Quote (Thor123422 @ Feb 11 2015 10:55am)
I haven't been keeping up with the read, but I'll give it a look I guess.
Let's see, sharylattkisson.com, I am immediately suspicious. Doesn't look like a reputable source so far.
Uses mainstream in quotes for some reason....
Not actually posting the evidence, just saying "This is what I heard"
Links the study, that's nice.
http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=486407 Study link
Read over the study, and basically it's a good first investigation, but is in no way conclusive. P value was .8, which is absolutely not conclusive, same for P values of 0.4 and 0.3. Not nearly enough to establish any kind of cause, and barely enough to say there's a solid relationship. Honestly I don't even understand why it was published in the first place. They aren't controlling for flu mutations from year to year, or really anything.
Overall, this study is just a "first glance" at the data and needs a much more in-depth analysis to be conclusive.
Let's see... Pulitzer Prize winning journalist from CBS. Let's get SUSPICIOUS!
Quote
The annual unadjusted number of excess all-cause deaths for all ages, averaged by decade, nearly doubled over the 3 decades studied, from about 21 000 in the 1970s to about 39 000 in the 1990s. The proportions of these influenza-related deaths that occurred among different age groups also changed substantially during this time; for example, people 85 years or older accounted for 24% of all influenza-related deaths in the 1970s, but this group accounted for 44% in the 1990s.
...coupled with the substantial increases in vaccination coverage. And yes, they did look at and make note of special years when the targeted strains and the actual strains didn't align. Sure, I misspoke about vaccination causation of excess deaths, it simply doesn't work is all. Plus you still get the side effects, Mr CuntyMcCunt.