Indian Doctors - WHO Siphoning Funds for Industry Profit.

[Guest guest]

Is this a misprint? 4 vaccinations for $250,000 sounds rather

outrageously high to me.

 

> the letter suggests that $250,000 will be spent to prevent 4 children getting

pneumonia.

> Instead the 4 cases could have been treated by WHO protocol for $1each.

 

Alobar

 

 

On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 11:59 AM, Jagannath

Chatterjee<jagchat01 wrote:

>

>

>

>

> *ALL **INDIA** DRUG ACTION NETWORK (AIDAN)**

> *(http://aidanindia. wordpress. com/)

>

> Rational Drugs and Vaccines for All!

>

> **57, Tejaswinagar, Dharwad 580002, **India**, Tel & fax +91- 836- 2461722 (

> **drdabade (AT) gmail (DOT) com**)

> * A-60, Hauz Khas, **New Delhi** 110016, **India**, Tel: +91-11-26512385 (

> mirashiva (AT) gmail (DOT) com)*

>

> ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -

>

> 4th July 2009

>

> To,

> Dr Margaret Chan,

> Director-General of WHO,

> Geneva

>

> Dear Dr Chan,

>

> This is in continuation of Drug Action Forum – Karnataka’s (DAF-K – is a

> member of AIDAN) letter dated 2nd September 2008, regarding the “revelation”

> regarding the pneumococcal vaccine that is being promoted by WHO globally

> and in India that “for every four children in whom pneumonia is prevented,

> two children develop asthma because of the vaccine”. Subsequently AIDAN in

> its letter dated 10th February 2009 had further reiterated the same concerns

> and in addition AIDAN members appreciated your comments in the 'The Lancet'

> dated 15th January 2009, titled " Primary health care as a route to health

> security " .*

>

> Your personal assistant Alison Porri, has acknowledged having received

> DAF-K’s letter on 4th September 2008, promising that “Your letter will be

> carefully reviewed and a response will be forthcoming”. After repeated

> reminders, AIDAN received a reply on 3rd April 2009, where in you mention

> that

>

> " We think that the introduction of pneumococcal vaccines, where merited by

> evidence of the disease burden, would be of tremendous benefit, saving many

> lives, particularly of children. WHO stands ready to assist its Member

> States to assess the need for the use of specific new vaccines, to aid in

> decision-making, prioritization and introduction, and to work on solutions

> for financing them. We look forward to creating a world where no person

> should die of a vaccine-preventable disease and to cooperating with

> countries and partners to realize this goal.”

>

> AIDAN has reservations about the first sentence of this statement because a

> letter published in the Lancet (2nd to 8th July) points out how this policy

> in effect siphons off money to vaccine manufacturers; the funds that are

> actually donated for the MDG without commensurate benefit for the children.

> For the pneumococcal vaccine the letter suggests that $250,000 will be spent

> to prevent 4 children getting pneumonia. Instead the 4 cases could have been

> treated by WHO protocol for $1each.

>

> The journal Vaccine of 9 July 2009 (Mathew JL Pneumococcal vaccination in

> developing countries: Where does science end and commerce begin? Vaccine 27

> (2009) 4247–4251) has also published a scathing indictment of the WHO

> recommendation on the pneumococcal vaccine and what WHO considers ‘evidence

> of the disease burden’ enough to merit vaccination.

>

> This is what the WHO recommendation states

>

> “WHO considers that it should be a priority to include this vaccine in

> national immunization programmes, particularly in countries where mortality

> among children aged <5 years is >50/1000 live births or where >50,000

> children die annually”. (No authors cited. Pneumococcal conjugate vaccine

> for childhood immunization – WHO position paper. Wkly Epidemiol Rec

> 2007;82:pp. 93–104.)

>

> The author point out that the first criteria of under five mortality

>>50/1000 live births was met by 32 countries but the total population to be

> vaccinated was 18 million. By including the criteria dependent on

> population size of ‘where >50,000 children die annually’ only 7 additional

> countries were added but it added 161 million to the numbers eligible for

> vaccination (in populous countries of India, China and Brazil). The WHO

> recommendations seem dictated by needs of increasing demand for vaccines and

> profits for manufacturers rather than the needs of public health.

>

> We earnestly appeal to you to reexamine how recommendations are arrived at

> by the WHO or else repeated exposures of this nature will erode the very

> credibility of the WHO. AIDAN and its members restate its demand that it

> should review its stand on the wrong advice given towards the vaccine in

> question.

>

> Please let us know what action you propose to correct this or whether you

> think the policy needs no correction, as you did when we wrote last time.

>

> *The entire correspondence can be accessed at:- http://alturl. com/dkty

>

> Yours truly

>

> Dr Gopal Dabade,

> drdabade (AT) gmail (DOT) com

>

> Dr Jacob Puliyal,

> puliyel (AT) gmail (DOT) com

>

> Dr Mira Shiva,

> mirashiva (AT) gmail (DOT) com

>

> Dr Anurag Bhargav,

> abhar786

>

> Mr Srinivasan,

> sahajbrc (AT) youtele (DOT) com

>

> Dr Anant Phadke,

> anant.phadke@ gmail.com

>

> --

> http://novartisboyc ott.org/petition

>

> Dr Gopal Dabade,

> 57, Tejaswinagar,

> Dharwad 580 002

> Tel 0836-2461722

> Cell (0)9448862270

> www.jagruti. org

> http://aidanindia. wordpress. com/

> www.daf-k.cjb. net

>