No proof of drug industry sway on WHO in pandemic: report

A health worker gets a single dose of Influenza A H1N1 vaccine inside a Department of Health (DOH) office in Mandaluyong City, Metro Manila April 26, 2010. REUTERS/Romeo Ranoco

A health worker gets a single dose of Influenza A H1N1 vaccine inside a Department of Health (DOH) office in Mandaluyong City, Metro Manila April 26, 2010.

Credit: Reuters/Romeo Ranoco

GENEVA | Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:52am EST

GENEVA (Reuters) - Independent experts who examined the World Health Organisation's handling of the H1N1 pandemic said on Thursday they had found no evidence of drug industry influence on the U.N. agency's decision-making in the crisis.

But in a draft report made public, the panel said WHO had failed to recognize and manage conflicts of interest among some experts on its advisory Emergency Committee who had disclosed their ties to pharmaceutical companies.

The world remains "ill-prepared" to face a severe influenza pandemic or similar public health emergency, the experts added.

The United Nations agency announced in June 2009 that the newly-emerged H1N1 swine flu virus was causing the world's first influenza pandemic in more than 40 years. It declared the pandemic over in August 2010, saying that the global outbreak had turned out to be much less severe than was feared.

"WHO performed well in many ways during the pandemic and confronted systemic difficulties and demonstrated some shortcomings," the panel said in a 33-page report. "The Committee found no evidence of malfeasance."

"As far as the Review Committee can determine, no critic of WHO has produced any direct evidence of commercial influence on decision-making," it added.

Critics who have suggested 'invisible commercial influences' may account for WHO's actions ignored the agency's core public health values to prevent disease and save lives, according to the panel headed by American flu expert Dr. Harvey Fineberg.

The Review Committee, composed of 27 experts, holds its last meeting in Geneva on March 28-30 to finalize its report which is to be submitted to WHO's annual ministerial meeting in May.

The panel criticised the WHO's lack of a consistent and measurable description for judging a pandemic's severity which had created confusion. It suggested a scale of three phases rather than the current six-phase scale which is under revision.

WHO bureaucracy had also prevented a timely distribution of donated vaccines in poor countries during the pandemic, it said.

GlaxoSmithKline and Sanofi-Aventis are among major producers of influenza vaccines.

"The world is ill-prepared to respond to a severe influenza pandemic or to any similarly global, sustained and threatening public health emergency," it said, citing the risk of massive disruption, suffering and loss of life.

(Editing by Jonathan Lynn)

Related Quotes and News

Company
Price
Related News
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (3)
Bisky71 wrote:
The globalists get behind a fake pandemic, no surprise. The mainstream media was predicting a pandemic when there were just a few cases. Why? There are new flu strains each year. The number of people infected and number of fatalities was less than any other flu. The number of infected was far less than the WHO’s own requirements for a pandemic. So did the WHO suddenly become stupid or corrupt? Well the last place I’ll look for the answer is the UN. And I’ll pass on the next bogus pandemic and the next mercury filled vaccine.

Mar 10, 2011 11:23am EST  --  Report as abuse
Mildmassacre wrote:
No proof. Exactly as planned, maybe next time they will leave a trail of corruption. Doubt it.

Mar 10, 2011 12:31pm EST  --  Report as abuse
sarah130 wrote:
yeah…changing the definition of ‘pandemic’ to include disease that causes very little morbidity or mortality is a clear-headed, logical move.

Mar 14, 2011 9:34am EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.