Dr. Brownstein: Another Study Showing Influenza Vaccine Failure – Flu Vaccine Fails 98% of People Who Receive It

Google+ Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr +

By Dr. Brownstein

The flu and cold season is upon us.  I have already seen numerous patients suffering with upper respiratory illnesses and even weathered my first bout.

The CDC and the Powers-That-Be would have you believe that you should receive the influenza vaccine on a yearly basis. (1) They claim that the flu vaccine can save thousands of lives.  Of course, I have written to you many times that there is not a single study that has ever supported the claim that the flu vaccine saves any lives.  In fact, the history of the flu vaccine shows clearly that it fails nearly all who take it.

A recent article in Family Practice News (September 1, 2017, p. 10) was titled, “Inactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccine safe, effective.”  The article states, “An intramuscular inactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccine reduced the risk of laboratory-confirmed influenza by up to 69% in previously unvaccinated children aged 6-35 months in a large randomized trial, reported at the annual meeting of the European Society for Paediartic (sic) Infectious Diseases.”

Wow. I have studied the influenza vaccine for years and I know that there is not one study that has shown the flu vaccine very effective for preventing the flu.  Is this something new?

I pulled the study and read it. Here’s what I found.

The study included 5,806 healthy 6-35-months-olds.  More than 5,400 were randomized to two doses of the quadrivalent vaccine (Fluzone) or placebo .  The trial was conducted in Europe, Asia, South America and Africa between March 2014 and September 2016.  The incidence of any laboratory-confirmed strain of influenza illness during the period from 14 days post-vaccination to the end of the flu season was 1.01% in the Fluzone group and 3.28% in those who received the placebo.

How did they get the 69% efficacy rate?  They used the relative risk statistical analysis by simply dividing 1.01 into 3.28.  When I lecture to health care professionals about statistics, I tell them that the relative risk analysis is used by the Big Pharma Cartel to make a poorly performing drug or therapy look better than it actually is.   Relative risk analysis should never be used when making clinical decisions about whether to prescribe a drug or therapy.  Sadly, most doctors and other health care professionals have no knowledge about how to properly review a medical study because they do not understand statistics.

The more accurate way to determine the effectiveness of the flu vaccine in this study (and all other studies as well) is to use the absolute risk difference.  In the Fluzone study, the absolute risk difference between the Fluzone and the placebo group was 2.27% (3.28%-1.01%). That means that Fluzone was nearly 98% ineffective in preventing the flu as there was only a 2.27% benefit received for those who were vaccinated. In other words, this study showed that injecting Fluzone failed nearly 98%–they received no protection from the flu.

Folks, this is another study showing a flu vaccine failing the vast majority who receive it.  This study is consistent with other flu vaccine studies.  Why would anyone prescribe–much less take–a therapy that fails nearly 98% who receive it?

Flu season is approaching.

Should you get a flu vaccine that fails the vast majority–98%–of the time?


1)     http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/885567?src=WNL_infoc_170924_MSCPEDIT_TEMP2&uac=83217PG&impID=1439801&faf=1

Read the full article at blog.drbrownstein.com.

This article (Dr. Brownstein: Another Study Showing Influenza Vaccine Failure – Flu Vaccine Fails 98% of People Who Receive It) was originally published on Holistic Medicine and syndicated by The Event Chronicle. Via Health Impact News.



  1. Doctor I have read some preliminary studies (although small sample number) that suggested that Vit D may significantly reduce flu infections. Are you aware of any rigorous studies that have investigated the influence of Vit D on flu infection rates??

  2. Great article. One of my close relatives who has a pHd in biomedical believes the mainstream and tells me not to go look at ‘crackpot’ sources on the internet. This was after I said no to her suggestion to take a yearly flu shot and the stuff they have in the vaccines. Fuck her and her paper qualifications.

    I can beat down any goddamn flu with loads of sardines in extra-virgin-olive-oil, butter, eggs and milk, with the usual fruits and veggies on the side. I have no faith in the establishment pigs who shut down Royal Raymond Rife and his cancer cure.

    Jim Stone has also detailed reasons why to never take any vaccine shots, especially after 1988. This guy was many levels higher than Edward Snowden when he was in the NSA and he knows his shit.

    • I’m getting over the flu right now. I took a couple of days off to rest, but it wasn’t that big of a deal. All of my relatives get flu shots and they always encourage me to get one every year (my aunt was a nursing supervisor for 35 years). I attempted to warm them for many years but eventually gave up. Oddly, all of these same people have various autoimmune diseases. I’d rather be sick for a few days than get ANY vaccine. I snuggled up on couch, drank tea, caught up on some reading and watched movies. I rather enjoyed the rest.