Is Tamiflu WORTHLESS?
Ilena Rose
profitable run vaccinating seniors with NO evidence of any benefit to
anyone but themselves. On the internet, the Snake-oil Vigilantes (aka
Health Frauds) spread vast amounts of industry propaganda.
www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/Snake-oil.htm
www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/QuackWatchWatch.htm
http://ilenarose.blogspot.com
Health Lover
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/83454.php
The mortality benefits of giving elderly people the flu vaccine have
been vastly overstated, according to a Review published in The Lancet
Infectious Diseases, October edition. Vaccinating people over 65
against influenza in developed countries is aimed at reducing the flu
mortality burden.
Dr Lone Simonsen, George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA
and team say that vaccinating not-so-frail elderly people more
frequently than their frail peers, plus the use of non-specific
endpoints, such as all-cause mortality, are the reasons for this
exaggeration.
"The remaining evidence base is currently insufficient to indicate the
magnitude of the mortality benefit, if any, that elderly people derive
from the vaccination program," say the authors.
Although placebo-controlled randomized trials have demonstrated that
the flu vaccine is effective in younger adults, a small number of
trials never included the elderly, especially those aged over 70.
About 75% of influenza related deaths occur among people aged 70 and
over, point out the authors.
These trials suggest that clinical gains and antibody responses in the
elderly fall with age after the age of 70.
Even though vaccination coverage rose from 15% in 1980 to 65% today,
there has been no confirmation of any influenza-related mortality
improvement since 1980, say the authors. "Paradoxically, whereas those
studies attribute about 5% of all winter deaths to influenza, many
cohort studies report a 50% reduction in the total risk of death in
winter - a benefit ten times greater than the estimated influenza
mortality burden."
The authors say that any future trial should use more precise
endpoints, for example, vaccine effectiveness against the highly
specific outcome of laboratory-confirmed influenza virus. Even though
such a trial would be more expensive and labor intensive, the vaccine
efficacy estimates are more likely to be reliable. Rather than use the
current arbitrary 4-month period, any future trial should also
identify the epidemic period for each season through utilization of
actual virus surveillance data.
The writers caution "While awaiting an improved evidence base for
influenza vaccine mortality benefits in elderly people, we suggest
that this group should continue to be vaccinated against influenza.
Influenza causes many deaths each year, and even a partly effective
vaccine would be better than no vaccine at all. But the evidence base
concerning influenza vaccine benefits in elderly people does need to
be strengthened."
"If current evidence points to substantial uncertainty, then what
next? Simonsen and colleagues suggest that 'refocusing on the likely
complications of immune senescence would require vigorous pursuit of
other options'. They also confront the ultimate taboo that drew so
much scorn in the evidence overview: doing randomized trials in
elderly people to settle the issue conclusively. That suggestion,
which seems to fly in the face of current policies, is in our opinion
the only ethical and scientific way to have definitive answer to the
question of whether or not current influenza vaccines protect elderly
people," Dr Tom Jefferson and Dr Carlo Di Pietrantonj, Cochrane
Vaccines Field, Alessandria, Italy, write in an accompanying Comment.
Mark Probert
Hi Ilena.
There seems to be somewhat of a disconnect between your subject line
and the content of this post.
Tamiflu is used to *treat* the flu, and the flu vaccine is used to
prevent the flu. Quite different, wouldn't you say.
The article you posted is important, as it demonstrates why families
of the elderly should get the flu vaccine, i.e. to prevent infecting
their elderly relatives.
Thanks for posting it.
Peter B.
"Ilena Rose" <B...@mundo.com> wrote in message
news:hlg1859jsunn5hmg4...@4ax.com...
>
>
> Dr Lone Simonsen, George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA
> and team say that vaccinating not-so-frail elderly people more
> frequently than their frail peers, plus the use of non-specific
> endpoints, such as all-cause mortality, are the reasons for this
> exaggeration.
>
So this mumbo jumbo is supposed to support something? It is a veiled
statement shaded to benefit the authors belief, not scientific facts.
Stick to your fake boobies and whorehouse experiences.
trigonometry1972@gmail.com |
> On Aug 10, 9:01 pm, Ilena Rose <B...@mundo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > The Vaccination Industry has had a long, successful and extremely
> > profitable run vaccinating seniors with NO evidence of any benefit to
> > anyone but themselves. On the internet, the Snake-oil Vigilantes (aka
Of course, the vaccine is less effective in the elderly and often
only moderates the disease course or has no apparent effect.
That point is widely known.
Plus there is some evidence that an ample regular dose
of vitamin D3 (not 400 or 800 IU) but rather a
real dose will raise cathelicidins levels and thus improve innate
immunity.
The antiviral drugs may help a bit if given in time but in an
overwhelmed system the intervention will likely come late
in the game. And with widespread use these drugs the
virus will adapt as well, IMO.
The other intervention and it is a conventional one is to
take a pneumonia shot in addition to the flu shot. In
hopes of prevention one of the complications of influenza.
Of course, that raises the question of how well the
vaccine works in the old and the elderly? And it
most be noted that a subset of the elderly are on drugs
that further impair immune response or otherwise put
them at risk pneumonia whether or not they
caught the influenza.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Curr Opin Investig Drugs. 2008 May;9(5):485-90.
Vitamin D and innate immunity.
Hewison M.
University of California, Los Angeles, David Geffen School of
Medicine,
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, 615 Charles E Young Drive South, Los
Angeles,
CA 90095, USA. mhew...@mednet.ucla.edu
It is becoming increasingly clear that vitamin D can exert effects
on human physiology beyond its long-standing association
with skeletal homeostasis. In particular, the ability of active
1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (1,25(OH)2D) to function as a potent
modulator of human immune responses has attracted much
attention. Over the last ten years, most studies on the
relationship between vitamin D and immunity have focused
on the effects of 1,25(OH)2D on lymphocytes and adaptive
immunity; however, studies have shown that local
macrophage synthesis of 1,25(OH)2D in response to
TLR signaling is also a key feature of innate immunity.
This new facet of 'non-classical' roles of vitamin D action is
discussed in this review.
PMID: 18465658
I no longer take the flu shots and I haven't had
a cold or the flu in 2 or 3 years and perhaps
longer and I credit this to my reaching
the needed threshold dose of vitamin D3. Then
again maybe I've just had all the colds and flu bugs
out there and am immune.
Just my tentative opinion.............Trig
Ilena Rose
profitable run vaccinating seniors with NO evidence of any benefit to
anyone but themselves. On the internet, the Snake-oil Vigilantes (aka
www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/Snake-oil.htm
www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/QuackWatchWatch.htm
http://ilenarose.blogspot.com
Health LoverAn Oxford University study, published in the British
Medical Journal (BMJ),
led by David Mant, analyzed four studies involving children aged one
to 12
who were prescribed Tamiflu. They found that the risks associated with
Tamiflu are not outweighed by the insignificant benefits:
"The downside of the harms outweigh the one-day reduction in
symptomatic
benefits."
The researchers reviewed four earlier clinical trials -- two with
Relenza
and two with Tamiflu -- for influenza treatment covering 1,766
children 12
or younger. More half had confirmed cases of type A flu. They also
reviewed
three other trials in which the drugs were given to children who had
been
exposed to the virus but showed no symptoms.
The BMJ report comes 10 days after Britain's Health Protection Agency
(HPA)
reported that more than half of 248 students given Tamiflu after a
classmate
fell ill with swine flu suffered adverse side-effects such as nausea,
insomnia and nightmares. Most of the students did not have the flu
when they
were given the drug. Thus, it cannot be argued--as the manufacturer of
Tamiflu does--that the symptoms were illness-related.
The UK Independent reports (below) that "the researchers found that
using
anti-virals preventatively had little effect - reducing transmission
of flu
by 8 per cent.
This means 13 children would have to be treated to prevent one
additional
case of the flu."
Given the minimal benefit--reduction of flu symptoms by half a day (at
most
one day), they conclude that a "more conservative strategy" is
probably in
order.
Dr Carl Heneghan, a GP and clinical lecturer at Oxford University, who
was
also involved in the study, said the current policy of giving Tamiflu
for
mild illness was an "inappropriate strategy:"
The study authors noted that the children were being treated for
normal
seasonal flu but Dr Matthew Thompson, a GP and senior clinical
scientist at
Oxford University, said the findings would extend to the current swine
flu
pandemic. "I don't think we have got any reason to think our results
would
be any different," he said.
"The current swine flu is generally a mild flu illness...it does not
seem
that different from current seasonal flu. We would be happy to say our
results apply to the current swine flu strain."
However, the UK Department of Health spokesman dismissed the Oxford
researchers' claims that their findings would also apply to swine flu.
"The BMJ review is based on seasonal flu and not swine flu," he said.
"As
the authors note, the extent to which the findings can be applied to
the
current pandemic is questionable - after all, we already know that
swine flu
behaves differently to seasonal flu, and past pandemics have hit
younger
people hardest."
"Whilst there is doubt about how swine flu affects children, we
believe a
safety-first approach of offering anti-virals to everyone remains a
sensible
and responsible way forward."
An investigation is in order to find what, if any, hidden persuaders
(undisclosed stakes) are at work influencing public health policy--in
the
UK, the US, and the UN.
Why are public officials promoting the premature, medically
unsupportable
use of (1) an inadequately tested vaccine, H1N1, and (2) the use of
anti-viral drugs whose "benefit" vis-`-vis the flu, is merely reduced
mild
symptoms by between half a day and one day?
See: Matthew Shun-Shin, Matthew Thompson, Carl Heneghan, Rafael
Perera,
Anthony Harnden, David Mant. Neuraminidase inhibitors for treatment
and
prophylaxis of influenza in children: systematic review and
meta-analysis of
randomised controlled trials, BMJ, Aug 10, 2009 Available free at:
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/339/aug10_1/b3172?q=w_pandemic_flu
See: http://anthraxvaccine.blogspot.com
See also, http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/619/9/ and
http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/626/9/
Contact: Vera Hassner Sharav
Mark Probert
>
> Curr Opin Investig Drugs. 2008 May;9(5):485-90.
>
> Vitamin D and innate immunity.
>
> Hewison M.
>
> University of California, Los Angeles, David Geffen School of
> Medicine,
> Department of Orthopedic Surgery, 615 Charles E Young Drive South, Los
> Angeles,
>
> It is becoming increasingly clear that vitamin D can exert effects
> on human physiology beyond its long-standing association
> with skeletal homeostasis. In particular, the ability of active
> 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (1,25(OH)2D) to function as a potent
> modulator of human immune responses has attracted much
> attention. Over the last ten years, most studies on the
> relationship between vitamin D and immunity have focused
> on the effects of 1,25(OH)2D on lymphocytes and adaptive
> immunity; however, studies have shown that local
> macrophage synthesis of 1,25(OH)2D in response to
> TLR signaling is also a key feature of innate immunity.
> This new facet of 'non-classical' roles of vitamin D action is
> discussed in this review.
>
> PMID: 18465658
>
> I no longer take the flu shots and I haven't had
> a cold or the flu in 2 or 3 years and perhaps
> longer and I credit this to my reaching
> the needed threshold dose of vitamin D3. Then
> again maybe I've just had all the colds and flu bugs
> out there and am immune.
>
Good points. I take both a flu shot, and the pneumonia shot a few
years ago. I was through both around 13 years ago and I have no desire
for a repeat.
The best flu preventive, though, is to have all those who come in
contact with the elderly vaccinated.
Happy Oyster
>The Vaccination Industry has had a long, successful and extremely
>profitable run vaccinating seniors with NO evidence of any benefit to
>anyone but themselves.
That is bullshit.
The problem ESPECIALLY with older people is that they did not fresh up their
vaccinations - and because of this get illnesses which do great harm to them.
The vaccinations against pneumonia etc are very important because the older you
get the more your lungs will suffer from an infection.
>On the internet, the Snake-oil Vigilantes (aka
>Health Frauds) spread vast amounts of industry propaganda.
That is a libel.
--
**** WARNING **** The web-hoster Globat.com steals money from your
credit card account. If you are a customer of Globat.com, never give
them any credit card information. If you can't erase the information,
then do delete the old card and get a new one! **** WARNING ****