Dialogbuch trustWHO, Stand 15.11.16,
Kontakt: lilian@oval.media
Lilian. Lilian nur für Kino (für Fernsehen
Alternativtext).
Lilian nur für TV: Weglassen für Kino
|
|
Pete Myers |
10.00.24 How many of you have family
or close friends with cancer or who have experienced cancers? Put up your
hands. What about diabetes? How about infertility? Family or close friends.
Now I want those of you who put their hand up at least once to put it up
again. For any of those questions… and look around you. |
Lilian Franck |
10.00.55 Today every third person
develops cancer. Who will it be? |
Celia |
10.01.02 Aah. |
Arzt |
10.0102 Done ...
wup. That's it. Plaster on it. Fine! That's it. |
News
report |
10.01.05 The
World Health Organisation recommends immunisation against measles, rubella,
polio hepatitis B, pneumococcal, rotavirus, tuberculosis… |
News
Report 2 |
10.01.13 Opponents
of vaccination describe side-effects such as autism, diabetes, asthma,
multiple sclerosis,epilepsy, narcolepsy… |
News
Report 3 |
10.01.22 According
to WHO, children should consume no more than six teaspoons daily of added
sugar. |
News
Report 4 |
10.01.27 Recommendations
of the WHO influence governments around the world. |
Angela
Merkel |
10.01.32 Health
is a human right. |
Obama |
10.01.35
Because
if we want to protect Americans from Ebola here at home, we
have to end it over there. H1N1, SARS, MERS. |
Margaret
Chan |
10.01.44 Universal
health coverage is the single most powerful concept that public health has to
offer. We will not let the people down. |
Radio
broadcast |
10.02.05
The
World Health Organisation, known as WHO, has its headquarters in Geneva. Here
it determines the medical norms which are applied around the world. But this
special United Nations organisation with around 7000 members displays
increasingly serious weaknesses, particularly during crisis interventions. |
Alison
Katz |
10.02.28 But after Fukushima, I
think, you can see that everyone knows that there's a kind of official and
high level cover up and the WHO is involved in it. |
Text
board |
10.02.40 Trust WHO |
Lilian Franck |
10.02.51 I'm a filmmaker, I have a daughter, it is
important to me that she finds the world in good condition. That is why I'm
travelling to the WHO headquarters in Geneva. The American journalist Robert
Parsons lives here. For 20 years now he's been writing about the WHO. |
Robert
Parsons: |
10.03.10 Until
a few years ago every Monday the opening day of the World Health Assembly
there was a presumptuous reception at the WHO, given by the Director General.
That was the great centrepiece, where everybody met and talked and it was a
very good situation for pulling everybody together in an informal setting. 10.03.39 Now
more than ever that sort of thing has been replaced by private receptions and
they are organised by industry. |
Merck-Sprecher: |
10.03.49 I am
particularly pleased to have two ministers of health… |
Robert
Parsons: |
10.03.53 And
the industry spends a lot of money. For them it is just part of the cost of
doing business. It’s a way of making direct contact with the people who, back
in their home countries, are making the decisions to formulate and implement
public health policy. |
Text
board |
10.04.13 1948,
creation of the World Health Organisation. |
WHO-Sprecher: |
10.04.15 Suffering
of millions of human beings in scores of countries will be alleviated and
many, many thousands of lives will be saved. |
TV
broadcast |
10.04.28 When it was founded, the
World Health Organisation featured 61 member states and was financed from
their contributions. |
TV
Broadcast 2 |
10.04.35 WHO
has positively changed everything. Smallpox was completely eradicated, which
was the first time ever that a disease was wiped out… |
TV
Broadcast 3 |
10.04.43 The
world saved each year 1000 million dollars on vaccines and care of the sick
alone. |
Lilian Franck |
10.04.50 According to Robert Parsons, the WHO is
infiltrated by the industry from the very start. |
Robert
Parsons: |
10.04.56 Here.
This one’s in English. This was in the San Francisco Examiner. Anyway, WHO
was not happy with my coverage because it made them look less than good. |
Lilian Franck |
10.05.12 Ever since the 1950s, studies have shown
that smoking damages health. But for decades the WHO does little to oppose
the tobacco industry. |
Advert |
10.05.25 How
often does your job call you out of bed in the middle of the night? Well, if
you were a doctor it would be often. And generally, there isn’t much time to
spare. |
Nurse Doctor
1 Doctor
2 Doctor
1 Doctor
2 Doctor
1 |
10.05.36 Coffee,
doctor? Oh,
fine! Have
a Camel with your coffee. Thanks! You
know, this night work is kind of rough, isn’t it? That’s
right. But a Camel is always a pleasure. |
Lilian Franck |
10.05.49 The majority of politicians take no action
against tobacco advertising for decades. |
Helmut
Schmidt: |
10.05.54 No matter what you think
about tobacco advertising it doesn't concern Brussels! |
Lilian Franck |
10.05.59 Nothing is done to check the profits of the
tobacco industry until charges are brought against it by its victims and the
USA. Gradually the tobacco companies are obliged to publish their internal
documents. |
Lilian Franck |
10.06.14 Their strategies to combat the WHO are made
public. One example is the Boca Raton action plan from the year 1988. Senior
figures at Philip Morris met in Florida and drew up a number of sophisticated
strategies to limit the power of the WHO. The first and most important aim.
This organisation has extraordinary influence on government and consumers and
we must find a way to diffuse this. |
Lilian Franck |
10.06.39 The WHO gets under pressure. |
Thomas
Zeltner: |
10.06.42 The
evidence show that tobacco companies had operated for many years with the
deliberate purpose of subverting the efforts of WHO to control tobacco. |
Thomas
Zeltner: |
10.07.00 The tobacco industry founded
institutes and bought scientists who would represent their position. And they
made sure their own names didn't appear anywhere. So the organisations were
called things that wouldn't make you suspect they were really representing
the tobacco industry. |
Lilian Franck |
10.07.29 One of these institutes is led by the
American lawyer Paul Dietrich. Philip Morris finances it with $240,000 a
year. At the same time Dietrich is a consultant for the WHO regional office
in America. When his double role becomes known, Dietrich moves into the
finance industry. |
Lilian Franck |
10.07.47 He won't agree to talk to me. And the WHO
report on the strategies of the tobacco industry, 6 other consultants are
mentioned. The British toxicologist Frank Sullivan for instance, claims that
passive smoking doesn't harm your health. His study on the subject is
financed by Philip Morris. |
Lilian Franck |
10.08.09 In the year 2000, Sullivan's collaboration
with the tobacco industry becomes public, but still continues to advise the
WHO. I meet with two department leaders combating tobacco under the auspices of
the WHO. |
Douglas
Bettcher Lilian
Franck Douglas
Bettcher |
10.08.23 We have a zero tolerance
approach as I said the Director General says, the tobacco industry is our
number 1 enemy and we wear that badge very proudly. Is Frank Sullivan still a
WHO consultant? Absolutely not I mean... They
can't because the names of all those persons are well known through the
documents. |
Lilian
Franck Douglas
Bettcher |
10.08.46 But did Frank Sullivan
consult to WHO in for example 2002 let's say? Not that I'm aware of as
well too, and again the policies that are in place now is that all
consultants no matter whether they're working in tobacco control or
infectious diseases or anywhere in the organisation, have to sign a
declaration of interest. |
Lilian
Franck Vera da
Costa e Silva Douglas
Bettcher Lilian
Franck |
10.09.10 But this means a lot of
trust. Don't you think they should be reviewed? Trust I think that you
should trust until such a day you lack trust. You cannot just start by
already being suspicious about people and their capacity to do things. That's good. Thank you so much. |
Lilian Franck |
10.09.30 We are not alone during the conversation,
three WHO staff are watching us and the press spokesman conducts the person
I'm interviewing with silent gestures. |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.09.41 The
WHO and also Thomas Zeltner, they always say 'okay we had a problem and there
were single persons who were corrupt. This was the Mr. Sullivans, Paul
Dietrichs and so on. But I'm always doubting, I mean, was it really single
persons and now it's over or would you say that entire segments of WHO are
corrupt? |
Robert
Parsons: |
10.10.05 We
also have all the tobacco company documents which show how major corporations
operate. And the pharmaceutical companies or the chemical companies do not
operate any differently. Their obligation to their shareholders completely
overwhelms any consideration of public health. These are the people that are
involved in the H1N1 push. |
Lilian Franck |
10.10.27 Swine flu, or H1N1, is presented by the WHO
and in the public media as a huge threat. Wrongly as it later emerges. |
News
report News
report 2 |
10.10.37 During the first year 258
people die of swine flu in Germany. Far fewer than in a normal flu outbreak. If you've been diagnosed
with probable or presumed 2009 H1N1 or Swine flu in recent months, you may be
surprised to know this. The odds are you didn't have H1N1 flu. In fact, you probably
didn't have flu at all. |
Lilian Franck |
10.11.03 Many countries including Germany, Italy,
France and Great Britain concluded secret agreements with pharmaceutical
companies before the Swine flu incident, which obliged them to purchase Swine
flu vaccinations. But only if the WHO issued a pandemic level 6 alert. |
Margaret
Chan: |
10.11.26 The
world is now at the start of the 2009 influenza pandemic. |
Wolfgang
Wodarg TV: |
10.11.34 According to analysts, the
WHO initiated spending on health measures around of $18 billion worldwide. |
Wolfgang
Wodarg: |
10.11.56 Glaxo, Novartis, Sanofi... They
had all launched new production programs to produce the vaccine for this
pandemic. They had all made agreements with nation states. And since they had
invested so much in this but couldn't sell the vaccine because there was no
pandemic, and no sign of a flu outbreak – they fabricated a pandemic. |
Lilian Franck |
10.12.18 Swine flu makes considerable profits for the
manufacturers of vaccines. |
Newsreader |
10.12.23 …in its
first quarter net-profit, stating its swine flu vaccine land test for the
gains. France's largest drug maker said its net profit in the quarter rose to
1,71 billion Euros, that's 2.26 billion US dollars from 1.58 billion dollars
a year ago. |
Lilian Franck |
10.12.37 I tried to arrange an interview with the
person responsible for Swine flu at the WHO, Keiji Fukuda, he was often on
television at the time. But I get an appointment with the official press
spokesman. |
Gregory
Hartl at a press conference |
10.12.48 Eleven
countries officially reporting 331 cases of influenza A H1N1 infection with
ten deaths. |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.13.03 Were
you aware of the contracts between pharmaceutical companies and government? |
Gregory
Hartl: |
10.13.07 We
have to be aware of this, of course, you have to be aware of everything
that's going on. And it is extremely easy to ... after the fact ... say 'well
maybe X should not have done Y and A should not have done B.' However, think
about the opposite: What would have happened had the influenza killed 50% of
the people it infected, and there was no vaccine. |
Germán Velásquez: |
10.13.38 At the time of the swine flu
outbreak I was WHO General Secretary in the Department of Public Health, Intellectual
Property and Medication. Nobody there was afraid. I didn't know anyone at the
WHO who had himself vaccinated. Including the Director-General, who told
journalists in response to their questions that she hadn't had time but would
get herself vaccinated later. |
Lilian Franck |
10.14.16 At the time I am pregnant and I avoid
airports, crowds and all forms of travel. Public media exaggerates with words
and images, the danger resulting from swine flu. |
Germán Velásquez: |
10.14.38 It was publicised around the
world, that the criteria for declaring a pandemic were changed and at the
same time the old guidelines vanished from the WHO website. |
Lilian Franck: |
10.14.50 Could they have
declared the pandemic level 6 also with
the old definition? |
Germán Velásquez: |
10.14.56 No, because the severity,
the number of deaths, would have been a factor. Since that was no longer one
of the criteria, it made it easier to declare a pandemic. |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.15.17 So
this is ...ah...this was removed before ...ah...2009 shortly before H.1.N.1. |
Gregory
Hartl TV interview Interviewer |
10.15.32 I have already told you that
we really have to work with the pharmaceutical industry because that they
have a good solution for swine flu. For all flu types. Yes, you certainly do that; your
director of vaccines comes straight from a large French pharmaceutical
company. |
Marie-Paule
Kieny |
10.15.53 Of
course we would like to have a vaccine tomorrow. We would have wanted to have it yesterday |
Lilian Franck |
10.15.59 In 2009, Miss Kieny is a member of the WHO
Swine flu working group. Previously she had worked for the French
pharmaceutical company Transgene. The press spokesman doesn't allow me to
interview her, so I try to approach her directly at a conference. |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.16.14 Would you have time for an
interview? |
Lilian Franck |
10.16.18 I ask Miss Kieny why the criteria of
severity was deleted from the definition of a pandemic phase. |
Marie-Paule
Kieny |
10.16.26 There was a series of
meetings between experts in order to arrive at objective criteria for
declaring a pandemic. It's always difficult to talk about the severity of a
disease especially at the beginning. The severity depends on the state of
health of those who are infected. So the experts thought it would be better
to proceed from objective criteria. Objective criteria mean that it can be
proven whether transfer within the community is taking place and in how many
countries this happens. |
Lilian
Franck |
10.17.06 How do you feel today about
that change? |
Marie-Paule
Kieny: |
10.17.10 Automatic criteria like
that, which can't take into account factors such as, for example, severity,
are definitely too strict. |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.17.25 Will that be changed again? |
Marie-Paule
Kieny: |
10.17.27 Yes, definitely. |
Wolfgang
Wodarg: |
10.17.28 The WHO officials have no
idea about such things. They have to depend on scientists. And the scientists
are allocated to them by the countries and by the organisations that finance
the WHO. And many of them gave advice and made decisions that benefited the
pharmaceutical industry. |
Lilian Franck |
10.17.59 The WHO working group on Swine flu consists
of 13 external consultants. Two of them report conflicts of interest. Neil
Ferguson declares consultancy fees from GlaxoSmithKline, Baxter and Roche,
the manufacturers of the swine flu vaccines and medications. Not a problem
for the WHO. In 2007, Albert Osterhaus loses his voting right on the Dutch
heath commission due to his conflicts of interest. He declares to the WHO
that he has shares in the pharma company Viroclinics, which is suspected of
profiting from Swine flu. He also declares that he is the chairman of ESWI,
describing it as a group of independent scientists. In fact, it is partly
financed by vaccine manufacturers. |
Albert
Osterhaus: |
10.18.49 I
can tell you that there is no scientific meeting today organised that is not
being sponsored by industry, and rightly so! Industry is making the vaccines,
it's not the national institutes that are making the vaccines any longer.
Industry is doing it. |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.19.02 I'm
very curious: are you still consulting WHO as an expert? |
Albert
Osterhaus: |
10.19.07 At
the moment I am working more with the private sector as well so I'm still
consulting from time to time. |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.19.31 Are
you still working with the European Scientists against Influenza? |
Albert
Osterhaus |
10.19.17 Yes,
I'm the chair of that particular organisation. |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.19.20 Because
I saw that you declared this as a conflict of interest? |
Albert
Osterhaus: |
10.19.24 No,
no, it's not a conflict of interest, but I declare also what might be
perceived as a conflict of interest. |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.19.31 Okay,
that's a difference. |
Albert
Osterhaus: |
10.19.32 No
but you have to be very careful there. So at least if you say that, and of
course people can hold it against you, but at least I can always say, and I
have always done that, at least you show what you do. |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.19.43 It
was written they're an independent group of scientists and when I looked on
the website I saw that it is funded by like, all the vaccine producers... |
Albert
Osterhaus: |
10.19.52 No,
no, it's not funded by... Some money comes from vaccine producers, but there
is money coming from many other sources as well, and that's the same with WHO
and a lot of other organisations. As long as you are transparent and show
what you are doing it's fine I think. |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.20.07 How
is the percentage of funding? |
Albert
Osterhaus: |
10.20.09 I
don't know exactly. But there is a substantial part of the funding ...comes
from elsewhere. It comes from meetings, comes from European projects, come
from... And there is a percentage coming from industry, and that's completely
transparent. |
Albert
Osterhaus: |
10.20.21 No,
it's fine to bring it up again, but for me... for me it‘s over |
Lilian Franck |
10.20.25 I don't get any hard figures from Mr.
Osterhaus afterwards either. Without any facts, without transparency, I can't
make any progress here. What about the WHO? |
Margaret
Chan: |
10.20.38 At
the country level I hear good news and I hear bad news about engagement with
non-state actors, that would... |
Germán Velásquez: |
10.20.46 At a meeting between the
Director-General and prospective vaccine manufacturers most of our colleagues
were excluded, including me. I was a head of department in the WHO and one of
the Director-General's closest associates: an important member of staff in
the organisation. On that specific day I went down to the conference room, and
the person at the door said: "No, this is a private meeting." Even
though I was a leading official at the WHO responsible for an important topic
that was under discussion there, I wasn't allowed to enter. |
Wolfgang
Wodarg: |
10.21.36 The situation was evaluated
correspondingly by the Council of Europe. Reprimand was issued. The lack of
transparency, the role of the experts who were being paid by the
pharmaceutical industry. Then changes were demanded, but the WHO didn't
respond to the Council of Europe. The WHO only turned up for the first
hearing and then didn't come again. It didn't have to. It isn't obliged to
supply us with any information. We can't demand to confiscate the files, look
through them. It is impossible. There isn't anybody who can do those things. And
there's no investigating commission like in Parliament where the MPs can go
and say something has to stop and then everybody has to turn up and show
their files. There's nothing like that. The WHO can operate in a very clandestine
fashion. |
Lilian Franck |
10.22.33 In the case of the pharmaceutical industry,
it's even more difficult for the WHO to maintain its independence than with
the tobacco industry. On the one hand the WHO is dependent on the
pharmaceutical industries for research and medication. But the industries
financial interests mustn't damage the WHO's activities in the area of
health. One thing is clear, today the pharmaceutical industry is part of the
health system, just like the governments that control the WHO. |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.23.06 Politics and industry: where
are developments moving today? |
Wolfgang
Wodarg: |
10.23.09 We are going through a
period of deregulation which means the work of the state is being cut back and
state tasks are being privatised. So now there is a huge amount of lobbying
work, new areas of growth, commercial activity where there used to be state
responsibility. And once it gets to that stage it's no longer necessary to
bribe officials. You can simply make money from it. That's the development
we're seeing at the present time. |
Lilian Franck |
10.23.43 Politics are losing power. And that's also
reflected in the financing of the WHO. In the 1990s, all countries froze
their membership contributions in the wake of the financial crisis. |
Lilian Franck |
10.23.58 Today UN organisations, foundations, NGOs
and industry contribute almost 40 percent of the WHO's annual |
Bill
Gates |
10.24.15 30
years ago in starting Microsoft there was... we had a very ambitious vision:
a computer for everyone. Now I join you in seeking to archive an even more
important vision, which is good health for every human being. |
Lilian Franck |
10.24.34 Today the WHO relies on voluntary
contributions like that from the Gates foundation, but these are often linked
to conditions. |
Lilian Franck |
10.24.43 The WHO's annual budget amounts to about 2bn
dollars. Coca Cola spends twice that much on advertising alone. And the
hospitals around Lake Geneva spend 6bn dollars a year. |
Lilian Franck |
10.25.02 When it was founded, the WHO could decide
how to distribute its funds itself. Now 70 percent of its budget is tied to
particular projects, countries or regions. |
Lilian Franck |
10.25.19 If the WHO receives funding to fight malaria
for example, it can't use that money to combat Ebola. |
Hermann
Gröhe: |
10.25.34 The
Ebola Interim Assessment Panel put it in very precise words: At present WHO
does not have the operational capacity or culture to deliver a full emergency
public health response. |
Lilian Franck |
10.25.50 What does the Director General of the WHO
think about that? I want to ask her what constraints she is under. |
Margaret
Chan: |
10.25.57 ...of
a newspaper? |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.25.59 No,
I'm from.. ehm ...I'm doing a cinema documentary, I'm a filmmaker. |
Margaret
Chan: |
10.26.04 Ok
..eh...let's discuss the date. You don't work in July/August? |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.26.09 No,
ehm, no August would also be possible. |
Margaret
Chan: |
10.26.13 July,
August, whatever, is not so hectic. July and ... |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.26.18 What
is better for you. Ok then I will adapt myself. |
Text
Board |
10.26.25 November 17th We explore, if it is possible to speak to Margaret Chan during the first
half of the year. |
Text
board |
10.26.34 June 30th As I said earlier, we will check if the interview is possible. |
Text
board |
10.26.41 July 20th We still have no decision on the interview. |
Test
board |
10.26.51 August 10th I do not have any news; many people are gone in August. We will let you
know when we do. |
Lilian Franck |
10.27.03 Since I can't get to speak to Margaret Chan,
I meet one of her close advisors. |
Gaudenz
Silberschmidt: |
10.27.10 I
think it's simply a wrong perception to think there can be an external,
independent review. Because then you have to say 'who is selecting these
independent experts? And who is controlling their independence? And who is
controlling the independence of those controlling the independence?' There is
no external entity as such 'independent'. |
Patti
Rundall: |
10.27.33 Of
course he is right, but he is wrong. You know, he is mixing everything up,
because this world is as it is and you have to do what you can to make sure
that the independence of the science is as good as possible. It will never
ever be perfect. He is quite right about that. But he should be talking about
his own, I mean he is from Switzerland, he came straight from Switzerland
which is a country that is completely locked in to a partnership approach.
And he is in charge of partnerships at WHO. So I know, Gaudenz was very keen
that any companies could come in as long as it was 'transparent', he didn't
mind. |
Japanese
kids Interviewer Japanses
kids Japanese
boy |
10.28.39 The radiation is in the
gaps. Where? The radiation is in these
cracks. This is a measuring device.
It measures the radiation. Because it's so high. |
News
report |
10.29.00 Fukushima city this morning.
The Health Commission is meeting the Prefecture in this hotel. They are
presenting new figures about alterations in children's thyroid glands. Over a
year and a half after the nuclear catastrophe. The chairman of the commission
is Prof Yamashita. Over 42% of the children displayed nodules or cysts. After
Chernobyl the corresponding figure was between 0.5% and 1%, as measured at
the time by Prof Yamashita. But what surprises us much more is that none of
the relevant experts are asking about the causes of these high figures. |
Lilian Franck |
10.29.33 Professor Yamashita is contributing to the
trivialisation of the risk of radioactive contamination in public. |
Professor Yamashita on TV |
10.29.39 If you laugh, the radiation
doesn't have any effect. If you don't laugh, it has an effect. This theory
has been proven in animal experiments. |
Lilian Franck |
10.29.52 Yamashita works together with the WHO in
cases of nuclear catastrophe. Is the WHO downplaying the dangers of nuclear
radiation? Is it for example, keeping silent about a rise in thyroid cancer?
It's difficult to find anybody who is allowed to talk. The mayor of
Matsumoto, Akira Sugenoya, is also a doctor and has founded a convalescence
camp for children from contaminated areas. |
Dr Akira Sugenoya |
10.30.18 Konichiwa! |
Dr Akira Sugenoya |
10.30.24 In particular, pregnant
women, mothers who are breastfeeding, and children can develop long-term
damage due to contact with radiation after the catastrophe. In order to
protect the lives of the children in particular I have advocated taking
measures to transfer them to safe regions. |
Dr Akira Sugenoya |
10.30.51 Since the attitude of the
government was that iodine wasn't necessary no official instructions for
taking iodine tablets were issued. In interviews I have said that people should
take the tablets anyway. |
Newspaper report |
10.31.07 Dr Sugenoya warns that
Fukushima has caused thyroid cancer. |
Newspaper report |
10.31.12 Radiation also a problem in
the future. |
Newspaper report |
10.31.16 Mistakes made at Chernobyl
should not be repeated! |
Lilian Franck |
10.31.19 As a result of experience after Chernobyl,
the WHO recommendations for issuing iodine were revised in the year 1999
under the supervision of the British scientist Keith Baverstock, a member of
staff at the WHO. |
Keith
Baverstock: |
10.31.46 When
I started my programme with WHO within a few weeks I learned that there was a
claim that there was a large number of thyroid cancers in children. And this
ended up in a mission to Minsk. We saw an astonishing number of children
who'd been operated for thyroid cancer, quite young children. So to see as we
did on that day possibly I think it was eleven or twelve, maybe, cases in one
place at one time all having been operated. It was really quite
extraordinary. We took it from there and with our Belarussian colleagues
published two short papers in the journal 'Nature' to draw attention to it.
After the papers were published WHO asked me to withdraw the paper from
'Nature'. |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.32.42 Ok. |
Keith
Baverstock: |
10.32.43 A
paper published with about five or six other people. All agreeing on this
position. And Kreisel asked me to withdraw that paper from publication. After
it had been published. |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.32.59 Who
worked Kreisel, who worked at WHO...? |
Keith
Baverstock: |
10.33.02 Geneva,
yes. He threatened me. |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.33.07 How
did he threaten you? |
Keith
Baverstock: |
10.33.08 With
my career. He said your career will be shortened, if you don't do this. |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.33.14 And
was it shortened? |
Keith
Baverstock: |
10.33.15 No. |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.33.23 I
wonder why in Fukushima iodine wasn't distributed. |
Keith
Baverstock: |
10.33.26 I
don't know. I don't know. They should have been giving it, yes. Yeah.
They don't like to cause panic. |
News
reporter |
10.33.40 Experts commissioned by the
government conclude that dangers were underestimated. In addition, they
criticise the crisis management procedure after the reactor accident. They
also claim that Tepco attempted to conceal the real extent of the incident and
that the government, under the then Prime Minister Naoto Kan, did not inform
the public adequately. |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.34.00 Did
you have any contact with WHO after the Tepco accident? |
Naoto Kan |
10.34.05 Of course there was contact,
at least I think so. The various departments instigated communications. I
don't remember exactly the details of the contact that was made. Naturally
various channels were used to maintain contact. We know today that
radioactivity emerged several days after the accident. But at the time of the
accident it was assumed that wasn't the case. That was the view issued by
both Tepco and the experts. As a result, unfortunately, no measures could be
taken initially. And it wasn't possible to issue iodine to all the children affected.
That's one of the things I regret most. |
Lilian Franck |
10.35.04 00:50:36:22 -->
00:50:40:21 I still find it beyond
belief that Naoto Kan was convinced at the time that no radioactivity would
emerge after the accident. Just one day after the accident a monitoring station
of the organisation CTBTO recorded raised levels of radioactivity 200km from
the nuclear power station. |
Ärztin |
10.35.25 Ms Kokoro Kamyama please. |
Ärztin: Ärztin: |
10.35.31 Date of birth? Was anything found last
time? |
Kokoro Kamyama: |
10.35.41 No, I don't think so. |
Ärztin: |
10.35.47 Where were you at the time
of the accident? |
Kokoro Kamyama: |
10.35.50 On 11th March I
was in Fukushima. During the summer holidays I moved house. |
Ärztin: |
10.36.00 But after the accident, after
the summer holidays, you were in Fukushima the whole time? |
Kokoro Kamyama: |
10.36.06 Yes. |
Ärztin: |
10.36.09 I can see something …in the
thyroid gland, about 5 mm in size. |
Dr Kaoru Konta |
10.36.21 I went to a number of
conferences in Fukushima, because I was very concerned about the effects of
the radiation. Everywhere they kept on saying it's safe. So I decided to go
to Belarus to discover the truth. The data I was allowed to see in Belarus showed
very clearly that cancer rates have risen constantly since Chernobyl. And are
still rising. On the basis of the data, I'm sure that the problem will also
become more serious in Fukushima. |
Naoto Kan: |
10.36.55 Some specialists say there
is a rise in cases of thyroid cancer. Others say that no rise can be
ascertained at the moment. That's my understanding of the situation at
present. |
Lilian
Franck |
10.37.08 But who is right? |
Naoto Kan: |
10.37.10 I personally think there is
a danger, and I am concerned about it. I can say that publicly now because
I'm no longer Prime Minister of Japan. |
Lilian Franck: |
10.37.26 Yeah, what do you think
today about iodine intake after a nuclear accident? |
Gregory
Hartl: |
10.37.30 Well
again, it was more or less what I said in the video. |
Gregory
Hartl interview |
10.37.35 People
are not taking iodine as of the moment. The Japanese authorities have not
said that that should be done. They have distributed iodine tablets as
preposition but they have not asked anyone to take them. Taking iodine
tablets in the absence of iodine radiation is actually bad for you. |
Gregory
Hartl: |
10.37.56 You
need to match iodine, taking iodine, to the exposure. |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.38.02 I
understand, but from today's point of view: Was the exposure given at that
time in most affected areas or not? |
Gregory
Hartl: |
10.38.10 You
know, again: that's almost five years ago and I can't remember the process
from day to day. And certainly we would have adapted, though, our
recommendations based on the information we were getting. |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.38.24 But
there are these guidelines and it's written in here: you should take iodine
within the first six hours after a nuclear accident. That's in here and it's
also clear that it was not given in Fukushima. That's also a fact. I mean,
that's something you don't have to look up. it's obvious. |
Gregory
Hartl: |
10.38.48 Ok.
I really think you are wasting your time on this topic as I only have till 12
o’clock... |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.38.59 Is
it that you can't say something critical about the Japanese government? |
Gregory
Hartl: |
10.39.05 I...
WHO work on a basis of facts. And if I don't have the facts and the
information at my fingertips, I'm not going to speculate. |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.39.15 Yeah.
But in general is it possible for WHO to criticise nations? |
Gregory
Hartl: |
10.39.22 I'm..
look I'm not going to say anything more about this. Why should I say anything
more? |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.39.27 No,
this was a general question, not in relation to Fukushima. |
Gregory
Hartl: |
10.39.30 Well,
let's move on to another topic. |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.39.32 Ok. Is it getting more
difficult for you? With all the... WHO losing trust of ..? |
Gregory Hartl: |
10.39.41 Who says WHO has
lost trust? Is that
you? |
Alison
Katz: |
10.39.59 I am Alison Katz. I
worked for the World Health Organisation myself for 18 years and since I have
left I have been involved with 'Independent WHO', which works in the area of
radiation and health. And we have been in front of the World Health
Organisation headquarters in Geneva for seven years now. And it is a
permanent, peaceful protest. So that the world understands, that somebody is
witnessing the victims of radiation, which includes almost everybody. |
Allison Katz |
10.40.33 The Japanese people
are already talking. And they are reporting very, you know, very serious
health effects in children that the World Health Organisation is ignoring, is
not talking about, doesn't mention in its report. You know... at the time of
Chernobyl the people couldn't talk freely. |
Allison Katz: |
10.41.00 The 'New York
Academy of Science' book, this one, comes up with an estimate of 985.000
deaths, but that is worldwide between 1986 and 2004. And of course that makes
a dramatic contrast with what the establishment says, which is still around
50 deaths and possibly 4000 cancers. As a final total. The other major
omission is that the World Health Organisation has never considered anything
except cancer as a health effect. |
Boy 1 |
10.41.34 I was diagnosed with a heart
defect when I was three months old. |
Boy 2: |
10.41.38 I have already had three
heart attacks. |
Girl: |
10.41.42 I have been sick since I was
seven. |
Interviewer: |
10.41.45 How old are you now? |
Girl: |
10.41.46 14. |
Interviewer: |
10.41.48 What sickness do you have? |
Girl: |
10.41.52 Systemic collagenosis. |
Doctor/interviewer |
10.41.56 What hurts you? |
Girl: |
10.41.58 My heart. |
Lilian Franck: |
10.42.26 But since
Tschernobyl we know that there are other diseases. |
Gregory Hartl: |
10.42.29 What other diseases? |
Lilian Franck: |
10.42.30 Unfortunately, yeah
for example... let me look. It's cardio-vascular diseases, infertility,
thyroid diseases other than cancer. There's a book, maybe you heard about it,
of the New York Academy of Sciences. |
Gregory Hartl: |
10.42.46 Which was repudiated
by the New York Academy of Sciences, because it's so unsound. |
Lilian Franck: |
10.42.51 But that's not true. |
Gregory Hartl: |
10.42.52 Yes. If you read the
Acade... the statement from the New York Academy of Sciences in 2011 or 12
they repudiated the book. Let me give you this, this is from the 'Journal of
Radiology' ... |
Lilian Franck: |
10.43.04 Oh, thank you. Ok,
I... |
Gregory Hartl: |
10.43.06 ... and it's a
review of the New York Academy of Sciences book, which talks about all the
flaws in it. |
Lilian Franck: |
10.43.10 Ok. So I should also
give you something. A book review by Independent WHO |
Gregory Hartl: |
Yeah. |
Lilian Franck: |
10.43.22 Ok, we read this and
then we meet again? |
Lilian Franck: |
10.43.37 Hello, this is Lilian
Franck. What does it mean exactly? Did the New York of Sciences repudiate the
Chernobyl book? |
Lilian Franck |
10.43.46 The editor tells me that the Academy never
repudiated the book. He permits me to record the phone call, but later he
withdraws his permission. Isn't he able to speak freely either? |
Lilian Franck |
10.43.59 Perhaps the publisher of the Chernobyl book
can help me. |
Janette
Sherman (telephone) |
10.44.07 Good morning! |
Lilian
Franck |
10.44.08 Good morning. |
Janette
Sherman (telephone) |
10.44.09 Ehm, the original
contact person at the New York Academy of Sciences, you know, agreed to
publish the book. And then there was a big to-do at the New York Academy and
they did not think it was a good idea. And I suspected they were pressured by
the nuclear industry, but I don't know for sure. |
Lilian Franck |
10.44.36 How big is the influence of the nuclear
industry? |
Lilian Franck |
10.44.41 The international Atomic Energy Agency,
IAEA, wants to promote the safe and peaceful use of atomic energy. |
Yukiya Amano: |
10.44.51 Nuclear power will
remain an important and viable option for many countries as a stable and
clear source of energy. |
Lilian Franck |
10.45.08 The WHO is concerned with health. These are
different priorities but the two organisations are working closely together. |
Lilian Franck |
10.45.21 For example, together with other UN
organisations they are compiling a report about the health consequences of
Chernobyl. |
Lilian Franck: |
10.45.31 This is your place.
I, ehm.. |
Ian Fairlie: |
10.45.32 I'm a critic of WHO
and they tended not to invite critics for their two reports, one on health
and one on environment. |
Ian Fairlie: |
10.45.42 The thing was there
would be a whole series of informal meetings going on between WHO and IAEA at
quite senior levels, very senior levels. And they would predetermine what the
line they would take. That's why they had a WHO stroke IAEA meeting in Vienna
in 2005, in October 2005, to put the line across. This is it. This is what we
are going to do. The trouble was that many, many people came opposed to all
of this. |
Lilian Franck |
10.46.25 Maria Neira works at the WHO. She is
responsible for the risks of radioactive contamination. I deliberately make
an appointment to see her in Paris. The press department won't get in the way
here. To make sure she agrees to see me, I don't tell her what I want to talk
about until we first meet. |
Maria Neira: |
10.46.44 Concerning
Chernobyl, there is a group saying that there have been one million deaths,
that WHO is hiding. Come on, one million deaths. Come on. Seriously. |
Lilian
Franck: |
10.46.53 Yeah,
but this because they looked at the broader... |
Maria Neira: |
10.45.54 One million deaths?
And then the humanity will not... I mean, one million! This is... |
Lilian Franck: |
10.47.01 Yeah but this
because they were looking at a broader part of the world population. |
Maria Neira: |
10.47.06 Yeah, but one
million deaths. You think you can hide one million deaths? |
Lilian Franck: |
10.47.10 But ... yeah but do
you seriously think... |
Maria Neira: |
10.47.12 Which records, you
have mortality records. |
Lilian Franck: |
10.47.14 How can you
seriously believe that Chernobyl accident caused 50 deaths? |
Maria Neira: |
10.47.20 No, we didn't say
that. |
Lilian Franck: |
10.47.21 But it's still on the
WHO website. |
Ian Fairlie: |
10.47.33 So we wrote the
other report. And the initials are T-O-R-C-H, which is TORCH. We said right
away that we expected somewhere between 30 and 60.000 altogether worldwide
future deaths. Because the plume from Chernobyl went right round the world.
The northern hemisphere. And whilst the concentrations were low far, far
away, it doesn't matter, because there were many, many millions of people.
There are 600 million people in Europe alone and they were all affected. |
WHO report |
10.48.10 The World Health
Organisation of the United Nations also does not consider there to be any
danger to people outside the affected region within the Soviet Union. |
Newspaper
report |
10.48.23 WHO report: Only slight
increase in risk of cancer after Fukushima |
Newspaper
report |
10.48.29 Report: Fukushima’s
radiation damaged more souls than bodies |
Newspaper
report |
10.48.34 Meltdown: Despite the fear,
the health risks from the Fukushima accident are minimal |
Maria Neira: |
10.48.49 We were not
using cancer mortality figures but rather incidents is because, as you know,
most of the cancers can now be treated and therefore they were not mortality
associated. |
Maria Neira: |
10.49.01 I don't know whether
you have noticed, but our health risk assessment is only with the logo of
WHO. |
Lilian Franck: |
10.49.07 But I mean if one
third of the experts belonged to IAEA? |
Maria Neira: |
10.49.11 This is kind of
anticipating that those experts from IAEA are not on the best of their
science, which is the case. I don't think they were there to represent any
interests. |
Lilian Franck: |
10.49.22 I mean it was
criticised that there was no oncologist or no radiobiologist, also no
scientist who published critical articles on health effects of nuclear
energy. |
Maria Neira: |
10.49.33 But when you need to
do a scientific report it's not a question bringing an activist from the left
wing, an activist from the right wing. It's a question of science. What
happens is that there are groups outside that they want to use those
accidents to say 'you see nuclear energy is..is bad, is...is dangerous, why
we don't stop the use of the nuclear energy? Which is a different cause. |
Lilian Franck: |
10.49.58 Do you think it
could also be the other way around, that nuclear industry tries to not to
tell the whole truth about the health impacts? |
Maria Neira: |
10.50.12 We are there, we are
doing the best we can. And with the support of everybody who recognises that
there is a need for a global public health... very heavy institution - heavy,
but in the good sense - I mean with weight institution and powerful
institution, it will be the best for all of us. And I will fight for that for
the rest of my life. I'm a convinced public health officer, and I think I’m
correct with it, that if we need to fight I'm not afraid. |
German
Velasquez: |
50.51 In an industrialised world,
the industrial powers want any international health organisation to be weak. |
Thomas
Zeltner: |
10.51.04 The World Health
Organisation is in a very fragile situation with regard to its financing. |
Wolfgang
Wodarg: |
10.51.16 The WHO is under financial
pressure because for many of the countries involved economic interests are
more important than health interests, even if they claim the opposite. |
Wolfgang
Wodarg: |
10.51.28 And that's criminal, because
people die as a result. |
Pete Myers: |
10.51.33 A scientist in the
United States this past spring made the observation that this generation of
children is the first generation in modern history that is not going to be as
healthy as their parents. That should not be. |
Lilian Franck |
10.51.53 What do I do with this knowledge now? Go out
on the streets together with independent WHO, or just go home again? Am I at
the end now? Is there any real end? Margaret Chan carries on. |
Zulfikar G. Abbany: |
10.52.25 Right, ehm.. it's
over to you folks. Who would like to start the round of questions? Thank you. |
Lilian Franck: |
10.52.32 Is it on? Do you
hear me? Yeah, ok. Lilian Franck, OVALmedia. It's a question to Dr. Chan: We
just learned that refugee health, AMR and climate change are huge global
challenges. But I'm asking myself: How can we meet them if WHO is constantly
losing power? Important donor nations, they want a weak WHO. One could even
compare WHO to Titanic, I would say. So isn't it your responsibility, Dr.
Chan, to step down before the end of your second term in order to signal to
the world that your organisation, your ship is sinking? |
Margaret Chan: |
10.53.12 You ask an excellent
question. If I tell you WHO as an organisation, only 30% of my budget is
predictable funds. Other 70% I have to take a hat and go around the world to
beg for money. And when they give us the money, they are highly linked to
their preferences, what they like. It may not be the priority of WHO. So if
we do not solve this, you know, we are not going to be as great as we were. |
END |
10.56.02 |