So far, I have always been interested in health and how to be healthy.
I did not deal with diseases, drugs and medicine
it's not my job, I'm not competent nor interested in it.
For me, it's health first ...
And then, I became a dad a year ago.
It is the most beautiful experience of my life.
like all fathers, I was
confronted with the question of vaccination at one point or another
And frankly, I hear everything and its opposite.
This goes from the classical speech about the obvious
and the absolutely essential and harmless nature of vaccines
up to the most disturbing testimonials,
especially in my environment. I have examples around me.
I realize that in the end,
I do not have the elements to make a choice on vaccination, the famous informed choice.
And for my son, I want the best, the full health.
I do not want to make random choices, and especially not play the Russian roulette ...
We talk about free and informed consent,
so, since nobody seemed to be able to inform me without taking sides,
I started an investigation, I did my own investigation,
with all the energy that is given by the love for my son.
Music: "Shine" by Hicham Chahidi
I wanted finally to know what was the "truth about vaccination".
My opinion does not matter at the end, and neither my choices.
What I want is to give everyone clear, rational information
and based on scientific facts in order to make an informed choice.
I am not "anti-vaccine", I am pro-science, pro-public health,
pro-happy and healthy child,
so I will ask questions and try to answer them!
IMMUNIZATION INVESTIGATION Episode 5: The vaccine against influenza and pneumococcus. More surprises
We all want our children to be healthy, right?
I called my friend Alex to film my testimonial about my investigation
and that he can account for the path I had taken
to untie the truth from the false.
This film is the testimonial of this investigation,
it's my way to the truth about vaccination!
A: Yo!
T: Hi Alex!
A: How are you?
T: Are you alright this morning? Fresh ?
A: It's beautiful. So good.
T: I still want to say to the camera what I am going through
Making a project like this with a videographer
He wanted the sunrise. Except that we are recording today June 21, 2018.
June 21st is the solstice.
Who says solstice says that the sun rises the earliest of the year.
So it's 6 o'clock in the morning, we record, but we have the sunrise over the Mediterranean Sea.
A: It's fantastic. I'm fine, anyway.
T: I can't see anything. I only see you. It is okay. Are you good ?
A: I'm good.
T: Great. We will continue our little adventure.
So, did you understand? After setting the basics of vaccine theory, what's going on and everything,
I thought, we'll go and inspect some vaccines one after the other.
We are not going to review them all,
but there were some iconic ones that I wanted to review.
Yesterday, we talked about the MMR, in the previous episode, which seemed really important to me,
because it is a vaccine that affects all children.
Each vaccine will have some specificities
and there are also common things that will be found in all vaccines.
And it's interesting because, you'll see
because for some, we should expect this, that and that, is it there? Yes.
So, we really understood what's going on.
There are others that I would like to see
it's the flu vaccine, it's going to be the subject of today.
Because we hear about it every year
and we need to be vaccinated every year.
And then, there will be, in the next episodes, the vaccine against papillomavirus,
papillomavirus which, in France, made a lot of noise following the arrest, in particular,
of a doctor called Professor Henri Joyeux, who had made a big media buzz, we'll say.
And then, we'll talk about hepatitis B,
Hepatitis B, the famous sexually transmitted disease for which children are vaccinated at 2 months.
Today, we will talk about the flu, if the rooster lets us do it because it is early morning
I give you, if you are in state, I give you your homework.
So, I always remind, you can just go under the video.
You can download all the scientific references on which I relied.
There is the complete file.
I did the math, in all, for the 8 episodes, you have more than 120 pages to read.
And then there is also the transcription of this video, so it's something much shorter,
for people who just want to have the transcript of this video, without having the scientific references.
Shall we start ?
Yes. Let's start.
T: We are talking about the flu.
The flu is a disease that reappears each year on winter, well, supposedly
and every year we hear about an influenza epidemic.
So, you have to get vaccinated.
So, what's funny is that when I did my research, in fact,
we come across some evaluation figures of influenza epidemics that are just mind-blowing.
That is to say, it varies, for France, between 1,000 and 15,000 deaths per year
according to the media, according to stuff like that.
From 1 to 15, it's still huge. 15,000 dead, it starts to be serious, it justifies it
And then, what's interesting is that the Ministry of Health doesn't dares to quote figures.
I saw a quote from Marisol Touraine, it was in 2015, which said ...
So, I'll do it good:
"The flu is not a benign disease.
Every year, it causes many deaths.
Each patient must be immediately treated and hospitalized if his condition requires it. "
Alex laughs
T: No, but do not laugh!
Alex laughs
So, the media tirelessly repeat the figure of 18,000, roughly, additional deaths, each year.
Okay ?
In the winter of 2014/2015, there were 18,000 deaths according to the media.
The France National Public Health Agency estimates 9,000 in the same year.
So already, they reduce it by half.
"18,000, anyway, guys, that's a bit much.
It's not serious. We will say 9,000, it will be better. "
The Epidemiology Centre on the medical causes of death, CepiDc, which I told you about,
because Christophe Jarry, who provided us with these curves, relied on CepiDc figures,
which is really the statistical reference in France.
He speaks of 431 deaths from the flu, on average, every year.
So, we go from 18,000 to 431 ... that's still ...
you say, where did they disappear, you see?
We have dead people who are suffering somewhere. So ...
And even the High Council for Public Health say:
"Seasonal flu affects 2 to 8 million people annually
and causes the death of several thousand people,
mainly people over 65 years old. "
A: So, all of this is pretty vague.
T: We do not know, we do not know where we are.
And it's very funny because you realize that it's not only in France that it's happening like that.
For example, I came across a lot of studies in the United States,
I always put all the references,
and there is one, for example, that amused me a lot, which says:
"Are U.S. Flu Death Figures More PR Than Science? "
And they say, "US data on deaths from influenza are difficult to interpret.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (the CDC is the one behind the American health system)
recognize a difference between deaths from influenza and deaths associated with influenza ... "
It's very difficult because you have people, sometimes, who are old and tired,
and then they will get the flu, they will die in that time, and you are told:
"Ah, but that's because of the flu! "
But it must be said: wait, wait, it is associated, so there is a correlation, it does not mean that there is a causality.
"In addition, there are significant statistical incompatibilities
between official estimates and national vital statistical data. "
National vital statistics data is really the statistical yearbook,
it's like CepiDc, so The Epidemiology Centre on the medical causes of death.
"These problems are compounded by fear-based marketing:
a CDC communication strategy in which the medical experts
predict dramatic results during flu periods. "
What they are saying is that there is a business of non-communication
or de-communication around the flu that is pretty mind-blowing.
They really talk about fear-based marketing.
So, there is also another issue around the flu,
that is often, and it happened in France too,
health workers are criticized for failing to effectively vaccinate against the flu.
They are criticized.
From my point of view, I would say they are not crazy.
To take a dose each year, they say, anyway, it's not great.
You may be pro-vaccine, you will say, not need to abuse anyway.
Even with good things, no need to do too much.
And then, a very interesting study, which was done on the health staff:
"What is the evidence that
vaccination of health staff against seasonal flu would protect their patients? "
You see, it's worth it to get vaccinated for a health professional if it protects patients.
"Critical examination. Conclusion: Studies that seek to prove widespread belief
that vaccination of health personnel would reduce the morbidity and mortality of patients
are completely wrong and vaccination recommendations are biased. "
It's interesting, huh?
So studies are wrong and vaccination recommendations are biased.
"No reliable published evidence shows
that the vaccination of the health staff would have any benefit for the patients:
no evidence of reduced morbidity or mortality of patients,
nor even evidence of increasing the vaccination rate of patients. "
So, clearly, it is useless.
So, let's resume. We still have something that is not very clear.
We have figures that are inflated, we manipulate by fear says an author ...
Whatever the number of deaths,
we will try to study the influence of the vaccine against the flu. Okay ?
And it's a little edifying.
So, to tell you a little bit about what's happening with the flu vaccine ...
You'll see that we're going to find things we've seen before.
A study that says it very clearly, called
"Annual influenza vaccines: a double-edged sword? "
You have it in English and French.
What this study says is that natural immunization
linked to being naturally exposed to the virus gives a heterosubtypic immunity,
broad-spectrum immunity against all viral strains of influenza,
whereas immunity specifically developed after a vaccine
will give ultra specialized immunity against a viral strain of influenza.
Since there are dozens in circulation,
it'll make you more fragile than anything else.
Vaccination, in a sense, prevents this heterosubtypic adaptation
and presents a risk to at-risk populations, especially children.
These are the conclusions of this study. You can go see it, there is all the text.
So I'll give you some things that we had already seen:
«Association between the 2008-09 seasonal flu vaccine
and the pandemic due to H1N1 during the spring and summer of 2009
Vaccine administration in 2008 and 2009 has been associated with an increased risk of H1N1 contamination
confirmed by doctors during the spring and summer of 2009 in Canada. "
So, you were vaccinated the previous year against a viral strain of the flu, the following year
you are more likely to get the flu. You understand ?
The immune system becomes hyperspecialized.
And this, we'll find everywhere. All the time.
We will be able to say: for the next vaccine, do we find ... yes!
We find it, automatically,
because it is the nature of viruses and bacteria to adapt, to change, very quickly
much faster than our medical engineering can create suitable vaccines.
Whenever we go to solicit our immune system through vaccination on a particular strain,
In a way, It's going to shut down everything else.
It was the story of the piano keyboard:
if you hit a key all the time,
you will have this sound only, and you will not play with the rest of the keyboard keys.
With tests on mice ...
previously vaccinated mice die during an influenza pandemic,
while the unvaccinated survive.
For example, the words are a bit complex, but it's worth reading:
"We show that induction of heterosubtypic immunity ..."
therefore, induction is the solicitation of this immunity by natural exposure to the disease,
"... by infection with the human H3N2 flu virus is prevented by vaccination against the H3N2 strain.
As a result, the vaccinated mice were no longer protected against H5N1 influenza infection. "
So, they say: the general immunity, which comes from the encounter with the H3N2 virus.
If we vaccinate, we no longer have general immunity.
What makes the mice, the day they get the H5N1 virus,
they are no longer protected.
"Following this, mice vaccinated against the H3N2 virus continued to lose weight after infection with the H5N1 virus,
had virus titers 100-fold higher in the lungs on the 7th day after infection
and more serious histopathological changes than mice that have not been protected by the H3N2 vaccine.
These results may have implications
on the general recommendation to vaccinate all healthy children against seasonal flu
in light of current pandemic threats caused by the highly pathogenic H5N1 avian influenza virus. "
They say clearly: a mouse ... a mammal that is vaccinated against a specific strain of flu
becomes much weaker when it comes to all other strains.
So, after that, you'll get vaccinate against others,
against others, and so on, and it will not stop.
Except that each time, you take a dose of aluminum and mercury too.
You go back to square one.
A: it is bad, yes!
T: I do not know if you follow, but I will insist again,
because this is a very important thing that I would like to see in these videos.
And that's why I'm exploring all the vaccines,
to see, really, leitmotivs that come back.
Vaccination solicits a very small branch of the immune system only, the humoral immunity,
which goes through the antibody response,
at the expense of cellular immunity and mucosal immunity.
So, in response to vaccines, the body makes a quantity of very specific antibodies,
which is totally different from natural immunity,
which is an adaptive immunity and which is much less specific. Okay ?
So, using the vaccine, it is a substitute, in a way, a very specific immune response.
Are you good? Are you following?
A: Yes
T: Did you understand this principle?
A: It's very clear.
T: It's very clear. I wanted to demonstrate it clearly.
Now, I think it's understood.
So, I went to see,
if there were any other troublesome side effects of the flu,
especially because there is a recommendation,
in any case in France, on the government website,
to vaccinate pregnant women.
You say, pregnant women, aluminum, mercury, fetus
If we were going to see the case of miscarriages,
birth defects, inflammations in pregnant women?
Are we going to find something?
You see, I knew where I wanted to go, so I started digging in that direction.
"Comparison of VAERS reports of miscarriage during three consecutive influenza seasons".
You have this study that is available on your documents.
10-fold more miscarriage rate among women who received the influenza vaccine.
A: By 10?
T: By 10. Anyway, It's bad.
"Using data from the Collaborative Perinatal Project that was sponsored by the FDA,
the US Public Health Service and the National Institute of Health,
researchers have shown that exposure to thimerosal (ie mercury) during pregnancy
had increased birth defects significantly.
Reproductive and fetal toxicity of methyl mercury (ie thimerosal) in humans
has been widely studied and accepted.
Many organizations, like the CDC and the FDA,
proclaimed that methyl mercury was more toxic than ethyl mercury,
but without the support of the scientific literature. "
This is what we saw last time, in which they said:
mercury in fish is less toxic than ethyl mercury.
But, overall, they have no proof.
It's like saying:
yes, I actually believe that exhaust fumes, in fact, are harmless.
I can dream what I want, in fact, you have to compare to the numbers.
And so, the conclusions were that we did not really have data so it was also toxic.
"Combining unquestionable evidence of the experimental reproductive toxicity of thimerosal and its metabolites
the limited scope of available studies on their safety in humans,
it is strange that the ACIP recommendation regarding the administration of influenza vaccine during pregnancy
has not been questioned previously. "
However, the Vaccination Info Service site of the French government ...
A: Yes, that's what I see, it's crazy, this sentence!
T: "Vaccination of pregnant women also protects the infant during the first months "
We can not write that. It's not correct.
A: And your study ...
T: My studies ...
A: Yes ... which demonstrated ...
T: I do not rely on one ...
A: ... it was 10 times more ...
10-fold miscarriage among women who received the influenza vaccine.
It was the NCBI, yes ...
T: Yes, you have it. So, we can not say that it protects the infant.
A: In addition, they write this sentence, but there is no study that supports it
T: No, but no, it's ... revealed truth!
It is Moses on the mountain receiving the tables of the law.
Suddenly, it falls: no, infants will be protected.
Ok, you can say what you want, but you have to rely on something.
It's a bit like when you're told: I have proof that the vaccines are harmless.
OK, but do something to prove it.
A: Yes, and in addition the immune system of the infant is not yet developed.
A virus is injected into a body ...
T: Oh no, but the fetus has not an immune system.
A: That's it!
T: The immunity of the fetus, it is the mother who gives it to him.
A: After delivery ...
T: the immunity in children, we will come back to it later, in an episode,
but the immunity of a child is given by the mother through breast milk.
A: It is very dangerous in fact, we inject ...
T: Mercury is injected into fetuses.
A: Who can not defend themselves against this ...
T: So, to understand a little bit of what can happen, I went a little deeper,
because it's a question that is very important to me.
In my environment, I have a lot of children who have neurological disorders.
So that's a question that I was confronted with.
But I think everyone ... I mean ...
if everybody looks around,
he's going to realize that since the 1980s and 1990s, in particular, there's something going on with children.
When were you born?
A: In 1989
T: Ah, here it is! The proof ! (Laughter)
A: (laughs)
T: We can not write that.
So, I went to see the studies of
what was happening at the body level, with mercury.
"The trivalent vaccine against the influenza virus causes a measurable inflammatory response among pregnant women.
Perinatal adverse medical outcomes,
such as preeclampsia and premature birth, have a strong inflammatory component ... "
Then, I thought, inflammatory component, I know from working on the subject, for example,
that we tend to link cases of schizophrenia, for example, and behavioral disorders
to inflammatory states of the mother during the gestation period.
So, I went to see.
"Disruption of the brain balance of the fetuses
between the pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory signals of the cytokine
could represent an essential mechanism in precipitation of pathologies related to schizophrenia
following prenatal maternal infection and congenital immune imbalances. "
Another study:
"Prenatal programming of mental illnesses: current understanding of the relationship and mechanisms.
Current evidence suggests that fetal exposure to inflammation results in
epigenetic changes in the placenta and fetus. "
So the inflammation in the mother makes ...
I do not say it's systematic,
but it is an aggravating factor in the appearance of heavy mental pathologies such as schizophrenia.
However, mercury in the flu vaccine gives widespread inflammation in the mother.
So, we can say that there is an aggravated risk of psychiatric-type pathology
in children whose mothers were vaccinated during pregnancy.
A: So, we're saying more and more that the flu shot is useless.
T: Yes, but we will come back to it. That's the thing.
When they talk to you about the balance between benefits and risks ...
If you have huge profits and huge risks, you can choose to play.
When you go to the casino, you can lose big, but you can win big.
So, you can say, Ok, deliberately, I choose to play.
But, frankly, if you go to a casino and the guys tell you:
"You can lose everything, but if you win, you will get a carambar,"
then, you will say to yourself, seriously, I will not risk 100,000 euros for a Carambar.
It's not worth the shot.
We are talking about free and informed choices, that was really my point.
What are we measuring?
You remember these calculations on the doses of mercury in the previous video, we will not go back to it.
And, indeed, as you said, what is being said is
the flu vaccine is for nothing.
"Vaccine against the flu", I quote some studies.
I've included a lot too.
" Influenza Vaccine :
Review of Effectiveness of the U.S. Immunization Program, and Policy Considerations
The current flu vaccination program appears to be ineffective.
It will be necessary to develop and license an effective vaccine ... "
because, for now, we do not have it,
"... which confers significant immunity against a wide variety of strains ..."
That's the problem, influenza virus mutates permanently.
When we create a vaccine against a strain, we are already several months behind,
because we took the strain that was prevalent in September
for the vaccine that will be released in December.
And in December, we have already moved on to the next generation.
"... so that it is not necessary to administer this vaccine every year.
Recipients of these vaccines should be informed of the limitations and risks of the vaccine,
as well as alternatives to vaccination ... "
Now, we are in a public health policy.
"In particular, they must be informed of the possibility that
repeated vaccinations may increase the risk of adverse effects. "
Yes, there is a cumulative effect with aluminum and mercury.
"More than 200 viruses cause flu-like syndromes that cause the same symptoms
(fever, headache, pain and runny nose) as the flu.
200 different viruses, and still, others are created each year.
"Injected flu shots probably have a small protective effect against the flu
and influenza syndromes (moderate evidence). "
"Vaccination can have little or no effect,
on hospitalizations or the number of lost working days. "
So, almost no effect on adults.
We will go to see the children.
"In children less than 2 years old, the effectiveness of the inactivated vaccine ..."
So, there are several vaccines against the flu.
There is one called the inactivated vaccine.
"... the effectiveness of the inactivated vaccine was similar to that of a placebo ..."
that is to say, no action on the flu, no action on the flu.
You remember, we use placebos that are vaccines,
but vaccines against something else.
So those who took the placebo did get a good dose of thimerosal, aluminum and so on,
they took the cocktail, they did not miss it, they were invited to the cocktail, but no efficiency.
"No safety comparison could be made,
which reinforces the need to standardize the methods
and the data representation of vaccine safety in future studies.
It was surprising to find only one study on inactivated vaccine in children under two,
given current recommendations to vaccinate all healthy children
from the age of 6 months in the United States and Canada. "
In the United States and Canada, it is recommended to vaccinate healthy children,
and there is only one study that has been done on safety and is still extremely incomplete.
It's still called playing Russian roulette for me.
A: Yes, that's right. From everything you show me
T: "TIV (trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine) did not provide protection against hospitalization
in pediatric patients, especially children with asthma.
On the contrary, we found a 3-fold increase in the risk of hospitalization
in patients who have received the TIV vaccine. "
You have all the studies, I have several that go in that direction.
No protection, a risk 3 times more of hospitalization ...
We will see for older people.
Because, overall, the flu shot is sold to the elderly.
I have elderly parents, who are in their 80s,
and I know that every year they get the flu shot.
Shout out to Dad and Mom, this part of the video is for you.
A: It's for the ones over 65, is it?
T: Yes, it is.
"Impact of influenza vaccination on seasonal mortality among the elderly population in the United States.
We have not been able to establish a correlation
between increasing vaccination coverage after 1980
and a drop in mortality in this or that age group.
Since less than 10% of winter deaths could be attributed to the flu of this or that season,
we conclude that observational studies significantly overestimate the benefits of vaccination. "
"Studies on excessive mortality could not confirm
the national decline in influenza-related mortality following the four-fold increase in immunization coverage.
Studies have consistently reported
that vaccination reduces winter mortality due to all possible causes of about 50%,
an extremely amazing assertion since
only about 5% of all winter deaths can be attributed to influenza.
This overestimation of the effectiveness of vaccination has now been attributed to a disconcerting and profound bias
concerning the selection of weak points in the studies. "
They talk about disconcerting bias, fear marketing, and so on.
There is no unbiased study right now. Point.
We do not talk about it anymore.
When it comes to the flu, no scientific study is available.
Moreover, to illustrate this, there are really high stakes with the flu.
The flu vaccine is a vaccine ...
So here, the same thing, it will be said that I'm going for conspiracy theories
it's a vaccine that brings in a lot of money.
So, there are high stakes.
And then, if you're vaccinated every year, you can imagine ...
A vaccine that must be redone every 10 years, you go to the cash register every 10 years.
If you have to do it every year, globally ...
A: We multiply by 10
Actually, bringing in a lot of money is a fact
It's not even an interpretation. It's just like that, actually.
T: Ah, but you sell a vaccine you make money. If you sell it every year, you make more money.
No, but wait, we will not start from the outset that it is done to earn money.
But, if it's inefficient and you sell it every year ...
you tell yourself, there is still a moment when you have to react, you see, overall ...
And it's funny because during my research on the flu,
I very often came across 4 letters: ESWI.
I even read an article that said
that the WHO would present its flu vaccination plan at the ESWI Congress.
A: So who are they?
T: Well, that's it! I did my research.
What is ESWI?
It is a group of researchers who have given themselves a moral obligation to eradicate the flu.
It is a group of researchers who said:
we meet to form a group to eradicate the flu, to make the flu disappear.
It's an influence group, and which is under influence, because, I went to see ...
I give you the links ... the status of the ESWI ...
I searched a lot, it's part of my investigation.
The advantage, with the Internet, is that, without moving from home,
we can find a lot of information.
In addition, I have friends who are specialists in information tracking,
so, little geniuses of the Web, let's say,
who helped me search where there was no information.
A: So, for example, you could find those who finance ...
T: Exactly, I went to see
I said to myself :
let's see these researchers, anyway, who are against the flu,
who want to eradicate the flu,
how independent they are.
So pharmaceutical companies that support ESWI include:
Hoffmann-La Roche, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK, the famous GSK),
Seqirus, Sanofi Pasteur, Mylan and Janssen,
that is to say, among the largest laboratories that produce influenza vaccine.
A: Okay.
T: I think that's exactly what the previous article is denouncing,
in which they speak about collusions between the various parts.
Moreover, to return to the relative inefficiency,
even the CDC, in the United States, openly admits ...
In an article published on the CDC website, I give you the link:
"During the period from November 2, 2017 to February 2018,
the overall effectiveness of vaccination against influenza A and influenza B was 36%. "
36% efficiency, it still means 64% inefficiency.
A: In addition, what is effective for them ? Or not ?
T: It could be discussed.
So, we will take a note, if you want ... on this flu virus
Every year, the influenza virus circulates, it is endemic in our society.
Everyone is exposed, it's natural, okay?
And when you are exposed, you gain cross protection,
that is, you develop what is called "heterosubtypic" immunity.
This term, I hope that people who have watched these videos, they will understand it already
a heterosubtypic immunity, which is the mark of natural immunity.
In contrast, vaccinated individuals do not develop broad-spectrum immunity such as heterosubtypic immunity.
If we look forward in 20 years, what's going on?
Viral strains have not stopped evolving
and people who take a vaccine dose each year tend to have immunity that,
each year, tightens, narrows, tightens ...
What is happening to these people?
I understand that health workers do not want to be vaccinated every year,
because they certainly have the minimum of knowledge at the immunological level to know that,
if they get vaccinated every year, their immunity will become more and more restricted,
more and more specific, more and more specialized, and more and more restricted.
So the flu vaccination weakens the immune defenses, and even,
accelerates the mutation of the virus, not to mention all the potential side effects.
Prooved? is that good to you?
A: It's very clear.
T: That's very clear?
So, let's discuss a last topic, in this video, on the pneumococcus.
A: So pneumococcus ...?
T: Pneumococcus is a bacterium that "attacks" the lungs.
A: Okay.
T: Pneumococcal infections are infections that affect the lungs.
We will find exactly the same things as for the flu.
So, I'll do it fast.
Vaccination has led to a reduction in pneumococcal cases from certain strains,
but a huge increase of the other strains.
For example ... I only mention a few studies,
but I did put a lot of studies, that's why there are so many pages.
It was easy to fill it. I am very proud of myself.
I said: I made a 120-page document, but, in fact,
there were so many studies that I could have made 240 pages, with one click, like that.
It was just copy, paste, copy, paste.
"The introduction of heptavalent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV7) ..."
So, what does it mean, it means that this vaccine contains 7 strains of pneumococcus, right?
"... in 2000, in the United States, it had a significant impact
on the decline in the incidence of invasive pneumococcal disease in all age groups,
especially in children under 2 years old.
However, the emergence of pneumococcal serotypes besides vaccine, as a replacement,
has resulted in an increase in the incidence of serious and invasive infections. "
Did you understand what that means?
A: No.
T: This means, that we introduced PCV7 with 7 strains
and that it had a big impact on the decline of pneumococcal diseases,
especially in children under 2 years, linked to these strains.
"However, the emergence of pneumococcal serotypes besides vaccine" ...
Serotypes are strains that were not taken into account by the vaccine.
That is, we have seen new strains emerge.
"... has resulted in an increase in the incidence of serious and invasive infections".
That is to say, on one hand, we decrease drastically with these 7 strains,
but we see the emergence of so many other strains that,
when we do the balance, we have an increase in cases of infection.
So, overall, it's counterproductive. Okay ?
"About 6 to 10 years after the launch of PCV7,
Invasive pneumococcal disease in adults has increased dramatically. "
"The almost total disappearance of vaccine serotypes occurred in young children,
with rapid replacement with serotypes besides vaccine ... "
therefore, strains that were not taken into account by vaccines ...
"Not responding to penicillin. "
The problem is that, until now, penicillin is the drug used against pneumococci.
Which means, we have strains that are much more resistant and much more virulent.
That is bad.
A: It is really bad.
T: Even dogs are not happy (laughs).
And so, what is proposed as a solution?
Go from 7 to 13 serotypes, obviously, we increase the number of serotypes.
"However, in 2014, there is evidence of increasing invasive pneumococcal disease due to non-PCV13 serotypes, ..."
That is to say, we introduced the 13th instead of the 7th saying, well, here we go, we will take more into account,
except that, in 2014, there is evidence that new strains that are not taken into account by the 13 ...
"... especially in children under 5 years old.
If this increase continues,
the maximum benefit of the PCV13 program in children could have already been achieved. "
That is, what's going on?
We create a PCV7, a vaccine that contains 7 strains. Good!
PCV7 is given, lots of profits, because we fight effectively against the 7 strains.
We prevent the infection, okay?
But, very quickly, we see new strains appear.
So, here we create a 13.
And, in 2014, you are told that we have already reached the benefits of the 13.
And there are more parallel infections that appear.
Finally, the result is that there are more pneumococcal infections, despite the introduction of 13.
So, what are we going to do? We'll go to 21, 36, 64, 72?
A: At 108 ...
T: Yes, at 108, I mean, there is no limit.
A: no, no, in this case ....
T: For the record, still, I remind you this study we talked about in the beginning:
"The infant mortality rate is worsened with the increase in the number of doses of vaccine usually given.
Is there a biochemical or synergistic toxicity?
It showed a statistically significant correlation
between the number of vaccine doses and the increase in infant mortality rates. "
Every time you increase the number of vaccines ...
This is not trivial, increasing the number of doses of vaccine ...
because they are going to tell you, we will increase the number of doses of vaccine.
Yes, but every time you increase the number of doses of vaccine,
we measure a relationship that was said to be counter-intuitive ...
it is not counter-intuitive, it is counter-intuitive in relation to a culture that was given
that the vaccines are harmless, thanks to our minister who, in one fell swoop, makes the vaccines harmless,
but, in fact, everything proves that they are not harmless.
Every time you increase the number of vaccines, it's not trivial.
Therefore, this correlation between the number of vaccines and infant mortality is all the more crucial when,
in France, on January 1, 2018, the number of vaccines is drastically increased.
I doubt that Agnes Buzyn did mot see these studies.
Or it is bad, because she is supposed to make informed choices.
But you see, they tell you, on January 1, 2018, we will vaccinate your child and so on,
but I have a study that shows that
the more the number of doses is increased, the more infant mortality is increased.
What are you doing with it? You sit on it?
To conclude this episode, if you want, I would like to go back a little bit
on the compensation fund for victims, the famous VAERS and the NCVIP.
We had seen, finally, that the NCVIP had compensated on the scale of 3 billion dollars,
just over $ 3 billion, $ 3.8 billion over 20 years,
victims of vaccine injuries in the United States.
We had seen that, according to the figures we have,
we have about 1 to 10% of the vaccine injuries that are actually reported.
And that's very interesting because, for having discussed with a lot of people who had vaccine injuries,
all of them tell me the same thing.
They tried to fill out compensation files, things like that,
and they all tell me: we did not succeed.
To recognize, in France in particular, but in the United States, it's the same,
to recognize an accident as a vaccine injury,
to recognize a causal link, it's a real obstacle course.
And a friend, too, who has a daughter who was severely disabled,
she said it was following vaccinal injury ... they say: no, no, no, it was genetic!
But my daughter, before that, she was good, and then, all of a sudden, she declined just after the vaccines!
But, you understand, causality, it is always difficult to establish.
But, most parents tell you:
No, but wait, they can tell me what they want, I have my conviction, I saw, as a parent, you know.
You have a kid who, from one day to the next, starts to regress.
You say to yourself, you see ...
A kid can fall and scratch his knee, that's an event that can happen in life.
But you have a kid who, cognitively, all of a sudden, you see,
he begins to have develop, the four legs and so on,
and then, all at once, he begins to regress completely.
I mean, what is the event that may have brought this?
Because, regressing, it's really that something is happening in the nervous system.
It's not falling on the knee or ... well, you see?
A: There must have been something at one point ...
T: There was something.
So, you search, and you say to yourself:
in the previous weeks, I had a vaccination.
So, you see, there is that.
So you have very few vaccine injuries that are reported.
A: So, just to understand why, it's because it's too long, too complicated, too expensive?
T: Too complicated. Too complicated, too complicated!
In France, I do not remember who takes care of that ...
Because, in addition, there is not, as in the United States, a VAERS ...
Because, in the United States, there is the VAERS website, so you can report your vaccine injuries to VAERS.
The numbers I have for the United States, I give you the references,
tell us that only 1 to 10% of vaccine injuries are reported to VAERS.
So, we will say 10%, we will make a big estimate.
We will say that there are 10% that are reported.
Actually, it's closer to 1%, but we're not going to be dramatic, finally we'll take 10%.
So, there are 10% of the vaccine accidents that are reported to VAERS.
And we know that, of the 10% of accidents that are reported on VAERS,
only a third are financially compensated.
That is, the VAERS will take them, and the NCVIP only compensates one third.
For the others, the files are rejected.
So, that means that if you have 3 billion dollars in compensation, over 20 years ...
I tried to see how much was paid for vaccine injuries,
to try to estimate the number of cases.
You have all the numbers:
for a dead child, you earn 250,000 dollars.
A dead child is worth $ 250,000.
It's the maximum pay you can get.
So, let's imagine we are on maximum compensation:
3.8 billion divided by 250,000,
that's about 15,000 cases. In truth, we have much more.
You see the number, how did I do it? 3,8 billion divided by 250,000.
Imagine that all the people who lodged a complaint had the maximum remuneration,
which is certainly not the case, it makes 15,000 cases.
15,000 cases knowing that we took the estimates, that it was only 10%.
So you multiply by 10, that's 150,000 cases.
Knowing that two thirds of the files are rejected, you multiply by 3, that is 450 000 cases.
Knowing that people who report to VAERS, these are people who have serious vaccine injuries.
A: It's serious.
T: That's it! Most vaccine injuries, epileptic seizures, things like that,
that have no long-term consequences, are not even seen.
450,000, low estimate, we were in the estimate of 10%.
If you go to the estimate of 1%, you are at 4.5 million in 20 years.
We are still talking about a significant matter.
A: Yes indeed
T: We are still talking about a significant matter.
We'll stop for this episode? yeah ?
A: Very rich, this episode.
T: Very very rich, we talked about the flu.
We will do a last episode on the papillomavirus.
Papillomavirus, very important because it affects a lot of women, especially
and then hepatitis B, because there is really something there.
In addition, in France, we have a real history with hepatitis B.
There was a big controversy about hepatitis B,
therefore, we already know that there are big problems with hepatitis B, we'll talk about it again.
A: And I had a question
Are there vaccines that are not recommended for pregnant women or even children?
Is there any vaccines ...?
T: No, not something I know.
There are recommended vaccines, there are mandatory vaccines,
but there are no vaccines banned as such, as far as I know.
We could check but ...
We meet again for the next episode?
A: Yes. Great, thank you.
See you soon !
T: See you soon !
For more infomation >> V-Rally 4 | Game Review - Duration: 6:11. 
For more infomation >> गॅस न पेटवता बनवा जबरदस्त लाडू | बाप्पांचा प्रसाद | Paan Ladoo Recipe | MadhurasRecipe | Ep - 440 - Duration: 6:29. 
For more infomation >> Caught On Tape: Dramatic Rescue In North Carolina Has Local Touch - Duration: 2:50. 
For more infomation >> Girl Shot In South Sacramento Pronounced Brain Dead - Duration: 0:27. 
For more infomation >> 皇帝不愿出席如懿丧礼，甄嬛说出一番话，竟让乾隆目瞪口呆 - Duration: 3:21. 
For more infomation >> Driftwood River Body Recovered - Duration: 0:35. 
For more infomation >> I-95 at SC/NC Border Closed Due to Flooding - Duration: 1:27. 
For more infomation >> Man plays saxophone along freeway - Duration: 2:09. 
For more infomation >> KAVANAUGH ACCUSER: No sign of Brett Kavanaugh accuser in her Palo Alto neighborhood - Duration: 2:37. 
For more infomation >> Utility Workers Mobilize to Restore Power - Duration: 1:24. 
For more infomation >> Four people believed dead after ATV crash sparks wildfire near Payson - Duration: 0:26. 
For more infomation >> Q2 10 O'clock Top Stories With Zoe Zandora - Duration: 8:36. 
For more infomation >> Chana Sundal Recipe । मसाला चना सुन्दल । Spiced Chickpeas with coconut - Duration: 3:02. 
For more infomation >> 5種廉價又高效的抗癌食物，大部分都被你扔掉了！- 健康 好 生活 - Duration: 3:05. 
For more infomation >> 5 REVENUS PASSIFS : 1000 EUROS par MOIS - Duration: 10:54. 
For more infomation >> 快本五位主持人站位大改变，谢娜地位不保？网友：实至名归 - Duration: 3:24. 
For more infomation >> Ukázka: Žst. N. Město n. Met. 15.9.2018 a nepřetržitá výluka - den pátý (video č.8) - Duration: 2:34. 
For more infomation >> Episode 44 : Les oyas 4 mois plus tard - Duration: 20:37. 
For more infomation >> Retired veteran, Ray Wood,
For more infomation >> 테슬라가 거절한 전기 오토바이 '모델 M' - Duration: 2:07. 
For more infomation >> 海賊王：空島的人長一雙翅膀，卻不能在空中戰鬥，白瞎了這個能力 - Duration: 3:55. 
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét