Preventing development of allergic disorders in children
BMJ 2006; 333 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.333.7566.485 (Published 31 August 2006) Cite this as: BMJ 2006;333:485All rapid responses
Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed. Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles. The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not including references and author details. We will no longer post responses that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
Since peanut oil is commonly used as an adjuvant in vaccines, the
source of the problem should be obvious. However, since it appears to be
crimethink even to suggest such a thing, I remain confident that the
medical profession will continue to overlook or deliberately(?) ignore the
obvious.
Competing interests:
Father of a vaccine-injured child. Currently taking legal action on his behalf.
Competing interests: No competing interests
Dear Sirs,
Preventing
development of allergic disorders in children
BMJ 2006;333:485 (2 September),
Regarding their
ten minute consultation, it might assist Chantelle
Anandan, research fellow and Aziz Sheikh, professor of primary care
research and development, University of Edinburgh to investigate what
causes the body to be in a condition in which it responds with a
reaction to allergens. It is trite that allergens are not
allergens if the body did not react to them. It is also trite
that avoidance of the causes of sensitisation will avoid sensitisation.
Whilst there is
very a little in the evidence-based literature, it is
well-known in
manufacturing circles that adjuvants cause allergies.
As biotech company Biovant's CEO, Steve Simes said on the
launch of their new adjuvant:-
"The
problem with most adjuvants is that they can cause
allergies,"
said Simes. "Ours might not be as potent as others, but it is safer."
By Val
Brickates Kennedy, MarketWatch
Last Update: 3:45 PM ET Apr 24, 2006
Further,
some
excipients are also known to cause sensitisation reactions and
hypersensitivity is a contraindication [2]
If, in
preparation for the ten minute consultation, Chantelle
Anandan and Aziz Sheikh would research the
evidence base on the risk of serious adverse effects with
the risks of avoidance of adjuvants and excipients as one of the causes
of
sensitisation, the decision on best practice is a simple one.
Regrettably, their search will be difficult and tenacity is needed as I
have found when reseaching these issues. As Dr Tom Jefferson said
when head of the vaccine division of the Cochrane Collaboration and
board member of the European Programme for Improved Vaccine Safety
Surveillance Jefferson said [1] "There
is some good research, but it
is overwhelmed by the bad. …. there was a "dearth" of sound
studies on the risks and benefits.”
But there
is
evidence. If they care to contact me I may be able to assist
their searches. Contact details can be found here:-
www.cliffordmiller.com.
[1] Vaccines
expert warns studies are useless The Telegraph
(London, England - Filed: 27/10/2002 - Lorraine
Fraser - Accessed 10 Sept 2006)
[2] SPC
& PL Wording for Use of Thiomersal in Medicinal Products With
Regard to Sensitisation As Agreed by the Chmp in February 2006 - Committee for
Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) CPMP/2612/99
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests
Peanuts are cheap sources of dietary protein and predominantly
ingested. In India it is known as "poor man's nut" and forms the chief
ingredient of baby weaning food products which is introduced as early as 6
months. Peanut allergy is not known in this part of the world or possibly
the symptoms of the reaction (if any) is not attributed to peanut.
The symptoms may vary from apprehension to chills to coma and death.
A reaction to peanut may be induced by consuming peanut or food labelled
as hydrolysed vegetable protein or even eating from plate containing
residues of peanut products.Most exposures are accidental. A peanut
sensitive child may undergo lot of peer pressure and therefore
psychological counselling should be given utmost importance.
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests
Dear Madam
Prof Sheikh has produced a timely guide, but perpetuates the peanut
avoidance advice in early childhood which may be plain wrong if Prof
Gideon Lack's [Professor of Clinical Immunology at Guys & St Thomas']
observations (outlined at a recent lecture I attended in London) of peanut
allergy rates in Israel and Sub-saharan Africa are considered. There is
no peanut allergy in these places which are linked by there early
introduction of peanut based substances in babyhood - in Africa 'peanut'
soup is the main source of protein for these kids; in Israel 'bamba' is
given to babies because it is wheat free and a tasty weaning food.
Prof Sheikh's advice perpetuates (Western)
cultural myths about nutrition and food allergy. If we wish to see
reductions in food (peanut) allergy, the dietary advice to mothers
concerning the use of peanut based products in their baby's diets needs
urgent review!
Yours sincerely
David Lewis
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests
Preventing patients having knowledge of allergic reactions
It is disconcerting that Anandan and Sheikh tell professionals to "
Reassure (her) that routine immunisations do not increase the risk of
babies developing allergic disorders and are safe to give to babies with
food allergies, eczema, or asthma ", when, as Clifford Miller has pointed
out, there is clear evidence that allergic reactions are associated with
products put into vaccines.
One example he gives is Thiomersal, and in the CHMP 2006 position
statement which he provides, it is clearly stated that those receiving the
vaccine should be made aware of the risks of allergic reactions to
Thiomersal.
In a reply to an FOI request to the Department of Health I was told
"As advised by the Committee on the Safety
of Medicine, the Department's only concerns about the inclusion of
thiomersal in vaccines were of possible hypersensitivity reactions".
Their reply is available to anyone who would like to read it.
Product inserts list contraindications and warn those who may have a
history of allergic reactions, such as anaphylaxis to tell their doctor
before having vaccinations.
Unless I have missed something, parents who take their children for
vaccination are not routinely given the product insert sheet for
contraindications to vaccines or the CHMP position statement when
Thiomersal has been in the vaccines, or indeed any information which may
make them less confident in the vaccine programme.
With the rate of allergies soaring to epidemic proportions and
factual information being kept back from parents about allergic reactions
to vaccines, how confident can we be about the desire to prevent allergic
reactions?
Competing interests:
Specialist in disorders which can be caused by vaccine and are often blamed on parents
Competing interests: No competing interests