Read Online Super Immunity by Joel Fuhrman - Free Book Online

breathe.
    Overall, the review found the evidence for universal vaccination to be underwhelming and were critical of the CDC’s recommendations for healthy adults.
    The Cochrane review made it clear that about half the trials reviewed were funded by the vaccine companies and observed that, in such cases, the results are questionable, because such trials include only ideal viral-matching conditions and also limit the tracking of harm. Cochrane investigators noted widespread manipulation of the conclusions in such vaccine-manufacturer-funded studies. But even when looking at these biased studies, where the vaccine was well matched to the circulating virus, we see that vaccination against influenza was far from fully protective against infection, that the vaccine did not significantly impact the number of days of work missed, and that it did not prevent complications of influenza.
    The Cochrane review also looked specifically at the vaccination of children against the flu. After reviewing the data on fifty-one studies addressing the effectiveness and safety of flu vaccines for children, the Cochrane reviewers were shocked with our government’s policy of universal vaccination. They found that in children under the age of two, the effectiveness of the vaccine was similar to that of a placebo. They also found it impossible to analyze the safety of vaccines from the available studies, due to the lack of recorded data in the trials. More concerning was their conclusion that the safety outcome data was not feasible due to extensive evidence of reporting bias in the studies. The Cochrane authors were again critical of the CDC’s decisions, stating, “If immunization in children is to be recommended as a public health policy, large-scale studies assessing important outcomes and directly comparing vaccine types are urgently needed.” 18
    Even among the elderly, where the risk of death from infections is higher, the studies on flu vaccination are not definitively favorable. A review of influenza vaccination among adults at age sixty-five or older suggested that the vaccine was of questionable efficacy. 19 While vaccination appeared to reduce the symptoms of influenza, the poor quality of the collected research prevented any strong conclusion regarding the effectiveness of the vaccine in preventing complications of influenza, even in this high-risk population.
    The fact that flu vaccination is heavily promoted by government and medical authorities, despite the marginal benefits, fuels distrust of the entire medical/pharmaceutical/government health complex, which reeks of collusion and conflict of interest. This situation is reflective of a foundational problem with health care today: governmental authorities shaping our personal medical decisions are heavily influenced by commercial interests wielding political donations, by powerful lobbyists, and by industry-funded experts.
    The scientists from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were quite pointed in their critique of public health efforts in the United States to heavily promote increased usage of the vaccine: “The CDC authors clearly do not weigh interpretation by the quality of the evidence, but quote anything that supports their theory.” No wonder, because almost all of the fifteen members of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices have financial ties to the vaccine industry! The CDC grants them waivers from statutory conflict-of-interest rules. Their professional experience contributes to the development of their immunization expertise—at least, that is the rationale offered by the CDC to justify the waivers. 20
    The Known Risks of Flu Shots
    If you read about the flu vaccine in the information supplied by the manufacturer, you will learn that each dose contains traces of formaldehyde and 25 micrograms of thimerosal (a mercury-containing compound), the latter used as a preservative. The injection of even this small amount