Published: 22 Sep 11 11:13 CET | Print version
Online: http://www.thelocal.se/36296/20110922/
A vaccination programme to combat cervical cancer has suffered further delays after GlaxoSmithKline appealed a deal agreed between Swedish health authorities and a rival firm.
What do you think? Leave your comment below.
As white-collar union Saco slammed Sweden for not helping well-educated foreigners into the labour market, The Local spoke to researcher Josefin Edström about the disconnect between foreign professionals and Swedish employers. READ () »
This year's Beckmans fashion graduates unleashed a dramatic clash of collections in Stockholm this week. It may have been dazzlingly hot outside in the sunshine, but on the catwalk things got a little dark. READ () »
For this week's secret location picture gallery quiz, we head to a city that's among the top 20 in terms of population size. Can you guess which one it is in nine clues? READ () »
Sweden's Princess Madeleine is "less nervous than she thought" about her impending walk down the aisle at Stockholm's Storkyrkan church to wed US financier Chris O'Neill. READ () »
Swedes are having less sex than ever before, a new survey has revealed, and their libidos appear to have waned too, prompting researchers to warn that "desire disorders" may be keeping Swedes from getting intimate. READ () »
A man has been arrested on the suspicion of murdering a 20-year-old woman who vanished three weeks ago in northern Sweden, and whose suspected body parts were uncovered on Monday. READ () »
At least two schools, a police station, and 15 cars were set ablaze in Stockholm on Thursday night as riots in the suburbs of the Swedish capital continued for the fifth straight night. READ () »
With one 18-year-old remanded in custody after four nights of rioting in Stockholm, Sweden's Integration Minister Erik Ullenhag said the rioters are a small minority, and did not represent a clash between young people in the suburbs and society. READ () »
More news from Germany at thelocal.de
More news from France at thelocal.fr
More news from Norway at thelocal.no
More news from Switzerland at thelocal.ch
Register now for:
> Free use of noticeboard
> Special discounts
> Weekly news roundup
> Unlimited use of discuss
“Örngott”, “luttanpluttan” and “chokladglass” »
"Hej! How is your Swedish coming along? I have received many questions on the Facebook page and in my email lately and it seems like a good idea to post the answers here. Enjoy! Question 1 – “får inte” or “måste inte” Could you please clarify for me which is the most commonly used phrase in Swedish for..." READ »
Your comments about this article:
The comments below have not been moderated in advance and are not produced by The Local unless clearly stated. Readers are responsible for the content of their own comments. Comments that breach our terms and conditions will be removed.
"The IMB (Irish Medicines Board) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) are aware of the recent communication from Sane Vax and following on from this, the EMA requested the marketing authorisation holder conduct an immediate assessment of the risk of contamination.
The IMB, through its participation in EU Scientific Committees is contributing to the ongoing EU assessment of this issue and will continue to do so at further EU meetings scheduled over the coming week. Any updates on the outcome of these discussions and any recommendations will be highlighted, as appropriate. At present, the balance of risks and benefits for the vaccine remains positive.
The Gardasil vaccine has been licensed for use in the EU since 2006. The IMB together with the EMA continue to monitor the benefit-risk profile of Gardasil."
This is particularly good news for medical consumers in the 27 countries belonging to the European Union (Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom). An 'immediate risk assessment' should mean the marketing authorisation holder must now:
* Determine the extent of the contamination
* Determine any potential health risk that could result from HPV rDNA attached to aluminium adjuvant being injected into the human body
The critical issue here is not that the vaccine has residual DNA in it, but that the contaminating HPV DNA is genetically modified and firmly attached to the aluminium adjuvant - making it an unknown quantity as far as potential health risks.
Is recombinant (genetically engineered) HPV DNA, or adventitious DNA, capable of altering human DNA potentially initiating cancer, or a host of autoimmune disorders?
The manufacturer of Gardasil™, Merck, went to great lengths to assure government health authorities around the world there was no viral DNA in the vaccine.[ii] [iii] Merck repeatedly told health authorities that this vaccine only contained virus-like particles manufactured from the L1 protein - NO HPV DNA. Recognizing the potential health risks of residual DNA, government health officials relied on this assurance when they approved the vaccine for use in their countries.
http://sanevax.org/gardasil-contamination-ema-steps-up-to-the-plate-fda-drops-the-ball/
Of course there is an alternative (I can heard the shrieks of other commenters already) to this vaccine. Abstenance followed by a lifelong monogamous sexual relationship with a partner who has similarly abstained until the start of this same lifelong monogamous sexual relationship. But that is never raised as an alternative to commerically driven multiple sexual partners. And certainly not when GSK's or SANE's profits are concerned.
What is perhaps more of a concern for the SAGE vaccine is that not only does it show contamination with HPV rDNA but also to be formulated with aluminum, which is highly toxic when ingested. Samples of rDNA contaminated vaccine have been located across the globe; it isn't just an Irish problem as might be inferred from the press report in JannySt's comment. And all GSK are being portrayed as worrying about is that they have been excluded from getting a share of the cake.
When the vaccine was first distributed in Britain two or three years ago I was working in a 16+ college. All female students were called in turn to receive the vaccine. Some parents objected to their daughter being injected on religious grounds. But eaves-dropping on conversations amongst the students prior to the event it was clear that most were already sexually active and had been for some time. Indeed it wasn't unknown for girls not-yet 16 years of age to enroll pregnant. (At least one of them for the second time.)
It is not just girls that should be vacinnated. Boys are the carriers. Both girls and boys should be vaccinated in early childhood, with a further booster vaccination in the teens, so as to give maximum coverage of the vaccination.
All people, regardless of sex or age, when attending a doctor or nurse, should be given the vaccination. Only then will HPV be safely removed from the population and the horrific deaths from the cancers that it causes, be reduced.
But how realistic is vaccination of the global population? And without it being global the possibility remains that the virus will be re-introduced into an area formerly thought clear. Such global eradication has been done once (for small pox, I think) however it took several decades to achieve. And will countries and societies that supposedly follow "no sex before marriage" and strict monogamy as a political ideal be persuaded that in fact their youngsters are at it like rabbits despite what the state religion says. The southern African experience of trying to deal with HIV/AIDS does not instill confidence that such a wide-spread vaccine for sexual health will be adopted.
Laudable aim but realistically about as much chance of it being effective as my suggestion of abstinence.
$44 million to save 100 lives a year?? This is NOT the best use of that much money. That $44m would save many more lives if spent on just about anything else.
There are risks and side affects as well.
But, it is a bit creepy that politicians, the media, and even some physicians are referring to this as a "cancer vaccine" rather than an STD vaccine. Its true the HPV virus can lead to cancer (the article here says only "a slightly higher risk" , if they don't do it before the infection, I don't know if that's accurate), but other STDs can cause just as serious health effects in completely different ways... Its just not very honest and direct to market it as an anti-cancer measure.
But much of that $44million is the phrams company simply being opportunistic and charging a price they believe someone will be stupid enough to pay. South Africa set a precendent a few years ago. Told the pharms company they weren't going to pay their exorbitant prices for HIV/AIDS drugs but were instead going to manufacture generics for themselves. Pharms caved in and set a realistic price. More governments/national health services should do the same with all medications. And don't tell me they need to recoup development costs before the patent(s) run out; I'm a paid up member of the PiratPartiet. Patents, like HPV and other life-threatening diseases, should be eradicated.
Infecting someone with HPV either through rape or lying should be considered in law no differently from infecting someone with HIV/AIDS through rape or lying. Actually the deliberate infection of anyone with *any* STD should attract the same punishment. Last night's episode of the BBC TV series Who Do You Think You Are? featured an incident in which a child went blind shortly after birth because the mother passed them gonorrhea as the foetus passed down the vagina. Indeed in earlier episodes other celebrity ancestors were found to have contract gonnorrhea or syphilis from their partner. We may be able to cure these diseases today with a course of anti-biotics but back then such remedies were not available.
But the "big" deal here is that one of the available HPV vaccines being used is a) contaminated with HPV rDNA on a grand scale and b) deliberately formulated with a highly toxic metal. One would be bad enough but both together!!!! Large numbers of young girls who are still developing are being injected with this stuff ... that is a big deal. And you think that similar issues don't exist with other medications.
As side benefit, a follow-up study could show which is more effective and safe.
Anybody who want get a vaccination can go right ahead. All they have to do is pay.
But aaah . . . this is Sweden . . . the Swedes worry themselves sick about cancer (and everything else), but if something is to be done about it, then somebody else has to pay, i.e. the taxpayers.
So the test for effective and safe is how many women who had GSK's vaccine develop a serious cancer compared to how many who had SAGE's vaccine develop that cancer instead. Heartless, cruel ... those are the more polite words I'd describe that suggestion as.
Of course, if one of the vaccine's is contaminated we won't know it an uncontaminated version would be safer.
This is not a drug test, both are already approved and if you read the article, you would know that either one (depending on who wins the contract), will be the sole supplier for Sweden. I don't know if you still would have the option of privately getting the other one, once a supplier has been selected.
At present we have only the two companies claiming theirs is better, based on studies they probably paid themselves. And whether you like it or not, only long term studies will show, which one is really better. Nobody can deny the benefit of polio vaccines, smallpox vaccines (eradicated now), even though for example at the beginning of the polio vaccine there was also a fight over which vaccine is better.
It's your choice to not take any medicine, but then stay in a cave and don't come running to a doctor when you are sick. There are no miracle cures, you have to balance pros and cons. Ultimately, after many lab and animal tests, drugs need to be tested on humans. So, even approved drugs, it would be wise to test decades later the effectiveness.
As to providing both versions on the free market, that would help force the companies to actually make sure their products are not contaminated. The one who has a problem on its hand will quickly try to clean up its act, since it couldn't sell anything anymore.
In the monopoly situation, it wouldn't be forced to do that, they just could keep arguing it doesn't matter.
A competitive market certainly works in other areas, where people buy good products and avoid bad ones.
As to a free market making for better quality, experience in other areas tells us the exact opposite will happen. A free market results in corners being cut (that would result in greater not less contaminated product), and a torrent of other quality control issues all in the name of giving the shareholders a better return. People don't buy based on good or bad products per se they buy on price differentiation and claimed USP.
Living in a cave, me?, no. But when my doctor prescribes medication I want to know what the side-effects are --- and on one occasion refused a chemical treatment plan because its side-effects would have been worse than the illness being treated. I don't want to live in a cave because that will deny me Internet access and prevent me from checking (as I did for Gardasil) whether there are any safety notices posted by national health agencies and information from pressure groups and independent monitors. Only then, when I have something passing for "informed consent", will I take the drug. Whereas the girls being vaccinated with Gardasil or Cervarix (its GSK equivalent) are a) not being the choice of informed consent with refusal usually being on parental religious-moral grounds, b) probably incapable of understanding the risks, and c) merely doing what their parents and government advise anyway.