How many people died from flu in Auckland in 2012?According to Shivers data:.
A child could understand this stunning graphic, yet Chloe didn’t bother to use it. Even a mug can see why she avoided this like the plague. One death from Flu in Auckland doesn't sell papers - no drama, no story.
I repeat: Out of 9 deaths of Serious Acute Respiratory (SARI) Illnesses in AUCKLAND in 2012 .. only ONE, .....tested positive for the flu.
What SHIVERS doesn’t show us, is what the other deaths WERE from, and in which age groups.
Now in the light of Chloe’s inflammatory article about, “400 children aged 4 and under admitted to hospital with the flu”, let’s look at what ELSE SHIVERS found when they looked hospitals from Auckland AND Counties Manukau District healthboards :
Above, are 80 confirmed cases in Auckland AND Counties Manukau.... by SHIVERS in the under fours in the 2012 flu season. So let’s analyse these cases in real life:
There are 250 Full time equivalent (FTE) GPs in Counties Manukau District Health Board and about 400 in Auckland District Health Board...
So that's 650 Full time GPs... and just say 80 cases of flu related SARI were admitted to two hospitals - Auckland and Middlemore ... that means an average GP in these two areas, would see one admission from their practice every eight years...! Five cases in their career!
And this is what they want to vaccinate against?
Let’s look at what SHIVERS found in terms of people in Auckland AND Counties Manukau, who doctors thought had the flu and were tested for it.
The red tips of the mountain are flu.
The blue is sickness that is assumed to be the flu but when tested, it isn’t.
In other words, doctors really don't have a clue what is flu and what is not. The last Season officially stops at December. Don’t forget that when the medical profession talks about SARI, that’s what they used to label “Influenza-like illnesses”, and when they talk about "the flu" to the public, all these other viruses which aren't the flu, which cause SARI are bundled under “the flu”.
If they didn’t inflate the statistics that way, then flu would look like a very rare disease, and most people would have to face that FACT that what they are told is the flu, isn’t the flu at all.
People would have to face the fact that they are not told the truth. Knowing the truth, would not be good for the influenza vaccine publicity would it?!!
Below, in the right hand column is the break down of swabs tested in Auckland plus the deaths from Shiver’s report dated 27th January 2013. Since 30 April 2012, there have been 13 deaths and TWO were positive for the flu. Which means 11 of those deaths, had nothing to do with the flu.
Although according to their text in the same report, they say 14 SARI cases have died...:
Of those 2,545 cases only 2,136 were from the Auckland hospitals. The rest were presumably from sentinel practices. So in a nutshell, SHIVERS shows that ONLY TWO out of the 13/14 flu deaths in Auckland AND Christchurch last year, were the flu . The rest were NOT the flu. And as we know from the previous blog, Cochrane shows the vaccine in healthy adults - in real life, has at best, a 16% impact.
Last year’s USA H3N2 was a perfect match with the circulating virus, but didn’t work.
According to the Herald on Sunday, the SHIVERS data for vaccine efficacy apparently isn’t ready yet. Hmmm….
What are the implications of the SHIVERS information so far, with regard to what we know as “the flu”?
My guess is that one of the outcomes of SHIVERS will be to scientifically prove that much of what they called “influenza-like illnesses” was, and is not, influenza-like illnesses at all, but are actually other infections for which there are no vaccines.
SHIVERS has already tightening up on ILI as a term – sorry SARI – so as a result, in the future, there should be far fewer infections accepted as “influenza-like infections”.
From 1996, the ESR (Environmental Science and Research) had already tightened up on what qualified as a death, so the death numbers dropped.
From 2012, the medical profession will be forced to confront the fact that they have hyped up winter flu cases and deaths, by falsely labelling other illnesses – as seen above – as the flu …. when they are not. They will be forced to remove provably non-flu infections. That is, if they are to tell the truth.
However, what I suspect will REALLY happen, is that the SHIVERS team, will continue to compare the reduction in numbers (caused by their now accurate testing), with the hit and guess approach of 1997. And just as the reduction in deaths was creditted to the vaccine in 2007, the seeming reduction in flu cases will also be attributed to the vaccine, when nothing could be further from the truth.
All the data accumulated by SHIVERS in their monthly reports, simply proves what most of us already knew – that most of what they had said was the flu in the past, isn’t the flu at all, and never has been.
But that is not their take home message in Sunday’s article, or on the SHIVERS infographic. Their take home message is what you would expect for a study funded by CDC vaccine pushers, which eventually will demand 100% national annual coverage of all ages:
Yet, SHIVERS data shows that the reality is, that the majority of hospitalised cases have nothing to do with the flu. So where do they get these "high numbers" from? Their own propanda. Their published facts don't line up with their infographics.
So you have to ask yourselves a question.
Why is it, that just before the influenza propaganda season starts, the Herald on Sunday essentially gave the flu vaccine till-ringers, free advertising using nonsensical data? And… why was all that drivel published, just before a meeting which was scheduled to be held on 6th March 2013 which was due to consider the inclusion of three vaccines to be added to the children’s vaccine schedule, including the flu vaccine for under fours?
But there is more. Part Three.