GlaxoSmithKline malaria vaccine trials successful but drug will not be profitable

GlaxoSmithKline malaria vaccine trials successful but drug will not be profitable

www.telegraph.co.uk

Britain's biggest pharmaceutical company, along with African research centres and the PATH Malaria Vaccine Initiative, is researching a vaccine to protect children against the mosquito-borne disease, which is responsible for almost 800,000 deaths each year.

The vaccine has been in development for more than two decades and data from long-awaited final-stage trials published in the New England Journal of Medicine on Tuesday showed that the shot, called RTS,S, gave protection against malaria in five to 17 month-olds in Africa.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.reuters.com
www.gsk.com

The results are in...

I am perfectly for protecting people from disease. But this headline got me thinking a little. The first major thing is that they admit it will not be profitable. Big pharma never does anything unless it is profitable. We all heard about the polio and small pox vaccines, and all the horror they caused.

I'm sorry but this has eugenics written all over it. Bill Gates admits to supporting population reduction and then donates billions to a fund that promotes child vaccination in Africa then this trial happens. I think there might be a connection here.

I also included a press release from 2009 when they first announced this trial. In case you haven't realized it yet GlaxoSmithKline funded all this. How convenient.

www.telegraph.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

Here is part of their sales pitch.

Fact Sheet: RTS,S Malaria Vaccine Candidate

Malaria kills approximately 900,000 people a year worldwide and sickens tens of millions more, most of them children living in Sub-Saharan Africa. A safe and effective vaccine is an important component of a comprehensive malaria control program and could potentially save hundreds of thousands of lives. RTS,S (also known as RTS,S/AS) is the most clinically advanced malaria vaccine candidate in the world. In clinical trials, it was the first to demonstrate that it can protect young children and infants in malaria-endemic areas against infection and clinical disease caused by Plasmodium falciparum, the most deadly species of the malaria parasite. The RTS,S malaria vaccine candidate was created in 1987 by scientists working at GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals

God damn Scum bags they could be saving lives! Profit seems to be the only thing that matters anymore.

I have an even better malaria treatment. Actually, bartenders are probably very familiar with this.

Ever look at the ingredients on a bottle of tonic water. An ingredient that is added to it is called Quinine. It is extracted from the bark of the cinchona tree.

Again, another remedy without the need of big pharma.

Quinine - wiki

It is actually strange that Big Pharma is deciding to shelve this drug due to its feasibility. Why did they initiate the research and phase trials in the first place? I read above that someone was thinking about population control. Well that's a dicy problem cuz it infringes on people's rights to live and whether or not a natural death is really natural when you have the power to prevent it.

Originally posted by Skewed
I have an even better malaria treatment. Actually, bartenders are probably very familiar with this.

Ever look at the ingredients on a bottle of tonic water. An ingredient that is added to it is called Quinine. It is extracted from the bark of the cinchona tree.

Again, another remedy without the need of big pharma.

Quinine - wiki

also without the adverse side-effects of the drugs produced by big pharma which cause further health problems..
Human life means nothing to the corporations only profit and they dont give a damn about how they earn that profit.
Interesting that they've developed a vaccine against malaria but will stick to using tcm (traditional chinese medicine) treatments for the few patients I see with malaria as tcm works and no negative side-effects unlike western medicine thats just as likely to kill as it is to cure..

Originally posted by Imlookingthroughyou
God damn Scum bags they could be saving lives! Profit seems to be the only thing that matters anymore.

If you'd stopped to READ the article, it says that although GlaxoSmithKline know they will not make a profit, they will continue to develop it anyway.

Mr Witty said Glaxo has "no intention of making a profit" from the vaccine. Saying Glaxo was committed to pricing the shot as low as possible, he said they will charge only the cost of manufacture plus a 5pc mark-up, which will be ploughed back into researching tropical diseases.

Originally posted by Skewed
Again, another remedy without the need of big pharma.

Quinine - wiki

It only treats 1 type of malaria with any great effectiveness, and is more toxic than most modern anti malarial drugs.

None-the-less it IS actually still used wher appropriate - which you would know if you had read the links in that article.

Here's a list of the common anti-malarial drugs

reply to post by alfa1


Well, they certainly are not doing it out of the goodness of their hearts.
They are getting something out of it.

reply to post by Skewed


Good publicity, showing up CT's as irrational - that's probably more than enough

Did you READ the article before posting it OP? And likewise to the responders (except one ) did you read the article presented? Because it states the exact OPPOSITE.

They are making the vaccine as cheap as possible so it will be more available.

Mr Witty said Glaxo has "no intention of making a profit" from the vaccine. Saying Glaxo was committed to pricing the shot as low as possible, he said they will charge only the cost of manufacture plus a 5pc mark-up, which will be ploughed back into researching tropical diseases.

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
Big pharma never does anything unless it is profitable....

Bill Gates admits to supporting population reduction and then donates billions to a fund ...

UN caught red handed sterilizing women without consent: link.

UNICEF has been embroiled in a controversy over sterilizing agents in vaccines. LifeSiteNews.com reported that in 1995, the Catholic Women's League of the Philippines won a court order halting a UNICEF anti-tetanus program because the vaccine had been laced with B-hCG, which when given in a vaccine permanently causes women to be unable to sustain a pregnancy. The Supreme Court of the Philippines found the surreptitious sterilization program had already vaccinated three million women, aged 12 to 45. B-hCG-laced vaccine was also found in at least four other developing countries.

Bill gates funding sterilization technology: link.

Two words: sterilization, vaccines. Look for yourself.


Eugenics has not died, it just has a nicer face:

“…The first task is population control at home. How do we go about it? Many of my colleagues feel that some sort of compulsory birth regulation would be necessary to achieve such control. One plan often mentioned involves the addition of temporary sterilants to water supplies or staple food. Doses of the antidote would be carefully rationed by the government to produce the desired population size.” – Paul Ehrlich (Obama's "Science Tsar"), The Population Bomb, p.130-131

“If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.” - Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh, leader of the World Wildlife Fund – quoted in “Are You Ready For Our New Age Future?,” Insiders Report, American Policy Center, December ’95

“A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.” – Ted Turner – CNN founder and UN supporter – quoted in the McAlvany Intelligence Advisor, June ’96

“The world has a cancer, and that cancer is man.” – Merton Lambert, former spokesman for the Rockefeller foundation

“In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. It is a horrible thing to say, but it’s just as bad not to say it.” – Jacques Cousteau

Originally posted by pianopraze

UNICEF has been embroiled in a controversy over sterilizing agents in vaccines. LifeSiteNews.com reported that in 1995, the Catholic Women's League of the Philippines won a court order halting a UNICEF anti-tetanus program ...

I'd heard of this before, and after refreshing my memory on google, I'm still no clearer.
The *ONLY* source for this reported court order is a report by "lifesitenews.com". Every other site that mentions it always points back to this lifesitenews story.
So I cant find...
- was the court order overturned?
- did the program continue?
- what was the amount of B-hCG
- is the story even true, at all?


Edit - found more info.
Like most urban legends on the net, this one is bogus. Losely based on true events, but the important thing to note here is that the court order was soon lifted, the program continued on, because the alleged hCG in the vaccine simply didnt exist.
factsheet

Originally posted by pianopraze

UN caught red handed sterilizing women without consent: link.

UNICEF has been embroiled in a controversy over sterilizing agents in vaccines. LifeSiteNews.com reported that in 1995, the Catholic Women's League of the Philippines won a court order halting a UNICEF anti-tetanus program because the vaccine had been laced with B-hCG, which when given in a vaccine permanently causes women to be unable to sustain a pregnancy. The Supreme Court of the Philippines found the surreptitious sterilization program had already vaccinated three million women, aged 12 to 45. B-hCG-laced vaccine was also found in at least four other developing countries.

wow!! I wanted to have alook at this but the closest I could get to something from 1995 about it was this article from 2002 which has that same paragraph in it.

So I went to a site that says it has all the Philippines SC cases, and looked through 1995 but couldn't see anything that looked like such a case.

It is widely reported - but they all seem to be direct copies of the link I posted above from 2002.

Edit to add - I found this article on tetanus vaccine contamination in the Philippine which is the right era - it has the right vaccine, mentions other countries, and the same hormone - but no mention of court cases, and it is WHO in the gun rather than UNICEF, and of course the hormone in question does NOT cause permanent sterility at all - it is normally created by embryo's when a woman is pregnant, and is metabolised by the liver.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
It is widely reported - but they all seem to be direct copies of the link I posted above from 2002.

By now you've probably read my post above yours showing the real truth of this story.
Its now been 16 and a half years since there was found to be no truth in the allegations of sterilisation in the vaccine but the anti-vaccine crowd still havnt caught onto that yet.
I suggest its because they dont want to know.
It took me about 16 and a half minutes to find the story was bogus, so there's no justification for the story to still be floating around the net all these years later.
Unless they simply dont care about lying.

Usually the kind of people that can survive in malaria prone areas tend to have thalassemia, and as such, a vaccine isn't really necessary unless you're perfectly healthy and don't have a genetic background from such an area.

en.wikipedia.org...

I think they're up to something else.

Originally posted by alfa1

Originally posted by Imlookingthroughyou
God damn Scum bags they could be saving lives! Profit seems to be the only thing that matters anymore.

If you'd stopped to READ the article, it says that although GlaxoSmithKline know they will not make a profit, they will continue to develop it anyway.

Mr Witty said Glaxo has "no intention of making a profit" from the vaccine. Saying Glaxo was committed to pricing the shot as low as possible, he said they will charge only the cost of manufacture plus a 5pc mark-up, which will be ploughed back into researching tropical diseases.

Why should I read the article - the title gives me all the information I need to hold an opinion!

Ooops. Perhaps not. I thought the same as him until I read the article.

Did you notice the 1 comment? Sick! "Doesn't that mean 400,000 more people to feed each year" - How can anyone think like that? Breaks my heart.

I am scepticle that this is just a good news story for them lead by their marketing department. They are still evil in most of the other work they do.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by Skewed

 

Good publicity, showing up CT's as irrational - that's probably more than enough

edit on 18-10-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)

Ah, but they're doing exactly what CT's have been saying for years that they would not do... and we all know CT's are never wrong, so it must be part of a conspiracy!

reply to post by alfa1


Um... there is tons of evidence that vaccines are being used for sterilization. I don't have all the refernce at my finger tips, but the UN has been found guilty. And thermesol (mercury) is a cause also...

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
H1N1 vaccine linked to 700% increase in miscarriages
Ten Things You're Not Supposed to Know about the Swine Flu Vaccine
Doctors speak out about H1N1 Vaccine Dangers
Avian and swine flu vaccines cause sterility and death

I get into it, and other provide more information in this thread: ats thread link.