Salt Lake County confirms first flu-related deaths

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • ArizonaMormon Mesa, AZ
    Jan. 7, 2014 11:20 a.m.

    Gail Fitches,
    So what if the virus used to make the vaccine is grown in monkey kidney cells? It's a miracle of modern science that we can do things like that. It's a huge leap in logic to imply that the way things are cultured in a lab has anything to do with autimmunity and cancer. There are untold thousands of particles of bacteria, viruses, and carcinogens in every breath you take. The miniscule amount of carcinogenic materials in vaccines are very low risk. There are carcinogens in cooked red meat, for example. Doesn't mean one well-done steak is going to give you cancer.

    The 'most deadly substances known to man' are dependent on dosages. Someone earlier mentioned essential oils. Enough peppermint oil will kill you. Enough pure water will kill you. The potassium chloride sold as a dietary salt substitute is exactly the same thing used in executions by lethal injection.

    As for researching vaccines, I assume you mean research on anti-vaccine websites that quote studies and facts out-of-context? Just because somethings is published on a well-designed website doesn't make it true.

  • Gail Fitches Layton, UT
    Jan. 6, 2014 10:00 a.m.

    Vaccines are listed as biological blood products on the FDA website. The H1N1 virus in grown in the African Green Monkey Kidney cells. Also, the FDA had a conference that is online on the FDA website regarding growing viruses and bacterias in human tumors. Autoimmune diseases are off the charts, and so is cancer, and I can see why. If people did the research, you are taking chances of getting life threatening diseases from the vaccination. Also, if you read the ingredients of what is in the vaccination, they are some of the most deadly substances known to man. The VAERS report shows only 10% at most, of the vaccine injuries and deaths. For those who want to force people to take, may I suggest you do some more research on the deaths from vaccinations. Also, on the Vaccine inserts, in 13.1, it states, "This vaccine has not been evaluated for carcinogenic (cancer creation) or mutagenic potential, or potential to impair fertility.

  • Anonyme Orem, UT
    Jan. 3, 2014 6:37 p.m.

    I did find a study of On Guard on PubMed. (By the way, PubMed is a database maintained by the US National Library of Medicine. It's basically a search engine for any publication on medical topics. Inclusion on PubMed does not indicate endorsement by the government.) The study measured the efficacy of On Guard on influenza virus in canine kidney cells in vitro. The study showed that “virus infectivity was suppressed by essential oil treatment in a dose-dependent manner. . . . The number of infected [canine kidney] cells decreased by 90% and 45% when virus was treated with 1:2,000 and 1:3,000 dilutions of the oil, respectively.” In other words, all the study shows is that the oil can attenuate the flu virus on surfaces. There are plenty of products which do that and more. Lysol, for example, kills almost 100% of viruses and bacteria on surfaces.

    Do you have any controlled studies conducted on humans? Because this was an in vitro, not an in vivo study, it does nothing to show the efficacy of essential oil to prevent or treat flu in comparison to the flu vaccine.

  • fowersjl Farmington, Utah
    Jan. 3, 2014 4:51 p.m.

    A couple of places to look for scientific studies on On Guard essential oil and the flu is a pub med website run by the government. Also an aromatic science site. University of Vanderbilt, University of Colorado, University of Utah are all currently doing research on these essential oils and their efficacy. The statement you quoted from the website is one required by law for anything not regulated by the FDA. I do personally know people who have had some very serious reactions to the flu shots, others who got super sick with the flu after getting the shot. It makes sense to me to have options. Interestingly, lots of reputable medical doctors, chemists, microbiologists are getting involved with these essential oils.

  • Anonyme Orem, UT
    Jan. 3, 2014 3:26 p.m.

    Fowersjl said, “In the past four years I have felt the flu coming on twice, but have stopped it in its tracks with these oils.” Hmm. In the past four years I have never had the flu or even felt it coming on. Maybe that's because I got flu shots. There were no side effects and I didn't have to follow a regimen of ingesting or spraying or applying anything. Plus the shots cost me nothing, unlike overpriced oils sold by MLM companies.

    You say you have scientific studies to prove essential oils combat flu, and yet your product's website says “This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.” That seems incongruous to me. Would you mind sharing the names of those studies here?

  • danr San Bernardino, CA
    Jan. 3, 2014 2:02 p.m.

    I wish there were some way of holding those people who refuse to be vaccinated, responsible for the deaths and suffering. There is NO evidence that vaccines cause autism, neurological disorders, or any of the other effects claimed by conspiracy theorists.

    Those of you citing 1.5% efficacy rates are leaving out important details. That is misleading and dishonest.

  • fowersjl Farmington, Utah
    Jan. 3, 2014 12:23 p.m.

    Smart Cookie, you can look me up on Facebook and message me and I can give you answers to your questions. We have scientific studies to show you, too. In the past four years I have felt the flu coming on twice, but have stopped it in its tracks with these oils. Great for routine colds and so many other things, too. Jana Larson Fowers

  • Smart Cookie Kissimmee, FL
    Jan. 3, 2014 12:07 p.m.

    Midvale Guy - I am not sure what study from the Lancet you are looking at. The one I found is a Meta-analysis in the Lancet shows an efficacy rate of 57 - 95% depending on what group they are looking at. With variations depending largely on how well the CDC was at forecasting the strain of flu for a given year. Current Vaccination rates are ~ 43 – 55%, if vaccination rates were closer to the target numbers of 80% and 90% the efficacy rate for the flu vaccinations would be much higher since there would be less chances for the virus to spread around the general population.

    Fowersjl – which certified pure therapeutic grade essential oils are you talking about? I would like to know, since I don’t like getting sick. Also it would help me to look up any information to see if there are any scientifically proven studies to show those specific oils work.

  • What in Tucket? Provo, UT
    Jan. 3, 2014 11:42 a.m.

    The commentators here as with me do not understand all the ramifications of the flu vaccines. It does not protect 100%. Influenza may cause pandemics with millions of deaths in the world in a given year. People over 50 are most likely to get the flu. Seniors now are getting a stronger vaccine. The vaccine is planned for the most likely strains for a given year. So some years it works better than others. I take one, but my wife refuses. I hope and think that my vaccination protects her too. You may consider the fact that a 40 minute walk daily has one nice result other than 70% lower incidence of cancer, stroke, and heart attack is one has 1/20th the infection rate. My wife and I seem amazingly free of colds and stuff despite being over 80.

  • midvale guy MIDVALE, UT
    Jan. 3, 2014 9:13 a.m.

    flu vaccines have an effectiveness rate of only about 1.5 percent, according to the Lancet study that health authorities now routinely use to claim that flu vaccines are effective. When you take into account possible margins of error and other discrepancies, the true effectiveness of the flu shot is negligible, based on all available data.
    What this means, of course, is that the CDC and various other major mouthpieces for public health are struggling to maintain the flu vaccine lie, as no matter how many people get the flu shot, flu outbreaks only continue to intensify. If anything, this shows that widespread malnutrition, lack of vitamin D, and toxic environments, and not a lack of flu shots, is to blame for the current flu epidemic.

  • fowersjl Farmington, Utah
    Jan. 3, 2014 6:18 a.m.

    The problem with the flu shot is that it only protects against one or two varieties, when there are so many strains, and new ones cropping up all the time. I prefer to rely on the certified pure therapeutic grade essential oils that are effective against both bacteria and viruses. They have been very reliable without the side effects of the flu shots.


  • trekker Salt Lake, UT
    Jan. 3, 2014 6:10 a.m.

    The real flu last for weeks, these bugs people get that last for just a few days is not the flu they immunize against.

  • cowshed Provo, Utah
    Jan. 2, 2014 5:01 p.m.

    "The health department reports that about 17 percent of the people hospitalized with influenza this year received a flu shot prior to getting sick.'

    If flu shots are as effective as my own experience shows (I haven't had a case of the flu in 20+ years since I started taking the shots.) wouldn't it be expected that a very low percentage of people hospitalized with flue would have a flue shot? I would think the percentage would be closer to 0 than 17.