Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry

by lizardking Wed Jan 06, 2016 8:01 pm

This is a thread to discuss Big Pharma and its devastating consequences to human health, man-made diseases such as AIDs and Cancer, vaccines, autism, natural cures, alternative treatment, corruption, cannabis oil, and much more.

Nearly half of all Americans will develop cancer in their lifetime. Quick math tells us that is an astonishing 157 million victims.
Over half a million people in America died of cancer in 2012.
In 2011, cancer was the #1 cause of death in the Western world, and #2 in developing countries.
Cancer is the #1 cause of childhood death in the United States.

One of the most prominent vaccine scientists in the history of the vaccine industry -- a Merck scientist -- made a recording where he openly admits that vaccines given to Americans were contaminated with leukemia and cancer viruses. In response, his colleagues (who are also recorded here) break out into laughter and seem to think it's hilarious. They then suggest that because these vaccines are first tested in Russia, they will help the U.S. win the Olympics because the Russian athletes will all be "loaded down with tumors." (Thus, they knew these vaccines caused cancer in humans.)

When asked why this didn't get out to the press, he replied "Obviously you don't go out, this is a scientific affair within the scientific community."

Full transcript at: http://www.naturalnews.com/033584_dr_maurice_hilleman_sv40.html

by lizardking Wed Jan 06, 2016 8:05 pm

Making a Killing with Cancer: A 124.6 Billion Dollar Industry

“It’s the advent of Big Pharma, Big Agri and Big Business. They are getting rich off of poisoning Americans through the manufacture of toxic elements that we are exposed to on a daily basis.

Unless you live in a bubble and have no contact with manufactured items, outside air, or the sun, you are exposed to a staggering number of known and suspected carcinogens every day. (Check out THIS LIST to see the known and suspected carcinogens that are readily available in the United States.)

The statistics support that the cumulative build up of all these different toxins in the human body eventually results in cancer in many people.

First, the manufacturers and the “food” producers profit when we buy their poisoned goods.

Then the medical system and pharmaceutical companies profit when we become ill and must fight cancer.

The drugs alone can cost over $100,000 per year, and that is on top of exorbitant costs for radiation, chemotherapy, and physician’s bills. In the United States, cancer is the #1 most expensive “per person” illness to treat.

Why would those who profit want to prevent cancer when 95.5 BILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR is spent on treating it? There is a vested interest in this increase in illness and the people benefitting from it have no intention of reducing the cases of cancer.

Don’t look to Obamacare to be the saving grace of cancer victims, either. With this type of government controlled medicine, budgets will be strictly adhered to and the decisions on how to proceed and what will be paid for will NOT be in the hands of the ill person. Treatments, medications, and funds will be strictly allocated through what many people are referring to as “death panels.”

Furthermore, Obamacare only covers 60% of your medical costs in most cases (after a hefty deductible) and none of your medication is covered. If you don’t have $50,000 or more kicking around for your co-pay, you will be out of luck, despite diligently paying your worthless monthly premiums.

Since most of us don’t live in a bubble, we will be subjected to some of these toxins – they’re impossible to avoid entirely. However, you can limit your exposure by taking the following steps to reduce your exposure to everyday poisons. (This list is expanded from the article, “The Great American Cancer Cluster” with permission from The Daily Sheeple.)”

Chemotherapeutic drugs are the only classification of drugs that the prescribing doctor gets a direct cut of (at least in the US), leading to stories such as these: www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/09/16/cancer-doc-admits-scam-giving-patients-unneeded-chemo/15754535/

"In this case, we had Dr. Fata administering chemotherapy to people who didn't need it, essentially putting poison into their bodies and telling them that they had cancer when they didn't have cancer," McQuade told the Free Press. "The idea that a doctor would lie to a patient just to make money is shocking ... Dr. Fata was unique in that he saw patients not as people to heal, but as commodities to exploit."

by lizardking Wed Jan 06, 2016 8:08 pm

97 Percent of The Time, Chemotherapy Does Not Work And Continues To Be Used Only For One Reason

Dave Mihalovic, Prevent Disease
Waking Times

Doctors and pharmaceutical companies make money from it. That’s the only reason chemotherapy is still used. Not because it’s effective, decreases morbidity, mortality or diminishes any specific cancer rates. In fact, it does the opposite. Chemotherapy boosts cancer growth and long-term mortality rates. Most chemotherapy patients either die or are plagued with illness within 10-15 years after treatment. It destroys their immune system, increases neuro-cognitive decline, disrupts endocrine functioning and causes organ and metabolic toxicities. Patients basically live in a permanent state of disease until their death. The cancer industry marginalizes safe and effective cures while promoting their patented, expensive, and toxic remedies whose risks far exceed any benefit. This is what they do best, and they do it because it makes money, plain and simple.

The reason a 5-year relative survival rate is the standard used to assess mortality rates is due to most cancer patients going downhill after this period. It’s exceptionally bad for business and the cancer industry knows it. They could never show the public the true 97% statistical failure rate in treating long-term metastatic cancers. If they did publish the long-term statistics for all cancers administered cytotoxic chemotherapy, that is 10+ years and produced the objective data on rigorous evaluations including the cost-effectiveness, impact on the immune system, quality of life, morbidity and mortality, it would be very clear to the world that chemotherapy makes little to no contribution to cancer survival at all. No such study has ever been conducted by independent investigators in the history of chemotherapy. The only studies available come from industry funded institutions and scientists and none of them have ever inclusively quantified the above variables.

Why? Money, greed and profits run the cancer industry–nothing else. The cancer establishment must retreat from the truth to treat cancer because there will never be any profit for them in in eradicating the disease. There is no governing body in the world that protects consumers from being subjected to these toxic therapies or even known carcinogens in our foods our environment, because that too, will prevent the profits from rolling in. It’s a business of mammoth proportions and must be treated as such. The most powerful anti-carcinogenic plants in the world such as cannabis must be demonized and be made illegal because they are so effective at killing cancer cells without side effects. Cannabinoids are so efficient at treating disease, that the U.S. Government patented them in 2003.

If orthodox medicine were truly interested in curing cancer and healing people, don’t you think they would look for a way to target cancer cells with the intent of killing them while sparing normal cells?

Chemotherapy does not target cancer cells, and because of this, chemotherapy:
1) Kills far more normal cells than cancer cells, and
2) Damages and toxifies many of the normal cells that do survive.

If a “magic bullet” were used FIRST by orthodox medicine, meaning thecut/burn/slash/poison treatments were avoided, a 90% true cure rate would be easy to achieve. But the fact is that the leaders in the medical community have absolutely no interest in finding a “magic bullet.” A “magic bullet” would cost the drug companies hundreds of billions of dollars, and patients would have less hospitalization and less doctor visits, etc.

You might ask your oncologist why your chances of survival are only 3% (ignoring all of their statistical gibberish such as “5-year survival rates” and deceptive terms like “remission” and “response”), when your chance of survival would be over 90% if they used something like DMSO. Actually, bring up DMSO to any oncologist and most of them won’t even talk to you about it. Why? Because DMSO is a natural product, cannot be patented and cannot be made profitable because it is produced by the ton in the wood industry.

Why Is Chemotherapy Killing So Many People?

Why does concentrated cyanide kill you? How do anthrax, arsenic, and zyklon B kill you? They are all poisons. Consume or inject enough poison into your body and you will eventually die. Toxic chemotherapy drugs just happen to take a little longer than many of those above, and they’re designed that way. We couldn’t have people dropping like flies one week after receiving chemo or the gig would be over. Again, that would be bad for business.

According to official statistics, one person out of two is claimed to recover from cancer through conventional methods. Although dramatic, the information nevertheless contains a certain amount of hope, as implicitly it provides something positive for both scientists and patients. To the scientists it says: continue the research because it is producing results; do not try preventive, alternative theoretical or therapeutic roads, nor get discouraged by the fact that patients keep on dying every day. To the patients, on the other hand, it provides a warning: you have a 50 percent chance of making it, as long as you follow the conventional therapeutic protocols without trying what they claim are the useless alternatives.

There is an international classification (the TNM system) that classifies tumors on the basis of their gravity. They are subdivided into stages I, II, III, IV, and into sub-groups. It is clear to any trained eye that initial lesions that are doubtful or at the limit of malignancy represent the overwhelming majority of the observed “neoplasias”.

It is equally clear how often these presumed neoplasias, which are often subject to both misunderstanding and manipulation, inflate those statistics to the point of implausibility.

So, in the early stages of tumors (the dubious ones) the recovery rates are extremely high, while in the following stages — that is, where they certainly are tumors — the rates are barely above zero. The reason for the discrepency is the qualification of the data and how a patient is assessed in terms of recovery. Immune reconstitution and tolerance, organ and metabolic toxicities, endocrine challenges, functional outcomes, quality of life, and neurocognitive outcomes are NEVER inclusively assessed in any clinical study discussing the long-term survival and recovery rates of cancer patients. The damage to these systems slowly develops after chemotherapy, however if often does not begin to manifest throughout the body until several months or even years have passed. It takes time, but within a 3-5 year period, most chemotherapy patients begin to have many more symptoms of disease than they every had before their diagnosis, due to and as a direct result of cytotoxic drug intervention.

Adjuvant chemotherapy is often given to patients who might not really need it at all. Oncologists do not consider the whole spectrum of chemotherapy risks versus benefits and thus compromise quality of life for every patient they treat. A study in the Annals of Oncology is one of few which assessed the different potential long-term adverse events associated with adjuvant chemotherapy in cancer, with a particular focus on long-term cardiac toxicity, secondary leukemia, cognitive function, and neurotoxicity. The authors stated that the adverse events are frequently overshadowed by the well-demonstrated clinical efficacy and/or reassuring short-term safety profiles of the different chemotherapy regimens commonly used today.

Another study in the American Society of Clinical Oncology determined whether long-term survivors of metastatic testicular cancer have an increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity more than 10 years after chemotherapy. They observed a significantly increased risk for occurrence of cardiac events accompanied by a persisting unfavorable cardiovascular risk profile likely due to chemotherapeutic agents.

Peter Glidden, BS, ND in the video above describes the 12-year meta-analysis published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology which observed adults who had developed cancer and treated with chemotherapy. The 12-year study looked at adults who had developed cancer as an adult. 97% of the time, chemotherapy did not work in regressing the metastatic cancers.

It’s a Business

Why would any corporation have an interest in treating cancer when it generates well over $100 BILLION DOLLARS annually? Follow the money and you’ll discover quickly why people continue to get cancer. When 50% of the population is developing a disease within their lifetime, something is very wrong. In 2011, cancer was the #1 cause of death in the Western world, and #2 in developing countries.

Dr. Glidden further explains: If you go to a medical doctor with a sinus infection and that doctor prescribes an antibiotic, he gets no financial kickback. Now, if he prescribes 5,000 units of that antibiotic in one month, the drug company that makes it might send him to Cancun for a conference, but he gets no direct remuneration. With chemotherapeutic drugs, it’s different. Chemotherapeutic drugs are the only classification of drugs that the prescribing doctor gets a direct cut of.

So, if your doctor prescribes chemotherapy for you, here’s how it goes more or less: The doctor buys it from the pharmaceutical company for $5,000, sells it to the patient for $12,000, insurance pays $9,000, and the doctor pockets the $4,000 difference. If Ford Motor Company made an automobile that exploded 97% of the time, would they still be in business? No.

With cancer treatment in the United States, we have lost the war on cancer. Why? Because cancer is not a reductionistic phenomenon. Cancer is a holistic phenomenon. When you try to bring a reductionistic methodology like drugs and surgery to bear on a holistic phenomenon, you will completely miss the boat each and every time. You cannot do it.

Medical doctors are like colorblind art critics. They can see that that’s a boat. They can see the black and white outline, but they’re completely blind to all of the colors and textures that make up the substance of the thing. There’s no difference with cancer. The reason that people get cancer in the United States and the reason that we have completely lousy outcomes is because medical doctors are driving the research bus.

When people get together and do a 5K run for breast cancer, all of that money–do you think any of that money goes to nutritional research? Do you think any of that money goes to homeopathic research or acupuncture or traditional Chinese medicine or naturopathic research? No. All of it goes to drugs and surgery, which do not work.

Why aren’t those women running for selenium? If every girl in this country took 200 mcg of selenium, in one generation we’d eliminate breast cancer by 82%. That’s a big number. Why aren’t we doing that? Because medicine in the United States is a for-profit industry, and most people are completely unaware of this, and most people bow down to the altar of MD-directed high-tech medicine at their own demise.

There has been a 68% increase in the use of chemotherapy drugs since 2003 and despite the massive increase in the incidence of cancer since then; the risk factors (according to the cancer industry) for primary and secondary cancers are still related to tobacco, alcohol, occupational exposures and genetic determinants. Cancer treatment or diagnostics is never mentioned as a cause of any primary or secondary cancers.

How Chemotherapy Actually Boosts Cancer Growth

Researchers tested the effects of a type of chemotherapy on tissue collected from men with prostate cancer, and found “evidence of DNA damage” in healthy cells after treatment, the scientists wrote in Nature Medicine.

Chemotherapy works by inhibiting reproduction of fast-dividing cells such as those found in tumours.

The scientists found that healthy cells damaged by chemotherapy secreted more of a protein called WNT16B which boosts cancer cell survival.

“The increase in WNT16B was completely unexpected,” study co-author Peter Nelson of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle told AFP.

The protein was taken up by tumour cells neighbouring the damaged cells.

“WNT16B, when secreted, would interact with nearby tumour cells and cause them to grow, invade, and importantly, resist subsequent therapy,” said Nelson.

In cancer treatment, tumours often respond well initially, followed by rapid regrowth and then resistance to further chemotherapy.

Rates of tumour cell reproduction have been shown to accelerate between treatments.

“Our results indicate that damage responses in benign cells… may directly contribute to enhanced tumour growth kinetics,” wrote the team.

The researchers said they confirmed their findings with breast and ovarian cancer tumours.

Patients with incurable cancers are promised much greater access to the latest drugs which could offer them extra months or years of life, however many doctors have been urged to be more cautious in offering cancer treatment to terminally-ill patients as chemotherapy can often do more harm than good, advice supported by Nelson’s study.

Doctors Speak Out About The Cancer Industry

Dr. Robert Atkins, MD, of Atkins Diet fame once announced there are several cures for cancer, but there’s no money in them. They’re natural, effective, and inexpensive, no expensive drugs are involved but they require quite a lot of self-discipline from patients. It costs millions to fund research and clinical trials needed to produce a new cancer drug that can be patented and sold. Often these drugs create more illness. It has been said that the key to success in the health business is to pull off the trick of making people patients for life. Consider how many people who registered a couple of abnormal blood pressure readings have been kept on medication until the medication killed them, when a quick fix course of drugs supported by major changes of diet and lifestyle would have returned their physical condition to an unmedicated healthy state.

According to Dr. John Diamond, M.D., “A study of over 10,000 patients shows clearly that chemo’s supposedly strong track record with Hodgkin’s disease (lymphoma) is actually a lie. Patients who underwent chemo were 14 times more likely to develop leukemia and 6 times more likely to develop cancers of the bones, joints, and soft tissues than those patients who did not undergo chemotherapy.”

Dr. Glenn Warner, who died in 2000, was one of the most highly qualified cancer specialists in the United States. He used alternative treatments on his cancer patients with great success. On the treatment of cancer in this country he said: “We have a multi-billion dollar industry that is killing people, right and left, just for financial gain. Their idea of research is to see whether two doses of this poison is better than three doses of that poison.”

Dr. Alan C. Nixon, past president of the American Chemical Society writes, “As a chemist trained to interpret data, it is incomprehensible to me that physicians can ignore the clear evidence that chemotherapy does much, much more harm than good.” And according to Dr. Charles Mathe, French cancer specialist, “…if I contracted cancer, I would never go to a standard cancer treatment centre. Only cancer victims who live far from such centres have a chance.”

Dr. Allen Levin stated: “Most cancer patients in this country die of chemotherapy. Chemotherapy does not eliminate breast, colon, or lung cancers. This fact has been documented for over a decade, yet doctors still use chemotherapy for these tumors.” In his book, The Topic of Cancer: When the Killing Has to Stop, Dick Richards cites a number of autopsy studies which have shown that cancer patients actually died from conventional treatments before the tumor had a chance to kill them.

-truth11

by lizardking Wed Jan 06, 2016 8:13 pm

Study Accidentally Finds Chemo Makes Cancer Worse

A team of researchers looking into why cancer cells are so resilient accidentally stumbled upon a far more important discovery. While conducting their research, the team discovered that chemotherapy actually heavily damages healthy cells and subsequently triggers them to release a protein that sustains and fuels tumor growth. Beyond that, it even makes the tumor highly resistant to future treatment.

Reporting their findings in the journal Nature Medicine, the scientists report that the findings were ‘completely unexpected’. Finding evidence of significant DNA damage when examining the effects of chemotherapy on tissue derived from men with prostate cancer, the writings are a big slap in the face to mainstream medical organizations who have been pushing chemotherapy as the only option to cancer patients for years. The news comes after it was previously ousted by similarly-breaking research that expensive cancer drugs not only fail to treat tumors, but actually make them far worse. The cancer drugs were found to make tumors ‘metasize’ and grow massively in size after consumption. As a result, the drugs killed the patients more quickly.

Known as WNT16B, scientists who performed the research say that this protein created from chemo treatment boosts cancer cell survival and is the reason that chemotherapy actually ends lives more quickly. Co-author Peter Nelson of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle explains:

WNT16B, when secreted, would interact with nearby tumor cells and cause them to grow, invade, and importantly, resist subsequent therapy.”

The team then complimented the statement with a word of their own:

“Our results indicate that damage responses in benign cells… may directly contribute to enhanced tumour growth kinetics.”

Meanwhile, dirt cheap substances like turmeric and ginger have consistently been found to effectively shrink tumors and combat the spread of cancer. In a review of 11 studies, it was found that turmeric use reduced brain tumor size by a shocking 81%. Further research has also shown that turmeric is capable of halting cancer cell growth altogether. One woman recently hit the mainstream headlines by revealing her victory against cancer with the principal spice used being turmeric.

This accidental finding reached by scientists further shows the lack of real science behind many ‘old paradigm’ treatments, despite what many health officials would like you to believe. The truth of the matter is that natural alternatives do not even receive nearly as much funding as pharmaceutical drugs and medical interventions because there’s simply no room for profit. If everyone was using turmeric and vitamin D for cancer (better yet cancer prevention), major drug companies would lose out.

by lizardking Wed Jan 06, 2016 8:52 pm

Hemp & Marijuana

The Medical Health Industry and Big Pharma block all alternative treatments for disease such as Hemp/Cannabis Oil. There has been a war on Cannabis/Marijuana because of its amazing health benefits.

"Many people assume that marijuana was made illegal through some kind of process involving scientific, medical, and government hearings; that it was to protect the citizens from what was determined to be a dangerous drug.

The actual story shows a much different picture. Those who voted on the legal fate of this plant never had the facts, but were dependent on information supplied by those who had a specific agenda to deceive lawmakers. You’ll see below that the very first federal vote to prohibit marijuana was based entirely on a documented lie on the floor of the Senate."

Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry 68409_403206903081128_657375709_n

Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry 68409_403206903081128_657375709_n

For most of human history, marijuana has been completely legal. It’s not a recently discovered plant, nor is it a long-standing law. Marijuana has been illegal for less than 1% of the time that it’s been in use. Its known uses go back further than 7,000 B.C. and it was legal as recently as when Ronald Reagan was a boy.

The marijuana (hemp) plant, of course, has an incredible number of uses. The earliest known woven fabric was apparently of hemp, and over the centuries the plant was used for food, incense, cloth, rope, and much more. This adds to some of the confusion over its introduction in the United States, as the plant was well known from the early 1600′s, but did not reach public awareness as a recreational drug until the early 1900′s.

America’s first marijuana law was enacted at Jamestown Colony, Virginia in 1619. It was a law “ordering” all farmers to grow Indian hempseed. There were several other “must grow” laws over the next 200 years (you could be jailed for not growing hemp during times of shortage in Virginia between 1763 and 1767), and during most of that time, hemp was legal tender (you could even pay your taxes with hemp — try that today!) Hemp was such a critical crop for a number of purposes (including essential war requirements – rope, etc.) that the government went out of its way to encourage growth.

The United States Census of 1850 counted 8,327 hemp “plantations” (minimum 2,000-acre farm) growing cannabis hemp for cloth, canvas and even the cordage used for baling cotton.

The Mexican Connection

In the early 1900s, the western states developed significant tensions regarding the influx of Mexican-Americans. The revolution in Mexico in 1910 spilled over the border, with General Pershing’s army clashing with bandit Pancho Villa. Later in that decade, bad feelings developed between the small farmer and the large farms that used cheaper Mexican labor. Then, the depression came and increased tensions, as jobs and welfare resources became scarce.

One of the “differences” seized upon during this time was the fact that many Mexicans smoked marijuana and had brought the plant with them, and it was through this that California apparently passed the first state marijuana law, outlawing “preparations of hemp, or loco weed.”

Other states quickly followed suit with marijuana prohibition laws, including Wyoming (1915), Texas (1919), Iowa (1923), Nevada (1923), Oregon (1923), Washington (1923), Arkansas (1923), and Nebraska (1927). These laws tended to be specifically targeted against the Mexican-American population.

When Montana outlawed marijuana in 1927, the Butte Montana Standard reported a legislator’s comment: “When some beet field peon takes a few traces of this stuff… he thinks he has just been elected president of Mexico, so he starts out to execute all his political enemies.” In Texas, a senator said on the floor of the Senate: “All Mexicans are crazy, and this stuff [marijuana] is what makes them crazy.”

Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry 643896_403179843083834_1995113281_n

Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry 643896_403179843083834_1995113281_n

by lizardking Wed Jan 06, 2016 9:02 pm

Hemp & Marijuana: Part Two

Jazz and Assassins

In the eastern states, the “problem” was attributed to a combination of Latin Americans and black jazz musicians. Marijuana and jazz traveled from New Orleans to Chicago, and then to Harlem, where marijuana became an indispensable part of the music scene, even entering the language of the black hits of the time (Louis Armstrong’s “Muggles”, Cab Calloway’s “That Funny Reefer Man”, Fats Waller’s “Viper’s Drag”).

Again, racism was part of the charge against marijuana, as newspapers in 1934 editorialized: “Marihuana influences Negroes to look at white people in the eye, step on white men’s shadows and look at a white woman twice.”

Two other fear-tactic rumors started to spread: one, that Mexicans, Blacks and other foreigners were snaring white children with marijuana; and two, the story of the “assassins.” Early stories of Marco Polo had told of “hasheesh-eaters” or hashashin, from which derived the term “assassin.”

In the original stories, these professional killers were given large doses of hashish and brought to the ruler’s garden (to give them a glimpse of the paradise that awaited them upon successful completion of their mission). Then, after the effects of the drug disappeared, the assassin would fulfill his ruler’s wishes with cool, calculating loyalty.

By the 1930s, the story had changed. Dr. A. E. Fossier wrote in the 1931 New Orleans Medical and Surgical Journal: “Under the influence of hashish those fanatics would madly rush at their enemies, and ruthlessly massacre every one within their grasp.” Within a very short time, marijuana started being linked to violent behavior.

Alcohol Prohibition and Federal Approaches to Drug Prohibition

During this time, the United States was also dealing with alcohol prohibition, which lasted from 1919 to 1933. Alcohol prohibition was extremely visible and debated at all levels, while drug laws were passed without the general public’s knowledge. National alcohol prohibition happened through the mechanism of an amendment to the constitution.

Earlier (1914), the Harrison Act was passed, which provided federal tax penalties for opiates and cocaine.

The federal approach is important. It was considered at the time that the federal government did not have the constitutional power to outlaw alcohol or drugs. It is because of this that alcohol prohibition required a constitutional amendment.

At that time in our country’s history, the judiciary regularly placed the tenth amendment in the path of congressional regulation of “local” affairs, and direct regulation of medical practice was considered beyond congressional power under the commerce clause (since then, both provisions have been weakened so far as to have almost no meaning).

Since drugs could not be outlawed at the federal level, the decision was made to use federal taxes as a way around the restriction. In the Harrison Act, legal uses of opiates and cocaine were taxed (supposedly as a revenue need by the federal government, which is the only way it would hold up in the courts), and those who didn’t follow the law found themselves in trouble with the treasury department.

In 1930, a new division in the Treasury Department was established — the Federal Bureau of Narcotics — and Harry J. Anslinger was named director. This, if anything, marked the beginning of the all-out war against marijuana.

Harry J. Anslinger

Anslinger was an extremely ambitious man, and he recognized the Bureau of Narcotics as an amazing career opportunity — a new government agency with the opportunity to define both the problem and the solution. He immediately realized that opiates and cocaine wouldn’t be enough to help build his agency, so he latched on to marijuana and started to work on making it illegal at the federal level.

Anslinger immediately drew upon the themes of racism and violence to draw national attention to the problem he wanted to create. He also promoted and frequently read from “Gore Files” — wild reefer-madness-style exploitation tales of ax murderers on marijuana and sex and… Negroes. Here are some quotes that have been widely attributed to Anslinger and his Gore Files:

“There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz, and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others.”

“…the primary reason to outlaw marijuana is its effect on the degenerate races.”

“Marijuana is an addictive drug which produces in its users insanity, criminality, and death.”

“Reefer makes darkies think they’re as good as white men.”

“Marihuana leads to pacifism and communist brainwashing”

“You smoke a joint and you’re likely to kill your brother.”

“Marijuana is the most violence-causing drug in the history of mankind.”

And he loved to pull out his own version of the “assassin” definition:

“In the year 1090, there was founded in Persia the religious and military order of the Assassins, whose history is one of cruelty, barbarity, and murder, and for good reason: the members were confirmed users of hashish, or marihuana, and it is from the Arabs’ ‘hashashin’ that we have the English word ‘assassin.’”

Yellow Journalism

Harry Anslinger got some additional help from William Randolf Hearst, owner of a huge chain of newspapers. Hearst had lots of reasons to help. First, he hated Mexicans. Second, he had invested heavily in the timber industry to support his newspaper chain and didn’t want to see the development of hemp paper in competition. Third, he had lost 800,000 acres of timberland to Pancho Villa, so he hated Mexicans. Fourth, telling lurid lies about Mexicans (and the devil marijuana weed causing violence) sold newspapers, making him rich.

Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry 395017_406455219422963_413206611_n

Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry 395017_406455219422963_413206611_n

by lizardking Wed Jan 06, 2016 9:13 pm

Hemp & Marijuana: Part Three

Some samples from the San Francisco Examiner:

“Marihuana makes fiends of boys in thirty days — Hashish goads users to bloodlust.”

“By the tons it is coming into this country — the deadly, dreadful poison that racks and tears not only the body, but the very heart and soul of every human being who once becomes a slave to it in any of its cruel and devastating forms…. Marihuana is a short cut to the insane asylum. Smoke marihuana cigarettes for a month and what was once your brain will be nothing but a storehouse of horrid specters. Hasheesh makes a murderer who kills for the love of killing out of the mildest mannered man who ever laughed at the idea that any habit could ever get him….”

And other nationwide columns…

“Users of marijuana become STIMULATED as they inhale the drug and are LIKELY TO DO ANYTHING. Most crimes of violence in this section, especially in country districts are laid to users of that drug.”

“Was it marijuana, the new Mexican drug, that nerved the murderous arm of Clara Phillips when she hammered out her victim’s life in Los Angeles?… THREE-FOURTHS OF THE CRIMES of violence in this country today are committed by DOPE SLAVES — that is a matter of cold record.”

Hearst and Anslinger were then supported by Dupont chemical company and various pharmaceutical companies in the effort to outlaw cannabis. Dupont had patented nylon, and wanted hemp removed as competition. The pharmaceutical companies could neither identify nor standardize cannabis dosages, and besides, with cannabis, folks could grow their own medicine and not have to purchase it from large companies.

This all set the stage for…

The Marijuana Tax Act of 1937.

After two years of secret planning, Anslinger brought his plan to Congress — complete with a scrapbook full of sensational Hearst editorials, stories of ax murderers who had supposedly smoked marijuana, and racial slurs.

It was a remarkably short set of hearings.

The one fly in Anslinger’s ointment was the appearance by Dr. William C. Woodward, Legislative Council of the American Medical Association.

Woodward started by slamming Harry Anslinger and the Bureau of Narcotics for distorting earlier AMA statements that had nothing to do with marijuana and making them appear to be AMA endorsement for Anslinger’s view.

He also reproached the legislature and the Bureau for using the term marijuana in the legislation and not publicizing it as a bill about cannabis or hemp. At this point, marijuana (or marihuana) was a sensationalist word used to refer to Mexicans smoking a drug and had not been connected in most people’s minds to the existing cannabis/hemp plant. Thus, many who had legitimate reasons to oppose the bill weren’t even aware of it.

Woodward went on to state that the AMA was opposed to the legislation and further questioned the approach of the hearings, coming close to outright accusation of misconduct by Anslinger and the committee:

“That there is a certain amount of narcotic addiction of an objectionable character no one will deny. The newspapers have called attention to it so prominently that there must be some grounds for [their] statements [even Woodward was partially taken in by Hearst’s propaganda]. It has surprised me, however, that the facts on which these statements have been based have not been brought before this committee by competent primary evidence. We are referred to newspaper publications concerning the prevalence of marihuana addiction. We are told that the use of marihuana causes crime.

But yet no one has been produced from the Bureau of Prisons to show the number of prisoners who have been found addicted to the marihuana habit. An informed inquiry shows that the Bureau of Prisons has no evidence on that point.

You have been told that school children are great users of marihuana cigarettes. No one has been summoned from the Children’s Bureau to show the nature and extent of the habit, among children.

Inquiry of the Children’s Bureau shows that they have had no occasion to investigate it and know nothing particularly of it.

Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry 61659_404994942902324_818109033_n

Inquiry of the Office of Education— and they certainly should know something of the prevalence of the habit among the school children of the country, if there is a prevalent habit— indicates that they have had no occasion to investigate and know nothing of it.

Moreover, there is in the Treasury Department itself, the Public Health Service, with its Division of Mental Hygiene. The Division of Mental Hygiene was, in the first place, the Division of Narcotics. It was converted into the Division of Mental Hygiene, I think, about 1930. That particular Bureau has control at the present time of the narcotics farms that were created about 1929 or 1930 and came into operation a few years later. No one has been summoned from that Bureau to give evidence on that point.

Informal inquiry by me indicates that they have had no record of any marihuana of Cannabis addicts who have ever been committed to those farms.

The bureau of Public Health Service has also a division of pharmacology. If you desire evidence as to the pharmacology of Cannabis, that obviously is the place where you can get direct and primary evidence, rather than the indirect hearsay evidence.”

Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry 548968_401354629933022_363799171_n

Committee members then proceeded to attack Dr. Woodward, questioning his motives in opposing the legislation. Even the Chairman joined in:

The Chairman: If you want to advise us on legislation, you ought to come here with some constructive proposals, rather than criticism, rather than trying to throw obstacles in the way of something that the Federal Government is trying to do. It has not only an unselfish motive in this, but they have a serious responsibility.

Dr. Woodward: We cannot understand yet, Mr. Chairman, why this bill should have been prepared in secret for 2 years without any intimation, even, to the profession, that it was being prepared.

After some further bantering…

The Chairman: I would like to read a quotation from a recent editorial in the Washington Times:

The marihuana cigarette is one of the most insidious of all forms of dope, largely because of the failure of the public to understand its fatal qualities.

The Nation is almost defenseless against it, having no Federal laws to cope with it and virtually no organized campaign for combating it.

The result is tragic.

School children are the prey of peddlers who infest school neighborhoods.

High school boys and girls buy the destructive weed without knowledge of its capacity of harm, and conscienceless dealers sell it with impunity.

This is a national problem, and it must have national attention.

The fatal marihuana cigarette must be recognized as a deadly drug, and American children must be protected against it.

Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry 561673_403740133027805_218626613_n

That is a pretty severe indictment. They say it is a national question and that it requires effective legislation. Of course, in a general way, you have responded to all of these statements; but that indicates very clearly that it is an evil of such magnitude that it is recognized by the press of the country as such.

And that was basically it. Yellow journalism won over medical science.

The committee passed the legislation on. And on the floor of the house, the entire discussion was:

Member from upstate New York: “Mr. Speaker, what is this bill about?”

Speaker Rayburn: “I don’t know. It has something to do with a thing called marihuana. I think it’s a narcotic of some kind.”

“Mr. Speaker, does the American Medical Association support this bill?”

Member on the committee jumps up and says: “Their Doctor Wentworth[sic] came down here. They support this bill 100 percent.”

And on the basis of that lie, on August 2, 1937, marijuana became illegal at the federal level.

The entire coverage in the New York Times: “President Roosevelt signed today a bill to curb traffic in the narcotic, marihuana, through heavy taxes on transactions.”

Anslinger as precursor to the Drug Czars

Anslinger was essentially the first Drug Czar. Even though the term didn’t exist until William Bennett’s position as director of the White House Office of National Drug Policy, Anslinger acted in a similar fashion. In fact, there are some amazing parallels between Anslinger and the current Drug Czar John Walters. Both had kind of a carte blanche to go around demonizing drugs and drug users.

Both had resources and a large public podium for their voice to be heard and to promote their personal agenda. Both lied constantly, often when it was unnecessary. Both were racists. Both had the ear of lawmakers, and both realized that they could persuade legislators and others based on lies, particularly if they could co-opt the media into squelching or downplaying any opposition views.

Anslinger even had the ability to circumvent the First Amendment. He banned the Canadian movie “Drug Addict,” a 1946 documentary that realistically depicted the drug addicts and law enforcement efforts. He even tried to get Canada to ban the movie in their own country, or failing that, to prevent U.S. citizens from seeing the movie in Canada. Canada refused. (Today, Drug Czar John Walters is trying to bully Canada into keeping harsh marijuana laws.)

Anslinger had 37 years to solidify the propaganda and stifle opposition. The lies continued the entire time (although the stories would adjust — the 21 year old Florida boy who killed his family of five got younger each time he told it). In 1961, he looked back at his efforts:

“Much of the most irrational juvenile violence and that has written a new chapter of shame and tragedy is traceable directly to this hemp intoxication. A gang of boys tear the clothes from two school girls and rape the screaming girls, one boy after the other. A sixteen-year-old kills his entire family of five in Florida, a man in Minnesota puts a bullet through the head of a stranger on the road; in Colorado husband tries to shoot his wife, kills her grandmother instead and then kills himself. Every one of these crimes had been proceeded [sic] by the smoking of one or more marijuana “reefers.”

As the marijuana situation grew worse, I knew action had to be taken to get the proper legislation passed. By 1937 under my direction, the Bureau launched two important steps First, a legislative plan to seek from Congress a new law that would place marijuana and its distribution directly under federal control.

Second, on radio and at major forums, such that presented annually by the New York Herald Tribune, I told the story of this evil weed of the fields and river beds and roadsides. I wrote articles for magazines; our agents gave hundreds of lectures to parents, educators, social and civic leaders. In network broadcasts I reported on the growing list of crimes, including murder and rape. I described the nature of marijuana and its close kinship to hashish. I continued to hammer at the facts.

I believe we did a thorough job, for the public was alerted and the laws to protect them were passed, both nationally and at the state level. We also brought under control the wild growing marijuana in this country. Working with local authorities, we cleaned up hundreds of acres of marijuana and we uprooted plants sprouting along the roadsides.”

This account only scratches the surface of the story. If you want to know more about the history of marijuana, Harry Anslinger, and the saga of criminalization in the United States and elsewhere, visit some of the excellent links below. (All data and quotes for this piece came from these sources as well).

• The History of the Non-Medical Use of Drugs in the United States
by Charles Whitebread, Professor of Law, USC Law School. A Speech to the California Judges Association 1995 annual conference.

• THE FORBIDDEN FRUIT AND THE TREE OF KNOWLEDGE: AN INQUIRY INTO THE LEGAL HISTORY OF AMERICAN MARIJUANA PROHIBITION
by Richard J. Bonnie & Charles H. Whitebread, II. VIRGINIA LAW REVIEW. VOLUME 56 OCTOBER 1970 NUMBER 6

• The Consumers Union Report – Licit and Illicit Drugs
by Edward M. Brecher and the Editors of Consumer Reports Magazine

• The History of the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937
By David F. Musto, M.D., New Haven, Conn.
Originally published in Arch. Gen. Psychiat. Volume 26, February, 1972

• The Report of the National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse
I. Control of Marihuana, Alcohol and Tobacco.
History of Marihuana Legislation

• The Marihuana Tax Act of 1937
The history of how the Marihuana Tax Act came to be the law of the land.

• Marijuana – The First Twelve Thousand Years
by Ernest L. Abel, 1980

by lizardking Wed Jan 06, 2016 9:30 pm

Cannabis The Most Medicinal Plant on the Planet: Nicknamed Marijuana!

More than a dozen U.S. states have now completely decriminalized the act of possessing marijuana and both Colorado and Washington have made it legal to possess, sell, transport and cultivate the plant.

In a historic and significant moment in American history, last November, Colorado became the first US state to legalize marijuana for recreational use. The impact of the decision could soon ripple across the entire country with vast opportunities to educate millions on the top health benefits of marijuana.

With the passage of I-502 in the 2012 Washington State election, marijuana also became legal in Washington–not just for medical use, but also for recreational use–and Alaska, California, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, Nevada, New York, Nebraska, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, and Vermont have all decriminalized marijuana.

Consumption and sale of marijuana is still illegal in all other states, though some cities and towns have passed local laws decriminalizing it or making it a low priority for law enforcement officers. There are also movements in many states to legalize pot, including legalization bills introduced in many other states.

For other states to mimic the systems in Colorado and Washington, they will first have to get legalization laws on their ballots or in their state houses, which could post a challenge, he said.

After Washington state and Colorado passed laws in November 2012 legalizing the consumption and sale of marijuana for adults over 18, lawmakers in both states waited to see whether the federal government would continue to prosecute pot crimes under federal statutes in their states. Both Colorado and Washington have been working to set up regulatory systems in order to license and tax marijuana growers and retail sellers, but have been wary of whether federal prosecutors would come after them for doing so.

They are the first states to legalize pot, and therefore to go through the process of trying to set up a regulatory system. Ruling Signals The End is Near For Marijuana Prohibition Last Thursday, the Department of Justice announced that it would not prosecute marijuana crimes that were legal under state law, a move that could signal the end of the country’s longtime prohibition on pot is nearing.

“It certainly appears to be potentially the beginning of the end,”

said Paul Armantano, deputy director of the pot lobby group NORML.

Marijuana Cannabinoids ~ The Medicinal Cannabis Full Spectrum Synergy!

Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry Cannab2_new

The Botanical Plant Genus Cannabis!

Cannabis is a flowering plant genus that includes three acknowledged varieties:

Cannabis sativa ~ medicinal/recreational ~ generally stimulating
Cannabis indica ~ medicinal/recreational ~ generally sedating
Cannabis ruderalis ~ generally industrial purposes aka; hemp

Cannabis Hybrids are bred for higher or lower CBD to THC ratios.

Cannabis has been used for hundreds of years by humans, for fiber (hemp), seed oils, seed, medical treatment and recreationally.

The word ‘Cannabis’ can be used interchangeably for the ‘botanical plant’ or ‘cannabinoids’ that Cannabis produces.

So where does Marijuana come into play? Marijuana is a ‘nickname’ for the ‘cannabinoids’ and NOT the ‘botanical plant’.

Medical Cannabis/Mary Jane is very different than Industrial Cannabis aka; Hemp, yet they are of the same family. They are both from the botanical genus ‘Cannabis’ but one is bred for [Medicinal/Recreational containing THC] and the other is bred for [Industrial non THC].

The memo sent to states Thursday by the DOJ said that as long as states set up comprehensive regulations governing marijuana, there would be no need for the federal government to step in, a decision that will save the Justice Department from having to use its limited resources on prosecuting individuals for growing or smoking marijuana.

Fact Is The Corporate Federal Government Has No Jurisdiction Over States, In Fact It Is The Other Way Around.

“This memo appears to be sending the message to states regarding marijuana prohibition that is a recognition that a majority of the public and in some states majority of lawmakers no longer want to continue down the road of illegal cannabis, and would rather experiment with different regulatory schemes of license and retail sale of cannabis,” Armantano said.

In 2011 the federal government decreed that marijuana had no accepted medical use and should remain classified as a highly dangerous drug like heroin.

Accepting and promoting the powerful health benefits of marijuana would instantly cut huge profits geared towards cancer treatment and the U.S. would have to admit it imprisons the population for no cause.

Nearly half of all drug arrests in the United States are for marijuana. According to MarijuanaNews.com editor Richard Cowan, the answer is because it is a threat to cannabis prohibition“…there really is massive proof that the suppression of medical cannabis represents the greatest failure of the institutions of a free society, medicine, journalism, science, and our fundamental values,” Cowan notes.

Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry What-are-cbd-cannabinoids

Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry What-are-cbd-cannabinoids

While Colorado and Washington have not yet set up their regulatory systems, both states will likely sell licenses to farmers who want to grow marijuana as well as to manufacturing plants and retail sellers.

The marijuana will also likely be taxed at each stage of its growth, processing, and sale.

“In both Colorado and Washington, legalization was done by citizens with no participation by elected representatives until they had to pass laws to comply with the initiative. In other initiative states I would expect such measures – I would expect a new one in California, for instance – and roughly half the states permit this and the rest don’t. In the states that do have initiatives I expect efforts to get it on the ballot. The other half it will be much tougher. It’s hard to get elected representatives to do this,” Collins said.

Armantano is more optimistic about the spread of legalized cannabis. He compared the DOJ’s announcement to the federal government’s actions toward the end of alcohol prohibition in America a century ago, when states decided to stop following the [illegal] federal ban on alcohol sales and the federal government said it would not step in and prosecute crimes.

“For first time we now have clear message from fed government saying they will not stand in way of states that wish to implement alternative regulatory schemes in lieu of federal prohibition,” Armantano said. New World Order Chronology: Nothing New Here ~ We Fought This Same Menace In 1776!

He predicted that within the next one to three years, five or six other states may join Colorado and Washington in legalizing the drug, setting the stage for the rest of the country to follow.

The Age of Deception is Ending;

In 2003, the U.S. Government as represented by the Department of Health and Human Services filed for, and was awarded a patent on cannabinoids. The reason? Because research into cannabinoids allowed pharmaceutical companies to acquire practical knowledge on one of the most powerful antioxidants and neuroprotectants known to the natural world.

The U.S. Patent 6630507 was specifically initiated when researchers found that cannabinoids had specific antioxidant properties making them useful in the treatment and prophylaxis of wide variety of oxidation associated diseases, such as ischemic, age-related, inflammatory and autoimmune diseases.

The cannabinoids are found to have particular application as neuroprotectants, for example in limiting neurological damage following ischemic insults, such as stroke and trauma, or in the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease and HIV dementia.

Non-psychoactive cannabinoids, such as cannabidiol [CBD], are particularly advantageous to use because they avoid toxicity that is encountered with psychoactive cannabinoids at high doses useful in the method of the present invention.

Besides the top 10 health benefits below, findings published in the journal PLoS ONE, researchers have now discovered that marijuana-like chemicals trigger receptors on human immune cells that can directly inhibit a type of human immuno-deficiency virus (HIV) found in late-stage AIDS.

Recent studies have even shown it to be an effective atypical anti-psychotic in treating schizophrenia a disease many other studies have inconsistently found it causing.

Top 10 Health Benefits of Marijuana:

1. Cancer Cannabinoids, the active components of marijuana, inhibit tumor growth in laboratory animals and also kill cancer cells.

Western governments have known this for a long time yet they continued to suppress the information so that cannabis prohibition and the profits generated by the drug industry proliferated. THC that targets cannabinoid receptors CB1 and CB2 is similar in function to endocannabinoids, which are cannabinoids that are naturally produced in the body and activate these receptors.

The researchers suggest that THC or other designer agents that activate these receptors might be used in a targeted fashion to treat lung cancer.

2. Tourette’s syndrome is a neurological condition characterized by uncontrollable facial grimaces, tics, and involuntary grunts, snorts and shouts. Dr. Kirsten Mueller-Vahl of the Hanover Medical College in Germany led a team that investigated the effects of chemicals called cannabinols in 12 adult Tourette’s patients.

A single dose of the cannabinol produced a significant reduction in symptoms for several hours compared to placebo, the researchers reported.

3. Seizures Cannabis/Marijuana is a muscle relaxant and has “antispasmodic” qualities that have proven to be a very effective treatment for seizures. There are actually countless cases of people suffering from seizures that have only been able to function better through the use of marijuana.

4. Migraines Since medicinal cannabis/marijuana was legalized in California, doctors have reported that they have been able to treat more than 300,000 cases of migraines that conventional medicine couldn’t through marijuana.

5. Glaucoma Cannabis/Marijuana’s treatment of glaucoma has been one of the best documented. There isn’t a single valid study that exists that disproves marijuana’s very powerful and popular effects on glaucoma patients.

6. Multiple Sclerosis Marijuana’s effects on multiple sclerosis patients became better documented when former talk-show host, Montel Williams began to use pot to treat his MS. Cannabis/Marijuana works to stop the neurological effects and muscle spasms that come from the fatal disease.

7. ADD and ADHD A well documented USC study done about a year ago showed that marijuana is not only a perfect alternative for Ritalin but treats the disorder without any of the negative side effects of the pharmaceutical.

8. IBS and Crohn’s Marijuana has shown that it can help with symptoms of the chronic diseases as it stops nausea, abdominal pain, and diarrhea.

9. Alzheimer’s Despite what you may have heard about marijuana’s effects on the brain, the Scripps Institute, in 2006, proved that the THC found in marijuana works to prevent Alzheimer’s by blocking the deposits in the brain that cause the disease.

10. Premenstrual Syndrome Just like marijuana is used to treat IBS, it can be used to treat the cramps and discomfort that causes PMS symptoms.

Using cannabis/marijuana for PMS actually goes all the way back to Queen Victoria. Mounting Evidence Suggests Raw Cannabis are the Best Cannabinoids in preventing cancer, reduce heart attacks by 66% and insulin dependent diabetes by 58%.

Cannabis clinician Dr. William Courtney recommends drinking 4 – 8 ounces of raw flower and leaf juice from any Hemp plant, 5 mg of Cannabidiol (CBD) per kg of body weight, a salad of Hemp seed sprouts and 50 mg of THC taken in 5 daily doses.

Why raw?

Heat destroys certain enzymes and nutrients in plants.

Incorporating raw cannabis allows for a greater availability of those elements. Those who require large amounts of cannabinoids without the psychoactive effects need to look no further than raw cannabis.

In this capacity, it can be used at 60 times more tolerance than if it were heated. Raw cannabis is considered by many experts as a dietary essential. As a powerful anti-inflammatory and antioxidant, raw cannabis may be right up there with garlic and tumeric

Eating fresh raw medicinal marijuana for health and vitality does not get you high. Marijuana is the most nutritious vegetable in the world with six amino fatty acids. Marijuana is one of the few plants in this world that is a complete protein. Juicing marijuana is very effective for restoring physiological balance. The health benefits are amazing. http://www.derekbutt.com http://www.chefderekbutt.com
For a more in-depth look at medicinal marijuana, check out my ebook at http://themedicalmarijuanaguide.com

by lizardking Sat Jan 09, 2016 2:24 pm

Cancer develops from fungal infections, like Candida
http://www.naturalnews.com/048341_cancer_Candida_fungal_infections.html

"The numbers related to those who are diagnosed with cancer and who die from it are sickening, to the point that cancer is on the doorstep of knocking out heart disease as the number one killer in the United States. It is estimated approximately that 1 in 3 people will be diagnosed with some type of cancer, and recent data shows that cancer claims at least 576,691 people per year, or nearly 23% of ALL deaths.

There are very few common threads among experts on what causes cancer, aside from obvious lifestyle choices like smoking and alcohol. However, to think cancer is largely caused by one thing is a bit too simplistic...or is it? Turns out, it may not be that complicated.

A simple fungal infection can cause cancer

According to The Home Medical Encyclopedia, in 1963 about 50% of all Americans suffered from an "unrecognized" systemic fungal infection. These infections can be brought on by many different factors that alter the optimal state of our intestinal ecology, most notably antibiotics, birth control pills, excessive processed sugar and grain consumption, heavy metal contamination, xenoestrogens, alcohol, smoking, and chronic stress. These factors, in combination with diets severely deficient in active enzymes and probiotics, have paved the way for the most prevalent fungal infection to take over, Candida albicans.

But how does a fungal problem like Candida lead to an eventual cancer diagnosis?

According to Dr. Robert Young:

"Bacteria, yeast/fungi, and mold are not the cause of a cancerous condition but are the result and the evidence of cells and tissues biologically transforming from a healthy state into an unhealthy state." Dr. Young astutely observed that, "over-acidification of the body leads to the development of chronic yeast and fungal infections and ultimately a cancerous condition of the cells and tissues."

Further backing this theory is the understanding that yeasts like Candida are anaerobes - which means they generate their energy in the absence of oxygen. Once in the blood stream, they can colonize in certain areas of the body and dramatically reduce oxygen levels. This results in local cells switching their energy system from oxygen based to one that doesn't use oxygen. This is the system used by cancer cells, which do not use oxygen to generate their energy. Otto Warburg won a Nobel Prize in 1931 for informing the world of this property of cancer cells and that oxygen was their enemy!

It has also been shown that beneficial bacteria in your intestine are known to direct up to 85 per cent of your immune response, to release anti-cancer vitamins (like biotin, B-12, folic acid, and vitamin K) from your foods and even to produce a compound (sodium butyrate), which causes cancer cells to self-destruct. Beneficial bacteria don't work well if the acidity of the gut increases, and they will be severely impaired in their anti-cancer function if you have a systemic Candida infection.

The Mayo clinic has also confirmed that cancer is a fungus, can be caused by a fungus, or is accompanied by late stage fungal infections. Johns Hopkins found that the drug itraconazole, commonly used to treat toenail fungus, can also block angiogenesis, the growth of new blood vessels commonly seen in cancers which allow metastases (spreading of cancer throughout the body) to occur.

Knowing these truths, is it any surprise that cancer is so rampant? How many people do you know that have:

Taken antibiotics (or any other prescription medication)
Used birth control pills
Eaten non-organic foods, high in sugars, grains (especially gluten) and starches (like potatoes)
Have metal dental fillings and have been vaccinated (exposed to mercury)
Consumed foods and beverages out of plastic containers
Drank beer, wine, or hard alcohol regularly
Consumed caffeine on a daily basis
Smoked cigarettes
Live with chronic underlying stress

Any ONE of these things can facilitate Candida overgrowth, and in many cases people are dealing with at least 2 or 3 of these from their history. It's important to note that a systemic Candida infection is not a quick fix, so recent changes in your lifestyle are not likely to have completely reversed the problem. It can take years of a lifestyle change that completely avoids the factors listed above (and more) and a diet rich in enzyme and probiotic rich foods to completely eliminate Candida."

by lizardking Sat Jan 09, 2016 2:25 pm

http://www.cureyourowncancer.org/

by lizardking Sat Jan 09, 2016 2:30 pm

Why Medicine Won't Allow Cancer To Be Cured
http://www.trueactivist.com/why-medicine-wont-allow-cancer-to-be-cured

Nearly two million Americans are diagnosed with cancer every year—one person out of three will be hit with a cancer diagnosis at some time in their lives, in spite of the massive technological advances over the past half-century.

Western medicine is no closer to finding a “cancer cure,” while cancer has grown into a worldwide epidemic of staggering proportions. The statistics speak for themselves:

In the early 1900s, one in 20 people developed cancer
In the 1940s, one in 16 people developed cancer
In the 1970s, it was one in 10

Today, it’s one in three!

According to the CDC, about 1,660,290 (1.66 million) new cancer cases are expected to be diagnosed in 20131. If overall death rates are falling, why are incidence rates still on the rise? The answer is simple: the 40-year “war on cancer” has been a farce.

The cancer epidemic is a dream for Big Pharma, and their campaigns to silence cancer cures have been fierce, which is a tale well told in the documentary film featured below, Cancer: Forbidden Cures.

The featured documentary is enormously informative. It details how the pharmaceutical industry partnered with the American Medical Association (AMA) in an ingenious plan to overtake the medical system in four swift, easy steps, back in the early 1900s. In a nutshell, it went something like this:

International bankers that own the drug and chemical companies gained control over the medical education system over 100 years ago.
They gave grants to the AMA and leading medical schools in exchange for seats on their board and the ability to control policy.
Finally, they cleverly engineered their control of virtually every federal regulatory agency relating to the practice of medicine.

Over the last hundred years, a number of natural cancer treatments have been developed and used successfully to treat patients in the US and other countries. All have been vehemently discounted, silenced, and pushed under the rug by the medical monopoly, with physicians and researchers attacked, smeared, sent to prison, and professionally ruined for daring to defy the medical establishment.

To this day, with respect to credibility in medicine, “quack” is synonymous with “competition.”

In order to protect the medical monopoly, any viable natural treatment is met with massive opposition by the pharmaceutical and medical industries. Drug companies have no interest in natural agents that they cannot patent, because they interfere with their revenue stream. They will go—and have gone—to extreme measures to prevent the truth about effective natural treatments (competitive threats) from reaching the public.

The FDA is now, thanks to PDUFA, primarily funded by the drug companies and is complicit in this process. They restrict competition in the guise of protecting the public, when the reality is they are protecting the profits of the drug companies.

by lizardking Sat Jan 09, 2016 2:36 pm

CDC Admits 98 Million Americans Received Polio Vaccine In An 8-Year Span When It Was Contaminated With Cancer Virus
http://preventdisease.com/news/13/071713_CDC-Admits-98-Million-Americans-Received-Polio-Vaccine-In-An-8-Year-Span-When-It-Was-Contaminated-With-Cancer-Virus.shtml

The CDC has quickly removed a page from their website, which WAS cached here (since removed by google so you can view an image of the cache here), admitting that more than 98 million Americans received one or more doses of polio vaccine within an 8-year span from 1955-1963 when a proportion of the vaccine was contaminated with a cancer causing polyomavirus called SV40. It has been estimated that 10-30 million Americans could have received an SV40 contaminated dose of the vaccine.

SV40 is an abbreviation for Simian vacuolating virus 40 or Simian virus 40, a polyomavirus that is found in both monkeys and humans. Like other polyomaviruses, SV40 is a DNA virus that has been found to cause tumors and cancer.

SV40 is believed to suppress the transcriptional properties of the tumor-suppressing genes in humans through the SV40 Large T-antigen and SV40 Small T-antigen. Mutated genes may contribute to uncontrolled cellular proliferation, leading to cancer.

Michele Carbone, Assistant Professor of Pathology at Loyola University in Chicago, has recently isolated fragments of the SV-40 virus in human bone cancers and in a lethal form of lung cancer called mesothelioma. He found SV-40 in 33% of the osteosarcoma bone cancers studied, in 40% of other bone cancers, and in 60% of the mesotheliomas lung cancers, writes Geraldo Fuentes.

Dr. Michele Carbone openly acknowledged HIV/AIDS was spread by the hepatitis B vaccine produced by Merck & Co. during the early 1970s. It was the first time since the initial transmissions took place in 1972-74, that a leading expert in the field of vaccine manufacturing and testing has openly admitted the Merck & Co. liability for AIDS.

The matter-of-fact disclosure came during discussions of polio vaccines contaminated with SV40 virus which caused cancer in nearly every species infected by injection. Many authorities now admit much, possibly most, of the world's cancers came from the Salk and Sabin polio vaccines, and hepatitis B vaccines, produced in monkeys and chimps.

It is said mesothelioma is a result of asbestos exposure, but research reveals that 50% of the current mesotheliomas being treated no longer occurs due to asbestos but rather the SV-40 virus contained in the polio vaccination. In addition, according to researchers from the Institute of Histology and General Embryology of the University of Ferrara, SV-40 has turned up in a variety other tumors. By the end of 1996, dozens of scientists reported finding SV40 in a variety of bone cancers and a wide range of brain cancers, which had risen 30 percent over the previous 20 years.

The SV-40 virus is now being detected in tumors removed from people never inoculated with the contaminated vaccine, leading some to conclude that those infected by the vaccine might be spreading SV40.

Soon after its discovery, SV40 was identified in the oral form of the polio vaccine produced between 1955 and 1961 produced by American Home Products (dba Lederle).

Both the oral, live virus and injectable inactive virus were affected. It was found later that the technique used to inactivate the polio virus in the injectable vaccine, by means of formaldehyde, did not reliably kill SV40.

Just two years ago, the U.S. government finally added formaldehyde to a list of known carcinogens and and admitted that the chemical styrene might cause cancer. Yet, the substance is still found in almost every vaccine.

According to the Australian National Research Council, fewer than 20% but perhaps more than 10% of the general population may be susceptible to formaldehyde and may react acutely at any exposure level. More hazardous than most chemicals in 5 out of 12 ranking systems, on at least 8 federal regulatory lists, it is ranked as one of the most hazardous compounds (worst 10%) to ecosystems and human health (Environmental Defense Fund).

In the body, formaldehyde can cause proteins to irreversibly bind to DNA. Laboratory animals exposed to doses of inhaled formaldehyde over their lifetimes have developed more cancers of the nose and throat than are usual.

Facts Listed on The CDC Website about SV40

◘ SV40 is a virus found in some species of monkey.

◘ SV40 was discovered in 1960. Soon afterward, the virus was found in polio vaccine.

◘ SV40 virus has been found in certain types of cancer in humans.

Additional Facts

◘ In the 1950s, rhesus monkey kidney cells, which contain SV40 if the animal is infected, were used in preparing polio vaccines.

◘ Not all doses of IPV were contaminated. It has been estimated that 10-30 million people actually received a vaccine that contained SV40.

◘ Some evidence suggests that receipt of SV40-contaminated polio vaccine may increase risk of cancer.

A Greater Perspective on Aerial Spraying and SV40

The Defense Sciences Office of the Pathogen Countermeasures Program, in September 23, 1998 funded the University of Michigan's principal investigator, Dr. James Baker, Jr. Dr. Baker, Director of Michigan Nanotechnology Institute for Medicine and Biological Sciences under several DARPA grants. Dr. Baker developed and focused on preventing pathogens from entering the human body, which is a major goal in the development of counter measures to Biological Warfare. This research project sought to develop a composite material that will serve as a pathogen avoidance barrier and post-exposure therapeutic agent to be applied in a topical manner to the skin and mucous membranes. The composite is modeled after the immune system in that it involves redundant, non-specific and specific forms of pathogen defense and inactivation. This composite material is now utilized in many nasal vaccines and vector control through the use of hydro-gel, nanosilicon gels and actuator materials in vaccines.

Through Dr. Baker's research at the University of Michigan; he developed dendritic polymers and their application to medical and biological science. He co-developed a new vector system for gene transfer using synthetic polymers. These studies have produced striking results and have the potential to change the basis of gene transfer therapy. Dendrimers are nanometer-sized water soluble polymers that can conjugate to peptides or arbohydrates to act as decoy molecules to inhibit the binding of toxins and viruses to cells. They can act also as complex and stabilize genetic material for prolonged periods of time, as in a "time released or delayed gene transfer". Through Dr. Baker's ground breaking research many pharmaceutical and biological pesticide manufacturers can use these principles in DNA vaccines specific applications that incorporate the Simian Monkey Virus SV40.

WEST NILE VIRUS SPRAYING

In 2006 Michael Greenwood wrote an article for the Yale School of Public Health entitled, "Aerial Spraying Effectively Reduces Incidence of West Nile Virus (WNV) in Humans." The article stated that the incidence of human West Nile virus cases can be significantly reduced through large scale aerial spraying that targets adult mosquitoes, according to research by the Yale School of Public Health and the California Department of Public Health.

Under the mandate for aerial spraying for specific vectors that pose a threat to human health, aerial vaccines known as DNA Vaccine Enhancements and Recombinant Vaccine against WNV may be tested or used to "protect" the people from vector infection exposures. DNA vaccine enhancements specifically use Epstein-Barr viral capside's with multi human complement class II activators to neutralize antibodies. The recombinant vaccines against WNV use Rabbit Beta-globulin or the poly (A) signal of the SV40 virus. In early studies of DNA vaccines it was found that the negative result studies would go into the category of future developmental research projects in gene therapy. During the studies of poly (A) signaling of the SV40 for WNV vaccines, it was observed that WNV will lie dormant in individuals who were exposed to chicken pox, thus upon exposure to WNV aerial vaccines the potential for the release of chicken pox virus would cause a greater risk to having adult onset Shingles.

CALIFORNIA AERIAL SPRAYING for WNV and SV40

In February 2009 to present date, aerial spraying for the WNV occurred in major cities within the State of California. During spraying of Anaheim, CA a Caucasian female (age 50) was exposed to heavy spraying, while doing her daily exercise of walking several miles. Heavy helicopter activity occurred for several days in this area. After spraying, she experienced light headedness, nausea, muscle aches and increased low back pain. She was evaluated for toxicological mechanisms that were associated with pesticide exposure due to aerial spraying utilizing advanced biological monitoring testing. The test results which included protein band testing utilizing Protein Coupled Response (PCR) methods were positive for KD-45. KD-45 is the protein band for SV-40 Simian Green Monkey virus. Additional tests were performed for Epstein-Barr virus capside and Cytomeglia virus which are used in bioengineering for gene delivery systems through viral protein envelope and adenoviral protein envelope technology. The individual was positive for both; indicating a highly probable exposure to a DNA vaccination delivery system through nasal inhalation.

The question of the century is how many other viruses and toxins are within current day vaccines that we'll only find out about in a few decades?

by lizardking Sat Jan 09, 2016 2:39 pm

Obama: Rockefeller’s man in the White House close to total victory

On July 26, 2000, the Journal of the American Medical Association published a landmark paper by Dr. Barbara Starfield (Johns Hopkins School of Public Health), “Is US health really the best in the world?” In it, Starfield revealed what many people inside the medical establishment already knew: every year, like clockwork, the medical system was killing huge numbers of people.

Each year in the US, as Dr. Starfield reported, there are:

12,000 deaths from unnecessary surgeries;

7,000 deaths from medication errors in hospitals;

20,000 deaths from other errors in hospitals;

80,000 deaths from infections acquired in hospitals;

106,000 deaths from FDA-approved correctly prescribed medicines.

The total of medically-caused deaths in the US every year is 225,000 (a conservative estimate).

This makes the medical system the third leading cause of death in America, behind heart disease and cancer.

In the wake of Starfield’s devastating report, other facts came to light: 2.1 million people in America, every year, are hospitalized as a result of reactions to FDA-approved medicines. Annually, 36 million serious adverse reactions to those drugs occur.

Pandemics such as the 2009 Swine Flu and 2014 Ebola Hoaxes are fake viruses created to coerce millions of people into having harmful vaccinations. Of the thousands of purported Ebola-related deaths in West Africa, not a single one was actually proven to have been caused by Ebola. Ebola was created by the US government and is not even a real disease, and just like HIV/AIDs, the symptoms of illness come fully from the treatment.

by lizardking Sat Jan 09, 2016 2:50 pm

Obama’s “War on Ebola” or War for Oil? Sending 3000 Troops to African “Ebola” Areas that Happen to Export Oil to China

Now Obama’s advisers, no doubt led by the blood-thirsty National Security Adviser, Susan Rice, have come up with a new war. This is the War Against Ebola. On September 16, President Obama solemnly declared the war. He announced, to the surprise of most sane citizens, that he had ordered 3,000 American troops, the so-called “boots on the ground” that the Pentagon refuses to agree to in Syria, to wage a war against….a virus?

In a carefully stage-managed appearance at the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC), Obama read a bone-chilling speech. He called the alleged Ebola outbreaks in west Africa, “a global threat, and it demands a truly global response. This is an epidemic that is not just a threat to regional security. It’s a potential threat to global security, if these countries break down, if their economies break down, if people panic,” Obama continued, conjuring images that would have made Andromeda Strain novelist Michael Chrichton drool with envy. Obama added, “That has profound effects on all of us, even if we are not directly contracting the disease. This outbreak is already spiraling out of control.”

With that hair-raising introduction, the President of the world’s greatest Superpower announced his response. In his role as Commander-in-Chief of the United States of America announced he has ordered 3,000 US troops to west Africa in what he called, “the largest international response in the history of the CDC.” He didn’t make clear if their job would be to shoot the virus wherever it reared its ugly head, or to shoot any poor hapless African suspected of having Ebola. Little does it matter that the US military doesn’t have anywhere near 3,000 troops with the slightest training in public health.

Before we all panic and line up to receive the millions of doses of untested and reportedly highly dangerous “Ebola vaccines” the major drug-makers are preparing to dump on the market, some peculiarities of this Ebola outbreak in Africa are worth noting.

Certified Ebola Deaths?

The World Health Organization, under the Director, Dr Margaret Chan, in a press conference on September 13, sounded the alarm, warning that Ebola in west Africa was surging out of control. “In the three hardest hit countries, Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone, the number of new patients is moving far faster than the capacity to manage them,” Chan claimed. WHO claims that almost half of 301 health-care workers dealing with alleged Ebola patients have themselves died, and that 2,400 people out of 4,784 cases in Africa have died of Ebola. On August 8, Chan declared the African Ebola situation a “Public Health Emergency of International Concern,” whatever that is supposed to mean.

A major problem for Chan and her backers, however, is that her Ebola statistics are very, very dubious. For those whose memory is short, this is the same Dr Margaret Chan at WHO in Geneva who was guilty in 2009 of trying to panic the world into taking unproven vaccines for “Swine Flu” influenza, by declaring a Global Pandemic with statistics calling every case of symptoms that of the common cold to be “Swine Flu,” whether it was runny nose, coughing, sneezing, sore throat. That changed WHO definition of Swine Flu allowed the statistics of the disease to be declared Pandemic. It was an utter fraud, a criminal fraud Chan carried out, wittingly or unwittingly (she could be simply stupid but evidence suggests otherwise), on behalf of the major US and EU pharmaceutical cartel.

In a recent Washington Post article it was admitted that sixty-nine percent of all the Ebola cases in Liberia registered by WHO have not been laboratory confirmed through blood tests. Liberia is the epicenter of the Ebola alarm in west Africa. More than half of the alleged Ebola deaths, 1,224, and nearly half of all cases, 2,046, have been in Liberia says WHO. And the US FDA diagnostic test used for the lab confirmation of Ebola is so flawed that the FDA has prohibited anyone from claiming they are safe or effective. That means, a significant proportion of the remaining 31% of the Ebola cases lab confirmed through blood tests could be false cases.

In short, no one knows what 1,224 Liberians in recent weeks have died from. But WHO claims it to be Ebola. Note that the countries affected by the Ebola alarm are among the poorest and most war-torn regions in the world. Wars over blood diamonds and colonial genocidal tribal wars have left a devastated, mal-nourished population in its wake.

WHO’s official fact sheet on Ebola, which now they renamed EVD for Ebola Virus Disease, claims, “The first EVD outbreaks occurred in remote villages in Central Africa, near tropical rainforests, but the most recent outbreak in west Africa has involved major urban as well as rural areas…” WHO further notes that, “It is thought that fruit bats of the Pteropodidae family are natural Ebola virus hosts. Ebola is introduced into the human population through close contact with the blood, secretions, organs or other bodily fluids of infected animals such as chimpanzees, gorillas, fruit bats, monkeys, forest antelope and porcupines found ill or dead or in the rainforest.”

Then the official WHO Ebola Fact Sheet dated September, 2014, states, “It can be difficult to distinguish EVD from other infectious diseases such as malaria, typhoid fever and meningitis.”

Excuse me, Dr Margaret Chan, can you say that slowly? It can be difficult to distinguish EVD from other infectious diseases such as malaria, typhoid fever and meningitis? And you admit that 69% of the declared cases have never been adequately tested? And you state that the Ebola symptoms include “sudden onset of fever fatigue, muscle pain, headache and sore throat. This is followed by vomiting, diarrhea, rash, symptoms of impaired kidney and liver function, and in some cases, both internal and external bleeding”?

In short it is all the most vague and unsubstantiated basis that lies behind President Obama’s new War on Ebola.

War on Ebola or War for Oil?

One striking aspect of this new concern of the US President for the situation in Liberia and other west African states where alleged surges of Ebola are being claimed is the presence of oil, huge volumes of untapped oil.

The offshore coast of Liberia and east African ‘Ebola zones’ conveniently map with the presence of vast untapped oil and gas resources shown here

The issue of oil in west Africa, notably in the waters of the Gulf of Guinea have become increasingly strategic both to China who is roaming the world in search of future secure oil import sources, and the United States, whose oil geo-politics was summed up in a quip by then Secretary of State Henry Kissinger in the 1970’s: ‘If you control the oil, you control entire nations.’

The Obama Administration and Pentagon policy has continued that of George W. Bush who in 2008 created the US military Africa Command or AFRICOM, to battle the rapidly-growing Chinese economic presence in Africa’s potential oil-rich countries. West Africa is a rapidly-emerging oil treasure, barely tapped to date. A US Department of Energy study projected that African oil production would rise 91 percent between 2002 and 2025, much from the region of the present Ebola alarm.

Chinese oil companies are all over Africa and increasingly active in west Africa, especially Angola, Sudan and Guinea, the later in the epicenter of Obama’s new War on Ebola troop deployment.

If the US President were genuine about his concern to contain a public health emergency, he could look at the example of that US-declared pariah Caribbean nation, Cuba. Reuters reports that the Cuban government, a small financially distressed, economically sanctioned island nation of 11 million people, with a national budget of $50 billion, Gross Domestic Product of 121 billion and per capita GDP of just over $10,000, is dispatching 165 medical personnel to Africa to regions where there are Ebola outbreaks. Washington sends 3,000 combat troops. Something smells very rotten around the entire Ebola scare.

by lizardking Sat Jan 09, 2016 2:54 pm

Ebola: how to stage a fake epidemic

First, keep in mind that what I’m talking about is the creation of false reality.

In 1988, as I finished my first book, “AIDS Inc., Scandal of the Century,” I made notes for an upcoming radio interview. Here is a relevant excerpt:

“It turns out there is absolutely no reason to say that HIV causes what is called AIDS. Once you subtract HIV from the official story, what are you left with?

“A number of people who present an array of illnesses and symptoms. But without HIV, the ‘glue’ that held them all together vanishes. So now you have sick people.

“You have them in Africa, in New York, San Francisco, Haiti, and other places. Yes, they are sick and they are dying. But that doesn’t make an epidemic, because the tiny virus that was supposed to be at the bottom of all this is missing from the equation.

“This tells you how to invent a fake epidemic. You take many sick and dying people, and you claim there is one germ that is causing all the trouble.

“You promote a few diagnostic tests that ‘will confirm the presence of the germ’ and you tell people they must be tested.

“But the tests don’t really confirm the presence of the germ. They’re deceptive and useless. Of course, the test will register positive in many cases.

“These positive people are said to be victims of the one germ that is at the root of the epidemic.”

I wrote that in 1988, and it applies just as well to Ebola, as I’ve demonstrated.

The two primary diagnostic tests for Ebola—the antibody and the PCR—are completely useless for verifying the presence of millions of Ebola virus in a patient—which is what you need to begin to say that patient is an “Ebola case.”

In 1988 with AIDS, and more recently with Ebola, I’ve explained the list of factors that would make people sick and kill them—factors that have nothing to do with HIV or Ebola virus.

In essence, this is how you create a fake epidemic. Real death, false explanation.

You tie together and link together people who are sick and dying for various reasons, and you claim they’re all dying because of the One Germ.

That gives you a powerful psychological ploy, because people are always looking for the one unified thing that explains a whole host of disturbing facts.

You give them what they want.

They buy it.

In the case of “the SARS epidemic” in 2003, it was “the coronavirus.” As I’ve mentioned before, a Canadian microbiologist working for the World Health Organization, Frank Plummer, inadvertently blew the whistle on the scam when he told reporters, stunningly, that the percentage of SARS patients who actually “had the virus” was shrinking from month to month.

In fact, finally, the percentage was approaching zero.

This rank absurdity was duly reported in the press by brain-dead journalists, and everyone moved on, unaware that a bomb had just exploded.

How could these people be called “SARS cases,” when the one and only cause of SARS, “the coronavirus,” wasn’t present in their bodies?

In the case of HIV, it was even worse, because the people who were diagnosed as “HIV-positive,” as a result of useless and misleading antibody tests, were given a drug called AZT.

AZT was a failed chemotherapy drug sitting on the shelves of the US National Institutes of Health. It had been there for nearly 25 years.

It was doled out to patients with orders that they take it every day for the rest of their lives.

To say AZT is highly toxic is a vast understatement. It attacks all cells of the body, including cells of the immune system. So when patients began dying as a result, doctors blithely assured one and all that “the AIDS disease had accelerated” and the deaths had nothing to do with AZT.

This gives you a clue about how medical criminals can target specific populations.

For example, gay men in America were heavily promoted to “take the AIDS test.” The propaganda was relentless. Naturally, a percentage of the tested men showed up positive on, again, the useless and misleading antibody test.

They were dosed with what amounts to a chemical warfare agent. AZT. Many died.

In the late 1990s, I gave talk about HIV to a group of people in the community room of a park in Hollywood. I said to them:

Imagine that this park is suddenly called the epicenter of an outbreak of a virus. It’s all a fake, but there it is. Health authorities order their agents to track down everyone who has been in the park in the last three months.

These park visitors must be tested for the presence of the virus. Of course, the test is fatally flawed. It shows positive results for a few dozen reasons, none of which has anything to do with the presence of a virus.

Those people, those park visitors who “test positive,” are now given a drug which is so toxic it can kill them. It does kill many of them.

As they die, the health authorities count them as victims of the “Hollywood Park virus.”

The circle is closed. The lies interlock.

After my book, AIDS Inc., was published in 1988, I interviewed a researcher attached to the largest HIV study ever done on gay men, the ongoing San Francisco Men’s Study.

This piece of research tracked men who had been diagnosed as HIV to see what happened to them over the course of many yerar.

Of course, all of them were taking AZT. A huge percentage of them fell ill and died.

But there was a subset of men who remained healthy for 8-10 years and were still healthy. The common denominator? They never took AZT, or they stopped taking it.

I asked the researcher why the organizers of the Study didn’t trumpet this fact.

She said they didn’t think it was very important.

Not important? According to the conventional “science,” these men should be dead. They weren’t. They were healthy. They didn’t take the drug.

This is the kind of “science” that is used to bolster fake epidemics. Real death, false reason.

A crime like no other.

by lizardking Sat Jan 09, 2016 2:55 pm

Post by thinkforyourself on Jun 28, 2015 at 5:16pm

Holy shit!

Good job.

by lizardking Sat Jan 09, 2016 2:55 pm

Post by thinkforyourself on Jun 28, 2015 at 5:20pm

Here are a few of my Cancer/Cannabis Oil links:

www.bibliotecapleyades.net/salud/salud_defeatcancer164.htm

http://weeksmd.com/2014/04/chemotherapy-effective-need-focus-cancer-stem-cells/
www.cannabiscure.info/

www.facebook.com/budbuddiesUK/info?tab=page_info

www.medicaljane.com/2013/11/08/cannabinoid-deficiency-may-explain-a-variety-of-health-conditions/

http://tabublog.com/2014/01/19/cure-all-cancers-with-medical-hemp-oil/

by lizardking Sat Jan 09, 2016 2:56 pm

Post by timewarper108 on Jun 28, 2015 at 5:46pm

I've been seeing my new girlfriend for a while now and when I met her she was on anti psychotic medication,had been for 28 years...we talked about it and started to lower the dosages down and down again,each time with strong withdrawal effects but now she's clear of them and starting to see the world again through clear eyes and with a clear mind....we've had no difficulties with the real world and no swings in mood etc. ...It wasn't that easy for her but she sure feels better now....can't stop smilin'......... THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY IS A SCAM

by lizardking Sat Jan 09, 2016 2:56 pm

Post by thinkforyourself on Jun 28, 2015 at 5:48pm

Jun 28, 2015 at 5:46pm timewarper108 said:
I've been seeing my new girlfriend for a while now and when I met her she was on anti psychotic medication,had been for 28 years...we talked about it and started to lower the dosages down and down again,each time with strong withdrawal effects but now she's clear of them and starting to see the world again through clear eyes and with a clear mind....we've had no difficulties with the real world and no swings in mood etc. ...It wasn't that easy for her but she sure feels better now....can't stop smilin'......... THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY IS A SCAM

I am very pleased to hear that she has recovered, and I fully agree with you that it is a scam, one of the most evil scams in history.

This planet gives us all of the medicines that we need, such as Cannabis Oil, and it is important that we spread the truth about the Health Industry.

by lizardking Sat Jan 09, 2016 2:57 pm

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.”

Dr. Angell cites the case of Dr. Joseph L. Biederman, professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School and chief of pediatric psychopharmacology at Harvard’s Massachusetts General Hospital. She explains:

“Thanks largely to him, children as young as two years old are now being diagnosed with bipolar disorder and treated with a cocktail of powerful drugs, many of which were not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for that purpose, and none of which were approved for children below ten years of age.”

“No one knows the total amount provided by drug companies to physicians, but I estimate from the annual reports of the top 9 U.S.-based drug companies that it comes to tens of billions of dollars a year in North America alone.By such means, the pharmaceutical industry has gained enormous control over how doctors evaluate and use its own products. Its extensive ties to physicians, particularly senior faculty at prestigious medical schools, affect the results of research, the way medicine is practiced, and even the definition of what constitutes a disease.”

http://ethicalnag.org/2009/11/09/nejm-editor/
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2009/jan/15/drug-companies-doctorsa-story-of-corruption/

by lizardking Sat Jan 09, 2016 3:06 pm

VACCINES

Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry ReBdxUj

The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program and the 2002 law passed by Congress gave the vaccine industry “BLANKET IMMUNITY” from all vaccine damage claims—the Vaccine Makers are immune from any lawsuit. If a family can meet the criteria to have their case heard in the vaccine court (NVICP) they cannot use a personal lawyer. A government lawyer from the Justice Department is assigned to represent what is really an administrative hearing. The average wait to hear if your case will be heard is 8 years. The full burden of proof is on the plaintiff because also written into the vaccine law is “NO DISCOVERY”. The vaccine makers will not provide you with any documentation to prove your case like in a regular trial. Despite this obstacle the court began the vaccine makers have paid out more than $2.8 billion in compensation awards.

The conflict of interest and revolving door relationship between the CDC-pharmaceutical industry-HHS-FDA-IOM-WHO-IOH-NIH-major universities connected to hospitals have strong financial ties with the pharmaceutical industry and now the Pentagon which has gone into the vaccine making business. This is known as the Medical Industrial Complex:

http://drhyman.com/blog/2011/04/29/the-dangers-of-the-medical-industrial-complex/#close

The above article is pretty simple. Go to this link called Dollars for Doc and it gives you an idea of the money that passes between Big Pharma and doctors, hospitals and universities.

^Taken from the comment section of: https://leviquackenboss.wordpress.com/2015/01/03/there-is-no-anti-vaccination-movement/

The Dangers of the Medical Industrial Complex

YOUR DOCTORS THINK they make decisions based on medical evidence.

But they don’t!

In fact, half of medical evidence is hidden from your doctors. And the half that’s hidden is the half that shows drugs don’t work.

The bad news is that drug companies are not policed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) the way they should be. A drug should be proven both effective and safe BEFORE it is prescribed to millions of people.

Sadly, that often isn’t the case.

Let me share with you two recent examples that highlight the dangerous collusion between drug companies and our government agency. They show why the FDA should really stand for “Federal Drug Aid.”

First, we now know that the cholesterol-lowering drug Zetia actually causes harm and leads to faster progression of heart disease DESPITE lowering cholesterol 58 percent when combined with Zocor.

This challenges the belief that high cholesterol causes heart attacks and shakes the $40 billion dollar cholesterol drug industry at its foundation.

Second, it’s come to light that nearly all the negative studies on antidepressants – that’s more than half of all studies on these drugs – were never published, giving a false sense of effectiveness of antidepressants to treat depression.

Don’t get me wrong.

I’m not telling you to blame your doctor.

Instead, blame deceptive scientific practices and industry-protective government polices. Let’s talk a closer look at these findings and their implications.

I once had a patient who worked in the drug approval division of the FDA. She taught me a very important lesson.

When a drug company designs and performs a study, it has to be registered with the FDA and ALL the results must be submitted to the FDA. But it doesn’t work that way.

Instead, the pharmaceutical companies ONLY submit the data they want to get published to medical journals. That means that any negative studies are hidden from the scientific community and from the public.

And when drug studies are sponsored by drug companies – as most are – they find positive outcomes at 4 times the rate of independently funded studies. This is also true for nutrition studies funded by the food industry that show the benefits of dairy or high-fructose corn syrup.

The FDA does not release this information.

Since drug companies fund most of the research in the world, other therapies that work better – such as diet and lifestyle or nutritional therapies – never get enough funding.

That was, it didn’t until 2004 when all the major scientific journals banded together and refused to publish any data from any drug study that did not list the results of all trials, either positive or negative, in a central database. (1)

Well, that sounds good – but listing obscure, unpublished studies buried deep in a hard-to-navigate public database run by the National Institutes of Health is hardly visible public disclosure.

Sure, the research studies are at least listed, but try to find out the results. After a few hours searching around on the website clinicaltrials.gov, I gave up.

Last year, Congress passed legislation expanding how much detail must be listed, but at the end of the day, who even looks at that? Most doctors don’t even have time to read the medical journals they receive. They get tiny bits of information from drug reps, who come to their office with free lunch and a sound bite about their drug.

They get slightly more information from researchers who are funded by pharmaceutical companies and present their findings at conferences sponsored by pharmaceutical companies, using presentations prepared for them by pharmaceutical companies. Not exactly independent, evidence-based medicine!

Now let’s get back to the news about Zetia. Zetia is a new drug that lowers cholesterol by a different mechanism than statin drugs like Lipitor and Zocor.

Why does this matter?

Well, doctors have been brainwashed to think that cholesterol is the cause of heart attacks even though half of all people who have heart attacks have NORMAL cholesterol. And it seemed like the statins, which lowered cholesterol, actually reduced heart attacks.

Seems logical. If you lower cholesterol, you reduce heart attacks, right?

No!

I believe that the reason statins lower risk is NOT because they lower cholesterol, but because they reduce inflammation. In fact, studies by Dr. Paul Ridker of Harvard show that the risk of heart attacks was only reduced if inflammation was lowered along with LDL cholesterol – but not if LDL cholesterol was lowered alone. (2)

So then along comes a drug that can be combined with statins to lower cholesterol even more. Great idea? Not really.

You see, the FDA approved Zetia without any proof that it lowered heart attacks or reduced the progression of heart disease. The drug was approved solely on the basis that it lowered cholesterol.

Yet Zetia was given to 5 million people – and made the drug companies $5 billion a year. That’s almost $14 million a day! And once Zetia was approved, its makers had no incentive to prove that it actually did what it was thought to do – lower heart attacks.

They dragged their feet doing the studies and then released the negative data (which they did only under pressure from news agencies and Congress) after a long delay.

Wouldn’t you drag your feet too if you were making $14 million a day?

But the FDA had the negative data on Zetia – and it didn’t speak up. The data that was withheld proved that Zetia did not reduce heart attacks but actually INCREASED fatty plaques in the arteries despite lowering cholesterol.

Let that sink in for a moment.

That’s right: Lowering cholesterol led to more heart disease!

That turns our whole medical model upside down. It shows us that high cholesterol is NOT a disease and may or may not be related to heart attacks.

Another recent study put another nail in the coffin of the Cholesterol Myth.

A major new cholesterol drug, torcetrapib, was pulled from the pipeline in December 2006 because despite lowering LDL cholesterol and raising HDL cholesterol in 15,000 people, it caused MORE heart attacks and strokes. (3)

This was to be the new cholesterol wonder drug. Oops.

All this points to a big research mess that is flawed in three ways.

First, what gets studied depends on who is funding it.

Since drug companies fund most of the research in the world, other therapies that work better – such as diet and lifestyle or nutritional therapies – never get enough funding.

Second, drug companies are aided by the FDA, which suppresses, hides, and doesn’t publish negative studies on drugs, only positive ones. This leads doctors to think they have all the evidence when they don’t.

Third, doctors, patients, and the media believe they have the whole truth, often until it is too late, like with Zetia or Premarin or Vioxx.

The evidence was there, but no one looked or publicized it. This makes it very difficult for consumers to get the best treatments for their health and the whole truth about drugs.

Here’s my advice on how to make sense of things.

1. Follow the money. Look carefully at who funded the study. Be suspicious if it was funded by drug companies.
2. Call or email your congressperson or Senator to demand better legislation providing an easy-to-navigate database of all drug trials, with consumer-friendly summaries of both published AND unpublished data submitted to the FDA so you can look up the drug you are prescribed and have a balanced opinion.
3. Don’t assume that drugs are the answer to your health problems. Heart disease is NOT a Lipitor deficiency but the result of your lifestyle interacting with your genes.
4. Learn to ask the question “why?” – and search for the answers. Dealing with lifestyle and environmental factors (the basis of UltraWellness) almost always works better for chronic illnesses. Drugs are there as a backup only if needed.
So take a closer look at the information you’ve been given about drugs. You might be surprised by what you find.

Now I’d like to hear from you…

Were you aware of the studies I’ve mentioned today?

Which of the steps here do you plan to follow?

What has you experience been with medications compared to lifestyle measures?

Please share your thoughts by leaving a comment below.

To your good health,

Mark Hyman, MD

by lizardking Sat Jan 09, 2016 3:11 pm

What do the one-time head of Autism Speaks, the one-time head of the CDC, the one-time President of Merck and the current Executive Vice President of Merck all have in common???? Ding, ding, ding… they are all the same person. Can you say conflict of interest?

-Taken from the comment section of: https://leviquackenboss.wordpress.com/2015/01/03/there-is-no-anti-vaccination-movement/

by lizardking Sat Jan 09, 2016 3:27 pm

Vaccines Did Not Save Us – 2 Centuries Of Official Statistics

Freedom of Information documents show the UK’s Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation and Ministry of Defence agreed as early as 1974 that:-

“there was no need to introduce routine vaccination against mumps” because “complications from the disease were rare” JCVI minutes 11 Dec 1974.

American parents awarded £600,000 in compensation after their son developed autism as a result of MMR vaccine

The Department for Work and Pensions, which administers the Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme, said: ‘We do not hold any information on how many awards have been MMR-related.

'It is not a requirement when a case is being assessed for the medical adviser to state which vaccine the damage has been attributed to.

Family win 18 year fight over MMR damage to son: £90,000 payout is first since concerns over vaccine surfaced

A mother whose son suffered severe brain damage after he was given the controversial MMR vaccine as a baby has been awarded £90,000 compensation.

The judgment is the first of its kind to be revealed since concerns were raised about the safety of the triple jab.

‘Robert was a more or less fit boy who, within the period usually considered relevant to immunisation, developed a severe convulsion... and he then went on to be epileptic and severely retarded.
‘The seizure occurred ten days after the vaccination. In our view, this cannot be put down to coincidence.
'It is this temporal association that provides the link. It is this that has shown on the balance of probabilities that the vaccination triggered the epilepsy.
'On this basis, we find that Robert is severely disabled as a result of vaccination and this is why we allowed the appeal.’

From Experimental Vaccines

Further reading/viewing:

Medical Experts Concerned About Whooping Cough Outbreaks: Vaccine May Be Losing Potency
87% Vaccinated Involved In Whooping Cough Outbreak
California whooping cough outbreak reveals limitation of vaccine
New York Measles Outbreak 90% Vaccinated
Whooping Cough Outbreak in Elk Grove Indicates Ineffectiveness of Vaccine
91% Fully Vaccinated Involved in Pertussis Outbreak
Pertussis Whooping Cough Vaccine Inserts

by lizardking Sat Jan 09, 2016 3:35 pm

For an in depth overview of the history of smallpox and smallpox inoculation, read this:

PART 1

Smallpox Shenanigans

Smallpox is caused by the variola virus. You can catch smallpox through infected blankets or clothing, or by inhaling droplets discharged from the nose and mouth of an infected person.

Within 12 days after exposure, those infected will experience fever, nausea, vomiting, headache, backache, and muscle pains. This is soon followed by severe abdominal pain and a subsequent rash develops on the entire body. The rash then transforms into pus-filled sores which eventually crust over and may leave scars. The disease almost always confers permanent immunity.

There are different forms of smallpox (variola major, variola minor, fulminating, malignant, modified, etc.) and some are more serious than others. According to the WHO, case-fatality rate can reach 20% or higher. By 1980 the WHO declared that smallpox had been eradicated.

Although the WHO was quick to give credit to their own worldwide vaccination campaign begun in 1967, variola had already stopped infecting people in more than 8 out of 10 countries throughout the world. At that time, only 131,000 cases of smallpox were reported. According to Neil Miller:

Some medical historians question the validity of [the WHO's] claim. Scarlet fever and the plague also infected millions of people. Vaccines were never developed for these diseases yet they disappeared as well. Several reputable historians credit multiple public health activities—sanitation and nutrition reforms—with reducing the incidence and severity of the early problematic diseases, including smallpox, scarlet fever, dysentery, typhoid, and cholera.

The history of smallpox inoculations is important to get an understanding of the history of vaccination, and not just because this story explains how the word “vaccine” was derived.

By the 1700s, it was known that contracting smallpox would give you immunity later in life. Some doctors even intentionally exposed people to smallpox hoping to provoke a less severe reaction and still confer immunity. Children were even exposed to pus extracted from “mild” cases of smallpox, a technique known as variolation.

In 1715, Peter Kennedy suggested collecting smallpox fluid and introducing it to the patient through a scratch in the skin. This technique would become the model for future applications and research.

It quickly became customary for the upper and middle classes to submit to the procedure. But it was an uncertain and hazardous practice. Often, smallpox by variolation was indistinguishable from an attack of ordinary smallpox. Moreover, it rarely conferred permanent immunity; the variolated could contract the disease more than once.

The trouble and risks of variolation were disliked and feared but were accepted in the name of duty. The variolated often died from the procedure, became the source of a new epidemic, or developed other illnesses from the lymph of the donor, such as syphilis hepatitis or tuberculosis.

Variolation spread throughout England, Europe, Canada, and the American colonies. However, the primary side effect of the procedure was smallpox itself. This caused researchers to seek alternatives to the dangerous and uncertain medical technique.

In 1774, Benjamin Jesty set out to prove that cowpox infection protected against smallpox. Apparently, there was a rumor in England among 18th century dairymaids that when you catch cowpox, a relatively harmless disease, you would become immune to smallpox.

Jesty took diseased matter from cows and “vaccinated” his wife and sons (cowpox is also referred to as the vaccinia virus). Supposedly, no one in his family contracted smallpox during later epidemics, although his wife almost lost her arm as the result of a severe inflammation, rousing the ire of his peers for experimenting on his own family.

Enter Edward Jenner, an English physician whose work Wikipedia dubiously refers to as having “saved more lives than the work of any other human.” Apparently, no credit is due to the 18th century milkmaids, or even Jesty, who “unlike Edward Jenner, a medical doctor who is given broad credit for developing the smallpox vaccine in 1796, did not publicize his findings made some twenty years earlier in 1774.”

Jenner made a deliberate cut on James Phipps, a healthy 8-year-old boy, and inserted cowpox matter into the open wound. The boy caught cowpox. Seven weeks later, Jenner injected smallpox matter into the boy and claimed he was immune to the disease.

Jenner's medical colleagues disputed his claim that cowpox protected against smallpox: “We know that it is untrue, for we know dairymaids who have had cowpox and afterwards had smallpox.” [White, W. The Story of a Great Delusion: In a Series of Matter-of-Fact Chapters (London: EW. Allen, 1885): xi.]

Soon thereafter, even Jenner admitted: “There were were not wanting instances to prove that when the cowpox broke out among the cattle at a dairy, a person who had milked an infected animal and had thereby apparently gone through the disease in common with other, was liable to receive the smallpox afterwards.” [Harding Rains, AJ. Edward Jenner and Vaccination (East Hussex, England: Wayland Publishers, 1974):59]

Despite facing a good deal of opposition, Edward Jenner continued his experiments and in 1798 he published his Inquiry into the Causes and Effects of the Variolae Vaccinae, a “vulgar treatise” on horsegrease cowpox.

He knew of men who milked cows soon after dressing the heels of horses afflicted with “the grease,” an oily and detestable horse disease. Jenner now insisted that these men were immune to smallpox, and that children would forever be protected from the disease if they were injected with cowpox after the cow was infected with the rancid secretions from horses' heels.

Jenner published Inquiry in order to recommend horsegrease cowpox. He carefully discriminated it from plain cowpox, which, he admitted, had no protective virtue.

The public was appalled by Jenner's recommendations. Still, many attempts were made to verify Jenner's prescription for protecting children; every experiment ended in failure. Jenner's peers were pleased to learn of his failures. One commented: “The very name of horsegrease was like to have damned the whole practice of vaccinations.”

This may have been why, in 1806, when the esteemed Dr. Robert Willan published On Vaccine Inoculation, a treatise on the most recent developments in the field, Jenner was freely cited, yet neither horsegrease nor horsegrease cowpox was ever mentioned. Instead, plain cowpox was exalted as the true prophylactic.

Jenner continued to promote his nauseating treatment and as a result of his petitions to the House of Commons in 1802 and 1807, mass inoculation campaigns began.

Soon thereafter cases of smallpox among the vaccinated were reported. At first they were denied. When denial was no longer possible—because the vaccinated were obviously afflicted with the disease—Jenner and his supporters claimed that if vaccination did not prevent smallpox, it at least provoked milder forms of the disease.

But when the vaccinated caught the disease and died, new explanations became necessary. These deaths were attributed to “spurious” cowpox. [Miller, G., ed., *To Doctor Alexander J.G. Marcet, London, 11 November 1801, Letters of Edward Jenner and Other Documents concerning the Early History of Vaccination (London, England: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1983):13]

Jenner explained that “the disease produced upon the cows by the colt and from thence conveyed to those who milked them was the true and not the spurious cowpox.” According to Jenner, protection from smallpox is not possible “until a disease has been generated by the morbid matter from the horse on the nipple of the cow, and passed through that medium to the human subject.”

However, it was virtually impossible to discriminate between the apparently different forms of cowpox. Thus, when the vaccinated recovered from the ordeal, Jenner claimed the cowpox was genuine; otherwise it was spurious!

Wikipedia's bold statement seems to be losing some of its bite, for Jenner even admitted that his “gift” caused disease and death: “The happy effects of inoculation...not very unfrequently produces deformity of the skin, and sometimes, under the best management, proves fatal.” He tried to blame the failures on improper inoculations, an excuse that would continue to be used in the years following his death in 1823.

By that time, three kinds of smallpox vaccination were being used, cowpox (promoted as “pure lymph from the calf”), horsepox (known as “the true and genuine life-preserving fluid”) and horsegrease cowpox, the “foul concoction” promoted in Jenner's Inquiry. All were known to cause disease and death.

After Jenner's deaths, vaccine failures continued to be blamed on improperly administered inoculations. Soon, two or more punctures were recommended, with some doctors claiming that a “good vaccination” required four punctures.

Even though there is no evidence that the number of puncture marks influenced the success of the practice, medical authorities at the time suggested that people be vaccinated again and again “until vesicles cease to respond to the insertion of the virus.” [White, W., pg. xxiii.]

by lizardking Sat Jan 09, 2016 3:50 pm

PART 2

To bolster their claim that smallpox inoculations were safe and effective, vaccine proponents often resorted to medical ploys. Hospital records were consistently “doctored.” For example, smallpox victims who were previously vaccinated and required hospital services were frequently registered as unvaccinated.

According to Dr. Russell of the Glasgow Hospital, “Patients entered as unvaccinated showed excellent marks (vaccination scars) when detained for convalescence.” Vaccinated patients who died from either smallpox or the smallpox injection were often certified as unvaccinated as well, or had their death certificates falsified.

For example, according to Dr. Herbert Snow, senior staff surgeon of the London Cancer Hospital, “Of recent years, many men and women in prime of life have dropped dead suddenly. I am convinced that some 80% of these deaths are caused by the inoculations or vaccinations they have earlier undergone. The coroner always hushes it up as 'natural causes.' I have been trying to get these case referred to an independent commission of inquiry, but so far, in vain.” [McBean, E. The Poisoned Needle (Mokelumne Hill, CA: Health Research, 1957)]

Even the renowned playwright George Bernard Shaw was aware of the medical shenanigans used to hoodwink the public: “During the last epidemic at the turn of the century, I was a member of the Health Committee of London Borough Council. I learned how the credit of vaccination is kept up statistically by diagnosing all the re-vaccinated cases as pustular eczema, varioloid or whatnot—except smallpox.” [Ibid., pg. 64]

By around 1850, several countries had enacted compulsory vaccination laws, including Bavaria, Denmark and England.

Prior to compulsory vaccine legislation, smallpox outbreaks were regional and self-limiting. The most severe epidemics occurred following mandatory shots.

In England, from 1870 to 1872, after more than 15 years of forced immunizations—and a 98% vaccination rate—the largest epidemic of smallpox ever recorded maimed and killed thousands of people. Most of the population had been vaccinated and re-vaccinated. [Allen, H. Don't Get Stuck! The Case Against Vaccinations and Injections (Tampa, Florida: Natural Hygiene Press, 1975):32]

Dr. William Farr, Compiler of Statistics of the Registrar-General, London, noted that “Smallpox attained its maximum mortality aftervaccination was introduced. The mean annual mortality to 10,000 population from 1850 to 1869 was at the rate of 2.04, whereas in 1871 the death rate was 10.24 and in 1872 the death rate was 8.33, and this after the most laudable efforts to extend vaccination by legislative enactments.” [McBean, E., pg. 27]

According to Sir Thomas chambers, a London health official: “Of the 155 persons admitted to the Smallpox hospital in the Parish of St. James, Piccadilly, 145 had been vaccinated.” At Marylevore hospital, 92% of the smallpox cases had been vaccinated. In 1871, officials at Highgate Hospital admitted that 92% had been vaccinated as well.

Figures were similar in many other countries where compulsory laws were established. For example, in 1870 and 1871 more than one million Germans contracted smallpox after Germany enforced mandatory shots; thousands died. 96% of the victims were vaccinated. [Ibid., pg. 13]

The German Chancellor himself opined, “The hopes placed in the efficacy of the cowpox virus as a preventative of smallpox have proved entirely deceptive.”

From 1887 to 1889, countless Italian citizens contracted smallpox after Italy enforced mandatory shots; thousands died. According to Dr. Charles Dauta, Professor of Hygiene and Materia Medica at the University of Perugia, “Italy is one of the best vaccinated countries in the world....For 20 years before 1885, our nation was vaccinated in the proportion of 98.5%....The epidemics of smallpox that we have had [from 1887 to 1889] have been so frightful that nothing before the invention of vaccination could equal them.” [“Vaccination in Italy,” NY Med J (July 22, 1899)]

Over a twenty year period beginning in 1886, thousands of Japanese citizens died and hundreds of thousands were infected with smallpox after Japan enforced mandatory shots every five years. [Shelton, HM. Vaccine and Serum Evils (San Antonio Texas; Health research, 1966):20-21]

In 1918 and 1919, after the US took control of the Philippines, mandatory smallpox vaccination was enforced. Thousands died after the entire population was vaccinated. A 1920 Report of the Philippines Health Services declared, “The 1918 epidemic looks prima facie as a flagrant failure of the classic immunization.” [Ibid., pg. 22]

Once the connection between mass vaccination and the increase in epidemic became more apparent, several countries rescinded the mandatory vaccination laws and even outlawed the practice completely.

The Secretary of the Governing Board in Dublin, Ireland, declared, “Smallpox virus taken from the calf would communicate that disease to the human subject and be thereby a fertile source of propagating the disease, and would, moreover, render the operator liable to prosecution under the Act prohibiting inoculation with smallpox.” [White, W., pg. xxi.]

Australia abolished compulsory vaccinations in the late 1800's, and proceeded to report only 3 cases of smallpox in 15 years. Statistics from England and Wales show an inverse correlation between the percentage of babies vaccinated and the number of smallpox deaths: the greater the number vaccinated, the greater the loss. Deaths from smallpox tumbled after people refused the vaccine. [Official statistics from England and Wales, as reported by Shelton, HM., pg. 22]

By the mid-1850's, a very large anti-vaccine movement had been established. After the 1870-1872 smallpox epidemic, thought to have been caused by mandatory shots, this movement gained credibility and became more organized in its efforts to resist compulsory laws and awaken others to the inherent dangers of smallpox vaccinations.

In 1878, Mary Catherine Hume published 150 Reasons for Disobeying the Vaccination Law by Persons Prosecuted Under It.Parents were being fined a jailed for refusing to submit their children to the shots.

Before the Exemption Act was passed in 1907, every year thousands of parents were prosecuted for resisting vaccination. Many had their homes and property confiscated. Hume's book advocated civil disobedience despite the punitive efforts of pro-vaccinators.

In 1884, a massive collection of smallpox data was published by the London Society for the Abolition of Compulsory Vaccination, containing “unbiased vaccine statistics, newspaper stories about people who were damaged by the shot, and legal briefs regarding compulsory laws.”

Despite harsh laws, many people refused to be vaccinated and would not allow their children to receive the shots. According to Lord Bramwell, “It is a most mischievous thing that there should be a law in existence which good people are tempted to disobey. It is a bad example to set, and it tends to bring laws into contempt which are of real importance.”

Even Mahatma Gandhi, although by no means a scientist, would eventually weigh in on the vaccine debate: “I am and have been for years, a confirmed anti-vaccinationist...I have not the least doubt in my mind that vaccination is a filthy process that is harmful in the end.” [Gandhi, MK. Gandhi an Autobiography: Story of My Experiments With Truth (Boston: Beacon PR., 1957)]

The following quotes are from late 18th and early 19th doctors and other health officials who were very vocally skeptical of the claims of the proponents of the smallpox vaccine. They are taken from these sources: Fatality Rates of Small-Pox in the Vaccinated and Unvaccinated by R.P. Garrow, Fatality Rates of Small-Pox in the Vaccinated and Unvaccinated by L.A. Parry, New York Press,(January 26th, 1909), and McBean, E., pp. 21-24; 42, 72.

Vaccination does not stay the spread of smallpox, nor even modify it in those who get it after vaccination. It does introduce in the system contamination and, therefore, contributes to the spread of tuberculosis, cancer, and even leprosy. It tends to make more virulent epidemics and to make them more extensive.

—Dr. Walter M. James, Philadelphia practitioner

I have studied the question of vaccination conscientiously for 45 years. As for vaccination as a preventative of disease, there is not a scrap of evidence in its favor. The injection of virus into the pure bloodstream of the people does not prevent smallpox; rather, it tends to increase its epidemics and it makes the disease more deadly.

—Dr. Charles E. Page, Boston practitioner

Cancer was practically unknown until cowpox vaccination began to be introduced. I have had to do with 200 cases of cancer and I never saw a case of cancer in an unvaccinated person. -Dr. W. B. Clark, New York practitioner
Abolish vaccination and you will cut the cancer death rate in half.

—Dr. F. P. Millard, Toronto practitioner

I am convinced that the increase of cancer is due to vaccination.

—Dr. F. Laurie, Medical Director of the Metropolitan Cancer Hospital, London

It is my firm conviction that vaccination has been a curse instead of a blessing to the race. Every physician knows that cutaneous diseases (including cancer) have increased in frequency, severity, and variety to an alarming extent. To no medium of transmission is the widespread dissemination of this class of diseases so largely related as to vaccination.

—B. F. Cornell, M.D., practitioner

I have removed cancer from vaccinated arms exactly where the poison was injected.

—Dr. E. J. Post, Michigan practitioner

I have no hesitation in stating that in my judgment the most frequent disposing condition for cancerous development is infused into the blood by vaccination and re-vaccination.

—Dr. Dennis Turnbull, 30 year cancer researcher.

Never in the history of medicine has there been produced so false a theory, and such fraudulent assumptions, such disastrous and damning results as have followed the practice of vaccination; it is the ultima Thule of learned quackery, and lacks, and has ever lacked, the faintest shadow of scientific basis. The fears of the people have been played upon as to the dangers of smallpox, and the promise of sure prevention by vaccination, until nearly the whole civilized world has become physically corrupted by its practice.

—Dr. E. Ripley, Connecticut practitioner

Vaccination is the infusion of contaminating elements into the system, and after such contamination you can never be sure of regaining the former purity of the body. Consumption (tuberculosis) follows in the wake of vaccination just as surely as effect follows cause.

—Dr. Alex Wilder, professor of pathology, Medical College of New York

How is it that smallpox is five time as likely to be fatal in the vaccinated as unvaccinated (referring to data published in the British Medical Journal, January 14th, 1928)? How is it that, as the number of people vaccinated has steadily fallen, the number of people attacked with variola has declined and the case mortality has progressively lessened? The years of least vaccination have been the years of least smallpox and least mortality. These are just a few points in connection with the subject which are puzzling me, and to which I want answers.

—Dr. L. A. Parry

I now have very little faith in vaccination, even as to modifying the disease, and none at all as a protective in virulent epidemics. Personally, I contracted smallpox less than six months after a most severe vaccination.

—Dr. R. Hall Bakewell, Vaccinator General of Trinidad

I believed that vaccination prevented smallpox...and I believed that re-vaccination, if only frequently enough, gave absolute immunity. Experience has driven all that out of my head.

—Dr. J. C. Ward, Royal College of Surgeons, England

After collecting the particulars of 400,000 cases of smallpox, I am compelled to admit that my belief in vaccination is absolutely destroyed.

—Professor A. Vogt, chair of Vita Statistics and Hygiene at Berne University

by Sponsored content

Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry