- Blorange
- Jan 31, 2007
-
A wizard did it
|
And there is more: not only are the vaccines much less effective than expected, but they have been shown in recent studies to INCREASE the susceptibility of the patient to H1N1, a far more serious strain of the flu, in the following year!
NVIC.org posted:
Studies Identify Flu Vaccine Failures
Findings from one of the case-control studies showed that prior vaccination with trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine is protective against seasonal influenza and reduced the flu risk by 56 percent. However, results from all four studies revealed that those vaccinated in the previous 2008-09 season were between 1.4 and 2.5 times more likely to contract H1N1 during the spring and summer of 2009.
I want to state again that I am not anti-polio vaccine, anti HPV vaccine, or any other vaccine that has proven medical value. Objective scientific data is our best way to determine what is good and bad for us w/r/t treatment, and we cannot rely on industry-funded research to objectively tell us what that is. Also yes I know that huffpost pushes herbal remedy bullshit and new age clap trap, but the studies cited in the article truly speak for themselves.
I might be a page late to the discussion, but the study NVIC.org is referencing here has this to say:
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.1000258
Danuta M. Skowronski et. all posted:Conclusions
Prior receipt of 2008–09 TIV was associated with increased risk of medically attended pH1N1 illness during the spring–summer 2009 in Canada. The occurrence of bias (selection, information) or confounding cannot be ruled out. Further experimental and epidemiological assessment is warranted. Possible biological mechanisms and immunoepidemiologic implications are considered.
They did find a correlation, but agree that additional study is needed. The possibility of self-selection bias is completely ignored in NVIC's summary of the study's results. People who are more likely to contract the flu are naturally more likely to seek out the flu vaccine. If the previous year's vaccine had no effect whatsoever, we'd still expect to a difference because fundamentally we're studying two separate populations. Additionally, increasing risk by 1.4-2.5 times seems like a big deal, but it's really a case of lying with numbers. If the risk chance small to begin with, doubling it is still negligible in the grand scheme of things.
So the studies here DO speak for themselves, but NVIC.org sure as hell doesn't speak for them.
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2014 16:34
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2024 13:38
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2014 16:34
