Australia bans flu vaccines in children after vomiting, fevers, seizures

Although it's still summer in North America, it is of course winter in Australia, and the flu season is well under way there. As usual, Australian health authorities have been urging parents there to vaccinate their children against the flu, propagating the mythology that flu vaccines are both safe and effective. But this time around, many Australian parents found out the hard way that they were being lied to.

It didn't take long to realize the truth after their children start going into convulsionsfollowing the flu vaccine injections. Other children began vomiting or exhibiting dangerously high levels of fever. One child has gone into a coma and may never recover.

As reported in WA Today(http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/f...)

"Perth mother of two Bea Flint said her 11-month-old boy Avery had a seizure after receiving the first dose of the two-dose fluvaccination on Saturday. Mrs Flint said that after the 9am vaccination she noticed Avery had a minor temperature about 2pm. At 7.45pm, Avery started whimpering and moaning. When Mrs Flint got to his cot the baby had vomited and was lying on his side having a seizure. 'He couldn't cry - his head was hanging down in the car seat and he couldn't move. I was petrified - it was one of the worst experiences of my life."

The story goes on to say, "The doctor who treated Avery told Mrs Flint her baby was the fifth child with similar symptoms admitted to the hospital that day."

In other words, this was no rare event. Vaccinated children suffering severe convulsions were piling up in hospital emergency rooms across the country.

The real kicker, though, is that children started having convulsions two weeks ago but Australian health authorities ignored them, insisting that the vaccine was safe and causing it to be injected in yet more babies. Two weeks later, with dozens more children experiencing convulsions (and who knows how many thousands actually being harmed in less obvious ways), Commonwealth chief health officer Professor Jim Bishop finally announced the vaccination ban.

Remember: Health authorities in Australia, UK, the United States and everywhere else have relentlessly insisted that flu vaccines are perfectly safe and can't possibly harm anyone. In the U.S., the FDA has given its approval to the very same flu vaccine that's harming children in Australia, and the CDC has insisted that all children in the USA -- regardless of age -- should now be injected with this very same flu vaccine.

So now we've got a vaccine that Australia has banned by the USA somehow says is safe enough to inject into a six-month-old infant. How many convulsing babies will it take in the U.S. before American parents realize the truth about flu vaccines?

Chemically induced convulsions

As you're reading this, you may find yourself wonder, "Well, what could cause such convulsions in children?"

The answer is more terrifying than you might think, because it's not "weakened flu viruses" that vaccine manufacturer claim they put into the vaccines. A weakened flu virus doesn't send children into convulsions. Only a chemical can do that.

The chemical in question is one that's routinely added to most vaccines as a way to aggravate the immune system to respond to the presence of the weakened virus. It's called an "adjuvant" and consists of a highly inflammatory chemical that we now know may damage brain tissues and the nervous system. It is this adjuvant that most likely caused the convulsions in children.

Even in children who don't experience convulsions, there is speculation that this adjuvant may lead to future Alzheimer's disease or other neurological disorders. Vaccine manufacturers always attempt to downplay their use of adjuvant chemicals, and few media outlets focus on this important point, but it is the adjuvant that is most likely responsible for sending these Australian children into hospitals with convulsions.

Health authorities defend dangerous vaccine

One thing I've noticed about vaccine pushers is that they behave like irrational zealots. No matter how much evidence surfaces about the dangers of vaccines, they continue to mindlessly push them while ignoring the evidence.

A pediatric professor in Australia, Dr Peter Richmond, admitted that researchers were trying to figure out if the entire vaccine was dangerous, or if there was just a bad batch. But even before getting the answer to this question, he goes on to say that everybody over the age of five should go ahead and get injected with this same vaccine!(http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/f...)

In other words, he's so convinced the vaccine is safe -- even after dozens of children were obviously harmed by it -- that he's still pushing the same dangerous vaccine onto everybody else!

This is precisely the kind of attitude reflected across the vaccine industry. Reports of children being harmed, or paralyzed, or hospitalized by vaccines are always written off as "coincidence." The mounting evidence is simply thrown out the window because it conflicts with the pro-vaccine agenda.

Can you imagine the outrage if an herbal product sent fifty kids to the hospital suffering from convulsions? Health authorities across the world would be quick to condemn the product, and they'd confiscate it right off the shelves while shutting down the operations of its manufacturer. But somehow when a vaccine does the same thing, these same health authorities urge people to keep on injecting their children with it!

It makes no sense. But then again, the vaccine industry was never based on rational thinking in the first place. If health authorities were truly rational, they'd be handing out vitamin D supplements to children instead of injecting them with vaccines, because vitamin D has been scientifically proven to provide better protection against the flu than vaccines. (
Of course, to ask health authorities to make rational decisions is sort of like asking politicians to start telling the truth. In the complicated world of profits and politics, rational, honest thinking just doesn't get any traction. It's far more profitable to keep lying to the world and raking in billions of dollars each year off dangerous vaccines, even as they continue to harm innocent children.

I often wonder... How many dead children will it take before parents wake up and realize that flu vaccines are dangerous? The answer may surprise you: Even a million dead children won't change the minds of most parents because they just do whatever they're told by health authorities, even if it makes no rational sense.

Most parents are so brainwashed by the medical system that they would gladly line up to have their babies injected with chemotherapy if they were told it was somehow necessary.

At some point, the parents whose babies are being harmed or potentially even killed by these vaccines can only blame themselves. They were the ones who brought their babies to be injected with a chemical adjuvant and viral fragments, and they should know better than to trust the government when it comes to health advice. The government, after all, still says that pharmaceutical chemicals are good for you while vitamins, herbs and natural remedies are dangerous. And it's the government that approved the very vaccines that are right now sending these children to the hospital.

Any parent that trusts the government with the health of their child is setting themselves up for catastrophe. And that catastrophe could very well cost them the life of their child.

Additional sources for this story include:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/h...

Articles Related to This Article: • Facebook crowdsourced investigation exposes vaccine denials of SIGA Technologies • The great thimerosal cover-up: Mercury, vaccines, autism and your child's health • Flu vaccines revealed as the greatest quackery ever pushed in the history of medicine • Vaccines cause autism: Supporting evidence • Are mandatory vaccinations acts of violence against children? • Ten questions about flu vaccines that doctors and health authorities refuse to answer

Obama goes for your guns again

Dear fellow American

He's at it again.
I’ve told you to beware of an Obama sneak attack, and here it comes.
In the face a tough election year, Barack Obama and the anti-gunners are willing to do ANYTHING to infringe upon your right to keep and bear arms.
Right now, Barack Obama has teamed up with liberal special interest groups to use the un-elected bureaucrats in the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to ban all traditional forms of ammunition.
That’s right, Obama and his cronies are trying to ban ALL your ammo.
By using the Toxic Substance Control Act of 1976, they want to ban all hunting, target and self-defense ammo that contains lead, no matter how little.
Make no mistake -- this is gun control at its worst.
Since your actions have stopped their plans to pass ammo and gun bans so far in congress,  they're using the old end-run.
Obama and his anti-gun cronies in the EPA know that by banning all but the most expensive ammo, they’ve effectively banned your guns in all but name.
And they’ve certainly destroyed the red-blooded American past time of just plain shooting.
To make matters worse, the anti-gunners are hoping to sneak this attack on our Second Amendment Rights through as a bureaucratic rule change.
They know that when they introduce gun control as legislation that gun owners like you and I have tremendous grassroots power.
The anti-gun lobby knows that is you keep the heat on congress most members of Congress will be afraid of angering gun owners so close to an election.
So they’re simply bypassing the democratic, legislative process all together by counting on bureaucrats in the EPA to do their anti-gun dirty work.
Think this doesn’t apply to you? Think again.
The goal of this rule change is simple: drive the price of ammo through the roof for all but law enforcement and the military.
Virtually all hunting, target and self-defense ammo has some lead components.
They’re trying to disarm us one bullet at a time.
But here’s where our opportunity comes: The EPA has opened up a public comment period on this proposed attack on our right to keep and bear arms.
And I want you to join with me in making them rue the day they opened up this can of worms.
I want federal staff members –- who are required by law to seek “public input” into this regulatory change –- to receive an avalanche of “public input” on this issue.
But comments to the Obam-crats at the EPA are not likely to make much difference.  After all, they are not up for re-elections.
That's why I am going to take a copy of every single petition and deliver it to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid with a simple message...
If the EPA ban ammunition, gun owners will hold Pelosi, Reid and their Democrat majorities 100% responsible for doing nothing to stop it.
Seriously. I want this to go down in the history books right next to dumping tea in Boston harbor as a moment of public protest over unjust and outrageous government overstepping of authority.
Please take a moment to make your voice heard by the bureaucrats at the EPA... and be a part of this epic battle to save our firearms rights.
Click here to sign the National Association for Gun Rights “Stop Barack’s Bullet Ban” petition against this outrageous sneak attack on our rights.

My staff and I at the National Association for Gun Rights will compile your petitions for public comment and forward them to the EPA as well as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.
Once you’ve signed the petition, please consider making a contribution to help the National Association for Gun Rights. $25, $10 or even $5 can help us build our war chest to fight this outrageous battle.
Gun owners like you and me must make our voices heard. The anti-gun special interest groups are trying to ban all hunting, target and self-defense ammo that contains even trace elements of lead.
I know it’s hard to believe, but the anti-gunners in D.C. think they’ve found the perfect way to violate your rights and avoid the tough legislative battles they would need to pass this as a bill.
They’re bypassing the legislative process so that they can achieve their two most important goals: banning guns and protecting their puppet politicians’ reelections.
I’ll be honest: backroom deals and midnight bureaucratic rule changes like this are hard to fight.
Unelected bureaucrats aren’t susceptible to the same kind of grassroots pressure that elected members of Congress are.
But if Pelosi and Reid figure out gun owners will turn on their Democrat majorities in mass, you can bet they will light up the White House phones with demands the EPA back down.
Or they could even do the right thing -- don't bet on it -- and pass emergency legislation to strip the EPA of all power to regulate guns and ammo.
That’s why it’s so important that you click here to sign our petition, RIGHT NOW.

The only way we can stop this ban on all traditional ammo is by making our voices heard LOUD AND CLEAR.
By clicking here, you’ll be making your voice heard not only to the EPA, but also to the Congressional leadership, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
My staff will complete and deliver these petitions to maximize their affect.
Unfortunately, we don’t have much time. Federal agencies like the EPA don’t really want to hear from you and me. They’re required by law to accept comments, but they won’t take them a day longer than they’re required.
That’s why it is so important that you click here and sign the National Association for Gun Rights “Stop Barack’s Bullet Ban” petition to the EPA, Senator Harry Reid and Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi.
Once you’ve signed the petition, please chip in $5 or $10 to help the National Association for Gun Rights continue to fight the EPA.
Your immediate action is vital to our success. We cannot allow un-elected bureaucrats in the EPA to ban all hunting, target and self-defense ammo which contains even trace elements of lead.

For liberty,

Dudley Brown
Executive Director

P.S. The un-elected bureaucrats in the Environmental Protection Agency are trying to use an ancient, arcane law to ban virtually all hunting, target and self-defense ammo.
They’re trying to use a bureaucratic end-run to bypass the legislative process and ban ammo without a single member of Congress casting a single vote.
Click here to sign the National Association for Gun Rights “Stop Barack’s Bullet Ban” petition to the EPA, Senator Harry Reid and Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi.

Once you’ve signed the petition, please chip in $5 or $10 to help the National Association for Gun Rights continue to fight the EPA.

Vitamin D really does prevent cancer, autoimmune diseases

A new study out of Oxford University pinpoints vitamin D deficiency as a culprit in serious illnesses like cancer and autoimmune disorders. According to the report, which was recently published online in the journal Genome Research, genetic receptors throughout the body need adequate vitamin D levels to prevent these and other serious illnesses from developing.

Multiple sclerosis, diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, Chron's disease, leukemia -- these and many more diseases are often caused by a lack of vitamin D. Your genes literally have receptors that need vitamin D in order to properly express themselves. If there is not enough of the vitamin, serious illness is prone to develop.

The Oxford team made specific observations about the importance of vitamin D in the genome regions associated with autoimmune diseases and cancer, noting that the nutrient is absolutely vital in helping to prevent these diseases from forming.

"Considerations of vitamin D supplementation as a preventative measure for these diseases are strongly warranted," expressed Sreeram Ramagopalan, author of the study.

However, current recommendations for vitamin D intake are unacceptably low, and many nations are considering updating their guidelines. The U.S. Institute of Medicine, for example, recommends getting a mere 200 to 600 international units (IU) of vitamin D a day, an amount far too low to have much therapeutic effect.

Since summer sun exposure creates about 20,000 IU of vitamin D in the skin in just 15 minutes, supplementation with at least 5,000 to 10,000 IU of vitamin D daily, particularly during the winter, is preferable. Healthy blood levels of vitamin D are somewhere between 50 and 80 nanograms per milliliter (ng/ml), so many natural health professionals recommend having a "25 OH Vitamin D" blood test performed to check these levels.

Sources for this story include:

http://health.usnews.com/health-new...

Articles Related to This Article: • Vitamin D Halts Growth of Breast Cancer Tumors • Vitamin D prevents breast cancer • Vitamin D is nutritional key for prevention of breast cancer • Vitamin D prevents heart disease • It's Winter - Do You Know Where Your Vitamin D Is? • Sunlight emerging as proven treatment for breast cancer, prostate cancer and other cancers

Welcome to the Police State, Comrade

For its entire history, (more than 230 years), the United States has been the world’s best hope … “a shining light on the hill” beckoning to the oppressed and downtrodden everywhere; the one place on the globe where personal freedom – along with unlimited opportunity – has always been assured.

And yet, in the early days of the 21^st Century, it may be fair to ask if a new and different United States has emerged, one that practices rewarding supporters of the political class while punishing political opponents, functioning as a police state. If you’ve lived your life as an American, these thoughts may be unsettling but they must be examined.

First, let’s determine the definition of a “police state,” or to be more accurate, the definition of a “fascist police state.” A police state, instead of allowing the law to function properly as a mechanism that assures a civil and just society, uses that law to suppress opposition and challenges to its power and authority from ordinary citizens.

When the state (or government) does this, it alone has the ability to interpret the law and it can then use the law as it pleases to the detriment of an individual or a group. In essence, the law becomes a tool the state can use to further its repressive or illegal policies.

In this dark world, citizens are free only if their actions remain within the restrictive confines and policies of the governing or, more appropriately, ruling state. If an individual or an organization comes into conflict with the state over a legal matter, the state will always prevail by using the law to repress the offending individual or group.

That is certainly not the republic Americans have known, nor is it freedom. It is, by definition, a police state, because the offending citizen no longer has the right of legal redress. And if that right has been removed, the result is, quite simply, a police state.

In this nightmarish scenario, the justice system exists but is never available to the ordinary citizen as a fair and open forum, and it does not provide the protections one expects in a free and just society. It is nothing more than a tool of the state.

Now, it’s interesting to note that a police state is not necessarily a dictatorship. In fact, many police states have in the past taken the form of representative democracies. That’s because a police state is not defined by its leadership or political structure. It is, however, clearly defined by its desire (and its ability) to protect itself and its interests against those of the individual citizen.

What about “fascism” … how is it defined? A rough definition might be to call it the tyranny of the Right … just as communism might easily be referred to as the tyranny of the Left. But these are rough definitions and may not do enough to clarify and provide the true meaning of these words.

Perhaps a better definition of fascism is the one that places the state as just another competing entity seeking to advance its selfish interests, along with corporations and unions, for example, but the entity that is the most powerful and best able to control the others.

Is it possible for an individual citizen to have power in a fascist or police state as previously defined? Generally speaking, the answer is no. However, the average citizen can enjoy greater personal standing (and even thrive) in such a dark society by belonging to a favored group.

We’ve now defined fascism and the police state. However, none of that answers the most important question: is the United States today (in the early 21^st Century) a fascist or police state?

Is the Holder vs. Humanitarian Law Project decision proof that the U.S. is indeed a fascist state?

I’ll try to answer that question by citing Holder vs. Humanitarian Law Project. The Humanitarian Law Project had been advising groups that were looked upon as “terrorist” by the U.S. government. Their advice centered on instructing these “terrorists” with various political agendas how to negotiate their demands peacefully and to avoid the use of violence to achieve their goals.

The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision, determined that the assistance provided by the Humanitarian Law Project constituted aiding and abetting a terrorist organization and was a method by which material support was also provided.

Obviously, the Humanitarian Law Project was forced to cease and desist. But, a larger question about this decision remains. Does that judicial decision now mean that the executive and/or the congress now has the right to bar any individual or group from speaking to a terrorist organization?

If your sensibilities and beliefs are Left of center, you may look at that decision as proof that the United States is indeed a fascist police state. If, however, your beliefs are more traditional and you tend to believe that the government’s primary role is the protection and security of its borders and its people, you may disagree that the judicial decision against the Humanitarian Law Project paints the United States with the broad brush of racism, fascism, tyranny and the horror that is a police state.  Then again, who will be called a  “terrorist” next?  Are you already on a watch list if you’re pro-life, pro-gun, or oppose open borders or gay marriage?

Clearly, this is a difficult issue that is anything but black and white. There are lots of shades of gray. If you believe in freedom of speech, you are likely to think the United States is now a police state. But (and this is a very big “but”) if you recognize the need to sacrifice a little bit of your personal freedom in times of great peril (such as the times we live in right now), than you understand that the United States is not a fascist police state, but is, instead, fulfilling its mandate to protect its citizens by making it difficult or even impossible for individuals or groups to assist “terrorist” groups.

Again, it is easy to interpret the decision by the Supreme Court as one that gives the state the right to further its power and to suppress any and all opposition to its policies. It alone, through its executive or congressional branches, can determine who is a terrorist threat and who is not. That may seem to be unbridled and dangerous power that, in the hands of the unscrupulous, can lead to tyranny.

Many would argue the United States has a long, long history in which its government has used power fairly and wisely. And there are precedents where the government, in a time of war, may have limited some constitutionally-mandated freedoms for the greater common good. The argument is that this is what free societies need to do in times of war.

On the other hand, I’m inclined to believe that leaders throughout history have always used war-time powers to curtail liberties and exercise greater control over the population.  Lincoln did it to anyone in the North who dared disagree with him, and history has shown that FDR exceeded his constitutional powers during World War II.

Are we at war today? Some, particularly those on the Left, say we are not and that the state needs to limit its power and authority. Many conservatives  will claim that we are in a global struggle for survival and dominance with an enemy that wants to wipe us off the face of the earth.  Yet others, including many libertarians, will say we have no business fighting these wars that only target Americans because we have inserted ourselves into conflicts which predate our own nation’s founding by many centuries.  I happen to believe that while we have done some good in recent wars, we are likely creating more enemies.

If, in fact, we are at war, most reasonable people will be glad to give the government powers it doesn’t normally enjoy and will be willing to sacrifice some of their personal freedom in the bargain. The reason is simple and sensible—it is all about survival.  And yet, when a government has been given power, does it ever return it peacefully?

Walgreens Fronts Big Pharma’s Newest Flu Scare

What gift says “I love you” better than a poke in the arm and the possibility of seizures and neurological damage? That must be the thinking behind the Walgreens marketing team as the store introduces a flu shot gift card.

That’s right, just in time for the coming fall flu scare, Walgreens is selling $29.99 gift cards so you can give your favorite loved one the gift of a flu shot — the same shot that causes convulsions and wonderful, heartfelt diseases like Guillain-Barré Syndrome and protects you from… nothing.

Last year the World Health Organization teamed up with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and governments around the world to cook up a global health pandemic and called it swine flu. The populace was ginned up over the possibility of hundreds of thousands of deaths and worldwide catastrophe like you’d find in a Stephen King novel.

And all the while those advising the WHO and CDC were laughing all the way to the bank as their paymasters — Big Pharma — raked in billions of government-sponsored largess and rewarded them handsomely.

Meanwhile, those who bought into the scaremongering convulsed and suffered.

Don’t buy into the hype. Flu vaccines contain harmful agents and DNA fragments and “protect” you from last year’s flu, as they’re made before the next season’s flu outbreak strikes. They are strictly a Big Pharma boondoggle aimed at taking your money — either directly from your pocket or through your government — and making you sick.

If you want to protect yourself from colds and flu, the best thing you can do is take Vitamin D supplements, according to NaturalNews.com.

Related Posts

• Social security boost for retirees (27)
• The White Lies About Black Gold (200)
• BNY Mellon: Pension funds failed to gain in July (1)

More docs stop accepting Medicare

As bad as Medicare is, it's about to get a whole lot worse.

New numbers show thousands of doctors fleeing the almost-bankrupt system... just as millions of aging boomers get ready to join the Medicare ranks.

I pointed this out a few weeks ago... and I take no pleasure in being proven so dramatically right so soon. But you can't ignore the numbers, and the latest shocker comes courtesy of USA Today -- as mainstream a paper as you'll find.

The American Medical Association says 31 percent of its primary care physicians have stopped accepting Medicare. In New York alone, 1,100 doctors have dropped Medicare -- including the president of the state's Medical Society.

The American Academy of Family Physicians says 13 percent of its members won't touch Medicare -- more than double the percentage from just six years ago -- and the American Osteopathic Association says 15 percent of its members don't participate, and 19 percent won't take new Medicare patients.

Yet some people STILL don't think there's a problem. Just look at the angry email I got last time I wrote about this.

"Give me a break! I live in Florida in a very large retirement community. There is no one complaining about their Medicare," wrote Pidge. "Most of the primary care doctors accept it."

Thank your lucky stars, Pidge, and make sure everyone in your retirement community does the same. I hope it lasts -- but the numbers don't lie. If you're not worried, you should be.

Here's the problem: Medicare already pays much less than other insurance companies, roughly 78 cents on the dollar. Even so, many doctors were willing to accept that reduced rate... but now, that already low rate is being slashed by another 21 percent.

Eventually, they'll ask doctors to work for love and promises -- a nice concept, but it won't pay the bills.

And even the doctors who do accept Medicare may not have anything to accept soon -- the Obama administration said last year that Medicare's hospital insurance trust fund would run out in 2017. Now, they say it may last until 2029.

Who knows how long it will really last. The fact is, our health care system is about to undergo a dangerously expensive experiment that will cost far more than anyone anticipates -- so doomsday could come a whole lot sooner than anyone expects.

The Presidential Poser

August 23, 2010 by Bob Livingston 

Just who exactly is this man posing as President of the United States? That’s a question being asked by a growing number of Americans.

In fact, a recent poll by CNN — a news organization that has been downright gushing in its praise of Barack Obama — showed that six out of 10 people are uncertain the President was even born in the U.S. And that includes about one-third of all Democrats.

It’s troubling that so many question Obama’s eligibility to hold the office of President but that so few of the elected class and those of national prominence will even broach the issue. It demonstrates what a superb job Obama’s team and the Democrat party have done in casting those who question his status as a natural born citizen as the lunatic fringe.

In fact, if you are a “birther” — a term coined by the mainstream press to disparage those who doubt Obama’s eligibility to hold office based on his citizenship — even so-called conservative icons like Ann Coulter and Glenn Beck consider you a nut.

All this proves is that the elitists who shape messages are a clique interested not in seeing that the U.S. Constitution is upheld, but in maintaining their power and protecting their own. This was demonstrated once before, when the House of Representatives voted to impeach Bill Clinton for lying to a grand jury, but the Senate voted 100-0 not to remove him.

When was the last time the Senate was unanimous on anything? Democrats and Republicans never agree unanimously. The fix was in from the beginning.

So, too, is the issue of Obama’s citizenship and eligibility. The fix is in, even though the evidence that he is not a natural-born citizen, and therefore ineligible to hold the office, far exceeds evidence that he is.

The Republican governor in Hawaii says a birth certificate exists but she has sealed access to it, thereby eliminating one avenue of determining whether he was born in Hawaii, as he says, or in Kenya, as Michelle Obama, several of Obama’s Kenyan relatives (his paternal grandmother, half sister and half brother) and a couple of Kenyan officials have said. And for you Obama sycophants, don’t even bring up the certificate of live birth (COLB) posted online as proof. The COLB was available to anyone. It is not a legal document, does not list the attending physician, does not include his fingerprints or footprints, could not have been used to obtain his passport and is only a diversion to a weak-minded press and public.

Earlier this year a senior Honolulu elections clerk went on local television and said that it was common knowledge among election officials that no official birth certificate — he called it the long-form birth record — exits in Hawaii, despite what Governor Linda Lingle has said.

The whole situation remains a muddle, just as Obama and his handlers want it. Documents disappear. Other documents crop up — some that cast more doubt on his story and some that seem at first glance to support his claims but simply serve to send the discussion on a tangent. And Obama fights disclosure at every turn, sending agents from the U.S. Justice Department out to block all efforts at obtaining his records.

Thankfully, one news organization is doggedly pursuing the story. Joseph Farah and his reporters at WorldNetDaily (WND) hammer on the Obama eligibility story relentlessly, slowly chipping away at the facade. Some other conservative, fearless publications and websites are also digging for the truth and opining on the eligibility question.

Yet despite a total blackout from the main stream media on the subject of Obama’s citizenship, 60 percent of the American public still doubt Obama’s story that he was born in Hawaii. As Farah says, that means the birthers are winning.

There are some things we do know — or can surmise — about Obama, thanks to WND, some other publications and Obama’s own book, Dreams From My Father.

The man who would ascend to the Presidency in 2009 was born to Ann Dunham on Aug. 4, 1961. The father is purported to be Barack Hussein Obama, a Kenyan student in Hawaii who married Dunham on Feb. 2, 1961.

Some have speculated that Barack Obama II’s (this is how Obama’s name is listed on the COLB) biological father was actually Frank Marshall Davis, a black friend of Ann Dunham’s parents and the man the young Obama would later claim in his autobiography was his mentor. The speculation about Davis — a radical communist — as possibly Obama’s biological father stems from a book Davis wrote under a pseudonym in which he describes having sex with an under aged white girl. The idea is plausible, as Davis was a good friend of Madelyn and Stanley Dunham, Ann Dunham’s parents.

The irony is that this is one nativity story that would cement Obama’s claim to be a natural-born citizen. If Obama Sr., a Kenyan citizen, is Obama’s father, Obama is not a Constitutionally described natural-born citizen because one parent is a non-citizen and the other was a minor and therefore unable to bestow citizenship on the child — if Obama was born in Kenya, as many believe.

As lawsuits have claimed, there is no evidence — beyond the afore-mentioned COLB — that Obama was born in Hawaii. Both Obama and a half sister have named two different Hawaii hospitals as his birth place, no records exist that Dunham was hospitalized in Hawaii and no physician or nurse has stepped forward to claim they assisted with the birth.

Obama’s supporters have pointed out that newspaper articles published in August 1961 in the Honolulu Advertiser and the Honolulu Star-Bulletin prove Obama was born in Hawaii. The address listed was the address of Madelyn and Stanley Dunham, Ann Dunham’s parents.WND has reported that official documents show Obama Sr., had a residence at another address at the same time. And neighbors of the Dunhams told WND they don’t recall a white woman with a black baby ever living next door. College transcripts indicate Dunham moved with her new baby to Seattle within days of Obama’s birth and enrolled in the University of Washington for classes that began on Aug. 19, 1961.

These birth announcements prove only that someone submitted information to two newspapers to herald the birth of a baby. They document the timeframe of the birth, not the location. The baby could have been born on Mars and these announcements could have still run in the newspapers.

Another problem Obama faces is found in his mother’s trip to Indonesia with her second husband, Lolo Soetoro, in the late 1960s. WND has reported that several lawsuits challenging Obama’s eligibility hinge on this time in Indonesia, which does not allow dual citizenship. Documents released by the U.S. State Department under two Freedom of Information Act requests indicate he may have given up his citizenship when he moved there.

Those documents show that Obama’s mother sought to have “Barack Obama II (Seobarkah)” removed from her passport, possibly as a prelude to obtaining Indonesian citizenship for him. If she did this it was more than likely for the child’s safety, as it was a turbulent time in Indonesia and there was a strong anti-American sentiment there.

While in Indonesia Obama was enrolled in school under the name of Barry Soetoro, as proven by school records photographed by an Associated Press photographer in 2007. Those school records list Soetoro as an Indonesian citizen, born in Honolulu, Hawaii, on Aug. 4, 1961, and records his religion as Muslim.

According to WND, Obama was either 5 or 6 years old when he traveled to Indonesia. This is important because if Lolo Soetoro adopted him at age 5 then he would have automatically become an Indonesian citizen. The law differed for children aged 6 and up and an adoption for a 6-year-old would have had to take place through legal channels.

Another puzzle uncovered by WND revolves around a photograph of Obama — or Soetoro, whoever he is — with another child at a school in Hawaii at the same time he was enrolled in school in Indonesia. The photo is marked has having been taken in 1969, and there is no good explanation as to how he was attending school in two different places at the same time.

The Obama camp has also refused to explain why Obama/Soetoro is using a Social Security number issued in Connecticut. WND has reported that two private investigators discovered the Social Security number anomaly and filed documents in an eligibility lawsuit showing the number was issued in Connecticut between 1977 and 1979, yet Obama’s/Soetoro’s earliest reported employment was at a Baskin-Robbins ice cream shop in Hawaii in 1975.

The Social Security website confirms that the first three numbers of Obama’s/Soetoro’s Social Security number are reserved for applicants with Connecticut addresses. That Social Security number corresponds with Obama’s/Soetoro’s Selective Service registration, according toWND.

Finally, questions surround a trip Obama/Soetoro has admitted he took to Pakistan in 1981,WND reports.

“I traveled to Pakistan when I was in college — I knew what Sunni and Shia was [sic] before I joined the Senate Foreign Relations Committee,” Obama/Soetoro reportedly stated at a fundraising event.

Pakistan in 1981 was under military rule. It was difficult for U.S. citizens to travel to the country without assistance. It would have been easier for someone to enter Pakistan on an Indonesian passport, WND reports.

Obama/Soetoro could easily clear up the confusion by releasing his birth records, his school records, college records and other official documents. Instead, he is spending millions of dollars to fight all attempts to obtain documents that most public officials release by habit. That begs the question: What is he hiding?

Some brave souls are fighting the good fight in trying to get to the bottom of the mysterious background of the 44th President. Some military people are putting their careers on the line in an attempt to get proof that any orders Obama/Soetoro issues are legitimate.

However, the court system seems hell-bent on covering up any efforts at discovery. It consistently throws out lawsuits on standing and is frequently hostile to plaintiffs. Several judges have threatened lawyers and plaintiffs with stiff fines if they continue to pursue the matter.

Meanwhile, the only logical conclusion is that Obama/Soetoro is not Constitutionally eligible to hold the office of President. Any other view is only based on hope — Obama’s/Soetoro’s favorite theme.

A Constitutional crisis is in the offing and when the truth finally gets out about Obama’s/Soetoro’s citizenship, the legitimacy of orders signed by an illegitimate President will be called into question. Expect mass chaos to ensue.

That very well could be the culmination of the whole plan by Obama/Soetoro and those pulling his strings.

Related Posts

• American Fascism and “Health Regulations” (1)
• Senate Passes Massive Defense Spending Bill (53)
• Gold Confiscation (47)

Rainy Days

Guest post written by Marsha Bryant

I have naturally curly hair that’s hard to tame so I hate humidity. It’s even worse when it rains for extended periods of time.

I go through a lot to make sure that my hair behaves, so when it’s raining I don’t touch my hair falt iron and just put some my gel in my hair and let it dry naturally. I don’t always check the weather before I leave for work so most days if it’s not raining then, I just straighten my hair.

But then a few weeks ago I hadn’t really checked the weather before I left my house and as soon as I walked outside I saw that it was storming. I would have thought that I would have heard it, especially because it was storming really badly and thundering and lightning. I thought that it was pretty bad that I hadn’t heard anything so I went and got a free hearing test. It ended up that I could use some hearing aids, so I bought some.

I was worried that I would have to style my hair differently to cover them up, but they’re really hard to see, actually!

Dr. Coldwell on Coast to Coast with George Noory

Dr. Coldwell on Coast To Coast

Government out of control Armed raid over raw milk Sunday, August 22, 2010 6:16 AM

If you’ve ever wondered why the cops don’t raid the local crack house, it’s because they’re too busy going after milk lovers.

You’re not going to believe this one, but a raw food coop in California was recently raided by armed police officers who burst in like gangbusters with their guns drawn, looking for raw milk.

Imagine that — armed officers of the law, storming into an ordinary American business just to bust them for selling milk. You’d think there were no other crimes taking place in the country! (Just to be sure, I checked — and yes, other crimes are still taking place in this country.)

No matter how you feel about raw milk, as a taxpayer you should be absolutely outraged over this complete misuse of money and resources to make a backward political point.

One of the coop volunteers put it best: “There’s a marijuana dispensary down the street from my house,” Lela Buttery told National Public Radio. “I can buy as much alcohol as I want, but I can’t drink this enzymatic, nutrient-rich superfood?”

Sorry — you’re out of luck, because in most states raw milk is either illegal, or you have to jump through hoops to get it… and milk lovers are often finding out the hard way.

Just ask the vanload of Georgians who drove to South Carolina to stock up on raw milk last year. When they crossed the state line back into Georgia, the authorities — who had been spying on them — were waiting.

Agents from the Georgia Department of Agriculture and the FDA forced them to pull over and dump all their milk — 110 gallons of it — on the side of the road.

Don’t be intimidated — know your local laws, and (more importantly) know the loopholes, because raw milk is the healthiest thing you can drink.

But you might have to stare down the barrel of a gun to get it.

Tainted tea leads to fluorosis risk

There's trouble brewing with tea -- and if you love your leaves, pay close attention to this one because you may not love them as much when I'm done.

A new study found that black tea could be bubbling over with dangerously high levels of fluoride, and it's not just from our tainted drinking water.

It's in the tea itself.

Dr. Gary Whitford, professor of oral biology at the Medical College of Georgia's School of Dentistry, had four patients suffering from advanced skeletal fluorosis -- and they all had something in common: They drank a lot of tea, up to two gallons a day for between 10 and 30 years.

So he tested their teas... and found, well, not much. Not at first. Other studies have found small amounts of fluoride in black tea, and he found the same.

But then he found a fatal flaw in the earlier studies: The fluoride in tea can bond with aluminum -- also found in the leaves in small amounts -- making it undetectable by the usual tests.

Once he broke that bond, he got the true fluoride levels. He found more than triple the expected amount of fluoride in some brands, as much as 9 milligrams per liter
-- well above safe levels for regular consumption.

This isn't just a tempest in a teapot -- because despite what the mainstream tells you, no amount of fluoride is safe for regular consumption. It's a toxic waste, and that's not just my opinion. Fluoride was once classified as such by our own government.

Too much of it will actually rot your teeth, not save them. And as those four tea-loving patients of Dr. Whitford can testify, it'll also destroy your bones and joints.

But if you love tea, you don't have to give it up completely. Tea plants suck fluoride and aluminum from the ground slowly, over time -- so the trick is to get the youngest leaves, before they've had a chance to pick up all that poison.

That means out with the black and in with the green and white -- the youngest tealeaves harvested, and also the healthiest. Leaf for leaf, black tea can't touch its younger siblings, which have been linked to everything from cancer prevention to longer lives.

Of course, you'll undo it all if you brew your tea in the fluoride-filled sludge that passes for water in most of the United States -- so make sure you use only clean fluoride-free water, ideally from a reverse-osmosis filter.

Teed off over toxic tea

Latest flu shot linked to seizures

Check the calendar, flu-shot season is here -- and if you thought last year's vaccine was bad, wait 'til you get a load of this one.

They haven't even started jabbing shoulders in earnest yet, and we're already getting terrifying warnings from the feds -- because one of the new vaccines has been linked to seizures in children.

Australia, just coming out of its flu season, had to suspend flu shots for kids -- because little ones were suffering febrile seizures at 10 times the normal rate.

It's bad enough that there's a "normal rate" of seizures associated with flu shots. The fact that it's now 10 times higher is just plain outrageous.

Ever see a febrile seizure? It's one of the most frightening things a parent or grandparent could ever witness. The child's temperature flies through the roof, causing the child to pass out, shake, stop breathing, and even turn blue.

Who knows what else will happen when this year's jab goes into wide use... but the feds aren't waiting. The CDC is already busy hawking vaccines, urging flu shots for every man, woman, and child older than six months.

That's a pretty bold recommendation when you consider that there's no evidence that flu shots cut flu deaths. None. Just look at what happened last year -- despite all the dire warnings and predictions, we Americans thumbed our collective nose at the dangerous swine flu vaccine... and we pulled through the "pandemic" just fine.

Of course, the joke was on us because we paid for those vaccines whether we used them or not -- but don't get me started on that.

So this year, turn back the clock and make like it's 2009 all over again. Skip the shot.

It's like I say every year: Flu prevention starts and ends with good hygiene and a good immune system. Keep clean, eat well and take your vitamins, and you'll be better protected than anyone who gets the vaccine.

And you won't have to worry about the side effects.

Flu Plan Scandal Ahead – An Urgent Warning

The World Health Organization (WHO) declared the swine flu pandemic officially over on August 9^th. The swine flu, which we were warned would kill millions, if not tens of millions of people, turned out to be a complete "dud" as far as pandemics go, but health agencies and governments around the world still managed to create massive fear of this hybrid flu virus.

And, of course, vaccine makers made millions off their novel H1N1 vaccines.

For those in the southern hemisphere, like Australia, the flu season has already begun, and the health hazards of this year's seasonal trivalent vaccine have already become evident.

For the rest of you, the flu season is nearing, and another round of advertisements for flu vaccines are about to hit the media.

Summary of a Failed Pandemic

Last year the United States contracted for the manufacture of over 170 million doses of swine flu vaccine. Probably the most significant accomplishment of this website was that we were able to contribute to the fact that only 90 million doses were used in the United States.

Armed with the facts, less than one-third of the US population fell for the fear mongering.

It quickly became very clear that this was in fact a very mild disease that was not going to kill people in large numbers. Yet the projected number of casualties in the US alone was declared to be between 60,000 to 90,000! And the campaign to hype up the fear and force the untested, unproven pandemic vaccine on the masses through any means reached previously unheard of proportions.

Within a week of Australia reporting that the virus appeared to be 40 times less lethal than originally feared, the WHO instructed countries to simply stop lab confirming suspected H1N1 cases, which meant that any and all flu-like symptoms were reported as pandemic influenza, padding the statistics.

STILL, despite this misrepresentation of the facts, last year's flu season turned out to be one of the mildest in recent years!

Since 2003, the official government statistic on flu deaths has been an average of 36,000 deaths per year (although as previously reported, this number is also far from the truth as it includes pneumonia deaths, which account for most of these deaths), but last year the CDC reported only 12,000 flu deaths – a mere one-third of the average!

These cases were also not serologically confirmed to be influenza, but included pneumonia and other flu-like illness, which means the actual number of people who died as a direct result of the flu – let alone H1N1 -- was even lower than that.

See, whenever you see flu mortality statistics, you need to beware that the number includes secondary respiratory complications such as pneumonia, which may or may not have been preceded by a bout of flu. This is sort of a catchall category that has been conveniently ascribed to influenza when, oftentimes, that's just the precipitating trigger.

Now, typically, one of the common mechanisms of death as you get older is respiratory infections. The influenza doesn't actually kill the person, the secondary pneumonia does, and it does so because their immune system is too compromised, whether due to age or underlying poor health.

Either way, the fact that last season's flu mortality statistic was a mere one-third of the average should serve as a valuable eye-opener to anyone who may still be panicking at the mere thought of the H1N1 swine flu.

Key WHO Pandemic Advisors had Financial Ties to Vaccine Makers

This was perhaps suspected, but when the World Health Organization finally released a list of its pandemic advisors, it finally confirmed that at least five of the key players who influenced the phase six pandemic declaration indeed had financial ties to vaccine makers.

As we now know, our tax dollars were completely wasted on these nonessential pandemic vaccines, and it appears as though financial conflicts of interest between WHO pandemic advisors and the industry may have had a great deal to do with it.

Is it really wise to take advice from people who have a financial stake in the outcome of the decision to declare a worldwide pandemic?

I think recent history tells us the answer is clearly NO!

On June 24^th, the European Parliamentary Assembly criticized the lack of transparency and "grave shortcomings" in the decision-making processes relating to the pandemic, stating:

"The Parliamentary Assembly is alarmed about the way in which the H1N1 influenza pandemic has been handled, not only by the World Health Organization (WHO) but also by the competent health authorities at the level of the European Union and at national level.

It is particularly troubled by some of the consequences of decisions taken and advice given leading to distortion of priorities of public health services across Europe, waste of large sums of public money and also unjustified scares and fears about health risks faced by the European public at large.

The Assembly notes that grave shortcomings have been identified regarding the transparency of decision-making processes relating to the pandemic which have generated concerns about the possible influence of the pharmaceutical industry on some of the major decisions relating to the pandemic."

They also remarked that:

"In Recommendation 1908 (2010) on lobbying in a democratic society (European Code of conduct on lobbying), the Assembly noted that unregulated or secret lobbying may be a danger and can undermine democratic principles and good governance."

I believe the swine flu pandemic of 2009 was a perfect example of just how devastating such 'secret lobbying' can be.

Flu Vaccine Does Not Prevent Death in Elderly, CDC Director Admits

Clearly, what the pharmaceutical industry would love for you to believe is that the flu vaccine is going to somehow magically protect you from dying from the flu, when in fact the evidence couldn't be more clear -- It doesn't work at all in the elderly! And the data is flimsy at best when it comes to children and adults.

In fact, in April, Michael Osterholm, director of the national Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP), publicly admitted that flu shots don't work in the elderly.

We also know the flu vaccine is fraught with side effects and health complications, so many people are literally receiving zero benefit and all risk when getting this vaccine!

There is a massive attempt to defraud and deceive people to generate profits from flu vaccines. Fortunately, we are able to penetrate this veil of misinformation, as we did so effectively last year. And this year, we want to start early by warning people about the new plan...

WARING: This Year's Flu Plan

The news for this year is that the flu vaccine you'll get this fall will be a combination vaccine that contains both the regular flu- and the swine flu vaccines – you will not be given the choice to take them individually.

Barbara Loe Fisher explains:

"In February of 2009, the CDC announced that every single American from the age of 6 months through the year of death should get an annual flu shot -- every single one of us, whether we're healthy or we're sick.

In March of 2009, this mysterious H1N1 bird-pig-human hybrid influenza virus was discovered.

So here we are… Everyone is supposed to get a flu shot every year. We're going into the flu season of 2010-2011…. [But] they have decided that in the annual influenza shot for this year, there will be three type A or type B viruses, and one will be H1N1."

This is the same type of vaccine that Australia recently suspended for use in children under the age of five because it caused a surprisingly high number of reports of children suffering high fevers, vomiting and febrile convulsions.

But children aren't the only group that seem to react more violently to the trivalent vaccine that contains the H1N1 component.

A special government committee has been created to investigate last year's H1N1 monovalent vaccine for signs that it may be associated with a higher rate of certain kinds of reactions. What the committee found out provisionally is that there were three signs of trouble with the H1N1 swine flu vaccine used last year.

Fisher explains:

"One was Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS), which we know has been associated with influenza vaccine since 1976 when the first swine flu vaccine was used. There is [also] a sign of a blood disorder called thrombocytopenia. Thrombocytopenia is when your blood cannot produce enough platelets. It's an autoimmune type reaction.

The other is Bell's palsy. That's a facial paralysis. It's a neuroimmune reaction.

The government is saying they don't know if these are true signals or not, but there were some red flags that were raised."

So now we're moving into the 2010-2011 flu season with a vaccine that may be very reactive.

"I am concerned," Fisher says, "We have over 300 million people [in the US] which… are supposed to get this influenza vaccine. And we have a very aggressive push by the media and others who are following the lead of the government, so we could have a bad situation."

Flu Vaccine Doesn't Work for Seniors, So Their Dose is Quadrupled!

For seniors, the news may be even more dire.

When H1N1 first hit last year, the CDC explained that seniors weren't included in the first round of shots because studies indicated the risk of infection in this age group was less than for younger groups.

But now that H1N1 is part of the seasonal shot, the CDC and WHO have some hefty plans for the same seniors who, last year, they said were less likely to get H1N1.

In the ACIP Provisional Recommendations for the Use of Influenza Vaccines, dated February 24, it states:

"A higher dose formulation of an inactivated seasonal influenza vaccine (Fluzone High-Dose, manufactured by Sanofi Pasteur, licensed by FDA on December 23, 2009) for use in people age 65 years and older will be available in the 2010-11 influenza season.

"Fluzone High-Dose contains four times the amount of influenza antigen compared to other inactivated seasonal influenza vaccines. …

Studies are underway to assess the relative effectiveness of Fluzone High-Dose compared to standard dose inactivated influenza vaccine, but results from those studies will not be available before the 2010-11 influenza season." [Emphasis mine.]

Yes, you read that right: if you're age 65 or older, the CDC wants you to take a flu vaccine this fall that not only contains an antigen they previously said you probably already have antibodies to (H1N1), but that is also four times as potent, with no safety evaluation whatsoever until AFTER the season is underway!

Again, the CDC is asking you to be a part of a large public health experiment.

This is why we're warning you early, because for the most part, none of this is really known. It's not been announced. It certainly has not received widespread publicity.

Another mind-bending irony is that unused or expired flu vaccines that contain the mercury preservative thimerosal can by law not be disposed of in regular garbage because it's considered hazardous waste.

Yet it's deemed to be safe to inject into your body – in the case of the flu vaccine, once a year, each and every year of your life!

Is the Vaccine Safe for Pregnant Women? Nobody Knows!

We now have the policy in place that every single American is supposed to get a flu shot this coming year, from six months of age through the year of death. That means every clinic; every doctor who has that flu vaccine is going to be pushing hard for it. Even in pregnant women.

"I am very concerned about the issue of pregnant women getting influenza shots, particularly this one," Fisher says. "We don't have enough scientific studies that have looked at the effects of giving influenza vaccine, particularly this H1N1 vaccine, to pregnant women.

Last summer the NIH announced that they were doing studies in children, adults and in pregnant women with the H1N1 swine flu vaccine. About 120 pregnant women were supposed to be enrolled in a study in early September… We have yet to see any announcement of what the results of those studies were."

I agree. It's shocking to think that pregnant women are advised to take a vaccine that has no scientific backing for its safety for either the mother or the unborn child.

Cradle to Grave Approach to Flu Vaccine – Is it Wise?

Fisher says:

"I think that we really need to take a hard look at this cradle to grave approach for influenza vaccine. We have to certainly demand that the proper scientific studies be done.

For those people who want to use influenza vaccine, they deserve no less. But we certainly shouldn't be in the business of mandating the use of influenza vaccine in this country. It seems like every single time the CDC recommends a vaccine for universal use by children, and now by adults, there is this issue of whether or not it should be required.

I am very concerned about that because we should all have the right to make free choices about the kind of healthcare we want, and the kind of products that we want to use, and that should go for vaccines as well."

Remember that products like vaccines that contain additives like mercury and aluminum can cause brain damage, or even death. If you happen to have certain genetics or biological high risk factors that put you at greater risk than others for suffering vaccine induced harm, you're out of luck…

There's also the issue of contamination, such as the rotavirus vaccine that was recently found to contain potentially dangerous pig viral DNA.

In truth, we have no understanding of what the acute implications are, let alone the long-term ramifications to the second and third generations.

Fortunately, we fought back and the H1N1 vaccine was not made mandatory last year. That was a major victory for the freedom to choose. So now, I encourage you to spread the word, to get educated, and to let your friends and relatives know about the flu plan for this year because they are not going to hear this from the conventional media.

In order to make an informed choice, you need to have the facts of what you're up against; including all the risks and the benefits.

Your involvement can play a huge role in preserving you and your family's freedom and protecting innocent children from undue harm. Let's make sure that we are never in a position where we are forced to get an influenza vaccine that has not been proven safe, effective, or necessary.

One More Time – Vitamin D to the Rescue

I've written about the benefits of vitamin D to ward off the flu in the past, and I'm pleased to announce that more and more studies about how Vitamin D can prevent infections, disease, and flu are coming out.

For example, if you're pregnant or planning to become pregnant, you'll be pleased to know that an article published May 1 in the American Academy of Pediatrics News recommends pregnant women take 4,000 IUs of Vitamin D daily to fight infection and disease, to maintain good health, and to deliver healthier, stronger babies.

But even this seemingly large amount may be seriously inadequate in many women. Some may need more than 10,000 units per day and the only way to know for sure is to have your vitamin D level tested.

Then, take a look at this Japanese study from last year, which showed that a group of children taking Vitamin D₃ was 58 percent less likely to catch influenza A. That's a higher effectiveness than any flu vaccine can claim, and doesn't come with a barrage of potentially devastating side effects!

Since we already know that most children and teenagers are Vitamin D-deficient, I urge you to get your children's vitamin D levels tested, and if found deficient, follow my recommendations for optimizing their levels. Do this, and they'll be far less likely to catch any cold or flu this year.

For more information, I highly recommend you watch my one-hour free vitamin D lecture along with my video on vitamin D's role in flu prevention.

Related Links:

  H1N1 Swine Flu Alerts 

  Swine Flu Fake Pandemic 

  Swine Flu Shot Side Effects