UPMC Children’s Hospital Targeting Pregnancy for Greater Flu Vaccine Acceptance

A world of worry is starting to set amongst the medical cartel as Americans continue to pull back their acceptance of routine vaccination. UPMC is a major pillar of this cartel, and a article in the Post-Gazette highlights a recent paper the hospital system published in JAMA.

The JAMA paper appears to demonstrate remarkable protective benefits for newborns from the flu vaccine. John Williams, pediatrician and chief of pediatric infectious diseases at UPMC Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh, reasures his patients that “Flu vaccines, are entirely, entirely safe. It’s one of the safest vaccines known. It’s been virtually unchanged for 50 years. We have decades of experience with it in hundreds of millions of patients.”

Perhaps Dr. Williams has never looked into the potential harms of flu vaccination, as more than four out of five (83%) of the vaccine injury cases (275/332) settled through the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP) for the nine-month period from mid-November 2016 through mid-August 2017 were flu-vaccine-related, including four deaths.

Some studies show a greater increase in spontaneous abortion in women who received the flu shot. Many OB/GYNs carefully advise their pregnant patients to avoid a lot of possible harmful items, which include a whole host of foods and beverages as well as very strict restrictions on medicines. It should be noted that there are no studies that allow the FDA or CDC to recommend any vaccination during pregnancy. Any use of a vaccine during pregnancy is considered “off-label” use and is a practice doctors nearly never consider, during a normal pregnancy, with any other group of pharmaceuticals.

Another misconception that the UMPC Children’s Hospital and Dr. Williams hold is that pregnant women are immunocompromised. This has become an outdated view that sees a fetus as akin to a transplanted organ that the body’s immune system seeks to reject. The immune system in pregnancy undergoes changes but is not officially immunocompromised or does the women have a weakened immune system.

The takeaway from this reporting should be seen as a positive sign that women who are pregnant (notice the Post-Gazette’s style editors have yet to remove the term pregnant women from their lexicography as the Inquirer has done) are beginning to revert to the norm. A 16% drop over the previous year is a telltale sign that women are not accepting potentially toxicological medicines during any term of their pregnancy.