Meryl Dorey, an experienced Registered Nurse in an Australian General Practice, recently received the monthly government vaccine order and was surprised to find a new addition to the National Immunization Program (NIP) called VAXELIS. Here are her findings.
This vaccine is positioned as an “alternative” to Infanrix Hexa, typically administered to babies at 2, 4, and 6 months for DTPa, hepB, polio & HIB.
What’s concerning is the lack of information provided to healthcare professionals about Vaxelis. Curiosity led me to investigate the official Product Information, revealing that it’s a ribosomal DNA vaccine. It’s disheartening that such a significant development was introduced without proper communication.
In response, I’ve taken it upon myself to inform every parent who visits the practice with a baby about Vaxelis. Furthermore, I’ve communicated my reservations to the practice manager, asserting my refusal to administer it until the NIP provides essential details like clinical trials, safety data, and an explanation for this lack of transparency.
This situation is confounding, especially when considering the rigorous educational requirements previously in place for immunizers. Prior to the upheaval caused by the ongoing pandemic, there were comprehensive training sessions and assessments with a 100% pass mark to ensure immunizers were well-prepared.
The recent alterations to the NIP schedule have been abrupt, with notifications often reduced to brief emails. This shift contrasts sharply with the meticulousness shown in the past, even for minor schedule adjustments. The inclusion of a new vaccine, especially one with genetic components, without accompanying information or studies is deeply concerning.
Additional research revealed that Vaxelis is a 6-in-1 vaccine approved in October 2020. It’s worth noting that trials were conducted using other vaccines, excluding the use of saline. Although six deaths occurred during the trials, authorities are keen to dissociate them from Vaxelis. The American link provides further details, while prescribing information from both the US and Australian sources differ on the mention of rDNA. Here is the original information from Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) here.
This incident raises questions about the historical use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in vaccines, stretching back to the 1980s with the introduction of Hepatitis B vaccinations. The utilization of immortal cell lines in viral vaccines has long been associated with serious health effects, including cancer and autoimmunity.
While the precise relationship between ribosomal DNA and human health remains unclear, the lack of thorough testing prior to release is a significant concern. As with any vaccine, their long-term effects may only become apparent over the next few decades.
Parents have every right to be frustrated by the lack of training and information surrounding these schedule changes. Our children should not serve as testing grounds for pharmaceutical companies. I implore you to share this information with anyone with children in the age group targeted by Vaxelis (between 6 weeks and 4 years of age) so they can make informed decisions.
It’s essential to remember that government regulators may not always prioritize public interest, given their financial ties to the corporations they oversee. To make truly informed health decisions, we need unbiased information and evidence. Until that’s provided, exercising caution with vaccination schemes is the safest course of action.
Lastly, it’s perplexing that Vaxelis, although approved by the TGA in 2020, is not listed in the most recent Commonwealth vaccination schedule. This raises questions about its administration without official scheduling. It’s a matter that warrants careful consideration.