Following the suggestions of her strong emergency committee, WHO General-Director Margaret Chan now officially declares the swine flu epidemic to be over. This official statement was made 15 months after an allegedly new flu virus H1N1 was notified in Mexico and after having alerted a pandemic in June 2009. According to official data, 18,400 humans have fallen victim to the flu since spring 2009 in about 200 countries. That appears impressing at first sight , but is however little in comparison to the number of humans, who suffer with the cold season influenza-like infections year-in, year-out. To say nothing about the million-number of victims of a “real” influenza epidemic. The official statistics of the WHO thus confirms the view that H1N1 is a rather harmless variant of the summer flu.
As I here have already analysed in detail, it was already clear at the beginning of this year that the European governments, who ordered substantially more inoculation doses than necessary for a reasonable inoculation ratio of the population from pharmaceutical companies with reference to the WHO and the ‘precaution principle’ embodied in the Lisbon Treaty of the European Union, would be stuck with 90% of their expensively paid vaccine. Because the authorities were not able to convince ordinary consumers of the danger despite fearmongering in the mass media. Rumors and conspiracy theories on purposeful production of the virus in US military laboratories or the felting of WHO advisors with the vaccine manufacturers GlaxoSmithKline and Roche were surely reasons for the attitude of the population. In addition, the lack of credibility of the World Health Organization seems to have existed already before.
Only a few years ago the critical US author James Surowiecki trained at Hayek had presented the decision-making processes within the WHO in his best-seller ‘The wisdom of crowds’ as an example of smart collective decision making. In the meantime however, the political cartelisation of medical science and pharmaceutical as well as food industry with their clear focus on the ‘precaution principle’ has progressed. Thus, more and more WHO decisions (not least within the ‘nutrition and health’ sector) meet the requirements of the Political Correctness, which however mocks the common sense of the majority. No wonder that the reputation of the WHO increasingly approaches the one of the UN.