Five-in-one jab adviser has links to vaccine firm
Five-in-one jab adviser has links to vaccine firm -- Posted by john on 08-16-04 04:43
Five-in-one jab adviser has links to vaccine firm
By James Chapman
Political Correspondent
Daily Mail Aug 16, 2004
THE row over the new five-in-one jab for babies intensified last night as
links were revealed between a key adviser to ministers and the drugs firm
making the vaccine.
The chairman of the government committee that approved the inoculation is
receiving financial support for his work from a company involved in its
manufacture.
Professor Michael Langman, who heads the Joint Committee on Vaccination and
Immunisation, gets funding from Merck Sharp and Dohme (MSD) for his medical
research at Birmingham University.
MSD and another drugs company, Aventis Pasteur, form Aventis Pasteur MSD,
which will supply the five-in-one vaccine in Britain.
The Department of Health said last night that Professor Langman had declared
all his interests in 'strict accordance' with the code of practice.
A spokesman said he had not received any personal benefit from Aventis
Pasteur MSD since becoming committee chairman.
The professor's interest Involved funding for a trial on colorectal cancer
and advice for chronic digestive disease. All the funding went straight to
the university.
'The code makes clear that in such cases of non-personal interest, it is not
necessary for people to stand aside from the work of the committee,' added
the spokesman.
Campaigners, however, said Professor Langman's links With MSD raised
'serious questions' about the independence of advice being given to the
Government. Jackie Fletcher, founder of the vaccine support group Jabs,
said: 'This raises serious questions about the integrity of committees,
which are always billed as wholly independent.
'We have been campaigning for full transparency. The powers that be must be
seen to be above any potential conflicts of interest.'
Tory health spokesman Andrew Lansley said: 'It would be preferable if
decisions on vaccines and their use in the NHS were made in the same way as
for other medicines -with an independent appraisal by the National Institute
for Clinical Excellence.
'The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation does not have the
degree of independence and transparency required.'
Liberal Democrat health spokesman Paul Burstow said: 'After all the
confusion and contradictory advice over MMR and the five-in-one jab, it is
vital parents feel they are being given the best advice. Reports of a
conflict of interest will do little to help concerned parents make the
right choice for their families.'
There have been growing concerns that links between government advisers and
vaccine manufacturers pose potential conflicts of interest.
Last year a Daily Mail investigation showed that at least 19 experts on
committees had interests in firms supplying the triple measles, mumps and
rubella vaccine.
The decision to introduce the vaccine to protect against diphtheria,
tetanus,, whooping cough, Hib - a bug which causes meningitis - and polio,
was announced last week.
The change is being made so that babies are no longer exposed to the
mercury-based preservative, thiomersal, which is contained in the existing
whooping cough vaccine.
Health chiefs dismissed as 'baseless' claims by campaigners that the
five-in-one vaccine could overload babies' immune systems.
The jab had been safely given to at least three million youngsters in Canada
over seven years, they said. . MMR vaccination in the U.S. has virtually
eradicated measles. Latest figures show that the 44 cases recorded in 2002
were the lowest number since the disease became nationally reportable in
1912. Most states make MMR compulsory before a child can start school.
In Britain, following a backlash by parents against MMR amid fears of a
link to autism and bowel disease, public health experts report that measles
cases soared by 43 per cent last year.
j.chapman@dailymail.co.uk
Re: Five-in-one jab adviser has links to vaccine firm -- Posted by Jan on 08-16-04 15:22
>Subject: Five-in-one jab adviser has links to vaccine firm
>From: "john" nospamoridiots@vaccine.com
>Date: 8/16/2004 12:43 AM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id:
Note this part:
>The Department of Health said last night that Professor Langman had declared
>all his interests in 'strict accordance' with the code of practice.
>
Guess who made this code???? Convenient so one could follow it.
Just one more example of organized medicine.
Jan
>Five-in-one jab adviser has links to vaccine firm
>By James Chapman
>
>Political Correspondent
>
>Daily Mail Aug 16, 2004
>
>THE row over the new five-in-one jab for babies intensified last night as
>links were revealed between a key adviser to ministers and the drugs firm
>making the vaccine.
>
>The chairman of the government committee that approved the inoculation is
>receiving financial support for his work from a company involved in its
>manufacture.
>
>Professor Michael Langman, who heads the Joint Committee on Vaccination and
>Immunisation, gets funding from Merck Sharp and Dohme (MSD) for his medical
>research at Birmingham University.
>
>MSD and another drugs company, Aventis Pasteur, form Aventis Pasteur MSD,
>which will supply the five-in-one vaccine in Britain.
>
>The Department of Health said last night that Professor Langman had declared
>all his interests in 'strict accordance' with the code of practice.
>
>A spokesman said he had not received any personal benefit from Aventis
>Pasteur MSD since becoming committee chairman.
>
>The professor's interest Involved funding for a trial on colorectal cancer
>and advice for chronic digestive disease. All the funding went straight to
>the university.
>
>'The code makes clear that in such cases of non-personal interest, it is not
>necessary for people to stand aside from the work of the committee,' added
>the spokesman.
>
>Campaigners, however, said Professor Langman's links With MSD raised
>'serious questions' about the independence of advice being given to the
>Government. Jackie Fletcher, founder of the vaccine support group Jabs,
>said: 'This raises serious questions about the integrity of committees,
>which are always billed as wholly independent.
>
>'We have been campaigning for full transparency. The powers that be must be
>seen to be above any potential conflicts of interest.'
>
>Tory health spokesman Andrew Lansley said: 'It would be preferable if
>decisions on vaccines and their use in the NHS were made in the same way as
>for other medicines -with an independent appraisal by the National Institute
>for Clinical Excellence.
>
>'The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation does not have the
>degree of independence and transparency required.'
>
>Liberal Democrat health spokesman Paul Burstow said: 'After all the
>confusion and contradictory advice over MMR and the five-in-one jab, it is
>vital parents feel they are being given the best advice. Reports of a
>conflict of interest will do little to help concerned parents make the
>right choice for their families.'
>
>There have been growing concerns that links between government advisers and
>vaccine manufacturers pose potential conflicts of interest.
>
>Last year a Daily Mail investigation showed that at least 19 experts on
>committees had interests in firms supplying the triple measles, mumps and
>rubella vaccine.
>
>The decision to introduce the vaccine to protect against diphtheria,
>tetanus,, whooping cough, Hib - a bug which causes meningitis - and polio,
>was announced last week.
>
>The change is being made so that babies are no longer exposed to the
>mercury-based preservative, thiomersal, which is contained in the existing
>whooping cough vaccine.
>
>Health chiefs dismissed as 'baseless' claims by campaigners that the
>five-in-one vaccine could overload babies' immune systems.
>
>The jab had been safely given to at least three million youngsters in Canada
>over seven years, they said. . MMR vaccination in the U.S. has virtually
>eradicated measles. Latest figures show that the 44 cases recorded in 2002
>were the lowest number since the disease became nationally reportable in
>1912. Most states make MMR compulsory before a child can start school.
>
>In Britain, following a backlash by parents against MMR amid fears of a
>link to autism and bowel disease, public health experts report that measles
>cases soared by 43 per cent last year.
>
>j.chapman@dailymail.co.uk
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: Five-in-one jab adviser has links to vaccine firm -- Posted by M,a,r,k P,r,o,b,e,r,t-August 16, 2004 on 08-16-04 17:43
"Jan" wrote in message
news:20040816152236.03820.00002150@mb-m19.aol.com...
> >Subject: Five-in-one jab adviser has links to vaccine firm
> >From: "john" nospamoridiots@vaccine.com
> >Date: 8/16/2004 12:43 AM Pacific Standard Time
> >Message-id:
>
> Note this part:
>
> >The Department of Health said last night that Professor Langman had
declared
> >all his interests in 'strict accordance' with the code of practice.
> >
> Guess who made this code???? Convenient so one could follow it.
>
> Just one more example of organized medicine.
Yes, OM recognized that there is a problem and requires that there be full
disclosure.
Nothing wrong with that.
Re: Five-in-one jab adviser has links to vaccine firm -- Posted by Jan on 08-16-04 18:32
>Subject: Re: Five-in-one jab adviser has links to vaccine firm
>From: "M,a,r,k P,r,o,b,e,r,t-August 16, 2004" M,a,r,kP,r,o,b,e,r,t
>08-16-04@lambercartel.com
>Date: 8/16/2004 1:43 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id:
>
>
>"Jan" wrote in message
>news:20040816152236.03820.00002150@mb-m19.aol.com...
>> >Subject: Five-in-one jab adviser has links to vaccine firm
>> >From: "john" nospamoridiots@vaccine.com
>> >Date: 8/16/2004 12:43 AM Pacific Standard Time
>> >Message-id:
>>
>> Note this part:
>>
>> >The Department of Health said last night that Professor Langman had
>declared
>> >all his interests in 'strict accordance' with the code of practice.
>> >
>> Guess who made this code???? Convenient so one could follow it.
>>
>> Just one more example of organized medicine.
>
>Yes, OM recognized that there is a problem and requires that there be full
>disclosure.
>
>Nothing wrong with that.
Now for the truth. Others in the past had problems with this code, so they
changed the code to let them do whatever they want.
They is lots wrong with that. It is called dishonest.
http://www.laleva.cc/choice/vaccine_bekin.html
Shoot First and Ask Questions Later
Scientific Fraud and Conflict Of Interest In Vaccine Research, Licensing &
Policymaking
By Michael Belkin
Presented at The 2nd International Public Conference on Vaccination 2000,
Arlington Virginia (10-15-2000)
In Business School, (Organizational Behavior) we studied what can happen
to organizations that suffer ethical management breakdowns (such as Johns
Manville with asbestos, Owens Corning breast implants, etc.). Nothing
illustrates the syndrome of management ethical failure more clearly than the
current scandal faced by Firestone and Ford. Those companies denied and
concealed deaths and injuries caused by tread separation and a high center of
gravity in the Ford Explorer for years. Management knew, denied and concealed
that their products were defective and were killing people -- the classic
ethical breakdown.
In the vaccine industry, scientific fraud and conflicts of interest are
causing a similar (but much larger) cycle of deaths and injuries that is being
concealed and denied by regulators and vaccine manufacturers. However, (as with
Firestone and Ford) a noose of their own making may be slowly tightening around
the vaccine scandal perpetrator's necks.
Financial conflict of interest is a complex issue -- because few
investors (except perhaps Tibetan Monks or Jesuit Priests) are likely to not
have pharmaceutical shares in their diversified portfolios in this day and age.
But financial conflicts of interest and scientific fraud (that lead to corrupt
public policy) damage the public interest and could eventually bankrupt vaccine
manufacturers that have perverted the regulatory process. Shareholders should
investigate the issue carefully.
There's only about 100 US Deaths from Firestone tire blowouts. There are
thousands of deaths and many thousands of cases of disability and neurological
damage lurking in the FDA Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). This
is a potential legal scandal of much larger scope than the Firestone/Ford
episode.
US vaccines are licensed by the FDA and immunization recommendations are
made by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), which is a
committee whose members are appointed by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC).
ACIP immunization recommendations are enacted into law by public health
departments and/or legislatures at the state level, via the energetic efforts
of vaccine manufacturer sales representatives. While the ACIP does nothing more
than craft and finalize the exact wording detailing recommended doses and ages
for administration of vaccines, ACIP recommendations are extraordinarily
influential, because they get turned into mandates at the state level.
These vaccine mandates are despotic intrusions into personal liberty and
democracy. School districts and social service departments demand that: You
must inject these viruses and bacteria into your body (or your child's body) or
you (or your child) may not attend school, you may be charged with child abuse
and your children may be removed from your home, placed in foster care and
forcibly vaccinated.
Such intimidation is taking place with greater intensity and frequency
as more and more ACIP recommendations and subsequent state vaccine mandates are
enacted. Furthermore, parents are being wrongfully accused and convicted of
shaken baby syndrome in cases where their children die immediately after
vaccination and have swollen brains in the autopsy report (brain inflammation
is a classic vaccine adverse reaction).
The enforcement of ACIP vaccine recommendations at the state and local
level by plodding and heavy-handed health and social service department
employees is a threat to the neurological systems of those vaccinated. Vaccine
adverse reactions are defined as the same thing as disease complications in the
medical literature -- encephalitis. "Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis
(postinfectious encephalomyelitis--see also Acute Viral Encephalitis and
Aseptic Meningitis) is characterized by perivascular Central Nervous System
demyelination, which can occur spontaneously but usually follows a viral
infection or VIRAL VACCINATION (or, very rarely, BACTERIAL VACCINATION),
suggesting an immunologic cause." Merck Manual
(www.merck.com/pubs/mmanual/section14/chapter180/180a.htm)
Thousands of reports of adverse reactions such as convulsions, brain
inflammation, inconsolable screaming syndrome, SIDS and neurological diseases
such as Multiple Sclerosis, Transverse Myelitis and Guillain-Barre Syndrome
continue to flood into the FDA Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS),
where they are largely ignored or tolerated as the cost of some mythical
victory over disease. Children and adults are developing the same encephalitic
and neurological complications after vaccination that science takes credit for
eliminating through immunization -- but the CDC, ACIP and American Academy of
Pediatrics all insist the vaccine adverse reactions don't exist or are
coincidences.
Their double standard is: You are required to receive this vaccination
so you and society don't develop encephalitic and neurological complications
from disease, but if you die or develop encephalitic or neurological
complications immediately after receiving the vaccine (which contains the same
virus or bacteria that causes the neurological complications), then it's all in
your imagination, it's a coincidence or we're still doing studies and we'll get
back to you when they are done.
Shoot first and ask questions later.
Unelected, unregulated and unaccountable ACIP medical bureaucrats have
blatant financial conflicts of interest and are committing scientific fraud by
recommending administration of vaccines that have not been tested for safety in
the age groups or populations targeted. Dr. John Modlin, current Chairman of
the ACIP (Merck Immunization Advisory Board 1996 - present, Merck shareholder)
gave his definition of scientific validity in a March 1999 University of New
Hampshire debate:
"Has the information withstood the test of peer review? Has the
information been published in a respected medical or scientific journal? ...
this is the standard that you should hold me to today ... has the information
been published in a scientifically reputable journal?"
One month earlier at the February 1999 ACIP meeting Chairman Modlin
lobbied for the ACIP to recommend the Rotavirus vaccine for premature infants,
although no safety studies had been done, much less peer reviewed or published:
".. available data are insufficient to fully establish the safety and efficacy
of rotavirus vaccine in premature infants ... there is a section under Adverse
Events that details what little information there actually are with respect to
premature infants ... To my knowledge we don't have data from a clinical trial
specifically ... Some bit of information from Seattle, as I recall, that had
suggested that was a slight increase in relative risk for hospitalization for
premature infants ... Obviously a situation where we have to make a judgment in
the absence of data, and with a vaccine that has not yet been tested in the
group ..." (ACIP transcript, pages 102-112)
Modlin then held a vote and the recommendation for premature infants
passed nine to one -- Modlin voted yes.
Shoot first and ask questions later.
As a member of The Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory
Committee (VRBPAC) and Chairman of the Rotavirus working group, Modlin had data
showing a risk of intussusception (life threatening bowel obstructions) in
clinical trials of Rotavirus vaccine before that February 1999 ACIP meeting.
The Rotavirus vaccine was withdrawn from the market in October 1999 after 113
cases of intussusception. One premature baby died after getting rotavirus
vaccine in a vaccine cocktail and another five-month-old infant died after
developing intussusception five days after receipt of the vaccine.
By ACIP Chairman Modlin's own definition, the ACIP's recommendation was
scientifically invalid. I'll go one step further and say the ACIP Chairman
committed blatant scientific fraud by issuing an ACIP recommendation that
Rotavirus vaccine be given to premature newborns without scientific proof that
it was safe to do so. And what was the penalty? Modlin was apparently
reappointed to another term as ACIP Chairman by the CDC. Commit scientific
fraud that causes death and grievous injury -- and get reappointed. That is the
incentive system in the US vaccine regulatory system.
Another case suggesting scientific fraud is the still-existing 1991 ACIP
recommendation that every newborn baby receive the hepatitis B vaccine in the
hospital within hours of birth. Samuel L. Katz, MD, who instituted that policy
when he was ACIP Chairman in 1991 has admitted they had no peer-reviewed,
published studies showing that it was safe to give to newborns when the ACIP
made that recommendation. (Katz is former Chairman Committee on Infectious
Diseases of the American Academy of Pediatrics, former Chairman of the Public
Policy Council of the Infectious Diseases Society of America).
When I asked Katz in the question/answer session after his April 12,
2000 NY/Cornell Medical School lecture on "Vaccines in the New Millennium" what
peer-reviewed, published safety study he used when he was ACIP Chairman to
recommend at-birth immunization of newborns in 1991 he answered: "you are quite
right there was no published peer-reviewed study" (tape and transcript
available). Newborns have negligible risk of contracting the hepatitis B virus,
unless the mother is infected. That risk can easily be determined by a maternal
blood test. No US vaccine had ever been mandated for newborn babies before. But
Katz and the ACIP decided it was safe to vaccinate not-at-risk for hepatitis B
newborns without any proper safety study.
Shoot first and ask questions later.
The results of that uncontrolled experiment are in: upwards of 36,000
adverse reactions and more than 440 deaths (VAERS). My daughter died after
receiving the hepatitis B vaccine. Katz also admitted that vaccine adverse
reactions are the same thing as neurological complications from disease when I
pressed him if he disagreed with that definition from the Merck Manual saying
"with measles vaccine it is possible that maybe one out of 150,000 children who
get the vaccine may get something that mimics measles encephalitis."
Parents report their children were perfectly normal until receiving the
MMR measles/mumps/rubella vaccine, at which point the children became autistic
after a neurological adverse reaction to the MMR vaccine ("something that
mimics measles encephalitis"). The incidence of measles disease may be down to
about 100 cases annually in the US, but the rate of Autism has soared hundreds
of percent -- a disease historically called "post-encephalitic syndrome."
For vaccine manufacturers -- the ACIP is a gold mine. ACIP
recommendations are a license for vaccine manufacturers to use state
governments, school systems and social service systems as a marketing
department for their products. With an ACIP recommendation in hand, vaccine
manufacturers use the government to say "you must buy my product and inject it
into your body, even if it kills you or causes brain damage."
This is a huge Anti-Trust violation. The Orwellian spectacle of
monopolistic and oligopolistic pharmaceutical manufacturers subverting
government agencies to ram unsafe products down children's veins is a violation
of the basic principals of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Our forefathers said "No Taxation Without Representation" to their
British oppressors. I say "No Vaccination Without Representation" to the
corporate tyrants at Merck, Smithkline and other vaccine manufacturers who have
so utterly subverted the US vaccine regulatory process.
Dr. John Modlin must be removed as Chairman of the ACIP and the
scientifically invalid newborn hepatitis B vaccine policy instituted without
safety studies by Dr. Katz must be revoked. The investors and directors of
vaccine manufacturers such as Merck and Smithkline must recognize that those
companies are conducting the classic ethical blunder of selling products that
are killing and injuring people -- and then concealing and denying the
evidence.
A Canadian doctor who treats hepatitis B vaccine adverse event victims
told me when he called Merck, they told him he was the first one who had ever
called them with such a problem. There are upwards of 36,000 reports in VAERS
and I would be delighted to provide them to anyone who cares to investigate the
issue for themselves, sorted by deaths, convulsions, screaming syndrome, liver
disorder and neurological damage -- median onset one day after vaccination.
This is the CDC's Mission Statement
"To promote the health and quality of life by preventing and controlling
disease, injury and disability." "CDC pledges to be a diligent steward of the
funds entrusted to it." "CDC pledges to base all public health decisions on the
highest quality scientific data, openly and objectively derived." CDC Core
values: Accountability -- we ensure that our services are based on sound
science and meet real public needs ..."
That's What They Say, Here's What They Do
The CDC misallocated funds that were targeted for chronic fatigue
syndrome (a vaccine adverse event) to some other non-vaccine related pet
project. The ACIP Chairman recommended the Rotavirus Vaccine for premature
infants without any data whatsoever showing that it was safe. The ACIP
recommended the hepatitis B vaccine for newborns without any public,
peer-reviewed, published study showing it was safe. The head of epidemiology of
the CDC presented a slide showing serious reactions to the hepatitis B vaccine
were approximately 10 times higher than for other vaccines at the February 1999
ACIP meeting. The CDC has ignored FOIA requests for the scientific data used to
justify the 1991 newborn hep B vaccine mandate.
The CDC has violated its own mission statement and current leadership
needs to be replaced. Most people don't realize that the CDC is a
quasi-Military organization that takes great pride in dressing up in uniforms
and strutting around one day a week.
Re: Five-in-one jab adviser has links to vaccine firm -- Posted by M,a,r,k P,r,o,b,e,r,t-August 16, 2004 on 08-16-04 18:34
"Jan" wrote in message
news:20040816183200.19157.00003527@mb-m06.aol.com...
> >Subject: Re: Five-in-one jab adviser has links to vaccine firm
> >From: "M,a,r,k P,r,o,b,e,r,t-August 16, 2004" M,a,r,kP,r,o,b,e,r,t
> >08-16-04@lambercartel.com
> >Date: 8/16/2004 1:43 PM Pacific Standard Time
> >Message-id:
> >
> >
> >"Jan" wrote in message
> >news:20040816152236.03820.00002150@mb-m19.aol.com...
> >> >Subject: Five-in-one jab adviser has links to vaccine firm
> >> >From: "john" nospamoridiots@vaccine.com
> >> >Date: 8/16/2004 12:43 AM Pacific Standard Time
> >> >Message-id:
> >>
> >> Note this part:
> >>
> >> >The Department of Health said last night that Professor Langman had
> >declared
> >> >all his interests in 'strict accordance' with the code of practice.
> >> >
> >> Guess who made this code???? Convenient so one could follow it.
> >>
> >> Just one more example of organized medicine.
> >
> >Yes, OM recognized that there is a problem and requires that there be
full
> >disclosure.
> >
> >Nothing wrong with that.
>
> Now for the truth. Others in the past had problems with this code, so they
> changed the code to let them do whatever they want.
>
> They is lots wrong with that. It is called dishonest.
>
> http://www.laleva.cc/choice/vaccine_bekin.html
>
> Shoot First and Ask Questions Later
>
> Scientific Fraud and Conflict Of Interest In Vaccine Research, Licensing &
> Policymaking
> By Michael Belkin
>
>
>
> Presented at The 2nd International Public Conference on Vaccination 2000,
> Arlington Virginia (10-15-2000)
It is four years old and the rules are different. Also, the study that the
article is based on comes from a univeristybased school, which equires full
disclosure.
IOW, as usual with you, OLD NEWS.
1 2 Continued »
|
