| February 2003 SALEM, Ore. — An Oregon judge has
dismissed most of the class action thimerosal lawsuits in that state,
including one that was seeking damages against a pediatrician in addition to
vaccine manufacturers.
This is the second time a lawsuit claiming damages due to thimerosal
exposure has been dismissed. Earlier this year, a federal judge in Texas
threw out another class action lawsuit, but said that the plaintiffs could
still sue for loss of consortium or companionship.
Claimants in the lawsuits alleged that thimerosal could cause
neurological damage — especially autism — in young children. The suits
sought millions of dollars from vaccine and thimerosal manufacturers for
injuries and medical monitoring of children who were exposed to
thimerosal-containing vaccines.
Although there has been no evidence that thimerosal can cause neurologic
damage in children, many parents still believe the link is possible. Studies
have shown that ethylmercury, the mercury ingredient in thimerosal, in high
doses can cause renal failure in children.
In other studies, methylmercury, a close chemical cousin of ethylmercury,
in extremely high doses has been shown to cause neurologic damage in
children.
A recent study, though, refutes the biological plausibility, saying that
ethylmercury is not similar, and therefore, not comparable to methylmercury.
The study noted that thimerosal was never present in levels deemed dangerous
to children.
In 1999, the FDA called for the removal of all thimerosal from the
childhood immunization schedule. The decision was based on a finding that
the total possible mercury exposure in the schedule exceeds mercury exposure
guidelines from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
But the EPA guidelines were based on a vastly conservative estimate of
how much mercury exposure could cause damage, the study said. There was also
evidence to suggest that children exposed to thimerosal-containing vaccines
excrete mercury in sufficient levels, so they are not at risk for neurologic
damage.
The FDA decision, the study concluded, was not an admission that
thimerosal-containing vaccines are dangerous to children, but rather an
effort to reduce overall mercury exposure during childhood.
The 1999 FDA decision was ill received by vaccine critics, and many
parents whose children had been given thimerosal-containing vaccines became
concerned. Lawsuits for medical monitoring, as well as a handful of
individual suits alleging specific damage from thimerosal exposure, are
pending in more than a dozen states.
At the heart of the lawsuits is a debate over whether thimerosal is an
ingredient or an adulterant. Since, as a preservative, thimerosal has been a
regular part of vaccine manufacturing for years, the Department of Health
said that it should be considered a regular ingredient.
In opposition, trial lawyers claim that since thimerosal is alleged to
cause harm, it is not an ingredient in vaccines — but in fact an adulterant.
The claim has allowed thimerosal cases to circumvent the Vaccine Injury
Compensation Program (VICP), which regularly adjudicates claims of injury
from vaccines.
A provision inserted into the Homeland Security Act passed by Congress in
December, gave additional protection to thimerosal manufacturers and
redirected all thimerosal suits back to the VICP. The provision angered many
Democrats, who called the insertion a kickback to the pharmaceutical
industry for millions of dollars in contributions during the last election
cycle.
Senate Republicans, embarrassed by the public scrutiny, have agreed to
repeal the provision. In exchange, Congress will vote on a new bill within
the next six months aimed at fixing the compensation program.
In the interim, pending thimerosal lawsuits will be permitted to
continue.
The VICP is designed to compensate families who believe their child has
been injured by a vaccine. The VICP fund compensates families based on a
preset list of injuries for each vaccine. There is no provision in the VICP
to compensate families for injuries due to thimerosal. |
