In Finland, sits a state employee researcher with a problem. It did begin well . This year was Professor Juhani Eskolas vaccine research program got
47 million dollars for research into pneumococcal vaccine from the danish medical manufacturer GlaxoSmithKline.
The largest single contribution the professor's institution has received in 2009. But then came the press, and then came the Finnish Minister of
Health with wagging fingers, and now sits Finnish professor suddenly in a national conflict of interest.
Juhani Eskola is also an advisor to WHO's so-called SAGE group. And it means something when you get 47 million dollars of industry. And he do not
Since November, the danish newspaper Information described seven WHO experts who have either secondary job as consultants for the pharmaceutical
industry or get their research funded by the pharmaceutical industry.
The same experts who counseled the WHO General Margaret Chan as she 11th June this year declared that the world stood in the middle of an H1N1
From that second came a long series of dormant contracts between member countries and pharmaceutical companies in force.
Production of vaccines to 55 billion kroner (around 1 billion dollar) started.
But when the person is shouting "alarm", have economic interests in emergency preparedness, the public should know.
No human is immune. Nor are scientists who say they are. On the contrary, numerous studies show that scientists, doctors and healthcare professionals
are affected by pharmaceutical companies' influence.
According to Glasgow University's Robertson Center for Biostatistics uses pharmaceutical industry average of 800,000 dollars a year on direct
Therefore appeal the international NGO, NoFreeLunch, all in the health service to submit a credible promise to withstand extensive pharmaceutical
industry marketing. When the marketing goes from being a cup with a logo or a golf tour to be 47 million dollars to the Foundation, you work for , may
require a man to resist the messages that come with the amount from danish GlaxoSmithKline.
Since danish GlaxoSmithKline today is a supplier of the vaccine Pandemrix in the Finnish population, the story of the secret million payment created
furor in Finland. There is no proven link between GlaxoSmithKline's research and the choice of the same company as the supplier of H1N1 vaccine. But
the point is that we can not know.
Then arises the next problem in the wake of the Finnish researcher conflicts of interest, namely the lack of transparency in the WHO. Today danish
newspaper Information brings the story of WHO's secret advisory committee, called the Emergency Committee, where 18 members names, background and
work is completely darkened.
The secret committee reports directly to Secretary-General Margaret Chan, and therefore they were like SAGE group to decide when pandemic preparedness
to enter into force.
According to WHO, the Committee is secret because experts could then come under pressure. It creates two new problems.
-Firstly, we do not recognize who actually advises world health most powerful person.
-Second is the logical consequence of the argument that the rest of the WHO teams need experience to be under pressure when they take decisions.
Openness is the basis for democratic governance. The public should know how the political decisions become.
We know from studies that lack of transparency is proportional to a high level of corruption. And it is logical that public confidence in governments
and public institutions is falling in line with revelations of corruption and concealment of information.
On 7 April 1948 WHO was created to ensure international public health.
WHO was created to prevent illness and save lives, and all knowledge of the international community that can contribute to the aim must be desirable.
But WHO's work is dependent on governments and people trust their recommendations.
And confidence to the people who are employed by WHO, acting in the public health, and only the interest of public health.
Informations relating to the worlds citizens, life and health should be freely available, like the names of all the stakeholders that affect WHO's
decisions should be published.
Finnish professors problem becomes our problem until governments require that WHO is fully open to the experts they hired, the decisions are taken and
the arguments behind the decisions
Above text is translated by me and is originally released in danish newspaper Information.
link to the danish article: