sharon sanders
Editor-in-Chief & President
Monday, June 07, 2010
Referral: New Scientist On The WHO `Conspiracy?
# 4629
A terrific editorial piece this morning in the New Scientist magazine by Debora MacKenzie that takes a hard look at some of the allegations being lodged against the World Health Organization and their advisors.
This is the `must-read? of the day.
Swine flu experts and big pharma: no conspiracy
<abbr>12:29 7 June 2010</abbr>
Debora MacKenzie, consultant
The parade of accusations surrounding the swine flu pandemic continues. The latest, published in the journal BMJ, claims the scientists who advised the World Health Organization (WHO) to declare H1N1 swine flu a pandemic were in the pay of companies that stood to profit from the resulting sales of antiviral drugs and vaccines.
The piece, by Deborah Cohen from BMJ and Philip Carter from a privately funded British non-profit called the Bureau for Investigative Journalism, says such conflicts of interest could be handled better. Fair enough, but it also says more: that the scientific advice given to the WHO on flu has been dishonestly slanted since 1999 to profit companies. This would be important if the journalists supported their case. I don't think they do - making this a troubling smear on science.
(Continue . . . )
I weighed in on this ongoing WHO controversy (again) yesterday, in Of Pandemics, Hurricanes and An Abundance Of Caution.
Referral: New Scientist On The WHO `Conspiracy?
# 4629
A terrific editorial piece this morning in the New Scientist magazine by Debora MacKenzie that takes a hard look at some of the allegations being lodged against the World Health Organization and their advisors.
This is the `must-read? of the day.
Swine flu experts and big pharma: no conspiracy
<abbr>12:29 7 June 2010</abbr>
Debora MacKenzie, consultant
The parade of accusations surrounding the swine flu pandemic continues. The latest, published in the journal BMJ, claims the scientists who advised the World Health Organization (WHO) to declare H1N1 swine flu a pandemic were in the pay of companies that stood to profit from the resulting sales of antiviral drugs and vaccines.
The piece, by Deborah Cohen from BMJ and Philip Carter from a privately funded British non-profit called the Bureau for Investigative Journalism, says such conflicts of interest could be handled better. Fair enough, but it also says more: that the scientific advice given to the WHO on flu has been dishonestly slanted since 1999 to profit companies. This would be important if the journalists supported their case. I don't think they do - making this a troubling smear on science.
(Continue . . . )
I weighed in on this ongoing WHO controversy (again) yesterday, in Of Pandemics, Hurricanes and An Abundance Of Caution.