Rapid Responses to:

SUPPLEMENTAL: Longer version [Full text]

Rapid Responses: Submit a response to this article

Rapid Responses published:

Hard facts.

John P Heptonstall   (20 May 2002)

A Few Thinking Points.

Carol A Teasdale   (22 May 2002)

Vaccine safety

john L Scudamore   (28 May 2002)

Hard facts. 20 May 2002
John P Heptonstall, DIrector of the Morley Acupuncture Clinic and Complementary Therapy Centre Leeds LS27 8EG Send response to journal: Re: Hard facts.	Sir The authors lambast Private Eye for inadequacies of reporting yet fail to support their own arguments scientifically about "misleading statements", "journalistic irresponsibility" etc. with sufficient detail for wider assessment. I think most people realise that Private Eye is not a medical journal and is allowed a degree of journalistic license not least the provision of anecdote which, though of extreme value to the public, rarely finds its way into medical journals; however, inaccuracies and "misleading statements" ought to be corrected - could Bedford and Elliman support their contentions with examples of the "misleading statements" so "doubting parents" can perform the necessary checks alluded to by the authors? The public is likely to take cognizance of the fact that Private Eye appears to hold no commercial bias in this matter (other than to sell the magazine) whereas the authors have strong links to the vaccine industry(3)(4) and such bias is therefore possible. As for the complete representation of scientists from both camps the authors suggest as imperative to avoid bias, I doubt any scientific journal has represented both camps sufficiently - I recently read the "Report of the MMR Expert Group" established by the Scottish Executive and could find no reference to two of the most compelling studies I believe strongly link measles and MMR vaccines to autism, by Vijendra K Singh et al (1)(2). The first makes a strong connection between measles antibodies and the brains of autistic persons, and the follow-up found MMR antibdies in the brains of autistics only; these studies suggest that measles and MMR vaccine viruses have some strong relationship with autism. Exclusion of these studies in a comprehensive enquiry would be inexcusable - perhaps Private Eye could do the public a great service by investigating such omissions? Regards John H. References 1. "Serological Association of Measles Virus and HHV-6 with Brain Autoantibodies in Autism", VK Singh et al, Clinical Immunology and Immunopathology, October 1998; 89(1): ISSN: 0090-1229. 2. "Positive Titre of Measles and MMR Antibody are Related to Myelin Basic Protein Autoantibody in Autism", VK Singh et al, University of Michigan, College of Pharmacy, Ann Arbor, MI 48109; abstract provided to American Association of Immunologists, 1998. 3. BMJ 2001, 27th January;322:183-184 Editorial "MMR Vaccine; the continuing saga" Bedford and Elliman. 4. BMJ 2000, 8th July;321:108 Letters, Bedford and Elliman.
A Few Thinking Points. 22 May 2002
Carol A Teasdale Send response to journal: Re: A Few Thinking Points.	Why did the researchers of this study in the Lancet (1) not use children who had all had the MMR to evaluate their tests? Why was the research included in the Lancet commentary (2)in the way it was? (please read both articles and you may wonder yourself) For everyone's information I would like to point out a comment by the World Health Organisation on rubella immunisation: "Universal rubella immunization has not been recommended by WHO to date, because of the need for very high coverage to avoid the potential for an increase in the risk of CRS [congenital rubella syndrome] in the presence of an immunization programme" (3) They also claim "if coverage is not high enough to reduce rubella transmission close to zero, there could thus be a paradoxical increase in CRS incidence in the presence of an immunization programme." (3) Would anyone like to see the detailed research used to support the introduction of the MMR. That which was carried out 'before' its introduction, not after? What standard of scientific testing do you think should be applied to the introduction of children's drugs ? Is autism the real true issue connected to the MMR, one of many issues, or is the denial of autism being shouted loudly to cover up for the lack of general research before mass use of the vaccine? 1. Absence of measles-virus genome in M A Afzal, P D Minor, J Begley, M L Bentley, E Armitage, S Ghosh, A Ferguson, Volume 351, Number 9103 28 February 1998 http://www.thelancet.com 2. Robert T Chen, Frank DeStefano, Vaccine adverse events: causal or coincidental? Volume 351, Number 9103 28 February 1998 http://www.thelancet.com 3. GLOBAL PROGRAMME FOR VACCINES AND IMMUNIZATION IMMUNIZATION POLICY http://www.trufax.org/vaccine/who1995program.html
Vaccine safety 28 May 2002
john L Scudamore, parent home HR2ODB Send response to journal: Re: Vaccine safety	It is amusing to see  Drs Elliman & Bedford  reacting to some reasonable investigative journalism.  Vaccine safety (and vaccine damage compensation) does seem to be lead by sources outside government & the industry, which is largely self-policing. The last real investigative journalism I read on vaccines was from a regional American paper, the Fresno Bee, with their 1984 DPT vaccine report (1), which was a factor in improving the safety of DPT vaccination, along with the book A Shot in the Dark by Harris Coulter & Barbara Loe Fisher of the NVIC. The debate on the contamination of polio vaccines was largely started by Rolling Stone magazine in 1992 (2). The contamination of Gulf War vaccines (and the only effective treatment) was taken up independently by a researcher outside the government (3), and so on. Up to now I haven't seen any real investigative reporting into vaccines in the UK apart from the odd story (4), and Private Eye leave out various studies and researchers such as Dr Yazbak MD (5), and don't ask various pertinent questions such as: 1. The part played by mercury containing vaccines like DPT in the history of autism, one asked by Teresa Binstock (6), Harris Coulter & Barbara Loe Fisher, and independent autism expert Dr Rimland Ph.D (7) 2. What effect measles vaccination actually had in reducing deaths when deaths had declined by 99.4% before vaccination? 3. The other completly ignored ways of dealing with measles through homeopathy, naturopathy & nutritional medicine 4. Is measles a needed process for the immune system and what are the long term effects of suppressing measles through vaccination? 5. How many of the measles deaths were in children under the age of vaccination. How many had been vaccinated? How many were ill & immune deficient children such as those children or adults on steroids or cancer chemotherapy? How many were bottle fed and may have been protected through breastfeeding, assuming vaccination hadn't interfered with their mother's ability to pass on some immunity? 6. Do we need a mumps vaccine when the BNF for 1985 states (page 385) that mumps and its complications are rarely serious. For this reason it goes on to suggest that there is little indication for the routine use of mumps vaccine (8). Yet the mumps component was the reason for the withdrawal of the last MMR vaccine, and even Dr Elliman admitted that one strain of mumps vaccine (Rubini) was completly useless. 7. The effectiveness of rubella vaccination. Where is medical responsibility?  Is it in keeping this MMR vaccine on the market and vilifying one of the few researchers who is studying the children instead of statistics which constitutes the government's "overwhelming evidence" suggesting no link? I don't think there is much difference in weight of paper if you add up the studies collected by David Thrower (9). Is it in refusing to use single measles vaccines when they have been shown to be safer. The Japanese don't use MMR as they consider it unsafe but Tony Blair was using Japanese measles deaths to support the use of MMR here!  And it was interesting to find out that the Japanese government had lied in the past over that MMR vaccine (10). The Japanese experience makes the government's position on single vaccines ridiculous, as Dr Yazbak points out as well, and leads me to the conclusion it is just down to politics, like most of medicine. Is it in producing a safer DPT vaccine (DTaP) but still using DPT in combination vaccines?  Is it in withdrawing an unsafe MMR vaccine (Urabe strain) but letting it be sold to the third world? (11)  (If they don't care about third world children why would I think they cared about mine?). Is it in compensating 900 children for serious brain damage from DPT vaccines but now denying any connection and stating on parent vaccine information leaflets that Whooping cough vaccine doesn't cause brain damage?  This parent is curious to know how DPT vaccine can cause death and serious brain damage but somehow not autism? The only "lay, anecdotal information" I read in What Doctors Don't Tell You and The Informed Parent is parent stories of vaccine damaged children, which is a result of them being ignored by the government, which it does to all vaccine victims if it can get away with it, just like the Canadian government where only one Province has just started to compensate victims (12).  If MMR was just another drug and not a vaccine those parent stories would have caused it to be withdrawn long ago. The "names of all those who continue to support the vaccine would leave little space for anything else"--is this the same list that appears on the Downing St website as "independent" that includes the Drs even though they have received funding from the MMR makers?! (13)  How can any of those organisations claim true independence from the drug industry?  How can the government be considered as trustworthy and unbiased to parents when it is busily promoting vaccination and has to compensate the victims?  And many, if not all, of the members of its committess that oversee vaccination have direct or indirect connections to the drug industry?  Since we don't have a Freedom of Information Act it is hard to actually find out the real true state of affairs but some idea can be gleaned from the US where it was found the main MMR spokesman, Dr Offit, was a consultant to the makers, Merck, amongst other unbelieveable facts on government vaccine committees (14). In fact, such is the state of secrecy in the UK, that it is hard to even find out what the government spends on vaccines. I can see the Eye report causing "an attack of apoplexy" in Drs Elliman & Bedford. The only real "danger" is in parents becoming well informed. Not something the vaccine companies and their spokespeople are too keen on. 1. Fresno Bee DPT report 1984 http://www.whale.to/vaccines/fresno.html 2. THE ORIGIN OF AIDS By Tom Curtis http://www.whale.to/vaccines/curtis.htm 3. Garth L. Nicolson, Ph.D., and Nancy L. Nicolson, Ph.D.http://www.immed.org/ 4.. Aug 2000 Eleven die after new vaccine jab http://www.observer.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,359830,00.html 5. Dr Yazbak MD http://www.whale.to/vaccines/yazbak.html 6. Autism: A Unique Type of Mercury Poisoning Sallie Bernard*, Albert Enayati, B.S., Ch.E., M.S.M.E.**, Teresa Binstock, Heidi Roger, Lyn Redwood, R.N., M.S.N., C.R.N.P., Woody McGinnis, M.D. http://www.altcorp.com/autism.htm 7. Testimony of Bernard Rimland, Ph.D. http://www.whale.to/v/rimland.html 8. Dr JK Anand (10/2001 BMJ) 9. MMR and Acquired Autism (Autistic Enterocolitis) A Briefing Note by David Thrower April 2002 http://www.whale.to/a/thrower.html 10. The Yomiuri Shimbun/Daily Yomiuri - Japan; Apr 17, 2002 (Financial Times) 11. Informed Parent Issue 2 --2000 12. Vaccine Risk Awareness Network (VRAN) http://www.vran.org/ 13. MMR support http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/page63.asp 14. Conflicts of Interest in Vaccine Policy Making,  Committee on Government Reform, U.S. House of Representatives June 15, 2000 http://www.whale.to/v/staff.html