This year, Americans are going to be pressured to get two flu vaccines; one for the seasonal flu, and another for the novel H1N1 flu, also known as swine flu. The pig farmers of America do not like the term "swine flu" so health care professionals are trying to refer to it as H1N1.

In considering whether or not to get any flu vaccine, it is helpful to look at the history of flu vaccines. In October 1976 the National Influenza Immunization Program (NIIP) began, which started with 1 million vaccinations per week and grew to 4 million per week very quickly. Within only 2 months, more than 10 states had reported Guillain-Barre syndrome, an autoimmune disease that attacks the nervous system, occurring in vaccinated people.

In December 1976 the program was discontinued. However, the damage had already been done. By January of 1977, more than 500 cases of GBS were reported. Some patients recovered completely, some partially, and 25 people died. The NIIP determined that the risk of acquiring GBS within 6 weeks of vaccination was 10 times higher than in non-vaccinated people, but this did not stop the government from promoting flu vaccines. In 1992, 1993, 1994, national campaigns were launched to promote flu vaccinations, and again this led to more cases of GBS. People became justifiably wary of flu vaccines.

In addition to the complications reported from the vaccines, there are issues about how deaths from flu are reported. The Centers for Disease Control continues to state that every year, about 36,000 Americans die from seasonal flu. But according to information obtained from the CDC's own website, in the year 2002, 753 people died from the flu and in 2001, only 251 people died from it. The discrepancy appears to be a result of reported deaths from pneumonia, which are combined with confirmed deaths from flu. But the flu does not cause pneumonia; they are two distinctly different conditions. But reporting combined deaths from these conditions justifies large budgets and increased staffing for fighting "the flu epidemic."

Tom Jefferson, M.D., was the lead author of a review of studies concerning safety and efficacy of flu vaccines which was published in the British Medical Journal in 2006. His group reviewed 15 randomized controlled trials, 8 cohort trials and one case-controlled study.

The findings of this review were disturbing. One major problem identified by Jefferson was the difficulty in differentiating influenza-like illness from influenza in doctors' offices and hospitals. Influenza-like illness is an acute respiratory disease caused by many different viruses and is the type of syndrome most commonly presented to doctors by patients. Only about 20% of all flu-like illness is due to type A or B influenza and most people, young and old, recover without serious complications from influenza. This confusion leads to a gross overestimation of the impact of influenza, and unrealistic expectations of the performance of vaccines.

Jefferson wrote "We found evidence that the influenza vaccines were effective against influenza viruses (emphasis mine), but were not very effective against influenza-like illnesses, which accounts for the majority of cases. If you are vaccinating to prevent acute infectious respiratory disease and its consequences, think again."

Jefferson identified other problems associated with the available research on flu vaccines:

• There is heavy reliance on non-randomized studies, particularly in the elderly population, making interpretation of data very difficult.
• Absence of evidence of efficacy - there was no reduction of hospitalizations, time off work, complications, or death in healthy people under 65 as a result of flu vaccines. There was also no benefit for patients with asthma or cystic fibrosis.
• There is little data on safety. The general data set is millions of observations, and safety data is only available for 2963 people in terms of adverse events reported within one week of receiving a vaccine.

Five randomized studies and five non-randomized studies were examined for evidence of efficacy for flu vaccines for children. The study concluded that efficacy was impossible to measure because of weak study design. Jefferson wrote, "We could find no evidence that vaccinating children younger than two made any difference compared to placebo."

Dr. Jefferson's group found no evidence that vaccinating children 16 or younger limited the spread of influenza or improved outcomes either. Vaccines were effective in reducing long school absences, but showed no significant advantage over placebo in length of hospital stays, prevention of secondary cases, lower respiratory tract infection, or acute otitis media.

Jefferson concludes that "re-revaluation should be urgently undertaken."

Meanwhile, the Centers for Disease Control, in conjunction with health organizations, medical professionals, and, of course, the drug companies, continue to promote annual flu shots.

In addition to the lack of evidence of efficacy, there are risks associated with getting flu shots. According to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, in 2007 there were 209 deaths from the flu vaccine, 797 life-threatening events, 260 permanent disabilities, and 2980 hospitalizations. When differentiating between influenza-like illness, influenza and pneumonia, there are years when more people may have died or were harmed from the vaccine than died or were harmed from the flu.

To be continued next week.

Lasky, T et al, "People developed Guillian-Barre," N Engl J Med, 1998 Dec 17; 339(25):1797-802

Tom Jefferson, coordinator Cochrane Vaccines Field, Anguillara Sabazia, Roma 00061, Italy "Influenza vaccination: policy versus evidence." BMJ 2006;333:912-915 (28 October), doi:10.1136/bmj.38995.531701.80

Article printed with permission from Dr. Pamela A. Popper and taken from Newsletters Vol 7 Issue 39 September 28, 2009. Dr. Popper is the founder and Executive Director of The Wellness Forum, a chain of health and wellness centers located throughout the United States and the Far East.