“Safe and effective” is an industry marketing mantra for vaccines. This mantra is not an evidenced-based statement from a peer-reviewed, published journal. The gold standard of science is a double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Long-term surveillance of health outcomes of drug users is also an important consideration. As consumers, we need to discern when our taxpayer dollars for public health are either advertising a drug for a pharmaceutical company or promoting an evidence-based health intervention. Because vaccines do not have liability like other drugs, and all vaccine adverse outcomes are the sole responsibility of consumers, it is especially important to scrutinize vaccine safety and efficacy claims.
State and county public health departments are required in statute and regulations to promote evidence-based health recommendations. Therefore, the public should expect health departments to include references from published journals with every recommendation, to support the credibility of the information. Without references, a recommendation is opinion or taxpayer funded drug marketing. When consumers do not see a scientific journal reference, then the public should challenge the claim. This is a safeguard to ensure that public health recommendations are based on science, and not grant funding from health organizations (front groups) acting on behalf of pharmaceutical companies, to sell a test, drug, or vaccine.
Currently, the public is inundated with advertising for the COVID and influenza vaccines, especially targeting the elderly. A Douglas County Health Department poster, lacking references, reads,
“Take Time to Immunize. Vaccination continues to protect against COVID-19 and Flu. COVID and Older Adults: Staying current with your COVID-19 vaccines and boosters can prevent severe illness, hospitalizations, and death. Flu and Older Adults: The flu vaccine is adjusted each year to provide protection for that season’s expected virus. People 65 and older should seek the flu vaccine designed for older adults. These contain an added ingredient to cause a better immune response to the vaccine.”
Douglas County Health Department responded to my CORA request for references to support the poster’s claims with “We do not have documents responsive to your request.” It is likely that many county health departments are marketing this same information because CDPHE or CDC distributed taxpayer funding to the health departments to promote these vaccines as the preferred strategy in public health to address cold and influenza season. This article will review the safety and efficacy claims of the COVID and influenza vaccines.
Does the COVID-19 Vaccine Prevent Death?
As reported by Physicians for Informed Consent, COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials did not demonstrate a difference in mortality between the vaccinated and unvaccinated:
“Clinical trials have observed tens of thousands of subjects and are the only studies 1) that included a control group and 2) where all subjects were monitored and tested for COVID-19 regardless of vaccination status. However, those trials did not detect enough COVID-19 deaths to measure a significant difference in mortality between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) states, “A larger number of individuals at high risk of COVID-19 and higher attack rates would be needed to confirm efficacy of the vaccine against mortality.”
As reported by Physicians for Informed Consent, 100% of the severe cases and fatal cases of COVID-19 in July 2021 were in vaccinated people:
“A study of a COVID-19 outbreak in July 2021 published in Eurosurveillance observed that 100% of severe, critical, and fatal cases of COVID-19 occurred in vaccinated individuals.”
As reported by Physicians for Informed Consent, there was no difference in US mortality rates before and after the COVID-19 vaccine was introduced:
“CDC data show mass vaccination with the COVID-19 vaccine has had no measurable impact on the COVID-19 mortality rate in the U.S. In the nine months before the introduction of mass vaccination (April 2020 through December 2020), there were about 356,000 COVID-19 deaths or 39,500 deaths per month — a mortality rate of 0.120 per 1,000 people. In the nine months after the introduction of mass vaccination (January 2021 through September 2021), there were 342,000 COVID-19 deaths or 38,000 deaths per month — a mortality rate of 0.115 per 1,000 people. And in the five months that followed (October 2021 through February 2022), there were an additional 249,000 COVID-19 deaths or 49,800 deaths per month — a mortality rate of 0.151 per 1,000 people.”
Does the COVID-19 Vaccine Prevent Hospitalization?
As explained by Physicians For Informed Consent, in the Pfizer trial, for every two (2) COVID-19 hospitalizations prevented in vaccinated people, there were ten (10) COVID-19 vaccine serious adverse events; and in the Moderna trial for every six (6) COVID-19 hospitalizations prevented in vaccinated people, there were fifteen (15) COVID-19 vaccine serious adverse events:
“A study published in Vaccine observed a risk of a serious adverse event (SAE) from the Pfizer vaccine in 1 in 556 vaccinated subjects. The same study also observed a risk of an SAE from the Moderna vaccine in 1 in 1,408 vaccinated subjects. The study states, ‘An SAE was defined as an adverse event that results in any of the following conditions: death; life-threatening at the time of the event; inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization; persistent or significant disability/incapacity; a congenital anomaly/birth defect; medically important event, based on medical judgment.’”
“In addition, the study found, ‘In the Moderna trial, the excess risk of serious AESIs [adverse events of special interest] (15.1 per 10,000 participants) was higher than the risk reduction for COVID-19 hospitalization relative to the placebo group (6.4 per 10,000 participants). In the Pfizer trial, the excess risk of serious AESIs (10.1 per 10,000) was higher than the risk reduction for COVID-19 hospitalization relative to the placebo group (2.3 per 10,000 participants).’”
Does the Influenza Vaccine Protect People Over Age 65?
As reported by Physicians for Informed Consent, there is no evidence indicating that the influenza vaccination reduces hospitalizations or mortality among elderly persons:
“The National Institute of Health (NIH) funded a study to measure the effect of seasonal influenza vaccination on mortality among the elderly. The study analyzed 7.6 million deaths and found ‘a sharp increase in influenza vaccination rates at age 65 years with no matching decrease in hospitalization or mortality rates.’”
Flu Vaccine Mandates Are Not Science-Based
Physicians for Informed Consent reports that systematic reviews in published journals conclude that the influenza vaccine recommendations are not science based:
“A Cochrane Vaccines Field analysis evaluated studies measuring the benefits of flu vaccination. The analysis, published in the BMJ, concludes: ‘The large gap between policy and what the data tell us (when rigorously assembled and evaluated) is surprising… Evidence from systematic reviews shows that inactivated vaccines have little or no effect on the effects measured… Reasons for the current gap between policy and evidence are unclear, but given the huge resources involved, a re-evaluation should be urgently undertaken.’”
A Cochrane research review of the influenza vaccine for people over age 65 found that with low-certainty that it might reduce influenza symptoms by 3.6%, with under-powered evidence and very-low-certainty to support protective effects against pneumonia and mortality, and no evidence to support prevention of hospitalizations. The Cochrane research reviews of the influenza vaccine found similar low efficacy outcomes for adults and children. The Cochrane reviews did not study adverse reactions that are also important risk considerations for consumers.
What Is the “Added Ingredient” in the Influenza Vaccine for Seniors?
The CDC reports the added ingredient in the influenza vaccine marketed to the elderly is an adjuvant of squalene, or MF59 and ASO3. (Vaccine ingredients often use codes or pseudonyms to hide the names of toxic ingredients.) Squalene is the vaccine ingredient that was implicated in published research and US Congressional testimony as the toxic agent in the 2001 Anthrax vaccine for the military. The development of Anti-Squalene-Antibodies (ASA) after administration of the Anthrax vaccine was linked with the resulting neurological symptoms called Gulf War Syndrome. Most internet searches outside of peer-reviewed journals or actual science portray squalene, or shark liver oil, as natural or safe in the human body. This is called “spin” by a pharmaceutical industry captured media. This spin is why the name of the vague “added ingredient” is omitted from the public marketing posters. To claim that this ingredient causes a “better immune response” is a deceptive way of stating that it will create a stronger immune response, but potentially a reactive antibody defense to a foreign agent added to human blood.
The Influenza Vaccine Increases Risk of Other Respiratory Illnesses by 65%
Every drug requires a risk-benefit analysis. The public is not informed of the risks of vaccines when they are marketed simply as “safe and effective.” As reported by Physicians for Informed Consent:
“To address the concern among patients that the flu vaccine causes illness (i.e., acute respiratory illness), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) funded a three-year study, published in Vaccine, to analyze the risk of illness after flu vaccination compared to the risk of illness in unvaccinated individuals. The study, which included healthy subjects, found a 65% increased risk of non-flu acute respiratory illness within 14 days of receiving the flu vaccine. The authors state, ‘Patients’ experiences of illness after vaccination may be validated by these results.’ The most common non-flu pathogens found were rhinovirus, enterovirus, respiratory syncytial virus, and coronaviruses.
This is important because although flu vaccines target three or four strains of flu virus, over 200 different viruses cause illnesses that produce the same symptoms—fever, headache, aches, pains, cough, and runny nose—as influenza, and more than 85% of acute respiratory illnesses do not involve the flu.”
Conclusion
By all objective measures, the influenza vaccine is a failure in efficacy. According to the CDC Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network, the influenza vaccine had a 65% vaccine failure rate between 2014 and 2018. Regarding the COVID-19 vaccine which is marketed to the public with similar “safe and effective” messaging while demonstrating no protective effects against mortality, hospitalizations, or severe illness, there is also no long-term research on the health outcomes regarding myocarditis, cancer, genetic alteration, or fertility.
Addendum: Contact Douglas County Health Department
You can submit your concerns about evidence-based public health to the following:
Responses