Dec 16, 2019 3-5PM ET
Monday on The Robert Scott Bell Show:
Flu season is here, and it’s coming for your kids The flu is out in force. And so far this season, it’s been hitting children the hardest.Influenza is a wily virus it’s almost impossible to predict where and how it will strike as it circumnavigates the globe. There are, however, some patterns that routinely occur, allowing investigators and public health agencies to sometimes anticipate what lies ahead.This is not one of those times.Officials at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said flu-like symptoms started spurring higher than normal doctor visits in the U.S. in early November weeks earlier than other recent flu seasons. The disease has also shown up in and shut down elementary schools across the South and West, in states such as Texas, Idaho, Oregon and Alaska. Much of the Northeast, a traditional hotbed for flu-induced misery, remains largely unscathed for now. At the same time, the severity of this year’s flu has been comparatively low. The number of people dying from pneumonia and influenza during the first week of December was substantially lower than the 6.4% threshold used to declare a flu epidemic at this time of year. (A new report on the spread of influenza spread is scheduled for release later Friday.)
Flu deaths in US reach 1,300, CDC estimates Some 1,300 people across the United States have died of the flu so far this year, according to new Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates. In a report released Friday, federal health officials said there have been at least 2.6 million flu illnesses this year and 23,000 hospitalizations. Flu activity has been reported across the country, but some states — namely Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Mexico, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and Washington — have reported “high” flu activity levels. Puerto Rico has seen high flu activity as well. Most of the illnesses this year have been caused by the influenza B/ Victoria viruses, which the CDC said is “unusual for this time of year.” This strain is most commonly reported among children 4 years of age or younger, according to the report.
Mom Shares Genius Hack for Getting Sick Kids To Painlessly Take Nasty Flu Medicine & Antibiotics The winter brings the inevitable annual fight we dread: getting our sick little ones to take their antibiotics. But instead of bribery (admit it, you’ve tried that) or an exhausting battle, pharmacist Joelle Smithmier Dew, a mom, has a brilliant solution that will only cost you the price of a bottle of coffee creamer. The mom shared her message on her Facebook page, where she had two words for parents trying to get their kids to take their Tamiflu: International Delight. “Word to the wise!” she wrote. “If you have a child that is having to take nasty smelling/tasting antibiotics like Clindamycin or Tamiflu for the flu, this coffee creamer is a life saver.” She also posted a photo of the coffee creamer in the flavor Hershey’s Chocolate Caramel, which TBH seems pretty tasty to us. “Back in the summer, the doctors at children’s hospital turned us onto this jewel,” she continued. “It works better than chocolate cake frosting etc..”
Tamiflu: Myth and Misconception Flu season is still here, and Hoffman-LaRoche, the manufacturer of the anti-viral drug Tamiflu (oseltamivir) are still running an ad intended to market directly to patients. “Sometimes what we suffer from is bigger than we think. The flu is a big deal, so don’t treat it like a little cold. Treat it with Tamiflu.” If you didn’t get the message from these ads, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has also issued public service announcements urging people to get Tamiflu at the first sign of a sniffle or sneeze. Between the two, the government recommendations and pharmaceutical ads appear to be having the desired effect, because Americans have been flooding their local emergency rooms and doctor’s offices asking for their prescription of Tamiflu.
Comment of The Day!
What’s up my healing partners?
I have been struggling with the effects of PTSD for a very long time. One of the symptoms is having really no emotion. I ended up drinking a lot to open up, or let down that emotion blocker (whatever that is). Anyway, I feel like I can be myself when I have a stimulant, hence the drinking.
That being said, I took advantage of Brave Botanicals free oz offer because I’ve heard about, not only the pain relieving effects, but also the ability to help with addiction. As soon as I started taking it, I no longer needed the alcohol. I’m on day 8 with no bad stimulants. Wow, this stuff is a life changer brother. Thanks for finding and promoting this clean all natural company.
Do they have a discount code?
Thanks brothers, love ya!!
Hour 2 – Special Guest – Ravi Kulasekere PhD, ND
Dr. Ravi Kulasekere is a graduate from the Trinity ND program, and a board certified holistic health practitioner. He is also a board certified medical physicist, a career that spanned almost 13 years in the field of cancer care. Here he was forced to look into vaccines in 2011 when in his hospital job required him to be vaccinated annually with the flu shot in order to keep his job. While refusing to be vaccinated, in November 2016 he voluntarily left his position as chief medical physicist at the county hospital in Cleveland, and opened his own holistic health practice Do No Pharm Naturopathy LLC in Lakewood, Ohio. Since 2011 he has also been diligently studying the untold science behind vaccines and has been a vocal supporter, both online and offline, of informed consent and the ability to choose to be vaccinated or not. He has provided both written and in-person expert testimony at many state sponsored bills in OH that are aimed at removing vaccine choice and is also actively involved in the health freedom advocacy group, Ohio Advocates for Medical Freedom and Health Freedom Ohio In his spare time, he loves to travel, enjoys gardening, ethnic cooking, astronomy, being active in the vegan community in Cleveland and playing with a toddler and her train set.
Immunization Agenda 2030: A Global Strategy to Leave No One Behind Immunization is a global health and development success story, saving millions of lives every year. We now have vaccines to prevent more than 20 life-threatening diseases, helping people of all ages live longer, healthier lives. Immunization is the foundation of the primary health care system and an indisputable human right. It’s also one of the best health investments money can buy. Yet despite tremendous progress, far too many people around the world – including nearly 20 million infants each year – have insufficient access to vaccines. In some countries, progress has stalled or even reversed, and there is a real risk that complacency will undermine past achievements. With the support of countries and partners, WHO is leading the co-creation of a new global vision and strategy to address these challenges over the next decade, to be endorsed by the World Health Assembly. IA 2030 envisions a world where everyone, everywhere, at every age, fully benefits from vaccines to improve health and well-being.
A lowered probability of pregnancy in females in the USA aged 25–29 who received a human papillomavirus vaccine injection Birth rates in the United States have recently fallen. Birth rates per 1000 females aged 25–29 fell from 118 in 2007 to 105 in 2015. One factor may involve the vaccination against the human papillomavirus (HPV). Shortly after the vaccine was licensed, several reports of recipients experiencing primary ovarian failure emerged. This study analyzed information gathered in National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, which represented 8 million 25-to-29-year-old women residing in the United States between 2007 and 2014. Approximately 60% of women who did not receive the HPV vaccine had been pregnant at least once, whereas only 35% of women who were exposed to the vaccine had conceived. For married women, 75% who did not receive the shot were found to conceive, while only 50% who received the vaccine had ever been pregnant. Using logistic regression to analyze the data, the probability of having been pregnant was estimated for females who received an HPV vaccine compared with females who did not receive the shot. Results suggest that females who received the HPV shot were less likely to have ever been pregnant than women in the same age group who did not receive the shot. If 100% of females in this study had received the HPV vaccine, data suggest the number of women having ever conceived would have fallen by 2 million. Further study into the influence of HPV vaccine on fertility is thus warranted.
Letters to the editor; Response to: a possible spurious correlation between human papillomavirus vaccination introduction and birth rate change in the United States In their letter to the editor, Shibata and Kataoka,1offer a critique of my paper, “A lowered probably of pregnancy in females in the USA aged 25–29 who received a human papillomavirus vaccine injection”.2 They suggest three reasons why my conclusion that HPV vaccine uptake is related to lowered probability of ever having been pregnant could be spurious. While the lowered fertility I found among women who received the HPV shot could be related to variables other than the HPV vaccine, the finding cannot be the result of the reasons they offer. The authors do not explain my findings, and their analysis does not negate the need for more research into the possible effect of the HPV vaccine on fertility. The first reason the authors offer is that the vaccine is recommended mainly for women who are not yet sexually active. The birth rate among such women would, by definition, be nil. This argument is weak, because even if a woman is not yet sexually active when she receives the shot, she could begin to be sexually active shortly thereafter. Precisely her concerns about a sexually-transmitted disease could spur her to obtain the shot.
A mother talks about why she no longer vaccinates Danielle Goodrich said her children received most of their vaccinations before she stopped trusting them, their manufacturers and the government bodies that regulate them. Goodrich, a resident of Johnson City, said she followed the vaccination schedule recommended by her doctor, but her children and a friend’s child had experiences that shaped her current beliefs. First, a friend’s son started showing symptoms of autism shortly after receiving shots, she said. And, after her own son had his first asthma attack at 22 months old, she continued to vaccinate because she said she still believed they were safe and effective. She now believes the asthma may have been triggered by vaccines. But when her daughter turned 1 shortly after she received her shots, Goodrich said she noticed a change.
Is Measles Eradication Through Vaccination a Realistic Goal? When the U.S. launched measles vaccination in the 1960s, facilitated by generous federal funding, there were experts who questioned the need for a vaccine, given the low and falling measles morbidity rate and the greater than 98% decline in mortality since 1900. In March 1963 the first two measles vaccines were approved for use in the United States: a live vaccine produced by Merck (Rubeovax) and a formalin-inactivated one produced by Pfizer (Pfizer-Vax Measles–K). In 1967, a campaign was launched to eliminate measles from the United States. “To those who ask me ‘Why do you wish to eradicate measles?’” wrote Alexander Langmuir, chief epidemiologist from 1949 to 1970 at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, I reply with the same answer that Hillary used when asked why he wished to climb Mt. Everest. He said “Because it is there.” To this may be added, “… and it can be done.” Today, 50 years after the introduction and widespread use of measles vaccination, we continue to see outbreaks of measles. This demands that we question how effective the goal to eradicate measles has been. Our public health agencies often point a finger at those who are vaccine hesitant or “anti-vaxxers” (typically parents of children who had significant adverse events following vaccination) as being responsible for outbreaks of measles. Such finger-pointing responses are overly simplistic and do not acknowledge the accumulating body of science questioning the effectiveness and safety of the measles vaccine.