GSK vaccine recall in Canada only proves that
"big pharma" is paying off people with monopoly money, if anything
GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) pharmaceuticals notified the Canadian Government that a batch of H1N1 vaccine had to be pulled off the market because of six (6) severe allergic reactions to the vaccine. The batch constituted 170,000 doses of the vaccine, and most of them may have already been administered.
Several anti-vaccine groups have asserted that "big pharma" is constantly in collusion with other agencies (public and private) to cover-up vaccine adverse reactions. This recent move by GSK over only six people with reactions among thousands (perhaps millions) who have received the H1N1 vaccine seems to disprove those assertions.
Apparently, "big pharma" is unable to cover-up six cases of adverse reactions and stands to lose millions in both stock and from H1N1 vaccine sales. Did the vaccine watchdogs triumph? Not quite. GSK, like other manufacturers, participate in collecting data on adverse reactions through different means. In Canada, the Public Health Agency of Canada is in charge of collecting information on any adverse reactions to H1N1 influenza vaccine or any other vaccine. Worse yet for some anti-vaccine groups, most vaccines in Canada do not contain thimerosal, a mercury-containing preservative (not adjuvant) that some groups continue to assert that it causes neurological damage despite continued evidence to the contrary. (Either that, or all studies are wrong.)
In the United States, the Vaccine Adverse Events Registration System (VAERS) collects information on anyone in the United States (and other parts of the world) who have a perceived adverse event to vaccines. The database is publicly available, and some interesting findings can be read from it. Going through the database, one can read case after case of so-called "vaccine injuries", though many of them are either not confirmed, made up, mockeries, or ruled-out as true adverse events.
If "big pharma" is as powerful as some claim, it has not been able to pay-off the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, and other groups who report and scientifically investigate these events (without bias and with verifiable evidence).
(Image courtesy of Peeper/Flickr)
Comments
What is the death rate per 170,000 from H1N1? Are you suggesting that all the doctors that entered comments are quacks? Are all the doctors required to enter comments?
I think Rene is trying to point out that Big Pharma was not able to cover up six cases but, somehow, anti-vaccine groups say that hundreds or thousands of cases are covered up.
May want to get your facts straight:
"Both vaccines contain a small amount of thimerosal. Thimerosal is a form of mercury used in the H1N1 flu vaccine to stabilize it and maintain its quality during storage... the unadjuvanted vaccine does contain 50 ug of thimerosal while the adjuvanted vaccine has only 5 ug of thimerosal."- Source: Public Health Agency of Canada.
So I'm to believe GSK tells Canadas Health Agency about the adverse events? How did they know? Wouldn't the info about side effects go to Health Canada? And then wouldn't Health Canada TELL GSK to recall it...? Backasswards, I say...who's running our Gov Health Agency? Health Canada or GSK?
Here's a couple of reactions to the Hepititis B vaccine that they missed Rene:
A 2009 study published in Toxicological and Environmental Chemistry titled “Hepatitis B triple series vaccine and developmental disability in US children aged 1-9 years” stated "the odds of receiving EIS [special education services] were approximately nine times as great for vaccinated boys as for unvaccinated boys after adjustment for confounders.
A 2008 study published in the journal Neurology called “Hepatitis B vaccine and the risk of CNS inflammatory demyelination in childhood” found that the Engerix B vaccine (GSK) greatly increased the risk of central nervous system inflammatory demyelination.
A recent study published in the journal the Annals of Epidemiology titled “Hepatitis B Vaccination of Male Neonates and Autism” found that “Boys who received the hepatitis B vaccine during the first month of life had 2.94 greater odds for ASD [autism] compared to later- or unvaccinated boys.”
Here's a study which suggests that severe reactions to the Hepititis B vaccine were missed Rene. Next I'll cover the other 19 (42 doses) vaccines.
An October, 2009 study published in the journal Neurotoxicology called “Delayed Acquisition of Neonatal Reflexes in Newborn Primates Receiving a Thimerosal-containing Hepatitis B Vaccine: Influence of Gestational Age and Birth Weight” found that monkeys who received a Hepatitis B vaccine on the first day of life experienced a significant delay in survival reflexes versus monkeys who received a placebo.
@Jerry: It has been my experience than more than two comments about the same thing on Rene's articles will get them deleted... I'd just leave it alone. Or, if you're smart enough, you might be able to contact him directly.
Jerry, are you one of them boys who says that saccharine is bad for you because tons of it were given to rats? Are you saying that the physiology of primates is the same as humans? I mean, I'm no primatologist, but humans think differently than primates, so we must have SOME diff'rence in brain structure and fxn. Can you cite me any peer-reviewed studies where HUMANS were affected? Oh, that's right, you'll just tell me there's a conspircy.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!