One Click Note: So far this 2012 Gayle DeLong's paper on conflicts of interest in vaccine safety research is the must read of the year for those with even just a passing interest in vaccines, especially those with children. It is highly informative.

As we now know, medical research fraud is endemic, vaccine research particularly so. 

Gayle DeLong highlights how vaccine manufacturers have little incentive to research the safety of their products.

ONE CLICK SELECTED EXTRACTS

Conflicts of Interest in Vaccine Safety Research, Accountability in Research. 19:65-88. 2012

From the FDA, CDC to U.S. Congress, they all get a hammering as Gayle DeLong pulls their vaccine policies apart:

"Sponsoring research that finds a link between autism and vaccines that the FDA has approved could greatly damage the Administration's reputation and reduce public trust in the FDA. If the information that the FDA is mandated to provide the public includes studies that show vaccines could be related to autism, it would be providing evidence for claims being filed within its own agency.

CDC: It has at least three major COls that could hamper its ability to provide objective research about vaccines. It is also charged with controlling disabilities. If the research it sponsors were to identify vaccines as being hazardous and if the vaccination schedule it recommends is associated with autism, it would be forced to concede that its policies did not support its goals and actually promoted disabilities. Since the CDC is charged with promoting vaccination programs as well as assessing vaccine risks, it might be reluctant to sponsor research that uncovers risks it may have created.

Members of Congress may be reluctant to sponsor research into vaccine safety for at least two reasons: contributions and prospects of future employment."

Medical journals:

"Few consequences seem to be in place for authors who do not declare COls, and at least one major medical journal, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), has modified its policy to make the investigation of COls less transparent (DeAngelis and Fontanarosa, 2009).

Medical journal authors' ties to vaccine manufacturers are pervasive, as revealed in a review of authors of vaccine safety articles published in top journals.

Even on the peer-reviewed side of things, it has been said that the journals are the marketing arm of the pharmaceutical industry. That is not untrue. To a large extent, that is true. (UKHC Science and Technology Committee, 2011)"

Vaccine safety:

"While the safety of an individual vaccine is considered in the regulatory approval process, studies tend to observe the effects of a vaccine for only a few weeks after the administration of the shot, so long-term effects are unknown.

Moreover, no study of the safety of the entire US. vaccine schedule has ever been undertaken. That is, the safety of the combination of vaccines is unknown.

Although many parents report that vaccines have caused or are associated with autism, no research sponsor has launched a major investigation of the children who are alleged to have developed autism from vaccines. One study found at least 83 vaccine-injured people who received compensation.

Some industry analysts have characterized public confidence in vaccines as a crisis (Black and Rappuoli, 2010). Kennedy et al. (2011) report that 77% of US. parents surveyed have at least one concern about vaccine safety.

Not only parents, but health care workers including new doctors are also raising questions about vaccine safety. One study revealed that only 40% of health care workers received an influenza shot (King et al., 2006). In another study, reasons for refusal by health care workers included concern over adverse reactions (Clark et al., 2009)."

Gayle DeLong is to congratulated for putting these concerns so effectively in the public domain. Reading the full text of this paper is an education, particularly for parents, that they will never live to regret.

The One Click Group
5 March 2012