So why are they being so heavily pushed onto the general public? Why is there so much enthusiasm for flu shots in general, and especially the new H1N1 flu shot or nasal spray, when there’s basically no proof whatsoever that getting it is any more effective than saying a prayer that you won’t get it?
Why did New York try to force unwilling health care workers to get the H1N1 vaccine, when it’s already known that flu vaccines are not very effective? That’s a good question.
Health expert and editor of NaturalNews.com, Mike Adams, points out that there has never been a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial on the efficacy of the flu shot (a fact that even most doctors don’t know). He recommends a tongue-in-cheek way to make a quick $100 bucks off of the confusion.
“If a doctor (or a friend) tries to push a flu vaccine on you, ask them this one simple question: ‘Do you think there have been any placebo-controlled studies that prove flu vaccines actually work?’ Your doctor will, of course, say, ‘Sure there are. There must be.’ You then answer, ‘I'll bet you my flu shot against your hundred dollars that you can't cite even one such study.’ After a few days of being scoffed at while they try to dig up a study that doesn't exist, you'll walk away $100 richer. Remember, the study has to be a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial on the efficacy of the flu shot. Such studies have never been done!”
But you don’t have to take Mike’s word for it. Here’s a quote taken directly from the flu vaccine FLULAVAL’s package insert (which you likely never see when getting the flu shot) for the 2009-2010 formula (pay special attention to the last line):
"FLULAVAL is an influenza virus vaccine indicated for active immunization of adults 18 years of age and older against influenza disease caused by influenza virus subtypes A and type B contained in the vaccine. This indication is based on immune response elicited by FLULAVAL, and there have been no controlled trials demonstrating a decrease in influenza disease after vaccination with FLULAVAL.”
So you may be thinking how it’s a little strange that such a heavily promoted and administered vaccine has never been rigorously tested for efficacy. You may be wondering why on Earth that would be. So am I. It seems like lunacy.
There has been an American Medical Association study that concluded that for every 100 people who get a flu shot, it will prevent 1 person from getting the flu. So, even in the most rosy, best case scenario possible, the flu shot still seems fairly ineffective. That you might be that lucky 1 in a 100 for whom the flu shot actually works, doesn’t seem worth the risk that you will be one of the many unlucky ones who develops unwanted side effects.
Believe me, I have nothing against vaccinations in general, and am very glad to be personally vaccinated against various deadly diseases. However, I believe people should only be injected with vaccines that work, and so far the flu shot doesn’t appear to be one of those that actually works—even during the years when they get the right strain, which they often don’t. And since it doesn’t seem to be particularly effective, why bother taking on the risk of the one thing we do know for sure—flu vaccines carry the risk of serious side-effects?
No, there isn’t much scientific research showing that flu vaccines do work, but there are highly credible studies coming out that flu vaccines are actually dangerous. In fact, children who get the flu vaccine are more at risk for hospitalization than their peers who do not get the vaccine, according to research presented at the 105th International Conference of the American Thoracic Society in San Diego. The study found that children who had received the flu vaccine had three times the risk of hospitalization, as compared to children who had not received the vaccine (read more at http://www.physorg.com/news161971715.html).
No, science hasn’t validated the flu shot, but here’s what rigorous scientific studies have concluded:
§ The flu vaccine is no more effective for children than a placebo, according to a large-scale, systematic review of 51 studies, published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.
§ A study published in the Lancet just found that influenza vaccination was NOT associated with a reduced risk of pneumonia in older people. This is VERY important to note, because 35,000 of the 36,000 “flu” deaths the government reports each year are caused by diseases like pneumonia, and NOT the flu itself.
§ Research published in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine also confirms that there has been no decrease in deaths from influenza and pneumonia, despite the fact that vaccination coverage among the elderly has increased from 15 percent in 1980 to 65 percent now.
§ Giving young children flu shots appeared to have no impact on flu-related doctor visits or hospitalizations, according to a study published in the October issue of the Archives of Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine. (Well, that’s sort of good news for flu shot supporters, because at least they found the shots were completely ineffective, which is still better than the studies showing that flu vaccines are actually dangerous.)
So, should you get the regular flu vaccine or the H1N1 flu shot this year? That’s your call. Why not if it makes you feel better, or if you think getting shots is pleasurable? But if you decide not to, then from a scientific perspective—no one who believes that scientific based evidence is worth something will blame you.
Posted by Rebecca Sato
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The H1N1 Flu Vaccine Debate: Should You, or Shouldn’t You?: