here
Officials say drug caused Nigeria polio
By MARIA CHENG, AP Medical Writer Fri Oct 5, 3:55 PM ET
LONDON - A polio outbreak in Nigeria was caused by the vaccine designed to stop it, international health officials say, leaving at least 69 children paralyzed.
It is a frightening paradox in a part of the world that already distrusts western vaccines, making it even tougher to stamp out age-old diseases.
The outbreak was caused by the live polio virus that is used in vaccines given orally — the preferred method in developing countries because it is cheaper and doesn't require medical training to dispense.
"This vaccine is the most effective tool we have against the virus, but it's like fighting fire with fire," said Olen Kew, a virologist at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The CDC and the World Health Organization announced the cause of the polio outbreak last week, even though they knew about it last year.
Outbreaks caused by the oral vaccine's live virus have happened before. But the continuing Nigerian outbreak is the biggest ever caused by the vaccine. It also follows a nearly yearlong boycott of the vaccine in Africa's most populous country because of unfounded fears the vaccine was a Western plot to sterilize Muslims.
Officials now worry that the latest vaccine-caused Nigerian outbreak could trigger another vaccine scare.
Experts say such outbreaks only happen when too few children are vaccinated. In northern Nigeria, only about 39 percent of children are fully protected against polio.
The oral polio vaccine contains a weakened version of polio virus. Children who have been vaccinated excrete the virus, and in unsanitary conditions it can end up in the water supply, spreading to unvaccinated children.
In rare instances, as the virus passes through unimmunized children, it can mutate into a form that is dangerous enough to spark new outbreaks.
In 2001, officials reported that 22 children were paralyzed from polio in the Dominican Republic and Haiti in this way. Subsequent vaccine-caused polio outbreaks have occurred in the Philippines, Madagascar, China and Indonesia.
In the West, the polio vaccine is given as a shot and uses an inactivated virus, but that method is more expensive and requires training.
In Nigeria, the outbreak comes "in the wake of all the other problems they've had in," said Dr. Donald A. Henderson, who led WHO's smallpox eradication campaign in the 1970s.
In 2003, politicians in northern Nigeria canceled vaccination campaigns for nearly a year, claiming the vaccine was a Western plot to sterilize Muslims. That led to an explosion of polio, and the virus jumped to about two dozen countries.
Now, health officials' decision to keep quiet about the cause of the outbreak for so long may look suspicious.
Dr. David Heymann, WHO's top polio official, said that because the organization considered the outbreak to be a problem for scientists and not something that would change global vaccination practices, they thought it was was unnecessary to immediately share publicly.
CDC's Kew added: "The people who are against immunization may seize on anything that could strengthen their position, even if it's scientifically untenable."
Rumors are still rife among Nigerians that the vaccine is unsafe, and several religious leaders continue to lecture on its dangers. Another mass vaccine boycott could lead to further polio spread, derailing long-standing eradication efforts for good.
Nigerian health officials contacted by The Associated Press declined to comment on the situation.
"Convincing the Nigerians to take even more of this vaccine will be a tough sell," said Dr. Samuel Katz, an infectious diseases specialist at Duke University and co-inventor of the measles vaccine.
More than 10 billion polio doses have been given to children worldwide, and the vaccine has been credited with cutting polio incidence by more than 99 percent since 1988. Far more children are paralyzed by the wild polio virus than the virus spread by the oral vaccine. But no vaccine is risk-free.
WHO said that changing the vaccination strategy is unnecessary. "It would be nice if we had a more stable oral polio vaccine, but that's not the way it is today," Heymann said. "We will continue working the way we have been working because we don't want children to be paralyzed anywhere."
Monday, October 8, 2007
aint no stopping ron paul
Ain’t No Stoppin’ Us Now!
by James Ostrowski
by James Ostrowski
Save a link to this article and return to it at www.savethis.comSave a link to this article and return to it at www.savethis.com Email a link to this articleEmail a link to this article Printer-friendly version of this articlePrinter-friendly version of this article View a list of the most popular articles on our siteView a list of the most popular articles on our site
DIGG THIS
Ron’s Paul’s announcement of his third-quarter fundraising was a major turning point in the campaign. It was the first time he received coverage from the mainstream media befitting a contender.
I just have a few small quibbles and not out of orneriness or ingratitude at the fine coverage.
The MSM actually understated the significance of this accomplishment.
First, the money was raised by a candidate the MSM had given no chance to win and little coverage. Much of the coverage was derisive or dismissive. His poll numbers were in the single digits. Ron Paul supporters evidently don’t care much about today’s poll numbers or MSM conventional wisdom. The Ron Paul Revolution is, among other things, a revolution against the MSM! The Revolution has used the MSM’s rival, the internet, to force its way into contention. This is the first presidential campaign where the internet has been a decisive factor, not just a sideshow.
Second, while money is the heart of the campaigns of the other contenders, official money is the lesser part of the Ron Paul campaign. The heart of Ron Paul’s campaign is a spontaneous, grassroots eruption of real world and virtual activism. This is simply nonexistent with Rudy’s campaign, for example. There is no grassroots Rudy campaign. I would know. I live in the second largest city in his home state and am a close observer of local politics. It just isn’t there.
As has been noted in various places on the web in recent days, the total economic value of the efforts on behalf of Ron Paul is far greater than reflected in his campaign spending. He has 50 paid staffers but tens of thousands of hardcore volunteers spending their own money. I spoke to a volunteer in Albany the other day. He said there were "only" 150 Ron Paul volunteers in Albany. Only 150 in one small city? Other campaigns would kill for that.
Third, it's a mistake to compare contributions to Ron Paul with contributions to Rudy. Rudy collects large donations from the usual suspects, the corporate state elite, rich people who wish to buy political influence. They want something specific and tangible for their money: a judgeship, a subsidy, a pardon, an ambassadorship. In Buffalo, his fundraiser was hosted by a man who did the same for George Bush and coincidentally got an ambassadorship to Malta. A tough job but somebody has to do it.
Those who give to Ron Paul do so mainly out of pure principle. While his supporters expect to benefit from his election, it’s not a specific tangible benefit at the expense of others. On the contrary, they expect an improvement in the general welfare of which they will partake. Concern for the general welfare has rarely provided the basis for substantial political fundraising. Political scientists tell us that people generally do not get heavily involved in politics unless they expect to materially benefit above and beyond the general public. Ron Paul is defying a law of politics known as rational apathy.
Fourth, the average donation to Rudy is many times higher than Ron Paul’s. This means that far more people stand behind those Ron Paul dollars. As the campaign goes on, they can continue to donate while many of Rudy’s influence buyers have maxed out. Also, there’s just more of us plain folk than fat cats, once again pointing to more room for growth for Ron Paul.
The MSM deserves credit for finally noticing the Ron Paul Revolution but they have barely begun to grasp its true strength. Nevertheless, this burst of publicity will generate even more contributions, boost poll numbers, and encourage more volunteers, which in turn will stimulate more publicity. I think the best metaphor for the campaign now is a nuclear chain reaction. That’s why this may be an appropriate campaign theme song:
by James Ostrowski
by James Ostrowski
Save a link to this article and return to it at www.savethis.comSave a link to this article and return to it at www.savethis.com Email a link to this articleEmail a link to this article Printer-friendly version of this articlePrinter-friendly version of this article View a list of the most popular articles on our siteView a list of the most popular articles on our site
DIGG THIS
Ron’s Paul’s announcement of his third-quarter fundraising was a major turning point in the campaign. It was the first time he received coverage from the mainstream media befitting a contender.
I just have a few small quibbles and not out of orneriness or ingratitude at the fine coverage.
The MSM actually understated the significance of this accomplishment.
First, the money was raised by a candidate the MSM had given no chance to win and little coverage. Much of the coverage was derisive or dismissive. His poll numbers were in the single digits. Ron Paul supporters evidently don’t care much about today’s poll numbers or MSM conventional wisdom. The Ron Paul Revolution is, among other things, a revolution against the MSM! The Revolution has used the MSM’s rival, the internet, to force its way into contention. This is the first presidential campaign where the internet has been a decisive factor, not just a sideshow.
Second, while money is the heart of the campaigns of the other contenders, official money is the lesser part of the Ron Paul campaign. The heart of Ron Paul’s campaign is a spontaneous, grassroots eruption of real world and virtual activism. This is simply nonexistent with Rudy’s campaign, for example. There is no grassroots Rudy campaign. I would know. I live in the second largest city in his home state and am a close observer of local politics. It just isn’t there.
As has been noted in various places on the web in recent days, the total economic value of the efforts on behalf of Ron Paul is far greater than reflected in his campaign spending. He has 50 paid staffers but tens of thousands of hardcore volunteers spending their own money. I spoke to a volunteer in Albany the other day. He said there were "only" 150 Ron Paul volunteers in Albany. Only 150 in one small city? Other campaigns would kill for that.
Third, it's a mistake to compare contributions to Ron Paul with contributions to Rudy. Rudy collects large donations from the usual suspects, the corporate state elite, rich people who wish to buy political influence. They want something specific and tangible for their money: a judgeship, a subsidy, a pardon, an ambassadorship. In Buffalo, his fundraiser was hosted by a man who did the same for George Bush and coincidentally got an ambassadorship to Malta. A tough job but somebody has to do it.
Those who give to Ron Paul do so mainly out of pure principle. While his supporters expect to benefit from his election, it’s not a specific tangible benefit at the expense of others. On the contrary, they expect an improvement in the general welfare of which they will partake. Concern for the general welfare has rarely provided the basis for substantial political fundraising. Political scientists tell us that people generally do not get heavily involved in politics unless they expect to materially benefit above and beyond the general public. Ron Paul is defying a law of politics known as rational apathy.
Fourth, the average donation to Rudy is many times higher than Ron Paul’s. This means that far more people stand behind those Ron Paul dollars. As the campaign goes on, they can continue to donate while many of Rudy’s influence buyers have maxed out. Also, there’s just more of us plain folk than fat cats, once again pointing to more room for growth for Ron Paul.
The MSM deserves credit for finally noticing the Ron Paul Revolution but they have barely begun to grasp its true strength. Nevertheless, this burst of publicity will generate even more contributions, boost poll numbers, and encourage more volunteers, which in turn will stimulate more publicity. I think the best metaphor for the campaign now is a nuclear chain reaction. That’s why this may be an appropriate campaign theme song:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
