Spanish flu: Collection of documents

"March 31, 2020, a 2018 post on a page called “Stop Mandatory Vaccination” claims that “the 1918
Influenza Epidemic was a Vaccine-caused Disease.” This claim is false.

The claim that the influenza pandemic of 1918 “was the after-effect of the massive nation-wide vaccine
campaign” is unfounded. A vaccine against the flu did not exist at the time. According to the Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), having “no vaccine to protect against influenza infection
and no antibiotics to treat secondary bacterial infections that can be associated with influenza
infections”

It is true that U.S. soldiers during World War I were subject to immunization requirements...."

Source

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-vaccines-caused-1918-influe-idUSKBN21J6X2

There is old so called "conspiracy" theory about Spanish Flu:

"In preparation for WW1, a massive military vaccination experiment involving numerous prior
developed vaccines took place in Fort Riley, Kansas- where the first “Spanish Flu” case was reported.

The fledgling pharmaceutical industry, sponsored by the ‘Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research’
headed by Frederick Gates, had something they never had before – a large supply of human test
subjects. Supplied by the U.S. military’s first draft, the test pool of subjects ballooned to over 6 million
men.

Autopsies after the war proved that the 1918 flu was not a “flu . ” at all. It was caused by random
dosages of an experimental ‘bacterial meningitis vaccine’, which to this day, mimics flu-like
symptoms. The massive, multiple assaults with additional vaccines on the unprepared immune systems
of soldiers and civilians created a “killing field”.

Then in 2008:

Bacteria were the real killers in 1918 flu pandemic. By Ewen Callaway
Medical and scientific experts now agree that bacteria, not influenza viruses, were the greatest cause of
death during the 1918 flu pandemic.
Government efforts to gird for the next influenza pandemic – bird flu or otherwise – ought to take
notice and stock up on antibiotics, says John Brundage, a medical microbiologist at the Armed Forces
Health Surveillance Center in Silver Spring, Maryland.
Brundage’s team culled first-hand accounts, medical records and infection patterns from 1918 and
1919. Although a nasty strain of flu virus swept around the world, bacterial pneumonia that came on
the heels of mostly mild cases of flu killed the majority of the 20 to 100 million victims of the so-called
Spanish flu, they conclude.
“We agree completely that bacterial pneumonia played a major role in the mortality of the 1918
pandemic,” says Anthony Fauci, director of National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Disease in
Bethesda, Maryland, and author of another journal article out next month that comes to a similar
conclusion.

Double whammy
That pneumonia causes most deaths in an influenza outbreak is well known. Late 19th century
physicians recognised pneumonia as the cause of death of most flu victims. While doctors limited
fatalities in other 20th-century outbreaks with antibiotics such as penicillin, which was discovered in
1928, but did not see use in patients until 1942.
This is not to say that flu viruses do nothing, says Jonathan McCullers, an expert on influenza-bacteria
co-infections at St Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, Tennessee.
McCullers’ research suggests that influenza kills cells in the respiratory tract, providing food and a
home for invading bacteria. On top of this, an overstressed immune system makes it easier for the
bacteria to get a foothold.
However, the sheer carnage of 1918 caused many microbiologists to reconsider the role of bacteria, and
some pointed their fingers firmly at the virus.

‘Unique event’
When US government scientists the H5n1 1918 strain in 2005, the virus demolished cells grown in a
Petri dish and felled mice by the dozen.

“The 1918 pandemic is considered to be – and clearly is – something unique, and it’s widely
understood to be the most lethal natural event that has occurred in recent human history,” Brundage
says.
But to reassess this conclusion, he and co-author Dennis Shanks, of the Australian Army Malaria
Institute in Enoggera, Queensland, scoured literature and medical records from 1918 and 1919.
The more they investigated, the more bacteria emerged as the true killers, an idea now supported by
most influenza experts.
For instance, had a super virus been responsible for most deaths, one might expect people to die fairly
rapidly, or at least for most cases to follow a similar progression. However, Shanks and Brundage
found that few people died within three days of showing symptoms, while most people lasted more
than a week, some survived two – all hallmarks of pneumonia.

Local bugs
Military health records for barracks and battleships also painted a different picture. New recruits – men
unlikely to have been exposed to resident bacteria – died in droves, while soldiers whose immune
systems were accustomed to the local bugs survived.
And most compelling, Brundage says, medical experts of the day identified pneumonia as the cause of
most deaths.
“The bottom line is we think the influenza virus itself was necessary – but not sufficient – to cause
most of the deaths,” he says.
As the world’s health experts prepare for the next influenza pandemic, many have looked to 1918 as a
guide, planning for a deadly super-virus.
The strains jetting around the world seem to kill humans without the aid of bacteria, but those viruses
aren’t fully adapted to humans, McCullers says. If H5N1 does adapt to humans, bacteria may play a
larger role in deaths, he adds.
“Everyone is focused exclusively on the virus, and that’s probably not the best idea,” he says.
Antibiotics and vaccines against bacterial pneumonia could limit deaths in the next pandemic. And
while an effective influenza vaccine should nip an outbreak in the bud, such a vaccine could take
months to prepare and distribute.
“The idea of stockpiling [bacterial] vaccines and antibiotics is under serious consideration,” says Fauci,
who is on a US government taskforce to prepare for the next flu pandemic.
At a recent summit on pandemic influenza, McCullers said health authorities were increasingly
interested in the role bacteria might play, but there had been little action taken.
“There’s no preparation yet. They are just starting to get to the recognition stage,” he says. “There’s this
collective amnesia about 1918.”

Note: After 90 years of lies and branding it as conspiracy theory highest scientist in USA get to the
same result as conspiracists that:
1, Origin of Spanish flu was military base in USA
2, and cause of deaths was bacterial pneumococcal bacteria not flu virus after: “Brundage’s team culled
first-hand accounts, medical records and infection patterns from 1918 and 1919.”

So why took them 90 years to go thru medical records? Remaining diference between conspiracy
theory and science in 2008 is what sparked the pandemic. It was vaccination or “New recruits – men
unlikely to have been exposed to resident bacteria – died in droves, while soldiers whose immune
systems were accustomed to the local bugs survived?”

So let's look at this: “The influenza pandemic of 1918 “was the after-effect of the massive nation-wide
vaccine campaign” is unfounded. A vaccine against the flu did not exist at the time. According to the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), having “no vaccine to protect against influenza
infection and no antibiotics to treat secondary bacterial infections that can be associated with influenza
infections”

Spanish Influenza Pandemic and Vaccines, By Karie Youngdahl

It’s National Influenza Vaccination Week, and we’re taking a look back to 1918, the time of the
“Spanish” influenza pandemic. When the illness emerged, several useful vaccines had already been
developed: smallpox, typhoid fever, and rabies, for example. Scientists and physicians tried many
different approaches to develop influenza vaccines during the pandemic even though the cause of
influenza was not clear. We look at several of them below.

No other epidemic has claimed as many lives as the Spanish influenza epidemic in 1918-1919.
Worldwide, at least 40 million people died as this virulent illness swept through city after city (some
estimates put total deaths closer to 70 million). Newspaper reports described people dying within hours
of first feeling ill. The mortality rate was highest among adults under age 50, who were, for unknown
reasons, particularly vulnerable to serious disease resulting from this strain of influenza.

The first reported cases of an unusual influenza appeared in U.S. Army camps in Kansas in early spring
1918. Later that spring, officials reported large numbers of cases from Europe, though this flu did not
seem particularly dangerous. However, influenza became more deadly in late summer. Soon waves of
infection moved through towns, nations, and continents, overwhelming hospitals and medical
personnel. Because of wartime censorship, reports of influenza were not widely distributed, but news
from Spain continued to flow. The name Spanish influenza came from the devastating effects of the flu
in Spain in autumn 1918.

Hunting for a Culprit

German physician Richard Pfeiffer (1858-1945), once a student of Robert Koch, had isolated bacteria
from the lungs and sputum of influenza patients during the influenza pandemic of 1892. Pfeiffer
believed that these bacteria were the cause of influenza, and they came to be known as “Pfeiffer
influenza bacillae” and later Bacillus influenzae (now Haemophilus influenzae). The scientific and
medical world widely, but not universally, adopted this view. Dissenters argued that other types of
bacteria could be isolated from influenza cases, and pointed to strains of streptococcal, pneumococcal,
and other bacteria as potential causes. Further, they noted that B. influenzae could not be found in all
cases of influenza, sometimes not even in most. Many argued that the bacterial infections were
opportunistic infections arising in the wake of influenza, and that the true cause of initial infection
remained unidentified.

The 1918 and 1919 volumes of the Journal of the American Medicine Association (JAMA) include
many articles on the cause, prevention, and treatment of influenza. Again and again, investigators
wonder at the spotty presence of B. influenzae in the ill, note its presence in healthy individuals, and
observe it in other infections such as measles, scarlet fever, diphtheria, and varicella (chickenpox). In
one article, the authors write, “There seems to be no justification for the belief that the epidemic was
due to the influenza bacillus, which is probably a secondary invader and bears about the same relation
to the influenza cases as to respiratory infections of a different sort” (Lord 1919).

In spite of the uncertainties surrounding the cause of influenza, William H. Park, MD, at the New York
City Health Department (and later instrumental in diphtheria immunization) was convinced that
Pfeiffer’s bacillus was the culprit, and he set about devising a vaccine and antiserum against it. It was
ready on October 17, 1918. In Philadelphia, Paul Lewis worked on refining pneumococcal vaccines
that had been in development for a few years, with the added challenge of adding Pfeiffer’s bacillus to
the mix. On October 19, 1918, the Philadelphia municipal laboratory released thousands of doses of the
vaccine (a mix of killed streptococcal, pneumococcal, and B. influenzae bacteria). Others across the
globe tried to develop vaccines as well. The following accounts of vaccines developed in 1918 come
from the January 4, January 18, January 25, and March 22, 1919, issues of the Journal of the American
Medical Association.

Vaccine Development Across the United States

At the Naval Hospital on League Island, Pennsylvania (the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard), physicians
described their approach to a vaccine: “After the nature of a drowning person grasping at a straw, a
stock influenza vaccine was used as a preventive in fifty individual cases and as a curative agent in fifty
other uncomplicated cases” (Dever 1919). They made the vaccine made from B. influenzae and strains
of pneumococcus, streptococcus, staphylococcus, and Micrococcus catarrhalis (now Moraxella
catarrhalis). Each dose contained between 100,000,000 and 200,000,000 bacteria per cubic centimeter,
in a four-dose regimen. The investigators reported that no vaccinated individuals (who were hospital
workers) became sick, but also noted that strict preventive measures were taken, such as the use of
masks, gloves, and so on. In a group of ill patients treated therapeutically with the vaccine, none
developed pneumonia but one developed pleurisy (infection of the lining of the lungs). They noted,
“The course of the disease [in those treated therapeutically]…was definitely shortened, and prostration
seemed less severe. The patients apparently not benefitted were those admitted from four to seven days
after the onset of their illness. These were out of all proportion to the number of pneumonias that
developed and the severity of the infection of the control cases. The effects were always more striking,
the earlier the vaccine was administered.” Finally, they concluded that, “The number of patients treated
with vaccines and the number immunized with it is entirely too small to allow of any certain
deductions; but so far as no untoward results accompany their use, it would seem unquestionably safe
and even advisable to recommend their employment.”

Another group of investigators described the use of vaccines at the Naval Training Station in San
Francisco. They relate that Spanish influenza did not reach San Francisco until October 1, 1918, and
that that staff at the training station therefore had time to prepare preventive measures (Minaker 1919).
Isolation was easy, due to the location of the base on Alameda Island, reachable only by boat from San
Francisco and Oakland. Naval Yard personnel were required to use an antiseptic throat spray daily.
Beyond these measures, the authors noted that “steps were taken to produce a prophylactic vaccine,”
even though there was a “great diversity of opinion as to the exciting cause” of the pandemic. In
general pneumococcus and streptococcus were seen as the cause of the most severe complications. 
Additionally, and amid dissent, they decided to obtain a culture of B. influenzae from a fatal case at the
Rockefeller Institute to include in the vaccine. In all, the vaccine contained B. influenzae, 5 billion
bacteria;  pneumococcus Types I and II, 3 billion each; pneumococcus Type III, 1 billion;  and
Streptococcus hemolyticus (S. pyogenes), 100 million.

Guinea pigs were first injected with the vaccine to assess toxicity, and then five lab worker volunteers
were inoculated. Lab tests determined that their white cell count increased and their sera agglutinated
B. influenzae (meaning that they had antibodies in their blood that reacted to the bacteria). Side effects
from the injection included local swelling and pain but no abscesses. Given permission to proceed,
more vaccine was prepared and 11,179 military and civilians were inoculated, including some at Mare
Island  (Vallejo, CA) and San Pedro as well as San Francisco civilians associated with the Naval
Training station. In most experimental groups, the rate of influenza cases was lower than in the
uninoculated groups (though no information is given on how the statistics for the uninoculated groups
were gathered, nor is there information on how a case was defined). Moreover, people who were
inoculated received the injections about three weeks after influenza appeared in California, so it’s
impossible to tell whether they had already been exposed and infected. The percent of influenza cases
in control groups ranged from 1.5% to 33.8% (the latter being nurses in San Francisco hospitals),
whereas between 1.4% and 3.5% (the latter being hospital corpsmen on duty in an influenza ward) of
those in the inoculation group became ill with influenza.

Another use of vaccine was documented in Washington State at the Puget Sound Navy Yard (Ely
1919). Investigators claim that influenza invaded the Navy Yard when a group of sailors arrived from
Philadelphia (it’s unclear exactly when they arrived, but the paper states that “the period of observation
was from September 17 to October 18, 1918”). In all, 4,212 people were vaccinated with a
streptococcal vaccine. The investigators reported that the influenza attack rate in the vaccinated ranged
from 2% to 57% and in the unvaccinated from 1.8% to 19.6%. However, they noted that no deaths
occurred in the vaccinated men. They stated “We believe that the use of killed cultures as described
prevented the development of the disease in many of our personnel and modified its course favorable in
others.” The investigators concluded that B. influenzae played no role in the outbreak.

E. C. Rosenow (Mayo Clinic) reported on the use of a mixed bacterial vaccine in Rochester,
Minnesota, where about 21,000 people received three doses of vaccine in his initial study. He
concluded that “The total incidence of recognizable influenza, pneumonia, and encephalitis in the
inoculated is approximately one-third as great as in the control uninoculated. The total death rate from
influenza or pneumonia is only one-fourth as great in the inoculated as in the uninoculated.” He would
go on to test his vaccine in nearly 100,000 people.

In an editorial entitled “Prophylactic Inoculation Against Influenza,” Journal of the American

Association of Medicine editors warned that, “the data presented are simply too inadequate to permit a
competent judgment” of whether the vaccines were effective. In particular, they addressed Rosenow’s
paper:

“To specify only one case: The experience at a Rochester hospital—where fourteen nurses (out of how
many?) developed influenza within two days (how many earlier?) prior to the first inoculation (at what
period in the epidemic?), and only one case (out of how many possibilities?) developed subsequently
during a period of six weeks—might be duplicated, so far as the facts given are concerned, in the
experience of other observers using no vaccines whatever. In other words, unless all the cards are on
the table, unless we know so far as possible all the factors that may conceivably influence the results,
we cannot have a satisfactory basis for determining whether or not the results of prophylactic
inoculation against influenza justify the interpretation they have received in some quarters.”

Measuring Success

Certainly none of the vaccines described above prevented viral influenza infection – we know now that
influenza is caused by a virus, and none of the vaccines protected against it. But were any of them
protective against the bacterial infections that developed secondary to influenza? Vaccinologist Stanley
A. Plotkin, MD, thinks they were not. He told us, “The bacterial vaccines developed for Spanish
influenza were probably ineffective because at the time it was not known that pneumococcal bacteria
come in many, many serotypes and that of the bacterial group they called B. influenzae, only one type
is a major pathogen.” In other words, the vaccine developers had little ability to identify, isolate, and
produce all the potential disease-causing strains of bacteria. Indeed, today’s pneumococcal vaccine for
children protects against 13 serotypes of that bacteria, and the vaccine for adults protects against 23
serotypes.

A 2010 article, however, describes a meta-analysis of bacterial vaccine studies from 1918-19 and
suggests a more favorable interpretation.  Based on the 13 studies that met inclusion criteria,  the
authors conclude that some of the vaccines could have reduced the attack rate of pneumonia after viral
influenza infection. They suggest that, despite the limited numbers of bacteria strains in the vaccines,
vaccination could have led to cross-protection from multiple related strains (Chien 2010).

It was not until the 1930s that researchers established that influenza was in fact caused by a virus, not a
bacterium. Pfeiffer's influenza bacillus would eventually be named Haemophilus influenzae, the name
retaining the legacy of its long-standing, though inaccurate, association with influenza. And today,
influenza vaccines – as well as H. influenzae type b vaccines—are widely available to prevent illness.

See also our articles on Influenza Pandemics and Influenza, as well as this video clip of vaccine
developer Maurice Hilleman discussing the emergence of the Asian influenza pandemic in 1957.

Sources

Chien Y, Klugman KP, Morens DM. Efficacy of whole-cell killed bacterial vaccines in preventing
pneumonia and death during the 1918 influenza pandemic. JID 2010;202(11):1639-1648.

Dever FJ, Boles RS, Case EA. Influenza at the United States Naval Hospital, League Island, PA. JAMA
72;4: 265-267.

Ely CF, Lloyd BJ, Hitchcock CD, Nickson DH, Influenza as seen at the Puget Sound Navy Yard.
JAMA 72;1: 24-28.

Lehmann KB, Neumann, R. Wood’s Medical Hand Atlases. Atlas and Essentials of Bacteriology. New
York: William Wood and Company, 1897.

Lord FT, Scott AC Jr., Nye RN. Relation of influenza bacillus to the recent epidemic of influenza. 
JAMA 73;3:188-190.

Minaker AJ, Irvine RS. Prophylactic use of mixed vaccine against pandemic influenza and its
complications at the Naval Training  Station, San Francisco. JAMA 72;12:847-850.

Plotkin SA. Personal correspondence. November 23, 2011.

Prophylactic inoculation against influenza. JAMA 72;1:44-45.

Rosenow EC. Prophylactic inoculation against respiratory infections during the present pandemic of
influenza. JAMA 72;1:31-34.

Shakman SH. On the Relation between Influenza and Post-Influenzal (VonEconomo's) Encephalitis,
and Implications for the Study of the Role of Infection in Epilepsy and Schizophrenia; A Review of the
Historical Works and Perspective of E.C. Rosenow (1875-1966), longtime head of Experimental
Bacteriology (1915-44) for the Mayo Foundation, Rochester, Minnesota. Institute of Science. No date.
http://www.instituteofscience.com/mental/Shakman-History-Rosenow.pdf.

The 1918-19 Spanish Influenza Pandemic and Vaccine Development, by Karie

Youngdahl

When people write about the Spanish Influenza pandemic of 1918-19, they usually start with the
staggering global death toll, the huge number of people who were infected with the pandemic virus,
and the inability of the medical field to do anything to help the infected. And while those factors were
hallmarks of the devastating episode, researchers and health workers in the United States and Europe
were confidently devising vaccines and immunizing hundreds of thousands of people in what amounted
to a medical experiment on the grandest scale. What were the vaccines they came up with? Did they do
anything to protect the immunized and halt the spread of the disease?
First, the numbers. In 1918 the US population was 103.2 million. During the three waves of the
Spanish Influenza pandemic between spring 1918 and spring 1919, about 200 of every 1000 people
contracted influenza (about 20.6 million). Between 0.8% (164,800) and 3.1% (638,000) of those
infected died from influenza or pneumonia secondary to it. 

A few vaccines to prevent other diseases were available at the time -- smallpox vaccine had, of course,
been used for more than 100 years; Louis Pasteur had developed rabies vaccine for post-exposure
prophylaxis after an encounter with a rabid animal; typhoid fever vaccines had been developed.
Diphtheria antitoxin -- a medication made from the blood of previously infected animals -- had been
used for treatment since the late 1800s; an early form of a diphtheria vaccine had been used; and
experimental cholera vaccines had been developed. Almroth Wright had tested a whole-cell
pneumococcal vaccine in South African gold miners in 1911. Manufacturers had developed and sold
various mixed heat-killed bacterial stock vaccines of dubious usefulness.

In terms of knowledge of influenza as an infectious diseases, not a great deal was understood at the
time. Many medical professionals thought that influenza was a specific communicable disease that
presented seasonally, usually in the winter.

Even so, without specific diagnostic tools, mild cases of influenza were difficult to distinguish from
other acute respiratory illnesses. The tools of the time were only able to detect bacteria, not smaller
pathogens.
And physicians and scientists struggled to understand whether the yearly influenza to which they were
accustomed was related to the occasional widespread and highly epidemic illness of years we now
know were pandemic influenza (1848-49 and 1889-90).
German scientist Richard Pfeiffer (1858-1945) claimed to have identified the causative agent of
influenza in a publication in 1892 -- he described rod-shaped bacilli present in every case of influenza
he examined. He was not, however, able to demonstrate Koch's postulates by causing the illness in
experimental animals. Many professionals accepted his findings, though, and thought Pfeiffer's
influenza bacillus, as it was called, was responsible for seasonal influenza.
But as the 1910s progressed and bacteriological methods matured, other researchers presented results
that conflicted with Pfeiffer's findings. They found his organism in healthy individuals and in those
suffering from illnesses that clearly were not influenza. Additionally, they looked for Pfeiffer's bacillus
in influenza cases and in many instances did not find it at all. Though many physicians still believed
that Pfeiffer had correctly identified the culprit, a growing number of others had begun to doubt his
findings.

Those true believers had some reason to be hopeful that a vaccine could prevent influenza as the
disease began its second appearance in the United States in early fall 1918. By October 2, 1918,
William H. Park, MD, head bacteriologist of the New York City Health Department, was working on a
Pfeiffer's bacteria influenza vaccine. The New York Times reported that Royal S. Copeland, Health
Commissioner of New York City, described the vaccine as an influenza preventive and an "application
of an old idea to a new disease." Park was making his vaccine from heat-killed Pfeiffer's bacilli isolated
from ill individuals and testing it on volunteers from Health Department staff (New York Times,
October 2, 1918). Three doses were given 48 hours apart. By October 12, he wrote in the New York
Medical Journal that he was vaccinating employees from large companies and soldiers in army camps.
He hoped to have evidence to demonstrate the effectiveness of the vaccine in a few weeks (Park WH,
1918).

Number of influenza cases reported to November 2, 1918, in Chicago. AJPH, 1918.

In November 1918, the Newark Evening News reported that 39,000 doses of Leary-Park influenza
vaccine had been prepared and that most doses were used. (Timothy Leary was a professor at Tufts
University School of Medicine.) Though it was too soon to tell if the vaccine was effective, "...the
average person need have no fear of the results of the vaccine. Neurotic and rheumatic individuals,
however, appear to be sensitive to the vaccine, while children take it with less disturbance than adults"
(Newark Evening News, 1918).

By December 13, 1918, Copeland was not so confident about his department's vaccine. He told the
Times that vaccines made from Pfeiffer's bacilli appeared to have no effect on influenza prevention.
Rather, he was confident that a mixed bacterial vaccine (streptococcal, pneumococcal, staphylococcal,
and Pfeiffer's bacilli) developed by E.C. Rosenow at the Mayo Foundation was an effective preventive.
And while he thought that most people in New York had already been exposed to Spanish influenza, he
mentioned that he would have Park prepare some of the Rosenow vaccine to immunize people in New
York throughout the winter (New York Times, December 13, 1918). Well more than 500,000 doses of
Rosenow vaccine were produced (Eyler, 2009).
University of Pittsburgh, Tulane University, and even private physicians were making their own
vaccines. Convalescent serum was also used (Boston Post, January 6, 1919; Robertson & Koehler,
1918). The Deseret (UT) Evening News noted on December 14, 1918, that free vaccine was available
in communities around the state.

Based on my survey of newspaper and medical journal articles from the time, it is clear that many
hundreds of thousands, if not a million or more, doses of vaccines were produced during the pandemic
years. (A few years ago I wrote another blog post about Rosenow's vaccine and other vaccines.)
The Editorial Committee of the American Journal of Public Health tried to put a damper on people's
expectations about the vaccines. They wrote in January 1919 that the causative organism of the current
influenza was still unknown, and therefore the vaccines being produced had only a chance at being
directed at the right target. They noted that vaccines for secondary infections made some sense, but that
all the vaccine being produced must be viewed as experimental. Acknowledging the somewhat ad hoc
nature vaccine development in the current crisis, they urged that control groups be used with all the
vaccines, and that the differences between control and experimental group be minimized, as to risk of
exposure, time of exposure during epidemic, and so on (Editorial Committee of the American Journal
of Public Health, 1919).

Certainly none of the vaccines described above prevented viral influenza infection – we know now that
influenza is caused by a virus, and none of the vaccines protected against it. But were any of them
protective against the bacterial infections that developed secondary to influenza? Vaccinologist Stanley
A. Plotkin, MD, thinks they were not. He told us, “The bacterial vaccines developed for Spanish
influenza were probably ineffective because at the time it was not known that pneumococcal bacteria
come in many, many serotypes and that of the bacterial group they called B. influenzae, only one type
is a major pathogen.” In other words, the vaccine developers had little ability to identify, isolate, and
produce all the potential disease-causing strains of bacteria circulating at the time. Indeed, today’s
pneumococcal vaccine for children protects against 13 serotypes of that bacteria, and the vaccine for
adults protects against 23 serotypes.

A 2010 article, however, describes a meta-analysis of bacterial vaccine studies from 1918-19 and
suggests a more favorable interpretation. Based on the 13 studies that met inclusion criteria,  the
authors conclude that some of the vaccines could have reduced the attack rate of pneumonia after viral
influenza infection. They suggest that, despite the limited numbers of bacteria strains in the vaccines,
vaccination could have led to cross-protection from multiple related strains (Chien, 2010).
It was not until the 1930s that researchers established that influenza was in fact caused by a virus, not a
bacterium. Pfeiffer's influenza bacillus would eventually be named Haemophilus influenzae, the name
retaining the legacy of its long-standing, though inaccurate, association with influenza. And today,
influenza vaccines – as well as H. influenzae type b vaccines—are widely available to prevent illness.
Parts of this post were adapted from an earlier blog post of mine.

Sources

Cecil RL. Present status of pneumococcus vaccine. AJPH. 1919;9(8):593-594.

Chien Y, Klugman KP, Morens DM. Efficacy of whole-cell killed bacterial vaccines in preventing
pneumonia and death during the 1918 influenza pandemic. JID. 2010;202(11):1639-1648.
Convalescent sera used. Boston Post. January 6, 1919.
Editorial committee of the American Public Health Association. A working program against influenza.
AJPH. 1919;9(1)1-12.
Eyler JM. The state of science, microbiology, and vaccines circa 1918. Public Health Reports.
2010;125(3_suppl):27-36.
Eyler JM. The fog of research: influenza vaccine trials during the 1918–19 pandemic. Journal of the
History of Medicine and Allied Sciences. 2009;64(4):401-428.
Influenza epidemic not expected here. New York Times. December 13, 1918.
Park WH. Bacteriology and possibility of anti influenza vaccine as a prophylactic. New York Medical
Journal. 1918;108:15:621.
Plotkin SA. Personal correspondence. November 23, 2011.
Robertson JD, Koehler G. Preliminary report on the influenza epidemic in Chicago. AJPH.
1918;8(11)849-856.
No decision yet as to anti-grip vaccine value. Newark Evening News. November 30, 1918.
Tells of vaccine to stop influenza. New York Times. October 2, 1918.
Free vaccine for communities of state. Deseret Evening News. December 14, 1918.
Find an Influenza Serum. Kansas City Star, September 29, 1918.

Note: Next article was written in 2018, before Covid-19

Did Rockefeller create the Spanish Flu pandemic of 1918?

Dr. Gary G. Kohls, MD

Rockefeller Spanish FluIt Started with the Rockefeller Institute's Crude Bacterial Meningitis
Vaccination Experiment on US Troops. The 1918-19 bacterial vaccine experiment may have killed 50-
100 million people. What if the story we have been told about this pandemic isn't true? What if, instead,
the killer infection was neither the flu nor Spanish in origin?

Newly analyzed documents reveal that the "Spanish Flu" may have been a military vaccine
experiment gone awry.

The reason modern technology has not been able to pinpoint the killer influenza strain from this
pandemic is because influenza was not the killer. More soldiers died during WWI from disease than
from bullets. The pandemic was not flu. An estimated 95% (or higher) of the deaths were caused by
bacterial pneumonia, not an influenza virus.
The pandemic was not Spanish. The first cases of bacterial pneumonia in 1918 trace back to military
bases, the first one in Fort Riley, Kansas. From January 21 - June 4, 1918, an experimental bacterial
meningitis vaccine cultured in horses by the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research in New York
was injected into soldiers at Fort Riley. During the remainder of 1918 as those soldiers - often living
and traveling under poor sanitary conditions - were sent to Europe to fight, they spread bacteria at
every stop between Kansas and the frontline trenches in France.

One study describes soldiers "with active infections (who) were aerosolizing the bacteria that colonized
their noses and throats, while others — often, in the same "breathing spaces" — were profoundly
susceptible to invasion of and rapid spread through their lungs by their own or others' colonizing
bacteria." (1) The "Spanish Flu" attacked healthy people in their prime. Bacterial pneumonia attacks
people in their prime. Flu attacks the young, old and immunocompromised. When WW1 ended on
November 11, 1918, soldiers returned to their home countries and colonial outposts, spreading the
killer bacterial pneumonia worldwide. During WW1, the Rockefeller Institute also sent its experimental
anti-meningococcal serum to England, France, Belgium, Italy and other countries, helping spread the
epidemic worldwide. During the pandemic of 1918-19, the so-called "Spanish Flu" killed 50-100
million people, including many soldiers. Many people do not realize that disease killed far more
soldiers on all sides than machine guns or mustard gas or anything else typically associated with WWI.

I have a personal connection to the Spanish Flu. Among those killed by disease in 1918-19 are
members of both of my parents' families.

On my father's side, his grandmother Sadie Hoyt died from pneumonia in 1918. Sadie was a Chief
Yeoman in the Navy. Her death left my grandmother Rosemary and her sister Anita to be raised by their
aunt. Sadie's sister Marian also joined the Navy. She died from "the influenza" in 1919. On my mother's
side, two of her father's sisters died in childhood. All of the family members who died lived in New
York City. I suspect many American families, and many families worldwide, were impacted in similar
ways by the mysterious Spanish Flu.

In 1918, "influenza" or flu was a catchall term for disease of unknown origin. It didn't carry the specific
meaning it does today. It meant some mystery disease which dropped out of the sky. In fact, influenza
is from the Medieval Latin "influential" in an astrological sense, meaning a visitation under the
influence of the stars.

Why is What Happened 100 Years Ago Important Now?

Between 1900-1920, there were enormous efforts underway in the industrialized world to build a better
society. I will use New York as an example to discuss three major changes to society which occurred in
NY during that time and their impact on mortality from infectious diseases.

1. Clean Water and Sanitation

In the late 19th century through the early 20th century, New York built an extraordinary system to bring
clean water to the city from the Catskills, a system still in use today. New York City also built over
6000 miles of sewer to take away and treat waste, which protects the drinking water. The World Health
Organization acknowledges the importance of clean water and sanitation in combating infectious
diseases. (2)
2. Electricity

In the late 19th century through the early 20th century, New York built a power grid and wired the city
so power was available in every home. Electricity allows for refrigeration. Refrigeration is an unsung
hero as a public health benefit. When food is refrigerated from farm to table, the public is protected
from potential infectious diseases. Cheap renewable energy is important for many reasons, including
combating infectious diseases.

3. Rockefeller's Pharmaceutical Industry

In the late 19th century through the early 20th century, New York became the home of the Rockefeller
Institute for Medical Research (now Rockefeller University). The Institute is where the modern
pharmaceutical industry was born. The Institute pioneered many of the approaches the pharmaceutical
industry uses today, including the preparation of vaccine serums, for better or worse. The vaccine used
in the Fort Riley experiment on soldiers was made in horses.

US Mortality Rates data from the turn of the 20th century to 1965 clearly indicates that clean water,
flushing toilets, effective sewer systems and refrigerated foods all combined to effectively reduce
mortality from infectious diseases before vaccines for those diseases became available. Have doctors
and the pharmaceutical manufacturers taken credit for reducing mortality from infectious disease which
rightfully belongs to sandhogs, plumbers, electricians and engineers?

If hubris at the Rockefeller Institute in 1918 led to a pandemic disease which killed millions of
people, what lessons can we learn and apply to 2018?

The Disease Was Not Spanish

While watching an episode of American Experience on PBS a few months ago, I was surprised to hear
that the first cases of "Spanish Flu" occurred at Fort Riley, Kansas in 1918. I thought, how is it possible
this historically important event could be so badly misnamed 100 years ago and never corrected?

Comment: Reminds one of these stories:

Did COVID-19 escape Fort Detrick vaccine trial? Evidence that virus originated in US bioweapons lab
CDC suddenly shuts down US Army's Fort Detrick bioweapons lab due to 'lapses in safety'

Why "Spanish"? Spain was one of a few countries not involved in World War I. Most of the countries
involved in the war censored their press. Free from censorship concerns, the earliest press reports of
people dying from disease in large numbers came from Spain. The warring countries did not want to
additionally frighten the troops, so they were content to scapegoat Spain. Soldiers on all sides would be
asked to cross no man's land into machine gun fire, which was frightening enough without knowing
that the trenches were a disease breeding ground.

One hundred years later, it's long past time to drop "Spanish" from all discussion of this pandemic. If
the flu started at a United States military base in Kansas, then the disease could and should be more
aptly named. In order to prevent future disasters, the US (and the rest of the world) must take a hard
look at what really caused the pandemic. It is possible that one of the reasons the Spanish Flu has never
been corrected is that it helps disguise the origin of the pandemic.
If the origin of the pandemic involved a vaccine experiment on US soldiers, then the US may prefer
calling it Spanish Flu instead of The Fort Riley Bacteria of 1918, or something similar. The Spanish Flu
started at the location this experimental bacterial vaccine was given making it the prime suspect as the
source of the bacterial infections which killed so many.

Comment: Not unlike the way some are calling Covid-19 'Wuhan Flu' or CCP virus? Why not Fauci
virus?

It would be much more difficult to maintain the marketing mantra of "vaccines save lives" if a
vaccine experiment originating in the United States during the years of primitive manufacturing
caused the deaths of 50-100 million people.

"The American Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research and its experimental bacterial
meningococcal vaccine may have killed 50-100 million people in 1918-19" is a far less effective
sales slogan than the overly simplistic 'vaccines save lives'." - Kevin Barry

The Disease Which Killed so Many was not Flu nor was it a Virus. It was Bacterial.

During the mid-2000's there was much talk about "pandemic preparedness." Influenza vaccine
manufacturers in the United States received billions of taxpayer dollars to develop vaccines to make
sure that we don't have another lethal pandemic "flu," like the one in 1918-19. Capitalizing on the "flu"
part of Spanish flu helped vaccine manufacturers procure billion-dollar checks from governments, even
though scientists knew at the time that bacterial pneumonia was the real killer. It is now my opinion
that bacterial pneumonia was the real killer - thousands of autopsies confirm this fact.

According to a 2008 National Institute of Health paper, bacterial pneumonia was the killer in a
minimum of 92.7% of the 1918-19 autopsies reviewed. It is likely higher than 92.7%.

The researchers looked at more than 9000 autopsies, and "there were no negative (bacterial) lung
culture results."

"... In the 68 higher-quality autopsy series, in which the possibility of unreported negative cultures
could be excluded, 92.7% of autopsy lung cultures were positive for ≥1 bacterium. ... in one study of
approximately 9000 subjects who were followed from clinical presentation with influenza to resolution
or autopsy, researchers obtained, with sterile technique, cultures of either pneumococci or streptococci
from 164 of 167 lung tissue samples.

"There were 89 pure cultures of pneumococci; 19 cultures from which only streptococci were
recovered; 34 that yielded mixtures of pneumococci and/or streptococci; 22 that yielded a mixture of
pneumococci, streptococci, and other organisms (prominently pneumococci and nonhemolytic
streptococci); and 3 that yielded nonhemolytic streptococci alone. There were no negative lung culture
results." (3)
Pneumococci or streptococci were found in "164 of (the) 167 lung tissue samples" autopsied. That is
98.2%. Bacteria was the killer.

Where Did the Spanish Flu Bacterial Pneumonia of 1918-19 Originate?

When the United States declared war in April 1917, the fledgling Pharmaceutical industry had
something they had never had before - a large supply of human test subjects in the form of the US
military's first draft. Pre-war in 1917, the US Army was 286,000 men. Post-war in 1920, the US army
disbanded, and had 296,000 men. During the war years 1918-19, the US Army ballooned to 6,000,000
men, with 2,000,000 men being sent overseas. The Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research took
advantage of this new pool of human guinea pigs to conduct vaccine experiments.

A Report on Anti-meningitis Vaccination and Observations on Agglutinins in the Blood of Chronic

Meningococcus Carriers as Recorded by Frederick L. Gates, MD in 1918 From the Base Hospital, Fort
Riley, Kansas and The Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York. Received July 20, 1918
(Author note: Please read the Fort Riley paper in its entirety so you can appreciate the carelessness of
the experiments conducted on these troops.). Between January 21st and June 4th of 1918, Dr. Gates
reports on an experiment where soldiers were given 3 doses of a bacterial meningitis vaccine. Those
conducting the experiment on the soldiers were just spit-balling dosages of a vaccine serum made in
horses. The vaccination regime was designed to be 3 doses.

4,792 men received the first dose, but only 4,257 got the 2nd dose (down 11%), and only 3702 received
all three doses (down 22.7%). A total of 1,090 men were not there for the 3rd dose. What happened to
these soldiers? Were they shipped East by train from Kansas to board a ship to Europe? Were they in
the Fort Riley hospital? Dr. Gates' report doesn't tell us.

An article accompanying the American Experience broadcast I watched sheds some light on where
these 1,090 men might be. Gates began his experiments in January 1918. By March of that year, "100
men a day" were entering the infirmary at Fort Riley. Are some of these the men missing from Dr.
Gates' report - the ones who did not get the 2nd or 3rd dose?

"... Shortly before breakfast on Monday, March 11, the first domino would fall signaling the
commencement of the first wave of the 1918 influenza.

"Company cook Albert Gitchell reported to the camp infirmary with complaints of a "bad cold."

"Right behind him came Corporal Lee W. Drake voicing similar complaints.

"By noon, camp surgeon Edward R. Schreiner had over 100 sick men on his hands, all apparently
suffering from the same malady..." (5)

Gates does report that several of the men in the experiment had flu-like symptoms: coughs, vomiting
and diarrhea after receiving the vaccine. These symptoms are a disaster for men living in barracks,
travelling on trains to the Atlantic coast, sailing to Europe, and living and fighting in trenches. The
unsanitary conditions at each step of the journey are an ideal environment for a contagious disease like
bacterial pneumonia to spread.

Comment: Mengele should be jealous

From Dr. Gates' report:

"Several cases of looseness of the bowels or transient diarrhea were noted. This symptom had not been
encountered before. Careful inquiry in individual cases often elicited the information that men who
complained of the effects of vaccination were suffering from mild coryza, bronchitis, etc., at the time of
injection.”
"Sometimes the reaction was initiated by a chill or chilly sensation, and a number of men complained
of fever or feverish sensations during the following night.”

"Next in frequency came nausea (occasionally vomiting), dizziness, and general "aches and pains" in
the joints and muscles, which in a few instances were especially localized in the neck or lumbar region,
causing stiff neck or stiff back. A few injections were followed by diarrhea.”

"The reactions, therefore, occasionally simulated the onset of epidemic meningitis and several
vaccinated men were sent as suspects to the Base Hospital for diagnosis." (4)
According to Gates, they injected random dosages of an experimental bacterial meningitis vaccine into
soldiers. Afterwards, some of the soldiers had symptoms which "simulated" meningitis, but Dr. Gates
advances the fantastical claim that it wasn't actual meningitis.”

The soldiers developed flu-like symptoms. Bacterial meningitis, then and now, is known to mimic flu-
like symptoms. (6) Perhaps the similarity of early symptoms of bacterial meningitis and bacterial
pneumonia to symptoms of flu is why the vaccine experiments at Fort Riley have been able to escape
scrutiny as a potential cause of the Spanish Flu for 100 years and counting.

How did the "Spanish Flu" Spread so Widely and so Quickly?

There is an element of a perfect storm in how the Gates bacteria spread. WWI ended only 10 months
after the first injections. Unfortunately for the 50-100 million who died, those soldiers injected with
horse-infused bacteria moved quickly during those 10 months.

An article from 2008 on the CDC's website describes how sick WWI soldiers could pass along the
bacteria to others by becoming "cloud adults."

"Finally, for brief periods and to varying degrees, affected hosts became "cloud adults" who increased
the aerosolization of colonizing strains of bacteria, particularly pneumococci, hemolytic streptococci,
H. influenzae, and S. aureus.”

"For several days during local epidemics — particularly in crowded settings such as hospital wards,
military camps, troop ships, and mines (and trenches) — some persons were immunologically
susceptible to, infected with, or recovering from infections with influenza virus.”

"Persons with active infections were aerosolizing the bacteria that colonized their noses and throats,
while others — often, in the same "breathing spaces" — were profoundly susceptible to invasion of and
rapid spread through their lungs by their own or others' colonizing bacteria." (1)

Three times in his report on the Fort Riley vaccine experiment, Dr. Gates states that some soldiers had a
"severe reaction" indicating "an unusual individual susceptibility to the vaccine".

While the vaccine made many sick, it only killed those who were susceptible to it. Those who
became sick and survived became "cloud adults" who spread the bacteria to others, which
created more cloud adults, spreading to others where it killed the susceptible, repeating the cycle
until there were no longer wartime unsanitary conditions, and there were no longer millions of
soldiers to experiment on.

The toll on US troops was enormous and it is well documented. Dr. Carol Byerly describes how the
"influenza" traveled like wildfire through the US military. (substitute "bacteria" for Dr. Byerly's
"influenza" or "virus"):
"... Fourteen of the largest training camps had reported influenza outbreaks in March, April, or May,
and some of the infected troops carried the virus with them aboard ships to France ...

"As soldiers in the trenches became sick, the military evacuated them from the front lines and replaced
them with healthy men.

"This process continuously brought the virus into contact with new hosts — young, healthy soldiers in
which it could adapt, reproduce, and become extremely virulent without danger of burning out.

"... Before any travel ban could be imposed, a contingent of replacement troops departed Camp Devens
(outside of Boston) for Camp Upton, Long Island, the Army's debarkation point for France, and took
influenza with them.

"Medical officers at Upton said it arrived "abruptly" on September 13, 1918, with 38 hospital
admissions, followed by 86 the next day, and 193 the next.

"Hospital admissions peaked on October 4 with 483, and within 40 days, Camp Upton sent 6,131 men
to the hospital for influenza. Some developed pneumonia so quickly that physicians diagnosed it
simply by observing the patient rather than listening to the lungs..." (7)

"The United States was not the only country in possession of the Rockefeller Institute's experimental
bacterial vaccine.

"A 1919 report from the Institute states: "Reference should be made that before the United States
entered the war (in April 1917) the Institute had resumed the preparation of anti-meningococcic serum,
in order to meet the requests of England, France, Belgium Italy and other countries."

"The same report states: "In order to meet the suddenly increased demand for the curative serums
worked out at the Institute, a special stable for horses was quickly erected ..." (8)
An experimental anti-meningoccic serum made in horses and injected into soldiers who would be
entering the cramped and unsanitary living conditions of war ... what could possibly go wrong?

Is the bacterial serum made in horses at the Rockefeller Institute which was injected into US soldiers
and distributed to numerous other countries responsible for the 50-100 million people killed by
bacterial lung infections in 1918-19?

The Institute says it distributed the bacterial serum to England, France, Belgium, Italy and other
countries during WWI. Not enough is known about how these countries experimented on their soldiers.

I hope independent researchers will take an honest look at these questions.

The Road to Hell is Paved with Good Intentions

I do not believe that anyone involved in these vaccine experiments was trying to harm anyone.

Some will see the name Rockefeller and yell. "Illuminati!" or "culling the herd!"
I do not believe that's what happened.
I believe standard medical hubris is responsible - doctors "playing God", thinking they can tame
nature without creating unanticipated problems. With medical hubris, I do not think the situation
has changed materially over the past 100 years.

What Now?

The vaccine industry is always looking for human test subjects. They have the most success when
they are able to find populations who not in a position to refuse.

Soldiers (9), infants, the disabled, prisoners, those in developing nations - anyone not in a position to
refuse. Vaccine experimentation on vulnerable populations is not an issue of the past. Watch this video
clip of Dr. Stanley Plotkin where he describes using experimental vaccines on orphans, the mentally
retarded, prisoners, and those under colonial rule.

The deposition was in January 2018. The hubris of the medical community is the same or worse now
than it was 100 years ago.

Watch as Dr. Plotkin admits to writing:

"The question is whether we are to have experiments performed on fully functioning adults and on
children who are potentially contributors to society or to perform initial studies in children and adults
who are human in form but not in social potential."

Comment: Spoken like a true eugenicist!

Please watch the horrifying video clip of Dr. Stanley Plotkin testifying under oath about the
experiments that the pharmaceutical industry has done on unaware, uninformed patients.
https://youtu.be/yevV_slu7Dw (10)

In part because the global community is well aware of medical hubris and well aware of the poor
record of medical ethics, the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights developed
international standards regarding the right to informed consent to preventative medical procedures like
vaccination. The international community is well aware that the pharmaceutical industry makes
mistakes and is always on the lookout for human test subjects. The Declaration states that individuals
have the human right to consent to any preventative medical intervention like vaccination.

Article 3 - Human Dignity and Human Rights

1. Human dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms are to be fully respected.
2. The interests and welfare of the individual should have priority over the sole interest of science or
society.

Comment: See Ethics and Fundamental Values in Times of Corona

Article 6 - Consent
1. Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the
prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information. The consent
should, where appropriate, be express and may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and
for any reason without disadvantage or prejudice. (11)
Clean water, sanitation, flushing toilets, refrigerated foods and healthy diets have done and still do far
more to protect humanity from infectious diseases than any vaccine program. Doctors and the vaccine
industry have usurped credit which rightfully belongs to plumbers, electricians, sandhogs, engineers
and city planners. For these reasons, policy makers at all levels of government should protect the
human rights and individual liberties of individuals to opt out of vaccine programs via exemptions.

The hubris of the medical community will never go away. Policy makers need to know that vaccines
like all medical interventions are not infallible. Vaccines are not magic. We all have different
susceptibility to disease. Human beings are not one size fits all. In 1918-19, the vaccine industry
experimented on soldiers, likely with disastrous results.

In 2018, the vaccine industry experiments on infants every day. The vaccine schedule has never
been tested as it is given. The results of the experiment are in: 1 in 7 of America's fully vaccinated
children is in some form of special education and over 50% have some form of chronic illness.
(12)

In 1918-19, there was no safety follow up after vaccines were delivered.

In 2018, there is virtually no safety follow up after a vaccine is delivered.

Who exactly gave you that flu shot at Rite Aid? Do you have their cell number of the store
employee if something goes wrong?

In 1918-19, there was no liability to the manufacturer for injuries or death caused by vaccines.

In 2018, there is no liability for vaccine manufacturers for injuries or death caused by vaccines,
which was formalized in 1986. (13)

In 1918-19, there was no independent investigative follow up challenging the official story that
"Spanish Flu" was some mystery illness which dropped from the sky. I suspect that many of those at
the Rockefeller Institute knew what happened, and that many of the doctors who administered the
vaccines to the troops knew what happened, but those people are long dead.

In 2018, the Pharmaceutical industry is the largest campaign donor to politicians and the largest
advertiser in all forms of media, so not much has changed over 100 years.

This story will likely be ignored by mainstream media because their salaries are paid by pharmaceutical
advertising. The next time you hear someone say "vaccines save lives" please remember that the true
story of the cost/benefit of vaccines is much more complicated than their three-word slogan. Also
remember that vaccines may have killed 50-100 million people in 1918-19. If true, those costs greatly
outweighed any benefit, especially considering that plumbers, electricians, sandhogs and engineers did,
and continue to do, the real work which reduces mortality from disease.

Vaccines are not magic. Human rights and bioethics are critically important. Policy makers should
understand the history of medical hubris and protect individual and parental human rights as described
in the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights.
Kevin Barry is the President of First Freedoms, Inc. a 501.c.3. He is a former federal attorney, a rep at
the UN HQ in New York and the author of Vaccine Whistleblower: Exposing Autism Research Fraud at
the CDC. Please support our work at www.firstfreedoms.org

Originally published at FirstFreedoms.org. Reprinted with permission.

References

1. Deaths from Bacterial Pneumonia during 1918-19 Influenza Pandemic

John F. Brundage* and G. Dennis Shanks†
Author affiliations: *Armed Forces Health Surveillance Center, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA;
†Australian Army Malaria Institute, Enoggera, Queensland, Australia
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/14/8/07-1313_article
2. World Health Organization: Unsafe drinking water, sanitation and waste management
http://www.who.int/sustainable-development/cities/health-risks/water-sanitation/en/
3. J Infect Dis. 2008 Oct 1; 198(7): 962-970.
Predominant Role of Bacterial Pneumonia as a Cause of Death in Pandemic Influenza: Implications for
Pandemic Influenza Preparedness
David M. Morens, Jeffery K. Taubenberger, and Anthony S. Fauci
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2599911/
4. PDF of Fort Riley Study (1918)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2126288/pdf/449.pdf
5. American Experience, "The First Wave", PBS
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/influenza-first-wave/
6. Mayo Clinic: Meningitis
www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/meningitis/symptoms-causes/syc-20350508
7. Public Health Rep. 2010; 125(Suppl 3): 82-91.
The U.S. Military and the Influenza Pandemic of 1918-1919
Carol R. Byerly, PhD
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2862337/
8. Rockefeller Institute pamphlet PDF (1919)
https://digitalcommons.rockefeller.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1005&context=rockefeller-
institute-descriptive-pamphlet
9. Is Military Research Hazardous to Veterans' Health? Lessons Spanning Half a Century, A Staff
Report Prepared for the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, United States Senate, December 1994
https://www.hsdl.org/?abstract&did=438835
10. Dr. Stanley Plotkin: vaccine experiments on orphans, the mentally retarded, and others (January
2018)
https://youtu.be/yevV_slu7Dw
11. Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights (19 October 2005)
http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-
URL_ID=31058&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html
12. CDC Offers New Stats On Disability Prevalence
https://www.disabilityscoop.com/2016/03/14/cdc-disability-prevalence/22034/
13. 1986 Vaccine Injury Compensation Act
https://worldmercuryproject.org/news/childhood-vaccine-injury-act-protect/
About The Author:

Dr. Gary G. Kohls is a medical doctor working for most of his career as a rural, full-service family
practice physician. In 1984 he was awarded a Bush Foundation Medical Fellowship. In the early 1990s
Dr. Kohls worked at a Regional Treatment Center as a physician for psychiatric inpatients and later
worked at a psychological services clinic. Now retired, he continues to present lectures and seminars to
healthcare professionals and the general public, as well as editing the popular e-newsletter Preventive
Psychiatry E-Newsletter (PPEN).
Read more at mindbodymedicineduluth.com

Comment: History may not always repeat itself exactly, but sometimes it sure does rhyme!

Ship of Death: The Tragic Tale of the USS Leviathan

by Catharine Arnold
In three successive waves, from spring 1918 to summer 1919, the ‘Spanish flu’ pandemic killed an
estimated 100 million people worldwide. By 1919, Spanish flu was responsible for the deaths of
500,000 people in the United States, five times its total military fatalities in the war. The tragic tale of
the USS Leviathan, a troopship sailing between the US and France, is just one example of the horrors
endured during this unprecedented outbreak.

Book: Pandemic 1918: Eyewitness Accounts from the Greatest Medical Holocaust
in Modern History, By Catharine Arnold