Many of you may not like to read this long Article but just go through a few Paras to know how our children are being treated as Experimental Animals by Money making M/cs worldwide.
Subject: Dr P M Bhargava exposes the politics of the polio vaccine. > The politics of polio Pushpa M. Bhargava > ________________________________ > Even the appropriate WHO document clearly states that there is evidence > that OPV has not worked in developing countries. > ________________________________ > > That Sabin's oral polio vaccine (OPV) has not been able to eradicate polio > in our country, is now well established (inter alia, Economic and Political > Weekly, 4-11-06, p. 4538-4540; and 23-12-06, p.5229-5237; Tehelka, 11-11-06, > p.8-9; The Hindu, Hyderabad, November 13, 2006, p.11; Down to Earth, > 31-12-06, p.24-31; Conclusions Recommendations of a National Consultative > Meeting organised by Ind ian Medical Association in New Delhi on May 14, > 2006; Editorial in the Indian Journal of Medical Research, (IJMR), January > 2007, p. 1-4; and numerous other articles in some of the world's best known > scientific journals, such as Science.) > [I do not subscribe to the theory that the IPV is in any way a better > choice than the OPV. It is like comparing one monster to another; all cases > of polio in the developed countries are today attributed to the IPV > advocated here which can also cause the dreaded paralytic state "Guillain > Barre Syndrome". The first positive step should be to study the disease > again with renewed intensity to find out the real cause. And now that the > OPV has been repeatedly exposed I would like to talk again about the issue > of compensation to the OPV paralysed children who may number more than a > lakh as per unofficial sources, (The Telegraph quoted the figure of 3 lakhs > in 2006). In the US recently a case of OPV induced paralysis appeared 16 > years after taking the vaccine. Is there any such long term follow up in > India? There is no other option, vaccines should go, sense should > prevail. We and our children have suffered enough of this cruel and > uncivillised, definitely > unscientific, intervention - Jagannath] > Not only that the cases of non–polio acute flaccid paralysis (AFP) in those > vaccinated with OPV have shown a dramatic rise. It appears that in 2005, in > Uttar Pradesh alone, 4,800 had residual paralysis, or died after acquiring > non-polio AFP, in comparison to the all-India figure of 4,793 polio cases in > 1994; the 2006 data, after six doses of monovalent OPV, are worse. The > infructuous expenditure on the OPV programme would probably run into > thousands of crores. > The pity of it is that all this was anticipated (Bhargava, The Hindu, > December 12, 1999 ), and that we could have easily eradicated polio from our > country by now. We did not do so because our successive governments and > those who worked for them in responsible positions such as Secretaries and > Joint Secretaries in the Ministry of Health, Directors-General of Medical > and Health Services and even of the ICMR, were primarily (exclusively?) > committed to personal and certain foreign interests and not to the cause of > polio eradication. Here is the story with which I was, in the initial > stages, connected.Two types of vaccines > There have been two types of vaccines available against polio: the > injectable Salk vaccine (IPV) and the oral Sabin vaccine (OPV) using an > attenuated live virus. Till the early 1980s, OPV was used in the developed > countries to maintain the polio-free status that had been largely achieved > through the use of IPV beginning the 1950s. By 1988, Jonas Salk (one of the > most celebrated scientists of the last century who made the first successful > polio vaccine, the IPV) had developed an enhanced potency injectable vaccine > (M-IPV). In a letter dated December 1, 1988 to me, he wrote, "It is urgent > that the incidence [of polio] be reduced as rapidly as possible. A simple > way would be to administer a single dose of the enhanced potency IPV > (M-IPV), to all those of six months of age or over who may have already > received one or more doses of OPV (some of whom we know, from experience may > not have been protected), and to those of the same age who may not have been > previously immunised against polio. A single dose of M-IPV of sufficient > potency will induce antibody and/or immunologic memory in nearly all infants > of that age. For infants less than six months of age who still possess > maternal antibody, two doses, preferably, one with DTP are necessary." I had > forwarded this letter to everyone concerned in the country with the polio > vaccination programme at that time, but no one took any note of it.Evidence > against OPV > Even before I had received the above-mentioned letter from Jonas Salk, at a > meeting held in Delhi in March 1988, convened by Sam Pitroda, the then > Adviser to the Prime Minister for National Technology Missions, overwhelming > evidence was presented that OPV had not worked in India (Bhargava, The > Hindu, December 12, 1999 ). Virtually every one concerned with polio was > present at this meeting at which an unambiguous decision was taken to shift > to IPV. > I quote from the official minutes of this meeting: > "Expedite establishment of M-IPV programme. On moral grounds and > considering the involvement of the lives of our children, cost shall be no > consideration. Indigenous production of IPV before 1991 shall be aimed at." > "Whenever children in large numbers are dying, getting afflicted with polio, > the empty and hollow argument of their being used as guinea pigs cannot be > accepted." "As new M-IPV programme ramps up, the OPV will ramp down." > Although IPV has always been more expensive than OPV, this is compensated by > the fact that one may need to take only one or at most two doses of IPV > whereas, in the case of OPV, the number of doses could be above ten. > It was clear that, for some time, OPV will continue to be with us. In fact, > the then Secretary of the Department of Biotechnology (DBT), S. > Ramachandran, had been earlier to the Soviet Union and, with their help, a > factory (BIBCOL) to produce OPV was set up in Bulandshahr. > In keeping with the decision of the 1988 meeting — the only meeting of > experts and concerned people so far convened by the government in regard to > polio vaccination programme — another company called Indian Vaccine > Corporation Ltd (IVCOL) was set up with a capital outlay of Rs. 90 crores. > Both DBT and the Indian Petrochemicals Ltd. of Baroda had equity in it even > though the majority shares belonged to Institut Merieux, one of the world's > largest, most reliable and respected vaccine producers that was committed to > produce M-IPV which was far more heat-stable than OPV. Obliging WHO > But we hadn't reckoned with our primary commitment to the interests of the > developed countries. As already mentioned, by this time the West had decided > to replace OPV with M-IPV. Therefore, market had to be found for OPV. WHO > advised that developed countries use IPV, while developing countries use > OPV. For us to oblige WHO, two steps were necessary: (1) that BIBCOL > produces no OPV of its own; and (2) India reverses its decision to gradually > shift to IPV. Both the steps were taken. BIBCOL has not produced a single > dose of OPV till today, and the Ministry of Health decided soon after the > March 1988 meeting, without any further consultations, to shift permanently > to OPV. Consequently IVCOL was closed down after incurring substantial > expenditure, and a number of senior officers of the above Ministry got plum > U.N. jobs with tax-free dollar salaries, after retirement. > It is particularly interesting that at a conference jointly organised by > the International Comparative Virology Organisation and the WHO in New > Delhi, in January 1992, experts from all over the world indicated the > preference of IPV over OPV for any plans of eradication of polio in > developing countries. Problem continues > An interesting question that one may, therefore, ask is: if we really felt > that there was a strong scientific case for using OPV (which there wasn't), > why did we not make it ourselves. The answer is that this wouldn't have > served the foreign interests to whom we had sold ourselves, ignoring the > interests of our own people and the sane advice of our own experts based on > incontrovertible evidence. It is amusing in this context that even the > appropriate WHO document clearly states that there is evidence that OPV has > not worked in developing countries. > The 64,000-rupee question now is: would the government wake up and get out > of the clutches of WHO so that it may serve our interests and not the > interest of powers that be outside India? And if it needs endorsement from a > foreign channel, it may read the article by V.K. Bhasin in January 2008 > issue of Nature Biotechnology, Nature being perhaps the world's best-known > and most respected scientific periodical. The article says that, in 2006, > there were 1,600 cases of OPV–induced polio plus a large number of cases of > AFP from which virus was not cultured. > So, the problem continues. But who cares! Polio is not a disease of > billionaires.(Dr. P.M.. Bhargava is former vice-chairman, National Knowledge > Commission.) > Printer friendly page > Send this article to Friends by E-Mail > "It is now 30 years since I have been confining myself to the treatment > ofchronic diseases. During those 30 years I have run against so many > histories of littlechildren who had never seen a sick day until they were > vaccinated and who, in the severalyears that have followed, have never seen > a well day since. I couldn't put my finger onthe disease they have. They > just weren't strong. Their resistance was gone. They wereperfectly well > before they were vaccinated. They have never been well since. "---Dr. > William Howard Hay > > >
