One minute I am outside with banners, protesting,
the next in the Press Conference.
I directed my question to the board chair of GAVI Dagfinn Hoybraten
“You have raised an extra 0.6 billion dollars today, would you consider setting up water & sanitation projects to increase health outcomes”
“NO” was the blunt answer, “we are only purchasing vaccines”.
Thankfully Sally Beck was there and asked the key question.
“The US and the UK have vaccine damage payment funds,
what will you have for the Developing World?”
“Vaccines are safe and magic” was the general reply. There was Psychosis over the whole panel at that point. Andrew Mitchell needs educating.
A Reuters reporter asked “How can you assure us that this is not just another way of lining the pockets of the Pharmaceutical companies?”
CBS chose the same angle…
Daniel Berman, a vaccines expert at Doctors Without Borders, said it was exciting so much money had been pledged towards saving lives. But he questioned whether the millions of taxpayer dollars would be spent properly.
“Why are we lining the pockets of big pharma like this?” Berman asked.
“That just screams conflict of interest and corporate welfare to us.”
A 2009 study published in the journal “The Lancet” showed dozens of developing countries exaggerated figures on vaccination rates, allowing them to get more money from the alliance. Researchers said these countries immunized half as many children as they claimed.
Other experts warned that donating vaccines to countries with broken health systems might mean they just end up sitting in warehouses. “We need to be mindful of the fact that investment in vaccines is not the magic answer to global health issues such as pneumonia and diarrhea,” said Sophie Harman, a public health expert at City University in London. “Without proper funding commitments to health infrastructure…any investment in vaccines will be redundant.”
Shame the UK press did not do their investigating. They mostly questioned if £800,000,000 for vaccine aid was fair to the UK people at a time like this, rather than questioning the whole concept. If they want ‘value for money’ then it will be up to us to give them the data…
Working on that!
ON MONDAY 13TH JUNE
Gather from 8am to lunch time
Press conference finishes the “Saving Children’s Lives” conference at 1.30pm
Meet outside location
THE GRANGE HOTEL
10 GODLIMAN STREET
ST. PAULS
LONDON
EC4V 5AJ
Question put to Bill Gates on the Save the Children Phone in..
“Each year half a million children die from diarrhoea caused by rotavirus, but
over a million die from lack of clean water and sanitation.
Vaccines may have helped reduce child deaths by 30% since 1990 but the WHO found
that mortality has reduced overall by 23% in the developing world just from the
introduction of vit A supplements.
How is the Gates Foundation getting on with your “aim to help reduce death and
disability due to micronutrient deficiencies and to prevent undernutrition in
children age 0 to 24 months in developing countries?”
And what plans will you build in for water and sanitation programs to support
your vaccine program please?
Hilde Lindemann, former president of the American Society for Bioethics and Humanities, has resigned as a member of the editorial board of the American Journal of Bioethics. She wrote:
“While the journal has been hugely successful, there seems to be no oversight or accountability, so it is difficult for board members to know very much about the review process, the acceptance rate, the rate of submission, the journal’s financial footing, who owns (as opposed to publishes) the journal, and other matters having to do with its day-to-day operations. I do not know who sits on the conflict of interest committee even though the Information for Authors page says it is “comprised [sic] of members of the editorial board.” And although the editor-in-chief has said he would disclose the financials of the journal, he has not done so — at least, not to me. The board is never called to meet; we are never consulted as a group in any meaningful fashion. It’s not even clear who chooses the board, or on what basis. So it seems that our good names go toward a journal that we know very little about.
…
I have been an editor myself for much of my adult life and I know what the pressure of deadlines can do to distort editorial judgment. But I also know that it’s possible to run a journal transparently and responsibly, and I no longer feel confident that AJOB is so run. Until that changes, I cannot lend my name to its masthead.”
…sent to the HPA
Please justify the use of the word considerable in your statement “there is considerable risk of catching measles if they are not protected”
There are 3 million such children made up of nearly 2 million totally unvaccined and a million without full boosters. Actually, the confirmed cases of measles is very small at 20 per month in England and Wales (From the HPA site) so I would suggest that the chances of an ‘unprotected’ child contracting measles very small.
|
Tested
|
Confirmed
|
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year |
Quarter
|
Uncorrected
Notified Cases |
Number
|
%
|
Number
|
%
|
| 2010* | 4th | 370# | 456 | 123.2% | 33 | 7.2% |
| 2010* | 3rd | 579# | 645 | 111.4% | 132 | 20.5% |
| 2010* | 2nd | 736 | 639 | 86.8% | 68 | 10.6% |
| 2010* | 1st | 543 | 446 | 82.1% | 10 | 2 |
Please also provide figures for the “serious consequences” from measles as I can’t seem to find any. There were just 19 complications in 2007 for mumps but it is impossible to find out the type and serious nature of the complications. The HPA said they ” are unable to provide this information to you as it falls under deductive disclosure due to a smaller dataset, and we would be in breach of patient confidentiality if this information is disclosed.”.
I understand that the role of the HPA is to reduce the spread of disease, however, this letter implies that if a child is not vaccinated then they are at considerable risk of contracting Measles when the data does not support this.
Many thanks…
….The reply was that they were acting within national policy… well that’s OK then!
With 2 million children under 18 years old totally unvaccinated and a further million children not ‘fully protected’ with just one jab, the several hundred confirmed measles cases each year year is akin to the risk of being struck by lightening. With 1 in 15 complications with measles reported in the Green Book, I am guessing that again, like mumps complications, the subset will be too small to release data for. I wonder if the 1 in 15 complications are taken from the UK of the states, which is significant.
European Parliament refuses to approve European Medicines Agency accounts
Adam Smith
Science and Communications Officer, ANH-Intl
KEY POINTS
European Parliamentarians have refused to sign off the European Medicines Agency’s accounts, citing “grave” concerns
The MEPs are worried about the Agency’s lack of independence from pharmaceutical companies
The Nordic Cochrane Centre accuses the Agency of working to protect pharmaceutical profits
This is among several signs of MEPs increasingly questioning aspects of the European Union’s stance aspects relating to natural healthcare
Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) have bared their teeth in no uncertain manner over the independence of the European Medicines Agency (EMA), the body entrusted to determine the safety and effectiveness of drugs in the European Union (EU).
In a damning indictment of the EMA, of the type many people had despaired of ever witnessing in the closed environment of the European Parliament, an overwhelming majority of MEPs – 637 to 4! – voted not to sign off on the EMA’s accounts.
MEPs said that there appears to be no proper guarantee of the independence of experts hired to carry out scientific evaluations of pharmaceutical drugs. Furthermore, MEPs believe that some of the experts involved in evaluating drugs have conflicting interests and that the EMA’s hiring practices are dubious and indicate further conflicts of interest, in particular the way in which they get funding and spend public money.
The now infamous ‘Danish Study’
American prosecutors are attempting to extradite a Danish scientist.
Poul Thorsen has been charged with 13 counts of wire fraud and nine counts of money laundering; a federal grand jury alleges that Thorsen stole over $1 million from autism research funding between February 2004 and June 2008.
Thorsen is said to have used the proceeds to buy a home in Atlanta, two cars and a Harley Davidson. He is said to have stolen the money while serving as the ‘principal investigator’ for a program that studied the relationship between autism and exposure to vaccines.
The Copenhagen Post reports:
“… [O]ver the four-year period he submitted over a dozen false invoices from the CDC for research expenses to Aarhus University, where he held a faculty position, instructing them to transfer the funds to a CDC account, which was in fact his personal account …
Thorsen’s research on autism is widely known in academic circles, where he was until this week a highly respected figure. A paper of his on the subject, which is known as ‘The Danish Study’, is quoted extensively to refute the autism vaccine connection.” And not forgetting Paul Offitt…
Attkisson had previously reported on the vaccine industry ties of Dr. Offit and others in a CBS Evening News report ‘How Independent Are Vaccine Defenders?… Offit told the OC Register that he provided CBS News “the details of his relationship … with pharmaceutical company Merck”, but documents provided by CBS News indicate Offit did not disclose all of his financial relationships with Merck.
Paul Offit on the Dangers of the Anti-Vaccine Movement http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/741343?src=mp&spon=17 The anti-vaccine movement, as called, is made up of parents with children they believe have been vaccine damaged, and health practitioners who see many possible adverse reactions to vaccines. The term anti-vaccine is derogatory and denies proper discussion about a product (vaccines) which have no benign placebo, no control group and no long term study into the outcomes for the health of the vaccinated and un vaccinated. Parents have the right to question prophylactic interventions and potentially damaging products for their babies. It is the state's responsibility to provide sound safety testing and active surveillance systems for such products - suppressing the user's valid concerns goes against the important phase 5 in the community. Each country uses different programs, so vaccines are not an exact science. Vaccines like the BCG are not mandatory in the US due to low efficacy and the Hep B vaccine in France is non mandatory while the link between this vaccine and Multiple Sclerosis in children is being researched. Please pass my comments on to Paul Offitt and the interviewer (I will update this post when I get a full reply rather than an acknowlegement)
The hepatitis B vaccine is given to U.S. infants at birth. But there is impressive evidence that for a preventive measure, hepatitis B vaccine is remarkable for the frequency, variety, and severity of complications from its use.
Hepatitis B vaccine has been shown in many peer-reviewed research papers to be associated with numerous infant deaths in the U.S. and Europe, multiple sclerosis and numerous chronic autoimmune disorders.
According to Child Health Safety, the U.S. government admitted as much when a Court found in favor of a plaintiff (deceased by the time the decision was made) who had developed systemic lupus erythematosus:
“Tambra Harris … filed a petition for compensation alleging that she suffered certain injuries as a result of receiving a vaccination. Among the injuries petitioner alleged that she had suffered as a result of receiving a hepatitis B vaccination was systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) … A lump sum of $475,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner as Administratrix of the Estate of Tambra Harris.”
n.b. France removed this vaccine from the mandatory schedule while they are looking into the possible link between the Hep B vaccine and M.S in children.
Is there a biochemical or synergistic toxicity?
The infant mortality rate (IMR) is one of the most important indicators of the socio-economic well-being and public health conditions of a country. The US childhood immunization schedule specifies 26 vaccine doses for infants aged less than 1 year—the most in the world—yet 33 nations have lower IMRs.
Using linear regression, the immunization schedules of these 34 nations were examined and a correlation coefficient of r = 0.70 (p < 0.0001) was found between IMRs and the number of vaccine doses routinely given to infants. Nations were also grouped into five different vaccine dose ranges: 12–14, 15–17, 18–20, 21–23, and 24–26. The mean IMRs of all nations within each group were then calculated. Linear regression analysis of unweighted mean IMRs showed a high statistically significant correlation between increasing number of vaccine doses and increasing infant mortality rates, with r = 0.992 (p = 0.0009). Using the Tukey-Kramer test, statistically significant differences in mean IMRs were found between nations giving 12–14 vaccine doses and those giving 21–23, and 24–26 doses. A closer inspection of correlations between vaccine doses, biochemical or synergistic toxicity, and IMRs is essential.
Source: Hum Exp Toxicol May 4, 2011.
http://het.sagepub.com/content/early/2011/05/04/0960327111407644
It is crazy that millions are spent on promoting & protecting drugs that can harm (adverse reactions are the 5th leading cause of death in Europe) but herbal preparations and supplements that have been used for years are to be even more restricted.
Chinese & Adeveyic medicines are worse hit, with none passed so far. The UK has passed 100 products but Adam Smith, from the Alliance for Natural Health, describes these products as pharmaceutical versions, many of which a respectful health food store will not stock.
I predict a rise in the use of herbal tea, allotments full of calendular & herbalists running preparation courses.
See the Alliance for Natural Health for new details
http://www.anh-europe.org/node/3113