Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Girls at risk in cancer jab row

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 22 February 2009
TENS of thousands of girls are at risk of contracting cancer because of a row over funding for a vaccine between doctors and the Government.
Health workers have been forced to set up makeshift clinics across Scotland after plans for all family doctors to provide the cervical cancer jab collapsed.

But early figures indicate that up to a third of school leavers have failed to receive the jab.

The revelation is an embarrassment to the Scottish Government, which launched the HPV vaccine last year in a blaze of publicity.

Uptake among pupils, who are vaccinated at school, is high. But plans to immunise up to 120,000 school leavers over the next three years in a £1.7m "catch-up" campaign are now in doubt.

Robert Music, director of the cervical cancer charity Jo's Trust, said: "If we lose these girls they are going to be at risk of cervical cancer and that could result in tragedies."

Dr Dean Marshall, chair of the British Medical Association's Scottish GP Committee, said many doctors were not offering the catch-up service because it was not being "resourced appropriately".

Yet Marshall warned that GPs are best placed to provide the service because they can easily target patients eligible for the vaccination against the sexually-transmitted human papilloma virus, which causes cervical cancer.

Some GPs will provide jabs but in many cases health boards have set up separate arrangements to immunise school leavers and girls who have missed out on school sessions.

Campaigners warned the move would put lives at risk because many girls would simply be lost in the system.

Marshall said: "It's the difficult-to-reach girls who were always going to be the problem and we were trying to negotiate a fee that would cover the amount of money it would cost us to bring in staff, write to them several times and phone them."

The Government had offered GPs around £22.53 for each girl they immunised but a lower fee of £13.50 if staff employed by the local health board carried out the task at the GP's surgery.

But the BMA had wanted around £25 for each girl and refused the lower fee because they said it would not cover costs. Now the scheme is being run differently in each part of the country.

NHS Dumfries and Galloway has set up 10 clinics because no GP surgery is offering the service. Just one-third of GPs in NHS Greater Glasgow are providing the jabs.

And girls in NHS Lothian must attend their nearest out-of-hours clinic.

Yesterday, most health boards refused to reveal figures but, among pupils immunised in school, uptake is understood to be high, at around 90%.

However, figures released by NHS Dumfries and Galloway reveal uptake among school leavers of just 67%.

Dr Barbara West, a GP in Drumchapel, Glasgow, decided not to offer the jabs after the BMA and the Scottish Government failed to reach agreement.

She said: "At some point you can't cope with the workload without taking on new staff, and that is a permanent commitment in the expenses you pay out."

Public Health Minister Shona Robison said: "It's disappointing that a national agreement could not be reached."


Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 22 February 2009 11:36 AM
  • Source: Scotland On Sunday
  • Location: Scotland
  • Related Topics: Cancer research
 
1

Fifi la Bonbon,

21/02/2009 23:58:36
We pay these GPs hundreds of thousands of pounds a year to provide a comprehensive health service to all the people and the greedy pigs want more to do this wee thing. Pathetic.

We need to re-nationalise the NHS, starting with GPs.

2

Fifi la Bonbon,

22/02/2009 00:00:05
And all you american loonies can keep out of this with your huge long cut and paste jobs banging on about "big-pharma."
3

Observer,,

Glasgow 22/02/2009 00:10:14
Here bloody here fifi it's weird agreeing with you.

You are completely right in both posts.
4

Fifi la Bonbon,

22/02/2009 00:11:55
That's twenty minutes and I'm still angry and upset at the idea that these overpaid GPs get to pick and choose what NHS treatments they give what patients without extra money.

I bet they never turn away a junkie wanting a prescription for methadone or someone wanting a sick line for "stress", but they're happy to demand £25 up front to give a girl a jag that might well save her life and avoid her kids losing their mother.

Lower than low, some of them. How many BMWs does a doctor need?
5

Observer,,

Glasgow 22/02/2009 00:13:20
It should have been hear hear I hope she'll forgive me.
6

Observer,,

Glasgow 22/02/2009 00:19:40
I've got a seventeen year old, she didn't get it through school as she's left now. It was a pain in the bum arranging it. A lot of mothers won't because asking for stuff is intimidating for a lot of people.
7

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 22/02/2009 00:24:04


This soo called 'anti-cancer' jab, has in many respects been portrayed as a lie in the 'guarantee' department and of the jabs safety issues, but like usual "lets experiment on Women"!
So! maybe its best that many Girls do not have access to giving them a "guarantee", that does not exist in the first place!

After saying this I do agree with #1/#2 in general, if it was a trusted medication.


8

Sheilz,

22/02/2009 00:46:30
I agree with Charles. Not only are the potential side effects of this vaccine reputed to be worse than having the disease itself, I also feel that this is experimentation of the worst sort. Where is the data for proving that this drug is effective? i suspect it doesn't exist, not to a degree that would inspire any confidence in me anyway. For sure my daughter will not be 'policed' in this way. My faith in anything to do with this (UK) government is zero. Somebody somewhere will be looking to make a profit but at what cost to these young girls? Too much sleaze and corruption for me to trust this lot with anything to do with my family.
9

zeno,

www.thinkhumanism.com 22/02/2009 00:51:29
Charles: please provide good evidence for your assertions.

Fifi: you were right - it didn't take long for the 'big pharma' to raise its ugly head!
10

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 22/02/2009 01:25:22

zeno ~9,

NO! You prove to me that I am wrong!

You can't and never will!

Women will still get "cervical cancer" 'jab or no jab'!

This soo called "Jab" is being sold as a freedom from cervical cancer, never in life has such a 'Big' Lie' been told!


11

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 22/02/2009 01:27:03

FACT!!,

Women get "Cervical Cancer" even if they, never in their lives had sex!!




12

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 22/02/2009 01:39:29

FACT!!,

Drug Companies, 'pushing it' to make 'major bucks'!


13

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 22/02/2009 01:45:25

FACT!!

Read and Learn!!

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-wellbeing/features/my-girls-wont-have-the-cancer-jab-1022918.html


14

,

22/02/2009 01:45:49
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
15

,

22/02/2009 01:51:57
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
16

Tussler,

22/02/2009 02:26:33
Observer and Charles hey what about toning it down? That's no way to settle an argument.
17

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 22/02/2009 02:40:52

Tussler ~16,

Agreed! I think both comments should be removed and will ask the Scotsman News to do soo,
I was furious at what was said about me, and brining the said person into the conversation, as the said person has affected me deeply.

18

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 22/02/2009 03:14:16

Tussler ~16,

That's it done!, it is now up to the administration, to decide, if both comments are appropriate to be, kept on the subject matter of "Cervical Cancer" and this "Jab", as the inner way the public see it, to affect them, and to say words out of context, when argument, is better.

19

Aasa,

Toronto, Ontario 22/02/2009 05:19:39
I would not recommend Gardasil or even Cervarix to any young girl, because these vaccines have not been studied long enough and their manufacturers cannot assure us that they are free of nasty longterm side effects. Neither of these vaccines have been evaluated for their potential to cause carcinogenicity and genotoxicity, and have not been studied adequately for their potential to impair fertility.

In my mind, partaking of these vaccines, is tantamount to playing "Russian Roulette" with one's life. The supposed "benefits" of these vaccines probably resound more loudly with the shareholders of the manufacturer, than with the recipients of these dubious products.

Something to consider,

Aasa
20

ddmc,

22/02/2009 05:59:31
#1 & 2

What makes you so sure that this treatment is the right choice, cause a big drug company said so. Think Vioxx, Thalidomide etc, never assume that a drugs company have our interests at heart, they are driven by profit, much in the same way your annoyed that GP's wont prescribe unless they receive extra funding. Medicines days as a non profit driven industry are over even if we do have social healthcare.
21

Fifi la Bonbon,

22/02/2009 06:18:07
#19 and #20 - it was precisely the likes of you that I had in mind at #2.

It is no business of foreigners what our NHS does, and your whining about "big pharma" is irrelevant to the subject of the story. Sod off and abolish capitalism in your homeland before you come and lecture us about anything. We know to make allowances for Charles, who seems to have stumbled onto some peculiar websites and let his mind brew up some nonsense. But you foreign "big-pharma" obsessives can eff right off.
22

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 22/02/2009 07:08:29
Come on Sturgeon, sort this scandal out. Government means decisiveness, not obfuscation.
23

Bluevoice,

Dubai, U.A.E. 22/02/2009 07:44:54
There are far too many vaccinations anyway. The drugs industry is earning far too much money through fear instilled in people. Homoeopathy and natural remedies... the way forward. (o:
24

Tweedmouth,

Coldstream 22/02/2009 08:56:04
Charles, you're just wrong about sex and cervical cancer. Nuns do not get cervical cancer; virgins who have nver had sex do not get cervical cancer; women who have one faitful, monogamous partner do not get cervical cancer.

If you give people a vaccination at 15 and tell them they are now protected against the main virus that causes this - you encourage them to go out and have multiple partners while they are young. They will undoubtedly come into contact with 'other' strains of the papilloma virus - along with syphilis, chlamysida, gonnorhoea, HIV, Hepatitis A, B and C, as well as TB - all sexually transmitted.

What we need is a 'behavioural fix' not a 'technological fix'. this fixes nothing,
25

Observer,,

Glasgow 22/02/2009 09:28:08
25 this is a sexual health issue not a sexual morality issue. You might want to change behaviour but witholding potentially life saving treatment is not the way to do it. Just think about what you are saying.
26

Highland Mist,

22/02/2009 09:32:27
Our GPs are spoiled and suit themselves thse days. I don't know one who puts in a long shift or overtime, but tehy take a massive salary with all the pampering that is theres for the taking these days. Time to clamp down.

The school offices are partly to blame for the girls being missed! Why? First hand experience of this with a daughter who left school to go to Uni a year early - along with one of her friends. Both were missed from the system and after months and months of nagging have eventually been seen at a makeshift clinic, with the explanation that they simply slipped off the radar and ceased to exist when they left school as the school instantly deleted them as they were no longer their responsibility. Office workers who could not give a damn (and another area of the local authority workforce that is spoiled).

Get it sorted, it's not a game, it is all about saving lives and it's time certain individuals in society were forced to take responsibility. If girls are missed and later die it is tantamount to murder by gross negligence.
27

comment4,

Edinburgh 22/02/2009 09:36:30
Thanks Scotsman for such a clear illustration of how our existing GP business set up consistently gets in the way of policy being implemented wel, change happening to improve the provision of health care in Scotland.
GP practises will not do anything unless money is added to what they already get.
Could you do an article listing all the payments they get - in particular those of the last few years and how much they get paid to attend local meetings so that joint working can take place.
28

Highland Mist,

22/02/2009 09:36:35
#25, the way to fix it is to stop judging people for having sex (because they always will), and to get to the source of teh problem and cure the men who carry the virus in the first place. NOT to blame women for having sex for pity sake that's ridiculous you fruit and nutcase. You might as well say just flog the girls to death now because they are going to have sex with those poor men who are carrying a virus that will infect them? Doh!
29

Highland Mist,

22/02/2009 09:39:35
Charles and Observer need to go to anger management class. I'd hate to have to sit in a room with you two debating.
30

Observer,,

Glasgow 22/02/2009 10:12:17
30 You are right and I apologise to everybody, especially Charles, for losing my temper.
31

saneatheist,

Bixter 22/02/2009 10:16:19
#23
Is that satire?
32

zeno,

www.thinkhumanism.com 22/02/2009 10:57:04
I sincerely hope you're right, saneatheist! Either that or sheer ignorance. There is already too much nonsense here about conspiracy theories, with 'Big Pharma', doctors, the government all in league with each other to invent diseases we don't have, and to force 'toxic' vaccines and other medicines we don't need that will give us all brain damage, just so they can all take a cut of the money.

Get real.
33

KL1,

Ampang, 22/02/2009 11:05:41
'Tens of thousands of girls are at risk of contracting cancer because of a row over funding for a vaccine between...'

Kate Foster and the sub should have checked out the veracity of the lead paragraph.

Tens of thousands at risk is sensationalist, ill-researched and designed as a poor effort to bash the SNP and drag GPs into the fray too.

In the UK - and around the world - there's a lot of debate on Gardasil/Cervarix, cervical cancer cases etc - a wealth of info that could have translated into a decent article - not a mere attempt to attack the Scottish Government. Little wonder Scotsman Group circulation figures are plunging.
34

JT,

22/02/2009 11:33:41
Thanks to crotchety old gits who run our medical practices who would rather a girl take the risk of not being protected because he's not making enough money. Im in my mid 30s and ironically going to get a test done tomorrow, after 3 letters from the surgery over the last year. This will not be the jab but the rather uncomfortable and unreliable test. Its taken a year due to taking medication which would squew the results and also the nurse only working 3 mornings a week and I work. It just so happens that Im on annual leave this week. Time to get all women inoculated, not just those at school.
35

Mikko,

Drumnadrochit 22/02/2009 11:56:47
Edinburgh took £650 million (and will take plenty more) for its tram craziness. Blame Edinburgh.
36

John JP,

Wishaw 22/02/2009 12:51:02
The refusal to administer this vaccine to eligible females is a disgrace. GP's have never had it so good and are currently extremely overpayed for the job they do. As well as their over inflated salary they also earn a fortune for signing forms, providing reports etc which should all be part of their remit without receiving further remuneration. Also a fair amount of them take part in commercial clinical research during surgery time for which they are paid handsomely. They would have no problem inviting a patient in for a clinical research study and then receive their fee. The sad part is that this vaccine was trialed in primary care and now some GP's won't administer it. Like a lot of Doctors if they concentrated on their commitment to the NHS and attention to detail instead of 'sideys' we would all have much improved health care.

Surely they don't want 'Fed More Gold'.

37

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 22/02/2009 13:04:30

Tweedmouth ~25,

You read my comments wrong!
This is what I am saying, The 'Jab' is sold and pushed as a freedom from cervical cancer, caused by STI's, but even if one never had sex, they can still get cervical cancer.
(hence 'jab' portrayed as a lie)

38

Fifi la Bonbon,

22/02/2009 15:31:31
#37 said - "Like a lot of Doctors if they concentrated on their commitment to the NHS and attention to detail instead of 'sideys' we would all have much improved health care."

That is the point, though, many GPs' commitment to the NHS is entirely superficial. They're in it for the huge amounts of money they can screw from the taxpayer, and unlike bankers, whose behaviour they now emulate, they enjoy a halo effect.

The papers ought to expose their greedy grasping ways, by setting out systematically the money they get paid in ther GMS contract and the extras they get on top, and the way the BMA refuses to allow them to do new things for patients without fat extra payments.

That Dr Barbara West from Drumchapel quoted in the story has put her head above the parapet, so she should be made to defend herself. What is she really paid - the whole lot, not just the basics? What's her take-home (they always plead poverty because of overheads)? What's her capital arrangements (lots of equity in premises)? What effort does she make to keep her impoverished patents aware of how much she makes out of them? I bet most would be shocked to learn abouut this.

The fact is that no GPs in NHS Lothian or NHS Dumfries and Galloway were prepared to offer the service to girls.

Two-third of GPs in NHS Greater Glasgow refused to offer the service to girls.

And the BMA have held out for £25 per girl - all to do the basic work of the NHS.

Sickening, and as far as I can see evil, greed which puts their wealth above girls' safety.
39

Fifi la Bonbon,

22/02/2009 15:37:18
Charles is demonstrating his extraordinary ignorance about cervical cancer, its causes and treatment. He does demonstrate how ignorance has the power to kill. I don't think he's ever given us the benefit of his views on MMR but I'm sure we can all guess.
40

mina,

Scotstoun 22/02/2009 16:21:17
I am saddened and astonished that so many of our GP's are not offering immunisation to their young female patients who could potentially be at risk from the Human Papilloma virus. I have just read the directive sent by the Cheif Medical Officer to all NHS Board executives before the launch of the immunisation programme, incidentally proving that GP's had ample time to wrangle out issues before the implementaion date of September 2008.Given that the uptake of cervical screening has fallen amongst young people in the past few years, I would urge young girls to seek information, and very importantly ask your GP for a smear test if you are over 20, I believe they still offer this service.
41

Fifi la Bonbon,

22/02/2009 16:27:25
#42, read #2 and then eff aff off. This has nothing to do with you.
42

Bluevoice,

Dubai U.A.E. 22/02/2009 16:42:55
#32 and #33 What I wrote was not meant in a satirical way at all. I am writing from experience. All drugs have side effects and there are other ways of healing ourselves. But there is no point in trying to sway people who say "Get real!" to anyone who opposes their point of view in a debate. Ironically, I am very real and much healthier since avoiding the medical profession and taking the more natural way.
43

Fifi la Bonbon,

22/02/2009 17:01:11
#45 - your ignorance is not just unwitting, it is malicious. And it has nothing to do with this story. I suspect that you are a MMR loony as well. If you aren't American, you talk like one.

I must say that I'd never come across a cervical-cancer-denier before.
44

Observer,,

Glasgow 22/02/2009 17:06:32
45 Is that you Freethinker ? Been banned again ? You've had more monikers than I've had hot dinners.

Sorry but I don't believe you on this one, for the simple reason being that the Government wouldn't be shelling out significant amounts of cash unless they were convinced that this was worth it.

45

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 22/02/2009 17:15:08

Observer,,~48,

"Government wouldn't be shelling out significant amounts of cash unless they were convinced that this was worth it"

It will be well worth it for the Government, as usual they will be getting their 'back pockets', lined by the drug companies!

46

Mendes,

Dundee 22/02/2009 17:25:28
I would urge anybody to read "The Sanctity of human blood, vaccination not immunisation" by Tim O'Shea if you are truly interested in learning about the industry of vaccinations. Does nobody see the conflict of interest by offering GPs financial incentives to administer certain drugs?
A quick search on pubmed reveals scientific articles on vaccinated women who still develop cervical cancer. This is not an open and shut issue, even the people administering these vaccines are not informed.
47

Observer,,

Glasgow 22/02/2009 17:33:42
51 I don't think anyone has said that it's a 100% guaranteed success. It's a preventative measure.

50 I'm sorry I thought you were someone else.

49 I really don't think that Nicola Sturgeon is running about with her back pockets stuffed with cash from the drug companies. And I would have said the same about her Labour equivalent if this had been an issue earlier. This is a preventative measure which has been tried and tested. It won't prevent all deaths from cervical cancer, but it will prevent some.
48

Catharine,

winnipeg 22/02/2009 17:37:04
Despite not wanting to get Fifi's knickers in a twist, I, a foreigner, am going to risk putting in my two pennies worth - and, as I am a survivor of the disease, I think I actually have a right to my opinion!! This vaccine is a farce. It protects SOME women from SOME forms of HPV which CAN if undetected lead to cervical cancer. My problem with this whole campaign is (oh here is the dreaded conspiracy theory) Big Pharma is touting it to be a miracle cure. Stick your daughters and they will never get cancer - WRONG!!! Never mind the lack of independent research, the lack of long term studies, the lack of truthful advertising, these drugs are NOT A CURE OR PREVENTION OF CANCER. Moreover, the only way to be sure is to go and have a yearly PAP test. HPV is carried on male genitalia. Unless you always use condoms, chances are you will come in contact with it. This "miracle" jab DOES NOT PREVENT ALL FORMS OF HPV. Women MUST take responsibility for their own bodies, practice safe sex and STILL hop into the stirrup chair. THAT is the only way to be sure, and to catch any and all abnormalities early enough to prevent cervical cancer.
49

Scottish Canadian,

ottawa canada 22/02/2009 17:49:28
CHARLES LINKSALL- Physicians would not advise patients that they would be "free of Cervical cancer" after receiving this vaccination as this is simply not true. This shot only reduces the risk of contracting certain strains of HPV which are known to be risk factors for cervical cancer.
As is stated above, annual pap smears for the sexually active, safe sex, and not smoking also help to reduce the incidence of this disease.
50

Mendes,

22/02/2009 17:57:55
Absolutely correct, not 100% guaranteed. Everyone has the right to choose whether or not they accept the validity of the vaccination and impose it upon their children. It would be folly though as a parent not to actually research this. GPs don't have time and therefore don't know any more than you or I and the manufacturers are answerable only to their shareholders, in the business of sales not health. I'm male, so I'm looking forward to the purported male vaccination to prevent me developing cervical cancer. I anticipate the success rate to be 100%.
51

Fifi la Bonbon,

22/02/2009 18:04:32
#47 - you said "How many deaths in Scotland last year from cervical cancer with document links... I have these stats but they're going into my post..."

I have no idea why you would want to conceal the fact that according to the General Register Office 105 women, probably most of them mothers, died from cervical cancer in Scotland in 2007. You probably think this is an insignificant amount.

It does demonstrate the extent of the crime being perpetuated by the BMA in encouraging the majority of GPs from providing this service to girls without being paid £25 extra a pop.

And the complicity of all the GPs in Lothians, Dumfries and Galloway, and most GPs in Glasgow.
52

Kitti Kat,

Newtown Square 22/02/2009 18:07:30
another reason for government keeping out of medicine. only doctors , patients or parents should have the right to decide on treatment, vaccines, etc.
53

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

22/02/2009 18:11:18
Girls girls girls...the only way to keep the nasties away is to ensure one carries a "Jenny bag" at all times....gone are the days when only the male of the species was the holder of the key to unwanted pregnancy...and horrible itches....a bit of a demand for younger girls I know but still..
54

Fifi la Bonbon,

22/02/2009 18:12:55
#59 - are you calling for the end of the NHS, or have you just failed to grasp the point of the story? This is about criminally greedy doctors refusing to treat girls.
55

Mendes,

22/02/2009 18:28:48
The risk for serious side-effects from gardisil is 1 in 10000 (bronchopasm)i.e. suffocating. as reported by Merck (the manufacturer), this doesn't take into account the under-reporting of serious side effects that is common place. Much much higher than the risk of being afflicted with this condition.
56

Maria,

www.thinkhumanism.com 22/02/2009 19:02:41
Am I the only one to have read the article properly? This isn’t about GPs wanting to line their own pockets, it’s about GP surgeries needing to cover their costs. Does anybody know an underworked GP? They all have too much to do as it is and if they are to provide another yet another service, they have to take on more staff. That’s why they need the money. Got it now?
57

Fifi la Bonbon,

22/02/2009 19:13:58
Does anyone know a GP that said he or she was underworked? Most people know only one GP or possibly one group practice. There is a bigger picture.

They get paid hundreds of thousands of pounds net profit to provide a health service, they aren't really part of the NHS but merely contractors, and they always want more, more, more to do less, less, less.

Did anyone ever hear of a GP working and making a loss, as opposed to a hugely growing profit?

That's why I think the press should expose the GP racket - research the economics, publish he evidence, demonstrate the big profits they make, the fact they won't get out of bed for less than a bag of gold to do "new" stuff - like treat girls against cervical cancer which will kill thousands of women.
58

John JP,

Wishaw 22/02/2009 19:59:33
#63, GP's need no extra resources to do this as their existing staff i.e. Practice nurses will do it along with all the GP contract work that generate the funds.

If you have ever worked in primary care and witnessed a GP throwing aside a form that he would'nt sign as he was not getting payed for it then you would understand the greed that exists in GP surgeries.

If you are ever unlucky enough to require full GP support at home then you will realise the poor service that generally exists and the appalling attention to detail. My apologies to those who dedicate their service to the NHS
59

Shuggie,

Vancouver 22/02/2009 20:07:03
Congrats to those Scots GPs who are refusing to be pressured by Megapharma into a horribly expensive experiment which may give some resistance to a few strains of Human Papilloma (wart) virus.
60

Fay Wray,

22/02/2009 20:46:25
GP's should be made to give girls this jag or lose their contracts that may concentrate some minds.
61

Fifi la Bonbon,

22/02/2009 21:33:02
#66 =- another of that strange breed of north american loonies that are effectively denying thr existence of cervical cancer. They clearly have had to move on since the lies about MMR were exposed. Read #2, and eff off out of an issue that doesn't concern you. See that homecoming thing - it doesn't apply to you.
62

John JP,

Wishaw 22/02/2009 23:21:26
#66. This is not an experiment shuggie. This vaccine went through all the stages of clinical research and the final phase was carried out in GP surgeries. Guess what Shuggie, the GP's in Scotland were more than happy to take part in this clinical research and pick up their fat fee for it. Its just they want another excuse to extort more dough out of the Scottish people for an inferior service. Perhaps things are different in Vancouver. If you ever come to Scotland you will see that our country is full of foreign GP's that often fly in just for the weekend to act as locums as they know they cant make money like this anywhere else in the world.
63

jtdx,

23/02/2009 15:28:56
#42, #45 you are a bit of an idiot, and also racist I would guess given the way you write "AMERICAN".
However your concent about Birth anomilies can be easily refuted. The vacine works best if you give it before you become sexually active. Now I know that you alternative-medicine fools have many propositions, but if you are trying to get a scare going about problems with pregnant virgins, then I reckon you need to take some more medicine!

64

John Fryer,

lehon 23/02/2009 15:41:16
Hi

There are far too many vaccines being produced with their safety and efficacy uncertain.

We eliminated smallpox using not just vaccines but good public health policy as well.

Measles should have been eliminated worldwide years ago but we fell for the multiple vaccine route which was as Dr Wakefield showed not the correct way to go.

Its just not good enough to say MMR has the measles prophylaxis as for various reasons worldwide the other components may not be wanted. No one doubts the value of the single vaccine.

Out of 4 vaccines with MMR, only one is recognised as safe or in use and this is contentious.

In USA and UK particularly is the practice of many vaccines at once with up to ten at a time and these two countries for some unknown reason lead the world with millions of autistic children. There has never been one test to show that multiple vaccines are safe. A quarter of a million adverse effects in one country in a few years shows either a quarter of a million liars or a quarter of a million DANGEROUS vaccines.

Do vaccines have risks. Yes they do.

Should we up a correct number of less than a dozen to more than a 100 until we get safety sorted? No!

My vaccine of 1960 is known to be safe to one adverse event in 50 million.

The Tozzi study of 2009 claimed vaccines today are safe with one child autistic in a study of 1 400.

OK if vaccines don't cause this condition but devastating if vaccines are even only partly responsible.

When in a hole it is good policy to STOP digging.
65

zeno,

www.thinkhumanism.com 23/02/2009 17:34:16
John Fryer

Wakefield has been thoroughly discredited and his 'theories' completely demolished:

http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?%2Fsite%2Farticle%2F6283%2F

66

Shuggie,

Vancouver 24/02/2009 17:15:11
68 Fifi. This North American Loonie is merely a bit peeved to see big American Drug Houses paid to try out their doubtful products in Scotland rather than having to recompense volunteers in Third World countries. Must be my native thrift!
67

pestypaul,

basildon 26/06/2009 09:36:05
as always with the chemical industry. safe untill proven toxic not toxic untill proven safe. if you would'nt eat it, dont inject it or apply it to your skin

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.