Let's assume for a moment that the flu vaccine provided a 100 percent guarantee against contracting influenza (which it doesn't, but just pretend it does). Would it make sense to vaccinate your family against the flu if doing so meant you increased their risk of contracting other upper respiratory illnesses by more than five times? Of course not! Reducing the risk of contracting one illness only to heighten the risk of multiple others is simply illogical. And yet that is exactly what the flu vaccine – which is only between 33 and 70 percent effective, anyway – does.

A study published in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases actually found that not only did the inactivated influenza vaccine not provide additional protection against the flu virus, but it also left recipients lacking in "temporary non-specific immunity that protected against other respiratory viruses." (Related: Flu vaccine BOMBSHELL: 630% more "aerosolized flu virus particles" emitted by people who received flu shots… flu vaccines actually SPREAD the flu.)

Playing Russian roulette with the flu shot

Natural Health 365 reported that while U.S. authorities have tended to look the other way regarding flu vaccine side effects, researchers in China have been far more proactive about determining exactly what the effects of these vaccines might be. The study mentioned above, which was conducted in Hong Kong, set out to compare the health of vaccinated patients versus those who have not been immunized in relation to either the flu and other illnesses.