The Scotsman Reports: Health Warning For Scots Children Flu Vaccine Plan
Read the full article at The Scotsman.com.
PARENTS have been warned that children’s health will be “risked unnecessarily” by government plans to save money by vaccinating all Scottish youngsters against seasonal flu.
As Scottish health chiefs confirmed yesterday that every child in Scotland between the age of two and 17 is to be offered a flu vaccine from next year, health campaigners claimed the programme will actually put children and others in the community at increased risk of contracting the virus and other health problems.
The Scottish Government says vaccinating children is a “cost-effective” way of cutting flu cases in adults, but campaigners said the proposed flu vaccine, Fluenz, a weakened form of the live virus which is administered using a nasal spray, is in fact “a very effective way to spread flu”. They highlighted warnings from the makers that there is a chance the virus in the vaccine could cause infection if it was transmitted to someone who has a weak immune system...
Great article as well John superb..just makes me wonder if the madness will ever stop..here we all are in our homes and we know vaccines cause the harm they do but still the pushers from the JVCI still have the say
Posted by: ANGUS FILES | July 26, 2013 at 06:47 PM
Hi Angus,
Yes, I also wrote about this here:
http://www.ageofautism.com/2013/05/uk-department-of-health-deliberately-exposes-vulnerable-population-to-flu-infection.html#more
Posted by: John Stone | July 26, 2013 at 06:23 PM
Child flu vaccine campaign launched in bid to halt spread of disease across Scotland this winter
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/health/child-flu-vaccine-campaign-launched-2092556
NASAL spray vaccinations are being phased in from this autumn and will be rolled out over the next two years.
Posted by: ANGUS FILES | July 26, 2013 at 06:14 PM
Further to my comment(below), I should point out, in the UK all persons over 65, and younger persons,(including children) with conditions or co-morbidies which could make them vulnerable to flu complications or deaths, are already offered an annual flu vaccination on the NHS. From the Vaccination Committee minutes:-
"As most severe influenza disease and influenza-related deaths occur in older adults and those in clinical risk groups, most of the cases of severe disease and death that would be averted from vaccinating children would be of older adults and those in clinical risk groups. Most of the benefit to children from vaccinating healthy children arises from averting a large number of cases of less severe influenza."
So, to paraphrase this wondrous minuted discussion, the UK Vaccination Committee have collectedly decided to spend an enormous amount of NHS cash, desperately needed in other more urgent areas, simply to make flu cases 'less severe' in children? It is already acknowledged the flu vaccine is not particularly effective anyway. I have not been able to ascertain whether Salisbury & Co intend to spray the children annually!!....but if not I don't see the point of Fluenz at all.
Posted by: Jenny Allan | March 14, 2013 at 04:56 AM
My 30 year old daughter had yet again - sigh- vaccine shot this fall of DTaP.
And as I predicted it has been one long constant severe cold or flu (you all call it heads or tales) with one big bad whooping cough allllllllllllllllll season long
She has one right now, gone hoarse, I hear her whooping right now and she has a fever.
One after another. vaccines damage the immune systems so they cannot fight off nothing.
Posted by: Benedetta | March 13, 2013 at 10:31 PM
Providing a vaccine to the young, who may in turn infect others, this is total madness.
The only one benefiting from this programme is Big Pharma!
Elizabeth Gillespie
Posted by: AussieMum | March 13, 2013 at 08:19 PM
My daughter got the flu recently from a friend who got the flu post-vaccination. We know this girl had the flu because her doctor said she had flu type B. Flu vaccines don't work...well, if they're supposed to keep you from getting the flu, they don't do that.
But we already knew that:
"Mar 1, 2013 (CIDRAP News) – Experts are puzzled by a new study in which influenza vaccination seemed to provide little or no protection against flu in the 2010-11 season—and in which the only participants who seemed to benefit from the vaccine were those who hadn't been vaccinated the season before....An additional finding was that the vaccine did not seem to protect participants who were exposed to flu in their own household, though the numbers in that arm of the study were small....The findings come amid a growing number of studies that raise questions about flu vaccine effectiveness (VE). They include, among others, last week's CDC report that this year's vaccine has worked poorly in elderly people and three recent European studies showing that vaccine-induced immunity in the 2011-12 season waned after 3 to 4 months. Other studies have cast doubt on the long-standing belief that a close match between the vaccine virus strains and circulating strains improves VE."
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/content/influenza/general/news/mar0113vestudy.html
Posted by: Carol | March 13, 2013 at 11:52 AM
Hi Jenny
I suppose ultimately if politicians believe their advisors even when they are transparently peddling self-contradictory nonsense they are to blame - after all they should inform themselves independently. As we saw in the recent congressional autism hearing some politicians in the US were prepared to take "the experts" to task.
Also, we have the pernicious and likely illegal situation in England where the Secretary of State for Health (ie the government) is obligated to follow the advice of our entirely bent and incompetent Joint Committee on Vacciniation and Immunisation)
http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2009/03/08/pharma-decide-uk-vaccination/
http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2012/03/14/government-experts-cover-up-vaccine-hazards/
but this doesn't actually pertain in Scotland (at least not legislatively).
But we have this wider unwritten convention in the UK that politicians never ever question the Department of Health - a convention that doesn't pertain in other areas of government, which leaves it effectively beyond any democratic control, and the inevitable result is perpetual abuse of the public interest by the executive, as here.
John
Posted by: John Stone | March 13, 2013 at 10:01 AM
Yes this is completely bonkers, but for once don't blame the Scottish Chief MOH. It's all the fault of this bunch of 'talking heads' from all parts of the UK, including Professor David Salisbury, who else? The Vaccination Committee seems to have been totally convinced about the safety and effectiveness of Fluenz by the glowing report from manfacturers AstraZeneca.
JOINT COMMITTEE ON VACCINATION AND IMMUNISATION
Minute of the meeting held on Friday 13 April 2012
1 – 4.00 pm
Richmond House, Department of Health,
79 Whitehall, London, SW1A 2NS
https://www.wp.dh.gov.uk/transparency/files/2012/05/JCVI_draft-mintues-13-April-2012.pdf
Extracts:-
From 14. “As few children die from influenza and those that do often have clinical risk factors, the number of deaths of children that would be averted from additionally vaccinating healthy children would be relatively small. As most severe influenza disease and influenza-related deaths occur in older adults and those in clinical risk groups, most of the cases of severe disease and death that would be averted from vaccinating children would be of older adults and those in clinical risk groups. Most of the benefit to children from vaccinating healthy children arises from averting a large number of cases of less severe influenza disease.”
18. "The committee considered additional information provided by the manufacturer (AstraZeneca) of the live attenuated intranasal influenza vaccine (Fluenz®), noting that the company had addressed the questions raised by the committee. The vaccine had long-established use in the United States and has a good safety profile. Furthermore, evidence suggested it was significantly more effective in children than the unadjuvanted inactivated influenza vaccines used currently. The vaccine was authorised for use in children aged two to less than 18 years and therefore would be suitable for use in a programme to vaccinate school children. However, the identified contraindications and precautions would need to be managed in the design of any programme."
I see no apparent sign of any "contraindications and precautions" being "managed in the design of any programme."
Thank You Jackie Fletcher and the Scotsman for publicising the dangers from this vaccine, but this should have been addressed by the Vaccination Committee and not left to a member of the public to point out.
Posted by: Jenny Allan | March 13, 2013 at 08:53 AM
Letthembegot
MedImmune is btw the wholly owned subsidiary of AstraZenca, formerly ICI or Imperial Chemical Industries (and it is presumably for their benefit that this is being done), but the comments you quote greatly over-estimate the normal efficacy and usefulness of flu vaccination:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20614424
http://www.ageofautism.com/2011/10/gerberding-reported-36000-influenza-related-deaths-under-oath-in-2004.html
Maybe it is a way of ensuring they get the right flu strain in future.
Posted by: John Stone | March 13, 2013 at 08:22 AM
I am just aghast at how bloomin stupid this is ! Last year I am already in dialogue with the chief Medical Officer in Scotland about the crazy Cervarix campaign. Exactly Angus Kids off school !!!
In summary :
1) Its not very effective.
This year according to the CDC the Flu vaccine was 56% effective. meaning just over half of those who were vaccinated were not protected at all. On an average year its is between 40-60 % effective.
2)This vaccine is not necessarily harmless. Unlike the adult flu vaccine which does contain thimerosal, Fluenz (FluMist) does not but instead has live Virus which cannot be guaranteed not to contain avian virus (developed in chick Kidney cells) and it also contains MSG.
3)It appears to spread the live viruses into the environment through the side effects of runny nose which can last up to 21 days. Effectively spreading the flu not preventing it.
4) But there is a giant positive - in 2003 the vaccine manufacturer MedImmune and Wyeth expected to push MedImmune's revenues to more than $1 billion/year.......
Posted by: Letthembegot | March 13, 2013 at 07:16 AM
Angus,yes I am just delighted that both our boys will have finshed school by the time the lunacy starts.
John
Posted by: John Stone | March 13, 2013 at 06:37 AM
Well done Jackie I shall keep my lot off school when they are dishing that about...
Posted by: Angus Files | March 13, 2013 at 06:28 AM
If you ever thought there was any good faith in the vaccine programme then the nasal flu vaccine scam is the absolute disproof - it even turns the programme's own normal dogma on its head because it actually exposes everyone to harm. The children and young people who receive the vaccine actually become contagious and a risk to the vulnerable sub-groups, the very young, the immunologically compromised and the old that the programme is allegedly supposed to be protecting. In most years this will be to strains that would not have proliferated anyway. Well done Jackie Fletcher of JABS for successfully drawing attention to it in a mainstream newspaper: the whole thing is mischief on stilts.
Posted by: John Stone | March 13, 2013 at 06:00 AM