A Stab in the Dark or Something More?

Today, whilst out shopping, I overheard an interesting conversation between a shop assistant on the checkout counter and a customer. The customer was explaining that despite recently having a Flu jab it hadn't prevented her from getting the Flu again.

"They're just taking a stab in the dark", she said, whilst explaining how the Flu jab couldn't protect against all the potential Flu strains, and only protected against a few know types, strains that the pharmicutical companies chose to protect against. And of course, she was right, in theory.



The question is, do the flu vaccinations offer any protection at all, and regardless of whether they do or not, what effect do the vaccines themselves have on the individual?

I was an on-the-spot observer of the 1918 influenza epidemic
All the doctors and people who were living at the time of the 1918 Spanish Influenza epidemic say it was the most terrible disease the world has ever had. Strong men, hale and hearty, one day would be dead the next. The disease had the characteristics of the black death added to typhoid, diphtheria, pneumonia, smallpox, paralysis and all the diseases the people had been vaccinated with immediately following World War 1. Practically the entire population had been injected "seeded" with a dozen or more diseases — or toxic serums. When all those doctor-made diseases started breaking out all at once it was tragic.

That pandemic dragged on for two years, kept alive with the addition of more poison drugs administered by the doctors who tried to suppress the symptoms. As far as I could find out, the flu hit only the vaccinated. Those who had refused the shots escaped the flu. My family had refused all the vaccinations so we remained well all the time. We knew from the health teachings of Graham, Trail, Tilden and others, that people cannot contaminate the body with poisons without causing disease.

When the flu was at its peak, all the stores were closed as well as the schools, businesses — even the hospital, as the doctors and nurses had been vaccinated too and were down with the flu. No one was on the streets. It was like a ghost town. We seemed to be the only family which didn’t get the flu; so my parents went from house to house doing what they could to look after the sick, as it was impossible to get a doctor then. If it were possible for germs, bacteria, virus, or bacilli to cause disease, they had plenty of opportunity to attack my parents when they were spending many hours a day in the sick rooms. But they didn’t get the flu and they didn’t bring any germs home to attack us children and cause anything. None of our family had the flu — not even a sniffle— and it was in the winter with deep snow on the ground.

When I see people cringe when someone near them sneezes or coughs, I wonder how long it will take them to find out that they can’t catch it — whatever it is. The only way they can get a disease is to develop it themselves by wrong eating, drinking, smoking or doing some other things which cause internal poisoning and lowered vitality. All diseases are preventable and most of them are cureable with the right methods, not known to medical doctors, and not all drugless doctors know them either.

It has been said that the 1918 flu epidemic killed 20,000,000 people throughout the world. But, actually, the doctors killed them with their crude and deadly treatments and drugs. This is a harsh accusation but it is nevertheless true, judging by the success of the drugless doctors in comparison with that of the medical doctors.

While the medical men and medical hospitals were losing 33% of their flu cases, the non-medical hospitals such as BATTLE CREEK, KELLOGG and MACFADDEN’S HEALTH-RESTORIUM were getting almost 100% healings with their water cure, baths, enemas, etc., fasting and certain other simple healing methods, followed by carefully worked out diets of natural foods. One health doctor didn’t lose a patient in eight years. The very successful health treatment of one of those drugless doctors who didn’t lose any patients will be given in the other part of this book, titled VACCINATION CONDEMNED, to be published a little later.

If the medical doctors had been as advanced as the drugless doctors, there would not have been those 20 million deaths from the medical flu treatment.

There was seven times more disease among the vaccinated soldiers than among the unvaccinated civilians, and the diseases were those they had been vaccinated against. One soldier who had returned from overseas in 1912 told me that the army hospitals were filled with cases of infantile paralysis and he wondered why grown men should have an infant disease. Now, we know that paralysis is a common after-effect of vaccine poisoning. Those at home didn’t get the paralysis until after the world-wide vaccination campaign in 1918.

Should you get the Flu shot?

News reports have been flooding us with articles warning that the impending flu season may be the worst in years.Even though it is difficult to separate the facts from the hype, a close evaluation of the flu vaccine will reveal that serious questions must be raised about the recommendations that are routinely touted, namely high efficacy with little risk. Anyone considering a flu shot should become informed about the substances coming through that needle, and should be determined to investigate the safety and efficacy issues that are still unresolved.

What's in a flu shot?

The influenza virus is grown in "specific pathogen-free" (SPF) eggs. Eggs are tested for a variety of agents usually between 23 and 31-to confirm the absence of those specific pathogens. Laboratories limit the number of agents that are screened due to the shear abundance of potential viruses and/or bacteria to choose from. In addition, screening for every potential agent would be cost prohibitive. If none of the tested agents are detected, the vaccine is reported as "pathogen free.

However, it should be understood that there is a distinct difference between "pathogen free and "specific pathogen-free. In its July 1996 report, the Institute of Medicine acknowledged that "although it is not possible to produce a completely uncontaminated animal, it is possible to produce an animal [or egg] certified to be free of specific pathogens. Viruses that are harmless to their animal host, however, may be potentially harmful to humans.

During the manufacturing process, antibiotics (neomycin, polymyxin B and gentamicin) are added to eliminate stray bacteria found in the mixture. The final solution can contain the following additives in any combination: Triton X-100 (a detergent); polysorbate 80 (a potential carcinogen); gelatin; formaldehyde; and residual egg proteins. In addition, many of the influenza vaccines still contain thimerosal as a preservative. Thimerosal (mercury) is being investigated for its link to brain injury and autoimmune disease.

Does the flu shot protect?

There are no guarantees that the influenza viruses selected for the vaccine will be the identical strains circulating during a given flu season. In fact, it has recently been announced that this year's flu vaccine does not include the strain that is being reported by doctors in the community called the "A Fujian strain. Outbreaks have been reported in Texas, Colorado and elsewhere that involve strains that do not match the current flu vaccine. CDC tests have confirmed that more than 80 per cent of the 55 strains of influenza virus isolated thus far are the A Fujian strain. Even so, the CDC still maintains that the current vaccine could provide cross-protection against the new variant, but the fact is, no one knows for sure.

Moreover, the majority of illnesses characterized by fever, fatigue, cough and aching muscles are not caused by the influenza virus. Non-influenza viruses (e.g., rhinoviruses respiratory syncytial virus [RSV], adenoviruses, and parainfluenza viruses) can cause symptoms referred to as influenza-like illnesses. Certain bacteria, such as Legionella spp., Chlamydia pneumoniae, Mycoplasma pneumoniae, and Streptococcus pneumoniae, have been documented as the causes of ILI.

Notably, these microbes are not part of the flu vaccine. Unless an organism's antigen is contained within the vaccine, there is no protection conferred by the vaccine.

Unusual and frightening complications with Flu outbreak

At left: Kim Collins talks to her son, Nick Collins, 9, both of Texarkana, Texas, as he opens his eyes briefly in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit at Arkansas Children's Hospital in Little Rock, Ark., Monday, Dec. 8, 2003. Nick, who arrived at the hospital on Nov.10, needs four chest tubes to drain air and fluid from three holes in his lungs caused by bacterial pneumonia.

Doctors are trying to prevent a blood clot from killing him. He's also developed a drug-resistant bacteria infection, a worrisome find that doctors are starting to see in other flu cases. Doctors are reporting unusual and frightening complications with this year's flu outbreak, particularly among young patients.

This last comment should raise some red flags and make one wonder about the following.

US Army scientists create "Spanish Flu" virus in laboratory

- medical benefit questionable [...]

Biosafety Irregularity in Spanish Flu Experiments

Highlights the Need to Strengthen Biodefense Transparency

The Sunshine Project
News Release
21 October 2003

(Austin and Hamburg) - Genetic experiments to recreate one of the most devastating viruses of the past century were not reviewed or approved by a biosafety committee. The University of Georgia claims that it was too troublesome to convene its Institutional Biosafety Committee to review research to genetically reconstruct the Spanish flu. Instead, the University signed off on the experiments based on ad hoc talks between only four members of its biosafety committee. As a result, no minutes were taken to describe safety review of the experiments. In fact, by not convening its committee, Georgia's actions ensured that there was no timely opportunity to raise concerns at all.

The case demonstrates a severe weakness in the public disclosure provisions of federal research rules (the NIH Guidelines) and underscores the need for mandatory committee-level (or higher) review of research projects with disease agents. By approving the experiments with an ad hoc subcommittee, requirements for public disclosure were avoided. The existence of the experiments only came to light through journal articles. According to Edward Hammond of the Sunshine Project, "Genetic engineering of bioweapons agents has national and international implications for health, biosafety, and security. But Georgia shied away from these and simply rubber-stamped the Pentagon-led project to recreate the Spanish flu."

In 1918-19, the Spanish flu killed 20-40 million people worldwide. In the US, deaths from the flu strain resulted in a 10 year drop in life expectancy. Recreating the deadly flu may create international unease, in particular because of the leadership of the US military in the project.

The Spanish flu reconstruction began at a University of Georgia biosafety level three (BSL-3) facility in 1999. Researchers from US universities, the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, and the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) are involved. The lab specializes in diseases of poultry, including avian influenza. The Sunshine Project has confirmed - and reconfirmed - under the Freedom of Information Act that USDA has no biosafety committee minutes related to the experiments. The Project also directly contacted the University of Georgia and requested Institutional Biosafety Committee meeting minutes that are required by the NIH Guidelines for Recombinant DNA Research. Georgia's Biosafety Officer stated that no minutes exist.

Scientists have recently begun to accept the need to reinforce the Institutional Biosafety Committee system established under the NIH Guidelines for Recombinant DNA Research. But the discussion, including that in a recent report on biosafety by the National Academies of Science, is out of balance because it is taking place almostly exclusively between scientists, government regulators, and the Pentagon. "There is a need to make more room at the table. The public has a right to help determine if, and under what conditions, risky research proceeds." says Hammond, "Biosafety review must be a matter of law, and public access provisions of federal research rules must be strengthened. Otherwise, risky experiments such as this one will take place with little or no transparency, and that will decrease international security and create environmental and health risks."

Spanish Flu - Why is the US government interested?

A recent commentary in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine (Madjid et al. 2003) noted that influenza is readily transmissible by aerosol and that a small number of viruses can cause a full-blown infection. The authors continued:"the possibility for genetic engineering and aerosol transmission [of influenza] suggests an enormous potential for bioterrorism" The possible hostile abuse of influenza virus is seen as a very real threat by public health officials in the USA. Just two weeks ago, $15 million was granted by the US National Institutes of Health to Stanford University to study how to guard against the flu virus "if it were to be unleashed as an agent of bioterrorism".

US scientists led by a Pentagon pathologist recently began to genetically reconstruct this specifically dangerous 1918 influenza strain. In one experiment a partially reconstructed 1918 virus killed mice, while virus constructs with genes from a contemporary flu virus had hardly any effect.

Attempts to recover the Spanish flu virus date to the 1950s, when scientists unsuccessfully tried to revive the virus from victims buried in the permafrost of Alaska. In the mid 1990s, Dr Jeffrey Taubenberger from the US Armed Forces Institute of Pathology started to screen preserved tissue samples from 1918 influenza victims. It appears that this work was not triggered by a search for flu treatments, or the search for a new biowarfare agent, but by a rather simple motivation: Taubenberger and his team were just able to do it. In previous experiments they had developed a new technique to analyse DNA in old, preserved tissues and for now looking for new applications: "The 1918 flu was by far and away the most interesting thing we could think of" explained Taubenberger the reason why he started to unravel the secrets of one of most deadliest viruses known to humankind.

No Limits

"In a given day, a given circumstance, you think you have a limit. And you then go for this limit, and you touch this limit[...] something happens and you suddenly can go a little bit further. With your mind power, your determination, your instinct, and the experience as well, you can fly very high."
- Ayrton Senna

Blair's Enabling Act

Today I've been reading details of the UK equivalent of the US Patriot Act, the new addition to the UK constitution, the Civil Contingencies Act. Passed on the 18th November 2004, the Act is legislation that allows for the implementation of a Police State under a State of Emergency.
While the mainstream media was making a front page flap over the Hunting Ban last year, just a few column inches on the same day were given to the new legislation that has far reaching consequences for everybody living the UK. Blair's Enabling Act.
This is law that we are told is going to "protect" the population from the so-called terror threat. What does it actually do?
Concerns were expressed back in 2003 when the draft bill was produced.

Dr Lewis Moonie MP, Chairman of "an all-party Committee of MP’s and Peers, set up to examine and report on the draft Civil Contingencies Bill" said:

"In defining emergency powers, the Government has come up with a one-size-fits-all Bill for every possible scenario.

We are concerned that as a result the draft Bill does not provide adequate safeguards to protect against the misuse of emergency powers. In the wrong hands, it could be used to undermine or even remove legislation underpinning the British Constitution and infringe human rights.

[...] The draft Bill defines an emergency as an event which presents a "serious" threat to: human welfare, the environment, political, administrative, or economic stability; and the security of the UK or part of it. We believe that the definition is too subjective and loose, especially in Part 2 where it could trigger substantial emergency powers. We suggest that key terms, such as "serious", "essential" and "stability" must be defined within the Bill and that robust safeguards appear on the face of the Bill."

Take a look at the following definition of emergency as it appears in the Act:

1 Meaning of "emergency"

(1) In this Part "emergency" means-

(a) an event or situation which threatens serious damage to human welfare in a place in the United Kingdom,

(b) an event or situation which threatens serious damage to the environment of a place in the United Kingdom, or

(c) war, or terrorism, which threatens serious damage to the security of the United Kingdom.

So, from the definition of Emergency above, taken from Chapter 36 , it's stated that a State of Emergency can be declared on threat of serious damage to human welfare, among other things.
The term "serious" isn't defined. What is the definition of "human welfare"?

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1)(a) an event or situation threatens damage to human welfare only if it involves, causes or may cause-

(a) loss of human life,

(b) human illness or injury,

(c) homelessness,

(d) damage to property,

(e) disruption of a supply of money, food, water, energy or fuel,

(f) disruption of a system of communication,

(g) disruption of facilities for transport, or

(h) disruption of services relating to health.

I can think of endless examples of natural and manmade events, many that have happened or have threatened to recently, that would fit the above catagorisations.
So, how long would a lock-down under a State of Emergency last once it is declared?

26 Duration

(1) Emergency regulations shall lapse-

(a) at the end of the period of 30 days beginning with the date on which they are made, or

(b) at such earlier time as may be specified in the regulations.

Okay, emergency regulations will lapse after 30 days, but wait...

(2) Subsection (1)-

(a) shall not prevent the making of new regulations, and

(b) shall not affect anything done by virtue of the regulations before they lapse.

And new regulations can be created by a senior Minister of the Crown, which includes the Prime Minister, based on a subjective assessment of conditions, as outlined in Section 21.
So there you have it. I've examined just one potential conditon and followed it through to show that the definitions of emergency and response are open to a subjective interpretation that cannot be challenged. The rest of the Act is no different. Check it out for yourself. On threat of distruption or damage to something or someone somewhere, Blair can declare a State of Emergency which may last 30 days, but can be extended indefinitely, or instituted permanently by legally amending the constitution before this period is over. Feel any safer now?

Virtual Fighter

This report actually ties in with my first post.

'Robot soldiers' bound for Iraq
BBC News
Sunday, 23 January 2005

The US military is planning to deploy robots armed with machine-guns to wage war against insurgents in Iraq.

Eighteen of the 1m-high robots, equipped with cameras and operated by remote control, are going to Iraq this spring, the Associated Press reports.

The machine is based on a robot already used by the military to disable bombs.

Officials say the robot warrior is fast, accurate and will track and attack the enemy with relatively little risk to the lives of US soldiers.

Unlike its human counterparts, the armed robot does not require food, clothing, training, motivation or a pension.

When not needed in war, it can be mothballed in a warehouse.[...]

A US officer who helped test the robot said it was a more accurate shot than the average soldier because it is mounted on a stable platform and takes aim electronically.

"It eliminates the majority of shooting errors you have," said Staff Sgt Santiago Tordillos.

Mr Quinn says there are plans to replace the computer screen, joysticks and keypad in the remote-control unit with a Gameboy-style controller and virtual-reality goggles.

Remove the reality of war from the mind and make the experience a little more "virtual". This will make slaughtering another 100,000 Iraqi civilians less painful for the soldiers controlling these robots, if indeed they are capable of feeling pain for another human being. Perhaps the reasons for the obsession with war and violence in videogames will become a little clearer after reading this report.

Final Reality Ad Infinitum

Videogames. What's the deal?

I've been playing computer and video games since the Sinclair ZX81 was launched back in 1981. I was nine when I first began playing games and programming computers, and more than 22 years later I'm still programming, and on rare occasion, playing the odd game. Things have changed though.

Games made during the early days of the industry were innovative, they had to be. Having only 16k or 48k of memory to store an entire game, as was the case with the Sinclair ZX Spectrum, seems almost incomprehensible today, let alone the 1k of RAM the ZX81 shipped with. Since then, so-called progress has given more power to the machine but smothered the creative potential. Gone are the days when a creative teenager coded a gaming hit from his bedroom after school. Nowadays, multi-million-dollar budgets and large teams of coders, sometimes numbering in the hundreds, spend their days and nights (complete with beds under desks) working to produce some technically excellent games. But where is the creativity? Sure, the Art Direction is full of creation, but where are the inspired gaming experiences that knock you for six. They're rare, and not through lack of technology or resources to realise them. The obvious answer would probably go something like this:

People are easily captivated by impressive graphics and audio and certain types of games sell well, so it's logical to create graphically impressive games of a particular genre that follow a tried and tested formula with just enough "innovation" and enhancement with each new iteration of the series to keep people interested... to make as much money as possible. The video gaming industry is big business now. Bigger than the music industry. It has been for a while.
But is this the only reason the market is now flooded with violent shooters and gritty fighting experiences?

First person shooters sell in massive quantities, the more blood and gore, it seems, the better. Fighting games are still huge sellers, and of course there are the ubiquitous driving games. Unfortunately, these have quickly become the only choices available to the general gaming public. There seems to be little wonder or fascination generated by most titles on the shelves. I've never seen the appeal of the FPS (first person shooter) or fighting games. They are essentially, "mechanical" games, requiring only a minimal amount of intellectual input that typically focuses on the gamer's ability to be as scheming and devious as possible. They have no content capable of evoking a real emotional reaction, other than perhaps shock in those people that quite naturally, find the graphic depiction of violence in today's visually realistic games disturbing. These games are, quite literally, "psychopathic" games.
If they were human, they'd be "button pushing", reactionary beings.

Although I've tried hard to over the years, I simply can't "get into" these types of games and nowadays the violence has reached such a level that, as in the case of the Grand Theft Auto games, the player is rewarded for their immorality, such as gaining Health Points for "using" a prostitute and then being given the opportunity to kill her and steal your money back. Is this still gaming?
Many people do "get into" this, and derive great pleasure from doing so. But it's okay, it's only a game, right?


Final Fantasy VII

Some of the great videogames of history, games that had an enormous impact on many millions of people, including myself, are the Final Fantasy RPGs and The Legend of Zelda adventure series. Interestingly, they contain very little blood and gore, and in the case of the Zelda series, about the most damage you can do to an unfortunate foe is cause him to disappear in puff of smoke with a swipe of your trusty sword.

One of the biggest videogames of all time, The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, created by Shigeru Miyamoto, was released in 1998 on the Nintendo 64 console and sold 2.5 million copies worldwide in the first month of release, earning it's publisher, Nintendo, $150 million in revenue. It became the fastest selling game of all time. In the last six weeks of 1998, it grossed more revenue than Hollywood's best movie efforts could manage during the same period.
A year earlier, Square Soft released Final Fantasy VII on the Sony Playstation which also sold in huge numbers and to this day it remains by far the most memorable title of the Final Fantasy series, which has now reached its 11th incarnation.

So, one might ask, what was it about The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time that appealed to videogamers worldwide, who still rate it the best game of all time?

The story. Although certainly, the groundbreaking virtual world in which it was told played a large part in the appeal.

Now, I don't mind admitting that whilst I sat in front of my TV playing Final Fantasy VII alone, late into the night, my girlfriend asleep in another room, I cried. It was whilst I watched Aeris being released into the water by Cloud, following her death at the hands of Sephiroth. I was 24 at the time, and as I found out when I went to work the following week, the work colleague whom I sat next to had also purchased the game and been similarly effected watching the same scene.
Here, again, it was the story that has a seemingly indefinable "something" that touches the soul, as many of the reviews of the title clearly recognised at the time:

All in all it sounds like the perfect ingredients for an awful Hollywood blockbuster. However it runs amazingly and it's the story that keeps you going rather than the game play.

Yet for all its top-notch graphics and sound, truly the best aspect of Final Fantasy VII is the plot that these peerless aesthetics help weave...

And what was the story that kept so many people playing for the 50+ hours it took to complete the game?

A giant energy manufacturing company known as Shinra Inc. is harvesting the sheer life energy of the Planet as a simple fossil fuel. Processed and made into products known as Mako and Materia, these materials can work miracles, granting the wisdom of the Ancients to the user. However, this substance, like all other fuels, is finite in supply, and the Planet's lifeforce is being malevolently drained by the constant exploitation of Mako by Shinra. Though aware of the harmful effects, they function without remorse.

However, the real battle lies not with a corporation, but a force much more competent from the distant past. A long-thought dead warrior bent on becoming more and more powerful, coupled with the Planet's drained energy, threatens the very existence of everything sacred.

Now a small rebel group emanating from the slums must quell the various dangers toward the innocent, and one mercenary for hire must look amidst the lies and deception and find the man he is within.

Must look amidst the lies and deception and find the man he is within.
Interesting enough, but is there more to this story than meets the eye?

Let's take a look at the story behind the sequel to Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, another big hitter, Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask:

Thrown into a parallel world by the mischievous actions of a possessed Skull Kid, Link found a land that was in grave danger. The dark power of a relic called Majora's Mask had wreaked havoc on the citizens of Termina, but their most urgent problem was a suicidal moon crashing toward the world. Link had only 72 hours to find a way to stop its descent, so he traveled through time and worked ceaselessly until he reached his goal.

I played this game to the very end and watched the final scene in which the moon attempted to assimilate Termina on the eve of the New Year.
What is it about these familiar archetypal themes that touch so many people and leave an impression above and beyond all the technical wizardry?
The story of a Hero's quest to overcome seemingly insurmountable odds to banish Dark Forces from the world and return to a place of peace from whence he came, isn't a new one. Neither is the idea of an "evil", controlling moon, or a group that "feeds" on its population...

More on this later.