Comments by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News

The annual flu vaccine is the most dangerous vaccine in the market today, a fact that is not in dispute.

The most recent report from the Department of Justice submitted at this year’s Advisory Commission on Childhood Vaccines (ACCV) meeting revealed that the U.S. Government had settled 275 lawsuits for flu vaccine injuries and deaths, while all other vaccine injury and death settlements were 57 combined. See:

Government Issues First Report in 2017 on Vaccine Injuries and Deaths: 275 Injured 4 Dead from Flu Shot

A new study published this month and actually making news in the corporate-sponsored “mainstream” media reveals a clear association between the flu vaccine given to pregnant women every year and spontaneous abortion. The study was funded by the CDC with American tax payer funds, so the results had to be published somewhere. Private studies exposing anything negative about vaccines are routinely censored in the U.S.

In spite of the dangers revealed in this study and a call for further research, there was no change to the CDC recommendation that all pregnant women be vaccinated with the flu shot every year in terms of public policy.

Association of spontaneous abortion with receipt of inactivated influenza vaccine containing H1N1pdm09 in 2010–11 and 2011–12

Vaccine – Volume 35, Issue 40, 25 September 2017, Pages 5314–5322

Abstract

Introduction

Inactivated influenza vaccine is recommended in any stage of pregnancy, but evidence of safety in early pregnancy is limited, including for vaccines containing A/H1N1pdm2009 (pH1N1) antigen. We sought to determine if receipt of vaccine containing pH1N1 was associated with spontaneous abortion (SAB).

Methods

We conducted a case-control study over two influenza seasons (2010–11, 2011–12) in the Vaccine Safety Datalink. Cases had SAB and controls had live births or stillbirths and were matched on site, date of last menstrual period, and age. Of 919 potential cases identified using diagnosis codes, 485 were eligible and confirmed by medical record review. Exposure was defined as vaccination with inactivated influenza vaccine before the SAB date; the primary exposure window was the 1–28 days before the SAB.

Results

The overall adjusted odds ratio (aOR) was 2.0 (95% CI, 1.1–3.6) for vaccine receipt in the 28-day exposure window; there was no association in other exposure windows. In season-specific analyses, the aOR in the 1–28 days was 3.7 (95% CI 1.4–9.4) in 2010–11 and 1.4 (95% CI 0.6–3.3) in 2011–12. The association was modified by influenza vaccination in the prior season (post hoc analysis). Among women who received pH1N1-containing vaccine in the previous influenza season, the aOR in the 1–28 days was 7.7 (95% CI 2.2–27.3); the aOR was 1.3 (95% CI 0.7–2.7) among women not vaccinated in the previous season. This effect modification was observed in each season.

Conclusion

SAB was associated with influenza vaccination in the preceding 28 days. The association was significant only among women vaccinated in the previous influenza season with pH1N1-containing vaccine.

————————

The dangers of giving the annual flu vaccine to pregnant women is a topic we have covered extensively in the past here at Health Impact News.

Previous articles:

Flu Vaccines NOT Tested on Pregnant Women

Should Pregnant Women Receive the Flu Vaccine?

Flu Vaccine and Pregnancy: A Dangerous Practice

A Doctor’s Awakening on Flu Vaccines in Pregnancy

CDC Targets Hispanics in Campaign to Strike Fear in Pregnant Women Who Refuse the Flu Shot

Flu Shot Not Tested on Pregnant Women – Newborn Babies Monitored for Birth Defects by Drug Company

4,250% Increase in Fetal Deaths Reported to VAERS After Flu Shot Given to Pregnant Women

Flu Shot for Pregnant Women? CDC Covers Up Influenza Vaccine-Related Fetal Deaths

Does Data in Hospital Research Show Flu Shot Given to Pregnant Women Increases Autism in Unborn?

FDA Prepares to Fast Track New Vaccines Targeting Pregnant Women

CDC Whistleblower: Mercury in Vaccines Given to Pregnant Women Linked to Autism

Order Here!

Leaving a lucrative career as a nephrologist (kidney doctor), Dr. Suzanne Humphries is now free to actually help cure people.

In this autobiography she explains why good doctors are constrained within the current corrupt medical system from practicing real, ethical medicine.

One of the sane voices when it comes to examining the science behind modern-day vaccines, no pro-vaccine extremist doctors have ever dared to debate her in public.

Medical Doctors Opposed to Forced Vaccinations – Should Their Views be Silenced?

One of the biggest myths being propagated in the compliant mainstream media today is that doctors are either pro-vaccine or anti-vaccine, and that the anti-vaccine doctors are all “quacks.”

However, nothing could be further from the truth in the vaccine debate. Doctors are not unified at all on their positions regarding “the science” of vaccines, nor are they unified in the position of removing informed consent to a medical procedure like vaccines.

The two most extreme positions are those doctors who are 100% against vaccines and do not administer them at all, and those doctors that believe that ALL vaccines are safe and effective for ALL people, ALL the time, by force if necessary.

Very few doctors fall into either of these two extremist positions, and yet it is the extreme pro-vaccine position that is presented by the U.S. Government and mainstream media as being the dominant position of the medical field.

In between these two extreme views, however, is where the vast majority of doctors practicing today would probably categorize their position. Many doctors who consider themselves “pro-vaccine,” for example, do not believe that every single vaccine is appropriate for every single individual.

Many doctors recommend a “delayed” vaccine schedule for some patients, and not always the recommended one-size-fits-all CDC childhood schedule. Other doctors choose to recommend vaccines based on the actual science and merit of each vaccine, recommending some, while determining that others are not worth the risk for children, such as the suspect seasonal flu shot.

These doctors who do not hold extreme positions would be opposed to government-mandated vaccinations and the removal of all parental exemptions.

In this article, I am going to summarize the many doctors today who do not take the most extremist pro-vaccine position, which is probably not held by very many doctors at all, in spite of what the pharmaceutical industry, the federal government, and the mainstream media would like the public to believe.