Sunday, October 13, 2019




The President announced a new non-military measure to hold turkey accountable in northern Syria as the U.S. follows through on the administration's decision to withdraw from the region. One America's Emerald Robinson has the details on the new executive order from the White House.


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Dave Gaubatz is a former U.S. Federal Agent with Top Secret/SCI clearance, expert in counter-intelligence and counter-terrorism on national security issues, highly trained in Islamic ideology and tactics, Arab linguist, author of Muslim Mafia, has investigated over 300 mosques/Islamic Centers in the USA and 150 outside USA, and after leaving his position in the government continued this work as a Civilian Agent. Using firsthand investigation, he then evaluates Risk/Threat Levels based on multiple factors including Materials on Premises and What They Advocate, Ties to Muslim Terrorists, and Sharia Adherence. Mr. Gaubatz estimates that 80% of mosques in America recruit and train in jihad (violent & civilization). Finally, he makes Recommendations to protect America, our citizens, our children. He asks about each mosque: Would ISIS be proud?
NOTE: Several Reports/Affidavits will be published. When you read one from earlier dates, note that Dave Gaubatz issued Risk/Danger warnings ahead, but in some cases, violence occurred later from a member of one of those reported mosques (ex: Trolley Square, Salt Lake City, Utah shooting; child abuse Nashville, TN). When you read a report that came after an attack (Ex: Report 2017, Boston Marathon Bombing by the Tsarnaev brothers in 2013), note that violence had already occurred, Mr. Gaubatz reported continued Risk/Danger years later from the same mosques terrorists had attended.  Reading professionally investigated and evaluated Reports/Affidavits from various years is important so the American public is aware of new or continuing Risk/Danger and can demand protection from all levels of government officials and law enforcement that they are sworn to provide.
I, Paul David Gaubatz, declare under penalty of perjury that the following statements are true and correct and based on my own personal knowledge:
This sworn affidavit pertains to Islamic Centers operating within Nashville, Tennessee, and the local authorities who are in my professional opinion jeopardizing the lives of innocent Muslim children at Al Farooq Nashville, the citizens of Nashville, and our country.
1. Background: I was a U.S. Federal Agent with a top Secret/SCI clearance for approximately 15.5 years. This was during the time period 1988 – 2003.
2. In addition to my top secret/SCI clearance, I was also briefed into many programs known to the public as Black Projects. These projects pertained essentially to Counter-intelligence and counter-terrorism issues.
3. On 11 Sept. 2001. I was assigned as an (1811) civilian Federal Agent in Albuquerque, NM. I had primarily been assigned the duties of Technology Protection in regards to our countries highest classification of technologies used to defend our country.
4. After the attack on our country (11 Sept. 2011) I was assigned counter-terrorism duties on a full time basis and in late 2001 assigned to the Foreign Service Institute (U.S. State Department/Arlington, VA). My duties were to train full time in Arabic and counter-terrorism issues. The Arabic language was almost one complete year. During this time period I was sent to Jordan for a three week ‘immersion’ program to better understand the Arabic language the culture, and Islam.
5. In Jan 2003, before Operation Iraqi Freedom, I was requested to deploy as a U.S. civilian Federal Agent to ArAr Air Base. Saudi Arabia (within a few miles of Iraqi border). My full time duties were to collect intelligence involving potential attacks against U.S. Armed Forces personnel and to conduct counter-espionage against Saudi Arabian government/military, Iraqi and other people in the ArAr area, I led several counter-terrorism/counter-espionage expeditions.
6. From Apr – Jul 2003, I was assigned inside (Nasiriyah, Baghdad, Basrah, and other cities) Iraq and my primary duties were counter-terrorism and counter-intelligence.
7. While in Iraq I interviewed numerous Iraqis in regards to terrorism against the US, the Islamic ideology pertaining to violent Jihadists activity and the methodology of Islamic terrorists.
8. While in Iraq I had the opportunity to discuss the training and tactics used by Islamic Terrorist leaders and their supporters.
9. I have received training on the Islamic terrorist ideology/tactics from people who were former members of Islamic terrorist groups and from Muslims who were investigating these groups themselves. These people included military and police officers who served under Saddam Hussein (former Iraq President).
10. Since returning from Iraq in 2003. I have trained over 2500 U.S. law enforcement officers in counter-terrorism involving Islamic terrorist groups and their supporters.
11. I have discussed Islam and Sharia law with over 100 Imams and Islamic leaders in the U.S.
12. I have listened to over one thousand plus hours of lectures by Islamic scholars/leaders that have been trained in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt and Iran.
13. I have read over 5000 different publications, books and brochures by Islamic scholars.
14. In 2005. I hired a senior Council on American-Islamic Relations leader to provide me training on the operation of this Islamic organization.
15. I have personally conducted first-hand research at over one hundred plus Islamic Centers in the U.S. The research involved speaking with the leaders, worshippers and reviewing the materials they use to educate their worshippers (men, women and children).
16. I have monitored several overseas based Islamic terrorist group internet sites.
17. I have received numerous U.S. Government awards pertaining to my work in protecting our country, our technology. and U.S. Armed Forces personnel.
18. I have worked jointly in counter-terrorism research and investigations with Muslims and non-Muslims.
19. My research is not biased. I credit the saving of my life and the saving of many U.S. military personnel lives with several Muslims who risked their lives to protect ours. These Muslims and I both realize there are Islamic groups, their supporters, and Islamic scholars based in the U.S. that do advocate violence against innocent men, women, children, and pose a ‘grave’ security risk to our country.
20. In March and April 2009, (last day of research was on 18 Apr 2009) I conducted first-hand research at the Al Farooq Islamic Center, 1421 4th Ave. South. Nashville. TN. and businesses in the Nashville area operated/supported by the leadership of Al Farooq and its worshippers. The research involved speaking with leaders. worshippers and reviewing the materials this Center and businesses use to educate their worshippers.
21. Based on my qualifications listed in numbers 1 through 19, it is my professional opinion the leadership of the Al Farooq Islamic Center, 1421 4th Ave South, Nashville, TN.
A: Does advocate violence against innocent Muslims and non-Muslims that do not adhere to and desire an Islamic Ummah (Nation) under Sharia Law in America.
B: Does advocate treason and sedition against the U.S. using violent and nonviolent tactics/methods as do such Islamic terrorist groups as Al Qaeda have and currently utilize.
C: Does pose a serious risk of educating innocent Muslim children into the violent aspects of Islamic terrorist groups and their violent activities directed against America.
D: This Islamic Center uses materials from convicted terrorist and supporters to educate their worshippers.
  1. Is not a religious institution, but more in line with a political/government system.
F: The leadership hit the children during study of the Quran and Sharia law and an audio/video was obtained as evidence.
G: The leadership is openly involved and advocates polygamous marriages, allegedly with children as young as 7 years old. A child at Al Farooq had mentioned her husband. This is also on audio/video.
H: Additionally, it is my professional opinion this Islamic Center has the support of personnel within the Nashville Metropolitan Police Department and/or Nashville Prosecutors Office.
I: I have been informed a Nashville Metropolitan Police officer fears lawsuits front CAIR and they are involved in ‘Interfaith’ meetings with Nashville Islamic scholars.
J: The Child Protective Officer who allegedly investigated the child abuse at Al Farooq conducted a poor job at best, and does not understand the Islamic ideology or Sharia law.
K: Recommendation to law enforcement: Conduct a thorough investigation of Al Farooq and its leadership (using federal or state authorities) due to the possible criminal violations by Metropolitan Police Personnel, Child Protective Services and the local Nashville Prosecutors office.
L: Remove Al Farooq IRS approved non-profit and tax exempt status as applicable.
M: My understanding is no formal investigation was conducted by law enforcement although more than sufficient probable cause evidence was provided by me to the authorities.
N: Somali owned businesses are involved in money laundering and support violence against innocent men, women and children who oppose an Islamic Ummah (Nation) under Sharia law within America.
22. Overall, I rate this Islamic Center and their related businesses located along Murfreesboro Pike, Nashville, TN as ‘High’ in regards to posing a threat to the security of the United States.
23. Overall, I rate the local authorities as a ‘High’ risk to the security of the innocent Muslim children at Al Farooq, to the citizens of Nashville and our country. This is based on my interaction/assessment of the local Nashville authorities. They are poorly trained in regards to understanding the mindset/ideology and tactics of Islamic terrorist groups and their supporters. The local authorities are intimidated by Islamic lenders/organizations. and are possibly illegally protecting the Islamic scholars from a thorough criminal investigation.
24. As stated above this assessment and professional advice are based on my qualifications as listed in numbers 1-19 above.
Executed this 24 day of April, 2009.
Paul David Gaubatz





Elizabeth Warren Mocks Christians, Sings ‘Jesus Loves the Little Children’ to Justify Homosexual ‘Marriage’

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
During a recent CNN so-called LGBTQ town hall meeting on Thursday night, 2020 presidential hopeful Elizabeth Warren mocked Christians who hold to the Biblical definition of marriage as being between one man and one woman, and broke out into a children’s Christian song about Jesus to defend her position in support of homosexuality.
Warren, the senior U.S. Senator from Massachusetts since 2013, and who is a top contender for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination, was asked by Morgan Cox of the Human Rights Campaign what she would tell someone who approaches her on the campaign trail that believes marriage is between one man and one woman because of their faith.
“Well, I’m going to assume it’s a guy who said that and I’m going to say, “Then just marry one woman. I’m cool with that,” Warren responded. “Assuming you can find one,” she added.
The response drew much laughter and applause from the room, which was mostly filled with supporters of homosexuality and so-called transgenderism.
Warren was then asked by moderator Andrew Cuomo if her views were different at one time regarding same-sex “marriage” since she grew up in a conservative Republican home.
“You grew up conservative in a conservative household. You were Republican by party for many years. Was there ever a time that you felt differently about this issue, in particular, about same-sex marriage?” Cuomo asked.
“No, I don’t think so. I actually don’t remember it. I mean, it may have been the case. I don’t — you know, I don’t have notes from when I was a little kid. But I don’t,” Warren responded.
Warren then broke out into song as a part of her further response.
“And that’s part of it. I mean, to me, it’s about what I learned in the church I grew up in. First song I ever remember singing is, ‘They are yellow, black, and white, they are precious in his sight, Jesus loves all the children of the world.’ And to me…”
“Can you sing it again?” Cuomo joked.
“You bet,” Warren said.
The following is a transcript of the full dialogue with Warren surrounding the topic:
QUESTION: Hi, Senator. Thank you for being here. Let’s say you’re on the campaign trail…
WARREN: I have been.
QUESTION: And you’re approached — you have been in, yes.
WARREN: Yeah. Uh-huh.
QUESTION: And a supporter approaches you and says, Senator, I’m old-fashioned and my faith teaches me that marriage is between one man and one woman. What is your response?
WARREN: Well, I’m going to assume it’s a guy who said that and I’m going to say, “Then just marry one woman. I’m cool with that.”
“Assuming you can find one.”
CUOMO: Let me ask you a follow on that.
WARREN: A follow-up? Joy kill. All right.
What’s your follow-up, Chris?
CUOMO: That’s the job. That’s the job.
CUOMO: You grew up conservative in a conservative household. You were Republican by party for many years. Was there ever a time that you felt differently about this issue, in particular, about same-sex marriage?
WARREN: No, I don’t think so. I actually don’t remember it. I mean, it may have been the case. I don’t — you know, I don’t have notes from when I was a little kid. But I don’t.
And that’s part of it. I mean, to me, it’s about what I learned in the church I grew up in. First song I ever remember singing is, “They are yellow, black, and white, they are precious in his sight, Jesus loves all the children of the world.” And to me…
CUOMO: Can you sing it again?
WARREN: You bet.
You want to harmonize with me on this? But to me, that is the heart of it. That was the basis of the faith that I grew up in. And it truly is about the preciousness of each and every life. It is about the worth of every human being.
And that I saw this as a matter of faith and saw there were a lot of different people who do a lot of different things, who look different from each other, who sound different from each other, who form different kind of families. And I know that back in Oklahoma in those days, there weren’t many people who were out. But the way I grew up, it was just gradual.
It was the two ladies who lived together. And it was just a part of what we understood in the area that I grew up. And the hatefulness, frankly, always really shocked me, especially for people of faith, because I think the whole foundation is the worth of every single human being. And I get people may make decisions for themselves that are different than the decisions other people make, but, by golly, those are decisions about you. They are not decisions that tell other people what they can and cannot do.
At the same town hall, Beto O’Rourke, another contender for the Democratic nomination for president, stated that he would make it a “priority” of his administration to revoke the tax exempt status of Christian churches.
CNN’s Equality Town Hall was co-hosted with the Human Rights Campaign in Los Angeles.


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Nine-year-old Ameer Hamideh has been kicked out of the CHC Learning Center in Buffalo, New York because he does not have all the vaccines mandated by the state of New York for children his age. Ameer, who has cerebral palsy and also suffers from a rare seizure disorder called Lennox Gastaut Syndrome (LGS), cannot get vaccinated because the vaccines would aggravate his seizures and possibly kill him.1 2
Ameer’s father, Ali Hamideh, told a local TV station that, “He was vaccinated the first couple years of his life. After the vaccines, started getting seizures. His body couldn’t tolerate it. It would make it a lot worse, chance of hospitalization, even a chance of death.” He added, “He’s obviously disabled, but he’s very smart..being out of school, he’s very hurt.”1
Mr. Hamideh filed for a medical exemption to vaccination for his son written by neurologist Sarah Finnegan, MD, who had determined that Ameer’s health could be compromised further if he was given more vaccines. Dr. Finnegan granted the medical vaccine exemption to Ameer on Aug. 6 2019.1
On Sept. 12, 2019, the New York Department of Health rejected the medical exemption for Ameer. In a letter to the Frontier Central School District, Elizabeth Rausch-Phung, MD, MPH, the director of the Bureau of Immunization, wrote:
I have reviewed the documentation submitted by Sarah Finnegan, MD with regard to the medical exemption for the student in your school with a birth date of 5/28/2010. Lennox Gastaut with refractory seizures is not a valid contraindication to the student receiving MMR, varicella, polio, or Tdap vaccines pursuant to Public Health Law (PHL) 2164 and the accompanying regulations at 10 NYCRR Subpart 66-1. Therefore, I recommend against accepting this medical exemption.
The information provided does not support that immunizing this student with MMR, varicella, polio, or Tdap at this time may be detrimental to this student’s health. If any additional documentation should become available, please forward for my review.
For more information on contraindication and precautions to vaccination please see the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices’ General Best Practice Guidelines for Immunization: Contraindications and Precautions online at
When asked about the rejection of Ameer’s medical exemption, Richard Hughes, who is the superintendent of Frontier Central School District, Richard Hughes, said: “The New York State Department of Health is the one that recommends to either deny the request or approve the request. If they recommend it to be denied, we’re saying recommend it to be denied. It would be foolish of us to go against the recommendation of the New York State Department of Health.”1
Mr. Hamideh does not think it is right that his son’s rights should be taken away, “especially being disabled and everything.”2
“It hurts. It really hurts, he said. “Ameer deserves his rights like every normal child.”1 2
Ameer is currently being homeschooled.1

1 Epps T. Blasdell boy stuck in vaccine debateWKBW Buffalo Oct. 7, 2019.2 WKBW TV. Blasdell boy stuck in vaccine debate. YouTube Oct. 7, 2019.

Blasdell Boy Stuck in Vaccine Debate

A student with a severe health condition is not allowed to go to school because of the state’s vaccination rules. Now, the student has cerebral palsy. His father tells 7 Eyewitness News reporter Taylor Epps that the student’s rights are being taken away, even though doctors say that getting vaccinated could really be harmful to his health. It […] that they take this kid’s rights away. Especially being disabled and everything, and you’re taking his rights away. It hurts. It really hurts. He’s talking about his nine-year-old son. Ameer is living with cerebral palsy and a rare seizure disorder called LGS. He was vaccinated the first couple of years of his life. And after the vaccines he started getting seizures from the vaccines. His body couldn’t tolerate it.


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Flu season is creeping up on us again and there are widespread calls to get your annual flu shot, despite the fact that, year after year, this strategy turns out to have an abysmal rate of effectiveness across the board. One group that consistently turns out to draw the short end of the stick when it comes to influenza vaccine failures is the elderly. U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data have repeatedly demonstrated that the flu vaccine does not work for seniors.
Pregnant women are another group that should carefully evaluate the risks and failures of influenza vaccine. The CDC recommends routine flu shots for women during any trimester in every pregnancy, but some scientific evidence suggests it could place their pregnancies at risk.
I’ve written many articles questioning the scientific basis for routine influenza vaccination in general. Here, my focus is the elderly and pregnant women, as there is scientific evidence detailing risks of flu vaccination for both groups.
First, though, I want to remind you of a little-known fact about influenza mortality estimates: Secondary infections such as pneumonia and other respiratory diseases, as well as1 are included in “flu death” statistics, and account for a majority of deaths attributed to influenza every year.

Beware of Sepsis

As discussed in a Health magazine article2 published 2018, the symptoms of sepsis can actually mimic influenza symptoms—with disastrous results. In this particular case, a strep infection progressed to sepsis, which presented as influenza and, unfortunately, led to the amputation of the woman’s arms and legs. She says:3
… if you have a fever that doesn’t go away or your body temperature is abnormally low, you have signs of any type of infection (whether it’s a cold or a UTI) that’s not getting better, you feel confused, or are in a lot of pain, go to your doctor and ask about sepsis.
To learn more about sepsis and its treatment, see “Recognizing the Signs and Symptoms of Sepsis” and “Sepsis Is a Top Cause of Death in Hospitals.” It’s worth finding out about a relatively new sepsis treatment using intravenous vitamin C, hydrocortisone and thiamine, discussed in these articles.
The treatment has been shown to be extremely effective—far more so than conventional treatments—but many hospitals have yet to make it routinely available, which means it can be difficult to convince them to use it. It’s worth a try, though.

Why is the Flu Vaccine So Ineffective?

It’s important to remember that the influenza vaccine contains only three or four type A or B vaccine strain influenza viruses, of which there are hundreds. So, even if those vaccine strain viruses are a perfect match for influenza viruses that are circulating in a given flu season, the vaccine does not prevent the majority of other respiratory infections that make people sick and often mistake for influenza unless lab testing is done.4
Twice a year, the World Health Organization issues recommendations on the composition of the upcoming season’s flu vaccines. For the 2019/2020 season, trivalent vaccines distributed in the U.S. will contain:5 6 7
  • A/Brisbane/02/2018 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus
  • A/Kansas/14/2017 (H3N2)-like virus
  • B/Colorado/06/2017-like (Victoria lineage) virus
Quadrivalent vaccines will contain the three above, plus B/Phuket/3073/2013-like (Yamagata lineage) virus. The selected strains for this year are anticipated to improve coverage. In Australia, where the flu season got an early start in the Southern Hemisphere, health officials told people to get vaccinated because it could be an unusually severe season.8 The predominant influenza viruses circulating in Australia this year have been H3N2 influenza A virus followed by influenza B virus.9
In the U.S., health officials have said that the selection of influenza viruses for inclusion in the vaccine this year occurred later than usual. There are reports that flu vaccine production and shipments have been delayed and there will a shorter window of opportunity to get vaccinated.10
A study11 published in 2018 sheds some much-needed light on unvaccinated individuals at risk for influenza and how as many as half of unvaccinated people infected with influenza do not know they have it. Researchers found that “approximately 1 in 5 unvaccinated children and 1 in 10 unvaccinated adults were estimated to be infected by seasonal influenza annually, with rates of symptomatic influenza roughly half of these estimates.”

Flu Vaccine Effectiveness Has Always Been Low

Historically, regardless of how well-matched the vaccine is to circulating strains, your chances of getting influenza after vaccination are still greater than 50/50 in any given year. According to CDC data updated September 10, 2019,12 the 2018/2019 flu vaccine (all vaccine types) against influenza A or B viruses had an adjusted effectiveness rating of:
  • 29 percent for all ages
  • 49 percent for children aged six months through eight years
  • six percent for children ages nine through 17
  • 25 percent for adults between the ages of 18 and 49
  • 12 percent for those over 50
  • two percent for those over 65
Ironically, despite offering no protection for more than two-thirds of the population, health officials in February touted higher numbers, calling them a great success, as the numbers they had at that time outperformed the 2017/2018 vaccine. Obviously, as the Southern Hemisphere’s season wore on, the numbers wore down, and they’re just as abysmal, if not more so, than other years.13
The 2017/2018 seasonal influenza vaccine’s adjusted overall effectiveness for the U.S. was just 36 percent against influenza A and influenza B virus infection.14 15 To put this into context, gargling with tea has been shown to lower your relative risk of the flu by 30 percent.16
Between 2005 and 2015, the flu vaccine’s adjusted overall effectiveness was less than 50 percent more than half the time—with a low of only 10 percent in the 2004/2005 season.17 18

Vaccinated Individuals Pose a Hidden Threat to Public Health

It’s also important to realize that you can get vaccinated, show few or no symptoms of infection, and still shed and transmit influenza to other people.19 20 This scientific fact flies in the face of statements claiming that vaccination is a “social responsibility” that “protects others around you, including family, friends, co-workers and neighbors.”21
In reality, after vaccination, you may actually become a contagious silent carrier of disease. A person with influenza who fully expresses symptoms of fever, body aches, cough and other signs of respiratory illness would likely stay at home. However, a vaccinated individual, who is silently contagious, would go to work and into stores and other public places and be unaware they are spreading infection.
This is an especially important fact for vaccinated health care workers, who move freely among patients in hospitals and other medical facilities because everyone assumes vaccinated medical personnel are “immune” to influenza if they get a flu shot every year.
A study22 published in the journal PNAS January 18, 2018, showed that people who receive the seasonal flu shot and then contract influenza excrete infectious influenza viruses through their breath.
What’s more, those vaccinated two seasons in a row have a greater viral load of shedding influenza A viruses. According to the authors, “We observed 6.3 times more aerosol shedding among cases with vaccination in the current and previous season compared with having no vaccination in those two seasons.”
They also note that other studies suggest annual flu vaccination leads to reduced protection against influenza, which means each vaccination is likely to make you progressively more prone to getting sick.
A 2014 paper23 also reveals how priming your immune system with influenza vaccine can make you more susceptible to infection from other viral and bacterial pathogens. This phenomenon is an effect inherent in what’s known as “heterologous immunity.”

Year After Year, Flu Vaccine Proves Useless for Seniors

As mentioned, the 2018/2019 flu vaccine had an adjusted effectiveness rating of just 12 percent for those ages 50 and above,24 but the full range was between a negative 12 percent to a positive 31 percent for ages 50 to 64 and a negative 29 to 41 in those over age 65. That means that for some people, vaccination actually made them more susceptible to infection. Unfortunately, the nine- to 17-year-old group also had a negative confidence interval.
For infections caused by the A(H3N12) virus, the statistics were even more worrisome, with a mere overall adjusted effectiveness of nine percent for all ages. For A(H1N1) the numbers were better at 44 percent—but it’s worth noting that the CDC chose to lump all ages together in that report, rather than breaking them down by age (something they had done earlier in the year, and which they had done for all past years). For example:
  • In 2017/2018,25 26 the adjusted influenza vaccine effectiveness for all vaccine types against influenza A viruses for people aged 50 through 64 was 20 percent (range: -five percent to 39 percent); for those over the age of 65 it was 11 percent (range: -eight percent to 38 percent)
  • In 2016/2017,27 the adjusted effectiveness for all vaccine types against influenza A or B viruses for those aged 50 through 64 was 40 percent (range: 24 percent to 53 percent), and those over 65 was 20 percent (range: -11 percent to 43 percent). This despite the fact that the vaccine for the 2016/2017 season was well-matched to the viruses in circulation28
Studies29 30 have also demonstrated that influenza vaccination has no impact on mortality among the elderly. As noted in one such study,31 “Because fewer than 10 percent of all winter deaths were attributable to influenza in any season, we conclude that observational studies substantially overestimate vaccination benefit.”
Research32 published in 2006 analyzed influenza-related mortality among the elderly population over age 65 in Italy, where flu vaccination coverage between 1970 and 2001 had significantly increased. Here too, investigators found no corresponding decline in deaths. According to the authors:
These findings suggest that either the vaccine failed to protect the elderly against mortality (possibly due to immune senescence), and/or the vaccination efforts did not adequately target the frailest elderly. As in the U.S., our study challenges current strategies to best protect the elderly against mortality, warranting the need for better controlled trials with alternative vaccination strategies.
Another 2006 study,33 which followed 72,527 seniors for eight years, showed that, even though seniors vaccinated against influenza had a 44 percent reduced risk of dying during flu season compared to unvaccinated seniors, those who were vaccinated were also 61 percent less like to die before the flu season ever started—a finding attributed to the “healthy user” effect.
According to the authors, “the magnitude of the bias demonstrated by the associations before the influenza season was sufficient to account entirely for the associations observed during influenza season.” In other words, the vaccine played no role whatsoever in reducing the risk of death during flu season.
Research trying to ascertain whether flu vaccination has any impact on hospitalization rates among the elderly has found it difficult to draw any conclusions due to rampant bias. As noted in a 2019 study34 in the journal Vaccine:
… 22 studies were included in the systematic review. Overall, two studies (nine percent) were deemed at moderate risk of bias, thirteen (59 percent) at serious risk of bias and seven (32 percent) at critical risk of bias.
For outpatient visits, we found modest evidence of protection by the influenza vaccine. For all-cause hospitalization outcomes, we found a wide range of results, mostly deemed at serious risk of bias.
The included studies suggested that the vaccine may protect older adults against influenza hospitalizations and cardiovascular events. No article meeting our inclusion criteria explored the use of antibiotics and ILI hospitalizations. The high heterogeneity between studies hindered the aggregation of data into a meta-analysis.

Cell-Based Flu Vaccine No Better Than Egg-Based

The “new and improved” flu shot, Flucelvax—a cell-based35 rather than egg-based vaccine—introduced during the 2017-2018 flu season, has also demonstrated disappointing results. Research by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration found it protected just 26.5 percent of those over the age of 65.36
A study37 published September 2019, “Comparison of Vaccine Effectiveness Against Influenza Hospitalization of Cell-Based and Egg-Based Influenza Vaccines, 2017-2018” also concluded that:
For any influenza, the adjusted relative VE [vaccine effectiveness] of cell-based vaccine versus egg-based vaccines was 43 percent for patients ages < 65  years and six percent for patients ages ≥ 65 years.
For influenza A(H3N2), the adjusted relative VE was 61 percent for patients ages < 65  years and four percent for patients ages ≥ 65 years. Statistically significant protection against influenza hospitalization of cell-based vaccine compared to egg-based vaccines was not observed …

Is Flu Vaccine Safe for Pregnant Women?

Historically, pregnant women have been discouraged from taking drugs and vaccines because there’s very little scientific data evaluating risks for the pregnant woman or the growing fetus. Including pregnant women in clinical trials has been considered unethical because there are unknown risks for both mother and child.
For better or worse, that is changing. In 2018, the FDA issued nonbinding recommendations38 for industry detailing when and how pregnant women can be enrolled in clinical trials for drugs and therapies.
Coincidentally, the increased push for women to get flu shots during any trimester in every pregnancy seems to coincide with an amendment to the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act that was included in the 21st Century Cures Act passed by Congress at the end of 2016.
The amendment gives a liability shield to drug companies producing CDC-recommended vaccines for pregnant women so they can’t be sued if a pregnant woman or her child developing in the womb born alive suffers injury from maternal vaccinations.39
As noted by Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder and president of the National Vaccine Information Center in a public statement given at a hearing September 17, 2018:40
This is a stunning expansion of vaccine product liability protection for the pharmaceutical industry in a 1986 tort reform Act that created a federal compensation program option for children injured by government recommended and mandated vaccines that was never intended to cover adults or be an exclusive remedy.
Despite the lack of safety data when it comes to maternal vaccination,41 the CDC now urges all pregnant women to get vaccinated against the flu. In a 2018 article,42 CNN quotes Dr. Laura E. Riley, professor and chair of the department of obstetrics and gynecology at Weill Cornell Medicine, saying “The flu vaccine is safe and effective for both pregnant women and their fetuses” and can be given during any trimester.
A definitive statement like that deserves strong supporting evidence, but not only is safety data for pregnant women sorely lacking, some of the data published in the medical literature suggests maternal vaccination may actually be deeply problematic.

Flu Vaccination Linked to Eightfold Risk of Miscarriage

Importantly, research43 44 funded by the CDC itself linked flu vaccination during early pregnancy to an eightfold risk of miscarriage. In all, 485 pregnant women aged 18 to 44 who had a miscarriage during the flu seasons of 2010/2011 and 2011/2012 were compared to 485 pregnant women who carried to term.
Women who had received an inactivated 2009 pandemic H1N1-containing flu shot the previous year were more likely to suffer miscarriage (spontaneous abortion) within 28 days of receiving another pH1N1-containing flu shot during pregnancy.
While most of the miscarriages occurred during the first trimester, several also took place in the second trimester.45 46 47 The median fetal term at the time of miscarriage was seven weeks.
Of the 485 women who miscarried, 17 had been vaccinated twice in a row—once in the 28 days prior to miscarriage and once in the previous year. For comparison, of the 485 women who had normal pregnancies, only four had been vaccinated two years in a row. CDC adviser for vaccines Amanda Cohn told The Washington Post:48
I think it’s really important for women to understand that this is a possible link, and it is a possible link that needs to be studied and needs to be looked at over more [flu] seasons. We need to understand if it’s the flu vaccine, or is this a group of women [who received flu vaccines] who were also more likely to have miscarriages.

Contradictory Findings Proclaimed ‘Unequivocal’ Evidence

The same researchers have now completed a second study and, this time, they found no link between flu vaccination and miscarriage. A quote by Dr. Edward Belongia, head of the Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Population Health at Wisconsin’s Marshfield Clinic, in STAT news reads:49 “For women right now who are wondering if it’s safe to get a vaccine in early pregnancy, we can say unequivocally, ‘Yes, it is safe.'”
The data, presented at a February 2019 Advisory Committee on Immunization Practice meeting, has yet to be published so I cannot give any details on the findings as of yet. I’d like to point out the obvious, though.
When the 2017 study came out, detractors were quick to point out that you can’t draw conclusions based on a single study. Yet now, they’re claiming to have “unequivocally” proven safety—based on a single study. In my view, the issue is still wide open for discussion and contemplation. Far more research needs to be done before a claim of safety can be made for women receiving influenza vaccine during pregnancy.
Categorical claims of safety cannot be made for vaccinating infants younger than 6 months against influenza, either.
The 2019 scientific review,50 “Influenza Vaccination: Effectiveness, Indications, and Limits in the Pediatric Population,” published in the journal Frontiers in Pediatrics, points out that “questions and limits about influenza vaccine in pediatric population remain open,” and that “vaccine effectiveness in children is variable and suboptimal, with reported differences according to vaccine types, seasons, and child age.” It also states that “there is no influenza vaccine that directly protects infants <6 months of age.”

Questions Abound About Vaccine Safety for Pregnant Women

In the 2013 article, “Vaccination During Pregnancy: Is it Safe?”51 Loe Fisher lists 10 vaccine facts pertaining to the lack of evidence of safety in pregnant women, including the following:
  1. Drug companies did not test the safety and effectiveness of giving influenza vaccine to pregnant women before the vaccines were licensed in the U.S.52 53
  2. Data on inflammatory and other biological responses to vaccination during pregnancy that could affect pregnancy and birth outcomes are still lacking.54 For example, it’s still unknown whether the influenza vaccine can cause fetal harm or affect your reproductive capacity,55 which is why the vaccine manufacturer product inserts state that the influenza vaccine should be given to a pregnant woman only if it’s “clearly needed.”
  3. The biological mechanisms of how maternal vaccination affects the immune and neurological systems of mother and child are not known. Loe Fisher points out, “There are no published biological mechanism studies that assess pre-vaccination health status and measure changes in brain and immune function and chromosomal integrity after vaccination of pregnant women or their babies developing in the womb.”
  4. There are very few studies comparing health outcomes between pregnant women and their children who receive the flu vaccine and those who do not.

Flu Vaccine Has Thousands of Vaccine Injury Filings

Importantly, injury following influenza vaccination is the most compensated claim in the federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP). Between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2017, a total of 3,575 injury claims for flu vaccine were filed, 3,057 of which were compensated.1 Being one of the riskiest vaccines, based on VICP injury filings and awards, is it really wise to proclaim the flu vaccine is safe for all pregnant women at all times?
Influenza vaccine package inserts57 58 59 will also inform you that flu vaccine safety and effectiveness have not been established in pregnant or breastfeeding women. This means there is a lack of scientific evidence demonstrating conclusively that pregnant women will benefit from flu vaccination or that getting vaccinated during pregnancy is, in fact, safe.
If safety and effectiveness have not been scientifically established through methodologically sound and rigorously controlled, replicated studies, the issue is still open for debate, and that’s certainly true when it comes to vaccinating pregnant women.
Sanofi Pasteur’s patient information sheet60 for Fluzone quadrivalent vaccine states that “Sanofi Pasteur Inc. is collecting information on pregnancy outcomes and the health of newborns following vaccination with Fluzone Quadrivalent during pregnancy.”
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists also tracks vaccine safety for pregnant women after the fact, while claiming it’s perfectly safe to receive the flu vaccine during pregnancy.61 The sad reality is that pregnant women who are given influenza vaccinations during any trimester during every pregnancy are basically participating in an uncontrolled experiment. They just don’t know it.

Vaccinating During Pregnancy is a Risky Proposition

Aside from the 2017 study linking flu vaccination to miscarriage, research has shown that stimulating a woman’s immune system—which is what vaccination does and must do to stimulate production of antibodies and artificial immunity—during midterm and later-term pregnancy significantly increases the risk that her baby will develop autism62 during childhood, and/or schizophrenia during the teenage years or early adulthood.63
Strong inflammatory responses during pregnancy may also increase the risk of seizures in the baby, and later, as an adult.64 In fact, a number of neurodevelopmental and behavioral problems can occur in babies born to women immunologically stimulated during pregnancy.65 66 67
Overall, given the uncertainty about how flu vaccination affects health in the short and long term, and the absolute unknowns about how it may affect the future health of the baby, it seems as reasonable to avoid vaccination during pregnancy as it is to avoid alcohol, smoking and exposure to other toxins.
As noted by Jeremy R. Hammond in his May 14, 2019, article, “The CDC’s Criminal Recommendation for a Flu Shot During Pregnancy,”68 the CDC relies on retrospective observational studies for its recommendation. The problem with that is that retrospective observational studies are designed to test a hypothesis. They’re not designed to prove or disprove causation and, in fact, cannot do that.
So, a finding of “no association” in an observational study does not mean that a causal relationship is nonexistent. Observational studies also make it difficult for researchers to detect unexpected harms. If they’re not specifically looking for an outcome, it likely will not show in the data.
It’s a rather long and detailed article, but well worth reading. In it, Hammond points out the hypocrisy of relying on observational data for vaccine safety, saying:69
[W]hen Aaron E. Carroll in the New York Times advocated the CDC’s flu shot recommendations, he was telling pregnant women, too, to get vaccinated.
He was, in other words, parroting the CDC’s implicit message that we can trust that observational studies are methodologically robust enough to rule out the possibility, with a high degree of confidence, that vaccination could cause harm to the expectant mother or her child.
Yet just a few months earlier, Carroll had reassured the public that observational studies finding a link between alcohol consumption and cancer aren’t determinative and suggested that more randomized controlled trials are needed to establish what harms and benefits are associated with drinking!
As he advised Times readers in that case, ‘Don’t give too much weight to observational data’ … Why should we forego our skepticism when it comes to the lives and health of entire future generations of children? …
Carroll’s credulous acceptance of the observational studies that the CDC relies upon to support its claims is another good example of the kind of institutionalized cognitive dissonance that exists when it comes to the practice of vaccination. It has become a religion, and we are supposed to believe in the safety and effectiveness of vaccines as a matter of faith …
When it comes to vaccines, we are not supposed to concern ourselves with the methodological weaknesses of the kinds of studies the CDC relies on to support its flu shot recommendation for pregnant women.
We are not supposed to notice that the CDC’s statement that ‘there’s a lot of evidence’ that it’s safe to vaccinate pregnant women also implies that there’s at least some evidence that it is not …
[I]f pharmaceutical companies made the same claims that the CDC makes about the safety of vaccinating pregnant women, they could be sued for fraud.

One of the Most Powerful Videos I’ve Ever Seen

The following video from Barbara Loe Fisher is one of the most powerful videos that I have ever seen. I am hopeful that watching this video will inspire you to take up the cause and join the fight for vaccine freedom and independence.
There is a cultural war and collusion between many industries and federal regulatory agencies that results in a suppression of the truth about vital important health issues. If this suppression continues we will gradually and progressively erode our private individual rights that our ancestors fought so hard to achieve. Please take a few minutes to watch this video:

This article was reprinted with the author’s permission. It was originally published on Dr. Mercola’s website at
Note: This commentary provides referenced information and perspective on a topic related to vaccine science, policy, law or ethics being discussed in public forums and by U.S. lawmakers.  The websites of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) provide information and perspective of federal agencies responsible for vaccine research, development, regulation and policymaking.