www.cidrap.umn.edu
Research increasingly suggests that getting flu shots repeatedly can gradually reduce the effectiveness of the vaccines under some circumstances.
www.statnews.com
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
The results of many peer-reviewed, published studies prove that the recommendation to get a flu shot because it will help you fight COVID-19 is bad advice and completely false.
childrenshealthdefense.org
I'd suggest you take either HCQ, Zinc, and Vitamin C every day during flu season, or Querciten, Zinc, and Vitamin C. Far more effective, and less damaging. It doesn't make anyone money of course, which is a major issue. I personally take the Querciten regimen, as Ohio has blocked doctors from prescribing HCQ for no good reason at all until you are in the hospital when is doesn't work as well. (it doesn't make anyone money, where as less effective, and more dangerous Remdesivir makes billions)
The flu vaccine still contains alarmingly high amounts of mercury. Something that has been removed from most if not all other vaccines. The EPA deems anything above 2ppb in drinking water to be toxic. The amount in one single flu shot: 51,000 ppb. Enjoy.
The first article cites a study in which the investigators recruited (i.e. advertised for volunteers) 328 households for a study that was published in
Clinical Infectious Disease that indicated no significant improvement resulting from the vaccinations. The article noted that this study sharply contrasted with several other observational studies that found the vaccine yielded about 60% protection during the same season.
It should be noted that none of these studies (neither the single study that seemed to suggest a lack of positive results nor the several that suggested otherwise) involved randomized placebo controlled double blind tests.
Randomized placebo controlled double blind tests are the gold standard because they are much more reliable than anecdotal or observational results potentially biased due to preconceptions and feelings. When the subjects are selected in a random fashion and when neither the investigators nor the patients know who received the drug and who received the sugar pill, the results of the test is much more reliable. Unfortunately, there are a number of impediments to the conduct of randomized testing in some cases including expense and ethics. So observational studies abound with often conflicting results.
The second article does not cite a specific study, but rather it describes a range of sometimes puzzling results from observational studies and attempts to make the case for randomized clinical trials to investigate these results in a more scientific fashion. The article raises some interesting questions regarding a number of theoretical questions and mentions specifically the problem of randomized clinical tests being performed the United States due to it being considered unethical for researchers to intentionally use placebos in said test causing people thus assigned to forgo vaccinations in some years.
Another problem not mentioned would be that designing a study to account for all the various puzzling results the article describes would be very difficult and each group of researchers have their own preferred puzzling result to investigate scientifically.
The third article is basically, as I understood it, a discussion in an online Medical Journal regarding the findings of some Canadian researchers in observational studies and the apparent criticism, perhaps unfairly, that they received. It is kind of technical and I didn't understand it very well.
The fourth article cited is by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. who is Chairman of an organization called Children’s Health Defense. Mr. Kennedy is a well-known opponent of vaccinations and in his article refers to a recent Pentagon study which advances the theory that flu vaccines increase the risks for coronavirus due to something called virus interference. There may be something to it for all I know. Apparently some scientists believe in the concept and biology is complex.
As for your recommendations, I have no idea how useful in combatting the flu or any virus that they might be. I know of no reliable double blind placebo controlled test to establish their usefulness.
