Devastating flu vaccine-miscarriage study sparks ridiculous spin (2)
Read the first part of the article
Let the science speak
So now you know that you may not get the truth about vaccine science from a Washington Post reporter. Well, what does the science actually say about flu shots? Here are 10 published studies (and a bonus) that hopefully will help you better understand this topic.
1. Influenza: marketing vaccine by marketing disease
Background: Johns Hopkins scientist and British Medical Journal editor delivers critique of the marketing and limited studies of flu vaccine.
Excerpt: “Closer examination of influenza vaccine policies shows that although proponents employ the rhetoric of science, the studies underlying the policy are often of low quality, and do not substantiate officials’ claims. The vaccine might be less beneficial and less safe than has been claimed, and the threat of influenza appears overstated.”
2. Comparison of VAERS fetal-loss reports during three consecutive influenza seasons: Was there a synergistic fetal toxicity associated with the two-vaccine 2009/2010 season?
Background: This study found the exact same flu vaccine/spontaneous abortion link when comparing the 2008–09 to the 2009–10 flu season.
Excerpt: “Thus, the concomitant administration of the seasonal influenza and pandemic A-H1N1 vaccines during 2009/2010 suggests a synergistic toxicity and a statistically significant higher rate of fetal loss reporting relative to the single-dose seasons.”
3. Influenza Vaccination During Pregnancy: A Critical Assessment of the Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)
Background: CDC’s recommendation to vaccinate pregnant women has no science to support it.
Excerpt: “The ACIP’s citations and the current literature indicate that influenza infection is rarely a threat to a normal pregnancy. There is no convincing evidence of the effectiveness of influenza vaccination during this critical period. No studies have adequately assessed the risk of influenza vaccination during pregnancy, and animal safety testing is lacking. Thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative present in most inactivated formulations of the vaccine, has been implicated in human neurodevelopment disorders, including autism, and a broad range of animal and experimental reproductive toxicities including teratogenicity, mutagenicity, and fetal death. Thimerosal is classified as a human teratogen. The ACIP policy recommendation of routinely administering influenza vaccine during pregnancy is ill-advised and unsupported by current scientific literature, and it should be withdrawn. Use of thimerosal during pregnancy should be contraindicated.”
4. Vaccination against Human Influenza A/H3N2 Virus Prevents the Induction of Heterosubtypic Immunity against Lethal Infection with Avian Influenza A/H5N1 Virus
Background: From Neil Z. Miller – “Mice that were infected with a seasonal influenza virus survived exposure to a lethal influenza strain; vaccinated mice died.”
Excerpt: “As a result H3N2-vaccinated mice continued to lose body weight after A/H5N1 infection, had 100-fold higher lung virus titers on day 7 post infection and more severe histopathological changes than mice that were not protected by vaccination against A/H3N2 influenza….These findings may have implications for the general recommendation to vaccinate all healthy children against seasonal influenza in the light of the current pandemic threat caused by highly pathogenic avian A/H5N1 influenza viruses.”
5. Effectiveness of Influenza Vaccine during Pregnancy in Preventing Hospitalizations and Outpatient Visits for Respiratory Illness in Pregnant Women and Their Infants
Background: This study showed no benefit in health outcomes for women who received a flu vaccine while pregnant.
Excerpt: “Although the immunogenicity of influenza vaccination in pregnancy in mother and infant has been well documented, in this study, we were unable to demonstrate the effectiveness of influenza vaccination with data for hospital admissions and physician visits.”
6. Mandatory influenza vaccination? First we need a better vaccine
Background: Highly respected Canadian scientists questioning efficacy of the flu vaccine.
Excerpt: “Two research groups have recently reanalyzed the literature supporting influenza vaccination, including the vaccination of health care workers as a patient-safety measure. Both concluded that influenza vaccination is considerably less effective than is commonly accepted. These conclusions are not new: in 2007, Simonsen and colleagues similarly challenged the results of published influenza vaccine efficacy studies involving elderly patients.”
7. Evidence of bias in estimates of influenza vaccine effectiveness in seniors
Background: This study claims the benefits to the elderly from getting a flu vaccine has been overstated. In fact, it says there are no benefits.
Excerpt: “The reductions in risk before influenza season indicate preferential receipt of vaccine by relatively healthy seniors. Adjustment for diagnosis code variables did not control for this bias. In this study, the magnitude of the bias demonstrated by the associations before the influenza season was sufficient to account entirely for the associations observed during influenza season.”
8. Efficacy and effectiveness of influenza vaccines: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Background: The authors reviewed 31 published studies on the flu vaccine and found little data to support the benefits of the vaccine.
Excerpt: “Influenza vaccines can provide moderate protection against virologically confirmed influenza, but such protection is greatly reduced or absent in some seasons. Evidence for protection in adults aged 65 years or older is lacking… New vaccines with improved clinical efficacy and effectiveness are needed to further reduce influenza-related morbidity and mortality.”
9. Yearly influenza vaccinations: a double-edged sword?
Background: Vaccinating children every year for the regular flu could make them more at risk to pandemic strains of the flu in the future. Not good.
Excerpt: “Preventing infection with seasonal influenza viruses by vaccination might prevent the induction of heterosubtypic immunity to pandemic strains, which might be a disadvantage to immunologically naive people, e.g. infants.”
10. Association between the 2008–09 Seasonal Influenza Vaccine and Pandemic H1N1 Illness during Spring–Summer 2009: Four Observational Studies from Canada
Background: Further proof that prior vaccination with flu vaccine can make you MORE susceptible to future strains.
Excerpt: “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.”
11. Influenza vaccine effectiveness in the community and the household
Background: From Neil Z. Miller – “The current season’s influenza vaccine will not work in people who also received the previous season’s influenza vaccine.”
Excerpt: “Vaccine effectiveness estimates were lower than those demonstrated in other observational studies carried out during the same season. The unexpected findings of lower effectiveness with repeated vaccination and no protection given household exposure require further study.”
In conclusion: we want the truth, we can handle it
Lena Sun of the Washington Post,
Parents are tired of hype and misdirection when it comes to vaccines. Vaccines have risks, vaccines have benefits. Many don’t personally understand what purpose reporters like Ms. Sun serve to this debate except obscuring the truth. Luckily, science on this topic is readily available for anyone willing to spend the time to do research.
The study in Vaccine looking at flu vaccines and spontaneous abortions is a credible, peer-reviewed study that found a very high correlation between successive seasons of flu vaccines and miscarriages. It deserves our attention, and it deserves an honest appraisal of where it fits into a growing body of literature raising serious concerns about the benefits of annual flu vaccines.
There are lengthy articles online detailing the emerging science that appeared to clearly explain how autism was caused. They highlight the pioneer of all this learning, Dr. Paul Patterson from Caltech, and his seminal work Pregnancy, Immunity, Schizophrenia, and Autism. A quote from Dr. Patterson feels like an appropriate way to end this article. Parents, please do your own research:
“Finally, I want to ask a question that’s come up in the literature in the last few years — should we really be promoting universal maternal vaccination? The flu vaccine has been recommended routinely to pregnant women in the United States since 1957. The official policy of the Centers for Disease Control states that ‘administration of vaccines to women seeking prenatal care is an opportunity for preventative intervention that should not be wasted’. Now you might say, ‘Well, of course, you don’t want to get the flu if you’re pregnant!’ But remember that double-stranded RNA experiment — we activated the immune system, and it caused all these downstream effects on the fetus. And what does a vaccination do? It activates the immune system. That’s the point of vaccination. In practice, not all pregnant women receive flu shots, and I think that universal vaccination of pregnant women could get us into a whole new set of problems.”
The news on this study is coming out fast and furious. Given what you just read about the science that has long been published what seems to corroborate the findings from this new study, we think you will share our shock in reading the above pictured article, which says the Committee that makes vaccination recommendations in the U.S. (the ACIP) has known about this data for YEARS. What can they say to women who have experienced a miscarriage after flu shot anytime after June, 2015?
Here are some excerpts from the article published in September 2017:
“ACIP has known about this work for a couple of years and to date has chosen not to change its recommendation that pregnant women at all stages of pregnancy get a flu shot. The researchers made a preliminary report to the panel in June of 2015.
ACIP will discuss the finding further, said Dr. Amanda Cohn, senior adviser for vaccines at the CDC and executive secretary of the ACIP. Cohn said she couldn’t predict at this point whether those deliberations will lead to a vote on a policy recommendation.
Dr. Laura Riley, an ACIP member, is not convinced the finding is real [she obviously hasn’t considered the 11 studies above – Ed.]. Riley, who is vice chair of obstetrics at Massachusetts General Hospital, said she doesn’t think there’s a biologically plausible explanation for why repeated flu shots would increase the risk of miscarriage [even though we have biological science telling us why – Ed.]. ‘I remain skeptical’, she said, adding the question needs more study.
‘It’s not going to change my practice, that’s for sure’, [cognitive dissonance? – Ed.] Riley told STAT. ‘I feel like women should be vaccinated when the vaccine becomes available and when they’re in my office. And if that’s in the first trimester, second trimester, third trimester, I’m vaccinating.’
She and other doctors will be doing a lot of that in the weeks to come. This is, after all, flu shot season in the Northern Hemisphere.
Belongia said while it’s not clear whether flu shots could increase the risk of miscarriage, it is known that contracting the flu during pregnancy can be dangerous for both a woman and her fetus.
But he and the CDC’s Cohn advised that pregnant women who are concerned should talk with their doctors. One option might be to time the flu shot for some point after the first trimester, if that’s possible, they suggested.”
March 1, 2019