Vaccination Against Influenza - Facts You Should Know


On January 13th 2011 newspapers carried headlines telling readers that the death toll from flu had more than doubled and had risen to 112. There were calls for compulsory vaccination against swine flu. In fact, these figures show that less people than usual were dying from flu for the time of the year. On the following day doctors and journalists described the incidence of flu as `a pandemic' and called for all children to be vaccinated immediately (despite the fact that it was mainly elderly people who were dying). Scaremongering, vaccine-promoting supporters of the planned vaccination programme pointed out that the vaccine cost only £6 per person.

Up until a year or two ago the World Health Organisation used to describe a pandemic as a disease which (among other things) killed large numbers of people.

This definition was changed in 2009 so that a disease which spread across national borders (but didn't necessarily kill many people) could be described as a pandemic.

Shortly after the definition was changed swine flu was officially declared a serious level 6 pandemic. And countries all over the world had little choice but to start buying up huge stocks of H1N1 flu vaccine. The financial cost was enormous. And the profits for the drug companies flogging the vaccines were enormous too.

When the swine flu vaccine was first introduced it was said that it would prevent the disease. Then it was announced that it would shorten the duration of the disease. It was said that 159 deaths had occurred in Mexico as a result of the flu but this was later corrected to just seven deaths. Independent doctors warned that for children the side effects of the drug far outweighed the benefits and that one in twenty children was suffering from nausea or vomiting (severe enough to bring on dehydration) and also nightmares. The disease was being diagnosed on the NHS telephone line (provided as an alternative to a disappearing GP service) by telephone operators who were, presumably, happy their diagnostic skills enabled them to differentiate between flu and early signs of other, more deadly disorders such as meningitis. (Making diagnoses on the telephone is a dangerous business even for a doctor.)

Senior politicians in Europe subsequently called H1N1 a faked pandemic and accused pharmaceutical companies (and their lackeys) of encouraging a false scare. Limited health resources had been wasted buying millions of doses of vaccine. And millions of healthy people had been needlessly exposed to the unknown side effects of vaccines that in my view had been insufficiently tested.

As always, vaccinations were given with greatest enthusiasm to children and the elderly - the most immunologically vulnerable and the easiest to damage with vaccines.

We don't develop immunity to influenza and the common cold because the viruses that cause these diseases are constantly mutating and changing. And for the same reason the anti-flu vaccine will be useless within months, weeks or days. For the drug companies this is great news because it means they can insist that everyone who is vaccinated needs re-vaccinating regularly.

The strains of influenza virus used are the available strains which the drug company and the authorities guess might be the ones which will hit in the current year. The chances are, of course, that the strains of flu which will spread will be quite different.

Because the flu virus is constantly changing, scientists have to try to predict which strains are likely to produce an epidemic a year ahead. This is a bit like forecasting the weather a year ahead. Actually, it's not a bit like that. It's exactly like that.

Moreover, for the sake of economic convenience, drug companies, politicians and doctors often talk about `this year's flu vaccine' as though the flu virus mutates just once a year. This, of course, is nonsense. Viruses don't take any notice of the calendar. They change as much as they like and as often as they can. The idea of giving anti-flu jabs on an annual basis is arbitrary and entirely unscientific. Once the drug companies have got hooked on an annual financial bonanza they will suggest that vaccines be given biannually. And doctors, who also make huge sums out of giving flu vaccinations, will be equally enthusiastic.

The vaccination programme is all about money.

I wonder how many people who have the flu jab know just what they are allowing their doctor (or, more likely, a nurse) to dump in their arm? How many know that a pretty standard influenza vaccine contains: different strains of influenza viruses propagated in chicken embryos; formaldehyde (used as a preservative); polyethylene glycol (used to stimulate the immune system); gelatin (made from cows bones) and thimerosal (which contains mercury).

In 2011, studies suggested that innate immunity is vital to flu resistance and that alveolar macrophages help to clear the flu virus out from the lungs. University of Texas researchers announced that enhancing this natural action would increase the body's resistance to flu infection. The obvious thing to do, therefore, is to encourage people to improve their natural immunity by avoiding things which are bad for the immune system and by eating foods which help the immune system. In contrast, the whole principle of vaccination is to encourage fake immunity. But does multiple vaccination increase or lower the body's general immunity? Personally, I believe vaccination could well lower real immunity. I don't think I'm the only doctor who worries about this. When I was in practice as a GP I don't think I ever met a doctor who had an anti-flu vaccination himself (or gave one to members of his family). To be honest, I would be most unwilling to trust the judgement of such a doctor if I ever found one.

The big question which no one answers (and hardly anyone asks) is: could the widespread use of flu vaccine be spreading flu, encouraging the developing of more potent viruses and, therefore, be responsible for the fact that a surprising number of relatively young, and healthy, individuals are now dying from the disease? I don't know. And I don't believe anyone else does, either. What I do know is that flu jabs don't have any useful effect on preventing hospitalisation, death or time off work.

Copyright Vernon Coleman 2011
Taken from Vernon Coleman's book Anyone Who Tells You Vaccines Are Safe And Effective Is Lying. Here's The Proof. For details of how to purchase a copy of the book see the shop on this website.

Home