XPost: alt.atheism, alt.health, sac.politics   
   XPost: misc.survivalism   
   From: drprocto@dnc.org   
      
   (CNN)The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled Wednesday   
   that courts may consider vaccines to be the cause of an illness,   
   even in the absence of scientific evidence confirming a link.   
      
   The EU's highest court said that if the development of a disease   
   is timely to the person's receiving a vaccine, if the person was   
   previously health with a lack of history of the disease in their   
   family and if a significant number of disease cases are reported   
   among people receiving a certain vaccine, this may serve as   
   enough proof.   
      
   The ruling stemmed from the case of a French man known as J.W.   
   who was vaccinated against hepatitis B in 1998 and developed   
   multiple sclerosis a year later. Multiple sclerosis is a   
   neurological disorder in which the body's own immune system   
   attacks the brain and spinal cord. The disease scars nerve   
   tissue and causes a range of symptoms, from vision problems to   
   paralysis. J.W. died in 2011.   
      
   In 2006, J.W. sued pharmaceutical company Sanofi Pasteur, which   
   produced the vaccine, blaming it for his decline in health.   
   The case was brought before the Court of Appeal in France, which   
   ruled that there was no scientific consensus supporting a causal   
   link and no evidence of a causal link between the hepatitis B   
   vaccine and the man's multiple sclerosis, therefore dismissing   
   the action.   
      
   This judgment was appealed and brought to the French Court of   
   Cessation, which took it to the European Court of Justice.   
   The Court of Justice said that "specific and consistent   
   evidence" relating to timeliness, a prior healthy status, lack   
   of family history and multiple cases may prove to be enough,   
   according to a statement. J.W.'s case referred to the first   
   three criteria.   
      
   The ruling added that courts must ensure that evidence is   
   "sufficiently serious, specific and consistent to warrant the   
   conclusion," having also considered available evidence and   
   arguments made by a vaccine's producer, to then decide that a   
   vaccine is the most plausible explanation for any damage to   
   health.   
      
   The court's decision is not a ruling on J.W.'s case but provides   
   guidance for all EU courts considering similar issues.   
   The EU court is authorizing national courts to make such   
   judgments about causality themselves, based on evidence they are   
   presented with, without reliance on expert opinion, said   
   Professor Tony Fox from the pharmaceutical medicine group at   
   King's College London.   
      
   In a statement, a representative from Sanofi Pasteur said: "It   
   is not our role to comment on this legal decision. However,   
   Sanofi Pasteur wishes to reiterate that its vaccines are safe   
   and effective and protect against infectious diseases. Our   
   hepatitis B vaccines are safe and well tolerated. They have been   
   approved by Health Authorities and are marketed for more than 30   
   years."   
      
   The decision drew criticism from experts.   
   "No causal link exists" between the hepatitis B vaccine and   
   multiple sclerosis, "but a few cases after vaccination would not   
   be surprising, especially when administered to teenagers, just   
   before the age of onset age for many MS sufferers," said Keith   
   Neal, emeritus professor in the epidemiology of infectious   
   diseases at the University of Nottingham.   
      
   "What they are saying is, the vaccine is responsible for the   
   patient's MS if it can't be proved it isn't, and that is   
   virtually impossible given what is worded. Potentially, this   
   ruling affects all drugs and threatens the development of new   
   drugs."   
      
   Peter Openshaw, president of the British Society for Immunology   
   and professor of experimental medicine at Imperial College   
   London, said "it is very concerning that the European Court of   
   Justice has ruled that judges can consider whether a vaccination   
   led to someone developing a medical condition, even if there is   
   no scientific evidence to support this."   
      
   "The scientific evidence does not support a link between the   
   hepatitis B vaccine, or any other vaccine in current use, and   
   multiple sclerosis," he said. "To say that there is a link   
   between any vaccine and multiple sclerosis and at the same time   
   to admit that there is no scientific evidence of such a link is   
   illogical and confusing to the public."   
      
   The prior health of the patient, absence of family history and   
   supposed close temporal relationship could all be coincidental,   
   Fox said.   
      
   "The only alleged evidence that would be worth taking seriously   
   is the alleged numbers of other similar cases," he said. "Those   
   data should be capable of detailed case comparisons for   
   consistency, and probably also orthodox epidemiological study."   
      
   But without such a study, Fox added, "one might just as well   
   say, 'If this vaccine causes MS, then why is it that millions of   
   people have been vaccinated and did not get MS? And why are   
   there so many people with MS who have never had this   
   vaccination?' "   
      
   http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/21/health/vaccines-illness-european-   
   court-bn/index.html   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)