Flu Vaccine Triples Child Hospitalizations, but Won’t Turn Them into Horned, Hairy Apes, say Experts!

By Kent Heckenlively, Esq.

Okay, maybe I made up the last part of that headline.

The real facts however, are bad enough.  According to new research to be presented at the 105th International Conference of the American Thoracic Society on May 19th in San Diego, CA, researchers from the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota “found that children who had received the flu vaccine had three times the risk of hospitalization, as compared to children who had not received the vaccine.”  (“Children Who Get Flu Vaccine Have Three Times Risk of Hospitalization For Flu, Study Suggests”, Science Daily, May 20, 2009)

The same pattern was reported in asthmatics.  Maybe I missed the importance of these factors, but the report also noted “no other factor-such as insurance plans or severity of asthma-appeared to affect risk of hospitalization.”  Okay, so I take this to mean that despite whether or not you had insurance, your child still had an increased risk of hospitalization if they got a flu shot.  I guess that means this can’t be blamed on all those parents with generous health plans putting their kids in the hospital so mom and dad can get a “date night.”

Or if you’re a parent of a child with asthma it means you're going to be making more trips to the hospital, regardless of whether your child has mild or severe asthma.  It's all so much more democratic!  Although I don't know how you're supposed to take this in light of previous studies which have shown "the concerns that vaccination my be associated with asthma exacerbations have been disproved with multiple studies in the past." I'm not sure, but I'm thinking, maybe the folks at the Mayo Clinic came up with a better designed study.

As most people are aware, the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommend annual influenza vaccination for all children aged six months to 18 years.  I’m curious how these organizations will respond to this new report.  I’m guessing they won’t suggest any changes to their recommendations.

And I bet there won’t be a single news organization which accuses them of being “anti-science.”

Kent Heckenlively is Legal Editor of Age of Autism

Comments

[Pregnant Mother]

The whole topic of vaccines can be daunting, its such s 'sacred cow' topic but as a parent its always a relief to find unbiased, well researched information. For anyone beginning this journey into uncovering your own truths for your own family, then I would recommend the "Well Adjusted Babies" website as an excellent place to begin....
Goodluck and great respect to all of you who seek to know, who respect free will and refuse to be herded into anything you believe may be unsafe for you or your beloved.

[Garbo]

Actually, I find the comments on this website to be among the most scientifically informed of any autism website I've been to, and most science websites as well. I see no need to denigrate the very intelligent and informed parents and researchers who post here. Yes, we would all love for there to be a large-scale study to follow up on all these studies. We would LOVE for there to be the study that's never been done on the relative safety or lack thereof of vaccine adjuvants. A follow up study of the Shaw study or the Burbacher studies would be GREAT! We would LOVE for there to be a study on vaccinated vs. unvaccinated children for overall health outcomes. We have been loudly asking for those studies for years, and the CDC, HHS, and NIH have been putting their hands over their ears and saying "lalalalalalalalaIcanthearyoulalalala". Time's a wasting, Ben. Our kids need help NOW, not ten years from now. Ten years from now will be too late for them. So we'll take from the existing research what we can -- that doesn't make us unscientific, it just means that nobody else is doing sweet FA to help. Either lead, follow, or get out of the way.

[Janelle]

"Date, night," lol!

Oh, but don't you know, if Timmy HADN'T gotten the flu vaccine, he would have gotten SO much sicker! So thank god I gave him the vaccine!

[Twyla]

Ben -
In the meantime, while we wait for extensive well-conducted large-scale studies which may be on the far horizon if in process at all, shall we continue to give babies 36 vaccines including an annual flu shot which in most states still contains thimerosal? You keep pointing out that this is so complicated and we don't really know anything for sure. In the absence of absolute knowledge, should we continue to inject babies with aluminum (with no safe level established, per http://www.mothering.com/articles/growing_child/vaccines/aluminum-new-thimerosal.html ) and proteins and multiple live viruses? Even when some vaccines such as the flu shot and Hep B are of dubious benefit to most babies? Shall we ignore the "anecdotal" accounts of vaccine reactions which remain anectdotal because they are not being studied? Shall we continue to ignore the anecdotal reports that a family history of auto-immune disorders or immune deficiency increases the risk of vaccine reactions?

It seems that you are saying, when in doubt continue full speed ahead with the current schedule, which in many states is required for school or even daycare.

Doing nothing because these issues are so complicated is not actually doing nothing -- it is continuing with the current schedule, which harms some babies.

[Natasa]

Ben, I am glad you and I are on the same page. None of the mainstream studies we posted here have nothing to do with Kent's article. One is dealing with vaccine adverse outcomes in fish, the other with vaccine adverse outcomes in chicken. Yet another talks about potentially very bad things that some human vaccine ingredients can do to cultured cells. None of these has anything to do with Kent's article. These studies may have something to do with vaccine safety though, and possible implications for human health. Maybe. And if someone is investigating the potential LONG TERM health effects of vaccinations in humans, including systemic vaccine induced autoimmunity (which may or may not be linked to autism) ... if you know of such reseach going on right now or being called for in near future please do tell!!! Share with us will you.

[John Stone]

Ben

Personally, I was pointing out the way that the possibility that flu vaccines might make things worse was already being dismissed in the press release, so where is the due caution about the continuing use of flu vaccine? And anybody who saw this might wonder what good it was doing adults as well.

The point is a doubt about culture which usually doesn't do the research properly (maybe this is an exception) and always gives vaccines the benefit of the doubt. This is not scientific, but it is a recipe for catastrophe. For instance, when you have taken away the spin on Cochrane Review of MMR there is no re-assurance left about the safety of the vaccine, and no re-assurance about autism - none of the studies were good enough, and Cochrane gave us bureaucratic doublespeak covering it up. There are no safety checks, and the twisted, cynical message to families when it goes wrong is "prove it!"

We have a culture which aggressively, indeed angrily, dismisses people's experiences and insists on trust. Well sorry, you are cheating and you are bullying people to get your way. This is not science, it is social repression.

[fluless]

I'm surprised that anybody gets a flu shot. Who is that stupid? I know who. My aunt told me that my college aged cousin got the meningitis shot and got so sick with the flu ( ha ha) directly afterwards that now she always gets the flu shot every year. I almost fell over laughing. Why is pharma spending so much money paying off politician to get vaccines mandatory when they have a fertile ground of stupid Americans who willingly roll up their sleeves to be poisoned.

[Ben]

To twyla and others. I agree that the results of this study are disturbing, but the comments on this website are consistently opposed to mainstream science unless it is convenient. Another poster suggested that demonstrating that vaccines may not be effective would end someone's career, and yet the very study we are talking about does just that. This study has not been buried, they are presenting it at a major conference. Demonstrating that something like VIDS truly existed would be a nobel prize winning discovery.
Garbo and I agree that the next step here is to look further into why these kids were in the hospital. I am willing to consider the possibility that vaccines increased the risk of contracting influenza. Are you willing to consider that there may be another explanation?

As for the numerous abstracts that people have posted. They are all preliminary studies. These studies demonstrate some scary results but without followup studies it is difficult to ascertain any true connection. This is not a copout. Replication and further studies are the hallmark of good science. That is why pasting dozens of unrelated preliminary studies is not as powerful as a a few studies in increasing scale and size. This is especially true in animal studies. The studies presented are an amalgam of many different experiments and results that all may have some relation to autism, but none of these studies really builds on another. They are all testing for different things and come to different conclusions.

[Natasa]

Here is another one, Ben, that has nothing to do with autism. Like the one before, which may or may not have something to do with Sudden Broiler Death Syndrome (but nothing whatsoever with Sudden Infant Death Syndrome), this paper may have something to do with vaccine safety. In Salmon. But God forbid that some silly researcher attempts a large scale biological investigation to rule out the incredibily remote possibility that vaccination-induced systemic autoimmunity in salmon could have any bearing on humans. Because those clever epidemiological studies tell us clearly that vaccination-induced systemic autoimmunity in humans cannot possibly exist. If she or he is mad enough to try and waste time and money we will show them their place. Bring upon them Sudden Career Death Syndrome.

J Immunol. 2008 Oct 1;181(7):4807-14.

Vaccination-induced systemic autoimmunity in farmed Atlantic salmon.

Koppang EO et al. Department of Basic Sciences and Aquatic Medicine, Norwegian School of Veterinary Science, Ullevålsveien 72, Oslo, Norway.

Over half of the salmon consumed globally are farm-raised. The introduction of oil-adjuvanted vaccines into salmon aquaculture made large-scale production feasible by preventing infections. The vaccines that are given i.p. contain oil adjuvant such as mineral oil. However, in rodents, a single i.p. injection of adjuvant hydrocarbon oil induces lupus-like systemic autoimmune syndrome, characterized by autoantibodies, immune complex glomerulonephritis, and arthritis. In the present study, whether the farmed salmon that received oil-adjuvanted vaccine have autoimmune syndrome similar to adjuvant oil-injected rodents was examined. Sera and tissues were collected from vaccinated or unvaccinated Atlantic salmon (experimental, seven farms) and wild salmon. Autoantibodies (immunofluorescence, ELISA, and immunoprecipitation) and IgM levels (ELISA) in sera were measured. Kidneys and livers were examined for pathology. Autoantibodies were common in vaccinated fish vs unvaccinated controls and they reacted with salmon cells/Ags in addition to their reactivity with mammalian Ags. Diffuse nuclear/cytoplasmic staining was common in immunofluorescence but some had more specific patterns. Serum total IgM levels were also increased in vaccinated fish; however, the fold increase of autoantibodies was much more than that of total IgM. Sera from vaccinated fish immunoprecipitated ferritin and approximately 50% also reacted with other unique proteins. Thrombosis and granulomatous inflammation in liver, and immune-complex glomerulonephritis were common in vaccinated fish. Autoimmunity similar to the mouse model of adjuvant oil-induced lupus is common in vaccinated farmed Atlantic salmon. This may have a significant impact on production loss, disease of previously unknown etiology, and future strategies of vaccines and salmon farming. PMID: 18802084

[Twyla]

Ben, you asked what this has to do with autism. Here is one of the ways it is related. Many parents report that their children became autistic after a round of vaccines. Besides being told that their observations and experiences have no significance, parents are told, "Well, would you rather your child be autistic or dead? Vaccines are necessary to save lives! Thousands of people die from the flu! Sure, vaccines can cause rare reactions, but they are necessary! They save lives!"

Yet, according to this study's abstract,
"The inactivated flu vaccine does not appear to be effective in preventing
influenza-related hospitalizations in children, especially the ones with asthma. In fact, children who get the flu vaccine are more at risk for hospitalization than their peers who do not get the vaccine..." and "children who had received the flu vaccine had three times the risk of hospitalization, as compared to children who had not received the vaccine."

For this we are adding yet another vaccine to the already crowded schedule? For this parents are giving their kids a vaccine that usually still contains a full does of thimerosal?

This is very relevant to the inadequate risk/benefit analysis occurring these days. As more and more vaccines are added to the schedule, the risks of so many vaccines are ignored. The risks of the diseases are exagerated. The benefits of the vaccines are exagerated.

Are 36 vaccines really necessary? Are babies who receive 36 vaccines healthier or less healthy than babies who receive fewer vaccines?