By now most Americans are clued in to the dangerous scam of the COVID shots and, despite the fierce government marketing behind them, are rejecting them. Thus far, less than 4% of the eligible population has gotten the new Omicron “booster” shot, and in Florida, where there is intrepid leadership at the top, the number is just 1 in 573 people. Whether it’s the ubiquitous sudden deaths or the clear lack of efficacy, after a painful 21 months of endless doses, the public finally got the message.

However, the bio-security state is not done by a long shot, and its leaders are planning a massive campaign to use another vaccine that the public is largely familiar with and accepting of in order to continue using their dangerous technologies. In other words, it’s time we give the flu shots – both past and future versions – the same scrutiny we’ve given to the COVID shots.

While Americans seem comfortable with the current flu shots despite their lack of proven efficacy, do we know what they are putting in the new versions and what they have planned for the future? On Monday, the AP published an article (perhaps at the behest of the industry?) warning seniors to ask for their “revved-up” flu shots this season. After all, because the flu essentially disappeared for two years, they can now scare people about flu season as if it’s something novel. So, what are these revved-up versions?

There are three choices. Fluzone High-Dose and Flublok each contain higher doses of the main anti-flu ingredient. The other option is Fluad Adjuvanted, which has a regular dosage but contains a special ingredient that helps boost people’s immune response.

Hmm … “higher doses” … “a special ingredient” … after everything we’ve been through over the past two years, don’t we want to find out more information about these ingredients and doses? What the COVID shots should have taught anyone is that vaccines have to be perfect. Not all types and levels of antibodies are good, and many can cause the immune system to either misfire or to attack the body with autoantibodies. And this is before we even discuss the mRNA lipid nanoparticle flu shots Pfizer and Moderna have planned for us next year. Before we blindly accept new versions of the flu shot, we should first understand that not everything we’ve been told about the existing flu shots is as pure as the wind-driven snow.

While it is certainly clear that the number of adverse events reported to VAERS from the flu shots is infinitesimal compared to the COVID shots, the lack of efficacy and waning immunity of these shots should give us pause. Now that we understand the concept of negative efficacy and original antigenic sin associated with waning vaccines, we must ask if the same holds true for the flu shot. Even according to the CDC, the flu shot was just 16% effective last season! However, now that we better understand waning immunity, we have to suspect an outcome of negative efficacy. In fact, past literature has suggested exactly that.

A study of infection rates in children in Hong Kong in a three-year randomized placebo-controlled vaccine study, 2009-2012, found no statistical difference or slight negative efficacy for several seasons.

Similarly, a Canadian study of vaccine efficacy during the 2018-2019 flu season found negative efficacy for some age groups because “vaccine mismatch [a form of original antigenic sin] may have negatively interacted with imprinted immunity.”

Despite all the fanfare around the flu shot, a 2005 study published in JAMA soberingly found that there was no correlation between “increasing vaccination coverage after 1980 with declining mortality rates in any age group.” The only mortality decline researchers discovered was against H3N2 in those born before the 1968 pandemic because of natural immunity, not the vaccines.

Here are some other studies published in prominent journals that failed to discover any benefit from flu shots.

• Vaccines to prevent influenza in healthy adults — Cochrane
• Influenza vaccination: policy versus evidence — PMC
• Tamiflu & influenza vaccines: more harm than good? — The BMJ
• The Effect of Influenza Vaccination for the Elderly on Hospitalization and Mortality: An Observational Study With a Regression Discontinuity Design — PubMed
• Efficacy and effectiveness of influenza vaccines: a systematic review and meta-analysis — PubMed

This is certainly not the informed consent most people have gotten over the past few decades regarding the flu shots.

What’s worse than zero efficacy is for the vaccine to harm the development of natural immunity in children. Much as we are seeing with the COVID shots, studies have shown that some flu vaccines may “hamper” the development of virus-specific CD8+ T cell immunity in children. A shocking 2010 study from pathologists at the University of Massachusetts Medical School seemed to discover the same viral immune escape we are seeing with the COVID shots creating endless variants. “We show that heterologous immunity can disrupt T-cell memory pools, alter the complexity of the T-cell repertoire, change patterns of T-cell immunodominance, lead to the selection of viral epitope-escape variants, alter the pathogenesis of viral infections, and, by virtue of the private specificity of T-cell repertoires within individuals, contribute to dramatic variations in viral disease,” concluded the authors.

For more information on possible negative efficacy, antibody dependent disease enhancement, or immune imprinting potentially caused by flu shots, you can read more in the following papers:

• Annual Vaccination against Influenza Virus Hampers Development of Virus-Specific CD8+ T Cell Immunity in Children — PMC
• Increased Risk of Noninfluenza Respiratory Virus Infections Associated With Receipt of Inactivated Influenza Vaccine — PMC
• Seasonal influenza vaccine and increased risk of pandemic A/H1N1‐related illness: first detection of the association in British Columbia, Canada — PubMed
• The plea against annual influenza vaccination? 'The Hoskins' Paradox' revisited — PubMed
• Variable efficacy of repeated annual influenza vaccination — PMC
• (Lymphocyte depletion) The effect of killed influenza virus vaccine on the kinetics of normal human lymphocytes — PubMed
• Swine study suggests flu vaccination may sometimes backfire — CIDRAP
• Negative Vaccine Effectiveness Isn't a New Phenomenon – It Turned Up in the Swine Flu Vaccine — The Daily Sceptic)
• (Flu vax raises covid rate) Influenza vaccination and respiratory virus interference among Department of Defense personnel during the 2017–2018 influenza season — ScienceDirect
• (flu vaccine wanes rapidly) Doubling up on Covid, flu shots may have downside, experts say — STAT
• Antibodies to influenza nucleoprotein cross-react with human hypocretin receptor 2

Thus, even before the pharma companies tamper with the flu shots and “rev” them up with mRNA and LNP technology, there is already an open question of whether the vaccines have even worked and whether any degree of minor efficacy has come at the expense of long-term immune suppression or macro viral immune escape. Now, both Pfizer and Moderna are racing to complete their phase 3 clinical trials on mRNA flu shots. We already know that mRNA flu shots passed down in the DNA of four litters of offspring in mice.

It is perhaps this newfound knowledge about vaccines that has led to a massive decline in flu shot uptake among Israeli health care workers.

The time has come to stop blindly treating every vaccine as a categorical one-sided benefit to be given to every last person in perpetuity. Just as chemotherapy, antibiotics, surgery, and other medical interventions have their time and place, vaccines must be more targeted. The time has come for a massive commission on vaccines in every state to start from scratch and treat no shot like a sacred cow. There’s no better shot to begin with than the flu shot, and there’s no time like the present.