Compare vaccine success for influenza and for the new C19 vaccines.

ere I am translating a Czech article from 2013 with an online translator so you can compare where the differences might be with the new vaccines?
I think it's all one. As in the belief of some or says many people who say: Oh, everything is one!
Well, look for yourself!

Flu vaccination: arguments PRO and AGAINST
Posted on 13.11.2013 by jk in Immunity, Prevention and Diseases

I'm probably one of that group of people who wouldn't even think about inoculation.
Despite all the arguments talking about the benefits of vaccination (it is quite normal that the developed thing must be sold,
and I also have to figure out how to sell it) I don't see any positive benefit for me or my surroundings.
However, personal impressions should be left aside and let's look at the facts.
If you are hesitant whether vaccination makes sense for you, you should know both sides of the coin and make a decision based on it.
Usually, there is only talk of the positive benefit of vaccination, and if there is a problem,
Put it under the rug, maybe it'll be forgotten.
Because no matter what it looks like, your health is at stake.

About 17% of the population is planned to be vaccinated this year (STEM/MARK survey).
Research has shown that the reason people refuse to inoculate are fears of side effects,
some think that they are not a risk group and do not get sick, and another group also considers vaccination unnecessary.
If I had to join one of the groups, then probably the last one.
I have nothing against well-intentioned advice from experts and knowledgeable people, but it's still not clear to me
Why can't I just lie down with the flu?
I soon got the answer, but we'll come back to that later.
Why get vaccinated?
Even if your eyes were closed, you couldn't overlook the ubiquitous recommendation of the Department of Health,
Chief Public Health Officer of the Czech Republic Vladimír Valenta or Chairman of the Czech Vaccine Society Roman Prymulu,
who uniformly and intensively recommend getting vaccinated against the flu.
In their opinion, this should ideally be done by everyone, but above all by risk groups
(diabetics, elderly people, people with weakened immunity, etc.).

"Vaccination can alleviate the course of the disease and, in extreme cases, save lives, especially in people over 65 years of age
and people with chronic diseases," says chief hygienist Vladimír Valenta and continues:
"most often, cardiovascular disease is found as a risk factor for influenza,
chronic respiratory diseases, diabetes or oncological diseases.
If people were vaccinated against the flu, many of them could avoid severe complications."

Perhaps there is no need to draw attention to the slight nuance between the word "can" or "it will happen".
The effectiveness of the flu vaccine is very difficult to measure, although advocates of vaccination have many explanations for this.
There are many more reasons to give vaccination the green light across the Internet.
Some sources have even quantified how much the vaccine will cost you (about 300 CZK) as well as the treatment
when you get sick, including loss of financial gain.
Of course, if you get sick as a result of vaccination (reaction to the vaccine, or weakened body cannot cope with
fight another virus See the information below)
You don't talk about that anymore, but it's a risk you're knowingly taking, and paradoxically, it's going to cost you even more...

Mrs. Simona speaks from her own experience "I first got a flu test about three years ago and I felt like,
I'm doing god knows what good for my health.
Next thing I know, I'm sick in a way I don't remember in my life.
It took me a few weeks to function normally again.
What surprised me is that, according to the district doctor, it's a common reaction, and I have nothing to worry about.
I've been sobering up permanently from vaccinations."
Why not get vaccinated?
Influenza is a common disease that sickes several percent of the population each year.
The risk is not the disease itself, but the complications it can cause.
A healthy individual's immune system can deal with the flu.
The problem occurs in the elderly and the weakened population with impaired immune system
(diabetics, people with chronic disease, asthma, HIV, etc.).
That's all true, but ...!
Do you have information about the possible risks of the disease that vaccination can cause?
Have you read any clinical trial data or results that demonstrate the safety and harmlessness of the flu vaccine?
No? Then you should keep reading.

Ludmila Eleková, a general practitioner for adults, has a clear opinion on vaccinations and makes no secret of her outspoken critical attitude:
"Last October, I was approached for the first time by Czech Television and I said a few sentences on the show čt24,
why you should think twice about a flu vaccination.
The year has come together and again we have a seasonal vaccination campaign.
Personally, I'm not going to get a flu test, and I can't recommend it.
And paradoxically, I cannot recommend it to those at-risk patients who are covered by the health insurance company",
Dr. Elek gives her argument.
There are several reasons why they do so.
Read carefully, it is information that may determine your health.
"Before I begin, I'll give you a thought.
In the media, only lamentations of the chief hygienist, the minister and others can be heard as our Czech nation reluctantly inocinations,
that we have a much lower vaccination rate than, for example, neighbouring obedient Germany or Austria.
This is true, but there is no evidence that, due to low vaccination rates, we have more flu than other countries",
says the doctor, and immediately continues:
"The flu vaccine is said to be up to 90% effective, so vaccination rates in some countries (up to 50%)
should be reflected in the number of cases of influenza.
If the vaccine actually protected 90% of those vaccinated, then countries with high vaccination rates should have less flu than countries,
where he doesn't get much inoy.
Since this logical argument has not yet been made from the mouths of vaccine advocates, I have looked for this data myself.
And I found something completely different.
The countries that inocur the most (e.g. the UK, France, Germany and Austria) have a much higher incidence of influenza
than notorious neo-voters like us, Poland and Finland.
Mr. Marián Fillo, the operator of the www.slobodavockovani.sk, went to a lot of work and compared the official Slovak vaccination data
and the occurrence of influenza (ŠZÚ and ŠÚKL) in different years.
If higher vaccination rates had an effect on the incidence of the disease, the fluctuating curves of the graph should cross – but they fall and rise simultaneously.
Thus, in the years when Slovaks were widely vaccinated, they had flu abundantly, in years when they were vaccinated less, they had less flu."

So is it possible that the effect of the vaccine would be opposite or even zero?
This is just one of the questions that needs to be answered.
Dr. Elek summarized the facts you should know before you get vaccinated.
It has not been sufficiently demonstrated that the effectiveness of vaccination is such as to balance its risks.
A meta-analysis of various flu vaccination studies (1) showed that the effectiveness is around 60%.
We need to break down this number to find out the true effectiveness for individuals.
The risk of infection and its change after vaccination should be compared.
The risk of infection with true flu for an unvaccinated individual in this meta-analysis was calculated at about 3%
(may be different in different seasons, but it's always about percentages).
In this study, they found that those vaccinated had a risk of about 1.4%.
By dividing these two numbers, they came to 60%.
From where some vaccination promoters get information that the effectiveness is 90%, it is not known.
If the risk of an individual is 3% and vaccination is reduced to 1.4%, this means that about 80 people need to be vaccinated,
to protect one from the flu.
Otherwise, it's also called "number need to treat" (NNT) – the number of people that need to be treated to help one.
That doesn't look very impressive, does it?
Vaccination will reduce your personal risk from 3% to just 1.4%, but at the same time you are 100% sure that the vaccine will do something in you that you do not want.
Every recipient of a drug or vaccine is exposed to side effects, only no one knows in advance what they will be like.
Editors' note: Roman Prymula, President of the Czech Vaccine Society, responded to this argument
in an interview with Týden.cz:
"When we act preventively, we must protect a larger part of the population in order to prevent these diseases from occuring in it"....
(full article on Tyden.cz).
Perhaps we should also doubt these figures.
One 2012 study even found that the vaccinated had up to 5.5× higher incidences of influenza and other viruses than unvaccinated (2)!
Vaccination therefore had a negative effect.
The authors themselves were puzzled by the results.
They believed in vaccinations so much that they tested it against real placebo.
This mistake will never be made by the big pharmaceutical companies.
The study authors explicitly stated that the vaccinated had "significant serological protection," they understand the antibodies, but they were something of a problem.
Thus, this study at least raises doubts about the effectiveness of antibodies from vaccination in protecting against the disease.
It is necessary to doubt the officially reported 90% reduction in the risk of influenza for vaccinated and overall lower morbidity.
Personally, I meet more people who have had a bad vaccination experience (they were more sick) than a good one.
Even according to the Cochrane Collaboration metanalysis, flu vaccination has not been shown to reduce overall mortality and morbidity (3).
Many people report getting the flu after vaccination.
This is denied by experts on the grounds that the vaccine is not live and therefore cannot cause influenza.
That is true, of course.
However, the fact is that many people get flu-like symptoms shortly after vaccination.
Virological tests are not commonly done, so people call this disease "flu" and logically think they have it from a vaccine.
In fact, they may or may not have, but it's not like they've contracted the vaccine.
They can catch the real flu.
They can catch it very easily, since vaccination weakens immunity.
The authors of the above study (2) also note this.
Or they caught some other virus they mistook for the flu.
Or they just have a reaction to vaccinations that can look similar.
Recent research shows that vaccination against one strain of flu can increase susceptibility to another strain of flu (2, 4).
Specifically, this was reflected in the swine flu season, when individuals vaccinated against seasonal flu had a higher risk than unvaccinated,
that they will get pandemic influenza.
This finding is in complete contrast to the claim of our vaccineologists that seasonal flu vaccination protects against pandemic.
With this statement, they reassured our public at a time of heiaring hysteria around swine flu, when it looked like there would not be enough vaccines.
Turns out the opposite is true.
Many people get vaccinated against flu in the mistaken hope that they will not be sick in winter.
Vaccination weakens immunity (2).
People confuse common viruses with flu.
There are over 200 different bacteria and viruses that can cause all these winter diseases.
Clinically, they are similar, from the clinical picture it is impossible to determine the causative agent of the disease, or whether it is a virus or bacteria.
If you want to be healthy in winter, you need to take completely different precautions than getting vaccinated.
The side effects (NAs) of vaccination can be really serious, which, incidentally, is also reported by vaccine manufacturers themselves.
Doubters should read the leaflet for any flu vaccine, take a look at the U.S. vaccination adverse reaction reporting system
VAERS ( [link to vaers.hhs.gov (secure)] or simply enter "flu shot adverse effect" into the internet search engine, or
"flu shot Guillan Barre syndrome", "flu shot CFS", etc.( [link to www.whale.to] ).
Also instructive are the pages of the U.S. Special Court for Damage Compensation After Vaccination.
Cases of compensation for influenza vaccine paralyzation are among the most common (5)!
When reading the leaflet (you should not agree to any vaccination without reading it), note the NCA section
reported in the post-marketing period.
This means NAs that appeared only during the normal use of the vaccine after its launch.
The comparison of NAs found in clinical trials and in normal use is striking.
NAs from studies are practically always non-serious, swelling and redness at the injection site, mild soreness, non-serious general symptoms, etc.
In contrast, reactions such as immune system disorders, angioedema,
nervous system disorders including inflammation of the brain and spinal cord, Guillan-Barré syndrome (general paralyzation, GBS),
involvement of the kidneys in vasculitis and others.
This difference shows that clinical studies before approval of the vaccine are not very thorough.
Only cases where suspicion arises will enter the NA reporting system.
If neither the patient nor the doctor considers that the problems are related to vaccination, they will not logically report them.
Official estimates indicate that 1-10% of NAs actually occur in NCA reporting systems.
Therefore, all numbers you see in the system need to be multiplied by at least 10×.
Personally, the N.F.D. spectrum of flu vaccines scares me quite a bit.
What scares me the most is their unpredictability.
At this point, I want to specifically warn against vaccinating pregnant women recommended by the WHO!
I consider this recommendation to be very dangerous and irresponsible (see article Vaccination of pregnant women against induces ...)
Another argument for vaccination is that if you get sick through vaccination, you will have a milder course.
It is necessary to clarify what a milder course means.
First of all, it may mean that you don't have the flu at all, but some other virus.
Flu vaccination can have no positive effect on its occurrence, only zero or negative (higher susceptibility).
If your doctor doesn't give you a virological examination, neither he nor he knows if you have the flu or just a virus.
But suppose you actually catch the flu despite the vaccinations.
A milder course does not have to mean any win at all.
The intensity of the symptoms of the disease depends primarily on the strength of your immune system.
Intense symptoms, high fever= strong immune system and very effective defense.
Less intense symptoms, low or no fever= weak defenses.
Every medic learns that weakened individuals can have severe flu without fever.
Any vaccination weakens Th1 immunity, which is responsible for fighting infection (2).
Then a "milder" course of flu after vaccination can only mean that you cannot defend yourself effectively.
This condition carries a higher risk of complications and death.
I always prefer my own immunity and the 39-40°C fever my body produces.
Unnatural administration of the altered virus (=vaccine) is known to lead to immunosuppression (8).
The result of a person's collision with the influenza virus is determined by the general state of health, or more precisely, the strength of the immune system.
This is fundamentally influenced by the nutrition and treatment of the disease.
When a person who eats poorly gets the flu, eats abundantly processed foods, plus smokes, does not play sports,
he does not go out, he undoubtedly has worse prospects than a person who eats well, moves and lives healthily overall.
The state of nutrition and immunity will determine whether we get the flu at all and how it turns out.
Unfortunately, ordinary doctors do not deal with this at all and, moreover, make inappropriate recommendations regarding treatment.
I consider it the worst routine recommendation to reduce fever.
Fever reduction drugs (paracetamol, ibuprofen and acetylosalicylic acid) have a common mechanism of action:
block immune action, stop the formation of the substance that immune system cells use to fight infection.
A decrease in the production of these substances is noted by the thermoregulatory center of the brain
(which previously recorded their presence as a sign of infection and raised body temperature)
and the fever will be reduced. The result of taking these drugs is one thing – there are the same or more viruses in you, you just stopped defending yourself.
In the light of this knowledge, flu mortality statistics in the elderly should be evaluated.
Seniors generally eat poorly, have weaker immunity and tend to take medication for everything.
They blindly listen to doctors who need to know better.
Paracetamol in flu can really be a nail in the coffin for them (9, 10, 11, 12).
Note: How to defend yourself against flu and what to do if you already have it?

"Opinions in favor of vaccination are a daily occurrence in the media.
You know them. I have presented you with a different opinion on why it is better not to vaccinate and how to deal with the disease.
Because you are the only one who decides your health personally," dr. Elek concludes.

Source: Thank you for the information provided and the processing of the topic of MuDr. Ludmile Elel,

www.slobodaockovaci.sk, www.tyden.cz