Yes, but for young children and the elderly that's like saying, "well, at least most of the bullets missed them."
I think you and a couple of others are misconstruing the point I am making.
I am not advocating against getting the flu shot nor am I saying it's not worth it.
My point is that due to the manufacturing process delay required by the current system, the CDC/WHO have to make guesses based on statistical probabilities.
What we need is a faster manufacturing process and/or a new delivery system that would greatly reduce the manufacturing, packaging and shipping phases
Every so often, they guess wrong and by the time the flu season makes that evident, a lot of people are already infected. If they can reduce the manufacturing process and/or provide a much faster delivery system, they could both guess and adapt and react should they guess wrong much faster.
Here's an article discussing the wrong guesses for the 2015 flu strains ..
---
Why scientists guessed wrong on this year’s flu vaccine, and why it could happen again
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...c6e010-9744-11e4-aabd-d0b93ff613d5_story.html
It’s an annual guessing game of sorts, one backed by data but also plagued with uncertainty. And when the guesses don’t exactly match the reality, as happened this past year, it can mean a dismal and deadly flu season.
“We’ll do the best we can,” said Daum, a Chicago doctor who heads the Food and Drug Administration advisory committee that makes the recommendations. But “the virus is smarter than we are at this point. I don’t know of any disease that plagues us more. It’s very, very frustrating and a very inexact science. . . . We do it with varying luck, and I think the luck is mostly the virus’s whim.”
---
I think some protection is better than no protection, but that still does not mean the process could not ultimately be improved.