Thursday, May 23, 2024


“You may choose to look the other way, but you can never say again that you did not know.”

— William Wilberforce


Flu Shots May Be Even Less Effective This Year

woman, blanket and tea

Just as publicity about the need for everyone to get a flu shot ramps up, there are signs that the influenza vaccine for this “flu season” (2019-2020) may be even less effective this year than last year. The strains of the influenza virus selected by the World Health Organization (WHO) and U.S. health officials for vaccine manufacturers to include in this year’s flu shot for the North Hemisphere (including the United States) may turn out to be a ‘mismatch,’ according to epidemiologist Danuta Skowronski, MD of the British Columbia Center for Disease Control in Vancouver, Canada.1 2

In February 2019, the WHO recommended the “influenza B virus component of trivalent vaccines for use in the 2019-2020 northern hemisphere influenza season be a B/Colorado,” and the A(H3N2) component in March. In September, the WHO selected different A/H3N2 influenza virus strains for the Southern Hemisphere, suggesting to Dr. Skowronski that the earlier strain prediction may be wrong.3 4

Dr. Skowronski told Scientific American, “I think the vaccine strain selections by the WHO committee are obviously important for the Southern Hemisphere but they’re also signals to us because they’re basing their decisions on what they see current predominating on the global level.”1 2

“There was great uncertainty around which version of H3N2 to choose for the Northern Hemisphere vaccine when the committee met last February—there was a lot of variation between the strain the U.S. was seeing and the H3N2 viruses sickening people in Canada and Europe,” writes journalist Helen Branswell for Scientific American. “There was so much uncertainty, in fact, that the [WHO] committee delayed making the choice of the H3N2 strain for a month to try to get a clearer picture.”1

It appears now that the WHO’s earlier prediction might end up being “off the mark,”1 which means that the flu shot this season could be less effective than it was last year. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that influenza vaccine was only 29 percent effective during the 2018-2019 flu season and only nine percent during the second half of the season.5

CDC estimates for the effectiveness of the flu shot usually range between 40-50 percent. During the 2004-2005, 2005-2006 and 2015-2016 flu seasons, the vaccine was only 10 percent, 21 percent and 19 percent effective respectively.5

“Every year, they basically have to guess which influenza strains are going to be most prevalent, because the influenza virus changes rapidly,” Barbara Loe Fisher of the National Vaccine Information (NVIC) told The Washington Post in June 2019. “Historically, they’ve had a problem ever since the influenza vaccine was first used decades ago. They’ve had a problem with getting it right, and this is a recurrent problem.”6


19 Responses

  1. Every year the CDC has a rationalization for WHY the Flu shot is ineffective and people buy into it because, well, it’s the CDC-why would they lie? If people learned nothing from the Swine Flu con job, they will never learn. I posted some information on a comment board where a guy said he was going to get the shot because if it was 40% effective it was good enough for him. He said he’s gotten the Flu shot every year and he’s had the Flu, it was bad so the shot is important to him. So I asked him did he get the Flu AFTER he got the shot. I than posted some info from the vaccine vial insert that said getting the shot could result in susceptible populations ILI-Influenza Like Illness which is identical to the Flu after the Flu shot but it’s not the Flu, but same symptoms. That was days ago and he hasn’t responded. At least he didn’t post what many people say when they get sick after they get the shot-I didn’t get it in time. LOL. Cognitive dissonance runs amok.

    Danuta Skowronski, MD is the researcher that the CDC, WHO and pharma tried to Wakefield when her group reported that the more Flu shots you get the less effective th shot will be afterwards. The Canadian Study by Dr. Danuta Skowronski observed in 2012 as part of a comprehensive analysis that individuals who received an annual flu shot during the 2008-09 winter season had a disproportionately higher risk of developing H1N1 infection than individuals who were not vaccinated. Confirming earlier suspicions, Dr. Skowronski and her colleagues observed after recreating the phenomenon in a group of ferrets that the annual flu shot from that year was definitively linked to higher rates of H1N1 infection: New Canadian studies suggest seasonal flu shot increased H1N1 risk-

    CDC document presenting the findings of their preliminary estimate, and it shows that, when it came to protecting against the H3N2 strain of the virus that predominantly circulated in the second half of the season earlier this year, the vaccine appears to have been considerably less than worthless.

    Data from the “Hospitalized Adult Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network” (HAIVEN) show that the vaccine was -43% effective against influenza A(H3N2).

    If people have been reading the vaccine vial inserts over the years you would have read on all vaccines how pharma is sanitizing their information and outright removing some information. In 2009 the Flulaval vaccine listed in fine print “not adequately demonstrated to decrease influenza”. That has been removed and now states:

    “Vaccination with FLULAVAL QUADRIVALENT may not protect all susceptible individuals.”

    Who are the susceptible individuals? They don’t say.

    Flu shot gives new meaning to the phrase: a shot in the dark.

  2. I have questions about the validity of the CDC data. How is efficacy of flu vaccination measured and who is doing the measuring? Poor as the data is, I wonder if the efficacy may be even worse than is reported. The CDC wants people to get the vaccine, because they spend billions every year purchasing these vaccines from the pharmaceutical industry and they need to sell them and to feel that their program is necessary. I think there should be independent verification of the testing. A recent Cochrane Collaborative review ( found only a 1% reduction in influenza incidence among vaccinated individuals and 2% for “influenza-like illness” (which may not be influenza) compared to unvaccinated individuals. This suggests that efficacy rates may be more in the 1-2% range than 20-40% range as the CDC has reported.

  3. Unless you have an immune deficient disease, why would you risk ingesting Mercury (thimerosal), a cancer-causing ingredient (a known neurotoxin–admitted on printed materials when you get the shot)–for a 20% effective vaccine? (2004-05 only 10% effective).

    Last year–only 9% effective for the 2nd half of flu season. This is an outrage–I doubt if doctors tell patients when recommending a shot this year, “Well, for the last 2 or 3 months of last flu season it was 9% effective.”

    Instead get good sleep, good nutrition, 1000 mg Vitamin C, 2000 IU Vitamin D3 and some K2 and daily exercise for stress. I’m 72, take no drugs, follow this regimen and haven’t had the flu for 20 or 30 years. Take Oil of Oregano (2-3 drops under the tongue) at the first sign of cough, sore throat, gum inflammation, etc. (anti-viral, anti-bacterial, anti-inflammatory, antihistamine, etc.). A few years ago I had what I thought was a severe toothache but was to fly in a few days and didn’t want to get a root canal yet, so finally went to the dentist the day before my flight and he gave me a prescription for antibiotics for gum inflammation. It took several days to work! A week after I got back, back came the pain. Instead of getting my prescription refilled, I checked my research and saw Oil of Oregano works for toothache, gum inflammation, as well as sore throat, congestion, headaches, etc. I had some and rubbed a couple of drops on my gums. ON CONTACT the paint disappeared!!!!!!!! I was amazed! Better than penicillin.

  4. Unless you have an immune deficient disease, why would you risk ingesting Mercury (thimerosal), a cancer-causing ingredient (a known neurotoxin–admitted on printed materials when you get the shot)–for a 20% effective vaccine? (2004-05 only 10% effective).

    Last year–only 9% effective for the 2nd half of flu season. This is an outrage–I doubt if doctors tell patients when recommending a shot this year, “Well, for the last 2 or 3 months of last flu season it was 9% effective.”
    Instead get good sleep, good nutrition, 1000 mg Vitamin C, 2000 IU Vitamin D3 and some K2 and daily exercise for stress. I am 72 and haven’t had the flu for 20 or 30 years.

  5. When only 10% of cases of ‘the flu’ are actually caused by influenza, even if the flu vaccine was perfect it could only be at best 10% effective.

    You guys really need to point out all the BS in these flu vaccine ‘effectiveness’ claims. It sounds like they are claiming ‘effectiveness’ based purely on the percentage of ‘correct’ strains they guessed on for that year.

    This is even worse than their usual claims of ‘efficacy’ which is just whether a vaccine raised antibody levels or not (a deceptive surrogate endpoint, since antibody titres ARE NOT the same thing as actual immunity against disease).

    So if (for example) they guess 33% correct on the most common strains of influenza that year, they will claim the vaccine was 33% effective? First, that assumes that for the strains they picked, the vaccine was perfect at preventing influenza. We’ve seen time and again how little effectiveness vaccines generally have, but lets say for a moment that this claim actually was true. Then that means about 3.3% effectiveness at preventing the flu (since only 10% of cases of ‘the flu’ were actually by an influenza virus).

    However, if their ‘effectiveness’ claim is just based on which strains they guessed right, and gives no indication of whether the vaccine will actually prevent even those strains (we are just supposed to take it on faith that it will be completely perfectly effective), then we don’t even have any real effectiveness data at all for those 3.3% of cases. It could be 1% or 0%.

    My point is that when they claim ‘effectiveness’ of the flu vaccine, it needs to be hammered and broken down what they actually mean, because as bad as the CDC stats are for ‘effectiveness’ of the flu vaccine every year, the reality is even worse. Making the side effects of this vaccine an even more absurd risk for such an ineffective vaccine against what is an inconvenient temporary illness.

    1. Pharmacies have incentive programs with all the insurance companies that they have as providers for their customers. The shot brings people into the stores and while the pharmacy does the paperwork for the injection most people will make other purchases while they wait. They get discounts from pharma and make up revenue when customers shop.

  6. Whenever you are being bribed into getting the flu shot then that should be a warning sign. My pharmacy was giving people a $25 gift card to get the flu shot there.

  7. Is the pneumonia vaccine for 2019/20 season safe for over 70 year olds? I refuse to take these shots but I have a new PC Dr and she’s trying to talk me into it. I have not had a seasonal illness, not even a cold, in 5 years and I am better off not getting these vaccinations.

  8. I am required (forced) to get the flu shot by the company I work for. I never had the flu before .I have never being so I’ll in my 68 years….I wonder why???I do not work for a health care facility ( even though my employer says they are one – not true) and I was not given a choice as a lot of my colleagues…

  9. Anti-vaxxers are the REAL danger here. They want us to die in a preventable pandemic in the most long, drawn out horrifyingly painful way possible.

    1. What in the world? It’s brainwashed, “skeptics” like you lining up to get jabbed that are the danger here. Nobody wants anyone to die, and the flu is not preventable you nitwit. It’s a cyclical virus that is impossible to predict, otherwise we wouldn’t be mismatched year, after year, after year. It’s also smarter than the entreprenuers making the vaccines, that’s why we get variants year, after year, after year. Only a small population of people are susceptible to COMPLICATIONS of the flu virus, and those people need to stay home and protect themselves as best they can without assuming that being around a person that is vaccinated makes them safe.

      All people spread disease, including every person that’s been vaccinated. They don’t present correctly to disease-causing pathogens, and THEY are the problem they just think their societal status is elevated since they did what they were told to do. Guess what, so did people that were injured. You think that just because you got vaccinated, you are immune from spreading disease and that’s just garbage.

      Those of you with a fever, stop bringing it down with anti-pyretics and wandering out into communities thinking “you’re better”. Just because you downed some acetaminophen to bring down your fever doesn’t mean you are not spreading disease. Your rhetoric is so flipping tired.

      Hmmm…. vaccine mismatch, yet again? Maybe I’ll just be a responsible member of society and stay home when I’m sick regardless of the pathogen or virus, vaccine-associated or not. It’s vaccinated people that think their vaccination status elevates their health status that are the real problem here.

    2. “Anti-vaxxers are the REAL danger here.”

      I never get a flu shot and haven’t had the flu in over 25 years. As a matter of fact, I never catch colds either. Has it occurred to you, Grace Messenger, that yearly flu vaccines might be keeping your immune system from working optimally?

      Stop buying into whatever you read or hear and start thinking for yourself. The CDC and medical profession don’t have all the answers. They don’t even have very many of them.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search in Archive