Astronomer68
As I posted earlier, the analysis of the 1918 Flu Epidemic virus has been completed and the results published in both Science and Nature (both with
world-wide distribution).
Astronomere - the published information was incomplete with respect to critical data - and had to be in order to qualify as "safe" for
publication.
I don't know whether or not a bird vaccine has been created yet--do you?
There is, but according to the Japanese press, the WHO is asking that birds NOT be vaccinated. The risk of vaccines spreading the flu is too high,
along with other issues.
Someone has to pay for the production & distribution of vaccines to farmers and agri-business and compensate small farmers for birds that must be
destroyed. The effort will not be cheap, but as they say, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
Yes - prevention is the key.
ThomasCrowne
...you seem to have a propensity for ignoring all logic fact and truth in the attempts at furthering your agenda.
Earlier this month, the CDC came under fire for hiding unclassified information, hoarding flu data, and obstructing vaccine development. US scientists
were especially incensed with a new CDC manual that tells officials how to hide data from the public without obtaining a "secret" classification.
The government's motivation in keeping data secret was identified by David Webster, president of Webster Consulting Group Inc., a health-industry
consulting firm, as possibly being motivated by the desire to help protect partner pharmaceutical companies' ability to profit from research
partially funded by taxpayer money.
Immediately following publication of the charges that they were hiding data, on October 5, the CDC announced that the 1918 flu virus had been
recreated, and said "the 1918 virus was reconstructed to help public health officials prepare for the threat of a new pandemic, to learn what made
the virus so harmful, and to help develop better flu drugs and vaccines." The secrecy expose was 'damage controlled' and coverage of the scandal
was suppressed in the mainstream US media.
On October 21, the CDC classified the 1918 bird flu as a "select agent." The classification makes perfect sense and is certainly warranted, but in
the current environment of secrecy, and given the CDC's policy of hiding unclassified information - the promised benefits "to help develop better
flu drugs and vaccines" very likely will not materialize. The critical, profitable data will be hidden along with the bulk of CDC data generated from
taxpayer funded research - as "Select Agent Sensitive Information."
The Federation of American Scientists (FAS) posted the CDC manual online, as part of their project on government secrecy:
PDF. CDC Policy on Sensitive But Unclassified Information Manual Guide - Information Security
CDC-02. Date of Issue: 07/22/2005. Proponents: Office of Security and Emergency Preparedness. Title: SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION.
In particular, the CDC manual outlines methods to hide unclassified information on "select agents," categorised as "Select Agent Sensitive
Information" OR SASI. Also see:
Issue Overview. Select Agent Research:
Sensitive but not classified (PPT)
"Withholding data is not just bad public policy, it is bad science," says Steven Aftergood, director of the Federation of American Scientists'
project on government secrecy. The CDC's role is to disseminate public health information, not withhold it, he says. Open government advocates say
the CDC's actions run counter to its mission. However, scientists and scientific associations fear to speak out because the CDC controls their
funding.
Researchers, advocates flay CDC data secrecy
Scientists are accusing the Atlanta-based Centers for Disease Control and Prevention of hoarding crucial data that could help vaccinations at a time
when there is growing concern about a possible influenza pandemic. ...The nation's disease control center also is under fire from open-government
advocates for recently issuing a guide on how to keep other data, documents and information from public inspection. Called the "Information
Security" manual, the 34-page document provides officials with 19 categories to shield data from public scrutiny without obtaining a secret
classification marking.
Open government advocates say the CDC's actions run counter to its mission. The CDC's role is to disseminate public health information, not withhold
it, said Steven Aftergood, director of the Federation of American Scientists' project on government secrecy, which first published the leaked manual
on its Web site. ..."The CDC is not the CIA," Aftergood said. "Withholding data is not just bad public policy, it is bad science."
The Sept. 22 issue of the journal Nature reported widespread concern among influenza researchers that too little flu data collected by the CDC are
made available for research, hindering their efforts to develop flu vaccines. ...One U.S. Institutes of Health researcher told the magazine that other
than the occasional large deposits of data that accompany published papers required by journals, information is "coming through an eyedropper."
Nearly all of the scientific associations and scientists interviewed for this story declined to comment on the record. The issue is "delicate," one
person explained, because the CDC controls funding for research.
The Coalition of Journalists for Open Government (CJOG) covered the topic in a brief on October 4, 2005:
Secrecy at Centers for Disease Control Criticized
The Centers for Disease Control have come under criticism from scientists because of their tight control of information, Cox Newspapers reports. An
article in the journal Nature focuses on the CDC’s failure to make available data it has collected on flu strains, which scientists say has slowed
research on the viruses. Open government advocates has also criticized the CDC’s publication of an “Information Security” manual setting out 19
categories of unclassified information to be shielded. (10/4/05)
The CDC has partnerships with the pharmaceutical industry; research is funded partly from tax coffers and partly by private companies. While the
National Institutes of Health mandates Open Access publication of any research that receives any public funding, the CDC obviously does not. The CDC
claims that it cannot keep up with information requests, but David Webster, president of Webster Consulting Group Inc., a health-industry consulting
firm, says that the CDC may be concerned that sharing data might negatively affect its industry partners.
Concern grows over secrecy at
CDC
Nature quoted Michael Deem, a scientist at Rice University, as saying: "Many in the influenza field are displeased with the CDC's practice of
refusing to deposit sequences of most of the strains that they sequence." ...Nature's own analyses found that the CDC deposited less than a tenth of
the 15,000 influenza A sequences in the gene database Genbank and the influenza sequence database at the Los Alamos National Laboratory. By
comparison, a consortium led by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases deposited more than 2,800 sequences this year alone.
One concern the CDC may have about sharing data is how it would affect any partnership it might have with vaccine manufacturers, said David Webster,
president of Webster Consulting Group Inc., a health-industry consulting firm.
The CDC might be concerned that those manufacturers might not be able to recoup their investment if the information is widely available.
There may be good reason to classify certain information to protect it from bioterrorists, but the information that the CDC is hiding is NOT
classified. The agency is moving from a position of scientific openness to one of secrecy - and that may not be in the public's best interest. At
all.
CDC locks up flu data
Given the threat of a biological attack by a terrorist group, there may be sound reasoning for securing certain information, said Meredith Fuchs,
general counsel at the National Security Archive at George Washington University.
However, the CDC manual shows a "shift in the agency mind-set from one that assumes openness to one that assumes secrecy," Fuchs said.
"It's worth understanding that secrecy is not necessarily going to advance the public's health," Fuchs said. "It's troubling and causes one to
pause."
An agreement made by the World Trade Organization in 2003 allows nations to bypass Patents and Intellectual Property Rights when the issue is one of
urgent public health. Officials at the international bird flu conference in Ottawa are talking about using this agreement to allow manufacturing of
generic Tamiflu. Talk soon may turn publicly to the idea of better, faster vaccine development and production - and bypassing Intellectual Property
Rights protections on related data and technologies. However, data and technologies classifed as "Select Agent Sensitive Information" will be
protected from such incursions.
.