Learning Center
Plans & pricing Sign in
Sign Out





                       - Dr Tim O'Shea 29 Sep 09
                         Author of The Sanctity of Human Blood

This has been a big week for swine flu vaccines. With the money machine in full swing
to get the untested swine flu vaccine out to the public ASAP, it's hard to keep up with the
level of deception in mainstream media. But we‟ll give it a try.


On 22 Sep 09, Associated Press ran the story

   "Govt: 1 swine flu shot enough for older kids" wherein they buried the lead:
National Institutes of Health now wants to give four separate flu shots to kids younger
than 10 years old. Two of the shots will be the brand new untested swine flu vaccines,
and the other two will be the 'regular' flu shot.

Before we look at the direct misstatements of fact in that AP article, let's read it at face
value. Here is some of the new 'information': [3]

National Institutes of Health director Fauci and CDC's Dr Schuchat do proclaim:

- children 9 and younger will need 2 flu shots and 2 swine flu shots
- everybody else will need 1 of each
- swine flu vaccine will be ready in October
- we'll have 251 million doses
- swine flu targets young children, which is why they need 2 shots
- they can get both shots the same day, one in each arm
- NIH has studies involving 600 children
- children 10 and older showed protection from the new vaccine
- younger children didn't show protection, since they don't have a mature immune
- a second dose is necessary to 'rev up' the immune system

For a study in modern propaganda techniques, the reader is directed to the entire AP
This article epitomizes a modern fact of media: the days of investigative reporting are
long gone. The article is nothing more but a dressed up, watered down version of the
NIH's own article [4] which came out the same day

             "Early Results: In Children, 2009 H1N1 Influenza Vaccine"

Associated Press offers not one bit of independent research, commentary, criticism, or
analysis. Except for deliberately omitting some of the glaring lack of science in the NIH
article, all that AP does is to try and give a junior-high parroting of the high points from
their master's voice.

The AP article obediently adopts the NIH's new pet word "protection" across the board:
"Protection kicks in for older children within eight to 10 days of the shot..." Only a
tested and proven vaccine could even hope to provide protection. The clinical trials on
swine flu vaccine are less than a month old, and won't be completed until April 2010.
The only thing these shots are protecting at this point is an experiment on the live

Trying to make believe that giving a 6 month old infant 4 flu shots would be 'normal'
Fauci: .. "the very young often need 2 doses of vaccine against regular winter flu."
Really? Why has he never shared that secret with anyone before now? CDC has never
recommended 2 flu shots for children.

Flu shots were added to the vaccine Schedule back in 2005, beginning at 6 months of age,
and yearly thereafter. [1] One shot. What is Fauci trying to pretend? He then bumbles
on..."this is very good news for the vaccination program." Why would we care what
is or isn't good news for the vaccination program? At $1 billion per shot approved, I
guess it would be good news for the vaccination program. What does that have to do
with the health of our kids? Another graduate of the Josef Goebbels school of social
graces: always be upbeat...

CDC's Schuchat, another towering medical genius, obviously off her meds, then pipes in
"it will be OK for kids to get one shot in each arm on the same visit." Excuse me,
Dr Mengele? Did you remember in first quarter med school when you learned that both
arms were attached to the same body, sharing the same systemic circulation? Exactly
what clinical trials confirm this personal hallucination of yours? And this is the principal
representative of our CDC?

The AP article plods bravely on: ..The new swine flu seems no more deadly than
regular winter flu, which every year kills 36,000 Americans and hospitalizes
200,000. But there's an important difference: This H1N1 strain sickens younger
people more frequently... [3]
There are no references for these sweeping statements in the AP article - again, it is
attempting to be summarizing NIH's article. What new swine flu are they talking about?
What disease? See the original Swine Flu chapter [1] at for
that discussion.


Next item, the figure of 36,000 deaths from flu is an old CDC sales technique that has
been employed unchanged for the past 20 years. Actual figures, according to CDC's own
documents [5] put the true figure at closer to 500 per year:


As we thoroughly explore in the full day vaccine seminar, there is no way that 36,000
people die from flu every year in this country, not by any stretch, although this figure is
rampantly misquoted in every media. The sales job here is that the new chimera we call
swine flu will be no greater threat than regular flu has been all these years, so it will be
easy for the vaccine to control it, the same way as flu is controlled by flu shots. That's
the perception they're going for here. But even if their own figures were accurate, they
admit that there has been no change in annual flu deaths in the past 20 years, even though
we started mandating flu shots in 2005. So what good have vaccines done? This is
supposed to be an endorsement for the new swine flu shots?


Let's continue with the AP article: “To determine the right child dose, the NIH set up
studies involving 600 children, from babies to teenagers.” [3]

That is actually true. At present there are 5 separate swine flu vaccine trials being done
on sample sizes of about 600 children. [2] But AP's next statement is a deliberate
misrepresentation: “About 76 percent of 10- to 17-year-olds showed strong protection
after one H1N1 shot.”

Looking at the actual studies themselves [2] we learn that they won't be finished until
April 2010! So what is Fauci talking about here? Answer: preliminary findings based
on a select group of 25 children !! But you can't find that fact out in the irresponsible
AP whitewash promo. No, for that fact you have to go to the NIH site, and actually read
the article that AP is supposed to be reporting on: Early Results: In Children, 2009
H1N1 Influenza Vaccine Works Like Seasonal Flu Vaccine -- 21 Sep 09. [4]

Easy to see misrepresentation right here-- the AP article leads us to believe these high
numbers were conclusive final evidence from complete studies. 76% favorable response
would be a gratifying long term result in any major study, but we find out that is only
after 10 days, looking at only 25 children within the entire sample of 600 subjects. [4]
Again, don't miss the point: these high numbers of "protection" are preliminary
findings only. The formal studies, which are the only ones being done in the whole
world to test the safety and efficacy of the new swine flu vaccines, these studies have just
begun last month, August 2009. Preliminary findings are meaningless in formal science.
That's why they design the entire study, and await the final outcome before making

Here we see one of the most disconcerting and insidious characteristics of the new swine
flu sales program: enlisting mainstream media to deliberately portray preliminary
findings as definitive, conclusive scientific results. This only happens in the world of
marketing. Real scientists are embarrassed by it.

The NIH report is further compromised in its own second paragraph wherein it quotes
Fauci prematurely ejaculating these minor preliminary findings into an overblown sales
pitch for a completely untested experimental vaccine, immediately making policy
statements based on this tiny amount of skewed information:

    It seems likely that the H1N1 flu vaccine will require just one 15-microgram
dose for children 10 to 17 years of age.

Oh, does it really seem likely, Tony? Does it indeed? Well we're certainly grateful to
have someone like you at the helm, someone whose instincts and feelings we can trust
without actually carrying out the complete clinical trials themselves.


One final important revelation about the AP article, and perhaps the agenda of the
Director of the NIH:

        "Younger children simply "don't have as mature an immune system," Fauci
explained. "So a first dose of vaccine against a flu strain they've never experienced
acts as an introduction for their immune system, and a booster shortly thereafter
revs up that immune response " [4]

Wow. Let's take a breath here, or maybe a cocktail. For the first time in history we have
the director of the National Institutes of Health enunciating in a public worldwide forum
one of the principal reasons why young children should not be vaccinated at all: they
don't have a mature immune system. Absolutely true. No child is born with an intact
immune system. That very complex biological symphony of interrelated allergic
responses, antibodies, antigens, self-recognition, cell response, etc -- about which we still
have only the most fragmented and vaguest knowledge -- struggles its way into existence
during the early years of the child's life. It needs no help, no interference, no enormous
experimental toxic load, especially one so politically contrived, in its fight to survive.

True to his training, Fauci immediately sidetracks us from that fact of nature to a
landmark illusion of American pseudo-science: pretending that a flu shot in a 6 month
old is a gentle natural gradual normal immune-building stimulus that will coax the infant
immune system into being: "... an introduction to their immune system..." Each flu shot
contains 30x the adult safe level of mercury, according to FDA's own toxicity index.

Fauci then absurdly follows that falsehood with a sublimely idiotic non-sequitur: the
subsequent booster shot 'revs up the immune system'. Revs up the immune system. Jesus

This is not the president of Harley Davidson talking here, my friends. This is the director
of the branch of government that is in charge of providing funding for all the medical
research done in this country, controlling an industry that is in excess of $1.2 trillion
annually. And this is his perception of the normal development of an infant's immune
system: an engine that needs to be 'revved up'. This is the individual who controls
policies and input and decisions on what substances will be mandated into your child's

Revs up the immune system.


There are actually five similar clinical trials on the new swine flu vaccine, being carried
out in various locations, all having just begun, all scheduled to be complete in about 6
months: spring of 2010. [2] And yet the AP article has just informed us that the swine
flu vaccine will be available in less than one month - October 2009! Untested.

Going now to the recent published report (15 Sep 09) of one of the five swine flu vaccine
clinical trials, the one by Sanofi Pasteur ( )
[6] we learn that their trial began in August 2009 and will go until April 2010. The
sample size is 650 children.

These children are all receiving doses of an H1N1 vaccine, although whether it's all the
same strain is never addressed. They just refer to it as the 2009 H1N1 virus, whatever
that may be. As we learned in the swine flu chapter at there
are dozens of strains of H1N1 virus, none of which has ever been proven to be the cause
of any disease in humans. Including swine flu. So even though this fact is uncontested,
what is certain is that the swine flu vaccines will all contain derivatives of some H1N1
virus. And that's what all of America will be getting.


Now let's ruminate on that fact for one second here and not gloss over it. Swine flu as a
disease has never been proven to exist. Caught up in the media-driven hysteria of global
pandemic, thousands of cases of something in several countries have been counted as
swine flu for the past 5 months without any conclusive testing that verifies all these
people have the same disease. Three months ago the specter of H1N1 was raised, with no
verifiable proof it was a virus that all the cases had in common. But if we have to make a
vaccine, we need a pathogen, and this was the best theory they could come up with:

After another month, with no conclusive testing of the 700 strains of H1N1 that exist, the
claim was suddenly made that swine flu was being caused by a "novel" H1N1 virus,
suggesting they found a brand new strain of disease-causing flu virus.. No proof of
testing on how they supposedly discovered that one novel strain was ever offered or
brought forth, or even asked for, from any scientific quarter. At the same time the CDC
continued to maintain on their website that a positive test for swine flu was merely the
presence of any Influenza A virus, of which there are hundreds of strains.

Again, there is no solid proof whatsoever that all these thousands of cases being counted
in all the various countries during the past 5 months -- there is no evidence that it wasn't
just plain old flu. All of it.

It was almost as though we are watching the birth of a religion here -- unsubstantiated
claims, vacillating science, relentless hype from irresponsible media trying to stay ahead
of the curve, government bureaucrat officials falling all over themselves to magnify the
potential of the global threat, lest anyone accuse them of down-playing the possible
horrors of the coming pandemic, followed by hundreds of millions in contracts being
awarded to several vaccine manufacturers to create 251 million doses.


A few days after the Associated Press article, another shocking bit of information came:
the new swine flu vaccines will contain high levels of mercury! Washington state Health
Secretary Salecky announced [2 ] that the state of Washington just lifted allowable limits
of thimerosal in the new swine flu vaccines, with no new levels set.

The announcement was masterfully phrased, obviously the work of professional Bernays-
type publicists:

    “Lifting mercury limits for H1N1 vaccine will give pregnant women and parents
or guardians of children under three the option of getting the vaccine if they want

Couching the issue in terms of availability to poor pregnant women sidesteps the
obvious: it would also give these women the option of exposing themselves and their
unborn children to unrestricted levels of the third most lethal neurotoxin known to man:
organic mercury. Perhaps realities like that don‟t make for good promo copy.

All this for a disease that has never been proven to exist, and has been admitted by the
CDC to be generally mild and self-limiting.
The Washington state declaration was helpful in that it quoted from one of the 5 swine flu
vax manufacturers – Sanofi Pasteur - from their 15 Sep 09 announcement [6] that their
new swine flu vaccination had just been licensed by the FDA. Even though the wording
is confusing, reading Sanofi‟s entire statement does give one the impression that their
brand new swine flu vaccine, which was in clinical trials for only 5 weeks, has actually
been approved by the FDA for general use.

This is in line with CDC‟s well published expectation to have the vaccines available by
October 2009.

Sanofi states that the clinical trial just began on August 6. Now remember - none of the
clinical trials is scheduled to be completed until April 2010. Which begs the questions:

       Why are vaccines being licensed at the very beginning of the clinical trials?

       If they‟re brand new vaccines, why do they have to have any
               thimerosal at all, let alone unrestricted levels?

Something‟s not right here.

Perhaps we can gain some insight from the tone of Sanofi‟s honcho:

       “Obtaining FDA licensure of this vaccine for A (H1N1) pandemic response is a key
milestone that will enable Sanofi Pasteur to provide a licensed vaccine to the U.S. government to
support pandemic immunization efforts,” said Wayne Pisano, President and Chief Executive
Officer of Sanofi Pasteur.

Sanofi is now referring to their vaccine as the Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent
Vaccine. This is the latest incarnation, or at least the newest name for the swine flu
vaccines. No more „novel,‟ no more just plain H1N1 vaccine - by putting H1N1 in
parentheses after Influenza A, Sanofi is trying to create the illusion that H1N1 is the
same thing as Influenza A virus.

We explained this completely in the swine flu chapter [7] – hundreds of strains of
Influenza A, and over 700 strains of H1N1. The pretense here is that by meticulous
testing they have identified the exact strain that has caused all these deaths and cases of
swine flu in all these countries during the past 5 months..

Nothing could be further from the truth.

The spectre of thimerosal having been raised portends the possibility, indeed the
likelihood, that the vaccine manufacturers who have just been awarded these huge
contracts to rush a vaccine onto the market -- that the new vaccines will not be new at
all, but rather old stockpiled vaccines that have been sitting around for years: either old
flu vaccines or Avian flu vaccines, or whatever. Virtually anything with a fragment of
any flu virus might qualify.


Again, if the vaccines are going to be brand new, created right now at this time, why
would they have to contain thimerosal at all? If these are brand new batches, why not
just leave it out? There are thimerosal-free vaccines, and have been for years. Even
Salecky notes this in her statement. So why add this neurotoxin to a vaccine that we‟re
going to be giving 2 shots of to a 6 month old infant, especially now when the connection
with autism has been so clearly documented?

For years, the „regular‟ flu shots contained 25 mcg of mercury, which is 30 times the
adult safe level. That was bad enough. that we have been doing it since 2006. And now
we have just learned that there will be even higher levels of thimerosal in the new

The practice of trotting out old vaccines, giving them a new promo package, and re-
marketing them is not new. We did the same exact thing back in 2002 with the smallpox
vaccine hoax. [8] At that time a vaccine manufacturer dug up 90 million doses of old
smallpox vaccines that had been sitting around in storage since 1971. With no new
clinical trials, the old vaccines were „tested‟ by Aventis, the company who had just
received four hundred million dollars to produce a smallpox vaccine overnight, and found
to be „still good.”

Remember this: batches of vaccines do have expiration dates, but they are never thrown
away. Vaccine manufacturers are the packrats of the drug industry in that regard. Just
never know when any of these old vaccine batches might come in handy.

A working hypothesis at the present time is that faced with the “emergency” to get swine
flu vaccines out immediately in order to stem the tide of the so-called global pandemic,
manufacturers will be digging through their cupboards to see if they have any old stuff
they can sell now just by changing the name and a little tweaking.

Historically it generally takes a year or more to create, test, and approve a brand new
vaccine. If this one's being forced into existence after one month by sheer political
expediency, the manufacturers are likely going to try every trick in the book. Remember,
Sanofi is the same company who got the hundred million dollar contract to produce avian
flu vaccine back in 2005, which they never delivered on. [ 9] So why on earth would
they not try to sell any expired inventory as swine flu stock ? Time is money.

Another company Baxter – was recently caught by the Czech government for doing
exactly that: selling unlicensed avian flu vaccine as swine flu vaccine. That was a major
worldwide scandal, in all the news in September 2009. [10]
When the Czech government pre-tested the vaccine on ferrets before giving it to humans,
all the ferrets died! That was earlier this month. Again, why wouldn‟t Sanofi or any of
the others try the exact same ruse?

Not surprising that about 25% of Sanofi‟s recent statement on swine flu [6] is directed to
their investors as a disclaimer about the way they are marketing the vaccine. The
economics of politics, exemplified in both the swine flu disaster of 1976 and also the
smallpox vaccine scam of 2001.

In both instances the excuse was offered by the FDA that there was no time to test the
vaccine because of the „imminent danger‟ of the „pandemic.‟ And so the vaccines were
rushed through the approval process without completing the clinical trials. All politics,
no science. In 1976 hundreds of people died from that mistake. In 2001, they took the
easy way out – after the $3 billion was spent they scrapped the whole smallpox vaccine


It's eerie. This identical urgency over today's swine flu program is being stoked almost
daily by inflammatory, largely unfounded news stories, all directed toward the same
outcome: there simply isn't time to test these new vaccines. So let's just get them out
there to the children and pregnant women such as they are. We'll sort of the details later.

Like toxicity, lethal side effects, permanent neurological damage, autism, etc.


Almost as bad as the promotion of an untested vaccine for a nonexistent disease is all this
internet noise making hysterical claims about subtextual Machiavellian aspects of the
swine flu program. Like the stories predicting mandatory swine flu vaccination which
evoke Third Reich policies of quarantining any objectors in stadiums or mass detention
centers ( which actually is law in this country at present, part of the Homeland Security
Act), etc ...

In reality all this is completely unnecessary. There's no need to make swine flu vaccine
mandatory. No vaccine in history has been supported and promoted by such an
enormous, well-crafted, incessant global media blitz. And of course it's working: most
people can't wait to get the new vaccine.

In the midst of everything we do not know, one fact is certain: without hyperbole or
sensationalism, the new swine flu vaccine coming soon - unidentified, untested and
untried - will be the most dangerous immunological experiment on this country's children
in the past 30 years.

     addendum to 2 previous articles on swine flu

Although the H1N1 panic is at a fever pitch at this time, it's a safe bet that by summer
2010 the swine flu issue will have faded off into the boneyard of vaccine memorabilia.

Remember you read that here.

Policymakers have well discerned that this particular illusion has a finite shelf life, due in
no small part to the ever-shortening attention span of the collective American mentality.

We must recall that the commotion in recent years over smallpox, anthrax, SARS, and
Avian flu lasted only as long as necessary for the drug and vaccine funds to be allocated.
Once that happens, there is no longer any motive to continue to fan the flames of
pandemic hysteria - a media campaign like that requires so much effort, and costs so
much money to maintain, especially for a disease that never existed in the first place.

The template for this type of disease diversion is now firmly established - so why tamper
with a working model? Our textbook refers to the abrupt media blackout which routinely
signals the end of the line for these creations - we call it The Case of the Disappearing
Threat. Once it becomes evident that the vaccine and the drugs assigned to the current
pandemic du jour, that these are dangerous and completely ineffective, the global threat
itself, which has been hawked incessantly for months and months as the disease threat
may bring the human race to extinction - is suddenly gone. Poof. Like it never existed.
Just like.

And no one ever asks where it went, or thinks it odd that something presented so urgently
suddenly vanished. And then magically no more cases of the horrible global killer are
ever heard of again - not even one. This is precisely what took place not only with
smallpox, anthrax, SARS, and avian flu phantasms of recent years, but with the 1976
swine flu vaccine disaster as well. Remember? One might be grateful for the good
manners of these individual pathogens who were gracious enough to simply disappear
just because we were unable to come up with any drugs of vaccines that actually worked.
Such politeness.

Anyone paying even moderate attention to the parade of emergencies that have been
making their appearance lately with almost routine regularity, might begin to be
desensitized to the urgency of these situations, vaguely remembering that since they
survived the last one, well they'll probably survive this one as well. The slightly more
vigilant might begin to notice that most of the programs result in a viable vaccine being
developed, and thereby the threat to themselves and their families will eventually be

This is exactly wherein lies the clear and present danger of the current swine flu vaccine
program. This swine flu vaccine is actually being brought into existence for
dissemination among the general public, starting with children. With 5 manufacturers
having begun clinical trials only in August 2009, none scheduled for completion until
next April, it is an astounding lesson in vaccine politics that the FDA approved the
untested H1N1 vaccine on 15 Sep 09, just one month after the testing began!
[] Licensed and untested.

We saw precisely the same sequence of events that led to the last swine flu fiasco in 1976
- 50 million were vaccinated with that untested vaccine. 21 deaths 565 paralyzed,
withdrawn in 10 weeks. And never replaced. Never replaced - that's the point. Why
not? If the threat was so urgent that we had to start vaccinating before the vaccine was
even tested, then where did that threat go? Why didn't we just withdraw the toxic
vaccine and then continue with researching and testing to develop one that worked?


With just a little research, independent of the popular media, a cognition begins to take
shape in the mind of the discriminating reader, that there may be an ulterior agenda here,
one that is not necessarily directed toward the overall well-being of children. If such a
reader is a responsible parent, the next realization might be to change the default setting
with respect to the decision to vaccinate. At present most parents default in favor of -
when in doubt, vaccinate.

Many today are changing that default setting: no more vaccines until it is proven to me
beyond a doubt that

       - the vaccines have been tested and found to be 100% safe with no chance of
               harming the child

       - that the child absolutely needs the vaccine for optimum immune development

       - there are no economic or political agendas involved in the vaccine being

Change the default. It is becoming increasingly clear that natural selection will favor the
lines of those parents who take these extra precautions to protect and safeguard the inner
immunity of their children.

Who else is going to come forward?

The FDA, who does no testing of their own before making a decision, but relies entirely
on the research submitted to them from the companies who stand to make billions in
profits if the vaccine is approved?
The vaccine manufacturers, who have been granted 100% immunity from liability for any
deaths or injuries? The other regulatory agencies - NIH, CDC, HHS - whose political
connections to the vaccine companies are a matter of public record?

But that's exactly what all the hurry, all the hyperbole, all the outright misdirection is
about. They know that they don't have time to come up with a fully tested vaccine - that
would take a year. But by that time the imaginary disease will be gone, with no hope of
raising it from the dead. The market is here and now. And everyone - the clinics, the
manufacturers, the regulators, and the media - all want their share of the rewards.


Most people will get the new swine flu shot. Numerous deaths and injuries from the
untested vaccine are the inevitable result. When that happens the cover story will be

       They didn‟t get the vacine soon enough
       The disease mutated

Nothing about the vaccine itself having caused the injuries, of course. That is the
thought that cannot be entertained. Except by the regulators who came up with the law
that no manufacturer can be liable for deaths or injuries from the new vaccines.

 Excerpted from

           To order The Sanctity of Human Blood, 13th edition
            call 408.298..1800


1. O'Shea T    The sanctity of human blood 13th ed. 2009.


3. Neergaard, L NEERGAARD, Associated Press – Mon Sep 21, 2009

4. National Institutes of Health
 "Early Results: In Children, 2009 H1N1 Influenza Vaccine"

5. Centers for Diseases Control site

6. Sanofi Pasteur

7. Swine flu: global pandemic

8. Weiss, R   Smallpox vaccine turns up   Washington Post 27 Mar 2002.

9. Kaufman, M Swiss Firm May Cede Bird Flu Drug Rights
             Washington Post October 19, 2005

10. Branswell, H Baxter: Product contained live bird flu virus
     THE CANADIAN PRESS TorontoSun September 28, 2009

To top