Cynthia Busuttil
Plans to cancel vaccines
Probe into whether WHO had faked pandemic
The government is looking into the possibility of cancelling as many as 225,000 of the 425,000 swine flu vaccines ordered, as those who opted to take the jab remains low.
Only about 80,000 people have so far been vaccinated against the H1N1 virus, which has claimed the lives of five people in Malta and thousands around the world. The lack of response to the vaccine is also experienced in other European countries, which are looking at ways of getting rid of their extra stock.
Moreover, last Saturday the health authorities decided that children only needed one dose - rather than two, as originally announced - of the vaccine, a decision that is bound to leave Malta with even more extra doses on its hands.
The government has thus been forced to ponder even cancelling the over 200,000 doses that have still not arrived even if a spokesman for the Community Care Parliamentary Secretary said that "strictly speaking, Malta is obliged to take the whole lot".
The authorities ordered the H1N1 vaccine from pharmaceutical giant GSK in December after Malta was left without any stock when international pharmaceutical company Solvay failed to honour an agreement to provide jabs to counter the global pandemic.
The whole lot will cost the island between €3 and €3.5 million but the authorities will not divulge the exact amount.
"In terms of the agreement signed between GSK and the government, it is not allowed to divulge to third parties the exact price paid by the Maltese government," the spokes-man said.
Worries about the health impact of the pandemic virus, which from the outset was milder than anyone predicted, seem to have waned over the months. Moreover, the Council of Europe is investigating accusations that the World Health Organisation had faked the pandemic. Wolfgang Wodarg, head of health at the Council of Europe, said he could not understand how 1,000 cases in Mexico City, where 20 million live, could be considered to constitute a real pandemic.
While the WHO has rejected any accusations of undue influence by the pharmaceutical industry to declare a pandemic, some experts have stuck up for the organisation.
"I agree 100 per cent that it merited to be called a pandemic. It has all the characteristics of previous pandemics, including the ability to sweep the world quickly and become a dominant virus," London-based virologist John Oxford said.
The professor of virology at Queen Mary's School of Medicine and Dentistry said the world was fortunate that H1N1 had proven to be a mild virus but it was mistaken to think that the pandemic was over.
"We're very lucky that it's still a mild virus. It has not gone away. Everyone seems to be conducting a post mortem but the patient is not dead, unfortunately. It will return next year and we have to start thinking what will happen then," he said.
One worrisome scenario is that the virus will mutate and start affecting more elderly people, which have, so far, seemed relatively immune to the virus.
"Then it will appear to be more deadly simply because once people in that age group are infected with the flu virus, they die much more readily than any other group," he said, adding that in previous pandemics the first wave was often not the deadliest.
Nigel Lightfoot, chief adviser on emergency preparedness and head of the pandemic influenza programme at the UK's Health Promotion Agency, agrees that the WHO was right in calling a pandemic.
"We always have to err on the side of caution and be ready for what Mother Nature throws at us," he said.
Prof. Lightfoot, who had helped draw up Malta's pandemic plan, also agrees that we could see a spike in deaths if the virus starts affecting the elderly more.
He pointed out that, even among younger people, there have been a number of deaths. "It was milder than we feared but we still saw some serious effects, including deaths in pregnant women," he said, adding that at the height of the pandemic there were several hundred people in intensive care in British hospitals.
He said all the plans were made for a virus that could have been as bad as the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic, which killed millions all over the world.
"At the beginning, we did not really know how severe this virus was going to be. It turned out to be less severe and the number of deaths associated with it is lower than expected.
"But if the WHO had not declared a pandemic and the virus had mutated - something that these viruses are very capable of doing - then it would have been wrong. I think all the right decisions were made," he said.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
Petrol price up 6c
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
23 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Christian Sciberras
Feb 22nd 2010, 15:31
Martin Cassar - Reason is all about facts, I don't see any.
C Attard - Incidentally, restaurants grow the more you eat [from them] do they attempt to starve you?
Government officials get pays from certain taxes, does it mean a government can impose excessive taxes?
On the same level of reason, a pharmaceutical company would be better of developing strawberry flavored paracetamol than [re]engineer a virus.
Until I/we read absolute facts, these ramblings remain baseless conspiracy theories.
Martin Cassar
Feb 12th 2010, 15:04
@Christian Sciberras.
I"swine flu is all a deliberately developed man-made virus"
So you mean to say a virus from 1918 was man made?
To put it more precisely – the HINI virus has been activated or reactivated by man.
C Attard
Feb 12th 2010, 13:33
Description of our current system:
Pharma companies make medicine to help us. We buy medicine. They get bigger and bigger.
So, the sicker we are the bigger they grow. BUT they are 'trying' to make us healthy, right? If we become healthy they go bust.
Is there a problem with this system?
Ian C Ellul
Feb 12th 2010, 12:19
Interestingly, initially the opposition criticised the government that he was not going to buy enough vaccinations. And now that he bought enough (no one could predict the poor response) part of the stakeholders (namely, healthy, young and middle aged persons) are picking on the government on the extra supplies. C'est la vie ...
Christian Sciberras
Feb 12th 2010, 11:03
Nigel Lawrence - You can get anti-traffic vaccines by actually minding the road while driving...
Ray Buhagiar - I agree.
It is pathetic how all these people reason, if people died of the pandemic they'd claim the vaccine was useless.
If the vaccine was successfull (less known infections) they'd claim it was useless just as well.
As to engineering virii, let me tell you that accidentally leaked viruses from BSL-4 environments never made it to pandemics and rarely even gets noticed, such a case was that of ebola in a German lab.
Christian Sciberras
Feb 12th 2010, 10:54
@Martin Cassar - I'm afraid you can't compare a man-made program with a biological (uncontrolable) ones.
Would MS develop I virus? I don't think so, they've already got enough on their mind with anti-trust suits, I don't think they fancy also getting others from NSA or DOD.
"Same company were behind what’s called Anthrax."
I don't know where you get your doomsday articles but there is no company behind anthrax. In fact, dropping the fact that anthrax was discovered in 1875, the mail anthrax was developed by the army itself and most known anthrax pandemics have either been natural or the result of an accident.
"swine flu is all a deliberately developed man-made virus"
So you mean to say a virus from 1918 was man made?
Ray Buhagiar
Feb 12th 2010, 07:06
Money spent for disaster planning always seems to be wasted until disaster strikes. THen we are all smiles that we were prepared. Disaster could take several forms from natural to economical.
After all aren't we also collectively paying large sums of money to insure our homes, cars, health, etc. Doesn't this seems a waste of money because in Malta we rarely get any earthquakes?
Thumbs up to our health authorities and civil protection who are always prepared for major disasters.
Mike Frraugia
Feb 11th 2010, 20:44
@Christian Sciberras
@ A Cassar
Unfortunately, I didn't keep a record of the link but I wrote in the times back in November that since many countries are ending up with huge piles of unwanted vaccines, and due to the fact that there were reported cases in Canada of deaths related to the vaccine (NOT the H1N1 virus) it was obvious that 500,000 doses ordered by the Maltese authorities, were going to be a waste of money.
And why isn't the value being made public? Aren't we paying for them? That stinks.
To my knowledge, the cost was about € 100 each bottle of 10 doses. (which actually result in 9 doses due to practical reasons).
Nigel Lawrence
Feb 11th 2010, 19:30
H1N1 virus, which has claimed the lives of five people in Malta and thousands around the world---
About the same as people killed on the roads. Where can one obtain the anti traffic vaccination?
Martin Cassar
Feb 11th 2010, 18:42
@Christian Sciberras.
In the USA it takes Mr. Bill Gates of Microsoft company considerable time to develop coded softwares, on the other side of the Atlantic you would see tens of thousands of hackers to decipher the code….This is what’s called virus and anti-virus business. When things (global financial) are going smooth then both hackers as well developers still enjoy a market share and happy. Now, what if Microsoft’s business facing troubles ? Would it be hard to Microsoft to develop a new computer virus, so eventually both hackers and developers are happy again? This is more or less same scenario with what’s called swine flu, the only difference is to replace Microsoft with another X company owned by a certain Mr. Donald Rumsfeld Ex. defense secretary of the USA under George Bush. Same company were behind what’s called Anthrax.
What does the Anthrax and Swine flu got in common?
The former was deliberately developed in 2003 to deflect people’s attention from USA’s failure in Iraq, while the latter is to deflect people’s attention about what’s happening in Afghanistan, as well to revive the almost bankrupted pharmaceutical companies.
My friend, it all business I am afraid
C Attard
Feb 11th 2010, 18:27
Do vaccines work? I just read, that, in an outbreak in New Jersey 77% of the persons that got mumps had been vaccinated against mumps! If mumps vaccines actually worked, shouldn't we see the mumps infection spreading more among those who refused the vaccines?
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/08/mumps.outbreak.northeast/index.html?hpt=T2
Christian Sciberras
Feb 11th 2010, 17:50
"How did the WHO get it so wrong? "
What did they get wrong with the virus even getting to Malta in only a couple of months?
"So the people rightly ask whether the vaccine is worth the risk (real or perceived)."
Yep, the people might as well get a crystal ball and try predict what's going on tomorrow.
"I get off-shore: In Africa for instance a child dies every 3 minutes not because of a swine flu but of hunger or water shortages. Thousands of peoples die and the miserable list of causes of death goes unnoticed."
Wait, wasn't it 3 seconds?! Let's all sue missionaries, ok? They're obviously lying!
"So we get feared and we must buy the vaccines."
That's not true at all. If people did fear enough, they'd watch out for basic hygene, in the first place. I'd cancel my flight back home if I knew I'd be introducing a disease in a "clean" (home/foreign)land (not for the love of it, of course).
The vaccine was a success if it weren't for some "fat heads" speaking out their area (/sarcasm), containment was a huge failure on the other hand.
Ramon Casha
Feb 11th 2010, 16:56
I don't think the Maltese health authorities can be blamed for trying to be prepared. The WHO was declaring an impending pandemic, other countries were vying to be the first to get all the vaccines they need, and we'd have howled in outrage had the Maltese authorities not responded by ensuring we would also get our share of vaccines.
On the other hand, one must ask some hard questions. How did the WHO get it so wrong? Although the flu spread rapidly, its mortality rate was actually LOWER than the ordinary flu which sweeps the world every year (which has an approximate mortality rate of half a million people). Could the manufacturers of the vaccine have influenced their decision? The manufacturers pocketed a very hefty sum here - if tiny Malta paid over €3 million, the global sum would be something astronomical. What's a few underhanded tactics when billions are at stake?
Patrick Sacco
Feb 11th 2010, 14:38
I will never take a vaccine that was not thoroughly tested first.
Martin Cassar
Feb 11th 2010, 13:55
Before I get off-shore first let me reflect on the situation in my lovely isle please. The number of peoples died in road accidents outnumbered the number of death of what so called sine flu. The number of peoples died because of drug overdoses, alcohol, smoking related diseases and seasonal flu outnumbered the number of swine flu’s death.
I get off-shore: In Africa for instance a child dies every 3 minutes not because of a swine flu but of hunger or water shortages. Thousands of peoples die and the miserable list of causes of death goes unnoticed.
I scratch my head and ask- is the swine flu a symptom of the credit crunch?
Honestly I sometime think, the whole thing about swine flu is all a deliberately developed man-made virus just to revive the almost bankrupted pharmaceutical companies on the USA.
So we get feared and we must buy the vaccines. This unethical acts are simply forms of what I call economical and medical-terrorism in what so called new world order-[or disorder?].
Will not be so long before we hear about a new virus.
John Scerri
Feb 11th 2010, 11:48
One factor that surely abetted the low uptake was the sudden death of the twenty-something year old bloke and the lack of evidence proving that his death was not caused by the vaccine. Other rumours of people losing sight and the like abound and they have never been disclaimed, to my knowledge, by the health department.
So the people rightly ask whether the vaccine is worth the risk (real or perceived).
Christian Sciberras
Feb 11th 2010, 11:47
That said, I'm impressed on how the media induces hype with a couple of sentences.
I think the situation have been taken care of in the most professional manner.
If in the future such an event happens, I'm sure that it would be dealt with professionally as in this case.
Christian Sciberras
Feb 11th 2010, 11:36
Mike Farrugia - By "we" do you mean "laymen that don't know a difference between common flu and whatnot"?
That said, if the vaccine was effective, how would you know it from if the virus was actually mild?
If it were mild how did it spread worldwide?
Maybe you people didn't realize the point of vaccination; it is to PREVENT infection not MEDICATE an infection.
From what I can see, the vaccine was a success.
A Cassar
Feb 11th 2010, 11:34
@Mike Farrugia
I'm very happy that you are able to see the future!!!!
Experts correctly predicted a pandemic (as evidenced by how swiftly swine flu spread round the world). Fortunately, the mortality was far less than initially feared. Experts, unlike yourself, cannot predict the future....but can measure risks. They didn't take the risk of millions dying, and rolled out a world wide pandemic campaign. Maybe they should have asked you to look into your crystal ball instead!!!
Some people, have accused WHO of being unduly influenced by vaccine manufacturing. And rightly so, the council of Europe are investigating this. Unlike yourself, I don't know if this is true or false.....I am very eager to hear your comment once the council of europe conclude their probe.
g. scerri
Feb 11th 2010, 11:10
The sad side of this story is that , now that people arerecognising more than ever the part played by the pharmaceutical industry ( Tami-flu, the antidote to bird flu was apparently tied to the business interests of a very important personality in the USA.) they just do not believe the warnings. Moreover the media image of the medical world is that they have been yearning for a pandamic for years. People have heard the fraudulent wolf howls far too often. Additionally many , including professionals in the health sector both abroad and in Malta, were skeptical of a vaccine that was cobbled together so swiftly and with a suspiciously short trial period. Even in Malta we are learning. The problem is that should something really serious occur in the future, people may very well dismiss it again. And whose fault will that be?
Christian Sciberras
Feb 11th 2010, 11:07
Prof. Lightfoot, who had helped draw up Malta's pandemic plan, also agrees that we could see a spike in deaths if the virus starts affecting the elderly more.
He pointed out that, even among younger people, there have been a number of deaths. "It was milder than we feared but we still saw some serious effects, including deaths in pregnant women," he said, adding that at the height of the pandemic there were several hundred people in intensive care in British hospitals.
He said all the plans were made for a virus that could have been as bad as the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic, which killed millions all over the world.
"At the beginning, we did not really know how severe this virus was going to be. It turned out to be less severe and the number of deaths associated with it is lower than expected.
"But if the WHO had not declared a pandemic and the virus had mutated - something that these viruses are very capable of doing - then it would have been wrong. I think all the right decisions were made," he said.
Kevin Zammit
Feb 11th 2010, 11:05
@Mike Farrugia et al.
What are 5 million euros for just 1 life? What's 5 million compared to 50 spent on a smoking bus? At least this money was spent for all the right reasons.
Mike Farrugia
Feb 11th 2010, 10:16
How come we all saw this coming a long time ago but the experts kept insisting on buying such a huge amount of vaccines? Will the experts please show some accountability and take responsibility of their acts?