Mark, it’s an ethical issue when it comes to using human subjects. Are you going to volunteer? The study would also involve exposing all participants to an infectious dose of the specific strain of flu virus. By the way, I didn’t see you mention what strain of flu? How bout the 1918 flu strain that killed 60 million people.
Vaccine trials have been conducted with negative controls in animal models by the hundreds if not thousands. Search the literature for yourself. What is your training?
Yes, it is an ethical issue, isn't it?
Is it ethical to study people who voluntarily do not take vaccines (control group) versus those who voluntarily will take a vaccine under study?
Or is it ethical to declare a product safe and effective when we just don't know that to be the case?
Is it ethical for a physician to tell a person they need to have the flu shot to protect them against the flu this winter (and, oh, by the way, with the exception of the egg allergy, not mention ANY side effect)?
Or is it ethical for a physician to tell a person they need to have the flu shot to reduce the vulnerability of the three or four specific strains they estimate will impact us...so that you go from a 10% chance of getting one of these 3 or 4 varieties of flu to a 3.5% chance? And let's talk about the potential side effects and adverse reactions while we're at it...
Again, let me stress, I'm not being anti-vaccination. If you work in a hospital, a refugee camp, a pre-school, and so on, it is probably a pretty good idea to at least think about it.
But I see conflicts of interest all over the place and I see really inadequate studies being done...studies that appear almost gamed. Almost.
Frankly, the attitudes of a lot of people are just perfect examples of argumentum ad verecundiam (Appeal to Authority):