The argument against flu vaccinations would typically be called a straw man’s argument, although, in this case, I truly believe that’s an insult to the intelligence of straw men everywhere.

The fair comparison is not people who died due to flu versus those who died due to flu vaccination, but rather, people who died due to flu versus how many would have died if there was no flu vaccination available.

According to this study in the American Journal of Public Health (2008 May; 98(5): 939–945), the death rate due to flu was 10.2 per 100,000 in the 1940s; by the 1990s, that rate had fallen to 0.56 per 100,000 living instead of dying from the flu.

Finally, how can the letter writer [Annette Huenke, The Leader, July 5] simultaneously dismiss CDC and other science-based expert recommendations for flu vaccinations while accepting the scientific information printed in the MSDS [material safety data sheet] from the vaccine manufacturer?

Either you believe in science, or you believe in tin foil.

JONATHAN BAKIN

Port Townsend

Editor’s note: We appreciate it when writers cite studies and articles but refrain from including hyperlinks to websites. Hyperlinks are often long and complicated and do not reprint well in a newspaper. General website information is permitted; hyperlinks are not.