Cochrane review and flu vaccines - Page 4

[Rrrrrachel]

I don't understand why you keep quoting that.  They still don't say the flu vaccine is ineffective.  I agree they are very critical of public policy and of the available research but the still ultimately conclude it is effective.

It is still a lie to say that they cochrane reivew says the flu vaccine is ineffective.  They dont' say it.  Not matter how many times you quote them saying something else.

[MamaMunchkin]

Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel 

I don't understand why you keep quoting that.  They still don't say the flu vaccine is ineffective.  I agree they are very critical of public policy and of the available research but the still ultimately conclude it is effective.

It is still a lie to say that they cochrane reivew says the flu vaccine is ineffective.  They dont' say it.  Not matter how many times you quote them saying something else.

I don't understand why you keep saying that the flu vax is effective - without - mentioning the warning that the Cochrane authors said, in - both - reviews ... that the evidence is thin and that there is evidence of widespread manipulation.

[Rrrrrachel]

I actually am not saying it's effective (although I do believe it is) all I'm saying is that the cochrane review authors did not say it's ineffective, as has been claimed.  Actually, they found it WAS effective in several areas, in spite of the thin evidence.

[MamaMunchkin]

Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel 

I actually am not saying it's effective (although I do believe it is) all I'm saying is that the cochrane review authors did not say it's ineffective, as has been claimed.  Actually, they found it WAS effective in several areas, in spite of the thin evidence.

Effecitve or ineffective ... so, what is this conclusion based on - given the evidence is thin and there is evidence of widespread manipulation?

[Rrrrrachel]

I don't know, Mama.  But it's still a lie to claim they said the flu shot is ineffective.

[MamaMunchkin]

Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel 

I don't know, Mama.  But it's still a lie to claim they said the flu shot is ineffective.

But it's a - fact - that the Cochrane authors warned that reliable evidence is thin and that there is evidence of widespread manipulation.  In both studies.

[Rrrrrachel]

sure, but they DIDN'T say it was ineffective!  I feel like we're locked in a repeating pattern, here . . .

[MamaMunchkin]

Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel 

sure, but they DIDN'T say it was ineffective!  I feel like we're locked in a repeating pattern, here . . .

Sure, but it is - still - based on thin evidence and evidence of widespread manipulation. 

[rachelsmama]

Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel 

sure, but they DIDN'T say it was ineffective!  I feel like we're locked in a repeating pattern, here . . .

Yeah, it all comes down to perspective.  Rrrrrachel is probably assuming it's safe and worthwhile until proven otherwise, and MamaMunchkin is reluctant to inject her healthy children without more compelling evidence that it's worth it. 
 

I hope the Cochrane reviews help put an end to all the peer pressure and other nonsense that goes on during flu-shot season.  It would be nice if the flu shot could return to being a medical procedure that can be opted into with informed consent, instead of the hooplah that goes on right now.

[Rrrrrachel]

What I'm assuming about the flu shot is really irrelevant, since all I'm doing is pointing out that they didn't say what people keep claiming they said.

[Taximom5]

Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel 

Yes, people are going around saying the cochrane review said the flu shot was ineffective.  Which is why I started the thread.

Well, according to the lead researcher for the review:

"In other words, we report that no effect of the influenza vaccines was detectable on influenza and its complications such as death.

I also like his final statement in that letter:  "It is not my place to judge the policies currently underway in British Columbia, but coercion and forcing public ridicule on human beings (for example by forcing them to wear distinctive badges or clothing) is usually the practice of tyrants."

 http://www.vancouversun.com/health/Cochrane+review+vaccine+definitive+health+officer+suggests/7543272/story.html#ixzz2Dx2sYzYQ

[Mosaic]

Way too many posts have been removed from this thread because of User Agreement violations (or responses to them). Props to HappyHappyMommy and Cynthia for cleaning up the mess in here!

I am opening this back up to discuss the Cochrane review, but I'm offering some additional guidelines for your consideration to avoid getting this thread shut down permanently:

1) Nazi references generally don't lead a conversation to a good place. So, please, don't go there.

2) People can interpret the same data differently. People also may have different feelings about what is considered "effective" or "ineffective." Your post would be more informative (and perhaps influential) if you explain your interpretation rather than argue against someone else's. Calling others' interpretations a "lie" is missing an opportunity to understand where they're coming from or point out something that you weigh more heavily in your interpretation.

Thanks for taking this as a fresh start!!
Edited by Mosaic - 12/3/12 at 5:42am

[Rrrrrachel]

I'm not trying to be ornery. If people want to interpret the cochrane review as saying flu vaccines are ineffective, more power to them. If they want to say what they got out of the cochrane review was that flu vaccines are ineffective, not effective enough, or the research was unreliable, good for them.

but saying the cochrane review said flu vaccines were ineffective is a lie. Period. We can't call a lie a lie?

Not everything is open to interpretation.

[Rrrrrachel]

From the cochrane review on flu vaccine and healthy children:

Quote:

Influenza vaccines are efficacious in preventing cases of influenza in children older than two years of age, but little evidence is available for children younger than two years of age.

From the review of healthy adults

Quote:

Influenza vaccines have a modest effect in reducing influenza symptoms and working days lost.

Not only does it not say the flu vaccine is ineffective, it says the opposite.

[Eligracey]

American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Volume 207, Issue 3 SUPPL., September 2012, Pages S38-S46

---

Safety of influenza immunization during pregnancy for the fetus and the neonate
Bednarczyk, R.A.ab, Adjaye-Gbewonyo, D.a, Omer, S.B.ab

a  Center for Health Research-Southeast, Kaiser Permanente, Atlanta,
GA, United States
b  Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States

---

Abstract
Since the 1960s, pregnant women in the United States have been
recommended to receive influenza vaccine. A maternal concern about the
possibility of adverse fetal and neonatal outcomes after the
vaccination of pregnant women has been cited as a reason for low
maternal influenza vaccination coverage. Recent research has
identified benefits to the fetus and neonate after maternal influenza
vaccination that have prompted efforts to increase coverage in
pregnant women. There is a long history of research findings that
highlight the safety of vaccinating pregnant women. This review
summarizes nearly 40 years of research on influenza vaccination of
pregnant women and the lack of association with adverse fetal or
neonatal outcomes. Future research should focus on vaccinations that
are given in the first trimester of pregnancy and on product-specific
analyses to account for differences in manufacturing processes. © 2012
Mosby, Inc.

[Eligracey]

Sorry, cutting and pasting on my phone! So the review above indicates that the flu vaccine is safe for fetuses and provides health benefits to babies after they're born if they received it when in utero. I can get the full text from my work if anyone wants to see it.

[Rrrrrachel]

Thanks, Eligracey!  There are a lot of studies that point to the flu vaccine being even more effective than the cochrane review said it was, but I am trying to keep this about the cochrane review, specifically.  I'm hoping to clear up some misunderstandings about it that may have been generated by some misleading claims.

(but here's a link to that study for anyone who's interested, which I definitely was: http://www.ajog.org/article/S0002-9378(12)00739-9/abstract )

[Mosaic]

Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel 

I'm not trying to be ornery. If people want to interpret the cochrane review as saying flu vaccines are ineffective, more power to them. If they want to say what they got out of the cochrane review was that flu vaccines are ineffective, not effective enough, or the research was unreliable, good for them.
but saying the cochrane review said flu vaccines were ineffective is a lie. Period. We can't call a lie a lie?
Not everything is open to interpretation.

I hate quibbling about word choice; but on a message board, that's all we have, right? The word "lie" implies dishonesty or intentional misleading, which is a judgement on the poster more than it is a comment about the facts. Your following post, however, which quotes the article and makes your point, is *perfect*. So perfectly perfectly perfect, I want to give it a kitten.

[Rrrrrachel]

Yeah, I probably shouldn't have been so insistent on using the word lie.  It is loaded.  It is very misleading, though.

[geekgolightly]

Originally Posted by Eligracey 

American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Volume 207, Issue 3 SUPPL., September 2012, Pages S38-S46

---

Safety of influenza immunization during pregnancy for the fetus and the neonate
Bednarczyk, R.A.ab, Adjaye-Gbewonyo, D.a, Omer, S.B.ab
a  Center for Health Research-Southeast, Kaiser Permanente, Atlanta,
GA, United States
b  Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States

---

Abstract
Since the 1960s, pregnant women in the United States have been
recommended to receive influenza vaccine. A maternal concern about the
possibility of adverse fetal and neonatal outcomes after the
vaccination of pregnant women has been cited as a reason for low
maternal influenza vaccination coverage. Recent research has
identified benefits to the fetus and neonate after maternal influenza
vaccination that have prompted efforts to increase coverage in
pregnant women. There is a long history of research findings that
highlight the safety of vaccinating pregnant women. This review
summarizes nearly 40 years of research on influenza vaccination of
pregnant women and the lack of association with adverse fetal or
neonatal outcomes. Future research should focus on vaccinations that
are given in the first trimester of pregnancy and on product-specific
analyses to account for differences in manufacturing processes. © 2012
Mosby, Inc.

Thanks for posting this. I didnt get the flu vaccine for years while I was TTC/Pregnant and wish I had. I was working as a nurse at the time, but was still under the last bits of antivax influence. Really wish this meta-analysis had come out sooner, but at least it is out now.