OT: Flu shot making the flu worse

Mar 29, 2019 40 Replies

Hi All,



First of before I start, I am only talking about one vaccine, not all of them. Each has to be taken on their own merits. No one tell me I am full of s*** because the polio or small pox vaccines do indeed work.



And, I do not consider "industry funded" studies to be scientific research because of the corruption involved.



It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.



--Upton Sinclair



I will also foot note [x] the crap out of what I state.



Okay, so here goes. The scientific evidence is that the flu vaccine does not work very well, if at all [1][2][3][6][7]. My own anecdotal experience is that the vaccine does not work at all.



To those healthy people to seem to think that the vaccine is working, there is an explanation for this. It is called the "Healthy user bias" [4]. It causes "damage the validity of epidemiologic studies" [4]



So now to the main reason I am writing this. The flu shot causes you to be more susceptible to next years flu. Surprise! The mechanism is called "Antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE)" [5]. And it can become " become life-threatening" [5].



Here is evidence of it happening (note that this study barely squeaked by entrenched financial interests):



Based on the sentinel study of 672 cases and 857 controls, 2008–09 TIV was associated with statistically significant protection against seasonal influenza (odds ratio 0.44, 95% CI 0.33–0.59). In contrast, estimates from the sentinel and three other observational studies, involving a total of 1,226 laboratory-confirmed pH1N1 cases and 1,505 controls, indicated that prior receipt of 2008–09 TIV was associated with *increased risk of medically attended pH1N1 illness* during the spring–summer 2009, with estimated risk or odds ratios ranging from 1.4 to 2.5. Risk of pH1N1 hospitalization was not further increased among vaccinated people when comparing hospitalized to community cases. [7]



And a financial explanation of all this from 2018:



The flu season in North America officially began 5 weeks ago, and the vaccine publicity juggernaut is still picking up steam. Manufacturers are hoping to sell 166 million doses in the US this season. One business group predicts an $8 billion US influenza vaccine market by 2025. (Coherent Market Insights, 1/5/18) The 2016-17 vaccine *increased the risk of H3N2 illness among UK elderly by 68%*, and officials are calling for better vaccines. (Osterholm, NY Times, 1/8/18) Meanwhile, in the absence of any evidence that it would help, officials and ordinary citizens in the US and UK wrangle about flu shot mandates for healthcare workers.[8]



So let all get in line and make Big Pharma and Big Med rich(er)! A little extra mercury and preservatives, along with a live virus that does not protect from the virus in the wild and will make it easier to catch next years virus, is good for ya! Got to love those guys int he marketing department! [9]


-T



I wonder if the good comrade doctor read this?


  1. Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy adults
    formatting link
    Influenza vaccines have a modest effect in reducing influenza symptoms and working days lost. There is no evidence that they affect complications, such as pneumonia, or transmission. WARNING: This review includes 15 out of 36 trials funded by industry (four had no funding declaration)


  1. Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy children
    formatting link
    Inactivated vaccines in children aged two years or younger are not significantly more efficacious than placebo. Twenty- eight children over the age of six need to be vaccinated to prevent one case of influenza (infection and symptoms). Eight need to be vaccinated to prevent one case of influenza- like-illness (ILI). We could find no evidence of effect on secondary cases, lower respiratory tract disease, drug prescriptions, otitis media and its consequences and socioeconomic impact. We found weak single-study evidence of effect on school absenteeism by children and caring parents from work

  2. Vaccines for preventing influenza in the elderly
    formatting link
    The available evidence is of poor quality and provides no guidance regarding the safety, efficacy or effectiveness of influenza vaccines for people aged 65 years or older


  1. Healthy user bias
    formatting link
    The healthy user bias is a bias that can damage the validity of epidemiologic studies testing the efficacy of particular therapies or interventions. Specifically, it is a sampling bias: the kind of subjects that voluntarily enroll in a clinical trial and actually follow the experimental regimen are not representative of the general population. They can be expected, on average, to be healthier as they are concerned for their health and are predisposed to follow medical advice, both factors that would aid one's health. In a sense, being healthy or active about one's health is a precondition for becoming a subject of the study, an effect that can appear under other conditions such as studying particular groups of workers (i.e. someone in ill health is unlikely to have a job as manual laborer).

  2. Antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE)
    formatting link
    Antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) occurs when non- neutralizing antiviral proteins facilitate virus entry into host cells, leading to increased infectivity in the cells. Some cells do not have the usual receptors on their surfaces that viruses use to gain entry. The antiviral proteins (i.e., the antibodies) bind to antibody Fc receptors that some of these cells have in the plasma membrane. The viruses bind to the antigen binding site at the other end of the antibody. ADE is common in cells cultured in the laboratory, but rarely occurs in vivo except for dengue virus. This virus can use this mechanism to infect human macrophages, causing a normally mild viral infection to become life-threatening



  1. Official doubletalk hides serious problems with flu shot safety and effectiveness
    formatting link
    Some history: 1960 Nobel Laureate and a primary developer of today’s influenza vaccine, Macfarlane Burnet, didn’t think it was worth much. (Br J Path 1936:17:282. Natural History of Infectious Disease 1972, page212)….In 2000 Kenneth McIntosh warned that we should not routinely give influenza vaccine to healthy children until multicenter randomized trials were done over several seasons to be sure that it was safe and effective. (Editorial, NEJM 2000;342:225) His advice was ignored….In 2004 a “Seven-Step Recipe” for using the media to boost demand for the vaccine was presented to the National Influenza Vaccine Summit, sponsored by the CDC and the AMA. The recipe included, “…statements of alarm by public health authorities…prediction of dire outcomes from influenza… continued reports that influenza is causing severe illness affecting lots of people…repeated urging of influenza vaccination…” (Doshi, BMJ 2005;331:1419) Sound familiar?

  2. Association between the 2008–09 Seasonal Influenza Vaccine and Pandemic H1N1 Illness during Spring–Summer 2009: Four Observational Studies from Canada
    formatting link


  1. Official doubletalk hides serious problems with flu shot safety and effectiveness
    formatting link
    estimates from the sentinel and three other observational studies, involving a total of 1,226 laboratory-confirmed pH1N1 cases and 1,505 controls, indicated that prior receipt of 2008–09 TIV was associated with *increased risk of medically attended pH1N1 illness* during the spring–summer 2009, with estimated risk or odds ratios ranging from 1.4 to 2.5

  2. Just checking to see if anyone read this far. :-)

More fun:

Macfarlane Burnet (creator of the flu vaccine):

formatting link
Fearing a repeat of the massive global influenza outbreak that occurred after World War I, Burnet focused the Institute in the search for a vaccine.[60] He first tested the vaccine on a group of medical students, and after a promising test on 107 army volunteers in February 1942 following a rise in infections, a large-scale program was introduced two months later to inoculate all new recruits after an influenza A outbreak. In this trial, 20,000 personnel were vaccinated, *without success*, and the scheme was abandoned

Dr. Burnet was noted as not thinking much of the vaccine.

[60] "Sir Frank Macfarlane Burnet – biography". Nobel Foundation. 1960. Archived from the original on 7 September 2008. Retrieved 5 October 2010. Biographical Memoirs, p. 97.

My doctor told me the flu shot they do every year is based on the prominent trait for that year and won't stop another trait if you contract it. Thus, it's not the actual shot that gives some the flu, it's just a different trait they acquired.

Who do you expect to fund them? And later, as evidence of what you use, you cite what amounts to an opinion from a pediatrician, as if that has scientific validity.

From your link:

" In the relatively uncommon circumstance of vaccine matching the viral circulating strain and high circulation, 4% of unvaccinated people versus 1% of vaccinated people developed influenza symptoms (risk difference (RD) 3%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2% to 5%). The corresponding figures for poor vaccine matching were 2% and 1% (RD 1, 95% CI 0% to 3%). These differences were not likely to be due to chance."

So, even with the vaccine being a poor match for the actual flu strain that emerges, it resulted in a 50% decrease in the percentage of people who were vaccinated contracting the flu compared to those that were not vaccinated. And the problem there is what? And how many work days lost, hospitalizations and deaths did vaccination prevent.

So? This is bad? How many have to be vaccinated to prevent one case of polio or measles? And how many hospitalizations or deaths from the flu did it prevent?

We could find no evidence of effect

What they are saying is that the data they could find was of such poor quality that they could not reach any conclusions. And they followed that with:

"To resolve the uncertainty, an adequately powered publicly-funded randomised, placebo-controlled trial run over several seasons should be undertaken."

It's only a bias if the sampling is done incorrectly. If you design a study correctly, you sample correctly.

They can

Which says nothing about flu and flu vaccinations.

One pediatrician's opinion. Here's the study he apparently references:

formatting link
And their conclusion:

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: There was no association between maternal influenza infection anytime during pregnancy and increased ASD risk. There was a suggestion of increased ASD risk among children whose mothers received an influenza vaccination in their first trimester, but the association was not statistically significant after adjusting for multiple comparisons, indicating that the finding could be due to chance. These findings do not call for changes in vaccine policy or practice, but do suggest the need for additional studies on maternal influenza vaccination and autism.

.. nope - I always just skip to the end. :-)

My personal experience, as a 62 year old is : : I've had the flu ~ twice in my first ~ 50 years : started getting flu shot the year there was a big scare < and line-ups , and no big serious outbreaks >

: got the flu shot for the next ~ 10 years < free & easy & I had an elderly frail parent >

: didn't get the shot this year < no reason but apathy >

Never had a reaction to the shot ; didn't get the flu this year when I missed getting the shot.

My conclusion / opinion : : it might be a cash cow for the Pharma-opolis Fie on them ! : I doubt that it makes many people sick <perhaps some >

: high risk and those in significant close contact with high risk ... buck-up and get the shot.

Not sure how it works in other countries - in my part of Canuck-istan - the shot is free ; readily available at the local drug store ; takes about 15 - 20 minutes. John T.

Chuckle!

Me too.

I can never tell what is the flue and what is the common cold. The symptoms overlap so much. Apparently, you have to do an actual DNA test to tell at times.

I haven't gotten really sick in years. Well, a bit, but not enough to get any attention. And "crabby" is a symptom of both the flu and the common cold.

The numbers I heard at around 60% get symptomatic. And if you don't, you will not develop immunity to the strain in the shot.

Keep in mind that the strain in the shot and the strain in the wild are almost never the same or even close enough, which is why it doesn't work.

That would probably even be worse for "high risk" individuals. It would be different if the shot actually worked and did not cause down stream harm (Antibody-dependent enhancement or ADE).

Free? ha. You pay out the ass for that service in taxes. Nothing is ever so expensive as when you make it free!

Hi John,

Sounds like you are a perfect description of the "Healthy user bias".

-T

Hi Meanie,

Don't take medical advice from an anonymous troll on Usenet.

Scott,

You don't even know what a troll is [1]. If anyone was trolling, you were as you were trying to pick a fight with the name calling.

And I was giving scientific report with tons of cites, not medical advice. I backed up everything I said.

-T

  1. Internet troll
    formatting link
    In Internet slang, a troll is a person who starts quarrels or upsets people on the Internet to distract and sow discord by posting inflammatory and digressive, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses and normalizing tangential discussion, whether for the troll's amusement or a specific gain.

I didn't read the paper but that's just about what I've read before.

I didn't bother getting a flu shot because real men don't get vaccinations. They just take their chances and muscle through if they get sick. But once I started taking these long trips with an expensive plane ticket involved that I didn't want to cancel or be sick during, I get one every year. Never had a bad reaction to the shot and I haven't gotten the flue either. (I did throw up 2 nights in a row last week, but whatever it was had no other symptoms. Samething the previous year.)

They've been working on a vaccine for all versions of the flu and I've read there is some progress. I'm sure there are several labs working on it but this might be what I read about.

formatting link
formatting link
formatting link
"The 2017-2018 flu season in the US posted the highest death count among children in at least five years, health officials said. Moreover, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention showed that while flu vaccines usually prevent 40 percent to 60 percent of flu cases, this past year’s vaccines were just 36 percent effective overall."

From

formatting link
"The World Health Organization (WHO) reports up to 500,000 annual seasonal flu-related deaths, mostly affecting people above 65 years old. Seasonal flu is the eighth leading cause of death in the United States, and it causes high social and economic burdens to patients, their families, and health care providers."

I think I'm over 65.

I'd never heard of the flu until I was 11 years old and had moved to a city from a small town. Small town people don't have the flu. They're not a big enough market for the distributors to bother with them. Small town people have to make do with colds. And that's better because you feed a cold (and starve a fever) and small town people like to eat.

The flu was invented by Democrat bureaucrats who wanted something to talk about when they gave speeches. It's not actually a different thing from a cold. Just check with my parents and they'll explain it.

I don't take flu shots. They're free for the elderly in Brazil. I have my reasons. I DO take tetanus shots though .... []'s

Shadow snipped-for-privacy@dow.br wrote

I don't either.

They are here too.

What are those ?

What do you think of the claim that once you have had a few,. that's all you need ?

I have had at least one when I was a kid but have never bothered since. Is tetanus worse in brazil than it is likely to be here ?

There are a lot of wonderful vaccine success out there, but this is not one of them.

Your take on "Antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE)" and this shot?

Agreed. I haven't had a flue shot in decades.

A tetanus shot doesn't have many traits and taking one every ten years isn't a major ordeal. I do the same.

You have to go to industry funded studies to get those results.

You will notice in my cites:

  1. Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy adults
    formatting link
    Influenza vaccines have a modest effect in reducing influenza symptoms and working days lost. There is no evidence that they affect complications, such as pneumonia, or transmission. WARNING: This review includes 15 out of 36 trials funded by industry (four had no funding declaration)
15 out of 36 trials funded by industry (four had no funding declaration). The author specifically warned about it.

Not following you. The vaccine has no affect and make the next flu you catch worse.

And the vaccine is live virus, so you are communicable with that strain. You make other people around you sick.

That’s a lie. It does stop some getting the flue.

and make the next

And that is a lie too.

Another lie.

You moron, your own cites clearly reference studies that show that the flu is effective, even in years when the vaccine is a poor match, it still cut the risk of getting flu in half. I didn't see anything about it making the next one you catch worse:

From the study conclusions:

"" In the relatively uncommon circumstance of vaccine matching the viral circulating strain and high circulation, 4% of unvaccinated people versus 1% of vaccinated people developed influenza symptoms (risk difference (RD) 3%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2% to 5%). The corresponding figures for poor vaccine matching were 2% and 1% (RD 1, 95% CI 0% to 3%). These differences were not likely to be due to chance."

Another lie repeated. Isn't it time to tell us that amalgam tooth fillings harden by the mercury leaching out?

Simply amazing, but a good example of a Trump supporter and their relationship with truth and logic.

Like this, which you presented?

"" In the relatively uncommon circumstance of vaccine matching the viral circulating strain and high circulation, 4% of unvaccinated people versus 1% of vaccinated people developed influenza symptoms (risk difference (RD) 3%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2% to 5%). The corresponding figures for poor vaccine matching were 2% and 1% (RD 1, 95% CI 0% to 3%). These differences were not likely to be due to chance."

It clearly says that even when the vaccine is a poor match, it reduced your chances of getting the flu by about half. And in years when the match was good, it cut the chance by 75%. The problem is that you either simply are incapable of understanding what you read or you just lie, lie, lie. Quite like Trump.

Not on those particular lies above you didn’t.

I didn’t comment on that.

More of your lies.

formatting link

Use the scientific method or don't bother with me.

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required