The vaccine issue - A serious examination of a media dominated issue

The vaccination issue does not differ from any of the other issues that our Mainstream Media touts as being a wonderful idea. The Big Pharmaceuticals are in close alliance with the news teams that urge us to have our yearly flu shot, and who tell us to get our children vaccinated.

And why is there this alliance? Have you noticed how many commercials for drug products exist our our TV broadcasts? It is an almost never-ending stream of ads. This money talks, and it certainly is not telling TV news teams to go out and investigate the vaccine issue (Although several years ago, the San Franciso Chronicle did do a very accurte portrayal of the absolutely disgustingly dirty conditions found in the very laboratories where these vaccination materials are created.)

Some parents who offer their children a measles vaccination do so because of the pharmaceutical industry spouting off that a serious measles infection can take the life of the child. However, few Americans realize that to get the statistics on large numbers of children dying from measles, the vaccination industry travelled to the inner city barrios of Central and SOuth America, an area of the world where measles does routinely kill children. (Malnourished children die from simple childhood disease ebcause they are already in bad health.)

If even one of my fellow DU members begins to question vaccination policy in this country, then I will feel that my work in this area was worthwhile and that I have not lived in vain.

Please NOTE: I am not saying NEVER, NEVER, EVER. I vaccinated my own son for certain diseases. But had it been available during his infancy, he would have had a needle with the Hep B vaccine injected into his newborn arm only over my dead body.

I submit my most recent article on vcaccinations from The Coastal Post here.


March, 2004 - The Coastal Post, editor Don Deane

You Should Worry About Vaccine Safety
By Carol Sterritt


Why do some parents and researchers now question vaccine safety? Are their fears reasonable or mass-induced hypnosis? Let's examine the situation and focus upon crucial experiences that have come into play. As you read this, may you come to an awareness that at the very least, the vaccination prescription needs to be altered to reflect the fact that 1) some children may simply not be able to tolerate some vaccines, and 2) certain vaccines, especially the hepatitis B vaccine, cause more injury and death than the disease that they supposedly remedy.

In the early 1980s, a young mother, Barbara Loe Fisher, brought her oldest child, who was two and a half years old, to the doctor's. They were there for what should have been a routine vaccination. Within hours following the shot's administration, the boy experienced convulsions and collapsed. He was unresponsive or more than six hours as he lay motionless in his bed. Everyone concerned was frantic.

Luckily for this child and his family, he did not stay unconscious or die. However during the following

weeks, "he suffered physical, mental and emotional regression including severe gastrointestinal dysfunction, failure to thrive, respiratory and ear infections, personality change, and loss of cognitive memory concentration, and motor skills. He was eventually diagnosed as having minimal brain dysfunction that included multiple learning disabilities and attention deficit disorder." (Quoted biographical material from B.L. Fisher)

This incident brought Fisher to a height of awareness. She began to question the "science" behind vaccines. She began, as so many activists must do, to unravel the link between industry profits and their production and distribution of a financially lucrative product, in this case, vaccines. She became effective in her work. By 1986 she had co-authored a book, "A Shot in the Dark." Also she together with other parents of vaccine-injured children founded an organization that became known as the National Vaccine Information Center. (Ph. 703 938-3783, website www.909shot.com)

Over the years, she watched the development of the vaccination-governmental-industrial complex and its effect on our population. As time went by, more and more vaccines came on the market. The number of immunizations now suggested or required is staggering. A baby can experience as many as thirty-one vaccines by the time of its first birthday. These include shots for diphtheria, measles, mumps, whooping cough, hepatitis b, chicken pox, polio and flu. Other vaccines that were thrown on the market have been withdrawn due to the fatalities that these hastily created and examined products inflicted on their target population: babies. (Parents in the late nineteen nineties who vaccinated their children for a rotovirus lost their children to the bowel obstruction side-effects of the supposed health aid. Fortunately it was rather quickly pulled from the market, but it was lack of government oversight that allowed it on the market to begin with.)

The group that Fisher heads, the National Vaccine Information Center, offers links to resource groups to families whose children are negatively impacted by vaccination. It is a clearinghouse for information, with its personnel and its website giving out information on lawsuits, new vaccine regulations, etc. As the number of "routine" vaccinations increases, so does the likelihood of a child having autism, asthma, Attention Deficit Disorder, seizures, and other impairments. Scientists are belatedly getting involved by designing studies to sort out which, if any, of these problems can be traced to vaccines.

There are now three camps of thought on the vaccine issue. One camp says, "Look. I'm educated. I understand fully the science behind the vaccine products. I have read about Edward Jenner and his discovery of a smallpox vaccine in the late 1700's. I am pleased that modern generations have not experienced polio, whooping cough, large pandemics of measles or chicken pox, etc. We have, until lately, put the spectre of smallpox to rest. I do not understand any people so uneducated, so backwards in their thinking that they will not consider vaccinating their child. Their doing as they please endangers everyone."

The more extreme camp says, "I would never vaccinate my child for any reason whatsoever."

And the more moderate crowd says, "I understand the issue both scientifically and from a consumer viewpoint. I might favor vaccination if I had not fully investigated the issue and discovered that vaccination material contains heavy metals such as mercury, thallium, tin, copper, and also bacteria and virus material unrelated to the vaccine serum's desired effect. I am aware that vaccine products are often created in labs that are not fully investigated as to their cleanliness or in terms of the purity of the product. I am also aware that some children are simply not able to ingest certain vaccination materials, much the way that some members of the population cannot withstand a shot of penicillin."

Lately. more and more people are falling into the latter camp of thought. Included in this group is Senator Dan Burton (R-Indiana.) In the spring of 2000, he assembled a Congressional hearing on the vaccine controversy. He specifically targeted the issue of autism and measles and the MMR vaccine. His stake in the issue is personal, as one of his grandchildren had become autistic after receiving a MMR vaccine. Among the witnesses that he called to present scientific findings was Dr. Wakefield from the UK.

I was able to watch the hearing over C-Span. Wakefield's testimony concerned a finding that when Wakefield examined the intestinal tissue of children in his study, he discovered that the measles component of the MMR vaccine had become active in that location in their body. According to the parents and doctors of the affected children, after their shots, these children began to experience chronic diarrhea and signs of autism. Wakefield concluded that it was this biophysical reaction that led to their becoming autistic. The non-autistic children were not found to have such components in the lining of their gut tissue.

Senator Burton had a colleague of Wakefield's submit his findings, which corroborated those of Wakefield. However critics have pointed out that they believe that Wakefield's testing methods are not sensitive enough to rule out that the measles material came about from a pre-existing, naturally occurring measles infection.

However, the mainstream network of industry and government totally ridicules Wakefield. They remark that his study did not consist of a large enough group of children, that there was never a peer-review of his findings etc. (What is amazing is that ALWAYS when a study differs with an industry's need for exoneration, you never find industry, with all its money and vast resources, attempting to duplicate the criticized findings. They refuse to take action, regardless of the significance of the first finding.) As usually is the case, once industry and government make their criticism, the focus of their derision can no longer receive grant funding. Thus, that scientist cannot return to a laboratory setting and conduct the very tests that critics call on them to conduct. It is this way with the pesticide issue, and so it is no surprise that the vaccination issue would handle such a situation in a similar fashion.

So if you are a scientist who establishes a protocol for a study, and the Establishment disagrees with you, your career is over.

However, if you are a governmental scientist who heads the American Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) and recommend a rotovirus vaccine that has little research done on its safety and then if 113 babies are immediately impaired by this vaccine, with one of them dying, what happens to you then? Well, since industry, with its governmental revolving door policies, ever lets any one of its own go down, you will be re-appointed. Such was the case of Dr. John Modlin, whose scientifically lacking and highly questionable rotovirus vaccine approval kept him in his highly paid position during the late 1990's.

But Dr. Wakefield remains a pariah, banished from the halls of science, although his work never injured anyone and might in fact be an important step to understanding vaccines and how they might trigger conditions like autism.

Now there does exist an entire body of research that proves that Wakefield's study was invalid. But, boys and girls, there are also shelves full of studies showing the gas additive MTBE is safe, and that cigarette smoking has health benefits. When industry pays for the scientific piper, and when the government is under industry's control, night is day, black is white, and up is down, and so it shall remain.

In addition to Fisher and Wakefield being tireless forces in the fight for truth about vaccines, a third person should be mentioned. Michael Belkin was one of the world's foremost statisticians. He made his living by running the numbers on market indications. He had done his life by the book. So when his pediatrician stressed the importance of having his newborn daughter inoculated with the hepatitis b series of vaccines, Belkin complied.

Tragically this vaccine killed Lyla Rose Belkin before she was even six months old. The vaccine industry never contemplated having a foe like Belkin. Once he ran the numbers on their various programs, their industry looked pretty shabby. According to Belkin, "Children and adults are developing the same encephalitic and neurological complications after vaccination that science takes credit for eliminating."

Belkin's analysis slams the MMR vaccine. It also destroys all plausible arguments for injecting minor children with the Hep B vaccine. The analysis underscores a most important doctrine of common sense much ignored by the pseudo scientific pharmaceutical industry: "Don't attempt fixing something if it is not broken." And also the maxim: "No individual should be subject to a 'remedy' that is more dangerous than the ailment it supposedly wards off."

It is almost unheard for middle and upper middle class families to have an infant contract Hepatitis B. Those infants suspected of such an infection can simply be dealt with by their physician doing a blood test on the mother, since the infection is usually passed on in utero.

Initially industry planned on making the Hep B vaccine part of a protocol for twelve year olds nationwide. But they suddenly changed their minds and issued directives to hospital maternity wards. Nowadays, a healthy baby program at most hospitals involves inoculating a newborn with this vaccine within twenty-four hours of its birth.

Why was this done? My suspicion is that the reason for this change was that newborns have no personal history. This vaccine is perhaps the most dangerous one on the market. Its side effects are pronounced and life threatening. It actually injures and kills more infants than would be harmed were there no vaccine programs for this disease. So its recipients must not have a provable history. Harm a twelve year old, and a wealth of stored data can make a court case that this individual was indeed harmed by the vaccine. Theparents can present as evidence in court such items as school report cards, home videos, and anecdotal accounts of how healthy and active the youngster was before their paralysis or death.

But a newborn? Damage a newborn and it can quickly be said that the fault was with the newborn and not the outside intervention. Too bad if the side effects that the poor baby endures include a lifetime of migraine headaches, brain dysfunction or worse.

But industry has the trump card. Marin County receives enough monies from the vaccination program that its officials wish only to "Hear No Evil."

Eventually the tide must turn. But at what cost? Across how many more coffins containing infant and toddler bodies must the shadow of vaccination fall?

####

Whenever a vaccine is in short supply, they will divert the vaccination material that is set to go to overseas health clinics and set it up for use here (In the USA we never get rid of anything - the Campbell's soup can that expired four years ago now sits on a grocery shelf in Norway, or elsewhere.)

this makes no sense to me. perhaps years ago when it was being phased out, but it's my understanding they don;t use it to manufacture vaccines in this country anymore. the OP is so outdated as to be misleading, it would seem.

but it sounds as if people want people to jump to that false conclusion.
and using that antiperspirant won't bring it on either. that's oversimplifying the biological process and Alzheimer researchers will tell you it's BS...

:popcorn:


I started looking for infant/toddler deaths due to vaccines yesterday after a similar discussion. I know for a fact we aren't getting all the statistics on this. I remember our pediatrician making me read a dozen pages of information before giving vaccinations. I told him to only give those that he was giving his own children. That resulted in many letters back and forth between schools and doctors every year the kids were in school. Bottom line, my kids never got the dread diseases, and they were allowed in school.

Go to Barbara Loe Fischer's site (mentioned in above article)

Belkin is a world class statitician and his figures are accurate

vaccines.

That group is not overtly anti-vaccine but pro-informed consent and working hard to get needs of kids destroyed by vaccines taken care of.

Barbara Loe Fisher! Shame on those DUer's who ignore her!

there are bad eggs in every industry. I have been in many, many, many labs where vaccine work is done. They are not dirty. Vaccine production and manufacturing is done in what are called clean rooms. Sterility is kept at the highest quality. That group you cite is an anti-vaccination group with links to natural supplement groups. FDA, NIAID,CDC, WHO all these organizations have good sound scientific data on vaccine safety. Are all vaccines 100% safe. Of course not! Are some vaccines not as good as others and need more safety trials yes absolutely!! Sometimes certain batches of vaccines get contaminated and have to be withdrawn. And oh btw on this whole big Pharma money making things, unlike drugs, vaccine production is NOT VERY PROFITABLE if you look at the cost per vaccine. Thats why pharmaceutical companies DON'T do it unless they get a grant from the government or foundation like the Gates foundation.
How many babies would die of Polio, Small Pox, Diptheria amoung others? And die horribly.
PS- Thimerosol (the mercury preservatives in some) is in NO vaccine anymore.
Soon there might be vaccines for things like HIV, malaria and TB which kill millions around the world.
I am really tired of this campaign of MISINFORMATION!! Its not the media thats distorting the truth its people like this OP!!!:mad: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

The only thing I have seen on TV is people that are pissed at Perry.
I haven't seen any other pro- or neg- about it...of course other than here.

or the children they kill and maim.

Nor are you interested in the actual medical scinece that proves not all vaccines are safe or even EFFECTIVE.

I went to a 4 week conference on vaccines and part of it was to deal with detractors.
And they were right.
Keep hitting them with facts and they will continue to personally attack you.
Cause that is ALL they got. The facts aren't on their side.

So...keep making that conference worth the $350 I paid for it.:hi:

To accuse me of that. I have worked with some of the top medical minds in the freaking world on vaccines and I know a hell of lot about vaccines and how they work. And if you are accusing me of being insensitive you are very wrong. I would post some of the papers on vaccine development (one of which uses some of MY data) if I thought you would understand it! I have a degree in biology. I worked at NIAID. I have been in the scientific field for 10 years doing both immunology and serology along with vaccine developments. I never said THEY ARE ALL SAFE AND EFFECTIVE EITHER. What are your credentials btw...:grr: :grr:

Are there safety issues with some vaccines as there are with some drugs? Absolutely...

However, NO drug and NO vaccine will be 100% without risk. Risk versus benefit analyses must be rigorous and take into account not only the need for minimizing risk, but also changing public perceptions about risk. When the underlying prevalence of a disease or the risk behaviors for acquiring a disease become low, the threshold for risk from any given vaccine or drug becomes increasingly LESS. That is not wrong.. It is fact. So, as we saw with policy regarding a change from live oral polio vaccine --which confers the best protection but has more risk--to the less protective, but ultimately safer killed vaccine, changing population-based risks DO and SHOULD drive policy.


Having said that, there are some who argue that NO level of risk is acceptable. In arguing this, I fear these individuals don't understand that they are arguing against their own future. To argue for NO risk, would have meant that we would still many deadly scurges of the 20th and 21st century, including polio, measles and smallpox. Take measles, for instance--which despite being effectively controlled here via vaccination, still remains a leading killer in developing countries. We can ignore it now a bit, only because we HAD to vaccinate for school entry. It would not have worked if we did it the other way (i.e., allowed parents to OPT IN, rather than requiring vaccination), because in order to control measles, a population must be widely immune--nearly all vaccinated. Not 100%, but nearly all must be vaccinated in order to contain the risk of future outbreaks..

I am sympathetic to those who fear risks. But I beseech those who have these concerns to talk to those in the medical profession that you DO trust. Do not rely on anti-vaccination websites (no matter how "official-sounding" the name) to give you the truth. As we see in politics, it is all too easy to spout lies or propaganda and all too difficult sometimes to discern the motive behind the lies...

Respectfully, and with sincere wishes for good health to all,
Hlthe2b

arguments worth fight over is That ONCE A VACCINE INJURES MORE BABIES THAN WOULD EVER BE INJURED FROM THE ACTUAL DISEASE, then it is time to
reconsider that vaccine.

The Hep B vaccine has its place. If you are of an age wherein you might be exposed, and your promiscuity or your drug use pattern (ie shared needles) warrants it, look into getting it. If you are a health worker who may come into contact with the above defined population, consider it.

It is not something I would be concerned about if it was not a mandatory vaccine, included in the "healthy baby" protocols of most hospitals in our large cities.

WHY in the world would we do this to our babies? Because if we vaccinate our newborns for Hep B, then there is very little liability when the baby ends up paralyzed, or suffering from lifelong migraines, or even if the baby dies (as Michael Belkin's daughter did) A baby is an unknown quantity: the parents have very little in the way of proof that the child was really healthy to begin with

Originally the Hep B vaccine was supposed to be given to every twelve year old in the country. But the pharmaceutical companies had a big problem with this: a twelve year old is a known quantity. The parents have lots of proof that their child was healthy up until the day of the innoculation. The liability issue was hige if it was a population of twelve year olds that wouldbe given the vaccine.

So they decided on the simple solution, and to hell with the fact that people unconnected with industry (like the researchers in Japan) are much more aware of the actual immune capabilities of children under the age of two and the inability of such an infant to withstand such horrors in their bloodstream.

"Originally the Hep B vaccine was supposed to be given to every twelve year old in the country. But the pharmaceutical companies had a big problem with this: a twelve year old is a known quantity. The parents have lots of proof that their child was healthy up until the day of the innoculation. The liability issue was hige if it was a population of twelve year olds that wouldbe given the vaccine."

That's not the reason it's given to newborns rather than waiting till age 12. It's given to newborns to prevent their acquiring it from their Hep-B infected mothers. Which is how most of the world's children pick it up.

I know people don't worry much about Hep B, but it kills enormous numbers of people in Asia -- people who DIDN'T pick it up via IV needles or unprotected sex.

Big Pharma in the united States *uses* to the utmost statistics of the situation in other third world countries to intimidate the health professionals and the parents of children in this country to allow for the maximum number of innoculations.

The logical stance about the babies of mothers infected with hep B would be to innoculate those babies - after all, since this country's AMA has effectively blocked midwivery, most babies are born in hospitals - so why not just screen the mothers? Then innoculte the infants who indeed are at risk.

WHat we are doing is to innoculate ALL the babies - and this means that the healthy babies once innoculated now face MORE health risks and more death than that population would incur if left uninnoculated.

Itis even sillier than that - the very population most at risk - the infants of the mothers with Hep B - are much less likely than the middle class infant to receive the ongoing innoculations (Hep B is not one shot but a series of shots) So it really is a dumb idea.


But again, you bring your four day old daughter home from the hospital, she is screaming like crazy from migraines - you are just going to assume you have produced, through your own genetics, a cranky baby.

salient remarks:

Question: What are the risks and benefits for administering this vaccine (Hepatitis B vaccine)
to infants?



Answer: Hepatitis B is a rare, mainly blood-transmitted disease. In 1996 only 54 cases of the disease were reported to the CDC in the 0-1 age group. There were 3.9 million births that year, so the observed incidence of hepatitis B in the 0-1 age group was just 0.001%. In the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), there were 1,080 total reports of adverse reactions from hepatitis B vaccine in 1996 in the 0-1 age group, with 47 deaths reported. Total VAERS hepatitis B reports for the 0-1 age group outnumber reported cases of the disease 20 to 1.
####

What he is saying is this: if you allow your child to be vaccinated with Hep B BEFORE the age of one, the child's chances of an adverse outcome due to the vaccine are 20 to one over what would occur normally.

Belkin is a top Wall Street statistician. He had no concern about the vaccine issue until a Hep B vaccine took the life of his five week old daughter.

His estimate is probably conservative. After all, some parents are not savvy enough to question hospital or pediatric's office personnel when their kid dies. THe parents will be in shock and they will be told that it was Sudden Infant Death Syndrome.

There have even been cases wherein a parent is charged with manslaughter - the way that the brain swells up after this vaccine (The brain swell is one of the causes of Hep B vaccine death) leads to the conclusion that the shaken baby sysndrome is to blame for the child's death.

tell us what you know about the collusion between scientists, doctors and pharmaceutical companies.

With a very easy search yesterday, I found two cites BY DOCTORS who are addressing this corruption.

And by the way, only a goddamned fraction of the deaths and other devastating illnesses caused by vaccines are ever reported because doctors and pharmaceutical companies don't want their bottom line disturbed.

And that website you bad mouth is from PARENTS OF KIDS WHO HAVE BEEN MAIMED OR KILLED!

Why is it okay for Matcom to post his sob story and yet you are happy to ignore those who want to warn people to become informed?

If they had their way polio and smallpox would still be killing and maiming thousands of people.

"And by the way, only a goddamned fraction of the deaths and other devastating illnesses caused by vaccines are ever reported because doctors and pharmaceutical companies don't want their bottom line disturbed."

Where'd ya get that scoop? Inner Rectum News?

All show these cites by doctors? I can near guarantee they been debunked already.

Suffered or even died from the results of innoculations.

After Michael Belkin's infant daughter died in his arms, he fought the system for several years.

To this date, he has yet to receive a copy of his daughter's health records from the doctor's office.

And although her death is an accepted statistic by the Vaccine Adverse Reporting System, people who do not have the financial resources of a Belkin never have even that small amount of satisfaction.

Many cases of death by vaccine are reported as Sudden Infant Death Syndrome.(SIDS.) never mind that on Tuesday Morning, at 10 AM, the infant is a happy chortling little person, and that by noon of the same day, just moments after an innoculation, she is arching and writhing her body in pain, beset by fevers, and screaming like crazy for endless hours.

If the baby dies at home, the death will most likely be listed as SIDS...

Eileen Danneman, who lives in the Chaicago land area, was so exhausted helping the parents of children badly impacted by vaccines that she finally tossed in the towel.

How is it that some migrate to DU to find "like minds" on progressive liberal political issues... to find individuals who share our populist views, our sense of fairness in society and government... YET abandon that assumption of "best intentions" when it comes to an issue like immunizations...

The anger, mistrust, and accusations that have been flying the past couple of weeks is depressing to me to witness. There are many very well informed and well educated DUers in many fields. Yet, it seems impossible for those who may have valuable information to share to even weigh in in this climate....While there may be some who are too entrenched to consider any opinions other than their own, I think this atmosphere does a tremendous disservice to those who may wish to talk through issues or even debate the current state of knowledge, science, and public policy...:shrug:

And then I will shut up.

I want to know that every single person on the Vaccination National Oversight Committee (I am paraphrasing - I forget the panel's exact name) is free of industry ties. Right now, every single person on that panel is connected to industry. If industry independence can be achieved in Japan, it can be done here. (But it won't because of Industry dominating our legislative processes.)

I want to stop most vaccinations under the age of two. Maybe polio AFTER the age of six months. Again, in Japan, the infants do not receive vaccinations until the age of two.

No more combination vaccines. None. NADA.

No more innoculations of sick children - this happens often enough to worry me. If my vet is smart enough to not vaccinate my pets when they are sick, I would expect the same mindfulness of any pediatrician's office. (If you don't believe it happens, start emailing people who have "My kid was healthy until we vaccinated him/her" websites. Those parents know differently)

Tell me that everyone involved in developping vaccinations has a true understanding of an infant's developping system. Among things they should know would be these items: how does a given vaccination affect the thyroid and other endocronological systems of an infant? What is the relationship between the functioning of the blood brain barrier and the materials in the vaccination material? What is the role of the thymus in the developping infant?

Upping the number of inspectors who go out and examine the vaccination labs. If the San Francisco Chronicle is to be believed, our nation does not have nearly eneough people working as inspectors of the vaccine-producing laboratories. These places do not seem to get examined very often - and despite the infrequency of inspection visits, the laboratory managers still would not have the place cleaned up on the day of inspection (I believe that this series of articles was written way back when Clinton was President - I can only imagine that the screenings are even more infrequent under Bush)

Fully funding the monies to re-imburse all the parents of all the vaccine injured children. The way it stands now, only a small number of people receive any help - although Sen Dan Burtion did get the number increased of people so people more easily receive a place on the list, by the time you receive the authorization to collect any monies, you have been through so many stages of a gauntlet that you may well have dropped out.

of which I understand from their history, you need to go to various sources. We or most of us all have access to the internet. You can talk to your doctor or doctors. I for one don't know much about this but it seems that vacinations are necessary and have done a lot of good over the years.

Yes, there could be other issues but, hey, calm down and do some research.

For me, I will stick to the vacinations until I know different.

and for chrissakes, we never landed on the moon. did you see how crazy that astronaut lady was on the news last week? crazy! nasa press releases were edited by a bush crony. this proves the space program is a very bad thing. what more must we pay before we realize the folly of playing god? nature knows best. parasites don't infest healthy people. cancer never kills healthy people. All one! All one!

fnord

We accept health dictates on blind faith. It is worth remembering when ads ran about "9 out of 10 doctors smoke Camels" - ouch - or when we had atmospheric nuclear tests in Nevada. Terrific.

Now we're given vaccine information that may not be correct. The swing flu vaccine under Ford was a real flop, lots of bad reactions. The questions about autism rates and vaccines, which have not yet been resolved, are another example.

Now we have the HPV vaccine which is vital and the vaccines for hepatitis. Those are useful but the shoddy record of answering obvious questions diminishes their value.

Thanks so much!

these groups like the WHO and CDC for example track these things. And they are purely medical facts

where I'd find that. I use Entrez Med a fair amount but that's not what your talking about and that's just lit searches.

I'm happy to look around if you direct me to the source.

but you are going to have to trust me because alot of these sites will be bashed by people. I know the CDC always has info and can direct you to specific sites. FDA has a branch just devoted to concerns on vaccines that has info as well. WHO would probably have some sites too. I have some other stuff from some scientific papers I can look up as well. But these are good jumping points. Most of these are based on large scale research and clinical trial data and should not have spin on them. I will also see if I can find some good journal articles for you to look at. That should get you started. I am trying to get a hold of someone who has access to quite a bit of info on the topic as well. Hopefully I can get that soon and post it. This is what I have wanted all along. People willing to be educated. Believe it or not you just made my day by actually asking for info instead of shreiking that I don't know what I am talking about!:)

All presented by an advocacy group that relies on RW medical studies?

I really don't know who to trust on this, but we tend favor on the side of the people who don't earn a living off of making or giving them. We're holding off on even considering vaccinations until my daughter is school age. Hopefully by then there will be some sort of clear consensus on this...or they figure out why autism has skyrocketed in recent years.

I make a living doing it so I know factually what is happening. The autism is linked to Mercury in the Thimerasol that USED TO BE USED as a preservative. That is gone. There is a clear consensus on this vaccines are good. THis is like the global warming or evolution debate where a very loud and stubborn MINORITY clouds the whole issue. Unfortunately they seem especially vocal here. I would strongly encourge you to have your daughter vaccinated. If you don't trust my knowledge or judgement I would at least ask multiple pediatricians on this issue.

She was fussy afterwards, had a slight fever, and then developed autistic symptoms....is still autistic at age 12. It pisses me off to no end that they deny, deny, deny the mercury link, but I know damn well that she was never the same after that shot. IT NEVER EVEN OCCURED TO ME THAT THERE WOULD BE MERCURY IN IT...this was in 1996 before they discontinued that preservative.

It didn't occur to me to ask, "so is there poison/toxins, noxious metals in here with the good stuff?" For this reason I tell new parents: ASK ASK ASK QUESTIONS! DO RESEARCH! Find out about these vaccinations before automatically getting them. I get some of them...not all of them.

My mom's 57 y/o neighbor died suddenly after taking Vioxx for mild arthritis before it was pulled...and my mom fought her doctor about the hormone replacements saying it doesn't make sense to put every post-menopausal woman on medicine the rest of their lives, it sounded like a con. Well she was right, they don't routinely do that anymore because of the pronounced increase in breast cancer it caused. So good for her for not following doctors orders on that.

Sometimes common sense trumps "medical experts." A lot of times just from what I've seen and experienced. Get a second, third opinion and do your own research before letting anything into your body just because it's on some schedule. I wish I would have done that with my daughter!

but people are just simply wanting to say all doctors and scientists are uncaring money grubbing people and therefore nothing we do can be trusted. I have no problem with being INFORMED. And no industry is perfect. I am definitely seen things that would make your hair curl no doubt and I yelled and screamed
and tried to my best to stop and informed too.
I always advocate making informed decisions. But to assume because this happened in the past it will continue to happen is wrong. Any ethical scientist and doctor will be more than happy to sit down with you and talk through your fears and concerns and decide what is the best for you. Blind faith in anyone is as dangerous and blind distrust of anyone and everyone in the field. For every horror story you dig up in the medical field (and I know there are plenty) there are also many, many, many success stories that you don't really hear much about. The smallpox vaccine is a nasty vaccine and dangerous with plenty of side effects and has killed and permanently damaged people. Yet it has wiped out one of histories biggest (and nasty if you look at the pictures of sick people) killers.
With Thimerosol, nobody thought they were putting a toxin in there. Any ethical docto/researcher now will tell you that was a huge mistake. One researcher I know wouldn't even have it in his lab to use in non-vaccine related buffers. Again, I am not saying their aren't idiots and incompetents in the field (I have a post a while back about a horrible experience at NIH) but too many people are using the bad apples to discredit the rest of us. I am very sorry about your child. Anyone in this field would be. And I get just as mad when I hear about things like Vioxx. If you want to be a skeptic and do research thats great and very healthy. Just don't let your bad experiences (or others) blind you to facts. Thats too much like what the jackasses in the govt do.

he was in bed and i call hubby in to watch and we are just amazed by the kids behavior. we had no idea there was any link with autism and vaccination... he has since had low level autism and something he has had to learn and struggle with for the last decade. i dont trust it either. i dont trust them actually trying to get an answer. but i know what was, i know what i saw and i know what we live with today

Senator Dan Burton was so impressed by this man that he brought him over to testify at a hearing on vaccines. (Burton's grandchild had suffered from autism after receiving the MMR vaccine)

I'd google "Wakefield" + MMR + vaccines

holds and who funds his campaigns.

longer used as a preservative. So where are all the new cases coming from?

Making liberals look ridiculous since the 1960s.

:eyes:

In fact in the UK, the greatest sources of conspiracy theories, on vaccines and on everything else, are the right-wing tabloids, especially the Daily ('Hate-')Mail.

In medical cost vs. benefit modeling (which strongly informs national medical public policy making and far too strongly informs the medical policies of HMOs), the most critical component is a value called "cost per life year gained."

If the cost per life year gained is under $50,000, that is generally considered a decent investment by US medical policy makers. If "cost per life year" gained is over $100,000, that is generally considered a wasteful medical policy because that money could surely be put to much better use elsewhere. Yes, this is cruel and heartless to some degree, but wide scale medical cost allocations do need to be made and, more relevantly, are continually made using these cost plus risk vs. benefit analyses. Think HMOs. Now consider why pap smears, blood tests and urine tests aren't recommended every month for everyone. Testing monthly could definitely save more than a few lives, and there is no measurable associated medical risk. But the cost would be astronomical versus the benefit over the entire US population when comparing these monthly tests to other therapies, procedures and medicines.

Now on to GARDASIL. By the time you pay doctors a small fee to inventory and deliver GARDASIL in three doses, you are talking about paying about $500 for this vaccine. And because even in the best case scenario GARDASIL can confer protection against only 70% of cervical cancer cases, GARDASIL cannot ever obsolete the HPV screening test that today is a major component of most US women's annually recommended pap smears. These tests screen for 36 nasty strains of HPV, while GARDASIL confers protection against just four strains of HPV.

Now let's consider GARDASIL's best case scenario at the moment -- about $500 per vaccine, 100% lifetime protection against all four HPV strains (we currently have no evidence for any protection over five years), and no risk of any medical complications for any subset of the population (Merck's GARADSIL studies were too small and short to make this determination for adults, these studies used potentially dangerous alum injections as their "placebo control" and GARDASIL was hardly even tested on little kids). Now, using these best case scenario assumptions for GARDASIL, let's compare the projected situation of a woman who gets a yearly HPV screening test starting at age 18 to a woman who gets a yearly HPV screening test starting at age 18 plus the three GARDASIL injections at age 11 to 12. Even if you include all of the potential medical cost savings from the projected reduction in genital wart and HPV dysplasia removal procedures and expensive cervical cancer procedures, medicines and therapies plus all of the indirect medical costs associated with all these ailments and net all of these savings against GARDASIL's costs, the best case numbers for these analyses come out to well over $200,000 per life year gained -- no matter how far the hopeful pro-GARDASIL assumptions that underpin these projections are tweaked in GARDASIL's favor.

Several studies have been done, and they have been published in several prestigious medical journals:

http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.290.6.781
http://tinyurl.com/2ovy95
http://tinyurl.com/2tbuma

None of these studies even so much as consider a strategy of GARDASIL plus a regimen of annual HPV screenings starting at age 18 to be worth mentioning (except to note how ridiculously expensive this would be compared to other currently recommended life extending procedures, medicines and therapies) because the cost per life year gained is simply far too high. What these studies instead show is that a regimen of GARDASIL plus delayed (to age 21, 22, 23, 25 or 27) biennial or triennial HPV screening tests may -- depending on what hopeful assumptions about GARDASIL's long term efficacy and risks are used -- hopefully result in a modest cost per life year savings compared to annual HPV screening tests starting at age 18.

If you don't believe me about this, just ask any responsible OB-GYN or medical model expert. Now, why do I think all of this is problematic?

1) Nobody is coming clean (except to the small segment of the US population that understands medical modeling) that the push for widespread mandatory HPV vaccination is based on assuming that we can use the partial protection against cervical cancer that these vaccines hopefully confer for hopefully a long, long time period to back off from recommending annual HPV screening tests starting at age 18 -- in order to save money, not lives.

2) Even in the best case scenario, the net effect is to give billions in tax dollars to Merck so HMOs and PPOs can save billions on HPV screening tests in the future.

3) These studies don't consider any potential costs associated with any potential GARDASIL risks. Even the slightest direct or indirect medical costs associated with any potential GARDASIL risks increase the cost per life year gained TREMENDOUSLY and can even easily change the entire analysis to cost per life year lost. Remember that unlike most medicines and therapies, vaccines are administered to a huge number of otherwise healthy people -- and, at least in this case, 99.99% of whom would never contract cervical cancer even without its protection.

4) These studies don't take in account the fact that better and more regular HPV screening tests have reduced the US cervical cancer rate by about 25% a decade over the last three decades and that there is no reason to believe that this trend would not continue in the future, especially if we used a small portion of the money we are planning on spending on GARDASIL to promote free annual HPV screening tests for all low income uninsured US women.

5) The studies assume that any constant cervical cancer death rate (rather than the downward trending cervical cancer death rate we have today) that results in a reduced cost per life year gained equates to sound medical public policy.

As I said before, if any of you don't believe me about this, please simply ask your OB-GYN how the $500 cost of GARDASIL can be justified on a cost per life year gained basis if we don't delay the onset of HPV screening tests and back off from annual HPV screening tests to biennial or triennial HPV screening tests.

The recommendations are already in: http://tinyurl.com/33p9q6

The USPSTF strongly recommends ... beginning screening within 3 years of onset of sexual activity or age 21 (whichever comes first) and screening at least every 3 years ...

Where are the cites for each statement?

How many times are you going to challenge my information without bringing any contrary facts, evidence, support, analysis or logic to the table?

Make a statement: Indicate your source. Footnotes, end notes or links will work.

For every statement you make.

(Or every statement you cut & pasted.)

just those for which you can't explain why or what you disagree with?

There's plenty of room here for opinion.

But spam does not age well. It gets all rancid.

If Guardisal is as effective as claimed, preventing 70% of life4 time cervical cancer cases, do you want to be the one to explain to women and their families that they are going through treatment for cervical cancer because the cost/benefit analysis showed it was cheaper for society that way?

Pharma companies will do anything to avoid making a complicated product which isn't very profitable and which leaves them open to liability. That's why there have been so many shortages of flu vaccines.

It is the nature of vaccines that a few people will react badly to them. That has always been the case. However, I think its a price well worth paying given that they have completely obliterated a lot of diseases which used to be death sentences.

Do some genealogy--look at all of your ancestors with 5-10 kids born, but 1-4 living to adulthood. Fuck this state of nature "paradise" nostalgia for a time where people never used vaccines.

and the response is I don't know what I am talking about despite 10 years in industry. Unfortunately there are enough publicly aired problems, like Thimerosol which leads everyone to totally dismiss the industry. That was bad but its being corrected but I guess if researchers aren't perfect than we can't trust them at all can we

How is that not extremely profitable?

Why do governments have such problems maintaining vaccine supplies if pharma was so eager to make them?

Profits before safety is what I always say!

http://www.buffalobeast.com/80/thimerosal.htm

Obscure but comprehensive.

If Rick Perry is being paid by Merck, Wakefield was paid by lawyers acting for parents suing vaccine manufacturers (this is documented). Neither of them can be taken as an objective authority on the matter. Both may well genuinely believe in what they are doing; but if potential conflict of interest invalidates the opinion of one, it invalidates the opinion of both.

Moreover, even apart from that, Wakefield's study has serious methodological pitfalls. It involved only 12 autistic children, who were mostly selected for also having bowel problems, and found that some of them had measles virus in their bowels. There was no adequate control group, and the study certainly did not prove that the measles virus was what was causing the autism.

There is a study that goes against the view that MMR causes autism. This is Honda et al's (2005) study in Japan, where the MMR vaccine was withdrawn in 1993 and was not reintroduced until recently. During the period, the rate of autism diagnosis continued to rise in exactly the same way that it has done in other countries.

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7076

This suggests either that the increase in autism is due to increased diagnosis, or that there are other environmental factors involved, or both.

In fact, before I'm accused of forcing vaccinations on people: I do think that people should have the right to make the ultimate decision as to what vaccines they take or give their children, though I think that they should be offered the chance of free vaccination, and told of the advantages and potential side-effects. (Personally, I choose not to get the flu vaccine, even though I'm in a risk group; though I would do so if either a severe epidemic was imminent, or a vaccine was introduced that would work long-term rather than needing to be taken each year.) But I think that being too quick to blame autism on one vaccine, on the basis of flimsy evidence, has its dangers - among others, that some real possible causes of autims may go undetected.

<<This is Honda et al's (2005) study in Japan, where the MMR vaccine was withdrawn in 1993 and was not reintroduced until recently.

If I am remembering things correctly - the reason they approve the MMR in Japan is that now children there are not vaccinated until a bit of maturity has set in - that is - no vaccinations on infants UNTIL the age of two. So the vaccine may have been re-introduced - but the inclusion of restrictions with regards to age affords the Japanese children a higher degree of safety than that offered American children here (Again, as I have stated before - when Japanese researchers talk amongst themselves about the need for a control population - or when they have to answer the patronizing and worse questions of American researchers - the Japanese assert that it is American children who afford the control base for the data. Don't you find that a bit terrifying? Our lack of control means our kids are the test population!)

It is our kids with the skyrocketing numbers of learning disorders, our kids with skyrocketing diabetes, our kids with various cancers that form the database and control for those astute enough in the Far East to offer protection for their youngsters.

As far as Andrew Wakefield - yes, he used only a small sample - unlike the Big Pharma studies where there are huge pursefuls of monies available, he was relying on monies offered by the parents whose children had been harmed.

Someday (or someday in my dreams) we will have a pharmaceutical industry that will NOT attack respectd reseaarchers like Wakefield - but an industry that will say, Hmm, this person was onto something - WE should expand the study. After all, WE have the money and resources not availabale to independent researchers - In fact we should HIRE Wakefield to help us.

My familiarity with all the in's and out's of the vaccine issue is far far less than the amount of attention that I have invested with the pesticide industry. But I am assuming that the same things that are Standard Operating Procedure for the pesticide concerns are standard operating procedure for the vaccination industry.

in the pesticide industry, the sampling of health risks was typically done on adult males who were a certain height and weight (say 5 feet six and 170 pounds, minimum) Pesticides were decided to be safe if this population did not suffer adverse effects. Never mind that children and women usually are not at that weight. Never mind that children and women have different bio-chemistries than fully men. It was good enough for Big Pesticide to say, ""RoundUp did not adversely affect these men - therefore it is safe for all people)

Also in the pesticide industry, they did misleading studies. So they would FEED RoundUp to dogs - knowing that RoundUp taken orally would be handled far differently with more factors for the body neutralizing it than a RoundUp exposure that is breathed in. Then they could release the results of this study and so state that there was little known and observed bad effects on the dogs - even though RoundUp was not a product that the backyard gardener would eat - but would be sprayed in their backyard. Professor Warren Porter PhD has spent his life examining RoundUp - and things he knows about RoundUp are chilling. (He also has some scary notions about Ritalin, as well)

I doubt that these same tricks are not utilized by the vaccine industry - one proof being their recent vaccine for a rotovirus for children. Despite only a small (comparatively) number of children who actually received this vaccine - 113 suffered serious side effects (including bowel obstructions) and one infant died.

is to END ALL VACCINATIONS?

If you don't want them, be my guest and DON'T GET THEM. But where the hell do you get off working overtime to deny the rest of us the right to vaccinations????

Where and when did you get your degree(s) in microbiology, immunology, virology, or medicine that make you such an expert?

Or maybe you subscribe to the sadly common belief that the more medical and biological education one has at the university level, the more stupid and misinformed one becomes?

'Cause you're a BIG virology and immunology EXPERT, right?

http://blogs.cgdev.org/globalhealth/

January 22, 2007
Hundreds of Thousands Saved: A Measles Success Story

The numbers are in! The Measles Initiative, which set out to halve the global measles burden between 1999 and 2005, has surpassed its goal with a 60 percent reduction. A new Lancet study (subscription required) reports an estimated drop in measles deaths from 873,000 in 1999 to 345,000 in 2005 (based on a natural history model to evaluate mortality trends).

For related coverage, see The Economist, the Washington Post, the New York Times and elsewhere. But also be sure to check out CGD's Millions Saved for a detailed account of how measles was nearly eliminated in seven southern African countries in the late 1990s. The case study suggests some key ingredients for the intervention's success: the commitment of governments, the strengthening of surveillance systems, and the integration of measles vaccinations with other health services. Some of these reasons are echoed by WHO director Margaret Chan in an International Herald Tribune op-ed on the more recent Measles Initiative success. She said that "it took a new partnership - with commitment, caring and cash - to turn things around," and noted that the success in countries was aided by their ability to build on the strategies and infrastructure of existing health programs and services.

As usual in public health, this success implies more work to be done. In a good sign that past successes are being used to inform future aims, the Measles Initiative has already set a new goal of reducing measles mortality 90 percent by 2010. Margaret Chan is optimistic that the new measles target will be achieved; so am I.


http://www.cgdev.org/section/initiatives/_active/vaccinedevelopment/overview

Nowhere are the potential benefits greater than in the production and distribution of new vaccines to prevent the diseases that needlessly take lives and destroy livelihoods in developing countries.

In 2003 we established a Working Group, including economists, public health professionals, lawyers, experts in public policy and pharmaceutical and biotech experts, with the mandate to develop a practical approach to the vaccine challenge: to go from ideas to action. The result is this report.

My colleagues propose an elegant solution to enable the high income countries to work together to accelerate the development of vaccines for diseases of low-income countries to guarantee to pay for such vaccines if and when they are developed. The solution is simple and practical. It unleashes the same combination of market incentives and public investment that creates medicines for diseases that afflict us: arrangements that have been spectacularly effective in improving the health of the rich nations in the last century. It creates incentives for more private investment in these diseases. And it will ensure that, once a vaccine is developed, the funds will be there to get the vaccine to the people who need it.

Adequate investment in global public goods should be a cornerstone of foreign assistance. By definition, we all benefit from global public goods, and we share a responsibility to see that they are properly funded and available to everyone. These are investments with high returns and low risks of corruption and appropriation. Furthermore, this proposal ties funding directly to results: if the commitment does not succeed, there is no cost to the sponsors.

Every so often, an idea comes along that makes you ask: now why didn't I think of that? This is such an idea.
Nancy Birdsall
President


http://www.savekids.org/vaccines/v.html

the above site is comprehensive in recording both past achievements and current achievements for saving millions of lives through vaccinations.
truly a remarkable human achievement.

this describes an effort to save 5 MILLION CHILDREN through vaccination
http://www.dfid.gov.uk/news/files/pressreleases/iffi-bond.asp

The first step was taken today to raise funds for a mass immunisation programme for children in the developing world, at a ceremony in London attended by the Chancellor of the Exchequer Gordon Brown, Queen Rania Al-Abdullah of Jordan, and representatives of Britain’s faith groups.
The International Finance Facility for Immunisation (IFFIm) will deliver 4 billion dollars over the next ten years to be spent on the immunisation of up to 500 million children in the world’s 70 poorest countries against preventable diseases like polio, measles and diphtheria. It is estimated this will save 5 million lives in the years up to 2015, and a further 5 million afterwards, and lead to the eradication of polio.
Speaking in advance of the launch, the Chancellor said:
"Millions of people campaigned to Make Poverty History last year, and now we can say to them all: we are delivering the promises we made, your hopes are becoming a reality, and millions of young children's lives will be saved as a result."
IFFIm uses long-term, binding commitments from donors as collateral against which to borrow money up front from institutional and private investors, which can be spent immediately on mass vaccination programmes. Commitments have so far been made by the UK, France, Italy, Spain, Sweden, Brazil and South Africa, together with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

The first step was taken today to raise funds for a mass immunisation programme for children in the developing world, at a ceremony in London attended by the Chancellor of the Exchequer Gordon Brown, Queen Rania Al-Abdullah of Jordan, and representatives of Britain’s faith groups.
The International Finance Facility for Immunisation (IFFIm) will deliver 4 billion dollars over the next ten years to be spent on the immunisation of up to 500 million children in the world’s 70 poorest countries against preventable diseases like polio, measles and diphtheria. It is estimated this will save 5 million lives in the years up to 2015, and a further 5 million afterwards, and lead to the eradication of polio.
Speaking in advance of the launch, the Chancellor said:
"Millions of people campaigned to Make Poverty History last year, and now we can say to them all: we are delivering the promises we made, your hopes are becoming a reality, and millions of young children's lives will be saved as a result."
IFFIm uses long-term, binding commitments from donors as collateral against which to borrow money up front from institutional and private investors, which can be spent immediately on mass vaccination programmes. Commitments have so far been made by the UK, France, Italy, Spain, Sweden, Brazil and South Africa, together with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.


''Vaccines have been one of the most important health gains in the past century. Infants and young children are particularly vulnerable to infectious diseases; that is why it is critical that they are protected through immunization. The benefits of vaccination far outweigh the risks. Children who are not immunized increase the chance that others will get the disease. Since this effort 50 years ago, we can now protect children from more than 12 vaccine-preventable diseases, and disease rates have been reduced by 99% in the United States. Immunizations are extremely safe thanks to advancements in medical research and ongoing review by doctors, researchers, and public health officials; yet without diligent efforts to maintain immunization programs here and strengthen them worldwide, the diseases seen 50 years ago remain a threat to our children.''
http://www.cdc.gov/nip/events/polio-vacc-50th/

the above quote is from the cdc re: the fiftieth anniversary of the polio vaccine and takes in the scope of what vaccines have brought humanity -- millions have been saved -- and many millions more will be through hard work and determination.


you live in a world so positively affected by the advent of vaccines -- and you don't realize it or you like to hyperventilate.
i'm not sure which.

for those of you who don't vaccinate your kids and they don't get sick -- thank the parents of the kids who were vaccinated.

2007 would would look more desperate than it does without vaccines -- and i suspect you know that -- which makes this all fairly reprehensible.

be sure not to get any when there ready.

http://www.sanofipasteur.com/sanofi-pasteur/front/index.jsp?codeRubrique=31&lang=EN&siteCode=AVPI_US
Other key projects

Our projects also concern other targets for which there are pressing medical needs.

* Dengue fever
This viral disease, previously confined essentially to South America and Southeast Asia is becoming increasingly prevalent and is expanding to the bordering regions. It is transmitted by mosquito bites and causes severe influenza-like symptoms, which may lead, in certain cases, to fatal hemorrhagic fever. Within a large network of collaborators, sanofi pasteur is working on several approaches to develop a vaccine that will protect endemic populations as well as travelers.
 
* Cancer
Taking advantage of its researchers' experience in the field of immunology and infectious disease, sanofi pasteur is focusing on the development of therapeutic cancer vaccines for colorectal cancer and melanoma. These vaccines are designed to harness the immune system to complement surgery and chemotherapy. Sanofi pasteur identifies specific antigens carried by the tumors in order to then inject them and elicit an immune response that can hinder the development of the primary tumor or metastases. This approach is a joint effort between scientists from the pharmaceutical and from the vaccine arms of sanofi-aventis and brings together the expertise of two companies that are leaders in their fields.
 
* AIDS
Sanofi pasteur is working on both preventive and therapeutic HIV vaccines in collaboration with a number of organizations: public institutions in France and North America, the US pharmaceutical industry and biotech firms. We have made a significant commitment to this field in terms of budget, scope of clinical trials, and the diversity of our approaches.
Several prototypes based on viral vectors have produced interesting immune responses and sanofi pasteur has pioneered the prime/boost approach. The production of these vaccines is, however, very complex and considerable efforts will be required to demonstrate uniform results and move to an industrial scale. In addition, the company is studying vaccine preparations intended for persons infected with the virus, in order to serve as an alternative to drug therapies, at least temporarily. With these vaccine preparations, sanofi pasteur has produced the first demonstration of tolerance and immunogenicity among HIV-infected persons. Over the years, sanofi pasteur has conducted or supported more than 40 clinical trials. It is today participating in a phase III clinical trial to test the efficacy of a combined prophylactic vaccines on 16000 volunteers in Thailand.
 
* Avian flu
Sanofi pasteur has taken a leadership role in pandemic influenza vaccine, developing the first H5N1 prototype vaccines produced in the US and France.
In 2005, a clinical trial was conducted in France comparing H5N1 vaccine candidates with and without adjuvants. Other clinical trials were or are currently being conducted.  These first clinical studies demonstrated safety and an immune response in a significant number of volunteers that were consistent with requirements of regulatory agencies for licensure of seasonal influenza vaccine.
The data will be submitted as part of the company’s core prototype vaccine dossier to the European Medicines Agency (EMEA). The core dossier has been developed in strict accordance with the EMEA guidelines. This process is expected to reduce the time necessary for approval of a pandemic vaccine in Europe once a strain is identified and a pandemic is declared.
Based on these encouraging results, the ongoing research will continue in 2007 and beyond, focused on the assessment of candidate vaccines in other target populations (children and elderly), and also on new adjuvants that could allow the use of decreased quantity of antigen per dose to protect an individual.
The rationale for the development of such a vaccine produced on an industrial scale, is to have available the greatest number of doses in as short a time as possible, with the goal of protecting the largest number of individuals, if an influenza pandemic is declared.

 

Just out of curiosity is this company doing any work with Malaria vaccine development? I have interest in that area...

been looking and reading TREMENDOUS amounts of information -- and it's getting hard to keep track of it.

if i find info i'll post it.

http://www.malariavaccine.org/res-int-rrabinovich.htm

http://www.bioedonline.org/news/news.cfm?art=3012
December 18, 2006

Malaria vaccine strategies get boost

Money and research results both on the up.
by Heidi Ledford
news@nature.com
RELATED SITES
* WHO malaria
* President Bush's Malaria Initiative
* Malaria Vaccine Initiative


Print this article Register for updates when new articles are posted Discuss this article
Christmas came early last week to researchers who aim to conquer malaria the mosquito-borne disease that kills over a million people every year. In a first-ever summit on the disease at the White House, US President Bush announced an expansion of his Malaria Initiative, which has dedicated an extra US$1.2 billion to cut malaria-related deaths by 50% in targeted African countries within five years. The number of targeted countries has now expanded to fifteen from last year's seven.
And the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation a charity set up by Microsoft founder Bill Gates and his wife Melinda announced an additional $83.5 million contribution in grants towards science aimed at conquering the disease. Including these grants, the Gates Foundation has thus far committed more than $750 million to fighting malaria.
Much of the Gates Foundation money will go toward developing vaccines. Despite more than twenty years of research in this area, no vaccines have yet made it through the final stage of drug testing and onto the market. But some 20 trials are in progress and the effort continues. The World Health Organization announced earlier this month that they intend to devise a vaccine that can protect 80% of the inoculated by 2025.
To meet those goals, some researchers are exploring fringe ways to keep the disease in check including using whole malaria parasites to prompt the human immune system, or trying to vaccinate mosquitoes instead of people against the disease-causing agent.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-12/bc-pmv121406.php
PATH Malaria Vaccine Initiative announces partnership to develop novel malaria vaccine

MVI and Sanaria Inc. to conduct initial safety and test-of-concept trial

Bethesda, MD, USA (December 14, 2006) – In a move that promises to expand the types of malaria vaccine candidates in clinical development, the PATH Malaria Vaccine Initiative (MVI) today announced a new partnership with Sanaria Inc., a Maryland company, to accelerate development of a unique malaria vaccine candidate.

Supported by a $29.3 million grant to PATH from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, this strategic partnership will focus on the development and manufacture of Sanaria's malaria vaccine candidate—one that uses a novel, whole-parasite approach to preventing infection from the most deadly malaria parasite, Plasmodium falciparum. MVI and Sanaria will move quickly to conduct an initial safety and test-of-concept trial of the Sanaria candidate among volunteers in the United States.

"Close to one million children die of malaria each year," said Dr. Melinda Moree, Director of MVI. "With this support, we can examine another promising malaria vaccine technology and bring the field closer to delivering a safe, effective, and affordable pediatric malaria vaccine to at-risk communities in Africa."

Of the more than one million people who die of malaria every year, most of them are African children under five years old. Hundreds of millions more people suffer the effects of the mosquito-borne, parasitic disease each year. Scientists have been working for years to develop a preventive malaria vaccine and have recently demonstrated that such a vaccine is possible.

http://www.genengnews.com/news/bnitem.aspx?name=11963419&source=genwire
i'd look through the above site occasionally for updated info.
there is some info there on sanaria and their work on the malaria vaccine.

although I kind of know some this already. I have personal contacts through both a family memeber and a former colleage of Sanaria. They do good work. I am good friends with someone extremely knowledgable in the field although due to ugly politics neither he nor I are anylonger in the field. I want to keep up with it though!! (I kind of have a cynical insiders view of why * is interested in Malaria right now anyway).
You are a font of good and helpful info. Keep it up!

but be sure to thank the people who did.

CHILDHOOD VACCINES IN CANADA
PRODUCTS & INGREDIENTS LIST

Prepared by VRAN – Vaccination Risk Awareness Network Inc.
www.vran.org

While health officials recommend an ever increasing quantity of vaccines for babies and young children, they are less than forthcoming with the ingredients list of vaccine additives and the potential for reactions. Today’s parents are concerned about the health impact of multiple vaccines & additives on their children’s health. Vaccine product monographs listing ingredients can be located in the CPS index (Compendium of Pharmaceuticals and Specialties) obtainable through any pharmacy in Canada. Some vaccine product monographs can be accessed on line at the manufacturers’ websites.

Starting at two months of age, most babies are injected with the following vaccines: Diphtheria, Tetanus, acellular Pertussis, Polio, Act-HIB (haemophilus influenza B), Hepatitis B, 7 valent Pneumococcal vaccine, Meningococcal C vaccine. Babies may be injected with as many as 8 vaccines concurrently. See the Canadian Immunization Guide for details of the vaccine schedule and number of doses given of each vaccine:
http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/publicat/cig-gci/index.html English
http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/publicat/cig-gci/index_f.html French

In the northern territories, babies are also routinely injected within hours of birth with BCG (tuberculosis vaccine) & hepatitis B vaccine. The province of New Brunswick vaccinates newborns with hepatitis B vaccine within hours of birth.

A two dose schedule of MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine is generally started at 12 months and given again at 18 months or 4-6 years. Varicella (chickenpox) vaccine is also injected at 12 months of age. Additionally, Influenza vaccine is now recommended for all children starting at 6 months of age. Babies and young children are injected with two doses of flu vaccine 30 days apart.

Health officials keep vaccine reaction reports under wraps. Unlike the U.S. where the VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System) is accessible on line and can be searched by anyone for vaccine reactions, Canadians do not have access to the vaccine reaction data base held by Health Canada. Only by filing an Access to Information request with the specific lot number of a vaccine, is it possible to obtain limited vaccine reaction information.

People should also know that the manufacturers do not disclose all the ingredients nor full details of the manufacturing process. Health Canada protects the "proprietary rights" of these companies and upholds their right to secrecy - something the greater Canadian public should be up in arms about. That parents are expected to submit their children for injection with multiple vaccines without first having full disclosure of all known ingredients is a disturbing statement on the control exerted by monopoly medicine and corporate and government allies.

Thimerosal (a preservative comprising 50% ethyl mercury) was phased out of early infant shots in Canada when polio vaccine was combined with DPT. Mercury is a potent neurotoxin. Apparently inactivated, injectable polio vaccine is degraded by thimerosal, hence vaccine combinations that contain polio vaccine do not contain thimerosal. Thimerosal may, however still be used in the manufacturing process, then filtered out. The question remains however, whether trace amounts of thimerosal still persist in the final product. Thimerosal was replaced by 2-phenoxyethanol, another toxic substance used in antifreeze and is contained in Pentacel, the DTPaP+Hib vaccine injected into most Canadian babies starting at 2 months of age.

Currently the two vaccines given to Canadian babies that may still contain thimerosal are influenza vaccine and hepatitis B. Both vaccines are available in single dose vials without thimerosal. Parents who choose to inject their babies with these vaccines should know they do have a choice to choose thimerosal free vaccines.
(top)


Your Baby’s First Shot - Five Vaccines in One:

Pentacel – combines Act-HIB and Quadracel vaccines(4 vaccines)
Produced by Sanofi Pasteur

Description:

Act-HIB ® Reconstituted with QUADRACEL ®Haemophilus b Conjugate Vaccine (Tetanus Protein - Conjugate) Reconstituted with Component Pertussis Vaccine and Diphtheria and Tetanus Toxoids Adsorbed Combined with Inactivated Poliomyelitis Vaccine.

Each single dose (approximately 0.5 mL) after reconstitution contains:

* purified polyribose ribitol phosphate capsular
* polysaccharide (PRP) of Haemophilus influenzae type b
* covalently bound to 20 µg of tetanus protein 10 µg
* pertussis toxoid (PT) 20 µg
* filamentous haemaglutinin (FHA) 20 µg
* fimbrial agglutinogens 2 + 3 (FIM) 5 µg
* pertactin (PRN) 3 µg
* diphtheria toxoid 15 Lf
* tetanus toxoid 5 Lf
* poliovirus type 1 (Mahoney) 40 D-antigen units
* poliovirus type 2 (MEF1) 8 D-antigen units
* poliovirus type 3 (Saukett) 32 D-antigen units
* aluminum phosphate 1.5 mg
* 2-phenoxyethanol (not as a preservative) 0.6% v/v
* polysorbate 80 10 ppm (by calculation)
* bovine serum ?50 ng
* trace amounts of formaldehyde
* trace amounts of polymyxin B and neomycin may be present from the cell growth medium


For information on precautions and adverse events, go to:  http://198.73.159.214/statics/vaccines/english/Pentacel_E.pdf

********************


Hepatitis B vaccines marketed in Canada are produced by Merck Frosst & GlaxoSmithKline

Recombivax HB

Produced by Merck Frosst

Description:

RECOMBIVAX HB ® is a non-infectious subunit viral vaccine consisting of surface antigen (HBsAg or Australia antigen) of hepatitis B virus produced in yeast cells. A portion of the hepatitis B virus gene, coding for HBsAg, is cloned into yeast and the vaccine for hepatitis B is produced from cultures of this recombinant yeast strain according to methods developed in the Merck Research Laboratories.

Two formulations are available:

* 10 µg/1.0 mL formulation: each 1.0 mL dose contains 10 µg of hepatitis B surface antigen adsorbed onto approximately 0.5 mg of amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate;
* 40 µg/1.0 mL formulation: each 1.0 mL dose contains 40 µg of hepatitis B surface antigen adsorbed onto approximately 0.5 mg of amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate;


Thimerosal (mercury derivative) 1:20,000 (50 µg/mL) has been added only to the preservative-containing formulations. All preparations have been treated with formaldehyde prior to adsorption onto amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate. The vaccine is of the adw subtype.

For information on precautions and adverse events, go to:   http://www.merckfrosst.ca/e/products/monographs/RECOMBIVAX_773-b_10_03-E.pdf

********************


ENGERIX ® -B

Produced by GlaxoSmithKline

Hepatitis B Vaccine (Recombinant)

Composition:

The vaccine is a slightly opaque, white, sterile suspension. A slow settling of the white aluminum hydroxide may occur during storage leaving a clear colourless supernatant liquid. Each 1 mL adolescent/adult dose of vaccine contains 20 µg of hepatitis B surface antigen adsorbed onto 0.5 mg of Al +++ as aluminum hydroxide. Each 0.5 mL pediatric dose contains 10 µg of hepatitis B surface antigen adsorbed onto 0.25 mg of Al +++ as aluminum hydroxide. Multi-dose presentations contain 5.0 mg of 2-phenoxyethanol per mL as preservative.

The ENGERIX ® -B formulation contains a trace amount of thimerosal (‹0.5 µg mercury in the 0.5 mL pediatric dose and ‹1.0 µg mercury in the 1.0 mL adolescent/adult dose) from the manufacturing.

For information on precautions and adverse events go to:  http://www.gsk.ca/en/products/vaccines/engerix-b_pm.pdf

********************


Prevnar – 7-valent conjugate pneumococcal vaccine

Produced by Wyeth Lederle

Website does not allow consumers to view a product monograph.   http://www.prevnar.com/ Ingredients list is taken from CPS 2004 edition, product monograph page 1587:

Prevnar is a sterile solution of saccharides of the capsular antigen of S.pneumoniae serotypes 4, 6B, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F and diphtheria CRM197 protein. Individual polysaccharides are prepared from purification of the culture broth of each serotype. The saccharides are directly conjugated to the protein carrier CRM197 protein by reductive animation. CRM197 is a nontoxic variant of diphtheria toxin isolated from cultures of C. diphtheriae strain C7(B197) and/or C.diphtheriae strain C7 (B197) pPx350 grown in a casamino acids and yeast extract-based medium. CRM197 is purified through ultrafiltration, ammonium sulfate precipitation, and iron-exchange chromatography to high purity. Each serotype is conjugated as a monovalent preparation prior to compounding as a multivalent vaccine. Individual glycoconjugates are analyzed for saccharide to protein ratios, for molecular size, free saccharide and free protein.

Each dose (0.5ml) contains:

* 2ug of each saccharide for serotypes 4, 9V, 14, 18C, 19F and 23F,
* and 4 ug of serotype 6B (16 ug total saccharides);

and approximately

* 20ug of CRM197 carrier protein.


Nonmedicinal ingredients:

* aluminum phosphate adjuvant
* sodium chloride
* and water for injection
.

For information on precautions and adverse reactions, see the CPS Index available at any pharmacy or medical library in Canada.

********************
(top)


MENJUGATE® - Meningococcal Group C–CRM197 Conjugate Vaccine

Produced by Merck Frosst

Description:

Menjugate ® (Meningococcal Group C–CRM197 Conjugate Vaccine) is intended for the prevention of meningitis and/or septicemia caused by Neisseria meningitidis group C in infants and older age groups. Menjugate ® is composed of meningococcal group C oligosaccharides conjugated to a protein carrier, a non-toxic mutant of diphtheria toxin, CRM197. In the final vaccine, aluminum hydroxide is used as an adjuvant.

Composition:

Menjugate ® (Meningococcal Group C–CRM197 Conjugate Vaccine) is formulated as a powder for suspension with each 0.5 mL dose containing 10 micrograms of meningococcal C oligosaccharide conjugated to Corynebacterium diphtheriae CRM197 protein (12.5 to 25.0 micrograms).13 Mannitol, sodium phosphate monobasic monohydrate, and sodium phosphate dibasic heptahydrate are present as excipients in the final lyophilized formulation. The lyophilized product is to be reconstituted with an adjuvant diluent containing aluminum hydroxide (1.0 mg per 0.5 mL dose) and sodium chloride in sterile water for injection. Menjugate ® contains no preservative.

For information about precautions and adverse effects go to: http://www.merckfrosst.ca/e/products/menjugate/home.html

********************


M-M-R ® II Measles, Mumps and Rubella Virus Vaccine, Live, Attenuated, MSD Std.

Produced by Merck Frosst

Composition:

M-M-R ® II (Measles, Mumps and Rubella virus vaccine, live, attenuated, MSD Std.) is a sterile lyophilized preparation of (1) ATTENUVAX ® (Measles virus vaccine, live, attenuated, MSD Std.), a more attenuated line of measles virus, derived from Enders' attenuated Edmonston strain and propagated in chick embryo cell culture; (2) MUMPSVAX ® (Mumps virus vaccine, live, attenuated, MSD Std.), the Jeryl Lynn ® (B level) strain of mumps virus propagated in chick embryo cell cultures; and (3) MERUVAX ® II (Rubella virus vaccine, live, attenuated, MSD Std.), the Wistar RA 27/3 strain of live attenuated rubella virus propagated in human diploid lung fibroblasts.

The reconstituted vaccine is for subcutaneous administration. When reconstituted as directed, the dose for injection is 0.5 mL and contains not less than the equivalent of 1,000 CCID50 (50% cell culture infective dose) of measles virus 5,000 CCID50 of mumps virus; and 1,000 CCID50 of rubella virus. Each dose of the vaccine is calculated to contain sorbitol (14.5 mg), sodium phosphate, sucrose (1.9 mg), sodium chloride, hydrolyzed gelatin (14.5 mg), human albumin (0.3 mg), fetal bovine serum (‹1 ppm), other buffer and media ingredients and approximately 25 µg of neomycin. The product contains no preservative.

The growth medium for measles and mumps is Medium 199 (a buffered salt solution containing vitamins and amino acids and supplemented with fetal bovine serum) containing SPGA (sucrose, phosphate, glutamate, and human albumin) as stabilizer and neomycin.

The growth medium for rubella is Minimum Essential Medium (MEM) (a buffered salt solution containing vitamins and amino acids and supplemented with fetal bovine serum) containing human serum albumin and neomycin. Sorbitol and hydrolyzed gelatin stabilizer are added to the individual virus harvests.

The cells, virus pools, fetal bovine serum, and human albumin are all screened for the absence of adventitious agents. Human albumin is processed using the Cohn cold ethanol fractionation procedure.

For information about precautions and adverse events, got to: http://www.merckfrosst.ca/e/products/m-m-r_ii/home.html

********************


VARIVAX® III varicella virus vaccine, live, attenuated (Oka/Merck) is a live, attenuated virus vaccine (a lyophilized preparation of the Oka/Merck strain of varicella).

COMPOSITION- Active Ingredients:

VARIVAX ® III , when reconstituted as directed, is a sterile preparation for subcutaneous administration. Each 0.5 mL dose contains a minimum of 1350 PFU (plaque forming units) of Oka/Merck varicella virus when reconstituted and stored at room temperature for 30 minutes.

Non-Medicinal Ingredients:

Each 0.5 mL dose contains approximately 18 mg of sucrose, 8.9 mg hydrolyzed gelatin, 3.6 mg of urea, 2.3 mg sodium chloride, 0.36 mg monosodium L glutamate, 0.33 mg of sodium phosphate dibasic, 57 µg of potassium phosphate monobasic, 57 µg of potassium chloride. The product also contains residual components of MRC-5 cells including DNA and protein; and trace quantities of neomycin, and fetal bovine serum from MRC-5 culture media. The product contains no preservative.

For information about precautions and adverse events, go to:  http://www.merckfrosst.ca/e/products/varivax/home.html

********************
(top)

Influenza Vaccines

In Canada, Vaxigrip and Fluviral are the two vaccines most widely used and are produced by pharmaceutical companies Sanofi Pasteur and ID Biomedical respectively. Product information for Vaxigrip is available on the Sanofi Pasteur website at:  http://198.73.159.214/statics/vaccines/english/Vaxigrip_E.pdf  Fluviral product details are not available on the ID Biomedical website but are copied below from the CPS index – 2004 edition, page.

A recent meta analysis conducted by international researchers at the Cochrane Vaccines Field, looked at the results of 64 international flu vaccine studies. They concluded that there is no scientific ground on which influenza vaccines should be recommended for babies. Despite this, the Canadian Paediatric Society promotes flu shots for all children 6 months and older, including those with immune dysfunction and other chronic diseases. Infants and young children are injected with two doses of the vaccine 30 days apart. See article by Dr. F. Edward Yazbak, “Nothing New about Lack of Effectiveness of Influenza Vaccination in Babies “ (5. Notes)

********************


VAXIGRIP® - Produced by Sanofi Pasteur

Inactivated Influenza Vaccine Trivalent Types A and B (Split Virion)

DESCRIPTION: - from CPS index, 2004 edition, page 2149

VAXIGRIP ® for intramuscular use, is a sterile suspension prepared from influenza viruses propagated in chicken embryos. The virus-containing fluids are harvested and the virus inactivated with formaldehyde and purified by zonal centrifugation. The virus is then chemically disrupted using polyethylene glycol p-isooctylphenyl ether (Triton ® X-100) producing a “split-antigen”. The split antigen is suspended in sodium phosphate-buffered, isotonic sodium chloride solution. The type and amount of viral antigens contained in VAXIGRIP® conform to the current requirements of the World Health Organization (WHO).

And from the VAXIGRIP ® web page: also contains Triton ® X-100 and trace amounts of sucrose and neomycin. Thimerosal (added as a preservative in multidose presentation only).

For information on precautions and adverse events go to:  http://198.73.159.214/statics/vaccines/english/Vaxigrip_E.pdf

********************


Fluviral S/F – Produced by ID Biomedical (previously Shire Bilogics)

Split-Virion Influenza Virus Vaccine, Inactivated

DESCRIPTION: - from CPS index - 2004 edition page 793

Fluviral S/F for i.m. injection is a trivalent, split-virion influenza vaccine prepared from virus grown in the allantoic cavity of embryonated hens’ eggs. The virus is inactivated with formaldehyde, purified by centrifugation and disrupted with sodium deoxycholate and/or polyethylene glycol p-isooctylphenyl ether (TritonX-100).

The composition of Fluviral S/F is established in agreement with the recommendations of the Canadian National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI). The split-virion vaccine contains 0.01% thimerosal as a preservative, and trace residual amounts of egg proteins, sodium deoxycholate and/or polyethylene glycol p-isooctylphenyl ether (Triton X-100). Antibiotics are not used in the manufacture of this vaccine.

The product monograph also contains the specific antigens designated for the 2003-04 influenza season.


Notes & Sources for more information:


1. VRAN publishes a comprehensive 32 page newsletter 3X a year with reports on vaccine awareness issues from around the world & alternatives to vaccination. Please contact VRAN at: info@vran.org or 250-355-2525

2. Numerous other vaccines may be offered your children that are not listed above. These may include DPT vaccines such as Adacel recommended for teens and young adults, Hepatitis A vaccines, 4-valent meningococcal vaccines, and DT (diphtheria & tetanus) as single tetanus vaccine is no longer available in Canada. Product monographs for these vaccines can be found at the Sanofi Pasteur website:
 http://www.sanofipasteur.ca/sanofi-pasteur-ca/front/templates/vaccinations-travel-health-vaccine-
aventis-pasteur.jsp?codeRubrique=53&lang=EN

and Merck Frosst at: http://www.merckfrosst.ca/e/products/home.html#vaccines

3. Critical Decisions Count: Medical and Articles on Immunizations: http://users.adelphia.net/~cdc/

4. VRAN Key Links to associated vaccine awareness websites around the world: http://vran.org/links/links-db.htm

5. Vaccination Not Mandatory in Canada – Health Canada Statement http://vran.org/legal/legal.htm

6. F. Edward Yazbak, MD, Nothing New about Lack of Effectiveness of Influenza Vaccination in Babies http://www.vran.org/new-art/news/new_files/yazbakoct-2005.htm

7. Meningitis C vaccine: A Look at the Disease & The Jab, by Dr. Jayne Donegan http://vran.org/vaccines/meningitis/men-info.htm

8. Additional articles on Meningitis C: http://vran.org/links/men-links.htm

9. Prevnar: Articles & critiques http://www.whale.to/v/prevnar.htm



(top)



this is the link you want for this list
http://www.vran.org/vaccines/vacing/vac-ing-can.htm

if you have any.

HPV vaccines
Vaccines are being developed to prevent HPV infection.  There are many different HPV strains.  Some are known to be high risk for cervical cancer.  If we had effective vaccines against all these strains, we might be able to prevent cervical cancer altogether.  Several research trials have been testing vaccines as a way of preventing infection with HPV.
A trial testing Gardasil called FUTURE II reported its results in October 2005.  This phase 3 trial involved over 12,000 women aged between 16 and 26.  These women did not have HPV before the start of the trial.  The women were divided into two groups.  Half the women were given Gardasil and the other half had a dummy vaccine (placebo).  Both groups of women had 3 injections of either the vaccine or placebo over six months.  Over the following two years the women had regular checks to see if they had developed HPV, or had any precancerous changes to the cells of the cervix, which could develop into a cancer.  The group who had the vaccine showed no precancerous changes.  Of the 5,258 women who had the placebo, 21 had precancerous changes, which is 0.4%.  The researchers found that Gardasil protected against HPV types 6 and 11, as well as 16 and 18.  Gardasil was licensed for use within the European Union in September 2006.  
Two other phase 3 trials have tested the vaccine Cervarix.  The first was for women under 26 and closed in July 2005.  It involved over 18,000 women from all over the world, including the UK.  This study was called ‘PATRICIA’ (PApilloma TRIal to prevent Cervical cancer In young Adults).   The second was for women of 26 and over, and closed in August 2006.  The aim of the trial is to find out the effect of the Cervarix vaccine on long term HPV infection. So it will be some time before we know the results.
It is possible that these vaccines will be used in a national vaccination programme in the UK in the future.  The research suggests that they would dramatically lower the number of cases of cervical cancer.  They would also reduce the need for colposcopy.  At the moment, they are only available on private prescription.  There is more information about HPV vaccines and cervical cancer in the cervical cancer questions and answers section of CancerHelp UK.
http://www.cancerhelp.org.uk/help/default_printer_friend.asp?page=9596

merck is not the only company who developed this vaccine -- a french drug company was also the developer

Comparable strategies needed to evaluate human papillomavirus vaccine efficiency across Europe

K Soldan1 (kate.soldan@hpa.org.uk), J Dillner2

1Health Protection Agency Centre for Infections, London, United Kingdom
2Dept of Medical Microbiology, MAS University Hospital, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden
A quadrivalent vaccine against human papillomavirus (HPV) types 16, 18, 6 and 11, known as GardasilTM (or Silgard, see note) was granted a marketing license by the European Commission in September 2006 following the positive opinion of the European Medicines Agency’s (EMEA) Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use in July 2006 <1>.

HPV infection is the most frequent sexually transmitted infection in Europe. Certain HPV types have been established as causative agents of cervical cancer (and its precursor stages that are the target of cervical screening), as well as of some other rare cancers of the ano-genital tract and oral cavity. A meta-analysis of published studies found just over 70% of invasive cervical cancer cases in Europe to be positive for HPV types 16 or 18 <2>. Pre-cancerous stages of cervical disease are common and often resolve with time. However, their follow-up, including treatment, repeated screening and examination of the cervix (colposcopy), is associated with considerable costs and anxiety. HPV 6 and 11 are not causally linked to cervical cancer, but are associated with some low-grade cervical lesions, the vast majority of genital warts and the rare condition of recurrent respiratory papillomatosis <3>.

The Gardasil vaccine is composed of virus-like particles (VLP) generated by the synthesis and self-assembly of the major HPV capsid protein (L1) in yeast cells (Saccharomyces cerevisiae). Gardasil has been licensed for the prevention of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN grades 2 and 3), cervical cancer, high-grade vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN grades 2 and 3), and external genital warts (condyloma acuminata) causally associated with HPV types 6, 11, 16, and 18 <1>. Trials have been undertaken to demonstrate the efficacy of the vaccine in women aged 16 to 26 years and immunogenicity in girls and boys aged 9 to 15 years. Protective efficacy in males has not been reported in the literature yet, but the results of more trials involving males are expected over the next few years.

Another vaccine composed of virus-like particles (VLP), a bivalent vaccine for HPV 16 and 18, manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline, is currently under evaluation by the EMEA. Both these prophylactic vaccines have been shown to have very high efficacy in uninfected women against infection, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and, by implication, against cervical cancer caused by the HPV types targeted by the vaccine <4>.

The availability of efficacious vaccines now means that vaccination strategies should be designed and evaluated to inform decisions on efficient control of HPV-related diseases. Several questions about HPV vaccination efficacy and effectiveness are still under consideration <5> For example, data on its efficacy against disease in males and in women aged over 26 years (of whom many could have been previously infected) are still awaited. A longer follow-up of vaccine programmes is needed to determine the duration of protection. The impact of vaccination on the epidemiology and disease burden of HPV types not covered by the vaccine is also uncertain. There are some data from trials which suggest cross-protection against HPV-types closely related to the vaccine types. The possibility of type-replacement with non-vaccine types emerging as the cause of more disease is also a concern to be evaluated further. It is likely that most European countries will first consider vaccination of girls who have not yet become sexually active
http://www.eurosurveillance.org/ew/2006/061123.asp

regarding the stigma around hpv --
Social Stigma
 
"There is unfortunately a social stigma associated with cervical cancer because HPV is a direct cause in approximately 70% of cases," Dr. Makhija told Medscape. "People are under the impression that this means the patient slept around or was in some way more sexually active, but this is often not the case, and she may well have been with 1 person who had the infection."
 
HPV is the most common sexually transmitted infection in the US. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that about 6.2 million Americans become infected with HPV every year and that over half of all sexually active men and women become infected at some time in their lives.
 
"Our expectation is that the far-right machine will gear up its disinformation and fearmongering tactics, all aimed at reducing availability of the vaccine by threatening funding and clouding the facts regarding the safety and the need for this vaccine," Ms. Julie Kay, an attorney for Legal Momentum, a New York City–based women's-rights organization, said in a statement to the press.
 
But Dr. Makhija said she has been pleasantly surprised by reaction so far. "I think people are realizing that this is not a political issue so much as a health issue." Based in Alabama, the investigator had worried about how difficult it might be to recruit women in the Deep South for the trial. "But we enjoyed an enormous response and had no trouble at all," she said. "People realized that this is something that could potentially protect their daughters, and the response has been excellent."
 
"Exciting Win Against Cancer"
 
Mr. Alan Kaye, from the National Cervical Cancer Coalition in Van Nuys, California, called the news "an exciting win against cancer." He is looking forward to what this could mean for public health.
 
But he is also glad from a personal perspective. Mr. Kaye founded the cancer coalition with his wife before she died of cancer. Today is the 5-year anniversary of her death. "It's wonderful to think that this amazing step forward has taken place on such an important day," he said. "My wife would be pleased."
 
http://www.brodstonehospital.org/your%20health.htm

other countries approve gardasil --
During an interview with Medscape, Jaime de la Garza, MD, from the Instituto Nacional de Cancerología in Tlapan, Mexico, agreed that the vaccines represent an important advance. He says they will be especially important for women in developing countries. "The incidence of cervical cancer is continuing to rise, and mortality rates are especially high in poor countries. If we can get vaccines such as these to patients, it will make a big difference."
 
Gardasil was approved last week for use in Mexico and is currently under review with regulatory agencies in the European Union, Argentina, Australia, Brazil, New Zealand, Singapore, and Taiwan.
http://www.brodstonehospital.org/your%20health.htm

this from an interview with dr tristram in the uk

Dr Tristram said, "This vaccine has to be given as a preventative, before there is any contact with the virus.


"If we are looking at the population and asking who should be vaccinated, we have to consider that one in four young people are sexually active before the age of 16, so we have to look at a younger age group.


"Another issue to consider is that, at around the time of puberty, if the cervix comes into contact with HPV, it is more likely to cause problems."

more --

Q Will the vaccine replace the need for regular smear tests?


A Dr Tristram said, "Cervical screening has been very successful in reducing the incidence of cervical cancer and this should not stop just because a vaccine has been introduced.


"There are lots of different types of HPV which can cause cervical cancer, not just 16 and 18, for which the current vaccine offers protection.


"The vaccine will reduce the incidence of cervical cancer further, but it will not get rid of it."

it also looks like some hpv related cancers are becoming MORE virulent and difficult to treat.

meps' in the uk supporting the use of gardasil

glynis wilmot is the labour mep for the west midlands

Cutting cancer deaths

I reported in the October edition that European Commission had licensed Gardasil, the first vaccine against HPV which can lead to cervical cancer. 

I am pressing the Commission on its plans to ensure that vaccination programmes are introduced in all member states, as well as a comprehensive programme of education to inform parents about the vaccine. Immunising every 12 year old girl could cut deaths from cervical cancer by more than 75%.

Latest information

http://www.gleniswillmott.labour.co.uk/ViewPage.cfm?Page=20338

planned parenthood's statement on gardasil

 Planned Parenthood Applauds FDA Approval of Gardasil
HPV Vaccine Is Crucial Step Forward for Women's Health  

New York, NY — Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) commended today's action by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which approved the first vaccine against two types of human papilloma virus (HPV) that cause about 70 percent of cervical cancer cases. 

"This is a huge step forward for women’s health.  Prevention is the key to good health, and this vaccine will give future generations the promise of health, safety and peace of mind," said PPFA President Cecile Richards.  “Now we must move forward to educate the public about the vaccine and ensure it is available to all Americans, regardless of their income level.” 

Planned Parenthood provides more than 1,000,000 women with cancer screenings each year.  This new vaccine will hopefully save lives. 

"The HPV vaccine is a public health breakthrough," said Richards.  "On behalf of the millions of women, men and teens Planned Parenthood serves every year, I thank the FDA for today's action." 

Worldwide, cervical cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths among women.  Each year approximately 10,000 cases of cervical cancer are diagnosed in the United States, and 4,000 American women die from the disease.    

###
http://ww1.ppgi.org/includes/media/prjune_06_c.asp

canada approves gardasil{ but of course merck has subverted the entire world to it's sinister plans}
HPV VACCINE APPROVED

In July 2006, a new vaccine to prevent against four strains of the Human Papilloma Virus was approved for use in Canada by Health Canada. Gardasil will be available by the end of August 2006 through Canadian physicians and pharmacists, and is designed to prevent cervical, vulvar, and vaginal cancer as well as genital warts.

For more information, please visit: http://www.cdc.gov/std/hpv/STDFact-HPV-vaccine.htm.
http://www.optionsforsexualhealth.org/

is that it give undue prominence to every quack and fundie that doesn't understand science- or will misrepresent the facts.

It's he said/she said "journalism" with little regard for the truth. They're very happy to quote the paranoid or absurd musings of the anti-vaccine crowd with little or no regard for how many people it will hurt.

They're a sterling example of why we need mandates in place to ensure that American kids are protected from preventable disease- which is spread not only through contact- but through ignorance.