Vaccination (Hansard, 13 December 1995)

§ Mr. Llew Smith
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to his answer of 8 November,Official 676W Report, column 976, on the report of the Public Health Laboratory Service on advance techniques for the surveillance of adverse reactions to measles, mumps and rubella immunisations; and if he will (a) put a copy of the report in the Library and (b) initiate a study to evaluate the adequacy of the present arrangements to monitor adverse reactions to the MR campaign. [5045]

§ Mr. Horam
A copy of the paper by Farrington P Et al inThe Lancet entitled, "A new method for active surveillance for diphtheria/tetanus/pertussis and measles/mumps/rubella vaccines" is available in the Library.
Monitoring of adverse reactions during the 1994 measles/rubella immunisation campaign was based on the yellow card scheme for reporting of suspected adverse reactions to all medicines by doctors, dentists and coroners. This scheme has been in operation since 1964 and its effectiveness in identifying possible safety hazards is well recognised. All reactions reported as suspected to be due to MR vaccine were handled as high priority. These monitoring arrangements proved more than adequate and there is no need for the suggested study. A report on adverse reactions reported to MR vaccine has been published in "Current Problems in Pharmacovigilance", which was distributed to all doctors in November 1995, copies of this publication are available in the Library.

§ Mr. Smith
To ask the Secretary of State for Health further to his departmental report, "Measles Rubella Immunisation Campaign in England—One Year On", published in November, page 1, what is the basis for his statement in respect of the recovery of the children who suffered immediate serious adverse reactions. [5050]

§ Mr. Horam
Information about recovery from immediate serious adverse reactions following immunisation with measles/rubella vaccine was obtained as part of detailed follow-up from doctors who reported these reactions on yellow cards. All children with immediate serious reactions recovered regardless of whether or not the reaction was likely to have been caused by the vaccine.

§ Mr. Smith
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to his answer of 8 November,Official Report, column 976, on the effects of the notification of the natural immunological response by vaccines in relation to the increase in auto-immune diseases, if he will publish in the Official Report the letter of reply sent to the hon. Member. [5024]

§ Mr. Horam
The letter my hon. Friend the then Under-Secretary of State gave the hon. Gentleman on 8 November is as follows.
I look forward to receiving the further clarification requested from the hon. Member and I will then publish a final reply in the Official Report.
Letter from Tom Sackville to Mr. Llew Smith, dated 8 November 1995: You have tabled the above parliamentary question. I am afraid it is not possible to give an appropriate reply without further information on which increases, in which autoimmune diseases you are interested in. One of my officials has sought your clarification of the question but has not received a response. Could you please clarify the specific diseases to which your question refers and I shall do my best to provide you with a prompt reply.
677W

§ Mr. Smith
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to his answer of 8 November,Official Report, column 975, on the disposal of surplus measles vaccines, what was the value of the reimbursement credit for the vaccines returned to the manufacturers; and what arrangements have been made to activate the credit in future. [5022]

§ Mr. Horam
For reasons of commercial confidentiality, it is not the practice for the Department of Health to disclose such information. All of the sum reimbursed has been used against other subsequent vaccine purchases.

§ Mr. Smith
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to his answer of 8 November 1995,Official Report, column 977, if he will list the documents which were sent to doctors and other health professionals on adverse reactions to the MMR vaccinations; and for what reasons each respective document was chosen as suitable to pass on to the health professionals involved in administering the campaign. [5042]

§ Mr. Horam
Information concerning possible adverse reactions to measles/rubella vaccine and guidance on the reporting of such reactions was contained in many of the letters and circulars issued to doctors during the planning and implementation of the measles/rubella immunisation campaign. The documents were prepared specifically for the campaign and contained information about the adverse reactions which health professionals might most commonly see during the course of the campaign. Information addressing the more specific concerns which it was thought might arise was also provided. In addition, the Department's memorandum "Immunisation Against Infectious Disease", which is issued to all doctors, and the British National Formulary contain information about possible adverse reactions to vaccines. The principal documents issued for the campaign, copies of which are in the Library, werePL CMO(94) 10/PL CNO(94)13: National measles and rubella immunisation campaign, issued 27 July 1994; EL(94)60: Measles/rubella schools immunisation campaign, issued 27 July 1994. Measles Fact Sheet (Health Education Authority) issued 1 September 1994; PL CMO(94)12/PL CNO(94)15: Measles and rubella immunisation campaign, issued 27 September 1994; Measles/rubella: Information for health professionals (issued under cover of above); EL(94)73: school-based measles/rubella immunisation campaign, issued 27 September 1994; PHLS Factsheet on measles for parents and children, issued October 1994; The measles/rubella immunisation: your questions answered (Health Education Authority) issued in October 1994.