Measles, Mumps and Rubella Vaccine (Hansard, 13 March 1998)

§ Ms Jowell

Following recent media coverage of a paper published inThe Lancet on 28 February, the Chief Medical Officer, Sir Kenneth Calman, issued a public statement on 12 March as follows: Since the Lancet article was published there has been much misleading media coverage about possible links between measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) and autism. I am concerned that health professionals should have available the best information to give to parents. Despite the Lancet paper stating categorically 'We did not prove a link between MMR vaccine and the syndrome described', this work has been wrongly reported as demonstrating a real causal association. Independent experts and I have seen the published research and we are not convinced that there is indeed any link. No evidence has been published that demonstrates that MMR plays a part in autism. Only one of the 13 authors of the Lancet paper has suggested, although not via published papers, that MMR should be given as three separate injections at least a year apart. The following points are important for parents and health professionals alike: There is no published evidence to support the separate doses suggestion. The suggestion is counter to the recommendations of the Department of Health's independent experts and the World Health Organisation. 378W There are clear adverse consequences from following such a suggestion: take up for three separate immunisations will undoubtedly be less than that where only one is needed—some children will inevitably miss one or two jabs. During the period from the first to the third injections children will be left unnecessarily at risk from serious diseases whilst they wait, unprotected, for two years or more between vaccines. During this time they and their contacts are at risk of infection. Concerned parents, may find it helpful to know that the Assistant Director-General of the World Health Organisation, Dr. Ralph Henderson, has written to the Department of Health this week saying: 'We believe none of these data [in the Lancet article] provide a basis for providing the different components of this vaccine in separate schedules. We wished to inform you of this as a means of offering you and your colleagues support in remaining firm in supporting the continued use of this highly effective vaccine which has such an outstanding safety record.' Immunisation policy is built on scientific evidence of benefit and risk. No scientific evidence of the risk of autism from MMR has been published. There is an inevitable increased risk in following the suggestion that children receive three separate vaccines, given that they may then be exposed to serious infections for far longer than necessary. Therefore I strongly recommend that parents continue to have their children vaccinated with MMR.

The Chief Medical Officer's statement also included the following joint statement by the British Medical Association, Community Practitioners' and Health Visitors' Association, Faculty of Public Health Medicine, General Medical Services Committee, Royal College of General Practitioners, Royal College of Midwives, Royal College of Nursing, Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, and Royal College of Physicians: We fully support the Chief Medical Officer's advice. We strongly advise all parents to continue with the present MMR vaccination programme. This is essential for the welfare of children.

The Chief Medical Officer's statement concluded: I believe it is important to listen to all the arguments on this topic. Last year I agreed to convene a scientific seminar to air these issues. That independent seminar is now being organised by the Medical Research Council and will bring together experts on virology, epidemiology, gastroenterology, paediatrics and immunology. Following that meeting, on the 23 March, I will be writing to all doctors to let them know my conclusions.