Little Confidence

Over the past few weeks I’ve been steadily downgrading, in my own mind, the threat posed by Ebola. Because while it seems to be highly contagious (and maybe slightly airborne) in its final stages, it doesn’t seem to be particularly contagious prior to that stage. The only people who caught the disease (so far) in Dallas were a couple of nurses caring for the Liberian patient. None of the people that the man met or shared a flat with prior to his admission to hospital seem to have developed the disease. So, while it looks like doctors and nurses need better protection, rigorous and forceful measures to isolate Ebola patients should act to stem the progress of the disease outside West Africa.

But I have little confidence that either the WHO or the CDC or the NHS are up to the job. In the first place, while the WHO has admitted that it failed to respond to the Ebola epidemic, it’s now blaming its own ‘incompetent’ West African offices. The same buck-passing has been going on in the USA, with Tom Frieden being very quick to blame the Dallas nurses for not following the correct protocols.

“At some point there was a breach in protocol,” Frieden said. “That breach in protocol resulted in this infection.”

Worse still, President Obama has now appointed a political operative, Ron Klain, as Ebola “czar”.

If Ron Klain sounds familiar to you, it’s because he has a long political pedigree. He has no medical, scientific, or federal agency administrative expertise, but he has a whole lot of political experience.

So Obama is going to treat Ebola as a political problem rather than a health threat. And everyone else is going to blame everybody but themselves for any further failures. He’s probably doing this because the USA is just weeks away from mid-term elections.

So “rigorous and forceful measures” aren’t going to be taken. It will all be spin, perception management, and buck-passing, at least until November 4.

But it’s not just that. This week WHO Director General Margaret Chan gave priority to attending an antismoking conference in Moscow.

“Yes, Ebola is truly an issue of international concern,” Dr. Chan told reporters in Russia, “but tobacco—if we put the evidence on the table—tobacco control is still the most cost-effective and efficient way of reducing unnecessary diseases and deaths arising from using such harmful products.”

And in the UK Lord Darzi has just been busy proposing a London park smoking bans in response to

the “major public health crises” of smoking and obesity.

And Tom Frieden was NYC mayor Michael Bloomberg’s chief architect of the city’s smoking ban:

Dr. Thomas R. Frieden, the city’s health commissioner, has turned out to be an active policy advocate among the city’s department heads, the outspoken architect of some of the Bloomberg administration’s more controversial policies. Although Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg is more closely associated with a law that bans smoking citywide, the legislation was actually developed by Dr. Frieden, who was also given responsibility for helping to push it through the City Council.

They’re all antismoking activists. And clearly, in their own minds, they regard their principal task as that of fighting the fictional “global tobacco epidemic” and the “obesity crisis” rather than any real contagious disease. Which is, of course, why the West African Ebola epidemic is now out of control. How can people like this be expected to be of any use whatsoever when confronted with a real epidemic?

But there’s also political correctness.

I’ll tell you our problem: Much of our political class is simply uncomfortable with the idea that border and immigration controls should be used vigorously and unapologetically to protect Americans. You can hear the objections now: It would be xenophobic, it might stigmatize West Africans, those countries will object to our State Department that they’re being discriminated against.

And what applies in the USA also applies in the UK and EU, of course. The attitude is exemplified by a guest on a US TV show saying:

“How dare we turn our backs on Liberia, given the fact that this was a country that was founded in the 1820s – 1830s because of American slavery. We have a responsibility to stay connected with them, and help them see this through.”

Add it all up, and what you’ve got is a major Ebola epidemic which, in the absence of politically-incorrect firewalls, is going to be repeatedly flown into the USA and Europe on unrestricted commercial airline flights for the next 6 months or more. And when it does arrive, it’s going to be met by a medical establishment which is fully engaged in fighting the entirely imaginary “global tobacco epidemic” and “obesity crisis”, and which will very quickly pass the buck for any failures onto everyone else but themselves. Add also ordinary incompetence, ignorance, and bureaucratic inertia, and it’ll get even worse. In fact, they can already see it coming:

Ebola will almost certainly hit London, Boris Johnson has warned.

Finally, H/T Brigitte, look at what’s written on the wall of Redemption Hospital in Monrovia (click on pic to watch the video):

clear-the-airYes: “Clear the air, stop smoking.” And next to that a smiling face saying, “I’ve quit smoking.” Isn’t it good to know that they’ve got their priorities right?


About Frank Davis

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

64 Responses to Little Confidence

  1. harleyrider1978 says:

    Sitz back and watches the worldwide Implosion of Public Health Fanaticism………..

  2. wobbler2012 says:

    I’m hoping by now that someone has added a cigarette or cigar to that chaps mouth. :@)

  3. jaxthefirst says:

    ”They’re all antismoking activists.”

    Of course they are. Anyone of any status in these hopeless organisations is. Anyone with a modicum of common-sense, tolerance, or a balanced viewpoint has long been ousted! And until such a time as people with a more realistic perspective on the world are re-instated, these useless would-be “world saviours” will go on chasing pointless initiatives whilst all around them millions of people will continue to get sick and die, and diseases of all varieties will zoom round the planet at breakneck speed. Oh well – all grist for the Eugenics mill, I guess.

  4. harleyrider1978 says:

    More secret meetings……

    Regulators Are Gauging Health of Europe’s Banks, and the Remedy May Sting a Little

    FRANKFURT — The global market turmoil is a vivid reminder that the European crisis didn’t go away — it has just been lying dormant.

    One big reason is that authorities never dealt with the dysfunctional banking system. And investors are increasingly concerned that more problems might be lurking in the banks’ books.

    The European Central Bank is trying to restore confidence with a deep dive into the banks to determine which are in good shape, which need to shore up their finances and which should be shut down. But the results, which are set to be released next weekend, may further rattle the markets if banks unexpectedly have to write down bad loans and quickly raise capital.

    Officials say that the short-term pain is necessary to put the European economy back on track. Regulators in the United States forced a similar catharsis on American banks in 2009, helping set the stage for the current recovery.

    The fragmented eurozone took a more timid approach. A review in 2011, conducted by another regulator, gave passing grades to banks in Belgium and Portugal that later imploded, casting doubt on the stability of the entire European financial system.

    Protesters ahead of an E.C.B. meeting.Credit Alessandro Garofalo/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

    Europe is paying the price. The uncertainty has made it difficult for banks to raise funds, creating a severe shortage of credit in some regions. Since businesses cannot obtain loans to invest in equipment or hire people, growth is at a standstill and unemployment remains high.

    The best way to create confidence “is to recognize loans that are bad and write them off, ” said William White, the former economic adviser to the Bank for International Settlements, the bank for central banks. The risk in not doing so, he said, is a cycle of stagnation like in Japan.

    Doubts, too, persist about whether the European Central Bank president, Mario Draghi, will make the bold moves necessary to revive the moribund economy and combat the deflationary trend. While he has unveiled an aggressive plan to buy bonds and pump money into the economy, details have been limited. That vacuum has only fed market concerns about the weakness in the global economy.

    “You could argue the falloff of the eurozone economy is at the epicenter of this,” said James W. Paulsen, chief investment strategist at Wells Fargo Asset Management. With the current weakness, investors will now be paying close attention to the verdict of the bank review. “Three or four weeks ago, no one in the U.S. would have cared,” he said.

    Europe’s new banking overseer, Danièle Nouy, has vowed that the E.C.B. bank tests will be tough.

    The review is part of a broader effort to create a uniform system of regulation for Europe’s biggest banks, replacing a country-by-country patchwork of supervision that the financial crisis exposed as woefully ineffective. The new pan-European regulator, the so-called Single Supervisory Mechanism that will officially take charge on Nov. 4, has the broad powers to curtail risky behavior and impose penalties.

    The head of the group, Ms. Nouy, a lifelong civil servant steeped in esoteric banking rules, has been on a hiring spree, helping expand a small army of civil servants and outside consultants to scrutinize banks’ books. An estimated 6,000 people are involved in the review.

    Compared with previous efforts, the E.C.B is taking a more comprehensive look, sifting through about 135,000 loan files at 130 of the largest banks in the eurozone as well as Lithuania, which will become the 19th country in the currency union next year. That amounts to 85 percent of banks’ outstanding loans and other assets, according to the E.C.B.

    The banks will also undergo a so-called stress test to see if they could withstand a major recession, bond market panic or other adverse situation. The E.C.B. has deliberately kept some of the methodology secret, to prevent banks from trying to manipulate the results.

    Investors “will know what is in the balance sheet of European banks,” Ms. Nouy said in an interview. “I am totally confident about that.”

    The main goal is to expose so-called zombie banks, lenders that have covered up deep problems by issuing new credit to troubled borrowers rather than allowing them to default. Lenders in Italy, Greece and Portugal are under scrutiny, given the weakness in those countries. Banks with a heavy concentration in certain industries, like commercial real estate, also face pressure.

    For example, HSH Nordbank, a lender in Hamburg, has been hit hard by huge loans it made to the depressed shipping industry. The bank’s position is considered particularly perilous because its options are limited if the E.C.B. finds a capital shortfall. HSH does not have a stock market listing, so it cannot sell additional shares, a standard way to raise more money.

    HSH Nordbank declined to comment. But a person with knowledge of the E.C.B. examination said the bank had enough capital to pass the asset quality review.

    Pressure from E.C.B. auditors has already helped uncover grave problems at one bank, Banco Espírito Santo in Portugal, which collapsed in August in the face of fraud accusations. The specter of E.C.B. scrutiny has also prompted a scramble for new capital to provide bigger cushions against potential shocks. Banks including Deutsche Bank of Germany and Monte dei Paschi di Siena of Italy have raised 200 billion euros, or $256 billion, since last summer, according to an E.C.B. estimate.

    To truly clean up the system, Ms. Nouy and the rest of the E.C.B. have to be willing to force some harsh medicine on the banks — and come to a consensus on those decisions. That hasn’t always been easy, at least based on Cyprus’s experience.

    By 2013, the E.C.B. had approved more than €9 billion in loans made by the country’s central bank to its second-largest financial institution, Cyprus Popular Bank. The money flowed to the institution, which later changed its name to Laiki Bank, despite objections by one top official who said it was insolvent, according to previously undisclosed minutes of meetings held by the E.C.B.’s decision-making arm.

  5. harleyrider1978 says:

    Its so sweet watching it all fall apart………….

    Is CDC Hiding Enterovirus Link To Illegal Alien Kids?

    Public Health: A disease that was once rare in the U.S. is killing Americans, and its rise coincides with the tidal wave of unaccompanied minor children arriving from Latin America under our de facto open-border policy.

    Eli Waller, a 4-year-old New Jersey boy, died Sept. 25. He was reportedly fine and healthy when he went to bed but died overnight, with the cause confirmed by the Centers for Disease Control to be enterovirus D-68 (EV-D68), one more casualty in an epidemic that has swept the country seemingly out of nowhere.

    The CDC website reports that from mid-August to Oct. 10, the CDC itself or state authorities confirmed that 691 people in 46 states and the District of Columbia had come down with some sort of respiratory illness caused by EV-D68. Five children, including Eli, died from their infections.

    More than a few observers have noticed that the sudden increase in EV-D68 cases coincides with the rapid rise of unaccompanied minors crossing our porous border. These children, often without proper health screenings, have been distributed throughout the U.S.

    The CDC denies any connection, noting that cases of EV-D68 have occurred in the U.S. for decades, having first been detected in California in 1962.

    “There is no evidence that unaccompanied children brought EV-D68 into the United States, we are not aware of any of these children testing positive for the virus,” the CDC told World Net Daily in an email response to an inquiry into the possible connection.

    It is true that EV-D68 has been in the U.S. at least since 1962. But according to a study done by doctors from the Division of Viral Diseases at the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases published on the CDC’s own website, EV-D68 “is one of the most rarely reported serotypes, with only 26 reports throughout the 36-year study period (1970 through 2006).”

    There’s often a disconnect between coincidence and correlation. But we suspect that the jump in cases from 26 in 36 years to nearly 700 in one year coming at the same time as the open-border influx of improperly screened illegal aliens is more than just a coincidence.

    As the relentless investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson points out, a 2013 study in Virology Journal found human enteroviruses, including EV-D68, present in 3% of nose and throat swab samples taken from children from Latin America under 8 years old with a median age of 3. Related human rhinoviruses were found in 16% of the samples, according to the study authored by a team of virologists headed by Josefina Garcia from U.S. Naval Medical Unit 6 in Lima, Peru.

    Read More At Investor’s Business Daily:

    • beobrigitte says:

      Harley, the link no longer works; however:
      From mid-August to October 17, 2014, CDC or state public health laboratories have confirmed a total of 825 people in 46 states and the District of Columbia with respiratory illness caused by EV-D68.
      Another tobacco-related illness? Perhaps the WHO/Tobacco Control would like to call for another conference (courtesey of the tax payer – in the Bahamas this time; it’s delegates need a bit of time for sun, sea and beach) is in order!

  6. harleyrider1978 says:

    NYT SUNDAY: Confidential memo from Obama pollster predicts ‘crushing Dem losses’ if blacks not engaged in election…

  7. Had the WHO been around in the 14th century (as well as smoking – in the ‘Old World’ – and mass obesity), it makes me wonder what their response would have been to the black death.

    The Black Death, caused by the Yersinia pestis bacterium, first exploded in Europe between 1347 and 1351. The estimated number of deaths ranges from 75 million to 200 million, or between 30 percent and 50 percent of Europe’s population.

    I expect they would have been going on junkets by luxury sailing ships to discuss the tobacco and obesity ‘epidemics’. After all, the Inquisition had started, although not as far-reaching then, but in the following century, Rodrigo de Jerez, credited as the first European smoker, brought his smokes back from Columbus’s first voyage to the Americas…

    “When he returned to Europe in the Niña, he introduced the habit to his home town, Ayamonte. The smoke surrounding him frightened his neighbours: the Spanish Inquisition imprisoned him for his “sinful and infernal” habits, because “only Devil could give a man the power to exhale smoke from his mouth”. When he was released seven years later, smoking tobacco had caught on.” (Wikipedia)

    In the centuries before the Black Death, about 10 percent of people lived past age 70, said study researcher Sharon DeWitte, a biological anthropologist at the University of South Carolina. In the centuries after, more than 20 percent of people lived past that age.

    The longevity boost seen after the plague could have come as a result of the plague weeding out the weak and frail, DeWitte said, or it could have been because of another plague side effect.

    Scientists long believed that the Black Death killed indiscriminately. But DeWitte’s previous research found the plague was like many sicknesses: It preferentially killed the very old and those already in poor health.

    That discovery raised the question of whether the plague acted as a “force of selection, by targeting frail people,” DeWitte said. If people’s susceptibility to the plague was somehow genetic — perhaps they had weaker immune systems, or other health problems with a genetic basis — then those who survived might pass along stronger genes to their children, resulting in a hardier post-plague population.

    There could be method in the apparent madness of the current ill-preparedness of all concerned (or not at all concerned). Another such pandemic would achieve two major objectives of the growing global government: depopulation and fitter people. The sick killed off. Better genetics. A ‘master race’.

    A bit far-fetched. Maybe…

    All quotes in italics from:

  8. beobrigitte says:

    So, while it looks like doctors and nurses need better protection, rigorous and forceful measures to isolate Ebola patients should act to stem the progress of the disease outside West Africa.

    If this had been done a few months back the spread of Ebola would be under control by now.
    The latest I could find on the net:

    “People are dying in greater numbers than we know, according to MSF [Médecins sans Frontières] and WHO officials. Certain departments are refusing to give them the figures – because the lower it is, the more peace of mind they can give people. The truth is that it is still not under control.”

    AND WHO OFFICIALS? How would they know? Which bit of WHO Director General Dr. Chan’s statement gives Ebola a priority?
    “Yes, Ebola is truly an issue of international concern,” Dr. Chan told reporters in Russia, “but tobacco—if we put the evidence on the table—tobacco control is still the most cost-effective and efficient way of reducing unnecessary diseases and deaths arising from using such harmful products.”
    Can Dr. Chan please put the “evidence” on the table, excluding the deaths simply caused by NATURAL ageing processes?

    Dr. Chan’s preoccupation with tobacco control made her miss a few FACTS?
    WHO has admitted that problems with data-gathering make it hard to track the evolution of the epidemic, with the number of cases in the capital, Monrovia, going under-reported. Efforts to count freshly dug graves had been abandoned.

    Counting freshly dug graves? Has the WHO MISSED EVERYTHING or simply is just too busy pushing the tobacco control/life style control agenda?

    And in the UK Lord Darzi has just been busy proposing a London park smoking bans in response to

    the “major public health crises” of smoking and obesity.

    This was put in the media as a matter of urgency whilst this highly secret meeting (the public was kicked out!!!) in Moskow was still ongoing!!! Was the WHO worried that voice might be getting loud for their funds set aside for tobacco control measures to be re-directed to the organisations (e.g. doctors without borders) in the Ebola affected areas? Or was the WHO trying to draw the public’s attention away from it’s utter, utter failure to respond to the first calls for help because tobacco control is more important to it?

    Indeed: Frieden, Bloomberg, Darzi…. all are anti-smoking activists. And they are worried.

    But there’s also political correctness.

    I’ll tell you our problem: Much of our political class is simply uncomfortable with the idea that border and immigration controls should be used vigorously and unapologetically to protect Americans. You can hear the objections now: It would be xenophobic, it might stigmatize West Africans, those countries will object to our State Department that they’re being discriminated against.

    It is ok to discriminate smokers (and of lately, vapers) but it is not ok to attempt to contain a virus that from 53% to 90% of the time kills it’s host?

    Last night, Al Jazeera ran a slot on the production of ZMAPP. (Can’t find the report on the net today, perhaps it has been culled?)
    It sure is a lot cheaper and faster than the by the GATES foundation funded research into the method of culturing genetically modified Chinese Hamster Ovary cells. Perhaps we should put the of-tobacco-plant-scared-anti-smoking-advocates’ minds at rest; the tobacco plant Nicotiana benthamiana is only a ‘cousin’ of the plants Nicotiana tabacum and Nicotiana rustica.

    At the same time, though, it should also be pointed out that the Marburg virus is a ‘cousin’ of the Ebola virus but I suspect that the latter is of no interest to the WHO and the tobacco control industry.

  9. margo says:

    Tobacco control has been going on now for over 40 years. Surely that’s long enough for many lives to have been saved? Can anyone find a graph showing the decrease, year on year, in tobacco-related deaths? There must be one somewhere. I have hunted and failed to find it. As beobrigitte asks, when are they going to put the evidence on the table?
    I have found other graphs and things – showing a steady rise in all cancers over the last 40 years – but absolutely no evidence whatsoever from Tobacco Control people of any reduction in deaths from smoking. Yet there must surely be some, since they keep telling us it’s so successful. It’s a mystery!

    • roobeedoo2 says:

      It’s bollocks and now they’ve put them in a vice and are turning the handle …

    • carol2000 says:

      Are you under the impression that you’re trouncing them merely by proclaiming that you can’t find anything? Forget it. It only makes you look like a low-information rube who somehow missed their abundant propaganda. And do you think they can’t “prove” they’ve supposedly saved lives? This just means that you still don’t have a clue how those claims are concocted. All they have to do is plug data on smoking prevalence and mortality stats into their SAMMEC computer program clone, and it will automatically regurgitate how many are supposedly “smoking related.” They just take the difference between the two levels of smoking prevalence. Any time there is a decline in smoking, it will automatically “find” that there has been a decline in smoking-related deaths – because that is how they pretend to determine these things. Only the most ignorant and naive people believe that they actually count bodies, or that they have to find it on death certificates (as if the multitude of anti-smoker doctors wouldn’t be happy to slap it on anywhere and everywhere).

      • Tom says:

        Actually, I once read somewhere that CDC requests that doctors meet some sort of quota in reporting “death caused by tobacco” – and on their official CDC death certificate form, they indicate a special box, just for that as well as special instructions on the back of their form.

        It can be found at:

        Notice Box # 35, “Did Tobacco Use Contribute To Death?” with the four answers being “Yes”, “No”, “Probably”, “Unknown”. So that question, it cannot go unanswered. It requires some sort of answer there, dependent on how anti-smoking the doctor issuing the certificate wishes to be at the time in assigning blame based on doctor prejudice.

        The instructions indicate that tobacco use “may” contribute to some deaths, so if the attending physician is of the “opinion” it did, then please check “yes”


        Check “Yes” if, in your opinion, the use of tobacco contributed to death. Tobacco use may contribute to deaths due to a wide variety of diseases; for example, tobacco use contributes to many deaths due to emphysema or lung cancer and some heart disease and cancers of the head and neck. Check “No” if, in your clinical judgment, tobacco use did not contribute to this particular death.

        So the entire death certificate process in the US, in regard to “tobacco related” is entirely based on the prejudice of whatever doctor fills out the form based on the words “may” and “opinion” (personal prejudice and arm-twisting by CDC to meet quotas).

        There was a lawsuit a while back, in Pennsylvania. A woman’s husband fell off the roof, off the ladder, to the ground, broke his neck or back, died. The attending doctor checked off it was death “due to tobacco usage” – she sued and won a large settlement.

        • beobrigitte says:

          The REAL twist in this is that the medic who ticks the boxes has to sign the death certificate. The ones who tick “NO” each time (or less than tobacco control demands) may as well leave the profession; he/she will be going no-where.

          Tobacco Control is collecting “data” to provide “proof” of all the tobacco deaths. I would like them to explain the average increase in life span NOW! The number of centenarians has grown rapidly in recent years. Why, when a whiff of passive smoke kills?

      • Some French bloke says:

        “All they have to do is plug data on smoking prevalence and mortality stats into their SAMMEC computer program clone, and it will automatically regurgitate how many are supposedly “smoking related.” They just take the difference between the two levels of smoking prevalence.”

        This last sentence makes it sound as if they automatically deduce declining death rates from lower smoking rates. In fact, what their Procrustean bed (i.e. etiological fractions derived from relative risk levels arrived at in their famous ‘studies’) does adjust is the supposed toxicity of tobacco smoke!
        Hence in the case of two countries similar as regards population levels, life expectancies and population pyramids, SAMMEC comes up with a yearly death toll of 73,000 for France and 115,000 in the UK, in spite of much lower smoking prevalence estimated for Britain (~20% as against ~30%), leaving us to suppose that tobacco use is sizeably less hazardous in France than it is across the Channel. Q.E.D…
        And they also have the extra option to change the level of relative risk, which they are especially tempted to do with regard to women’s rates of ‘tobacco-related’ mortality, which secular trends contradict their hypothesis even more than men’s.

  10. beobrigitte says:

    Just found the latest WHO news release:

    18 October 2014 ¦ MOSCOW – The sixth session of the Conference of the parties (COP6) to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) concluded today in Moscow. Several landmark decisions were adopted in the course of the six-day session, regarded as one of the most successful in the WHO FCTC’s history.

    The Liberians will be pleased to read this, won’t they?

    Parties have taken courageous steps forward in a number of areas and I am pleased by the guidance to the Secretariat to scale up our collaboration with international organizations to reduce tobacco use, while continuing to assist Parties in accelerating the implementation of the Treaty,” said Dr Vera da Costa e Silva, Head of the Convention Secretariat.

    Actually, I thought that secret WHO meeting ended on Friday – if Dr. Chan hadn’t excused herself and already rushed off to Montrovia to see the WHO’s progress of the smoking ban for herself.
    Wouldn’t her presence reassure the population that all will be well with tobacco control measures tightened there?
    These decisions include:

    – Proposals for regulation of smokeless tobacco and water pipe products;
    – Recommendations for entry into force of the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products;
    – Continuing to work on Article 19 on liability of tobacco companies;
    – Articles 17 and 18 principles addressing sustainable alternative livelihoods for tobacco growers;
    – Trade and investment issues related to FCTC implementation;
    – Assessment of the Convention’s impact on tobacco epidemic.

    Never mind Ebola when there is a tobacco “epidemic”?

    • beobrigitte says:

      didn’t close the bracket right… Of course the last sentence:

      Never mind Ebola when there is a tobacco “epidemic”?

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        The WHO’s news releases are about as useful as toilet paper……………..I expect within a very short time like by summer we will start to see a top down restructuring and firing or forced removal of WHO personell and REALIGNMENT of what their actual core mission is and a very heavy hand put to them to stay within their only legal jurisdiction. Disease vectors of bacterial and viral components. Or they will be simply Abolished and a new start over begun. Yes its finally hit MELTDOWN for them.

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          The moe damage control they try and do,the worse it gets and the MSM is all over that ass of the WHO’s………..

  11. beobrigitte says:

    And, for all it is worth:

    18 October 2014

    A WHO internal document recently obtained by some media outlets was the first draft of a small team documenting the chronology of the Ebola outbreak events for future review. This document has not yet been fact-checked or reviewed by WHO staff involved in the initial response to Ebola, and is part of an on-going analysis of our response.

    WHO will not do interviews or explain details on this document until it is completed. WHO believes in transparency and accountability and will release this review when it is fact-checked. For now, WHO’s focus is to obtain the resources needed to successfully fight this Ebola outbreak.

    A full review and analysis of global responses to this, the largest-ever Ebola outbreak in history, will be completed and made public once the outbreak is under control. We are a public health organization and our focus right now must be to stop this outbreak and save lives. We cannot divert our limited resources from the urgent response to do a detailed analysis of the past response. That review will come, but only after this outbreak is over.

    Didn’t the WHO just attend a meeting held in Moskow? The diversion of ‘limited resources’ for utter nonsense is justified?

    A full review and analysis of global responses to this, the largest-ever Ebola outbreak in history, will be completed and made public once the outbreak is under control.

    In short, they are looking to blame the world for the WHO’s utter failure and negligence? If it is the world governments who have to bail the WHO out (which is what I read into this “news”) we can safely dissolve this organisation as it is nothing more than a money drain.

    • nisakiman says:

      WHO believes in transparency and accountability

      Which is, of course, why their COP6 junket was conducted behind closed doors with both public and press excluded. Yes, very transparent.

  12. Simon says:

    Has anyone mentioned yet that the most effective treatment against Ebola (Zmapp) is grown in.. tobacco? It was just reported on BBC News and I had to rewind and watch it again to make sure I’d heard correctly. That must be terribly inconvenient for WHO.

    • Frank Davis says:

      It’s been mentioned several times. For instance, here. What’s good about it is that it’s not just from a tobacco plant, but the work of evil tobacco companies:

      The small company of 9 employees released the experimental drug ZMapp which until now has only been used on infected animals. A subsidiary of Reynolds manufactures the treatment for Mapp from tobacco plants.

      Why hasn’t ASH been campaigning to stop it?

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        Its been out for over 2 months now,just that the MSM is finally picking up on it for tobacco and zmapp…………Yes the Nazis are losing their asses over it.

        • carol2000 says:

          They’re losing absolutely nothing due to ZMapp. It won’t remove a single smoking ban or roll back a single cigarette tax anywhere, because it doesn’t refute a single lie. They could as well have been growing it in dandelions for all its relevance to smokers’ rights.

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          Carol they grow it in tobacco because it has the so called enzymes needed and the structure to mass produce the drug in vast quantity.
          It isn’t just zmapp busting the Nazis asses its that entire anti-agenda smoking their asses.

          Lifestyle medicine they have been pushing andwasting money on tather than their core mission. That’s what they are getting busted on and all the junk science of anti-smoking if you’ve watched the news and internet. These bastards are being kicked everywhere over it all. They are in total defense mode that’s not standing up…………The political agenda of lifestyles is over. Just give it time. They’ve lost.

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          They aren’t stupid they knew the political will for the bans was already dying that’s why they’ve been in fever pitch to pass as many bans and stupidity as they can for the last year. Now they’ve even got a few calling for entire downtown districts to be SMOKEFREE ZONES! Insanity knows no bounds even while the ship goes under the waves………….

    • Rose says:

      Further details

      Drug given to American Ebola patients is produced in Kentucky using tobacco plants
      4th August

      “The serum wasn’t manufactured but grown — in a greenhouse full of genetically modified tobacco plants.

      Kentucky BioProcessing, acquired by Reynolds American in January, conducts contract research and development for San Diego-based Mapp Biopharmaceutical, said David Howard, spokesman for RAI Ser vices, a subsidiary of Reynolds American.”

      “In 2007, Mapp, working under contract for the U.S. Department of Defense and other federal agencies, engaged KBP to develop a process to manufacture a compound designed to be a post-exposure treatment for Ebola virus.”

      Ebola breakthrough as new drug cures all monkeys in trial
      29th August

      “The experimental drug ZMapp has cured all monkeys infected with Ebola in a new clinical trial, leading to hope that a treatment for the disease has finally been found.
      “The treated monkeys were exposed to a lethal level of Ebola virus before receiving three doses of ZMapp starting three, four and five days after infection.

      The treatment reversed Ebola symptoms including excessive bleeding, rashes, and liver damage.

      Three weeks after they were infected, no trace of the virus could be detected in the animals’ blood.
      Untreated monkeys all succumbed to the virus by day eight after infection.

      One drawback of the research was that it used a version of the virus different from the Guinea strain responsible for the current outbreak, which was not available at the time. But lab tests have shown that ZMapp does block the Guinea strain from replicating.”

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        Up in Owensboro ky not far from my great grandmothers tobacco farms she had in SEEBREE KY…………The mayor there is a Total Nazi.

  13. Frank Davis says:

    This seems fairly topical:


  14. harleyrider1978 says:

    For public health, let them vape cake

    E-cig flavors probably help people quit smoking

    BY Jacob Sullum /



  15. harleyrider1978 says:

    In New York, a Nose for Hidden Compartments and Cigarettes

    Cigarettes are often bought out of state to be sold illegally in New York. Bodegas try to hide them in secret compartments. But detectives find them.

  16. harleyrider1978 says:


    Public health vs private life: It was never going to end with smoking | Conservative Home

    There is nothing uniquely evil about tobacco: the precedents set in the crusade against it will be used…

    One of the most dangerous fallacies commonly encountered in democratic politics is the idea that there exists a non-ideological, objectively correct way to rule over people. This notion finds its most receptive amongst political elites, where it manifests as technocracy: the flattering, alluring, and poisonously undemocratic notion of government by ‘experts’.

    I have touched on this subject a couple of times before when discussing the bizarre modern tendency to set judges on a pedestal and, by sincerely advocating the elevation of their opinions over the will of our elected representatives, treat them as if they had access to some sort of revealed truth. But advocates of judicial rule will have to up their game considerably if they are to match the achievements of the public health movement.

    Public health is the most astonishingly effective technocratic project that I can think of in the modern world. It is a doctrine so broadly embedded in our ruling elite that most of them probably don’t realise that it is a doctrine at all. Bedecked in the vestments of science and “evidence based policy making”, it provides a 21st Century justification to very 19th Century attitudes towards the proper relationship between rulers and ruled. You can read more about how this is done in this IEA report.

    In light of this week’s attempt to ban smoking in London parks (happily rejected by Boris Johnson) it is worth reminding ourselves both of the scope of the public health movement’s ambitions, for the sake of those who have been blasé about the targeting of smokers, and of its true nature as a political movement.

    In this and a companion article I will attempt to set out first why the public health crusade was never going to stop end with smoking, and second why it is not justified in persecuting tobacco in any case.

    The most important thing to bear in mind is that public health has no regard for individual choice. As a movement which measures its success largely in averaged outcomes and national statistics, its focus is not on minimising harm to third parties or helping individuals to make informed choices – although it will employ those arguments – but on controlling people to force its desired outcomes.

    Boris’ quaint notion that there is no justification in preventing him lying on the grass with a cigar because he was harming nobody but himself will cut no ice with the public health movement. It’s bad for his health, so it should be stopped. Many, probably most, public health activists make no secret of their intention to prohibit tobacco.

    But their ambitions are not limited to tobacco. Some months ago there was an outbreak of press hysterics about sugar, the ‘new nicotine’. This should have surprised nobody. There was always going to be a ‘new nicotine’, just as when sugar taxes have tripled the price of a Yorkie bar and we’re drinking cola from olive-green ‘plain cans’ with pictures of clogged arteries on them there would be a ‘new sugar’.

    For years it has suited both sides of the public health debate to pick on cigarettes. Lovers of booze, food, or idleness could pretend that there was some particular wickedness in tobacco that warranted making a special case of it, whilst public health activists could establish useful precedents to wield against fresh targets when the time came.

    Come that time has. There are already calls for sugar taxes, and along with calls for a ban on alcohol advertising it is not hard to envision the Coca Cola Santa appearing as strange a cultural phenomenon a generation hence as the Marlboro Man does today. Is it really less wicked or ridiculous, if you accept the logic, for Coca Cola to sponsor the Boris Bikes than for Marlboro to sponsor sports teams?

    Proof of the sheer breadth of the public health movement’s ambitions can be found in Lord Darzi’s call for public spaces to be turned into what one writer describes as “theatres of health, where children only see physically beneficial activities”.

    Of a piece with the smoking ban and other setbacks for freedom of expression, this marks the slow transformation of our public spaces from common areas where free people are expected to rub along and tolerate each other into government spaces where citizens must publicly conform to the state’s virtues, which now come flavoured with a slightly Fascistic* emphasis on physical vigour.

    But this truly creepy authoritarianism is seldom called out as such because the root justification of the public health movement, the concept of “preventable death”, is a work of totalitarian genius. But that, as well examining the idea that physical health is more important than individual choice, is a subject for another time.

    *Capital F, used accurately rather than pejoratively.

    Edit: To be clear, arguments like “the NHS can’t afford to let you smoke” will be addressed in part two. I have not overlooked or avoided them, so please don’t feel compelled to make them in the comments

    • smokingscot says:

      @ Harley,

      They did exactly the same thing in 2009. Used “Conservative Home” as an organ to vaguely hint they might do something about the smoking ban. If memory serves it was to be an objective, independent review of the whole thing.

      “I will attempt to set out first why the public health crusade was never going to stop end with smoking, and second why it is not justified in persecuting tobacco in any case.”

      Some of us swallowed that line five years ago… not this time Squire. No way, no how.

  17. harleyrider1978 says:

    But this truly creepy authoritarianism is seldom called out as such because the root justification of the public health movement, the concept of “preventable death”, is a work of totalitarian genius.

    That hits it right at the crust of the matter!

  18. harleyrider1978 says:

    Via Audrey

    This should represent the quintessential response to assertions that nanny state measures “help the public to make the right ‘choice.'”

  19. harleyrider1978 says:

    Tobacco killjoys are less healthy than the smokers they ban – Financial Times – Vaporizer Stocks

    Spiteful restrictions mean any place meant for pleasure is now off-limits, writes David Hockney ©Getty So the mean-spirited are at it again. I’ll repeat: the mean…

  20. harleyrider1978 says:

    Here’s an Astonishing List of What the Federal Government Funded INSTEAD of Developing an Ebola…

    The NIH has also spent $15,313,372 on cessation studies devoted to every kind of smoker imaginable. Current studies are targeted at American Indians ($2,899,954); Chinese and Vietnamese men ($424,875); postmenopausal women ($4,151,850); the homeless ($558,576);Korean youth ($94,580); young schizophrenics ($397,802); Brazilian women smokers ($955,368);Latino HIV-positive smokers($471,530); and the LGBT community ($2,364,521).

    Yale University is studying how to get “Heavy Drinkers” to stop smoking at a cost of $571,799. Other projects seek to use Twitter to provide “social support to smokers” ($659,469), and yoga ($1,763,048) as a way to quit.”

    Like I said they are being attacked on every front…….heads should be rolling soon………….we will wait and see.

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      As the MSM digs into it,Pharmas name will start to pop up and their hand in the FDA,CDC,NIH,HHS etc……………Pharma grants to keep the federal prohibitionist depts. in money after they wasted all theirs to keep the FRAUD alive and on going.

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        CDC Misled Congress on Spending, Records Show Agency Diverted Funding, Filed False Reports
        By Joe Stephens and Valerie Strauss of the WASHINGTON POST

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          CDC Misled Congress on Spending, Records Show Agency Diverted Funding, Filed False Reports

          By Joe Stephens and Valerie Strauss of the WASHINGTON POST

          WASHINGTON, Feb. 2 — Seven years ago a long-distance runner from New Mexico caught cold, struggled for breath as liquid flooded her lungs, then suddenly died. Her fiancé died five days later, followed by more than two dozen other residents of the American Southwest.

          The Federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention dentified the killer as a previously unknown strain of hantavirus, a mouse-borne disease with a staggering mortality rate. An alarmed Congress responded by giving the CDC up to $7.5 million a year to fight it. At least, Congress thought it did.

          Instead, apparently without asking Congress, the CDC spent much of the money on other programs that the agency thought needed the funds more, interviews and documents show. One official said the total diverted is almost impossible to trace because of CDC bookkeeping practices, but he estimated the diversions involved several million dollars.

          Regardless of the amount, the CDC’s spending practices have troubled officials within the agency and on Capitol Hill. Agencies are supposed to give Congress accurate reports about the spending of taxpayer dollars. But in the past year, disclosures about secret diversions of CDC funds have incensed some members of Congress and fueled debate over who knows best how to spend federal funds ­the lawmakers who hand out the cash or the bureaucrats who run the government day-to-day.

          In the case of hantavirus, records show that once Congress voiced its willingness to fund CDC research, the agency reported year after year that it had spent up to $7.5 million annually battling the deadly germ. Keith Newbold of Colorado, whose 38-year-old wife, Cheri, died from hantavirus two years ago, said the CDC’s decision to redirect research funds “surprises me and disturbs me.” He said victims and their families had waited anxiously for new research into the disease but “we were led to believe the money wasn’t there.”

          Senior CDC officials declined to comment on the hantavirus spending. But the agency acknowledged in an unsigned statement that it had spent an undisclosed amount on other diseases. It said the decision was made under “the budgetary discretion given the director.”

          The hantavirus diversion is strikingly similar to the CDC’s controversial decision to redirect money intended for research into chronic fatigue syndrome ­ a matter that last year led to calls for a criminal investigation. It also bolsters the accounts of CDC scientists who have complained of loose bookkeeping at the $2.4 billion agency, which works to prevent and control diseases.

          An inspector general’s audit last year found that the CDC could not account for or defied congressional intent while spending $12.9 million appropriated to study chronic fatigue syndrome, a debilitating illness characterized by a lack of stamina. While there was no suggestion that the money was stolen or used illegally, Sen. Harry M. Reid, D-Nev., in November asked the Justice Department to investigate whether the agency had violated laws against lying to Congress.

          In the aftermath, the CDC promised to restore lost funds and apologized for “a breach of CDC’s solemn trust.” Director Jeffrey Koplan said at the time that it was an isolated incident and that he knew of no other diversions.

          Yet documents show that 16 months ago, the head of the hantavirus program told an auditor that he was worried because no one outside the Atlanta-based agency knew of his program’s spending practices. He said other CDC managers were scared as well. “Funds were used consistently to cover other things,” explained William Reeves, head of chronic fatigue syndrome research. “That is not a bad way to do things. But you do not lie and hide it.” Reeves exposed the manipulation of chronic fatigue money in 1998, saying he refused to participate in a coverup. He charged that his superiors did not consider the disease a serious health threat but were unwilling to air the issue in Congress, which had been heavily lobbied by patients’ groups.

          Last summer, Koplan promised unprecedented changes. He announced mandatory legal training for all budget managers and placed the viral division ­ home of the hantavirus and chronic fatigue programs ­ on budgetary “probation.” “We have learned a valuable lesson through this experience,” the agency said in a statement at the time. But the vow failed to appease some in Congress. “These bureaucracies get so big, they don’t care where Congress wants the money to go,” Reid said at the time he requested the criminal probe. “They are kind of above it all; they do what they want to do with the money.”

          As head of the CDC’s Special Pathogens Branch, C.J. Peters directs research into hantavirus and other quick-killing germs. The white-bearded scientist works in a “spacesuit” and an isolation lab, which protect him from exotic viruses. His risky research inspired Dustin Hoffman’s character in the movie “Outbreak” and won Peters a prominent spot in the book “The Hot Zone.” “C.J. Peters could swim through a bureaucracy like a shark,” wrote author Richard Preston. But auditor’s notes, obtained under the federal Freedom of Information Act, depict Peters not as a predator but as a frustrated and fearful bureaucrat.

          An auditor prepared the memorandum during the inquiry into chronic fatigue funding. It quotes Peters as saying years of budget problems peaked in 1997 when the CDC slashed a quarter of his funding. Even worse, Peters told the auditor, he was not told of the cuts until more than 10 months into the fiscal year, when most of that year’s funding had already been spent. “He was very upset,” the auditor wrote.

          To keep all programs afloat, Peters said in an interview, viral division chief Brian Mahy directed him to use part of the hantavirus money to research Ebola and Lassa fevers, which the agency apparently had been paying for out of discretionary funds. Since then, more than a third of the hantavirus money has gone toward Ebola and other exotic diseases, Peters said.

          Peters said Mahy promised to revise reports sent to Congress to reflect the diversion. But there is no evidence that ever happened. In its statement last week to The Washington Post, the CDC announced that it has proposed changes in the report language “to more accurately reflect how these resources are being used.”

          Ebola fever has killed people in Africa but has never been diagnosed in a human in the United States. In 1989, it tore through a colony of monkeys at a quarantine facility in Reston. It is one of dozens of maladies targeted by the viral division of the National Center for Infectious Diseases, one of 11 centers that make up the CDC.

          Mahy, who oversees a budget of more than $40 million, would not discuss uses of the hantavirus money. Mahy’s budget officer said he doubted that the branch suffered a 25 percent budget reduction or that news of the cut would have been delivered so late.

          Peters said he could not comment further. But auditor’s records show Peters complained about the cuts to Mahy and to James Hughes, director of the Center for Infectious Diseases. Mahy “responded by writing him a nasty note which essentially told him to shut up,” the auditor wrote.

          Hughes told The Post that he was aware of concerns about redirection of the hantavirus money but had not determined whether they were valid.

          There is no evidence that word of the funding issues reached Congress, where annual budget reports continued to cite concern about the hantavirus outbreak. “The [Appropriations] committee encourages CDC to continue to prioritize the prevention and containment of the hantavirus,” a 1999 report said.

          The CDC supplied Congress with reports showing that the agency’s “actual” hantavirus expenses increased 11.7 percent to $7.5 million in fiscal 1997 ­ the same year that Peters said his branch suffered deep cuts. The CDC reported that it spent $7.39 million on hantavirus in fiscal 1998.

          But Peters told the auditor that after administrators subtracted hefty overhead charges, his branch appeared to be losing roughly one-fifth of the $5 million a year he expected to cover all his research programs. Peters said determining a more precise figure was impossible because of fractured accounting. The auditor studied funding for Peters’ programs in fiscal 1998 and arrived at an even higher estimate: $1.4 million missing.

          Wilmon Rushing, who retired about a year ago as associate director for budgeting at the center, agreed that hantavirus money “ideally” should not have been spent elsewhere. But he said that during his six years in the job, the agency sometimes had borrowed from marked money, hoping to repay it later.

          Auditor’s notes quote Peters as saying he felt legally “at risk” because no one outside the CDC knew of the spending practices. The auditor wrote that “other branch chiefs are nervous as well, because they are afraid they will not actually get the money” needed to run their programs.

          NO PAPER TRAIL
          In interviews and auditor’s reports, other researchers confirmed the outlines of Peters’s account: budgets that arrive belatedly, money swapped among programs at the fiscal year’s end, an inability to track spending on particular programs.

          The agency budget “is almost unfathomable,” said Charles Rupprecht, head of the CDC rabies program. “No one can tell us what our balance is day to day.” Auditors who tried to track the chronic fatigue money said that when CDC officials shifted the money, they often left no paper trail.

          Yet some researchers said the loose system worked well because it allowed scientists to bounce money among programs as needed to fight disease outbreaks or pursue medical discoveries. “It’s probably not kosher accounting-wise,” William Bellini, head of the CDC measles virus section, said of some of the money juggling. “So much of what always went on I thought was kosher, now I’m finding out wasn’t.”

          Researcher Phil Pellett echoed the sentiments of many scientists. He does not condone misleading the public but said it sometimes would be a “bigger crime” to follow Congress’s direction rather than spend money where science dictates.

          Pellett grew furious when an auditor questioned the propriety of funding his herpesvirus research with chronic fatigue money. According to the auditor’s notes, Pellett demanded, “How can some congressman know better than we what the important public health issues are?”

          Researcher Alice Crites contributed to this report.

          © 2000 The Washington Post Company

    • beobrigitte says:

      I’m sure this will all be discussed at the World Health Summit (19.10.14 – 22.10.14) in Berlin. (?)
      The program will be structured by four main tracks:

      1. Education and Leadership
      2. Research and Innovation
      3. Evidence to Policy
      4. Global Health for Development

      Well, that sounds a little vague, doesn’t it and includes ANYTHING, even a justification for squandering a lot of monies on senseless meetings whilst Ebola infected people are being turned away from rather makeshift looking hospitals simply because there is no more space for admitting yet another patient. Wich one of the points listed above directly addresses this?
      As heard on Al Jazeera News: “… amongst other things Ebola will be discussed”.

      I beggars belief! Whilst REAL people die, hospitals run out of space, medicines and staff (quite a few of them have died, too, others are too exhausted or too scared to turn up for work) more “delegates” spend a weekend in a hotel (courtesey of the tax payer) deciding more farfetched policies.

      A tweet:
      Ángela Bernardo @maberalv

      “These outbreaks are dramatic, but they’re usually confined in remoted places. This ebola crisis has been totally unexpected”

      CRISIS???? It is a full blown EPIDEMIC that still has not been brought under control in the remotest. UNEXPECTED??? ‘Doctors without borders’ DID warn the WHO months ago!

      Anyway, for people interested, here the session plan:

    • nisakiman says:

      The NIH has also spent $15,313,372 on cessation studies devoted to every kind of smoker imaginable. Current studies are targeted at American Indians ($2,899,954); Chinese and Vietnamese men ($424,875); postmenopausal women ($4,151,850); the homeless ($558,576);Korean youth ($94,580); young schizophrenics ($397,802); Brazilian women smokers ($955,368);Latino HIV-positive smokers($471,530); and the LGBT community ($2,364,521).

      Young schizophrenics? Brazilian women smokers? Latino HIV-positive smokers? WTF?

      That is beyond parody…

  21. harleyrider1978 says:

    The shit is coming back to haunt them all!

  22. Rose says:

    Should Ebola Fear… Tobacco?

    “Initially, researchers focused on alfalfa, but eventually it was tobacco’s five-week growth period and pharmacologically friendly makeup that won out.

    One of the companies that was at the forefront of this research was Medicago, partly owned by Phillip Morris International and Mitsubishi. Medicago owns a 97,000 square foot greenhouse in North Carolina as well as patents important to growing virus-like particles in plants.

    The approach at Medicago’s plant is much as you’d imagine. Rows and rows of plants in lines that stretch out endlessly tended with the latest growing technology. Those plants are specially treated to embed the vaccine into them and then they’re allowed to grow. After a period of weeks, the leaves from the plants are harvested and broken down into vaccine.

    Just how much vaccine can be produced by these leaves? In a test in 2012, Medicago produced 10 million doses of an H1N1 vaccine in one month.”

    That should flummox the WHO, does article 5.3 still apply to makers of life saving drugs?

    Guidelines for implementation of Article 5.3 of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control

    “on the protection of public health policies with respect to tobacco control from commercial
    and other vested interests of the tobacco industry ”

    • smokervoter says:


      Done deal. You were merely improvising.

      Painful admission time. The first nightmare I ever experienced was a result of viewing The Blob (starring Steve McQueen).

      My older brother caught hell for supposedly dragging his pre-kindergarten widdle brudda’ along to the Saturday matinee featuring this gory horror movie.

      Truth be told there was no way I was going to miss it after viewing the neato keeno marquee outside the now defunct Oriental Theatre on Sunset Blvd. in Hollywood.

      • smokervoter says:

        Actually the Oriental Theatre building is now the infamous Guitar Center of Hollywood.

        Read the History section, if you’re so inclined.

        I know. Way, way, way too much information. And too much strong coffee and cigarettes on a fine Sunday morn here (currently 23 degrees Celsius).

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          64 degrees F here today no breeze either………

        • Rose says:


          The Blob is one of my favourites, but thinking back, if any blob was in the back of my mind at the time I imagined what a beacon of health might look like, it could be this one –

          Owen Paterson: I’m proud of standing up to the green lobby

          “However, I leave the post with great misgivings about the power and irresponsibility of – to coin a phrase – the Green Blob.

          By this I mean the mutually supportive network of environmental pressure groups, renewable energy companies and some public officials who keep each other well supplied with lavish funds, scare stories and green tape. This tangled triangle of unelected busybodies claims to have the interests of the planet and the countryside at heart, but it is increasingly clear that it is focusing on the wrong issues and doing real harm while profiting handsomely.”

          Or maybe this one –

          “We believe children will flourish if we challenge them but the Blob, in thrall to Sixties ideologies, wants to continue the devaluation of the exam system,” says Gove.”

          We seem to be beset by blobs at the moment, so naturally any healthist blob would be pink and smell faintly of bleach as it tries to sanitize the human race.

        • beobrigitte says:

          Rose, your last answer to Frank made me laugh; this one even more!!

          We seem to be beset by blobs at the moment, so naturally any healthist blob would be pink and smell faintly of bleach as it tries to sanitize the human race.

          It’s fluorescent pink pulsates, emitting the smell of bleach and dettox about 80x/min.

          I will see the blob each time the WHO/ASH etc. will be mentioned on the news…… Obesity epidemic (the blob pulsates at the rate of 120 pulses/min)… Beer epidemic (the blob pulsates at the rate of 150 pulses/min) … Tobacco epidemic (the blob experiences atrial fibrillation).

    • nisakiman says:

      That should flummox the WHO, does article 5.3 still apply to makers of life saving drugs?


  23. harleyrider1978 says:

    Oh it just keeps getting better

    CDC doled out $25 million in bonuses while blaming cuts for Ebola outbreak

  24. beobrigitte says:

    Sorry for being a bit viral today; here something Medecines sans frontieres put up on 28.8.14
    We have learned an uncomfortable lesson over the past six months: none of the organizations in the most affected countries—the UN, WHO, local governments, NGOs (including MSF)—currently have the proper set-up to respond at the scale necessary to make a serious impact on the spread of the outbreak. For some, the limits are due to capacity constraints—the simple inability to do more—and others may need to be encouraged to demonstrate more willingness to push the boundaries and scale up effective activities at a meaningful scale.

    It is the 19.10.14 today. There was a Moskow meeting lasting until 18.10.14 about smoking/vaping to attend for the WHO….. Priorities…

    • Joe L. says:

      It just blatantly proves that the goal of these organizations is profit/power and not public health. They’re not even trying to hide it any longer.

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        Joe most of us have known that simple fact for years others for decades. We like so many others cared about what was happening but did nothing until it hit us personally and then we went to war……………………

  25. harleyrider1978 says:

    Somebody go bust this bytch Nazi nurses ass I cant get in……….

    • beobrigitte says:

      Sorry, no access for me, either! They only appear to allow facebook people’s replies..
      But, THIS is interesting, especially for the full time vapers who occasionally read here:

      • The World Health Organization is currently recommending a ban on indoor use of e-cigarettes, as well as sales and advertising targeting youth. E-cigarette devices expel nicotine, formaldehyde, nickel, acrolein and other harmful substances.

      Is that the same WHO who just had to miss an Ebola epidemic that has the potential to spread into all our lives because there was a few days in a 5 star hotel in Moskow with the option of deciding what to do to smokers/vapers next, which was far more important than this ‘lousy Ebola epidemic’?

      Not only has this -giving rather successfully the impression of being dumb- Belinda Blair dug out the old idiotic tobacco control lies, she now peddles the same bullsh*t for the vapers.

  26. beobrigitte says:

    Little confidence is rapidly becoming NO CONFIDENCE at all!

    The WHO has taken control of Ebola and over what is to be published and what not.
    The BBC is quick to announce that there will be “millions” of Ebola vaccines next year. This is not very comforting for the many Liberians et al affected NOW.

    MSF did initially speak up – it’s gone rather quiet on their site, too.

    When the WHO takes control the truth is swept under the carpet?

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s