Anyone Remember Swine Flu?

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Remember the panic last autumn -- and which afflicted a few comrades here, who seemed to believe everything they were told by 'neutral' and 'peer reviewed' scientists?

http://www.revleft.com/vb/swine-flu-pandemic-t121097/index.html?highlight=Swine+Flu

Recall, too, how some of us said this was all kicked up by Big Pharma keen to guarantee profits in the downturn?

Then check this out:


Report condemns swine flu experts' ties to big pharma

Trio of scientists who urged stockpiling had previously been paid, says report

Randeep Ramesh, social affairs editor

The Guardian, Friday 4 June 2010

Scientists who drew up the key World Health Organisation guidelines advising governments to stockpile drugs in the event of a flu pandemic had previously been paid by drug companies which stood to profit, according to a report out today.

An investigation by the British Medical Journal and the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, the not-for-profit reporting unit, shows that WHO guidance issued in 2004 was authored by three scientists who had previously received payment for other work from Roche, which makes Tamiflu, and GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), manufacturer of Relenza.

City analysts say that pharmaceutical companies banked more than $7bn (£4.8bn) as governments stockpiled drugs. The issue of transparency has risen to the forefront of public health debate after dramatic predictions last year about a swine flu pandemic did not come true.

Some countries, notably Poland, declined to join the panic-buying of vaccines and antivirals triggered when the WHO declared the swine flu outbreak a pandemic a year ago this week. The UK, which warned that 65,000 could die as a result of the virus, spent an estimated £1bn stockpiling drugs and vaccines; officials are now attempting to unpick expensive drug contracts.

The cabinet office has launched an inquiry into the cost to the taxpayer of the panic-buying of drugs.

Today, the Council of Europe, produces a damning report into how a lack of openness around "decision making" has bedevilled planning for pandemics.

"The tentacles of drug company influence are in all levels in the decision-making process," said Paul Flynn, the Labour MP who sits on the council's health committee. "It must be right that the WHO is transparent because there has been distortion of priorities of public health services all over Europe, waste of huge sums of public money and provocation of unjustified fear."

Although the experts consulted made no secret of industry ties in other settings, declaring them in research papers and at universities, the WHO itself did not publicly disclose any of these in its seminal 2004 guidance. In its note, the WHO advised: "Countries that are considering the use of antivirals as part of their pandemic response will need to stockpile in advance."

Many nations would adopt this guidance, including Britain. In 2005, the government said it had begun bulk-buying the drug Tamiflu, initially ordering 14.6m doses after bird flu killed 40 in Asia.

The specific guidance on antivirals was written by Professor Fred Hayden. He has confirmed in an email that he was being paid by Roche for lectures and consultancy work at the time the guidance was produced and published. He received payments from GSK for consultancy and lecturing until 2002. He said "[declaration of interest] forms were filled out for the 2002 consultation".

The previous year Hayden was also one of the main authors of a Roche-sponsored study that asserted what was to become a main Tamiflu selling point – its claim of a 60% reduction in flu hospitalisations.

Dr Arnold Monto was the author of the WHO annex dealing with vaccine usage in pandemics. Between 2000 and 2004, and at the time of writing the annex, Monto had openly declared consultancy fees and research support from Roche and GSK. No conflict of interest statement was included in the annex published by the WHO.

When asked if he had signed a declaration of interest form for WHO, Dr Monto said "conflict of interest forms are requested before participation in any WHO meeting".

The third scientist, Professor Karl Nicholson, is credited with the WHO's influential work Pandemic Influenza. According to declarations he made in the BMJ and Lancet in 2003, he had received sponsorship from GSK and Roche.

Even though the previous year these declarations had been openly made, no conflict of interest statement was included in the annex. Nicholson said he last had "financial relations" with Roche in 2001.

When asked if he had signed a declaration of interest form for WHO, he replied: "The WHO does require attendees of meetings, such as those held in 2002 and 2004, to complete declarations of interest."

A WHO official told the BMJ it had to balance an individual's privacy with the robustness of guidelines, which were subject to a wide external review process.

Bold added.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/jun/04/swine-flu-experts-big-pharmaceutical

And Poland, which refused to take this 'advice', had a lower death rate from swine flu. USA: death rate (per million): 35.28; UK: 6.68; Poland: 4.51.

http://www.flucount.org/

Who'd have thought that under capitalism such things could occur, and that scientists and governments would be so easily corrupted (yet again)?

[piet11111]

its nothing to be concerned about but i am still doing my part by consuming a lot of alcohol especially the belgian ones

And i remained healthy while the swine flu was on my island :laugh:

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Yellow journalism and capitalist corporations peddling their shitty drugs (http://www.badscience.net/2009/05/i-dont-really-get-why-people-are-chatting-about-tamiflu-as-if-its-all-that/) doesn't mean there wasn't a risk.

[Fullmetal Anarchist]

I had it and it was fucking horrible I felt shitty for months afterwards and you know what I would give anything not to feel like that again. Honestly it was worse than getting shot and the wound getting infected.

[The Red Next Door]

Yeah. I remember it well, It was the best tool of the bigots in the US.

[Mendax]

In all fairness a lot of people didn't take it seriously fromt he beggining -
http://doihaveswineflu.org/
http://haveigotswineflu.co.uk/

[S.Artesian]

Remember the panic last autumn -- and which afflicted a few comrades here, who seemed to believe everything they were told by 'neutral' and 'peer reviewed' scientists?

http://www.revleft.com/vb/swine-flu-pandemic-t121097/index.html?highlight=Swine+Flu

Recall, too, how some of us said this was all kicked up by Big Pharma keen to guarantee profits in the downturn?

Then check this out:



Bold added.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/jun/04/swine-flu-experts-big-pharmaceutical

And Poland, which refused to take this 'advice', had a lower death rate from swine flu. USA: death rate (per million): 35.28; UK: 6.68; Poland: 4.51.

http://www.flucount.org/

Who'd have thought that under capitalism such things could occur, and that scientists and governments would be so easily corrupted (yet again)?


I don't know what was said last season, and I don't think panic was necessary, but having a supply of vaccine on hand is not in and of itself evidence of a "phony" pandemic.

In this aricle itself the guidelines were published in 2004, the authors identified their previous connections to GSK, etc. so the idea of creating panic to boost swine flu vaccine sales in 2009 is a bit of a stretch.

How about SARS? That was a cooked up deal also? Avian flu? I have no doubt that pharmaceutical companies take advantage as much as they can. They are capitalist of course.

In NYC where I live, the mortality rate from swine flu exceeded that of previous influenza outbreaks-- besides, this influenza is not necessarily no longer viable as an infectious agent. It may return the coming season, it may not.

Let's not be pulling Mbekis when it comes to anti-virals.

[AK]

Maddox put it best: http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=swine_flu :lol:
The symptoms were the exact same as ordinary flu.

It was nothing but dollar signs sewn into pigskins.

[S.Artesian]

Maddox put it best: http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=swine_flu :lol:
The symptoms were the exact same as ordinary flu.

It was nothing but dollar signs sewn into pigskins.


Not completely. Check the CDC studies on pediatric mortality due to influenza. Deaths due in the 2009-2010 season traceable to swine flu are about triple the deaths for previous years.

You got kids? I got kids. I think they appreciated getting vaccinated. I know I did as a parent.

[GreenCommunism]

do people here have any respect for those who denounce vaccins as causing autism and other stuff like that? wouldn't children be the most vulnerable to the adverse effect of vaccins?

it is true that it is sometime good to be on the side of caution, also i think it is easier not to get the vaccine than to get it. but it sounds too easy to causes panics over just about any new viruses. if big pharma's and the media have linked interest it's just obvious. i personally hate the whole issue, people won't take the vaccine because they don't trust the companies, thus not only are vaccination are not done for good reasons, but when those vaccination truly are important they may not be taken due to the other useless times.

[piet11111]

My sis actually asked me if she should have their 2 kids vaccinated against swine flu.
I told her that the safety procedures where drastically shortened and that Obama made it into law that big pharma could not be prosecuted for any deaths that would follow from the vaccination program.
If such measures are taken to protect big pharma while on the other hand it just means catching a moderately-nasty flu then i tend to take my chances with the flu.
My sis agreed and neither of her kids got sick anyway.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

do people here have any respect for those who denounce vaccins as causing autism and other stuff like that?

I certainly don't have much patience for that rubbish.

[Stand Your Ground]

And i remained healthy while the swine flu was on my island :laugh:
Yep, that shit was in my town and never affected me. All government scare tactics.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Yep, that shit was in my town and never affected me. All government scare tactics.

Please tell me you are not being serious.

[ComradeOm]

Yellow journalism and capitalist corporations peddling their shitty drugs (http://www.badscience.net/2009/05/i-dont-really-get-why-people-are-chatting-about-tamiflu-as-if-its-all-that/) doesn't mean there wasn't a risk.Of course not. Risks however are to be managed. In the case of swine flu the risk was, apparently, grossly exaggerated. This has had a real impact - most notably in the huge sums that governments spent on vaccines that were rarely used or effective. It also contributed to a climate of fear in which people were suddenly obsessing over a risk that was really negligible

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Noxion:


Yellow journalism and capitalist corporations peddling their shitty drugs doesn't mean there wasn't a risk.

Indeed, and about the same 'risk' as when the boy cried 'wolf' The problem is that now, few people will pay much heed to the next warning, even if it's genuine.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

S Artesian:


I don't know what was said last season, and I don't think panic was necessary, but having a supply of vaccine on hand is not in and of itself evidence of a "phony" pandemic.

The problem, if you actually read what was posted, was with the anti-virals and vaccines, the former of which were of limited or no value at all -- as the figures from those countries that did not use them attest -- which various naive/venal governments were bounced into stock-piling on the advice of the WHO, who had been advised by those in the pay of Big Pharma when those guidelines were written.

And by sheer 'coincidence', the two big Pharma companies involved made $7 billion out of the panic, at a time when their profits would have been hit by the downturn. How amazing!

And the drugs were largely ineffectual (except for otherwise healthy adults):

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601100&sid=a9acc7qIJFdU

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/339/dec07_2/b5106?ijKey=b9e57312b08cf03c1923f6a254048e5d5a08e6 0d&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_swine_flu_outbreak#Effectiveness_of_antiviral s_questioned


In this aricle itself the guidelines were published in 2004, the authors identified their previous connections to GSK, etc. so the idea of creating panic to boost swine flu vaccine sales in 2009 is a bit of a stretch.

Only to those with a naive view of the lobbying power of Big Pharma.


How about SARS? That was a cooked up deal also? Avian flu? I have no doubt that pharmaceutical companies take advantage as much as they can. They are capitalist of course.

Both were manufactured panics, too. Did you see the press headlines at the time?


In NYC where I live, the mortality rate from swine flu exceeded that of previous influenza outbreaks-- besides, this influenza is not necessarily no longer viable as an infectious agent. It may return the coming season, it may not.

Alas the general health of US citizens rivals, in places, many of those who live in the 'third world' -- and this is quite apart from the fact that this virus was particuarly lethal for obese individuals. In general, US citizens, alas too, are not known for their slender figures.


Let's not be pulling Mbekis when it comes to anti-virals.

Or the wool over our own eyes...

And, the deaths in the US from this flu were only slightly higher than previous years (but certainly far less than the panic would have had us believe):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_flu_pandemic_in_the_United_States#Flu_strain_ severity

Which might just as well be due to the massive increase in poverty in the US (homelessness, unemployment, etc.) since 2007.

As one Canadian expert said:


I don't agree with (the WHO) because I think it's a panic metre, not a pandemic metre. [...] If that flu-like illness is not deadly, I don't know what the cause for alarm is for people who are not really sickened by this virus. [...] I'm really eager to know how much worse this is than seasonal flu. So far it's looking like it's not that serious.

Seasonal flu killing more people than 'swine flu' (http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20090429/WHO_panic_090429/20090429?hub=Health)

Finally, you refer us to the CDC, but we are also told by the CDC that their statistics are unreliable:


The CDC has maintained that actual data on hospitalizations and deaths is grossly under-reported. Data is gained from laboratory-confirmed outcomes and unfortunately that includes "incomplete testing, inaccurate test results, or diagnosis that attribute hospitalizations and deaths to other causes, for example, secondary complications to influenza."

http://diseases-viruses.suite101.com/article.cfm/swine-flu-risk-for-2010--h1n1-fears-subside-but-will-it-mutate

http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/estimates/April_October_17.htm

[GreenCommunism]

I certainly don't have much patience for that rubbish.
aren't there increases in autism since vaccines are more prevalent? i know that some people whose children is autist blame the vaccines or so . of course there could simply be more children diagnosed with autism.

Indeed, and about the same 'risk' as when the boy cried 'wolf' The problem is that now, few people will pay much heed to the next warning, even if it's genuine.
exactly what i said, this is what concerns me the most about this whole industry.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

aren't there increases in autism since vaccines are more prevalent?

Doesn't mean that vaccines are the cause of the increase, if the increase is real in the first place and not just a media distortion of the statistics.


i know that some people whose children is autist blame the vaccines or so . of course there could simply be more children diagnosed with autism.

That could be the case, but one must also remember that intuition has a very bad track record when it comes to medical matters. We could just be getting better at detecting autism earlier, which might make it seem to a parent that the vaccine received at the same time or shortly before was the "cause" of the autism.

[Ocean Seal]

The swine flu panic was just used to distract people from the abysmal economic conditions. I know that it afflicted a lot of people including my friend, but at the same time the amount of people afflicted with the flu as a whole went down (I believe it went down slightly don't quote me on this) and I strongly believe that our government just capitalized on this epidemic in order to divert attention away from other issues.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Just as the Sars and Bird Flu scares were used to distract us from the war in Iraq.

[S.Artesian]

The autism connection has been refuted, if it even needed refutation since there was no clinical evidence connecting vaccines with rates of autism.

As for Rosa's usual blahblahblahing-- I read the article posted in the OP. It refers to Tamiflu and Relenza-- not the vaccines. The scientists involved where open about work they had done from Roche, GSK, etc.-- work performed 5,6 years prior to the swine flue.

Yes, CDC tells us that their statistical method is an estimate and may never be validated. And so far, nobody has provided a statistical assay of the data that refutes CDC's methodology, or its conclusions.

So... being that the CDC methodology is uncertain is country mile away from being evidence that supports the 'grand conspiracy' theory of which Rosa seems so certain.

Do I think the bourgeoisie hyped, manipulated, the prospects of an influenza pandemic to accumulate capital? Of course. That's what being the bourgeoisie means. Do I think the bourgeoisie created the lethality of this virus, created the prospects of a pandemic, in order to create a vaccine, in order to accumulate capital? Nope.

As for Rosa's attributing the heightened mortality rates in the US to... near 3rd world health conditions and obesity.... How the fuck can someone who questions the "reliability" of CDC statistics because the CDC admits to uncertainty; how can someone who claims fears of pandemic were all based on rumor, hearsay, ignorance, and profit, turn around and without batting an eyelash, trumpet such phony baloney pseudo-analysis, such hearsay, rumor, and ignorance, without providing a shred of supporting data regarding actual mortality and morbidity rates on sectors of the population, there income levels, healthcare availability, age, percent body fat, etc? How? Simple. It's Rosa. That's what Rosa does.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

S Artesian (still smarting...):


As for Rosa's usual blahblahblahing-- I read the article posted in the OP. It refers to Tamiflu and Relenza-- not the vaccines. The scientists involved where open about work they had done from Roche, GSK, etc.-- work performed 5,6 years prior to the swine flue.

And where have I denied this? In fact I pointed this out!


Yes, CDC tells us that their statistical method is an estimate and may never be validated. And so far, nobody has provided a statistical assay of the data that refutes CDC's methodology, or its conclusions.

So... being that the CDC methodology is uncertain is country mile away from being evidence that supports the 'grand conspiracy' theory of which Rosa seems so certain

Where have I expressed 'certainty' over any of these figures?

The only one who seems to have done that is you:


In NYC where I live, the mortality rate from swine flu exceeded that of previous influenza outbreaks-- besides, this influenza is not necessarily no longer viable as an infectious agent. It may return the coming season, it may not.

Let's not be pulling Mbekis when it comes to anti-virals.


Do I think the bourgeoisie hyped, manipulated, the prospects of an influenza pandemic to accumulate capital? Of course. That's what being the bourgeoisie means. Do I think the bourgeoisie created the lethality of this virus, created the prospects of a pandemic, in order to create a vaccine, in order to accumulate capital? Nope.

And how might they hype an epidemic without also hyping the 'lethality' of this virus?

Or do you suppose they hyped the epidemic while arguing the virus was quite weak?:lol:


As for Rosa's attributing the heightened mortality rates in the US to... near 3rd world health conditions and obesity.... How the fuck can someone who questions the "reliability" of CDC statistics because the CDC admits to uncertainty; how can someone who claims fears of pandemic were all based on rumor, hearsay, ignorance, and profit, turn around and without batting an eyelash, trumpet such phony baloney pseudo-analysis, such hearsay, rumor, and ignorance, without providing a shred of supporting data regarding actual mortality and morbidity rates on sectors of the population, there income levels, healthcare availability, age, percent body fat, etc? How? Simple. It's Rosa. That's what Rosa does.

Where did I 'attribute' the heightened mortality rates to £near 3rd world health conditions and obesity"?

Here is what I said:


Which might just as well be due to the massive increase in poverty in the US (homelessness, unemployment, etc.) since 2007.

Notice my use of the subjunctive mood?


how can someone who claims fears of pandemic were all based on rumor, hearsay, ignorance, and profit, turn around and without batting an eyelash, trumpet such phony baloney pseudo-analysis, such hearsay, rumor, and ignorance, without providing a shred of supporting data regarding actual mortality and morbidity rates on sectors of the population, there income levels, healthcare availability, age, percent body fat, etc?

What 'hearsay'? I provided links to those that argue the same as I do -- perhaps you do not know how to follow links?

You are the one who failed to support what you had to say with any evidence/links at all.

[S.Artesian]

Here's where you imply, because you don't want to actually "claim" anything-- you're like a trader in derivatives Rosa, you don't take a position, you hedge your positions so you can slip away, but here's where you imply that about 3rd world, and obesity in the US contributing to higher mortality and morbidity rates in the US:

"Alas the general health of US citizens rivals, in places, many of those who live in the 'third world' -- and this is quite apart from the fact that this virus was particuarly lethal for obese individuals. In general, US citizens, alas too, are not known for their slender figures."

Now go on with your hair-splitting, equivocating, and general obscurantism. I expect nothing less.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

S(marting) Artesian:


Here's where you imply, because you don't want to actually "claim" anything-- you're like a trader in derivatives Rosa, you don't take a position, you hedge your positions so you can slip away, but here's where you imply that about 3rd world, and obesity in the US contributing to higher mortality and morbidity rates in the US:

It's hardly my fault if you do not understand the use of the subjunctive mood in English.

Check this out, it might help you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjunctive_mood


Now go on with your hair-splitting, equivocating, and general obscurantism. I expect nothing less.

Just because your thought is irredeemably sloppy, you express surprise when mine isn't, too -- and call it 'hair-splitting'.:lol:

So, no, I won't sink to your low level...

[ComradeOm]

aren't there increases in autism since vaccines are more prevalent? i know that some people whose children is autist blame the vaccines or so . of course there could simply be more children diagnosed with autismThe MMR controversy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccine_controversy) is a perfect example of the incestuous combination of bad science, media hype, and professional greed. There is absolutely no evidence proving that MMR vaccines cause or contribute to autism yet the (false) perception otherwise has caused real damage

[Stand Your Ground]

Please tell me you are not being serious.
Yes. I had friends who got scared, went to get the 'vaccine' and ended up getting swine flu a couple days later.

[Pavlov's House Party]

I remember that there was a local media hype about huge swine flu numbers because colleges and universities had a thing where students who thought they had the flu had to miss a week of classes, no doctor's note required. Needless to say, hundreds if not thousands of students used it as an excuse for a small vacation.

That's just one example, but I think that many reported cases were not actually swine flu and it lead to a giant hype where anyone who was sick thought they had it.

[Jazzratt]

Yes. I had friends who got scared, went to get the 'vaccine' and ended up getting swine flu a couple days later.

Your reasoning is faulty, you're relying on anecdotal evidence. Your "evidence" (such as it is) is also suspect, do you really expect us to believe you have friends?

[Stand Your Ground]

Your reasoning is faulty, you're relying on anecdotal evidence. Your "evidence" (such as it is) is also suspect, do you really expect us to believe you have friends?
Well we all have our own opinions. Feel free to think as you wish.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Well we all have our own opinions. Feel free to think as you wish.

Matters of public health are not (or rather, should not be) decided on the basis of personal opinion. The more idiots there are deciding not to vaccinate because some celebrity figure got their facts wrong, the less effective vaccines become.

It is true that a minority of people will have an adverse reaction to a vaccine. But that's better than lots of people dying or being crippled because of the disease.

[Stand Your Ground]

Matters of public health are not (or rather, should not be) decided on the basis of personal opinion. The more idiots there are deciding not to vaccinate because some celebrity figure got their facts wrong, the less effective vaccines become.

It is true that a minority of people will have an adverse reaction to a vaccine. But that's better than lots of people dying or being crippled because of the disease.
Well I didn't get vaccinated, and I'm fine. Some people did, and died or got sick anyway, so that's enough for me to justify my actions. When the health of people is actually a concern, not profits, I will trust medicines.

[piet11111]

Matters of public health are not (or rather, should not be) decided on the basis of personal opinion. The more idiots there are deciding not to vaccinate because some celebrity figure got their facts wrong, the less effective vaccines become.

It is true that a minority of people will have an adverse reaction to a vaccine. But that's better than lots of people dying or being crippled because of the disease.

I agree but with the swine flu vaccine i was not convinced of the necessity for it (hardly any fatality's) along with the rush job of producing enough of it and bypassing safety regulations along with legal immunity from prosecution in case of damages caused by the vaccine i did not feel comfortable taking it.

[S.Artesian]

Well I didn't get vaccinated, and I'm fine. Some people did, and died or got sick anyway, so that's enough for me to justify my actions. When the health of people is actually a concern, not profits, I will trust medicines.

Well, yeah, that's biology. Some don't get vaccinated and don't get sick, some do get vaccinated and do get sick. But we're dealing with these things on the social level, over the entirety of the population, and the probabilities across that population.

Wasn't the idiot who started the crap about vaccinations and autism just sent to jail? What was that? The response of the state/pharma combine to an attempt to uncover their collusion?

Tell you what, I'll go with The Lancet, which seems to have the best grasp on the relationship between public health and individual mortality/morbidity rates I've come across.

Anecdotes are not antidotes.