Stampa messaggio di Windows Live Hotmail Pagina 1 di 4

#1164: Exposing WHO's risk analysis process for declaring a pandemic:

Who profits?
Da: EMFacts Consultancy (don@emfacts.com)
Inviato: martedì 1 dicembre 2009 13.00.34
A: cinciripini@hotmail.com

A new Post "#1164: Exposing WHO's risk analysis process for declaring a
pandemic: Who profits? " was written on the December 1, 2009 at 10:50 pm on
"EMFacts Consultancy".

Back in June of this year the World Health Organisation (WHO), acting
on the expert advice of its supposedly independent influenza advisers,
declared the H1N1 Swine Flu as a world pandemic that activated a
number of processes to combat the disease, obstentially to protect the
world's population against the potentially deadly disease. Essentially
the WHO influenza advisers conducted a risk assessment (risk analysis)
which led to their recommendation to enact the pandemic
classification.

Unfortunately, as with the case of the WHO risk analysis for power
frequency hazards (http://www.emfacts.com/papers/who_conflict.pdf),
again it is industry hacks who have the final say in direct violation
of WHO conflict of interest policy.

Michael Repacholi, who founded both ICNIRP and the WHO's International
EMF Project (IEMFP) stated in an Australian Senate inquiry in 2001
that the WHO had a firm policy against industry involvement in its
processes. To quote:

"The World Health Organization does not allow industry to participate

in either standard setting or in health risk assessment. The WHO takes
the view that there cannot be industry representation on standard
setting working groups. There cannot be someone on the working group
who is having an influence on health effects for an industry when they
derive benefit from that industry."

For the WHO, having a policy is one thing, following it is another

thing entirely it seems.

Don

******************************************************************************

Exposing WHO Influenza Advisers: They're Paid By The Pharmaceutical

Industry
(Originally in Danish)

Link:
http://preventdisease.com/news/09/111909_WHO_on_big_pharma_payroll.shtml

Several of the WHO's influenza advisers are paid by the pharmaceutical

industry. Conflicts of interest have encouraged the industry to
influence the decision that the H1N1 swine flu is a pandemic - and
that the vaccine is necessary to defeat the disease.

On June 11, 2009, WHO Director General Margaret Chan stated that the
swine influenza was a pandemic. It meant a huge economic benefit for
the pharmaceutical industry. Many member countries - including Denmark
- have contracts with major pharmaceutical companies and are therefore

http://sn126w.snt126.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpid... 01/12/2009
Stampa messaggio di Windows Live Hotmail Pagina 2 di 4

obligated to purchase vaccines in the event of a pandemic.

Investment bank JP Morgan estimates that the pharmaceutical industry

may well receive vaccine orders up to $10 billion (US) this year. Much
of the turnover is due to the WHO's decision.

Many of the apparently impartial researchers the WHO uses are paid by
the companies that produce vaccines.

The double roles are problematic, believes Professor Tom Jefferson,

who is epidemiologist at the Cochrane Center in Rome:

"It is worrying that many members of WHO committees, declare

themselves with other titles, although they actually represent the
pharmaceutical industry," he said.

One of the experts in the WHO H1N1-specific advisory group, Dr. Albert
Ostenhaus, has been a significant figure on the Dutch government's
agenda. The Government has convened a crisis meeting because of an
article in Science where it has emerged that Albert Ostenhaus has
economic interests in several pharmaceutical companies.

Meanwhile, Dr. Albert Ostenhaus in the Netherlands is known as' Dr

Flu' because he promotes as the solution to epidemics.

Dr. Frederick Hayden is an outside expert in WHO's SAGE (strategize

Advisory Group of Experts), which advises WHO on vaccines. He appears
in the official papers as flu-research coordinator from the anonymous
organization "The Wellcome Trust in London."

[ NOTE: the Wellcome Trust is one of the UK's largest "independent"

charities that funds biomedical research in the UK and
internationally, spending over £600 million each year. It is a
pharmaceutical industry organization operating under the guise of a
charity.]

But in a Google search shows that Dr. Hayden has many other employers.
He is in particular a 'paid adviser' for pharmaceutical companies
Roche, RW Johnson, SmithKline Beecham and Glaxo Wellcome.

Dr. Arnold Monto, who also appears as an invited expert on SAGE's

members list of paid consultants in association with MedImmune (which
produces the intranasal flu vaccine), Glaxo Wellcome and ViroPharma.
SAGE 's list says he is only listed as the head of a department at the
University of Michigan.

"There is a huge pharmaceutical lobby in the WHO, and it has been this
way for so long. It is hard to see through what is the industry's
interest and what is factual information," says specialist in
community medicine, and former employee at the university Mauri
Johansson.

The minutes from the SAGE meeting, held on July 7th stipulated that:
"It will probably be necessary to give two doses of vaccine to ensure
protection," although several researchers have pointed out that a
single vaccine should be enough. The minutes also recommended that all
health professionals and all pregnant women be vaccinated.
Furthermore, there is a need for "a better understanding of the global
vaccine demand 'and members' are invited to consider the use of
vaccine as part of their pandemic preparedness."

Tom Jefferson of Cochrane encountered mysterious recommendations from

the WHO:

http://sn126w.snt126.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpid... 01/12/2009
Stampa messaggio di Windows Live Hotmail Pagina 3 di 4

"The WHO's latest recommendations on the control of pandemic influenza

has stitches and frequent washing of hands mentioned twice. Vaccines
and antivirals are however mentioned 24 and 18 times. "Why would an
international public health agency focus on expensive interventions
such as vaccines and medication when it is not proven that they work?"
he said and stresses that washing is the best sanitizing method known.

Wolf Dieter Ludwig, head of drug commission of the German Medical

Association is no doubt about what has happened:

"The authorities have succumb to a campaign by pharmaceutical

companies, which seeks to monetize a non-existent threat," he told Der
Spiegel.

According to Tom Jefferson, the result should be that the WHO

committee split:

"The counselors must be separated from the WHO-makers and those who
evaluate the WHO recommendations. And we must ensure that nobody can
get away with non-publication of their conflicts of interest, "he
says.

Something to contribute

WHO spokesman, Gregory Hartl, believes that it is quite natural that

the pharmaceutical industry participate in WHO meetings.

"Everybody has something to contribute in this process - industry,

NGOs and professional players - so we can gather all information. They
can not vote, they have no influence on the outcome, and they can only
speak when they are asked. When we make vaccine recommendations, we
need knowledge about what is required to produce a vaccine. It is the
only manufacturer who has the knowledge. "

Frederick Hayden and Alfred Monto attended the meeting on July 7th by
experts from a university, but they were both paid by the
pharmaceutical industry. Information about their financial ties are
just not publicly available in the WHO auspices. Why not?

"All staff must sign the declaration of conflicts of interest, so we

are clear about their background. But again, Frederick Hayden is the
best influenza viral specialist in the world, so if you want to know
how an influenza behaves, you ask Fred Hayden. That is why there are
differences between observers and participants. "

But why not publish the financial information to the public?

"I'm not sure why we did not publish it ... I can not answer you on '.

When scientists from the WHO warn millions of people on a deadly

pandemic and recommended vaccine, and then if it is exposed that he
has financial interests, will it have some impact in the World Health
Organization?

"No ...the WHO has a system that guarantees independence. We are aware
that we do not let anything or anyone influence us. "

Will the WHO continue to conceal the medical experts' financial

interests?

'I will not speak on that... it is possible that we will look at a

code of disclosure for financial information, but I can not promise
anything. "

http://sn126w.snt126.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpid... 01/12/2009
Stampa messaggio di Windows Live Hotmail Pagina 4 di 4

http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/?p=1203

________________________________________________________

You have subscribed to these Emails.

If you want to change your settings or unsubscribe please visit:

http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/wp-post_notification.php?
code=e5d1b37cf665a135dee0da300641d5cd&addr=cinciripini@hotmail.com&

http://sn126w.snt126.mail.live.com/mail/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpid... 01/12/2009