Swine flu: UK praised, but told to beware big pharma

An independent review of the UK government's response to the 2009 swine flu pandemic has concluded that the overall approach was proportionate – just a week after an inquiry by the Council of Europe found the World Health Organisation had "vastly overrated" the seriousness of the disease.

Interestingly, both reviews were critical of the role of big pharmaceutical companies during the swine flu pandemic.

The UK review, revealed yesterday by Dame Deirdre Hine, found that although the government did not overreact to the severity of the swine flu outbreak, it should in future ensure its response to such events is more flexible.

"The unexpectedly mild nature of the pandemic emphasises that the only predictable thing about the flu virus is its unpredictability," Hine said. As a result, the UK government bought too many doses of swine flu vaccine and tied itself into a contract with GlaxoSmithKline from which it could not extricate itself when the disease turned out not to be as virulent as first predicted.

In future, the government ought to ensure its contracts with pharmaceutical companies give it more flexibility over the eventual quantity of vaccines purchased, the review concluded.

GSK, which has made at least £700m out of sales of its swine flu vaccine, said that because of the huge demand at the time for the swine flu vaccine from all European governments, it would not have been "ethical" to offer one country a break clause when others were not able to have all the vaccine they wanted.

However, the Council of Europe was last week far more direct in its criticisms both of big pharma and the World Health Organisation's handling of the swine flu outbreak.

The Council found "grave shortcomings" in the way the WHO decided to declare a pandemic last year. It noted "concerns about the influence of the pharmaceutical industry on decisions taken".

In January, epidemiologist Dr Wolfgang Wodarg told the Council the swine flu pandemic was "one of the greatest medical scandals of the century" perpetrated by the WHO and big pharma. In a devastating assessment of the affair, he claimed the WHO was persuaded to change the definition of 'pandemic' by scientists linked to pharmaceutical companies in order to trigger lucrative 'sleeping' vaccination contracts.

The WHO has rejected the allegations, but the Council of Europe last week said there was "overwhelming evidence that the seriousness of the pandemic was vastly overrated by WHO" and has called for an inquiry into its handling of the outbreak. ·