TENPENNY 12/18/03 - HOW THE MASS MEDIA IN THE U.S. CREATED FLU HYSTERIA

[Guest guest]

PLEASE go to the webpage for TONS MORE - I hesitate to post the whole

article as I want you to go to their webpage, but I know some of you don't

have net access, only email.

Sheri

http://www.redflagsweekly.com/conferences/vaccines/2003_dec18.html

HOW THE MASS MEDIA IN THE U.S. CREATED FLU HYSTERIA AND HELPED DRIVE THE

VACCINE MARKETS FOR THE MAKERS OF FluMist AND FLUZONE.

By RFD Columnist, Dr. Sherri Tenpenny

The hype regarding this year’s flu “epidemic” continues. In the wake of the

media-induced hysteria, a fascinating series of chronologically connected

events has materialized that appears to protect the pharmaceutical industry

profits at the expense of our children. This issue demands further

examination.

On June 20, 2002, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)

adopted a resolution to include the influenza vaccine in the childhood

vaccination schedule. The influenza vaccine will be recommended annually to

all children aged 6 months to 23 months, and to children aged 24 months to

18 years who are household contacts of children aged less than 2 years.

After becoming effective on March 1, 2003, the resolution was implemented

during the 2003-04 influenza season and the vaccine will be encouraged

annually, for every subsequent flu season, in other words, creating

“regular customers for life.”

Coming on the coattails of this announcement, the FDA approved the use of

FluMist, the first nasally injected vaccine. The company originally had

sought an indication for use in healthy people aged 1-64 years, but it was

denied by the FDA. Reports suggested the vaccine caused a 3.53-fold

increased risk of “asthma events” after the first dose in children 12-59

months of age.[ii] After a 32-month review that included the submission of

additional data, the decision was reversed and on June 17, 2003, the FDA

issued a license to Medimmune to produce FluMist, a live attenuated

influenza vaccine for use in 5-to-49 year olds. In a complicated vote, ACIP

decided that, because only 641 adults over 50 years of age were studied,

there was insufficient evidence of vaccine efficacy in 50-64 year olds.[iii]

MedImmune Inc., FluMist’s manufacturer and Washington DC’s successful

biotechnology company, was jubilant over the decision. When MedImmune

executives and Wall Street bulls learned that FluMist would be released in

time for the fall flu season, MedImmune's stock soared to $43.32 per share,

more than 63 times earnings.[iv] MedImmune announced it would manufacture

between 4 million and 6 million units of FluMist for the 2003 season.

A $25 million marketing campaign was launched in October by MedImmune, and

its partner, Wyeth, to create a demand for their new product. Ad after ad

demonstrated the inconveniences the flu caused to family members and

co-workers, encouraging everyone to get their flu shot—especially the shot

up the nose. It just so happened that flu outbreaks began to be reported in

Houston earlier than in previous years and about the same time as FluMist

began to be used. Texas Children's Hospital diagnosed 40 patients with the

flu in five days. During comparable weeks of the flu seasons in the

previous two years, only 9 cases per week had required treatment.[v]

However, despite the best efforts of a massive marketing blitz, the big

demand for FluMist didn’t materialize. The “billion dollar blockbuster”

lacked the appeal its creators had dreamed about. The advantage of a

getting a mist up the nose over a shot in the arm couldn’t justify the

hefty price not covered by health insurance (FluMist for $60-70 vs. flu

shot for $7).

By November 17, MedImmune had reduced its 2003 fourth quarter, full-year

revenue expectations as earnings were projected to be $60 million less than

anticipated. MedImmune’s CEO, M. Mott, stated that he was

“disappointed.” Half-way through the 12-week peak “immunization season” the

anticipated demand was just not there.[vi] Perplexed, MedImmune announced

on November 23 that it had “hired a consultant to discover why its

needle-free flu vaccine, FluMist, had disappointed sales expectations this

fall and was considering placing the emphasis on FluMist's safety as well

as its convenience.”[vii]

Shortly thereafter, the outbreaks initially seen in Texas were being

reported all around the country—much earlier than usually anticipated.

Indeed, even a few children were reported to have died from the flu. The

media hyped these reports as though this were an outbreak of smallpox

instead of the flu, causing hysteria.

With the announcement of the “flu epidemic” blazoned from every conceivable

form of news report, a stampede of patients arrived at doctors’ offices,

demanding a shot to ward off the “deadly strain” of influenza. Parents

especially wanted their children vaccinated, and were willing to drive to

cities hours from home and even stand in line for up to 90 minutes.[viii]

But wait.

Doesn’t the CDC say repeatedly that 36,000 people die every year from the

flu? Were these reported deaths indicative that all deaths possibly related

to the flu might be different or more numerous than deaths reported any

other year? In a telephone interview on November 17, 2003, this is what the

CDC had to say:

MODERATOR: Miriam Falco from CNN, your line is open.

QUESTION: Hi, Dr. Gerberding, thanks for doing this. Is this the most

serious early onset since 1976?

DR. GERBERDING: This is early onset from the standpoint that we have more

cases, particularly in Texas, where we see it's fairly widespread

[outbreak] of flu. But we have had many years where flu has started early

and peaked earlier than average. So it's a little too early in the game to

say whether or not this portends the worst flu season we've had in a long

time.[ix] (emphasis mine)

Again, on December 11, 2003, Dr. Gerberding reported the following

during a CNN teleconference:

“We don't have scientific evidence or epidemiologic evidence to suggest

that this year's influenza outbreak is worse than it has been in the past

or that the strain is more virulent than strains that we've dealt with

before. It's just simply too early in the course of the outbreak to say for

sure how this will compare overall…”[x] (emphasis mine)

If that is the case, isn’t the “epidemic” being reported nationwide by the

media a little like yelling “fire” in a crowded theater…when there is no

fire? People can be harmed and even killed by the ensuing stampede.

Further evidence suggests that the outbreaks did not deserve the

feeding-frenzy level of media coverage they have received. For example, the

Rocky Mountain News reported on December 11 that officials said flu cases

had been cut in half and the “the worst of worst Colorado season in years

is over.” The report went on to say that, “during a typical year, no more

than two children and a total of 750 to 800 Coloradoans die of

complications of the flu or pneumonia. " [xi] Do nine reported deaths in

children make this year the " worst of the worst " ? Does an increase of 7

deaths over previous years constitute an epidemic?

In Arizona, the Department of Health Services reported on December 11, 2002

that two adults and one child had died of influenza related sickness.

, the health department’s spokesperson, said that Arizona

typically has 20 children deaths a year caused by influenza.[xii] Is one

death an “epidemic”?

This does not in any way minimize the tragedy of the death of a child. What

needs to be put into context is how extraordinarily small these numbers are

to lead to such media-driven hysteria. Furthermore, what were the

underlying health conditions of those who died? At least one other report

stated that one of the children in Colorado died of the flu and “other

causes.” A 3-year-old boy who reportedly died from complications of the flu

at Children's Medical Center in Dayton also had a missing pituitary gland

and a cleft pallet.[xiii] Both conditions can be associated with a

compromised immune system. Perhaps the CDC should recommend giving the flu

shot only to children at highest risk—and their immediate family

members—instead of encouraging mass vaccination of children with normal,

intact immune systems.

Do we know if the reports of “flu-related illness” and death were actually

caused by an influenza virus? The CDC reports that the majority of

influenza-like illnesses are not caused by the influenza virus, but by

other viruses (e.g., rhinoviruses and respiratory syncytial virus [RSV]),

adenoviruses, and parainfluenza viruses).[xiv] Benevento, executive

director of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment stated

the department's definition of " flu-related illness " includes kids who have

flu symptoms but haven't had a confirmatory test.[xv]

By early December, reports began to come out that stated the viral strain

of this year’s flu “epidemic” was the A/Fujian strain. This was a serious

error on the part of the vaccine program because the most virulent strain

of the flu identified this season was not part of FluMist or Fluzone. In

order to continue encouraging vaccination, the CDC proclaimed that the flu

vaccines “should” confer “some” protection against this strain. The media

continued to blare: get your flu vaccine.

The CDC estimates that only 13 percent of healthy people less than 50 years

of age, or about 17 million Americans, got flu shots last year.[xvi]

Typically, 80 million doses of the flu shot are manufactured annually.

Therefore, millions of unused doses of the flu vaccine from the previous

year’s stock are discarded, along with the profits connected to them. With

all this attention on the flu, Aventis certainly benefited. As the

manufacturer of Fluzone (the “flu shot”), it is interesting to note that

Aventis stock rose from $48/share at the beginning of September to $61.43

on December 12.[xvii] The extra, unanticipated Fluzone sales may not be

the sole contributor to the stock increase, but certainly this can be

considered as playing a role.

Predictably, the demand for the flu vaccine soon outstripped supply. In an

effort to assist health officials, effective December 10, 2003, Wellmark

Blue Cross and Blue Shield was one of many insurance carriers that began

covering the cost of FluMist vaccine through the end of December, or

through the vaccination time period recommended by the CDC for the

2003-2004 flu season.[xviii]

Now, even the government is getting on the band wagon to support consumer

use of FluMist. Negotiated by the CDC, the agreement will allow state and

local officials to purchase the nasal-spray vaccine for $20 a dose from now

through the middle of February from both MedImmune and Wyeth. At less than

half of the suggested wholesale price of $46 per dose, this may be the

ultimate boost to faltering sales.[xix]

The upshot of the run on flu shots, the newly implemented insurance

coverage and the boost from the federal government has surely created a

bonanza for MedImmune. The company probably hasn’t had to spend an

additional marketing dime to implement the ideas of its newly hired

consultants. Much of its marketing was accomplished for free…through the

Six O’clock news.

(SEE OTHER ARTICLES ON THE FLU BY DR. SHERRI TENPENNY LISTED BELOW)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

----

MMWR. September 27, 2002/51(38);864, 875

[ii]ePediatric News. July 2003, Volume 37, Number 7.

[iii] CDC.

[iv]The Washington Post. MedImmune's Pain-Free Ambitions. March 18, 2002;

Page E01

[v]October 15, 2003.

[vi] PRNewswire November 17, 2003.

[vii] Washington Post. November 25, 2003. “MedImmune Seeks Help in

Relaunching FluMist.”

[viii] Rocky Mountain News. December 11, 2003 “Cases of flu cut in half.”

[ix] CDC News Conference Transcript. November 17, 2003. Update on Current

Influenza Season.

[x] CDC News Conference Transcript. December 11, 2003. Influenza Update.

[xi] Rocky Mountain News. December 11, 2003 “Cases of flu cut in half.”

[xii] The Navaho Times. December 11, 2002. “Flood of flu cases using up

vaccine.”

[xiii] December 15, 2003. “Toddler Dies Of Flu Complications”

[xiv] MMWR November 9, 2001/50(44); 984-6

[xv] Rocky Mountain News. December 11, 2003 “Cases of flu cut in half.”

[xvi] Washington Post. June 18, 2003, Pg. A01. “Spray Vaccine For Flu Wins

FDA Clearance.”

[xvii] Forbes Financial Report.

[xviii] Blue Cross/Wellmark.

[xix] The Washington Post. Tuesday, December 16, 2003; Page E01Government

To Purchase FluMist at A Discount. Deal Could Give Boost To MedImmune Vaccine

OTHER ARTICLES

December 8, 2003

IS IT POSSIBLE THAT FluMist®, THE NASAL SPRAY FLU VACCINE, MAY BE CAUSING

THE FLU?

November 30, 2003

NEW CAMPAIGN TO MARKET TOUGH-SELL FluMist

November 24, 2003

SHOULD YOU GET THE FLU SHOT?

October 3, 2003

RISKS OF FluMist VACCINE

Hundreds of TV and print ads have been designed to persuade everyone into

taking FluMist. The campaign will cost an estimated $25 million over the

next couple of months. And a three-year, $100 million campaign will be

launched to encourage use of the nasal flu vaccine among physicians. But

there are many reasons for caution.

ABOUT SHERRI J. TENPENNY

--------------------------------------------------------

Sheri Nakken, R.N., MA, Classical Homeopath

Vaccination Information & Choice Network, Nevada City CA & Wales UK

$$ Donations to help in the work - accepted by Paypal account

vaccineinfo@... voicemail US 530-740-0561

(go to http://www.paypal.com) or by mail

Vaccines - http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/vaccine.htm

Homeopathy On-Line course - http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/homeo.htm

ANY INFO OBTAINED HERE NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS MEDICAL

OR LEGAL ADVICE. THE

DECISION TO VACCINATE IS YOURS AND YOURS ALONE.

******

" Just look at us. Everything is backwards; everything is upside down.

Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy

knowledge, governments destroy freedom, the major media destroy information

and religions destroy spirituality " .... Ellner