© SebastianRushworth.com
As I've discussed several times before on this blog, mortality from a specific disease is a meaningless when trying to work out if an intervention is life saving or not. The only statistic that matters is overall mortality. If an intervention decreases your risk of dying of breast cancer by 10%, but increases your risk of dying of something else by 10%, you probably wouldn't be interested in that intervention. People care about whether they are dead or alive, not about which cause of death is listed on their death certificate.
Unfortunately, a lot of scientists don't seem to understand this very basic concept, and so continue to produce meaningless studies showing that intervention x decreases the risk of dying of y, without any thought as to what the effect on overall mortality is.
When it comes to screening, there is a second problem, and that is that screening generates a lot of false positives. A false positive is when someone is told that they have a disease when in fact they don't. The problem with false positives is that they lead to follow-up interventions, which can sometimes cause physical harm and even death.
Comment: So it seems that the harmful effects of vaccines are even worse than even a well informed individual might suspect, if such a thing were possible.
It couldn't be said enough: getting enough rest/deep sleep, exercise, maintaining a low-carb diet, and sticking to supplements like Vitamin C and Vitamin D. among other things - are really one's best bet for boosting one's immune system naturally and fighting the flu.
And that sure beats the risk of taking toxic vaccines.