FLU SHOT EFFECTIVENESS WILDLY OVERESTIMATED
E-News: VRAN-Vaccination Risk Awareness Network -Oct/05 www.vran.org
EFFECTIVENESS OF FLU SHOTS WILDLY OVERESTIMATED
" What
you see is that marketing rules the response to influenza, and scientific
evidence comes fourth or fifth" (1)"People should ask whether it's
worth investing these trillions of dollars and euros in these vaccines." (2)
-Dr. Tom Jefferson
While the public endures an intensifying barrage of flu shot propaganda and
dire predictions of an avian flu pandemic, health officials stay tight lipped
about basic facts you need to know to make an informed decision before
submitting to the flu vaccine.
Every year, laboratory tests conducted across Canada and compiled by Health
Canada’s Flu Watch, consistently show that the majority of cases of
"influenza like illnesses" (ILI) involve pathogens other than the
influenza virus. In other words, the influenza virus is NOT the cause of most
of the flu like illnesses commonly occurring during flu season.
Flu Watch reports that Between 22 August 2004 and 12 March, 2005, a total of
68,849 laboratory tests for influenza were reported of which10,319 tested
positive for influenza. That is, only 14.9% of the specimens tested showed
evidence of influenza viruses. (3)
The remainder of these
laboratory tested cases of "influenza-like-illnesses" (85.1%), (3) involved other pathogens against
which influenza vaccines offer NO protection whatsoever. The majority of
"influenza-like-illnesses" are NOT caused by influenza viruses and
are impervious to flu vaccines.
What health officials also don’t tell you is that their claims of vaccine
effectiveness are based on a misleading measure - the ability of the
vaccine to produce antibodies against the virus. It is well known in immunology
that circulating antibodies are not necessarily a measure of immunity from
disease.
In a flu vaccine debate published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal
about the effectiveness of the mass influenza vaccination program in Ontario,
Italian epidemiologist, Dr. Demicheli refutes the 70%- 90% claims of vaccine
efficacy, saying this is "both wrong and misleading…and refers only to
the ability of the vaccine to produce antibodies effective against the virus.
But this is not the important measure of vaccine efficacy. Instead, we should
measure the ability of the vaccine to prevent clinical disease, in this case
influenza. By this measure, vaccine efficacy is no greater than 25%." (4)
Dr. Demicheli also
affirmed that "The actual proportion of influenza A and B cases among
ILI cases is not well known, but the few available studies indicate a modest
proportion of probably less than 10%, regardless of age group." (5)
In 2000 the Ontario
Minister of Health and Long-Term Care launched a $38 million (annually)
universal influenza immunization program for Ontario, Canada. Its objective was
to decrease the seasonal impact of influenza on emergency department (ED)
visits and to decrease the number and severity of influenza cases. A review of
the efficacy of this program published in the Canadian Journal of Emergency
Medicine found that the percentage of acute upper respiratory illnesses seeking
emergency medical help is very low - "only 4.4% and of these influenza
accounted for only 0.34%". Conclusion: "Based on this
study, a universal influenza immunization campaign is unlikely to affect ED
volume."(6)
On September 21, 2005 a
New York Times article reported that "Just as governments around the world
are stockpiling millions of doses of flu vaccine and antiviral drugs in
anticipation of a potential influenza pandemic, two new research papers
published today have found that such treatments are far less effective than
previously thought."(1)
The first meta-analysis
was done by the Cochrane Vaccines Field, a group of scientist who looked at the
results of 64 international flu vaccine studies. Their findings are published
online at The Lancet, a leading British medical journal. (7)
"There is a wild overestimation of the impact of these vaccines in the
community," says Dr. Tom Jefferson, an epidemiologist in Rome who led
the analysis for the Cochrane Collaboration, an independent international
effort that evaluates the efficacy of medical care and performs systematic
reviews of research data. (1)
Jefferson’s team
analyzed patient studies on the flu vaccine performed worldwide in the past 37
years and discovered that vaccines showed at best a "modest"
ability to prevent influenza or its complications in elderly people. "The
runaway 100 percent effectiveness that's touted by proponents was nowhere to be
seen," said Dr.Jefferson. "It is assumed to be 70, 80 or 90 per cent in
the elderly,'' Jefferson said, but the study shows "it's not as
effective... That needs to be clearly presented to our customers, not fudged.''
(8)
The researchers found
that flu shots were only 27 per cent effective in reducing the chance of an
elderly person ending up in a hospital with influenza or pneumonia. The
findings are similar to those of a previous study done by the U.S. National
Institutes of Health, which reviewed three decades of U.S. data. Published in
the February 14, 2005 Archives of Internal Medicine, the study found that flu
shots for the elderly in the United States had not saved any lives. (8)
"In the case of
a pandemic, we are unsure from the data whether these vaccines would work on
the elderly. Vaccines may be less effective in older people because their
immune systems are less able to mount a vigorous response", Jefferson and
others said. (1,2)
"People should ask whether it's worth
investing these trillions of dollars and euros in these vaccines," Jefferson said.
"What you see is that marketing rules the response to influenza, and
scientific evidence comes fourth or fifth," (2,1)
"The best
strategy to prevent the illness is to wash your hands." said Dr. Jefferson. (1)
For several years,
health officials in Canada and the U.S. have been urging parents to vaccinate
their babies age 6 to 23 months with flu vaccine. Infants and young children
receive two shots 30 days apart.
Dr. Jefferson’s team also reviewed 25 studies that looked at the impact of
vaccines on the number of cases of influenza and its symptoms in children up to
16. The Cochrane team concluded that there is no evidence that vaccinating
children under 2 years old against influenza reduces deaths or complications
from the illness. (9,10)
"Immunization of
very young children is not lent support by our findings," said Dr
Tom Jefferson. "We recorded no convincing evidence that vaccines can
reduce mortality, [hospital] admissions, serious complications and community
transmission of influenza. In young children below the age of 2, we could find
no evidence that the vaccine was different from a placebo," Jefferson
told Reuters (9,10)
In his recent article, Influenza
Vaccination of Infants: A Useless Risk
Dr. F. Edward Yazbak, a U.S. pediatrician who now devotes his time to the
research of autoimmune regressive autism and vaccine injury,
offers additional insight into the Cochrane Vaccine Fields study led by Dr. Tom
Jefferson. He also analyzed the two studies on which the CDC bases its
recommendation of flu vaccination of babies, calling them "limited, weak
and irrelevant."(11) Dr. Yazbak suggests that the CDC and its Advisory Committee on
Immunization Practices have a simple choice:
"They
can continue recommending the useless influenza vaccination of infants aged 6
to 24 months."
or
"They can do the right thing and rescind the 2004 recommendation."
In a follow
up article Dr. Yazbak points to the lack of evidence of safety of influenza
vaccines in babies. (12)
Writes Dr. Yazbak,
"In a letter to the editor of The Lancet on Sept. 3, 2005, T. Jefferson,
S. Smith, V. Demichelli, A. Hamden and A. Rivetti expressed their concerns and
frustration at the fact that, though they tried, they were unable to get
reliable information regarding the safety of influenza vaccines on the market.
This team has written and published several comprehensive publications on
vaccination practices. My most recent article on influenza vaccination of infants
6 to 23 months was mostly based on their impressive review of the efficacy and
effectiveness of influenza vaccines in children, a review that included every
study they could find in any language.
In the letter to The Lancet, Jefferson and associates expressed deep concern
that safety studies were not done, the studies were too old and too small, or
the vaccine manufacturer simply refused to allow the team to review the data
from the vaccine trials.
The frustrated authors ended their letter stating, “We believe all unpublished
trial safety data should be readily accessible to both the regulatory bodies
and the scientific community on request. Our evidence gives rise to a concern
that lack of access to unreported data prevents published data being put into
context and hinders full and independent review. This cannot be good for public
confidence in these vaccines. " (12)
The Canadian Paediatric
Society’s Position Paper is in concert with U.S. flu vaccine policies for
children and recommends vaccination of all Canadian children older than 6
months including those with immune dysfunction and other chronic diseases.
Infants and young children are injected with two doses of the vaccine 30 days
apart. "While recognizing that research is needed to determine the
efficacy of universal influenza immunization of healthy children between six
months and two years of age in the prevention of illness and hospitalization
due to influenza (7), the Canadian Paediatric Society agrees with the decision
of the National Advisory Committee on Immunization that the risk of
hospitalization due to influenza among children in this age group justifies
routine influenza immunization…The dosage for or children from six to 35 months
of age is 0.25 mL. The dose for children, 36 months of age and older, is 0.5
mL." (13)
In Canada, Vaxigrip and
Fluviral are the two vaccines most widely used and are produced by
pharmaceutical companies Sanofi Pasteur and ID Biomedical respectively. Product
information for Vaxigrip is available on the Sanofi Pasteur website. (14) Fluviral product details are not
available on the ID Biomedical website.
According to a July 13, 2005 press release, ID Biomedical has been granted a
"ten-year mandate from the Government of Canada in 2001 to assure a state
of readiness in the case of an influenza pandemic and provide influenza vaccine
for all Canadians in such an event. It also currently supplies approximately
75% of the Canadian government's influenza vaccine purchases. (15)
Resistance to
Anti-Viral Flu Agents Increasing Worldwide
A second paper
published in the Lancet (Sept.21/05) (7) has found that since the mid-nineties, worldwide
resistance to drugs used to treat influenza has increased by 12%. Researchers
from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control found that influenza viruses,
particularly those from the dreaded bird flu strain, have developed resistance
to commonly used antiviral drugs such as amantadine. In China and other parts
of Asia, resistance is said to be as high as 74%.
Dr Rick Bright of the CDC is quoted in the Lancet press release: "We were
alarmed to find such a dramatic increase in drug resistance in circulating
human influenza viruses in recent years. Our report has broad implications for
agencies and governments planning to stockpile these drugs for epidemic and
pandemic strains of influenza. With the increasing rates of resistance shown
here, amantadine and rimantadine will probably no longer be effective for
treatment or prophylaxis in the event of a pandemic outbreak of influenza."
All human cases of the bird flu (H5N1) strain - which is still extremely rare
in humans – have been resistant, the researchers said.
For the developing world, these findings may be ominous because wealthier
nations have been stockpiling newer and vastly more expensive antiviral drugs
like Tamiflu which are still under patent protection and not available in the
cheaper generic form.
Researchers speculate that one reason why resistance rates to the older,
cheaper antiviral drugs in Asia jumped so much and skyrocketed after 2002, is
that doctors there started prescribing the drugs far more widely after the
advent of bird flu in 1997 and SARS, in 2002. (1)
Although actual human
cases of these two diseases are rare, the death rate is high which is why patients
are given antiviral drugs when they develop a respiratory illness, even though
most cases will be nothing more than a common cold. Antiviral drugs work only
if they are started within 48 hours of the onset of symptoms and, in that
period, it is generally impossible to tell if patients have a deadly strain of
flu or merely a mild virus.
The new research demonstrates how quickly and unexpectedly flu viruses can
become impervious to medicines once they are put into common use. Antiviral
medicines do not cure influenza. They function by cutting down on transmission
of the disease and reduce somewhat the symptoms and complications in those
already infected.
Dr Jefferson concludes: "We need a more comprehensive and perhaps more
effective strategy in controlling acute respiratory infections, relying on
several preventive interventions that take into account the multi-agent nature
of infectious respiratory disease and its context (such as personal hygiene,
provision of electricity and adequate food, water and sanitation)." (7)
References:
1. 2 Studies Question the
Effectiveness of Flu Vaccines, By Elisabeth Rosenthal, The New York Times,
September 21, 2005
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/21/health/21cnd-bird.html?ei=5088&en=b7ec201d
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/health/2002511754_flushot22.html
http://www.caep.ca/004.cjem-jcmu/004-00.cjem/vol-4.2002/v44-245.htm
10 Safety of influenza vaccines in children: The Lancet, 2005;
366:803-804 DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736 (05)67204-2
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140673605672042/fulltext
11. F. Edward Yazbak, MD, Influenza Vaccination of Infants: A Useless Risk
12. F. Edward Yazbak, MD, Nothing New about Lack of Effectiveness of
Influenza Vaccination in Babies http://www.redflagsdaily.com/yazbak/2005_oct12.html
13. Recommendations for the use of influenza vaccine for children.
Infectious Diseases and Immunization Committee, Canadian Paediatric Society
(CPS) http://www.cps.ca/english/statements/ID/ID04-01.htm
Paediatrics & Child Health 2004;9(7):283-284 Reference No. ID04-01
14. Sanofi Pasteur vaccine product monographs: http://www.sanofipasteur.ca/sanofi-pasteur-ca/front/templates/vaccinations-travel-health-vaccine-aventis-pasteur.jsp?codeRubrique=53&lang=EN
15. ID Biomedical: www.idbiomedical.com