The Highly Questionable Efficacy Of Flu Vaccines... And The Flu Pandemic That Wasn't

There is little evidence that flu vaccines are effective in preventing the flu, says THE WORLD'S LEADING EXPERT on influenza vaccines.

This article was originally published in the HuffingtonPost (March 18, 2010), though I have updated it in many ways. Please know that the SAME critique that is made below for the H1N1 flu can be made for the newer H5N1 flu. Further, the influenza vaccine continues to be one of the least effective vaccines presently available.

Most people don’t know that physicians and the media fudge flu statistics by including death from pneumonia (usually causes by a bacteria) with the deaths from influenza (caused by a virus). If this fact alone doesn’t tell you that our media is collaborating with Big Pharma to inflate statistics and instill fear into the general public, then the media is assuming that the public is OK about being fooled. Judge for yourself.

(The references provided below have been updated with newer research which continue to conclude that the flu vaccine is embarrassingly ineffective.)

Evidence to date suggests that the “H1N1 flu is not a major threat,” and there is little evidence that flu vaccines are effective in preventing the flu, so says Tom Jefferson, MD, arguably the world’s leading expert on influenza vaccines. There is even less evidence for the newer H5N1 flu.

According to Google: “It's still unclear how effective they would be, since there haven't been enough people infected with H5N1 to conduct proper studies on how well they would protect against illness.”[1](accessed November 19, 2024)

Dr. Jefferson has authored 10 reviews of research on the influenza vaccine for the Cochrane Collaboration, which is a widely recognized leading international science institution that evaluates clinical research.

Jefferson notes that Australia has completed its wintertime, and only 131 deaths related to the flu occurred this year. Because Australia’s population is 22 million people, this death rate is not significant. One does not need to predict the future when the future has already happened somewhere else.

Jefferson’s previous detailed analyses of flu vaccines show very little efficacy in providing real health benefits. Jefferson’s team asserted strongly, “There is not enough evidence to decide whether routine vaccination to prevent influenza in healthy adults is effective.”[2]

Jefferson’s research confirmed that flu vaccination did reduce slightly the number of adults experiencing confirmed influenza, but there were increased numbers of adults experiencing “influenza-like illness” (its symptoms are similar to the flu, though are presumably causes by other viruses, not the flu viruses). The bottom line is that the number of adults needing to go to the hospital or take time off work did not change between those adults giving the flu vaccine and those who did not.

Although the media commonly promotes the flu vaccine for children, Jefferson and his research group summarized their investigation on this subject by asserting, “National policies for the vaccination of healthy young children are based on very little evidence.”[3]

They expressed strongest concern about the lack of efficacy and safety of flu vaccination of infants two years of age and under. They did note that the flu vaccine is effective in reducing the flu in children over two years of age, but they found little evidence that the flu vaccine was even effective in reducing school absences. Further, they found “no convincing evidence that vaccines can reduce mortality, hospital admissions, serious complications and community transmission of influenza.”

Jefferson’s previous detailed analyses of flu vaccines show very little efficacy in providing real health benefits. Jefferson’s team asserted strongly, “There is not enough evidence to decide whether routine vaccination to prevent influenza in healthy adults is effective.”[1] Jefferson’s research confirmed that flu vaccination did reduce slightly the number of adults experiencing confirmed influenza, but there were increased numbers of adults experiencing “influenza-like illness” (its symptoms are similar to the flu, though are presumably causes by other viruses, not the flu viruses). The bottom line is that the number of adults needing to go to the hospital or take time off work did not change between those adults giving the flu vaccine and those who did not.

Although the media commonly promotes the flu vaccine for children, Jefferson and his research group summarized their investigation on this subject by asserting, “National policies for the vaccination of healthy young children are based on very little evidence.”[3] They expressed strongest concern about the lack of efficacy and safety of flu vaccination of infants two years of age and under. They did note that the flu vaccine is effective in reducing the flu in children over two years of age, but they found little evidence that the flu vaccine was even effective in reducing school absences. Further, they found “no convincing evidence that vaccines can reduce mortality, hospital admissions, serious complications and community transmission of influenza.”

Jefferson’s previous detailed analyses of flu vaccines show very little efficacy in providing real health benefits. Jefferson’s team asserted strongly, “There is not enough evidence to decide whether routine vaccination to prevent influenza in healthy adults is effective.”[2] Jefferson’s research confirmed that flu vaccination did reduce slightly the number of adults experiencing confirmed influenza, but there were increased numbers of adults experiencing “influenza-like illness” (its symptoms are similar to the flu, though are presumably causes by other viruses, not the flu viruses). The bottom line is that the number of adults needing to go to the hospital or take time off work did not change between those adults giving the flu vaccine and those who did not.

Although the media commonly promotes the flu vaccine for children, Jefferson and his research group summarized their investigation on this subject by asserting, “National policies for the vaccination of healthy young children are based on very little evidence.”[3] They expressed strongest concern about the lack of efficacy and safety of flu vaccination of infants two years of age and under. They did note that the flu vaccine is effective in reducing the flu in children over two years of age, but they found little evidence that the flu vaccine was even effective in reducing school absences. Further, they found “no convincing evidence that vaccines can reduce mortality, hospital admissions, serious complications and community transmission of influenza.”

The strongest evidence of benefit to the flu vaccine is in the elderly.[4] However, the researchers found that the benefits to the elderly were “modest.” In fact, the number of flu-related deaths in elderly Americans has actually increased steadily during the past 33-year-period despite the fact that there has been a large increase in flu vaccinations for this population. Only 20% of all elderly Americans had a flu shot in 1980, compared with 65% in 2001.

Jefferson expresses some considerable surprise at how few studies have been conducted on the elderly, especially recently. He notes, “Only five randomly controlled trials have been carried out in elderly people, of which only one was carried out in the past 2 decades using vaccines available today.”[5]

Dr. Jefferson’s team noted that the benefits of the flu vaccine for the elderly are “consistently below those usually quoted for (national policy) decision or economic model making.”

What about the H1N1 Vaccination?

Jefferson had some particularly harsh words about the safety and efficacy of this vaccination. The FDA recently announced the approval of four (!) H1N1 vaccines. And Dr. Jefferson has expressed serious alarm about the “evidence” for the safety and efficacy of these vaccines:

1) The study was tiny, only 240 adults. The authors made reassuring statements about Guillain–Barré syndrome (GBS), which is ridiculous because GBS occurs in one out of 750,000 to 1 million vaccinations, and this study only had 240 participants;

2) One-third of these volunteers had side effects that resembled influenza-like illness (fevers, headaches, sore throats, etc.), so they were vaccinating to prevent symptoms that they were causing;

3) There was no placebo arm in the study, yet there’s no ethical excuse for not having a placebo arm because these are experimental vaccines; and

4) The description of what additive substances were in the vaccine was unclear. We know that there is thimerosal [mercury] in this H1N1 vaccine, but its manufacturer did not say whether there are additional substances like aluminum, which can be found in many other vaccines. We just don’t know. And they are advising this vaccine for pregnant women and children over six months of age!

Is There Really a Pandemic?

Something “fishy” seems to be going on at the World Health Organization (WHO). WHO has declared a “flu pandemic,” in part because they changed their definition of the word “pandemic” in May, 2009.

The earlier version defined pandemic as: “An influenza pandemic occurs when a new influenza virus appears against which the human population has no immunity, resulting in epidemics worldwide with enormous numbers of deaths and illness [emphasis in the original document].” The NEW definition of pandemic was changed to: “A disease epidemic occurs when there are more cases of that disease than normal. A pandemic is a worldwide epidemic of a disease. An influenza pandemic may occur when a new influenza virus appears against which the human population has no immunity.”

Because flu viruses change on a regular basis, the WHO will declare a new “pandemic” when simply one more death than the “normal” is observed. Big Pharma “warn” people about the yearly possible pandemic, pumping more fear into the hearts and minds of the susceptible and gullible public.

When Jefferson was asked about the “flu pandemic,” he responded directly: “this pandemic really is a commercial operation.”

In light of some recent efforts to make the H1N1 vaccination “mandatory,” it seems that Big Pharma’s commercial operations have become so successful that they have successfully lobbied politicians to require health and medical workers to get the H1N1 vaccine. Big Pharma’s efforts have been so successful that they have almost successfully fooled other scientists to think that it is “unethical” to conduct a placebo-controlled trial due to the (incorrect) assumption that flu vaccines are effective.

Even Big Media whose coffers are filled with Big Pharma’s advertising are not immune to this influence. Isn’t it a bit strange that the research of Tom Jefferson and his team have been virtually ignored by Big Media, despite the fact that their research has been published in the BMJ (British Medical Journal), the Lancet, the Cochrane Database, and other high-impact scientific journals. One would hope that the media and government would follow the research rather than the money.

NOTE OF DISCLOSURE: Although many colleagues in the field of homeopathic medicines are critical of vaccination, a greater number have a similar perspective that I do, that is, they (we) believe that each person and each vaccination has to be evaluated individually and in light of long-term community health. In this perspective, I do not consider myself to be either pro-vaccination or anti-vaccination in over-simplistic terms.

Further, the “father of immunology,” Emil Adolph von Behring, directly pointed to the origins of immunizations to homeopathy, and therefore, we homeopaths do not have anything fundamentally against this utilization of the underlying principle of homeopathy or the use of small doses of whatever may cause illness in order to catalyze immune response. When von Behring was asked about the origins of immunology, he responded, "(B)y what technical term could we more appropriately speak of this influence than by Hahnemann's word "homeopathy"[6].

The field of homeopathic medicine offers real alternatives to treating the flu in safer ways. Although homeopathic medicines are usually a lot more effective when they are individually prescribed to a person according to whatever symptoms that person is actually experiencing, there is one homeopathic medicine that is commonly used to treat people with the flu that several studies published in peer reviewed medical journals have found to be effective.

First, it is very instructive to know this background of Oscillococcinum: It has been trusted for 80 years…and what is REALLY interesting is that this medicine is actually made from the heart and liver of a duck. Although this might sound like the epitome of “quackery” (pun intended!), ducks are BIRDS (of course!)…and scientists have determined that the type of duck used to make this medicine is known to carry various influenza viruses in their digestive tracts. Further, epidemiologists have deemed that ducks are one of the carriers of flu viruses from one part of the world to another (of course!).

Clinical studies have shown that “Oscillo” helps reduce both the duration and severity of flu-like symptoms, including body aches, headache, fever, chills, and fatigue [7][8]. Oscillo is non-drowsy and recommended for everyone ages 2 and up.

More info about Oscillococcinum is here. It is available in 6 small bottles here and 30 small bottles here. To learn how homeopathic doses of the most recent flu virus are being used to prevent the onset of influenza and influenza-like symptoms, go here.

IMPORTANT REFERENCE FOR FURTHER VACCINATION INFORMATION:

Dr. Tom Jefferson (cited above of one of THE leading experts on flu vaccination) coauthors a regular blog with Dr. Carl Heneghan called Trust the Evidence. I highly recommend subscribing (it is FREE, though you can voluntarily pay for a subscription to support their important work).

Tom Jefferson, MD, is a Senior Associate Tutor at the University of Oxford, a former researcher at the Nordic Cochrane Centre and a former scientific coordinator for producing HTA reports on non-pharmaceuticals for Agenas, the Italian National Agency for Regional Healthcare.

Carl Heneghan, MD, is Professor of Evidence-Based Medicine at the University of Oxford. He is a clinical epidemiologist with expertise in evidence-based medicine, research methods, and evidence synthesis. He also works as an NHS urgent care GP and has over 450 peer-reviewed publications.

REFERENCES:

[1] https://www.google.com/search?q=the+questionable+efficacy+of+the+H5n1+vaccine

[2] Demicheli V, Di Pietrantonj C, Jefferson T, Rivetti A, Rivetti D. Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2007, Issue 2. Art. No.: CD001269. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD001269.pub3. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17443504/

[3] Jefferson T, Rivetti A, Di Pietrantonj C, Demicheli V. Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy children. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Feb 1;2(2):CD004879. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004879.pub5. PMID: 29388195; PMCID: PMC6491174. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29388195/

[4] Demicheli V, Jefferson T, Di Pietrantonj C, Ferroni E, Thorning S, Thomas RE, Rivetti A. Vaccines for preventing influenza in the elderly. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Feb 1;2(2):CD004876. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004876.pub4. PMID: 29388197; PMCID: PMC6491101. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6491101/

[5] Jefferson T. Mistaken identity: seasonal influenza versus influenza-like illness. Clinical Evidence. 2009.

[6] https://www.sueyounghistories.com/2008-07-08-emil-adolf-von-behring-and-homeopathy-2/

[7] Papp, R., G. Schuback, E. Beck, et. al. Oscillococcinum® in Patients with Influenza-Like Syndromes: A Placebo-Controlled Double-Blind Evaluation. British Homoeopathic Journal 87, no. 2 (1998): 69-76. doi:10.1038/sj.bhj.5800208.

[8] Ferley, J.P., D. Zmirou, D. Dadhemar, and F. Balducci. “A Controlled Evaluation of a Homoeopathic Preparation in the Treatment of Influenza-Like Syndromes.” British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 27, no. 3 (1989): 329-35. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2125.1989.tb05373.x.

BIO:

DANA ULLMAN, MPH, CCH, received his Bachelor’s degree (1975) and his masters in public health from UC Berkeley (1978).  UC Berkeley’s alumni magazine published a feature interview with Dana Ullman here.

He is one of America’s leading advocates for homeopathy. He has authored 10 books, including The Homeopathic Revolution: Why Famous People and Cultural Heroes Choose Homeopathy, Homeopathy A-Z, Homeopathic Medicines for Children and Infants, Discovering Homeopathy, and (the best-selling) Everybody’s Guide to Homeopathic Medicines (with Stephen Cummings, MD). Dana also created an e-course How to Use a Homeopathic Medicine Kit which integrates 80 short videos with his famous ebook that is a continually growing resource to 400+ clinical studies published in peer-review medical journals testing homeopathic medicines. This ebook is entitled Evidence Based Homeopathic Family Medicine.

Dana Ullman has also authored chapters on homeopathic medicine that included in medical textbooks published by Oxford University Press, the American Academy of Pain Management, and Mosby.

He is the founder of Homeopathic Educational Services, also known as www.homeopathic.com, America’s leading resource center for homeopathic books, tapes, medicines, software, and e-courses. Homeopathic Educational Services has co-published over 40 books on homeopathy with North Atlantic Books.

Dana previously wrote a regular column for the popular website, www.huffingtonpost.com (to access these articles, click HERE!)