Questions over vaccine safety
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Reddit
Google
Stumble Upon
Fark
Newsvine
YahooBuzz
Bebo
Twitter
Independent Minds
enlarge
Health officials have been forced to withdraw 21,000 doses of the meningitis C vaccine from GP clinics around the UK after it emerged that some doses may have been contaminated with a blood-poisoning bacterium.
More than 60,000 doses of the vaccine, which is offered to all four-month-old babies, could be contaminated with the hospital-acquired infection – the Staphylococcus aureus bacterium – and a third of these had already been sent to vaccination clinics before officials became aware of the problem.
Officials within the Department of Health and the vaccine's manufacturers are believed to have known of the problem since Tuesday but only issued an emergency recall last night after being contacted about the potential contamination by The Independent.
Last night the Tory health team demanded answers about why it had taken so long to withdraw the vaccine and
said there may need to be an inquiry. It is not known how many children may have received the dose, but one official said that there have as yet been no reports of any adverse reactions.
In a statement, the Department of Health denied that any contaminated samples had entered the UK market. "Two batches have been identified and are being recalled as a purely precautionary measure. These two batches passed all routine quality testing, including a sterility test."
The revelation comes at a critical time given that many parents are still suspicious about childhood vaccinations due to the unfounded scare over the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine which was incorrectly linked to autism in a study published over 10 years ago and since retracted.
The meningitis C vaccine, sold under the trade name Menjugate, is manufactured and packed in Italy by Novartis, a multinational pharmaceutical company. One insider told The Independent that any contamination with Staphylococcus – which is related to MRSA – would have occurred during the preparation of the vaccine in the manufacturing centre in Siena.
The company confirmed last night that two lots of the vaccine – some 61,117 doses imported into Britain – could be contaminated and that 21,301 doses have been sent to GP surgeries over the past week for the Government's childhood vaccination programme.
The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) was working last night with Novartis to recall all the remaining doses of vaccine that had been sent to GPs but which had not yet been used. A spokeswoman for Novartis said that the company's press office was made aware of the problem on Monday but she could not say when the company had informed the Department of Health.
"Novartis is working with the relevant government authorities including the MHRA and the Italian Ministry of Health to recall two lots of Menjugate distributed in the UK," the spokeswoman said.
"We are investigating a sterility testing positive result from samples of one lot of aluminium hydroxide solvent which was used in the packaging of two lots of Menjugate. The solvent lot passed all release specifications. The subject result was identified during a special study," she said.
The MHRA said in a statement issued last night that it was first alerted to the problem on Tuesday. "The tested samples were of one batch of solvent used in two batches of Menjugate Kit, and were identified positive for the bacteria Staphylococcus aureus during the sterility test. They [the two samples] were not distributed to the UK market," it said.
"However, as a precaution, these two batches of Menjugate Kit which were distributed in the UK are being recalled. There is at present no evidence that these two batches of Menjugate Kit are affected," it added.
A spokeswoman for the MHRA said that, despite the recall, there was no evidence of any risk to children from the vaccine but she could not say how many babies could have already been injected with the vaccine. "The recall is purely a precautionary measure. There is no reason for UK children to be at any risk from this product. All vaccine supplied to the UK had passed the tests required for its use," she said.
Andrew Lansley, the shadow Health Secretary, said: "This is very disturbing news. We will be looking to the Government to give the fullest possible account of what's happened.
"Parents who bring their children for immunisation need to have the greatest possible confidence that the vaccines concerned are safe and their children won't come to harm. I will be looking to the Government to provide this specific assurance."
Mike Penning, a Tory health spokesman, said: "Parents take vaccines to make their children safe, not put them at risk. They will want answers as to why it took so long to withdraw the vaccine. The Government has got to come clean about its decision-making and when the Secretary of State was told what happened. We could need an independent inquiry to establish the facts."
The Menjugate vaccine – one of two distributed in the UK – was the subject of safety concerns in 2000 soon after it was introduced into Britain. However, the Medicines Control Agency said at the time that the fears were unfounded.
Pat Troop, then deputy chief medical officer, said in 2000 the meningitis C vaccine was very safe. The number of adverse reactions – such as headaches, and sore arms – were normal for this sort of vaccine, she said.
Novartis: The company behind the jab
The Swiss pharmaceutical giant Novartis is one of the largest medicine manufacturers in the world with 81,000 employees operating in 140 countries. It was formed out of the merger in 1996 of two "big pharmas", Ciba-Geigy and Sandoz. In 2006, Novartis acquired the US-based vaccine supplier Chiron Corporation. Two years earlier, Britain's Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency seized more than 48 million doses of Fluvirin, an influenza vaccine made in Chiron's factory in Liverpool, over concerns they were contaminated. The seizure caused a major shortage of flu shots in the US market in which Chiron had a near monopoly. Nonetheless the vaccine market has remained a strong moneyspinner for Novartis. Last month the US government awarded it a $486m (£342m) contract to build a factory to produce a cell-based influenza vaccine which would be capable of churning out 150 million flu shots within six months of Washington declaring a flu pandemic. In Britain over the past two years Novartis has been trying to create a vaccine for meningitis B, which kills more than 100 children every year. Novartis, the Health Protection Agency and the Oxford Vaccine Group have been carrying out a joint trial on three different strains of meningitis B with positive results. Novartis expects to apply for a licence next year and hopes to have it on the market by 2011. Currently 10 per cent of the children with meningitis B die and 15 per cent of those who survive are left with severe disabilities.
Jerome Taylor
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited
Comments
Actually, if it i not a criminal offense to prevent one's children to have vaccines, it should be made one. One accident like this, vs millions bugs out there...mmm I think the odds that the kid can grab something far worse and potentially deadly by not being vaccinated are greater than of suffering an accident like this one.
This is ONE case of incompetence and neglect. However, this ONE case can't erase the health modern miracle that vaccination is.
Given the 2 huge blows that the anti-vaccine crowd has already taken this year (with Wakefield's outright fraud being exposed and the test cases for 'vaccine damage' re:autism in the US being well and truly shot down) this will be like a gift on a platter to them. I can only hope that the damage they cause to the next generation by destroying herd immunity with their lies and distortions, is lesser than the damage done to prior generations before our children could be protected.
How lucky tommytog is if he/she has had no vaccinations ever, and no illnesses. Well, scarlet fever is back and in its worst form it's the flesh eating terror. No-one knows why it suddenly died out in the last century after being a scourge.
tommytog shouldn't be let loose amongst any impressionable young parents. He might like to read about what smallpox was like and how the smallpox vaccination was developed - a fascinating story which led to the eventual almost complete eradication of that dread disease. And how many people does tommytog know who've had diptheria?
The whooping cough/autism scare was certainly a disaster for vaccination given so many parents have unwisely left their kids unprotected. Sadly, there are bound to be scares now and again.
Our GPs are doing their very best for us. If in doubt, see your GP. I've nothing against alternative medicine when it clearly works - eg diet information, various bone manipulations and a great deal of care given as when you pay for the treatment they have more time to give to you. But keep a sense of proportion. Viruses and non-benign bacteria are out to get us. How else will they go ahead and multiply?
that was back in the 50s when people had common sense and inherited wisdom from general knowledgesmallpox had been predicated by then so vaccination does work if there is no general immunity
Your just like the people who say, "In my day we didn't have child safety seats and seat belts and I never had a car accident."
http://www.informedchoice.info/cock
And to think, this morning I inadvertently drank Dihydrogen monoxide from my tap... and so did you!
(Dihydrogen monoxide = water)
But yet and still the drum beats of the anti-vaccine brigade will be beating hard in response to inflamatory headlines... yet again, the media is leading the way for another reduction in uptake of vaccines for our children and a greater increase in risk to the public at large and our children's health.
Just great.
As for the Dihydrogen monoxide = water response, what's your point? We know that, are you trying to tell us that scary sounding names like thiomerosol and aluminium hydroxide aren't dangerous?
We are not stupid, simply because we choose to follow the hard science and long-held facts of vaccination, with all its pros and cons, and not fall in line with fears and theories that have less basis in reality than the epidemic resurgence of illness that maim and kill.
I have heard no one here say vaccines and medical science is absolutely perfect. But the conspiracy theory that there are a mass of ill-informed stupid parents who would dare follow mainstream medicine out there, and that they are somehow stupid and need these charts and scare tactics to wise them up is a repulsive concept and a dumb tactic in an argument that deserves better.
No parent has the right to put other children;s health at risk. We need new laws to force all parents to have vaccines for this kids - and we should let doctors do their jobs. Most parents ARE idiots in my experience and we should tell them to shut up - and look after public health and not their smug and ignorant egos.
The solution is easy: ALL children should be vaccinated whether idiot neurotic mummy or uneducated fearful daddy, like it or not - it is a mather os PUBLIC health, and affects everyone, so is NOT just a personal decision for every family.
Silly 'health' scaremongering in the media causes so many problems - as they give the false impression that vaccines are dangerous.
Can you give us the details of that child's death from measles, what were their circumstances (had they been vaccinated, were they suffering from any other complications) - who's scare-mongering? It's all very well saying a child has died but there may be a number of reasons that added to the complexity of that child's deterioration - we can all manipulate figures to suit our needs.
The point is vaccines MAY BE dangerous, we just don't know and are supposed to put our trust in pharmaceutical companies that manufacture these products for a substantial profit.
Parents are not scientists or public health specialists so shoudl NEVER have the right to refuse vaccines. Children should all be given vaccines by force at school. End of. Parents have NO RIGHT to harm public health because of their ignorance. You should just shut up. We should all be grateful for vaccines and drugs, despite side effects, despite the money made by drug companies. Supermarkets make money too - do you boycott their food too. Fool.
You have no ides about science or how drugs work or the horrible history of the past, when many kids dies from measles, scarlet fever etc. All drugs carry a small risk - but even if a few children die because of vaccines, all children should be forcibly given them for the sake of public health - epidemics can kill MILLIONS! You are typical of the ignorant yummy mummies who create public health problems through your selfishness. Fool. Your actions create disease and kill children. Immoral. that is the point actually.
Parents should be disempowered and all kids should be given vaccines by force at school. Or at home, is parents keep them away. If necessary, childredn should be taken from their parents, held down and injected. For the greater good - not the selfish egocentrism of idiot igorant mothers.
"We should all be grateful for vaccines and drugs, despite side effects" - Tell that to those families that have been hit by those side effects and have had a pay out from the vaccine damage payment units. All the money in the world won't change what they've been through. It seems like you're so blinkered by the so called 'miracle' of vaccinations that you can't even open your mind to the possibility that there may be a problem with the vaccine and that they are not a "fit all" solution to childhood illnesses and diseases. That's probably why we're in the mess we're in because we have doctors and scientists of the same mind set who are not prepared to question this particular field of medicine.
If only a few children are affected by bad side effects of any kind, it DOES NOT MATTER. Society and public health MUST run on the basis of the responsible management of healthcare. So stop using emotional blackmail you twerp. You as a parent HAVE NO RIGHT to put public health at risk by refusing to have your kids vaccinated and should be forced. Simple as that.
Perhaps you could get an education and read some history books rather than the very hungry caterpillar - then you'd realis how awful public health was before vaccines and pills and conventyial medicine.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rober
ANOTHER AUTISM CASE WINS IN VACCINE COURT
By Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
Last week, the parents of yet another child with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) were awarded a lump sum of more than $810,000 (plus an estimated $30-40,000 per year for autism services and care) in compensation by the Court, which ruled that the measels-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine had caused acute brain damage that led to his autism spectrum disorder.
Why is this story not in the UK media? There are hundreds of families in the UK with damaged children from the MMR vaccine and we will NOT go away.
Too frightened to tell the real truth.
This case was judged in 2007.
It can be added to the case of Hannah Poling, granted compensation in 2008.
That makes 2 cases where vaccines were conceded to have caused an extremely rare reaction [not autism] that would actually be liklier to occur if the child had caught a virus infection naturally!.
Yup, vaccines can cause side effects, and when they do, compensation is appropriate.
In contrast, the 3 sentinel test cases for the main event, the Autism Omnibus hearings, were soundly rejected as there was NO EVIDENCE for any link between vaccination and autism.
QED
Case over.
Wrong.
Lets take this step by step, shall we?
"...due to the unfounded scare over the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine..."
This "unfounded scare" is a reference to the Dr Wakefield case. Please ditch the urban myths, and stick to the facts! In his paper he commented that on the limited sample he took there seemed to be a link between the vaccine, autism and bowel disorders, and suggested that further research is needed. The tabloid media (and the guardian) demonised him, trying to link him to a funds scandal for which he has been cleared of all charges by the US high court.
"...which was incorrectly linked to autism in a study over 10 years ago..."
The only correct part of that phrase is the time scale. As I have already said, Dr Wakefield purely commented on a possible link and requested that further research should be done on the untested vaccine to ensure it is safe to use. The US high court has confirmed that his findings are valid and correct, and in no way misleading or false.
"...and since retracted."
Now that is just careless. This last little bit shows just how prejudiced Steve Connor is against Dr Wakefield. He has not retracted his findigns, despite the fact that several of his co-workers have been pressurised and hassled by the tabloid media until they have done so.
"...contaminated with the hospital-acquired infection - the Staphylococcus aureus bacterium - ..."
Meningitis C is not MRSA. Neither do you find it in hospitals. You find it in the nasal passages of the populations of Earth. It is an essential part of our immune system, not some marauding parasite. Your statement is wrong, and about as pointless as the vaccine itself.
To The Independant: Please ensure that your proofreaders check such inaccuracies before printing!
To Steve Connor: Do your own research! I expect this kind of nonsense from the Daily Mail, not The Independant. Please do not publish incorrect and biased findings. With these exceptions, I am pleased with the article, and pleased that a journalist has not followed the mainstream view of 'vaccines are the holy grail of medicine, and as so unfaliable.'
I think you don't know what you are talking about, since he has never been charged with anything to do with financial irregularities.
Wrong. Read my previous comment about Dr Wakefield. And then throw away all of your tabloids you must have stored at home for you to have soaked in such nonsense.
"You as a parent HAVE NO RIGHT to put public health at risk by refusing to have your kids vaccinated and should be forced."
Where on earth did you get that idea? You are presuming that if you are vaccinated, then there is no way for you to catch the disease. Foolish person. Vaccines purely aid your immune system against the disease. The best defense against illness is your own body, always has been. You are also conveniently forgetting that with a large number of vaccines, there is a higher incidence rate among the vaccinated than the non-vaccinated.
"then you'd realis how awful public health was before vaccines and pills and conventyial medicine."
Public health was awful due to poverty. That is a fact. Between 1840 and 1880, social reformers began to improve the living and workign conditions of the poor in London. As a result, the incidence rate of 'childkiller' diseases such as scarlet fever, whooping cough and measles fell rapidly, without any form of vaccination. With one exception: smallpox. Guess which disease did have a specific vaccine: smallpox. In those 40 years the incidence rate nearly doubled, while all of the other, non-vaccinated diseases fell by nearly half. So when you see the pamphlets showing you a graph of the incidence rate of vaccinated diseases, look up the extended graph. You will find that in almost all cases the introduction of the vaccine had little effect on the already dropping incidence rate.
You are also presuming that if you are not vaccinated agaisnt a disease, then you will catch it and anyone else, including those that are vaccinated, will catch the disease and die. That is clearly wrong. There is no truth in that. And you should not so casually dismiss human rights either. When the incidence rate of bad side effects from a vaccine outweigh the incidence rate of the disease itself, then the vaccine is clearly having an adverse effect on public health. So, to use your own arguments, you have no right to put public hhealth at risk by insisting upon vaccines.
Please think before blindly accepting vaccines as holy and blindly regarding any contrary opinion as blasphemy.
Reasoning: It is considered more ethical to potentially inject the whole population with a harmful, untested substance than it is to let the people in the test sample allow their own bodies to deal with the illness. The theory is that if the vaccine is successful, then those poeple could have been saved rather than potentially allowing them to die, and that is deemed more important that allowing many, many more people to potentially die due to unknown adverse effects of the vaccine.
Conclusion: No vaccine should legally be allowed to be given until thorough testing has been done. It is illegal; since the formaldehyde legal case there are minimum standards of drug testing that have to be fulfilled before the various health agencies will allow doctors to give the drug. These LAWS are ignored by the health agencies, for the reasons outlined above.
I checked the online data base (pubmed) for research articles on the safety, efficacy or immunogenicity of combination vaccines. There were over 800 scientific papers listed. (Some of these actually indicate which vaccines are harmful in combination, helping scientists to decide which ones are safe to give).
It is obvious you are just mindlessly parroting a line sold to you by the antivax brigade, who like to imagine no-one has ever studies these things.
There exists a vaccine damage claiming system in the UK which allows you to claim up to 120,000 pounds in payments to pay for vaccine damage. Payments are given, they are just hushed up to prevent people refusing to have vaccines. Which, luckily, they are anyway.
Sorry for the consecutive comments.
Just to highlight what you have said, I would like to tell you about a family friend of mine. She has two children, who are now nine and seven years old. The elder child, who obviously cannot be named, had the routine vaccinations. This friend of mine had the attitude of 'if the doctor says it will help my child, then I will give it to my child.' Along came the MMR vaccine. Before the vaccine, the elder child could say a few words, which he did vocally and often. I can still remember the last carefree conversation I had with this child; although I say conversation is the lightest of terms, as it was me speaking and receiving a few one-word replies. Later that week this child had the MMR vaccine.
I saw this family several days after the vaccine. Something had definately changed about the child; something about the way the child looked around. He seemed constantly nervous, never gaining eye contact with anyone. He spent most of that afternoon sitting in a corner by himself. Worst of all, he didnt speak a word to anyone. And it was the same day after day for this child. It took this child three years to rebuild the confidence to speak a word to anyone outside his immediate family. Six months after the vaccine, this child was diagnosed with severe autism, despite being called a 'low risk' baby after birth.
Naturally, this friend of mine refused to have the vaccine done to her second child. However, when the routine vaccinations were done at school, for which this child was excempt, the school nurse told this six-year old child that she was goign to die because of her parents descision. What a horrible thing to say to so young a child!
These vaccine damages are not just statistics, they happen to real people. I know the effects of the diseases also happen to real people, but I am yet to meet one who has come in contact with this. However, I know at least half a dozen people with similar stories to tell.
http://mercuryxxpoisoned.com
These are not affected by standards of hygiene (since, as you realise if you think about it for a second, everyone gets these, or at least they did before the days of vaccination). These diseases can be eliminated by vaccination. Before measles vaccine was introduced there were half a million cases a year in the UK. Measles was eradicated from the UK with vaccination, but last year, thanks to the fall in vaccination rates and with the reintroduction of measles, it was declared to be endemic once more. In the last 4 years there have been 4000 cases and 2 deaths in Britain.
There is no link between autism and vaccines. 15 large scale research studies have failed to find one, and only one study hinted at a link (Wakefield's). This has been comprehensively discreditied, and 10 of his co-authors have subsequently retracted the conclusions.
So anyone who wishes to vaccinate - go ahead. Just hope that you are not receiving a bad batch, or don't have a DIE (disease inducing effect) as a result. Those of us who don't have recognised that here is now so much disinformation surrounding the subject of health.
* Measles (et al) is dangerous. Well, look at conventional descriptions of measles in the 1960's and 1970's prior to MMR. The 'dangers' of the disease in bygone times, and in the 3rd world, relate to poverty factors, and the more recent need of Big Pharma to sell their vaccination.
* Diseases have been eradicated by vaccination. Most statistics I have seen about all these indicaate the rates of disease declined with improvements in diet, housing, etc.,. and the introduction of vaccines made no difference in this decline. The propaganda of Big Pharma, however, has been brilliant is selling us the idea that it is all down to them.
* Are we being told the full truth about the dangers of drugs and vaccinations? The number and rate of new ConMed disasters is matched only by benign reassurances from government, NHS, Big Pharma that medication is really very safe, and we are not in danger.
The fact being recognised by an increasing number of people is that ConMed is an inherently dangerous form of medicine, and that not accepting it (in any of its forms) is the action of wise and careful individuals who have considered the growing evidence supporting this statement.
What the government, the department of health, and the NHS must realise in future is that they are going to have to be much more open and honest about medical issues, that people are increasingly demanding more accurate and honest information about the treatments being offered to them, and that patients are going to demand choice in the medical therapies available to them when they become ill.