reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The speaker claims that the flu vaccine's purpose has shifted from preventing the flu to only lessening symptoms. A Cleveland Clinic study allegedly found the flu vaccine had a negative efficacy of 26.9% last winter. According to the speaker, this means that individuals who received the flu vaccine were 26.9% more likely to contract influenza. The speaker notes the study doesn't detail the pharmaceutical industry's profits from the vaccine or list its side effects. They state the side effects would be less than an mRNA vaccine, as it is a dead virus vaccine. The speaker reiterates that taking the flu shot allegedly makes one almost 27% more likely to get sick than not taking it.

Flu vaccines are administered annually starting at six months old, with nine branded options available in the U.S. A CDC document lists all vaccine ingredients, revealing that three flu vaccines contain hydrocortisone, a corticosteroid known to suppress the immune system. This raises questions about the effectiveness of flu vaccines, which are marketed to boost immunity. Additionally, one vaccine contains Madine Darby canine kidney cells, which are highly susceptible to the flu virus. Other concerning ingredients include formaldehyde and polysorbate 80, which can affect the blood-brain barrier. The hepatitis B vaccine also contains MRC-5 cells derived from a fetus, prompting further scrutiny about the ingredients in vaccines and their implications for health.

Division scientists acknowledged the danger of a vaccine, but it was still used for three years while they examined the evidence against it. The vaccines didn't work as intended and contained a cancer-causing agent. However, removing the agent wasn't possible, so there was no alternative. Millions of people were subjected to deadly viruses due to this decision. American troops received a vaccine that prevented colds but caused cancer in lab animals. The pressure to test influenza vaccines caused internal stress, but it was deemed more important to use the vaccines than to remove them from the market. George's simple words are left as a parting thought.

Doctors admit flu vaccine can be ineffective and harmful in larger doses, but still recommend it for elderly and chronically ill. Government criticized for not informing public about ineffective vaccines. Division of biologic standards tests vaccine safety, not effectiveness. Scientists found flu vaccine ineffective in the 1960s but were silenced. Adenovirus vaccine with cancer-causing contaminant given to soldiers despite scientists' warnings. Division director defends vaccine use, saying it took 3 years to assess risks. Troops injected with cancer-causing vaccine for 3 years. Some scientists prevented from publishing ineffective vaccine findings. Control officer raised concerns about flu vaccine potency in 1960.

Vaccines are claimed to be safe, easy to take, and protective. However, Judy Roberts took a shot in November 1976 and two weeks later, she says she experienced numbness in her leg. She was diagnosed with Guillain Barre Syndrome (GBS). Roberts was mostly confined to a wheelchair for over a year and will have leg braces for the rest of her life, along with weakness in her hands. Roberts says she was told to take the shot by someone with the government, who allegedly knew facts they didn't release because they believed people wouldn't take the shot if they knew. Roberts says she will never take another shot that the government tells her to take.

Over 20 years, flu shot rates among seniors rose from 15% to 65%, yet flu deaths continued to climb. An NIH study adjusting for various factors confirmed that flu shots haven't reduced deaths in the elderly. We were astonished by these findings, which hold true in other countries like Australia, France, Canada, and the UK. Despite billions spent, current research suggests flu shots in seniors haven't had the desired impact. The CDC is exploring new strategies but maintains that seniors should still get vaccinated, as it may lessen flu severity or prevent other complications. The CDC may shift towards vaccinating more children and others around seniors to protect them indirectly.

The Department of Defense used shady contracting practices and laws to shield pharmaceutical companies from conducting proper clinical trials. They manipulated public perception with the help of mainstream media. The clinical trials were just a theatrical performance and not required by law. Human subjects were deceived, including a 13-year-old girl who experienced adverse events. The Vaccine Safety Council had an ad featuring her, but it was pulled from airing during the Super Bowl. Most clinical trial sites, investigators, and FDA employees were also deceived, as only a few top officials were aware of the scam.

The CDC recommended increasing flu shot coverage for babies and pregnant women, despite evidence suggesting it could be harmful to fetuses. The flu shots contained thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative. The CDC's decision was criticized because mercury exposure during pregnancy can have catastrophic effects. Some doctors and patients questioned the safety of the flu shot, especially for pregnant women. Studies showed that thimerosal increased the abortion rate in animals, and it was found to be more toxic to males than females. A woman shared her personal experience of suffering a miscarriage and having her daughter diagnosed with severe autism after receiving a flu shot while pregnant. The government agencies involved defended their recommendations, but some people doubted their credibility.

CBS did a report 20 years ago that may shock you. The percentage of seniors getting flu shots sharply increased from 15% to 65%. You'd think flu deaths among the elderly would decrease, but they continued to climb. The NIH did a study, but then suppressed it. CBS got their hands on it, and the study revealed flu shots have not reduced deaths among the elderly. The lead author was not available for comment but a co-author, Dr. Reichert, said they were astonished by the results. They also found the same poor results in other countries like Australia, France, Canada, and the UK. The CDC is now looking at new strategies, but still recommends flu shots. They may shift toward vaccinating more children to protect the elderly.

In 1951, with FDR’s polio story in the background, Jonas Salk develops a polio vaccine and distributes it to four pharmaceutical companies, notably Cutter Pharmaceuticals. Cutter is highlighted as central to the tale, though the lesson is not taught to doctors. The vaccine’s growth is difficult, so Salk proposes using a primate culture near humans, specifically African green monkey kidney cells, to produce the vaccine. The first test subject for Salk’s vaccine is Dr. Ochsner of the Ochsner Medical Foundation in New Orleans, a renowned surgeon and former head of Tulane’s medical school. Ochsner, who had a storied career and a controversial reputation in New Orleans medical circles, brings the vaccine into the surgical amphitheater in 1951, where he injects his grandson and granddaughter. The grandson dies within seven days of polio; the granddaughter develops polio in her leg but does not die. The narrator notes that younger doctors in New Orleans are not taught this story, as Ochsner had died earlier but his son lived, and the narrator later trained at Ochsner Medical Foundation. The narrator recounts being in New Orleans during JFK’s era, with Oliver Stone filming in the basement of Charity Hospital, and the narrator meeting Virginia Garrison (daughter of Jim Garrison, the DA who prosecuted Clay Shaw in the JFK case). Virginia warns the narrator about Alton Ochsner, suggesting he was a nefarious figure, contrasting public perception with the stories she knew from her father’s dealings. Ochsner allegedly advocates slowing the vaccine development and recommends transferring the science to a doctor at the NIH, Bernice Eddy. Eddy investigates from 1951 to 1953/1954 and discovers that all of Salk’s original polio vaccines were tainted with SV40 (Simian Virus 40), no one knowing this because DNA had not yet been discovered. Eddy tells the NIH and FDA about the contamination, but the industrial–military complex reportedly pushes forward, distributing the vaccine to about 300 million people and contributing to a cancer epidemic. Eddy reportedly faced cancellation for revealing these findings, including a 1955 New York Academy of Sciences talk where she disclosed SV40 contamination. As a result, Eddy’s lab is defunded and she is marginalized, and historians note there is little trace of the Cutter incident on FDA/NIH sites from 1951–1957. The narrator later digs through medical school archives and talks with Ochsner’s son, a cardiothoracic surgeon, to learn more. In a later exchange with JO (Ochsner’s son), the narrator learns more about the family’s involvement, ultimately culminating in a question about why a nuclear device exists in the basement of a community hospital.

"Over twenty years, the percentage of seniors getting flu shots increased sharply from fifteen percent to sixty five percent." "But no matter how they crunched the numbers, they got the same disappointing result. Flu shots have not reduced deaths among the elderly." "We realized that we had incendiary materials." "Doctor Reichert says they thought their study would prove vaccinations had helped." "Were you surprised?" "Astonished." "That study soon to be published finds the same poor results in Australia, France, Canada, and The UK." "Decades of promoting flu shots in seniors and the billions spent haven't had the desired result." "The CDC says they should still get their flu shots, that it could make flu less severe or prevent other problems not reflected in the totals." "But watch for the CDC to shift toward protecting the elderly by vaccinating more children and others around them who could pass the flu."

A Cleveland Clinic study found the influenza vaccine had a negative efficacy of 26.9% last winter. This means individuals who received the flu vaccine were 26.9% more likely to contract influenza. The report does not specify the pharmaceutical industry's profits from selling this vaccine.

For over 20 years, flu shot rates in seniors sharply increased, but flu deaths among the elderly continue to climb. NIH researchers conducted a study adjusting for factors masking the shots' benefits, but found flu shots haven't reduced deaths among the elderly. We sought out Dr. Reichert, who confirmed the study's surprising results, which were also found in Australia, France, Canada, and the UK. Despite billions spent, promoting flu shots in seniors hasn't had the desired result. The CDC is considering new strategies but still recommends seniors get vaccinated to lessen flu severity and prevent other issues. The CDC will likely shift towards protecting the elderly by vaccinating more children and those around them.

Dr. David Sensor, former head of the CDC, developed and promoted the swine flu program. However, there were no confirmed cases of swine flu reported worldwide at the time. The CDC created a consent form for the public, but it failed to mention that a different vaccine, X53A, was given to most of the 46 million people who received the shot. The consent form also did not warn about potential serious complications. People who experienced adverse reactions, such as heart attacks or Guillain-Barre syndrome, felt they should have been informed. Dr. Michael Hatwick, who oversaw surveillance for the program, claims he did inform his superiors about the possibility of neurological disorders, despite their denial. The CDC also used the names of prominent individuals who took the shot in their campaign without obtaining permission.

Big problem with trusting the science is not the science part, it's who's behind the science part, primarily in the area of vaccines for children. Normally, when you study a drug, you compare it with a placebo, so that way you can truly test the side effects on something, but that is not how they test children's vaccines. This so called placebo control is not really a true placebo control because it's not inert. It's an active vaccine with something called an adjuvant. The big one that they've been using for a long time is aluminum. My question is, how can you really truly test the safety and effectiveness of something if you're looking at the relative safety of an active vaccine to another active vaccine with adjuvants. That just muddies the water to this whole safe and effective claim that you keep hearing over and over and over.

Whistleblowers highlighted in vaccine history include Sir Graham Wilson, The Hazards of Immunization (1967), who argues many vaccine accidents were not reported and that important records were buried; he credits RA O'Brien and others for uncovering hidden data. Joseph Anthony Morris of the Division of Biological Standards in Bethesda found influenza vaccine effectiveness ranging from zero to forty percent in the Caroline Islands, faced harassment, and prompted a 1972 Senate hearing that investigated vaccine irregularities and 32 vaccines released by DBS; Morris was transferred after DBS was remodeled into the FDA. Bernice Eddy of the NIH exposed problems with Salk polio vaccines and early adenovirus vaccines, linking SV40 to tumors in hamsters and to kidney disease, with higher SV40 positivity in FSGS patients. Maiden-Darby kidney cells are used to make flu vaccines and are described as tumorigenic by FDA documents. Merck scientists are suing under the False Claims Act over MMR vaccine potency since 2000. Outliers face suppression.

The division of biologic standards tests vaccines for safety and potency, but not for effectiveness. In the 1960s, four scientists found the influenza vaccine to be ineffective and refused to give it to their families. Two were transferred and one left the division. Their unfavorable findings were not allowed to be published. Another case involved the adenovirus vaccine given to American soldiers, which was found to contain a cancer-causing contaminant and was taken off the market three years later.

The aluminum safety study that allowed aluminum into US vaccines was based on a study of four New Zealand white rabbits, but the results from one rabbit were lost, leaving only three. The rabbits were killed after 28 days with no cognition tests. Upon sacrificing the rabbits, the aluminum adjuvants were still present in their bodies. 94% of one type of aluminum adjuvant and approximately 70% of another remained. The aluminum was found in the kidneys, liver, heart, lymph nodes, bone marrow, and brain. Despite the study's flaws and horrifying results, the FDA and CDC declared aluminum adjuvants in vaccines safe and effective. The speaker asserts that anyone who reads the study would not want to inject their children with aluminum adjuvanted vaccines.

Vaccines are neither safe, effective, necessary, nor harmless, and this has been a two-hundred-year indoctrination. No vaccine has ever been proven safe because true placebos aren't used, and subjects aren't followed long enough. Safety is determined by whether the vaccine causes immediate death. Long-term effects like asthma, allergies, eczema, ADD, ADHD, neurological problems, and autoimmune diseases are not monitored. The FDA arbitrarily decided in the early 1990s that side effects appearing more than 72 hours after vaccination are unrelated.

A prototype vaccine is being deployed to the public without actually preventing transmission, which is keeping the disease more dangerous than necessary. This is a concerning public health response. The problem is that even if we acknowledge this issue, we don't know how to change it. People tend to believe that public health authorities are doing the right thing because the alternative seems hopeless. It's difficult to discredit them without sounding like they are deliberately harming public health. People find it hard to accept that medical officials in charge of our lives may have bad motivations.

Doctors at the Federal Communicable Disease Center admit the flu vaccine can be ineffective or harmful in large doses. Despite this, it is still recommended for older people and the chronically ill. A senate subcommittee criticized the government for not informing the public about ineffective vaccines. The division of biologic standards tests vaccines for safety but not effectiveness. Some scientists found the flu vaccine ineffective but were silenced. The adenovirus vaccine was taken off the market after causing cancer in animals, despite scientists warning about it. American troops were given a cancer-causing vaccine for 3 years. Some division scientists were prevented from publishing results showing vaccines were ineffective. A control officer in 1960 raised concerns about the flu vaccine's potency.

Fluzone package insert: Indicated for six months of age and older. Adverse reactions for kids, normal crying, malaise, drowsiness, appetite loss, vomiting, fever, and headache. Section 5.1 under warnings and precautions. evidence for a causal relationship, not correlation, but causation of Guillain Barre syndrome. Guillain Barre is described as a type of partial paralysis that looks a lot like polio with influenza vaccine. The decision to give Fluzone quadrivalent should be based on careful consideration of potential benefits and risk. Fluzone has not been evaluated for carcinogenic or mutagenic potential or for impairment of fertility. There are no placebo controlled randomized trials for this product. They base efficacy simply on the ability of the product to elicit antibody response that's measured in the blood. Translation. We don't know if this product causes cancer or can interfere with reproductive health, but let's give it to a six month old. Informed consent.

The speaker, recently retired from a local hospital, claims widespread disbelief in flu shots among colleagues due to data issues, stating "the efficacy and I won't give you data. You created the data. Ten percent one year, eighteen percent the next, forty percent at best." They describe the flu vaccine given to children aged two to eight for nearly four years as ineffective, with a claimed three percent efficacy at times. The speaker contrasts this with their hospital experience, where doctors, nurses, medical assistants, patient care, and lab staff did not believe in the flu shot, until mandates and recommendations arrived. They express relief at retirement, saying their soul was sick about what they witnessed, and that conflicts of interest prevented them from speaking out while employed. They recount working on high-volume ER days with about 300 flu cases daily and claim they never contracted the flu, attributing this to personal practices: washing hands, taking vitamin D, and using a berry syrup. The speaker criticizes the shift from physicians and nurses to pharmacists administering the vaccine, accuses the system of bribing people with Target gift cards and marketing the vaccine as free, and denounces scare tactics. They observe an increase in vaccination across generations, noting "some of you are my age," with their generation having seven shots, their daughter ten, her son around sixty, and their new grandson expected to receive seventy-two vaccines, expressing shock at this escalation. The speaker references Robert F. Kennedy Jr., saying he fights for them and goes to court for kids who suffered, noting that Kennedy's family started Special Olympics. They claim that in Kennedy’s view, autism linked to vaccines is evident since there were no autistic kids in the past four decades, and allege that vaccines have caused autism. They describe watching a perfectly healthy two-year-old become a "severe autistic child" after vaccination, expressing certainty that autism exists because of vaccines. They forecast their 10-year-old grandson becoming an adult who, at age 40, would be walking in the mall with a diaper and a helmet. The speaker ends by thanking studies they claim are not done and reiterates their stance against vaccines, including autism implications, as presented in the narrative.

Speaker 0 discusses this year's flu shot and mentions that flu season is longer than usual. He references headlines about flu vaccine links to higher infections, citing a Cleveland Clinic study involving their employees and the influenza vaccine during this respiratory viral season. In the study, 53,402 employees were observed; 43,857 (82.1%) had received the influenza vaccine by study end. Influenza occurred in 1,079 individuals (2.02%). The cumulative incidence of influenza was similar for vaccinated and unvaccinated groups early on, but over time the cumulative incidence increased more rapidly among the vaccinated. The study includes an adjusted analysis controlling for age, sex, clinical nursing job, employment location, and reports that the risk of influenza was significantly higher for the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated, yielding a calculated vaccine effectiveness of -26.9%. In other words, the data suggested a 26.9% greater chance of contracting the flu or other respiratory virus for the vaccinated group. The conclusion presented is that influenza vaccination of working-age adults was associated with a higher risk of influenza during the 2024-2025 season, suggesting the vaccine did not have the intended protective effect. Speaker 1 adds commentary, noting that the Cleveland Clinic study admits they effectively coerced over 80% of their staff to get the flu shot, implying these individuals are not biased against the vaccine and would be expected to defend it. They argue this makes the bias the opposite of what some might assume and suggest that the study should prompt reconsideration of vaccination. Speaker 1 then pivots to an appeal: they encourage viewers to sign up for their email list at thehighwire.com or ICANN, promising to deliver the study and related evidence in their inbox. They urge viewers to take the Cleveland Clinic document to their doctor and ask, “Should I get this year's flu shot?” If the doctor says yes, Speaker 1 counsels firing the doctor and presenting the document as a reason, claiming doctors may be unaware of the study. They emphasize firing doctors who do not know the study and assert that this week they wish to see doctors fired across the country if they cannot defend the use of the vaccine in light of the study. Speaker 1 concludes with a personal admonition to avoid doctors who, in their view, are not making informed decisions about health and the future of children. Speaker 0 revisits the broader context, noting that a flu vaccine with low effectiveness is not surprising since strains are guessed before the season and production is ramped up accordingly. He references Canadian headlines about low or no protection this year, and remarks that negative efficacy, such as -26.9%, is particularly noteworthy.

Doctors at the Federal Communicable Disease Center acknowledge that the flu vaccine and its recommended dosage are ineffective; in a larger dose, it can be harmful. Nevertheless, the flu vaccine is still recommended for older people and the chronically ill. A senate subcommittee headed by Abraham Rebikoff charged that the federal government wasn’t doing a good enough job of informing the public about ineffective vaccines. Scientists at the Division of Biologic Standards test vaccines for potency and safety before licensing them for public use. However, the division does not determine the effectiveness of the vaccine. That is left to the manufacturers. A case in point is the influenza vaccine. Four scientists in charge of work on the flu vaccine during the 1960s found it to be ineffective, and they refused to give it to their own families. Two were transferred to other work, a third left the division, and over the entire ten-year period, not one word of their unfavorable findings was allowed to be published. But a more serious case involving the relationship between the leaders of the division and their scientists involves the adenovirus vaccine, a vaccine given to thousands of American soldiers to prevent certain cold-like symptoms. When it was shown that the vaccine contained a contaminant which caused cancer in laboratory animals, it was taken off the market. But that was three years after the division’s own scientists had pointed out the danger. Doctor Murray justifies the use of the vaccine by saying it took three years to examine the evidence against it. "It is more important to use the vaccines than to take them off the market and remove the agent." "It is more important to use the vaccines" "than to take them off the market" "and to remove the agent." Thus, for three years, American troops were injected with a cold-preventing vaccine, which was causing cancer in laboratory animals. And some of the division’s scientists who charged they were prevented from publishing results of experiments which show some of the vaccines to be ineffective. "It's the control officer in 1960 who has grave doubts about the potency of influenza vaccine. These doubts were made known to the director of the division and through the proper channels."