Posts Tagged ‘vaccines’

“‘No link’ between MMR and autism”

Another study finds no link between the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine and rising incidence of autism. (BBC, Mar. 3). For more on the litigation-fueled efforts to establish such a link in Britain, see our earlier reports: Dec. 29, 2003 and Feb. 25, 2004. More: Helene Guldberg, “MMR, autism and politics” (interview with Dr. Michael Fitzpatrick), Spiked-Online (UK), Jun. 23, 2004.

Also at Point of Law

All sorts of other stuff is going on at our sister website:

* An all-new featured discussion on medical liability has just begun, proceeding from the publication of an important new empirical study by Stanford prof Daniel Kessler;

* Legal ethicist and law prof Lester Brickman has a commentary on a Manhattan judge’s questioning of legal fees in 9/11 cases;

* The Manhattan Institute is seeking applications for a research fellowship on legal issues;

* Law prof Michael DeBow, familiar to many readers for his guest postings here, is joining the Point of Law blog as a regular contributor, with comments already on flu vaccine, the dismissal of a charity hospital suit, FDA jurisdiction over tobacco, and a new antitrust blog;

* Ted Frank contributes items on malpractice by expert witnesses and on a new study suggesting that experts suffer from some of the same biases as lay observers in high-damage cases, on whether much “pro bono” litigation really helps the public, and on “Robin Hood” school-finance suits;

* Jim Copland welcomes a new and improved website, LegalReformNow;

* I’ve got posts on sanctions for wrongful litigation (did you know federal judges liked the sanctions in their old, stronger form?), collective business guilt, ski slope disclaimers, Sarbanes-Oxley, Judge Posner’s view that both Sherlock Holmes and law reviews are much overrated, liability’s burden on small businesses, and insurance broker scandals (posts in progress). Much more, too; bookmark the site today.

Trial lawyers and the flu vaccine shortage

Kevin Drum argues that the reason that liability fears are not enough to keep vaccine makers out of the market is because vaccine makers can buy liability insurance and then raise their uncapped prices to compensate them for this additional expense. Thus, he concludes, restrictive FDA regulations are behind the shortage.

But why can vaccine makers raise their prices to cover liability insurance costs, but not raise their prices to cover their regulatory costs? After all, regulatory costs are much more predictable than liability costs.

The Weekly Standard correctly pins the culprit: strict product liability. American vaccine manufacturers have fallen by the wayside because trial lawyers have succeeded in driving them out of business.

In 1974, a British researcher published a paper claiming that the vaccine for pertussis (whooping cough) had caused seizures in 36 children, leading to 22 cases of epilepsy or mental retardation. Subsequent studies proved the claim to be false, but in the meantime Japan canceled inoculations, resulting in 113 preventable whooping cough deaths. In the United States, 800 pertussis vaccine lawsuits asking $21 million in damages were filed over the next decade. The cost of a vaccination went from 21 cents to $11.

Every American drug company dropped pertussis vaccine except Lederle Laboratories. In 1980, Lederle lost a liability suit for the paralysis of a three-month-old infant–even though there was almost no evidence implicating the vaccine. Lederle’s damages were $1.1 million, more than half its gross revenues from sale of the vaccine for that entire year.

(William Tucker, “La Grippe of the Trial Lawyers”, Oct. 25; this site, Oct. 14, Dec. 23). If only the Discovery Institute could stick to its sound work on tort reform and give up its embarrassing support for creationism quackery, I wouldn’t be so reluctant to cite to an article by one of its fellows.

Lawsuit reform at the debates

Wednesday night transcript:

[Question about flu vaccine shortage]

BUSH: […] We have a problem with litigation in the United States of America. Vaccine manufacturers are worried about getting sued, and therefore they have backed off from providing this kind of vaccine. [ed.: see Dec. 24 and earlier links]

One of the reasons I’m such a strong believer in legal reform is so that people aren’t afraid of producing a product that is necessary for the health of our citizens and then end up getting sued in a court of law. […]

KERRY: […] This president has turned his back on the wellness of America. And there is no system. In fact, it’s starting to fall apart not because of lawsuits — though they are a problem, and John Edwards and I are committed to fixing them [Oct. 12] — but because of the larger issue that we don’t cover Americans. […]

[Question on medical insurance costs]

BUSH: […] I do believe the lawsuits — I don’t believe, I know — that the lawsuits are causing health care costs to rise in America. That’s why I’m such a strong believer in medical liability reform.

In the last debate [Oct. 9], my opponent said those lawsuits only caused the cost to go up by 1 percent. Well, he didn’t include the defensive practice of medicine that costs the federal government some $28 billion a year and costs our society between $60 billion and $100 billion a year. […]

[Kerry’s response addressed Medicare bulk purchasing, the uninsured, and prescription drug reimportation, but not medical malpractice reform.]

Alex Tabarrok also has more on vaccines.

“Journal repents over vaccine-autism link”

“One of the world’s pre-eminent medical journals, the British magazine The Lancet, has said that it should never have published a 1998 study into controversial research linking a triple vaccine for infants to autism due to the researcher’s ‘fatal conflict of interest’.” British physician/researcher Andrew Wakefield, who conducted a study raising fears about the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine, did not disclose that he had been hired by lawyers seeking to press damage claims over the vaccine. The Wakefield study was later assailed as badly flawed. (Reuters/Washington Post/Sydney Morning Herald, Feb. 23). As a result of scaremongering over the vaccine, “The incidence of measles in parts of Britain is rising ominously as the number of children formerly inoculated against the disease falls to the level which risks an epidemic. In short, we could be on the verge of a major public-health disaster. … Colossal damage has been done and hundreds of thousands of children may be at risk of serious disease.” (“Misled over MMR” (editorial), The Observer, Feb. 22). See Jane Fineman, “Maverick view that sparked panic over the triple vaccine”, The Observer, Feb. 22. For more on MMR and other vaccine litigation, see Dec. 29; earlier posts. And: Michael Fitzpatrick, “MMR: Investigating the interests”, Spiked Online, Feb. 22; Black Triangle (UK blog, posting currently suspended; numerous posts; via GruntDoc). Yet more: Michael Fumento weighs in (“Anti-vaccine Activists Get Jabbed”, Scripps-Howard, Mar. 11), as does Charles Murtaugh (Dec. 22 and Feb. 22). Update Mar. 4, 2005 (another study finds no link).

“Gulf war syndrome: the legal case collapses”

United Kingdom: “An eight-year, multimillion pound legal battle by more than 2,000 veterans for compensation for Gulf war syndrome has collapsed because there is not enough scientific evidence to prove their case in court.” Although the government-aided Legal Services Commission is estimated to have spent around ?4m on the case, “a trawl by scientists through 10 years of research worldwide, overseen by the veterans’ lawyers and funded by the LSC, has found no evidence which establishes any specific cause for the range of health problems they suffer. … The collapse of the case comes only months after litigation by parents who blame the MMR vaccine for their children’s autism suffered a similar fate, also for lack of scientific evidence to back up their claims.” (see Dec. 29) (Clare Dyer, The Guardian, Feb. 5). Last year a lawsuit was filed in this country against chemical companies on behalf of Gulf War Syndrome sufferers: see Aug. 25. For more on the weakness of the scientific evidence ascribing GWS to chemicals in the environment during the first Iraq war, see Michael Fumento’s work.

Vaccines, cont’d

Britain’s legal-aid commission invested ?15 million in assisting claimants who wanted to sue makers over the measles, mumps, rubella (MMR) vaccine, but finally decided to call a halt: “After taking expert advice, the LSC acknowledged that, given the failure of research to establish a link between MMR and autism, the litigation was ‘very likely to fail'”. Michael Fitzpatrick, writing for the UK’s Spiked Online, explores what he calls the “enormous waste of public funds” on the litigation. (“Medicine on trial”, Dec. 15). Efforts to pin the blame on the preservative thimerosal have come up short, according to an editorial in today’s WSJ: “Researchers recently examined the health records of all children born in Denmark from 1971 to 2000 for autism diagnoses. Though Denmark eliminated thimerosal from its vaccines in 1992, the researchers found that the incidence of autism continued to increase. A second research team reviewed the records of nearly 500,000 Danes vaccinated for pertussis. They also found that the risk of autism and related disorders didn’t differ between those vaccinated with thimerosal and those without.” (“The Politics of Autism” (editorial), Wall Street Journal, Dec. 29). More on vaccines and liability: Jim Copland (Manhattan Institute), “Liable to Infection”, Dallas Morning News, Dec. 14; Robert Goldberg (also Manhattan Institute), “Vaccinating against disaster”, Washington Times, Dec. 17; and see Dec. 24 and earlier posts. Update Feb. 25: Lancet regrets publication of anti-MMR study; Mar. 4, 2005: another study finds no link.

Vaccine shortages

Professor Tyler Cowen notes a Financial Times article (subscription only) on how liability issues have driven many vaccine manufacturers out of business, causing the vaccine shortages we see today. (Marginal Revolution blog, Dec. 23).