Health Supreme by Sepp Hasslberger

Networking For A Better Future - News and perspectives you may not find in the media

Networking For A Better Future - News and perspectives you may not find in the media

Health Supreme

News Blog

Site Map

NewsGrabs

Economy

Environment

Epidemics

Health

Human Potential

Legislation

Pharma

Science

Society

Technology

The Media

War Crimes


Articles Archive

 

See also:

 

Communication Agents:

INACTIVE  Ivan Ingrilli
  Chris Gupta
  Tom Atlee
INACTIVE  Emma Holister
  Rinaldo Lampis
  Steve Bosserman
  CA Initiative
  CA Journal

 

Robin Good's
Web sites:

 

Other Interesting Health Sites:

 

The Individual - Human Ability:

 

Society/Politics:

 

Economy & Environment:

 

Technologies -
New Energy:

 

Physics:

 

Information:

 

The blog universe:

October 28, 2004

US Court: Forced Anthrax Vaccination Illegal - FDA's Approval Invalid

Categories

On October 27, a federal court ruled against the US government for violating the right of military personnel to informed consent.

U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan ruled that the “involuntary anthrax vaccination program” by the Department of Defense is “illegal,” says Vera Hassner Sharav of the Alliance for Human Research Protection.

The Court ruled that the FDA’s approval of the anthrax vaccine for use on military personnel was invalid inasmuch as the FDA failed to comply with its own safety procedures. The Court found the FDA was in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act: “This Court has an obligation to ensure that FDA follow the law in order to carry out its vital role in protecting the public’s health and safety.” The Court ruling is a permanent injunction that will remain in effect "unless and until the FDA" obeys the law. Until that time, DoD's "involuntary anthrax vaccination program is rendered illegal."

The FDA is no newcomer to violating its own rules to please big business, taking health concerns in stride. It has done so when Donald Rumsfeld, then Chief Executive of Searl Pharmaceuticals, engineered the approval of Aspartame, a sweetener found in "light" soft drinks, bakery goods for diabetics and numerous other foods, over the express objections of the agency's own scientists. Aspartame has been called neurotoxic by several scientists, but FDA refuses to examine its own evidence of side effects.

FDA has also come under heavy criticism recently after covering up the adverse effects of psychiatric medications. The agency was recently forced to institute severe warnings on the labels of antidepressant drugs.

Read the Alliance for Human Research Protection's comments on the recent court decision, which really is a victory not only for the service personnel involved, but for all of those who think vaccinations as such are a damaging practice to be eliminated.

ALLIANCE FOR HUMAN RESEARCH PROTECTION
Promoting Openness and Full Discloure
www.ahrp.org


On October 27, a federal court ruled against the US government for violating the right of military personnel to informed consent.

U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan ruled that the “involuntary anthrax vaccination program” by the Department of Defense is “illegal.”

Furthermore, the Court ruled that the FDA’s approval of the anthrax vaccine for use on military personnel was invalid inasmuch as the FDA failed to comply with its own safety procedures. The Court found the FDA was in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act: “This Court has an obligation to ensure that FDA follow the law in order to carry out its vital role in protecting the public’s health and safety.” The Court ruling is a permanent injunction that will remain in effect "unless and until the FDA" obeys the law. Until that time, DoD's "involuntary anthrax vaccination program is rendered illegal."

The plaintiffs in the case were 6 military servicemembers. The defendants:
Secretary of Defense (Donald Rumsfeld), Secretary of Health and Human Services (Tommy Thompson), and Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration (Mark McClellan).

Justice Sullivan rebuked the government, stating: “Congress has prohibited the administration of investigational drugs to service members without their consent. This Court will not permit the government to circumvent this requirement. The men and  women of our armed forces deserve the assurance that the vaccines our government compels them to take into their bodies have been tested by the greatest scrutiny of
all - public scrutiny. This is the process the FDA in its expert judgment has outlined, and this is the course this Court shall compel FDA to follow.”

This decision is a major victory affirming the universal right of informed consent to medical experimentation—including members of the armed forces. The decision is a bitter sweet victory exonerating soldiers who were subjected to disciplinary measures for asserting their right to refuse an experimental vaccine that in their judgment posed unacceptable heath hazards.

The anthrax vaccine decision underscores the need for civilian oversight over the military and the immense importance of trial lawyers who often provide the only means for stopping government officials from abusing their authority. Once again, the FDA has been shown to put its seal of approval to illegal practices that adversely affect the health and safety of citizens - in this instance, military personnel.

Vera Hassner Sharav
veracare@ahrp.org

U.S. Barred From Forcing Troops to Get Anthrax Shots
By Marc Kaufman
Washington Post Staff Writer
(Original here)

Thursday, October 28, 2004

The Defense Department must immediately stop inoculating troops with anthrax vaccine, a federal judge ruled yesterday, saying that the Food and Drug Administration acted improperly when it approved the experimental injections for general use.

Concluding that the FDA violated its own rules by approving the vaccine late last year, U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan said the mandatory vaccination program -- which has inoculated more than 1.2 million troops since 1998 -- is "illegal."

Sullivan said that his ban on involuntary vaccination will remain in place until the FDA reviews the anthrax vaccine properly or until President Bush determines that the normal process must be waived because of emergency circumstances.

The Defense Department has required many troops serving in Iraq and Afghanistan to be vaccinated, and it has punished and sometimes court-martialed those who refused. The Pentagon expanded its anthrax and smallpox vaccination programs in July to include troops stationed in South Korea and other areas in Asia and Africa, despite complaints from some service members that the anthrax vaccine made them sick.

In a statement, the Defense Department said it is reviewing the decision and will "pause giving anthrax vaccinations until the legal situation is clarified. . . . DoD remains convinced that the anthrax immunization program complies with all the legal requirements and that the anthrax vaccine is safe and effective."

In his ruling, Sullivan said that the FDA's approval was invalid because it did not meet the required review standards and the agency failed to seek the necessary public comment.

"Congress has prohibited the administration of investigational drugs to service members without their consent," Sullivan said. "This Court will not permit the government to circumvent this requirement."

"The men and women of our armed forces deserve the assurance that the vaccines our government compels them to take into their bodies have been tested by the greatest scrutiny of all -- public scrutiny. This is the process the FDA in its expert judgment has outlined, and this is the course this court shall compel FDA to follow," Sullivan wrote.

The judge ruled on a suit filed in March 2003 by six service members and civilians who argued that the FDA never properly reviewed the vaccine's ability to protect against inhalation anthrax. The suit contended that the drug was never shown to be effective, and that some vaccinated troops experienced extreme fatigue, joint pain and temporary memory loss after being vaccinated. The vaccine, made by BioPort Corp. of Lansing, Mich., is given in a series of shots.

Mark Zaid, an attorney for the six who has also defended more than a dozen service members court-martialed for refusing the vaccination, said one of his clients is a breast-feeding mother who does not think the vaccine is safe for her child.

"We will now initiate an effort to ensure the government reverses all punishments that were imposed for refusing an order to take the vaccine," Zaid said. He said he will also seek compensation for service members who contend they were harmed. "As we've seen in Iraq, there wasn't any actual threat from anthrax, so there was never any real need for the vaccine," Zaid said.

Sullivan initially ruled in late 2003 that the FDA had never approved the vaccine and ordered that the inoculations be stopped. Eight days later, the FDA approved the vaccine based on an application made 18 years earlier, and the inoculation program was resumed. Yesterday's ruling concluded that the agency did not follow its own rules in declaring the vaccine safe and effective.

In particular, Sullivan criticized the FDA for not allowing the public to comment on its decision -- a prerequisite for any approval. There was some public comment when the approval was first sought in 1986, but the 2003 decision was based on research conducted later and never subjected to public comment.

The FDA argued that comments had been submitted as part of a 2001 citizens' petition questioning proposals to begin the vaccinations, but Sullivan found them insufficient. "It is clear to this Court that if the status of the anthrax vaccine were open for public comment today, the agency would receive a deluge of comments and analysis that might inform an open-minded agency," he wrote.

Because the anthrax agent is so deadly, it has been difficult to