FLU VACCINES FOUND TO BE INEFFECTIVE FOR CHILDREN
Each year when flu season rolls around, we're reminded of the
importance of
getting annual flu shots, especially for high-risk groups like
children. We
take it for granted that it's the right thing to do . but is it? A
study in
the Journal of the American Medical Association (Oct. 25, 2006) says
yes,
while the recent conclusion of the Cochrane Collaboration - an
international, not-for-profit, independent body that critiques health
care
outcomes - concluded that there is little scientific evidence backing
the
safety or effectiveness of the inactivated influenza vaccine in
children
(British Medical Journal, October 28, 2006).
Calls for a Re-Evaluation of Annual Flu Shots
The Cochrane Collaboration called for a re-evaluation of the strategy
of
routinely promoting annual flu vaccinations in children as public
health
policy, noting that "large-scale studies assessing important outcomes
and
directly comparing vaccine types are urgently required." The National
Vaccine Information Center - a national, non-profit, educational
organization dedicated to the prevention of childhood vaccine injuries
and
deaths -- went even further. Given the Cochrane findings, along with
what it
considered to be methodological flaws in the JAMA study, the NVIC
called for
a halt on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
recommendation of annual influenza vaccinations for infants and
children --
at least until we have the scientific evidence to back them up.
To gain more perspective on the issues surrounding the influenza
vaccine, I
spoke with NVIC president Barbara Loe Fisher. She told me that there is
a
huge gap between the scientific research on the influenza vaccine and
government policies on it. Fisher cites concerns such as methodological
flaws in studies, safety considerations (i.e., adverse events due to
vaccination) and the relative lack of effectiveness of the vaccines.
About the Studies
The JAMA study, which was conducted at Kaiser Permanente in California
and
funded by the CDC, looked at the medical records of children 6 to 23
months
old who received the trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (a vaccine
containing dead flu viruses) as well as other vaccines between 1991 and
2003
(45,356 children with 69,359 vaccinations). As such, it was a
non-randomized, retrospective analysis, rather than a more rigorous
randomized, placebo-controlled trial. There were no unvaccinated
controls.
After examining children's medical records, researchers concluded that
the
influenza vaccine in children 6 to 23 months is associated with few
medical
problems, "none of which were serious" or "significantly associated
with the
vaccine." Fisher was concerned, however, that adverse events due to the
vaccine slipped through the cracks. She notes that cases of convulsions
and
Guillain-Barre Syndrome (a rare neurological disease characterized by
loss
of reflexes and temporary paralysis) were written off as coincidental
or
attributed to other vaccines. Fisher adds that nine of the nineteen
Kaiser
Permanente and CDC study authors reported financial ties to influenza
vaccine manufacturers, and all received CDC funding. Although this does
not
necessarily mean that they were biased, it is a potential conflict of
interest that raises red flags.
The Cochrane Collaboration's analysis of flu vaccine studies reached a
very
different conclusion, pointing out the significant gap between public
health
policy and scientific evidence. Surprise was registered that there was
only
one study of inactivated flu vaccine in children under two years, given
the
recent US recommendation for vaccination of all healthy children from
six
months to two years old. Moreover, in children under two, the Cochrane
Collaboration found that the effectiveness of inactivated vaccine was
similar to placebo. It was impossible to carry out safety comparisons,
because of the lack of rigorous, standardized, randomized,
placebo-controlled studies.
According to the Cochrane Collaboration, the influenza vaccine did not
fare
much better with adults. In an analysis of flu shots in healthy people
under
65, there was no evidence that the vaccines had an impact on measurable
factors such as time off work, hospital stays or mortality (death
resulting
from the flu or its complications). In the elderly, the results were so
scattered that they were termed "both counterintuitive and
implausible."
Further Research Is Necessary
Clearly more research is necessary to come up with good, solid answers
about
the safety and effectiveness of influenza vaccines. Mark Stengler, ND,
editor of Bottom Line's Natural Healing newsletter, likewise expresses
concern that the flu vaccine, especially in regard to children, has no
long-term studies to back it up. He worries that side effects such as
neurological damage have not been properly assessed. In Dr. Stengler's
view,
it seems only prudent to conduct more thorough research on the flu
vaccine
for children, whose maturing organ systems are more prone to damage.
Whatever decision you come to regarding flu shots, keep in mind that
there
are also many natural ways to avoid infection (wash hands, avoid
exposure to
infected people, etc.) and enhance immunity during flu season. See the
XXX
issue of Daily Health News for tips on how to protect your family and
yourself.
Sources .
Barbara Loe Fisher, President, National Vaccine Information Center.
Mark Stengler, ND, editor of Bottom Line's Natural Healing newsletter
and
author of The Natural Physician's Healing Therapies (Bottom Line
Books). Dr.
Stengler practices naturopathic medicine at the La Jolla Whole Health
Clinic, La Jolla, California. To learn more about his work, visit
www.drstengler.com.
The Cochrane Collaboration, www.cochrane.org/
National Vaccine Information Center, www.nvic