Doctors Assumptions: Humiston, Boonstra, and Savoy Train Physicians on How To Fail
The Autism Literary Underground

Report Alleges Cover up of Infant Deaths Post Vaccination

InfanrixTwo doctors in New Delhi have exposed an attempt by a multinational drug manufacturer to conceal sudden deaths in infants following the administration of its vaccine.  

Jacob Puliyel, a pediatrician at the St. Stephen's hospital and C. Sathyamala, an epidemiologist, have reported their finding in the peer reviewed  Indian Journal of Medical Ethics.   

The vaccine in question, "Infanrix hexa," -- that combines diphtheria, tetanus,  pertussis, hepatitis B,   polio   and   influenza type B vaccines -- is manufactured by  GlaxoSmithKline   (GSK) and was introduced in Europe in October 2000. 

Puliyel and Sathyamala discovered the cover-up by analyzing data in the   Periodic Safety Update Reports (PSUR) about the vaccine that its manufacturer GSK  is required to regularly provide  to the European Medicines Agency (EMA). 

These confidential   safety reports on this vaccine were received by Puliyel from Italian Dr. Loretta Bolgan who obtained them from EMA under the   Freedom of Information Act – the Italian version of the Right to Information Act in India.  

On analysis, the doctors   found that the latest 19th safety report on 'Infanrix hexa' vaccine submitted by GSK   (2015)    has deleted deaths that were reported previously by the manufacturer in its 16th report (2012). They, however, note that it is not clear from the report how these deaths were deleted. 

The authors Puliyel and Sathyamala note that ten years after the publication of a Center for Disease Control paper examining a relationship between MMR and autism, one of the authors William Thompson admitted that he and his co-authors had omitted statistically significant information - that African American males given the MMR vaccine before the age of 36 months, were at increased risk of autism. After the Thompson and his colleagues found evidence of this increased risk, they deleted data of children without Georgia birth certificates (and so disqualified a disproportionate number of black children) and they presented their data saying there was no increased risk of autism.   It is not clear whether the authors of the PSUR 19 performed some similar retroactive disqualification of children documented to have died in the PSUR 16. 

"If these deaths had not been deleted, the deaths after vaccination would have been significantly higher than what was expected by chance. The manufacturer would have had to admit to the EMA that their vaccine was the cause of these excess deaths," the authors report.   

Puliyel and Sathyamala argue that the manufacturer "needs to explain the apparently faulty figures that it submitted to the regulatory authorities. 

Until now the manufacturer has been claiming that the deaths reported after the vaccine are "coincidental" and that they would have taken place in these children even if they had not been vaccinated.  

However, in their commentary in the journal, Puliyel and Sathyamala point out that their analysis has shown that 83 % of the reported deaths have taken place soon after vaccination in the first 10 days and only 17% happened in the next 10 days.  

"If this were simply coincidental deaths then it would not all cluster immediately after vaccination but would have been distributed uniformly over the 20 day period." 

Puliyel and Sathyamala write that any argument that the  sudden deaths after vaccination  is offset against the lives saved   by the vaccine is not acceptable   in the same way it would be considered  unethical to   kill  one person to use his or her organs for saving five other persons. 

"Glossing over of the deaths after vaccination can prevent or delay evaluation of the vaccine’s safety profile and this has potential to result in more, unnecessary deaths which are difficult to justify ethically," they say. 

They point out that Hexavac – a similar vaccine manufactured by Sanofi Pasteur and introduced in the market also in 2000 was removed from the European market in 2005. It was found to have increased deaths of children within two days of vaccinating with it.   

In the Indian context, the    authors note that the Drug Controller General of India  ( DCGI) should reconsider the current policy of automatically approving any drug licensed in   the USA and Europe. "This reliance on due diligence by the EMA may be misplaced and needs to be re-evaluated." 

"Pentavac", manufactured by Serum Institute of India  and marketed in India,  is similar to  the now banned Hexavac and the Infanrix hexa reported here, except that the whole cell whooping cough vaccine is replaced by an acellular vaccine and it has a sixth component, the injectable polio vaccine."   

In the light of their finding, Puliyel and Sathyamala suggest that "it is crucial  for the DCGI  to be aware of the PSUR reports provided to the EMA and the concerns raised through this commentary."   (End)

Indian Journal of Medical Ethics Online First Published September 5, 2017

Infanrix hexa and sudden death: a review of the periodic safety update reports submitted to the European Medicines Agency

Jacob Puliyel, C Sathyamala

Abstract

There have been a number of spontaneous reports of sudden unexpected death soon after the administration of Infanrix hexa (combined diphtheria, tetanus, acellular pertussis, hepatitis B, inactivated poliomyelitis and Haemophilus influenza type B vaccine). The manufacturer, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), submits confidential periodic safety update reports (PSURs) on Infanrix hexa to the European Medicines Agency (EMA). The latest is the PSUR 19. Each PSUR contains an analysis of observed/expected sudden deaths, which shows that the number of observed deaths soon after immunisation is lower than that expected by chance.

This commentary focuses on that aspect of the PSUR which has a bearing on policy decisions. We analysed the data provided in the PSURs. It is apparent that the deaths acknowledged in the PSUR 16 were deleted from the PSUR 19. The number of observed deaths soon after vaccination among children older than one year was significantly higher than that expected by chance once the deleted deaths were restored and included in the analysis.

The manufacturer must explain the figures that have been submitted to the regulatory authorities. The procedures undertaken by the EMA to evaluate the manufacturer’s claims in the PSUR need to be reviewed. The Drugs Controller General of India nearly automatically accepts drugs and vaccines approved by the EMA. There is a need to reappraise the reliance on due diligence by the EMA.

FULL TEXT

 

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

David Foster

Right now the study is unavailable, the authors are correcting data in one of the tables but say it will be available shortly.

I've been following this story since 2015 with great interest as I believe it is the strongest evidence yet that vaccines contributes to SIDS deaths.

The following links to an article which includes a graph you simply must see, and does not require any explanation:

http://www.inquisitr.com/1751130/doctor-claims-that-hexavalent-infanrix-vaccine-causes-sudden-death-of-babies-anti-vaccination-advocates-question-why-report-was-confidential/

Did you go to that link and see the graph? If not...GO TO THE LINK AND LOOK AT THE GRAPH! :)

Now it will be painfully obvious the great lengths to which the authors of the original study went to in order to obfuscate a correlation which be obvious to a 10-year-old:

http://jacob.puliyel.com/download.php?id=345

What is especially significant here is that not only is there a very strong temporal correlation between day of vaccination and day of death for the first vaccine dose, but there is a similar though less pronounced correlation for the second dose. This is very strong evidence of a causal relationship. When you look at the original paper and see how they presented that data, there is simply no reasonable explanation other than the fact that they wished to cover it up.

John Stone

Susan

I attempted to put the abstract of the paper in British Medical Journal under the report announcing that Infanrix Hexa was about to be added to the UK schedule - like a previous letter it has not been posted.

http://www.ageofautism.com/2017/07/not-published-in-the-british-medical-journal-the-dangers-and-conflicts-of-infanrix-hexa.html

It shows the extent to which the British medical establishment is under the thumb of a bureaucracy and dependent on the patronage of an industry. In the past they have posted abstracts in their correspondence column where relevant. Now they deny the possibility of discussion and deliberately hold back information relevant to government health policy. You have to assume that if there was any good answer they would welcome debate, but it is getting beyond that. The argument is actually going be default, while being suppressed.

susan welch

Infanrix hexa has just been added to the UK vaccine schedule. Although not mandatory here, parents are pressurised to get all their vaccines.

Sadly, I am sure there will be many more 'SIDS' deaths. They will, of course, be 'coincidental' and you can be sure the media will not be reporting the increase in infant deaths.

Shelley Tzorfas

Last night on Mainstream TV News they said that ""A child is diagnosed with Cancer every 36 seconds." Does anyone know what the rate was before the 72 Vaccines in 1985?

Shelley Tzorfas

Corporate- paid- for- Science has lost its Conscience and Humanity. Deleting deaths after vaccinations (From) vaccinations is injuring and killing Your children and grandchildren. Are you listening now??

David Weiner

The lies and fraud never cease.

We need to abolish these programs before they terminate us.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)