|
December 10, 2010
from
PreventDisease Website
A remarkable study
published in the
Cochrane Library found no evidence
of benefit for influenza vaccinations and also noted that the vast
majority of trials were inadequate.
The authors stated that the only ones showing benefit were
industry-funded. They also pointed out that the industry-funded
studies were more likely to be published in the most prestigious
journals...and one more thing:
They found cases of
severe harm caused by the vaccines, in spite of inadequate
reporting of adverse effects.
The study, "Vaccines
for preventing influenza in healthy adults", is damning
of the entire pharmaceutical industry and its minions, the drug
testing industry and the medical system that relies on them.
In the usual manner of understatement, the authors concluded:
The results of this
review seem to discourage the utilization of vaccination against
influenza in healthy adults as a routine public health measure.
As healthy adults have a low risk of complications due to
respiratory disease, the use of the vaccine may be only advised
as an individual protection measure against symptoms in specific
cases.
The Study
The authors attempted to find and investigate every study that has
evaluated the effects of flu vaccines in healthy adults aged 18-65.
To this end, they,
"searched Cochrane
Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane
Library, 2010, issue 2), MEDLINE (January 1966 to June 2010) and
EMBASE (1990 to June 2010)."
They included 50
reports. Forty of them were clinical trials adding up to over 70,000
people. Two reported only on harmful effects and were not included
in this study.
Studies of all types of influenza vaccines were included: live,
attenuated, and killed - or fractions of killed - vaccines.
The primary outcomes they looked for were numbers and seriousness of
influenza and influenza-like illnesses. They also looked at the
number and seriousness of harms from the vaccines. The authors
attempted to collect missing data by writing to the authors.
They describe the
response as "disappointing". In the end, they included 50 studies
and refused to use 92, mostly because of highly significant flaws,
such as using inappropriate controls, not being randomly controlled
trials, inconsistencies in data presented, lack of study design,
unclear definitions, poor reporting, lack of crude data, and lack of
placebo.
The authors found that,
-
vaccines
administered parenterally, that is, outside the digestive
tract, usually meaning by injection, reduced influenza-like
symptoms by 4%
-
they found no
evidence that vaccination prevents viral transmission!
(there goes the whole herd immunity argument!)
-
they also found
no evidence that they prevent complications, either
They attempted to
ascertain the degree of complications, and though they did report on
some, most of the studies simply did not address the issue or did so
inadequately.
Five Myths to
Keep in Mind About Flu Vaccines
-
Myth 1: The Flu
Shot is very effective.
Statistically, you are less likely to get the flu if you
haven’t had a flu vaccine. A BCTV reporter in Vancouver,
commenting on the overload in BC emergency rooms, said that
out of 32 people who had received a flu shot, 30 got the
flu.
-
Myth 2: The Flu
Shot has a high success rate.
This is a
vaccine that only has a 6.25% success rate. This is a pretty
big under-achievement, considering that the average reaction
to placebo injections of distilled water is 30%.
-
Myth 3: The Flu
Shot is safe.
Hugh Fudenberg MD, who is
the world’s leading immunogeneticist, says that if a person
had 5 flu vaccinations between 1970 and 1980 he/she is 10
times more likely to get Alzheimer’s Disease than if he/she
had only one or two shots.
Fudenberg said
that this was because of the aluminum and mercury, which
almost every flu vaccine contains. The gradual accumulation
of aluminum and mercury in the brain leads to cognitive
dysfunction.
-
Myth 4: There
are no harmful ingredients in vaccinations.
Flu
vaccines consist primarily of 3 categories of ingredients.
First there are viruses and cultured bacteria.
The second
ingredient is the way in which they can be cultivated. This
includes aborted human fetal cells, chick embryos, pig
blood, monkey kidney tissue, cowpox pus, and calf serum, and
all of these foreign proteins get injected straight into
your bloodstream. A bit repulsive just thinking about it,
isn’t it?
The flu shot
also contains neutralizers, stabilizers, carrying agents and
preservatives such as mercury, aluminum, and formaldehyde.
Formaldehyde is something that is used for embalming the
dead and is known to cause cancer.
There is no
amount of formaldehyde considered safe when injected into a
living organism.
-
Myth 5: The Flu
Shot works.
The flu
shot could actually weaken your immune system and make you
more likely to catch this virus. It is has absolutely no
value and should probably be avoided for your own safety.
Not only is it
loaded with toxic chemicals, but many people actually get
the flu shortly after getting the shot, because it weakens
their immune system instead of making it stronger like it is
claimed to do.
Dr.
Viera Scheibner, arguably one
of the world's most respected scientists and scholars on vaccine
medical data stated from her research and writings on vaccine
science and history:
"Ever since the turn
of the (last) century, medical journals published dozens and
dozens of articles demonstrating that injecting vaccines (can)
cause anaphylaxis, meaning harmful, inappropriate immunological
responses, which is also called sensitization. (This) increase(s)
susceptibility to the disease which the vaccine is supposed to
prevent, and to a host of related and other unrelated
infections."
"We see it in
vaccinated children within days, within two or three weeks.
(Most of them) develop runny noses, ear infections, pneumonitis,
(and) bronchiolitis. It is only a matter of degrees, which
indicates immuno-suppression, (not immunity). It indicates the
opposite. So I never use the word immunization because that is
false advertising. It implies that vaccines immunize, which they
don't. The correct term is either vaccination or sensitization."
In addition, "Vaccines
(can) damage internal organs, particularly the pancreas," so
everyone vaccinated, including for seasonal flu, is vulnerable to
contracting,
...and dozens of others.
Some can kill. Others produce a lifetime of disability and pain
because autoimmune disease happens when the "body attacks itself,"
or more accurately "is attacked" by an unhealthy lifestyle, stress,
and various harmful ingestible substances; that is, toxins in drugs,
food, air, water, and other liquids.
According to
immunologist, Dr. Jesse Stoff, human health is compromised
four ways:
-
by poor
nutrition
-
man-made
environmental toxins
-
disease-causing
organisms and their toxins
-
immune system
trauma from factors like x-ray radiation and stress
Other factors include a
lack of sleep and exercise, smoking, heavy alcohol consumption, and
various excesses that throw the body out of balance, making it
susceptible to a host of debilitating illnesses.
Conclusions
The Cochrane study found very little evidence to support even a
small improvement in time off work. Even that finding needs to be
put into the context of industry influence.
The authors wrote:
This review includes
15 out of 36 trials funded by industry (four had no funding
declaration). An earlier systematic review of 274 influenza
vaccine studies published up to 2007 found industry funded
studies were published in more prestigious journals and cited
more than other studies independently from methodological
quality and size.
Studies funded from
public sources were significantly less likely to report
conclusions favorable to the vaccines. The review showed that
reliable evidence on influenza vaccines is thin but there is
evidence of widespread manipulation of conclusions and spurious
notoriety of the studies.
The content and
conclusions of this review should be interpreted in light of
this finding.
"...industry
funded studies were published in more prestigious journals
and cited more than other studies..."
"...reliable evidence on influenza vaccines is thin..."
"...there is evidence of widespread manipulation of
conclusions..."
Most assuredly, the
"content and conclusions of this review should be interpreted in
light of this finding"!
Even without taking into
account the shoddiness of the studies in general, the authors were
still hard put to find any benefit of any sort for influenza
vaccinations in healthy people.
At best, they found a
small decrease in number of days off work. They did not find that
the vaccinations had any benefit whatsoever in complications or
mortality. In spite of the limited reporting on adverse effects, the
authors did find some, including 1.6 Guillain-Barré cases per
million.
The question that must be asked is:
How can influenza
vaccinations be justified when there is virtually no
benefit - not even the oft-cited dubious herd-immunity -
and cases of severe harm are documented, in spite of
disgustingly limited reporting of adverse effects?
It is long past time to
end the travesty of jabbing adults and children without a shred of
evidence showing real benefit in spite of trying to find it, and
with evidence of crippling harm, in spite of trying to mask it.
Sources
|