Minutes of Evidence of 23 November, 2000

Members Present:

*Deputy D. Stanton in the absence of Deputy P. Bradford for part of the Meeting.

**Senator John Cregan in the absence of Senator D. Fitzpatrick

DEPUTY B. O'KEEFFE in the chair.

Chairman: I wish to welcome everybody and I thank you for taking the time to appear before the Committee. To deal with the issue in hand, in July this year the committee agreed to consider the issue of child vaccination and to include an examination of the current vaccination policy, practices, poor take-up rates, and public concerns about the risks and adverse effects of vaccination. Written submissions were invited from the general public, the medical profession, health boards and others. To date, we have received in excess of 80 submissions. The committee also agreed to invite selected correspondents to address it in person. At today's meeting we will hear the views of a number of parents.

In the interests of those present, I would advise Members that as a Committee we are having a series of public hearings based on the submissions we have received. We thought that it would be in the interests of, and courteous to, those who made submissions to us that the greatest possible number of those people would be given an opportunity to present their cases orally. When the hearings have been completed, we will review the position with regard to who else should be invited. This process is to give you an opportunity to present your case first of all, and Members of the Committee will thus be better informed about the issues of concern to you and to other representative groups.

Our hearings, therefore, are not the end of the line. We will reassess our position and you can be assured that we will have the widest possible audience before the Committee to ensure that we leave no stone unturned in examining this issue. It is important to stress this before starting the hearings because the last thing I want this Committee and the groups to be involved in is megaphone diplomacy. We will approach this hearing with an open mind, address sensitively the issues you will outline to us and do everything possible to complete as thorough an examination as we can.

We will be calling on each group before us to make an opening presentation of approximately ten minutes, after which the sitting will be opened to members for a question and answer session. We would ask for your co-operation in limiting your contributions to ten minutes because another meeting has been scheduled for this room at 11.45 a.m. Members should be as brief and concise as possible in posing their questions.

I would like to introduce those who are making presentations today. Representing a group of parents who are also nurses, we have Ms Frances Howlin and Ms Marguerite Ronayne. Apologies for absence have been received from Ms Cathy Synnott. Representing the Hope project we have Ms Caroline McCabe and Ms Miriam Twomey. Representing the allergy induced autism we have Ms Cecilia Young and Ms Rosemary McCarthy. Representing the concerned parents group we have Mr. Shane Russell and Ms Lorna McCarthy. Finally, representing the informed immunisation network we have Mr. Colm McCaffrey and Mr. Stephen Halliday.

Before the meeting commences I would remind you that Members of the Committee are covered by privilege. Unfortunately, others appearing before Committee do not enjoy the same privilege. I call on Ms Frances Howlin to make the opening presentation.

Ms Howlin: Firstly, as a group of concerned parents and health care professionals we would like to express our appreciation for being afforded this opportunity to present our views and concerns in relation to vaccination. As this oral submission is but a brief synopsis of our written submission, I would like to refer the Committee to the written submission for further information which it may require. We will deal with various issues which we have dealt with in the written submission, the first of which is vaccination safety. One of the main areas of concern to us, as parents, has been vaccination safety. The majority of health care professionals maintain that vaccines are safe and adverse effects are rare. However, critics of vaccination would disagree and question such assurances on the following basis...I have copies of this oral submission if it would be of any help. Mr. Hamilton requested 25 copies and they are there. It might make it easier for Members to follow.

Chairman: While we are distributing those, I would remind you that we have received apologises from Deputies Gay Mitchell, Cecilia Keaveney and Liz McManus who are unable to be with us this morning.

Ms Howlin: On vaccination safety, as I said critics of vaccinations would disagree with and question such assurances on the following basis - first, the validity and reliability of the research conducted. I point out to the Committee that funding for the majority of the research conducted to date on vaccinations has been conducted by large pharmaceutical companies which are the manufacturers of the vaccines. The time frames of the studies carried out are also in question in that they tend to examine for a two week period only. However, one study did look at the MMR for a three week period. Obviously, only short term complications can be examined. One could not look for long-term complications within such a time frame.

Also, such studies have failed to use unvaccinated control groups in the sense that if you are carrying out research, for example, in order to accurately examine a situation, you should really have a control group of unvaccinated children and compare them with a study group of vaccinated children to accurately isolate the side effects of the vaccines. To date, this has not happened.

A further concern for us as parents has been the link between vaccination and sudden infant death syndrome which has come from Dr. Viera Scheibner's research. I am well aware of research on the other side as well where there has been increased incidence of sudden infant death syndrome in unvaccinated children. This research, which was discussed by Professor Matthews in The Irish Times recently, found that these children, who were not vaccinated and who had a higher incidence of sudden infant death syndrome, were from lower socio-economic groups where there were other mitigating variables, such as smoking. There is a higher incidence of sudden infant death syndrome in such groups.

I would like to draw the committee's attention to the high incidence of sudden infant death syndrome in the USA where vaccinations are mandatory versus the low incidence of sudden infant death syndrome in Japan where children were not vaccinated until after the age of two. Since Japan reduced the age of vaccination to the three months, incidence of sudden infant death syndrome has started to rise.

Dr. Andrew Wakefield's research links the MMR with inflammatory bowel disease and atypical autism. He has been funded for a further three years to do further independently funded research. Hopefully, he will present his findings in three years time. Dr. Coulter also linked the DPT with neurologically damaged children. He believes that encephalitis caused by the DPT vaccination can lead to minimal brain damage, learning disorders and autism. He estimated that in the United States, mental and nervous system disorders have increased by as much as 80 per cent since the introduction of vaccinations.

As regards possible adverse affects on the immune system, there seems to be a lot of concern among the critics of vaccinations as to what happens the immune system when you inject an infant up to the age of 15 months with 22 separate antigens. There has, for example, been a rise in autoimmune disease and in rheumatoid arthritis. There has been an increase in asthma in many countries. For example, in the United States, they estimate it has increased by as much as 65 per cent. There is the risk of recurrent infections in children and in generalised chest infections. Their susceptibility to infections of a bacterial and viral nature post-immunisation is increased.

Vaccines also contain chemicals and toxins of the micro-organisms themselves. I am sure the Committee is well aware of the SV40 virus scare - the monkey virus that was around in the 1950s which has, thankfully, been sorted out. More recently, there has been the possible contamination with new variant CJD.

Chemicals, such as aluminium, mercury and formaldehyde, are added to vaccines. One could argue there are no safe level of these substances when they are being injected into infants or adults.

Use of the live polio vaccine has been the main cause of polio in the last 15 to 20 years. In fact, there have been no cases of wild polio in that period. Other countries use injectable polio and they do not have the same risks as use of live polio.

There has obviously been a problem as well establishing a causal link between the vaccine itself and complications that arise following its administration simply because many of the committees that have been set up to examine the complications from vaccines have very strict protocols and it can be very difficult for parents to fit into that protocol and, therefore, have the side effects of the vaccine recognised as an actual vaccine reaction.

Vaccination is not as effective as it is purported to be. Vaccination has not always been found to prevent the disease for which it has been administered. For example, in the US in 1985, 80 per cent of those who had been vaccinated against measles contracted measles. In fact, recent outbreaks have occurred in 100 per cent vaccinated populations. A similar situation can be found for other diseases, namely diphtheria, pertussis and TB.

Vaccination can also lead to the occurrence of the disease in atypical age groups. We saw this with the measles epidemic where it was occurring in infants of less than one year, which is most unusual. The problem with that, particularly when it occurs in adolescents who would not normally contract measles, is that they are at higher risk of developing complications such as pneumonia and liver complications. i.e. an increased risk of 20 per cent.

We could also argue as a group that susceptibility to infectious diseases is perhaps multi-factorial and not solely dependent on vaccination status. For example, you or I could enter a room with somebody with the 'flu but not all of us would develop it - likewise with any of the infectious diseases. One has to stand back from that situation and ask what is the difference between you and I. Are our immune systems different or what are the other factors involved? Vaccination cannot always eliminate the disease. Critics would argue that many of these diseases were declining anyway prior to the onset of vaccination such as polio, diphtheria, measles, tetanus and pertussis. In fact, bubonic plague disappeared itself without any vaccination programme. Furthermore, decreases in the reported incidence of infectious diseases may not be representative of a relationship between vaccination and the disease itself. It has been argued by the critics that there may be underreporting of disease in the sense that if the medical profession feels we have achieved an 80 per cent to 90 per cent immunisation rate, they are possibly less likely to look at a child presenting with symptoms of pertussis as having pertussis because that child has been immunised. Diseases have been reclassified, such as polio and small pox. This can cause problems as well in terms of statistics and the analysis of pre-vaccination programmes with post vaccination programmes.

As regards alternatives to vaccination, homeopathy has been used widely in the past to treat epidemics. It can also be used post vaccine to treat vaccine reactions. In terms of health promotion practice in which the Government is involved, the promotion of things that are important to us as parents, such as breastfeeding and generalised health education, to build up the immune systems of the population generally and their nutritional levels will enable them to fight disease in a better way. In conclusion, I would like to draw the committee's attention to our recommendations which are very important. We feel very strongly that independently funded research should be undertaken which compares the health status of a controlled group of unvaccinated children with a study group of vaccinated children and that it should not be just left in the hands of large pharmaceutical companies. Independently funded research is extremely important. We would also like access to information that presents both sides of the debate. The McKenna judgment should apply in this instance so that parents feel they are informed and can make an informed choice. We would like continued support at governmental level for freedom of choice in relation to vaccination. As a group, we would hate to see what has happened in the United States with mandatory vaccination, happen in this country. We feel it is a parental decision as to whether or not to vaccinate. We would like to see a public debate where experts from the pro and anti-vaccination areas can present and debate their arguments so that parents can make an informed choice in relation whether to vaccinate.

Ms Twomey: Chairman and esteemed Members of the Dáil and Seanad, thank you for providing us with a platform through which we can express our findings and recommendations. As chairman of the Hope project, I am presenting myself as a campaigner and I campaign from the heart. I devote a lot of time to the research of autism and while I do not claim to be a medical expert, I am becoming an expert parent of an autistic child.

As the group devoted to the medical education and therapeutic research of autism, we are today representing the latest in medical findings by a worthy group of doctors and scientists from around the world. Some of them are not too far from here.

Since we were founded in 1996 we have been in contact with over 600 families, numerous professional and concerned parents. There is no doubt in our minds that there is a rapidly increasing number of autistic children in the country, which begs the question, what is causing the increase? Parents who are presented with the same problems continuously hint at a vaccine connection and their normally functioning child suddenly becomes derailed, usually before the age of two and generally following a vaccination. The stories are usually identical. The child had developed normally until then, sometimes displaying a propensity for upper respiratory tract infections, colic, hay fever, allergies, etc. After vaccination mild, moderate or even severe fever, lethargy and behavioural changes generally preceded the more noticeable long-term effects associated with autism.

The once well functioning child has now become alienated from his own family, withdraws from society and refuses to participate in normal childhood activities. Families that have spoken to us generally relate the same history of events. There can also be the onset of bowel problems as well as symptoms of a dysfunctioning immune system and a series of ear infections. Some parents have noticed that their children reacted badly to the earlier vaccinations, that is, the DPT, and that the latterly administered MMR vaccine ruined their child's health.

Parents who suspect that vaccination had a role to play in the onset of their child's autism find that their claims are falling on deaf ears and are told by the medical profession that bad reactions to the vaccine are limited to one in every 10,000. This is not true. I have personally been involved in a population based study in one suburb in Cork where the numbers of autistic children far exceeds these grossly falsified numbers. The numbers we have come up with are one in 394 in this area. There is a consensus based among the general population. The statistics we have come up with were 33 children in a population of 13,000. One of them was an adult, the rest were under five.

I cannot emphasise strongly enough the necessity of not only acknowledging the vaccine connection but of examining the role of its denial in the prevention of providing appropriate treatment for the children who have been damaged. The controversy surrounding vaccines and autism should not act as a deterrent in the process of providing adequate treatment for our autistic children. Instead, it should act as an alarm bell, beckoning immediate intervention and action provided by conscientious, good science.

After returning from a medical conference in Birmingham I am delighted to report that medical science is at last making startling new discoveries on the aetiology of autism. World renowned doctors and scientists are examining virgin territory and are coming up with startling results relating to autism as a medical disease linked to vaccines, not a psychological or psychiatric disease, as has been treated in the past. We are on the brink of discovering new treatments and it is only through the acknowledgement of the trigger of the disease that we can attempt to provide help and solutions for later therapy and treatment.

It must be stressed that these children are suffering from a medical condition. That includes bowel problems, immune defects and ongoing neurological damage. The origins of autism may be multi-factorial and they may include genetic susceptibility, which needs to be screened for, and dysfunctioning immunological and metabolic systems. Autism is now emerging as an auto-immune disease and many autistic children are now being diagnosed with a new variant of the bowel disease which manifests in the epithelium cells of the gut. My son Ciain is one of these children, who suffered not only from the cruel disability of autism but goes through bouts of painful spasm and suffering by his bowel condition. I want to work with this condition and normalise his life. This will not happen if he continues to suffer pain or neglect as a result of a vaccine related problem.

A common symbol for autism is one piece of the puzzle. Today's submission are a further piece. As it stands we have no hope of solving the mystery in Ireland as long as two trends continue. First, vaccination is continuously being protected from scrutiny or examination. Second, we continue to invest in psychology and psychiatry, not in the medical aspects of the disease. These children are medically sick.

This has obvious implications for all of our children. First, the refusal to acknowledge this connection jeopardises an already painful condition. Second, further vaccinations for autistic children and boosters for their siblings, to which they are contra-indicated, are detrimental to the families involved. The test of any vaccine is that it is of benefiting and even normalising autistic children. Thankfully, many doctors who work successfully with autistic children have listened to the parents and cared enough about the children and their plight to search endlessly, even though this endangers their personal and professional lives.

Researchers are discovering links between vaccines and autistic spectrum disorders. While vaccinations have helped eradicate certain diseases, they have caused side effects ranging from minor brain damage to more serious disorders and even death. Vaccinations do not limit themselves to causing noticeably severe side effects. Problems arise with the child who has suffered from a mild fever accompanied by even drowsiness or lethargy for a number of days. Not every child is a suitable candidate for vaccination. Some children suffer from immuno-deficient conditions where the onslaught of live viruses confuses an already dysfunctional immune system.

Not every drug is 100 per cent safe for 100 per cent of the population. Many drugs include little pamphlets or leaflets advising their users of the potential contra-indications and adverse affects. Why do we not know about the contra- indications of vaccines? Vaccines create a major insult to those who already may possess some form of an immuno-deficiency or who are unable to fight viruses successfully. Some children, perhaps through genetic predisposition, are unable to handle the insult to their systems provided by multiple vaccines. Recent findings indicate that autistic children may have a faulty mechanism in clearing viruses from their system. There are no long-term scientific studies following vaccination. I understand the maximum is three weeks. The Finland study, which goes a little beyond this, did not use the diagnosis of autism connected with the bowel disease.

In response to the outcry of parents, professionals and educators and concern with the increasing number of children with autism, the Californian legislature and two Governors of different political parties responded by mandating the first objective report on the increase in autism in California. This has given rise to Congressional hearings and the questioning of vaccine involvements. The body responds to the vaccine with an immune reaction that attacks its own components. Sometimes the immune reaction also attacks a constituent of the body itself. This could be the bowel or the brain. It bears a chemical resemblance to the constituents of the vaccine. Virus anti-body levels have been measured in autistic children. However, the majority of autistic children who have virus antibodies also had brain anti-bodies, anti-MBP. Injury following vaccination may not be immediate. Disorders involving damage to the exquisitely timed development of a young central nervous system may come to light weeks, months and even years later. Accompanying bowel disorders need to be acknowledged and treated. Parents do not invent disorders or their disease.

New findings need to be openly assessed and accepted. Japanese findings in 1993 resulted in the withdrawal of all forms of the MMR in favour of the monovalent form following reports that the adverse reactions were 78 times greater than those reported. Japanese policy changed previously MMR vaccine administrations to a monovalent needle vaccination as a result of these findings. Withdrawal of the rota virus vaccines followed as a result of deaths and bowel obstructions following immunisation.

Modern vaccine programmes seem to ignore the high potential for mutation of viruses. It was established in 1986 that a mixture of non-virulent viruses can produce a disease by means of complementation recombination. According to warnings issued by R.D. Laing in 1984, mass immunisation with several live virus vaccines might increase the possibility of genetic recombination and might result in a new disease. We can safely refer to autism here.

Almost any vaccine can lead to a non-infectious inflammatory reaction involving the central nervous system. The common denominator consists of a vascular condition that is often associated with immunisation.

Proponents of immuno-pathogenesis could account for a subset of autism similar to the above. One possible reason for a child's immune system being incapable of coping with the vaccine might be genetic deficiencies in protein manufacture necessary for normal immune reaction. Recently researchers at an Edinburgh university are claiming success with a new nasal spray vaccine being invented to prevent multiple sclerosis. They have realised that the injected vaccines caused problems, that they launched an attack and they are attempting to agitate the T cells not to set off inappropriate reactions. Thereby they are acknowledging there have been inappropriate reactions.

Recent research carried out by the FDA suggested less than satisfactory discoveries of the manufacturing standards of the flu vaccine at a location in Liverpool. To date Reid Warren, PHD, Utah State University and Sudhir Gupta, MD, immunologist at University of California at Ervine Medical School have come up with results indicating that 30 per cent to 45 per cent of children with autism have significant T cell abnormalities. They are not fighting it correctly. I will leave the committee to read the rest of my recommendations in the submission. I will pass on to Caroline.

Ms McCabe: Catherine Synnott sends her apologies to the Committee. She would have liked to have been here to day but her son is too ill. She has made two submissions which we have included in the documentation to you and she asked me to make a couple of main points for her. Vaccine safety and effectiveness is the great unproven hypothesis which no one seems to feel must be proved before more and earlier vaccines are injected into our population. I feel that the onus should be on those producing, promoting, profiting from and administering vaccines to prove that they do not cause harm rather than on parents to have to prove that they can and do. Not only have vaccines created autism in many children but the vaccine controversy I maintain has been instrumental in denying these same children the medical help they need once they are autistic.

Very few doctors seem willing to acknowledge the serious disease condition suffered by these autistic persons. There are no clinics for autistic persons as there are for asthmatics, diabetics, cystic fibrosis, AIDS, etc. I have reason to believe that the lack of expert medical care for autistic people goes beyond Department sluggishness and is based on an attitude of resistance by medical and Department of Health authorities to recognising autism as more than a psychological condition. To recognise autism as a medical condition is to beg the question of its medical origins. In Ireland there seems to be a resistance to admitting the staggering increase in the number of children succumbing to autism. Again an admission of autism epidemic begs an uncomfortable question of cause and demands positive action to stem the autism epidemic.

Autism is a particularly cruel disability because it handicaps people in the very areas that make life liveable like relationships, communication and imagination. It affects all five senses skewing sensory and motor massaging in a way that makes existence confusing, frightening and even painful. It sets the nervous system on high alert and anxiety and the immune system on constant overdrive. Autism is a relatively new disability. It has been rapidly increasing in the developing world. The increase in the occurrence of autism and other autistic spectrum disorders is such that it has been termed an epidemic in the US. A similar upward trend is being seen in Ireland.

Autism is disastrous for the individual, his or her family and for society. The known history of autism parallels the history of vaccination. Although there may be a genetic component in autism the autism epidemic cannot be explained by genetics. There is no such thing as a genetic epidemic. I maintain that we, as a society, are dabbling in the area of human sacrifice when we decide that it is all right to accept that a minority of persons can be sacrificed to suffer serious adverse reactions by death or lifelong mental and physical disability for the perceived good of the health of the majority.

I am very grateful to the committee for taking the time to investigate this situation and hope that we can get the necessary medical intervention in this country to save all these children from a life of pain and frustration. I believe that if we put in place all the medical, therapeutic and educational interventions that are required Ireland could become a world leader in defeating this terrible diseases that is devastating our children, families and society.

Ms Cecilia Young: Ladies and Gentlemen, Members of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Health and Children, my name is Cecilia Young and I am joined here today by Rosemary Kessick, chief executive officer of the UK registered charity, AIA, Allergy Induced Autism to talk about our experiences in Ireland.

AIA understands that vaccines have saved millions of lives worldwide and fully endorses the use of safe, effective vaccines to ensure the continuing health of the world's children. AIA's remit is to support medical research into the causes of autism and to disseminate pertinent information to parents, carers and professionals. Under this remit AIA has held major seminars in Ireland bringing doctors and scientists together in both Dublin and Cork to speak publicly about their research.

For those parents who may be unfamiliar with autism, it is important for us to define and clarify the nature of the condition. Autism is an end product, a collection of symptoms, and may be arrived at by many routes. Readily accessible medical literature established the association with autism of a number of metabolic and genetic disorders as well as viral, bacterial and parasitic links. Rubella, Mumps and Chicken Pox are listed among the associations.

A number of workers throughout the world are researching a potential genetic component. Looked at in the light of what is already known about the multifactorial nature of autistic spectrum disorders it does not come as a surprise that Dr. Ed Cook, head of the autism unit at the University of Chicago, recently estimated, following detailed literature research, that current genetic research only accounts for at best 20 per cent of the autistic population. Given these numerous associations it seems unlikely that any one genetic condition will be discovered which will account for the remaining 80 per cent.

Considering the comparative rarity of these disorders already documented as having an association with autism it is not surprising that worldwide incidence figures quoted more than ten years ago were usually in the region of between one to five per 10,000 people. Based on a study by Judith Gould, the National Autistic Society in the UK was beginning to publicise the incidence of autistic spectrum disorders as 91 in 10,000 as far back as 1997 where the autistic spectrum was taken as autism and Aspergers Syndrome.

Recent audits by independent researchers in the UK have found an alarming incidence of autism, In 1999 in one UK health trust area alone one baby boy in every 69 under the age of three was diagnosed with autism. One west Yorkshire local education authority was supporting five autistic children in 1992. By 1999 that figure had risen to 111. These rising numbers are being echoed in Europe and throughout the USA.

AIA is deeply concerned by these figures. It is impossible to quantify the range and terms of relative seriousness as each child is disabled and many, if not most, will require some degree of help for life. AIA is aware that these figures are just not available in Ireland and calls for a full audit. This should encompass children already diagnosed with an autistic spectrum disorder in addition to those referred for aggression and failure to develop. Figures should be sought from both the health and education boards throughout Ireland. The worrying question is: can Ireland sustain the financial burden of the projected cost should we have the same numbers here?

AIA supports work done on dietary intervention and autism and deals on a day to day basis with parents and professionals who have made a choice to implement dietary intervention based on scientific evidence so far. Work initiated by Pankep in the USA and continued by Reichlt in Norway and more recently, Shattock and Friedman USA identified that autistic subjects are not breaking down casein and gluten in the body. The resulting substances are opiate peptide compounds. Opiate peptides derived from gluten caesin are traceable in urine and when these substances are eliminated from the diet the peptides disappear and discernible improvement can be noted in behaviours, ability to learn and speed patters.

A five year study by Niceberg in Norway quantified improvement and also regression in cases where refraction of the diet occurred. AIA's experience is that when dietary intervention is implemented great improvement in the condition can occur and in general the younger the child on implementation the better the result. Many Irish children are being helped through dietary intervention. The cost of gluten free and casein free food is great but nothing like the cost of the long-term support for a seriously disabled person.

A second area of focus is that of the sulphation mechanism in the body which was first shown to be faulty in autistic children by Dr. Rosemary Warring, reader on human toxicology at Birmingham University. This important system is responsible for the detoxification of anolic compounds, the condunion of drugs and the cleaning up and disposal of used neuro transmitters and also the turnover of nucrose in the body. The enzyme responsible has been shown to be inhibited by pyshco-coins both in the test tube and human subjects. Psycho-coins are released by the immune system in inflammatory conditions.

As a result of sulphation inhibition, individuals display varying degrees of tolerance to other foods and environmental allergens. Studies replicated worldwide on autistic subjects have consistently identified abnormal gut permeability which relies on sulphation for its integrity.

AIA is contacted daily by parents and carers of autistic children throughout Ireland and the UK greatly concerned about physical symptoms such as constipation, diarrhoea, bloating and self-limiting of the diet, symptoms largely ignored by those professionals charged with diagnosis. Investigations by paediatric gastroenterology teams worldwide have identified acute and chronic inflammatory bowel disease in autistic spectrum disorder children. These children are often unable to verbalise and can only indicate their pain by headbanging, screaming, tearing at their hair and a number of other behaviours. Standard treatment for inflammatory bowel disease and associated constipation alleviates the pain and many of these behaviours improve.

Many parents tell us that their child was developing normally and reaching all his or her milestones before he or she received the vaccination. More often than not, they told us that they believe the MMR to be the suspect culprit. They tell us that their baby was no different to any of their other children until he or she received the combined measles, mumps and rubella vaccination. Frequently, there is a strong family history of auto-immune disease and allergy.

AIA is always careful not to suggest any association. As a charity, AIA's concern is to identify the cause and treat the effect with the health of the individual of paramount importance. AIA does not deal in scaremongering but, based on experience, we believe that many Irish children are being unnecessarily damaged by the use of this poorly tested triple vaccine.

The evidence is stacking up. An eminent professor at one of the world's greatest seats of medicine, the Coombe Women's Hospital in Dublin, has identified measles RNA signals in the gut biopsy samples of children who have never been exposed to natural measles. In many of the cases, the parents and GPs suspected the MMR vaccination as being responsible for the autism and bowel disease. The doctor in question, Professor John O'Leary, was invited to give evidence earlier in the year at a US Government hearing. We understand that both he and Dr. Wakefield from the Royal Free Hospital medical school in London will be giving evidence to the committee on a date before Christmas and consider it of utmost importance that all the committee members hear their evidence first hand.

The physical difficulties and intense pain suffered by these children are as real as they are dreadful and should be investigated from a medical viewpoint in the first instance. Unfortunately, AIA's experience is that many ASD sufferers, especially but not exclusively the non-verbal, are not receiving the medical treatment necessary to manage their condition. The evidence is mounting.

We at AIA implore Committee Members to put on hold the use of the MMR vaccine in Ireland and return to offering single vaccines until sufficient scientific investigation has proven why these children are being so radically affected by this combination vaccine. It is not if they are being affected but why. The Committee should not commission endless searches of children's records to see if a connection can be ruled out. Children are being struck down every single day. We are in the midst of a national disaster.

The Department of Education and Science is investing millions in provision for autistic children in first level schools. There are comparatively few autistic children in second level education. What does this imply? We in Ireland cannot and must not stand by and leave the science and decisions to other nations of the world before we make up our minds. Let us learn a lesson from the recent British BSE inquiry recommendation that Governments listen to the scientists and act on their recommendations.

As the MMR controversy is fought out in the world battlefield, I hope and pray that my country will emerge as the hero and not as a villain. Too many children are at risk. The association is already known. Even the vaccine manufacturer's literature cites the possible contra-indications of the vaccine. This literature is never shown to parents to enable them make an informed choice. It matters not what we call the condition, autism, Heller's syndrome, PDD, simple vaccine damage or whatever. It is happening to our children today and every day and my child was one of them.

On behalf of AIA and the children of Ireland, we respectfully request that committee members halt the MMR programme with immediate effect, offer single component vaccines as an alternative, identify the numbers affected, instigate mandatory yellow card reporting on suspicion of vaccine reaction, fund appropriate research with a focus on gastroenterology, immunology and biochemistry to identify risk factors and potential predisposition, fund basic gluten and casein free products and appropriate supplements for affected individuals, actively encourage early diagnosis and dietary intervention in affected cases and instigate a training programme for dietitians and paediatricians. AIA will be pleased to offer any assistance which the committee feels may be appropriate. I thank committee members for their time.

Chairman: I thank Ms Young. We now have Mr. Shane Russell from the Concerned Parents' Group.

Mr. Russell: From the point of view of the presentation, I will make the introduction and list the summary of our recommendations which we would like the Committee to examine. Ms Lorna McCarthy will look at our concerns.

I thank the Chairman and Committee Members for inviting us to address them on our concerns regarding the complex issue and subject of child vaccination. We are a small group of concerned parents based in Cork who meet every two to three months to consider issues and developments relating to vaccinations. Our sources of information include GPs, newspaper articles, books, the Internet and relevant lectures on the subject. Unfortunately arising from this information, we are often left confused and very concerned about the conflicting evidence and reports available. We are not anti-vaccination per se, some of our group have had their children vaccinated, but we are pro-information.

We welcome greatly the initiative taken by the Government in establishing this Oireachtas Joint Committee to consider the issue of child vaccination. We all have a shared goal, and that is the good health and well-being of our children. We take this opportunity to share these concerns with the committee and I now hand over to Ms McCarthy.

Ms McCarthy: Our first concern is the MMR vaccine. There are people in this country who believe that their children have been damaged by the MMR vaccine, many of them claiming a link between vaccination and autism or Crohn's disease. This link is being refuted by many in the medical profession who say that international studies in England, Sweden and Finland indicate no such link.

However, in April 2000, the Irish Examiner newspaper reported that Professor John O'Leary of Dublin's Coombe Women's Hospital and Dr. Andrew Wakefield of London's Royal Free Hospital conducted a study of children who developed the chronic brain condition after an apparently healthy infancy and found that 24 out of 25 had the measles virus in their gut. They said the virus could have come from the MMR jab. This report was presented to the US Congress as part of a debate on autism. Obviously this latest research leaves open the possibility of a link.

In the UK, 2,000 parents are fighting for compensation for children who they believe have been damaged by the MMR vaccine. On 29 August 2000, The Independent stated:

The most telling fact used to promote suspicion of MMR is that it is banned in Japan.

Recently the Department of Health and Children launched a national vaccination campaign to combat the group C strain of meningitis which accounts for one third of infections. This vaccination programme got under way in Britain last year and, according to the Minister, Deputy Martin, it has already resulted in a 75 per cent decrease in the number of group C cases.

However, we are concerned about the 16,000 adverse reactions, including severe headaches, fits and blackouts, reported in the UK. This is apparently a much larger incidence of adverse reaction than has been reported with other vaccines. Among these reactions were 11 deaths. The UK Committee on Safety of Medicines refuted any links between the deaths and the new vaccine. Of the 11 deaths, two were among cases who had existing heart conditions, six were due to sudden infant death syndrome, one from a convulsion ten days after the vaccination and two of septicaemia meningococcal group B meningitis.

These deaths are of concern to us because of past reported links between vaccinations and cot deaths, although we understand that the Ireland Sudden Infant Death Association disagrees with such a link. We are also concerned about reports suggesting that research in America has found grounds to suggest that the vaccine encourages a new variant meningitis strain to form. A three year study is under way in Oxford to assess the risk of the anti-meningitis C vaccine promoting the emergence of the B strain.

Before I move on to the remainder of our concerns, for the purpose of my oral presentation, I will not include all the extracts taken from the newspapers which are included in our written submission. This is in the interest of saving time.

Regarding the medical profession debate, in recent times the Association for General Practitioners has voiced a number of concerns regarding vaccinations and the Department of Health and Children's campaign on same. We refer in particular to an Irish Examiner newspaper article on 27 August 1999 and the following are excerpts from that report:

The Government has a legal obligation to provide information to holiday makers and parents of babies about the side effects of vaccines so they are aware of the potential hazards, the Association said.....The Association also called on the Government to separate immunisation programmes such as the MMR vaccination into separate vaccines in the light of recent health scares, which linked the combination of vaccines to Crohn's disease.....The Department of Health and Children rubbished suggestions that patients were in danger from the vaccine's side-effects. "The safety of all vaccines is ensured through the Irish Medicines Board along with international medical advice. Our policy is that the benefits of vaccines far outweigh any possible risks," a department spokesman said.

The safety of all vaccines is ensured through the Irish Medicines Board along with international medical advice. Our policy is that the benefits of vaccines far outweigh any possible risks,' a Department spokesman said."

Obviously such conflicting messages from the parties involved is cause for much concern. Also, in an article in the Sunday Independent of 22 October 2000, Patricia Redlich referred to Dr. Mary Grehan, PRO for the Association of General Practitioners, who had spoken on the previous Wednesday on "Today with Pat Kenny". These are excerpts from that article:

She wanted the Department of Health to provide the public with information on possible difficulties associated with vaccines. . . the doctors are also concerned because the legal advice is that they carry the can, both professionally and financially, if something goes wrong with a patient after vaccination. The Department, it seems, accepts no liability.

Again, we feel this is cause for concern.

In recent years there have been reports highlighting increases in chronic illnesses including autism, diabetes, asthma and multiple sclerosis. Regarding autism, as previously stated, there are ongoing debates about the possibility of a link between vaccines and autism. A link between vaccines and diabetes was suggested in a study by doctors who the effect of haemophilis influenza type-E vaccine, a flu vaccine which is considered to reduce the risk of complications such as meningitis on approximately 116,000 Finnish children. The Sunday Independent of 24 January 1999 stated that the study data found that immunisation starting after the age of two months is associated with an increased risk of diabetes. This data, the authors argued, is supported by a similar rise in diabetes after immunisation with the same vaccine in the US and the UK. Also, in a letter to The Irish Examiner on 22 September 1999, this was stated:

Last October France became the first country to stop hepatitis B jabs for schoolchildren after numerous reports of arthritis and multiple sclerosis-like symptoms in vaccinated children. Attorneys representing over 15,000 French citrizens are now suing the Government health officials for understating the vaccine's risk and exaggerating its benefits.

While recognising that this vaccine is not part of a general immunisation schedule for children, there are some in the community who have received the hepatitis B vaccine. The possibility of such links between vaccines and such illnesses raise concerns about the possible long term effects of vaccinations.

When we look at the listing of vaccine ingredients we note that they include the likes of formaldehyde, which is a disinfectant. In an article already referred to in the Sunday Independent of 22 October 2000 it was stated:

Dr. Grehan also points out that by the time babies are 12 months old, their vulnerable immune systems have been subjected to a battery of vaccinations, thirteen vaccination occasions for eight different diseases. Babies' immature immune systems are already bombarded.

An article in The Irish Examiner dated 27 October 2000 by Katie Hannon stated:

Nine different vaccines administered by GPs in Ireland are made at a plant with a history of poor production safety standards. The Irish Medicines Board confirmed that it has licensed nine separate vaccines made by Medeva, which is the company behind the oral polio vaccine that had to be recalled last week when it emerged material from cows which could have been contaminated with BSE was used in the production process.

Later the article stated:

A week-long inspection of the plant into the production of the flu vaccine, Fluviron, by the FDA found that Medeva plant had failed to clean, maintain and sanitise equipment at the appropriate intervals to prevent contamination. It also found that they had failed to maintain systems to prevent unacceptable levels of toxins and bacteria contaminating the production process. Contamination could cause serious adverse reactions to vaccines.

This up-to-date information is of concern, particularly in light of the Kenneth Best case in Ireland. His family won a Supreme Court case in 1992 and were awarded £2.75 million against a manufacturer of the three-in-one vaccine. The Best case hinged on the fact that records showed he was vaccinated from a toxic batch of vaccine, eight times more potent than it should have been, highly toxic for an infant.

We understand from our reading of the immunisation guidelines for Ireland that all suspected adverse reactions and quality defects should be reported to the IMB and we welcome this but we feel that the area of vaccination research, recording and monitoring needs to be more extensively undertaken and made more public.

I referred to many newspaper articles and we have photocopied such articles from July 1997 up to the current date. We have two copies of this on hand.

Mr. Russell: This is how we feel our concerns should be addressed. There should be a balanced public debate. As concerned parents we would feel a lot more confident regarding vaccination if all the facts and up to date information were made public. There should be a more balanced advertising and information campaign from the Department of Health and Children to highlight the risks and benefits of vaccines. There should be proper and complete records. We would like to feel assured that we have all the information regarding vaccines - batch numbers, lot numbers and so on - in the event of something going wrong. Perhaps a receipt-type document signed by the GP administering the vaccine could be considered.

We would like to be informed of all international research carried out and would welcome more extensive independent research in Ireland on existing and new vaccines, such as meningitis C. We would also like research carried out on unvaccinated children, to compare immune system status. We would welcome a screening of children's immune systems to establish if acquired immunity exists or whether prior conditions exist which preclude a child from vaccination. A vaccine damage payments scheme has been in place in England since 1979 and since its inception the UK scheme has had over 4,000 claims made against it. Of these 416 received payment immediately while 482 received payments on appeal. Recently, after a two-year review, the scheme was overhauled and £60 million was set aside to be made in payments. A similar scheme, the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Programme operates in America and we would like to see a vaccine damage compensation fund similar to these operated in Ireland.

We would like a broader approach to health matters. In addition to a vaccination policy, to help prevent serious illnesses we would welcome investment in other areas to encourage healthy lifestyles - for example, nutrition and nutritional supplements, advertising the benefits of breastfeeding, possibly introducing a policy in national schools of no junk food in lunchboxes, investigating the possible benefits of alternative treatments such as homeopathy, herbalism, acupuncture and so on, improved health and physical education, exercise and relaxation. We would like to be offered the choice of single vaccinations as opposed to multiple injections.

As concerned parents, we seek to be consulted and treated as full partners with Government and health officials on any of the recommendations to come from this committee and to have the final say as the primary child carer in the decision of vaccination and any other health matters concerning our children.

Chairman: To clarify, this Committee was set up as independent of Government, the Minister and the Department of Health and Children. The initiative to inquire into these matters was taken by the Members of the Committee and not the Department. It is important to stress that.

Mr. McCaffrey: On behalf of the Informed Immunization Network I thank the Committee for giving us the chance to make this submission.

The network was established in 1997 as a non-profit making organisation by a group of parents extremely concerned by the risks of vaccinations. The IIN was established to provide vaccination information and support to parents, prospective parents and other concerned parties regardless of the decisions they make. Regarding the vaccination of children it is recognised that the decision to vaccinate a child or not is the sole responsibility of parents or guardians. IIN promotes awareness and understanding about vaccinations in order to provide the freedom of an informed choice. The current information available from the Department is all pro-vaccination. Risks or adverse reactions are simply dismissed out of hand with standard statements that on balance, the risk associated with the vaccine is less than the risk associated with the disease. The decision of our members not to vaccinate is an informed one based on published medical facts and not on forgetfulness, apathy or mistaken beliefs.

The current childhood vaccination programme for Ireland means that most children will received 27 vaccinations before starting school, 26 if in County Cork, as BCG is not given there. If one lives in north County Dublin one's child receives 32 vaccines due to an extra MMR jab due to the recent measles epidemic and the introduction of the new meningitis C vaccine.

If one lives in north County Dublin, one's baby will receive 32 vaccines due to an extra MMR jab, because of the recent measles epidemic, and the introduction of the new meningitis C vaccine. It is disturbing that no study of the long-term effects has been carried out on the interaction of multiple vaccines on children's immune systems and their long-term general health.

Why continue with BCG vaccinations for the majority of babies when, in County Cork, the disease declined in the absence of vaccination and, despite a recent small outbreak, the health board defended its non-vaccination policy? In the UK, BCG is not given until 13 years of age and the US has never included it as part of its childhood vaccination policy, yet the decline of the disease is the same in all three countries. The only long-term studies carried out were in India which discovered a higher incidence of the disease in the vaccinated compared with the unvaccinated.

We are no strangers to the damage the DPT vaccine can cause. After a 20-year battle, Kenneth Best won compensation of £2.75 million after being brained damaged by a toxic vaccine administered in the early 1970s. Revelations in the media confirmed a further 243 children received the toxic DPT vaccine. More disturbing is the fact that it has been estimated that up to 4 million doses of the vaccine were manufactured for use in Europe which failed two safety tests but was still released for use. The vaccine was distributed around this country in small lots and the full extent of the actual number of children given the vaccine may never be known because records have been lost or destroyed. A recent report by the chief medical officer adds further controversy where it is suspected that vaccine trials using a new DTP vaccine were carried out on children in care during the 1960s and 1970s, without consent being obtained.

Despite having mandatory vaccinations and achieving almost 100 per cent uptake, the incidence of pertussis in the USA is on the increase, according to figures released for 1999. More disturbing is the research carried out by Dr. Viera Scheibner linking the DPT vaccine with SIDS, or cot death syndrome. It is worth noting that the western country with one of the highest incidents of SIDS is the USA, which has mandatory vaccinations, while Japan, having raised the age of vaccination to two years, has virtually eliminated cot deaths since 1975 by not vaccinating babies.

With more and more evidence being published suggesting a link between the MMR vaccine and autism it seems incredible that the option of having the vaccines given individually has not been made available. Where doubt exists over safety, the precautionary principle argues that the benefit of doubt should be given to those at risk, namely, our children. This argument has already been made by the Association of Family General Practitioners when it called on the IMO to introduce individual vaccines earlier this year. In answer to this controversy, the official line has been to state that the current scientific evidence does not support the hypothesis that the MMR vaccine causes autism.

Bearing in mind that the longest study undertaken on MMR only lasted three weeks it is not surprising there is a lack of evidence. Remember a lack of evidence means there is no evidence to prove that the vaccine does not cause autism. The studies carried out in the UK, claiming proof that no link exists between MMR and autism, were seriously undermined at the US congressional hearing last April. Even more worrying was the refusal by the UK Department of Health to hand over the raw data upon which these studies were based so it can be independently analysed. The same Department refused to contribute to a debate on BBC Radio 4 in August of this year because it did not agree with the format and the selected panel of experts and said it would not discuss vaccination with ordinary people.

The fact that the MMR vaccine is the only way to avail of a vaccine for measles, mumps or rubella takes no account of children who have already contracted one or more of these diseases. So those children who have contracted measles during the current epidemic will be given MMR to protect them against mumps and rubella, but have to run the risk of damage from the measles vaccine which affords absolutely no benefit to the recipient who now has a lifetime natural immunity from the disease.

The World Health Organisation states that MMR is the safest vaccine ever, yet the incidence of autism in the West is reaching epidemic proportions. In the USA the incidence of autism has gone from 1/10,000 to 1/500 in some states.

Japan withdrew the MMR vaccination in April 1993, four years after its introduction, due to the large number of incidents of aseptic meningitis in the vaccinated. Japan still has no plans to introduce MMR but offers its citizens individual vaccines instead and leads the world with the lowest rate of infant mortality.

The recent measles epidemic as reported in EPI-Insight, published by the National Disease Surveillance Centre, reported that 12 per cent of cases were vaccinated against the disease, suggesting 88 per cent were unvaccinated. However, the Northern Area Health Board issued details that 12 per cent were vaccinated, 61 per cent unvaccinated and 27 per cent unknown. Why 27 per cent unknown? They were either vaccinated or unvaccinated. Could it be that these children were recently vaccinated according to their parents, but could not be confirmed as records had not been processed yet? If the two reported deaths are measles-related, then some serious questions need answering.

Before vaccination was introduced the death rate was approximately 1/5,000. If the two deaths are confirmed, the death rate is now about 1/500. What have we done to make measles a more dangerous disease compared with the pre-vaccination era? Does this mean children in the 1950s were healthier than children of the new millennium?

In the USA, since the early 1970s, all cases of polio have been caused by the vaccine. The USA is now stopping the oral live polio vaccine for the injected killed polio vaccine in a bid to stop polio cases. One could argue, as the disease was dying out anyway, by stopping polio vaccination we could eradicate the disease.

It has been long argued that we a need a 90 per cent uptake of the vaccine to stop an epidemic and a 95 per cent or higher uptake to eradicate the disease. However, despite never achieving these targets, there has been no epidemic. Even in 1993, the uptake rate was as low as 57 per cent, well below natural herd immunity which is 68 per cent. A 68 per cent immunity to disease is required in the animal kingdom to stop an epidemic occurring in any group or herd of animals.

The danger now from polio is from the vaccine, particularly from changing babies' nappies, as the virus is secreted in the faeces for up to six weeks after administration, which puts a susceptible person at serious risk. Further controversy caused by the recent withdrawal of the Medeva oral polio vaccine and criticism by the FDA of its UK plant only confirms our fears that vaccines are far from safe.

The new meningitis C vaccine has been introduced this year. The promotion of this vaccine has been based on the success in the UK in combating this disease. However, little is being said about the adverse reactions. There are currently two manufacturers - Chiron and Wyeths. Chiron's vaccine seems to produce more adverse reactions compared with Wyeths' even though both should be the identical. With the follow up on selected children receiving the vaccine lasting only 28 days, how will they ever know the long-term effects on the health of these children? Most disturbing is the fact that there have been 12 suspicious deaths the UK so far related to the new meningitis C vaccine which have been discounted out of hand by the UK authorities.

In Ireland we have the highest rate of meningitis in Europe. The B strain is on the increase and accounts for 55 per cent of cases. The C strain is on the decrease, accounting for approximately 26 per cent of cases. Doctors in the UK have warned that tackling the C strain may result in the B strain increasing and also that it is not unusual for the disease to change from one strain to another. Do we conclude that the number of meningitis cases may remain the same but the diagnosis will favour the B strain?

Mr. Halliday: When I thought about the proceedings today, one thing which was self-evident is that the Committee is the gatekeeper of this information. I compliment the groups in showing the Committee how much more knowledge exists on vaccination and I apologise if some of it is not included in the written submission.

When I teach I use a phrase from the philosopher Erasmus who said, "By identifying new learning with heresy, you make orthodoxy synonymous with ignorance". Much information is now coming to light. Five hundred years ago the astronomer Copernicus was confronted with vast amounts of information which seemed rock solid. However, he discovered a different way of looking at the world and that the Sun, not the Earth, was the centre of the Universe.

The same thing is happening with vaccination. Scarlet fever is not one of the infectious diseases against which we vaccinate, yet its effects are as disastrous as those diseases we vaccinate against.

There is no campaign in the world to vaccinate against scarlet fever and yet the outcomes of scarlet fever are just as disastrous. It raises a big issue about vaccination and what it does. The same is true of the black death, which illustrates the same situation about what vaccination does. I will not regurgitate the wonderful information all these wonderful people have spent many hours researching. It is so pleasing to see the same information is being produced.

How does one go about the process of seeing what the information means? We have done some major thinking on this and have come up with some straightforward points, namely, to set up a long term study to compare the health of vaccinated children with that of unvaccinated children, independently managed and assessed. This would give a straight analysis of the processes. This is the first rung on the ladder for setting up a public forum to debate vaccination. The remaining points are: Government Departments providing information on vaccination should be obliged by law to give full and accurate details of risks, side affects and adverse reactions and the establishment of a vaccine damage compensation scheme. Vaccination should remain a free choice and in the case of children remain the sole responsibility of parents or guardians.

I do not want to go further except to say I do not know where this information will go from here except that members, as gatekeepers, take it on. It is of Copernicum type proportions. There is so much information to be studied it is impossible for the members to study it now. It takes weeks to delve through the information. Instead of allowing the situation to perpetuate for almost 100 years as when Copernicus was alive - he had to fight for what he believed in which was eventually shown true - things should move quicker.

Chairman: I thank all of you for your presentations and for sharing with us the very valuable experiences gained and research undertaken to date. We are glad you came before the Committee and that you had an opportunity to present your case. Some Members wish to ask questions. I wish to clarify two things. Arising from what has been said, is it a fact of life that there is no database available in Ireland on autism, the age groups affected, etc.? Is that the experience in other countries?

Ms Kessick: The only database we know about is in the state of California, which has excellent data on disabilities over the past 20 years. They were the first to show the increase.

Chairman: Much emphasis was put on autism being a disease and being viewed as such. What is the medical opinion in this regard? It was said it is being treated as something psychological. Has it been accepted as a disease anywhere in the medical profession?

Ms Kessick: One of the problems with autism is that there are a number of conditions which can lead to it. It has been a collection of symptoms, but it was officially identified for the first time as being a condition or a set of symptoms by a number of doctors whose specialisms were psychological. Historically it has remained within the remit of psychologists and psychiatrists. Unfortunately for the children concerned, none of the medical sides of their difficulties have been taken into account as at GP level they are being passed on to psychiatrists. They are falling between two stools.

Ms McCabe: In my personal experience I have tried to get help for my son on a medical basis, including dietary intervention, etc., and we were sent down the psychiatric/psychological route, which is what is available in Ireland. When I went to other countries I got a phenomenal increase in my son's development and recovery, mainly due to interventions in South Africa and the USA where they are successfully doing this. I have spoken with parents who started a couple of years before me who have totally recovered children. My son is well on the way, but I was two years later starting because the information or treatment is not available here to newly diagnosed children.

Chairman: What treatment?

Ms McCabe: Specific medical treatment.

Chairman: Is it possible to get a single vaccination in Ireland?

Ms Young: It is up to the doctors. It can be received if doctors prescribe it, but I think many doctors have gone down the road of the three-in-one, which is less traumatic for the child. As was pointed out earlier, those who have natural immunity to measles are a cause for concern. They need to be protected against two other diseases, but they are being revaccinated against measles and one wonders what will happen their immune system. This is a worry as we do not know what will happen. In a few years another group could be appearing before a committee outlining what happened.

Ms Kessick: The single vaccination is available. Several years ago a couple of drug companies did say they were awaiting an instruction to produce the single vaccine. It is still available, including in the UK, but is not widely advertised. If a GP writes "medically indicated" on the prescription and a copy is sent to the sole importers, then any child can have the one vaccine. In our country GPs are paid a bonus if they reach a certain percentage of triple vaccine for children and I wonder if that exists in Ireland.

Chairman: I do not think so.

Deputy: ? Yes, it is the same here.

Ms Kessick: In our country it is not in the interest of the GP to allow children have the single vaccine for which they will take sole responsibility as opposed to the Government dictated triple vaccine for which they will get a bonus.

Chairman: Can somebody tell us about the bonus which is offered? We are talking about the enlightened investigation which has taken place. We would term the medical profession and those involved in the health services in general to be the enlightened. Every one of their submissions, by and large, have been very positively disposed to MMR. Why do you believe this is so? Why are they so well disposed to MMR testing? The very first statement of the IMO, which represents 5,000, is a positive recommendation regarding the MMR vaccine.

Ms Young: Can I answer that? With no disrespect to any other children, that happened because the children were not brought into hospital within 60 hours of vaccination. The children would have been screaming high pitched, blood curdling screams and would have lapsed into unconsciousness. It is very easy for people to sit back and say children should be immunised when they have not undergone this experience themselves. I am pro-vaccine but we must be very mindful of the potential dangers involved. One of my other children has been vaccinated against DPT, hib and polio but I am too scared to avail of the MMR vaccine.

Ms Howlin: Some doctors tend to be swayed by the research produced by the large pharmaceutical companies because some of the other evidence tends to be produced in smaller, lower funded studies. In some instances, the evidence is based on the observations of the physicians involved which, to some extent, is anecdotal evidence. From a research point of view, that may not be deemed sufficient to sway the argument against vaccination. Perhaps if further independent research were undertaken, the medical profession would be prepared to re-examine the situation.

Mr. McCaffrey: The research we have done shows that the longest study into the MMR vaccine was carried out over a three week period. If one wants to discover the long-term effects of a vaccine, a study must be carried out for a longer period than that. A three week study is hardly scientific.

The MMR vaccine was withdrawn in 1992-3 in the UK due to the high incidence of aseptic meningitis and was replaced by a vaccine which was deemed to be safer. In 1997, Brazil opted for a mass immunisation programme with some 600,000 children to be vaccinated over a number of weeks. Some 40 per cent were vaccinated on the first day. The vaccinations resulted in a huge incidence of aseptic meningitis and it was discovered that the MMR vaccine being used was identical to that which was withdrawn from the UK in 1992-3. In spite of having been aware of the problems experienced in Japan and the UK, the Brazilian authorities decided on balance - probably bank balance - that the vaccine should be used. The argument was, as a doctor had expressed the view on BBC radio, that aseptic meningitis does not normally result in death. The Brazilian hospitals dealing with infectious diseases, particularly meningitis, were overrun with wall to wall cases of aseptic meningitis.

American Paediatrics carried a report earlier this year on the matter. The authors tried to be absolutely categorical about the incidence of aseptic meningitis in Brazil. They discounted anybody who previously had meningitis because there would be antibodies in their system but, in spite of discounting such people, they were not in any doubt that the vaccine has caused the problems. They concluded that the adverse reactions involved in any mass immunisation programme, such as the one carried out in Brazil, could be plainly identified. As we are vaccinating smaller groups of people in this country, it is easier to discount adverse reactions. The American Paediatrics report did not make reference to the fact that the vaccine used in Brazil had actually been banned in the UK.

Deputy Gormley: I thank the members of the delegations for their excellent and persuasive presentations. I have had very serious doubts about the MMR vaccine for a number of years. Would the members of the delegation agree that their strong views on this subject have been systematically censored as they have not been heard in public? Do they agree that the medical establishment has almost branded parents who choose not to vaccinate as irresponsible? Are they aware that the IMO has put forward a proposal to the effect that children who are not vaccinated should not be allowed to attend school and, if so, do they agree that this is a gross infringement of people's civil liberties? How does the pharmaceutical industry benefit from vaccination programmes? I have tabled parliamentary questions on this matter but the replies I received were not as comprehensive as I would have wished. Is it your view that we should now follow the Japanese example and discontinue the MMR vaccine immediately? Can you explain how the screening process would work in terms of immuno-deficiencies and genetic predispositions? How, in your opinion, should the State compensate people who have been affected by the MMR vaccine?

Deputy Bradford: I welcome the members of the delegations and thank them for their contributions. Deputy Gormley has covered most of the issues of concern. Mr. Halliday made a very valid point when he stated that the volume of information on this issue was difficult to assimilate.

I was particularly struck by the Japanese experience. Did that result from a particular public policy decision or did it arise from research findings? Unfortunately, I cannot wait to hear the reply as I am due to speak in the Dáil in the next few minutes but I am sure my colleagues will pass it on to me.

Ms McCarthy: I want to quote from an article published in a national newspaper - I believe it was The Examiner - on 24 April 1998:

Doctors participating in the primary childhood immunisation programme are paid £15.61 for each child registered for immunisation services and a fee of £52.03 per child is payable in respect of the administration of a complete course of immunisation - DPT, DDT, hib, polio and MMR. If a doctor achieves a 95 per cent uptake level within his cohort of children, a bonus payment of £15.61 per child is made.

Deputy Gormley: What about payments to the pharmaceutical industry?

Ms Kessick: I do not think anyone would have that information to hand but we could forward it to the Deputy.

Chairman: We would be obliged if you could do that as soon as possible because members of the medical profession are due to attend our next meeting.

Ms Kessick: I learned of a case only last night which might put this issue into perspective. In the state of Louisiana in the US, a group of parents lobbied to ensure that it would not be mandatory for parents to vaccinate their children. In fact, some political lobbyists worked on the group's behalf free of charge. The father - a lawyer by profession - of a seriously vaccine damaged child explained that the group saw a sea of money across the floor on day five of the lobbying process.

On day five they suddenly saw a sea of money across the floor. The various companies were paying $50,000 for each of ten political lobbyists. They lost the vote by three. That was a parent group. That was just to stop the parents having free choice as to whether they could vaccinate. That was nothing to the sort of money we are talking about.

Chairman: We will have to make a declaration here that we have not been asked to act as lobbyists.

Ms McCabe: On the issue of checking for the immune system of a child, a doctor who has been working with my son in the United States told me that, because of mandatory vaccination, the basis of litigation among his clients is that it is the constitutional right of the child to have the immune system checked before vaccination. This is not being done and this will be the basis for the litigation cases against the Government. I asked him what was involved and he said a very simple blood test. The thing is to have the correct assay and the correct equipment. I had the same tests done in Ireland and the United States and I got two separate answers.

Deputy Gormley: Would that check also for genetic predisposition?

Ms McCabe: No, it would check the immune function of the child at that time. There would then be a list of criteria with regard to family history that would have to be checked. A screening programme would be required.

Ms Kessick: One of the problems with that at the moment is that as part of a screening programme one is looking for antibodies to specific viruses and bacteria. The longer the vaccination programme goes on, the less frequently the child is likely to be exposed to a virus or bacteria, so they will not actually develop the antibodies. We are in a catch 22 situation of which we must be aware. We must also be aware that in vaccinating so freely with measles, it is my belief and that of many medics that the companies have grossly under-estimated the danger of measles. Some members might find this strange, but measles is dangerous when it mutates. We now have a mutating virus which is likely to be a problem and, the more we vaccinate, the more dangerous it will become.

Ms Twomey: In the case of my son, since he was born he was very healthy and normally functioning. He was a highly functioning child. He met all the developmental milestones but he had a history of upper respiratory tract infections. He had bronchialitis which would be cased as infant asthma at 8 months of age. He was on an inhaler at that age four times a day. He suffered from hay fever at 8 months and he was put on medication for three months in the summer for that. He suffered from colic as a baby and I would say his immune system was not functioning correctly without any blood test.

Ms Kessick: Our experience in Allergy Induced Autism - last year alone we took 6,000 calls - is that the families have got immune problems with an allergy in them. Very simply, that would act as an initial screen. The immunologists with whom we work say that if you must vaccinate, do not vaccinate so young; split them and vaccinate later. It will be a time risk but if you must do it, wait until two, three or four - space them out. Do not continue to bring them back. Many immunologists believe that to be the cause of the problems. I suggest Ms Twomey's child had been vaccinated at a very early age.

Ms Twomey: Yes, he had. He had his vaccinations on time but I delayed his MMR until he was 20 months old.

Ms Kessick: It would be very easy to put together a list of questions that could be asked at the vaccination time which would immediately ring bells as to whether the child should have no vaccinations or have them delayed.

Chairman: Would it be possible for a group of you to put that easy list of questions together and provide it to the Committee?

Ms Kessick: Yes, we can do that.

Chairman: Two other questions were posed. One related to whether we should introduce the Japanese experience. The other related to the medical profession and whether children should not be allowed to attend school if they had not been vaccinated. Would someone like to take these questions?

Ms Young: I wish to answer the first question. As a parent, that seriously disturbs me. I voluntarily took my child for the MMR because of the measles outbreak and the 1994 campaign. My son was born in 1994 and vaccinated in 1995. In fact, I ran with the child to the doctor because I was afraid the winter would come in and he would get infections, colds or flu and could not be vaccinated. Little did I know what would happen to me.

In relation to what doctors say about parents neglecting children if they have not been vaccinated, in fact, the contrary is the case. We are aware of the dangers. I have no reason for saying here that a vaccine damaged my child if it did not happen and I did not have medical records to prove that he was taken to the hospital and the doctor. I have no gripe with these people but I have a gripe with those who say that "one size fits all". We once believed that the world was flat and we had to change our minds. I believe the way forward is to knock the MMR on the head. We do not have to omit it but we should go for the monovalent form. If one has natural measles, one can avail of rubella and mumps separately without the risk of having the combined vaccine.

On the suggestion that these children should not go to school. There was a row last year in relation to autistic children who had no school. Now the boot is on the other foot. These children are vaccine damaged and are in school. I understand that the medical profession is trying to eradicate these diseases - I agree with them in this regard because we must be mindful of these issues - but it is ignoring the health problems of the autistic population. Autistic children have had to be brought to the Royal Free Hospital and Portland Hospital in London for colonoscopies. Parents have had to take out bank loans and so on. I am not ashamed to say that I have been there because I had no option. My child's health was deteriorating and I was told his back teeth were the problem.

Ms McCabe: May I add to that. I would like to know what the IMO would do with my son if it provided him with an education? He has been MMR vaccinated but his blood tests in the United States show he is not immune to either measles or mumps. Where does he fit in not going to school vaccinated?

Ms Twomey: As a family who possibly has a genetic predisposition to susceptibility and inability to clear viruses like vaccines, I have decided not to have my older two children vaccinated any more. I just cannot take that risk. It is difficult being the parent of one autistic boy, I do not choose to have both my boys autistic. My other boy is in senior infants and, with a booster, it is possible he could become autistic. This is seriously disturbing and I am seriously upset that I might have to pull my other two children out of school. I am a teacher by profession but who will provide me with the equipment, home schooling and so on to teach my children? I would love to do that but I cannot risk my future as a mother of more than one autistic child.

Mr. McCaffrey: You said you got a lot of positive reactions from the medical profession. That does not surprise me because vaccination is the cornerstone of the medical profession. It is absolutely the best thing since sliced bread. It is cheap and has got rid of diseases worldwide. However, the truth of the matter is that this is unproven by scientific fact. Unfortunately, very few doctors are aware of this side of the argument. It is not debated or talked about in college. If one brings up the issue with doctors, they will say they are not aware of the issue but they are aware of such and such a book and so on.

Given all the research carried out by pharmaceutical companies on behalf of the medical profession, if they do not do it independently and if the person who pays for it has a vested interest, then there is a real problem. In the UK, at least four of the people on the committee who allowed the meningitis C vaccine come into being had interests in vaccination companies. That has to be a cause of conflict.

The mandating of vaccines is a serious human rights issue. It involves the State taking complete responsibility for the health and care of children. This could involve the payment of large sums of money in compensation. Parents must be indemnified that their children are safe. If my child were vaccinated against a disease which he later contracted, I would certainly seek compensation.

The Japanese experience is different from ours. They tend to do things by committee rather than individually and decisions are taken globally rather than individually. Therefore, in Japan they have been guided by statistics, databases and so on. From the medical point of view, one would have to say the United States is the safest country in the world for children because vaccination there is mandatory and many diseases have been eradicated. However, that country is number 20 in the world, - behind Cuba and many African countries which do very little vaccination, - for child life expectancy. In the United States approximately 20 per cent of children are on medication for behavioural problems. Many other children are confined in institutions or prisons. Since Japan switched to individual vaccines and stopped mandatory vaccination before two years of age and an increase in life expectancy of children has been observed. Statistically, Japan is the leading country for child life expectancy. Sweden is second but Ireland is well down the scale.

Chairman: Three Members wish to ask questions. They are Senators Camillus Glynn and Mary Jackman and Deputy Dan Neville.

Senator Glynn: The old adage that prevention is better than cure is being called into question. It has been my experience that tuberculosis has manifested itself in people who are resident in long term institutions although very little has been said about this phenomenon. When these residents were sent for TB screening it was often not made clear that they were being screened for that disease. I do not know why this was. It may be that the authorities did not want to arouse concern. Nevertheless, in the past number of years there has been an increased incidence of tuberculosis among long term residents of institutions.

I was interested to hear that there are 11 autistic children in a population of 33,000. Is that the correct figure?

Ms Twomey: No. There are 33 autistic children in a population of 13,000.

Senator Glynn: Which is worse.

Ms Twomey: This is the equivalent of one child in 394. The population in question is that of a suburb in Cork. We have been in contact with the Central Statistics Office and have checked the figures. The majority of these children are under five years and there was one adult.

Senator Glynn: With the exception of the MMR vaccine, is the group in favour of vaccination?

Ms Kessick: Yes.

Ms Twomey: We are pro-choice.

Ms Kessick: There are lots of issues.

Deputy Neville: Has the project made submissions to the Irish Medicines Board and has the board responded? I find the board extremely conservative and slow to respond. Nevertheless, the board has a role in this matter and must have a view on the application of MMR.

Senator Jackman: I came to learn and I am flabbergasted by what I have heard. Is it because the Minister for Health and Children and the chairman of this committee are both from Cork that the members of the group are all from there also. Do similar organisations exist throughout the country?

Ms McCabe: I am from Dublin.

Senator Jackman: Is the debate led by Cork. As a Limerick person, could I be represented by this group?

Mr. McCaffrey: The Informed Immunisation Network tries to be a nationwide network. The network was formed in Dublin but we are not Dublin based. We have members throughout the country. It is very difficult for a group of parents with young children and operating on a shoestring to make itself known. We have gained members by word of mouth. If the Department would fund us we could do more work. However, that sort of help is not available. Some areas appear to be more conservative than others. Cork seems to be more open to this sort of thing.

Senator Jackman: I would have thought the World Health Organisation would have been to the forefront of research in this area. I am surprised to hear the WHO say that the MMR is the safest vaccine although the group says the incidence of autism is reaching epidemic proportions in the western world.

I did not know Professor John O'Leary was invited to give evidence to the US Government hearing. Another eminent person in the field, Professor Andrew Wakefield, was also mentioned today. I was not aware that we had such expertise in Ireland. It appears extraordinary that Professor O'Leary's expertise is not being used by the Department of Health and Children.

Ms Kessick: Absolutely.

Chairman: Is it not also extraordinary that neither of the two people seem to have made a submission to this Committee, even though we advertised?

Ms Kessick: I think the submission was made to the Minister, Deputy Martin, but there may have been an administrative problem. I looked into this matter.

Chairman: If you are in contact you should ask the Department to redirect the submission to the Committee.

Ms Kessick: I will.

Chairman: It would be a valuable contribution to our work.

Deputy Cooper-Flynn: Everyone appears to have expressed concern about MMR. Mr. McCaffrey went into detail about problems with other vaccinations. I found all the submissions frightening. If I had children I would be inclined not to have them vaccinated. One of the aims of the group is to inform parents of alternatives to vaccination. Is there an alternative?

Mr. Halliday: Nobody vaccinated for scarlet fever or bubonic plague but we do not see epidemics of those diseases. We think the only choice is to vaccinate or not to vaccinate but a third solution has not been explored. There is a possibility that vaccines could be used in a certain way. For example, to give it orally is the normal route of entry of the polio virus. This means that the human body can respond appropriately to an attenuated vaccine or in whichever form it comes. There is a thinking that there should, perhaps, be a halfway house, that all vaccines should be given, so that the immune system of the human body can take it naturally, which means an oral virus. Research is being undertaken to try to produce this.

Deputy Cooper-Flynn: That is a very important point in fighting the argument. There is concern that in relation to certain illnesses there should be an appropriate measure one can take, rather than it being a simple question of being against vaccination. I fully agree with you that pharmaceutical companies have a vested interest in screening. We are all aware of the horror stories from films during the years. If there is a pound in it for them, they may even hide the side effects - God forgive me for saying this - but that is, probably, the reality.

Mr. McCaffrey: On vaccination, there seems to be an assumption that disease is bad. There is a huge thinking, however, that disease is actually good. Like any other part of the human body, the immune system needs to be exercised. It has been proved that catching colds and getting measles, mumps and rubella is more beneficial and been found that those who will suffer from chronic illnesses later in life will have suffered from very few of the childhood illnesses. I grew up in the 1960s, at a time when one got everything. When somebody had chickenpox, measles, mumps or rubella, I was packed off by my mother with everybody else on the street and we all came home with it as well. Our doctors seemed to support us in this and nobody seemed to worry about it. All of a sudden a vaccine is developed and it is a terrifying disease. One has to look at the whole picture and at a person's immune system.

The vaccination issue is based on the germ theory developed by Louis Pasteur. Unfortunately for the medical profession, an issue about which it does not say much, Louis Pasteur changed his mind and said that germs are not what cause disease, they are a side effect. Healthy people just do not drop dead. What happens is that people become susceptible at which point germs invade the body. If one puts a rotting piece of meat on the table, it will rot away and flies will be attracted to it. If tissue is healthy and living, it will not.

It is the mindset of the medical profession that one has to change, so that it treats disease. One might even come to the argument that vaccination is invasive and diseases are beneficial. This will be confirmed by many paediatricians who will state that measles is beneficial for speech and so forth. All these diseases are milestones in our development. If we do not get them, we will end up with sicker children. The children of today should be the healthiest ever, they are not. There has been an increase in the incidence of asthma, autism, eczema and ADHD. It is getting out of proportion. We will, probably, have a sick society if we do not start to stem the tide and look at what is happening.

Ms Kessick: The crux of the issue is that it is cheaper to vaccinate wholesale than it is to ensure every child in the country is well nourished. One of the difficulties is that in talking to eminent doctors we find that their attitude is, "Look at Third World countries and see how wonderful vaccination is". In Third World countries most children are not as well nourished as in our countries and are not dying from measles, but from side effects of malnutrition such as marasmus. This is something about which one has to think. Let me give one statistic. The monovalent measles vaccine was introduced in the United Kingdom in 1967 and continued to be given until 1988 when the MMR was introduced. The damage claims for monovalent measles amount in number to less than half a year's worth of the MMR damage claims in the United Kingdom.

Chairman: Deputy Neville asked a very interesting question about contact with the Irish Medicines Board to which nobody has replied.

Ms Howlin: Deputy Cooper-Flynn mentioned alternatives. Colleagues of mine are very happy to use homeopathy as opposed to orthodox vaccination procedures. In many instances, the parents concerned had their first child immunised and then became aware of the controversy and decided not to have second and third children immunised. When their elder child was being given boosters for polio, for example, in school, they obviously became very worried about their younger children. They have found that using polio nosodes is very effective in treating their children. As their use has been the subject of much debate in the homeopathic sector, every homeopath would not take this line, but for worried parents it is an alternative which could be explored.

Senator Jackman mentioned Dr. Andrew Wakefield and Dr. John O'Leary. The Department of Health and Children has placed information on the Internet. It has explored the research which has been undertaken and stated that other research groups established in the United Kingdom have disputed and disproved their theories. Dr. Wakefield recommended that the MMR vaccine should be given separately. The Department has stated, however, I think in 1999, that it would not be in favour of separating the dosages because it would leave children at risk. Thankfully, because of the US congressional hearing in April this year, a further three years of independent research by Dr. Wakefield and Dr. O'Leary is to be funded. We hope this will cause the situation to be reviewed and the findings of Dr. Wakefield's research to be taken on board as accurate. I am sure they will make the Joint Committee aware of this.

Ms Twomey: When I returned from London with my son I had photographs which clearly displayed nodules on three sections of his bowel. We are going through the final stage of testing at Professor O'Leary's pathology laboratory at the Coombe and are awaiting a result to identify the cause of the problem, which we believe led to the onset of autism and his behavioural changes. One of the leading paediatric gastroenterologists in the country at the time suggested through discussion with a general practitioner that the nodules did not exist and that there was nothing wrong with my son's bowel. I omitted to bring them with me, but the pictures are very clear.

Chairman: I thank the Members of the Joint Committee for their patience and interest in this matter. I also thank those who have been involved in this exchange, which we have found very revealing, expansive and interesting and, at times, provocative to the extent of being shocking. It has been an extremely valuable experience and I hope you are of the view that it has been worth your while attending. We will invite representatives from the medical side to appear before the Joint Committee in two weeks time. If some of you are asked at a later stage to reappear before the Joint Committee, I hope you will be willing to make yourselves available. I thank you all for your attendance.

The Joint Committee adjourned at 11.45 a.m.

Next | Up | Previous