Flu Vaccine Ineffective in 91% of Seniors

Shock CDC Study: Flu Vaccine Ineffective in 91% of Seniors







Activist Post

A study released today by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC) shows shockingly low rates of effectiveness for this year's flu
vaccine.

According to the report,
the flu vaccine was effective for only 9% of seniors over 65 years old.
In other words, 91% of seniors in the study who were vaccinated were
still susceptible to getting the flu.

The CDC showed somewhat better results for younger persons. They claimed
that the flu vaccine was effective for 58% of those aged 6 months-17
years, 46% for persons aged 18–49 years, and 50% for persons aged 50–64
years.

Overall, the CDC claimed this year's flu vaccine was "moderately
effective" and made the unprovable claim that "influenza vaccination
reduced the risk for medical visits resulting from influenza A and B by
56%."

But since young people generally have stronger immune
systems than seniors it's unclear how many of the younger test subjects
would not have gotten the flu whether they were vaccinated or not.

It seems that the figure for seniors is far more accurate as to the
actual effectiveness of the vaccine precisely because they have weaker
immune systems.





One would think these dismal numbers should dampen the CDC's enthusiasm
for flu vaccines, but it seems to have done just the opposite. The CDC
claims that the figures for younger adults "confirm the benefits" and
"offers further support" for annual flu vaccines.

The editors of the report state:
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Confirmation of the protective benefits of the 2012–13 influenza vaccine
among persons aged 6 months–64 years offers further support for the
public health benefit of annual seasonal influenza vaccination and
supports the expansion of vaccination, particularly among younger age
groups.</blockquote>
The
CDC called the woefully low effectiveness in seniors "nonsignificant",
only that it "reinforces the need for continued advances in influenza
vaccines," and that "vaccines remain the best preventive tool
available."
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The nonsignificant adjusted VE of 9% against A (H3N2) among persons aged
≥65 years is similar to the estimate in a recent interim report from
Europe (6) and reinforces the need for continued advances in influenza
vaccines, especially to increase protective benefits for older adults. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
One possible explanation for these findings is that some older adults
did not mount an effective immune response to the influenza A (H3N2)
component of this season's vaccine. Nonetheless, this finding should not
discourage future vaccination by persons aged ≥65 years, who are at
greater risk for more severe cases and complications from influenza.
Influenza vaccines remain the best preventive tool available.</blockquote>
However, according to their own data, a strong immune system is the best
preventative measure against the flu, but Big Pharma doesn't make any
money from that.

Finally, the CDC concludes the report with a recommendation to increase
the use of flu vaccines; "This report highlights the value of both
increasing the use of influenza vaccines, especially among children and
young adults, and continuing efforts to develop more effective vaccines
and vaccination strategies."

If a 91% failure rate is "nonsignificant" to the CDC, what level of failure must be reached for them to disavow vaccines?

Source:-
http://www.activistpost.com/2013/02/shock-cdc-study-flu-vaccine-ineffective.html