Former CDC Chief Named President of Merck Vaccine Division
879 days agoFormer CDC Chief Named President of Merck Vaccine Division http://www.infectioncontroltoday.com/hotnews/geberding-named-merck-vaccine-president.html Some excerpts: Gerberding served as CDC director from 2002 to 2009. During her tenure at CDC, Gerberding led the agency during...
Former CDC Chief Named President of Merck Vaccine Division
http://www.infectioncontroltoday.com/hotnews/geberding-named-merck-vaccine-president.html
Some excerpts:
Gerberding served as CDC director from 2002 to 2009. During her tenure at CDC, Gerberding led the agency during more than 40 emergency response initiatives for health crises including anthrax bioterrorism, foodborne disease outbreaks and natural disasters, and advised governments around the world on urgent public health issues such as SARS, AIDS and obesity.
“Vaccines are a cornerstone of Merck’s commitment to health and wellness,” said Richard T. Clark, chairman and chief executive officer, Merck & Co., Inc. “We are delighted to welcome an expert of Dr. Gerberding’s caliber to Merck. As a preeminent authority in public health, infectious diseases and vaccines, Dr. Gerberding is the ideal choice to lead Merck’s engagement with organizations around the world that share our commitment to the use of vaccines to prevent disease and save lives.”
Basically what this means is that the former head of the CDC (America’s Center For Disease Control) is now the President of the Merck’s Vaccine Division and this tells us a lot on what is happening to the drug industry. It also tells you NOT to trust what the CDC recommends. Why? Well, first of all, isn’t that a conflict of interest? Dr Gerberding is the CDC Director from 2002 to 2009. Merck sells vaccines, drugs and other medical supplies to hospitals and clinics which are supposed to help combat diseases. That would make Dr Gerberding’s decisions as the CDC Director highly biased when you look at the entire picture. She is supposed to be an authority in public health, infectious diseases and vaccines and her influence on government policies is quite significant. It also shows that drug companies have a lot of influence on government policies. No doubt about it. If she had not been “cozy” with Merck and other drug companies (or at least supportive of their efforts), she would probably not been given a position in their company. So it makes perfect sense. And by the way, Merck is the company which continued to sell the painkiller Vioxx to the public even AFTER it was found to increased heart attacks. And worst of all, they knew about it for years. They even submitted studies to the FDA which clearly states the increased heart attacks from Vioxx in those studies. If you are interested, please take a look at Wikipedia’s Vioxx page here.
Yes, this is the nature of big businesses. But we are talking about public health here. Not cars, not shampoo, not carpets, not Blackberries, not Playstation. But health and diseases. That is something which should not be played with and there should be strict controls. Yet, we have this where you can easily see the conflict of interest.Probably why the government is leading the charge for people to get vaccinated against the recent H1N1 scare when we all know that the H1N1 effects are just very mild. And yes, Merck manufactures and distributes a portion of those H1N1 vaccines. I know that ignorance is bliss. But how long can we pretend that this is not a problem? Aren’t you worried that those high ranking government officials are not looking at your best interest? Instead they are looking at their OWN interests, which are the same as the big drug companies. That is to sell as many drugs and vaccines to the public as possible. PROFITS are the only interests of drug companies. Let me ask you, how can you be sure that the vaccines are safe? How can you be sure that the vaccines are effective? How can you be sure that there are no long term effects on your health? Because the government and the drug companies tell you? If they told you the truth, you might not be willing to risk the negative effects of vaccines and drugs and there goes the profits of the pharmaceutical companies. There is no incentive for the government officials and the drug companies to tell you the truth. So you will have to take your own initiative and start reading on the pros and cons about vaccines, drugs and other therapies. Don’t rely on just one source of information. And I would highly recommend you to treat medical advise from drug companies the same way you treat financial advise from your financial adviser – with skepticism. The recent minibonds and financial meltdown tells you that everyone just wants to make money off you. The same goes for drug companies. The truth is, the doctors get their information from drug companies too. Even honest ones might not understand the true implication of vaccines and drugs. They are taught at universities which teaches them what drug companies want those institutes to teach their students – that drugs and vaccines are great and they are the only real solution to our health problems. Is it? All you have to do is to look around you and see whether our overall health have improved or not. Just look at the number of people today with chronic diseases and long term health problems. Look at the increasing number of people suffering from cancer, autoimmune diseases and so on. Is it really better? It has been like 40 years since the start of the battle for cancer, yet it seems that we are losing the battle with conventional medicine. Why keep on going the same way when we know that it won’t work?
However, at the very least, the Internet has changed the lock on information. We no longer have to rely on just one source. That is why I always recommend people to go read and find out more on how to improve their health and beware of frauds and myths.
