Progress on ‘Universal’ Flu Vaccine


The United States is in the grip of a tough flu season, and the current influenza vaccine is only partially effective. However, scientists say they’re getting closer to a “universal” flu shot for the leading strain of the illness — a vaccine that wouldn’t need to be redeveloped and readministered each year.

Trials in mice found that the new shot triggered lasting immunity against influenza A virus strains, which are responsible for up to 90 percent of cases this year.

“Vaccination is the most effective way to prevent deaths from influenza virus, but the virus changes very fast and you have to receive a new vaccination each year,” explained lead researcher Dr. Bao-Zhong Wang. He’s associate professor at the Institute for Biomedical Sciences at Georgia State University.

“We’re trying to develop a new vaccine approach that eliminates the need for vaccination every year,” Wang said in a university news release. “We’re developing a universal influenza vaccine. You wouldn’t need to change the vaccine type every year because it’s universal and can protect against any influenza virus.”

Currently, flu vaccines have to be changed every year to match the flu viruses predicted to be the most common in the upcoming flu season. However, the vaccines miss the mark in some flu seasons.

The experimental vaccine against influenza A targets flu viruses in a different way. As the researchers explained, the typical seasonal flu vaccine is engineered to focus on the microscopic head of the virus’s exterior surface protein. But this part of the flu virus mutates easily, so it’s a “moving target” each year.

The new vaccine goes deeper — aiming at the interior “stalk” of the virus, which is much less quick to change.

“This way you’re protected against different viruses because all influenza viruses share this stalk domain,” Wang said.

Using super-small protein “nanoparticles” to help target the stalk, Wang’s group found that the vaccine shielded mice against a wide range of influenza A viruses, including strains H1N1, H3N2, H5N1 and H7N9.

Of course, much more work needs to be done, since experiments that work in animal studies often don’t pan out in humans. The next step is to test the vaccine in ferrets, which are more similar to humans in terms of their respiratory system, Wang’s group said.

Two flu experts said such a shot is desperately needed.

“Any vaccine technology that can potentially result in a ‘universal’ vaccine is welcome news,” said Dr. Sunil Sood, chair of pediatrics at Southside Hospital in Bay Shore, N.Y.

“A layered protein nanoparticle influenza A vaccine, if ultimately tested in humans, could protect against the majority of influenza viruses that circulate yearly, because A viruses almost always predominate,” he said.

Dr. Marta Feldmesser is chief of infectious disease care at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City. She expressed cautious optimism for the new research.

“While they demonstrate efficacy in mice, whether humans will respond similarly awaits future demonstration,” Feldmesser said.

Source:  Nature Communications.

Advertisements

Influenza vaccine safe for hospitalized patients


The similarity in risk of readmission between vaccinated and unvaccinated surgical inpatients should encourage influenza immunization in this group, claimed researchers of a recent study.

Study participants were individuals aged ≥6 months who were scheduled to undergo inpatient surgery between 1 September and 31 March in 2010-2013 (influenza seasons). From a cohort of 42,777 surgeries, there were 6,420 influenza vaccines administered in-hospital, 78 percent of which were administered on day of discharge.

There were no differences between the groups in terms of risk of inpatient visits (rate ratio [RR], 1.12, 95 percent CI, 0.96-1.32; p=0.162) or emergency department (ED) visits (RR, 1.07, 95 percent CI, 0.96-1.20; p=0.22) 7 days postdischarge. There was also no difference detected for postdischarge fever (RR, 1.00, 95 percent CI, 0.76-1.31; p=0.99) or clinical evaluation for infection (RR, 1.06, 95 percent CI, 0.99-1.13; p=0.099) between the groups. [Ann Intern Med 2016;doi:10.7326/M15-1667]

There was, however, a slightly higher risk of outpatient visits in the vaccinated group (RR, 1.05, 95 percent CI, 1.00-1.10; p=0.032). Study authors felt that this minor increased risk should be weighed against the benefits of vaccination.

“Our data support the rationale for increasing vaccination rates among surgical inpatients,” said the authors, who stated that approximately 34 percent of the study population did not receive an influenza vaccination despite being eligible.

“The concern among providers is that vaccine-associated adverse events could lead to unnecessary evaluations and would influence postsurgical care,” said the authors. However, previous studies have shown that the safety of influenza vaccines is similar in hospitalized and ambulatory patients.

Flu Vaccine Causes 5.5 Times More Respiratory Infections – A True Vaccinated vs. Unvaccinated Study .


While the government in the U.S. continues to resist doing a true study on vaccinated vs. unvaccinated children or adults, stating that such a study would be “unethical”, researchers in Hong Kong have conducted a true vaccinated vs. unvaccinated study on the influenza vaccine. This is probably one of the few, if not only, true study conducted in recent times where a real placebo was actually used and compared to the vaccine. The results are quite remarkable, suggesting that it is unethical NOT to pursue more studies comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated populations. People receiving the flu vaccine suffered from other respiratory infections at a rate 5.5 times more than the placebo group!

Thanks to Heidi Stevenson at Gaia Health for providing her excellent analysis of this study .

The utter absurdity of vaccination ‘science’ is revealed in this study. It claims a flu vaccine results in less disease risk because it causes antibodies to develop, in spite of not reducing the likelihood of contracting the disease and also resulting in 5.5 times more incidents of similar diseases!

by Heidi Stevenson
Gaia Health

Would you be interested in a vaccination that results in more than 5 times as much illness? If you take the seasonal influenza vaccination, that’s what you’re doing. The seasonal trivalent flu vaccine results in 5.5 times more incidents of respiratory illness, according to a study published in Clinical Infectious Diseases.

The study is particularly noteworthy because it was a double-blind placebo-controlled trial—and the researchers used saline solution, a genuinely inactive placebo, as a standin for the trivalent flu vaccine. Most vaccine trials utilize active placebos, which are substances that include ingredients used in the vaccines, making the studies meaningless—though this fact is almost never revealed in the writeups.

Subjects were followed for an average of 272 days. The active influenza vaccine adminstered was Sanofi Pasteur’s Vaxigrip. The trial included children aged 6-15 years. 69 were given Vaxgrip and 46 received the saline placebo.

With regard to effectiveness against influenza, the authors wrote:

There was no statistically significant difference in the risk of confirmed seasonal influenza infection between recipients of TIV [trivalent influenza inactivated vaccine] or placebo.

The flu vaccine provided no benefit!

The authors tried to cover that by adding:

TIV recipients had significantly lower risk of seasonal influenza infection based on serologic evidence.

In other words, the authors are trying to suggest that, in spite of the fact that vaccine recipients suffered as much genuine influenza as those who’d received a placebo, they still benefited because of “serologic evidence”. This “serologic evidence” consists of antibodies produced as a result of the vaccine, which is the standard method of determining a vaccine’s effectiveness.

In other words, a vaccine’s effectiveness is not determined by whether it prevents disease, but rather by whether it causes antibodies to be produced!

But the story is even worse than this. The study also demonstrated that the vaccine resulted in recipients having 5.5 times more respiratory illness. Here’s a partial breakdown of their results:

Vaccinated  Placebo(saline)
Any Seasonal Influenza 58 88
H1N1 (Swine Flu ‘Pandemic’) 58 0
   Total Influenza Cases 116 88
Noninfluenza Viruses
   Rhinovirus (common cold) 230 59
   Coxsackie/Echovirus 160 0
   Other Respiratory Viruses 97 29
      Total Other Viruses 487 88

 

As you can see, even though the authors claim that there was no distinction in cases of influenza between the subjects who received a vaccine and those who received the placebo, the reality seems to be quite different: There were a total of 116 influenza cases in the vaccinated group and 88 in the placebo group.

The authors play with statistics in this study by using assumptions about whether people actually had diseases, because there were many reported instances that couldn’t be verified. They came up with a relative risk of 4.4. In any case, relative risk is actually a meaningless statistic here, because it requires that exposure to the causative agent be known, which it clearly wasn’t in this study.

I prefer a simpler, more straightforward—and, I believe, more honest—approach of simply comparing the numbers of cases of disease. Doing that, we get 487 ÷ 88, which tells us that those who were vaccinated were 5.5 times more likely to contract a confirmed respiratory illness!

Now, let’s take a look at the other respiratory illnesses that people were more likely to contract as a result of being vaccinated for influenza. The rhinovirus is the common cold, so it isn’t a big deal. However, coxsackievirus and echovirus are quite different. Both of them are known to cause meningitis, paralysis, hepatitis, and heart disorders. This is not common, but the same thing is true of poliovirus. It also causes a usually minor respiratory illness, but in rare cases can result in much the same harm that coxsackievirus and echovirus can.

It is, therefore, reasonable to suggest that the rate of severe crippling diseases may also be increased by the influenza vaccine, and potentially by any vaccine against a respiratory illness.

Implications

This study’s implications are quite serious. The authors suggest:

Receipt of TIV could increase influenza immunity at the expense of reduced immunity to
noninfluenza respiratory viruses, by some unknown biological mechanism. Alternatively, our results could be explained by temporary nonspecific immunity after influenza virus infection, through the cell-mediated response or, more likely, the innate immune response to infection.

In other words, the act of injecting antigens probably damages the innate cell-mediated immune response, the part of the immune system that protects without the need of resorting to development of antibodies. They go on to state:

The phenomenon of virus interference has been well known in virology for >60 years.

The interference of vaccinations with the innate cell-mediated immune response is well known! The authors go on to cite several sources supporting this fact.

In summary, this study demonstrates:

  • Influenza vaccines provide no benefit.
  • Influenza vaccines cause a hugely increased number of respiratory illnesses.
  • Influenza vaccines—and very likely other vaccines—harm the innate cell-mediated immune response, which results in a significant increase in infectious disease incidents.

Nonetheless, our agencies of health destruction, such as the US’s alphabet soup of FDA, CDC, and NIH, the UK’s NHS, MHRA, and DOH, Australia’s ANPHA, and Canada’s Health Canada, plus the international WHO and massive foundations such as the Gates Foundation and GAVI—these and so many more routinely lie about the reality of vaccinations. They use fear tactics and lies to promote the profiteering of Big Pharma and Big Medicine at the expense of the populace, and worse, of our children.

The reality of all these agencies is that, though they may have been created for the purpose of benefiting our health, they’ve been co-opted by Big Pharma and Big Medicine, who have managed to buy their way into them. The result is that these agencies now actively promote, and even enforce, the use of products and methods whose first purpose is to make profits. If that means the public’s health must suffer … apparently, it’s a small price to pay when it doesn’t affect the bottom line.

Sources:

– See more at: http://healthimpactnews.com/2013/study-flu-vaccine-causes-5-5-times-more-respiratory-infections-a-true-vaccinated-vs-unvaccinated-study/#sthash.dwlNZcmU.pjcod8Xp.dpuf

Study Backs Health-Promoting Text Messages


 

Sending electronic text messages that not only reminded parents that their children needed a second influenza vaccine dose but also contained other health information was more effective than plain reminders in getting the kids to come in for the booster, researchers reported.

Children whose families received the informational text reminders had a second dose at some point during the flu season of 72.7%, compared with 57.1% among those who were given written reminders (P=0.003), according to Melissa Stockwell, MD, MPH, of Columbia University Medical Center in New York City, and colleagues.

Among families who received simpler reminders focusing only on the second dose, compliance rates were 66.7%.

The inclusion of health literacy-promoting information may have helped parents become more proactive and timely in getting their children vaccinated, the researchers wrote in Pediatrics.

“Text message programs allow for healthcare providers to care for their patients even when they are not in front of them in the office, somewhat like a modern day ‘house call,'” said Stockwell.

Study Details

Researchers performed a randomized, controlled trial at three community-based pediatric clinics in New York City during the 2012-2013 influenza season. The study enrolled 660 families of children 6 months to 8 years old who had received their first influenza vaccine dose at one of the study sites and who needed a second dose, either because they had not received two doses of the vaccine since July 2010 or had not received two previous seasonal vaccinations plus the 2009 H1N1 vaccine.

All families received a written reminder about when to come in for their child’s second dose of the vaccine, and were then randomly assigned into one of three groups: those who received the written reminder only, those who received a conventional text message about the needed second dose, and those who received the more elaborate educational text message. Both text message groups received five messages in total: three before the next dose was due, one the day after the dose was due, and the last one 2 weeks after the dose was due.

Educational text messages helped improve vaccine compliance, even when vaccines were overdue. Families receiving educational text message reminders were more likely to receive a second dose of the influenza vaccine within 2 weeks of the due date.

Compliance rates were lower when restricted to children receiving the second dose within 42 days of the first dose as recommended: 43.5% among those receiving the informational text messages, 33.9% for those getting the simpler text messages, and 25.6% for those receiving only written information (P<0.001).

Limitations of the study included its size and composition. Almost 90% of participants were Latino and nearly all (97%) had public insurance, such as Medicaid or the State Children’s Health Insurance Program.

“[A] next step would be to assess the impact of these text message vaccine reminders in other populations,” Stockwell said.

The deadly truth about vaccines United Nations genocide.


lethal injection

The mercury and aluminum in vaccines and flu shots causes an inflammatory reaction in the brain, spinal cord and vital organs (heart, lungs, liver, bowel, kidney, colon) of your body. The vaccine and flu shot manufacturers intentional develop their vaccines to cause this deadly inflammatory reaction. No vaccine or flu shot can prevent influenza or the flu. Vaccines and flu shots actually inflict healthy people with influenza and other flu viruses. Pharmaceutical companies and the health care system in Canada and the United States are in the business of “treating” (i.e. prolonging the effects of) ailments and disease, not preventing or curing them. They generate $billions in sales by making us sick with poison laden vaccines and flu shots and then prolonging the effects of what they caused, for the rest of our lives.

Over the past 18 years, the WHO Task Force on Vaccines for Fertility Regulation has been supporting basic and clinical research on the development of birth control vaccines directed against the gametes or the preimplantation embryo. These studies have involved the use of advanced procedures in peptide chemistry, hybridoma technology and molecular genetics as well as the evaluation of a number of novel approaches in general vaccinology. As a result of this inter national, collaborative effort, a prototype anti-HCG vaccine is now undergoing clinical testing, raising the prospect that a totally new family planning method may be available before the end of the current decade.” – “The WHO Task Force on Vaccines for Fertility Regulation. Its formation, objectives and research activities” by P.D. Griffin of the Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction, World Health Organization 1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland 

Since 1973 the UN’s World Health Organization (WHO) has been looking for ways to use vaccines and other intentionally laced injections (intentional poisoning) to drastically reduce the World population – genocide. The US government is implementing this United Nations Organization (UNO, a.k.a Vatican “Fourth Reich” One World government, New World Order) genocidal policy through NSSM 200.

Vaccination Against Seasonal Influenza May Reduce the Risk of Cardiovascular Events.


For many people, getting a seasonal flu shot may help them avoid a week or more of misery. But for some individuals, especially those with heart disease, vaccination against influenza appears to help reduce the likelihood of major adverse cardiovascular events, such as heart attack and stroke.

Researchers, whose findings appear today in JAMA, found that receiving influenza vaccine was associated with a 36% lower risk of cardiovascular events compared with not being immunized against flu. For individuals with recent acute coronary syndrome, such as a heart attack or unstable angina, influenza vaccine was associated with a 55% lower risk of cardiovascular events within 12 months compared with those who had a recent acute coronary syndrome but did not receive the vaccine. The findings are based on a systematic review and meta-analysis involving 6 randomized clinical trials, 5 published and 1 unpublished. These trials collectively enrolled 6735 patients with a mean age of 67 years; 36% had a history of heart disease.

Lead author Jacob A. Udell, MD, MPH, of the University of Toronto in Canada, discusses his team’s findings.

news@JAMA: Why did you do the study?

Dr Udell: There have been reports suggesting that getting the flu shot was protective against heart attack and stroke, but most of these reports were observational. So we went back and systematically reviewed all clinical trials involving vaccine or placebo to see if this signal of cardioprotection was reproducible and consistent across the studies.

news@JAMA: What did you find?

Dr Udell: We found there was a 36% risk reduction overall for getting a cardiac event in those who were vaccinated compared with those who did not get the vaccine. We also found that those who had a heart attack had even more benefit. So in the higher-risk patients, the flu vaccine gave more benefit.

news@JAMA: Although your study cannot answer this question, can you speculate why influenza vaccination is associated with reduced heart risk?

Dr Udell: The flu may be a severe illness, causing a lot of inflammation, and that will have an effect on all your organs, including the heart and brain. This inflammation may also disrupt stable hardened arteries and free atherosclerotic plaque, causing a heart attack. Another theory is that the flu may push people over a tipping point, especially among the frail and elderly.

news@JAMA: So what would you tell others about the implications of your study findings for vaccination against influenza?

Dr Udell: For the skeptics out there, I’d note that we now have yet another reason why receiving influenza vaccine might be a beneficial thing to do. And those hospitalized with a heart attack should be vaccinated before they walk out the door so they don’t have care gaps that could be very dangerous.

Super-vaccine could eliminate need for annual flu jabs within five years after successful trials.


  • New universal vaccine being developed by British and European scientists
  • Job would provide lifetime immunity against all flu viruses
  • First ever successful human trials have taken place
  • Larger trails involving thousands of people now planned
  • Researchers believe the new vaccine could be available in 2018
A new ‘Holy Grail‘ flu vaccine which gives lifelong protection against all strains of the virus could be available within five years.
A new universal vaccine which could provide lifetime protection against every type of flu has shown successful results for the first time in small trials

Scientists from Britain and Europe are getting ready to start large-scale trials of a universal vaccine after early tests on humans proved successful.

If all goes to plan the new injection would stop the need for annual flu jabs and could save thousands of lives every year.

It could also be effective against highly dangerous forms of the disease, such as Spanish flu, even if they mutate, preventing global pandemics like the one which killed 100million people in 1918.

Despite carrying out human trials on almost 100 patients over many years, this is the first positive news.

Professor John Oxford, British flu expert and a key researcher of the study, said that his team are ‘wildly enthusiastic’ about the vaccine’s prospects.

The programme has recently received a multi-million pound EU grant to fund its research.

At the moment vaccines work by identifying viruses by their ‘coats’, however as viruses mutate these change, making old vaccines ineffective.

The universal vaccine works by attacking proteins hidden within the virus which are common throughout harmful strains.

If it works, the 'Holy Grail' vaccine would eliminate the need for annual flu jabs and could save thousands of lives every year and prevent global flu pandemics If it works, the ‘Holy Grail’ vaccine would eliminate the need for annual flu jabs and could save thousands of lives every year and prevent global flu pandemics

The news comes at the end of a week which has seen a new strain of bird flu re-emerge in China and after it was reported to have passed between humans in August.

A 32-year-old woman was said to have died after caring for her father who was infected by the H7N9 strain of bird flu.

A new strain of bird flu, H7N9, has begun spreading in China after killing 45 people earlier in the yearA new strain of bird flu, H7N9, has begun spreading in China after killing 45 people earlier in the year

Reports of human infection began in March this year but have trailed off in the last few months having killed at least 45 people out of 136 cases.

However as poultry stocks swell ahead of Chinese new year a 35-year-old man in the eastern province of Zhejiang has been hospitalised and the World Health Organisation confirms two more people are in hospital with another 88 being sent home.

A nasal flu spray has also been made available for all children aged between two and three years old, and will eventually be extended into a national programme for all under-16s.

While children are less likely to die from flu compared with the elderly, they are key spreaders of flu, and can become very ill if they have asthma, heart or lung conditions.

While specialists agree that the vaccine could help protect elderly relatives of younger children, Dr Richard Halvorsen disagrees.

Speaking to the Sunday Express, he said: ‘It is rare for children to die from flu and giving extra vaccines a year is a lot of extra vaccinations.’

If trials of the new flu super-jab are successful it could be available for use by 2018.

CATCHING A CHANGING KILLER – THE SCIENCE BEHIND THE VACCINE

Bird Flu Virus. January 2004

Traditional vaccines work by training an immune system to identify a disease and increasing the body’s defences, usually by injecting weak or dead parts of a disease into the patient.

Flu vaccines work by attacking the ‘coat’ of a virus, the H and N protein shell which surrounds the disease.

However this is problematic as this coat changes every time the virus mutates, meaning flu vaccines are only truly effective for a year as the virus will change rapidly, meaning vulnerable patients, such as elderly people, have to have injections every year.

But, hidden within every dangerous strain of influenza, are two proteins known as M and NP proteins which do not change with mutations.

Researches have tried for years to develop a vaccine which could target and attack these parts of the virus, and now think they may have found the solution.

In small human trials they have shown the first successful results ever for a universal vaccine and are now rolling out wider trials of the new medicine.

If these are successful then the new jab could be on the market by 2018, saving thousands of lives each year.

23 Seniors Have Died So Far This Year After Receiving Flu Shots.


Package insert for Fluzone flu vaccine marketed to seniors reveals 23 seniors died during drug trial

The annual marketing campaign pushing people to receive flu vaccinations is in full force. CVS Pharmacies is offering a 20% off shopping pass if you purchase a flu vaccine.

As you can see in the screen shot below, taken from the CVS website, senior citizens over the age of 65 are being targeted to get the “high-dose” flu vaccine.

The FAQ at the CVS website defines the “high-dose” flu vaccine: “Containing four times the amount of antigen (the part of the vaccine that causes the body to produce antibody) in regular flu shots, high-dose flu shots, along with the additional antigen produced, are intended to create a stronger immune response.”

The name of this flu vaccine that is marketed for seniors is called “Fluzone.” You can find it being marketed to seniors at all the major pharmacies in the United States.

Package inserts for flu vaccines show a multitude of side effects, including death, and yet they are marketed the same as over-the-counter drugs with no prescription needed. Why?

Because in the United States vaccines enjoy complete immunity from lawsuits in the market place. If you are injured or die from a vaccine, you or your family cannot sue the manufacturer of the vaccine. This law enacted by Congress, was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2011.

Therefore, they are marketed with the same marketing techniques as any other high-profit product. With the baby boomer generation moving into their senior years, today’s seniors are seen as an especially lucrative market.

So financial incentives like discounts on other products, as CVS is doing, is quite common in order to boost vaccine sales.

Walgreens has a different program that especially boosts sales of vaccines:

While vaccine rates in the U.S. among children are close to 90%, rates in other parts of the world (where pharmaceutical companies do not have immunity from the law for adverse effects) are much lower. So, in partnership with Walgreens, a non-profit organization (Shot@Life) buys up the vaccines and sends them to these countries for free (who doesn’t want something for free, especially when you live in a poor country??)

This is a brilliant marketing plan for the pharmaceutical companies, as the U.S. government gives the organization buying the vaccines non-profit status, allowing them to receive tax deductible donations to pay for the vaccines. Walgreens is probably a contributor to the program as a tax write off.

With legal immunity to market dangerous products, don’t expect those doing the marketing and making the profits to warn you of the side effects. You need to find this information yourself, usually from the Internet.

For those pro-vaccine forces that warn people how dangerous it is to get information from the Internet, the information we are about to share is directly from the FDA website (at least at the time of this writing – they have been known to remove items from their website if it gets too much publicity and makes them look bad), and you can look it up yourself.

The high-dose Fluzone vaccine being marketed this flu season to seniors, which has four times the amount of antigens that the regular flu shot has, as well as the non-high dose version, had 23 seniors die during drug trials.

In the section documenting adverse effects, this is what is written:

Within 6 months post-vaccination, 156 (6.1%) Fluzone High-Dose recipients and 93 (7.4%) Fluzone recipients experienced a serious adverse event. No deaths were reported within 28 days post-vaccination. A total of 23 deaths were reported during the period Day 29–180 post-vaccination: (0.6%) among Fluzone High-Dose recipients and 7 (0.6%) among Fluzone 1 recipients. The majority of these participants had a medical history of cardiac, hepatic, neoplastic, renal, and/or respiratory diseases. No deaths were considered to be caused by vaccination.

This statement stating that 23 seniors died, which really should be headline news but is buried in a package insert on the FDA website, begs several questions:

1. By what basis can they conclude that “No deaths were considered to be caused by vaccination”??

2. If, as it is implied, these 23 deaths were all caused by pre-existing conditions, why were there no deaths in the first 28 days? Shouldn’t the deaths, if not attributable to the vaccine but pre-existing conditions, be equally spread out through all time periods?
3. How does the medical history for these 23 seniors compare to the medical history of those who did not die? Were there any significant differences? The range of symptoms given in the package insert can very well cover almost all seniors during the flu season.

Besides death, which is just one “serious adverse event,” there were 226 other “serious” adverse events, for a total of 249 serious adverse events, out of only 3,833 participants.

If this does not constitute a dangerous drug that should probably not even be on the market, then I don’t know what does. And yet, it is sold to unsuspecting seniors and others like candy at these drug stores.

One of these other adverse side effects (besides death) is Guillain-Barré syndrome, which has symptoms similar to polio. If you are brought into an emergency room with the paralyzing effects of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), the first question the doctors will ask you is if you just received the flu shot. Read one story here of how one man went from being able to bench-press 275 pounds to struggling how to walk after receiving last year’s flu shot: Miami Man Contracts Guillain-Barré Syndrome, Nearly Dies After Getting Flu Shot.

The CDC would like you to believe that the risk of GBS from the flu shot is only one out of one million. But if that is the case, why is there a warning on package inserts of flu vaccines, and why is it the first question EMTs ask when dealing with GBS emergencies?

The package insert for Fluzone states: “If Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) has occurred within 6 weeks of previous influenza vaccination, the decision to give Fluzone High-Dose should be based on careful consideration of the potential benefits and risks.”

I wonder how many vaccine sales people at these pharmacies give “careful consideration” to this adverse side effect, or any others, before injecting you?

 

Source: undergroundhealth.com

      

All children offered flu nasal spray


  • Flu is a respiratory illness linked to infection by the influenza virus.
  • Symptoms usually include headache, fever, cough, sore throat, aching muscles and joints.
  • Influenza occurs most often in winter and usually peaks between December and March.
  • The virus was first identified in 1933.
  • There are two main types that cause infection: influenza A and influenza B
  • New strains of the virus are constantly emerging, which is why the flu vaccine should be given each year.

A flu vaccine nasal spray is being offered to every two and three-year-old in Scotland for the first time.

Previously, only children in “at risk” groups were offered the protection.

Scotland’s largest ever immunisation programme was launched by First Minister Alex Salmond, who received the vaccine in a surgery in Aberdeenshire.

He said that as an asthmatic, he gets the injection every year and urged other eligible Scots to get protected before the winter.

A fifth of the Scottish population will be offered a free flu vaccine, including people aged over 65 and those with conditions that put them at greater risk.

For the first time, all two and three-year-olds – about 120,000 children – will be offered the vaccine, as well as 100,000 primary school pupils in health board areas which are taking part in a pilot programme.

The programme will be rolled out to eventually see about one million children aged between two and 17 have the chance to be immunised towards the end of 2015.

The vaccine will take the form of a nasal spray rather than an injection.

Scotland’s senior medical officer said the spray, which is being phased in this autumn and rolled out over the next two years, was more effective in children than injections, as well as simpler to administer.

Speaking after receiving his own vaccine, Mr Salmond said it was better to be safe than sorry.

“As an asthmatic, I get my flu vaccination every year to make sure I’m protected and ready for the winter and I’m delighted to launch this national campaign,” he said.

“It is hugely successful and the existing programme has seen 2,000 fewer hospitalisations and 25,000 fewer GP consultations.

“For the first time this winter we are taking extra precautions to protect families by making sure children are also offered this vital vaccine.”

Senior medical officer Dr Nicola Steedman said every year she sees examples of how devastating flu can be.

_61780154_fluenz_girl

She added: “For those with existing health conditions such as asthma, diabetes, heart or liver problems, flu can result in serious complications.

“Furthermore, those who are pregnant or over 65 are also at increased risk of flu and its complications and should be vaccinated to help protect against flu, even if they currently feel healthy and fit.

_64335608_flu_virus_particle-spl

“Flu can also be very serious for children, particularly the youngest ones who have little or no immunity to the infection, which is why we are rolling out the new childhood flu immunisation programme.”

All two and three-year-olds in England and Wales will be also offered the vaccine this winter. In Wales, children aged 11 to 12 will also be eligible, while children aged between two and 10 in certain areas of England will be offered protection.

Source: BBC

Scientists take big step towards universal flu vaccine


Scientists say they have made a significant leap towards creating a vaccine that would protect against every form of flu.

The influenza virus is a constantly shifting target so seasonal flu vaccines rapidly become useless and new ones are needed each year.

A team at Imperial College London say they have made a “blueprint” for a universal flu vaccine.

Their discovery is published in the journal Nature Medicine.

Influenza is able to change the proteins that protrude from the surface of the virus as readily as people change outfits.

However, the material on the inside is common to many strains of flu. Vaccine researchers believe targeting the core of the virus may be the way to develop a universal vaccine.

“Start Quote

We have the know-how, we know what needs to be in the vaccine and we can just get on and do it”

Prof Ajit Lalvani Imperial College London

A specific part of the immune system, called T-cells, is thought to be able to recognise proteins in the core. A team at Imperial used the 2009 swine flu pandemic to test the theory.

_70021465_c0019511-swine_flu_virus_pa

Milder symptoms

Swine flu was a new virus from a mix of bird and pig flu.

The outer shell should have been a completely new experience to the immune system, but the core may have been encountered before in other flu viruses.

The team compared levels of one kind of T-cells at the start of the pandemic with symptoms of flu in 342 staff and students at the university.

They showed that the higher the levels of the T-cells a patient had, the milder their symptoms were.

Researchers then teased out the specific part of the immune system that offered some pandemic flu protection and which part of the virus it was attacking.

Prof Ajit Lalvani, who led the study, told the BBC: “It’s a blueprint for a vaccine. We know the exact subgroup of the immune system and we’ve identified the key fragments in the internal core of the virus. These should be included in a vaccine.

“In truth, in this case it is about five years [away from a vaccine]. We have the know-how, we know what needs to be in the vaccine and we can just get on and do it.”

‘Long journey’

This would be a distinct approach compared with other forms of vaccination, such as the MMR jab. These trigger the immune system to produce antibodies that can attack an invader.

The prize could be huge. Seasonal flu kills between 250,000 and 500,000 people each year and new pandemics have the potential to take doctors by surprise and kill large numbers of people.

Yet the researchers admit it is “generally harder” to develop a T-cell vaccine than provoke an antibody response. The challenge will be to get a big enough T-cell response to offer protection and a response that will last.

Prof John Oxford, of Queen Mary University of London, said: “This sort of effect can’t be that powerful or we’d never have pandemics. It’s not going to solve all the problems of influenza, but could add to the range of vaccines.

“It’s going to be a long journey from this sort of paper to translating it into a vaccine that works.”

Prof Sarah Gilbert, who is developing a universal flu vaccine at the

Jenner Institute in Oxford, said: “Live attenuated influenza vaccines which are given by nasal spray and will be used in children in the UK from this autumn are much better at increasing the number of influenza-specific T cells, but these vaccines only work in young children who haven’t yet had much exposure to influenza virus, so we need an alternative approach for adults.

“The new publication contains information on the precise characteristics of the influenza-specific T cells which were protective, and this information will be useful in monitoring the immune response to vaccination when testing novel influenza vaccines which are designed to provide protection against pandemic as well as seasonal influenza viruses.”