[Prevnar UK] A JAB TOO FAR

[Guest guest]

No URL, scanned.

NB: This doc has also written on MMR

<http://www.whale.to/a/halvorsen_h.html>http://www.whale.to/a/halvorsen_h.ht

ml

A JAB TOO FAR

Daily Mail, Jan 1, 2005

Babies are soon to face yet another vaccination. But is it safe? Here,

one GP argues that we are taking a reckless gamble.

IT WAS revealed last week that government advisers have approved an

injection to protect youngsters against meningitis. But with the MMR

controversy still fresh in parents' minds, is this necessary? In this

highly personal piece, DR RICHARD HALVORSEN argues the case for caution.

ARE you alarmed by reports that the Government intends to introduce yet

another vaccination programme aimed at all our very young children? You

should be.

Do we really want a re-run of the bitter and damaging controversy which

developed over the combined measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) jab? In spite

of intense pressure by ministers, uptake of that injection has fallen to 80

per cent and in some areas is now as low as 70 per cent.

Whether you think this revolt is justified or not, the Government would do

well to show a little humility and to recognise that it represents a

significant vote of 'no confidence' by worried parents in the advice given

to them by officialdom.

Certainly I — a doctor who has spent years investigating the risks and

benefits of child–hood vaccinations — am seriously concerned about this new

scheme to introduce a vaccination against the pneumococcal bacterium (one

cause of meningitis, pneumonia and septicaemia) in spite of the promise by

health service chiefs that a final decision will not be made without

widespread consultation. Remember that most children under two are already

routinely given no fewer than 21 vaccinations in seven injections,

including the controversial MMR vaccine.

Do we really need a further series of vaccines at a time when so many

parents — and a significant minority of doctors and scientists working in

the field — are already deeply concerned about vaccine 'overload' on a

developing immune system?

Indeed, there is some evidence that the increasing number of vaccinations

given to children may be a factor in the rising numbers affected by

childhood diabetes, asthma and other immune-related disorders.

A Health Department spokesperson was quoted last week as saying that a

baby's immune system has huge spare capacity.

'The concept of a vaccine overload has been studied carefully and the

science says that this does not happen. A baby's immune system could

tolerate over 1,000 vaccines.'

To me, such a brash assertion is madness. It is based on theoretical

calculations and not the real world. So the remark shows a quite

astonishing complacency and arrogance about our ability to control Nature.

Trying to conquer diseases is admirable but we cannot allow ourselves to

assume that science will always win out.

I think, for example, of the unpredicted arrival on the scene of the HIV

virus in the Eighties — there is a theory that the emergence of the virus

in humans was itself caused by trials of the polio vaccine in Africa in the

1950s — and the prolonged struggle we are now facing to understand Aids,

let alone control and eventually eliminate it.

I think, too, of the unexpected horrors unleashed by the drug thalidomide a

generation ago and more recently government reassurances over BSE right up

until the announcement that yes, there was a link between mad cow disease

and a fatal degenerative brain disease in humans.

Of course, if we knew that the vaccinations were completely safe and highly

effective, these worries would not arise. No sensible person, lay or

specialist, could then have any reasonable objections to mass vaccination

programmes directed at protecting the very young.

But things are not that simple. The harsh truth is that there is no such

thing as a risk-free vaccination.

Vaccinations are not completely safe (no medical intervention ever is) and

many are less effective than health officials would have us believe.

When I was a young doctor, vaccinations were given to combat a number of

diseases which were both common and deadly serious — diphtheria and

smallpox, for exam–ple — and that approach made perfect sense. But most of

those diseases, which commonly killed or maimed large numbers of

youngsters, have largely disappeared, partly due to vaccination but mainly

due to better health, nutrition and housing.

What we are left with are a number of others; common diseases such as

chickenpox — a mild illness that is very rarely serious — and further

diseases which are serious but thankfully rare.

This is the context in which the Government intends to introduce its new

programme of early childhood vaccination against the pneumococcal bug, one

cause of meningitis, septicaemia (blood poisoning) and pneumonia.

At which point we should ask three basic questions.

Is this particular new vaccination worth having? Does it work? And finally,

is it safe?

We should look first at the scale of the problem it is supposed to address.

Children under five have a one-in-7,000 chance of getting a serious

pneumococcal infection such as meningitis or blood poisoning — in any one

year Of those who do contract such infec–tions, one in five will die and

one in five will be permanently disabled.

Of course, the death of any child is a tragedy, as is the possibility of

continuing disability. As a doctor, I see the devastating impact this can

have.

But when you look at these figures critically, you have to say that the

death of children from meningitis or septicaemia is, thankfully, a pretty

rare event.

The next question is: does the vaccine work?

The answer must surely be 'not very well'. Estimates are that it would be

effective in 66 per cent of cases. That means a one-in-three chance that

your child will not be protected by the vaccine.

Finally, and crucially: is the new vaccine, which the Government is

embracing so enthusiastically on behalf of our children, really safe? The

truth is that I don't know, and neither does anybody else, whatever claims

the power be might choose to make.

What we do know is that U.S., where the vaccination is already in use,

parent doctors have reported 117 deaths relatively soon after vaccination.

There is no proof that vaccination was the cause, but the deaths remain

obstinately unexplained.

GIVEN that there is no widespread, life-threatening epidemic to be fought,

we should surely err on the side of caution. The truth is that proper,

long-term, follow up research has not been done, either here or in America.

The reason is that really convincing research would involve giving a

control group of young children an inert or lifeless form of the vaccine

(a placebo) and observing how they got on over a number of years, compared

with those who had been give the active vaccination.

This research — though normally demanded of any new drug---is just not done

with new vaccines for obvious ethical reasons.

But suppose such research was permitted and it was demonstrated that some

lives indeed had been saved by vaccination but that others who had also

received it had died or suffered devastating side-effects.

What possible conclusion you draw?

I am not an enemy of vaccination. Indeed, I strongly support some

vaccinations and I tell my patients so. But I do feel that to introduce a

new vaccination campaign now, without strong cause, is grossly

irresponsible.

I urge ministers to think again while there is still time.

[Dr Halvorsen is a GP in London.]

--------------------------------------------------------

Sheri Nakken, R.N., MA, Classical Homeopath

Vaccination Information & Choice Network, Nevada City CA & Wales UK

$$ Donations to help in the work - accepted by Paypal account

vaccineinfo@... voicemail US 530-740-0561

(go to http://www.paypal.com) or by mail

Vaccines - http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/vaccine.htm

Vaccine Dangers On-Line course - http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/vaccineclass.htm

Homeopathy On-Line course - http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/homeo.htm

ANY INFO OBTAINED HERE NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS MEDICAL

OR LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION TO VACCINATE IS YOURS AND YOURS ALONE.

******

" Just look at us. Everything is backwards; everything is upside down.

Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy

knowledge, governments destroy freedom, the major media destroy information

and religions destroy spirituality " .... Ellner