© Unknown
Wolfgang Wodarg
Here is my interview for the Danish 'Information' on the swine-flu pandemic:

"We have had a mild flu - and a false pandemic," says Wolfgang Wodarg, the chair of the Health Committee in The European Council. The German parliamentarian is also an epidemiologist and former health director in Flensburg. For that reason he has followed the H1N1-pandemic closely since June 11 and up to the present. He calls the pandemic "one of the greatest medical scandals of the century", and for that reason he has decided to take the case to the European Council:

"In January, we will arrange an emergency debate about the influence of the pharmaceutical industry on the WHO, and 47 parliaments all over Europe are going to be informed. Following this, we will initiate an investigation and hearings involving those responsible for the pandemic emergency," says Wolfgang Wodarg.

"The aim is that none of the pharmaceutical companies under any circumstances must be allowed to make their influence felt on pandemic emergencies," he says and adds that rules for patenting also will be checked:
"Vaccines are also an ethical issue. The pharmaceutical industry should not be allowed to get a patent to develop a preparation which is so important for our society."
Definition of a pandemic

As early as 2004, during the avian flu, Wolfgang Wodarg (at that time a German parliamentarian for the SPD) went to see WHO to ask for proof that a pandemic emergency was required:

"The avian flu was more dangerous than the H1N1, but far less contagious, and accordingly the arguments for a coming pandemic were thin to put it mildly. But the avian flu helped create an atmosphere of panic, and it influenced many countries to create a pandemic emergency plan. Furthermore Germany, Denmark and many other countries have bought large stocks of Tamiflu, even though it has not been sufficiently tested," he says, and criticises also the vaccine contracts that many countries entered into in the period after the avian flu:
"The governments have sealed contracts with vaccine producers where they secure orders in advance and take upon themselves almost all the responsibility. In this way the producers of vaccines are sure of enormous gains without having any financial risks. So they just wait, until WHO says "pandemic" and activate the contracts."
For that reason, Wolfgang Wodarg also finds it suspicious that WHO changed it's definition of a pandemic on it's homepage at the end of May this year:

"From June 2009 it is no longer necessary, that "an enormous amount of people have contracted the illness or died" - there simply have to be a virus, spreading beyond borders, and one that people have no immunity towards," he says.

The patent holders are the winners

Every year a new flu comes into existence - and every year you accordingly mix existing vaccine with the new virus in order to inoculate the population against the new seasonal flu.

Wolfgang Wodarg holds the opinion, that you could have used the same method to vaccinate the population against swine flu in a much cheaper fashion.

"If you simply had added H1N1 virus to the flu vaccines we already have in stocks, then there would have been no need for a pandemic emergency - but some of the additives in the vaccines are patented, and therefore nobody from the industry is interested in mixing the old vaccine with the new one," he says and adds:

"Furthermore the producers recommended, that you inoculate twice, which is not normal. It is self evident that they earn more money in that way. Therefore several things made me suspicious."

No control over WHO

Wolfgang Wodarg chose to consult all the other members of the European Council because at the end of the day there is no control with the WHO. Only governments can exercise influence through the annual assembly in WHO. Today, a majority of the Health Committee in the European Council agree on an independent investigation of the influence of the pharmaceutical industry on WHO.

In Russia a Russian parliamentarian has suggested a boycot of the WHO until transparency is established. What do you think about that idea?
"Everybody who knows about epidemiology should have questioned the way WHO handled this case from the beginning."
How will we ensure we have technical knowledge about vaccines, if the industry is not allowed to participate?

"Independent institutes which are controlled by the parliaments of the member countries, and which maintain complete transparency so that the public can follow what is going on. They will have to set the standard for how much money is going to be used on vaccines. In Germany alone, we have spent 700 millions euros on pandemic emergency and in Europe it is around two billions euros. It is emormous amount of money. But furthermore vaccines are an ethical topic. A vaccine which is that important should not be patented. Everyone who technically is capable of doing so should produce vaccines as quickly as possible when an emergency arises. In that way we can save more lives when a true pandemic arrives."

Is it realistic to remove the industry totally from the WHO?

"No, and therefore we have to insist on transparency. Furthermore they don't have to participate in the committees, which in reality decide when we have a pandemic, and who is going to be inoculated. They just have to answer how quickly they can deliver vaccines. And only when asked," says Wolfgang Wodarg.

WHO gives 180 million doses to third world countries, which they have got from the member countries surplus stocks. What do you think about that?

"I find it completely senseless, and if we don't maintain the control with untested additives then it may cause more harm than good."

Source (Danish)