SEBELIUS: HHS document EXTENDING THE PANDEMIC to 2012

H1N1, Influenza, Top Stories, Undue Influence, Vaccine Laws

SEBELIUS: HHS document EXTENDING THE PANDEMIC to 2012

No Comments 08 March 2010

.
.
.

*Special thanks goes to Eileen D. for bringing this to our attention.

See bolded Excerpt such as:

Therefore, pursuant to section 319F-3(b) of the Act, I have determined there is a credible risk that the spread of pandemic influenza A viruses and those with pandemic potential and resulting disease does or could constitute a public health emergency.

…and extends through February 28, 2012.

Section 319F-3(a)(4)(A) confers immunity to manufacturers and distributors of the Covered Countermeasure, regardless of the defined population.

…and amended on September 28, 2009 to provide targeted liability protections for pandemic countermeasures to enhance distribution


100226 Sec HHS Sebelius Pandemic Influenza Vaccines Amendment

[Federal Register: March 5, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 43)]
[Notices]
[Page 10268-10272]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr05mr10-76]

=======================================================================
———————————————————————–

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Office of the Secretary

Pandemic Influenza Vaccines–Amendment

Authority:  42 U.S.C. 247d-6d.

ACTION: Notice of amendment to the September 28, 2009 Republished
Declaration under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act.

———————————————————————–

SUMMARY: Amendment to declaration issued on September 28, 2009 (74 FR
51153) pursuant to section 319F-3 of the Public Health Service Act
(“the Act”)

[[Page 10269]]

(42 U.S.C. 247d-6d) to revise covered countermeasures and extend
effective date and republication of the declaration to reflect the
declaration in its entirety, as amended.

DATES: The amendment of the republished declaration issued on September
28, 2009 is effective as of March 1, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nicole Lurie, MD, MSPH, Assistant
Secretary for Preparedness and Response, Office of the Secretary,
Department of Health and Human Services, 200 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20201, Telephone               (202) 205-2882         (202) 205-2882 (this is not a toll-free
number).
HHS Secretary’s Amendment to the September 28, 2009 Republished
Declaration for the Use of the Public Readiness and Emergency
Preparedness Act for H5N1, H2, H6, H7, H9 and 2009-H1N1 Vaccines:
Whereas there are or may be multiple animal influenza A viruses,
circulating in wild birds and/or domestic animals that cause, or have
significant potential to cause, sporadic human infections or have
mutated to cause pandemics in humans;
Whereas, these viruses may evolve into virus strains capable of
causing a pandemic of human influenza because these viruses may cause
infection in and spread among humans and because humans have little or
no immunity to these viruses;
Whereas, one such virus is the 2009 H1N1 Influenza Virus;
Whereas, vaccination may be effective to protect persons from the
threat of pandemic influenza;
Whereas, Secretary Michael O. Leavitt issued a Declaration for the
Use of the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act dated
January 26, 2007 (“Original Declaration”), as amended on November 30,
2007 and October 17, 2008 with respect to certain avian influenza
viruses;
Whereas, I amended the declaration on June 15, 2009 with respect to
2009 H1N1 influenza virus and on September 28, 2009 to provide targeted
liability protections for pandemic countermeasures to enhance
distribution and to add provisions consistent with other declarations,
and republished the declaration each time in its entirety;
Whereas, the September 28, 2009 declaration extended through
February 28, 2010 for vaccines against influenza virus strains named in
the Declaration other than 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccine;
Whereas, modifications are necessary to revise covered
countermeasures and to extend the effective date of the Declaration;
Whereas, the findings I made in the declaration issued on September
28, 2009 continue to apply;
Whereas, in accordance with section 319F-3(b)(6) of the Act (42
U.S.C. 247d-6d(b)), I have considered the desirability of encouraging
the design, development, clinical testing or investigation,
manufacturing, labeling, distribution, formulation, packaging,
marketing, promotion, sale, purchase, donation, dispensing,
prescribing, administration, licensing, and use of additional covered
countermeasures with respect to the category of disease and population
described in sections II and IV of the September 28, 2009 Republished
Declaration, as hereby amended, and have found it desirable to
encourage such activities for these additional covered countermeasures,
and;
Whereas, to encourage the design, development, clinical testing or
investigation, manufacturing and product formulation, labeling,
distribution, packaging, marketing, promotion, sale, purchase,
donation, dispensing, prescribing, administration, licensing, and use
of medical countermeasures with respect to the category of disease and
population described in sections II and IV of the September 28, 2009
Republished Declaration, as hereby amended, it is advisable, in
accordance with section 319F-3(a) and (b) of the Act, to provide
immunity from liability for covered persons, as that term is defined at
section 319F-3(i)(2) of the Act, and to include as such covered persons
other qualified persons as I have identified in section VI of the
September 28, 2009 Republished Declaration, as amended;
Therefore, pursuant to section 319F-3(b) of the Act, I have
determined that there is a credible risk that the spread of influenza A
viruses with pandemic potential and resulting disease could in the
future constitute a public health emergency and that spread of one of
these viruses (2009 H1N1 Influenza) has caused a disease that
constitutes a public health emergency.
In order to extend the scope of covered countermeasures and to
extend the effective date of the Declaration, the September 28, 2009
Republished Declaration, is hereby amended as follows:
In the title, delete “for H5N1, H2, H6, H7, H9 and 2009 H1N1
Vaccines” and replace with “for Vaccines Against Pandemic Influenza A
Viruses and Those with Pandemic Potential”.
In the recitals, delete the first through the fourth “whereas”
clauses, and insert two new recitals as follows:
Whereas there are or may be multiple animal influenza A viruses
circulating in wild birds and/or domestic animals that cause, or have
significant potential to cause, sporadic human infections or have
mutated to cause pandemics in humans;
Whereas, these viruses may evolve or have evolved into virus
strains capable of causing a pandemic of human influenza because these
viruses may cause infection in, and spread among, humans and because
humans have little or no immunity to these viruses;
In the sixth “whereas” clause, insert “October 1, 2009, and
December 28, 2009” after “July 24, 2009”.
In the “therefore” clause, delete “avian influenza viruses and
resulting disease could in the future constitute a public health
emergency, and that 2009 H1N1 influenza constitutes a public health
emergency” and replace with: “pandemic influenza A viruses and those
with pandemic potential and resulting disease does or could constitute
a public health emergency”.
In section I, first paragraph, delete “the pandemic
countermeasures influenza A H5N1, H2, H6, H7, H9, and 2009 H1N1
vaccines” each time it appears and replace with “vaccines against
pandemic influenza A viruses with pandemic potential”.
In section I, at the end of the second sentence, replace “IX”
with “X”.
In section II, delete “the virus with (1) highly pathogenic avian
influenza A (H5N1, H2, H6, H7, or H9) virus; or (2) 2009 H1N1
influenza” and replace with “animal and/or human influenza A viruses
against which most humans do not have immunity, except those included
in seasonal influenza vaccines and/or covered under the National
Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, that are circulating in wild birds
and/or domestic animals causing or having significant potential to
cause sporadic human infections or have mutated to cause pandemics in
humans”.
In section III, first paragraph, delete in its entirety and replace
with: “The effective period of time of this Declaration commenced as
described in the September 28, 2009 Republished Declaration, and
extends through February 28, 2012.
In section III, second paragraph, delete “; except that with
respect to 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccine, the effective period commences
on June 15, 2009 and extends through March 31, 2013” and replace with
“through February 28, 2012.”
In section III, add to the end of the section as a new paragraph:
“With respect to any covered countermeasure subsequently covered under
the

[[Page 10270]]

National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, the effective time period
expires immediately upon such coverage.”
In section VIII, insert “and use” after “administration in the
first sentence, delete “the Act’s” from the second sentence and
replace with “this”, and delete “Countermeasure” from the second
sentence and replace with “Countermeasures”.
In section IX, add to the end of the first sentence: “; and
amended on September 28, 2009 to provide targeted liability protections
for pandemic countermeasures to enhance distribution and to add
provisions consistent with other declarations and republished in its
entirety.”
In section X, after the fifth paragraph, insert a new definition as
follows:
Pandemic influenza A viruses and those with pandemic potential:
Animal and/or human influenza A viruses, except those included in
seasonal influenza vaccines and/or covered under the National Vaccine
Injury Compensation Program, that are circulating in wild birds and/or
domestic animals, that cause, or have significant potential to cause,
sporadic or ongoing human infections, or historically have caused
pandemics in humans, or have mutated to cause pandemics in humans, and
for which the majority of the population is immunologically na[iuml]ve.
In Appendix I, title and item 32, add “H7,” after “H6”.
Throughout, insert “National” before “Vaccine Injury
Compensation Fund”.
All other provisions of the June 15, 2009 Republished Declaration
remain in full force.
Republication of HHS Secretary’s September 28, 2009 Republished
Declaration, as Amended, for the Use of the Public Readiness and
Emergency Preparedness Act for Vaccines Against Pandemic Influenza A
Viruses and Those with Pandemic Potential.
To the extent any term of the September 28 Republished Declaration,
as hereby amended, is inconsistent with any provision of this
Republished Declaration, the terms of this Republished Declaration are
controlling.
Whereas there are or may be multiple animal influenza A viruses
circulating in wild birds and/or domestic animals that cause, or have
significant potential to cause, sporadic human infections or have
mutated to cause pandemics in humans;
Whereas, these viruses may evolve or have evolved into virus
strains capable of causing a pandemic of human influenza because these
viruses may cause infection in, and spread among, humans and because
humans have little immunity to these viruses;
Whereas, on April 26, 2009, Acting Secretary Charles E. Johnson
determined under section 319 of the Public Health Service Act, (42
U.S.C. 247d), that a public health emergency exists nationwide
involving the Swine Influenza A virus that affects or has significant
potential to affect the national security (now called “2009-H1N1
influenza”);
Whereas, on July 24, 2009, October 1, 2009, and December 28, 2009 I
renewed the determination by the Acting Secretary that a public health
emergency exists nationwide involving the Swine influenza A virus (now
called “2009-H1N1 influenza virus”);
Whereas, vaccination may be effective to protect persons from the
threat of pandemic influenza;
Whereas, the possibility of governmental program planners obtaining
stockpiles from private sector entities except through voluntary means
such as commercial sale, donation, or deployment would undermine
national preparedness efforts and should be discouraged as provided for
in section 319F-3(b)(2)(E) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C.
247d-6d(b)) (“the Act”);
Whereas, immunity under section 319F-3(a) of the Act should be
available to governmental program planners for distributions of Covered
Countermeasures obtained voluntarily, such as by (1) donation; (2)
commercial sale; (3) deployment of Covered Countermeasures from Federal
stockpiles; or (4) deployment of donated, purchased, or otherwise
voluntarily obtained Covered Countermeasures from State, local, or
private stockpiles;
Whereas, the extent of immunity under section 319F-3(a) of the Act
afforded to a governmental program planner that obtains Covered
Countermeasures except through voluntary means is not intended to
affect the extent of immunity afforded other covered persons with
respect to such covered countermeasures;
Whereas, to encourage the design, development, clinical testing or
investigation, manufacturing and product formulation, labeling,
distribution, packaging, marketing, promotion, sale, purchase,
donation, dispensing, prescribing, administration, licensing, and use
of medical countermeasures with respect to the category of disease and
population described in section II and IV it is advisable, in
accordance with section 319F-3(a) and (b) of the Act, to provide
immunity from liability for covered persons, as that term is defined at
section 319F-3(i)(2) of the Act, and to include as such covered persons
such other qualified persons as I have identified in section VI;
Whereas, in accordance with section 319F-3(b)(6) of the Public
Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 247d-6d(b)) (“the Act”), I have
considered the desirability of encouraging the design, development,
clinical testing or investigation, manufacturing and product
formulation, labeling, distribution, packaging, marketing, promotion,
sale, purchase, donation, dispensing, prescribing, administration,
licensing, and use of medical countermeasures with respect to the
category of disease and population described in sections II and IV
below, and have found it desirable to encourage such activities for the
Covered Countermeasures;
Therefore, pursuant to section 319F-3(b) of the Act, I have
determined there is a credible risk that the spread of pandemic
influenza A viruses and those with pandemic potential and resulting
disease does or could constitute a public health emergency.

I. Covered Countermeasures (as Required by Section 319F-3(b)(1) of the
Act)

Covered Countermeasures are defined at section 319F-3(i) of the
Act.
At this time, and in accordance with the provisions contained
herein, I am recommending the manufacture, testing, development,
distribution, dispensing; and, with respect to the category of disease
and population described in sections II and IV, below, the
administration and usage of vaccines against influenza A viruses with
pandemic potential and any associated adjuvants. The immunity specified
in section 319F-3(a) of the Act shall only be in effect with respect
to: (1) Present or future Federal contracts, cooperative agreements,
grants, interagency agreements, or memoranda of understanding for
vaccines against pandemic influenza A viruses with pandemic potential
used and administered in accordance with this declaration, and (2)
activities authorized in accordance with the public health and medical
response of the Authority Having Jurisdiction to prescribe, administer,
deliver, distribute or dispense the pandemic countermeasures following
a declaration of an emergency, as defined in section X below. In
accordance with section 319F-3(b)(2)(E) of the Act, for governmental
program planners, the immunity specified in section 319F-3(a) of the
Act shall be in effect to the extent they obtain Covered
Countermeasures through voluntary

[[Page 10271]]

means of distribution, such as (1) donation; (2) commercial sale; (3)
deployment of Covered Countermeasures from Federal stockpiles; or (4)
deployment of donated, purchased, or otherwise voluntarily obtained
Covered Countermeasures from State, local, or private stockpiles. For
all other covered persons, including other program planners, the
immunity specified in section 319F-3(a) of the Act shall, in accordance
with section 319F-3(b)(2)(E) of the Act, be in effect pursuant to any
means of distribution.
This Declaration shall subsequently refer to the countermeasures
identified above as Covered Countermeasures.
This Declaration shall apply to all Covered Countermeasures
administered or used during the effective time period of the
Declaration.

II. Category of Disease (as Required by Section 319F-3(b)(2)(A) of the
Act)

The category of disease for which I am recommending the
administration or use of the Covered Countermeasures is the threat of
or actual human influenza that results from the infection of humans
following exposure to animal and/or human influenza A viruses, against
which most humans do not have immunity, except those included in
seasonal influenza vaccines and/or covered under the National Vaccine
Injury Compensation Program, that are circulating in wild birds and/or
domestic animals causing or have significant potential to cause
sporadic human infections or have mutated to cause pandemics in humans.

III. Effective Time Period (as Required by Section 319F-3(b)(2)(B) of
the Act)

The effective period of time of this Declaration commenced as
described in the September 28, 2009 Republished Declaration and extends
through February 28, 2012.
With respect to Covered Countermeasures administered and used in
accordance with the public health and medical response of the Authority
Having Jurisdiction, the effective period of time of this Declaration
commences on the date of a declaration of an emergency and lasts
through and includes the final day that the emergency declaration is in
effect including any extensions thereof through February 28, 2012.
With respect to any covered countermeasure subsequently covered
under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, the effective
time period expires immediately upon such coverage
.

IV. Population (as Required by Section 319F-3(b)(2)(C) of the Act)

Section 319F-3(a)(4)(A) confers immunity to manufacturers and
distributors of the Covered Countermeasure, regardless of the defined
population.
Section 319F-3(a)(3)(C)(i) confers immunity to covered persons who
could be program planners or qualified persons with respect to the
Covered Countermeasure only if a member of the population specified in
the Declaration administers or uses the Covered Countermeasure and is
in or connected to the geographic location specified in this
Declaration, or the program planner or qualified person reasonably
could have believed that these conditions were met.
The populations specified in this Declaration are the following:
(1) All persons who use a Covered Countermeasure or to whom such a
Covered Countermeasure is administered as an Investigational New Drug
in a human clinical trial conducted directly by the Federal Government,
or pursuant to a contract, grant or cooperative agreement with the
Federal Government; (2) all persons who use a Covered Countermeasure or
to whom such a Countermeasure is administered in a pre-pandemic phase,
as defined below; and/or (3) all persons who use a Covered
Countermeasure, or to whom such a Covered Countermeasure is
administered in a pandemic phase, as defined below.

V. Geographic Area (as Required by Section 319F-3(b)(2)(D) of the Act)

Section 319F-3(a) applies to the administration and use of a
Covered Countermeasure without geographic limitation.

VI. Other Qualified Persons (as Required by Section 319F-3(i)(8)(B) of
the Act)

With regard to the administration or use of a Covered
Countermeasure, Section 319F-3(i)(8)(A) of the Act defines the term
“qualified person” as a licensed individual who is authorized to
prescribe, administer, or dispense the countermeasure under the law of
the State in which such Covered Countermeasure was prescribed,
administered or dispensed. Additional persons who are qualified persons
pursuant to section 319F-3(i)(8)(B) are the following: (1) Any person
authorized in accordance with the public health and medical emergency
response of the Authority Having Jurisdiction to prescribe, administer,
deliver, distribute or dispense Covered Countermeasures, and their
officials, agents, employees, contractors and volunteers, following a
declaration of an emergency, and (2) Any person authorized to
prescribe, administer, or dispense Covered Countermeasures or who is
otherwise authorized under an Emergency Use Authorization.

VII. Additional Time Periods of Coverage After Expiration of
Declaration (as Required by Section 319F-3(b)(3)(B) of the Act)

A. I have determined that, upon expiration of the applicable time
period specified in Section III above, an additional twelve (12) months
is a reasonable period to allow for the manufacturer to arrange for
disposition of the Covered Countermeasure, including the return of such
product to the manufacturer, and for covered persons to take such other
actions as are appropriate to limit the administration or use of the
Covered Countermeasure, and the liability protection of section 319F-
3(a) of the Act shall extend for that period.
B. The Federal Government shall purchase the entire production of
Covered Countermeasures under the contracts specifically listed by
contract number in section I for the stockpile under section 319F-2 of
the Act, and shall be subject to the time-period extension of section
319F-3(b)(3)(C). Production under future contracts for the same vaccine
will also be subject to the time-period extension of section 319F-
3(b)(3)(C).

VIII. Compensation Fund

In addition to conferring immunity to manufacturers, distributors,
and administrators of the Covered Countermeasures, the Act provides
benefits to certain individuals who sustain a covered injury as the
direct result of the administration or use of the Covered
Countermeasure. The Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP)
within the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)
administers this compensation program. Information about the CICP is
available at               1-888-275-4772         1-888-275-4772 or http://www.hrsa.gov/countermeasurescomp/
default.htm
<http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leavingFR.html\
&log=linklog&to=http://www.hrsa.gov/countermeasurescomp/default.htm> .

IX. Amendments

The Declaration for the Use of the Public Readiness and Emergency
Preparedness Act for H5N1 was published on January 26, 2007; amended on
November 30, 2007 to add H7 and H9 vaccines; amended on October 17,
2008 to add H2 and H6 vaccines; amended on June 15, 2009 to add 2009
H1N1 vaccines and

[[Page 10272]]

republished in its entirety; and amended on September 28, 2009 to
provide targeted liability protections for pandemic countermeasures to
enhance distribution and to add provisions consistent with other
declarations and republished in its entirety. This Declaration
incorporates all amendments prior to the date of its publication in the
Federal Register. Any future amendment to this Declaration will be
published in the Federal Register, pursuant to section 319F-2(b)(4) of
the Act.

X. Definitions

For the purpose of this Declaration, including any claim for loss
brought in accordance with section 319F-3 of the PHS Act against any
covered persons defined in the Act or this Declaration, the following
definitions will be used:
Administration of a Covered Countermeasure: As used in section
319F-3(a)(2)(B) of the Act includes, but is not limited to, public and
private delivery, distribution, and dispensing activities relating to
physical administration of the countermeasures to recipients,
management and operation of delivery systems, and management and
operation of distribution and dispensing locations.
Authority Having Jurisdiction: Means the public agency or its
delegate that has legal responsibility and authority for responding to
an incident, based on political or geographical (e.g., city, county,
Tribal, State, or Federal boundary lines) or functional (e.g., law
enforcement, public health) range or sphere of authority.
Covered Persons: As defined at section 319F-3(i)(2) of the Act,
include the United States, manufacturers, distributors, program
planners, and qualified persons. The terms “manufacturer,”
“distributor,” “program planner,” and “qualified person” are
further defined at sections 319F-3(i)(3), (4), (6), and (8) of the Act.
Declaration of Emergency: A declaration by any authorized local,
regional, State, or Federal official of an emergency specific to events
that indicate an immediate need to administer and use pandemic
countermeasures, with the exception of a Federal declaration in support
of an emergency use authorization under section 564 of the FDCA unless
such declaration specifies otherwise.
Pandemic influenza A viruses and those with pandemic potential:
Animal and/or human influenza A viruses, except those included in
seasonal influenza vaccines and/or covered under the National Vaccine
Injury Compensation Program
, that are circulating in wild birds and/or
domestic animals, that cause, or have significant potential to cause,
sporadic or ongoing human infections, or historically have caused
pandemics in humans, or have mutated to cause pandemics in humans, and
for which the majority of the population is immunologically na[iuml]ve.
Pandemic Phase: The following stages, as defined in the National
Strategy for Pandemic Influenza: Implementation Plan (Homeland Security
Council, May 2006): (4) First Human Case in North America; and (5)
Spread Throughout United States.
Pre-pandemic Phase: The following stages, as defined in the
National Strategy for Pandemic Influenza: Implementation Plan (Homeland
Security Council, May 2006): (0) New Domestic Animal Outbreak in At-
Risk Country; (1) Suspected Human Outbreak Overseas; (2) Confirmed
Human Outbreak Overseas; and (3) Widespread Human Outbreaks in Multiple
Locations Overseas.

Dated: February 26, 2010.
Kathleen Sebelius,
Secretary.

APPENDIX

I. List of U.S. Government Contracts–Covered H5N1, H2, H6, H7, H9, and
2009-H1N1 Vaccine Contracts

1. HHSN266200400031C
2. HHSN266200400032C
3. HHSN266200300039C
4. HHSN266200400045C
5. HHSN266200205459C
6. HHSN266200205460C
7. HHSN266200205461C
8. HHSN266200205462C
9. HHSN266200205463C
10. HHSN266200205464C
11. HHSN266200205465C
12. HHSN266199905357C
13. HHSN266200300068C
14. HHSN266200005413C
15. HHSO100200600021C (formerly 200200409981)
16. HHSO100200500004C
17. HHSO100200500005I
18. HHSO100200700026I
19. HHSO100200700027I
20. HHSO100200700028I
21. HHSO100200600010C
22. HHSO100200600011C
23. HHSO100200600012C
24. HHSO100200600013C
25. HHSO100200600014C
26. HHSO100200600022C (formerly 200200511758)
27. HHSO100200600023C (formerly 200200410431)
28. CRADA No. AI-0155 NIAID/MedImmune
29. HHSO100200700029C
30. HHSO100200700030C
31. HHSO100200700031C
32. All present, completed and future Government H5N1, H2, H6, H7,
H9, and 2009-H1N1 vaccine contracts not otherwise listed.

[FR Doc. 2010-4644 Filed 3-4-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • PDF
  • LinkedIn
  • Live
  • NewsVine
Doctor Fired After Warning Colleagues of H1N1 Vaccine Dangers

H1N1, Medical Cartel

Doctor Fired After Warning Colleagues of H1N1 Vaccine Dangers

No Comments 24 February 2010

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • PDF
  • LinkedIn
  • Live
  • NewsVine
Novartis chief warns states over cancelled vaccine orders

H1N1, Top Stories, Vaccine Development, Vaccine Propaganda

Novartis chief warns states over cancelled vaccine orders

No Comments 28 January 2010

Source: AFP

BASEL, Switzerland — The head of Swiss pharmaceutical giant Novartis on Tuesday warned that governments now trying to cancel swine flu vaccine contracts might not be dealt with so swiftly in the next pandemic.

Chairman and chief executive Daniel Vasella said those that had been reliable partners would be favoured.

“The same governments that exerted a lot of pressure on the industry (…) to deliver vaccines very quickly were the same governments that then said ‘we don’t want any more what we ordered’, once they saw they ordered too much,” he told AFP.

“If you want an effective vaccine industry you have to be consequent, because the next time that there will be a pandemic — and there will be another one — the governments who have been reliable partners will be treated preferentially,” he added.

Vasella underlined that both sides had to respect legally binding contracts.

“If they are only binding for you and not for me, it’s not a contract anymore. We don’t want anybody to buy something that is not useful,” he explained.

Several big nations that rushed to order pandemic flu vaccine from pharmaceutical firms while it was being developed last year have been trying to scale back their orders.

Officials have blamed the poor response to mass vaccination campaigns and a change in expected dosage.

The French health ministry announced earlier this month that it wanted to cancel an order for 50 million doses of vaccine — 32 million from GSK, 11 million from Sanofi Pasteur and seven million from Novartis.

Vasella said he understood the pressures that governments were under and was ready to be flexible with outstanding orders.

What was “delivered has to be kept and has to be paid. Outstanding orders are a different story. One should be flexible,” he added.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • PDF
  • LinkedIn
  • Live
  • NewsVine
Patient Administered Vaccination Without Doctor Approval In a US Hospital

H1N1

Patient Administered Vaccination Without Doctor Approval In a US Hospital

1 Comment 23 January 2010

.
.
.

S. Humphries, MD
Medical Voices
January 22, 2010

H1N1 and seasonal influenza vaccines are now being given to sick hospital patients with or without their doctor’s consent.  This is being done despite there being no data on the safety of doing so.

I am a licensed, board-certified nephrologist, otherwise known as a kidney specialist, working in a large, city-based hospital.  Because I rarely admit patients to the hospital other than for specific procedures, such as a kidney biopsy, I only recently became aware of my hospital’s policy regarding flu shots for sick people. Waking up to this new rule made me realize that Big Pharma is getting closer and closer to bypassing doctors completely to deliver direct patient “care”.

We have an elaborate electronic charting system at our hospital. All of the medications and procedure orders are placed into the patient’s record by doctors and nurses so that every person has access to all that is happening with the patient. A few weeks ago, I arrived to see my first patient of the day, a patient with a kidney ailment that leaks protein and usually progresses to complete kidney shutdown. When I opened her electronic chart, I expected my section to be empty.  Instead, I saw an order for an influenza vaccine with my name on it. Even more shocking was that the order was highlighted bright blue, meaning, the shot had already been given.  I thought perhaps I had opened the wrong chart or some sort of mistake had been made.  But it was the right file; her name in the upper left hand corner.  And my electronic signature was on the page after the order. My patient, with kidney failure and an autoimmune disorder had been given a flu shot without my consent.

I was informed that according to a hospital policy that had been in effect since 2007, a pharmacist is permitted to visit a patient and offer them a flu vaccine. If the patient agrees, the RN is instructed to administer the shot and document the event in the chart. The attending physician’s signature stamp is used to complete the order.  No one called to ask, “By the way, your patient wants a flu shot; can we give her one?” I’m not sure what was said to her, but she obviously agreed, and I didn’t need to be involved.  The pharmacist had written an order for an injectable substance that I considered toxic and inappropriate for my patient, and it was administered by the RN before I even got to the floor.

My dissatisfaction eventually made it to the Chief of Internal Medicine who challenged me to produce peer-reviewed journal articles in support of my objection. There were dozens of case reports of kidney disease or small blood vessel inflammation following influenza vaccination.  In fact, one paper cited 16 patients in its written report(1).  Under-reporting of adverse vaccine reactions is a known phenomenon.  The National Vaccine Information Center estimates that only about two percent of adverse vaccine reactions ever get reported.  It would follow that written and published case reports found in medical journals represent a miniscule sampling of the totality of vaccine injury cases.  These implications should evoke at least some curiosity on the part of doctors and health care advocates.

The peer-reviewed literature was delivered to the department head.  His initial response was to suggest that future vaccination orders be signed off by another physician so I didn’t have to be involved with the process of a nurse giving a “routine” flu shot.  But the point had been missed; flu shots should not be given to sick patients.

I was challenging “routine orders” that had been in place since 2007. The defense for supporting the policy was that no side effects had been reported since the standing order had been instituted. I wondered to myself and then later inquired: How do you know that is true?  Is it because nobody filed a formal report? If a patient became more ill after the shot, did you consider his condition to be a side effect of the vaccine, or was it simply called an unfortunate complication to the patient’s current illness?  What if the patient was discharged from the hospital but readmitted several weeks later. Was the reason logged simply as a progression of his existing disease…or was the cause an overlooked, delayed side effect of the vaccination? If vaccine reactions are not considered as part of a patient’s differential diagnosis, how do you know?  Without taking a vaccine history when considering a timeline of events, how could anybody possibly make the connection between a vaccine and a subsequent illness?  How does anyone else know for that matter – that there were no side effects from the “routine” administration of flu shots, ordered by a pharmacist and given by a nurse, without doctor consent? The truth is, there is no real tracking and reporting system in place.  And nobody is enthused about trying to start one.  What has essentially happened is that the guards have all been told to go home and nobody is thinking to even look for the wolf.

I am sure there are thousands of unreported cases of kidney failure – and a wide range of other serious health conditions – because doctors fail to ask a very simple question as part of the admission evaluation: “When was your last vaccine?”  And few doctors suspect any connection because the party line screams, “Vaccines are safe, effective and harmless. They keep people healthy and prevent infection.”  If nobody looks, vaccine-related side effects and complications won’t be found.

There was a law passed in 1986, the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Act, that made vaccine manufacturers and administering physicians immune from legal recourse in the event of a vaccine injury.  This has given manufacturers a dangerously long leash and has enabled them to push vaccines through FDA approval with little need to create a safe product. Now drug companies have extended their reach into the hospital right past doctors, and put the power  to vaccinate in the hands of pharmacists and executive committees, allowing them to make decisions about what is best for a patient.

For years, I have suspected that vaccines affect the immune system in an unnatural way.  Those who are trained in the sciences should know this has to be true. For starters, the partial and temporary effect of a vaccination is significantly different than the precise and long-lasting cellular responses that come from a natural infection.  Vaccines contain more viral and bacterial particles than what we are told; there are known allowable contaminants in vaccine cultures and in vaccine vials(2). The solutions also contain heavy metals, carcinogenic chemicals and toxic preservatives. Vaccine-induced antibodies can become “confused”.  They can then adhere or deposit in small blood vessels and the kidney filters called glomeruli, causing inflammation and degeneration, known as an “autoimmune response”; the person’s own antibodies attack and destroy the body.  The incidence of autoimmune disease has sharply increased in recent years, and I believe that vaccines have played a role. That is why it has never made sense to me to vaccinate anyone, let alone someone who is sick— but especially someone already sick with an autoimmune disease.  While patients who are immunocompromised  may be at a disadvantage when faced with infectious pathogens, giving them a flu shot with toxic chemicals cannot, in my estimation,  possibly protect them.  Moreover, it is known that elderly patients and those who are losing protein in the urine don’t necessarily mount a strong or protective response to flu vaccine injections.  Despite these facts, the CDC and various medical organizations still recommend injecting sick, elderly patients with flu vaccines.

There is no scientific basis for this. Vaccine research is conducted on healthy people. Vaccine research does not include double blind placebo studies; rather they use a false placebo which is often the prior years’ flu vaccine.  Once a vaccine is approved for general use, the shot is routinely given to everyone. Case reports (1, 3-7) support the notion that it is highly possible that an unhealthy person could develop an exacerbation of an underlying kidney disease or that a healthy person could develop a new kidney disease after a vaccine. It should be common sense that patients who are sick and have advanced kidney disease are much more vulnerable to the 25 micrograms of mercury in multi-dose flu vaccines than healthy persons with normal kidney function.

Doctors take note: You are not in control anymore.  Your patients can be harmed by vaccines that you have not ordered– while your back is turned.

Patients: Be vigilant and ask questions. Big Pharma has dozed past another barrier and now its reach has expanded past your doctor and right into your hospital room.  Propaganda about vaccines and the flu will be posted around the hospital.  If ever there was a time to become highly suspicious of the motives in the world of hospitals and pharmaceutical business, it is now. Take these suggestions to heart:

  • When somebody other than your doctor enters your hospital room and offers you anything, even if they tell you the doctor ordered it, do not believe that you must accept it without first talking to the doctor in charge of your care.  You have a right to know why you are being injected and what the risks are.
  • If there is ever a good time to get a vaccine, it is not while you are sick.  Please consider both sides of the vaccination debate before agreeing to one. You won’t be given a fact sheet with balanced pros and cons by a conventional medical doctor or by the hospital.
  • You have the right to refuse any drug, any shot and any intervention at any time, as long as you are psychologically competent.

Mine is only one story, but it represents things to come with the corporate takeover of medicine and the massive push for vaccines. It has been insidious but it is now showing up everywhere:  In the schools, in Wal-Mart, in the mainstream press.  The doctor-patient relationship is no longer valued or honored.  Guidelines, recommendations and one-size-fits-all treatment programs of all comers for the sake of profit are the real driving forces.  Our “health care system” has little to do with health.  Even the word “health” has been mutated and twisted to represent some distorted picture that looks more like desperation for survival than thriving vitality.  Health care centers that vaccinate with complete disregard for the truth about what they are actually doing to people, are not delivering a sound product that can be trusted and relied upon by those who hope to have their health guarded and restored.

References:

1.     Kelsall, John T.  et. al. Microscopic Polyangiitis After Influenza Vaccination, Journal of Rheumatology. Vol.24:6, pp1198-1202.

2.     Tenpenny, Dr Sherri J, FOWL!  Bird Flu: It’s not what you think,  2006, pg. 74.

3.     Yanai-Barar, et al., Influenza vaccination induced leukocytoclastic vasculitis and pauci-immune crescentic glomerulonephritis. Clinical Nephrology, vol 58. No. 3/2002

4.     Damjanov, Ivan, Progression of Renal Disease in Henoch-Schonlein Purpura After Influenza Vaccination, JAMA 1979, vol. 242, No.23. p2555-2556.

5.     Ulm, S et. al., Leukocytoclastic vasculitis and acute renal failure after influenza vaccination in an elderly patient with myelodysplastic syndrome., Onkoligie, 2006, vol. 29, No. 10, 470-2.

6.     Tavadia, S, Leukocytoclastic vasculitis and influenza vaccination. Clin Exp Dermatol., 2003, vol 28, No 2, 154-6.

7.     Kielstein, JT, Minimal Change nephrotic syndrome in a 65-year-old patient following influenza vaccination.,Clin Nephrol, 2000, vol 54, no 3, 246-8.

8.     Narendran, M, Systemic Vasculitis following influenza vaccination—report of 3 cases and literature review., J Rheumatol, 1993, vol 20, no 8, 1429-31.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • PDF
  • LinkedIn
  • Live
  • NewsVine
Swiss warn on flu vaccine with autoimmune disease

By Reactions, H1N1, Top Stories

Swiss warn on flu vaccine with autoimmune disease

No Comments 22 January 2010

.
.
.

Sam Cage
Reuters

ZURICH (Reuters) – Switzerland’s medical regulator recommended patients with serious autoimmune diseases should not use an H1N1 flu vaccine from Novartis, saying there were no studies assessing the innoculation in that population.

Swissmedic said on Wednesday it could not be ruled out that either or both of the adjuvant — which can enhance the immune response — and the antigen, or less active ingredient, could lead to an intensifying of autoimmune diseases.

Autoimmune diseases, like rheumatoid arthritis, are caused by an overly active immune system attacking its own body, targeting substances which are normally present.

Novartis was not immediately available to comment.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • PDF
  • LinkedIn
  • Live
  • NewsVine
Stillbirth heartbreak after swine flu jab

Death, H1N1, Top Stories

Stillbirth heartbreak after swine flu jab

1 Comment 22 January 2010

Staff Reporter
The Standard
Thursday, January 21, 2010

A 37-year-old woman’s child was stillborn on Tuesday – just weeks after she received a vaccination against human swine flu (H1N1).

The woman was 28 weeks’ pregnant when she was admitted to Tuen Mun Hospital after she reported decreased fetal movement and no heart sound could be detected.

A spokesman for the Centre for Health Protection said there is “no medical evidence presently to suggest that the intrauterine death was related to the vaccination.”

But he said cases of stillbirths following swine flu vaccinations have also been recorded overseas.

“However, so far, no causal relationship has been found between [the] vaccination and stillbirths.”

Investigations into common causes of intrauterine death, including infection, genetic and metabolic disorders, are being carried out.

In Hong Kong, about 150 to 220 stillbirths are recorded every year.

Meanwhile, a 58-year-old doctor who developed a disorder after receiving a swine flu shot, has been discharged from hospital.

He is the first and only case so far diagnosed with Guillain-Barre syndrome – in which the body attacks its own nerve cells – after receiving a human swine flu vaccine.

But authorities said the disorder may not be directly linked to the vaccination that he received on December 24.

Secretary for Food and Health York Chow Yat-ngok confirmed the doctor had been discharged from hospital.

“I am really happy that he has recovered so quickly and more or less completely within two weeks. This is a good sign that the treatment given to him is very effective,” Chow said yesterday.

The cardiologist, who runs a clinic in North Point, received the vaccine on December 24 and was admitted to hospital on January 2.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • PDF
  • LinkedIn
  • Live
  • NewsVine
Thousands of Americans died from H1N1 even after receiving vaccine shots

H1N1, Mike Adams, Top Stories, Vaccine Propaganda

Thousands of Americans died from H1N1 even after receiving vaccine shots

No Comments 19 January 2010

.
.
.

Mike Adams
Natural News
January 17th, 2010

(NaturalNews) The CDC is engaged in a very clever, statistically devious spin campaign, and nearly every journalist in the mainstream media has fallen for its ploy. No one has yet reported what I’m about to reveal here.

It all started with the CDC’s recent release of new statistics about swine flu fatalities, infection rates and vaccination rates. According to the CDC:

• 61 million Americans were vaccinated against swine flu (about 20% of the U.S. population). The CDC calls this a “success” even though it means 4 out of 5 people rejected the vaccines.

• 55 million people “became ill” from swine flu infections.

• 246,000 Americans were hospitalized due to swine flu infections.

• 11,160 Americans died from the swine flu.

Base on these statistics, the CDC is now desperately urging people to get vaccinated because they claim the pandemic might come back and vaccines are the best defense.

But here’s the part you’re NOT being told.

The CDC statistics lie by omission. They do not reveal the single most important piece of information about H1N1 vaccines: How many of the people who died from the swine flu had already been vaccinated?

Many who died had already been vaccinated
The CDC is intentionally not tracking how many of the dead were previously vaccinated. They want you (and mainstream media journalists) to mistakenly believe that ZERO deaths occurred in those who were vaccinated. But this is blatantly false. Being vaccinated against H1N1 swine flu offers absolutely no reduction in mortality from swine flu infections.

And that means roughly 20% of the 11,160 Americans who died from the swine flu were probably already vaccinated against swine flu. That comes to around 2,200 deaths in people who were vaccinated!

How do I know that swine flu vaccines don’t reduce infection mortality? Because I’ve looked through all the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials that have ever been conducted on H1N1 vaccines. It didn’t take me very long, because the number of such clinical trials is ZERO.

That’s right: There is not a single shred of evidence in existence today that scientifically supports the myth that H1N1 vaccines reduce mortality from H1N1 infections. The best evidence I can find on vaccines that target seasonal flu indicates a maximum mortality reduction effect of somewhere around 1% of those who are vaccinated. The other 99% have the same mortality rate as people who were not vaccinated.

So let’s give the recent H1N1 vaccines the benefit of the doubt and let’s imagine that they work just as well as other flu vaccines. That means they would reduce the mortality rate by 1%. So out of the 2,200 deaths that took place in 2009 in people who were already vaccinated, the vaccine potentially may have saved 22 people.

61 million injections add up to bad public health policy
So let’s see: 61 million people are injected with a potentially dangerous vaccine, and the actual number “saved” from the pandemic is conceivably just 22. Meanwhile, the number of people harmed by the vaccine is almost certainly much, much higher than 22. These vaccines contain nervous system disruptors and inflammatory chemicals that can cause serious health problems. Some of those problems won’t be evident for years to come… future Alzheimer’s victims, for example, will almost certainly those who received regular vaccines, I predict.

Injecting 61 million people with a chemical that threatens the nervous system in order to avoid 22 deaths — and that’s the best case! — is an idiotic public health stance. America would have been better off doing nothing rather than hyping up a pandemic in order to sell more vaccines to people who don’t need them.

Better yet, what the USA could have done that would have been more effective is handing out bottles of Vitamin D to 61 million people. At no more cost than the vaccines, the bottles of vitamin D supplements would have saved thousands of lives and offered tremendously importantly additional benefits such as preventing cancer and depression, too.

The one question the CDC does not want you to ask
Through its release of misleading statistics, the CDC wants everyone to believe that all of the people who died from H1N1 never received the H1N1 vaccine. That’s the implied mythology behind the release of their statistics. And yet they never come right out and say it, do they? They never say, “None of these deaths occurred in patients who had been vaccinated against H1N1.”

They can’t say that because it’s simply not true. It would be a lie. And if that lie were exposed, people might begin to ask questions like, “Well gee, if some of the people who were killed by the swine flu were already vaccinated against swine flu, then doesn’t that mean the vaccine doesn’t protect us from dying?”

That’s the number one question that the CDC absolutely, positively does not want people to start asking.

So they just gloss over the point and imply that vaccines offer absolute protection against H1N1 infections. But even the CDC’s own scientists know that’s complete bunk. Outright quackery. No vaccine is 100% effective. In fact, when it comes to influenza, no vaccine is even 10% effective at reducing mortality. There’s not even a vaccine that’s 5% effective. And there’s never been a single shred of credible scientific information that says a flu vaccine is even 1% effective.

So how effective are these vaccines, really? There are a couple thousand vaccinated dead people whose own deaths help answer that question: They’re not nearly as effective as you’ve been led to believe.

They may not be effective at all.

Crunching the numbers: Why vaccines just don’t add up
Think about this: 80% of Americans refused to get vaccinated against swine flu. That’s roughly 240 million people.

Most of those 240 million people were probably exposed to the H1N1 virus at some point over the last six months because the virus was so widespread.

How many of those 240 million people were actually killed by H1N1? Given the CDC’s claimed total of deaths at 11,160, if you take 80% of that (because that’s the percentage who refused to be vaccinated), you arrive at 8,928. So roughly 8,900 people died out of 240 million. That’s a death rate among the un-vaccinated population of .0000372

With a death rate of .0000372, the swine flu killed roughly 1 out of every 26,700 people who were NOT vaccinated. So even if you skipped the vaccine, you had a 26,699 out of 26,700 chance of surviving.

Those are pretty good odds. Ridiculously good. You have a 700% greater chance of being struck by lightning in your lifetime, by the way.

What it all means is that NOT getting vaccinated against the swine flu is actually a very reasonable, intelligent strategy for protecting your health. Mathematically, it is the smarter play.

Because, remember: Some of the dead victims of H1N1 got vaccinated. In fact, I personally challenge the CDC to release statistics detailing what percentage of the dead people had previously received such vaccines.

The headline to this article, “Thousands of Americans died from H1N1 even after receiving vaccine shots” is a direct challenge to the CDC, actually. If the CDC believes this headline is wrong — and that the number of vaccinated Americans who died from H1N1 is zero — then why don’t they say so on the record?

The answer? Because they’d be laughed right out of the room. Everybody who has been following this with any degree of intelligence knows that the H1N1 vaccine was a medical joke from the start. There is no doubt that many of those who died from H1N1 were previously vaccinated. The CDC just doesn’t want you to know how many (and they hope you’ll assume it’s zero).

Where are all the real journalists?
I find it especially fascinating that the simple question of “How many of the dead were previously vaccinated?” has never been asked in print by a single journalist in any mainstream newspaper or media outline across the country. Not the NY Times, not WashingtonPost.com, not the WSJ, LA Times or USA Today. (At least, not that I’m aware of. If you find one that does, let me know and I’ll link to their article!)

Isn’t there a single journalist in the entire industry that has the journalistic courage to ask this simple question of the CDC? Why do these mainstream journalists just reprint the CDC’s statistics without asking a single intelligent question about them?

Why is all the intelligent, skeptical reporting about H1N1 found only in the alternative press or independent media sites?

You already know the answer, but I’ll say it anyway: Because most mainstream media journalists are just part of the propaganda machine, blindly reprinting distorted statistics from “authorities” without ever stopping to question those authorities.

The MSM today, in other words, is often quite pathetic. Far from the independent media mindset that used to break big stories like Watergate, today’s mainstream media is little more than a mouthpiece for the corporatocracy that runs our nation. The MSM serves the financial interests of the corporations, just as the CDC and WHO do. That’s why they’re all spouting the same propaganda with their distorted stories about H1N1 swine flu.

But those who are intelligent enough to ask skeptical questions about H1N1 already realize what an enormous con the pandemic was. In the end, it turned out to be a near-harmless virus that was hyped up by the CDC, WHO and drug companies in order to sell hundreds of millions of doses of vaccines that are now about to be dumped down the drain as useless.

Sources for this story include:
CNN

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/…

Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy…

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • PDF
  • LinkedIn
  • Live
  • NewsVine
Swine flu shambles: Drunken call centre staff run riot, says ex-worker

H1N1, Top Stories

Swine flu shambles: Drunken call centre staff run riot, says ex-worker

No Comments 19 January 2010

.
.
.

Daniel Martin and Alison Smith Squire
Daily Mail
11th January 2010

Temporary workers in swine flu call centres are diagnosing patients while high on cannabis or drunk on vodka, a whistleblower has claimed.

The former worker, who said she was forced to leave the ’shambolic environment’ at one of the centres, said patients were being put at risk because staff did not receive enough training.

Ashleigh Venus said she was shocked that £6-an-hour staff with no medical knowledge were being trusted to hand out the anti-viral drug Tamiflu after asking a prepared script of questions, even though there are no doctors on site to give advice.

The revelation of poor standards in swine flu call centres adds to growing concerns that millions have been wasted tackling what turned out to be a mild disease.

Some 132million doses of vaccine were ordered when ministers believed the virus could kill as many as 65,000. They now admit the toll will be less than 1,000 – and might have to give the vaccine away at a possible cost of £1billion.

Health officials now say that as few as one in five of those given Tamiflu after ringing the swine flu hotline actually had the disease. More than one million packs have been handed out, raising the fear that the virus could have needlessly developed resistance to Tamiflu.

The Mail can reveal the truth about the call centres after speaking to 18-year-old Miss Venus, who started work at one in the north of England after three hours’ training.

She said many staff – some as young as 16 – did not take the job seriously. Callers were routinely mocked, and she was forced to deal with staff shouting and throwing paper aeroplanes around.

Supervision was so lax that staff ate pizzas and played board games while speaking to worried patients on the phone.

Miss Venus said: ‘I was very concerned that patients were ringing, often in great distress, but were not getting a proper diagnosis.

‘Some staff brought in vodka disguised as water to drink as they answered calls. And a few smoked cannabis during their breaks.’

She added: ‘The Government should be ashamed of this service. I know I was ashamed to work there.’

Critics say patients with deadly meningitis could be at risk because the symptoms can sound similar to those of flu.

Liberal Democrat health spokesman Norman Lamb said: ‘These revelations about the culture that exists in call centres are simply shocking.

‘They add to concerns that the whole battle against swine flu has been a botched job. In the race to appear on the front foot compared with other countries, we ended up with a system that was flawed in its implementation – and dangerous as a result.

‘It demands a thorough and robust review of the whole experience of dealing with this pandemic so lessons are learned.

‘The critical thing is to avoid enormous sums of money being wasted in the future without achieving very much. It is inevitable that we will have another pandemic, and next time it could be far worse.’

The centre where Miss Venus worked was one of 19 set up by Health Secretary Andy Burnham in July at the height of the outbreak.

Since then, the number of call centres is understood to have fallen. But the Department of Health would not say how many there still are, nor how many staff are employed.

In the summer, the department faced embarrassment after it emerged that many call centre staff were GCSE students who were working late into the night in contravention of employment guidelines for under-18s.

Last night a spokesman said: ‘Experienced call operators are trained for a minimum of three hours. Less experienced call operators receive a day’s training.

‘All call centre agents are trained by NHS Direct personnel. Clinical on-call support will be available to the call centres.

‘If people are not receiving this training or facilities are not up to the required standard it is a breach of contract and action can be taken.

‘Strict industry standard regulations are in place when employing staff, including satisfactory employment and character references.’

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • PDF
  • LinkedIn
  • Live
  • NewsVine
Red Bluff man loses his driver’s license after flu shot

H1N1, Top Stories

Red Bluff man loses his driver’s license after flu shot

No Comments 05 January 2010

.
.
.

Tang Lor
Contra Costa Times
01/04/10

With a number of people getting flu shots all sorts of side effects and reactions have been reported, but most people don’t end up losing their driver’s license because of a flu shot.

Red Bluff resident Robert Roof claims the shot is what triggered a series of events that has left him thinking how can one little thing lead to such a hardship for a person.

What started as a routine flu shot for the 68-year-old turned into an ordeal of losing his driving privileges and hundreds of dollars lost for medical exams.

In September, Roof went to Walgreens to get a flu shot. After getting his shot he fainted. The Walgreens staff assured him it was a normal reaction and sent him on his way.

It was no big thing, he said. I felt fine and I left.

The people at Walgreens told me it happens all the time.

The next day, Roof went to the emergency room at St. Elizabeth Community Hospital and asked for an EKG test. He had no problematic symptoms but thought that he should get his heart checked because of his family’s history of heart trouble.

While at the hospital he mentioned to one of the staff that he had fainted the day before.

In November, Roof received a letter from the Department of Motor Vehicles stating that his license would be suspended.

Someone from the emergency room had reported Roof’s fainting to the DMV.

According to California health and safety laws, physicians and surgeons are required to report to the DMV any person who experiences a lapse of consciousness.
Roof didn’t know there was a law that physicians are required to report these types of incidents, otherwise he would not have said anything when he was at the hospital, he said.

There are many reasons why a person’s license gets suspended, said DMV spokesman Armando Botello. In cases involving medical conditions, the person must go through an evaluation and, depending on the outcome and doctors’ recommendation, the DMV will take action.

Botello could not comment specifically on Roof’s case and said the DMV does not keep track of the number of licenses that are suspended or revoked due to lapses of consciousness or other medical conditions.

To get his license back, Roof went through several rounds of doctor visits with different doctors, including a specialist in Chico. He had to show proof to the DMV that he was not epileptic and the fainting was just a one time occurrence. All the physicians he saw gave him approval saying he was capable of driving.

During the period when Roof’s license was suspended he had to use a taxi or bicycle because he didn’t have anybody to drive him around. It was especially difficult because he was dealing with some family issues at the time and he wanted to be with family members, he said.

I guess the reason why my situation is unique to others is because I was holed up in my house and I didn’t have anybody to drive me around, so that’s why I was making a big deal out of it, he said.

After working with the DMV and doctors to get the proper paperwork to prove that he was not epileptic, Roof had one last hurdle to cross.

He was required to take a behind-the-wheel driver’s test.

Roof took the test Dec. 17 and passed.

This whole thing has taught me that if you faint, you just keep your mouth shut about it, he said.

And don’t tell anybody, especially in the emergency room, that you fainted.

While Roof may have that new outlook, physicians still urge that patients be honest.

Disclosing personal health information to healthcare providers in any circumstance is paramount to providing effective treatment, said Kristin Behrens, marketing manager at St. Elizabeth Community Hospital.

Providing accurate, truthful information not only assists in streamlining the process of treatment, it also contributes to a more accurate and complete assessment of the health related situation and supports patient safety protocols.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • PDF
  • LinkedIn
  • Live
  • NewsVine
Julie Gerberding Primed Big Pharma’s Pump with Flu and HPV Vaccines

Autism, H1N1, H5N1, Robert Scott Bell, Top Stories

Julie Gerberding Primed Big Pharma’s Pump with Flu and HPV Vaccines

1 Comment 04 January 2010

.
.
.

Robert Scott Bell
vactruth.com
01/04/2010

(vactruth.com) The most recent in a long list of government bureaucrats to leave the public dole and take up the high-paying cause of Big Pharma is none other than former head of the CDC Julie Gerberding. One year and one day from the date of departure from the Taxpayer payroll, Ms. Gerberding takes the reins as president of the vaccine division of the principle descendant of I.G. Farben: Merck Pharmaceuticals.

The revolving door between the Department of Health and Human Services and the pharmaceutical industrial complex is legend – and it swings both ways. Current head of the FDA, Margaret Hamburg, served on the board of directors for Henry Schein, Inc., manufacturer of mercury dental amalgams, in between her stints with the Clinton and now Obama administrations. Therefore it should surprise no one that the FDA, despite mercury’s known neurotoxicity, in 2009 ruled that mercury amalgams are really not so bad.

While Hamburg’s return to the federal bureaucratic oligarchy has already paid dividends to the industry she left, Gerberding’s departure should raise conflict-of-interest concerns for anyone wanting a CDC free of undue influence from Merck and other vaccine manufacturers.

A long time proponent of drug and vaccine intervention, Dr. Gerberding earned the nickname “Chicken Little” during her tenure at CDC for claiming that each successive flu season might be the one that puts the 1918 Spanish Influenza to shame. Yet there has always been a strange cognitive dissonance in her message.

In between vaccine promotional efforts during the H5N1 Bird Flu hype of 2006, The News Tribune in Tacoma Washington caught her admitting on April 15 of that year:

“There is no evidence it will be the next pandemic,” Dr. Julie Gerberding, head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, said of avian flu. There is no evidence it is evolving in a direction that is becoming more transmissible to people.”

One wonders, is it fringe to ask why mainstream medical reporters find it uninteresting to follow up on such statements from the head of the CDC? Especially considering this statement, specifically, contradicted most of her other official pronouncements that stressed potential end-of-the-world influenza scenarios. Even paid vaccine advocate Paul A. Offit (Children’s Hospital Philadelphia) admitted at the time that H5 viruses have been around for 100 years and never caused a pandemic and likely never will.

Two newer drugs benefit the most from the annual CDC-sky-is-falling-pronouncements: Tamiflu and Relenza. Due to CDC’s unwavering allegiance to the products of Big Pharma, billions of dollars in Taxpayer funds have been transferred to the drug industry for stockpiling these medicines that may only shorten duration of viral infection by ½ to 1 day. Warnings about delirium and other abnormal behavior (some resulting in fatal outcomes) coupled with limited data proving effectiveness seem to have been ignored by CDC’s leadership.

Outside of those two blockbuster drugs for influenza, it had become apparent that the future profitability of the pharmaceutical industry rests heavily on the growth of its vaccine divisions. Increasingly, that growth had grown incredibly dependent upon government health organizations and their ability to foment fear in the lay populace.

Why would Merck want to hire someone so schizophrenic on the issue of annual influenza outbreaks? One likely scenario has Gerberding helping institutionalize the annual flu hype, which became quite the bonanza for vaccine manufacturers at a time when the new drug pipeline had stalled out. With very few blockbuster drugs on the horizon, existing, more profitable drugs were all too close to having to compete with generics.


Julie Gerberding serves her future master well

Gerberding’s January 2004 Report to Congress “Prevention of Genital Human Papillomavirus Infection” paved the way for eventual approval for Merck’s Gardasil vaccine, guaranteeing billions in profits for her future employer. Perhaps the vaccine presidency is Julie’s reward for cementing the relationship between government and Merck via the CDC, the agency that behaves as the de facto marketing arm of the vaccine industry.

Another gift to Merck under Gerberding’s management has been the CDC’s continual denial that there is any link between the mercury-based preservative, thimerosal, and autism on the small scale; and vaccinations and autism on the large scale. Recent CDC reports place the incidence of autism at 1 in 110 children, four times higher than previous estimates. A major key to the viability of future vaccines in the pipeline is the tacit denial of any link of autism to the heavy metal, or vaccines in general, now or in the future.

Julie Gerberding holds a medical degree and a Masters in Public Health, yet she can’t seem to do the math coinciding with a four-fold increase in the number of mandated childhood vaccines since the time autism estimates were ¼ of what they are now. Although she would likely not qualify for a job requiring statistically relevant analysis, her ability to look away from that which is reasonable in assessing vaccine safety is evidently a vital prerequisite for the presidency of Merck vaccines.

Personnel within federal agencies under the auspices of the Department of Health and Human Services, rather than protecting the public, behave as if they work on behalf of the interests of BIG PHARMA.

Now that she is out of the vaccine closet since Merck’s hiring, will Julie Gerberding come clean about her unconscionable denials regarding any link between vaccines and autism, much less the link between the CDC and Merck? Or does she believe that the over-two-billion dollars paid out to families of injured and killed children since passage of the Vaccine Injury Compensation Act is mere coincidence as well?


http://robertscottbell.blogspot.com/

http://askrsb.podbean.com

Each week Robert Scott Bell empowers his listeners with healing principles that can aid in physical, emotional, mental, spiritual, economic and yes even political healing! Robert Scott Bell hosts the fastest three hours of healing information on radio he deals with everyday health issues from the perspective of alternative/holistic health care. This program features caller input and questions, live interviews, and news and views in the important world of keeping one’s health in balance. The desire for good health and a long quality of life crosses all boundaries, cultures, economic strata and age groups.
Robert Scott Bell tackles the tough issues and shows no fear when confronting government and corporate bullies who would stand in the way of health freedom. You will be amazed by the amount of information about healing that is kept secret from you and what you can do to learn more about it.
Robert Scott Bell is a homeopathic practitioner with a passion for health and healing unmatched by anybody on radio. He personally overcame numerous chronic diseases using natural healing principles and has dedicated his life to revealing the healing power within all of us. He served as Board Member for the American Association of Homeopathic Pharmacists (AAHP) 1999-2001.
Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • PDF
  • LinkedIn
  • Live
  • NewsVine

Newsletter

Click to Join Our Newsletter! Carl Bruning Constitutional Larimer County Sheriff

Users Online

Featured Vaccine Book

Dr. Todd Elsner's Book

 

Today, according to the CDC’s recommended vaccination schedule, a child receives 36 shots containing a total of 126 vaccines from birth through six years of age. This is quadruple the number of vaccines a child received in the 1980’s. In 1983 a child received only 10 shots containing 30 vaccines.

Could this quadrupling of the schedule be responsible for the drastic increase in childhood disorders we are seeing today?

 

Get the information your pediatrician will never tell you!

Live Healthy

Award Winning Inspirational Documentary by Valya Boutenko
Best Selling Books and DVDs from the Raw Family

Ads

Silver Lungs

Optimize Your Health

Vibrant Living with Delicious Green Smoothies