Cleveland Clinic’s release of a new study that appears to raise serious doubt about the value of the flu vaccine. On April 4, that research found its way onto the preprint server medRxiv. It showcases the positive effects that flu vaccinations have had on the lives of nearly 53,000 Cleveland Clinic employees. The findings reveal a concerning statistic: individuals who received the flu shot showed a 27% higher risk of testing positive for the flu compared to their unvaccinated counterparts.
The Cleveland Clinic objects to these shocking findings. They stress the research does not prove that vaccination increases the likelihood of getting the flu. In that same study, nearly 82% of employees received the flu vaccination. That’s why experts are calling for caution when interpreting these results.
Understanding the Findings
The study’s results have generated a lot of excitement and controversy over vaccine effectiveness, especially for the next 2024-25 flu season. Jeffrey S. Morris, PhD, performed the analytic approach to the research. He was surprised to find that vaccinated people were actually 27% more likely to get infected with the flu than people who didn’t get the vaccine. Amazingly, he put this statistic out there in public. This drew outrage from across the internet, including one X user posting “GET THE SHOT GET THE DISEASE!”
We spoke with Geeta Sood, MD, ScM, to get some more background on the study’s impactful findings. This is a clear example where testing bias probably skewed these results, she said. Wheeler added that those who choose not to get vaccinated tend to forgo testing or going to a physician altogether. That trend is not unique. Yet this strongly confounding variable greatly complicates any interpretation of the study’s conclusions.
The Cleveland Clinic pointed out that the new study looked purely at infection rates. It did not consider serious illness or hospitalization rates. Vaccines have been shown to dramatically decrease these more severe health impacts over history.
The Role of Vaccination and Virus Mutation
Experts emphasize that even if the flu vaccine proves less effective due to mismatches with circulating virus strains, vaccination remains important. As Shira Doron, MD, noted, given the constant mutation of influenza, those success rates are not guaranteed on an annual basis. “We have to start the manufacturing process of the vaccine well in advance of flu season,” she noted. As a result, there is usually a lag between vaccine effectiveness and what’s actually circulating strains.
Additionally, Sood emphasized that vaccinated people do not get influenza from the vaccine. She noted that the inactivated and recombinant vaccines that the majority of individuals get do not include the key components of the virus. The virus can no longer reproduce,” she said. It’s simply too late for it to do so now.
The Importance of Peer Review and Future Research
This study, as a preprint study, has not yet been through the full process of peer review. Dr. Shira Doron, one of the most creative thinkers in this space, knows just how important this piece is saying, “Too often preprints never become manuscripts. But she also admitted that, considering the history of this research team, it probably would go on to make it further. She warned that “sometimes the conclusions change very dramatically from preprint to peer-reviewed, so you have to be careful,” highlighting the need for careful analysis.
The Cleveland Clinic’s results are an important counterpoint coming at a crucial time amid the debate over vaccination and public health. Despite concerns raised by this study, experts continue to advocate for seasonal flu vaccinations as a means to protect against severe illness and hospitalization.
Leave a Reply