[v0x]

Barely better than placebo? The paper you linked says:

"Inactivated influenza vaccines probably reduce influenza in healthy adults from 2.3% without vaccination to 0.9%"

That's a ~60% reduction, which is nothing to shake a stick at. But I don't think it's a surprise to anyone that the flu shots do not have a remarkably high reduction rate; that's been public knowledge for a long time. In fact the CDC's own data on this is even gloomier than the Cochrane review:

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/vaccines-work/effectiveness-studies....

In any event, if people are concerned about mRNA vaccines for whatever reason, there are other vaccines out there like the J&J vaccine.

While there are always reasons to be distrustful of the gov't (it is not hard to find examples of the CDC, Surgeon General, etc being dead wrong on aspects of the pandemic), a cost benefit analysis of whether to get the vaccine or not should produce a pretty clear result.

[__blockcipher__]

Sorry, where are you getting that quote? I couldn't find your quote on the page. Anyway, that quote doesn't disprove the points I made whatsoever. The number needed to treat is enormous, and there's no detectable benefit on either hospitalizations or missed days of work:

> Injected influenza vaccines probably have a small protective effect against influenza and ILI (moderate-certainty evidence), as 71 people would need to be vaccinated to avoid one influenza case, and 29 would need to be vaccinated to avoid one case of ILI. Vaccination may have little or no appreciable effect on hospitalisations (low-certainty evidence) or number of working days lost.

That's literally the spitting definition of "barely better than placebo" in my book.