As someone who works with the FDA approval process and is familiar with the pharmaceutical multi-phase trials, I can tell you that those trials pick a up a broad range of inconsequential, potential side effects. One of the primary reasons for this is the need for the manufacturers to perform low-cost testing and minimize their liability. To maximize cost-effectiveness, many tests are performed on the residents of third world nations (because most first world citizens are simply unwilling to take the risks involved in experimental trials). Unfortunately, for many of these poor test subjects, this a viable source of income that leads to application for multiple drug trials at once. It is perfectly acceptable to execute and OUS (outside the US) trial in this manner, but the downside is that many companies have no idea of just how many pharmaceuticals their subjects are taking. In an effort to maintain FDA compliance and mitigate legal exposure, they record and disclose a broad range of potential side effects (See virtually any new drug ad.). Given that most of the research that I've seen (or had related to me by immuno-biologists) on vaccines shows absolutely no link between vaccinations and autism, I would expect the GSK report to disclose inconsequential data that has no practical value.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
