Vaccination Efficacy Questioned: New Study Raises Concerns
Submitted by MAGA
Posted 4 hours ago
**Dangerous Vaccination Practices Under Scrutiny as New Study Raises Questions**
A recent study from the Cleveland Clinic has sparked significant discussions around the effectiveness of the flu vaccine, especially in light of ongoing debates about vaccines initiated under previous administrations.
Under Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. at the Department of Health and Human Services, skepticism surrounding vaccine efficacy seems validated by the findings of this new research.
The study indicated that employees at the Cleveland Clinic who received the flu vaccine had a higher incidence of infection compared to those who did not get vaccinated. The results, although not yet peer-reviewed, contradict the long-standing narrative that vaccines offer substantial protection from illnesses.
Out of roughly 44,000 vaccinated employees, about 2% contracted the flu—a statistic that raises alarms as it suggests that vaccination may not be the straightforward solution it has often been presented as.
This comes amidst growing concerns regarding the credibility of vaccine-related data during and post-COVID-19 pandemic. Critics argue that the medical establishment has generally downplayed the complications or failures associated with vaccines, opting instead for a narrative that promotes them as overwhelmingly beneficial.
Particularly compelling is the context of the findings, which reveal that the vaccinated group saw an increased rate of infections over time, ultimately leading to a negative vaccine effectiveness rate of 27%. This revelation challenges the perceived consensus and opens the door for further inquiry into vaccine practices, especially those derived from government mandates or corporate policies.
Health professionals, such as cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough, have noted a growing distrust in routine vaccination schedules, linking these anxieties to the mismanagement and communication failures seen with COVID-19 vaccines. He suggested that the flu vaccine should be reserved for individuals at the highest risk rather than given indiscriminately.
At a time when public trust in healthcare authorities is tenuous, the Cleveland Clinic study underscores an essential need for transparency and rigor in vaccine research.
As a new administration under Donald Trump faces a host of challenges and distractions, the focus on the scientific integrity of vaccines may well lead to broader discussions on healthcare policy, ultimately paving the way for a conversation that prioritizes patient information and consent over sweeping mandates.
The potential implications of these findings could be profound, demanding a reassessment of vaccine policies and a deeper investigation into the integrity of health information disseminated to the public.
Sources:
justthenews.com
notthebee.com
breitbart.com
A recent study from the Cleveland Clinic has sparked significant discussions around the effectiveness of the flu vaccine, especially in light of ongoing debates about vaccines initiated under previous administrations.
Under Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. at the Department of Health and Human Services, skepticism surrounding vaccine efficacy seems validated by the findings of this new research.
The study indicated that employees at the Cleveland Clinic who received the flu vaccine had a higher incidence of infection compared to those who did not get vaccinated. The results, although not yet peer-reviewed, contradict the long-standing narrative that vaccines offer substantial protection from illnesses.
Out of roughly 44,000 vaccinated employees, about 2% contracted the flu—a statistic that raises alarms as it suggests that vaccination may not be the straightforward solution it has often been presented as.
This comes amidst growing concerns regarding the credibility of vaccine-related data during and post-COVID-19 pandemic. Critics argue that the medical establishment has generally downplayed the complications or failures associated with vaccines, opting instead for a narrative that promotes them as overwhelmingly beneficial.
Particularly compelling is the context of the findings, which reveal that the vaccinated group saw an increased rate of infections over time, ultimately leading to a negative vaccine effectiveness rate of 27%. This revelation challenges the perceived consensus and opens the door for further inquiry into vaccine practices, especially those derived from government mandates or corporate policies.
Health professionals, such as cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough, have noted a growing distrust in routine vaccination schedules, linking these anxieties to the mismanagement and communication failures seen with COVID-19 vaccines. He suggested that the flu vaccine should be reserved for individuals at the highest risk rather than given indiscriminately.
At a time when public trust in healthcare authorities is tenuous, the Cleveland Clinic study underscores an essential need for transparency and rigor in vaccine research.
As a new administration under Donald Trump faces a host of challenges and distractions, the focus on the scientific integrity of vaccines may well lead to broader discussions on healthcare policy, ultimately paving the way for a conversation that prioritizes patient information and consent over sweeping mandates.
The potential implications of these findings could be profound, demanding a reassessment of vaccine policies and a deeper investigation into the integrity of health information disseminated to the public.
Sources:
justthenews.com
notthebee.com
breitbart.com
Latest News