4

Vaccine Meeting at FDA

Catherine Frompovich
09/07/2010
Vactruth.com

Whenever you’re in conflict with someone, there is one factor that can make the difference between damaging your relationship and deepening it.

That factor is attitude.

….William James, American Philosopher & Psychologist (1842-1910)

Why in the world would I open a report about a vaccine meeting at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in Rockville, Maryland, with such a quote? My answer is quite simple: Both sides of the vaccine injury issue need to interact intelligently because, as one member at that meeting said privately, “We’re both on the same page only at different paragraphs.”

That remark has resounded in my consciousness numerous times since I heard it at the Advisory Commission on Childhood Vaccines Meeting September 2 and 3, 2010. Furthermore, after listening to the committee and my making a three-minute presentation on Shaken Baby Syndrome, I’ve begun to realize that there just may be some truth to that unapparent statement. However, there’s a caveat, which is: The perspective from which government and vaccine safety advocates approach the “page” differ somewhat.

As I and other lay-advocates sat there listening to impressive information, I began to wonder about a few things. I am a consumer healthcare researcher for over 35 years and a journalist. I believe I know how to research and cite statistics and information. I value the moral integrity of factual information. I appreciate transparency. I truly believe in the principles of public health, safety, and welfare. I also wonder how, on an issue as important as vaccine safety and adverse reactions, there can be palpable differences.

Here’s a case on point.

On the last day of the meeting a report was given about the H1N1 Vaccine Safety Update wherein a statement was made that there were no pregnancy and/or fetal adverse reactions reported. Within a few minutes of hearing that remarkable statement, advocate Eileen Dannemann of the National Coalition of Organized Women (NCOW) made her astounding three-minute presentation that highlighted the 178 VAERS reports on H1N1 vaccine-related miscarriages. Ms. Dannemann’s presentation was totally serendipitous, as no one had access to what was going to be presented at the meeting. Can you imagine the look on committee members’ faces as Dannemann made her presentation? Personally, I sat there feeling sorry for everyone involved. There is nothing more humiliating than being contradicted by valid government agency data, which Dannemann pitched with aplomb. How come Dannemann had those statistics and the person who made that apparently erroneous statement didn’t? I’ve thought about that almost constantly since I heard the contradictory presentation and wonder just how much more information is not being shared with government advisory committees who, in turn, make recommendations regarding health issues and particularly, vaccines—the apparent ‘sacred cow’ of public health policy.

I truly believe that every member on that vaccine committee is an honest and dedicated professional who wants to make a difference in the safety of vaccines. However, I wonder just how informed they truly are. After my presentation I was approached by several members of the committee who expressed their concerns about Shaken Baby Syndrome being a vaccine adverse reaction, something they had never equated with vaccines before. I thought, “How enlightening. I’m glad I made the effort.” I could see real concern expressed in their faces. I hope they will follow through and make a recommendation to higher-ups within the CDC and FDA so that parents will not be prosecuted legally for damages caused by vaccines. Please read my presentation Brain Swelling and Damage Associated With Vaccines Inappropriately Labeled Shaken Baby Syndrome that will be published on VacTruth as part of a series of several advocates’ presentations made at that meeting.

The presentations will be published as a series in the rotation they were made by the advocates at the meeting:

First: Catherine J Frompovich, Shaken Baby Syndrome

Second: Laraine Abbey, RN, about the dangers of adjuvants and, in particular, aluminum

Third: Harold E Buttram, MD, The Possible Role of Vaccines in Causing Retrogressive Changes

As a result of attending that meeting, I came away with a resolve that lay-advocates for vaccine safety need to interact with CDC and FDA and their respective committees in a truly advisory capacity since they don’t seem to get it—that is factual information. Vaccine safety advocates need to divest themselves of emotional issues and pitch from the perspective of science, statistics, and preferably government agency published information that seems to be embargoed from its employees and/or committees.

I further believe it is imperative that vaccine safety advocates realize that we need to work from the bottom up because there are powerful forces working from the top down, e.g., lobbyists with deep pockets and other interests who promote agendas that may not be in the public’s interest. We saw that happen with the World Health Organization and the 2009 pandemic. Consumers need to become informed and as they say, “proactive” if they want to safeguard both their health and children. If what we experienced at the vaccine meeting with regard to blatant misinformation being disseminated, healthcare consumers must become more informed to make correct decisions regarding their right to self-determination.

In closing I offer my resources to CDC and FDA as a vaccine safety advocate. I feel I ferret out more accurate information that just may be helpful to those agencies, IF they really want it.

To be continued … Next: see Catherine J Frompovich’s presentation tomorrow.

Catherine J. Frompovich
 

Catherine J Frompovich is a retired natural nutritionist who earned advanced degrees in Nutrition and Holistic Health Sciences, Certification in Orthomolecular Theory and Practice plus Paralegal Studies. Her work has been published in national and airline magazines since the early 1980s. Catherine authored numerous books on health issues along with co-authoring papers and monographs with physicians, nurses, and holistic healthcare professionals. She has been a consumer healthcare researcher 35 years and counting. Catherine is an editor and writing consultant who helps authors get into publication. For numerous semesters she taught several writing courses for a suburban Philadelphia school district’s Adult Evening School. Her passion is assisting and guiding authors into print. Catherine’s latest book, A Cancer Answer, Holistic BREAST Cancer Management, A Guide to Effective & Non-Toxic Treatments, will be available on Amazon.com and as a Kindle eBook sometime in July 2012. Two of Catherine’s more recent books on Amazon.com are Our Chemical Lives And The Hijacking Of Our DNA, A Probe Into What’s Probably Making Us Sick (2009) and Lord, How Can I Make It Through Grieving My Loss, An Inspirational Guide Through the Grieving Process (2008).

  • Irene Baron

    Good article Mrs. Frompovich.
    I enjoyed reading your comments.

  • JB

    Excellent article and I agree with you whole-heartedly. True change must come from the bottom up.

  • .in response to Catherine’s quote which intimates that if I had or we had “shared” in advance, the committee, in service to the people and their health, would have made different recommendations regarding pregnant women.

    Catherine speaks: “I’ve thought about that almost constantly since I heard the contradictory presentation and wonder just how much more information is not being shared with government advisory committees who, in turn, make recommendations regarding health issues and particularly, vaccines—the apparent ‘sacred cow’ of public health policy”.

    Eileen: On the contrary, I did “share” our incoming data and its source (VAERS)with Marie McCormick months prior to the meeting which contradicts Catherine’s statement below. It was shared and purposely disregarded. Which only goes to show how the CDC knowing something in “advance” can manipulate data sources to substantiate its own preferred outcomes. This meeting was proof in the pudding and was only revealed, fortunately, by the strategy not to let the committee know in advance of what was going to be presented.

    Catherine: “Ms. Dannemann’s presentation was totally serendipitous, as no one had access to what was going to be presented at the meeting. Can you imagine the look on committee members’ faces as Dannemann made her presentation? Personally, I sat there feeling sorry for everyone involved”.

    It was a purposeful strategy that I did not share “in advance” our study with the meeting’s organizer, Andrea Herzog (a very nice gal). It was God’s flow that I was the only presentation right after McCormick and God’s Grace that Jeff asked her the question of how many adverse events in pregnant women re: H1N1 Vaccine the committee had found. (NONE)
    Why would Catherine feel sorry for everyone on the committee? Did I subvert their ability to create an advance spin? I think the shock value to those committee members who are genuinely out to benefit the public health and genuinely believe in vaccines was a needed wake up call. The incident engendered concern about the effectiveness and veracity of their own study groups…. that their own risk evaluating committee did not look into VAERS; did not sufficiently track pregnant women outcomes; and yielded a report that was fallacious and possible fraudulent.

  • Catherine Frompovich

    As the author of this series, which Laraine Abbey and Doctor Buttram agreed to my writing as a report on the FDA vaccine committee meeting we attended, Ms. Dannemann insisted in taking an adversarial approach to the committee and FDA, which we thought was not necessary or proper since Dannemann did not attend Thursday’s meeting where we made our presentations and were treated cordially. The tenor of her remarks posted indicates her position, in my opinion. On the basis of Dannemann’s wanting “to pick a fight,” we decided to exclude her presentation from the series and she apparently is not happy.