Spread of Spanish Flu Was Never Experimentally Confirmed
“Perhaps, if we have learned anything, it is that we are not quite sure what we know about the disease.”
Young adults were the most vulnerable group to the 1918–1919 Spanish flu, the history’s deadliest pandemic that claimed about 50 million lives. Epidemiological observations suggest that the Spanish flu influenza virus spread by human contact. But human experiments seem to suggest otherwise.
Puzzling Human Studies
The landmark study of Milton J. Rosenau, MD, “Experiments to Determine Mode of Spread of Influenza,” was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 1919.
- They isolated microbial mixtures from the throat and noses of carefully selected influenza cases from an outbreak location. The researchers then administered these to 10 young U.S. navy volunteers without prior exposure to influenza. None fell sick.
- They drew blood from influenza patients and transferred it to the navy volunteers. None fell sick.
- They collected influenza patients’ mucous membranes with swabs and filtered them to exclude larger microbes like bacteria. They then injected the filtrate into the navy volunteers. None fell sick.
- They brought the navy volunteers to meet influenza patients. They shook hands and conversed. The patients also exhaled (as hard as possible) onto the volunteers’ face for five times. Then the patients cough directly onto the volunteers. None fell sick.
In case these ten navy volunteers were somehow immune, though unlikely as they had no prior influenza exposure, the study recruited another set of 50 volunteers. They repeat the experiment with influenza patients from another outbreak location, but could not prove human-to-human transmission. And, intriguingly, one physician involved in the study contracted influenza.
“I think we must be very careful not to draw any positive conclusions from the negative results of this kind. Many factors must be considered. Our volunteers may not have been susceptible. They may have been immune,” Dr Rosenau addressed. “We entered the outbreak with a notion that we knew the cause of the disease, and were quite sure we knew how it was transmitted from person to person,” he concluded. “Perhaps, if we have learned anything, it is that we are not quite sure what we know about the disease.”
Other eight human experiments, documented in “Experiments Upon Volunteers to Determine the Cause and Mode of Spread of Influenza, Boston, November and December, 1918,” also failed to confirm how the Spanish flu spread. “Our failure, however, to reproduce the disease with these discharges suggests that there may be unknown factors involved, either in the discharge of the virus from the body, or in its entrance into the victim, or both,” the document ended.
“Perhaps, if we have learned anything, it is that we are not quite sure what we know about the disease.”
Reviewing these studies, John M. Eyler, PhD in the historical science at the University of Minnesota, said in a 2010 paper: “It seemed that what was acknowledged to be one of the most contagious of communicable diseases could not be transferred under experimental conditions.”
Possible Explanations Are Unconvincing
Some argue that participants in those studies were already immune. This is rather unlikely, however, as the volunteers recruited had no prior exposure to influenza. As a 2008 review wrote: “While possible, none of the volunteers reported symptoms in 1918, even a fever.” If the volunteers were indeed immune, an initial infection must happen first to generate adaptive immunity that ‘remembers’ the Spanish flu virus. But, again, the volunteers were never symptomatic.
Another reason could be that the influenza patients had passed the infectious phase. This possibility, too, is dubious as Dr Rosenau ensured that influenza patients examined were in their first three days of illness, the period where virus shedding peaks.
Could the participants never contract the Spanish flu virus? Even though no technology could confirm virus diagnosis at that time, “we doubt U.S. Public Health Service physicians had much trouble making an accurate clinical diagnosis of influenza in 1919,” the 2008 review added. Maybe the sick could not transmit the Spanish flu virus to the healthy? Equally improbable as countless healthy people fell sick with the flu at that time.
We’ll Probably Never Know the Answer
The Spanish flu virus eventually disappeared, only to be resurrected in 2005 for animal experimentations to understand its mechanism of virulence. And, indeed, the Spanish flu is a unique influenza virus. “No other human influenza viruses tested were as exceptionally virulent,” the CDC stated. “In that way, the 1918 virus was special — a uniquely deadly product of nature, evolution and the intermingling of people and animals.”
As human infection experiments are no longer ethical and require extensive enrollment procedure, scientists may never solve why experimental human-to-human transmission of the Spanish flu could not be achieved. At least the human studies showed that human contact alone does not explain the Spanish flu pandemic. Underlying factors are likely at play. Evidence has suggested that a tuberculosis co-infection might be a prerequisite to a severe flu infection during the 1918 pandemic. Or perhaps animals were the main culprit in driving the 1918 flu transmission.
https://medium.com/microbial-instincts/spread-of-spanish-flu-was-never-experimentally-confirmed-9f91b37c4dd8
NSW and Vic Deaths
Where’s the action on the more important priorities? Altered priorities like this point up a hidden agenda that has nothing to do with health and welfare but everything to do with ushering in a tyrannical police state that is a far greater threat to us all than the cold or flu or Covid.
I strongly encourage you to spend 13 minutes to listen to the inventor of the mRNA vaccine, Dr Robert Malone, give an inspiring talk on how to overcome the mass psychosis, get through to people and rescue our freedom!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INHpQL9fgto&t=13s
Lawyer Thomas Renz Exposes Covid Lies and Fraud
Lawyer Thomas Renz provides proof of deaths and injuries, lies and fraud and asks you to spread the word to help stop the harm.
First Time
They’re Playing Russian Roulette With Covid Child Vaccines – 12 Reasons Not To Inject Your Child
A time-saving compilation of data (with links to sources) for those wanting the best for their children and prepared to look beyond the propaganda.
How to save Australia from the vax passes
How to save Australia from the vax passes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WKPnx3YDxg
Further actions listed here:
https://www.tomgrimshaw.com/tomsblog/?p=36001
Covid Pre-Jab Protocol
Please discuss this with your primary health care practitioner.
There is one point here that is not technically accurate, heat does reduce the efficacy of vitamin C.
EXTRACT:
In 2009 Dr Russell Blaylock wrote a PreVax recommendation for the H1N1 shots.
Astaxanthin 12 mcg
Fish Oil 3 grams
Quercetin (dose per label on bottle)
Turmeric 1 gram
Vitamin C to bowel tolerance (10 grams a day)
Vitamin E 800 mg for women, 1,200 mg for men
Zinc 30 – 70 mg last thing at night
Avoid immune stimulants (betaglucans, mushroom extracts, whey protein)
Dr Russell Blaylock writes:
EPA (Eicosapentaenoic Acid) one of the Omega-3 fatty acids found in fish oil supplements, is a potent immune suppressant. In the case of an immune adjuvant reaction you want to suppress the immune system. Studies show if you take EPA oil an hour before injecting a very powerful adjuvant called LPS (lipopolysccharide) it would completely block the ability of LPS to cause brain inflammation. Take a moderte dose every day and more if needed to tame a cytokine storm.
Flavonoids, particularly Quercetin and Turmeric, block the ability of the adjuvants in vaccines to trigger a long-term immune reactions.
Autism Prevalence
Deaths among UK Children are 44% higher than the 5-year-average since they were offered the Covid-19 Vaccine according to ONS data
Official data published by the Office for National Statistics proves that deaths among children have increased significantly compared to the five-year-average since they were offered the Pfizer mRNA Covid-19 vaccine.
On September 13th 2021, Professor Chris Whitty the Chief Medical Officer for England, wrote to the UK Government advising them that all children over the age of 12 should be offered at least one dose of the Pfizer Covid-19 injection.
This was despite the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) refusing to do so due to concluding the benefits do not necessarily outweigh the risks. The reason they concluded this is due to the negligible amount of children who suffer serious illness due to Covid-19, let alone die, and the real possibility of children suffering myocarditis (inflammation of the heart muscle) as an adverse reaction.
For the first time in history the UK Government chose to ignore the advice of the JCVI and instead opted to roll-out the Covid-19 injection to all children over the age of 12 with immediate effect.
The ONS publishes weekly figures on deaths in 2021 which can be accessed here, and they have a previously published a ‘2015-2019, Five-Year Average’ dataset on deaths which can be accessed here.
We have used the figures from both datasets for our analysis, both can be downloaded so that you can confirm our figures are correct –
- Download the 2021 Dataset on Deaths (Up to Week 45)
- Download the 2015 – 2019, 5-year-average Dataset on Deaths
September 13th, the day Chris Whitty advised the UK Government to offer the Covid vaccine to children, fell in week 37 of 2021. Thanks to plans already put in place under the instruction of the Health Secretary Sajid Javid, the NHS were ready to start injecting children with immediate effect, so we have analysed all deaths occurring from week 38 onwards.
The following chart shows the number of deaths per week, between week 38 and week 45, among all children aged 10-14 in England and Wales, in 2021 and the 2015-2019 5-year-average dataset.
Deaths among children aged 10-14 have been higher than the five-year-average every single week since they were offered a Covid-19 injection except for week 42. The highest number of deaths fell in week 40, with 11 deaths being registered compared to the 4 that occurred in the 5-year-average dataset. This represents a 175% increase in deaths in week 40 alone.
Between week 38 and week 45 in the five-year-average dataset, a total of 41 deaths among children aged 10-14 occurred. But during the same timeframe this year a total of 59 deaths have occurred among children. This represents a 44% increase on the five-year-average since they were offered a Covid-19 injection.
Deaths among male children aged 10-14 have been higher than the five-year-average every single week since they were offered a Covid-19 injection except for week 42 and 43 where they were lower, and week 44 where they were the same. The highest number of deaths fell in week 40, with 7 deaths being registered compared to the 2 that occurred in the 5-year-average dataset. This represents a 250% increase in deaths in week 40 alone.
Between week 38 and week 45 in the five-year-average dataset, a total of 24 deaths among male children aged 10-14 occurred. But during the same timeframe this year a total of 34 deaths have occurred among male children. This represents a 42% increase on the five-year-average since they were offered a Covid-19 injection.
Deaths among female children aged 10-14 have been higher than the five-year-average every single week since they were offered a Covid-19 injection except for week 41 where they were lower, and week 42 and 45 where they were the same. The highest number of deaths fell in week 40, with 4 deaths being registered compared to the 2 that occurred in the 5-year-average dataset. This represents a 100% increase in deaths in week 40 alone.
Between week 38 and week 45 in the five-year-average dataset, a total of 17 deaths among female children aged 10-14 occurred. But during the same timeframe this year a total of 25 deaths have occurred among female children. This represents a 47% increase on the five-year-average since they were offered a Covid-19 injection.
Quite clearly these numbers are not astronomically high but there is good reason for this in that children don’t generally die. Which should make it all the more concerning that we are seeing a significant increase in deaths among children since they were offered a Covid-19 injection.
Correlation does not of course equal causation but there seems to be a mountain of coincidences forming in relation to the Covid-19 vaccines. Is this just another coincidence, or are these injections to blame?
The only thing that’s certain is that UK authorities should be urgently investigating why deaths among children, male children, and female children are 44%, 42%, and 47% higher than the five-year-average since they were offered a Covid-19 injection.
https://dailyexpose.uk/2021/11/24/child-deaths-increasing-since-offered-covid-vaccine/