Excellent Piece!!

[HARDCORE]

Excellent piece! One of the things that always stands out at me however during these types of debates is that the leadership defending the program, can never refute the facts. The same rhetoric gets stated: "safe, effective, etc...", but read below...
No where in Grabenstein's statement does he refute any of the facts presented by MAJ Rempfer or LTC Dingle.
As "well-meaning" as Grabenstein is at defending this illogical program and deliberately lying about the illnesses, screenings and refusers, it begs for common sense that the only result of these actions are destroying the lives and health of those who serve of which the leadership has an obligation to protect.



Army Times
December 15, 2003
Pg. 54



Should troops get the anthrax vaccination?
Andrea N. Meyerhoff, M.D., is adviser for medical CBRN defense for the assistant secretary of defense (health affairs). (For subscribers only)
Issue Date: December 15, 2003

Should troops get the anthrax vaccination?
YES: Vaccines give protection against the threat of anthrax

By Andrea N. Meyerhoff and Col. John D. Grabenstein

Andrea N. Meyerhoff, M.D., is adviser for medical CBRN defense for the assistant secretary of defense (health affairs).

Col. John D. Grabenstein, PhD, is deputy director for military vaccines, Office of the Army Surgeon General.

We protect our service members from many health threats, both natural and man-made. We do so following science and the best practice of medicine. Anthrax poses a threat to our armed forces; we must protect them.

A few vocal critics of our force health-protection initiatives continue to make inaccurate statements and misconstrue facts regarding the Anthrax Vaccine Immunization Program. We have examined these assertions; experts inside and outside the Defense Department have examined these assertions. We again refute them. It is not helpful for critics, however well-meaning, to misrepresent facts and science on this issue.

The secretaries of defense in both the Clinton and Bush administrations carefully reviewed the anthrax vaccination policies and approved them. Senior military leaders continue to believe troops need protection from lethal anthrax weapons. Vaccination offers the best round-the-clock protection against anthrax. Since March 1998, we have protected almost 1 million service members.

We have confidence in the anthrax vaccine based on its continued Food and Drug Administration licensing since 1970. The FDA, America?s arbiter of manufacturing quality, knows the production process in detail and approved the vaccine in its entirety. Our confidence is reinforced by the National Academy of Sciences? comprehensive report on anthrax vaccine safety. In March 2002, America?s best scientists, after weighing all the evidence and listening to the critics, stated clearly that the anthrax vaccine is as safe as other vaccines.

Not unexpectedly, service members became ill before, during and after deployments for Operation Iraqi Freedom. In each instance we carefully examined the case to determine whether vaccination may have contributed to the illness. Our conclusions show that troops who receive the anthrax vaccination have similar rates of illness as those who have not received the vaccination.

We provide the details of illnesses following vaccinations to the FDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. We do this to assure careful, independent review by our nation?s premier medical experts. In rare cases where a vaccine may have caused harm, we share the medical evaluation with the health-care community and seek to gain important information to improve our program. The knowledge we gained from the case of Spc. Rachel Lacy, the Army reservist who died earlier this year, will benefit others.

Our vaccination programs include comprehensive service member outreach and education. Since we restarted our anthrax vaccination program in 2002, fewer than 10 service members have separated for refusing vaccination. Understanding the benefits to themselves, their units and their missions, hundreds of thousands of service members readily receive vaccinations. We honor their trust with continued careful screening, education and monitoring to provide an unparalleled vaccination program.

We recognize that some vaccine critics will continue to repeat their inaccurate assertions about the anthrax vaccine. We will continue to present the facts, the whole truth and the best that medical science teaches us. At the same time, we will continue to investigate, examine and discuss all that we learn through our force health-protection program. Our objective is the health and safety of our service men and women.




Should troops get the anthrax vaccination?
At top, Maj. Thomas Rempfer and, above, Lt. Col. Russell Dingle are Air Force Reserve officers who were members of a 1998 Connecticut Air National Guard investigative team that helped identify legal and ethical issues regarding the anthrax vaccine. Their views do not reflect the official position of the Defense Department or the Air Force. (For subscribers only)

Issue Date: December 15, 2003

Should troops get the anthrax vaccination?
NO: Vaccination program rife with unresolved concerns

By Maj. Thomas Rempfer and Lt. Col. Russell Dingle

At top, Maj. Thomas Rempfer and, above, Lt. Col. Russell Dingle are Air Force Reserve officers who were members of a 1998 Connecticut Air National Guard investigative team that helped identify legal and ethical issues regarding the anthrax vaccine. Their views do not reflect the official position of the Defense Department or the Air Force.
?Stovepiping? describes a policy-making process lacking rigorous scrutiny by the entire chain of command. A recent article by Seymour Hersch in The New Yorker discussed this concept in relation to Middle East threat assessments.

This type of threat assessment was the foundation of the military?s Anthrax Vaccine Immunization Program ? the epitome of stovepiping. Without proper staffing or requisite review, the AVIP became a forcewide mandate. Thus, a known inadequate, highly reactive and experimental vaccine was used in conflict with U.S. law ? Title 10, Section 1107 ? specifically written to protect our troops from experimentation.

The ?threat? debate aside, serious, unresolved AVIP concerns exemplify a stovepiped absence of rigorous scrutiny:

?FDA has acknowledged never legally finalizing the anthrax vaccine license as required by law.

?Unapproved manufacturing changes before the 1991 Persian Gulf War rendered the vaccine adulterated.

?These unapproved changes never were studied as a possible cause of Gulf War illness, and the vaccine never was ruled out because records were not kept.

?The General Accounting Office has issued 12 reports concerning the anthrax vaccine ? all critical. These reports verified the unapproved manufacturing changes and safety problems.

?Based on a Navy study, the FDA reclassified the vaccine due to the risk of birth defects to children of female service members.

?The Defense Department continues to justify punishing, discharging and imprisoning service members based on a suspect scientific report it funded. The fine print of this report acknowledges the vaccine as only ?reasonably safe,? and insists a new vaccine is ?urgently needed.? President Bush directed development of this new vaccine in 2002.

?Service members are denied the right to present legal arguments in courts-martial concerning the illegality of the mandate.

The vaccine also has been linked to serious illnesses and deaths. Army reservist Spc. Rachel Lacy died of a pneumonia-like illness within weeks of receiving five vaccines, including the anthrax vaccine, one day before deploying overseas. The civilian coroner told the Military Times newspapers: ?It?s just very suspicious in my mind ... that she?s healthy, gets the vaccinations and then dies a couple of weeks later.? The death certificate listed ?post-vaccine? problems.

Military officials initially tried to deny links between the vaccine and pneumonia-like symptoms. The Army pharmacist responsible for defending the AVIP, who is not a medical doctor, referred to the death as ?unexplained,? claiming vaccines are ?probably not to blame.? Later, he said vaccines are ?unlikely to be a factor.?

Recently, two civilian medical panel reviews forced the Defense Department to admit the death was ?probably? or ?possibly? a reaction to vaccines. The admissions emerge amid anticipated congressional intervention and parents of the victims claiming a cover-up.

The department?s denials are puzzling in light of previous data:

?An Army report showed 17 soldiers died of complications of pneumonia between 1998 and 2001; 19 more recently have fallen ill, and two of them have died.

?A testimony to Congress in 1999: ?There have been three reports of serious illness coincidentally associated with vaccination ... reports involved ?hypersensitivity pneumonia ...?

?A 1999 Pentagon news conference: ?We?ve had one individual we think may have a long-term pulmonary problem.?

?A 2002 medical journal article by three Navy doctors in Cardiopulmonary and Critical Care Journal (CHEST) titled ?Hypersensitivity Pneumonitis Following Anthrax Vaccination.?

?A 2003 government study on adverse reactions concluded the vaccine was the ?possible or probable? cause of pneumonia in some service members.

These unresolved issues jeopardize the integrity of future force-protection programs, injure countless service members and end the careers of many others.

Failure to properly investigate and reverse the denial and deceit will ensure the program goes down in the history books with radiation testing, Agent Orange and Gulf War illness.

Officials should properly care for the ill and correct records of those punished for refusing the vaccine ? and hold accountable those responsible for playing loose with the law and our troops? health.



Resolution questions vaccine programs

A senator wants the Pentagon to reconsider its mandatory anthrax and smallpox vaccine policies ? and the health and career consequences of those policies on U.S. troops. (For subscribers only)


Issue Date: December 15, 2003


Resolution questions vaccine programs

Measure seeks support for probing illnesses, adverse reactions to shots


By Deborah Funk

Times staff writer


A senator wants the Pentagon to reconsider its mandatory anthrax and smallpox vaccine policies ? and the health and career consequences of those policies on U.S. troops.

Pointing to reports of possible bad side effects, morale problems and a lack of information on how the vaccines affect long-term health, Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., introduced Senate Resolution 278 on Nov. 25.


The nonbinding ?sense of the Senate? resolution, referred to the Senate Armed Services Committee for consideration, asks the Defense Department to:


??Reconsider the mandatory nature? of the program, ?pending the development of new and better vaccines? in progress.


?Re-evaluate the anthrax and smallpox threat to troops in Iraq and Afghanistan ?to reflect operational realities? when weighing whether to continue the mandatory shots.


??Reconsider adverse actions already taken or intended to be taken against service members for refusing to accept the anthrax or smallpox vaccine.?


Finally, the resolution asks the Department of Veterans Affairs to look at reports of possible side effects and whether the vaccines are causing health problems and to estimate VA?s future costs to treat such ailments.


Pentagon officials did not respond to requests for comment.


Bingaman is seeking Senate support for his resolution based on information from service members who have said they became ill after receiving their anthrax or smallpox vaccinations.


Senior Department of Defense medical officials Andrea N. Meyerhoff and Col. John D. Grabenstein contend that the vaccinations are safe and necessary against very real threats.


?In March 2002, America?s best scientists after weighing all the evidence and listening to the critics, stated clearly that the [anthrax] vaccine is as safe as other vaccines,? they wrote in a commentary for Army Times (Back Talk, page 54).


A national priority


In introducing his proposal, Bingaman pointed out that President Bush has made developing a modern anthrax vaccine a national priority and that the Institute of Medicine also urged the government over 18 months ago to develop a new anthrax vaccine.


?Vaccines are an important factor in ensuring protection of our nation?s military personnel from health threats,? Bingaman said. ?However, the current smallpox and anthrax vaccines have real and serious consequences that must be weighed against the potential benefits.?


Since the military began its mandatory anthrax vaccination program, the label has been modified to add more reported potential side effects, including serious adverse events reported after vaccination.


Bingaman said some news organizations blame anthrax and smallpox vaccines for the deaths of 11 soldiers he named.


One of the most prominent cases was that of Army Reserve Spc. Rachel Lacy, who died last spring from lung damage several weeks after receiving five shots in one day, including anthrax and smallpox vaccinations.


Defense officials have said two expert committees that reviewed her case concluded one or more of the vaccines she received likely ? but not definitively ? triggered an underlying illness that led to her death.


A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention advisory panel on vaccines dropped its support for expanding the civilian smallpox vaccination program after finding one in 500 civilians ?had a serious vaccine event.?


Lack of data cited


A report by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease noted a lack of data showing anthrax vaccine protects against inhalation anthrax in humans, Bingaman?s resolution states.


Hundreds of service members have been punished for refusing to take the anthrax vaccine, and an unknown number have left the military rather than take the shots.


The military threat of anthrax or smallpox attack ?has significantly
diminished? since Iraq?s Saddam Hussein was toppled and al-Qaida operations were disrupted in Afghanistan, the resolution said.


Anthrax shots are voluntary for the British and Australian militaries, Bingaman noted.