2002 American Medical Association study concludes Ebola and Marberg best bio-weapons choice for use against populace
The new outbreaks — by coincidence or by design?
By Shepard Ambellas | Intellihub.com
A white paper published in 2002 by the American Medical Association suggests that the Ebola and Marberg viruses are the top two choices for bio-weaponry for use against the civilian populace. In fact, the paper concludes that “Weapons disseminating a number of HFVs could cause an outbreak of undifferentiated febrile illness 2 to 21 days later, associated with clinical manifestations that could include rash, hemorrhagic diathesis, and shock.” Interestingly enough these are the exact viruses seen in the two new emerging outbreaks.
Like a bad horror movie, the paper goes on to shockingly point out that modern “clinical and microbiology public health laboratories are not currently equipped to make a rapid diagnosis of any of these viruses, and clinical specimens would need to be sent to the CDC or the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID; Frederick, Md) the only 2 level D laboratories in the Laboratory Response Network.” Meaning, that it will just be too much work and take too much time to screen everyone showing up to hospitals and medical clinics with symptoms. This is what is already taking place in the West-Africa, the U.S., Spain and even Australia. We are likely past the point of no return. It’s been reported that as many as 1.4 million deaths may occur by mid-January according to official projections conservatively.
In 2010, two Merck virologists filed a federal lawsuit under the False Claims Act against their former employer, alleging the vaccine maker lied about the effectiveness of their mumps vaccine (which is part of the trivalent measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine).
The whistleblowers, Stephen Krahling and Joan Wlochowski, claimed they witnessed “firsthand the improper testing and data falsification in which Merck engaged to artificially inflate the vaccine’s efficacy findings.”
They charged that Merck used improper testing techniques; manipulated testing methodology; abandoned undesirable test results; falsified test data; and failed to adequately investigate and report the diminished efficacy of its mumps vaccine.
They also claim Merck falsely verified that each manufacturing lot of mumps vaccine would be as effective as identified in the labeling; falsely certified the accuracy of applications filed with the FDA; falsely certified compliance with the terms of the CDC purchase contract; and mislabeled, misbranded and falsely certified its mumps vaccine, among other violations.