Posted on 12/24/2003 6:44:49 AM PST by xzins
By Sandra Jontz, Stars and Stripes
European edition, Wednesday, December 24, 2003
ARLINGTON, Va. — The Pentagon isn’t sure how it will deal with troops who refuse to get the anthrax vaccine now that a federal judge has temporarily banned the Defense Department’s policy that it be mandatory.
“We are considering all options,” said William Winkenwerder Jr., assistant secretary of defense for health affairs, adding he did not know if troops would continue to face punishment if they refuse the vaccine.
While officials work it out, the Pentagon still is administering anthrax vaccines to troops deploying to high-risk areas, but on a voluntary basis.
U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan’s ruling on Monday “came quite as a surprise,” Winkenwerder said.
“There is some interpretation as to what the order means,” Winkenwerder said. According to Sullivan’s ruling, short of a presidential special order, the Pentagon cannot force troops to get the vaccine.
Sullivan ruled the vaccine is not approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use against inhalation anthrax, and as such, is an experimental drug.
But Winkenwerder disagreed with the finding, saying the vaccine was approved by the FDA in 1970 for all forms of anthrax, and “a clarification by the FDA on their part is what we need,” Winkenwerder said. Lawyers will continue to argue the case before Sullivan in a March hearing in his chambers.
“The decision is not supported by medical science or medical fact,” Winkenwerder said.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said it was too premature to speculate on how the judge’s order would change, if at all, the Pentagon’s policy to vaccinate all servicemembers who travel to high-risk areas.
“The decision is recent and the lawyers are examining it. At the appropriate time, we’ll be making a recommendation as to the way forward,” Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said Wednesday during a press briefing. “I don’t want to comment on any specifics.”
Both Winkenwerder and Rumsfeld strongly objected to Sullivan’s characterization that the Defense Department was using personnel “as guinea pigs for experimental drugs.”
“Obviously, that comment, if he said it, is inaccurate,” Rumsfeld said.
“I categorically reject use of that term with response to the treatment of our servicemembers,” Winkenwerder said.
Air Force Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the vaccine not only is safe, but also needed to protect troops sent into harm’s way.
Since the program’s inception, roughly 1 million servicemembers have been vaccinated. Since June 2002, the number varies between 600,000 and 700,000, Winkenwerder said. Of those recent vaccinations, the Pentagon has seen about 10 refusals, dramatically lower from the roughly 400 between 1998 and 2001, he said.
Anthrax is a deadly biological agent that can be weaponized.
Roberts: Okay. Mr. Secretary, have you been vaccinated against anthrax?He ain't vaccinated.Rumsfeld: No.
Rumsfeld: Have you?
Roberts: No. Thank you very much. Thank you for being here.
11/26/2002
Hundreds of American soldiers have suffered serious illness after being compulsorily injected with a controversial Anthrax vaccine, a batch of which has been found to be contaminated
Critics of the vaccine, who include congressmen, senior military officers and more than 450 American servicemen who have been court-martialled or forced to leave the military for refusing to take it, say its ability to combat inhalation anthrax has never been proven and it has never been tested on humans; it has never been licensed to combat inhalation anthrax; and its long term effects have never been known. Those claims are supported by a congressional committee which issued a scathing and alarming report into the efficacy and supervision of the vaccine, and the immunisation programme, in April 2000.
The 95-page report found lots of the vaccine contaminated, a filtration process not authorised by the FDA, problems with cleanliness and the sterility of equipment and a failure to ensure a uniform potency of the drug.
“The firm routinely redates Anthrax Vaccine lots that have reached their labelled expiration date,” the report says. And it states: “Lot FAV036 was at room temperature for 20 hours, the filling operation was aborted, it was placed back in the refrigerator.” According to military records it was a dose from Lot FAV036 that was given to Wilson that December morning, eight months after the FDA report had been sent to BioPort.
1/1/2003
Alarmed service personnel are avoiding the shots by leaving the military at an alarming rate, and those who submit to the shots are becoming ill at a far greater rate than the Pentagon claimed. According to the GAO, between September 1998 and September 2000 about 16 percent of the pilots and aircrew members of the Guard and reserve had transferred to another unit (primarily to nonflying positions) to avoid or delay receiving the anthrax shots, moved to inactive status or left the military. Another 18 percent said they intended to leave in the near future. Of those who changed status or quit, 69 percent said it was because they didn't want to take the anthrax shots.
Those who quit or were reassigned to nonflying positions were experienced pilots with more than 3,000 flight hours on average. In addition, the GAO noted that two-thirds of those surveyed did not support the vaccination program. While the survey was conducted prior to the events of 9/11, which may impact how reservists would respond now, the survey confirmed that the Pentagon had failed to convince reservists that the shots were safe or needed, ultimately resulting in the depletion of trained pilots. Moreover, the GAO says in no uncertain terms that the Pentagon has put one over on Congress by failing to produce data to support claims that the numbers of those leaving are comparable with normal attrition rates.
Among those who took one or more shots, the GAO found that 85 percent reported experiencing some type of reaction. The overall rate reported for adverse reactions was nearly three times that published in the vaccine manufacturer's product insert, which claimed only 30 percent would experience some adverse reaction. Of those experiencing side effects, 24 percent had adverse effects considered serious enough for the shots to be discontinued. These systemic reactions included malaise and lassitude, chills and fever. The rate for these reactions was more than 100 times higher than claimed in the insert provided to those taking the shots. The rates may have been even higher, the GAO noted, because many adverse reactions were not reported to military command for fear of loss of flight status, negative effect on military or civilian careers and potential for being ridiculed.
The GAO recommended that the secretary of defense direct the establishment of an active surveillance program to identify and monitor adverse events associated with each anthrax immunization. The program, the GAO suggests, should ensure that appropriate and complete treatment and follow-up are provided to those who have experienced adverse effects and to those who may experience them in the future.
The Pentagon has refused to do so, citing a National Academy of Sciences (NAS) claim that there are "no data that indicate the need for the continuation of special monitoring programs." This "is misleading," the GAO charges, because the NAS actually suggested that the Pentagon regularly should study data for new trends and monitor reactions to vaccinations. Not to do so would lead to continued depletion of reserve forces, the GAO warned.
"Unfortunately, the actual losses and expected losses as a result of this program represented some of the most experienced and highly trained individuals in these services and are people not easily replaced," the GAO noted. "It takes time and a great deal of money and other resources to develop trained, experienced pilots and other aircrew members to support the important missions of these reserve components, particularly in light of the current battle against terrorism."
Here's the Pentagon's side of the story as of November 2003.
21. Considering the direct attacks on the Pentagon in September 2001, will people working in the Pentagon be vaccinated?Your strategy of sending soldiers to the battlefield unprepared for a disease that we have a preparation for is an anti-soldier decision if you are the commander. Period.At this time, we do not plan to vaccinate personnel simply because they work in the Pentagon.
It's as bad as sending them without kevlar and makes them unnecessarily susceptible to mass death.
LOL. Tell you what stud-o, I don't think it was a good commander's decision to tell the troops to "walk toward the light" to find out the battlefield effects of atomic weapons. As a vet of GW I, I'm pretty skeptical of the procedures the DoD uses to pump chemical cocktails into the troops to "prepare" them for the battlefield.
Despite all that, I dutifully trotted down to the hospital to start my series of shots when I got orders to go to one of those "high threat" areas, only to have them decide later on that a shortage in the stocks meant the area I was in was no longer high enough to continue giving me shots. So, I'm not very impressed with your "retired" command opinion.
Defensive measures should not be voluntary any more than it should be voluntary to leave your gas mask or body armor behind because they makes you uncomfortable. You don't get those things because they think you may want it, you get it because your survival on an individual level has an effect on the survival of your team, unit, and ultimately on the success of the mission.
Beyond that, however, every soldier will have an opportunity to see Iraq GIVEN the size of the army and the rotation needs in Iraq.
All soldiers SHOULD begin their series of anthrax shots now considering that it takes time to have the entire series.
From Post 17:
BECAUSE someone works in the Pentagon is no reason to immunize them.
If I were not going to the battlefield, then I would not necessarily desire to be vaccinated. If I were, then I would, and I would want my unit immunized. Period.
Hmmmmm ... seems to me you would be screaming for all uniformed Pentagon REMFs to be immunized at the very least and given the Pentagon has already been part of the battleground in International terrorism and the post-9/11 anthrax attacks targeted domestic civilian and congressional offices, you would at least be consistant.
Veterinarians and animal handlers have been using this same vaccination for some time.
Why do you think THEY use it?
Not for inhalation of weaponized anthrax, that's for sure.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
