The global burden of disease (morbidity) is now greater due to emerging NCDs since the start of vaccines.
To deliver good science vaccine research, data on the sequence, timing and amount of all the vaccines, and data on sanitation and nutritional status of the study population are essential, as is the collection of not only mortality but also morbidity (NCD) data of vaccinated compared with late- and or unvaccinated cohorts.
The purpose of the request by the WHO and SAGE for this systematic review and subsequent corroboration by the authors is therefore unclear. http://www.milbank.org/quarterly/articles/mass-production-redundant-misl...
The authors start the discussion, as if compelled, with: "BCG, DTP, and MCV have prevented countless illnesses and deaths among infants and children worldwide", but do not indicate that the actual factors controlling mortality and morbidity are nutrition and sanitation. http://www.bmj.com/content/355/bmj.i5170
Adherence to current vaccine schedules is promoted but might be increasing the global burden of disease (GBD), for example, apparently a delay in diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus (DTP) vaccination seems to be associated with a reduced risk of childhood asthma.
When taking nutrition and sanitation into account, the burden of disease due to non-communicable diseases (NCD) seems now greater than before vaccination started in the highly vaccinated countries.
Peter Aaby is aware: http://www.bmj.com/content/344/bmj.e3769/rr/593438
John Ioannidis is aware: http://www.bmj.com/content/348/bmj.g3058/rr/699304
The WHO is aware but appears to be influenced by the vaccine lobby: http://www.bmj.com/content/347/bmj.f5535/rr/664108
Every CMO and public health professional is aware of the NCD endemics that have emerged since immunisations started, but to start good science, no one dares.
No one dares to question the newspeak of the vaccine ideology. Also the authors of this systematic review submissively conclude with: "Although efforts should be made to ensure that all children are immunised on schedule". They continue their conclusion: " with BCG, DTP, and MCV, randomised trials are needed to compare the effects of different sequences." Of course, the first part was dictated by newspeak and exclude any vaccine deletions in the second part of their conclusion.
Why waste time and money and put the lives and health of children at risk with systematic research (SR) studies like this one? This SR reiterates what was already known and displays bewildering reasoning of the authors in the summary of their SR in fig 8 as described by Frank Shann in his rapid response.
Instead, stand up for the children of the world and start appropriate morbidity (NCD) and mortality research. http://www.bmj.com/content/352/bmj.i867/rr-7
Starting with the authors of this article, rather than talking newspeak like: "the data raise sufficient concerns for us to strongly recommend further studies on the possible effects of immunisations on the immune system and on the risk of morbidity and mortality", can the authors specify more in detail good science vaccine studies?
WHO will do what?
Competing interests: No competing interests