Hide this
Previous Article Next Article
 

Vaccine Doctor Given at Least $30 Million Dollars to Push Vaccines?

June 25, 2009 | 63,215 views
Share This Article Share

vaccines, vaccinations, moneyDr. Paul Offit of the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia earned millions of dollars as part of a $182-million sale by the hospital of its worldwide royalty interest in the Merck Rotateq vaccine. The amount of income distributed to Offit could be as high as $46 million. Offit has refused to say how much he made from the vaccine.

The high price placed on the patents raises concerns over Offit’s use of his former position on the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) to help create the market for rotavirus vaccine -- effectively, to vote himself rich.

Offit’s claim to a share of the profits from Rotateq revenues is based on his role as a listed inventor on the cluster of patents that protect Merck’s vaccine. Paul Offit had a great personal interest in Rotateq’s commercial success, and more than any other individual in the world he found himself in a position to directly influence that success.

Unlike most other patented products, the market for mandated childhood vaccines is created by the recommendation of an appointed body, ACIP. From 1998 to 2003, Offit served as a member of ACIP.
 

Dr. Mercola's Comments:

If you want to read a fascinating expose of this doctor read the recent Philadelphia Magazine expose on him.

Dr. Paul Offit, or as he is also known Paul “For Profit” Offit, is a fairly well-known and frequent commentator in favor of vaccinations who dismisses many vaccine risks and promotes vaccine mandates. But he is not just a doctor who believes that vaccinations save lives. Far from it.

Dr. Offit is also a listed inventor on a cluster of patents that protect Merck’s Rotateq vaccine and share the title “Rotavirus Reassortant Vaccine.” They include four granted U.S. patents -- US5626851, US5750109, US6113910 and US6290968 -- and two granted European patents -- EP323708 and EP493575.

He is also the recipient of a $350,000 grant from Merck for the vaccine’s development, a consultant to Merck Pharmaceuticals and, the icing on the cake, previously served as a member of The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP).

ACIP is a 15-member panel of immunization experts, selected by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. They provide advice and guidelines to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on vaccine-preventable diseases.

As a member of the ACIP from 1998 to 2003, Dr. Offit was involved in CDC recommendations about giving rotavirus vaccine to babies. He voted “yes” three times out of four on issues pertaining to the ACIP’s rotavirus use recommendation (including, voting for his own vaccine to be included in the immunization schedule).

To clarify, Dr. Offit voted for the FIRST Rotashield vaccine manufactured by Wyeth (monkey-human hybrid virus) approved by ACIP in 1998 to be given to all babies. He abstained from the vote in 1999 to recommend that Rotashield be removed from the market. He did not vote for the Merck Rotateq vaccine (cow-human hybrid virus) to be recommended for use in all babies -- he was prevented under ACIP/government rules from voting to recommend a product he had a personal financial stake in.

Now, as a result of Merck’s rotavirus vaccine being added to the CDC’s childhood vaccination schedule, the value of Dr. Offit’s stake in the vaccine has skyrocketed.

Why Isn’t This ILLEGAL?????


Though he has declined to say exactly how much he has gained personally, Age of Autism reports that Dr. Offit earned at least $29 million, and perhaps as much as $55 million, as part of a $182-million sale by the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia of its worldwide royalty interest in the Merck Rotateq vaccine.

Of course, all of this begs the question, can someone’s vote on an “independent” safety board be trusted when there is $30 million at stake? Would Dr. Offit, or anyone for that matter, truly be an unbiased voice of safety? Or would they be swayed by this hidden motivation?

It’s a rhetorical question but I think the answer speaks for itself. Especially when you consider that Dr. Offit is also the doctor who made the infamous and incomprehensible statement, “an infant can safely receive up to 10,000 vaccines at once.”

Always Look for Hidden Motivations

It is understandable that most people would like to believe the words of respected leaders in the health field. Unfortunately, doing so is often very naïve.

It’s not enough to look at the obvious credentials of your spokespeople, whether they’re pro- or anti- an issue or hold a prestigious degree. Today, you also have to consider the hidden motivations behind their recommendations. Where is their loyalty? Who pays for their lifestyle? Where is their money coming from?

It’s very sad to say, but some of the most trusted voices in defense of vaccine safety are nothing more than paid shills for the industry. As CBS News reported last year, these include:
  • The American Academy of Pediatrics, to whom the vaccine industry gives millions for conferences, grants, medical education classes and even to help build their headquarters.
  • Every Child By Two, a group that promotes early immunization for all children and admits they receive money from the vaccine industry -- but won’t say how much.
  • Dr. Paul Offit, who in addition to the monies described above holds in a $1.5-million research chair at Children's Hospital, funded by Merck.
Why You Should Stay Educated About Vaccine Issues


Clearly the above listed “trusted” health care groups cannot really be trusted for an unbiased opinion. Not while they are busy accepting untold amounts of money from the vaccine makers.

So, then, what other choice do you have but to seek out the truth for yourself?

The good news is that there are still trustworthy sources of information out there, and one of the best is The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), the American vaccine safety watchdog. Exploring the information on this site, as well as on the many pages of Mercola.com, will help you to get educated.

The site was founded by vaccine-educated parents and is run by longtime vaccine safety and informed consent advocate Barbara Loe Fisher. To the best of my knowledge Dr. Offit has repeatedly refused to debate her in public. Likely he knows she would win that debate because he doesn’t have half a leg to stand on.

More parents are clearly opposed to the "mandatory" vaccine laws and understand that vaccinations are not the heavily promoted miracle cure-all that will keep their children from getting sick. Instead, they are seeing the truth: that vaccines carry the risk of serious side effects such as crippling neurological damage like autism and even death.

I believe it is extremely important to have the right to choose -- to be allowed to make informed consent decisions about what you want to inject into your child, and yourself, and when.

The current U.S. immunization schedule calls for children to get 48 doses of 14 vaccines by the time they’re just 6 years old. By age 18, federal public health officials say they should have gotten a total of 69 doses of 16 vaccines from day of birth to age 18.

Public health officials have NEVER proven that it is indeed safe to inject this number and volume of vaccines into infants, children, pre-adolescents and teenagers. What's more, they cannot explain why, concurrent with an increasing number of vaccinations, there has been an explosion of neurological and immune system disorders in American children.

But perhaps more disclosures like the article above, where we learn that a key proponent of vaccine safety is being made rich off of his recommendations, will shed some light on why the U.S. vaccine schedule just keeps growing ever larger.

So please do the health of your children a favor. Seek out a knowledgeable health care practitioner who is aware of the conflict of interest surrounding public health policy, and chooses to make educated decisions based on solid information, and your child’s health and safety, rather than on the promise of a future payoff.

[+] Sources and References