Conversations that in the development of vaccines against various epidemics that have swept across the planet in recent years have been rather confusing for a long time. Various versions of who are in fact profitable from the spread of mass hysteria and, as a consequence, the rush demand for drugs, which often have not passed all necessary tests and trials, are regularly expressed.
During the outbreak of the Ebola virus in 2013, many news agencies circulated the news, which spoke about the statement of several companies of the giants of the pharmaceutical market that it was unprofitable to develop and manufacture a vaccine against the new virus. Citing market research from GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer and Merck, it was argued that developing a vaccine is not profitable and would not be undertaken by pharmaceutical companies. At the same time, no less large concern Johnson & Johnson not only did not quit research, but announced about investing about 200 million dollars in drug development. The same Pfizer, although it refused to work on the development of a remedy for Ebola, nevertheless, announced its readiness to become a technical consultant in this matter. And the Merck company earlier even bought the rights to the manufactured vaccine from NewLink Genetics Corp, although further research was suspended due to the discovery of side effects on the human body.
Another strange thing happened with the ZMapp vaccine, in the production of which government agencies in the United States and Canada were involved. The recognition of this drug as suitable for the prevention of the disease appeared at the very beginning of 2014, i.e. almost simultaneously with the outbreak of the virus. The question of how in such a short period of time it was possible to develop a new vaccine and conduct its comprehensive research is still open.
No less indicative is the story of the American doctor Kent Brentley, who, after being infected with the Ebola virus, got rid of the disease in a couple of hours using ZMapp and was discharged from the hospital within a month. The combination of these factors prompts the idea that the spread and emergence of the epidemic, as well as the subsequent development of a vaccine, is a skillful hoax with a planned ending.
Against this background, WHO specialists, officials of various medical institutions made constant statements about the need to jointly fight the virus, create a common supranational fund and collect donations for the development of a vaccine, which, as it turned out, is already available. Even UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon criticized the lack of funds raised. US President Barack Obama delivered a speech in which he described Ebola as a global threat. British Prime Minister David Cameron demanded that the G20 member countries take the maximum possible participation in solving the problem. WHO itself has adopted a program providing assistance in the amount of $ 750 million, and the World Bank announced its readiness to allocate 200 million. In September, Margaret Chen made a presentation on the critical epidemiological situation in West Africa,although, according to the available information, up to 70% of all Ebola cases were not laboratory confirmed, but were based only on initial examination.
All the excitement to raise funds to fight the epidemic was in sharp contrast to the situation in the very foci of the spread of the virus. In Sierra Lyon and Liberia, the countries most affected by the virus, no special attempts were made to cope with the spread of the disease, the most basic medicines and care for the sick were lacking, and terrible unsanitary conditions reigned in the lesion. With all the powerful campaign to raise funds in Western countries, in places where the infection was spread, on the contrary, no explanatory measures were taken with the population about how to prevent and treat diseases. Perhaps as a result of this, the indigenous population not only did not welcome attempts to use prototype vaccines, but even opposed the possible general vaccination, accusing doctors ofthat it is they who provoke the infection with fever. The unrest was so widespread that paramilitary units had to be deployed in some areas to guard medical workers.
It is difficult to answer how true this statement is, but one more fact should be noted. Among the sponsors who donated funds for the development of vaccines was the Bill Gates Foundation, which is not only a supporter of the idea of universal vaccination, but in every possible way promotes the idea of overpopulation of the planet and the need to reduce the population. Moreover, there are cases when in vaccines created to combat this or that epidemic, one of the side effects was the inability to further reproduce the offspring.
At the same time, Sylvia Bauval, Secretary of the US Department of Health, came up with an interesting initiative. She proposed requiring the United States government to protect vaccine developers. As expected, one of the elements of such protection was to remove responsibility from developers for the side effects of vaccines and their further use. This procedure was planned to be extended to other countries.
Promotional video:
By the way, considering the theory of the artificial origin and spread of epidemics and the development of vaccines as a way to reduce the population, it is worth noting that the new disease, which is gradually displacing Ebola from the media space, the Zika virus also has a direct impact on a person's ability to produce offspring. According to research by scientists, it is most dangerous for pregnant women, as it causes brain damage in newborns.
In the 21st century, thanks to television and the Internet, our society has turned into a single information space. Any information is distributed as soon as possible. Fear, artificially whipped up in society, deprives people of the opportunity to soberly assess the situation, suppresses their will, making them easily suggested. It is the hysteria provoked around diseases that periodically arise in different parts of our planet that turns the virus into a pandemic.