Brazil, featured, United States
Comments 19

Zika is not yet proven to cause anything but a mild cold – but don’t let that stop the hysteria

by Catte

As Miami sprays Naled over its own populations, and GM mosquitoes are poised to be launched over parts of Florida, let’s pause to reflect on the sober realities about what we really know about Zika

Before the sudden emergence of a media-campaign claiming links between Zika and microcephaly in infants born to infected women, no one had ever considered Zika to be worthy of comment. Discovered in 1947, in Africa, it was known as a largely benign organism that may cause mild flu-like symptoms in 20% of those infected (the other 80% will be symptomless).

So, why the sudden hysteria? Why the travel-warnings, the mass-sraying programs, the dire warnings? Is it because Zika has now been found to be a serious threat to human health? Not at all. If you look beyond the screaming media headlines you’ll see there is as yet no proven causal connection between Zika and microcephaly at all.

The original Brazilian research on which the media hysteria was based found 404 confirmed cases of microcephaly (not over 4000 as some media alleged), and in only 17 – seventeen – of these was Zika detected in the mother or infant.

Other research indicates there is, or may be, a real though poorly defined, increase in local incidents of microcephaly in newborns in Northeast Brazil, but it regards a causal connection with the Zika virus as merely one theoretical possibility of many, and indeed it offers several good reasons for being sceptical about the potential connection:

Currently, the association with the ZIKV infection is the most explored possibility. Evidence of perinatal transmission of ZIKV(10) together with its strong neurotropism(11) and its documentation in amniotic fluid of foetuses with microcephaly(4) are factors that favour this hypothesis. However, if the ZIKV were indeed introduced in Brazil at the World Cup in mid 2014(12), the outbreak of microcephaly would have preceded it. ZIKV has been identified in Africa over 50 years ago, and neither there nor in the outbreaks outside Africa, such an association with microcephaly has been reported

In June this year a study was published that further weakened the potential link between Zika and microcephaly. Reviewing incidents of microcephaly in Columbia, it found almost no detectable connection between the defect and maternal infection with Zika.

Of the nearly 12,000 pregnant women with clinical symptoms of Zika infections until March 28, no cases of microcephaly were reported as of May 2. At the same time, four cases of Zika and microcephaly were reported for women who were symptomless for Zika infections and therefore not included in the study itself.

[…]

The NECSI report analyzes the data and shows that the four cases of Zika and microcephaly that have been observed till April 28 are just what would be expected due to the background rate — of the 60,000 pregnancies about 20,000 births would already be expected. The expected microcephaly rate for countries with no reported infections of 2-in-10,000 births gives exactly four cases. The study also notes that until April 28 there has been a total of about 50 microcephaly cases in Colombia, of which only four have been connected with Zika. The four cases are expected for the coincidence of Zika and microcephaly in the same pregnancies even if Zika is not the cause.

In light of this evidence, NECSI says the cause of microcephaly in Brazil should be reconsidered.

So, why is the establishment, its media and major “health” institutions such as the World Health Organisation and the CDC, continuing to promote the Zika/microcephaly connection as a done deal? Why is the CDC openly asserting that “Zika causes microcephaly” even though the only research it cites found only the smallest possible correlation? (go here for a good breakdown of that). Why, on the basis of inconclusive science, pseudo-science and poor reasoning, is the US government instigating nationwide “prevention and containment” efforts aimed at stopping the spread of the virus, which includes the spraying of urban areas with highly toxic pesticides? How much sense can it possibly make for the the US govt to drench parts of its own population with Naled, a compound that is known to cause, amongst other things,reduced-brain-size in unborn foetuses, in order to kill mosquitoes that might be carrying a virus that might be linked to a small risk of – reduced brain size in unborn foetuses?

And if that isn’t enough, it’s also given the go-ahead to release millions of genetically-modifed mosquitoes.

Because clearly a vanishingly small risk to public health demands as big and stupid an over-reaction as is humanly possible.

Here’s a vid on the subject from Truthstream media

19 Comments

  1. AnotherLover says

    It’s the gmo mosquitoes they want. It is an extraordinarily horrible idea, and only shrunken baby heads could make people want to do it. They made it up.

    Like

  2. The CDC and Toma Frieden especially need to be charged with fraudulently attempting to extort 1.8 billion taxpayer dollars from the US government for research for this insignificant virus. Frieden needs to be made an example and given a long prison sentence as the leading perpe-traitor. Hundreds of millions of people are being doused with deadly pesticides because of this little worms lies.

    Jail to Tom Frieden!!!

    Liked by 1 person

  3. A subject well worth drawing attention to, it reminds me of the avian flu threat at the beginning of the century. Despite no real evidence all the media ‘experts’ immediately blamed it on wild birds. I begged to differ then, and I beg to differ now.

    The part of Spain where I live is a major stopping point on one of the two major routes for wild birds migrating between Europe and Africa in spring and autumn. I can actually see North Africa from my window, It’s a great place for twitchers with a wide variety of species to see. They can’t help mixing as thousands stop off to feed at the same protected sites on their way north.

    You might have thought the fact that many locals raise free-range chickens, ducks, turkeys and geese on smallholdings, would’ve resulted in the region becoming a hotspot for avian flu. Amazingly, given all the scare stories in the corporate media, not one case of the virus was reported as occurring in the wild or domestic fowl populations of this area.

    Strangely enough, at the start of the outbreak, we didn’t get any of the ‘experts’ wheeled out to stir up panic mentioning another possible migratory route for avian flu. That route flowed east to west, not south to north or north to south, and the birds didn’t fly it. Another bit of news didn’t see the light of day till some time later.

    Coincidentally, that avian flu appeared to follow the main roads linking east to west didn’t occur to the ‘experts’. Yet lines of huge container trucks stuffed with countless flocks of domestic fowl had been travelling the same roads for years. Poultry destined for sale in Western European supermarkets was being shifted in industrial quantities – dead or alive – from the east.

    This only came to light as one documented case led to a prosection in February 2007. When an outbreak of bird flu at the Bernard Matthews plant in Suffolk got out of hand, it had to be reported. A shipment of 38 tonnes of chicken breasts had been imported from another Matthews plant based in Hungary. That shipment was discovered to have carried the infection into Britain. Many chicken fans must have choked on their nuggets at the news as Bernard Matthews ‘bootiful’ poultry products were on sale at most major supermarket outlets in Britain.

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2007/feb/11/health.birdflu.

    And then there’s the swine flu pandemic that made Donald ‘Schwein’ Rumsfeld a fortune, as he got the world’s hospitals to stock up on countless millions of doses of Tamiflu, pocketing millions of dollars that could have been spent on combating real diseases.

    It has since been discovered that Tamiflu doesn’t work:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-h-newman-md/tamiflu_b_4400584.html

    This latest scare seems like yet another global corporation is pulling another global scam. A good time for the elite to invest in Frankensquito shares, to dump them at the first sign of a drop in price.

    Liked by 2 people

  4. Reblogged this on The Most Revolutionary Act and commented:

    *
    *
    The original Brazilian research on which the media hysteria was based found 404 confirmed cases of microcephaly (not over 4000 as some media alleged), and in only 17 – seventeen – of these was Zika detected in the mother or infant.

    Like

  5. Brian Harry, Australia says

    It’s all about “keeping the people scared”, and then claiming that “we will keep you safe”. Not only does the American govt keep repeating the mantra “Keeping Americans safe”(despite 30,000+Americans being killed each year from gunshots), but even here in Australia I’ve noticed members of the government using the term “Our first responsibility to Australians is to ‘keep you safe'”. It’s as if there are “Bogymen” everywhere and only WE can save you.
    We’ve had ‘Swine Flu’, ‘Bird flu’ ‘Horse flu’ even some sort of ‘Flying Fox'(Bats) virus…………..First you scare them, then you promise to save them. It works every time, thanks to a compliant media who are always on side. It used to be called Bullshit.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Secret Agent says

      It’s all part of the bait and switch. It used to be that the Government would look out for our economic wellbeing and would try to promote general prosperity but they found that by scaring the people they were easier to herd and fleece.

      There was a film made called “The power of Nightmares” that explains it.

      As in nightmares, stop running and turn to face what is chasing you.

      And Zika? Once you have had it, you are immune.

      Like

  6. rtj1211 says

    The whole media approach to ‘medicine’ explains why ‘experts’ now have such a bad Press.

    The question which always has to be asked is whether the Press ‘interprets’ the research accurately, or faithfully reports what was reported.

    Having written scientific papers myself, I know full well the way the game is played and you should never read Paper Titles, Paper Abstracts or Paper Conclusions, but focus solely on the data presented to determine for yourself what the conclusions to draw should be.

    Strong titles are always demanded when the reality of much scientific data is that it is much less black and white, more a shade of grey.

    In the case of microcephaly, you cannot say that Zika Virus is THE causative agent if the majority of cases of microcephaly show no presence of Zika virus. You can say that it might be A causative agent, but unless you can show cogent evidence of a ‘hit and run’ mechanism, whereby Zika Virus infection triggers something which remains around to cause the microcephaly even if the virus infection is cleared by the immune system, you cannot state that it is THE cause, because if it isn’t there, how can it cause it….?

    It is equally important to start the search for (a) causative agent(s) without prejudice. It is a good idea to study historical research often older than 25 years (which is often ignored by scientists due to the difficulty in getting hold of reprints in the pre-digital age). Microcephaly is not a new phenomenon, so studying what happened many years ago gives hints as to the nature of how microcephaly is caused……

    There is a very common narrative nowadays that a story line is pre-agreed and then the media and all organs of Government press it globally for commercial reasons. There are always commercial reasons…..

    It is the case for ‘global warming’: the pre-agreed line was decided upon in 1990 and it is 25 years later starting to be exposed for the myth that it always was.

    It is the case for ‘9/11, Saddam Hussein’s Weapons of Mass Destruction etc etc’ and we all know how the evidence there is now regarded…..

    One wonders whether it will be the same where certain vaccination protocols are concerned……

    The lesson to learn about science in the media is this: never trust any journalist to report things faithfully, appropriately or honestly, since those three descriptions are not dramatic, emotionally challenging or newsworthy.

    A sad thing to say about journalists and their editors, but it is a statement based on seeing how the Press report science since 1986, when I first started working in a lab after graduating in science…….

    Like

    • Willem says

      I agree with everything in this comment, except for the global warming part, which I see as a waste of opportunities. Even if fossil fuel does not cause global warming, it is a waste to use it in the vast amounts that we do use it today as we (and that means everybody on the planet) have an alternative that is solar power and wind power. Not only are those sources of energy 100% safe, it will also stop endless wars in the middle East and elsewhere as these oil wars are no longer necessary when you have solar/wind power.

      I am sure that a lot of infrastructure is needed and that it will not be 100% effective from the start (so that you still need fossil fuel, for instance in winter when there is less sun to warm your sun powered roof (of your car and house), but for that problem you could provide money to science in the hope that they will find a solution for that (which is far more effective than giving grants to scientists to prevent zika virus for instance). In the meantime you make housing more energy friendly, provide cars with solar fuel tanks, etc, for which you need to employ people. And even if fossil fuel does not threathen the world by global warming, Earth will run out of it some day. And how are we going to use our air conditioners and heating then?

      In summary:
      1) alternative energy (sun power/ wind power) will stop the endless wars in the Middle East
      2) It will also solve the unemployment problems that western societies are facing (manufacturing jobs)
      3) It does not waste fossil fuel of which Earth will run out some day.
      4) You do not run the risk that Earth will become a new Venus or Mars within years to come (the green scare).

      I think this is the idea which Jill Stein promotes with her Green New Deal. I think it is worth a try.

      I am sure that NATO and fossil fuel companies oppose the idea since it will threathen the existence of these companies and institutions. But as a government you could still give them a lot of money if they shift their interest from nuclear war and so on, to nucleair opportunities in space and so on where they can find new life and resources. Maybe far sought, but Carl Sagan made a beautiful effort for this in in his 1980s series Cosmos.

      It is worth a try and it is not science fiction. It only needs different thinking, a new mindset. Which is needed anyway, as today’s mindset of glorious capitalism that is promoted by the media in an endless stream, as if it concerns religion, is dead anyway.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Secret Agent says

      Thing is, most reporters failed in science and can’t do math. They just act as stenographers for whatever they are told, aren’t really interested anyway, and would be much happier watching dramas on the TV than examining source material.

      Journalists who do enjoy examining source material and asking questions are typically called conspiracy therorists, and are ostracised by their more credulous peers.

      Like

  7. Thank you for extending this information – of which I had already become aware but is not allowed into mainstream media. The medical front is often completely overlooked by political and cultural perspectives – as if it were neutral, objective and independently verified information – by which populations are ‘medicated’ and patently absurd profits generated from sickness and death – in this case poisoned and provided with a cover story that itself generates more poisonous outcomes.
    Most news stories are legal documents where the conjecture of false association is given headline – with some plausible deniability hidden at the somewhere n the small print.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Indeed, yes.

    “Zika is not yet proven to cause anything but a mild cold – but don’t let that stop the hysteria”

    A suspect for the cause of microcephaly in northeast Brazil is the pesticide that was put in the sources of drinking water in the same region.

    It is pyriproxyfen, and it is billed as an insect juvenile hormone agonist. Its mode of action is to mimic insect juvenile hormone which normally goes away as the insect reaches maturity, thus driving development to the sexually competent and winged adult.

    Another juvenile hormone agonist, methoprene, has metabolites that bind to the retinoid X receptor in mammals. This can lead to birth defects, including microcephaly.

    Another retinoid X receptor, accutane, was used to treat severe cystic acne in the 1980s and this resulted in birth defects, including microcephaly.

    I have seen no definitive studies on whether pyriproxyfen or its metabolites also has retinoid X receptor activity.

    I think that is because nobody has bothered to look, not that it won’t do the deed.

    In the drinking water, yes indeedie.

    James (Jim) Ierdell Moss
    Gainesville
    Florida
    USA

    http://plaza.ufl.edu/dushka/

    http://original.antiwar.com/vlahos/2013/05/26/memorial-day-remembering-the-apostates/

    Like

  9. sabelmouse says

    funny how the guardian fully supports the zika=microcephaly hypothesis. i am so disgusted.

    Like

  10. Jim Porter says

    Some of my reading shows a higher correlation of microcephaly to the spraying of Naled by…..is it Monsanto….no, but a company called Valent which has a global collaboration agreement with Monsanto.

    Liked by 1 person

.....................

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s