# 4638
Over the past several months the World Health Organization has come under increasing (and in my mind, largely unwarranted) attack from critics who see conspiracies and duplicity behind their declaration of a pandemic last June.
Recently, the BMJ ran an article calling into question the integrity of the experts who serve as advisors to the WHO, suggesting that they might have been influenced by Big Pharma.
On Saturday I covered CIDRAP Dissects The WHO Allegations, and on Sunday I offered my latest take on the situation in Of Pandemics, Hurricanes and An Abundance Of Caution.
On Tuesday, the WHO released Margaret Chan’s Open Letter To The BMJ.
Today we get a lengthy response from the WHO regarding a number of the criticisms levied towards them. I’ll not post the whole thing, as it runs roughly 2,000 words.
Follow the link to read it in its entirety.
This briefing covers the following points:
Is this a genuine pandemic?
Did WHO remove severity from the definition of a pandemic?
Did WHO exaggerate the threat?
Were any WHO pandemic decisions made to increase industry profits?
What safeguards are in place to guard against conflicts of interest?
What is the function of the Emergency Committee and why have the names of its members not been disclosed?
What evidence supports a role for antiviral drugs during an influenza pandemic?
Was a WHO meeting held in 2002 on influenza vaccines and antiviral drugs influenced by industry?
The international response to the influenza pandemic: WHO responds to the critics
Pandemic (H1N1) 2009 briefing note 21
Background
10 JUNE 2010 | GENEVA -- On Friday 4 June 2010, the BMJ, formerly British Medical Journal, and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) simultaneously released reports critical of the World Health Organization's handling of the H1N1 pandemic. WHO takes the issues and concerns that were raised seriously and wishes to set the record straight on several points.
