*EXPERTS IN FIGHTING INFECTIOUS DISEASES SAY NO VACCINES OR DRUGS NEEDED TO STOP EBOLA
*SLAM QUARANTINES, SAY ONLY A LIMITED ROLE FOR FOREIGN MILITARY
*COMMENTS COME AS EBOLA VACCINE TRIALS RUSHED THROUGH WITH HYBRID VIRUSES BUT NO LIVE VIRUSES
The New York Times asked ten leaders on the fight against smallpox, polio, SARS and other diseases on how best to deal with Ebola all ten were “sure the outbreak could be stopped without experimental drugs or vaccines.”
If ten of the world s top experts, some of them legends in their fields, as the New York Times puts it, say no Ebola drugs or vaccines are needed, why is WHO, the CDC and UK government rushing into clinical trials for Ebola vaccines, which are not going to be properly tested?
In a repeat of 2009 false flag swine flu pandemic, WHO and partners appear t be brazenly exploiting the Ebola outbreak to promote the commercial interests of Big Pharma. GSK looks set to profit from the Ebola vaccine programme but we haven t heard how much they will be paid yet.
Several clinical Ebola trials are starting, some apparently with adjuvants, some apparently without, but all claiming to use inactivated viruses or proteins which cannot transmit Ebola. Let s see.
GSK plans to produce 10,000 Ebola doses in parallel with the trials. Why the rush, if independent experts say there is no need for any vaccines at all?
The clinical trials run by NIH will use a type of chimpanzee virus and create a combination between the Ebola Zaire strain and the Ebola Sudan strain. Why are the researchers creating and testing what appears to be a new and potentially dangerous hybrid virus when no such virus has been reported in the current outbreak?
A US bioweapons expert Nancy Sullivan designed this trial. Sullivan is based in Bethesda close to the infamous Fort Detrick biological warfare facility.
The infectious diseases experts also slammed plans which have been floated for UK and US military intervention and the brutal enforcement of Ebola quarantines. Needless to say some of them did not want to be named for fear of undercutting WHO s and the UN s efforts.
“All said that Western countries needed to help generously, especially those with long ties to affected nations: the United States to Liberia, Britain to Sierra Leone and France to Guinea. Their militaries may be useful, as long as they only deliver supplies, set up field hospitals, provide electricity and communications — and avoid anything that involves brandishing weapons, including enforcing quarantines.
The experts were universally appalled at the sight of rural areas hemmed by roadblocks and a slum in the Liberian capital, Monrovia, with barbed wire that made residents believe they were being locked in to die; they were even more appalled that soldiers used truncheons and bullets during what was supposed to be a public health effort,” writes the New York Times.