How The U.S. Mass Media Created Flu Hysteria &
Helped Drive the Markets of FluMist & FluZone
Dr. Sherri Tenpenny
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/tenpennyfluhysteria18dec03.shtml
Dec. 18, 2003
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
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, [i] 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.
Dr. Sherri Tenpenny
Web posted at: http://www.redflagsweekly.com/conferences/vaccines/2003_dec18.html
(SEE OTHER ARTICLES ON THE FLU BY DR. SHERRI TENPENNY LISTED
BELOW)
[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
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.
All information posted on this web site is
the opinion of the author and is provided for educational purposes only.
It is not to be construed as medical advice. Only a licensed medical doctor
can legally offer medical advice in the United States. Consult the healer
of your choice for medical care and advice.