|
In an era in which information can be transmitted in real time, health ministries could provide up to date information on a daily basis in order to compare the current data on H1N1 with that of previous years. However, the numbers regarding sick people are hazy, the reliability of the tests for the diagnosis of the illness doesn’t exceed 32%, and the news released by the media is oriented towards sensationalism rather than substance.
We are yet to receive official data regarding the presence of protective antibodies in people who have been exposed to persons with the H1N1 virus but have not contracted it. No one provides us with data about the protective effects on people who have taken a flu vaccine in the past years. Even though it was a different triple vaccine, one of its components was an H1N1 type and thus able to develop at least a partial coverage for this swine flu.
The official data on every normal person’s ability to recover from this illness is not disclosed and value is only given to news that frightens and causes irrational reactions on the part of the public.
Regardless of this, the data gathered after the recently concluded winter in Australia and Brazil confirms that the death rate for this flu is extremely low. This leads us to think that people’s autonomous defense abilities are high and that the virus in itself doesn’t possess substantial aggressive characteristics. This should be enough to dissuade people from taking the vaccine.
Every vaccine carries a risk, even though the data on the harmful effects of flu vaccines and other vaccines are often artfully concealed. The risk between developing a neurological illness like Guillain-Barré syndrome and the possibility of getting the flu doesn’t stand comparison.
As a parent, if I thought that my children could become ill (between 1 in 100.000 in vaccinated people and 1 in 10,000 depending on the scientific study) and in some cases become paralyzed as an effect of the vaccine for a period ranging from a few months to life, I would surely choose the flu...
Unfortunately, Man’s only experience of a swine flu for which a vaccine was used was dramatic. In 1976 the New Jersey swine flu was combated with mass vaccinations for the H1N1 swine that had developed that year. The consequences were dramatic. The number of neurological syndromes and post-vaccine paralyses was immediately substantial and the vaccine had to be recalled within a few weeks after its release.
The experimental period for the vaccine that is being proposed at present is clear to all. The information that is geared towards generating fear still echoes in our ears and on the pages of many newspapers “…we won’t have enough time to formulate a vaccine” they all said, evoking fears that ought to be reconsidered today. If what they said was really true, this means that the vaccine that had already been in use for months hadn’t followed the normal protocol for risk evaluation.
The real experiment will be performed on the public who are unaware of the risk and reduced to objects. Is this truly necessary when there are valid alternatives that are natural, safe and effective?
The same concerns were brought forth in an article published in the newspaper Corriere della Sera on September 13 (page 45). Although the article cited the reassurances of the experts who all agreed (how is this possible?) that the vaccine was safe for children and pregnant women, it reported that the experimentation was not yet complete and that the various products used to stimulate the immune reaction were of various types, each one with possible side effects.
Considering this state of confusion, as a citizen I ask myself how the experts can possibly make unequivocal observations about the vaccine's safety and lack of risk.
We should remember that one of the adjuvants that will be used in this next H1N1 vaccine will be squalene. An adjuvant is a substance that facilitates the immune reaction and is added to the H1N1 preparation in order to aid in the immunological response. Some experts say that it excessively facilitates this action and as such, subverts it.
As a matter of fact, since 2002 squalene has been known to be one of the substances that can cause arthritic forms similar to rheumatoid arthritis after it has been injected (according to data published in Clinical Experimental Immunology). Evidently, after the masses have been vaccinated, we’ll have a mass consumption of an anti-arthritis drug... The perfect anti-inflammatory for all.
In the name of common sense, regardless of ministerial recommendations encouraging pregnant women to take the vaccine, the president of SIGO (the Italian Gynecological and Obstetrical Society) Professor Giorgio Vittori advised caution with regard to the vaccine. He discouraged the global vaccination of pregnant women even though it was recommended by the ministry of health (DoctorNews, year 7 no. 151, September 2009).
Fortunately I’m not the only member of the medical world who has evaluated the risks and benefits and has found more risks than benefits.
For this reason I'm going to say no to my H1N1 vaccination and hope that common sense will help others to make the same choice.
|
News 
