[BPSDB] A number of news articles, such as this one in the Guardian have covered financial links between World Health Organisation advisors and pharmaceutical companies. Naturally, NaturalNews gets in on the act with a typically measured piece from Mike Adams:
It is headlined
WHO scandal exposed: Advisors received kickbacks from H1N1 vaccine manufacturers
The generally accepted meaning of the term “kickback” is bribe – and usually one on commission at that; that is, the greater the income accruing to the briber, the bigger the sum payed to the bribee. So judging by the headline, Adams is accusing WHO advisers of making their declarations for finabcial gain. Pretty serious stuff. In the print media, it is common for headline writers to be more concerned with grabbing the readers attention rather than accurately reflecting the content of the story. Is this the case here?
How the scam really worked
Here’s a summary of how the WHO vaccine scam worked:
Step 1) Exaggerate the risk: WHO hypes up the pandemic risk by declaring a phase 6 pandemic even when the mortality rate of the virus was so low that it could be halted with simple vitamin D supplements.
Step 2) Urge countries to stockpile: WHO urged nations around the world to stockpile H1N1 vaccines, calling it a “public health emergency.”
Step 3) Collect the cash: Countries spend billions of dollars buying and stockpiling H1N1 vaccines while Big Pharma pockets the cash.
Step 4) Get your kickbacks: WHO advisors, meanwhile, collected their kickbacks from the vaccine manufacturers. Those kickbacks were intentionally kept secret.
Step 5) Keep people afraid: In order to keep demand for the vaccines as high as possible, WHO continued to flame the fears by warning that H1N1 was extremely dangerous and everybody should continue to get vaccinated. (The CDC echoed the same message in the USA.)
So, yes, Adams is accusing WHO advisors of exaggerating the risks in order to receive payments from the vaccine manufacturers. What is his evidence for this?
He does not appear to have any. He gives two links as ‘sources’ for the story but neither make this accusation. Nor does the Guardian article linked to above. It says that the advisors “had previously received payments” from pharmaceutical companies. It could be argued that given Britain’s repressive libel laws, the Guardian’s lawyers had advised against making the accusation directly. However, the Washington Post (linked to by Adams) – operating under far more liberal American libel laws – also fails to make this accusation.
The details of Adams’ accusation crumble away when subject to scrutiny:
When WHO declared a phase 6 pandemic, there had been cases on all continents except Antarctica. Thus WHO were acting within guidelines drawn up in 2004, long before anyone ever heard of H1N1 swine flu. It is true that the mortality rate for H1N1 was low but pandemics often come in waves of increasing lethality. The WHO advisors could not know ahead of time how lrthal the later waves would be; if they had done nothing and the virus had returned with Spanish Flu like lethality, one can imagine the finger pointings and demand for heads to roll that would have ensued.
Oh, and the Vitamin D thing; Adams is always banging on about it as a universal cure-all but as usual he supplies no references or links to back up his medical claims. So I had a look for myself and found this which examines the link between vitamin D deficiency and respiratory infections and concludes that:
Vitamin D deficiency predisposes children to respiratory infections
While this makes it clear that D deficiency is a problem it does not say that supplements are to be preferred to getting sufficient vitamin D from ones diet. Nor does it say that taking supplements above the reccommended daily levels will reduce the chances of catching flu yet further.
In a case of the kettle calling the pot black, Adams goes on to claim that vaccines don’t work:
…there has never been a single scientific study ever published showing that H1N1 vaccines worked. Not only was the H1N1 pandemic a fraud to begin with, but the medicine they claimed treated it was also based on fraud.
Which kind of implies that there were no trials – I think it reasonable to assume that if trials had shown the vaccine not to work, Governments would not have bought it. However a quick google found this about GlaxoSmithKline’s human trials of the H1N1 vaccine. I suppose FOIA requests would settle things one way or the other.
Another point that escapes Adams is that Governments (especially those in Europe which fund state health services) have every incentive, especially in these financially straitened times, to keep medical costs down. If cheap supplements worked to prevent ‘flu, Governments would be buying them rather than vaccines.
Anyway, back to the conspiracy theory:
It does appear to be the case that advisors consulted by WHO had previously been consulted by vaccine manufacturers and this was not declared by WHO (althought the advisors concerned had declared their links on their published research). Personally, I don’t find it surprising that both vaccine manufacturers and the World Health Organisation should choose to consult established experts. Such relationships are at risk of becoming dangerously incestuous of course but Adamsdoes not help in publicising such concerns when he swamps them with stories about non-existent kickbacks,