Most MMR studies are meaningless, investigation claims

Vaccination News Home Page

http://www.guardian.co.uk/medicine/story/0,11381,805576,00.html

Guardian Unlimited
 
Login

Go to:  
Guardian UnlimitedSpecial reports
Home   UK   Business   Net   News in pictures   The wrap   Weblog   Talk   Search  
The Guardian   World   News guide   Arts   Special reports   Columnists   Audio   Help   Quiz  


 

  Medicine and health


  Search this site


Go to...
Special report: medicine and health

 
Medicine and health archived articles

 







 In this section
Leader: Patent justice

 
Nobel prize for British and US scientists who used worms to decode the book of life

 
Sally Weale: Children and the risk of accidental poisoning

 
Joanna Moorhead: The hidden risks of working from home

 
Dea Birkett: The pointlessness of hair

 
Paul Bailey: My recovery from heart failure in Romania

 
Michele Hanson: Rosemary's leg

 
Most MMR studies are meaningless, investigation claims

 
Robo-ops set to cut out the human factor

 
60 hospitals face axe in NHS reform

 
Leader: Masters of the mozzies

 
Complete DNA coding opens new ways to beat malaria

 
Health: Desperate measures

 
Doctors warn 22m children are too fat

 
Radical surgery 'needed to fight cancer gene'

 


 

   Most MMR studies are meaningless, investigation claims

Sophie Petit-Zeman
Sunday October 6, 2002
The Observer

A massive review of the evidence on the safety of the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine has concluded that most studies to date have been meaningless, and that more research into the vaccine's long-term effects is needed.

The review found that only 20 out of 3,500 safety studies of MMR could help determine whether it contributes to the development of a variety of conditions, including autism.

Concern about MMR has grown since a controversial report in the Lancet in 1998 linked it to bowel problems and autism. Despite official attempts to reassure parents, immunisation rates have fallen and some parents now choose single vaccines for their children rather than accepting the triple jab offered by the NHS.

The review's author, Dr Thomas Jefferson, criticised the lack of clear design and reporting criteria for vaccine safety studies and called urgently for guidelines.

'In most of the studies we assessed, it was almost impossible to ascertain what had actually been done,' he said. 'The results were certainly deficient. We don't know whether the research was too.'

As co-ordinator of the Cochrane Vaccines Field, part of a respected international collaboration that gathers health care evidence, Jefferson will present the results of the study at a conference in Amsterdam this month. He added: 'We found that vaccination with MMR is unlikely to be associated with bowel problems or autism, and we can say with certainty that without MMR children are vulnerable to a variety of debilitating and potentially fatal illnesses.'

Jefferson, who called for more research into the long-term effects of the vaccine, says the Government has 'refused to listen to people's anxieties and been unwilling to evaluate evidence critically'.

More science news and features
Observer Science pages

Fighting cancer
15.09.2002: Women confused by conflict in NHS advice
15.09.2002: Focus: Can fresh fruit really help?

Food and health
15.09.2002: Misery of fat children obsessed by junk food
15.09.2002: Cristina Odone: The fat of the land

Cancer breakthrough
07.07.2002: The Observer Profile: Richard Doll
09.12.2001: Simon Garfield: The cancer revolution

Science and public trust
23.06.2002: Public accepts gene science
26.05.2002: Mary Riddell: Beware mad, bad boffins
02.12.2001: Interview: The clone arranger

Observer profiles
26.05.2002: Robin McKie on Stephen Jay Gould's last book
14.04.2002: The time lord: Stephen Jay Gould



 

Printable version | Send it to a friend | Read it later | See saved stories





UP
 
 

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2002
 

Vaccination News Home Page

ALL INFORMATION, DATA, AND MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE IS FOR GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE KNOWLEDGE OR OPINIONS OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED AS PROVIDING MEDICAL OR LEGAL ADVICE.  THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO VACCINATE IS AN IMPORTANT AND COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU ALONE, IN CONSULTATION WITH YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.