Science, Public Health Policy and the Law
Science, Public Health Policy & the Law
An IPAK PHPI Publication
In spite of billions of dollars invested into biomedical research and practice, western civilizations are characterized by chronic illness. Papers published in this journal will focus on the nexus between science, public health policy, biomedical practice and the laws and regulations that govern health care practices. Solution-focused improvements in translation of science into improved human life are welcome.
Contact: Email the Editor-in-Chief
James Lyons-Weiler, Editor-in-Chief
Joshua P Bennett
The corporate proponents of vaccine products are promoting their use to the U.S. Government as a tool for promoting national security. There are quite a few factors that make these claims dubious at best. Among the accumulating evidence that national security claims for vaccines are over reaching are the following developments. First, the measles vaccine does not provide lifelong immunity. When the shot ”wears off” after a number of years, the victim may get adult measles, which is actually more dangerous than childhood measles. The vaccine itself contains live virus particles which lead to ”asymptomatic” (and unknown) infection, which in itself can be a threat to public health. Here we begin to separate biological facts from corporate fiction
There are likely but hitherto unreported safety signals for Gardasil vaccine in the form of increased risk of suicides and deaths from all causes in clinical trial group exposed to the Gardasil vaccine. Comparison of suicide rates in the two exposure clinical groups yielded relative risks of 3.53 and relative risk of death from all causes of 1.77 compared to CDC-reported baseline suicide rates. Since these are the only clinical trial data available on the question, public health policy on Gardasil recommendations should be updated and as soon as possible, new clinical studies focused on suicide rates utilizing inert placebo (i.e., truly saline-only) vs. vaccine clinical group comparisons must be undertaken.
From the Director & Editor-in-Chief
This initiative exists to help insure that policies in public health practice and law are founded on a full consideration of available knowledge derived by robust science. From Dr Lyons-Weiler: "While IPAK will continue to conduct basic, clinical and translational biomedical research in a completely unbiased manner, and will pubish results regardless of the outcome, it will also be increasingly centered on questions of policy and law that impact public health, laws that impact public health, and cases and rulings that impact the citizen's expression of self-governance through law. We're putting the Public back into Public Health."
IPAK does not endorse any particular candidate and does not support any speciifc piece of legislations, but instead provides analyses of proposed positions on their likely impact on human pain and suffering and works to educate legislators on the current state of biomedical knowledge in the peer-review published literature.