Doing "God's Work": is Bill Gates's Second Career Ethically Messier than his First?
Posted Jan 01 2013 12:00am
By John Stone
Next week Bill Gates is to deliver the BBC’s annual Dimbleby lecture. In advance of this event Gates was profiled by a Daily Telegraph feature writer, Neil Tweedie. Unfortunately – like so many modern mainstream journalists – Mr Tweedie seems to have abandoned the task of balanced and informed reporting. He certainly shows no sign of responding to the letter I sent him three days ago. Thus it is Gates seems to be able to rely on a defeated and abject mainstream media to ignore or cover over the tracks of disaster.
Gates’s second career is in many ways very like his first: a matter of global conquest without too much finesse (everyone simply has to have his products) but this time the price in human terms is very high when it goes wrong. Here is my letter to Tweedie Dear Mr Tweedie,
You may not have known but on the day your
interview with Bill Gates was published he was successfully negotiating for the
exclusion of mercury containing paediatic vaccines from a UN global mercury ban , a matter which he omitted to
mention and in which he has kept a low profile . Despite what his underlings or the British
government say, all mercury is toxic and it is being administered to infants in
toxic quantites. The use of these vaccines in the UK was phased out in
2004, either because the British government thought it politically
unacceptable or because they tacitly knew they were doing damage. I have also
written about it here .
Meanwhile, in regard to polio eradication I draw you
attention to a paper by Vashisht and Puliyel in the Indian Journal of
Medical Ethics sarcastically titled: "Polio programme: let us declare
victory and move on" for which this is the abstract:
It was hoped that following polio eradication, immunisation could be
stopped. However the synthesis of polio virus in 2002, made eradication
impossible. It is argued that getting poor countries to expend their scarce
resources on an impossible dream over the last 10 years was unethical.
Furthermore, while India has been polio-free for a year, there has been a huge
increase in non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP). In 2011, there were an
extra 47,500 new cases of NPAFP. Clinically indistinguishable from polio
paralysis but twice as deadly, the incidence of NPAFP was directly proportional
to doses of oral polio received. Though this data was collected within the
polio surveillance system, it was not investigated. The principle of
primum-non-nocere was violated. The authors suggest that the huge bill of US$ 8
billion spent on the programme, is a small sum to pay if the world learns to be
wary of such vertical programmes in the future.
Also, the schedule which Gates, GAVI, the WHO and
governments are implementing takes no account of the adverse synergistic
effects of the combined vaccines. I attach
a copy of the paper by Aaby et
al 'Vaccine programmes must their effect on general resistance' ( BMJ. 2012 Jun 14;344:e3769. doi:
Finally, I note the horrific story ,
so far unreported in the mainstream media of Europe and the US of the tragic
consequences of an experiment in Chad ... with a new
meningitis vaccine [which] has left 40 out of 500 children paralysed.
My own view is that if Bill Gates really wants to do
good he should be more careful : just being a big guy with a big heart
is not enough. In the "war on disease" the collateral damage can
be utterly appalling and the media should not shy away from reporting it.