C.D.C. AGAIN FUDGING FIGURES as they push everyone to get loaded up with their annual mercury dosages.

Here we go again. Flu season. The time when we are inundated with television, radio, billboard (you name it) ads reminding us it's time for us to inject thousands of times the safe-levels of mercury (and other dangerous adjuvants) directly into our blood streams, along with live viruses, in order for us all to be more "safe" from the influenza nuisance that rarely causes more than discomfort. Are you ready? ROLL UP THAT SLEEVE and take one for the team.

Not so fast. New examinations of the C.D.C. statistics on influenza deaths are raising serious questions about the "data" or other "bases" for the claim that massive vaccination campaigns against influenza are even needed, let alone closing in on being made mandatory in many locations.

Here is an excellent and detailed new article by Lew Rockwell covering what is going on:

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2018/10/no_author/the-cdcs-influenza-math-doesnt-add-up-exaggerating-the-death-toll-to-sell-flu-shots/

Here is a key excerpt from the above link:

"...the CDC’s high-flying flu numbers for 2017-2018 raise a number of questions. If accurate, 80,000 deaths would represent an enormous (and mystifying) one-year jump—tens of thousands more flu deaths compared to the already inflated numbers presented for 2016 (and every prior year). Moreover, assuming a roughly six-month season for peak flu activity, the 80,000 figure would translate to an average of over 13,300 deaths per month—something that no newspaper last year came close to reporting.

The CDC’s statistics are impervious to independent verification because they remain, thus far, unpublished—despite the agency’s pledge on its website to base its public health pronouncements on high-quality data derived openly and objectively. Could the CDC’s disappointment with influenza vaccination coverage—which lags far behind the agency’s target of 80%—have anything to do with the opacity of the flu data being used to peddle the unpopular and ineffective vaccines?"

Could it, indeed. Could it also have anything to do with the fact that "our" "elected" "representatives" received untold millions and millions of dollars given to their campaigns by the Big Pharma VAXXERS behind the push for making vaccines mandatory? Could it be that even people inside the C.D.C. are also being bribed to, well let's just say, "to fudge the facts" a tad?

I think so. Logic is a tough thing to refute, and it is only logical to believe that PEOPLE receiving large donations will take that into account when making decisions that might effect the welfare of those from whom those donations were received. If anyone tells you otherwise, they are either ON THE TAKE TOO, or very, very poor judges of human nature.

(CDC headquarters, Atlanta.)

Here is another brief excerpt from those who may not have time to read the whole article (which is excellent, and well worth your time, btw...):

"Semantics also play a key role in the CDC’s slippery communications about 'flu.' For example, CDC’s outpatient surveillance focuses on the broad category of 'influenza-like illness' (ILI)—an almost meaningless term describing general symptoms (fever, cough and/or sore throat) that any number of non-influenza viruses are equally capable of triggering. Cochrane lists several problems with the reliance on ILI to make inferences about influenza:

There is 'no reliable system to monitor and quantify the epidemiology and impact of ILI' and no way of knowing what proportion of ILI is caused by influenza. There are almost no reliable data on the number of ILI-related physician contacts or hospitalizations—and no one knows what proportion of ILI doctor visits and hospitalizations are due to influenza.

'Pneumonia,' too, is a catch-all diagnosis covering lung infections caused by a variety of different agents: viruses (non-influenza as well as influenza), bacteria, fungi, air pollutants and many others."

In other words, the entire government/CDC/Drug company advertising blitz is based on total Hocus Pocus, fudged figures, semantic games, and OUTRIGHT DECEPTION.

Can you say "CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS?"

LOL....don't hold your breath. You may need more than a jab to revive you if you do.

FYI...If you really want to avoid influenze, GET YOUR IMMUNE SYSTEM STRONG by taking high-daily dosages of Vitamin C (10 x the United Nations recommended daily allowance, at least) PLUS THIS:

If you take two of these (10,000 IU) per day, and then three or four of them in the winter months if you live in the north with little sun exposure, YOU WILL NOT GET SICK! Try it. Also, pound them if you do feel a cold (or "influenza" symptoms ) coming on...as much as YOUR BODY WEIGHT IN I.U.s for a day or two, and the symptoms should immediately dissipate without you actually getting sick. (P.S. I have not had a cold for 15 years, and I used to get 4-5 bad ones a year prior to starting my own D3 and C regimen.)

DISCLAIMER: I AM NOT A DOCTOR. DO YOUR OWN DUE DILIGENCE.