http://www.lewrockwell.com/keller/keller20.html
The Flu Scare Game
by <mailto:politics@netzilla.netJohn Keller
by John Keller
I always know when it's flu season. First, the media begins its usual role as hysterical government press secretary, uncritically trumpeting the same cooked numbers about the coming flu epidemic. The steady drone of recent broadcasts, including one on NBC's Today Show (10/6/04), warn that the flu kills about 36,000 people every year in the United States. The broadcasts usually cite the CDC as the source of this huge number. This is borne out by the main CDC page, with http://www.cdc.gov/flu/keyfacts.htm its immediate link to flu information and statistics. It's a crock, a lie, and a sham; a conspiracy to generate fear and stampede people to use a vaccine of questionable effectiveness to the benefit of pro-immunization bureaucrats, and big pharma. Sounds harsh, but follow the math and the money.
A cursory glance at the most recent (2001) death statistics from the
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/nvsr52_09p9.pdf
Data Highlights page
posted on the CDC site, shows that Influenza and Pneumonia (International Cause of Death numbers J10 and J18) killed 62,034 people. Quick mental subtraction would tell you that just over half were killed by the flu, versus pneumonia, if the 36,000 number is correct. So far, the size of the flu epidemic seems plausible.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/nvsr52_09p9.pdf
Here's the link to the
National Vital Statistics System page within the CDC site that has the Data
Highlights and Full Reports.
This is important, because the Data Highlights page is just that, a single page highlight of all the various mortality stats gathered by the CDC. Now, let's dig into the more detailed reports. The http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr52/nvsr52_03.pdf
"Deaths: Final Data for 2001" report is an 8MB PDF.
Skip it unless you want all the charts detailing deaths by race, age, and ethnicity. The 2002 preliminary report contains the interesting parts of the 2001 final report, as well as data from 2002. The second search result for J10 (the mortality code for flu) brings us to page 16 of 48, which contains the breakout of flu and pneumonia. Total flu deaths for 2002: 753. Pneumonia accounted for the other 65,231 deaths. Scrolling to the right are the numbers for 2001. Again, total flu deaths were under one thousand, coming in at 257. That's right, less than a thousand people died of the flu in 2001 and 2002, according to the CDC's own numbers.
Searching around on the CDC website reveals several more pages that call into question the 36,000 deaths per year number. For example, http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/0304season.htm this page dedicated to the 2003-04 season states that "152 influenza-associated deaths among children" occurred during the 2003-04 flu season, but carefully avoids answering its own question about the total number of dead in the 2003-2004 season. Instead, it goes on in serious sounding quais-scientific statistico blather: "During the 2003-04 season, the percentage of P & I-associated deaths was higher than the epidemic threshold for 9 consecutive weeks." Again, lumping pneumonia and flu deaths together, even thoughhttp://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/diseases/submenus/sub_pneumonia.htm the CDC does not recognize the flu as one of the many causes of pneumonia.
Finally, the CDC's own
http://www.cdc.gov/flu/avian/gen-info/pandemics.htm
"Flu Pandemics" page
puts deaths in the United States from the Spanish Flu Pandemic of 1918-1919 at 500,000, Asian Flu pandemic of 1957-58 at 70,000, and the Hong Kong Flu pandemic of 1968-69 at 34,000. These are the three 20th century pandemics, and two of them killed close to what the CDC is now calling average. What's going on here?
How is it that the CDC could be off by two orders of magnitude between their own official mortality stats, and the press kit number of 36,000 deaths per year. Could it be that the CDC is somehow misleading the public about the relative dangers of the flu?
Here is a link to the CDC-AMA sponsored
http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/article/1826-8377.html
National Influenza
Vaccination Summit for 2004. This is an invitation only conference hosted by the CDC and the American Medical Association. Luckily for the public, the speaker list, agenda, and presentations are posted online. The attendees list of this CDC-AMA sponsored event reads like a lobbying group for flu immunization. Of the 97 attendees, vaccine manufacturers CHIRON (10), Aventis-Pasteur (10), Medimmune (5), and Baxter Vaccines (4) were a full 29 strong. Medical Conglomerates Kaiser Permanente (6) and McKesson (3) rounded out the big corporate influence cabal. The CDC sent 39 attendees and the AMA (proper, not members) had 4. The remainder of the attendees were a mix of state and local health departments (e.g. Rhode Island Medical Society), smaller pharma companies (e.g. Solvay Pharmaceuticals), and pro-immunization organizations (e.g. Sabin Vaccine Institute).
And did these learned scholars of immunology, virology, and general public health debate the merits of vaccinating against a virus that kills less than 1,000 people in most years? Perhaps they were celebrating the fact that only a few hundred died from the flu, thanks to their vaccines? Not exactly. The manufacture, distribution, and administration of flu vaccine is a cash cow, worth several hundred million dollars a year. Here's a quote from http://biz.yahoo.com/e/040303/chir10-k.html
CHIRON CORP's 2003 Annual
Report: "Sales of our flu vaccines were $332.4 million, $90.0 million and $74.7 million in 2003, 2002 and 2001, respectively." Those numbers represent just the manufacture of flu vaccine, from one company, not including any of the profits from the distribution, or administration of the vaccine.
Buried in the speakers presentations from the conference are some interesting stats. It turns out that 147 children under 18 died of the flu in the 200304 season. Of those, 101 reported whether or not the child received the flu vaccine. Of those, 22 had received at least one flu shot, and 4 had received multiple flu shots. That puts the percentage of immunized children that died at just under 22% of all children (page 10 of 23, http://www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/36/2004_flu_cochi.pdf
Cochi Presentation.) Further in the report we learn that the CDC's own studies show they believe the flu vaccine to be only 16%-63% effective against the flu, while a French report shows 61% effectiveness against influenza-like-illness (without confirming that it's actually the flu). According to a Harvard study, ( http://www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/36/2004_flu_nowak.pdf Nowak presentation, page 26), only 22% of parents of children 623 months had them immunized, and only 30% of children under 18 were immunized.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/lott/lott-arch.html
Now, I'm no Dr. John Lott when it comes to statistics, but if the ratio of immunized to non-immunized children in the total population (22%30%) is nearly identical to the immunized to non-immunized ratio of children in an admittedly small sample of children that died (22%), the case could be made that the flu vaccine is largely worthless.
In other words, the best case these needle-happy pro-flu vaccinators can mount shows that their immunization program would work, maybe, just over half the time, but some simple number crunching of our own shows that its probably much less than that. The coup de grace' comes from one of the CDC's own, Glen Nowak, PhD., in a presentation titled
http://www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/36/2004_flu_nowak.pdf
Planning for the 2004-5 Vaccination Season: A Communication Situation Analysis" the good doctor lays out a media manipulation campaign that would make
http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/goebmain.htm
Goebbels proud. Pages 27 on detail a literal "7 Step Recipe" that the CDC will use, in conjunction with the virus makers, to "(Frame)... the flu season in terms that motivate behavior (e.g., as very severe, more severe than last or past years, deadly)".
To summarize thus far:
* The flu kills fewer than 1,000 people on average, not 36,000
* Flu Vaccine is of highly dubious effectiveness
* The CDC and Vaccine Manufacturers are in closed door sessions with the primary stated purpose of boosting vaccination numbers by spreading fear
At this point, some may think, "Hey, it might be worth getting, just as a preventative measure. Sort of like throwing a little salt over your shoulder, what can it hurt?" Plenty.
The good Dr. Donald Miller, cardiac surgeon and Professor of Surgery at the University of Washington in Seattle, recently did
http://www.lewrockwell.com/miller/miller14.html
an article about the dangers of mercury in vaccines and amalgam fillings. The CDC has a position on Thimerosal (methyl mercury based preservative) in flu vaccines
http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/thimerosal.htm posted to its website. Without admitting that Thimerosal might be responsible for the epidemics of autism, alzheimers, and ADD in this country, the CDC gives us a sop about taking it out or removing it. Reading the fine print, however, tells us: "the majority of influenza vaccines distributed in the United States currently contain Thimerosal as a preservative." Furthermore, in a bit of regulatory trickery, the FDA is letting smaller amounts go undisclosed : "..some contain only trace amounts of Thimerosal and are considered by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to be preservative-free." In other words, even if you ask to see the vaccine label, check for Thimerosal, and get a warm fuzzy feeling about the shot being labeled "Thimerosal free," thanks to the FDA's accommodation of drug manufacturers, it could still contain mercury.
When the major manufacturers of flu vaccine get together with the CDC in a closed door summit with the sole purpose of figuring out how to stick 185 million doses of a questionable vaccine into a population in which less than 1,000 people a year die, what should we call it? Yes, Virginia, it is a conspiracy. Luckily the conspirators are foolish enough to believe that their website is safely hidden amidst all the chaff of the Internet, or else, are so brazen in their contempt for the general population that they think we can't do a little math and conclude "The vaccine doesn't work, and the flu is a flim-flam!"
Eventually, there will be another pandemic of the flu, and thousands will die. The CDC should concentrate on finding ways to lower the spread, working alternatives to vaccines, and ways to minimizing the severity of the flu, rather than pumping out fake numbers, creating an aura of fear and hysteria, and shilling for profits to huge pharma companies.
Footnote: Thanks to the
http://www.hsibaltimore.com
Health Sciences
Institute daily health e-letter for calling this fraud to my attention.
October 9, 2004
John Keller <mailto:politics@netzilla.net[send him mail] owns a
<http://www.netzilla.netTechnology Consulting and a
<http://www.kellerknapp.comReal Estate business in Atlanta, GA.
http://www.redflagsweekly.com/conferences/vaccines/2004_oct07.html
Annual Number of flu deaths: it’s a guess
By Sherri Tenpenny, DO
www.nmaseminars.com
I have received many requests for a specific reference to the following statement made in my article “The Flu Season Campaign Begins” : “Even though less than 175 people actually died from influenza in 2003, anticipate that exponentially more messages regarding the “deadly flu” will be pushed through the news media this year.” After weeks of intense research to locate the full source for that statement, I have unearthed some interesting and powerfully useful information.
Recapping Last Year’s Flu Season
During the 2003--2004 season, influenza activity in the United States began earlier than usual (October 2003), peaked between late November and early December, and then declined rapidly during January-February, 2004. The CDC scrambled as it was discovered that neither of the trivalent influenza vaccines used (Fluzone® or the new intranasal vaccine, FluMist®) contained the strain A/Fujian strain, the most prevalent virus in circulation. By Jan. 15, the CDC issued a press release admitting that ongoing testing showed that the year's vaccine "was not effective or had very low
effectiveness" in the test subjects. [i]
As of the week ending March 27, 2004, laboratories at the World Health Organization (WHO) and National Respiratory and Enteric Virus Surveillance System (NREVSS) had tested 115,222 specimens and only 21.0% of the samples were found to be positive for influenza viruses. [ii] During the four most recent influenza seasons (1999-00, 2000-01, 2001-02, and 2002-03), the number of specimens that tested positive for influenza viruses ranged from 23.9 to 30.9% [iii] In other words, over the last 5 winters, 70-80% of the sniffles, fevers and body aches generally characterized as “the flu” were not caused by influenza viruses, but by organisms not covered by a vaccine, regardless of the strain that was used.
Influenza-associated pediatric deaths received considerable attention last year, prompting the CDC to request state and local health departments to report influenza-associated deaths in persons less than 18 years of age. As of May 31, 2004, 152 “influenza-associated deaths” in children had been reported by 40 states. [iv] Most of the children who died in last year's flu season were younger than 5 years of age. Because no similarnational data were collected previously, whether this number of pediatric deaths represents a change from previous seasons is unknown. [v]
Beginning in 2002, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) began to recommend that all childrenaged 6-23 months and close contacts of children aged 0-23 months receive annual influenza vaccination. With the increased reports of pediatric deaths in 2003, the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE) approved an initiative to add “all pediatric influenza-associated deaths” to the list of nationally notifiable conditions on June of 2004. [vi] This will turn out to be a boon for flu vaccine manufacturers as the media doggedly tracts and then morbidly reports this season’s statistics, placing fear in the hearts of parents who will in turn demand the flu shot for their children.
It should be noted that this initiative was undertaken after the influenza vaccine was added to the pediatric vaccination schedule, protecting the manufacturers from liability under the rules of the National Vaccine Injury Act.
Therefore, my statement that “less than 175 people who died” was technically incorrect and should have read, “less than 175 children died” in last year’s flu season. However, as few as 175 adult deaths could have occurred too. Here’s why…
Predicting 36,000 deaths
The CDC claims that influenza is “a highly contagious virus that causes an average of 36,000 deaths and 200,000 hospitalizations in the U.S. every year.” But how does the CDC determine the number of deaths related to influenza? Where is the tangible, annual report somewhere in the CDC’s database with an actual number of reported deaths among adults, such as the 152 reported deaths among children? These questions deserve answers. Upon intense investigation, I uncovered a startling truth.
The CDC receives information on influenza cases from a several different sources. During each October to May period, the CDC receives weekly reports from approximately 120 World Health Organization (WHO) and National Respiratory and Enteric Virus Surveillance System (NREVSS) collaborating laboratories in the United States regarding influenza virus isolations. In addition, reports from several hundred “sentinel physicians” are received regarding the total number of patient visits and the number of visits for influenza-like illness (ILI). Sentinel physicians are randomly selected physicians who work in the community or for local health departments who collect nasal swabs on patients reporting flu-like symptoms. These swabs are sent to laboratories for organism identification and quantification.
A third source is the state and territorial epidemiologists who estimate the level of local influenza activity. The final source, the vital statistics offices for 122 cities across the country, report the total number of death certificates filed and the number of those in which 1) pneumonia was identified as the underlying cause of death or 2) influenza was listed anywhere on the death certificate. These reports from death certificates are filed throughout the year. From the number of positive nasal swabs and the complied data from epidemiological death certificates, the CDC “determines” the number of deaths per year from influenza. [vii]
A CDC spokesman, Mr. Curtis Allen told Insight Magazine last year,
“There are a couple problems with determining the number of deaths related to the flu because most people don't die from influenza - they die from complications of influenza - so the numbers [of deaths] are based on mathematical formulas. We don't know exactly how many people get the flu each year because it's not a reportable disease and most physicians don'tdo the test [nasal swab] to indicate whether [the symptoms are caused by] influenza.” [viii]
Hence, the oft-repeated “36,000 deaths nationwide” is nothing more than a computer-generated, ominous-sounding guesstimate, rather than an actual number.
NOTE: Between Oct 1, 2003 and Apr 9, 2004, the CDC identified 863 antigenically DIFFERENT influenza viruses. [ix] Therefore, even if one assumes that the flu vaccines work for the three chosen strains, it is important to understand that the vaccines will not provide protection against the other 860 influenza viruses known to be in circulation.
Hence the CDC’s statement about the flu is correct:
Yearly, adults can average one to three and children three to six influenza-like illnesses (ILIs). The vaccine does not prevent influenza-like illnesses caused by infectious agents other than influenza [strains found in the shot], and many persons vaccinated against influenza will still get the flu. [x]
Special thanks to Mrs. Lujene Clark and Mrs. Dawn Richardson for help with this research.
http://www.jrnl.com/PDFs/mtg/monday.pdf
Maryland Journal
November 29, 2004
A SHOT IN THE DARK
Doctors question CDC flu statistics
By KELLY O'MEARA
Special to The Journal
Americans are scared. From coast to coast, young and old have stood in lines, signed up for lotteries and even crossed national borders with the hope of getting a shot at this year's limited supply of the influenza vaccine. The credit for the mass hysteria that has swept the nation in the last two months should be given to federal health officials, who, through ongoing public relations campaigns that easily rival those of corporate America's top-selling products, have successfully convinced the public that without the vaccine tens of thousands, or worse, might die.
In fact, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has told the public that influenza is the most frequent cause of death from vaccine-preventable disease in this country and that from 1990 through 1998, an average of 36,000 flu-related pulmonary and circulatory deaths occurred each season in the United States. Alan Clark, a family physician in Atlanta, specializing in emergency medicine argues that those "deaths" cannot be confirmed.
"The CDC cannot show anyone in any year where there were 36,000 actual deaths due to influenza," he said. "I think the vaccine is not working, and even if they do get the right strain of virus the chances of it being helpful is maybe 60 to 80 percent in a healthy adult, less than 50 or 60 with health problems - and I mean maybe. The only thing the vaccine is effective for is making money for the vaccine manufacturers."
Even CDC officials reluctantly admit the deaths are not "real" numbers, but only estimates. CDC spokesman Von Roebuck said the CDC uses indirect modeling methods to estimate the numbers of deaths associated with influenza, an approach that has been used for 40 years. Using this approach, the CDC estimates that about 36,000 influenza-associated deaths occur annually in the United States, he said.
This estimate is obtained by using the models to analyze the National Center for Health Statistics, NCHS, for underlying respiratory and circulatory deaths. The estimated 36,000 deaths from influenza represents about 3 percent of about 1.1 million underlying respiratory and circulatory deaths that occur during the year. However, what the CDC fails to tell the public is that it has no idea how many people who died from underlying respiratory and circulatory problems actually had the influenza infection. In other words, the CDC doesn't know if a person who died of pneumonia also had the flu, because those statistics are not collected. The one fact that CDC can state for certain is this: The greatest number of influenza deaths recorded since 1979 were 3,006 in 1981. Still, most physicians eagerly will admit that the influenza virus is nothing to, well, sneeze at, and that history well documents the bug's lethality.
But is the influenza scare justified? To answer that question, The Journal decided to take a hard look at the CDC's historical data and last year's flu season as a good place to start. Recall that public health officials announced that the 2003 flu season not only began earlier than normal but that the strain of influenza circulating in North America did not match the strain formulated in the vaccine. Early in the 2003-2004 flu season, the CDC advised that although a vaccine had been developed with the wrong strain of virus it, nevertheless, "may provide some protection or lessen the symptoms," and continued to encourage worried Americans to be vaccinated.
However, after analyzing 2003 data this year, the CDC acknowledged that the 2003-2004 influenza vaccine had "no or low effectiveness against ILI (influenza-like illness)." In other words, last year's shot didn't work. Mark Geier, a Silver Spring physician and president of the Genetic Centers of America along with his son, David Geier, a Maryland consultant on vaccine issues, argue that the "no or low effectiveness" statement by the CDC is misleading.
"What the CDC looked at in its study of the 2003-2004 season were people who received the vaccine versus those who did not receive the vaccine and they followed these people for weeks to months," explained David Geier. "What was demonstrated was that last year's vaccine did not prevent any influenza-like illness - it had no statistical efficacy against the influenza infection." "Anyone can look at the CDC data and see that there is no statistical difference between those who received the vaccine and those who did not," David Geier said.
The data can be found at the CDC Web site, www.cdc.gov <http://www.cdc.gov/ , under the report titled Preliminary Assessment of the Effectiveness of the 2003-2004 Inactivated Influenza Vaccine Colorado, Dec. 2003. The data shows that vaccine efficacy runs from -0.14 to 0.33. "The zero means that statistically it is not different from zero and has no efficacy," David Geier said. "In other words last year's vaccine made no difference in the rate of developing influenza-like illness," David Geier said. "The CDC says it had "no or low effectiveness," but that's just the CDC's spin that maybe one person was helped but they can't find them."
The Geiers also point to additional historical CDC data to further question not only whether the influenza vaccine is effective in any given year, but also raise questions about the reported 36,000 estimated deaths associated with the influenza virus. "What is most disturbing is that the CDC's own data posted at the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics show that the influenza vaccines do not work," adds Mark Geier. "What we see (from the CDC data) is that in the late 1970s between 10 and 15 million doses of influenza vaccine were given to high-risk people, and by 2001-2002 nearly 80 million doses were distributed.
Despite the enormous increase in the number of people receiving the influenza vaccine and the CDC's public relations campaign to sell the vaccine, there has not been a decrease in the population rate of influenza deaths or influenza illnesses." In response to Mark Geier's claim that the "vaccines do not work," CDC spokesman Roebuck explained that "the studies looking at trends in mortality over time cannot address the effectiveness of the vaccination program since influenza vaccine information is not linked to death certificates or hospital data.
One explanation for not seeing a decline in influenza-related hospitalizations and deaths is the aging population, particularly persons 85 years and older. In addition, A (H3N2) viruses have predominated in more recent seasons." "This response is ridiculous," countered Mark Geier. "The rules in science and medicine are that the vaccine manufacturers have to demonstrate efficacy - now we have to demonstrate that it isn't efficacious. What the CDC is saying is 'well, the data don't show that it's efficacious, but the numbers aren't good enough so we're going to keep giving it.' That's not how this is supposed to work.
They have to prove that the vaccine is working, and the CDC has no proof." "Furthermore," explained Mark Geier, "the CDC reports that roughly 100 children die from influenza each year, but the data show that there really are between five and 15 deaths in any given year. The CDC also touts the estimated 36,000 yearly deaths due to the influenza virus. All anyone has to do is look at the CDC's own data to see that in reality it is maybe 1,000 deaths." Mark Geier is referring to the data made available by the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics which show, for example, the actual number of deaths due to influenza in 1979 were 604. The highest number of deaths recorded occurred in 1981 with a total of 3,006. These data include all age groups.
"The argument by the CDC that the vaccine is stopping these deaths doesn't hold up because with the increase of the vaccine over the years one would expect to see the number of deaths going down," Dr. Geier said. "We don't see a decrease. There is very little, if any, trend in these numbers and the point is there aren't a whole lot of deaths to be prevented." "Given the CDC's data," concludes Mark Geier, "no one should be standing in a line thinking 'Oh God, if I get the vaccine I'm going to live and if I don't get the vaccine I'm going to die, because it appears that it just doesn't make much difference whether you get the vaccine or not."
Kelly O'Meara is a veteran investigative reporter who holds journalistic awards for articles in the medical field.
What's to come ...
Today: Are the CDC estimates of flu deaths this year fact or fiction?
Calculating U.S. Influenza Deaths
By F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP
For years, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has been telling anyone who would listen: "Every year in the United States, on average: 5 percent to 20 percent of the population gets the flu, more than 200,000 people are hospitalized from flu complications, and about 36,000 people die from flu." (1) It is not clear how the specific statistic - 36,000 American deaths a year "on average" - was formulated or from what sources it was derived. It seems to have just suddenly appeared, like a rabbit from a top hat. It certainly could have been any other number of thousands of cases. After all, what are a few thousand deaths up or down? No one knows when the next number change will come but, when it does, it is guaranteed to be an increase. Scaring people, especially old people, out of their wits always sells vaccine and that seems to have become the CDC's main purpose.
Another well-kept secret is over how many years the influenza deaths were "averaged." Did the CDC calculate "average deaths" from 2000 to 2004 or from 1980 to 2004? To have 36,000 deaths "on average," there must be years with 26,000 deaths and about the same number of years with 46,000 deaths and, not to belabor the point, as many years with 16,000 deaths as with 56,000. At least, this is what most people would think averaging and "on average" mean. The past influenza season came and went very quietly because the CDC was busy with dying birds in the Far East and Turkey. We will never find out where exactly the most recent "deaths from flu" will fit on the curve, but it is a good bet that 2005-2006 will not be, propaganda-wise, a "real good year."
Testifying before the committee on government reform of the U.S. House of Representatives on Feb. 12, 2004, CDC Director Julie L. Gerberding, MD, carefully stated that "CDC scientists estimate that an average of 36,000 people die from influenza-related complications each year in the United States." (2) It is not clear why the director made the distinction, while under oath, between deaths from the flu and deaths from complications of the flu. A few people, including this writer, think there is a distinct difference between the two; many others do not think so. To place the CDC influenza deaths in perspective, the U.S. lost 33,741
officers and enlisted men and women in Korean War battles from 1950 to 1953. (3) And a special communication published by the Journal of the American Medical Association listed 43,000 deaths due to motor vehicle crashes and 29,000 involving firearms in the U.S. in 2000. (4)
The National Vital Statistics Report for 2001, published on Sept. 18, 2003 [Vol. 52, No. 3], was the last official U.S. government report on influenza mortality before the CDC director's appearance at the February 2004 Congressional hearing. Certified figures about Influenza mortality [J10-J11] were listed on page 31 of the report. (5)
There were, in all, 257 influenza deaths recorded in 2001. Of those, 13 deaths were under the age of 5; 50 were between 5 and 54; 21 from 55 to 64; 21 between 65 and 74; 56 from 75 to 84; and 96 were 85 years old or older. Also in 2001, there were 61,777 official deaths due to pneumonia (J12-J18) of which 48,686 (79 percent) were 75 years old or older. The same document (table 11, page 35) lists the reciprocal number of deaths per 100.000 population. In 2001, influenza-pneumonia deaths (J10-J18) amounted to 21.8 per 100.000 with influenza at 0.1 and pneumonia at 21.7. With the U.S. population being around 284 million in 2001, it would seem that the calculated number of 284 (0.1/100.000) deaths from influenza would be close enough to the actual listed number of 257.
The following should be kept in mind:
"Pneumonia" is caused by bacteria, viruses and fungi. Elderly patients (75 years and over) who have laboratory confirmed influenza disease may develop pneumonia but die from other underlying serious conditions, such as heart or kidney failure to name just two. It is not known how many of the 48,686 elderly individuals who died in 2001 had received the influenza vaccine that year. People of that age are usually vaccinated early in the season and certainly more frequently than others. In the U.S., influenza/influenza-like illnesses only occur during the flu season, a period of three months on average and rarely four months. Pulmonary complications and specifically deaths due to influenza will only occur during that short period, while other causes of pneumonia deaths exist year-round.
Most people who have influenza-like illness, as the condition is fondly referred to by the CDC, do not have influenza; only a small percentage of them are ever confirmed by culture or other accurate laboratory means. For the period 2000-2005, influenza virus positive cultures were 11 to 18.9 percent of the obtained cultures with a mean of 12.5 percent. It is well known that the virus strains in the community may be different from those in the available vaccine. Because immunity is strain-specific, vaccination in such cases is essentially ineffective in preventing disease. The percent of antigenic match between 2000 and 2005 varied from 11 to 63.2 percent with a mean of 54.2 percent. The maximum effectiveness of the vaccination effort, therefore, ranged between 2.1 percent in 2003-2004 and 11.5 percent in 2002-2003 with a mean of7.2 percent. (6)
Taking all these facts into consideration, it is safe to say that only a small percentage of the 61,777 individuals who died of pneumonia in 2001 actually had influenza. Clearly, therefore, a large majority of individuals who died that year of pneumonia did not die of influenza or influenza-related complications. In addition, the CDC figures clearly show that a large percentage of those who died were elderly and, historically, the elderly, as a group, have always been better vaccinated. As to the 257 individuals who were actually listed as influenza deaths in the 2001 statistical report, the influenza virus was actually identified in only 18 of them, the 18 classified as J10. (6) Apparently in 2001, not even 257 people died of influenza or influenza-related complications. The Monthly Vital Statistics Report of Sept. 17, 1981 sheds additional light on the issue. Under pneumonia and influenza, the report states: "An estimated 52,720 deaths in 1980 were attributed to pneumonia and influenza. The age- adjusted death rate for this cause increased about 14 percent from 11.1 per 100,000 population in 1979 to 12.6 in 1980, reflecting the influenza epidemics in 1980 and the absence of one in the previous year. For pneumonia and influenza, death rates increased for the age groups 35 years and over." (7)
The above statement by none other than the CDC suggests that around 1.5 deaths per 100,000 were or could have been attributed to influenza or influenza complications in 1980, an epidemic year, when one would have expected a very large number of cases and more severe illness and certainly in a period when influenza vaccination was not as popular as it is now. Considering that the U.S. population was around 226.5 million in 1980, 1.5 deaths per 100.000 would translate to around 4,000 deaths that year. So here we have official CDC statistics listing around 4,000 deaths, unconfirmed by viral cultures, from influenza and influenza-related complications in 1980, a banner year, and maybe 18 or 257 in 2001 and the propaganda machine is still talking about "an average of 36,000 deaths" a year. How preposterous!
References
1. Key Facts about Influenza and the Influenza Vaccine, CDC.
Available at http://www.cdc.gov/flu/keyfacts.htm
2. J.L. Gerberding. Protecting the Public's Health: CDC Influenza
Preparedness Efforts. Testimony before the Committee on Government Reform U.S.
House of Representatives, Feb. 12, 2004.
Available at http://www.cdc.gov/washington/testimony/In2122004200.htm
3. America's Wars: U.S. Casualties and Veterans.
Available at http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004615.html
4. A.H. Mokdad et al. Actual Causes of Death in the United States, 2000. JAMA. 2004; 291: 1238-1245. Available at http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/291/10/1238
5. E. Arias et al. Deaths: Final Data For 2001. National Vital Statistics
Reports. Volume 52, Number 3. Sept. 18, 2003.
Available at http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr52/nvsr52_03.pdf
6. D.M. Ayoub, F.E. Yazbak. Influenza Vaccination During Pregnancy: A Critical Assessment of the recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. J. Am Phys Surg. 2006; 11(2): 41-47. Available at http://www.jpands.org/vol11no2/ayoub.pdf
7. Annual Report of Births, Deaths, Marriages and Divorces: United States
1980. Monthly Vital Statistics Report: Vol. 29, No.13. Sept. 17, 1981.
Available at http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/mvsr/supp/mv29_13.pdf
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/apr/15/cdcs-deadly-mistakes
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
CDC's deadly mistakes
Sometimes connecting the dots reveals a grim picture. Several new reports about hospital infections show that the danger is increasing rapidly, and that the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention isn't leveling with the public about it.Tomorrow Congress will hold hearings on whether the federal government is doing enough to prevent deadly hospital infection. The answer is "no." The biggest culprit is the CDC. The CDC claims 1.7 million people contract infections in U.S. hospitals each year. The truth is several times that number. The proof is in the data.
One of the fastest growing infections is "Mersa" or MRSA, which stands for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, a superbug that doesn't respond to most antibiotics. In 1993, there were fewer than 2,000 MRSA infections in U.S. hospitals. By 2005, the figure had shot up to 368,000 according to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. By June, 2007, 2.4 percent of all patients had MRSA hospital infections, according to the largest-ever study, published in the American Journal of Infection Control. That would mean 880,000 victims a year.
That's from one superbug. Imagine the number of infections from bacteria of all kinds, including such killers as VRE (vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus) and C. diff (Clostridium difficile). Dr. Julie Gerberding, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, recently told Congress that MRSA accounts for only 8 percent of hospital infections.
These new facts discredit the CDC's official 1.7 million estimate. CDC spokeswoman Nicole Coffin admits "the number isn't perfect." In fact, it is an irresponsible guesstimate based on a sliver of 6-year-old (2002) data. The CDC researchers who came up with it complained that not having actual data "complicated the problem."
Numbers matter. Health conditions that affect the largest number of people generally command more research dollars and public attention.
The problem doesn't end there. The CDC has resisted calling on hospitals to make the key change needed to stop infections: MRSA screening. A study in the March issue of the Annals of Internal Medicine shows MRSA infections can be prevented by testing incoming patients and taking precautions on those who test positive.
The test is a noninvasive skin or nasal swab. Researchers at Evanston Northwestern Healthcare System, a group of three hospitals near Chicago, reduced MRSA infections 70 percent over two years. "If it works in these three different hospitals, it will work anywhere," said the study's lead author, Dr. Lance Peterson, an epidemiologist.
That's fortunate, because the problem is everywhere. The June 2007 survey found MRSA is "endemic in virtually all U. S. health-care facilities." Screening is necessary because patients who unknowingly carry MRSA bacteria on their body shed it in particles on wheel chairs, blood pressure cuffs, and virtually every surface. These patients don't realize they have the germ, because it doesn't make then sick until it gets inside their body, usually via a surgical incision, a catheter, or a ventilator for breathing. With screening, hospitals can identify the MRSA positive patients, isolate them, use separate equipment, and insist on gowns and gloves when treating them.
Screening is common in several European countries that have almost eradicated MRSA, and some 50 studies show it works in the U.S. too.
Congress and seven state legislatures are considering making screening mandatory. Illinois, New Jersey and Pennsylvania acted in 2007. Why is legislation needed? Because the CDC, which is responsible for providing guidelines for hospitals on how to prevent infections, has failed to recommend that all hospitals screen patients. The CDC's lax guidelines give hospitals an excuse to do too little.
It is common for government regulators to become soft on the industry they are supposed to regulate. A coziness develops. Federal Aviation Administration inspectors failed to insist on timely electrical systems inspections, say news reports. The same may be true at the CDC, where government administrators spend too much time listening to hospital executives and not enough time with grieving families.
Betsy McCaughey is chairman of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths and a former lieutenant governor of New York.
The Flu Scare Game
by <mailto:politics@netzilla.netJohn Keller
by John Keller
I always know when it's flu season. First, the media begins its usual role as hysterical government press secretary, uncritically trumpeting the same cooked numbers about the coming flu epidemic. The steady drone of recent broadcasts, including one on NBC's Today Show (10/6/04), warn that the flu kills about 36,000 people every year in the United States. The broadcasts usually cite the CDC as the source of this huge number. This is borne out by the main CDC page, with http://www.cdc.gov/flu/keyfacts.htm its immediate link to flu information and statistics. It's a crock, a lie, and a sham; a conspiracy to generate fear and stampede people to use a vaccine of questionable effectiveness to the benefit of pro-immunization bureaucrats, and big pharma. Sounds harsh, but follow the math and the money.
A cursory glance at the most recent (2001) death statistics from the
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/nvsr52_09p9.pdf
Data Highlights page
posted on the CDC site, shows that Influenza and Pneumonia (International Cause of Death numbers J10 and J18) killed 62,034 people. Quick mental subtraction would tell you that just over half were killed by the flu, versus pneumonia, if the 36,000 number is correct. So far, the size of the flu epidemic seems plausible.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/nvsr52_09p9.pdf
Here's the link to the
National Vital Statistics System page within the CDC site that has the Data
Highlights and Full Reports.
This is important, because the Data Highlights page is just that, a single page highlight of all the various mortality stats gathered by the CDC. Now, let's dig into the more detailed reports. The http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr52/nvsr52_03.pdf
"Deaths: Final Data for 2001" report is an 8MB PDF.
Skip it unless you want all the charts detailing deaths by race, age, and ethnicity. The 2002 preliminary report contains the interesting parts of the 2001 final report, as well as data from 2002. The second search result for J10 (the mortality code for flu) brings us to page 16 of 48, which contains the breakout of flu and pneumonia. Total flu deaths for 2002: 753. Pneumonia accounted for the other 65,231 deaths. Scrolling to the right are the numbers for 2001. Again, total flu deaths were under one thousand, coming in at 257. That's right, less than a thousand people died of the flu in 2001 and 2002, according to the CDC's own numbers.
Searching around on the CDC website reveals several more pages that call into question the 36,000 deaths per year number. For example, http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/0304season.htm this page dedicated to the 2003-04 season states that "152 influenza-associated deaths among children" occurred during the 2003-04 flu season, but carefully avoids answering its own question about the total number of dead in the 2003-2004 season. Instead, it goes on in serious sounding quais-scientific statistico blather: "During the 2003-04 season, the percentage of P & I-associated deaths was higher than the epidemic threshold for 9 consecutive weeks." Again, lumping pneumonia and flu deaths together, even thoughhttp://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/diseases/submenus/sub_pneumonia.htm the CDC does not recognize the flu as one of the many causes of pneumonia.
Finally, the CDC's own
http://www.cdc.gov/flu/avian/gen-info/pandemics.htm
"Flu Pandemics" page
puts deaths in the United States from the Spanish Flu Pandemic of 1918-1919 at 500,000, Asian Flu pandemic of 1957-58 at 70,000, and the Hong Kong Flu pandemic of 1968-69 at 34,000. These are the three 20th century pandemics, and two of them killed close to what the CDC is now calling average. What's going on here?
How is it that the CDC could be off by two orders of magnitude between their own official mortality stats, and the press kit number of 36,000 deaths per year. Could it be that the CDC is somehow misleading the public about the relative dangers of the flu?
Here is a link to the CDC-AMA sponsored
http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/article/1826-8377.html
National Influenza
Vaccination Summit for 2004. This is an invitation only conference hosted by the CDC and the American Medical Association. Luckily for the public, the speaker list, agenda, and presentations are posted online. The attendees list of this CDC-AMA sponsored event reads like a lobbying group for flu immunization. Of the 97 attendees, vaccine manufacturers CHIRON (10), Aventis-Pasteur (10), Medimmune (5), and Baxter Vaccines (4) were a full 29 strong. Medical Conglomerates Kaiser Permanente (6) and McKesson (3) rounded out the big corporate influence cabal. The CDC sent 39 attendees and the AMA (proper, not members) had 4. The remainder of the attendees were a mix of state and local health departments (e.g. Rhode Island Medical Society), smaller pharma companies (e.g. Solvay Pharmaceuticals), and pro-immunization organizations (e.g. Sabin Vaccine Institute).
And did these learned scholars of immunology, virology, and general public health debate the merits of vaccinating against a virus that kills less than 1,000 people in most years? Perhaps they were celebrating the fact that only a few hundred died from the flu, thanks to their vaccines? Not exactly. The manufacture, distribution, and administration of flu vaccine is a cash cow, worth several hundred million dollars a year. Here's a quote from http://biz.yahoo.com/e/040303/chir10-k.html
CHIRON CORP's 2003 Annual
Report: "Sales of our flu vaccines were $332.4 million, $90.0 million and $74.7 million in 2003, 2002 and 2001, respectively." Those numbers represent just the manufacture of flu vaccine, from one company, not including any of the profits from the distribution, or administration of the vaccine.
Buried in the speakers presentations from the conference are some interesting stats. It turns out that 147 children under 18 died of the flu in the 200304 season. Of those, 101 reported whether or not the child received the flu vaccine. Of those, 22 had received at least one flu shot, and 4 had received multiple flu shots. That puts the percentage of immunized children that died at just under 22% of all children (page 10 of 23, http://www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/36/2004_flu_cochi.pdf
Cochi Presentation.) Further in the report we learn that the CDC's own studies show they believe the flu vaccine to be only 16%-63% effective against the flu, while a French report shows 61% effectiveness against influenza-like-illness (without confirming that it's actually the flu). According to a Harvard study, ( http://www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/36/2004_flu_nowak.pdf Nowak presentation, page 26), only 22% of parents of children 623 months had them immunized, and only 30% of children under 18 were immunized.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/lott/lott-arch.html
Now, I'm no Dr. John Lott when it comes to statistics, but if the ratio of immunized to non-immunized children in the total population (22%30%) is nearly identical to the immunized to non-immunized ratio of children in an admittedly small sample of children that died (22%), the case could be made that the flu vaccine is largely worthless.
In other words, the best case these needle-happy pro-flu vaccinators can mount shows that their immunization program would work, maybe, just over half the time, but some simple number crunching of our own shows that its probably much less than that. The coup de grace' comes from one of the CDC's own, Glen Nowak, PhD., in a presentation titled
http://www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/36/2004_flu_nowak.pdf
Planning for the 2004-5 Vaccination Season: A Communication Situation Analysis" the good doctor lays out a media manipulation campaign that would make
http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/goebmain.htm
Goebbels proud. Pages 27 on detail a literal "7 Step Recipe" that the CDC will use, in conjunction with the virus makers, to "(Frame)... the flu season in terms that motivate behavior (e.g., as very severe, more severe than last or past years, deadly)".
To summarize thus far:
* The flu kills fewer than 1,000 people on average, not 36,000
* Flu Vaccine is of highly dubious effectiveness
* The CDC and Vaccine Manufacturers are in closed door sessions with the primary stated purpose of boosting vaccination numbers by spreading fear
At this point, some may think, "Hey, it might be worth getting, just as a preventative measure. Sort of like throwing a little salt over your shoulder, what can it hurt?" Plenty.
The good Dr. Donald Miller, cardiac surgeon and Professor of Surgery at the University of Washington in Seattle, recently did
http://www.lewrockwell.com/miller/miller14.html
an article about the dangers of mercury in vaccines and amalgam fillings. The CDC has a position on Thimerosal (methyl mercury based preservative) in flu vaccines
http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/thimerosal.htm posted to its website. Without admitting that Thimerosal might be responsible for the epidemics of autism, alzheimers, and ADD in this country, the CDC gives us a sop about taking it out or removing it. Reading the fine print, however, tells us: "the majority of influenza vaccines distributed in the United States currently contain Thimerosal as a preservative." Furthermore, in a bit of regulatory trickery, the FDA is letting smaller amounts go undisclosed : "..some contain only trace amounts of Thimerosal and are considered by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to be preservative-free." In other words, even if you ask to see the vaccine label, check for Thimerosal, and get a warm fuzzy feeling about the shot being labeled "Thimerosal free," thanks to the FDA's accommodation of drug manufacturers, it could still contain mercury.
When the major manufacturers of flu vaccine get together with the CDC in a closed door summit with the sole purpose of figuring out how to stick 185 million doses of a questionable vaccine into a population in which less than 1,000 people a year die, what should we call it? Yes, Virginia, it is a conspiracy. Luckily the conspirators are foolish enough to believe that their website is safely hidden amidst all the chaff of the Internet, or else, are so brazen in their contempt for the general population that they think we can't do a little math and conclude "The vaccine doesn't work, and the flu is a flim-flam!"
Eventually, there will be another pandemic of the flu, and thousands will die. The CDC should concentrate on finding ways to lower the spread, working alternatives to vaccines, and ways to minimizing the severity of the flu, rather than pumping out fake numbers, creating an aura of fear and hysteria, and shilling for profits to huge pharma companies.
Footnote: Thanks to the
http://www.hsibaltimore.com
Health Sciences
Institute daily health e-letter for calling this fraud to my attention.
October 9, 2004
John Keller <mailto:politics@netzilla.net[send him mail] owns a
<http://www.netzilla.netTechnology Consulting and a
<http://www.kellerknapp.comReal Estate business in Atlanta, GA.
http://www.redflagsweekly.com/conferences/vaccines/2004_oct07.html
Annual Number of flu deaths: it’s a guess
By Sherri Tenpenny, DO
www.nmaseminars.com
I have received many requests for a specific reference to the following statement made in my article “The Flu Season Campaign Begins” : “Even though less than 175 people actually died from influenza in 2003, anticipate that exponentially more messages regarding the “deadly flu” will be pushed through the news media this year.” After weeks of intense research to locate the full source for that statement, I have unearthed some interesting and powerfully useful information.
Recapping Last Year’s Flu Season
During the 2003--2004 season, influenza activity in the United States began earlier than usual (October 2003), peaked between late November and early December, and then declined rapidly during January-February, 2004. The CDC scrambled as it was discovered that neither of the trivalent influenza vaccines used (Fluzone® or the new intranasal vaccine, FluMist®) contained the strain A/Fujian strain, the most prevalent virus in circulation. By Jan. 15, the CDC issued a press release admitting that ongoing testing showed that the year's vaccine "was not effective or had very low
effectiveness" in the test subjects. [i]
As of the week ending March 27, 2004, laboratories at the World Health Organization (WHO) and National Respiratory and Enteric Virus Surveillance System (NREVSS) had tested 115,222 specimens and only 21.0% of the samples were found to be positive for influenza viruses. [ii] During the four most recent influenza seasons (1999-00, 2000-01, 2001-02, and 2002-03), the number of specimens that tested positive for influenza viruses ranged from 23.9 to 30.9% [iii] In other words, over the last 5 winters, 70-80% of the sniffles, fevers and body aches generally characterized as “the flu” were not caused by influenza viruses, but by organisms not covered by a vaccine, regardless of the strain that was used.
Influenza-associated pediatric deaths received considerable attention last year, prompting the CDC to request state and local health departments to report influenza-associated deaths in persons less than 18 years of age. As of May 31, 2004, 152 “influenza-associated deaths” in children had been reported by 40 states. [iv] Most of the children who died in last year's flu season were younger than 5 years of age. Because no similarnational data were collected previously, whether this number of pediatric deaths represents a change from previous seasons is unknown. [v]
Beginning in 2002, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) began to recommend that all childrenaged 6-23 months and close contacts of children aged 0-23 months receive annual influenza vaccination. With the increased reports of pediatric deaths in 2003, the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE) approved an initiative to add “all pediatric influenza-associated deaths” to the list of nationally notifiable conditions on June of 2004. [vi] This will turn out to be a boon for flu vaccine manufacturers as the media doggedly tracts and then morbidly reports this season’s statistics, placing fear in the hearts of parents who will in turn demand the flu shot for their children.
It should be noted that this initiative was undertaken after the influenza vaccine was added to the pediatric vaccination schedule, protecting the manufacturers from liability under the rules of the National Vaccine Injury Act.
Therefore, my statement that “less than 175 people who died” was technically incorrect and should have read, “less than 175 children died” in last year’s flu season. However, as few as 175 adult deaths could have occurred too. Here’s why…
Predicting 36,000 deaths
The CDC claims that influenza is “a highly contagious virus that causes an average of 36,000 deaths and 200,000 hospitalizations in the U.S. every year.” But how does the CDC determine the number of deaths related to influenza? Where is the tangible, annual report somewhere in the CDC’s database with an actual number of reported deaths among adults, such as the 152 reported deaths among children? These questions deserve answers. Upon intense investigation, I uncovered a startling truth.
The CDC receives information on influenza cases from a several different sources. During each October to May period, the CDC receives weekly reports from approximately 120 World Health Organization (WHO) and National Respiratory and Enteric Virus Surveillance System (NREVSS) collaborating laboratories in the United States regarding influenza virus isolations. In addition, reports from several hundred “sentinel physicians” are received regarding the total number of patient visits and the number of visits for influenza-like illness (ILI). Sentinel physicians are randomly selected physicians who work in the community or for local health departments who collect nasal swabs on patients reporting flu-like symptoms. These swabs are sent to laboratories for organism identification and quantification.
A third source is the state and territorial epidemiologists who estimate the level of local influenza activity. The final source, the vital statistics offices for 122 cities across the country, report the total number of death certificates filed and the number of those in which 1) pneumonia was identified as the underlying cause of death or 2) influenza was listed anywhere on the death certificate. These reports from death certificates are filed throughout the year. From the number of positive nasal swabs and the complied data from epidemiological death certificates, the CDC “determines” the number of deaths per year from influenza. [vii]
A CDC spokesman, Mr. Curtis Allen told Insight Magazine last year,
“There are a couple problems with determining the number of deaths related to the flu because most people don't die from influenza - they die from complications of influenza - so the numbers [of deaths] are based on mathematical formulas. We don't know exactly how many people get the flu each year because it's not a reportable disease and most physicians don'tdo the test [nasal swab] to indicate whether [the symptoms are caused by] influenza.” [viii]
Hence, the oft-repeated “36,000 deaths nationwide” is nothing more than a computer-generated, ominous-sounding guesstimate, rather than an actual number.
NOTE: Between Oct 1, 2003 and Apr 9, 2004, the CDC identified 863 antigenically DIFFERENT influenza viruses. [ix] Therefore, even if one assumes that the flu vaccines work for the three chosen strains, it is important to understand that the vaccines will not provide protection against the other 860 influenza viruses known to be in circulation.
Hence the CDC’s statement about the flu is correct:
Yearly, adults can average one to three and children three to six influenza-like illnesses (ILIs). The vaccine does not prevent influenza-like illnesses caused by infectious agents other than influenza [strains found in the shot], and many persons vaccinated against influenza will still get the flu. [x]
Special thanks to Mrs. Lujene Clark and Mrs. Dawn Richardson for help with this research.
http://www.jrnl.com/PDFs/mtg/monday.pdf
Maryland Journal
November 29, 2004
A SHOT IN THE DARK
Doctors question CDC flu statistics
By KELLY O'MEARA
Special to The Journal
Americans are scared. From coast to coast, young and old have stood in lines, signed up for lotteries and even crossed national borders with the hope of getting a shot at this year's limited supply of the influenza vaccine. The credit for the mass hysteria that has swept the nation in the last two months should be given to federal health officials, who, through ongoing public relations campaigns that easily rival those of corporate America's top-selling products, have successfully convinced the public that without the vaccine tens of thousands, or worse, might die.
In fact, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has told the public that influenza is the most frequent cause of death from vaccine-preventable disease in this country and that from 1990 through 1998, an average of 36,000 flu-related pulmonary and circulatory deaths occurred each season in the United States. Alan Clark, a family physician in Atlanta, specializing in emergency medicine argues that those "deaths" cannot be confirmed.
"The CDC cannot show anyone in any year where there were 36,000 actual deaths due to influenza," he said. "I think the vaccine is not working, and even if they do get the right strain of virus the chances of it being helpful is maybe 60 to 80 percent in a healthy adult, less than 50 or 60 with health problems - and I mean maybe. The only thing the vaccine is effective for is making money for the vaccine manufacturers."
Even CDC officials reluctantly admit the deaths are not "real" numbers, but only estimates. CDC spokesman Von Roebuck said the CDC uses indirect modeling methods to estimate the numbers of deaths associated with influenza, an approach that has been used for 40 years. Using this approach, the CDC estimates that about 36,000 influenza-associated deaths occur annually in the United States, he said.
This estimate is obtained by using the models to analyze the National Center for Health Statistics, NCHS, for underlying respiratory and circulatory deaths. The estimated 36,000 deaths from influenza represents about 3 percent of about 1.1 million underlying respiratory and circulatory deaths that occur during the year. However, what the CDC fails to tell the public is that it has no idea how many people who died from underlying respiratory and circulatory problems actually had the influenza infection. In other words, the CDC doesn't know if a person who died of pneumonia also had the flu, because those statistics are not collected. The one fact that CDC can state for certain is this: The greatest number of influenza deaths recorded since 1979 were 3,006 in 1981. Still, most physicians eagerly will admit that the influenza virus is nothing to, well, sneeze at, and that history well documents the bug's lethality.
But is the influenza scare justified? To answer that question, The Journal decided to take a hard look at the CDC's historical data and last year's flu season as a good place to start. Recall that public health officials announced that the 2003 flu season not only began earlier than normal but that the strain of influenza circulating in North America did not match the strain formulated in the vaccine. Early in the 2003-2004 flu season, the CDC advised that although a vaccine had been developed with the wrong strain of virus it, nevertheless, "may provide some protection or lessen the symptoms," and continued to encourage worried Americans to be vaccinated.
However, after analyzing 2003 data this year, the CDC acknowledged that the 2003-2004 influenza vaccine had "no or low effectiveness against ILI (influenza-like illness)." In other words, last year's shot didn't work. Mark Geier, a Silver Spring physician and president of the Genetic Centers of America along with his son, David Geier, a Maryland consultant on vaccine issues, argue that the "no or low effectiveness" statement by the CDC is misleading.
"What the CDC looked at in its study of the 2003-2004 season were people who received the vaccine versus those who did not receive the vaccine and they followed these people for weeks to months," explained David Geier. "What was demonstrated was that last year's vaccine did not prevent any influenza-like illness - it had no statistical efficacy against the influenza infection." "Anyone can look at the CDC data and see that there is no statistical difference between those who received the vaccine and those who did not," David Geier said.
The data can be found at the CDC Web site, www.cdc.gov <http://www.cdc.gov/ , under the report titled Preliminary Assessment of the Effectiveness of the 2003-2004 Inactivated Influenza Vaccine Colorado, Dec. 2003. The data shows that vaccine efficacy runs from -0.14 to 0.33. "The zero means that statistically it is not different from zero and has no efficacy," David Geier said. "In other words last year's vaccine made no difference in the rate of developing influenza-like illness," David Geier said. "The CDC says it had "no or low effectiveness," but that's just the CDC's spin that maybe one person was helped but they can't find them."
The Geiers also point to additional historical CDC data to further question not only whether the influenza vaccine is effective in any given year, but also raise questions about the reported 36,000 estimated deaths associated with the influenza virus. "What is most disturbing is that the CDC's own data posted at the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics show that the influenza vaccines do not work," adds Mark Geier. "What we see (from the CDC data) is that in the late 1970s between 10 and 15 million doses of influenza vaccine were given to high-risk people, and by 2001-2002 nearly 80 million doses were distributed.
Despite the enormous increase in the number of people receiving the influenza vaccine and the CDC's public relations campaign to sell the vaccine, there has not been a decrease in the population rate of influenza deaths or influenza illnesses." In response to Mark Geier's claim that the "vaccines do not work," CDC spokesman Roebuck explained that "the studies looking at trends in mortality over time cannot address the effectiveness of the vaccination program since influenza vaccine information is not linked to death certificates or hospital data.
One explanation for not seeing a decline in influenza-related hospitalizations and deaths is the aging population, particularly persons 85 years and older. In addition, A (H3N2) viruses have predominated in more recent seasons." "This response is ridiculous," countered Mark Geier. "The rules in science and medicine are that the vaccine manufacturers have to demonstrate efficacy - now we have to demonstrate that it isn't efficacious. What the CDC is saying is 'well, the data don't show that it's efficacious, but the numbers aren't good enough so we're going to keep giving it.' That's not how this is supposed to work.
They have to prove that the vaccine is working, and the CDC has no proof." "Furthermore," explained Mark Geier, "the CDC reports that roughly 100 children die from influenza each year, but the data show that there really are between five and 15 deaths in any given year. The CDC also touts the estimated 36,000 yearly deaths due to the influenza virus. All anyone has to do is look at the CDC's own data to see that in reality it is maybe 1,000 deaths." Mark Geier is referring to the data made available by the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics which show, for example, the actual number of deaths due to influenza in 1979 were 604. The highest number of deaths recorded occurred in 1981 with a total of 3,006. These data include all age groups.
"The argument by the CDC that the vaccine is stopping these deaths doesn't hold up because with the increase of the vaccine over the years one would expect to see the number of deaths going down," Dr. Geier said. "We don't see a decrease. There is very little, if any, trend in these numbers and the point is there aren't a whole lot of deaths to be prevented." "Given the CDC's data," concludes Mark Geier, "no one should be standing in a line thinking 'Oh God, if I get the vaccine I'm going to live and if I don't get the vaccine I'm going to die, because it appears that it just doesn't make much difference whether you get the vaccine or not."
Kelly O'Meara is a veteran investigative reporter who holds journalistic awards for articles in the medical field.
What's to come ...
Today: Are the CDC estimates of flu deaths this year fact or fiction?
Calculating U.S. Influenza Deaths
By F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP
For years, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has been telling anyone who would listen: "Every year in the United States, on average: 5 percent to 20 percent of the population gets the flu, more than 200,000 people are hospitalized from flu complications, and about 36,000 people die from flu." (1) It is not clear how the specific statistic - 36,000 American deaths a year "on average" - was formulated or from what sources it was derived. It seems to have just suddenly appeared, like a rabbit from a top hat. It certainly could have been any other number of thousands of cases. After all, what are a few thousand deaths up or down? No one knows when the next number change will come but, when it does, it is guaranteed to be an increase. Scaring people, especially old people, out of their wits always sells vaccine and that seems to have become the CDC's main purpose.
Another well-kept secret is over how many years the influenza deaths were "averaged." Did the CDC calculate "average deaths" from 2000 to 2004 or from 1980 to 2004? To have 36,000 deaths "on average," there must be years with 26,000 deaths and about the same number of years with 46,000 deaths and, not to belabor the point, as many years with 16,000 deaths as with 56,000. At least, this is what most people would think averaging and "on average" mean. The past influenza season came and went very quietly because the CDC was busy with dying birds in the Far East and Turkey. We will never find out where exactly the most recent "deaths from flu" will fit on the curve, but it is a good bet that 2005-2006 will not be, propaganda-wise, a "real good year."
Testifying before the committee on government reform of the U.S. House of Representatives on Feb. 12, 2004, CDC Director Julie L. Gerberding, MD, carefully stated that "CDC scientists estimate that an average of 36,000 people die from influenza-related complications each year in the United States." (2) It is not clear why the director made the distinction, while under oath, between deaths from the flu and deaths from complications of the flu. A few people, including this writer, think there is a distinct difference between the two; many others do not think so. To place the CDC influenza deaths in perspective, the U.S. lost 33,741
officers and enlisted men and women in Korean War battles from 1950 to 1953. (3) And a special communication published by the Journal of the American Medical Association listed 43,000 deaths due to motor vehicle crashes and 29,000 involving firearms in the U.S. in 2000. (4)
The National Vital Statistics Report for 2001, published on Sept. 18, 2003 [Vol. 52, No. 3], was the last official U.S. government report on influenza mortality before the CDC director's appearance at the February 2004 Congressional hearing. Certified figures about Influenza mortality [J10-J11] were listed on page 31 of the report. (5)
There were, in all, 257 influenza deaths recorded in 2001. Of those, 13 deaths were under the age of 5; 50 were between 5 and 54; 21 from 55 to 64; 21 between 65 and 74; 56 from 75 to 84; and 96 were 85 years old or older. Also in 2001, there were 61,777 official deaths due to pneumonia (J12-J18) of which 48,686 (79 percent) were 75 years old or older. The same document (table 11, page 35) lists the reciprocal number of deaths per 100.000 population. In 2001, influenza-pneumonia deaths (J10-J18) amounted to 21.8 per 100.000 with influenza at 0.1 and pneumonia at 21.7. With the U.S. population being around 284 million in 2001, it would seem that the calculated number of 284 (0.1/100.000) deaths from influenza would be close enough to the actual listed number of 257.
The following should be kept in mind:
"Pneumonia" is caused by bacteria, viruses and fungi. Elderly patients (75 years and over) who have laboratory confirmed influenza disease may develop pneumonia but die from other underlying serious conditions, such as heart or kidney failure to name just two. It is not known how many of the 48,686 elderly individuals who died in 2001 had received the influenza vaccine that year. People of that age are usually vaccinated early in the season and certainly more frequently than others. In the U.S., influenza/influenza-like illnesses only occur during the flu season, a period of three months on average and rarely four months. Pulmonary complications and specifically deaths due to influenza will only occur during that short period, while other causes of pneumonia deaths exist year-round.
Most people who have influenza-like illness, as the condition is fondly referred to by the CDC, do not have influenza; only a small percentage of them are ever confirmed by culture or other accurate laboratory means. For the period 2000-2005, influenza virus positive cultures were 11 to 18.9 percent of the obtained cultures with a mean of 12.5 percent. It is well known that the virus strains in the community may be different from those in the available vaccine. Because immunity is strain-specific, vaccination in such cases is essentially ineffective in preventing disease. The percent of antigenic match between 2000 and 2005 varied from 11 to 63.2 percent with a mean of 54.2 percent. The maximum effectiveness of the vaccination effort, therefore, ranged between 2.1 percent in 2003-2004 and 11.5 percent in 2002-2003 with a mean of7.2 percent. (6)
Taking all these facts into consideration, it is safe to say that only a small percentage of the 61,777 individuals who died of pneumonia in 2001 actually had influenza. Clearly, therefore, a large majority of individuals who died that year of pneumonia did not die of influenza or influenza-related complications. In addition, the CDC figures clearly show that a large percentage of those who died were elderly and, historically, the elderly, as a group, have always been better vaccinated. As to the 257 individuals who were actually listed as influenza deaths in the 2001 statistical report, the influenza virus was actually identified in only 18 of them, the 18 classified as J10. (6) Apparently in 2001, not even 257 people died of influenza or influenza-related complications. The Monthly Vital Statistics Report of Sept. 17, 1981 sheds additional light on the issue. Under pneumonia and influenza, the report states: "An estimated 52,720 deaths in 1980 were attributed to pneumonia and influenza. The age- adjusted death rate for this cause increased about 14 percent from 11.1 per 100,000 population in 1979 to 12.6 in 1980, reflecting the influenza epidemics in 1980 and the absence of one in the previous year. For pneumonia and influenza, death rates increased for the age groups 35 years and over." (7)
The above statement by none other than the CDC suggests that around 1.5 deaths per 100,000 were or could have been attributed to influenza or influenza complications in 1980, an epidemic year, when one would have expected a very large number of cases and more severe illness and certainly in a period when influenza vaccination was not as popular as it is now. Considering that the U.S. population was around 226.5 million in 1980, 1.5 deaths per 100.000 would translate to around 4,000 deaths that year. So here we have official CDC statistics listing around 4,000 deaths, unconfirmed by viral cultures, from influenza and influenza-related complications in 1980, a banner year, and maybe 18 or 257 in 2001 and the propaganda machine is still talking about "an average of 36,000 deaths" a year. How preposterous!
References
1. Key Facts about Influenza and the Influenza Vaccine, CDC.
Available at http://www.cdc.gov/flu/keyfacts.htm
2. J.L. Gerberding. Protecting the Public's Health: CDC Influenza
Preparedness Efforts. Testimony before the Committee on Government Reform U.S.
House of Representatives, Feb. 12, 2004.
Available at http://www.cdc.gov/washington/testimony/In2122004200.htm
3. America's Wars: U.S. Casualties and Veterans.
Available at http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004615.html
4. A.H. Mokdad et al. Actual Causes of Death in the United States, 2000. JAMA. 2004; 291: 1238-1245. Available at http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/291/10/1238
5. E. Arias et al. Deaths: Final Data For 2001. National Vital Statistics
Reports. Volume 52, Number 3. Sept. 18, 2003.
Available at http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr52/nvsr52_03.pdf
6. D.M. Ayoub, F.E. Yazbak. Influenza Vaccination During Pregnancy: A Critical Assessment of the recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. J. Am Phys Surg. 2006; 11(2): 41-47. Available at http://www.jpands.org/vol11no2/ayoub.pdf
7. Annual Report of Births, Deaths, Marriages and Divorces: United States
1980. Monthly Vital Statistics Report: Vol. 29, No.13. Sept. 17, 1981.
Available at http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/mvsr/supp/mv29_13.pdf
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/apr/15/cdcs-deadly-mistakes
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
CDC's deadly mistakes
Sometimes connecting the dots reveals a grim picture. Several new reports about hospital infections show that the danger is increasing rapidly, and that the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention isn't leveling with the public about it.Tomorrow Congress will hold hearings on whether the federal government is doing enough to prevent deadly hospital infection. The answer is "no." The biggest culprit is the CDC. The CDC claims 1.7 million people contract infections in U.S. hospitals each year. The truth is several times that number. The proof is in the data.
One of the fastest growing infections is "Mersa" or MRSA, which stands for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, a superbug that doesn't respond to most antibiotics. In 1993, there were fewer than 2,000 MRSA infections in U.S. hospitals. By 2005, the figure had shot up to 368,000 according to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. By June, 2007, 2.4 percent of all patients had MRSA hospital infections, according to the largest-ever study, published in the American Journal of Infection Control. That would mean 880,000 victims a year.
That's from one superbug. Imagine the number of infections from bacteria of all kinds, including such killers as VRE (vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus) and C. diff (Clostridium difficile). Dr. Julie Gerberding, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, recently told Congress that MRSA accounts for only 8 percent of hospital infections.
These new facts discredit the CDC's official 1.7 million estimate. CDC spokeswoman Nicole Coffin admits "the number isn't perfect." In fact, it is an irresponsible guesstimate based on a sliver of 6-year-old (2002) data. The CDC researchers who came up with it complained that not having actual data "complicated the problem."
Numbers matter. Health conditions that affect the largest number of people generally command more research dollars and public attention.
The problem doesn't end there. The CDC has resisted calling on hospitals to make the key change needed to stop infections: MRSA screening. A study in the March issue of the Annals of Internal Medicine shows MRSA infections can be prevented by testing incoming patients and taking precautions on those who test positive.
The test is a noninvasive skin or nasal swab. Researchers at Evanston Northwestern Healthcare System, a group of three hospitals near Chicago, reduced MRSA infections 70 percent over two years. "If it works in these three different hospitals, it will work anywhere," said the study's lead author, Dr. Lance Peterson, an epidemiologist.
That's fortunate, because the problem is everywhere. The June 2007 survey found MRSA is "endemic in virtually all U. S. health-care facilities." Screening is necessary because patients who unknowingly carry MRSA bacteria on their body shed it in particles on wheel chairs, blood pressure cuffs, and virtually every surface. These patients don't realize they have the germ, because it doesn't make then sick until it gets inside their body, usually via a surgical incision, a catheter, or a ventilator for breathing. With screening, hospitals can identify the MRSA positive patients, isolate them, use separate equipment, and insist on gowns and gloves when treating them.
Screening is common in several European countries that have almost eradicated MRSA, and some 50 studies show it works in the U.S. too.
Congress and seven state legislatures are considering making screening mandatory. Illinois, New Jersey and Pennsylvania acted in 2007. Why is legislation needed? Because the CDC, which is responsible for providing guidelines for hospitals on how to prevent infections, has failed to recommend that all hospitals screen patients. The CDC's lax guidelines give hospitals an excuse to do too little.
It is common for government regulators to become soft on the industry they are supposed to regulate. A coziness develops. Federal Aviation Administration inspectors failed to insist on timely electrical systems inspections, say news reports. The same may be true at the CDC, where government administrators spend too much time listening to hospital executives and not enough time with grieving families.
Betsy McCaughey is chairman of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths and a former lieutenant governor of New York.
