Hansard

I congratulate Nicola Sturgeon on securing this debate, which is important for many of us with young children, and also for those who, like Jamie McGrigor, have pregnant partners and spouses. It is an issue not just for children but for pregnant women, who can also be adversely affected. In the United States of America, the Institute of Medicine urged that

"full consideration be given to removing thimerosal from any biological product to which infants, children, and pregnant women are exposed."

Pregnant women, it suggested, should be advised to take mercury-free flu jabs, but the only groups advised against the jab in the United Kingdom are people with heart disease or diabetes and people who are allergic to eggshells. Advising women away from mercury would acknowledge the fact that it does pose some kind of medical risk, however remote. That appears to be something that UK ministers—until now, at least—refuse to do.

The Scottish Parliament has the power to ban all mercury from vaccines, and it can do that now, as health is devolved. The vaccines are available and general practitioners have freedom to order what they want. Holyrood should set an example to ensure that we have better practice in this country.

There is a lot of medical evidence on the issue. One study suggests that it is hypersensitivity to thimerosal that triggers autism, and not specifically the mercury poisoning. There will be a study on mercury poisoning later this year, but it will be on Alzheimer's, not autism. Clearly, a lot more research must be done, but why should we take chances? In the United States, all routinely recommended licensed paediatric medicines that are currently manufactured contain no thimerosal or only trace amounts.

There are now two hepatitis B vaccines that are thimerosal free, four haemophilus influenzae type B—HIB—vaccines, and two DTP vaccines. Previously, the maximum cumulative exposure to mercury by routine childhood vaccinations during the first six months of life was 187.5 micrograms of mercury. The newly formulated vaccines allow a maximum cumulative exposure during the first six months of less than 3 micrograms, which is a 98 per cent reduction, and a huge and significant step in the right direction.

The issue has had a much higher profile in the United States than in this country. Indeed, there are now £30 million-worth of lawsuits being launched in the United States because of perceived cover-ups in recent years. The reason for that is that many people who suffer from illnesses such as fibromyalgia, lupus, depression and bipolar disorder directly link their illness to mercury. Clearly, the issue must be given greater focus.

We should err on the side of caution. If several vaccines are available to prevent a range of illnesses, surely we should do what the United States has done since 1999 and ban mercury, except very trace amounts if they are necessary. Of course, the US went even further. The House of Representatives formed a committee specifically to consider the danger of mercury in medicine. The US did that because a study came out of the Faroe Islands based on some 900 children born in 1987 whose mothers had eaten mercury-contaminated whale meat. It was discovered that the children had slow reaction times and diminished attention spans. Mercury is so toxic, as Nicola Sturgeon pointed out, that even if the amount of mercury in the umbilical cord was as low as 1 microgram per kilogram, it will still be enough to trigger a set of neurological conditions commonly associated with autism and other conditions.

I urge the minister to err on the side of caution, and think about the fact that the amount of mercury in a thermometer is enough to pollute an entire loch. For the sake of our children and pregnant women, let us ensure that our vaccines are mercury free.