Worth posting - by Fumento - remember him???

Vaccine Dangers, Childhood Disease Classes & Homeopathy

Online/email courses - next classes start October 28 & 29

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/10/22/michael-fumento-the-who-s-political-pandering.aspx

October 24, 2009

can't stand Fumento but he is on the ball here, strange to tell

john

[VaxActivists] Worth posting - by Fumento -

remember him???

This is actually a great article and worth posting!

~Ingri

---

I'm no fan of the National Post but for once they hit the nail on the

head with printing this badly needed article.

Fumento: The WHO's political pandering

Posted: October 22, 2009, 9:00 AM by NP Editor

As evidence continues to mount that swine flu is more of a piglet

than a raging razorback, why isn’t curiosity mounting about why the World

Health Organization (WHO) declared it a pandemic? And why does the agency

continue to insist we’re going to get hammered? The answers have far less

to do with world health than with redistribution of world

wealth.

Medically, the pandemic moniker is unjustifiable. When the WHO made

its official declaration in June, we were 11 weeks into the outbreak, and

swine flu had only killed 144 people worldwide — the same number who die

of seasonal flu worldwide every few hours. The mildest pandemics of the

20th century killed at least a million people worldwide. After six

months, swine flu has killed about as many people as the seasonal flu

does every six days.

So how could WHO make such an outrageous claim?

Simple. It rewrote the definition of “pandemic.”

A previous official definition required “simultaneous epidemics

worldwide with enormous numbers of deaths and illness.” Severity is

crucial because seasonal flu always causes worldwide simultaneous

epidemics. But the definition promulgated in April eliminated severity as

a factor.

That’s also how we can have a “pandemic” when six months of

epidemiological data show swine flu to be far milder than the seasonal

variety. New York City statistics show it to be perhaps a 10th as lethal.

Swine flu isn’t some sort of alien from outer space as we’ve been led

to believe, but rather “the same subtype as seasonal A/H1N1 that has been

circulating since 1977,” as the BMJ observes. It’s “something our immune

systems have seen before,” echoes Palese of New York’s Mount Sinai

School of Medicine.

Nevertheless, because WHO dubbed this a “pandemic,” vaccination

plans, emergency response measures and frightening predictions have been

based on comparisons with true pandemics that by definition were

especially severe. That includes the August report from the President’s

Council of Advisors on Science and Technology with its “plausible

scenario” of “30,000 — 90,000 [u.S.] deaths” peaking in

“mid-October.”

Check your calendar.

So why did WHO do it?

In part, because it was losing credibility over the refusal of avian

flu H5N1 to go pandemic and kill as many as 150 million people worldwide,

as the WHO’s “flu czar” had predicted in 2005. Around the world, nations

stockpiled antiviral medicines and H5N1 vaccine.

So when pig flu conveniently appeared, the WHO essentially crossed

out “avian,” inserted “swine,” and WHO Director-General Margaret Chan

could boast: “The world can now reap the benefits of investments over the

last five years in pandemic preparedness.”

Yet this doesn’t explain why the agency hyped avian flu in the first

place, nor why it exaggerated HIV infections by more than 10 times, or

why it spread hysteria over Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS).

That disease ultimately killed a day’s worth of seasonal flu victims

before vanishing.

But the SARS scare was enough, leading to a broad expansion of WHO

powers, including a degree of direct authority over national health

agencies. It’s now using that to leverage more authority and a bigger

budget. No shocker there.

What may be surprising is that it wants to use that power to help

bring about a global economic and social revolution — and that

Director-General Chan was so blunt about it in a speech in Copenhagen

last month.

She said “ministers of health” should take advantage of the

“devastating impact” swine flu will have on poorer nations to tell “heads

of state and ministers of finance, tourism and trade” that:

The belief that “living conditions and health status of the poor

would somehow automatically improve as countries modernized, liberalized

their trade and improved their economies” is false. “Changes in the functioning of the global economy” are needed to

“distribute wealth on the basis of” values “like community, solidarity,

equity and social justice.” “The international policies and systems that govern financial

markets, economies, commerce, trade and foreign affairs have not operated

with fairness as an explicit policy objective.”

Splendid! So let’s put the WHO in charge of worldwide economic and

social engineering.

Then let’s form a new agency that sees disease as something to

prevent and treat rather than something to exploit.

National Post

fumento@...

Fumento is director of the non-profit Independent Journalism

Project, where he specializes in health and science issues.

Sheri Nakken, R.N., MA, Hahnemannian

Homeopath

Vaccination Information & Choice Network, Washington State, USA

Vaccines -

Vaccine Dangers, Childhood Disease Classes & Homeopathy

Online/email courses - next classes start October 28 & 29

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/10/22/michael-fumento-the-who-s-political-pandering.aspx

October 24, 2009

can't stand Fumento but he is on the ball here, strange to tell

john

[VaxActivists] Worth posting - by Fumento -

remember him???

This is actually a great article and worth posting!

~Ingri

---

I'm no fan of the National Post but for once they hit the nail on the

head with printing this badly needed article.

Fumento: The WHO's political pandering

Posted: October 22, 2009, 9:00 AM by NP Editor

As evidence continues to mount that swine flu is more of a piglet

than a raging razorback, why isn’t curiosity mounting about why the World

Health Organization (WHO) declared it a pandemic? And why does the agency

continue to insist we’re going to get hammered? The answers have far less

to do with world health than with redistribution of world

wealth.

Medically, the pandemic moniker is unjustifiable. When the WHO made

its official declaration in June, we were 11 weeks into the outbreak, and

swine flu had only killed 144 people worldwide — the same number who die

of seasonal flu worldwide every few hours. The mildest pandemics of the

20th century killed at least a million people worldwide. After six

months, swine flu has killed about as many people as the seasonal flu

does every six days.

So how could WHO make such an outrageous claim?

Simple. It rewrote the definition of “pandemic.”

A previous official definition required “simultaneous epidemics

worldwide with enormous numbers of deaths and illness.” Severity is

crucial because seasonal flu always causes worldwide simultaneous

epidemics. But the definition promulgated in April eliminated severity as

a factor.

That’s also how we can have a “pandemic” when six months of

epidemiological data show swine flu to be far milder than the seasonal

variety. New York City statistics show it to be perhaps a 10th as lethal.

Swine flu isn’t some sort of alien from outer space as we’ve been led

to believe, but rather “the same subtype as seasonal A/H1N1 that has been

circulating since 1977,” as the BMJ observes. It’s “something our immune

systems have seen before,” echoes Palese of New York’s Mount Sinai

School of Medicine.

Nevertheless, because WHO dubbed this a “pandemic,” vaccination

plans, emergency response measures and frightening predictions have been

based on comparisons with true pandemics that by definition were

especially severe. That includes the August report from the President’s

Council of Advisors on Science and Technology with its “plausible

scenario” of “30,000 — 90,000 [u.S.] deaths” peaking in

“mid-October.”

Check your calendar.

So why did WHO do it?

In part, because it was losing credibility over the refusal of avian

flu H5N1 to go pandemic and kill as many as 150 million people worldwide,

as the WHO’s “flu czar” had predicted in 2005. Around the world, nations

stockpiled antiviral medicines and H5N1 vaccine.

So when pig flu conveniently appeared, the WHO essentially crossed

out “avian,” inserted “swine,” and WHO Director-General Margaret Chan

could boast: “The world can now reap the benefits of investments over the

last five years in pandemic preparedness.”

Yet this doesn’t explain why the agency hyped avian flu in the first

place, nor why it exaggerated HIV infections by more than 10 times, or

why it spread hysteria over Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS).

That disease ultimately killed a day’s worth of seasonal flu victims

before vanishing.

But the SARS scare was enough, leading to a broad expansion of WHO

powers, including a degree of direct authority over national health

agencies. It’s now using that to leverage more authority and a bigger

budget. No shocker there.

What may be surprising is that it wants to use that power to help

bring about a global economic and social revolution — and that

Director-General Chan was so blunt about it in a speech in Copenhagen

last month.

She said “ministers of health” should take advantage of the

“devastating impact” swine flu will have on poorer nations to tell “heads

of state and ministers of finance, tourism and trade” that:

The belief that “living conditions and health status of the poor

would somehow automatically improve as countries modernized, liberalized

their trade and improved their economies” is false. “Changes in the functioning of the global economy” are needed to

“distribute wealth on the basis of” values “like community, solidarity,

equity and social justice.” “The international policies and systems that govern financial

markets, economies, commerce, trade and foreign affairs have not operated

with fairness as an explicit policy objective.”

Splendid! So let’s put the WHO in charge of worldwide economic and

social engineering.

Then let’s form a new agency that sees disease as something to

prevent and treat rather than something to exploit.

National Post

fumento@...

Fumento is director of the non-profit Independent Journalism

Project, where he specializes in health and science issues.

Sheri Nakken, R.N., MA, Hahnemannian

Homeopath

Vaccination Information & Choice Network, Washington State, USA

Vaccines -

Vaccine Dangers, Childhood Disease Classes & Homeopathy

Online/email courses - next classes start October 28 & 29

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/10/22/michael-fumento-the-who-s-political-pandering.aspx

October 24, 2009

can't stand Fumento but he is on the ball here, strange to tell

john

[VaxActivists] Worth posting - by Fumento -

remember him???

This is actually a great article and worth posting!

~Ingri

---

I'm no fan of the National Post but for once they hit the nail on the

head with printing this badly needed article.

Fumento: The WHO's political pandering

Posted: October 22, 2009, 9:00 AM by NP Editor

As evidence continues to mount that swine flu is more of a piglet

than a raging razorback, why isn’t curiosity mounting about why the World

Health Organization (WHO) declared it a pandemic? And why does the agency

continue to insist we’re going to get hammered? The answers have far less

to do with world health than with redistribution of world

wealth.

Medically, the pandemic moniker is unjustifiable. When the WHO made

its official declaration in June, we were 11 weeks into the outbreak, and

swine flu had only killed 144 people worldwide — the same number who die

of seasonal flu worldwide every few hours. The mildest pandemics of the

20th century killed at least a million people worldwide. After six

months, swine flu has killed about as many people as the seasonal flu

does every six days.

So how could WHO make such an outrageous claim?

Simple. It rewrote the definition of “pandemic.”

A previous official definition required “simultaneous epidemics

worldwide with enormous numbers of deaths and illness.” Severity is

crucial because seasonal flu always causes worldwide simultaneous

epidemics. But the definition promulgated in April eliminated severity as

a factor.

That’s also how we can have a “pandemic” when six months of

epidemiological data show swine flu to be far milder than the seasonal

variety. New York City statistics show it to be perhaps a 10th as lethal.

Swine flu isn’t some sort of alien from outer space as we’ve been led

to believe, but rather “the same subtype as seasonal A/H1N1 that has been

circulating since 1977,” as the BMJ observes. It’s “something our immune

systems have seen before,” echoes Palese of New York’s Mount Sinai

School of Medicine.

Nevertheless, because WHO dubbed this a “pandemic,” vaccination

plans, emergency response measures and frightening predictions have been

based on comparisons with true pandemics that by definition were

especially severe. That includes the August report from the President’s

Council of Advisors on Science and Technology with its “plausible

scenario” of “30,000 — 90,000 [u.S.] deaths” peaking in

“mid-October.”

Check your calendar.

So why did WHO do it?

In part, because it was losing credibility over the refusal of avian

flu H5N1 to go pandemic and kill as many as 150 million people worldwide,

as the WHO’s “flu czar” had predicted in 2005. Around the world, nations

stockpiled antiviral medicines and H5N1 vaccine.

So when pig flu conveniently appeared, the WHO essentially crossed

out “avian,” inserted “swine,” and WHO Director-General Margaret Chan

could boast: “The world can now reap the benefits of investments over the

last five years in pandemic preparedness.”

Yet this doesn’t explain why the agency hyped avian flu in the first

place, nor why it exaggerated HIV infections by more than 10 times, or

why it spread hysteria over Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS).

That disease ultimately killed a day’s worth of seasonal flu victims

before vanishing.

But the SARS scare was enough, leading to a broad expansion of WHO

powers, including a degree of direct authority over national health

agencies. It’s now using that to leverage more authority and a bigger

budget. No shocker there.

What may be surprising is that it wants to use that power to help

bring about a global economic and social revolution — and that

Director-General Chan was so blunt about it in a speech in Copenhagen

last month.

She said “ministers of health” should take advantage of the

“devastating impact” swine flu will have on poorer nations to tell “heads

of state and ministers of finance, tourism and trade” that:

The belief that “living conditions and health status of the poor

would somehow automatically improve as countries modernized, liberalized

their trade and improved their economies” is false. “Changes in the functioning of the global economy” are needed to

“distribute wealth on the basis of” values “like community, solidarity,

equity and social justice.” “The international policies and systems that govern financial

markets, economies, commerce, trade and foreign affairs have not operated

with fairness as an explicit policy objective.”

Splendid! So let’s put the WHO in charge of worldwide economic and

social engineering.

Then let’s form a new agency that sees disease as something to

prevent and treat rather than something to exploit.

National Post

fumento@...

Fumento is director of the non-profit Independent Journalism

Project, where he specializes in health and science issues.

Sheri Nakken, R.N., MA, Hahnemannian

Homeopath

Vaccination Information & Choice Network, Washington State, USA

Vaccines -

Vaccine Dangers, Childhood Disease Classes & Homeopathy

Online/email courses - next classes start October 28 & 29