322 



production method, if there are any. We are able to review the potency testing 

 they have done, and able to review the safety testing they have done."" 



When questioned about the defects of the Cutter vaccine, Dr. Scheele 

 explained that no causality had been determined and the matter was 

 under study. 



* * * As of the moment, we are not in a position to say that the Cutter vaccine 

 caused the polio in these children, and it will be quite some time before we can 

 determine that, if we can determine it. This is a matter that requires careful 

 study. All of those materials that were used are under study at the present time, 

 and we will, of course, in due time see whether we can tell definitely yes or no." 



He added that : "There is a possibility that there may have been some 

 live virus that caused it," and that "There is a possibility that these 

 cases were sheer coincidences, that these children had polio virus and 

 would have developed polio anyway." *^ 



The questions of the safety and efficacy of the Salk vaccine formula 

 were not raised by PHS in these hearings. In response to a question by 

 Eepresentative Vanik about whether more testing of the vaccine would 

 be needed before it could be declared effective, Dr. Scheele replied : 



That would be impossible, the experiment has been completed and the efficacy 

 of the vaccine shown. 



Later he added that evaluation of moral issues compelled PHS to 

 license the vaccine immediately, prior to doing more research : 



I think we had had enough testing, that it was worth trying to do something 

 about polio in 1955, and not wait until 1956 * * *. And the decision was taken at 

 that time, that the enemy we were fighting in polio was worth moving toward 

 without taking too much time to do more research before we finally put the prod- 

 uct into use.^ 



He then went on to say that investigations of new cases of polio 

 caused b}' the vaccine would be examined by the recently activated polio 

 epidemic intelligence activity in the Atlanta Communicable Disease 

 Center.'* 



]\Iany legislators took exception to the statistical conclusions of the 

 Francis report and the subsequent interpretation of data contained in 

 it.^ Others were distressed by the rush to publicize the report and the 

 contribution of this activity to charges of poor PHS administration. 

 They felt that this action, coupled with the later defects found in man- 

 ufacturing, had contributed to public apprehension and emotionalism 

 about the issue.*' 



Senator Hubert Humphrey said : 



I think it is generally known that this was a major public information ex- 

 travaganza, so to speak — there was television, there was radio, and there was 

 press. As a result of that, with the tremendous interest of the American people 



<«Ibid.. pp. 12, 17. 



« Ibid., pp. 18-19. 



«Iblfl.. p. 19. 



« Ibid., pp. 87-88. 



** Ibid., p. 4. 



•^ Ibid., pp. 60-76. 



•^ Re^ardlnjr public apprehension, Carter reports on a New York Times story printed 

 in mid-May 1955. " 'The result of all the confusion,' commented the New York Times, 'has 

 been twofold. First, the Nation is now badly scared. Never before have reports of the 

 number of polio cases been so widely publicized and so carefully studied. Millions of 

 parents fear that if their children don't set the vaccine they may get polio, but if they 

 do get the vaccine, it might give them polio. This fear was evident in New York State 

 last week. The National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis * * • received enough of 

 the cleared Parke, Davis vaccine for New Yorkers. But as many as 30 percent of the 

 children who had applied for injections last month failed to turn up last week.' " (Carter, 

 ibid., p. 327.) 



