Chicago Sun-Times Commentary
A pox on state for vaccine law

February 1, 2002

Chicken pox is not fun. For most people--90 percent of Americans get it before they reach adulthood--it means a week of fever, rashes and itching. But it is rarely severe--just 100 out of the nearly 4 million who get it each year die from the disease, mostly adults and small infants. Over the last decade, a vaccine against chicken pox became available, and Illinois joined those states requiring children to be inoculated against the varicella-zoster virus that causes it. As inconvenient and expensive as the illness is--nearly $500 million is lost nationwide because parents miss work to care for cranky kids--we do not believe the government should require immunization for chicken pox, certainly not in the way it is doing now.

First, chicken pox immunization is an unnecessary intrusion. If the state is going to demand that parents inject their children with a foreign substance, it ought to have a very good reason. Chicken pox is just not severe enough, certainly not compared with other diseases--polio, diphtheria and such--that the state requires children to be immunized against.

Second, there is an argument that it is good for children to get chicken pox--it helps prevent the illness from striking when they are adults, when the complications are much more severe. Having chicken pox does not give you lifetime immunity as many believe, but subsequent infections are usually so mild that the affected person doesn't notice.

And third, as reported in Sunday's Sun-Times, the decision process in Illinois is flawed regarding immunizations. Five of the 18 Immunization Advisory Committee members have financial ties to Merck, the manufacturer of chicken pox vaccine. They receive large speaking fees and grant money. Two others own stock in Merck. The chicken pox decision is difficult enough--well-informed people are justified taking either side--that even the smallest personal financial consideration is too much. Add to this the fact that Gov. Ryan, who received $9,000 in contributions from Merck, vetoed a bill that would have banned people with financial ties to pharmaceutical companies from serving on the committee, and you have an uncomfortable situation where sound medical judgment is forced to play tug-of-war with the considerations of money and personal gain.

Children are required by law to receive 18 vaccinations. That's a lot of needles to stick into a child--at least one too many. No child should receive a single jab without good, unbiased medical cause.

BACK to Main Page