public health

Is the indigenous Rotavirus vaccine safe for children?

Some health activists don't think so. A PIL filed before Supreme Court seeks the complete data of the vaccine's clinical trial.

A month after the first indigenous anti-diarrhoea rotavirus vaccine was launched in India, a health rights activist on Monday filed a public interest litigation seeking to prevent the vaccine – Rotovac – from being included in the country’s Universal Immunisation Programme. The petition argued that the government has not publicly disclosed the complete data related to the clinical trial yet, and that the vaccine could possibly have side effects on a significant population.

Rotavirus infections are the leading cause of severe diarrhoea among children. In India, about one lakh children die due to rotavirus diarrhoea annually, while another 10 lakh children are hospitalised because of it. For a start, it has been introduced in four states – Andhra Pradesh, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, and Odisha. It will be made available in the rest of the country in phases.

Dr Pradeep Haldar, deputy commissioner in department of Health and Family Welfare, who handles the immunisation programme, said he did not want to comment on the issue.

‘Make data public’

The Rotovac clinical trial was conducted on 6,799 infants at three centres – Delhi, Pune and Vellore – between 2011 to 2013. Voices against the introduction of the vaccine, produced by Hyderabad-based Bharat Biotech Limited, started to be raised after the aggregated data of the vaccine efficacy during its trials was published in two peer-reviewed scientific journals – Vaccine and Lancet in 2014.

Both studies said that the vaccine was safe for children, and that the risk of intusussception – intestinal obstructions that may need urgent surgery to prevent death among infants – was not clinically significant in the population studied. However, the segregated data from the three centres, which could possibly indicate if different populations had different reactions to the vaccine, has not been released.

Dr Jacob Puliyel, an expert member of the National Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation, an apex body that advises the government on immunisations, wrote to government authorities and to Christ Medical College, which led the clinical trial in Vellore, to release the data.

Puliyel, who heads Paediatrics at St Stephens Hospital in Delhi, deduced from the aggregated data that the number of cases of intussusception in infants administered the vaccine during its trial were the highest at the Vellore centre. He wanted the trial data from all three centres to ascertain if a certain population was more susceptible to its side-effects as compared to others.

If Puliyel’s calculations are to be believed, the Vellore trial shows an excess of 11 cases of intussusception per 10,000 vaccinated children as compared to the trial figures from Delhi. This is five to 10 times higher than the risk of intussusception with the Rotashield vaccine – which was withdrawn from the market – and nearly 70 times higher than the risk associated with the current internationally licensed vaccine, RotaTeq.

Puliyel filed a writ petition seeking the segregated data before the Delhi High Court last July. At the time, the government, as well as CMC Vellore, argued that:

“… site specific data on safety is inappropriate for release as per protocol and its inappropriate interpretation or publication which would lead to disinformation about the product (that has been) developed by government with great effort and expense, and will give unfair advantage to multinational products which were never tested in India, (and) yet (were) licensed.”

The High Court dismissed Puliyel‘s plea last October. When the matter went into appeal before the Supreme Court, it held that Puliyel could not file a PIL as he was a serving member of the body that advised the government on immunisations. But the questions in the petition were left unaddressed.

Matter of public health

On Monday, S Srinivasan from LOCOST, a company based out of Vadodara that produces low cost medicines for the poor, filed a similar PIL for the Supreme Court to look into. His lawyer, Neha Rathi, said that the matter could come up in two weeks.

The petition states:

“Concealment of this vital data does severe injustice to the thousands of infants who participated in this study, the researchers who painstakingly conducted the trials and the medical/scientific community who depend on this data for their work,” 

With fewer resources in rural areas to handle side-effects like intusussception, the recommendation to include the vaccine into a major government programme has to be done carefully, argued a letter to the editor published in the journal Vaccine last year.

The question is: will parents whose children will be immunised be told about this indigenous vaccine’s possible side-effects so that they can make an informed choice?

Support our journalism by subscribing to Scroll+ here. We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content BY 

Innovations in payment options are making premium products more accessible

No need for documentation or applications to own high-quality items

Credit cards have long been associated with an aspirational lifestyle. The ability to buy something out of your wish list without needing to pay the entire amount can tempt even the most disciplined shoppers. A designer couch, the latest mobile phone, a home entertainment system or a car, as long as you can pay back the borrowed amount within the grace period, your credit card purchases know no bounds.

However, credit cards, pre-approved or not, come with a number of complications. The tedious application procedure starts with the collection and submission of various documents. Moreover, there are several reasons your credit card application might get rejected including low income that compromises your repayment capability, certain occupations or work history, mistakes in the application form, possession of multiple cards or even a failed physical verification attempt. While applying for a credit card might have become easier, the success of the application can take time and effort.

Credit card owners are regaled with benefits all year round with attractive EMIs, offers on purchases, airline miles, lounge access, cashbacks and a plethora of exclusive deals. It’s worth noting that debit card owners don’t get even half of these benefits and offers, despite the sheer size of the debit card customer base in the country (846.7 million compared to 36.2 million credit card holders).

This imbalance of finance and purchase options between credit card and debit card owners is slowly changing. For instance, the new EMIs on debit card feature on Flipkart ensures affordability and accessibility to Indian consumers who don’t own credit cards. The payment innovation increases the purchasing power of the consumer. By providing credit access to non-credit card holders, expensive and high-quality products are made more affordable for a large base of customers without denting their cash flow. The video below comically captures a scenario that people who don’t own a credit card will relate to.

Play

Flipkart’s EMIs on debit card feature doesn’t require a minimum account balance, documentation, nor does it charge a processing fee, making online shopping a seamless experience even for more high-end products. To find out if you’re eligible for EMIs on debit card, see here.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of Flipkart and not by the Scroll editorial team.