KEY POINTS:
The head of New Zealand's meningococcal B immunisation programme says the Health Ministry is running damage control after a controversial television documentary screened.
Jane O'Hallahan, head of the MeNZB vaccine programme, also ended up having to defend herself after Green MP Sue Kedgley detailed comments she made at an international conference that described vaccine opponents as a "menace" and the programme as a "gamble".
Dr O'Hallahan told Parliament's Health select committee that after a Norwegian documentary screened on November 5 about alleged side-effects from the vaccine the number of parents that rang a immunisation help line doubled.
"I do think we are into damage control -- that the misleading documentary has led to some parents becoming fearful and the 0800 immune line, since the playing of the documentary, has had double the callers to that line from parents."
Dr O'Hallahan said the line was usually mainly used by health professionals.
"Parents are concerned, they're angry, they feel they have been misled. The consequences can be quite dramatic."
She said to avoid a drop in immunisations risk groups were being targeted and a communications strategy developed.
Green MP Sue Kedgley grilled Dr O'Hallahan about comments she made to a vaccine research conference in Baltimore in the United States in May.
She asked whether people had the right to scrutinise the $200 million -- the most spent on a single health initiative -- that the vaccine had cost and quoted Dr O'Hallahan telling the conference that surveillance of an Independent Safety Monitoring Board (ISMB) had not found any significant safety concerns.
"This ISMB has enhanced public confidence and assisted us in the management of the anti-immunisation menace."
Also: "This calculated gamble has paid off -- we are in the process of controlling an epidemic using a designer vaccine."
Dr O'Hallahan defended herself: "I don't believe them all to be a menace.
"I believe those that promulgate misleading information or misinformation can have an impact on individuals and parents and lead to a lower vaccination rate and I think that that has an impact in the future -- a serious impact in the future."
The use of the word gamble was inappropriate.
"I think I was unwise in using those words I think it was a calculated risk. Everything we do entails risk... Nobody took any risk in terms of safety."
Ms Kedgley challenged the vaccine's testing saying the lack of phase three trials meant the vaccine was experimental.
"I do not accept that terminology at all," Dr O'Hallahan said.
"This is not an experiment, it never was an experiment. Nobody would experiment on New Zealand children. This was a very, very carefully staged, designed series of clinical trials that were internationally peer reviewed at every step of the way."
She defended the rollover of provisional approval for the vaccine saying it had sufficient safety data and Medsafe was considering the full licence application and reviewing the effectiveness data.
Claims New Zealand had relied on Norwegian data taken from older children was wrong and 375 babies were trialled in New Zealand with additional data coming from several countries with comparable vaccines, she said.
Director-General of Health Stephen McKernan, in his first appearance before the select committee in the job, said the vaccine was vital and people were not getting the other side of the story.
"I tell you some children would die if they weren't immunised."
The vaccine had resulted in reduced illness and disability and saved lives, he said.
Ms Kedgley noted there were about 20 vaccines for babies and asked if there was any limit -- such as 1000.
Dr O'Hallahan said she did not believe that providing multiple antigens through vaccination had a detrimental effect and 1000 would not overwhelm the immune system.
More than one million New Zealand children have received three shots of the vaccine, based on a Norwegian product altered to target the strain of the disease in this country.
- NZPA
