I've read some evidence that people who are more likely to die from flu are less likely to get vaccinated for flu thus the vaccinated population 'looks' healthier.
Worst this means that flu vaccines are bogus (not likely, we're quite good at creating vaccines and they work in labs) and best it means they are a HUGE waste of time and money (a bit more likely but you can level that argument at most things we routinely do for health).
However since I am _not_ a virologist or epidemiologist I tend to follow what my doctor says.
Uh, what? At worst, that's indicative of nothing, not affirmation of the negative hypothesis.
Think of it this way: if you are healthy, you are more likely to get the flu vaccine and less likely to die of any reason. If you are unhealthy, you are less likely to get the flu vaccine and more likely to die of any reason. Notice that neither of these statements say the following, "Patients who receive the flu vaccine are [more/less] likely to die of the flu then they would have been." Instead, it simply makes the statement that you cannot treat statistics as affirmation of flu effectiveness.
Worst this means that flu vaccines are bogus (not likely, we're quite good at creating vaccines and they work in labs) and best it means they are a HUGE waste of time and money (a bit more likely but you can level that argument at most things we routinely do for health).
However since I am _not_ a virologist or epidemiologist I tend to follow what my doctor says.