Lee D. Hieb, M.D. published this paper in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons Volume 18 Number 2 Summer 2013.
Between 1979 and 2001, on average 36,000 people per year in the U.S. died from complications of influenza. Based on the number of hospital beds in acute and chronic care facilities, and spreading that risk evenly across all facilities, one person every three years, on average, would die at our hospital from influenza sequelae. This number is probably a significant overestimate since proof of influenza from positive viral cultures is rarely obtained (in most cases, 1,000–4,000 samples are submitted before a single
positive viral culture is obtained), and deaths from influenza B and other influenza‐like diseases, which would not be prevented by vaccination, may be included in these statistics. And, as noted below, vaccination does not clearly reduce these deaths…
… Even these modest results must be interpreted with caution as there is a disturbing pro‐vaccine bias in the literature. For example, in another study by Munoz et al. in 1999, based only upon the low vaccination rate and work absences of the staff nurses, the researchers concluded that nurses were the probable cause of an influenza outbreak. Drawing such a conclusion violates every epidemiologic principle, and does not even begin to meet Koch’s postulates…
… There are very few risk‐free medical therapies, and no one—not even the most ardent vaccination supporter—believes that the influenza vaccine is risk free. In reviewing data from the previously cited studies submitted for FDA approval of Fluarix and Flulaval, common side effects reported were: 1.6% vomiting, 1.6% nausea, 1.4% influenza‐like illness, one in 11,000 cases of anaphylaxis, and a smattering of other minor complaints. From 5% to 11% of children became febrile after vaccination.
Importantly, the studies of 10,000 people on which approval was based only looked at a 21‐day window after the vaccination. Other problems self‐reported via the vaccine registry include Stevens‐Johnsons syndrome, encephalomyelitis, neuritis, facial palsy, meningitis, myelitis, Guillain‐Barré syndrome, and other neurologic sequelae. There is general agreement that neurologic problems can occur after immunizations of various sorts, and that these neurologic changes are of an acute and unpredictable nature. Guillain‐Barré is perhaps the best known of the risks. The incidence is unknown because of the sometimes delayed onset and the need for self‐reporting, but is common enough that during my career I have seen a handful of cases that occurred after vaccination. This ascending paralysis can be fatal or leave permanent movement and sensory deficits. A study of 10,000 people may not be large enough to capture the incidence in controlled studies, and cases will be missed in studies looking at only a 21‐day post-vaccination window. The more controversial vaccine issues involve potential long‐term sequelae that may be related to the adjuvants used in the vaccine to stimulate the immune response, the risk of vaccines containing small SNPs (single nucleotide polymorphisms) of oncogenes from the media in which they are grown, and the overall risk‐to‐benefit ratio of multiple vaccinations…
… Before mandating a potentially risky medical treatment with limited effectiveness, we should ask, “Are there alternatives?” It turns out there are. A randomized clinical trial from Japan showed that Vitamin D supplementation was more effective than the influenza vaccine in preventing influenza in school children. Vitamin D is a cheap, safe supplement. No overdose has ever been reported at 10,000 units a day, and it is generally conceded (except by the Institute of Medicine) that there is a worldwide deficiency of Vitamin D in temperate climates. This study has led to the suggestion that the seasonal nature of the influenza may be less attributable to confined winter quarters than to lack of sunlight and falling winter Vitamin D levels…
… Most importantly, there is a grave ethical issue at stake here. Does any government or public agency have the right to force a medical treatment with its attendant risks on an individual or group of individuals? A private business can require that certain physical standards be met, even vaccination, but to do so it must bear the moral burden of potentially harming people.
According to a study by the American College of Cardiology, the half‐life of medical truth is about 20 years. In other words, looking back at the literature, only about half of what was touted as true 20 years ago is still thought to be valid 20 years later. The other 50% has been supplanted by new evidence and ideas. It may well be that in 20 years we will determine that the adjuvants we gave as part of these vaccines were, as some suggest now, responsible for a long‐term autoimmune reaction in genetically
susceptible people. To give a vaccine to people on a voluntary basis is one thing, but to mandate such a treatment puts the hospital in a very different moral space.
End of quote.
So, maybe you want to consider plenty of Vitamin D for yourself and your loved ones next winter instead of a flu shot – if you still have a choice.
And if you wanted a clear indication that vaccination is NOT primarily about the better health of you and your children, this paper gives it to you.