Swine Flu: A Whole Industry Is Waiting For a Pandemic

An Interview With Der Spiegel
Original source here - dated 21st July 2009
Part 1: An Interview with Epidemiologist Tom Jefferson

Tom Jefferson, 55, has worked for the Cochrane Collaboration for 15 years. Along with an international team of scientists, he evaluates all published flu- related studies. Before assuming his current position, he was a general practitioner in the British Army. He lives near Rome. Interview conducted by Johann Grolle and Veronika Hackenbroch.

The world has been gripped with fears of swine flu in recent weeks. In an interview with SPIEGEL, epidemiologist Tom Jefferson speaks about dangerous fear-mongering, misguided, money-driven research and why we should all be washing our hands a lot more often.
SPIEGEL: Mr. Jefferson, the world is living in fear of swine flu. And some predict that, by next winter, one-third of the world's population might be infected. Are you personally worried? Are you and your family taking any precautions?

Jefferson: I wash my hands very often -- and it's not all because of swine flu. That's probably the most effective precaution there is against all respiratory viruses, and the majority of gastrointestinal viruses and germs as well.

SPIEGEL: Do you consider the swine flu to be particularly worrisome?

Jefferson: It's true that influenza viruses are unpredictable, so it does call for a certain degree of caution. But one of the extraordinary features of this influenza -- and the whole influenza saga -- is that there are some people who make predictions year after year, and they get worse and worse. None of them so far have come about, and these people are still there making these predictions. For example, what happened with the bird flu, which was supposed to kill us all? Nothing. But that doesn't stop these people from always making their predictions. Sometimes you get the feeling that there is a whole industry almost waiting for a pandemic to occur.

SPIEGEL: Who do you mean? The World Health Organization (WHO)?

Jefferson: The WHO and public health officials, virologists and the pharmaceutical companies. They've built this machine around the impending pandemic. And there's a lot of money involved, and influence, and careers, and entire institutions! And all it took was one of these influenza viruses to mutate to start the machine grinding.

SPIEGEL: On your Italian homepage, there is a "pandemic countdown" that expires on April 1. Don't you think the situation calls for just a bit more seriousness?

Jefferson: I'm just using it ironically to expose the false certainty that we are fed. Will one-third of the world's population get swine flu? Nobody can say for sure right now. For now, at least, I don't really see any fundamental difference, no difference in the definition between this and a normal flu epidemic. Swine flu could have even stayed unnoticed if it had been caused by some unknown virus rather than an influenza virus.

SPIEGEL: Do you think the WHO declared a pandemic prematurely?

Jefferson: Don't you think there's something noteworthy about the fact that the WHO has changed its definition of pandemic? The old definition was a new virus, which went around quickly, for which you didn't have immunity, and which created a high morbidity and mortality rate. Now the last two have been dropped, and that's how swine flu has been categorized as a pandemic.

SPIEGEL: But, year after year, 10,000-30,000 people in Germany alone die from influenza. In the Western world, influenza is the most deadly infectious disease there is.

Jefferson: Hold on! These figures are nothing more than estimates. More than anything, you have to distinguish between an influenza-like illness and a genuine flu, the real influenza. Both of them have the same symptoms: a sudden high fever, a sore throat, coughing, rheumatic pain in the back and legs, possible bronchitis and pneumonia. But real flues, real influenzas are only caused by influenza viruses, while there are more than 200 different viruses that cause influenza-like illness. When it comes to figures related to so-called flu deaths, you always get other causes of death caused by other viruses mixed in. Now, in the case of elderly people who die of pneumonia, nobody would do a postmortem to figure out if it was really an influenza virus that killed them. Approximately 7 percent of influenza-like illness cases are caused by influenza viruses. It's a very small percentage. What I know is that real influenza is systematically overestimated.

SPIEGEL: And what about the 200 other kinds of viruses?

Jefferson: They're not as popular as influenza. Researchers are just not as interested in that. Take rhinovirus, a horse-derived virus. It's the most commonly isolated agent in common colds. There are a hundred different types of these rhinoviruses. They usually only cause a normal runny nose, but they can be deadly, too. Or so-called RSV, the human respiratory syncytial virus, that is highly dangerous to infants and small children.

SPIEGEL: So why aren't researchers interested in it?

Jefferson: It's easy: They can't make money with it. With rhinoviruses, RSV and the majority of the other viruses, it's hard to make a lot of money or a career out of it. Against influenza, though, there are vaccines, and there are drugs you can sell. And that's where the big money from the pharmaceuticals industry is. It makes sure that research on influenza is published in the good journals. And that's why you have more attention being paid there, and the entire research field becomes interesting for ambitious scientists.

SPIEGEL: But is there any scientific reason to be interested in influenza viruses?

Jefferson: The strict focus on influenza is not only misguided; it's also dangerous. Do you remember something called SARS? That was a truly dangerous epidemic. It was like a meteor: It came and it went quickly, and it killed a lot of people. SARS took us by surprise because it was caused by a completely unknown coronavirus. Where did it come from? Where did it go? Or is it still here? We still don't know. There are lots of other strange things like that coming out. Every year, a new agent is identified. For example, there's something called bocavirus, which can cause bronchitis and pneumonia in small children. And there's something called metapneumovirus, which studies say is responsible for more than 5 percent of all flu-related illnesses. So, we should keep our eyes open in all directions!

SPIEGEL: But the great pandemic of 1918/1919 was caused by an influenza virus, and it killed up to 50 million people around the world. Or do scientists contest that?

Jefferson: It's very well possible that it was, but there are many aspects about the 1918/1919 pandemic that still puzzle us. It was only 12 years ago that we learned that the H1N1 virus caused it. But there was also a lot of bacterial activity going on at the time. And it's particularly unclear why the mortality rate for the flu dropped so dramatically after World War II. Today, you only get a fraction of what was standard before the war. When it comes to the later pandemics, such as the "Asian flu" of 1957 or the "Hong Kong flu" of 1968/69, you can barely detect them as exceptional figures when it comes to death statistics as a whole.

Part 2: Contradictions between Scientific Findings and Practice

SPIEGEL: So why should we even speak of pandemics at all?
Jefferson: That's something you should ask the World Health Organization!

SPIEGEL: In your opinion, what do you think it takes to make a virus like the swine flu a global threat?

Jefferson: Unfortunately, we can only say that we don't know. I suspect that the whole issue is much more complex than we are even able to imagine it today. Given all the viruses that produce flu-like symptoms, perhaps Robert Koch's postulate that one particular pathogen causes one particular disease doesn't go far enough. Why, for example, do we not get influenza in the summertime? In the end, the pathogen is there all year long! Already in the 19th century, the German chemist and hygienist Max von Pettenkofer had developed a theory about how the pathogen's contact with the environment can alter the disease. I think that research in this direction would be worthwhile. Perhaps it would allow us to understand the pandemic of 1918/1919 better or to be able to assess the dangers of swine flu.

SPIEGEL: Humans have better defenses today than they did in 1918, and it probably won't be long before we have a swine flu vaccine. Last week, Germany's federal government announced that it wanted to buy enough for 30 percent of the population. How much do you think that will protect us?

Jefferson: When it comes to pandemic vaccination, as we say in English, the proof is in the pudding. The proof is in using it. We'll see. It does generate an antibody response, but will it really guard against the disease?

SPIEGEL: Are you pessimistic about that?

Jefferson: No, I'm just saying I think we're about to find out (laughter). Let's have this conversation again in about a year's time, shall we?

SPIEGEL: For a number of years, as part of the Cochrane Collaboration, you have been systematically evaluating all the studies on immunization against seasonal influenza. How good does it work?

Jefferson: Not particularly good. An influenza vaccine is not working for the majority of influenza-like illnesses because it is only designed to combat influenza viruses. For that reason, the vaccine changes nothing when it comes to the heightened mortality rate during the winter months. And, even in the best of cases, the vaccine only works against influenza viruses to a limited degree. Among other things, there is always the danger that the flu virus in circulation will have changed by the time that the vaccine product is finished with the result that, in the worst case, the vaccine will be totally ineffectual. In the best of cases, the few decent studies that exist show that the vaccine mainly works with healthy young adults. With children and the elderly, it only helps a little, if at all.

SPIEGEL: But aren't those the exact groups that influenza immunization is recommended for?

Jefferson: Indeed. That's one of the contradictions between scientific findings and practice, between evidence and policy.

SPIEGEL: So, what's behind this contradiction?

Jefferson: Of course, that has something to do with the influence of the pharmaceutical industry. But it also has to do with the fact that the importance of influenza is completely overestimated. It has to do with research funds, power, influence and scientific reputations!

SPIEGEL: So, at the moment is it reasonable to keep vaccinating against seasonal influenza?

Jefferson: I can't see any reason for it, but I'm not a decision maker.

SPIEGEL: And what about Tamiflu and Relenza, two of the anti-flu medications that are being deployed against swine flu? How well do they really work?

Jefferson: If taken at the right time, on average, Tamiflu reduces the duration of a real influenza by one day. One study also found that it diminishes the risk of pneumonia.

SPIEGEL: Could these medications lower mortality rates associated with the flu?

Jefferson: That's possible, but it has yet to be scientifically proven.

SPIEGEL: And what about side effects?

Jefferson: Tamiflu can cause nausea. And there are things that point toward psychiatric side effects. There are reports coming out of Japan that young people who have taken Tamiflu have had acute psychotic reactions similar to those found in schizophrenics.

SPIEGEL: So, is it sensible to use such medications at all?

Jefferson: When it comes to severe disease, yes. But under no circumstances should Tamiflu be handed out to whole schools, as is currently sometimes being done. With that being the case, it doesn't surprise me at all that we're already hearing reports about resistant strains of swine flu.

SPIEGEL: In Germany, the government is supposed to stockpile flu medications for 20 percent of the population. Do you see that as being sensible?

Jefferson: Well, at least there are much cheaper ways to accomplish a lot more. For example, school children should be taught to wash their hands regularly -- preferrably after every class! And every airport should install a couple hundred wash basins. Whoever gets off a plane and doesn't wash their hands should be stopped by the border police. You could tell for example by putting an invisible, neutral dye in the water. And wearing masks can be sensible, as well.

SPIEGEL: Has it really been shown that these measures work?

Jefferson: There are several good studies on this that were done during the SARS epidemic. They are so-called case-control studies that examined individuals that had had close contact with the SARS virus. They compared the characteristics of those who had been infected with the virus through this contact with those of people who had not been infected. These studies resulted in very clear results.

SPIEGEL: You sound pretty impressed.

Jefferson: I am. What's great about these measures is not only that they are inexpensive, but also that they can help against more than just influenza viruses. This method can fight against the 200 pathogens that bring about flu symptoms as well as against gastrointestinal viruses and completely unknown germs. One study done in Pakistan has shown that hand washing can even save children's lives. Someone should get a Nobel Prize for that!

SPIEGEL: Mr. Jefferson, we thank you for this interview.source:healthymuslim.com

Who Are the Kibaar Ulama?

Ibn Masuood – radiAllahu anhu- said: ‘The People will not cease to be in good as long as their Knowledge comes from their Elders, for if their Knowedge comes from the young ones, then this the time of there Destruction’

Ibn Qutaiba said: He intends (by this) that the people will not cease to be in good, as long as their Ulama are the Mashaikh (The elder Scholars) and their Ulama are not the Young ones.

This is because the delights of youth have departed the Shaikh (elder scholar) and he is not excitable, hasty or foolish, and he has experience, so no doubt this enters into his knowledge and he is not overcome by desires nor turned by them, and the Shaytan does not cause him to slip like the Young one. As well as, (the Shaikh) having age and eminence, nobility and awe.

And it is possible for the Young one to affected by those things that the Shaikh is saved from, and if they affect him (i.e. the young one) and he then gives a ruling, he is destroyed and destroys others’

And the Prophet – peace be upon him - described the Khawarij who have gone astray as “Hudatha As’naan”: young in age.

And Nawawee -May Allah have mercy upon him - said:
‘The benefit from this, is that strong insight is at the perfection of age and an abundance of experience is gained and strong intellect’


Abdus- Salam al-Burjis –May Allah Protect him- says:

‘Indeed the ones who are worthy to be called (Aalim) are very few. And it wouldn’t be extreme if it was said ‘rare’ this is because an Alim has particular qualities, and most of them are not found amongst those who connect themselves to knowledge today, so an Alim is not one who is eloquent in language, and an Alim is not one who compiles a book or checks a manuscript; And, if an Alim is just understood by these affairs, and unfortunately, this is what is in the minds of many (of the people) who are not acquainted with who an Alim is, and for this reason, many of the General masses have humbled themselves to eloquence in language and the writings of other than the Ulama. So these things become a point of amazement with them. So an Alim in truth is the one who is well versed with the Ilm as-Shara’ee (legislative Knowledge) and is familiar with the general rulings of the Book and the Sunnah, acquainted with the Naasiq and Mansooq the Mutlaq and Muqayid and the Mujmal and Mufasar and also has read the statements of the Salaf in those areas in which they differed’.

Taken from the tape “Who are the Ulama”,

ISLAAM IS COMING:

Sects, The easy way to know them!

Principles Concerning 'Infectious Disease' (al-Adwaa) In Light of the Swine Flu Drama -

- by HealthyMuslim
Key topics: Contagion • Infectious Disease


All praise is due to Allah and prayers and salutations be upon His Prophet. To proceed.
Inshaa'Allaah, this series of articles will cover some broad principles by which, as a Muslim, you can have a clearer perspective of this subject in general and with regard to the current issue of swine flu in particular.

The subject of al-adwaa (contagion, infectious disease) can be confusing when you start looking into it, so what we want to do is to start isolating the various principles and build upon them one by one inshaa'Allaah in this series of articles.

PRINCIPLE: It is from the belief of the people of Jaahiliyyah and the Disbelievers (and secular, atheistic societies) that al-adwaa (contagion, "infectious disease") is infectious by its own inherent and intrinsic nature (bit-tab'), that it infects outside of the domain of Allaah's Will (Mashee'ah), Permission (al-Idhn) and Decree (Qadr).

We first draw upon a quote from Ibn Hajar al-Asqalaanee (rahimahullaah) in his "Badhl ul-Maa'oon Fee Fadl it-Taa'oon" (Dar ul-Kutub al-Athariyyah, 1993CE) which is a book specifically dealing with the plague, as he lived during the time of outbreaks of plague in Egypt and covered the issues relating to contagion in the Sunnah (Prophetic Narrations). On page 212 of this book, after lengthy preceding discussions, he summarises the various viewpoints on contagion (what is referred to as "infectious disease"). He says:

The first: that the disease is infectious by its intrinsic, inherent nature (bi tab'ihi), and this is the saying of the disbelievers.
We will come back to this full quote in a later part in this series, at this point, we just want to document what is held in an atheistic secular society in relation to contagion ("infectious disease").

Next we have a statement from Shaykh al-Albaanee (rahimahullaah), who says in the course of discussing the issue of al-adwaa (contagion) in Silsilah as-Saheeah (no. 971):

...And know that there is no contradiction between these two hadeeths and between the hadeeths, "There is no contagion ("infectious disease")..." that have preceded (nos. 781-789), since what is intended by them is to affirm contagion. And the intent behind these hadeeths is to negate the contagion that the peple of Jaahiliyyah used to believe in, which is its transmission by itself, without looking at the (determination of the) Will of Allaah in that... How today resembles yesterday! For indeed the European doctors are in the most severe heedlessness away from Him, the Most High, due to their shirk (association of partners to Allaah) and their misguidance, and their belief in contagion ("infectious disease") upon the way of Jaahiliyyah...
We should note here that when you look at the speech of the scholars in this regard, you see that in some words they appear to be affirming contagion and in other's they are saying it is false. They are referring to two things. When they affirm, what they are referring to is the spread of disease due to Allaah's permission and will. When they are negating, and declaring contagion to be false, they are referring to what is believed by the people of Jaahiliyyah, the secular and atheistic societies and their likes, that a disease is infectious in its own right, in its inherent intrinsic nature, outside of Allaah's control, will, permission and decree, and that it moves and spreads in a population, outside of Allaah's will, decree and permission.

From Shaykh Ibn Baaz (rahimahullaah) in his treatise "al-Qawaadih fil-Aqeedah wa Wasaa'il as-Salaamah Minhaa":

And whoever claims that there is al-adwaa (contagion, infectious disease), then this is falsehood (baatil), however Allah has made mixing with some of the ill to sometimes be a means (sabab) of the disease being found in the healthy, however it does not infect (spread) by its inherent, intrinsic nature...
And Shaykh Saalih Aal us-Shaykh says in his explanation of Kitaab ut-Tawheed, on this subject:

And the people of Jaahiliyyah believe that the contagion transmits of its own accord (from person to person, or place to place) so Allaah - the Mighty and Majestic - falsified that, He falsified that belief, and he [the Messenger] - may prayers and salutations be upon him - said, "There is no contagion ("infectious disease")", meaning: that which is the effective, influencing element on its own.
Now we can bring more quotes from the Scholars, but here we just want to establish the principle here that the belief on the inherent, intrinsic infectiousness of a disease, that it infects due to its inherent nature (at-tab'), is something held by the people of Jaahiliyyah and the disbelievers.

We can bring in some speech of Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan just to give us a slightly wider perspective before closing this article,and so as not to cause any confusion. He says in his "I'aanat ul-Mustafeed" (Vol 2/7-8):

His (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam's) saying, "There is no contagion ("infectious disease")": What is meant by contagion (al-adwaa) is: The spread of a disease from one person to another, or from an animal to another, or from one place to another. And disease can spread from one place to another and it can spread from the ill to the healthy and from the sick animal (scabies) to the healthy. This is something that exists.
But the Messenger (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) is not negating this, he is negating the contagion ("infectious disease") that the people of Jaahiliyyah used to believe in, that the disease spreads by itself without the decree of Allaah, the Sublime and Exalted.

So al-adwaa (contagion) is: The spread of disease from one place to another because of the nearness of the healthy to the diseased, and the one who decrees it is Allaah, the Most High. For a healthy person can be close to an ill person and nothing will afflict him, and he may sometimes be close and he will be afflicted (with the illness). And so the cause is that it goes back to Allaah, if He wills, the Sublime and Exalted, the illness will spread (to the other person) and if He wills, then it will not spread.

So the mere nearness of the ill person to the healthy person, or going to a place where a disease has broken out, this is a sabab (a means). As for the effect (ta'atthur), then it is in the Hand of Allaah, the Sublime and Exalted. For a person can enter into a land where a disease has broken out, and he will not be afflicted, an ill person may pass by a healthy person and (the latter will) not be affected. An ill person may sleep next to the healthy person and he (the latter) will not be afflicted. Sometimes, he may. But what is the separating matter between the two situations?

That this goes back to Allaah, the Most High's Will (Mashee'ah).

As for the people of Jaahiliyyah, they don't differentiate, rather to them: Everyone who comes close to an illness, or everyone who comes close to an ill person - that he will be afflicted. And they don't ascribe this to Allaah's ordainment (qadaa) and decree (qadar), and nor do they place reliance upon Allaah, the Sublime and Exalted, and they exaggerate in omens (at-tashaa'um and at-tiyarah) and in the spread of contagion ("infectious disease") and they do actions that are laughable.

So what we find here is that the phenomenon of disease spreading is something that is observable and witnessed. So clearly this outwardly observable phenomenon is not being negated, it does take place. However, this is not because of the "infectiousness" of the disease or this being inherent and intrinsic to it (bi tab'ihi). Further, the mixing between people can sometimes be a sabab, a means. The decisive factor in the spread of the disease is actually Allaah's will, His permission, His decree. This is what the affair return's back to. From this understanding a range of other issues branch off which inshaa'Allaah will be covered in later articles.

What we should note here is that there are a number of viewpoints amongst the Salaf

There are those who say that there is no such thing as contagion ("infectious disease") at all, and that any spread of disease is because Allaah creates that disease afresh in each individual. We will be documenting this view later inshaa'Allaah. For now we'll just mention what has been summarised by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalaanee in the aforementioned book (p.213), and which in his view is the most correct view:
The fourth: That disease is not infectious by its inherent nature at all (aslan, fundamentally). Rather, to whichever person a disease occurs, then that is due to Allaah's, the Sublime and Exalted, creating of that in him afresh. For this reason, many who are afflicated with a disease - about which it is said that it is "infectious" - are observed where a healthy person mixes with them often and nothing afflicts him at all, and many who have not mixed at all with the one with the disease are observed, yet the disease (still) afflicts that person (nevertheless). And all of that occurs from the decree (taqdeer) of Allaah...
So here it is explained that because it is often observed that there are many who have never mixed with those with the disease, and who still catch the disease - this shows that the mixing on its own is not the sabab (means), rather it is purely from Allaah's decree and will that other people get the disease, since whether a person mixes with an ill person or not, they still get the disease.

And others from the Salaf say that Allaah has made the mixing between two people to sometimes be a means (sabab), but that the actual effect is under the control of Allaah's will, permission and decree..
These views have arisen out of the necessity to provide an explanation for the apparent contradiction between the hadeeths that negate contagion (such as "there is no contagion") and those that appear to affirm it (such as "flee from the leper"). So you have different ways of reconciling. We will go into that in more detail inshaa'Allaah in future articles.

Summary

The people of Jaahiliyyah, and atheistic, secular societies believe that a disease is "infectious" by its own inherent, intrinsic nature (bi tab'ihi), and that the spread of disease is outside of Allaah's will, permission and decree. When you read much of the language in the scientific documents, in the reporting and in the general coverage of "infectious disease", and in many of the health leaflets on "infectious diseases" and especially when there is an outbreak of some disease (large or small) you come across an abundance of language indicating this.
Here is just one example from the Washington Post from 2nd May 2009:

Mexican Officials Say Flu's Ability to Spread May Be Low. Mexican health officials studying the new influenza virus said Friday they have found that its ability to spread from person to person may be fairly low, raising hopes that the extreme measures taken here -- the shutting down of all nonessential commerce and government -- can contain its spread... In an obscure government building in the south of this city, dozens of experts in public health gathered in a "war room" to monitor on computer screens the spread of swine flu around the country. While it is far too early to answer with any certitude the most pressing questions -- how infectious and lethal is the virus? -- they offered some preliminary assessments
And another example:

...they've determined that the virus is capable of human-to-human transmission...
And another example from the LA Times, 30th April 2009:

The swine virus does appear able to spread easily among humans, which persuaded the WHO to boost its influenza pandemic alert level to phase 5, indicating that a worldwide outbreak of infection is very likely.
The capability, and ability in the transmission, is attributed to the virus in this type of language being used.

So the point being here, that in the language used in atheistic, secular societies (and likewise in the educational and medical establishments), diseases are noun-entities that are "disease-causing" in and of themselves, and they are then spoken of as having inherent and intrinsic properties and abilities, such as "infectiousness", "capability of transmission" and so on. And this language is widespread - and it affects the way people think and perceive of the situation, and its a reminder of what was said by Shaykh al-Albaanee (rahimahullaah):

...How today resembles yesterday! For indeed the European doctors are in the most severe heedlessness away from Him, the Most High, due to their shirk (association of partners to Allaah) and their misguidance, and their belief in contagion ("infectious disease") upon the way of Jaahiliyyah...
The spread of disease, however, is an observable phenomenon. The mixing between people can be a means (sabab), and the control and power over it's effect lies only with Allaah, the Sublime and Exalted. Since Allaah is the Creator of the asbaab (ways and means) and the musabbabaat (the resulting effects). However, as Allaah is the Creator He can prevent the asbaab (means) from being tied to their musabbabaat (effects). Further, some of the ways and means are strongly, or inextricably tied to their effects, so the sabab (say drinking water) always leads to its effect (removing thirst), and other ways and means are loosely tied to their effects (say planting a seed may not always lead to the plant and its fruits, or a man having intercourse with this wife, may not always lead to a child) - since there may be additional asbaab (means) that are required also, as well as the absence of preventative barriers for the musabbabaat (effects) to be seen. So ultimately, Allaah has power over everything.
The above is one explanation, namely the mixing between the people is a sabab (means) that is under the control of Allaah, and it can lead to the transmission of disease from one person to another, but this is purely by Allaah's will and decree.

The other explanation from the Salaf is that there is no such thing as "infectious disease" (al-adwaa), at all, and that Allaah creates the disease in each individual afresh. This will be documented in more detail in a later article inshaa'Allaah.

It is permissible for a person to keep away from a person with a disease or from a land where a disease has broken out, out of the principle of not subjecting oneself to potential harm, and keeping away from the asbaab (ways, means) that can lead to harm. And in this regard there is the hadeeth of Umar not advancing to the place where plague had broken out - this will be covered on its own in more detail in a future article inshaa'Allaah. So not subjecting oneself to harm is a general principle, so it applies to things like a person not climbing down a well that is deep, or climbing up a tree, or a building where there is a danger of falling, because this is subjecting oneself unnecessarily to potential harm, and so keeping away from a person with a disease that can spread (by Allaah's will and decree), or from a land where a disease has broken out, is permissible, since the mixing with such people, or going to such a land is from the asbaab (means) that can lead to potential harm. The Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) forbade going to a land where a disease has broken out and from fleeing from a land where a disease has broken out with the intent of fleeing from the disease. And some of the scholars have explained that the one who has strong faith and reliance upon Allaah can go to a land where a disease has broken out, but that those of weak faith should avoid this in case their aqeedah becomes corrupt.
Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan said in I'aanat ul-Mustafeed (2/8):
So his saying "There is no contagion", meaning, upon the manner that the people of Jaahiliyyah believed in it. As for contagion (the spread of disease) occurring by the permission of Allaah, then this is an affair that occurs, and for this reason the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) prohibited from mixing with the leper, and he (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) prohibited from approaching a land where disease has broken out, and he he prohibited whoever was in the land in which the disease broke out from leaving that land, and the one who was outside was not to enter into it, because these are asbaab (ways and means) that lead to the spread of disease, and to prevent them is to adopt the protective ways and means, and proceeding towards (such a land) is throwing oneself to destruction. And Allaah prohibited from that, except for the one whose faith and his reliance upon Allaah, the Most High, is strong, for such a one can proceed to the affected land, and can mix with the diseased and he will not be afflicted, because he is relying upon Allaah, the Sublime and Exalted, however this is only for the people of strong faith. As for the people of weak faith, then they are to remain far from these places in case they are affected and then their aqeedah becomes evil
.
It is also permissible for a person to mix with a person with a disease out of reliance upon Allaah (tawakkul), upon the belief that Allaah is the one who controls everything. These two actions are both validated in the Sunnah, and explained by the Scholars.
On a closing note, in the Time Magazine from 27th April 2009:
How to Deal with Swine Flu: Heeding the Mistakes of 1976. In February 1976, an outbreak of swine flu struck Fort Dix Army base in New Jersey, killing a 19-year-old private and infecting hundreds of soldiers. Concerned that the U.S. was on the verge of a devastating epidemic, President Gerald Ford ordered a nationwide vaccination program at a cost of $135 million (some $500 million in today's money). Within weeks, reports surfaced of people developing Guillain-Barré syndrome, a paralyzing nerve disease that can be caused by the vaccine. By April, more than 30 people had died of the condition. Facing protests, federal officials abruptly canceled the program on Dec. 16. The epidemic failed to materialize.

the four you mustn't take knowledge from:

Author: Ibn Muflih al-Maqdisee

Reference: Al-Adaab ash-Shar'eeyyah: P.146 - more about reference here...
Muhammad ibn Ismaa’eel narrated to us, that Ibraheem ibn al-Mundhir narrated to him, that Ma’een ibn ‘Eesaa said:
Maalik ibn Anas used to say:

Knowledge must not be taken from four types of people, and can be taken from other than them:

A foolish person whose foolishness is known, even if he narrates the most Ahaadeeth amongst people.
A liar who lies about people’s narrations if this is known about him, even if he is not accused of lying upon the Messenger - .
One who follows his desires/an innovator who calls the people to his desires/innovations.
A Shaykh who has virtue and worship if he does not know Hadeeth.

Insist I am A Salafee

Shaikh Al-Albaanee: “I insist I am Salafee”
[A refutation of the false principle of Aa’id Al-Qarnee]
Author: Imaam Muhammad Naasir-ud-Deen Al-Albaanee

Translator: abu maryam

Questioner: One of the students of knowledge in the lands of Najd (Saudi Arabia) said: “Whoever says I am Salafi” or “I am Tableeghi” and so on mentioning other groups, then he must be made to repent. And if he doesn’t repent, then he is to be killed, as a hadd (Islamic punishment).

Shaikh: I don’t think he said this.

Questioner: By Allaah, Shaikh, he said it, and here is a cassette recording, which confirms it.

[Then the questioner plays the tape on which Aa’id Al-Qarnee’s voice can be heard saying the following: “And know, may Allaah preserve you, that it is not permissible for anybody to make it obligatory for someone to follow one of the madhaahib. So whoever says to the people or to one amongst the servants (of Allaah: ‘You are obligated to be a Hanbalee, or Maalikee, or Shaafi’ee or Hanafee’, then he must be made to repent. And if he does not repent he is to be killed. And whoever makes it obligatory for one of the people to be Ikhwanee or Salafee or Tableeghi or Suroori – he makes this an obligation – then he must be made to repent and if he doesn’t do so, he is to be killed. This is because Allaah did not name us anything but Muslims.” Then the tape stops and the Shaikh comments.]

Shaikh: I don’t think a scholar would say this. I don’t think a person of knowledge would say something like this! [People laughing in the background] As for someone who is not a scholar, then it is possible that he can say such a thing or even worse than it.

Questioner: So what is your advice O Shaikh?

Answer: My advice to him is that he understands – what is the meaning of (the word) Salafee? And I say to him now: “Are you absolving yourself from the Salaf??” He will say “No” if he is a person of knowledge. But if he is from one of those who doesn’t know anything, he will say: “I just follow the Qur’aan and Sunnah.”

But how do you understand the Qur’aan and how do you understand the Sunnah? Do you interpret the Qur’aan, by means of the Qur’aan first, then the Sunnah second? What do we call this? This is an error. It is not permissible for us to say: “We interpret the Qur’aan by way of the Qur’aan, then the Sunnah.” Rather, we interpret the Qur’aan by way of the Qur’aan and the Sunnah, together. This is since we absolutely cannot manage to understand the Qur’aan without the Sunnah.

This is why I used to mention in some of my books that one of the evidences for rejecting the hadeeth of Mu’aadh Ibn Jabal, in which he said that Allaah’s Messenger (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) – as the hadeeth alleges – that when he sent Mu’aad Ibn Jabal to Yemen he said: “What will you judge by?” Mu’aadh said: “By the Book of Allaah.” So he said: “And if you don’t find it (i.e. an answer in it)?” He said: “Then by the Sunnah of Allaah’s Messenger.” So he said: ”And if you don’t find (an answer in) it?” So he said: “I will strive to come up with my own opinion.” So the Prophet (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said: “All praise be to Allaah who guided the messenger of Allaah’s Messenger towards that which Allaah’s Messenger loves.”

This is a munkar (rejected) hadeeth. Why? Is it correct, with regard to those who graduated from the school of Muhammad (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam), as is commonly said nowadays, to differentiate between the Qur’aan and the Sunnah and to place the Sunnah with respect to the Qur’aan in the same position as the opinion with respect to the Sunnah? When does the scholar refer to his opinion (?) – when he doesn’t find an answer in the Sunnah. When does he refer to the Sunnah (?) – when he can’t find an answer in the Qur’aan. This is not correct. It is obligatory to combine both the Qur’aan and the Sunnah together because they both originate from one source.

But this hadeeth gives the Sunnah a position of being under the Qur’aan, equaling it to the position of the opinion under the Sunnah. When does one exert himself to come up with his own opinion (?) – when he doesn’t find any answer in the Sunnah. When does he refer to the Sunnah (?) – when he doesn’t find any answer in the Qur’aan.

This is wrong. The first one was correct. When does he refer to his own opinion (?) – when he doesn’t find an answer in the Sunnah. When does he refer to the Sunnah (?) – when he doesn’t find an answer in the Qur’aan. This is wrong. Why?

Now we will ask a question concerning the dead animals of the sea. Are they Halaal (lawful) or Haraam (unlawful)? Allaah says: “Forbidden for you are dead animals.” [Surah Al-Maa’idah: 6] So then we have found the answer in the Qur’aan, right? No, but we must continue to look, is there anything in the Sunnah that responds to this ayah and which restricts it? Yes, there is. So therefore the scholar actually has no choice but to combine between the Qur’aan and the Sunnah.

So the matter is as Allaah’s Messenger (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said: “Do not let any of you sit reclining on his couch, saying: ‘This is the Book of Allaah, so whatever of Halaal we find in it, we declare it to be lawful. And whatever of Haraam we find in it, we declare it to be unlawful (in exclusion of the Sunnah).’ Indeed, I was given the Qur’aan and something similar to it along with it. Indeed, what Allaah’s Messenger has made forbidden is just like what Allaah has made forbidden ”

Therefore, there is no way one can ever divide between the Qur’aan and the Sunnah. So whoever says: “We will interpret the Qur’aan by way of the Qur’aan and then the Sunnah”, this person has come about due to this munkar hadeeth.

Rather, we only interpret the Qur’aan by means of the Qur’aan and the Sunnah, together. Furthermore, if we don’t find a tafseer (interpretation) of an ayah in either the Qur’aan or the Sunnah, we turn back to our righteous predecessors (the Salaf As-Saalih), especially the Companions, who were spoken the words of Allaah directly by the Prophet (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam). And also…

In my opinion, the least that can be said (about this person) – and I don’t know the level of his knowledge – the least that can be said is that he is heedless of this fact. And in reality this is a severe negligence on his part, especially since he issued that harsh ruling afterward – that whoever doesn’t repent is to be killed.

So give him the glad tidings that I still insist that I am a Salafee – upon the Book and the Sunnah and upon the methodology of the Salaf as-Saalih. And whoever doesn’t adopt this manhaj (methodology) then there is no difference between him and the Raafidah. And no doubt, so long as he is in the lands of Najd, and there is (no difference) between him and between the Raafidah, this is the same as what Al-Hadaad did.

Questioner: And we are with you O Shaikh!

Shaikh: May Allaah reward you.

The Danger of Mixing with Ahl ul-Bida`

`
By Shaykh Rabee` bin Haadee al-Madkhalee

This is a translation of a transcription of this extremely beneficial talk by the Noble Shaykh and Imaam, Rabee` bin Haadee (hafidhahulLaah).



[The Concern of the Salaf us-Saalih in Warning from Ahl ul-Bida`, both in Knowledge and in Action (Practical Implementation)]

The Shaykh said:

Verily, this matter is very important and its affair is dangerous (serious). It is for this reason that the Book and the Sunnah and the Salaf us-Saalih have given it concern in the [various] works of Islaam, and especially in what relates to the `aqaa'id, and more specifically, with what relates to the positions (to be held) towards the people of innovation and misguidance, and the people of tribulations and heresies, and the companions of evil specifically. So in that which they explained is a healing and a sufficiency for the one who desired good for himself, and who desired that he is restored with a life that will please his Lord and bring him closer to Him and distance him from the Fire.

And our Salaf us-Saalih (may Allaah's pleasure be upon them) showed concern to this topic in terms of knowledge, action and implementation (may Allaah's pleasure be upon them).

And if we desire deliverance, then there is nothing upon us except that we follow the path of those true and sincere believers, those who knew the Islamic Sharee`ah, its beliefs, its methodologies, and its goals and objectives. So they presented sincere advice and clarification and warning to whomever Allaah intended to show good towards from this Ummah and for whomever He intended deliverance and [the success in] riding upon the ship of deliverance, practically!

In the Noble Quraan there is a verse that you read, the saying of Allaah, the Blessed and Exalted, "It is He Who has sent down to you the Book (this Qur'ân). In it are Verses that are entirely clear, they are the foundations of the Book and others not entirely clear. So as for those in whose hearts there is a deviation (from the truth) they follow that which is not entirely clear thereof, seeking Al-Fitnah, and seeking for its hidden meanings, but none knows its hidden meanings save Allâh. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: "We believe in it; the whole of it is from our Lord.". (Aali Imran 3:7)

So Allaah explained in this verse, the reality and condition of the people of deviation and desires, and that they reserve evil for the Ummah, and that they reserve tribulations for them. Because their intentions are not sound, their hearts are diseased and they desire that the people are afflicted with their (own) ailments, because (it is) as is said in the similitude, "When it predominates, it will become contemptible", and also in the general similitude, "The tail of the fox was cut, and so it cut the tails of others".

And Allaah, the Blessed and Exalted, has said concerning the Kuffaar, "O you who believe! If you obey a group of those who were given the Scripture (Jews and Christians), they would (indeed) render you disbelievers after you have believed!" (Aali Imran 3:100). The Kuffaar, and the Jews and Christians love that the Muslims apostatise from their religion, and the people of innovation have their great share of this evil intent (as well) [i.e. in desiring that the Salafee abandon Salafiyyah], and of desiring evil for the people of goodness.