Louise Strandberg (2009) looked at length and exhaustively into interactions between nutrition, obesity, and the immune system.
Importantly, she writes, “In the 1950’s, it was first recognised that dietary fat could contribute to cardiovascular diseases in the Western World. However, the Greenland Eskimos were known to eat large amounts of fat but still had a very low incidence of cardiovascular disease. In the 1970ies, Bang and Dyerberg found that the Eskimos had low levels of cholesterol and lipoproteins, except for the high-density lipoproteins that is [sic] now known as “the good cholesterol…quality of dietary fat rather than quantity is important for development of cardiovascular disease”.
That would have represented the generation of non-vaccinated Eskimos.
Based on medical research, a logical conclusion is that an important primary cause of the observed abnormal cholesterol and triglyceride levels in children may be an invasive medical intervention in the form of vaccination.
And for the sources...
Rauh LW, and Schmidt R. 1965. Measles immunization with killed virus vaccine. Am J Dis Child; 109: 232-237.
Fulginiti VA, Eller JJ, Downie AW, and Kempe CH. 1967. Altered reactivity to measles virus. Atypical measles in children previously inoculated with killed-virus vaccines. JAMA; 202 (12): 1075-1080.
Scott TF, and Bonanno DE 1967. Reactions to live-measles-virus vaccine in children previously inoculated with killed-virus vaccine. NEJM; 277 (5): 248-251.
Barratta RO, Ginter MC, Price MA, Walker JW, Skinner RG. et al. 1970. Measles (Rubeola) in previously immunized children. Pediatrics; 46 (3): 397-402.
Conrad JL, Wallace R, and Witte JJ. 1971. The epidemiologic rationale for the failure to eradicate measles in the United States. Am J Publ Health; 61 (11):2304-2310.
Linnemann CC, Hegg ME Rotte TC et al. 1973. Measles MgE response during re-infection of previously vaccinated children. J Pediatrics; 82: 798-801.
Gustafson TL, Lievens AW, Brunell PA, Moellenberg RG, Christopher BS et al. 1987. Measles outbreak in a fully immunized secondary-school population. NEJM; 316 (13): 771-774.
Black EI, Berman LL, Reichelt CA, de Pinheiro P et al. 1984. Inadequate immunity to measles in children vaccinated at an early age: effect of revacination. BULL WHO; 62 (92): 315-319.
Robertson SE, Markowitz LE, Dini EF, and Orenstein WA. 1992. A million dollar measles outbreak: epidemiology, risk factors, and selective revaccination strategy. Publ Health Reports; 197 (1): 24-31.
Sutter RW, Markowitz LE, Bennetch JM, Morris W, Zell ER and Preblud WSR. 1991. Measles among the Amish: a comparative study of measles severity in primary and secondary cases in households. J Infect Dis; 163: 12-16.
Hedrich AW. 1933. Monthly estimates of the child population “susceptible” to measles, 1900-1931, Baltimore, MD. Am J Hygiene: 613- 635.
Lennon and Black 1986. Maternally derived measles immunity in era of vaccine-protected mothers. J Pediatr; 108 (1): 671-676.
Matthews and Feery 1978, Lancet ii: 1212-1213.
Bell et al. (2012. Lipids in Australian children: cause for concern? 2005-2007 Busselton Health Study. J Paediatr & Child Health; Oct 2012: 863-953).
- See more at: http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/2013/01/18/the-ineffectiveness-of-measles-vaccines-and-other-unintended-consequences-by-dr-viera-scheibner-phd#sthash.2XIkmFHj.dpuf
If you have been following any health news since the beginning of the year you have noticed a common theme. There has been a full blown attack on people who choose to with hold or delay vaccines. Now, that is not what they call those people, they call them "antivaxxers" or the "anti-vaccine movement". They have to use something that sounds derogatory or like the enemy. Which is exactly what they are portraying the "antivaxxers" as. You know, the anti-science, ignorant people who are to blame for every recent outbreak of measles or whooping cough. Which this had to be very inconvenient for them, Measles Outbreak Traced To Fully Vaccinated Patient. Their portrayal of "antivaxxers" is very inaccurate as well, as the people who opt out of vaccines are actually a well educated and wealthy demographic. But that wouldn't sound nearly as good as "antivaxxers" would it? The small but rising number of wealthy, well educated individuals and families who are delaying or opting out of vaccines after researching and outweighing the risks. Yea, let's stick with "antivaxxers".
So why all of a sudden is there such a deliberate attack on people who chose not to vaccinate? I mean these people have been around forever. Just look up the history of the Raggedy Ann Doll. But even before then, back in the 1800’s when enough people witnessed family members and friends getting sick or dying after receiving the mandatory smallpox vaccine, an uproar eventually led to Conscientious Objection of 1898. The 1898 Vaccination Act gave parents the right to choose. So this is nothing new. There is no sudden movement created by “hipsters” (According to an LA Time’s Article). So why now? Why the blitz? Well maybe because Big Pharma is losing their grip. A 2014 AP-GfK survey found that only 51 percent of Americans were confident that vaccines are safe and effective. I would say that would be something for Pharma to worry about. Billions are at risk.
I am not going to use this blog to point out potential risks that come with vaccines, I’ve done that numerous times and post about it on social media constantly. I’m also not going to use this blog to show you how vaccines didn’t eradicate diseases in the past. Yea, that’s right I said it. You have been lied to your entire life. I simply just wanted to point out this attack, this media blitz targeting “antivaxxers”. A group I’m proud to be in. You know sometimes I think, maybe I just shut up about vaccines? Like yesterday when a guy called me a quack on Twitter and then decided to take also to my Facebook page to make sure everyone knew that a Canadian disk jockey thought I was a quack. Or like today when the owner of my beloved Dallas Mavericks decided to post an article bashing “antivaxxers”.It would be a whole lot easier if I just talked about weightloss and back pain. But you know what I cant shut my mouth, Ive never been able to, ask my mother. And I will never shut my mouth as long as it helps parents make a better decision for their kids. And that is exactly what I tell parents to do, research every single shot before making a decision, all 49 doses before age 12 of them. Make an informed choice, not just because someone tells you to.
That seems logical right? To research something before injecting it into your child? So why do people get so freaking angry when that person who does the research decides to delay or with hold vaccines? We know why Pharma would get mad, but why does the mom or dad of Billy and Suzie who have already decided to vaccinate their kids. Why would someone else posting something send them in to a rage. The answer is fear. And this is exactly the tactic that Big Pharma and the CDC use to promote compliance. There is the fear of an “outbreak”, which if your kid is vaccinated Im still not sure why you would be scared if vaccines do work, and there is the fear of being wrong. What if you did make the wrong decision to vaccinate your kids? What if you did do harm to your own child? You wouldn’t want to face that, you couldn’t handle that. It’s like asking a religious person what if there is no God? It is something most refuse to even think about, they couldn’t even fathom. And if you press them they will likely get angry. (I am religious by the way, but I can have open discussions without letting emotions get the best of me) Dr Robert Mendelsohn MD, physician and author, actually compares medicine to religion. He calls it the Church of Allopathy. And he is right, the doctors are the saviors, they can never be wrong, they should never be questioned. They are the head of the church and our faith is so strong that anything that contradicts what the savior says is a contradiction to our religion. Thus anger.
So all that to say, what I always say. Know the risks, the benefits, the failures, and the mistakes before getting a vaccine. And this blitz? Bring it.
As I was doing my internet rounds today, something I do every day gathering health articles and studies, I found two articles of recent reports of flu shot deaths. You may be shocked to learn that someone could die from a vaccine or flu shot, but I’m use to this, I come across these type of articles all the time. Why don’t you see them on major news outlets? Because it’s bad for business. Big Pharma are large corporate sponsors and advertisers through media and if you run stories that make them look bad their money goes bye bye. And a death here and there isn’t major news, it’s a one in a million chance! Losing a few kids here and there is the inherent risk, but if you look at the bigger picture keeping these stories quiet is for the better good right? We wouldn’t want you to be scared to get your shots or even worse ask us hard questions about them. So nothing to see here, shut up and get your shot.
But today, these stories got to me. One was a young hospital worker and one was a three year old girl. I don’t know if it was because I have a three year old daughter too, or if it was the hospital worker who is forced to get the shot or lose her job and instead she lost her life. Maybe it was a combination of both. But they got to me none the less. And one thing that is always consistent with these incidents is the arrogance and lack of remorse of the doctors or scientists interviewed about the incidents. They always say the same unapologetic rhetoric, “Vaccines are safe, this was a one in a million chance.” Or like from one today’s articles “For the majority of people, they should get vaccinated because this is a very unusual case, and it typically doesn’t happen.” Comforting right? Or how about the remorse shown by the Kenosha County Health Officer Cynthia Johnson who shrugged the incident off as a fluke and used this opportunity to urge people to get vaccinated. This is the reaction that everyone has in these cases, they play damage control and refuse to pin any blame to the vaccine or it’s manufacturers.
But I want you to think about what it would feel like to be the mother or father of one of these victims. Because that is exactly what I try to do when I read these. And I say try on purpose, because I really couldn’t imagine. I wonder if Cynthia Johnson has thought what it would feel like? What do you think the percent chance of death from a flu shot is to a parent who just lost their child to a vaccine reaction? 1 in a million? No It’s 100%. Their child is gone, 100% gone. You think they find comfort in the statistics? I can guarantee that they don’t. But I wonder if they or you are aware of these statistics… Last year, 2014, the US Department of Health and Human Services, through the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, paid out $80,310,705.54 to victims and families of victims of vaccine injuries or deaths. Are we still talking about One in a Million? Because our government paid out over $80 million just in 2014. And since this fund was set up in 1988, the program has paid out $2,857,926,807.60 to families. In 2013, they paid out over $276 million! You can find the break downs on their website here http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/statisticsreports.html. And just so you know, this isn't just money you apply for, these are awarded in court. So vaccines don’t cause anything? That couldn’t be further from the truth. And for these families it was 100% reality.
Here are the two stories I was referring to…
Today's blog is going to be short and sweet. I just want to ask you a question and I want you to really think about a good answer, mostly because I can't find one. If you haven't heard by now, early last month the CDC admitted that they got the flu virus wrong and that the flu shot this year will be ineffective. In case for some reason you don't believe me or you live under a rock you can read the multiple sources I have supplied at the bottom of the blog. So my question to you is why are they still giving flu shots?
CDC says it is too late to make new flu vaccine for this season
CDC: Flu shot less effective this year because current virus has mutated
Flu vaccine may be less effective this winter
CDC says flu shots may not be good match for 2014-15 virus
CDC Warning: Flu Viruses Mutate and Evade Current Vaccine
By now you have probably heard about the passing of ESPN’s Stuart Scott. You have probably heard inspiring stories on how he fought cancer courageously 3 times. You have probably seen or heard his ESPY Jimmy V award speech replayed. ESPN and it’s affiliated networks has done a wonderful job playing tribute to the man. And I am not trying to be insensitive when I say I am kinda shocked by the reaction. And please don’t stop reading, I have a point I promise. I have been kind of shocked on just how much attention his death has been getting. Now trust me, I loved watching the guy, I was raised on his stuff, and in my opinion he made ESPN what it is today. But still, this much attention? For a sports broadcaster? He is getting more attention than hall of famers who die, great coaches, and other celebrities. So why then such a large reaction? One word IMPACT.
Yesterday as I was making a long drive back to Dallas from New Orleans, I was tuned in to sports radio to catch the NFL Playoff games. I caught some various sports talk shows before the games actually started. And everyone had a story about Stuart Scott. How he impacted their life, a piece of advice he gave them, encouraging words through their own tough time, how he made them laugh, how he was a role model and great example. From his closest friends like Rich Eisen and Scott Van Pelt, to people who only met him once or twice, his impact was so large. Anyone who encountered this man left with something. There are certain people who are contagious, their energy, enthusiasm, positivity, I believe Stuart Scott was that kind of person. So this reaction isn’t for a sports broadcaster, it is for the man Stuart Scott. Who he was, and how he was. So my question to you is how will you be remembered, what kind of impact will you have?
13450 INWOOD ROAD #100 DALLAS, TX 75244
COPYRIGHT © 2018. ADJUST DALLAS. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Designed by RFQSF