|
|
2#
楼主 |
发表于 2010-9-18 09:57:48
|
只看该作者
5.2 身份匿名、利益联系没有公开披露
向对世卫组织起关键决定性作用的紧急委员会的16人身份保持匿名，并且他们与制药业的利益联系没有公开披露。尽管《英国医学杂志》/新闻调查团一再要求世卫组织公开信息，但世卫组织没有提供任何关于相关专家利益冲突细节。16人紧急委员会来自八个国家，澳大利亚，加拿大，智利，日本，墨西哥，西班牙，英国，美国。只有主席是公开身份，他是John MacKenzie教授。《英国医学期刊》/新闻调查团可以证实：Arnold Monto[阿诺德芒托]博士，美国密歇根大学公共卫生学院[the University of Michigan School of Public Health] ；John Wood[约恩伍德]博士，英国生物标准和控制研究所 [the National Institute for Biological Standards and Control in the U.K.]；Masato Tashiro博士，东京的世卫组织合作流感监测和研究中心主任[the WHO collaborating center for surveillance and research on influenza]；这三人都是紧急委员会成员。
5.3 修改定义、夸大病例、新闻造假
另一项助长阴谋论因素是危机沟通方式。没有人质疑不明朗情况下沟通或大流行危机形式下沟通的困难。但一个世界级危机沟通专家，Gerd Gigerenzer，德国马克斯普朗克研究所自适应行为与认知中心主管主任，告诉英国医学杂志/新闻调查局：“问题不在于沟通不确定性是困难的，而是不沟通才具有不确定性。世卫组织估计有20亿疑似H1N1病例，没有科学依据。我们对疫苗接种的好处和危害知道很少。世界卫生组织坚持20亿疑似H1N1病例这个估计，即使在澳大利亚和新西兰冬季后显示，1000人只有一到两个人感染[H1N1]。最后但并非最不重要的，它改变了大流行的确切定义。“ Another factor that has fuelled the conspiracy theories is the manner in which risk has been communicated. No one disputes the difficulty of communicating an uncertain situation or the concept of risk in a pandemic situation. But one world expert in risk communication, Gerd Gigerenzer, director of the Centre for Adaptive Behaviour and Cognition at the Max Planck Institute in Germany, told the BMJ/The Bureau: “The problem is not so much that communicating uncertainty is difficult, but that uncertainty was not communicated. There was no scientific basis for the WHO’s estimate of 2 billion for likely H1N1 cases, and we knew little about the benefits and harms of the vaccination. The WHO maintained this 2 billion estimate even after the winter season in Australia and New Zealand showed that only about one to two out of 1000 people were infected. Last but not least, it changed the very definition of a pandemic.” [WHO and the pandemic flu “conspiracies”]
在英国，卫生部最初宣布，可以预料约65 000人死亡。在此期间，2010年开始，这一估计被降级为只有1 000人死亡。到2010年1月，不到5000人被登记为H1N1流感患者，只有360人死于H1N1流感。在2010年3月，报告人有机会会见Gillian Merron，国家公共卫生部长，以讨论国家一级如何处理H1N1流感病毒，并获悉，一个独立的内部调查由内阁办公室正在进行，结果将在2010年6月以后报告。 In the United Kingdom , the Department of Health initially announced that around 65 000 deaths were to be expected. In the meantime, by the start of 2010, this estimate was downgraded to only 1 000 fatalities.
By January 2010, fewer than 5 000 persons had been registered as having caught the disease and about 360 deaths had been noted. In March 2010, the rapporteur had the occasion to meet with Gillian Merron, Minister of State for Public Health, in order to discuss the handling of the H1N1 influenza at national level, and was informed that an independent internal investigation by the Cabinet Office was underway, the results
of which would be reported after June 2010.[
注2，见The handling of the H1N1 pandemic: more transparency needed 3月23日 版本]
一些科学界成员开始担心，当世卫组织迅速转向[宣布]大流行6级水平时候，实际上流感大流行呈现出相对温和症状。刚好在H1N1流感大流行声明被高度关切之前，大流行级别定义改变。由沃尔夫冈医生，流行病学家和德国的前国会议员，在 2010年1月26日 听证会强调，目前大流行宣布可能只是通过改变大流行定义，降低其申报门槛造成。A number of members of the scientific community became concerned when WHO rapidly moved towards pandemic level 6 at a time when the influenza presented relatively mild symptoms. This combined with the change in the definition of pandemic levels just before the declaration of the H1N1 pandemic heightened concerns. As Dr Wolfgang Wodarg, German epidemiologist and former member of the Assembly, highlighted at the public hearing on 26 January 2010, the declaration of the current pandemic was only made possible by changing the definition of a pandemic and by lowering the threshold for its declaration. [见The handling of the H1N1 pandemic: more transparency needed 6月7日 版本]
“Pandemic Influenza Preparedness and Response: A WHO Guidance Document” (new title) was updated in May 2009. Notwithstanding these assertions, there is clear evidence that changes were made and that, most importantly, the former criteria of ‘impact and severity’ of an epidemic in terms of the number of infections and deaths was no longer considered relevant in the updated document24. In other words, the pandemic could be declared without the need to show that it was likely to be severe in terms of its impact on the population (for example regarding severity of illness and death). The definition before 4 May 2009 was worded as follows: “An influenza pandemic occurs when a new influenza virus appears against which the human population has no immunity, resulting in epidemics worldwide with enormous numbers of deaths and illness. With the increase in global transport, as well as urbanization and overcrowded conditions, epidemics due the new influenza virus are likely to quickly take hold around the world”, whilst the same definition became the following on WHO’s website after this date: “A disease epidemic occurs when there are more cases of that disease than normal. A pandemic is a worldwide epidemic of a disease. An influenza pandemic may occur when a new influenza virus appears against which the human population has no immunity …. Pandemics can be either mild or severe in the illness and death they cause, and the severity of a pandemic can change over the course of that pandemic”.Shortly afterwards, WHO spokeswoman Nathalie Boudou justified the change by saying that the “old” definition was in “error” and had been removed from the WHO website. She stated that the correct definition was that a "pandemic indicated outbreaks in at least two of the regions into which WHO divides the world, but has nothing to do with the severity of the illnesses or the number of deaths”.25 These subsequent definitions and comments presented at a time when the pandemic was imminent were confusing for both public health professionals involved and attentive observers amongst the European public at large. [见The handling of the H1N1 pandemic: more transparency needed 6月7日 版本]
世卫组织继续断言，大流行基本定义从未改变。只是大流行警戒级别描述修改,在“流感大流行性的防备和反应：世卫组织指导文件”（新名称）文件在2009年5月更新。尽管这些说法，但有明确证据表明，确实改变了，而且最重要的是，以前关于流行病标准的“影响及严重程度在感染及死亡人数方面，并没有在2009年5月更新文件中考虑。换句话说，宣布大流行疫情可以不考虑严重程度（例如致病及死亡数量）。该定义在2009年4月之前，措辞如下：“流感大流行发生时，会出现一个新流感病毒，人类完全没有免疫力，导致世界范围流行，产生巨量的致病及死亡数量。随着全球运输增加，以及城市化和拥挤条件下，由于新流感病毒可能会迅速传播世界各地导致大流行瘟疫”，然而5月4日之后在世卫组织网站同样定义变成这样：“一个疾病流行，当这种疾病病例比正常更多时。流感大流行将可能发生，当一个新流感病毒出现而人类完全没有免疫力...。大流行可以是温和的也可能是严重的在造成疾病和死亡方面，大流行严重程度可以改变在大流行其间。[去掉产生巨量的致病及死亡数量这一最最关键标准！！！！！！] 不久之后，世卫组织发言人Nathalie Boudou辩解说，“旧”的定义是“错误”，并且已经被删除从世卫组织网站上。她说，正确的定义是，“大流行，至少在世卫组织划分的世界两个地区，但和疾病或死亡的数量无关”。以后的定义及大流行要暴发前说出现的评论使欧洲相关公众健康专业人员和细心观察家困惑不解。WHO continues to assert that the basic definition of a pandemic was never changed. Only the description of pandemic alert levels was revised when the document “Pandemic Influenza Preparedness and Response: A WHO Guidance Document” (new title) was updated in May 2009. Notwithstanding these assertions, there is clear evidence that changes were made and that, most importantly, the former criteria of ‘impact and severity’ of an epidemic in terms of the number of infections and deaths was no longer considered relevant in the updated document24. In other words, the pandemic could be declared without the need to show that it was likely to be severe in terms of its impact on the population (for example regarding severity of illness and death). The definition before 4 May 2009 was worded as follows: “An influenza pandemic occurs when a new influenza virus appears against which the human population has no immunity, resulting in epidemics worldwide with enormous numbers of deaths and illness. With the increase in global transport, as well as urbanization and overcrowded conditions, epidemics due the new influenza virus are likely to quickly take hold around the world”, whilst the same definition became the following on WHO’s website after this date: “A disease epidemic occurs when there are more cases of that disease than normal. A pandemic is a worldwide epidemic of a disease. An influenza pandemic may occur when a new influenza virus appears against which the human population has no immunity …. Pandemics can be either mild or severe in the illness and death they cause, and the severity of a pandemic can change over the course of that pandemic”.Shortly afterwards, WHO spokeswoman Nathalie Boudou justified the change by saying that the “old” definition was in “error” and had been removed from the WHO website. She stated that the correct definition was that a "pandemic indicated outbreaks in at least two of the regions into which WHO divides the world, but has nothing to do with the severity of the illnesses or the number of deaths”.25 These subsequent definitions and comments presented at a time when the pandemic was imminent were confusing for both public health professionals involved and attentive observers amongst the European public at large. [见The handling of the H1N1 pandemic: more transparency needed 6月7日版本] |
|
IP卡
狗仔卡
发表于 2010-9-18 09:55:03
收藏
提升卡
置顶卡
沉默卡
喧嚣卡
变色卡
显身卡