Hype about swine flu
English translation of the interview in a german newspaper TAZ:
"It reeks of influence from the industry"
The SPD politician Wodarg has reached a hearing on the hype surrounding the swine flu at the Council of Europe . He wants to know why government overreacted and the pharmaceutical industry earned billions.
Interview
Mr. Wodarg, you have initiated a hearing about the swine flu vaccine in the Council of Europe. Will the hearing be public?
Wolfgang Wodarg: Yes, at first, the World Health Organization (WHO) resisted - now she says she would of course make it public.
Who will be questioned?
Representatives of WHO and the pharmaceutical industry. Epidemiologist Professor Ulrich Keil, and I take part as experts.
Which issues would you like to bring up?
We want to understand how it came about that the WHO has suddenly lowered the threshold for the declaration of a pandemic so that a normal flu season could lead to an alarm. And we want to know how this was connected with treaties between governments and the pharmaceutical industry, which had come into force as soon as the WHO declared a pandemic. Worldwide vaccine sales are approximately 20 billion U.S dollars.
What do you think happened?
It looks like the WHO is under the influence of the industry. There is scientific evidence that it was a false alarm. In 2005, 2006, it was similar with the avian flu - which has never been transmitted from person to person. Now we see that the swine flu causes much less damage than any normal flu season.
Is there a risk of severe influenza pandemic?
Severe lethal outbreaks are self-limiting, they do not spread so easily, because their victims are homebound and the infection can not spread to the office, school or subway. The danger is theoretically so unlikely, we should force our health care system to focus more on serious risks. Even fatal diseases such as SARS and Ebola virus could be contained without the vaccine.
What makes governments vulnerable to the flu hype?
That is what we want to investigate. Many national institutions that advise governments appear to have danced to the tune of the people who have the say in the WHO. There are certain virologists who for years swore that there will be a flu threat. We wonder whether there was a long-term strategy, whether the institutions have had a common cause with the industry. Or whether they just wanted to come into the lime-light. They have also benefited: they have become more important and were offered new positions and received money.
Could it be that governments are prone to economic and job growth promises from the pharmaceutical industry?
That may be a factor. But an important role seems to be the scientific policy advice at play.
Schouldn't also the Bundestag (lower house of parliament) be more critical of the H1N1 vaccine?
Of course. I have no confidence in our Robert-Koch-Institut and the Paul Ehrlich Institut. We need to clarify how it is that they too have proclaimed flu risks for which there was no evidence.
You were in the Health Committee for a long time - do they discuss things like this?
I've tried it. In the institutes and the Ministry, I was politely rejected.
Governments with SPD participants put many stops on the pandemic preparedness ....
Yes, that horrifies me.
Was your party too naive?
We need to distinguish between the party and bureaucratic apparatus. Sure: Minister and Secretaries of State have a responsibility. If they had listened to critics like me, they would have saved a lot of money.
INTERVIEW: KATJA SCHMIDT
