If Mr. Hawkins had bothered to contact me before attacking me, he would have received the following scientific data that supported my letter to the editor.  In medicine we reference the original data, not using the CDC website as a definitive source.  Within the context of RCT (randomized controlled trials) the experts (neither Mr. Hawkins nor myself are experts in statistical analysis) use compilations like the Cochrane database.  The following are direct quotes from medline Cochrane Database articles with citations given for the reader.  All of this data was available to Mr. Hawkins prior to his libel against me had he bothered to even look at my website:  www.maloneymedical.com.  I have literally hundreds of studies posted on numerous diseases as a public service.   

In reference to that effect to the flu vaccine (no data exists on the swine flu vaccine.  Everything is about the regular vaccine.  Since the two were prepared the same way, all the experts expect the effect will be the same). 

“Excluding the studies of the 1968 to 1969 pandemic, effectiveness was 15% (95% CI 9% to 22%) and efficacy was 73% (95% CI 53% to 84%). Vaccination had a modest effect on time off work, but there was insufficient evidence to draw conclusions on hospital admissions or complication rates.”  In other words, the overall effective rate of the flu vaccine in preventing the flu was 15%.  It has not been shown to prevent complications, including hospitalizations and deaths.  This is what I said in my editorial to the KJ.  It is scientific fact.  Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Apr 18;(2):CD001269

“Overall the percentage of participants experiencing clinical influenza decreased by 6%. Use of the vaccine significantly reduced time off work but only by 0.16 days for each influenza episode (95% CI 0.04 to 0.29 days); Analysis of vaccines matching the circulating strain gave higher estimates of efficacy, whilst inclusion of all other vaccines reduced the efficacy. REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS: Influenza vaccines are effective in reducing serologically confirmed cases of influenza. However, they are not as effective in reducing cases of clinical influenza and number of working days lost. Universal immunisation of healthy adults is not supported by the results of this review.”  So, rather than being a quack for criticizing vaccination, it turns out that I’m actually promoting the best scientific information available.  Mr. Hawkins does not seem to realize that one of the CDC’s goals is the promotion of vaccination.  It does that very well, but does not give an objective analysis of the information available.  This is the second number I referenced in my editorial, as the 6-15% range of effectiveness for flu vaccines.  The final line is a direct quote by the scientific experts.  They don’t recommend universal vaccination because it isn’t scientific.  Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001;(4):CD001269

“In children under two, the efficacy of inactivated vaccine was similar to placebo”  Again, the CDC recommends the vaccination of children over six months but the scientific data available does not support this recommendation.  Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Apr 16;(2):CD004879

The information I provided above is not “cherry picking.”  It is the most recent, definitive scientific medical information available. 

 I believe that Mr. Hawkins was unable to find the study I cited on black elderberry being effective on the H1N1 newest mutation.  A simple check of the following terms on medline:  “elderberry, H1N1” produces the following result:

Phytochemistry. 2009 Jul;70(10):1255-61. Epub 2009 Aug 12.

Elderberry flavonoids bind to and prevent H1N1 infection in vitro.

Roschek B Jr, Fink RC, McMichael MD, Li D, Alberte RS.

HerbalScience Group LLC, 1004 Collier Center Way, Suite 200, Naples, FL 34110, USA.

A ionization technique in mass spectrometry called Direct Analysis in Real Time Mass Spectrometry (DART TOF-MS) coupled with a Direct Binding Assay was used to identify and characterize anti-viral components of an elderberry fruit (Sambucus nigra L.) extract without either derivatization or separation by standard chromatographic techniques. The elderberry extract inhibited Human Influenza A (H1N1) infection in vitro with an IC(50) value of 252+/-34 microg/mL. The Direct Binding Assay established that flavonoids from the elderberry extract bind to H1N1 virions and, when bound, block the ability of the viruses to infect host cells. Two compounds were identified, 5,7,3',4'-tetra-O-methylquercetin (1) and 5,7-dihydroxy-4-oxo-2-(3,4,5-trihydroxyphenyl)chroman-3-yl-3,4,5-trihydroxycyclohexanecarboxylate (2), as H1N1-bound chemical species. Compound 1 and dihydromyricetin (3), the corresponding 3-hydroxyflavonone of 2, were synthesized and shown to inhibit H1N1 infection in vitro by binding to H1N1 virions, blocking host cell entry and/or recognition. Compound 1 gave an IC(50) of 0.13 microg/mL (0.36 microM) for H1N1 infection inhibition, while dihydromyricetin (3) achieved an IC(50) of 2.8 microg/mL (8.7 microM). The H1N1 inhibition activities of the elderberry flavonoids compare favorably to the known anti-influenza activities of Oseltamivir (Tamiflu; 0.32 microM) and Amantadine (27 microM).

PMID: 19682714