Nieuws item

Pneumococcal vaccine and otitis media

"With all of these unknowns, the vaccination of newborns with seven pneumococcal serotypes and possible eradication of those serotypes, is an uninformed experiment at best," said Cantekin.

Cantekin discussed the new Prevnar vaccine for pneumococcal, as  endorsed by the American Academy of Pediatrics. "The alleged benefits for this  new vaccine are greatly exaggerated and the risks are significant," said  Cantekin. "The bacteria pneumococcus, with more than 90 serotypes, is a common  pathogen. Though pneumococcus causes various diseases the carriage rate and  serotype distribution rates in different groups are not know. Also, it is not  known how pneumococcus transmutes itself into a pathogen. The role of  pneumococcus in the microbiological balance is not known. It does contribute to  3,000 cases a year of meningitis, 50,000 a year of bacteremia, 500,000 cases of  pneumonia, and seven million cases of otitis media or ear infections.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

 

"With all of these unknowns, the vaccination of newborns with seven  pneumococcal serotypes and possible eradication of those serotypes, is an  uninformed experiment at best," said Cantekin.

  

 

Transcibed by and made available by Families for Natural Living,

www.FamiliesforNaturalLiving.org  or FNLemail@aol.com.

From the  National Vaccine Information Center's Second International Public Conferene,  "Science

for Hope and Healing: Challenging the Status Quo" on September 8 -  10, 2000

in Arlington, Va. For more information on the NVIC see www.909shot.com

 

"Pneumococcal Vaccine  and Otitis Media" by Dr. Erdem Cantekin

 

Erdem Cantekin, Ph.D., is  Professor of Otolaryngology, University of Pittsburgh. An internationally  ecognized authority on otitis media and has studied causes and treatments for  ear infection and sinusitis in his 25 year career. An early, outspoken critic  of the overuse of antibiotics to treat ear infections, Dr. Cantekin has  published more than 150 articles and abstracts in the medical literature on  eustachian tube function, ear tube surgery, antibiotic resistance and conflicts  of interest in biomedical research and manufacturer sponsored medicine.

 

Cantekin discussed the new Prevnar vaccine for pneumococcal, as endorsed  by the American Academy of Pediatrics. "The alleged benefits for this new  vaccine are greatly exaggerated and the risks are significant," said Cantekin.  "The bacteria pneumococcus, with more than 90 serotypes, is a common pathogen.  Though pneumococcus causes various diseases the carriage rate and serotype  distribution rates in different groups are not know. Also, it is not known how  pneumococcus transmutes itself into a pathogen. The role of pneumococcus in the  microbiological balance is not known. It does contribute to 3,000 cases a year  of meningitis, 50,000 a year of bacteremia, 500,000 cases of pneumonia, and  seven million cases of otitis media or ear infections.

"With all of these unknowns, the vaccination of newborns with seven  pneumococcal serotypes and possible eradication of those serotypes, is an  uninformed experiment at best," said Cantekin. "Unfortunately, our public  health officials have no good estimates of these carriage rates in common  populations. The rates of healthy newborns contracting these diseases are not  well documented and yet to be determined.

Yet in February 2000 Prevnar, a seven-valent, conjugate vaccine was approved  for infants and toddlers. The FDA did not approve pneumococcal for pneumonia or  otitis media. This approval was limited and paradoxical because three years  earlier the New England Journal of Medicine the scientists had concluded that  'bacterial meningitis in the US is now a disease predominately of adults rather  than infants and young children.'" Cantekin pointed out that the study on  Prevnar violated rules of internationally accepted methods of reporting clinical  trials by publishing the results when they were incomplete. For example,  regarding pneumonia there was no information at all. All the results were  presented in a "confusing nonstandard format." Also, the control group for the  study did not receive a placebo, but another meningitis vaccine.

Other questions remained unanswered: "If this HMO trial was going to be the  only foundation to vaccinate every newborn in the United States, why were those  findings, involving 38,000 captive HMO children, not published in a leading  medical journal? The results were instead published in a journal well known to  be the mouthpiece of drug manufacturers. It is also troubling that, prior to  the publication of primary results, the medical economic analysis was rushed to  publication in the Journal of the American Medical Association. Then a string  of publications appeared in print - this was a well-organized effort to capture  the newborn population as quickly as possible. Prevnar is not effective for  otitis media or pneumonia and the prevention of meningitis data are  inconclusive.

Why does the American Academy of Pediatrics want our children to be  immunized using Prevnar? Why

are all those experts excited about this new  vaccine? I'm afraid the answer does not lie in the scientific realm.  Endorsements by experts become more puzzling if we examine the adverse or  peculiar effects of the vaccine in the HMO trial. As shown here, Prevnar had  four times more seizures, four times more gastritis than the control group,  significantly more developed asthma, one death in the Prevnar group. Strangely,  there were twice as many SIDS in the control group, but remember the control  group was receiving another experimental vaccine.

"The big push for Prevnar came from its supposed prevention of otitis media,  even though it had not been approved for this use. The promise of saving  children from this common, self-limiting disease now turned into persistent  childhood pest, is an excellent strategy, for marketing. Every parent knows and  abhors otitis media. "Simple facts about otitis media is that 60 percent of the  cases are viral, less than 40 percent are bacterial, and perhaps 25 percent of  all otitis media is due to pneumococcus. In two days, 90 percent of the otitis  cases resolve by itself without treatment. Regardless of these facts our  experts for two decades have been recommending aggressive interventions, such as  long duration antibiotic therapy and designer drugs, antibiotic prophylaxis and  then followed by aggressive surgery. This clinical practice, not supported by  existing scientific based evidence, fuels our $5 billion a year otitis media  medical economics.

So if Prevnar could stop the cycle of drug and slash, it would have been a  great public benefit. But that is not the case. The FDA data both from Finland  and the HMO trial show that the prevention benefit is less than four percent.  Despite this, the economic spin goes on." When the JAMA rushed to publish the  economic analysis deployment of Prevnar in the US prior to the publication of  the HMO trial results, Cantekin wrote a letter to the editor. In this letter he  pointed out that all of the money the vaccine was supposed to save health care  consumers would be saved without the vaccine if health care providers would  stick to the clinical guidelines for the treatment of otitis media. His letter  to the editor was rejected. "Prevnar will have the same effect that antibiotic  abuse currently has because, by changing serotype, it will exert selective  pressure on the microbial ecology.

This vaccine is the perfect example of a profit driven health care with no  checks and balances. In our $1 trillion health care system the public health  for people's interest are supposedly in the hands of three government agencies:  the FDA, the CDC, and the NIH. These three pillars of our public health system  are more and more in the hand of expert panels and advisory committees with ad  hoc appointed outsiders. Such experts dictate policies, control the complex  biomedical information system, and directly influence the taxpayers' health and  wealth. Those experts are frequently in the state of conflict of interest  because they also serve those special interest groups who profit from their  expert decisions. Most experts are in financial relationships with these  special interest groups and are usually registered with the speaker offices of  various manufacturers. In other words, they are paid lobbyist. The perils of  such interlocking conflicts are dangerous to public health. With increasing  frequency we witness the media exposures of these white coat crimes. I think it  is time that a reform act was in order and the people demand better controls  from the government to protect their health and their pocket books." (Too see  some of the 150 papers Dr. Cantekin has written, go to the National Library  of Medicine, PubMed, at www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi&nbsp; )