Excellent Flu Vaccine Info

[Guest guest]

It is that time of year again when the flu vaccine marketing machine is

revving up its engines and my email inbox is loaded with flu vaccine

questions. Here are some articles that you can share with your family,

friends, and the human resources departments at your repective employers to

give people another side to consider before they roll up their sleeve. This

is a note worth saving and sharing. Educate before you vaccinate! Dawn

THE FLU AND THE FLU VACCINE (by the National Vaccine Information Center)

http://www.909shot.com/flufax.htm

FULL TEXT PROVIDED BELOW

Are Flu Vaccines Beneficial? by e Severyn R.Ph., Ph.D (a friend and

colleague)

http://www.spotlight.org/01_07_00/Vacc/vacc.html

FULL TEXT PROVIDED BELOW

Flu Vaccine Warning for Pregnant Women: Stay Out of My Womb! by Dawn

(me)

(Note: All flu vaccines for the 2000-2001 season still contain mercury)

http://www.vaccineinfo.net/issues/flu_vaccine_warning.htm

FULL TEXT PROVIDED BELOW

" Study: Giving Flu Vaccine Doesn't Save Money "

http://dailynews./h/nm/20001003/sc/health_flu_dc_3.html

" Flu Shots Cut Misery, But Not Costs "

http://dailynews./h/nm/20001004/hl/flu_shots_1.html

Journal Articles of Flu Vaccine Adverse Reactions

http://www.whaleto.freeserve.co.uk/vaccines/flu2.html

-------------------------

THE FLU AND THE FLU VACCINE

http://www.909shot.com/flufax.htm

What is the flu? Influenza is a respiratory infection that produces fever,

chills, sore throat, muscle aches, and cough that lasts a week or more. The

flu can be deadly for the elderly and those with compromised immune systems

or who are suffering from diabetes, kidney dysfunction and heart disease.

Each year about 20,000 Americans, mostly in these high risk groups,

reportedly die from flu complications such as pneumonia.

What is the flu vaccine? The flu vaccine is prepared from the fluids of

chick embryos inoculated with a specific type(s) of influenza virus. The

strains of flu virus in the vaccine are inactivated with formaldehyde and

preserved with thimerosal, which is a mercury derivative.

Every year, federal health agency officials try to guess which three flu

strains are most likely to be prevalent in the U.S. the following year to

determine which strains will be included in next year's flu vaccine. If they

guess right, the vaccine is thought to be 70 to 80 percent effective in

temporarily preventing the flu of the season in healthy persons less than 65

years old (the efficacy rate drops to 30 to 40% in those over 65 years old

but the vaccine is thought to be 50 to 60% effective in preventing

hospitalization and pneumonia and 80% effective in preventing death from the

flu in the over 65 age group). However, sometimes health officials do not

correctly predict which flu strains will be most prevalent and the vaccine's

effectiveness is much lower for that year.

Does the flu vaccine protect against all throat, respiratory,

gastrointestinal and ear infections? The flu vaccine only protects against

the three specific viral strains which are included in any given year's flu

vaccine. Throat, respiratory, gastrointestinal and ear infections caused by

bacteria or other kinds of viruses are not prevented by getting an annual

flu shot.

Why do doctors say I have to get a flu vaccine every year? Like all

vaccines, the flu vaccine only gives a temporary immunity to the virus

strains or closely related virus strains contained in the vaccine. The only

way to get natural and permanent immunity to a strain of flu is to recover

naturally from the flu. Natural immunity to a particular strain of flu can

be protective if that strain or closely related strains come around again in

the future. However, because the vaccine only provides a 70 to 80 percent

chance of temporary immunity to selected strains and those strains may or

may not be prevalent each year, doctors say you have to get a flu shot every

year.

Are there reactions to the flu vaccine? The most common reactions, which

begin with 12 hours of vaccination and can last several days are: fever,

fatigue, painful joints and headache. The most serious reaction that has

been associated with flu vaccine is Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) which

occurs most often within two to four weeks of vaccination. GBS is an immune

mediated nerve disorder characterized by muscle weakness, unsteady gait,

numbness, tingling, pain and sometimes paralysis of one or more limbs or the

face. Recovery lasts several months and can include residual disability.

Less than 5 percent of GBS cases end in death.

What are contraindications to the flu vaccine? Among high risk factors

listed by the CDC and the vaccine manufacturers are anyone who: (1) is sick

with a fever; (2) has an impaired immune system; (2) has an egg allergy; (3)

has a mercury allergy; (4) has a history of Guillain-Barre syndrome. In

years past, pregnancy was also a contraindication to flu vaccine but, today,

the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) of the Centers for

Disease Control (CDC) recommends flu vaccine for women more than 14 weeks

pregnant.

The package inserts published by the flu vaccine manufacturers state that

" Animal reproduction studies have not been conducted with influenza virus

vaccine. It is also not known whether influenza virus vaccine can cause

fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman..Although animal

reproductive studies have not been conducted, the prescribing health care

provider should be aware of the recommendations of the Advisory Committee on

Immunization Practices .The ACIP states that if used during pregnancy,

administration of influenza virus vaccine after 14 weeks of gestation may be

preferable to avoid coincidental association of the vaccine with early

pregnancy loss. "

Is Flu Vaccine Recommended for Children? The flu vaccine has never been

recommended for healthy children. However, in the past few years there have

been indications that health officials are soon going to recommend flu

vaccine for all children. A nasal flu vaccine is scheduled to be on the

market in late 2000 and publicity promoting this vaccine has centered on its

potential use in children.

The current injectable flu vaccine contains mercury as a preservative. In

the summer of 1999, the FDA, CDC and EPA directed the vaccine manufacturers

to remove mercury as a preservative in childhood vaccines. Mercury is a

known neuro-toxin and American babies under six months of age are currently

exposed to mercury in childhood vaccines that exceed EPA safety standards.

One consideration with the mass use of flu vaccine in healthy children is

the removal of natural antibodies to flu which are obtained from natural

infection. The question of whether it is better for healthy children, who

rarely suffer complications from flu, to get the flu and develop permanent

immunity to that flu strain or it is better for children to get vaccinated

every year to try to suppress all flu infection in early childhood is a

question that has yet to be adequately answered by medical science.

What should I do? Become educated about the flu and its benefits and risks

and the vaccine and its benefits and risks and make an informed decision

after consulting multiple sources of information and discussing your

questions with one or more health professionals.

---------------

Are Flu Vaccines Beneficial

http://www.spotlight.org/01_07_00/Vacc/vacc.html

There has been a lot of hype as to whether influenza vaccines really ward

off bouts of the flu. According to this expert, the vaccines aren't worth

risking the side effects.

By e Severyn, R.Ph., Ph.D.

Every autumn the elderly and other high risk groups are encouraged to

receive influenza vaccine (flu shots). Congress authorized Medi care funding

for flu shots in 1993, believing that vaccination costs are less than

hospitalization costs related to influenza complications. Was Congress

misled when it authorized this $80 million per year Medicare flu shot

entitlement? Have vaccine recipients been misled?

Although influenza is associated with more disease, hospitalization, and

death in " at risk " populations, no adequate controlled studies exist which

prove that influenza vaccine reduces the incidence of influenza in these

groups.

CDC CRYSTAL BALL

Influenza virus strains mutate, necessitating a new vaccine each year.

Technicians affiliated with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

(CDC) collect influenza viruses from pigs and people in foreign lands, e.g.,

China.

CDC personnel then attempt to predict which viruses will infect people in

the United States the following year-the CDC crystal ball. These

CDC-selected viruses are distributed to vaccine manufacturers early in the

year for influenza vaccine production for administration that autumn.

Predicting which influenza viruses from China, for instance, will infect

people in Dayton, Ohio, a year later involves a fair amount of guesswork.

Flu shot history is replete with examples of poor matches between influenza

viruses in the vaccine and those actually infecting people.

For example in the 1994-1995 flu season, the CDC reported that 43 percent of

isolated influenza samples for the predominant virus type A(H3N2) were not

similar to that in the vaccine. Likewise, for another type A virus (H1NI),

87 percent of samples were not similar to that in the vaccine. According to

a worldwide influenza activity update in the Aug. 8, 1995, Morbidity and

Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR), 76 percent of isolated samples of influenza

type B were not similar to the influenza in the vaccine.

The CDC crystal ball also erred during the 1992-1993 influenza season when,

as reported in the Sep. 1, 1993, edition of MMWR, 84 percent of the isolated

influenza samples for the predominant virus (A(H3N2)) were not similar to

the virus in the vaccine.

WISHFUL THINKING

Despite its poor track record in predicting which influenza viruses will

infect communities, the CDC admitted Feb. 26, 1999, in its nationally

broadcast program, " Preparing for the Next Influenza Pandemic, " that

influenza vaccine is " approximately 70 percent " effective in preventing

influenza in " healthy persons less than 65 years of age " if " there is a good

match between vaccine and circulating viruses. "

Depending on the study cited vaccine efficacy actually ranges from a low of

0 percent to a high of 96 percent. And, as illustrated above, the CDC often

finds it difficult to match vaccines with circulating viruses.

According to the CDC, influenza vaccine efficacy drops to 30 percent to 40

percent among the elderly-this group being the main " target " for flu shots.

CDC attributes lack of influenza vaccine efficacy in the elderly to their

" decreased immunologic re sponse. "

Past studies by NH Arden, et al, of type A(H3N2) influenza vaccine in

nursing home patients yielded an average of only 27 percent efficacy with

four studies demonstrating vaccine efficacy at 0, 2, 8 and 9 percent. Poor

vaccine efficacy can even occur when the vaccine virus is " essentially

identical " to that virus which is causing the outbreak. For influenza B

vaccine, studies conducted by Arden range from 0 percent to 36 percent

effective, averaging 21 percent.

DAMAGE CONTROL

To justify its recommendation that all elderly persons receive flu shots,

the CDC asserts in an April 21, 1995, MMWR article that, even though the

vaccine does not prevent influenza very well, " the vaccine can be 50 percent

to 60 percent effective in preventing hospitalization and pneumonia and 80

percent effective in preventing death. "

This optimistic scenario is clouded by results of the congressionally

mandated $69 million 1988-1992 Medicare Influenza Vaccine Demon stration

Project. This study, intended to promote Medicare-funded flu shots, yielded,

according to a 1993 MMWR report, a disappointing 31 percent to 45 percent

effectiveness " in preventing hospitalization for any pneumonia " during three

influenza seasons.

Results for the 1989-1990 season were described as " mixed at best, " with

" Medicare payments . . . significantly higher for those who had been

vaccinated, " noted Kidder and Schmitz in the 1993 report Options for the

Control of Influenza II.

Government agencies " calculated " an economic benefit of flu shots to

Medicare by manipulating numbers in a computerized simulation until

desirable results were obtained. The CDC reported in 1993 that its

theoretical assumptions did not include all vaccine-related costs. In 1994

and 1995, The New England Journal of Medicine published medical studies with

similar economic claims for flu shots that had been funded by a vaccine

manufacturer.

Several studies and government projections from the Department of Human and

Health Services confirm that, with or without a flu shot, pneumonia and

influenza hospitalization rates for the elderly are less than 1 percent

during the influenza season. This means that, regardless of vaccination

status, more than 99 percent of people weather a bout of flu without

requiring hospitalization. Even the past director of CDC's National

Immunization Program, Dr. Walter Orenstein, reported at a 1981 influenza

conference that the " at risk " population for influenza complications is

small. "

Considering that more than 90 percent of pneumonia and influenza deaths

occur in persons 65 years of age or older, but that about 65 percent of all

deaths (from any cause) occur in this age group anyway, it is nearly

impossible to prove if flu shots significantly increase life expectancy in

the elderly. Indeed one study of elderly Medicare patients in Ohio and

Pennsylvania, published in Options for the Control of Influenza II, showed

" no demonstrated effect of influenza vaccine in preventing death or limiting

the length of hospital stay. "

Health authorities in other countries do not share the U.S. public health

community's enthusiasm for influenza vaccine. At one CDC-sponsored influenza

symposium a British researcher stated: " The [influenza vaccine]

recommendations are strong in certain countries, but weak in others, since

not all authorities are convinced of the benefit of immunization. "

He deplored the " unsatisfactory situation " of poor influenza vaccine

efficacy which " compares unfavorably with other influenza vaccines. " Even

CDC officials confessed that " influenza vaccines are still among the least

effective immunizing agents available, and this seems to be particularly

true for elderly recipients. "

Congress and the American taxpayer have been defrauded about the alleged

advantages of flu shots.

Instead of being an effective prevention, evidence indicates that flu shots

may be useless. Although endorsed and funded by federal and state

governments the shots seem only to benefit the companies that make them,

public health bureaucrats who promote them, and medical personnel who

administer them.

---------------

FLU VACCINE WARNING FOR PREGNANT WOMEN

Please distribute and post so every pregnant woman in America can read this!

http://www.vaccineinfo.net/issues/flu_vaccine_warning.htm

(Critical Update 10/25/00 - All three of the flu vaccines for the 2000-2001

season still contain mercury. The CDC has since updated the link refered by

my article below - it is no longer valid, but their new answer to the

question who is most vulnerable to methyl mercury is much more revealing:

" Two groups are most vulnerable to methyl mercury: the fetus and pregnant

women. Premature babies are more vulnerable because they tend to be very

small and their brain is not as developed as a full term baby " )

http://www.cdc.gov/nip/vacsafe/concerns/thimerosal/thimerosal.htm

October 8, 1999

Flu Vaccine: Stay Out of My Womb!

Commentary by Dawn

Pregnant women everywhere know the feeling of making it to the milestone of

their second trimester. For most, queasiness starts to subside, energy

returns in spurts, and of course there is that indescribable feeling of

becoming aware of your developing baby's movements.

You've altered your diet, exercised, stayed away from over the counter

medications, your true hair color is revealing itself, and that wonderful

bottle of wine with the Surgeon General's warning will continue stay buried

in the back of the refrigerator awaiting the skinnier days ahead.

You ask yourself, " Is there anything more that I can do for me and my baby

during the remainder of my pregnancy? " Well, according to the Centers for

Disease Control (CDC) and the federal government's Advisory Committee on

Immunization Practices (ACIP) there is - get the flu vaccine before this

year's flu season hits. According to the CDC and ACIP, it was estimated

that an average of 1 to 2 hospitalizations among pregnant women could be

prevented for every 1,000 pregnant women immunized. (Prevention and Control

of Influenza: Recommendations of ACIP. MMWR - May 1, 1998; 47)

My initial pregnant maternally protective hormonal response to this was

utter disbelief. How could a biological pharmaceutical product be

recommended for routine use for all healthy second and third trimester

pregnant women? As I looked into this further, I became outraged and

inspired to share the truth with pregnant women so they could make up their

own minds. Here is what I found.

There are four drug manufacturers for this year's flu vaccine. The product

package inserts published by the manufacturers state the disclaimer that

" Animal reproduction studies have not been conducted with influenza virus

vaccine. It is also not known whether influenza virus vaccine can cause

fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman...Although animal

reproductive studies have not been conducted, the prescribing health-care

provider should be aware of the recommendations of the Advisory Committee on

Immunization Practices...The ACIP states that, if used during pregnancy,

administration of influenza virus vaccine after 14 weeks of gestation may be

preferable to avoid coincidental association of the vaccine with early

pregnancy loss... "

Additional reading and phone calls to the manufacturers confirmed that all

four flu vaccines contain thimerosal, a mercury derivative preservative

banned by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in over-the-counter (OTC)

drug preparations because of questions over safety. (Federal Register: April

22, 1998 (Volume 63, Number 77)][Page 19799-19802].

On July 7, 1999, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and the United

States Public Health Service (PHS) issued a joint statement that because of

the " neuro-developmental effects posed by exposure to thimerosal " ,

" thimerosal-containing vaccines should be removed as soon as possible. " The

PHS and AAP recognized that because of thimerosal in vaccines, some

children would be exposed to " a cumulative level of mercury over the first

six months of life that exceeds one of the federal guidelines on methyl

mercury. " Hospitals around the country responded this summer by halting

the administration of the thimerosal containing vaccine for hepatitis B at

birth, deferring vaccination until the baby is older and more developed.

What about my beloved little baby that isn't even developed enough to live

outside the womb yet?

A quick internet search showed that even the CDC, in a revealing

self-contradiction at another location, posted: " Q. Who is most vulnerable

to mercury? A. Two groups are most vulnerable to methyl mercury: the fetus

and children ages 14 and younger. "

(http://www.cdc.gov/nip/Q & A/genqa/Thimerosal.htm) More searching on the

National Library of Medicine site almost effortlessly produced hundreds of

articles and studies in medical and scientific journals clearly documenting

the damaging effects of prenatal exposure to mercury. The results of one

recent study published in the August 1, 1999 issue of the American Journal

of Epidemiology stated that " the greatest susceptibility to methylmercury

neurotoxicity occurs during late gestation, while early postnatal

vulnerability is less " which is the precise point in time that ACIP and the

CDC is recommending we get the shot.

I then decided to call the CDC's Influenza Division myself, as a pregnant

mother baffled by this scientifically unfounded and potentially unsafe

recommendation. Maybe I was missing something that an " expert " could reveal

for me. I was told that there was no scientific proof that the flu vaccine

caused fetal harm. Well of course not, the manufacturers are right up front

when they state that this hasn't been studied - isn't that convenient. I

was also told that the CDC had no intention to change the recommendation for

pregnant women because of thimerosal. The doctor blamed the recent concerns

on " politics " rather than science. What a shame.

Even though the CDC does claim that a single study of a small number of

pregnant women have demonstrated no adverse fetal effects associated with

influenza vaccine; they continue and say, " however, more data are needed. "

Maybe this scientifically unsubstantiated recommendation is how the CDC

plans on getting that data. So much for the Nazi war criminal trials at

Nuremberg outlawing human experimentation without informed consent.

While I would absolutely hate to be one of the 1 in 1000 pregnant women

needing to go to the hospital for the flu this winter, at this point, I feel

far more threatened by the public health bureaucrats recklessly willing to

experiment on me and my unborn child with a flu vaccine not proven safe for

my baby.

__________

" Study: Giving Flu Vaccine Doesn't Save Money "

Tuesday October 3 3:16 PM ET

By Maggie Fox, Health and Science Correspondent

for full article

(http://dailynews./h/nm/20001003/sc/health_flu_dc_3.html)

....``Vaccination of healthy adults may not provide overall economic benefit,

even in a well-paid population,'' Dr. Carolyn Buxton Bridges of the National

Center for Infectious Diseases at the Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention (news - web sites) (CDC) told reporters.

....During the 1997-1998 flu season, the first of the study, the vaccine did

not match well with the flu virus that was going around and no benefit was

found to vaccination.

....``But because influenza rates were low and the (resulting) costs were

low, the average cost of vaccine ... in the vaccine group was $11.32 greater

than the average cost of illness alone in the placebo group,'' Bridges said.

``Vaccination of this population did not result in a net cost saving from a

societal perspective.'' The vaccine was estimated to have cost $10, while

employee time was estimated, based on the average hourly wage at Ford, to be

worth $29.39 per hour. The average cost of getting a shot was estimated to

be $24.70.

------------------------

Wednesday October 4 1:12 PM ET

Flu Shots Cut Misery, But Not Costs

By Amy Norton

for full article

http://dailynews./h/nm/20001004/hl/flu_shots_1.html

" NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Employers who offer workers flu vaccines in the

hopes of cutting sick days may not be saving money after all, new research

suggests.

Experts agree that people at risk of flu complications, such as the elderly

and the chronically ill, should get vaccinated every year. For healthy

younger adults, vaccination is more about avoiding a few days of misery than

preventing a serious health threat. And in terms of dollars, researchers

have found, it is not a cost-effective choice... "

_________________________________________________________________________

Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at

http://profiles.msn.com.