Chit-Chat


Reply to topic

Search

So, who's had the flu this year?

re: So, who's had the flu this year?

I wonder if "serial vaccination" is causing a decreased effectiveness this year. Many people now get the flu shot every year. Multiple studies are now showing that the vaccine in some seasons is ineffective or has a negative effect for those who have been vaccinated in previous years.

Notice for those vaccinated in two subsequent years in the quote below the *negative percent* vaccine effectiveness (meaning those vaccinated were *more likely* to be negatively effected by the flu than the unvaccinated).

"In the 2014-15 season... "negative effects of prior vaccination were pronounced and statistically significant," the researchers found. VE [vaccine effectiveness] in those who received only the 2014-15 vaccine was estimated at 65% (95% CI, 25% to 83%), whereas VE for patients vaccinated two seasons in a row was -33% (95% CI, –78% to 1%)."

from: http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2017/02/studies-shed-light-effects-serial-flu-shots-current-vaccines-benefits

"In an even more unusual finding, people who were vaccinated 3 years in a row—in the 2012-13, 2013-14, and 2014-15 seasons—appeared to have a higher risk of being infected with the dominant flu strain in the latter season, according to the report, published last week in Clinical Infectious Diseases.

That surprising result echoed controversial findings reported by the Canadian flu surveillance network in the wake of the 2009 H1N1 flu pandemic. In studies published in 2010, researchers said they found that Canadians who had received a seasonal flu shot in the fall of 2008 were 1.4 to 2.5 times more likely to get an H1N1 infection requiring medical attention, compared with those who didn't get the seasonal shot."

from: http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2016/04/study-prior-year-vaccination-cut-flu-vaccine-effects-2014-15


"Researchers use the term 'antigenic distance hypothesis' (ADH) to describe the possible negative effects of serial flu vaccination. The hypothesis, according to the JID report, predicts that a prior season's influenza vaccine may interfere negatively with the effectiveness of the current season's vaccine when the difference, or antigenic distance, between the two vaccines is small but the difference between the vaccine strains and the current epidemic strain is large."

from: http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2017/02/studies-shed-light-effects-serial-flu-shots-current-vaccines-benefits

I am definitely no expert on this, so I am not trying to give anyone medical advice. I am just wondering if there is a relationship between "serial vaccination" and overall effectiveness.

re: So, who's had the flu this year?

The cancer risk needs to be mentioned, as well:

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/fluVaccinesCancerRisks.php
Excerpt:
A third type of cell line, called PER.C6 cells, is derived from retinal cells of aborted fetal tissues. The fetal cells are transformed by infecting them with an adenovirus, turning them into “immortalized” cells and the capability to replicate endlessly. By their very nature, these cells are neoplastic (cancer-causing); researchers refer to them as “oncogenic” cells. If tumors are formed when the cells are injected into experimental animals, the cell lines are beyond oncogenic; they are tumorigenic.

There is a real risk of residual retinal DNA and stray viral fragments from the animal tissues getting into flu shots. DNA snips are classified as either “infectious” or “oncogenic” by researchers who worry that the stray DNA is being incorporated into the recipient’s DNA. FDA regulations insist on the “importance of minimizing the risk of oncogenesis in vaccine recipients”. But manufacturers have been instructed only to ensure the final vaccine contains less than 1 million residual animal cells and less than 10 ng stray DNA per vaccine [6].

Is every lot tested for purity in accordance to these parameters? No. Spot-checked lots are sent to the FDA, and the FDA takes the word of vaccine manufacturers that these standards have been met.

Since 1998, the FDA and its subdivision, the Centers for Biological Evaluation and Research (CBER), have been drafting regulations to allow use of both oncogenic and tumorigenic cell lines to be used in vaccine production. The FDA is fully aware that the new cell lines, especially the PER.C6 cells, have substantial risks, including the risk of potentially deadly adventitious (stray) viruses making their way into shots.

And it gets worse. The same FDA memo goes on to say [7]: “In addition to the possibility of contamination of cell substrates with adventitious viruses…the use of immortalized, neoplastic human cells to develop [vaccines] raises theoretical concerns with regard to possible contamination with TSE/BSE agents.”

TSE is Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy, a condition that includes a group of rare degenerative brain disorders characterized by tiny holes in the brain tissues, giving a “spongy” appearance when viewed under a microscope. When this condition occurs in cows, it is called Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, commonly known as “mad cow disease.” In a study published in 2004, researchers found that any cell line could potentially support the propagation of TSE agents [8].

re: So, who's had the flu this year?

Regarding "effectiveness:"

Knowing that each week thousands of nasal and throat swabs from ill persons are sent to CDC Centers to be tested to determine the type of pathogen causing the patient’s symptoms, I examined the CDC’s Weekly Flu Activity and Surveillance Reports. The government loves to track of numbers and data, and these reports are a prime example of your tax dollars at work. Going through each report was a tedious task, but the results are important – and very telling – identifying WHY the influenza vaccine is completely unnecessary.

For example, in the 2015-16 flu season, 639,456 samples were tested. Only 64,921, or 10.15%, of the samples were positive for influenza virus. Over a 19 year period of time, millions of samples have been tested and on average, influenza symptoms have been caused by influenza viruses only 15.34% of the time.

Meaning, if you really believe the flu shot keeps you from getting the flu, it would be protective only 15% of the time. Said another way, if you get an influenza-like illness, you have an 85% chance that the bug making you sick is not an influenza virus.

from:
http://vaxxter.com/disgusting-stuff-flu-shots/

re: So, who's had the flu this year?


So when someone says a flu shot is only 10% effective, this is very misleading.
-------

Minnie, this stat was reported in the news, was said to have been reported by the CDC.

Mama Anna and M4J, thank you both for that extensive information! I'll be passing that along to friends. :)

Eta: Doctors are telling parents not to bring dc in for routine, well checkups. To stay away unless dc are very sick.

This post was edited on Feb 01, 2018 03:28 PM

re: So, who's had the flu this year?


Did you see that there is an outbreak of swine and bird flu at or near where the Olympics is being held?
-------

I did not see this, farmschool. Thanks for letting us know -- I will be praying for the safety of everyone who goes there.

re: So, who's had the flu this year?

Flu originates each year in Asia. :( It then makes its way toward us in the West. Yikes. ETA - Because of the amount of both the bird and human population; and the way humans keep birds in such close proximity to their living quarters - sometimes living in the same quarters!

This post was edited on Feb 01, 2018 04:11 PM

1234

Reply to topic

Search


Return to Chit-Chat