Wednesday, September 23, 2009

H1N1 Flu Mist Insanity

Categorized Autism, Pharma/FDA
H1N1 Flu Mist Insanity
Posted on 22 September 2009 by C. Linderman Sr. - ATO Press

C. L. Linderman Sr. ATO

Opinion Press

As public health departments and physicians across the country prepare for the impending “pandemic” we know affectionately as The Swine Flu, many of them will not be paying attention to anything but the hype and lies that are being propagated by the Centers for Disease Control and other mainstream medical associations. There is little doubt from those that pay attention to the inherent conflicts of interest within these governmental and medical organizations (primarily the CDC and FDA) that there seems to be far more concern with the bottom lines of the vaccine manufacturers than there is with the health and well being of the American public.

For any discerning physician that cares to educate themselves on the facts behind the live H1N1 nasal spray vaccine and continues to vaccinate those individuals targeted by our government for inoculation, I consider them to be criminals and domestic terrorists. Many of us have heard that pregnant women and children will be among the first to receive the H1N1 vaccine and because of the all-too-real concern regarding the mercury content of the injected H1N1 vaccine, many parents and expectant mothers will opt for the nasal vaccines for their children. This decision could be the mistake of a lifetime.I have before me as I am writing this, the PDF copy of the H1N1 2009 Monovalent Intranasal Vaccine insert and what I am reading is disturbing to say the least. On the very first page of this 21 page PDF, under the heading of “Use in Specific Populations” I am reading; “Safety and effectiveness of Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine, Live Intranasal, have not been studied in pregnant women or nursing mothers.” On the very same page in the “Full Prescribing Information Contents” sections, #8 reads; “Specific Population” 8.1 states clearly; “Pregnancy” and 8.2 states “Nursing mothers”. So while there have been no studies regarding how this vaccine will affect the fetus of a pregnant mother or her nursing infant, they are still being targeted as those that should be subjected to this vaccine!

If this weren’t enough for worried expectant mothers, 8.1 Pregnancy category C, states “Animal reproductive studies have not been conducted (with this vaccine). It is not known whether (this vaccine) can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman or can affect reproductive capacity.” This same paragraph goes on to clearly suggest that the vaccine “should be given to pregnant women only if clearly needed“, Yet pregnant women are one of the main groups targeted so I feel that it is safe to assume that this fills that criterion for vaccination despite the fact that they have no idea what the side effects will be. Section 8.3 (Nursing Mothers) gets even better. “It is not known whether (this vaccine) is excreted in human milk. Therefore, as some viruses are excreted in human milk and additionally, because of the possibility of shedding of vaccine virus and the close proximity of a nursing infant and mother caution should be exercised if (this vaccine) is administered to nursing mothers.”It just gets worse as we read on. How many in this country have been asked (or will be asked) if their children are asthmatic prior to being vaccinated at the local WalMart or grocery store pharmacy? It seems that this particular vaccine increases the potential risk of wheezing, asthma attacks and hospitalization. Also, this document states that if there has been a history of Guillain Barre’ Syndrome within 6 weeks of a previous influenza vaccination, “the decision to give Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine, Live, Intranasal or Flu Mist should be based on careful consideration of the potential benefits and potential risks.” So contracting a disorder that paralyzes you could possibly indicate that perhaps you shouldn’t receive another poisonous injection? Am I the only one that finds this bizarre?The CDC also warns you that this vaccine “may not protect all individuals receiving the vaccine.” To be honest with you, to call the CDC disingenuous would be a serious understatement given that last year’s seasonal flu vaccine was determined to be 90% ineffective yet they continued to tell the American public that they should get the vaccine anyway.

Here are a couple of other side effects that one should consider before subjecting themselves or their children to this idiotic measure to supposedly protect them from a virus that by all indications is far less virulent than the common seasonal flu: Exacerbation of symptoms of mitochondrial encephalomyopathy (Leigh Syndrome), Gastrointestinal disorders (i.e. nausea, vomiting, diarrhea) Immune system disorders (anaphylactic reaction, facial edema and uticaria) Guillain Bare’ syndrome and Bells Palsy, Respiratory, thoracic and mediatinal disorders and skin and tissue disorders.

Add to this previous nonsense the fact that this nasal spray vaccine is a LIVE virus and therefore must infect and replicate in cells lining the nasopharynx of the recipient to induce immunity, one must assume that this will allow the H1N1 virus to be shed to those that come in contact with the ones that have recently been vaccinated. Many doctors believe that this infectious stage lasts up to 21 days! Let’s not also forget that the cribiform plate, the paper thin bone at the top of the nasal passages will allow this live virus to infect the brains of a small portion of those that receive the vaccines, causing a brain infection known as encephalitis which, pardon me for mentioning, is far more deadly than this benign “pandemic”.With all this information, one should get only one message: DO YOUR HOMEWORK!

Wednesday, September 2, 2009

Dr. Jay Gordon on Swine Flu Vaccine

Hello and merry meet to all my new readers! Welcome. :)

I just received an e-mail from Dr. Jay Gordon regarding the swine flu vaccine and I thought I'd share it with you, loyal readers. I have a far more comprehensive piece on the swine flu planned for early next week.

I will say though, I completely agree with Dr. Gordon.

Without further ado, here's his thoughts on the topic:


I have seen more children and adults with influenza-like illness: 104 degree fevers, muscle soreness, sore throat and negative tests for strep, than in any summer I can remember. I haven't used the "flu swab" to test anybody, but I'm sure that many if not most of these sick people had Swine Flu. They all felt miserable, and they are all feeling just fine now.

Preventing outbreaks of this "novel H1N1" influenza may be a mistake of huge proportions. Yes, sadly, there will be fatalities among the 6 billion citizens of the planet. Tens of millions of cases of any illness will lead to morbidity and mortality, but this is completely (tragically) unavoidable. The consequences of not acquiring immunity this time around, however, could be really terrible and far outweigh a mass prevention program.

Here's my rationale for not using Tamiflu: If (if, if, if) this virus circles the globe as the rather innocent influenza it now appears to be, but mutates and returns as a very virulent form of influenza, it will be quite wonderful and life-saving to have formed antibodies against its 2009 version. These antibodies may be far from 100% protective, but they will help. This is incredibly important but being ignored in the interest of expediency.

In 1918, it appears that influenza A (an H1N1, by the way) did this globe-trotting mutation and killed millions. The times and state of medical care are not comparable, but a milder parallel occurrence is possible. Perhaps this happens every 100 years or so, perhaps every three million.

Whenever possible, we should form antibodies against viruses at the right stage of their existence and at the right stage of our lives (For example, chickenpox in childhood and EBV/mono in early childhood. There are many other examples.) Getting many viral illnesses confers lifetime immunity, and very few vaccines do.

Tamiflu is a very powerful drug with little proven efficacy against this bug, and with its major side effect being tummy upset. I'm not using it at all. Psychiatric side effects are also possible.

I also won't be giving the flu shot to the kids and parents in my practice unless there are extraordinary risk factors. I anticipate giving none at all this year. I doubt that there will be any really large problems with the vaccine, but I also doubt any really large benefits. As I said, I think that this year's version of this particular H1N1 is as "mild" as it will ever be and that getting sick with it this year will be good rather than bad. The chances that a new "flu shot" will be overwhelmingly effective are small.

I consider this, and most seasonal and novel influenza A vaccines, as "experimental" vaccines; they've only been tested on thousands of people for a period of weeks and then they'll be given to hundreds of millions of people. Not really the greatest science when we're in that much of a hurry. Yes, one can measure antibodies against a certain bacterium or virus in the blood and it may be associated with someone not getting sick, but there are very few illnesses common enough or enough ethics committees willing enough to do the right tests. That is, give 1000 people the real vaccine and 1000 placebo shots, expose all of them to the disease and see who gets sick. Seriously. I know it sounds terrible.

This is, obviously, a difficult public discussion because it touches on the concept of benefits and risks, again, of morbidity and mortality. Few public officials have the courage or inclination to present all facets of this difficult decision. I give vaccines to my patients every single day, but I always err on the side of caution. Implying that this is a dangerous new shot is not scientifically or statistically correct and represents hyperbole and even dishonesty on the part of the so-called "anti-vaccine" camp.

It sure isn't "sexy" to suggest handwashing, good nutrition, hydration, extra sleep and so on. It's not conventional to suggest astragalus, echinacea, elderberry and vitamin C. Adequate vitamin D levels are crucial, too.

I just think that giving this new H1N1 vaccine is not the cautious nor best thing to do.


Jay Gordon, MD FAAP

More to come! In the meantime, stay healthy loyal readers. :)

Thursday, August 13, 2009

Sweeteners Which Are 'Sweet' For Your Health

Let's face facts...our taste buds crave it, our mouths water for it, even our guts yearn chuggishly for it. The 'it' I'm referring to, in case you haven't guessed, is sugar.

From the day we're born, we're programmed to enjoy the taste of anything sweet. Even mother's milk contains a natural sweetener...lactose. Unfortunately, because organic lactose is hard to come by on the marketplace, many baby formula makers are now using sucrose as their sweetener of choice.

“Sucrose tends to be five times sweeter than lactose and too much of any sugar can cause problems, but especially sucrose. There can be problems with dental damage, problems with tooth decay, excessive weight gain, and sucrose tends to make people overeat, “said Dr. Jennifer Shu, a pediatrician at Atlanta’s Children’s Medical Group.

Indeed, it should be noted that sucrose-sweetened baby formulas are banned in Europe. Experts are concerned about the proliferation of childhood obesity rates among other health concerns. And truly, do we really want our newborn infants exposed to refined sugars at such an early age, if at all? I know, as a mother of two, I certainly don't. Yet another reason to applaud breastfeeding mothers.

Indeed, America's addiction to sugar has created an epidemic of health and immune problems including candida overgrowth, vitamin and mineral deficiencies, adrenal fatigue, diabetes, and obesity.

25 Reasons to Avoid Sugar

While we're all very much aware of the dangers of refined sugars, the news is finally coming to light and circling among the masses that artificial sweeteners [i.e. aspartame, saccharin, and sucrolose], are downright dangerous to ingest. For more information on these market-heavy products, click HERE.

"So if I can't use sugar or Splenda/Sweet N' Low/Equal...what can I use, Bridgett?"

Oh! I'm so glad you asked, dear reader.

Allow me to lead you to the world of all-natural, organic products. The good news is, healthy natural sweeteners do exist.
  • Products made from flowers, plants, and trees.
  • Products which don't contain chlorine or various other chemicals.
  • Products which won't cause overeating by fooling your brain with addictive components.
Probably the most popular natural sweetener at this time is Stevia.


Stevia is derived from a small shrub found primarily in China and South America, and is 200-300 times sweeter than sugar. In its unrefined yet medicinal form it has a slight licorice taste that makes it unpleasant as a sweetener. Many years ago the Japanese discovered how to extract the two sweet elements in stevia, (rebaudioside and stevioside) from the leaf creating the safest, natural, calorie-free sweetener on the market today. In fact, the Coca-Cola company is now using Stevia in their diet drinks.

Benefits of Stevia [according to Donna Gates for Body Ecology]:
  • It has a long history of safe use as an herbal sweetener, and as an antifungal, anti-inflammatory, and antibiotic agent.
  • It helps balance the pancreas, which is quite often compromised in people with candida.
  • It is recommended for diabetics and for people with hypoglycemia.
  • It regulates the digestive tract and greatly increases energy.
  • It does not feed candida in the intestinal tract.
So is it safe to ingest? Japanese scientists did numerous studies using hamsters in the early nineties. The results of these studies can be found HERE. In short, these scientists tested fertility, carcinogenic effects, toxicity, risks of obesity and various other health issues often tied to artificial sweeteners. What they found? Stevia exhibitied none of these side effects, and in fact, appeared to decrease breast tumors and kidney damage in the rodents.

Here are a couple Stevia brands I recommend:

Only Sweet

Both are zero calories and can be purchased in powder or liquid form. The NOW brand can be purchased on Amazon.


Xylitol is a sweetener found in many fruits and vegetables and is even produced by the human body during normal carbohydrate metabolism . Xylitol is typically manufactured from birch tree cellulose or other natural xylan-rich sources.

Benefits of Xylitol
  • It has been clinically proven to fight dental cavities, and to facilitate the remineralization of dental enamel.
  • It tastes similar to sugar, with 40% fewer calories.
  • It helps stabilize blood sugar.
  • It does not feed candida in the intestinal tract.
  • It fights respiratory and ear infections, decreasing the need for antibiotics.

Is it safe? Yes! In 1983, JECFA, a joint expert committee of WHO and FAO, confirmed the fact, already known by scientists that it is a safe sweetener for foods. The FDA also confirmed this fact in 1986.

A couple brands I recommend?


Epic Dental

I use products from both of these companies and highly recommend them to you [no, I'm not getting paid to say this either]. Epic Dental provides my family toothpaste (flouride-free, of course), mouthwash, mints, and gum. Xlear provides individual packets of xylitol for drinks and nasal spray.

Lo Han

Lo Han, another natural sweetener that does not feed candida, is extracted from the Lo Han Guo fruit, which is a member of the gourd family. I am not personally familiar with this sweetener, but it has been used for decades in western medicine.

Benefits of Lo Han:

  • It is 250-400 times sweeter than sugar.
  • Is calorie free.
  • Like Stevia and xylitol, it is safe for diabetics and hypoglycemics.
  • It is used as a medicinal herb in Southern China, and for treating coughs and sore throats.

If any of you, loyal readers, have used this sweetener and are familiar with its properties, please leave a comment in the comment section. I'm anxious to learn more about Lo Han.

Manuka & Raw, Organic Honey

Manuka Honey is a premium medical-grade honey, exclusively found in the New Zealand region. It has been discovered that this unique type of honey contains extraordinary healing properties that are capable of treating a wide spectrum of health conditions. Although pricey, it's an excellent supplement to keep in the cupboards, as its benefits are AMAZING. Manuka honey is the 'Cadillac' of all honey.

Raw, organic honey has been used for centuries for its healing properties, as well as its sweetness. People use it to bake as it requires less use of heat. Its tasty flavor is one reason many people prefer it over table sugar. Besides that, honey is much sweeter than regular table sugar and better for you.

It’s always best if you buy locally grown organic raw honey whenever you can. Locally grown because it’s produced by bees which are from the environment in which you live. It's wise to grow or consume foods from the area in which you live as they contain the immune stimulating properties needed for your body to adapt to its environment. Fresh raw honey will also be tastier, and more potent. And, when you buy from local independent farmers you help keep them in business, which is good for your economy.

Benefits of Manuka Honey:

  • Manuka Honey has natural antibacterial, antimicrobial, antiviral, antioxidant, antiseptic, anti-inflammatory and antibacterial properties.
  • Manuka Honey creates a moist healing environment that allows new skin cells to grow across a healing wound flush with the surface of the wound, preventing deformity of the skin and scaring.
  • Manuka Honey rapidly clears infection by destroying bacteria.
  • Manuka Honey repairs damaged skin and regenerates new skin growth.
  • Manuka Honey hastens the healing process.
  • Manuka Honey eliminates malodor by destroying the bacteria that cause it.
  • Manuka Honey can heal Staph infections and destroy antibiotic-resistant strains of bacteria such as MRSA and VRE.
  • The viscosity of Manuka Honey provides a protective barrier to prevent wounds from becoming infected.
  • Manuka Honey causes scabs and dead skin cells to lift off the surface of the wound, leaving a clean healthy wound bed in which the regeneration of skin tissue can occur.
  • Manuka Honey stimulates the growth of tissue involved in the healing process.
  • Manuka Honey stimulates the formation of new blood capillaries and the growth of fibroblasts that replace the connective tissue of the deeper layer of the skin and produce the collagen fibers that give strength to the repair.
  • Manuka Honey has an anti-inflammatory action that relieves pain.
  • Manuka Honey has antifungal properties that can cure ringworm and other fungal conditions such as athlete's foot, jock itch and nail fungus.
  • Manuka Honey is all-natural and organic.
  • Manuka Honey has no known side effects.

Now, some of these benefits are from actually rubbing the honey into the wounds and not ingesting them...but I wanted to list all them all for your benefit.

Manuka honey also comes in two types:

1. Regular

2. UMF (Unique Manuka Factor)--The
higher the UMF, the stronger the antibacterial properties.

Benefits of Raw, Organic Honey:
  • Taking organic raw honey is a healthy way to get an energy boost. Its carbohydrates supply us with energy and strength. It can boost your endurance and reduce muscle fatigue.
  • Honey is a great aid in relieving morning sickness, reportedly even more effective than traditional soda crackers. It’s also good for sore throats including laryngitis and pharyngitis.
  • Honey and cinnamon can help in many areas including relief from bladder infections, arthritis, upset stomach and bad breath. It’s even supposed to be able to slow down hair loss.
  • Honey can be used as a medication for men with problems of impotence and women with problems related to infertility. Warm raw goat milk and raw honey is believed to increase sperm count considerably.
  • A salve made of honey, for diabetic ulcers, has been proven effective when other topical antibiotics are not well tolerated. It can be applied to eczema, canker sores or bleeding gums.
  • Honey and apple cider vinegar can be used for many ailments like stomach aches, constipation and even migraines.
  • Honey and lemon goes to work in the body shifting the extra fat stores, thus making it usable energy for regular body functions. And, honey is cholesterol-free. It reportedly can even help to keep cholesterol levels in check.
  • Honey has a viscous texture due to its low water content. It also establishes a poor environment for bad bacteria to grow, and is a good natural preservative.

Despite the numerous benefits listed above, both raw and Manuka honey is one and a half times sweeter than sugar and feeds the systemic yeast infection, candida. It also raises blood sugar almost as much as table sugar. So if you have candida gut issues, as many autistic children do, or you're diabetic, you'll want to eat honey very sparingly.

Once you are free of candida symptoms, and your digestive tract is well populated with the friendly microflora essential for good health, you may be able to handle small amounts of honey.


Molasses is made by refining sugarcane and sugar beets. During processing, sugar crystals are extracted leaving a dark, syrupy mixture. If the molasses is from sugarcane grown in high quality soil, it can have an abundance of minerals like iron, calcium, and magnesium. Blackstrap Molasses is the darkest color molasses you can get, and this indicates the presence of less sugar, and more nutrients. Again, like honey, even the healthiest version of molasses will feed candida.

Avoid Agave Nectar!!

Agave is derived from a plant found mainly in Mexico and contains a sweet, sticky juice that is ninety percent fructose. Growers have unfortunately found a way to process agave, and convert it into something called hydrolyzed high fructose inulin syrup. This chemically processed agave is similar to high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), a sugar with serious health implications. In fact, some agave distributors have been caught re-labeling HFCS as agave syrup!

It is difficult to tell whether the agave syrup sold on the market is from a toxic variety of agave, which might be used due to the shortage of blue agave, or whether it is the highly processed fructose syrup. For these reasons, it is best to avoid agave syrup until further legal mandates are in place to ensure its source, and its safety.

This recently released information has me deeply disturbed. Like many parents of autistic children, we've been sweetening my son's foods with agave for over a year now, as we believed it was a 'low glycemic index' food, which wouldn't feed candida. We were betrayed by manipulative marketing.

Despite what we were led to believe, agave is NOT:
  • a natural, organic food
  • low calorie
  • low on the glycemic index

In conclusion, I recommend avoiding all other types of sugar, including fructose, HFCS, agave, and any type of artificial sweeteners. I hope this information is helpful to you and I hope you'll all consider making the change to natural sweeteners.

Stay healthy!

Wednesday, August 5, 2009

What Can I Say?

This summer has fluidly slipped right past me while I was busy doing everything...and nothing. I've neglected this blog for far too long and for that, I apologize.

I intend to get 'Part 2' of my artificial sweetener series posted as soon as I can.

Stay tuned. :)

Wednesday, May 6, 2009

Artificial Sweeteners: Too Good To Be True

Even without seeing the results of these polls, I can safely say at one point or another throughout our lives, we've all dieted and happily chugged an artificial sweetener in our coffee, iced tea, diet soda, or lemonade. Unfortunately, while we were imagining the svelte figure we were sure to obtain but cutting all the sugar and calories, our bodies were in chaos. A chaos caused by:

  1. Nutrasweet/Equal -- aspartame

  2. Sweet N' Low -- saccharin

  3. Splenda -- sucralose

Since their introduction to the market after approval by the FDA, these artificial sweeteners have wreaked havoc on bodies world-wide. Side effects as simple as headaches and severe as cancer have been reported.


Perhaps the worst of the worst is aspartame. Although I'm not certain when this news clip was made (the computers featured suggests it was probably awhile ago), it's still very much relevant today.

Millions of people consume aspartame's hard not to. Aspartame is contained in 6-7,000 items on the market today.

It was approved by the FDA in 1981, despite it causing multiple brain tumors in laboratory rats. While a variety of symptoms have been reported, most fall into the neurological and behavioral category consisting mostly of headaches, mood alterations, and hallucinations. The remaining third is mostly gastrointestinal symptoms.

According to Dr. Mercola, some side effects of aspartame include:

  • Multiple sclerosis

  • Parkinson’s disease

  • Alzheimer’s disease

  • Memory and hearing loss

  • Hormonal problems

  • Epilepsy

  • Brain lesions

  • Neuroendocrine disorders

  • Vision problems

  • Headaches, ear buzzing, dizziness

  • Nausea and gastrointestinal disturbances

  • Weakness, numbness and shooting pains in your extremities

  • Behavioral disturbances

  • Memory lapses

And, of course, there's also cancer.

According to Dr. Mercola, "one well-controlled, peer-reviewed, SEVEN-year study even found that as little as 20 mg per day can cause cancer in humans. One 12-ounce diet soda contains about 180 mg of aspartame, so you do the math on that risk!"

Aspartame can be found in the following items, so be sure to read labels to check if it's aspartame-free.

  • Diet sodas, juice drinks, and flavored waters

  • Chewing gum

  • Diet and diabetic foods

  • Breakfast cereals, such as Fiber One

  • Fiber supplements, such as orange flavored Metamucil

  • Jams

  • Sweets

  • Certain vitamins (including those for childrens) as well as prescription and over the-counter drugs such as Alka Seltzer Plus, and some Tylenol medications


Although sometimes considered the best-of-the-worst in terms of safety, saccharin has been linked to bladder cancer in rats.

According to Lisa Shea of, "The FDA began researching saccharin in the 70s, to ensure it really WAS safe. A series of studies were done and saccharin was found to cause bladder cancers. Some felt it was impurities in the saccharin, and not the saccharin itself, that caused the trouble, so nothing was done. However, in 1977, Canadians proved conclusively that it WAS the saccharin itself causing the cancer.

As a result, the FDA required that any saccharin products carry a warning label about cancer.

The actual warning reads:

"Use of this product may be hazardous to your health. This product contains saccharin, which has been determined to cause cancer in laboratory animals."

In fact, drinking just two cans of diet soda a day increases a person's risk for bladder cancer (and a myriad of other problems).

Saccharin has also been shown to be very addictive as opiates.

Furthermore, Shea says, "Pregnant mothers are especially cautioned to stay away from saccharin, because even small usage of saccharin could overwhelm the developing fetus' defenses and cause damage to the developing bladder area."


Per Dr. Mercola:

"It’s very important to realize that Splenda (sucralose) is actually NOT sugar, despite its marketing slogan “Made from sugar, so it tastes like sugar”. Rather it’s a chlorinated artificial sweetener in line with aspartame and saccharin, and with detrimental health effects to match."

That's right, folks. Splenda (i.e. sucralose) is loaded with chlorine.

Various news reports have also centered around artificial sweeteners’ ability to impair your appetite regulation and leading to weight gain.

Other side effects of Splenda include:

  • Stimulate your appetite
  • Increase carbohydrate cravings
  • Stimulate fat storage and weight gain
  • Gastrointestinal problems (including decreasing beneficial bacteria in your gut by 50%)
  • Migraines
  • Seizures
  • Dizziness
  • Blurred vision
  • Allergic reactions
  • Blood sugar increases
  • Weight gain

As with the other artificial sweeteners, you might be consuming sucralose without realizing you're doing so. This happened to us, in fact. I ordered some liquid zinc from a very reputable company and discovered too late it contained oodles of sucralose. So once again...READ YOUR LABELS! I can't stress how important it is to monitor what you're ingesting.

And remember, Splenda has NEVER been proven safe for human consumption!

Because the length of this entry is out of control, I will do another entry in the next few days about healthier, safe sweetener alternatives.

In the meantime, avoid this artificial junk and you might be surprised how much better you start feeling.

Stay Healthy,

Wednesday, April 29, 2009

Dr. Mercola Chimes In On Swine Flu

Just received an e-mail from Dr. Mercola.
This piece, while somewhat lengthy, is very thought-provoking and worthy of your time.

The Swine Flu Pandemic: Fact or Fiction?