top of page

When the Vaccinated Spread Illness

Updated: Jan 30, 2021

Chapter 8: Article 5

In many places within the US, and Canada, flu shots are now required if you want to keep your job, or if you simply want to be treated with respect while at work. In many instances, unvaccinated employees are either being fired, or they are being required to wear a mask for the entire duration of their shift (8 – 12 hours), and for the entire duration of flu season, which lasts for months. Unvaccinated nurses who opt to wear a mask all flu season-long and forgo a vaccine, are obviously easily identifiable, and these nurses state that they are now being treated poorly by their fellow staff, by their superiors, and by some patients and visitors, because their personal medical choice has been labeled on them for everyone to see.

I assume the initial intent of the policy wasn’t to label people or cause discrimination - at least I hope that was not the intent, I will give those policy makers the benefit of doubt on that point - BUT, when nurses explained to their superiors that the masking policy was resulting in visual labeling and was causing preferential discriminatory treatment, against a minority group that is openly hated, the policy makers at that point should have evaluated and changed how the policy was being enforced. OR they should have retracted and abolished the policy completely. They didn't. Instead, the policy continues to be enforced today, in the same way. As I’ve said a few times now, enforcing policy that labels a minority group of people, a group which media verbally attacks and encourages you to hate, such enforced policy is deeply discriminatory and incredibly dangerous.

Not only is the LABELLING of people discriminatory and dangerous, but the “Flu shot or Mask Up” policy itself is discriminatory because of HOW the policy is enforced. Research conducted by the highly respected Cochrane organization looked at vaccination research conducted on millions of people, and their analysis concluded that vaccination is NOT reducing the cases of severe influenza, it’s not reducing influenza hospital admissions, nor is it having an appreciable effect on the number of absentee days that health care workers take off from work. Cochrane found that vaccination is having only a minimal effect on reducing cases of influenza in healthy adults, with 71 people needing to be vaccinated, to prevent one case of influenza. The conclusion of several of their analysis’ has stated that mass vaccination against flu is a completely ineffective public health strategy. So why are health professionals being penalized if they refuse to get this shot? Looking at more "positive” flu vaccine research published by the vaccine manufacturer GSK for their Flulaval-Tetra vaccine, in a clinical trial that they conducted, they discovered that in a group of about 2400 children, influenza occurred in 5.3% (58 children) of the unvaccinated population, and 2.4% (128 children) of the vaccinated population. So their "vaccine positive" research showed that their flu shot provided benefit for 2.7% of the vaccinated, during the flu season when this study was conducted. (I could only find two studies that looked at the protective effects (not just anti-body generation for Canadian-approved flu vaccines. The two trials were both conducted on children, and this one used a larger group of participants. I have not found a comparable trial conducted on adults, and so until I do, I will use these results to illustrate my point next point.)

Ultimately, the point needs to be made that we are either terrified of influenza or we aren’t. If we are terrified of influenza, then we have to be terrified of influenza transmission FROM ALL PEOPLE, regardless of who it came from, an unvaccinated or vaccinated person. Right now, we’re only terrified of influenza from the unvaccinated. Lets put numbers to this using the Flulaval study data. Currently, we are so terrified of potential influenza from the healthy unvaccinated nursing population, that we are requiring ALL of them to mask themselves ALL THE TIME while on shift even while healthy, because 5.3% of their population will get sick at some point. Transmission of the deadly influenza from that 5.3% of the unvaccinated nursing population NEEDS TO BE PREVENTED, period, because that influenza is just so completely terrifying and dangerous. Whereas, we aren't terrified of the harmless influenza that occurs in 2.7% of the vaccinated nursing population and subsequently we do NOT need any of those nurses to mask themselves, because the influenza that those nurses might be incubating and transmitting to their coworkers and patients is just NOT terrifying at all.

So which is it? Are we terrified or aren’t we? If we’re terrified, then ALL health care providers should be wearing masks all flu season long, period. Anything short of that should be viewed as being completely dangerous AND discriminatory. If we’re not terrified of the influenza cases that continue to occur within the vaccinated population, then we aren’t terrified of influenza, and in that case, current masking policy needs to be scrapped completely and immediately, again because it's unnecessary and discriminatory.

A similar situation is also happening related to the other vaccine preventable illnesses. For example, there is now CAUSATIVE association that demonstrates the whooping cough vaccine is not contributing to herd immunity because the vaccine CANNOT prevent whooping cough infection or transmission in the vaccinated population. For the vaccinated population, the only benefit experienced from the vaccine is a PERSONAL one; The vaccinated population, once infected, are only protected from experiencing the severe symptoms and some vaccine recipients may have no symptoms at all. That said, when whooping cough outbreaks do occur, if a vaccinated person is exposed, they WILL become infected, period. They may not appear sick, or they may be mildly ill (and their symptoms won't be recognized as whooping cough) BUT they still are infected and they remain infectious for up to 42 days. During this time, they go to school, work, public centers and stores, where they spread the illness around to other vaccinated people, unvaccinated people, babies and immunocompromised people.

In comparison, the unvaccinated who usually become sick upon exposure to whooping cough bacteria, they remain infectious for up to 38 days. BUT, as a result of the symptoms they experience, they stay home and self-quarantine for much of the time that they are infectious, and therefore they spread the illness considerably less than the vaccinated. Once recovered from the illness, if they are re-exposed to whooping cough bacteria again, they remain completely immune, meaning they do not become infected again and cannot silently transmit the illness to others. The Health Authorities have very clearly stated that the increasing rates of whooping cannot be attributed to the unvaccinated, and illness rates are increasing because the vaccinated become infected and silently and unknowingly spread the illness around. So if we’re concerned about protecting the herd from whooping cough because it's such a dangerous and terrifying illness, why do media never mention that the vaccinated are significantly contributing to the spread of illness? This makes no sense.

Moving past whooping cough, and ignoring the fact that illness outbreaks do occur in fully vaccinated populations due to primary and secondary vaccine failure, it needs to be recognized that the vaccines themselves can cause illness, even though media denies this. Scientific research conducted on the live viral vaccines for chicken pox, shingles, rotavirus, measles and mumps, has proven that these vaccines cause shedding of virus, for weeks after vaccine administration, and these vaccine strain viruses have been proven to cause illness. For chicken pox, the vaccine package insert clearly states that the recently vaccinated should avoid close associations with susceptible persons for six weeks afterwards. Case studies have documented vaccine strain chicken pox infection months after vaccination. When it comes to rotavirus, published research (Here and Here) demonstrates that the vaccine causes shedding for up to four weeks. A published case study has also demonstrated that shedding of vaccine strain virus can sicken others. The case study explained that a child needed hospitalization because the vaccine strain virus had mutated and became more virulent. The mumps vaccine has been shown to cause vaccine strain mumps in vaccine recipient children, three weeks after vaccination, which then caused vaccine strain mumps in several family members five to seven weeks after the children were vaccinated. The measles vaccine has been shown to shed for at least two weeks post vaccination, and a case study has demonstrated that the vaccine has caused vaccine strain measles in a vaccine recipient 37 days aftervaccination. In a Flumist vaccine clinical trial, it was demonstrated that shedding occurred for up to four weeks after administration of the vaccine, and the vaccine virus can be transmitted to susceptible people. The oral polio vaccine causes polio outbreaks, which is why it is no longer used in North America. Unfortunately it is still used in developing nations and vaccine strain outbreaks continue to occur. 

In many illness case studies, the researchers concluded that the vaccine strain illness was identified ONLY because they were in the midst of an illness outbreak which put health authorities on heightened alert, causing them to look more closely at the cases. So how often are vaccine strain cases and outbreaks occurring, that are assumed to be caused by the wild type viruses and subsequently blamed on the unvaccinated?

Also, signage in many hospitals now clearly states that the recently vaccinated should not visit certain areas, because of the real risk of transmission of vaccine strain illness. Why does the media focus only on the unvaccinated. Why aren’t they informing the population that they should be taking precautions around those who have recently been vaccinated with a live virus vaccine. Thosse vaccine recipients are shedding virus and are capable of transmitting illness to susceptible populations. So which is it, are we terrified of these illnesses or aren't we? To only be terrified of the unvaccinated population, when the vaccinated population is also spreading the illnesses as well, this makes zero sense.

CONTINUE to the next article here: Ch8: Part 6

Article Sources

  • Cochrane - Flu vaccine does not reduce severe cases or hospital admissions Here

  • Flulaval Package Insert – Clinical Trial Data is Presented on Pages 18-19 Here

  • Whooping Cough: Vaccine Fails to Prevent Infection and Transmission of Illness Here

  • Chicken Pox: Package Insert – The Vaccine Virus can Infect Others – Pg 5 Here

  • Chicken Pox: 5 months after 2 siblings were immunized against chicken pox, the one child developed shingles and subsequently infected his sibling with vaccine strain chicken pox Here

  • Shingles: Vaccine can infect others with Chicken Pox – Pg4 Here

  • Rotavirus: Shedding Here and Here, and Sibling Transmission of Vaccine Derived Rotavirus Here

  • Measles: Sheding Here and vaccinated child develops vaccine strain measles 37 days after immunization Here

  • Mumps: Vaccine strain mumps infected the vaccinees and was transmitted to family contacts Here

  • Mumps: Another case of vaccine transmission Here

  • Flumist vaccine sheds for up to four weeks Here

  • Hospital Recommendations to Visitors who have been Vaccinated Here

532 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Fraud: Poul Thorsen & Andrew Wakefield

Chapter 8: Article 1 Let’s turn our attention back to fraud, again. Poul Thorsen is a Danish researcher, and the US Government has charged him with wire fraud and money laundering. It’s believed he st

Propaganda & Censorship: Part 1

Chapter 8: Article 2 Drug safety and effectiveness is a measurable thing that can be tested in a clinical setting. But, a drug’s use, its overuse or improper use, that sometimes results from its accep


bottom of page