HC Deb 18 January 1977 vol 924 cc145-8W
Mr. Ashley

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will list the research studies, investigations or reports

Nature of Study Date started Final Report expected
Study of Serious Reactions to Pertussis Vaccine by the Department of community Medicine, Middlesex Hospital Medical School. 1st January 1976(for3years) March1979
Research into Pertussis Vaccine by the Microbilogical Research Establishment, proton Down, Salisbury March 1974 (for 4 years) June1978

In addition the following studies are being supported by the Medical Research Council:

Nature of Study Date started Report expected
Trial of rabies vaccine and human rabies immuno-globulin. January 1977 … … … Results expected to be available late 1977.
Long-term follow-up of children in MRC measles vaccine trials (trials started in 1974). 1964 … … … A paper is in preparation for publication, probably late in 1977.
Long-term prospective study in which a group of school-children in Edinburgh aged 11–14 have been screened for immunity to rubella; those without immunity have been vaccinated and are being followed up at 5-year intervals up to the age of 25 to compare immunity given by vaccine with natural immunity. 1970 … … … —
National Congenital Rubella Surveillance Programme in which paediatricians report cases of congenital rubella to two registers maintained at Leeds and at the Institute of Child Health, London. 1971 … … … —
Prospective studies in Manchester and London of persistance and type of antibodies in persons vaccinated against rubella as compared with those having natural immunity. 1970 … … … —

Mr. Ashley

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) if he will undertake to publish all reports, final or interim, that he receives on any aspect of vaccines and their use;

(2) if he will ask his Advisory Committee on Vaccination to invite Professor Gordon Stewart of Glasgow University to present the full results of his inquiry into 200 cases of children who appear to be damaged by vaccines; and how long Professor Stewart was allowed to speak to the committee on the previous occasion that he appeared before it;

(3) if he will list the names of medical people who have provided evidence for

which are currently being made into any aspect of vaccines and their use; and if, in each case, he will specify the nature of the study, when it was started, and when a report, final or interim, is expected.

Mr. Ennals

My Department is currently supporting the following studies:

his Department's Committee on Vaccination in last three years;

(4) whether his Advisory Committee on Vaccination has reported to him or previous Secretaries of State on the accuracy of the MRC trials as an indication of the safety of the whooping-cough vaccine.

Mr. Ennals

The Joint Committee is satisfied with the accuracy of MRC trials. It is not possible in the time allowed to list all those who have provided evidence during the last few years. Professor Stewart, at the meeting referred to, presented a paper for about half an hour and was invited to provide more detailed evidence to the Sub-Committee on Complications of Vaccination. It is not possible to publish all reports on this subject but many are printed in the medical and scientific press.

Mr. Ashley

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) what are the criteria on which his Department's support of the immunisation programme is based, giving the relative weights attached to: (a) the protection given to the immunised individual assuming he comes into contact with the disease and (b) the protection given to those not immunised by the reduced frequency of the disease arising directly from the immunisation programme;

(2) if he has been advised that babies too young for immunisation are given protection by the immunisation of older children in the family; and if he will estimate the degree to which the immunisation of siblings reduces the risks of babies catching the disease;

(3) what proportion of immunisations is done in local authority health clinics;

(4) what precautions are taken to ensure that health clinic doctors are aware of the medical history of the children and the families.

Mr. Ennals

The immunisation programme as a whole is based on advice from the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation, a group of medical and scientific experts. Its primary purpose is to protect individuals.

It is well known that immunisation given to older children protects younger children, though this cannot be quantified.

About half the total number of vaccination is done in community clinics. Medical histories are a clinical matter for doctors themselves.

Mr. Ashley

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) whether his Department has given evidence to the Pearson Commission on the subject of vaccine damage to children; and, if so, if it favoured compensation for those children;

(2) what is his policy toward the view of the Central Health Services Council, expressed in its evidence to the Pearson Commission, that a reasonable case could be made for paying compensation where it was possible to prove that vaccination was the cause of damage;

(3) what studies he has made of the compensation schemes for vaccine-damaged children which have been established in other countries.

Mr. Ennals

Evidence was given to the Royal Commission in confidence, but Ministers have frequently expressed sympathy with the problems of families with vaccine-damaged children and with the claim for compensation. I am aware of compensation schemes that exist in other countries.

Mr. Ashley

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) if he will detail the advice his Department has given on the contra-indications for immunisation, stating when, and why, the advice has been changed, and to whom it is given;

(2) what steps his Department has taken to ensure that doctors follow the advice issued on contra-indications;

(3) if his Department advised that any adverse reaction to the first immunisation should be a contra-indication to further ones of the same vaccine.

Mr. Ennals

Advice on contra-indications has been given in the memorandum "Immunisation against infectious disease" and in CMO letter 17/74 "Immunisation against whooping cough" both of which were issued to all doctors in the NHS. This is in addition to leaflets provided by manufacturers with each issue of vaccine. The Department's advice has not changed, though the CMO letter is more specific. The memorandum indicates that a severe reaction to a first vaccination is a contra-indication, but doctors bear the responsibility of advising parents as they consider best.