I knew there was something fishy about the alleged flu epidemic of last year – the stench of yet another orchestrated vaccine campaign was palpable.
Most readers will recall the orchestrated Swine Flu Pandemic of 2009 that failed to materialise, but which cost Australian taxpayers many millions of dollars for vaccines and the stockpiling of Tamiflu, a drug claimed to treat viral infections (assuming such a thing exists), but which in reality, is neither effective or safe.
Were there really more cases of flu during 2017?
The correct answer to that question is that nobody could possibly know. Disease notification data is subject to many sources of bias, and in any case, is only a sub-set of the overall burden of disease. Year to year comparative data considered in isolation (discussed in further detail below) is particularly problematic because it is dependent on the diagnostic methods employed, which change over time.
A comment by Dr. Sue Ieraci, who is on the management team of both Stop the Australian Vaccination Network & Friends of Science in Medicine, in reply to a recent Conversation article is illuminating in this respect.
In Australian EDs, it was the first season that rapid viral swabs were extensively used to detect the virus. We therefore were able to identify which illnesses that we used to just call “respiratory virus” were actually influenza infections.
Her admission that cases which were previously attributed to another “respiratory virus” are now classified as flu due to the widespread use of ‘rapid viral swabs’, would suggest that diagnostic substitution is likely to be behind the alleged increase in flu cases during 2017.
A 2017 article by Pathology Awareness Australia expresses similar concerns that the alleged increase in the number of flu cases may be due to increased use of ‘rapid flu tests’.
So far in 2017, more cases of influenza have been reported than last year in the same period but some health professionals have been keen to point out that this may be in part due to more flu tests being performed.
Rapid flu tests have also been introduced this year by New South Wales Health Pathology in NSW public hospitals, and are available in various other locations.
Increased detection of a particular disease – as opposed to a real increase in the incidence of a disease – is a strategy which has been successfully employed by the pharmaceutical industry (via its controlled public health officials) to sell more vaccines in Australia.
A case in point is the alleged Australian Whooping Cough epidemic of 2009 – 2012, and the extra vaccines taxpayers funded as a consequence. Well, there was no epidemic. In the same way as the alleged flu epidemic of 2017 was due to increased detection, so too was the alleged Whooping Cough epidemic of 2009 – 2012. As McIntyre and Nolan belatedly admitted:
…testing for pertussis by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) has qualified for reimbursement since 2008, after which a sevenfold increase in testing of children in general practice was documented…
In other words, the Australian Whooping Cough epidemic of 2009 – 2012 was created by increased detection via PCR testing (not a real increase of the disease), which testing was first subsidised by Medicare from 2008.
What does the following graph tell us about the incidence of flu over time?
There is no easy way to say this, but the above graph tells us nothing useful about the incidence of flu over time. Absolutely nothing. All the graph tells us is that a surrogate marker for flu is being detected increasingly over time. That’s it. The best, and only way to know for sure if the 2017 “flu epidemic” was real would be to compare all-cause hospitalisation and death rates from 2017 with the same data from previous years.
What’s in it for the pharmaceutical industry?
That’s easy. It’s a classic case of upselling. Ka-Ching $$$
The super-charged flu vaccines which federal Health Minister Greg Hunt recently announced would be subsidised for the elderly, are significantly more expensive than the garden variety seasonal flu vaccines currently used in Australia.
How to debate a Pro-vaxer
I urge all readers to access and share the document called ‘How to debate a pro-vaxer‘. It is a comprehensive guide to debunking the vaccination racket, authored by a well known vaccine sceptic.