SCI/TECH: Flu Vaccine Technology: Who’s Blocking its Use?, page 1
Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times
Topic started on 27-11-2004 @ 11:58 AM by soficrow
Cutting-edge technology for flu vaccine development is called "reverse genetic engineering." It’s quick, easy and reliable, but it’s not being used to create vaccines for the bird flu epidemic that’s threatening some parts of the world. Supposedly, it’s too expensive. Vaccine manufacturers say profits will suffer if they pay royalties, so they still use the old, slow, unreliable "genetic reassortment" technology. As a result, some estimates indicate a billion people may die world-wide from bird flu, including millions of Americans. Maybe a billion more will live to suffer progressive degeneration and disability.



www.modbee.com
"People get sick; people die. But two biotechnology methods will change that. One is reverse genetics, which precisely replicates only the viral genes that must be grown into vaccine. The other concerns multiplying that vaccine in mammalian cells. Both scramble the egg technique and slash manufacturing time, allowing a quick and life-saving turnaround in production of new doses.
Reverse genetics will speed up things at the early stage of vaccine making. ...Reverse genetics means accurate replication first time, every time. Webby's lab and others have done it in less than a week.
...The second speed-up will replace all those millions of eggs. ...Solomon says he believes the entire vaccination-production process can be cut "to 90 days or less." ...Thus a new strain might not be discovered until the flu season actually begins, yet we could have a fresh vaccine ready before it peaks."

Stanford University’s May, 2004 paper “High Tech IP Issues in a Global Marketplace: Influenza in the US in the 20th Century” outlines the science and legal issues:
www.wipo.org/meetings/2004/stanford/en/ppt/dfedson.ppt



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


"Bird flu epidemic" media coverage in early 2003 said the problems were solved; the epidemic, when it hit, would be handled. Using reverse genetics, vaccine development is fast and easy; the first vaccine for H5N1 bird flu was created within weeks in 1999. Development of a second vaccine for the 2002-2003 strain was even faster, at St. Judes Hospital in the USA and independently in the UK.

Unknown to most people, the flu vaccine situation deteriorated rapidly in the spring of 2004, but wasn’t covered by the media. Ordinary people watching the situation were left with the impression that everything was under control, and all was well. Wrong. There’s a manufacturing hold-up. The issues are murky and legal, and the spin doctors are rewriting the storyline almost daily.

Reverse genetics would save the day, said the early 2003 reports. Vaccine development now takes only a few days. Unlike old "genetic reassortment" technology, reverse genetics is easy to use with the deadly H5N1 bird flu viruses. Plus, it is fast and reliable. Using reverse genetics technologies, world vaccine production capacity can provide 750 million doses or 6 billion adjuvanted doses – within weeks.

By comparison: old "genetic reassortment" technology is slow, very difficult and subject to failure. It uses chicken eggs – which often are killed by bird flu H5N1 strains. Best case scenario: 250 million doses in 6 months at full-out glitch-free world production capacity; nowhere near enough, and way too slow.

Yet despite its deficiencies, old "genetic reassortment" technology still is being used to develop and manufacture vaccines for the coming bird flu epidemic.

More than three groups own the Intellectual Property rights for reverse genetic engineering. One of the groups is a company called Medimmune. Information about the other IP owners is not available. Reverse genetics technology was first developed in the 1980’s; ownership likely changed hands since. This is the kind of technology Big Pharma would want to control.

If a vaccine that’s developed using reverse genetics goes into commercial production, then manufacturers need to negotiate royalties with all the IP patent holders. MedImmune will waive royalties on its intellectual property for pandemic flu vaccines that are offered free to the public, but the other IP patent holders remain invisible; none have made similar promises.

Before mid-November of 2004, not one vaccine manufacturer in the world had negotiated the rights to manufacture vaccines developed with reverse genetics engineering technology. The World Health Organization apparently brokered a deal, but nothing is being discussed publicly – not the terms, actual situation or implications.

The vaccine manufacturing hold-ups were known when President Bush made the Bio-Shield program a funding priority in the spring of 2004. Bio-Shield commits $5.6 billion to develop vaccines for non-existent biological weapons, says William Schaffner, chairman of the preventive medicine department at Vanderbilt Medical School in Nashville. "They're creating a very expensive program against diseases that don't exist anywhere in the world," said Dr. Schaffner.

In comparison, the Bush administration funded the "War Against Flu" with only $283 million, reports Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Bird flu is an identified crisis with a known solution. But $5.3 Billion more tax dollars are committed to vaccine development for non-existent biological weapons – leaving ordinary Americans without bird flu vaccines when bird flu is about to go epidemic.

"There is a need to raise the profile of pandemic preparedness as a matter of national security planning," warned Dr. Klaus Stöhr of the WHO, in a news conference at the end of November’s closed Emergency flu meeting in Geneva.

Granted, the USA is not the only country without protection against bird flu. The whole planet is in the same boat. Some authorities are incensed; others are not. The split is between interventionists on one side, and non-interventionists on the other. Interventionists believe everything possible should be done to prevent the bird flu epidemic. Non-interventionists support policies of inaction and "benign neglect."

Non-interventionists say bird flu will take care of the world’s overpopulation problem: that flu is a legitimate form of natural selection. The weak, old and already sick will be weeded out. When it’s all over, say non-interventionists, the world’s people will be stronger and healthier. Moreover, they say, overpopulation creates an undue strain on the world’s finite resources, which will be relieved with depopulation.

Interventionists say research shows flu survivors are susceptible to progressive degeneration and disability that ends in heart disease and stroke. Survivors will not be healthier they say, but will become burdens to health care and national economies. Moreover, depopulation policies misrepresent the environmental situation to put corporate needs before ordinary people. Interventionists agree that finite resources – from energy to water and food – are being depleted to the point of crisis, but they insist it is industry that’s over-using resources, not people.
Find links for infection-related heart disease and stroke at:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

The explanations for the vaccine fiasco become more contradictory and murky every day, but the anticipated impacts are very clear:

A billion-odd people will die quickly; infected survivors will become disabled by heart disease then stroke. Instead of contributing to national economies, these survivors will become economic and social burdens. The world’s nations will be overwhelmed by deaths and hospitalizations during the epidemic, and then destroyed economically by the domino effect that will follow. An alliance of multinational corporations is positioned to storm the breach.

The technology exists to prevent the crisis and the fallout. Yet the technology is not being used. All things considered, it looks, smells and feels like a conspiracy.



Related News Links:
www.biomedcentral.com
www.bloomberg.com
www.goupstate.com
www.concordmonitor.com

Related Information:
www.biomedcentral.com...
jvi.asm.org...
www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov...
www.jcb.org...

[edit on 27-11-2004 by Banshee]


reply posted on 27-11-2004 @ 02:14 PM by soficrow
Originally posted by sardion2000
Where did you get your numbers from? Billions seems a bit much IMO.


Estimates from the World Health Organization (WHO) are based very conservatively on a standard 1% mortality rate, which is why their estimates are low.

That's just the spin, most often quoted. The bird flu H5N1 strains are anything but standard.


" “Up to one billion people could die around the whole world in six months,” says Dmitry Lvov, the head of the Russian Virology Institute. "
www.mosnews.com...



(Dennis Maki, top University of Wisconsin immunologist said) " "Look at this, ...pointing to the screen where his (H5N1 flu) Power Point presentation read: "72 percent mortality." The median age of the victims was 13. ...Traditional flu, as seen in this country, has a mortality rate of less than 1 percent.

"It's evolving as it goes along," Maki said of the (H5N1) virus. "My fear is, it will acquire genes that will allow it to spread efficiently from person to person. If that happens, we're going to have a big problem."

...The Institute of Medicine, a part of the National Academy of Sciences, reported (that) ...the H5N1 virus is only "a few mutations away" from being passed from person to person."
www.madison.com...



"...if the receptor binding domain on H3 was put on the avian H5 via recombination, then the H5N1 would be able to transmit human to human, but would still be largely H5N1, the virus that produces a 70-80% case fatality rate in Vietnam and Thailand.

...Such a recombinant, capable of infecting 1/4 of the world's population and killing 70% of those infected, would kill over 1 BILLION, not the 2-7 million cited by WHO."
www.recombinomics.com...



"...think of the consequences. Panic. Crippled health-care systems. Economic disruption on a global scale. Grounded airlines. Distribution networks that will grind to a halt. Social instability.

...Or, "three years of a given hell," as a leading U.S. epidemiologist, Michael Osterholm, puts it: "I can't think of any other risk, terrorism or Mother Nature included, that could potentially pose any greater risk to society than this." "

From "Flu Pandemic Near, Experts Fear." By Helen Branswell of Canadian Press. Good article, online at:
globalresearch.ca.myforums.net...




reply posted on 28-11-2004 @ 10:29 AM by soficrow
.
.
.
Further to: Deconstructing the Spin.

Current spin says reverse genetic engineering-based vaccine manufacturing technology is 2-5 years away. But that’s bull puckey.

“Genetic engineering” already is the foundation of a well-established commercial industry – used to create genetically modified organisms (GMOs). GMO genetic engineering uses viruses and bacteria to transmit genetic material (plasmids) across biological kingdoms.

“Reverse genetic engineering” is the same technology as “genetic engineering” – just used in reverse. It looks at the plasmids to find out what genetic material or proteins are being transmitted in order to create the vaccine. The “new” vaccine production process is straight out genetic engineering – already well-developed for use in creating GMO’s.

(FYI – a plasmid is “A small, independently replicating, piece of extrachromosomal cytoplasmic DNA” – and the focus for vaccine development and manufacturing, as well as GMO’s.)

The question is not whether the technology exists, but rather, whether or not it will be available for vaccine manufacturing.

The link above to a Stanford paper outlining the status of the science and legal issues didn’t come through. …Here it is again:
“High Tech IP Issues in a Global Marketplace”
www.wipo.org/meetings/2004/stanford/en/ppt/dfedson.ppt

Also FYI – genetic engineering and reverse genetic engineering are not that new. What’s (relatively) new is that the methods and technologies can be privately owned as “Intellectual Property,” terms defined and established in the late 1980’s under NAFTA and later through GATT and the WTO.

IP rights confer a great deal of power that goes well beyond the potential for financial return – and allow rights holders to decide if, and how, a technology might be used. For example, genetic engineering technologies now are available to create GMO’s but not to manufacture vaccines.

IP rights holders are well-supported by the legal system. In another odd twist, legal constraints obstruct the use of genetic engineering technologies for vaccine manufacturing, but not for manufacturing GMO’s.



oops. accidentally bolded the whole post

[edit on 28-11-2004 by soficrow]


reply posted on 29-11-2004 @ 10:42 AM by soficrow
.
.
.
.
UPDATE: 11-29-04



www.iht.com...

A global pandemic of avian influenza is "very, very likely" ...Deaths associated with the rapid spread of a new form of influenza would be high...

"We are talking at least 2 to 7 million, maybe more - 20 million or 50 million, or in the worst case, 100" million," ...[Note: 100 million is 1 Billion. The article is quoting Dr. Shigeru Omi, WHO's regional director for Asia and the Pacific.]

Dr. Malik Peiris, a top influenza researcher at Hong Kong University, said that Omi's range of potential fatalities was realistic and consistent with current research into the A(H5N1) avian influenza virus.




.


reply posted on 18-2-2006 @ 11:37 PM by soficrow
And this remains the story that still isn't a story. Tamiflu does not work, but Cheney and his associates are getting richer and richer on the backs of ordinary Americans, poor Africans, ...


World must invest in bird flu vaccine: WHO official

GENEVA (Reuters) - The world has spent more than $3 billion to stockpile anti-virals against bird flu but is not investing enough to develop an influenza pandemic vaccine, a top official of the World Health Organization (WHO) said on Friday. Klaus Stohr, WHO's special adviser on influenza pandemic vaccine development, also said that while preliminary results from several clinical trials looked ''promising,'' much more work was needed.

medscape
washingtonpost
redorbit
aol
wired
reuters


Bird Flu and Beyond: Assisted Suicide Instead of Prevention

WHO Pushes for Bird Flu Vaccine Production, March 2005


reply posted on 19-2-2006 @ 01:10 PM by Astronomer68
Soficrow your contention about mis/disinformation may well be right on the mark. Even though I don't share your thoughts about such doesn't mean it could not be true--it could. Concerning H5N1 though, at present there seems to be no real threat from the virus except for people directly handling infected poultry and those in close or intimate association with those people. To prepare a vaccine right now would not be appropriate for combatting a potential human pandemic based on some variant of the H5N1 strain of flu .that has yet to appear.

There is clearly a real danger that such a variant may surface at any time, as long as the H5N1 strain is loose in the same environments where humans live, work & play. All scientific estimates & analyses that I have been privy to say the greatest danger is that someone already infected with a human to human transmissable variant of the flu will, while infected with such, contract the H5N1 infection as well (I.e., at the same time). If that happens, there is a high probability that a human to human variant of H5N1 will form (due to the propensity of viruses to freely swap genetic material). Should such a human to human variant of H5N1 form then there is a grave danger of a human pandemic because of the gregarious nature of humans and their propensity to move around freely and rapidly. If such a variant surfaces there will not be much time to identify the new variant and rapidly produce a vaccine. Even a few weeks development & production & dissemination time could be devastating. However, a vaccine cannot be developed until such a variant surfaces (if it does). We simply cannot produce an effective vaccine in advance for a strain of the flu that we don't know the details of yet.

Of further concern, is the fact that swine may contract the H5N1 flu and be infected with another strain at the same time. We already know that flu strains transmissable between swine quite easily make the jump to humans. The danger is apparaently not quite as high as the human based scenario, but it is still high enough to be of serious concern.


[edit on 19-2-2006 by Astronomer68]


reply posted on 1-4-2006 @ 08:53 PM by soficrow
Flu vaccines: Looking beyond eggs

The global spread of avian flu is putting additional pressure on vaccine developers to rethink their traditional techniques, which rely heavily on eggs to incubate vaccine stocks: The lethality of avian flu in poultry makes it unlikely that there will be 4 billion embryonated eggs available-the number needed to protect the 1.2 billion people at high risk-in the case of a pandemic, according to Suryaprakash Sambhara at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Cell culture is emerging as a viable and versatile alternative to eggs for churning out large quantities of vaccine.




Using cell cultures involves genetic engineering - and complex negotiations for numerous licensing fees.

This is worth watching.
Pages:     ^^TOP^^