[Health&Healing] How Mass Media Created Flu Hysteria/Drove Profits for FluMist

[Guest guest]

Comments?

Misty L. Trepke

http://www..com

 

HOW THE MASS MEDIA IN THE U.S. CREATED FLU HYSTERIA

AND HELPED DRIVE THE VACCINE MARKETS FOR

THE MAKERS OF FluMist AND Fluzone.

By RFD Columnist, Dr. Sherri Tenpenny

http://www.redflagsweekly.com/conferences/vaccines/2003_dec18.html

 

The hype regarding this year's flu " epidemic " continues. In the wake

of the media-induced hysteria, a fascinating series of

chronologically connected events has materialized that appears to

protect the pharmaceutical industry profits at the expense of our

children. This issue demands further examination.

 

On June 20, 2002, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices

(ACIP) adopted a resolution to include the influenza vaccine in the

childhood vaccination schedule. The influenza vaccine will be

recommended annually to all children aged 6 months to 23 months, and

to children aged 24 months to 18 years who are household contacts of

children aged less than 2 years. After becoming effective on March

1, 2003, the resolution was implemented during the 2003-04 influenza

season and the vaccine will be encouraged annually, for every

subsequent flu season, in other words, creating " regular

customers for life. "

Coming on the coattails of this announcement, the FDA approved the

use of FluMist, the first nasally injected vaccine. The company

originally had sought an indication for use in healthy people aged 1-

64 years, but it was denied by the FDA. Reports suggested the

vaccine caused a 3.53-fold increased risk of " asthma events " after

the first dose in children 12-59 months of age.[ii]

After a 32-month review that included the submission of additional

data, the decision was reversed and on June 17, 2003, the FDA issued

a license to Medimmune to produce FluMist, a live attenuated

influenza vaccine for use in 5-to-49 year olds. In a complicated

vote, ACIP decided that, because only 641 adults over 50 years of

age were studied, there was insufficient evidence of vaccine

efficacy in 50-64 year olds.[iii]

MedImmune Inc., FluMist's manufacturer and Washington DC's

successful biotechnology company, was jubilant over the decision.

When MedImmune executives and Wall Street bulls learned that FluMist

would be released in time for the fall flu season, MedImmune's stock

soared to $43.32 per share, more than 63 times earnings.[iv]

MedImmune announced it would manufacture between 4 million and 6

million units of FluMist for the 2003 season.

A $25 million marketing campaign was launched in October by

MedImmune, and its partner, Wyeth, to create a demand for their new

product. Ad after ad demonstrated the inconveniences the flu caused

to family members and co-workers, encouraging everyone to get their

flu shot-especially the shot up the nose. It just so happened that

flu outbreaks began to be reported in Houston earlier than in

previous years and about the same time as FluMist began to be used.

Texas Children's Hospital diagnosed 40 patients with the flu in five

days. During comparable weeks of the flu seasons in the previous two

years, only 9 cases per week had required treatment.[v]

However, despite the best efforts of a massive marketing blitz, the

big demand for FluMist didn't materialize. The " billion dollar

blockbuster " lacked the appeal its creators had dreamed about. The

advantage of a getting a mist up the nose over a shot in the arm

couldn't justify the hefty price not covered by health insurance

(FluMist for $60-70 vs. flu shot for $7).

By November 17, MedImmune had reduced its 2003 fourth quarter, full-

year revenue expectations as earnings were projected to be $60

million less than anticipated. MedImmune's CEO, David M. Mott,

stated that he was " disappointed. " Half-way through the 12-week

peak " immunization season " the anticipated demand was just not there.

[vi] Perplexed, MedImmune announced on November 23 that it

had " hired a consultant to discover why its needle-free flu vaccine,

FluMist, had disappointed sales expectations this fall and was

considering placing the emphasis on FluMist's safety as well as its

convenience. " [vii]

Shortly thereafter, the outbreaks initially seen in Texas were being

reported all around the country-much earlier than usually

anticipated. Indeed, even a few children were reported to have died

from the flu. The media hyped these reports as though this were an

outbreak of smallpox instead of the flu, causing hysteria.

With the announcement of the " flu epidemic " blazoned from every

conceivable form of news report, a stampede of patients arrived at

doctors' offices, demanding a shot to ward off the " deadly strain "

of influenza. Parents especially wanted their children vaccinated,

and were willing to drive to cities hours from home and even stand

in line for up to 90 minutes.[viii]

But wait.

Doesn't the CDC say repeatedly that 36,000 people die every year

from the flu? Were these reported deaths indicative that all deaths

possibly related to the flu might be different or more numerous than

deaths reported any other year? In a telephone interview on November

17, 2003, this is what the CDC had to say:

MODERATOR: Miriam Falco from CNN, your line is open.

QUESTION: Hi, Dr. Gerberding, thanks for doing this. Is this the

most serious early onset since 1976?

DR. GERBERDING: This is early onset from the standpoint that we have

more cases, particularly in Texas, where we see it's fairly

widespread [outbreak] of flu. But we have had many years where flu

has started early and peaked earlier than average. So it's a little

too early in the game to say whether or not this portends the worst

flu season we've had in a long time.[ix]

(emphasis mine)

Again, on December 11, 2003, Dr. Julie Gerberding reported the

following during a CNN teleconference:

" We don't have scientific evidence or epidemiologic evidence to

suggest that this year's influenza outbreak is worse than it has

been in the past or that the strain is more virulent than strains

that we've dealt with before. It's just simply too early in the

course of the outbreak to say for sure how this will compare

overall. " [x] (emphasis mine)

If that is the case, isn't the " epidemic " being reported nationwide

by the media a little like yelling " fire " in a crowded theater.when

there is no fire? People can be harmed and even killed by the

ensuing stampede.

Further evidence suggests that the outbreaks did not deserve the

feeding-frenzy level of media coverage they have received. For

example, the Rocky Mountain News reported on December 11 that

officials said flu cases had been cut in half and the " the worst of

worst Colorado season in years is over. " The report went on to say

that, " during a typical year, no more than two children and a total

of 750 to 800 Coloradoans die of complications of the flu or

pneumonia. " [xi] Do nine reported deaths in children make this year

the " worst of the worst " ? Does an increase of 7 deaths over previous

years constitute an epidemic?

In Arizona, the Department of Health Services reported on December

11, 2002 that two adults and one child had died of influenza related

sickness. Michael Murphy, the health department's spokesperson, said

that Arizona typically has 20 children deaths a year caused by

influenza.[xii] Is one death an " epidemic " ?

This does not in any way minimize the tragedy of the death of a

child. What needs to be put into context is how extraordinarily

small these numbers are to lead to such media-driven hysteria.

Furthermore, what were the underlying health conditions of those who

died? At least one other report stated that one of the children in

Colorado died of the flu and " other causes. " A 3-year-old boy who

reportedly died from complications of the flu at Children's Medical

Center in Dayton also had a missing pituitary gland and a cleft

pallet.[xiii] Both conditions can be associated with a compromised

immune system. Perhaps the CDC should recommend giving the flu shot

only to children at highest risk-and their immediate family members-

instead of encouraging mass vaccination of children with normal,

intact immune systems.

Do we know if the reports of " flu-related illness " and death were

actually caused by an influenza virus? The CDC reports that the

majority of influenza-like illnesses are not caused by the influenza

virus, but by other viruses (e.g., rhinoviruses and respiratory

syncytial virus [RSV]), adenoviruses, and parainfluenza viruses).

[xiv] Douglas Benevento, executive director of the Colorado

Department of Public Health and Environment stated the department's

definition of " flu-related illness " includes kids who have flu

symptoms but haven't had a confirmatory test.[xv]

By early December, reports began to come out that stated the viral

strain of this year's flu " epidemic " was the A/Fujian strain. This

was a serious error on the part of the vaccine program because the

most virulent strain of the flu identified this season was not part

of FluMist or Fluzone. In order to continue encouraging vaccination,

the CDC proclaimed that the flu vaccines " should " confer " some "

protection against this strain. The media continued to blare: get

your flu vaccine.

The CDC estimates that only 13 percent of healthy people less than

50 years of age, or about 17 million Americans, got flu shots last

year.[xvi] Typically, 80 million doses of the flu shot are

manufactured annually. Therefore, millions of unused doses of the

flu vaccine from the previous year's stock are discarded, along with

the profits connected to them. With all this attention on the flu,

Aventis certainly benefited. As the manufacturer of Fluzone

(the " flu shot " ), it is interesting to note that Aventis stock rose

from $48/share at the beginning of September to $61.43 on December

12.[xvii] The extra, unanticipated Fluzone sales may not be the sole

contributor to the stock increase, but certainly this can be

considered as playing a role.

Predictably, the demand for the flu vaccine soon outstripped supply.

In an effort to assist health officials, effective December 10,

2003, Wellmark Blue Cross and Blue Shield was one of many insurance

carriers that began covering the cost of FluMist vaccine through the

end of December, or through the vaccination time period recommended

by the CDC for the 2003-2004 flu season.[xviii]

Now, even the government is getting on the band wagon to support

consumer use of FluMist. Negotiated by the CDC, the agreement will

allow state and local officials to purchase the nasal-spray vaccine

for $20 a dose from now through the middle of February from both

MedImmune and Wyeth. At less than half of the suggested wholesale

price of $46 per dose, this may be the ultimate boost to faltering

sales.[xix]

The upshot of the run on flu shots, the newly implemented insurance

coverage and the boost from the federal government has surely

created a bonanza for MedImmune. The company probably hasn't had to

spend an additional marketing dime to implement the ideas of its

newly hired consultants. Much of its marketing was accomplished for

free.through the Six O'clock news.

(SEE OTHER ARTICLES ON THE FLU BY DR. SHERRI TENPENNY LISTED BELOW)

MMWR. September 27, 2002/51(38);864, 875

[ii]ePediatric News. July 2003, Volume 37, Number 7.

[iii] CDC.

[iv]The Washington Post. MedImmune's Pain-Free Ambitions. March 18,

2002; Page E01

[v]October 15, 2003.

[vi] PRNewswire November 17, 2003.

[vii] Washington Post. November 25, 2003. " MedImmune Seeks Help in

Relaunching FluMist. "

[viii] Rocky Mountain News. December 11, 2003 " Cases of flu cut in

half. "

[ix] CDC News Conference Transcript. November 17, 2003. Update on

Current Influenza Season.

[x] CDC News Conference Transcript. December 11, 2003. Influenza

Update.

[xi] Rocky Mountain News. December 11, 2003 " Cases of flu cut in

half. "

[xii] The Navaho Times. December 11, 2002. " Flood of flu cases using

up vaccine. "

[xiii] December 15, 2003. " Toddler Dies Of Flu Complications "

[xiv] MMWR November 9, 2001/50(44); 984-6

[xv] Rocky Mountain News. December 11, 2003 " Cases of flu cut in

half. "

[xvi] Washington Post. June 18, 2003, Pg. A01. " Spray Vaccine For

Flu Wins FDA Clearance. "

[xvii] Forbes Financial Report.

[xviii] Blue Cross/Wellmark.

[xix] The Washington Post. Tuesday, December 16, 2003; Page

E01Government To Purchase FluMist at A Discount. Deal Could Give

Boost To MedImmune Vaccine

OTHER ARTICLES

December 8, 2003

IS IT POSSIBLE THAT FluMist®, THE NASAL SPRAY FLU VACCINE, MAY BE

CAUSING THE FLU?

November 30, 2003

NEW CAMPAIGN TO MARKET TOUGH-SELL FluMist

November 24, 2003

SHOULD YOU GET THE FLU SHOT?

October 3, 2003

RISKS OF FluMist VACCINE

Hundreds of TV and print ads have been designed to persuade everyone

into taking FluMist. The campaign will cost an estimated $25 million

over the next couple of months. And a three-year, $100 million

campaign will be launched to encourage use of the nasal flu vaccine

among physicians. But there are many reasons for caution.

Once you recognize what is happening, you have a moral obligation to

become involved.-- Dr. Stanley Monteith

One (wo)man with courage makes a majority.---Andrew Jackon

A truth's initial commotion is directly proportional to how deeply

the lie was believed.When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold

gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem

utterly preposterous and its speaker, a raving lunatic. --Dresden

James

*********************

Ingri Cassel, President

Vaccination Liberation - Idaho Chapter

P.O. Box 457

Spirit Lake, ID 83869

(208)255-2307/ 888-249-1421

vaclib

www.vaclib.org

" Free Your Mind....

From The Vaccine Paradigm "