A recent study from the Cleveland Clinic has sparked controversy after finding that the influenza vaccine used during the 2024–2025 flu season may have done more harm than good. According to the data, individuals who received the flu shot were 26.9% more likely to contract influenza than those who skipped the vaccine.
This negative efficacy figure has raised significant questions about the effectiveness—and future—of seasonal flu vaccines.
📊 The Findings at a Glance
-
Study Group: 53,000 Cleveland Clinic employees
-
Vaccinated: Over 82% of participants
-
Result: Vaccinated individuals experienced a significantly higher rate of flu infection compared to their unvaccinated peers over a 25-week study period.
-
Hazard Ratio: 1.27 — meaning vaccinated individuals were approximately 27% more likely to get the flu.
Early in the season, infection rates between the two groups were similar. But over time, the gap widened, with the vaccinated group showing more cumulative flu cases.
🧬 Echoes of COVID Vaccine Data
This isn’t the first time Cleveland Clinic researchers have found “negative efficacy” in vaccines. A previous study on COVID-19 vaccination revealed a similar trend: more doses received correlated with a higher risk of contracting COVID.
They also found that natural immunity—particularly from recent infection—offered stronger protection than vaccination.
🌍 Are These Results Generalizable?
According to the authors, yes. The study’s findings apply to healthy working-age adults across the U.S., not just in Ohio. That’s concerning, given how heavily U.S. health agencies promote the annual flu shot.
💉 What Type of Vaccine Was Used?
The study evaluated a trivalent inactivated vaccine (not mRNA), targeting:
-
H1N1
-
H3N2
-
Influenza B
These vaccines are formulated months in advance based on predictions of circulating strains. When those predictions miss the mark, the result can be poor—or even harmful—efficacy.
⚠️ Bigger Questions on the Horizon
While the study didn’t examine side effects or pharmaceutical profits, it raises pressing issues:
-
Why promote a vaccine with negative efficacy?
-
Will public health agencies push for a shift to mRNA-based flu vaccines instead?
The speaker ends with a stark warning: a poorly performing vaccine may open the door for mRNA flu shots, which come with their own safety and ethical concerns.
🚨 Bottom Line
This year’s flu vaccine didn’t just fail to protect—it seems to have increased risk.
With a -26.9% efficacy rate, the Cleveland Clinic’s findings challenge mainstream public health narratives and demand a deeper look into how vaccines are developed, approved, and recommended.
Medicine has been weaponized.