Letter to congressman regarding CDC vaccination policies
I recently have been doing some reading on the issue of how
vaccination polices are developed. What I found really bothered me, so I decided to write my congressman expressing my desire for reform in the system. If any of you have similar feelings, I would urge you to do the same. I think it's important that such policy-making committees be as free of bias as possible in order to make the best choices for society as a whole. If you're interested, the report that I found so disturbing can be found at: http://www.mindspring.com/~schlafly/vac/staff.txt I know that many people don't write their congressperson because they just don't have the time to compose a letter, so I'm posting mine. Please feel free to copy it in whole or in part if you like. Thanks Beth Clarkson It has recently come to my attention that the members of the vaccine advisory committees for the CDC have massive conflict-of-interest regarding their financial ties to the companies that manufacture vaccines. This is unacceptable to me. It means that the recommendations made by the CDC coming from this committee are biased towards recommending vaccines. The result is I cannot trust them. Please look into this. A majority staff report is available prepared by the Committee on Government Reform called "Conflicts of Interest in Vaccine Policy Making" dated June 15, 2000. Some of the details I found disturbing in this report we "The CDC routinely grants waivers from conflict of interest rules to every member of its advisory committee." "Perhaps one of the major problems contributing to the overall influence of the pharmaceutical industry over the vaccine approval and recommendation process may be the loose standards that are used by the agency in determining whether a conflict actually exists. In many cases, significant conflicts of interest are not deemed to be conflicts at all." The report provides documentation of exactly the sort of thing I would expect to occur in a committee composed entirely of biased members. "CDC Advisory Committee members who are not allowed to vote on certain recommendations due to financial conflicts of interest are allowed to participate in committee deliberations and advocate specific positions." "Four out of eight CDC advisory committee members who voted to approve guidelines for the rotavirus vaccine in June 1998 had financial ties to pharmaceutical companies that were developing different versions of the vaccine." Presumably, one of them would have been Dr. Patricia Ferrieri, about which the report later states: "Dr. Patricia Ferrieri, Chair: She directed the discussion on the Rotashield vaccine. At the time of the proceedings, Dr. Ferrieri owned at about $20,000 of stock in Merck, an affected company and manufacturer of an upcoming rotavirus vaccine. This conflict was waived by the FDA as it was deemed to be of low involvement. Also, Dr. Ferrieri received a $135,000 NIAID grant for unspecified research on rotavirus[xl] for 1998-1999, after the committee voted to approve the Rotashield vaccine. It is not certain whether this grant was in negotiations at the time of the VRBPAC vote on Rotashield. Dr. Ferrieri received a full participation waiver." This last shows the problems inherent in a committee composed solely of biased members. The Rotoshield vaccine is the one that had to be withdrawn from the market. I think it likely that if the committee were less biased, they might have insisted on sufficient research and analysis to identify the problem prior to making their recommendation, not afterwards. All of this adds up to a committee that is biased towards recommending vaccinations. Such a bias is a definite financial boom to vaccine manufacturers because it creates an immediate and large market for the vaccine. As the report notes: "The recommendation for routine use of a vaccine is tantamount to a Federal mandate for vaccine use. HHS regulations require that all grants for childhood immunizations are subject to the States' implementation of procedures to ensure routine vaccination. To receive federal funding the States must, among other things, require a plan to systematically immunize susceptible children at school entry through vigorous enforcement of school immunization laws." I hope that you find this news as disturbing as I did and are moved to implement improvements. Please let me know what action, if any, you decide to take. Thank you very much for your time. Your constituent |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:37 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
ParentingBanter.com