Advertisement
Policy Forum

Policy Forum Policy Forum articles provide a platform for health policy makers from around the world to discuss the challenges and opportunities in improving health care to their constituencies.

See all article types »

What Led to the Nigerian Boycott of the Polio Vaccination Campaign?

  • Ayodele Samuel Jegede
  • Published: March 20, 2007
  • DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040073

Reader Comments (2)

Post a new comment on this article

The missing key to the story.

Posted by plosmedicine on 31 Mar 2009 at 00:21 GMT

Author: Hilary Butler
Position: freelance journalist/writer
Institution: Home.
E-mail: butle@watchdog.net.nz
Submitted Date: February 27, 2008
Published Date: February 27, 2008
This comment was originally posted as a “Reader Response” on the publication date indicated above. All Reader Responses are now available as comments.

It is very disappointing that Mr Jagede choses to glide over the one document, which could really answer this question.

It is the document provided by the laboratory recommended in India, which tested the Nigerian vaccine, and found the contaminants. The work was done by a combined team, and did indeed find unacceptable levels of contamination. The scientific facts of the matter have been swept under the carpet, despite 23 days of testing in India in a laboratory nominated by the WHO. The results of the tests were provided to WHO, UNICEF and all other organisations and stakeholders involved.

The Nigerian government also tested the vaccine elsewhere, yet copies of their report were suppressed presumably because they showed the same as the WHO mandated laboratory tests.

What happened after the test results were discussed in Nigeria, then becomes a matter of chinese whispers, mainly expanded upon by western media.

The foundational facts are that the vaccine tested in India was grossly substandard and failed all tests for safety and purity.

That the author did not request a copy of that report from the Nigerian scientist Dr Haruna Kaita, or WHO, or UNICEF, or the stakeholders, and discuss that information first, means that the rest of the article lacks foundational context.

Competing interests declared: I am dedicated to consideration of the truth, not assorted cherry picked information which misses out the key facts.