Background: Merck & Co. is an American pharmaceutical company and one of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world. In 1971 the United States approved the use of an MMR vaccine made by Merck, containing the Jeryl Lynn strain of mumps vaccine. In 1978 Merck introduced the MMR II, using a different strain of the rubella vaccine. In 1997 the FDA required Merck to conduct effectiveness testing of MMRII. Initially it was over 95%; to continue the license; Merck had to convince the FDA that the effectiveness stayed at a similar rate over the years.
Antecedents: In 2010, two former Merck’s virologists, Stephen Krahling and Joan Wlochowski, accused Merck in 2010 of faking the efficacy of its measles vaccine and filed a lawsuit against Merck
Confronted with two failed methodologies, Merck then falsified the test data to guarantee the results it desired. Having achieved the desired efficacy threshold, Merck submitted these fraudulent results to the FDA and European Medicines Agency. Merck attempted to cover up their fraudulent testing actions by destroying evidence of the falsified data and then lying to an FDA investigator. Merck also attempted to bribe the team on the MMRII testing process with financial incentives to cooperate and remain silent about the fraudulent activities and testing taking place. Merck went as far as to threaten Stephen Krahling with jail if he reported fraud to the FDA. Clearly, Merck’s purposes are corrupted and its actions of manipulating science distained its very mission of making the public healthier. Merck is doing the exact opposite of what its company’s objective is to do, it is putting young children and the public’s health at risk, all for the objective of continuous profit, reputation, power, influence, and maintaining its precious license to continue to distribute this vaccine. Thus, Merck’s actions and behaviors are unethical for defrauding the FDA and European Medicines and European Government by implying that the public are at a healthier standpoint by taking the vaccine while in actuality individuals may be at more harm by taking the vaccine versus having the virus. Firstly, Merck admits that the MMRII vaccine can cause serious life threaten conditions such as Vasculitis (inflammation of the blood vessels), Pancreatitis (inflammation of the pancreas), Diabetes, Thrombocytopenia (low blood platelet count), Chronic arthritis, Encephalitis (inflammation of the brain), and Panniculitis (inflammation of the subcutaneous fat layer). Several of these conditions are brought on by the live viruses in MMRII alone. Additionally, vaccines eliminate all possibility of a person developing lifelong immunity to infectious diseases like measles because they circumvent innate immunity, the body’s first line of defense against disease, exposing the adaptive immune system to viral components that it would never otherwise encounter. This causes permanent damage to the immune system and helps explain why many people today are stricken with autoimmune disorders that prior to vaccines were virtually nonexistent. Where in fact, natural exposure to measles is generally mild and imparts permanent immunity which is a nature’s
In the Frontline episode The Vaccine War, a progressively distressful debate ensues among many scientists and doctors within the public health system and an unnerving alliance of parents, politicians, and celebrities. The topic of debate is the overwhelming pressure parents feel to vaccinate their children and their right to decline such vaccinations. In several American neighborhoods, groups of parents have been exercising their right to refuse vaccinations, which has elevated anxiety on the return of vaccine-preventable diseases such as pertussis and measles. The reason such parents are denying their children various vaccines such as the MMR “triple shot” for measles, mumps, and rubella is because they are convinced that it is linked to autism, a link that has yet to be proven. Many of these parents are focused solely on their children, not taking into account that their decision may put the American populace at risk for disease. Such parents are not thinking about other members of society that vaccines don’t work for, and in certain adolescents the effects deteriorate, thus only when every person is immunized the “heard immunity” is successful.
“Immunizing Against Bad Science: The Vaccine Court and the Autism Test Case,” written by Lauren L. Haertlein, deals with one of today’s most popular controversies; vaccinations causing autism in children. Haertlein’s article gives insight into the history of vaccine litigation and the policies that accompany it. Furthermore, she talks immensely about the Vaccine Court, whose job is to work with petitioner’s stating that a vaccine, such as measles-mumps-rubella (MMR), has caused some illness to their child. The article uses real-life Vaccine Court examples such as Michelle Cedillo’s case, whose mother claimed a vaccination gave her daughter autism, as a way to better understand how the Vaccine Court works. This controversial topic is being discussed daily in magazines, journals, and on talk shows. The families that are blaming autism on vaccinations are giving vaccines a bad name and causing other parents to re-think their decision about getting their children vaccinated.
The extent of adverse reactions to vaccines is crippling. Every year, there are more than 20,000 vaccine adverse reaction reports that are filed with the US government (Merino 17). 13% are classified as serious, including death, lifelong disability or life-threatening illness (“Vaccines ProCon”). Considering that almost all Americans are vaccinated makes these numbers seem less significant. However, it is estimated that less than ten percent of adverse reactions are reported (“National Vaccine…”). This means that over 200,000 people in America are possibly affected in a negative way by vaccines per year.
The history of vaccinations does not begin with the first vaccination itself but rather an infectious disease that had greatly affected the human population. In 1796 Edward Jenner created a successful composition using cowpox material that created immunity to the ongoing growth of the small pox disease. Jenner’s method underwent 200 years of medical and technological changes until it had finally resulted in complete elimination of the smallpox disease. Vaccinations have been a controversial medical topic for many years and although it is proven to be an effective means of preventing serious effects, including fatalities from childhood illnesses the controversy remains that the side effects from the immunizations outweigh the risk of contracting the disease. According to the College of Physicians of Philadelphia they state that “innovative techniques now drive vaccine research, with recombinant DNA technology and new delivery techniques leading scientist in new directions. Disease targets have expanded, and some vaccine research is beginning to focus on non-infectious conditions, such as addictions and allergies” (“The History of Vaccines” College of Physicians of Philadelphia. Web. 10 January. 2014). While public health officials insist that vaccines are the best way to protect public health. Over the past thirty years the vaccination schedule has tripled and since then there has been an alarming rise in the infant mortality rate in America. The problem is not the vaccination itself, but the quality of the vaccination.
Despite the doctors’ reassurances and mounting evidences about the safety and value of immunization, many parents are still wary about getting their children injected. Some even opposed it because they fear that the vaccine itself is not benign. It is often considered unnecessary in many cases because the illnesses don’t pose a big threat to the child’s life. However, others point out that they help eradicate many contagious illnesses and prevent many deaths. For example, polio and smallpox, once killed thousands of children, are eliminated because of the use of vaccines. There were many studies conducting to show whether it can trigger serious reactions and disorders. In 1998, Andrew Wakefield published an observation of 12 children that linked the measles, mumps, and rubella combination vaccine with intestinal problems which he believed led to autism. Once people heard this news, they become alarmed. However, many large studies had been conducted and found no association between the t...
On February 28th, 1998, the Lancet released a study by Andrew Wakefield linking the MMR vaccination to autism. Wakefield’s study was later proven false due to unethical practices, falsification of information, and the failure to state his financial gain. Wakefield’s first mistake was not informing the Lancet that he was receiving funding from anti-vaccination lawyers which indicate Wakefield was bias. Wakefield also went into the study knowing he had signed a patent for a new vaccine (Rao, 2011). Another major fault in Wakefield’s claim was that without clinical approval, he practiced unethical procedures including but not limited to colonoscopy’s and lumbar punctures (Dyer, 2010). Using the results of these unethical procedures, Wakefield manipulated and falsified his results.
to the vaccinations for Polio, MMR, DTP and many other life-threatening diseases, the death rate
Childhood vaccinations have received a lot of media in the past few years, and parents continue to question whether or not they should have their children vaccinated. This topic is a very important issue because it seems to be a trend in our society where parents are not vaccinating their children. This then leads their children becoming more susceptible to unnecessary diseases/viruses that can be prevented with vaccines. The focus of the following articles was on the association of the specific vaccines measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR), and vaccines containing thimerosal, which has been a speculated reason for the cause of autism. This contentious hypothesis has many parents failing to vaccinate their children; this is especially true of many friends and family members of mine. They believe that vaccines can cause autism, and I want to prove otherwise.
Doctor Andrew Wakefield had written a paper in Lancet journal in 1998 which suggested that MMR vaccine causes autism. In his research, he found out that MMR vaccine was responsible for bowel inflammation that leads to the translocation of non-permeable peptides into the bloodstream. (American Academy of Pediatrics) This in turn carries them to the brain causing the root of autism spectrum disorder to form. His research was called weak by drug corporations, governments and media companies and was then discredited earning him a fraud reputation. His paper has since raised a decade long argument on MMR vaccine originating autism spectrum disorder. This has caused a lot of parents to withdraw their children from being vaccinated, which increased measles infections.
The first Measles vaccination was introduced in 1963, the improved upon in 1968. During the years of 1967 and 1968, a vaccination for Mumps and Rubella was also introduced. The three vaccines were combined in 1971, and called the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine (Immunization Action Coalition, “Measles: Questions and Answers”). One dosage of the MMR vaccination was proven to protect about 90-95% of children, then in 1989 the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices decided to change the dose from one to two, raising the percent of children protected to about 97% (National Network for Immunization Information (NNii), “Measles, Mumps, Rubella (MMR)”). The CDC reported that 95% percent of children receiving their first dose of the MMR vaccine between the ages of 12 months and 15 months become immune to measles, mumps, and rubella after this initial dose. Those not becoming immune after the first does become immune after the second dose given between ages four years old and six years old (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Vaccines”). Thanks to these changes made measles, mumps, and rubella have become nearly eliminated in the United States. However, to ensure that these diseases do not spread from countries not vaccinating, it is important that we continue with our current program. While the MMR vaccination is the safest way to ensure that we do not have an outbreak, the vaccination has been a source of controversy over the years. At one time, the MMR vaccine was thought to be unsafe because not only does it overwhelm your immune system, but also the vaccine contained toxic additives, and was thought to be linked to Autism. Studies have since pro...
While the anti-vaccination movement is based on discredited science and conspiracy theories, it does not negate the validity of my patient’s concerns.
Now, one vaccine in particular worries the anti-vaccers; the MMR (Measles, Mumps, and Rubella). The reason they think it is bad is because of its high mercury content, caus...
ANA CEO and nurse Myrtle Aydelotte once said, “Nursing encompasses an art, a humanistic orientation, a feeling for the value of the individual, and an intuitive sense of ethics, and of the appropriateness of action taken”.1 In preparing to develop my own nursing practice, I find this statement to be invaluable. It is this philosophy which has guided my educational and experiential journey from scientific evidence and statistics alone, to include patient relationship and ethical understanding. My first exposure to the “Vaccine Controversy” occurred in my biology undergraduate. I was fascinated, as I had only been exposed one side of the story, and began to research avidly, wondering if I might find definitive evidence giving backbone to the passionate arguments I heard. I should preface by saying that I was very particular about my sources of information, and refused to accept articles signed with random initials of an unknown author, photos of crying babies next to an impending syringe, or from sites with titles such as “The Angry Patriot”. What I found didn’t really surprise me. As do many people with healthcare experience, I understand that nearly every treatment we utilize in modern medicine is, to some extent, risk v. benefit. So, when my research indicated that some preservatives/ingredients utilized in vaccines might result in anaphylactic reactions, immune responses and other serious health problems at statistically low rates, I wasn’t shocked or concerned. When I read that some, more poorly made vaccines with pushy manufacturers and few long-term trials had these issues at higher rates, I was also not exactly surprised.2-4 I can understand though, why some people might be. Mainstream healthcare (not including general media...
Vaccines against diphtheria, polio, pertussis, measles, mumps and rubella, and more recent additions of hepatitis B and chicken pox, have given humans powerful immune guards to ward off unwelcome sickness. And thanks to state laws that require vaccinations for kids enrolling in kindergarten, the U.S. presently enjoys the highest immunization rate ever at 77%. Yet bubbling beneath these national numbers is the question about vaccine safety. Driven by claims that vaccinations can be associated with autism, increasing number of parents are raising questions about whether vaccines are in fact harmful to children, instead of helpful (Park, 2008).
For innumerable centuries, unrelenting strains of disease have ravaged society. From the polio epidemic in the twentieth century to the measles cases in the latter half of the century, such an adverse component of nature has taken the lives of many. In 1796, Edward Jenner discovered that exposure to cowpox could foster immunity against smallpox; through injecting the cowpox into another person’s arm, he founded the revolutionary concept known as a vaccination. While many attribute the eradication of various diseases to vaccines, many United States citizens are progressively beginning to oppose them. Many deludedly thought that measles had been completely terminated throughout the United States.