Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry
+25
AlmightySavoisien88
Von_Emmy
Schpankme
MMDC
Oliver_Bestfall
Alpha
Real World
Irish O'African
Jonny1989
Captain Rocketblast
Torus_Ouroboros
Realearth
tristancobane
Admin
lotuseater
Lightning_Peasant
MaryMoon
csp
mitch
newflatearther2000
Foreverlearning
ladyvelveeta
Thinkforyourself
searching
lizardking
29 posters
IFERS - Exposing the 'Global' Conspiracy From Atlantis to Zion :: Other Conspiracies, Hoaxes, Myths and Lies
Page 6 of 9
Page 6 of 9 • 
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
Re: Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry
by lizardking Mon Feb 01, 2016 4:39 am
Top Ten Best-Researched Herbs
all-natural.com/natural-remedies/top-ten/
Beautiful to behold in nature, many plants have been used medicinally for thousands of years. Here are ten proven medicinal herbs that scientists have tested in clinical studies. Few people are aware of the multitude of scientific studies done on plants. This information should not be used as medical advice.
Garlic
“If we were to design a drug that had perfect properties according to what we know about heart disease and associated risk factors, we couldn’t improve on garlic,” says Amanda McQuade-Crawford, herbalist and director of the Ojai Center of Phytotherapy in Ojai, Calif. Regular use of garlic is associated with the prevention of cardiovascular disease, she explains. Garlic raises protective HDLs (high-density lipoproteins), while it lowers harmful LDLs (low-density lipoproteins) and triglycerides (blood fats). Garlic is also known to help lower high blood pressure, she says. Garlic aids in cancer prevention by raising the body’s level of glutathione transferase, a liver enzyme known to detoxify the body of carcinogens, says McQuade-Crawford. In China, researchers found gastric cancer was reduced where garlic intake was high. Other researchers have noted improved helper/suppressor ratios of T-cells in AIDS patients who take garlic. Proven to work against various micro-organisms including bacteria resistant to antibiotics, garlic is known to be antifungal and antiviral, she adds.
Hawthorn
The berries of this flowering shrub are best used for the heart, says McQuade-Crawford. Hawthorn aids the heart’s pumping action by opening the coronary arteries to nourish the heart muscle. The herb can also slow a rapid heart rate and strengthen a failing heart. Hawthorn usually lowers high blood pressure, especially a raised diastolic high blood pressure, and it benefits low blood pressure due to weak heart muscles with arrhythmia (irregular heart rhythm).
“Hawthorn takes a long time to do its best — six months or longer. In the style of a true herbal tonic, it can be taken safely and effectively over time for its best effects,” notes McQuade-Crawford.
Ginkgo Biloba
Ginkgo Biloba extract from the ginkgo tree has been shown to benefit visual function by improving microcirculation to the eyes especially among patients suffering from senile macular degeneration, a common condition thought to involve free radical damage, says Steven Schechter, N.D., author of Fighting Radiation & Chemical Pollutants With Foods, Herbs &Vitamins (Vitality, Ink).
More than 280 scientific studies indicate standardized ginkgo extract prevents and/or benefits ailments such as vertigo, tinnitus, inner ear disturbances, memory impairment, ability to concentrate, anxiety, depression, neurological disorders, senility, circulatory disorders, edema and Raynaud’s disease (a vascular disorder). Ginkgo extract improves the quality and increases the quantity of capillary circulation, thus increasing blood flow to the brain, heart and tissues in organs and glands, Schechter says. In addition, he notes, the flavonoids in ginkgo are potent free radical scavengers.
Ephedra
Also known in Chinese as ma huang, ephedra may be the world’s oldest herb cultivated for medicinal purposes, dating back nearly 5,000 years, says McQuade-Crawford. It’s commonly used in cold formulas as a decongestant.
“Ephedra is a great bronchial dilator,” McQuade-Crawford says. It helps asthma sufferers by opening the sinus passages and has an antihistamine effect which aids chronic and acute allergies. Ephedra also acts as a circulatory stimulant to blood pressure and heart function; it elevates blood pressure. Ephedra’s main constituent is ephedrine, which increases adrenaline secretion in our bodies. The boost you get from ephedra stimulates certain glands, muscles and tissue functions, while it suppresses others.
“In the long term, ephedra’s adrenaline overdrive can lead to chronic stress and even to degenerative disease,” warns McQuade-Crawford. She notes this is important for people using ephedra for dietary weight loss or “pep pill” purposes because the effects of ephedra linger in the body long after the herb is gone. “Ephedra shouldn’t be used with drugs for the heart or for the lungs and never with antidepressant drugs. It’s not for use with the weak or the ill and when used long term, dosages should be conservative,” McQuade-Crawford cautions.
Licorice
Licorice has been most recently researched as an antiviral and in the treatment of gastrointestinal ulceration, explains McQuade-Crawford. Its soothing, anti-inflammatory and relaxing actions help smooth muscles in the gastrointestinal tract on contact. “Licorice gets into a painful, contracted, tight digestive tract and coats the raw places, relaxes the clenched-up muscles and acts as a local anti-inflammatory,” she says. Licorice also increases bile secretion. Licorice is indicated for any gastrointestinal ulcers, including mouth ulcers. The root is indicated for chronic coughs and bronchitis as a soothing decongestant. It’s also indicated in small amounts to reduce sugar cravings.
The Chinese often use licorice to improve the taste and the effects of other herbs in complex formulas. Japanese research has shown licorice to decrease high testosterone levels in women with ovarian cysts and to increase their fertility. Large amounts of licorice or long-term use raises blood pressure in some people.
Bilberry
A strong antioxidant, bilberry benefits your circulatory system, eyes, heart and brain, and helps generate overall good health, says Schechter. Bilberry fruit contains a type of flavonoid called anthocyanosides, which are responsible for increasing flexibility of capillaries and increasing blood flow.
Research shows that standardized extract of bilberry can enlarge range of vision and improve sharpness of images, enhance ability to focus, and improve blurred vision, eyestrain and nearsightedness. Bilberry extract also helps strengthen coronary arteries and helps prevent atherosclerosis and venous insufficiency, which causes swollen ankles and feet. “Since adding bilberry to my own health program, I’ve noticed my muscles seem to recover slightly faster, I experience less muscular pain and my vision has improved from 20/100 to approximately 20/50,” says Schechter.
Echinacea
Decades of research prove echinacea’s value for aiding the immune system, Schechter explains. Studies have determined echinacea’s ability to activate white blood cells and stimulate the regeneration of the cellular connective tissue and the epidermis. Schechter notes that echinacea’s infection-fighting properties stem from its ability to neutralize a harmful enzyme involved in the infection process. Echinacea also increases two vital components of your immune system that consume and eliminate invading organisms and foreign particles.
German studies have shown echinacea extract contains proteins that help protect noninfected cells against viral infections, one reason why echinacea is regarded as an influenza preventor. Another German study found echinacea effective in allergy treatment because it helps prevent tissue inflammation due to harmful foreign toxins.
Milk Thistle
“I consider standardized milk thistle seed extract the most beneficial herbal product for liver detoxification, regeneration and protection, and, in general, one of the most universally necessary herbal products for the 1990s,” says Schechter. He notes that the stress of toxins from chemical pollutants, pharmaceuticals, alcohol, tobacco smoke, drugs and different forms of radiation have cumulative side effects that need to be addressed.
More than 120 scientific studies have shown that milk thistle extract regenerates, regulates and strengthens liver functions. Because free radicals attack the liver, primarily the fat tissue in the liver, the antioxidant qualities of milk thistle are extremely beneficial. Milk thistle stimulates your body to produce superoxide dismutase, which is one of two primary antioxidants the body can manufacture.
Astragalus
Astragalus has been used as an immunity booster in China for nearly 4,000 years, according to Rob McCaleb, founder of the Herb Research Foundation in Boulder, Colo. Astragalus extracts can increase immune system efficiency by increasing immune activity. One study found that astragalus extracts could increase the impaired immune function of blood cells up to and sometimes beyond normal cell ability.
According to Planetary Herbology (Lotus Press) by Michael Tierra, N.D., astragalus helps strengthen digestion, raise metabolism, strengthen the immune system and promote wound healing. It can also treat chronic weakness of the lungs, shortness of breath, low energy, prolapse of internal organs, spontaneous sweating, chronic lesions and deficiency edema.
Ginseng
Ginseng is one of the most widely studied herbs, having been the subject of more than 3,000 scientific studies to investigate how ginseng helps improve a person’s physical and/or mental performance, notes McCaleb. Studies have shown ginseng helps increase memory and learning by improving circulation. It’s also been shown to reduce cholesterol and protect the liver from toxins. Ginseng, according to Tierra, is known to strengthen the lungs, nourish body fluids and calm the spirit. It may be used for shock, collapse and heart weakness, as well as for promoting longevity and increasing resistance to disease.
A Japanese study showed cancerous liver cells could be reverted to normal cells in a Petri dish culture when treated with Panax ginseng extract. Siberian ginseng has also been shown to stimulate the immune system.
all-natural.com/natural-remedies/top-ten/
Beautiful to behold in nature, many plants have been used medicinally for thousands of years. Here are ten proven medicinal herbs that scientists have tested in clinical studies. Few people are aware of the multitude of scientific studies done on plants. This information should not be used as medical advice.
Garlic
“If we were to design a drug that had perfect properties according to what we know about heart disease and associated risk factors, we couldn’t improve on garlic,” says Amanda McQuade-Crawford, herbalist and director of the Ojai Center of Phytotherapy in Ojai, Calif. Regular use of garlic is associated with the prevention of cardiovascular disease, she explains. Garlic raises protective HDLs (high-density lipoproteins), while it lowers harmful LDLs (low-density lipoproteins) and triglycerides (blood fats). Garlic is also known to help lower high blood pressure, she says. Garlic aids in cancer prevention by raising the body’s level of glutathione transferase, a liver enzyme known to detoxify the body of carcinogens, says McQuade-Crawford. In China, researchers found gastric cancer was reduced where garlic intake was high. Other researchers have noted improved helper/suppressor ratios of T-cells in AIDS patients who take garlic. Proven to work against various micro-organisms including bacteria resistant to antibiotics, garlic is known to be antifungal and antiviral, she adds.
Hawthorn
The berries of this flowering shrub are best used for the heart, says McQuade-Crawford. Hawthorn aids the heart’s pumping action by opening the coronary arteries to nourish the heart muscle. The herb can also slow a rapid heart rate and strengthen a failing heart. Hawthorn usually lowers high blood pressure, especially a raised diastolic high blood pressure, and it benefits low blood pressure due to weak heart muscles with arrhythmia (irregular heart rhythm).
“Hawthorn takes a long time to do its best — six months or longer. In the style of a true herbal tonic, it can be taken safely and effectively over time for its best effects,” notes McQuade-Crawford.
Ginkgo Biloba
Ginkgo Biloba extract from the ginkgo tree has been shown to benefit visual function by improving microcirculation to the eyes especially among patients suffering from senile macular degeneration, a common condition thought to involve free radical damage, says Steven Schechter, N.D., author of Fighting Radiation & Chemical Pollutants With Foods, Herbs &Vitamins (Vitality, Ink).
More than 280 scientific studies indicate standardized ginkgo extract prevents and/or benefits ailments such as vertigo, tinnitus, inner ear disturbances, memory impairment, ability to concentrate, anxiety, depression, neurological disorders, senility, circulatory disorders, edema and Raynaud’s disease (a vascular disorder). Ginkgo extract improves the quality and increases the quantity of capillary circulation, thus increasing blood flow to the brain, heart and tissues in organs and glands, Schechter says. In addition, he notes, the flavonoids in ginkgo are potent free radical scavengers.
Ephedra
Also known in Chinese as ma huang, ephedra may be the world’s oldest herb cultivated for medicinal purposes, dating back nearly 5,000 years, says McQuade-Crawford. It’s commonly used in cold formulas as a decongestant.
“Ephedra is a great bronchial dilator,” McQuade-Crawford says. It helps asthma sufferers by opening the sinus passages and has an antihistamine effect which aids chronic and acute allergies. Ephedra also acts as a circulatory stimulant to blood pressure and heart function; it elevates blood pressure. Ephedra’s main constituent is ephedrine, which increases adrenaline secretion in our bodies. The boost you get from ephedra stimulates certain glands, muscles and tissue functions, while it suppresses others.
“In the long term, ephedra’s adrenaline overdrive can lead to chronic stress and even to degenerative disease,” warns McQuade-Crawford. She notes this is important for people using ephedra for dietary weight loss or “pep pill” purposes because the effects of ephedra linger in the body long after the herb is gone. “Ephedra shouldn’t be used with drugs for the heart or for the lungs and never with antidepressant drugs. It’s not for use with the weak or the ill and when used long term, dosages should be conservative,” McQuade-Crawford cautions.
Licorice
Licorice has been most recently researched as an antiviral and in the treatment of gastrointestinal ulceration, explains McQuade-Crawford. Its soothing, anti-inflammatory and relaxing actions help smooth muscles in the gastrointestinal tract on contact. “Licorice gets into a painful, contracted, tight digestive tract and coats the raw places, relaxes the clenched-up muscles and acts as a local anti-inflammatory,” she says. Licorice also increases bile secretion. Licorice is indicated for any gastrointestinal ulcers, including mouth ulcers. The root is indicated for chronic coughs and bronchitis as a soothing decongestant. It’s also indicated in small amounts to reduce sugar cravings.
The Chinese often use licorice to improve the taste and the effects of other herbs in complex formulas. Japanese research has shown licorice to decrease high testosterone levels in women with ovarian cysts and to increase their fertility. Large amounts of licorice or long-term use raises blood pressure in some people.
Bilberry
A strong antioxidant, bilberry benefits your circulatory system, eyes, heart and brain, and helps generate overall good health, says Schechter. Bilberry fruit contains a type of flavonoid called anthocyanosides, which are responsible for increasing flexibility of capillaries and increasing blood flow.
Research shows that standardized extract of bilberry can enlarge range of vision and improve sharpness of images, enhance ability to focus, and improve blurred vision, eyestrain and nearsightedness. Bilberry extract also helps strengthen coronary arteries and helps prevent atherosclerosis and venous insufficiency, which causes swollen ankles and feet. “Since adding bilberry to my own health program, I’ve noticed my muscles seem to recover slightly faster, I experience less muscular pain and my vision has improved from 20/100 to approximately 20/50,” says Schechter.
Echinacea
Decades of research prove echinacea’s value for aiding the immune system, Schechter explains. Studies have determined echinacea’s ability to activate white blood cells and stimulate the regeneration of the cellular connective tissue and the epidermis. Schechter notes that echinacea’s infection-fighting properties stem from its ability to neutralize a harmful enzyme involved in the infection process. Echinacea also increases two vital components of your immune system that consume and eliminate invading organisms and foreign particles.
German studies have shown echinacea extract contains proteins that help protect noninfected cells against viral infections, one reason why echinacea is regarded as an influenza preventor. Another German study found echinacea effective in allergy treatment because it helps prevent tissue inflammation due to harmful foreign toxins.
Milk Thistle
“I consider standardized milk thistle seed extract the most beneficial herbal product for liver detoxification, regeneration and protection, and, in general, one of the most universally necessary herbal products for the 1990s,” says Schechter. He notes that the stress of toxins from chemical pollutants, pharmaceuticals, alcohol, tobacco smoke, drugs and different forms of radiation have cumulative side effects that need to be addressed.
More than 120 scientific studies have shown that milk thistle extract regenerates, regulates and strengthens liver functions. Because free radicals attack the liver, primarily the fat tissue in the liver, the antioxidant qualities of milk thistle are extremely beneficial. Milk thistle stimulates your body to produce superoxide dismutase, which is one of two primary antioxidants the body can manufacture.
Astragalus
Astragalus has been used as an immunity booster in China for nearly 4,000 years, according to Rob McCaleb, founder of the Herb Research Foundation in Boulder, Colo. Astragalus extracts can increase immune system efficiency by increasing immune activity. One study found that astragalus extracts could increase the impaired immune function of blood cells up to and sometimes beyond normal cell ability.
According to Planetary Herbology (Lotus Press) by Michael Tierra, N.D., astragalus helps strengthen digestion, raise metabolism, strengthen the immune system and promote wound healing. It can also treat chronic weakness of the lungs, shortness of breath, low energy, prolapse of internal organs, spontaneous sweating, chronic lesions and deficiency edema.
Ginseng
Ginseng is one of the most widely studied herbs, having been the subject of more than 3,000 scientific studies to investigate how ginseng helps improve a person’s physical and/or mental performance, notes McCaleb. Studies have shown ginseng helps increase memory and learning by improving circulation. It’s also been shown to reduce cholesterol and protect the liver from toxins. Ginseng, according to Tierra, is known to strengthen the lungs, nourish body fluids and calm the spirit. It may be used for shock, collapse and heart weakness, as well as for promoting longevity and increasing resistance to disease.
A Japanese study showed cancerous liver cells could be reverted to normal cells in a Petri dish culture when treated with Panax ginseng extract. Siberian ginseng has also been shown to stimulate the immune system.
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7172
Reputation : 2603
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 29
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry
by lizardking Mon Feb 01, 2016 4:39 am
The Top 4 Medical Studies That Prove Cannabis Can Cure Brain Cancer
For years, an unnecessary label has been attached to this plant, and the fact that it is classified as an illegal drug for no reason is obscure. Furthermore, the studies that prove cannabis can cure brain cancer are done so by safe cannabinoid delivery with zero psychoactive effects.
It’s becoming more clear that multiple substances labelled as “drugs” by the government as harmful are most likely illegal due to the fact that they threaten multiple corporate interests. Prescription drugs alone kill over 100, 000 people every year. Our governments and the corporations that run them don’t have the best interests of the human race at hand. It seems that we should be more concerned about the drugs that are legal, as much as we are concerned about the ones that are not. Instead of constantly relying on them for information (corporations and governments), it’s up to us to do our own research and find out the truth for ourselves.
Cannabis has been proven to be effective for a wide range of ailments, this article will focus mainly on brain cancer. Cannabinoids refer to any group of related compounds that include Cannabinol and the active constituents of Cannabis. They activate Cannabinoid receptors in the body. The body itself produces compounds called endocannabinoids and they play a key role in many processes throughout the body that help to create a healthy environment. They also play an important role in immune system generation and re-generation.
Cannabinoids have been proven to reduce cancer cells as they have a great impact on the rebuilding of the immune system. While not every strain of cannabis has the same effect, more and more patients are seeing success in cancer reduction in a short period of time by using cannabis. I’ve provided one of many examples of this at the bottom of the article.
Brain Cancer
1. A study published in the British Journal of Cancer, conducted by the Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at Complutense University in Madrid, this study determined that Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and other cannabinoids inhibit tumour growth. They were responsible for the first clinical study aimed at assessing cannabinoid antitumoral action. Cannabinoid delivery was safe and was achieved with zero psychoactive effects. THC was found to decrease tumour cells in two out of the nine patients.
2. A study published in The Journal of Neuroscience examined the biochemical events in both acute neuronal damage and in slowly progressive, neurodegenerative diseases. They conducted a magnetic resonance imaging study that looked at THC (the main active compound in marijuana) and found that it reduced neuronal injury in rats. The results of this study provide evidence that the cannabinoid system can serve to protect the brain against neurodegeneration.
3. A study published in The Journal of Pharmacology And Experimental Therapeutics already acknowledged the fact that cannabinoids have been shown to possess antitumor properties. This study examined the effect of cannabidiol (CBD, non psychoactive cannabinoid compound) on human glioma cell lines. The addition of cannabidiol led to a dramatic drop in the viability of glioma cells. Glioma is the word used to describe a brain tumour. The study concluded that cannabidiol was able to produce a significant antitumor activity.
4. A study published in the journal Molecular Cancer Therapeutics outlines how brain tumours are highly resistant to current anticancer treatments, which makes it crucial to find new therapeutic strategies aimed at improving the poor prognosis of patients suffering from this disease. This study also demonstrated the reversal of tumour activity in Glioblastoma multiforme.
Method of Ingestion
Contrary to popular belief, smoking the Cannabis is not the most effective way in treating disease within the body as therapeutic levels cannot be reached through smoking. Creating oil from the plant or eating the plant is the best way to go about getting the necessary ingredients which are the Cannabinoids. Also, when Cannabis is heated and burnt it changes the chemical structure and acidity of the THC. This changes its ability to be therapeutic and anytime you burn something and inhale it, you create oxidation within the body. Oxidation is not healthy for the body and can lead to health issues in itself.
Cannabis- whether Sativa, Indica, Ruderalis, male, female, hermaphrodite, wild, bred for fiber, seeds or medicinal resin – is a vegetable with every dietary essential we can’t synthesize. It has essential amino acids, fatty acids and cannabinoid acids. Apart from that, it has hundreds of anti-cancer compounds.
If you heat the plant, you will decarboxylate THC-acid and you will get high, you’ll get you 10 mg. If you don’t heat it, you can go up to five or six hundred milligrams and use it as a dietary cannabis and push it up to the anti-oxidant and neuro-protective levels which come into play at hundreds of milligrams – Dr William Courtney
The Endocannabinoid System (ECS) maintains our biological systems by regulating each cell tissue. It uses Arachadonic acid/Omega 6 to make Endo-Cannabinoids. These are fatty molecules that communicate harm between cells. Dietary Cannabis mimics the ECS by providing Cannabinoids when there is an Arachadonic acid deficiency or clinical Cannabinoid deficiency.
Related Article: 20 Medical Studies That Prove Cannabis Can Cure Cancer
Sources:
www.nature.com/bjc/journal/v95/n2/abs/6603236a.html
jpet.aspetjournals.org/content/308/3/838.abstract
www.jneurosci.org/content/21/17/6475.abstract
mct.aacrjournals.org/content/10/1/90.abstract
www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer-help/about-cancer/cancer-questions/is-cannabis-treatment-brain-tumours
www.rawhemp.tk/
www.phoenixtears.ca/
cannabisinternational.org/
edrv.endojournals.org/content/27/1/73.full
cannabisclinicians.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/OS-2011-Terpenes+Minor-CBs.pdf
20 Medical Studies That Show Cannabis Can Be A Potential Cure For Cancer
Cannabis has been making a lot of noise lately. Multiple states across the United States, along with many countries around the world, have successfully legalized medical marijuana, and the Uruguay parliament recently voted to create the world’s first legal marijuana market.
This is good news, as the health benefits of cannabis are vast, with multiple medical and scientific studies to confirm them. But what about the harmful effects? All psychological evaluations from the intake of cannabis are largely based on assumptions, suggestions, and observations (1). When we look at the actual science behind cannabis, it seems negative effects are difficult to confirm.
The Science Behind Cannabis
Let’s take a look at the science behind cannabis and cancer. Although cannabis has been proven to be effective for a wide range of ailments, this article will focus mainly on its effectiveness in the treatment of cancer. Cannabinoids may very well be one of the best disease and cancer fighting treatments out there. Cannabinoids refer to any of a group of related compounds that include cannabinol and the active constituents of cannabis. They activate cannabinoid receptors in the body. The body itself produces compounds called endocannabinoids and they play a role in many processes within the body that help to create a healthy environment. Cannabinoids also play a role in immune system generation and re-generation. The body regenerates best when it’s saturated with Phyto-Cannabinoids.
Cannabinoids can also be found in cannabis. It is important to note that the cannabinoids are plentiful in both hemp and cannabis. One of the main differences between hemp and cannabis is simply that hemp only contains 0.3% THC while cannabis has 0.4% THC or higher. (Technically they are both strains of Cannabis Sativa.) Cannabinoids have been proven to reduce cancer cells, as they have a great impact on the rebuilding of the immune system. While not every strain of cannabis has the same effect, more and more patients are seeing success in cancer reduction in a short period of time by using cannabis.
While taking a look at these studies, keep in mind that cannabis can be much more effective for medicinal purposes when we eat it rather than smoking it. Below are 20 medical studies that suggest cannabis can be an effective treatment and possible cure for cancer. This is a good starting point for the push for further human clinical trials.
Brain Cancer covered in above article
Breast Cancer
5. A study published in the US National Library of Medicine, conducted by the California Pacific Medical Centre, determined that cannabidiol (CBD) inhibits human breast cancer cell proliferation and invasion. They also demonstrated that CBD significantly reduces tumour mass.
6. A study published in The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics determined that THC as well as cannabidiol dramatically reduced breast cancer cell growth. They confirmed the potency and effectiveness of these compounds.
7. A study published in the journal Molecular Cancer showed that THC reduced tumour growth and tumour numbers. They determined that cannabinoids inhibit cancer cell proliferation, induce cancer cell apoptosis, and impair tumour angiogenesis (all good things). This study provides strong evidence for the use of cannabinoid based therapies for the management of breast cancer.
8. A study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS) determined that cannabinoids inhibit human breast cancer cell proliferation.
Lung Cancer
9. A study published in the journal Oncogene, by Harvard Medical Schools Experimental Medicine Department, determined that THC inhibits epithelial growth factor induced lung cancer cell migration and more. They go on to state that THC should be explored as novel therapeutic molecules in controlling the growth and metastasis of certain lung cancers.
10. A study published by the US National Library of Medicine by the Institute of Toxicology and Pharmacology, from the Department of General Surgery in Germany, determined that cannabinoids inhibit cancer cell invasion. Effects were confirmed in primary tumour cells from a lung cancer patient. Overall, data indicated that cannabinoids decrease cancer cell invasiveness.
11. A study published by the US National Library of Medicine, conducted by Harvard Medical School, investigated the role of cannabinoid receptors in lung cancer cells. They determined its effectiveness and suggested that it should be used for treatment against lung cancer cells.
Prostate Cancer
12. A study published in the US National Library of Medicine illustrates a decrease in prostatic cancer cells by acting through cannabinoid receptors.
13. A study published in the US National Library of Medicine outlined multiple studies proving the effectiveness of cannabis on prostate cancer.
14. Another study published by the US National Library of Medicine determined that clinical testing of CBD against prostate carcinoma is a must. That cannabinoid receptor activation induces prostate carcinoma cell apoptosis. They determined that cannabidiol significantly inhibited cell viability.
Blood Cancer
15. A study published in the journal Molecular Pharmacology recently showed that cannabinoids induce growth inhibition and apoptosis in mantle cell lymphoma. The study was supported by grants from the Swedish Cancer Society, The Swedish Research Council, and the Cancer Society in Stockholm.
16. A study published in the International Journal of Cancer also determined and illustrated that cannabinoids exert antiproliferative and proapoptotic effects in various types of cancer and in mantle cell lymphoma.
17. A study published in the US National Library of Medicine conducted by the Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology by Virginia Commonwealth University determined that cannabinoids induce apoptosis in leukemia cells.
Oral Cancer
18. A study published by the US National Library of Medicine shows that cannabinoids are potent inhibitors of cellular respiration and are toxic to highly malignant oral tumours.
Liver Cancer
19. A study published by the US National Library of Medicine determined that THC reduces the viability of human HCC cell lines (Human hepatocellular liver carcinoma cell line) and reduced their growth.
Pancreatic Cancer
20. A study published in The American Journal of Cancer determined that cannabinoid receptors are expressed in human pancreatic tumor cell lines and tumour biopsies at much higher levels than in normal pancreatic tissue. Results showed that cannabinoid administration induced apoptosis. They also reduced the growth of tumour cells, and inhibited the spreading of pancreatic tumour cells.
Final Thoughts
Cannabis is a great example of how the human mind can be conditioned to believe something, even when faced with contradicting evidence afterwards. Growing up, we are told “drugs” are bad, which is very true, however not all substances that have been labelled as “drugs” by the varying authoritative bodies are harmful. It’s possible that substances are labelled as a “drug” in order to protect corporate interests. One example is the automobile and energy industry; a car made from hemp is stronger than steel, and can be fuelled from hemp alone. Henry Ford demonstrated this many years ago. Hemp actually has over 50,000 uses!
Sources:
All sources highlighted throughout article. Click on the highlighted parts of the article to view them.
1) bjp.rcpsych.org/content/178/2/116.full
For years, an unnecessary label has been attached to this plant, and the fact that it is classified as an illegal drug for no reason is obscure. Furthermore, the studies that prove cannabis can cure brain cancer are done so by safe cannabinoid delivery with zero psychoactive effects.
It’s becoming more clear that multiple substances labelled as “drugs” by the government as harmful are most likely illegal due to the fact that they threaten multiple corporate interests. Prescription drugs alone kill over 100, 000 people every year. Our governments and the corporations that run them don’t have the best interests of the human race at hand. It seems that we should be more concerned about the drugs that are legal, as much as we are concerned about the ones that are not. Instead of constantly relying on them for information (corporations and governments), it’s up to us to do our own research and find out the truth for ourselves.
Cannabis has been proven to be effective for a wide range of ailments, this article will focus mainly on brain cancer. Cannabinoids refer to any group of related compounds that include Cannabinol and the active constituents of Cannabis. They activate Cannabinoid receptors in the body. The body itself produces compounds called endocannabinoids and they play a key role in many processes throughout the body that help to create a healthy environment. They also play an important role in immune system generation and re-generation.
Cannabinoids have been proven to reduce cancer cells as they have a great impact on the rebuilding of the immune system. While not every strain of cannabis has the same effect, more and more patients are seeing success in cancer reduction in a short period of time by using cannabis. I’ve provided one of many examples of this at the bottom of the article.
Brain Cancer
1. A study published in the British Journal of Cancer, conducted by the Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at Complutense University in Madrid, this study determined that Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and other cannabinoids inhibit tumour growth. They were responsible for the first clinical study aimed at assessing cannabinoid antitumoral action. Cannabinoid delivery was safe and was achieved with zero psychoactive effects. THC was found to decrease tumour cells in two out of the nine patients.
2. A study published in The Journal of Neuroscience examined the biochemical events in both acute neuronal damage and in slowly progressive, neurodegenerative diseases. They conducted a magnetic resonance imaging study that looked at THC (the main active compound in marijuana) and found that it reduced neuronal injury in rats. The results of this study provide evidence that the cannabinoid system can serve to protect the brain against neurodegeneration.
3. A study published in The Journal of Pharmacology And Experimental Therapeutics already acknowledged the fact that cannabinoids have been shown to possess antitumor properties. This study examined the effect of cannabidiol (CBD, non psychoactive cannabinoid compound) on human glioma cell lines. The addition of cannabidiol led to a dramatic drop in the viability of glioma cells. Glioma is the word used to describe a brain tumour. The study concluded that cannabidiol was able to produce a significant antitumor activity.
4. A study published in the journal Molecular Cancer Therapeutics outlines how brain tumours are highly resistant to current anticancer treatments, which makes it crucial to find new therapeutic strategies aimed at improving the poor prognosis of patients suffering from this disease. This study also demonstrated the reversal of tumour activity in Glioblastoma multiforme.
Method of Ingestion
Contrary to popular belief, smoking the Cannabis is not the most effective way in treating disease within the body as therapeutic levels cannot be reached through smoking. Creating oil from the plant or eating the plant is the best way to go about getting the necessary ingredients which are the Cannabinoids. Also, when Cannabis is heated and burnt it changes the chemical structure and acidity of the THC. This changes its ability to be therapeutic and anytime you burn something and inhale it, you create oxidation within the body. Oxidation is not healthy for the body and can lead to health issues in itself.
Cannabis- whether Sativa, Indica, Ruderalis, male, female, hermaphrodite, wild, bred for fiber, seeds or medicinal resin – is a vegetable with every dietary essential we can’t synthesize. It has essential amino acids, fatty acids and cannabinoid acids. Apart from that, it has hundreds of anti-cancer compounds.
If you heat the plant, you will decarboxylate THC-acid and you will get high, you’ll get you 10 mg. If you don’t heat it, you can go up to five or six hundred milligrams and use it as a dietary cannabis and push it up to the anti-oxidant and neuro-protective levels which come into play at hundreds of milligrams – Dr William Courtney
The Endocannabinoid System (ECS) maintains our biological systems by regulating each cell tissue. It uses Arachadonic acid/Omega 6 to make Endo-Cannabinoids. These are fatty molecules that communicate harm between cells. Dietary Cannabis mimics the ECS by providing Cannabinoids when there is an Arachadonic acid deficiency or clinical Cannabinoid deficiency.
Related Article: 20 Medical Studies That Prove Cannabis Can Cure Cancer
Sources:
www.nature.com/bjc/journal/v95/n2/abs/6603236a.html
jpet.aspetjournals.org/content/308/3/838.abstract
www.jneurosci.org/content/21/17/6475.abstract
mct.aacrjournals.org/content/10/1/90.abstract
www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer-help/about-cancer/cancer-questions/is-cannabis-treatment-brain-tumours
www.rawhemp.tk/
www.phoenixtears.ca/
cannabisinternational.org/
edrv.endojournals.org/content/27/1/73.full
cannabisclinicians.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/OS-2011-Terpenes+Minor-CBs.pdf
20 Medical Studies That Show Cannabis Can Be A Potential Cure For Cancer
Cannabis has been making a lot of noise lately. Multiple states across the United States, along with many countries around the world, have successfully legalized medical marijuana, and the Uruguay parliament recently voted to create the world’s first legal marijuana market.
This is good news, as the health benefits of cannabis are vast, with multiple medical and scientific studies to confirm them. But what about the harmful effects? All psychological evaluations from the intake of cannabis are largely based on assumptions, suggestions, and observations (1). When we look at the actual science behind cannabis, it seems negative effects are difficult to confirm.
The Science Behind Cannabis
Let’s take a look at the science behind cannabis and cancer. Although cannabis has been proven to be effective for a wide range of ailments, this article will focus mainly on its effectiveness in the treatment of cancer. Cannabinoids may very well be one of the best disease and cancer fighting treatments out there. Cannabinoids refer to any of a group of related compounds that include cannabinol and the active constituents of cannabis. They activate cannabinoid receptors in the body. The body itself produces compounds called endocannabinoids and they play a role in many processes within the body that help to create a healthy environment. Cannabinoids also play a role in immune system generation and re-generation. The body regenerates best when it’s saturated with Phyto-Cannabinoids.
Cannabinoids can also be found in cannabis. It is important to note that the cannabinoids are plentiful in both hemp and cannabis. One of the main differences between hemp and cannabis is simply that hemp only contains 0.3% THC while cannabis has 0.4% THC or higher. (Technically they are both strains of Cannabis Sativa.) Cannabinoids have been proven to reduce cancer cells, as they have a great impact on the rebuilding of the immune system. While not every strain of cannabis has the same effect, more and more patients are seeing success in cancer reduction in a short period of time by using cannabis.
While taking a look at these studies, keep in mind that cannabis can be much more effective for medicinal purposes when we eat it rather than smoking it. Below are 20 medical studies that suggest cannabis can be an effective treatment and possible cure for cancer. This is a good starting point for the push for further human clinical trials.
Brain Cancer covered in above article
Breast Cancer
5. A study published in the US National Library of Medicine, conducted by the California Pacific Medical Centre, determined that cannabidiol (CBD) inhibits human breast cancer cell proliferation and invasion. They also demonstrated that CBD significantly reduces tumour mass.
6. A study published in The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics determined that THC as well as cannabidiol dramatically reduced breast cancer cell growth. They confirmed the potency and effectiveness of these compounds.
7. A study published in the journal Molecular Cancer showed that THC reduced tumour growth and tumour numbers. They determined that cannabinoids inhibit cancer cell proliferation, induce cancer cell apoptosis, and impair tumour angiogenesis (all good things). This study provides strong evidence for the use of cannabinoid based therapies for the management of breast cancer.
8. A study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS) determined that cannabinoids inhibit human breast cancer cell proliferation.
Lung Cancer
9. A study published in the journal Oncogene, by Harvard Medical Schools Experimental Medicine Department, determined that THC inhibits epithelial growth factor induced lung cancer cell migration and more. They go on to state that THC should be explored as novel therapeutic molecules in controlling the growth and metastasis of certain lung cancers.
10. A study published by the US National Library of Medicine by the Institute of Toxicology and Pharmacology, from the Department of General Surgery in Germany, determined that cannabinoids inhibit cancer cell invasion. Effects were confirmed in primary tumour cells from a lung cancer patient. Overall, data indicated that cannabinoids decrease cancer cell invasiveness.
11. A study published by the US National Library of Medicine, conducted by Harvard Medical School, investigated the role of cannabinoid receptors in lung cancer cells. They determined its effectiveness and suggested that it should be used for treatment against lung cancer cells.
Prostate Cancer
12. A study published in the US National Library of Medicine illustrates a decrease in prostatic cancer cells by acting through cannabinoid receptors.
13. A study published in the US National Library of Medicine outlined multiple studies proving the effectiveness of cannabis on prostate cancer.
14. Another study published by the US National Library of Medicine determined that clinical testing of CBD against prostate carcinoma is a must. That cannabinoid receptor activation induces prostate carcinoma cell apoptosis. They determined that cannabidiol significantly inhibited cell viability.
Blood Cancer
15. A study published in the journal Molecular Pharmacology recently showed that cannabinoids induce growth inhibition and apoptosis in mantle cell lymphoma. The study was supported by grants from the Swedish Cancer Society, The Swedish Research Council, and the Cancer Society in Stockholm.
16. A study published in the International Journal of Cancer also determined and illustrated that cannabinoids exert antiproliferative and proapoptotic effects in various types of cancer and in mantle cell lymphoma.
17. A study published in the US National Library of Medicine conducted by the Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology by Virginia Commonwealth University determined that cannabinoids induce apoptosis in leukemia cells.
Oral Cancer
18. A study published by the US National Library of Medicine shows that cannabinoids are potent inhibitors of cellular respiration and are toxic to highly malignant oral tumours.
Liver Cancer
19. A study published by the US National Library of Medicine determined that THC reduces the viability of human HCC cell lines (Human hepatocellular liver carcinoma cell line) and reduced their growth.
Pancreatic Cancer
20. A study published in The American Journal of Cancer determined that cannabinoid receptors are expressed in human pancreatic tumor cell lines and tumour biopsies at much higher levels than in normal pancreatic tissue. Results showed that cannabinoid administration induced apoptosis. They also reduced the growth of tumour cells, and inhibited the spreading of pancreatic tumour cells.
Final Thoughts
Cannabis is a great example of how the human mind can be conditioned to believe something, even when faced with contradicting evidence afterwards. Growing up, we are told “drugs” are bad, which is very true, however not all substances that have been labelled as “drugs” by the varying authoritative bodies are harmful. It’s possible that substances are labelled as a “drug” in order to protect corporate interests. One example is the automobile and energy industry; a car made from hemp is stronger than steel, and can be fuelled from hemp alone. Henry Ford demonstrated this many years ago. Hemp actually has over 50,000 uses!
Sources:
All sources highlighted throughout article. Click on the highlighted parts of the article to view them.
1) bjp.rcpsych.org/content/178/2/116.full
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7172
Reputation : 2603
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 29
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry
by lizardking Mon Feb 01, 2016 4:39 am
Are New Vaccines Laced with Birth-Control Drugs?
During the early 1990s, the World Health Organization (WHO) had been overseeing massive vaccination campaigns against tetanus in a number of countries, among them Nicaragua, Mexico, and the Philippines. In October 1994, HLI received a communication from its Mexican affiliate, the Comite' Pro Vida de Mexico, regarding that country's anti-tetanus campaign. Suspicious of the campaign protocols, the Comite' obtained several vials of the vaccine and had them analyzed by chemists. Some of the vials were found to contain human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG), a naturally occurring hormone essential for maintaining a pregnancy.
hCG and Anti-hCG Antibodies
In nature the hCG hormone alerts the woman's body that she is pregnant and causes the release of other hormones to prepare the uterine lining for the implantation of the fertilized egg. The rapid rise in hCG levels after conception makes it an excellent marker for confirmation of pregnancy: when a woman takes a pregnancy test she is not tested for the pregnancy itself, but for the elevated presence of hCG.
However, when introduced into the body coupled with a tetanus toxoid carrier, antibodies will be formed not only against tetanus but also against hCG. In this case the body fails to recognize hCG as a friend and will produce anti-hCG antibodies. The antibodies will attack subsequent pregnancies by killing the hCG which naturally sustains a pregnancy; when a woman has sufficient anti-hCG antibodies in her system, she is rendered incapable of maintaining a pregnancy.(1)
HLI reported the sketchy facts regarding the Mexican tetanus vaccines to its World Council members and affiliates in more than 60 countries.(2) Soon additional reports of vaccines laced with hCG hormones began to drift in from the Philippines, where more than 3.4 million women were recently vaccinated. Similar reports came from Nicaragua, which had conducted its own vaccination campaign in 1993.
The Known Facts
Here are the known facts concerning the tetanus vaccination campaigns in Mexico and the Philippines:
* Only women are vaccinated, and only the women between the ages of 15 and 45. (In Nicaragua the age range was 12-49.) But aren't men at least as likely as young women to come into contact with tetanus? And what of the children? Why are they excluded?
* Human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) hormone has been found in the vaccines. It does not belong there -- in the parlance of the O.J. Simpson murder trial, the vaccine has been "contaminated."
* The vaccination protocols call for multiple injections -- three within three months and a total of five altogether. But, since tetanus vaccinations provide protection for ten years or more, why are multiple inoculations called for?(3)
* WHO has been actively involved for more than 20 years in the development of an anti-fertility vaccine utilizing hCG tied to tetanus toxoid as a carrier -- the exact same coupling as has been found in the Mexican-Philippine-Nicaragua vaccines.(4)
The Anti-Fertility Gang
Allied with the WHO in the development of an anti-fertility vaccine (AFV) using hCG with tetanus and other carriers have been UNFPA, the UN Development Programme (UNDP), the World Bank, the Population Council, the Rockefeller Foundation, the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, and a number of universities, including Uppsala, Helsinki, and Ohio State.(5) The U.S. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (part of NIH) was the supplier of the hCG hormone in some of the AFV experiments.(6)
The WHO begain its "Special Programme" in human reproduction in 1972, and by 1993 had spent more than $356 million on "reproductive health" research.(7) It is this "Programme" which has pioneered the development of the abortificant vaccine. Over $90 million of this Programme's funds were contributed by Sweden; Great Britain donated more than $52 million, while Norway, Denmark and Germany kicked in for $41 million , $27 million, and $12 million, respectively. The U.S., thanks to the cut-off of such funding during the Reagan-Bush administrations, has contributed "only" $5.7 million, including a new payment in 1993 by the Clinton administration of $2.5 million. Other major contibutors to the WHO Programme include UNFPA, $61 million; the World Bank, $15.5 million; the Rockefeller Foundation, $2.5 million; the Ford Foundation, over $1 million; and the IDRC (International Research and Development Centre of Canada), $716.5 thousand.
WHO and Philippine Health Department Excuses
When the first reports surfaced in the Philippines of tetanus toxoid vaccine being laced with hCG hormones, the WHO and the Philippine Department of Health (DOH) immediately denied that the vaccine contained hCG. Confronted with the results of laboratory tests which detected its presence in three of the four vials of tetanus toxoid examined, the WHO and DOH scoffed at the evidence coming from "right-to-life and Catholic" sources. Four new vials of the tetanus vaccine were submitted by DOH to St. Luke's (Lutheran) Medical Center in Manila -- and all four vials tested positive for hCG!
From outright denial the stories now shifted to the allegedly "insignificant" quantity of the hCG present; the volume of hCG present is insufficient to produce anti-hCG antibodies.
But new tests designed to detect the presence of hCG antibodies in the blood sera of women vaccinated with the tetauns toxoid vaccine were undertaken by Philippine pro-life and Catholic groups. Of thirty women tested subsequent to receiving tetanus toxoid vaccine, twenty-six tested positive for high levels of anti-hCG! If there were no hCG in the vaccine, or if it were present in only "insignificant" quantities, why were the vaccinated women found to be harboring anti-hCG antibodies? The WHO and the DOH had no answers.
New arguments surfaced: hCG's apparent presence in the vaccine was due to "false positives" resulting from the particular substances mixed in the vaccine or in the chemicals testing for hCG. And even if hCG was really there, its presence derived from the manufacturing process.
But the finding of hCG antibodies in the blood sera of vaccinated women obviated the need to get bogged down in such debates. It was no longer necessary to argue about what may or may not have been the cause of the hCG presence, when one now had the effect of the hCG. There is no known way for the vaccinated women to have hCG antibodies in their blood unless hCG had been artificially introduced into their bodies!
Why A Tetanus Toxoid "Carrier"?
Because the human body does not attack its own naturally occurring hormone hCG, the body has to be fooled into treating hCG as an invading enemy in order to develop a successful anti-fertility vaccine utilizing hCG antibodies. A paper delivered at the 4th International Congress of Reproductive Immunology (Kiel, West Germany, 26-29 July 1989) spelled it out: "Linkage to a carrier was done to overcome the immunological tolerance to hCG."(
Vaccine Untested by Drug Bureau
After the vaccine controversy had reached a fever pitch, a new bombshell exploded; none of the three different brands of tetanus vaccine being used had ever been licensed for sale and distribution or registered with the Philippine Bureau of Food and Drugs (BFAD), as required by law. The head of the BFAD lamely explained that the companies distributing these brands "did not apply for registration."(9) The companies in question are Connaught Laboratories Ltd. and Intervex, both from Canada, and CSL Laboratories from Australia.
It seemed that the BFAD might belatedly require re-testing, but the idea was quickly rejected when the Secretary of Health declared that, since the vaccines had been certified by the WHO -- there they are again! -- there was assurance enough that the "vaccines come from reputable manufacturers."(10)
Just how "reputable" one of the manufacturers might be is open to some question. In the mid-`80s Connaught Laboratories was found to be knowingly distributing vials of AIDS-contaminated blood products.(11)
Epilogue
At this juncture, evidence is beginning to appear from Africa.(12) HLI has called for a Congressional investigation of the situation, inasmuch as nearly every agency involved in the development of an anti-fertility vaccine is funded, at least in part, with U.S. monies.
During the early 1990s, the World Health Organization (WHO) had been overseeing massive vaccination campaigns against tetanus in a number of countries, among them Nicaragua, Mexico, and the Philippines. In October 1994, HLI received a communication from its Mexican affiliate, the Comite' Pro Vida de Mexico, regarding that country's anti-tetanus campaign. Suspicious of the campaign protocols, the Comite' obtained several vials of the vaccine and had them analyzed by chemists. Some of the vials were found to contain human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG), a naturally occurring hormone essential for maintaining a pregnancy.
hCG and Anti-hCG Antibodies
In nature the hCG hormone alerts the woman's body that she is pregnant and causes the release of other hormones to prepare the uterine lining for the implantation of the fertilized egg. The rapid rise in hCG levels after conception makes it an excellent marker for confirmation of pregnancy: when a woman takes a pregnancy test she is not tested for the pregnancy itself, but for the elevated presence of hCG.
However, when introduced into the body coupled with a tetanus toxoid carrier, antibodies will be formed not only against tetanus but also against hCG. In this case the body fails to recognize hCG as a friend and will produce anti-hCG antibodies. The antibodies will attack subsequent pregnancies by killing the hCG which naturally sustains a pregnancy; when a woman has sufficient anti-hCG antibodies in her system, she is rendered incapable of maintaining a pregnancy.(1)
HLI reported the sketchy facts regarding the Mexican tetanus vaccines to its World Council members and affiliates in more than 60 countries.(2) Soon additional reports of vaccines laced with hCG hormones began to drift in from the Philippines, where more than 3.4 million women were recently vaccinated. Similar reports came from Nicaragua, which had conducted its own vaccination campaign in 1993.
The Known Facts
Here are the known facts concerning the tetanus vaccination campaigns in Mexico and the Philippines:
* Only women are vaccinated, and only the women between the ages of 15 and 45. (In Nicaragua the age range was 12-49.) But aren't men at least as likely as young women to come into contact with tetanus? And what of the children? Why are they excluded?
* Human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) hormone has been found in the vaccines. It does not belong there -- in the parlance of the O.J. Simpson murder trial, the vaccine has been "contaminated."
* The vaccination protocols call for multiple injections -- three within three months and a total of five altogether. But, since tetanus vaccinations provide protection for ten years or more, why are multiple inoculations called for?(3)
* WHO has been actively involved for more than 20 years in the development of an anti-fertility vaccine utilizing hCG tied to tetanus toxoid as a carrier -- the exact same coupling as has been found in the Mexican-Philippine-Nicaragua vaccines.(4)
The Anti-Fertility Gang
Allied with the WHO in the development of an anti-fertility vaccine (AFV) using hCG with tetanus and other carriers have been UNFPA, the UN Development Programme (UNDP), the World Bank, the Population Council, the Rockefeller Foundation, the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, and a number of universities, including Uppsala, Helsinki, and Ohio State.(5) The U.S. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (part of NIH) was the supplier of the hCG hormone in some of the AFV experiments.(6)
The WHO begain its "Special Programme" in human reproduction in 1972, and by 1993 had spent more than $356 million on "reproductive health" research.(7) It is this "Programme" which has pioneered the development of the abortificant vaccine. Over $90 million of this Programme's funds were contributed by Sweden; Great Britain donated more than $52 million, while Norway, Denmark and Germany kicked in for $41 million , $27 million, and $12 million, respectively. The U.S., thanks to the cut-off of such funding during the Reagan-Bush administrations, has contributed "only" $5.7 million, including a new payment in 1993 by the Clinton administration of $2.5 million. Other major contibutors to the WHO Programme include UNFPA, $61 million; the World Bank, $15.5 million; the Rockefeller Foundation, $2.5 million; the Ford Foundation, over $1 million; and the IDRC (International Research and Development Centre of Canada), $716.5 thousand.
WHO and Philippine Health Department Excuses
When the first reports surfaced in the Philippines of tetanus toxoid vaccine being laced with hCG hormones, the WHO and the Philippine Department of Health (DOH) immediately denied that the vaccine contained hCG. Confronted with the results of laboratory tests which detected its presence in three of the four vials of tetanus toxoid examined, the WHO and DOH scoffed at the evidence coming from "right-to-life and Catholic" sources. Four new vials of the tetanus vaccine were submitted by DOH to St. Luke's (Lutheran) Medical Center in Manila -- and all four vials tested positive for hCG!
From outright denial the stories now shifted to the allegedly "insignificant" quantity of the hCG present; the volume of hCG present is insufficient to produce anti-hCG antibodies.
But new tests designed to detect the presence of hCG antibodies in the blood sera of women vaccinated with the tetauns toxoid vaccine were undertaken by Philippine pro-life and Catholic groups. Of thirty women tested subsequent to receiving tetanus toxoid vaccine, twenty-six tested positive for high levels of anti-hCG! If there were no hCG in the vaccine, or if it were present in only "insignificant" quantities, why were the vaccinated women found to be harboring anti-hCG antibodies? The WHO and the DOH had no answers.
New arguments surfaced: hCG's apparent presence in the vaccine was due to "false positives" resulting from the particular substances mixed in the vaccine or in the chemicals testing for hCG. And even if hCG was really there, its presence derived from the manufacturing process.
But the finding of hCG antibodies in the blood sera of vaccinated women obviated the need to get bogged down in such debates. It was no longer necessary to argue about what may or may not have been the cause of the hCG presence, when one now had the effect of the hCG. There is no known way for the vaccinated women to have hCG antibodies in their blood unless hCG had been artificially introduced into their bodies!
Why A Tetanus Toxoid "Carrier"?
Because the human body does not attack its own naturally occurring hormone hCG, the body has to be fooled into treating hCG as an invading enemy in order to develop a successful anti-fertility vaccine utilizing hCG antibodies. A paper delivered at the 4th International Congress of Reproductive Immunology (Kiel, West Germany, 26-29 July 1989) spelled it out: "Linkage to a carrier was done to overcome the immunological tolerance to hCG."(
Vaccine Untested by Drug Bureau
After the vaccine controversy had reached a fever pitch, a new bombshell exploded; none of the three different brands of tetanus vaccine being used had ever been licensed for sale and distribution or registered with the Philippine Bureau of Food and Drugs (BFAD), as required by law. The head of the BFAD lamely explained that the companies distributing these brands "did not apply for registration."(9) The companies in question are Connaught Laboratories Ltd. and Intervex, both from Canada, and CSL Laboratories from Australia.
It seemed that the BFAD might belatedly require re-testing, but the idea was quickly rejected when the Secretary of Health declared that, since the vaccines had been certified by the WHO -- there they are again! -- there was assurance enough that the "vaccines come from reputable manufacturers."(10)
Just how "reputable" one of the manufacturers might be is open to some question. In the mid-`80s Connaught Laboratories was found to be knowingly distributing vials of AIDS-contaminated blood products.(11)
Epilogue
At this juncture, evidence is beginning to appear from Africa.(12) HLI has called for a Congressional investigation of the situation, inasmuch as nearly every agency involved in the development of an anti-fertility vaccine is funded, at least in part, with U.S. monies.
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7172
Reputation : 2603
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 29
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry
by lizardking Mon Feb 01, 2016 4:40 am
BBC Admits Dark Side to Bill Gates’s Polio Project Ahead of Dimbelby Lecture
BBC forced to admit dark side to Bill Gates’s polio project ahead of lecture.
Ahead of tonight’s prestigious Dimbleby lecture by Bill Gates the BBC has been forced to acknowledge that there are serious concerns about the safety and usefulness of Gates’s polio project. In an apparently upbeat article ‘The world can defeat polio’ the BBC’s Medical Correspondent, Fergus Walsh, slips in a reference to the work ofJacob Puliyel quote in AoA last week. The abstract to the paper by Vashisht and Puliyel in the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics states:
It was hoped that following polio eradication, immunisation could be stopped. However the synthesis of polio virus in 2002, made eradication impossible. It is argued that getting poor countries to expend their scarce resources on an impossible dream over the last 10 years was unethical. Furthermore, while India has been polio-free for a year, there has been a huge increase in non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP). In 2011, there were an extra 47,500 new cases of NPAFP. Clinically indistinguishable from polio paralysis but twice as deadly, the incidence of NPAFP was directly proportional to doses of oral polio received. Though this data was collected within the polio surveillance system, it was not investigated. The principle of primum-non-nocere was violated. The authors suggest that the huge bill of US$ 8 billion spent on the programme, is a small sum to pay if the world learns to be wary of such vertical programmes in the future.
Clearly, what should occur is an open public debate about these issues rather than just taking the word of the world’s most successful salesperson. Last week Gates told the Daily Telegraph: “The golden rule that all lives have equal value and we should treat people as we would like to be treated.” But the reality is that the golden rule applies neither at the level of open debate (the opposition is shouted down) or the children horrifically injured in pursuit of alleged greater good. There is no indication that he is doing anything but continuing to act high handedly, and his words should be treated with as much suspicion as before.
‘Bill Gates Buying Immortality In History - By Beating An Already Beaten Disease - And Killing Kids’
Bill Gates is on a mission to buy himself historical immortality as a philanthropist eradicating the world’s diseases. But the world’s supposedly independent media have failed to tackle what is seriously wrong with this picture. Gates is using an already beaten disease and his billions to gain for himself the credit in history for its eradication. Some children who are not at risk of polio will likely die from a disease which is twice as fatal [NPAFP] as a result of the ensuing vaccination campaigns.
Polio has been on its way out for decades with most of the world already polio free and only three countries with 205 cases between them last year. India, already polio free, has seen over 47,000 cases of NPAFP [non polio acute flaccid paralysis] rising in direct proportion to the number of doses of polio vaccine given. To get an idea of what the Bill Gates proposals will mean with intensive vaccination campaigns to eradicate the last cases of polio is that this will cause the NPAFP equivalent of 235 years of polio cases and Bill will be imposing this on third world children from the comfort of Seattle, USA and his billions of dollars. There will inevitably be deaths.
The polio eradication plans have been condemned in a peer reviewed medical journal with eradication being impossible to achieve, the campaigns causing a disease NPAFP which is twice as fatal, being unethical and not worth the cost to hard-pressed third world economies for the limited benefits: New Paper – Polio Vaccine – Disease Caused by Vaccine Twice As Fatal – Third World Duped – Scarce Money Wasted – Polio Eradication Impossible – April 7, 2012.
It has been believed by W.H.O. and other experts over at least 10 years that polio eradication is not possible – see this CHS post made 30 Jan 2013 with references: Bill Gates Polio Eradication Plans – To Cause The Polio Equivalent of 235 Years of Cases Of A Twice As Deadly Disease.
But no one seems to dare to challenge the world’s second richest man: a man who ceded his Chairmanship of Microsoft following a long complex European Union investigation into the illegal business practices of Microsoft under his Chairmanship which saw sanctions and a US$326 million fine: Commission concludes on Microsoft investigation, imposes conduct remedies and a fine Brussels, 24 March 2004.
But tomorrow Gates is giving the BBC’s annual Dimbleby lecture. This will set out Bill’s vision of how he is to use his billions of dollars to defeat polio seemingly singlehandedly: [Bill Gates: The world can defeat polio 28 January 2013 Fergus Walsh].
Additionally, laying the credit for the fall in polio solely on vaccination campaigns, none of the media mention key factors in the reduction in polio worldwide. These include Improved economic conditions and natural attentuation of disease. With these major scientific confounders it is impossible to credit vaccines with defeating such diseases alone or at all. If vaccines have provided any contribution it is a comparatively much smaller one.
Attenuation is the process by which diseases steadily diminish all by themselves and die out. It is a well-known phenomenon in medicine: Vaccines Did Not Save Us – 2 Centuries Of Official Statistics
Improved economic conditions bring the biggest contribution – cleaner water followed by improved nutrition: How UNICEF Harms Third World Children And Misleads About Their Deaths January 21, 2013.
A significant problem with the existence of an illness like NPAFP is that it raises the question of whether the 1940s and 1950s polio pandemics upon which present-day vaccination campaigns are based were in fact caused by polio or whether the pandemics were of something else. Those pandemics did not follow the regular repeating cyclical pattern of epidemics and pandemics of other infectious diseases, and were over before the polio vaccine was first introduced, as these US CDC graphs show:
Instead of reporting the facts and issues we see the BBC and world’s media simpering to Gates over his supposed philanthropy:-
Bill Gates: My Plan to Fix The World’s Biggest Problems Wall Street Journal January 25, 2013,Bill Gates
Bill Gates close to completely eradicating polio Washington Post-26 Jan 2013
‘I have no use for money’: Bill Gates plans to use his billions to eradicate polio UK Daily Mail Damian Ghigliotty 21 January 2013
Bill Gates interview: I have no use for money. This is God’s work Neil Tweedie UK The Telegraph 18 Jan 2013
Not only are people around the world not trusting the established for profit media, but this distrust means people are turning to more reliable sources for news.
Here is a remarkable piece of brown nosing by the BBC’s medical correspondent Fergus Walsh [Bill Gates: The world can defeat polio 28 January 2013 Fergus Walsh, BBC]. It is the only UK media report mentioning the critical peer reviewed journal paper by Dr Puliyel.
The Puliyel paper Polio programme – let us declare victory and move on is justifiably critical of unethical and dangerous polio campaigns. But the BBC’s Fergus Walsh fails to mention the main criticisms and their justification. And he misrepresents the only one he does mention.
Walsh mentions the criticism that polio vaccine causes the twice as fatal disease NPAFP but fails entirely to mention the critical and strong evidence of the vaccine being the cause of the fatal disease NPAFP – that NPAFP cases rise in direct proportion to the numbers of doses of polio vaccine given. Walsh also fails to mention the criticism that the vaccine caused 47,000 cases when India is polio free – having zero cases of polio.
Walsh instead claims, without any source or attribution for his claim, that NPAFP can be caused by many other things. And Walsh says nothing else about any of the other criticisms in the peer reviewed paper by Dr Puliyel – which is also cited on the US National Library of Medicine’s database pubmed.
But then the BBC is not a reliable source of news – as the world has seen recently over the gross sexual abuse of children by ‘Sir’ Jimmy Savile which took place over many decades under the noses of many BBC managers. Not only did no one at the BBC do anything about it, when they had the chance to report the news, the BBC stopped the broadcast going out.
If Bill Gates has business interests or investments in the drug industry, the one place we will never hear of them – if there are any – is from the UK’s BBC. But if anyone does know if Bill has any such interests or investments or does not and can prove it either way, please do let everyone know.
Whilst Gates company Microsoft was engaging in illegal practices harming the development of healthy necessary competion, his company’s software has been causing vast problems for businesses around the world over decades with an unparalleled history of crashes and bugs. Gates, having gotten rich on the back of that, now claims he has no need for the money and is doing God’s work. Which begs the question – why he did not ensure the money was put into developing better software which did not cause so much economic harm – that would be philanthropic – but is Bill Gates really a philanthropist doing “God’s work” or something else, like the work of another less “user friendly” immortal?
“Polio has not been eradicated by vaccination, it is lurking behind a redefinition and new diagnostic names like viral or aseptic meningitis. When the first, injectible polio vaccine was tested on some 1.8 million children in the United States in 1954, within 9 days there was huge epidemic of paralytic polio in the vaccinated and some of their parents and other contacts. The US Surgeon General discontinued the trial for 2 weeks.”
Doctor Viera Scheibner PhD
“The vaccinators then put their heads together and came back with a new definition of poliomyelitis. The old, classical, definition: a disease with residual paralysis which resolves within 60 days has been changed to a disease with residual paralysis which persists for more than 60 days. Knowing the reality of polio disease, this nifty but dishonest administrative move excluded more than 90% of polio cases from the definition of polio. Ever since then, when a polio-vaccinated person gets polio, it will not be diagnosed as polio, it will be diagnosed as viral or aseptic meningitis. According to one of the 1997 issues of the MMWR, there are some 30,000 to 50,000 cases of viral meningitis per year in the United States alone. That’s where all those 30,000 – 50,000 cases of polio disappeared after the introduction of mass vaccination. One must also be aware that polio is a man-made disease since those well-publicized outbreaks are misrepresented that those huge outbreaks were causally linked to intensified diphtheria and other vaccinations at the relevant time.”
Doctor Viera Scheibner PhD
“New studies have found that SV-40, a major contaminant of the polio vaccine until 1963, not only existed as a latent virus for the lifetime of those exposed to the vaccine but was being passed on to the next generation, primarily by way of sperm, something called vertical transmission. This means that every generation from now on will be infected with this known carcinogenic virus. There is also compelling evidence that some polio vaccines manufactured after 1963 may contain SV-40 virus.”
Doctor Russell Blaylock MD
“What makes the SV-40 contamination disaster of such concern is its association with so many cancers – including mesothelioma, medulloblastoma, ependymoma, meningioma, astrocytoma, oligodendroglioma, pituitary adenoma, glioblastoma, osteosarcomas, non-Hodgkins lymphoma, papillary thyroid carcinomas, and anaplastic thyroid carcinomas.”
Doctor Russell Blaylock MD
healthyprotocols.com/2_vac_polio.htm
BBC forced to admit dark side to Bill Gates’s polio project ahead of lecture.
Ahead of tonight’s prestigious Dimbleby lecture by Bill Gates the BBC has been forced to acknowledge that there are serious concerns about the safety and usefulness of Gates’s polio project. In an apparently upbeat article ‘The world can defeat polio’ the BBC’s Medical Correspondent, Fergus Walsh, slips in a reference to the work ofJacob Puliyel quote in AoA last week. The abstract to the paper by Vashisht and Puliyel in the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics states:
It was hoped that following polio eradication, immunisation could be stopped. However the synthesis of polio virus in 2002, made eradication impossible. It is argued that getting poor countries to expend their scarce resources on an impossible dream over the last 10 years was unethical. Furthermore, while India has been polio-free for a year, there has been a huge increase in non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP). In 2011, there were an extra 47,500 new cases of NPAFP. Clinically indistinguishable from polio paralysis but twice as deadly, the incidence of NPAFP was directly proportional to doses of oral polio received. Though this data was collected within the polio surveillance system, it was not investigated. The principle of primum-non-nocere was violated. The authors suggest that the huge bill of US$ 8 billion spent on the programme, is a small sum to pay if the world learns to be wary of such vertical programmes in the future.
Clearly, what should occur is an open public debate about these issues rather than just taking the word of the world’s most successful salesperson. Last week Gates told the Daily Telegraph: “The golden rule that all lives have equal value and we should treat people as we would like to be treated.” But the reality is that the golden rule applies neither at the level of open debate (the opposition is shouted down) or the children horrifically injured in pursuit of alleged greater good. There is no indication that he is doing anything but continuing to act high handedly, and his words should be treated with as much suspicion as before.
‘Bill Gates Buying Immortality In History - By Beating An Already Beaten Disease - And Killing Kids’
Bill Gates is on a mission to buy himself historical immortality as a philanthropist eradicating the world’s diseases. But the world’s supposedly independent media have failed to tackle what is seriously wrong with this picture. Gates is using an already beaten disease and his billions to gain for himself the credit in history for its eradication. Some children who are not at risk of polio will likely die from a disease which is twice as fatal [NPAFP] as a result of the ensuing vaccination campaigns.
Polio has been on its way out for decades with most of the world already polio free and only three countries with 205 cases between them last year. India, already polio free, has seen over 47,000 cases of NPAFP [non polio acute flaccid paralysis] rising in direct proportion to the number of doses of polio vaccine given. To get an idea of what the Bill Gates proposals will mean with intensive vaccination campaigns to eradicate the last cases of polio is that this will cause the NPAFP equivalent of 235 years of polio cases and Bill will be imposing this on third world children from the comfort of Seattle, USA and his billions of dollars. There will inevitably be deaths.
The polio eradication plans have been condemned in a peer reviewed medical journal with eradication being impossible to achieve, the campaigns causing a disease NPAFP which is twice as fatal, being unethical and not worth the cost to hard-pressed third world economies for the limited benefits: New Paper – Polio Vaccine – Disease Caused by Vaccine Twice As Fatal – Third World Duped – Scarce Money Wasted – Polio Eradication Impossible – April 7, 2012.
It has been believed by W.H.O. and other experts over at least 10 years that polio eradication is not possible – see this CHS post made 30 Jan 2013 with references: Bill Gates Polio Eradication Plans – To Cause The Polio Equivalent of 235 Years of Cases Of A Twice As Deadly Disease.
But no one seems to dare to challenge the world’s second richest man: a man who ceded his Chairmanship of Microsoft following a long complex European Union investigation into the illegal business practices of Microsoft under his Chairmanship which saw sanctions and a US$326 million fine: Commission concludes on Microsoft investigation, imposes conduct remedies and a fine Brussels, 24 March 2004.
But tomorrow Gates is giving the BBC’s annual Dimbleby lecture. This will set out Bill’s vision of how he is to use his billions of dollars to defeat polio seemingly singlehandedly: [Bill Gates: The world can defeat polio 28 January 2013 Fergus Walsh].
Additionally, laying the credit for the fall in polio solely on vaccination campaigns, none of the media mention key factors in the reduction in polio worldwide. These include Improved economic conditions and natural attentuation of disease. With these major scientific confounders it is impossible to credit vaccines with defeating such diseases alone or at all. If vaccines have provided any contribution it is a comparatively much smaller one.
Attenuation is the process by which diseases steadily diminish all by themselves and die out. It is a well-known phenomenon in medicine: Vaccines Did Not Save Us – 2 Centuries Of Official Statistics
Improved economic conditions bring the biggest contribution – cleaner water followed by improved nutrition: How UNICEF Harms Third World Children And Misleads About Their Deaths January 21, 2013.
A significant problem with the existence of an illness like NPAFP is that it raises the question of whether the 1940s and 1950s polio pandemics upon which present-day vaccination campaigns are based were in fact caused by polio or whether the pandemics were of something else. Those pandemics did not follow the regular repeating cyclical pattern of epidemics and pandemics of other infectious diseases, and were over before the polio vaccine was first introduced, as these US CDC graphs show:
Instead of reporting the facts and issues we see the BBC and world’s media simpering to Gates over his supposed philanthropy:-
Bill Gates: My Plan to Fix The World’s Biggest Problems Wall Street Journal January 25, 2013,Bill Gates
Bill Gates close to completely eradicating polio Washington Post-26 Jan 2013
‘I have no use for money’: Bill Gates plans to use his billions to eradicate polio UK Daily Mail Damian Ghigliotty 21 January 2013
Bill Gates interview: I have no use for money. This is God’s work Neil Tweedie UK The Telegraph 18 Jan 2013
Not only are people around the world not trusting the established for profit media, but this distrust means people are turning to more reliable sources for news.
Here is a remarkable piece of brown nosing by the BBC’s medical correspondent Fergus Walsh [Bill Gates: The world can defeat polio 28 January 2013 Fergus Walsh, BBC]. It is the only UK media report mentioning the critical peer reviewed journal paper by Dr Puliyel.
The Puliyel paper Polio programme – let us declare victory and move on is justifiably critical of unethical and dangerous polio campaigns. But the BBC’s Fergus Walsh fails to mention the main criticisms and their justification. And he misrepresents the only one he does mention.
Walsh mentions the criticism that polio vaccine causes the twice as fatal disease NPAFP but fails entirely to mention the critical and strong evidence of the vaccine being the cause of the fatal disease NPAFP – that NPAFP cases rise in direct proportion to the numbers of doses of polio vaccine given. Walsh also fails to mention the criticism that the vaccine caused 47,000 cases when India is polio free – having zero cases of polio.
Walsh instead claims, without any source or attribution for his claim, that NPAFP can be caused by many other things. And Walsh says nothing else about any of the other criticisms in the peer reviewed paper by Dr Puliyel – which is also cited on the US National Library of Medicine’s database pubmed.
But then the BBC is not a reliable source of news – as the world has seen recently over the gross sexual abuse of children by ‘Sir’ Jimmy Savile which took place over many decades under the noses of many BBC managers. Not only did no one at the BBC do anything about it, when they had the chance to report the news, the BBC stopped the broadcast going out.
If Bill Gates has business interests or investments in the drug industry, the one place we will never hear of them – if there are any – is from the UK’s BBC. But if anyone does know if Bill has any such interests or investments or does not and can prove it either way, please do let everyone know.
Whilst Gates company Microsoft was engaging in illegal practices harming the development of healthy necessary competion, his company’s software has been causing vast problems for businesses around the world over decades with an unparalleled history of crashes and bugs. Gates, having gotten rich on the back of that, now claims he has no need for the money and is doing God’s work. Which begs the question – why he did not ensure the money was put into developing better software which did not cause so much economic harm – that would be philanthropic – but is Bill Gates really a philanthropist doing “God’s work” or something else, like the work of another less “user friendly” immortal?
“Polio has not been eradicated by vaccination, it is lurking behind a redefinition and new diagnostic names like viral or aseptic meningitis. When the first, injectible polio vaccine was tested on some 1.8 million children in the United States in 1954, within 9 days there was huge epidemic of paralytic polio in the vaccinated and some of their parents and other contacts. The US Surgeon General discontinued the trial for 2 weeks.”
Doctor Viera Scheibner PhD
“The vaccinators then put their heads together and came back with a new definition of poliomyelitis. The old, classical, definition: a disease with residual paralysis which resolves within 60 days has been changed to a disease with residual paralysis which persists for more than 60 days. Knowing the reality of polio disease, this nifty but dishonest administrative move excluded more than 90% of polio cases from the definition of polio. Ever since then, when a polio-vaccinated person gets polio, it will not be diagnosed as polio, it will be diagnosed as viral or aseptic meningitis. According to one of the 1997 issues of the MMWR, there are some 30,000 to 50,000 cases of viral meningitis per year in the United States alone. That’s where all those 30,000 – 50,000 cases of polio disappeared after the introduction of mass vaccination. One must also be aware that polio is a man-made disease since those well-publicized outbreaks are misrepresented that those huge outbreaks were causally linked to intensified diphtheria and other vaccinations at the relevant time.”
Doctor Viera Scheibner PhD
“New studies have found that SV-40, a major contaminant of the polio vaccine until 1963, not only existed as a latent virus for the lifetime of those exposed to the vaccine but was being passed on to the next generation, primarily by way of sperm, something called vertical transmission. This means that every generation from now on will be infected with this known carcinogenic virus. There is also compelling evidence that some polio vaccines manufactured after 1963 may contain SV-40 virus.”
Doctor Russell Blaylock MD
“What makes the SV-40 contamination disaster of such concern is its association with so many cancers – including mesothelioma, medulloblastoma, ependymoma, meningioma, astrocytoma, oligodendroglioma, pituitary adenoma, glioblastoma, osteosarcomas, non-Hodgkins lymphoma, papillary thyroid carcinomas, and anaplastic thyroid carcinomas.”
Doctor Russell Blaylock MD
healthyprotocols.com/2_vac_polio.htm
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7172
Reputation : 2603
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 29
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry
by lizardking Mon Feb 01, 2016 4:40 am
Posted by marleyites on 10/09/2015
Great posts, Liz.
For cannabis to be effective as a curative, you must reach a therapeutic dose.
This cannot be achieved by smoking.
Although most (all) of what we hear about is smoking ...
smoking pot
smoking joints
smoking smoking smoking.
You'd think that was the whole enchilada. Smoking.
Well, smoking is best for quick, symptomatic relief.
When you need fast relief, ingestion won't work; it can take hours for ingested cannabis to become effective.
But,
If you have anxiety, a few puffs and you are fine.
If you have chronic pain, acute pain, muscle spasm, a few puffs and you see/feel a difference.
If you wake up in the middle of the night and can't sleep, hit the pipe.
If you have epileptic or trauma-based seizure, the smoking will help it stop.
This smoking routine will not cure the condition. It will quell symptoms.
Not to worry, though, about smoking. Research shows it will not damage lungs.
Tashkin, a devoted drug warrior until conducting this research, finds that
cannabis smoking actually has protective effect on lungs:
To get a therapeutic dose, you must concentrate the whole plant (buds).
Do not be fooled by "no THC" cannabis; THC is the workhorse here.
The other compounds are ancillary, imho.
More like complementary actually.
(and, I believe that Charlotte's Web low-THC cannabis is a GMO version; that's why it's pushed and talked about and allowed).
Here find Granny StormCrow's list of cannabis related medical info.
It's up to 750 pages now.
veteransforcompassionatecare.org/letfreedomgrowCOM//cmu/GSCListJan2014CONDITIONS.pdf
Thank you again Liz for these great posts above.
One with the plant, /s/ Marley-ites
Great posts, Liz.
For cannabis to be effective as a curative, you must reach a therapeutic dose.
This cannot be achieved by smoking.
Although most (all) of what we hear about is smoking ...
smoking pot
smoking joints
smoking smoking smoking.
You'd think that was the whole enchilada. Smoking.
Well, smoking is best for quick, symptomatic relief.
When you need fast relief, ingestion won't work; it can take hours for ingested cannabis to become effective.
But,
If you have anxiety, a few puffs and you are fine.
If you have chronic pain, acute pain, muscle spasm, a few puffs and you see/feel a difference.
If you wake up in the middle of the night and can't sleep, hit the pipe.
If you have epileptic or trauma-based seizure, the smoking will help it stop.
This smoking routine will not cure the condition. It will quell symptoms.
Not to worry, though, about smoking. Research shows it will not damage lungs.
Tashkin, a devoted drug warrior until conducting this research, finds that
cannabis smoking actually has protective effect on lungs:
To get a therapeutic dose, you must concentrate the whole plant (buds).
Do not be fooled by "no THC" cannabis; THC is the workhorse here.
The other compounds are ancillary, imho.
More like complementary actually.
(and, I believe that Charlotte's Web low-THC cannabis is a GMO version; that's why it's pushed and talked about and allowed).
Here find Granny StormCrow's list of cannabis related medical info.
It's up to 750 pages now.
veteransforcompassionatecare.org/letfreedomgrowCOM//cmu/GSCListJan2014CONDITIONS.pdf
Thank you again Liz for these great posts above.
One with the plant, /s/ Marley-ites
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7172
Reputation : 2603
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 29
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry
by lizardking Mon Feb 01, 2016 4:41 am
Posted by lizardking on 10/09/2015
Thanks so much for all the helpful information, and looks like you were right:
"Charlotte's Web is a genetically modified marijuana plant that was bred to replicate the high cbd and low thc composition typically associated with non-medical hemp plants."
Oct 8, 2015 23:03:52 GMT marleyites said:
Thank you again Liz for these great posts above.
One with the plant, /s/ Marley-ites
Thanks so much for all the helpful information, and looks like you were right:
"Charlotte's Web is a genetically modified marijuana plant that was bred to replicate the high cbd and low thc composition typically associated with non-medical hemp plants."
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7172
Reputation : 2603
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 29
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry
by lizardking Mon Feb 01, 2016 4:41 am
Posted by marleyites on 10/09/2015
Anytime I see mainstream plugging something, anything ... I'm downright suspicious.
They do not want THC benefits to run loose among the main population. THC effects (high) are demonized as "toxicity". LOL, it's mainly the THC that does the healing.
"But what about the children?" (usually called "kids" these days, hmmm traditional joo sacrifice animal, baby goat).
This scientific study might help the "children" problem:
www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/medical/can-babies.htm
Prenatal Marijuana Exposure and Neonatal Outcomes in Jamaica:
An Ethnographic Study
Melanie C. Dreher, PhD; Kevin Nugent, PhD; and Rebekah Hudgins, MA
ABSTRACT.
Objective. To identify neurobehavioral effects of prenatal marijuana exposure on neonates in rural Jamaica.
Design. Ethnographic field studies and standardized neurobehavior assessments during the neonatal period.
Setting. Rural Jamaica in heavy-marijuana-using population.
Participants. Twenty-four Jamaican neonates exposed to marijuana prenatally and 20 nonexposed neonates.
Measurements and main results. Exposed and nonexposed neonates were compared at 3 days and 1 month old, using the Brazelton Neonatal Assessment Scale, including supplementary items to capture possible subtle effects. There were no significant differences between exposed and nonexposed neonates on day 3. At 1 month, the exposed neonates showed better physiological stability and required less examiner facilitation to reach organized states. The neonates of heavy-marijuana-using mothers had better scores on autonomic stability, quality of alertness, irritability, and self-regulation and were judged to be more rewarding for caregivers.
Conclusions. The absence of any differences between the exposed on nonexposed groups in the early neonatal period suggest that the better scores of exposed neonates at 1 month are traceable to the cultural positioning and social and economic characteristics of mothers using marijuana that select for the use of marijuana but also promote neonatal development. Pediatrics 1994;93:254-260; prenatal marijuana exposure, neonatal outcomes, Jamaica, Brazelton scale supplementary items.
Here's another study not specific to children:
csp.org/chrestomathy/ganja_in.html
Ganja in Jamaica: The Effects of Marijuana Use.
Rubin, Vera, and Comitas, Lambros.(1976).
Garden City, NY: Anchor.
ISBN: 0-385-12172-5
Description: Paperback, xxii + 217 pages.
Contents: Foreword by Raymond Philip National [US] Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse, preface, acknowledgements, Jamaica Project Staff, 12 chapters, 8 appendices: A. " Ganja Smoking as a Danger to the Natives of this Colony," (Editorial from Daily Gleaner, Jamaica, June 10, 1913); B. Summary of ganja legislation in Jamaica, 1913-1972; C. Laboratory Analyses of ganja samples; D. Demographic profile of clinical sample based on life histories; E. Chromosome studies, steroid excretion and peripheral thyroid hormone levels; F. Estimated THC content of cannabis used in the U.S. and other countries; G. Responses to questions concerning reaction to first experiences with ganja & Responses to questions concerning subsequent experiences with ganja; H. Life expectancy table; bibliography.
Note: This book was originally published in hardcover as Ganja in Jamaica: A Medical Anthropological Study of Chronic Marijuana Use in 1975 by Mouton & Co.
Excerpt(s): Dragons in dark caves, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes once reminded us, are far more fearsome than when they are seen in daylight. How refreshing it is, therefore, to have available an objective study which not only exposes but also demolishes many emotional and "fright-symbolic" dragons which have clouded our perspective in recent years with reference to cannabis. It is refreshing, also, to see the results of so many individuals and institutions working together, scientifically, separating "fact from fiction" in an area so important to human beings everywhere, namely, the use of a psychotropic substance such as marihuana.
The Jamaica study, sponsored by the Center for Studies of Narcotic and Drug Abuse, National Institute of Mental Health, was the first project in medical anthropology to be undertaken and is the first intensive, multidisciplinary study of marihuana use and users to be published. (Foreword, Raymond Philip Shafer, pages v-vi)
... Almost unanimously, informants categorically stated that ganja, particularly in spliff form, enabled them to work harder, faster and longer. For energy, ganja is taken in the morning, during breaks in the work routine or immediately before particularly onerous work.
The belief that ganja acts as a work stimulant and the behavior that this induces casts considerable doubt on the universality of what has been described in the literature as "the amotivational syndrome," or a "loss of desire to work, to compete, to face challenges. Interests and major concerns of the individual become centered around marijuana and drug use becomes compulsive." In Jamaica, and one would suspect other cannabis-using agricultural countries, ganja is central to a "motivational syndrome," at least on the ideational level. Ganja, in the cultural setting of rural Jamaica, rather than hindering, permits its users to face, start and carry through the most difficult and distasteful manual labor. (page 58)
In addition, ganja, unlike alcohol, has special symbolic attributes. Rastafarian metaphysics, for example, emphasizes and brings into focus general concepts derived from working-class views of ganja. For them, it is "the wisdom weed," of divine origin, an elixir vitae, documented by Biblical chapter and verse which over-rides man-made proscriptions. Religious authority thus validates and fortifies commitment to its use; ... the sacred source of ganja permits a sense of religious communion, marked by meditation and contemplation. (page 151)
please note: Rastafari do not abide by "religion" as Rastafari is a way of life, not a religion. It's a difficult concept to grasp, so they call it religion.
One love. /s/ Marleyites
Anytime I see mainstream plugging something, anything ... I'm downright suspicious.
They do not want THC benefits to run loose among the main population. THC effects (high) are demonized as "toxicity". LOL, it's mainly the THC that does the healing.
"But what about the children?" (usually called "kids" these days, hmmm traditional joo sacrifice animal, baby goat).
This scientific study might help the "children" problem:
www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/medical/can-babies.htm
Prenatal Marijuana Exposure and Neonatal Outcomes in Jamaica:
An Ethnographic Study
Melanie C. Dreher, PhD; Kevin Nugent, PhD; and Rebekah Hudgins, MA
ABSTRACT.
Objective. To identify neurobehavioral effects of prenatal marijuana exposure on neonates in rural Jamaica.
Design. Ethnographic field studies and standardized neurobehavior assessments during the neonatal period.
Setting. Rural Jamaica in heavy-marijuana-using population.
Participants. Twenty-four Jamaican neonates exposed to marijuana prenatally and 20 nonexposed neonates.
Measurements and main results. Exposed and nonexposed neonates were compared at 3 days and 1 month old, using the Brazelton Neonatal Assessment Scale, including supplementary items to capture possible subtle effects. There were no significant differences between exposed and nonexposed neonates on day 3. At 1 month, the exposed neonates showed better physiological stability and required less examiner facilitation to reach organized states. The neonates of heavy-marijuana-using mothers had better scores on autonomic stability, quality of alertness, irritability, and self-regulation and were judged to be more rewarding for caregivers.
Conclusions. The absence of any differences between the exposed on nonexposed groups in the early neonatal period suggest that the better scores of exposed neonates at 1 month are traceable to the cultural positioning and social and economic characteristics of mothers using marijuana that select for the use of marijuana but also promote neonatal development. Pediatrics 1994;93:254-260; prenatal marijuana exposure, neonatal outcomes, Jamaica, Brazelton scale supplementary items.
Here's another study not specific to children:
csp.org/chrestomathy/ganja_in.html
Ganja in Jamaica: The Effects of Marijuana Use.
Rubin, Vera, and Comitas, Lambros.(1976).
Garden City, NY: Anchor.
ISBN: 0-385-12172-5
Description: Paperback, xxii + 217 pages.
Contents: Foreword by Raymond Philip National [US] Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse, preface, acknowledgements, Jamaica Project Staff, 12 chapters, 8 appendices: A. " Ganja Smoking as a Danger to the Natives of this Colony," (Editorial from Daily Gleaner, Jamaica, June 10, 1913); B. Summary of ganja legislation in Jamaica, 1913-1972; C. Laboratory Analyses of ganja samples; D. Demographic profile of clinical sample based on life histories; E. Chromosome studies, steroid excretion and peripheral thyroid hormone levels; F. Estimated THC content of cannabis used in the U.S. and other countries; G. Responses to questions concerning reaction to first experiences with ganja & Responses to questions concerning subsequent experiences with ganja; H. Life expectancy table; bibliography.
Note: This book was originally published in hardcover as Ganja in Jamaica: A Medical Anthropological Study of Chronic Marijuana Use in 1975 by Mouton & Co.
Excerpt(s): Dragons in dark caves, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes once reminded us, are far more fearsome than when they are seen in daylight. How refreshing it is, therefore, to have available an objective study which not only exposes but also demolishes many emotional and "fright-symbolic" dragons which have clouded our perspective in recent years with reference to cannabis. It is refreshing, also, to see the results of so many individuals and institutions working together, scientifically, separating "fact from fiction" in an area so important to human beings everywhere, namely, the use of a psychotropic substance such as marihuana.
The Jamaica study, sponsored by the Center for Studies of Narcotic and Drug Abuse, National Institute of Mental Health, was the first project in medical anthropology to be undertaken and is the first intensive, multidisciplinary study of marihuana use and users to be published. (Foreword, Raymond Philip Shafer, pages v-vi)
... Almost unanimously, informants categorically stated that ganja, particularly in spliff form, enabled them to work harder, faster and longer. For energy, ganja is taken in the morning, during breaks in the work routine or immediately before particularly onerous work.
The belief that ganja acts as a work stimulant and the behavior that this induces casts considerable doubt on the universality of what has been described in the literature as "the amotivational syndrome," or a "loss of desire to work, to compete, to face challenges. Interests and major concerns of the individual become centered around marijuana and drug use becomes compulsive." In Jamaica, and one would suspect other cannabis-using agricultural countries, ganja is central to a "motivational syndrome," at least on the ideational level. Ganja, in the cultural setting of rural Jamaica, rather than hindering, permits its users to face, start and carry through the most difficult and distasteful manual labor. (page 58)
In addition, ganja, unlike alcohol, has special symbolic attributes. Rastafarian metaphysics, for example, emphasizes and brings into focus general concepts derived from working-class views of ganja. For them, it is "the wisdom weed," of divine origin, an elixir vitae, documented by Biblical chapter and verse which over-rides man-made proscriptions. Religious authority thus validates and fortifies commitment to its use; ... the sacred source of ganja permits a sense of religious communion, marked by meditation and contemplation. (page 151)
please note: Rastafari do not abide by "religion" as Rastafari is a way of life, not a religion. It's a difficult concept to grasp, so they call it religion.
One love. /s/ Marleyites
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7172
Reputation : 2603
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 29
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry
by lizardking Mon Feb 01, 2016 4:41 am
Posted by marleyites on 10/10/2015
Kenya catholics have current investigation into anti-fertility tetnus vaccines.
Here's Jon Rappaport's take on it.
The vaccine matrix: covert birth control, female sterility
by Jon Rappoport
July 15, 2015
“Part of the vaccine covert op involves turning humans into social constructs who can only think, in the most shallow terms, about ‘protecting the group’. Such people would lose any semblance of individuality, as well as the ability to analyze vaccines and understand what harm they do.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)
In the vaccine research community, it’s an open secret that the Rockefeller Fund, the UN, and other groups have been backing the development of vaccines that function as agents of population control. This work has been going on for decades.
We’re talking about inducing female sterility.
Through which vaccine? Tetanus, for example, which is given with the diphtheria and pertussis vaccines in a one-shot combination.
The combination has a number of names (and the contents of the vaccines may vary to some degree): DPT, DTP, DTwP, DTaP, Tdap. Tdap is the version currently recommended by the Centers for Disease Control.
jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2015/07/15/the-vaccine-matrix-covert-birth-control-female-sterility-2/
/s/ Marleyites
Same topic, this time out of Africa.Oct 8, 2015 18:51:04 GMT lizardking said:
Are New Vaccines Laced with Birth-Control Drugs?
During the early 1990s, the World Health Organization (WHO) had been overseeing massive vaccination campaigns against tetanus in a number of countries, among them Nicaragua, Mexico, and the Philippines.
Kenya catholics have current investigation into anti-fertility tetnus vaccines.
Here's Jon Rappaport's take on it.
The vaccine matrix: covert birth control, female sterility
by Jon Rappoport
July 15, 2015
“Part of the vaccine covert op involves turning humans into social constructs who can only think, in the most shallow terms, about ‘protecting the group’. Such people would lose any semblance of individuality, as well as the ability to analyze vaccines and understand what harm they do.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)
In the vaccine research community, it’s an open secret that the Rockefeller Fund, the UN, and other groups have been backing the development of vaccines that function as agents of population control. This work has been going on for decades.
We’re talking about inducing female sterility.
Through which vaccine? Tetanus, for example, which is given with the diphtheria and pertussis vaccines in a one-shot combination.
The combination has a number of names (and the contents of the vaccines may vary to some degree): DPT, DTP, DTwP, DTaP, Tdap. Tdap is the version currently recommended by the Centers for Disease Control.
jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2015/07/15/the-vaccine-matrix-covert-birth-control-female-sterility-2/
/s/ Marleyites
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7172
Reputation : 2603
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 29
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry
by lizardking Mon Feb 01, 2016 4:45 am
Clear Proof sciencebasedmedicine.org’s Doctor David Gorski [aka ORAC] Is Dishonest And A Liar – And If You Find A Bigger Gorski Lie To Better This Example Let Us Know
It is a serious matter when a medical doctor abuses the trusted status of a licensed medical professional to abuse bully disparage and attack others. It is worse when he uses that status and trusted position to lie about published medical research to make false claims intended to mislead and actively spread deliberate misinformation about medical knowledge whilst doing so to make false claims about others. It is even worse when he does it so publicly and routinely, publishing to mislead people worldwide and on a daily basis on the internet.
Here on CHS we examine just one deliberate intentional lie by Dr Gorski, the circumstances in which he made that lie and look at some implications. The lie we are interested in is published on the website sciencebasedmedicine.org. It is in an attack blog directed against investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson for her work exposing the scandal of vaccines causing autism in hundreds of thousands of US children. Dr David Gorski engages in his dishonest bullying conduct against a number of other people in the same blog post.
But first some background and we also invite readers to post comments here with other examples of Dr Gorski’s sciencebasedmedicine.org’s lies which they believe they have found to see if they can better our example.
Dr Gorski’s behaviour reveals him as a pseudoscientist and quack. And it indicates Dr Gorski may not be of good moral character – which is what his dishonesty suggests.
This kind of behaviour also brings all of modern medicine into disrepute and taints all medical doctors. Government health officials are able to avoid answering difficult questions hiding behind bloggers like Gorski who distract attention whilst spreading blatant misinformation and attacking wrongfully the characters and credibility of independently minded people who ask and even sometimes answer the questions health officials prefer to avoid.
It of course also tells the world about the website sciencebasedmedicine.org. Dr David Gorski is its Managing Editor. What are the other editors doing about Gorski’s deliberate lies and online bullying? Do they condone Dr Gorski’s behaviour? Have they done anything to stop it? Do they intend putting matters right? Gorski has been doing this kind of thing for many years.
The other editors are: Stephen P Novella; Kimball C. Atwood IV, MD; Mark A. Crislip, MD; Harriet Hall, MD; and Paul Ingraham (a former Registered Massage Therapist in Vancouver, Canada).
Are they liars too? We do not know about that because we have not considered any of their work. But if they do nothing then that tells you something about them.
Dr David Gorski seems to lie as a matter of routine. Worse still he asserts he relies on science when he is just lying. Gorski of course is not the only liar. On CHS we have highlighted other liars who have been caught lying blatantly, in some instances having to apologise and pay compensation.
So what are the implications of Gorski’s cyber bullying and lying under the requirements to be met by a licensed medical practitioner in the State of Michigan? [Dr Gorski practices medicine in Michigan].
The Michigan Board of Medicine appears to be responsible for enforcing for the practice of medicine the Public Health Code under Public Act 368 of 1978, as amended. Section 16221 contains a multitude of behaviours but lying appears to fall under a “lack of good moral character“. After all, if a licensed medical professional lies about medical knowledge to mislead others and so publicly that does not sound like someone of good moral character, does it?
But that is not all. If Dr Gorski advises and treats patients on the basis of the kind of defective untrue and misleading information he published on his blog then he may violate other requirements. Violations include negligence or failure to exercise due care as well as any conduct or practice that impairs, or may impair, the ability to safely and skillfully practice medicine. And it may also indicate a lack of competence to advise and treat patients in accordance with his obligations. Incompetence can be a violation. A mental inability reasonably related to and adversely affecting the licensee’s ability to practice in a safe and competent manner can also violate the Code. That raises the question of whether Dr Gorski’s psychological profile as revealed by his blogging activities and specifically his inability to be truthful about medical scientific matters makes him psychologically unfit to treat patients. That is not a question for CHS to answer but it would seem an appropriate question to ask.
So what did the liar Dr David Gorski do? He published one of his usual rambling articles on the sciencebasedmedicine.org website. It was 3333 words entitled “Anti-vaccine propaganda from Sharyl Attkisson of CBS News“ published on April 4, 2011.
You can see this was not a trivial matter. Gorski attacked a prominent US journalist along with a number of other people and he lied to do it. Ms Attkisson reported for CBS News on a peer reviewed journal paper published by Dr Helen Ratajczak. Ms Attkisson’s report included:
This is the part of Dr David Gorski’s article in which the lie appears and it is a significant lie:
Notice our emphasis added to just three words “all based on“. Dr Gorski chose those words to make sure his lie would be all the more convincing. Those three words show how deliberate and calculated Dr Gorski was being in his lying and dishonesty.
And just to make sure we are comparing apples with apples, this is the CHS article Dr Gorski lied about Vaccination Causes Autism – Say US Government & Merck’s Director of Vaccines as it appeared when Dr Gorski wrote his blog post in April 2011.
Notice how in his article Dr Gorski admits he found and read the article. There is no mistake. And of course Dr Gorski was making claims intended to damage the reputations of Ms Attkisson and Dr Ratajczak among others. So it was deliberate, intentional and to cause harm to others. And it was bullying cyber abuse.
Now what you can also see here is that Dr Gorski not only lied about the CHS article but he also lied about a number of other things [and this is just looking at the one paragraph] and all for the purposes of attacking Ms Attkisson and Dr Ratajczak.
Most people do not click on links in blog posts. But this particular Gorski lie would be one CHS would know to be a lie without needing to refer to the CHS article concerned. But we make sure you can refer to it to so you can see just how dishonest Doctor David Gorski MD is.
Contrary to Dr David Gorski’s contrived and dishonest claims, the admissions by Merck’s Director of Vaccines and U.S. government agencies that vaccines cause autistic conditions were not “all based on” autism caused by rubella infection. They were not based on that at all. And that is perfectly clear from the CHS article. So Gorski despite having found and read the CHS article clearly lied and did so deliberately and intentionally with a remarkable degree of dishonesty.
It is also plain for all to see that not only did the CHS article cover several known causes of autism and not just one [as the liar Dr Gorski claimed], but also the quotes admitting vaccines cause autism were in relation to further separate mechanisms by which that can happen.
In addition to that the CHS article quoted, cited and linked to original sources including a number of peer reviewed medical journal papers.
What is also notable is the causes of autism which Dr Gorski omitted are causes which he steadfastly has avoided referring to. It is difficult for him to deny the admissions made because they were made and the CHS article cited and linked to original sources showing that. That is another aspect of his dishonesty. He ignores completely evidence which goes against the political commercial views he publishes under contract on sciencebasedmedicine.org to support the drug industry and to support government officials in pressurising parents into giving dangerous unnecessary vaccines to their children.
But what it does show is that Dr Gorski knows those admitted causes are known real causes of vaccine-caused-autism. If he were to contradict that he would also have to claim Merck’s Director of Vaccines and US Government agencies were lying when they made those admissions – admissions which were against their interests [but definitely in the public interest]. So Gorski avoids acknowledging the admissions, but in doing so tacitly confirms he knows they are true.
But Gorski did not stop there. He lied also about it being improper of Dr Ratajczak to cite CHS in a peer reviewed journal. But it would have been improper for Dr Ratajczak to take the benefit of the work of others without citing CHS as the source. To do that would have been plagiarism.
Dr Ratajczak properly cited the source of the information, which itself cited original sources. So Gorski lied again. And of course Dr Gorski knows that.
This also addresses a further lie by Dr Gorski, that the peer review system of the journal concerned was in some way defective by allowing such a citation. Clearly, it was not and could not have been.
And that brings us to a final point. That one Gorski paragraph is comprised of 133 words, yet it contains at least 3 lies. So on that basis one might estimate 75 Gorski lies in just that one blog post of 3333 words. And he blogs 6 days a week under contract, so that could be around 450 Gorski lies a week. And over the course of a year it could be 22,500 lies p.a. making Dr Gorski quite an impressive liar by quantity. And if sciencebasedmedicine.org contains that many lies from just one author, how many other lies might there be, if any?
You should not hold your breath waiting for the Michigan Board of Medicine to do anything. But what this information does is raise the question: if one doctor can lie that much in one year and so blatantly and publicly and get away with it, how many other doctors and “scientists” are lying too? How many in the US Centers for Disease Control for example?
It is a serious matter when a medical doctor abuses the trusted status of a licensed medical professional to abuse bully disparage and attack others. It is worse when he uses that status and trusted position to lie about published medical research to make false claims intended to mislead and actively spread deliberate misinformation about medical knowledge whilst doing so to make false claims about others. It is even worse when he does it so publicly and routinely, publishing to mislead people worldwide and on a daily basis on the internet.
Here on CHS we examine just one deliberate intentional lie by Dr Gorski, the circumstances in which he made that lie and look at some implications. The lie we are interested in is published on the website sciencebasedmedicine.org. It is in an attack blog directed against investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson for her work exposing the scandal of vaccines causing autism in hundreds of thousands of US children. Dr David Gorski engages in his dishonest bullying conduct against a number of other people in the same blog post.
But first some background and we also invite readers to post comments here with other examples of Dr Gorski’s sciencebasedmedicine.org’s lies which they believe they have found to see if they can better our example.
Dr Gorski’s behaviour reveals him as a pseudoscientist and quack. And it indicates Dr Gorski may not be of good moral character – which is what his dishonesty suggests.
This kind of behaviour also brings all of modern medicine into disrepute and taints all medical doctors. Government health officials are able to avoid answering difficult questions hiding behind bloggers like Gorski who distract attention whilst spreading blatant misinformation and attacking wrongfully the characters and credibility of independently minded people who ask and even sometimes answer the questions health officials prefer to avoid.
It of course also tells the world about the website sciencebasedmedicine.org. Dr David Gorski is its Managing Editor. What are the other editors doing about Gorski’s deliberate lies and online bullying? Do they condone Dr Gorski’s behaviour? Have they done anything to stop it? Do they intend putting matters right? Gorski has been doing this kind of thing for many years.
The other editors are: Stephen P Novella; Kimball C. Atwood IV, MD; Mark A. Crislip, MD; Harriet Hall, MD; and Paul Ingraham (a former Registered Massage Therapist in Vancouver, Canada).
Are they liars too? We do not know about that because we have not considered any of their work. But if they do nothing then that tells you something about them.
Dr David Gorski seems to lie as a matter of routine. Worse still he asserts he relies on science when he is just lying. Gorski of course is not the only liar. On CHS we have highlighted other liars who have been caught lying blatantly, in some instances having to apologise and pay compensation.
So what are the implications of Gorski’s cyber bullying and lying under the requirements to be met by a licensed medical practitioner in the State of Michigan? [Dr Gorski practices medicine in Michigan].
The Michigan Board of Medicine appears to be responsible for enforcing for the practice of medicine the Public Health Code under Public Act 368 of 1978, as amended. Section 16221 contains a multitude of behaviours but lying appears to fall under a “lack of good moral character“. After all, if a licensed medical professional lies about medical knowledge to mislead others and so publicly that does not sound like someone of good moral character, does it?
But that is not all. If Dr Gorski advises and treats patients on the basis of the kind of defective untrue and misleading information he published on his blog then he may violate other requirements. Violations include negligence or failure to exercise due care as well as any conduct or practice that impairs, or may impair, the ability to safely and skillfully practice medicine. And it may also indicate a lack of competence to advise and treat patients in accordance with his obligations. Incompetence can be a violation. A mental inability reasonably related to and adversely affecting the licensee’s ability to practice in a safe and competent manner can also violate the Code. That raises the question of whether Dr Gorski’s psychological profile as revealed by his blogging activities and specifically his inability to be truthful about medical scientific matters makes him psychologically unfit to treat patients. That is not a question for CHS to answer but it would seem an appropriate question to ask.
So what did the liar Dr David Gorski do? He published one of his usual rambling articles on the sciencebasedmedicine.org website. It was 3333 words entitled “Anti-vaccine propaganda from Sharyl Attkisson of CBS News“ published on April 4, 2011.
You can see this was not a trivial matter. Gorski attacked a prominent US journalist along with a number of other people and he lied to do it. Ms Attkisson reported for CBS News on a peer reviewed journal paper published by Dr Helen Ratajczak. Ms Attkisson’s report included:
The article in the Journal of Immunotoxicology is entitled “Theoretical aspects of autism: Causes–A review.” The author is Helen Ratajczak, surprisingly herself a former senior scientist at a pharmaceutical firm. Ratajczak did what nobody else apparently has bothered to do: she reviewed the body of published science since autism was first described in 1943. Not just one theory suggested by research such as the role of MMR shots, or the mercury preservative thimerosal; but all of them.
Vaccines and autism: a new scientific review By Sharyl Attkisson CBS News April 1, 2011
This is the part of Dr David Gorski’s article in which the lie appears and it is a significant lie:
And she cites the anti-vaccine blog Child Health Safety as one of her references? The date of the CHS entry cited is June 30, 2010. All I could find wasthis entry, which purports to argue that both Merck’s Director of Vaccines and the U.S. government have admitted that vaccines cause autism all based on the long known science showing that a maternal case of rubella while carrying a fetus can result in autism in the child, something that’s been known for several decades and is in fact one reason why vaccination against rubella is so important. How on earth did this get through peer review. Obviously, the peer reviewers of Dr. Ratajczak’s article were either completely ignorant of the background science (and therefore unqualified) or asleep at the switch.“
Notice our emphasis added to just three words “all based on“. Dr Gorski chose those words to make sure his lie would be all the more convincing. Those three words show how deliberate and calculated Dr Gorski was being in his lying and dishonesty.
And just to make sure we are comparing apples with apples, this is the CHS article Dr Gorski lied about Vaccination Causes Autism – Say US Government & Merck’s Director of Vaccines as it appeared when Dr Gorski wrote his blog post in April 2011.
Notice how in his article Dr Gorski admits he found and read the article. There is no mistake. And of course Dr Gorski was making claims intended to damage the reputations of Ms Attkisson and Dr Ratajczak among others. So it was deliberate, intentional and to cause harm to others. And it was bullying cyber abuse.
Now what you can also see here is that Dr Gorski not only lied about the CHS article but he also lied about a number of other things [and this is just looking at the one paragraph] and all for the purposes of attacking Ms Attkisson and Dr Ratajczak.
Most people do not click on links in blog posts. But this particular Gorski lie would be one CHS would know to be a lie without needing to refer to the CHS article concerned. But we make sure you can refer to it to so you can see just how dishonest Doctor David Gorski MD is.
Contrary to Dr David Gorski’s contrived and dishonest claims, the admissions by Merck’s Director of Vaccines and U.S. government agencies that vaccines cause autistic conditions were not “all based on” autism caused by rubella infection. They were not based on that at all. And that is perfectly clear from the CHS article. So Gorski despite having found and read the CHS article clearly lied and did so deliberately and intentionally with a remarkable degree of dishonesty.
It is also plain for all to see that not only did the CHS article cover several known causes of autism and not just one [as the liar Dr Gorski claimed], but also the quotes admitting vaccines cause autism were in relation to further separate mechanisms by which that can happen.
In addition to that the CHS article quoted, cited and linked to original sources including a number of peer reviewed medical journal papers.
What is also notable is the causes of autism which Dr Gorski omitted are causes which he steadfastly has avoided referring to. It is difficult for him to deny the admissions made because they were made and the CHS article cited and linked to original sources showing that. That is another aspect of his dishonesty. He ignores completely evidence which goes against the political commercial views he publishes under contract on sciencebasedmedicine.org to support the drug industry and to support government officials in pressurising parents into giving dangerous unnecessary vaccines to their children.
But what it does show is that Dr Gorski knows those admitted causes are known real causes of vaccine-caused-autism. If he were to contradict that he would also have to claim Merck’s Director of Vaccines and US Government agencies were lying when they made those admissions – admissions which were against their interests [but definitely in the public interest]. So Gorski avoids acknowledging the admissions, but in doing so tacitly confirms he knows they are true.
But Gorski did not stop there. He lied also about it being improper of Dr Ratajczak to cite CHS in a peer reviewed journal. But it would have been improper for Dr Ratajczak to take the benefit of the work of others without citing CHS as the source. To do that would have been plagiarism.
Dr Ratajczak properly cited the source of the information, which itself cited original sources. So Gorski lied again. And of course Dr Gorski knows that.
This also addresses a further lie by Dr Gorski, that the peer review system of the journal concerned was in some way defective by allowing such a citation. Clearly, it was not and could not have been.
And that brings us to a final point. That one Gorski paragraph is comprised of 133 words, yet it contains at least 3 lies. So on that basis one might estimate 75 Gorski lies in just that one blog post of 3333 words. And he blogs 6 days a week under contract, so that could be around 450 Gorski lies a week. And over the course of a year it could be 22,500 lies p.a. making Dr Gorski quite an impressive liar by quantity. And if sciencebasedmedicine.org contains that many lies from just one author, how many other lies might there be, if any?
You should not hold your breath waiting for the Michigan Board of Medicine to do anything. But what this information does is raise the question: if one doctor can lie that much in one year and so blatantly and publicly and get away with it, how many other doctors and “scientists” are lying too? How many in the US Centers for Disease Control for example?
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7172
Reputation : 2603
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 29
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry
by lizardking Mon Feb 01, 2016 4:47 am
Death Rate Drops During Doctor Strike
www.heart-disease-bypass-surgery.com/data/articles/67.htm
The June 10, 2000 issue of the British Medical journal reports on an interesting statistic that has occurred in Israel. It seems that three months ago physicians in public hospitals implemented a program of sanctions in response to a labor dispute over a contract proposal by the government. The article stated that the Israel Medical Association began an action in March to protest against the treasurys proposed imposition of a new four year wage contract for doctors. Since then, the medical doctors have cancelled hundreds of thousands of visits to outpatient clinics and have postponed tens of thousands of elective operations.
To find out whether the industrial action was affecting deaths in the country, the Jerusalem Post interviewed non-profit making Jewish burial societies, which perform funerals for the vast majority of Israelis. Hananya Shahor, the veteran director of Jerusalems Kehilat Yerushalayim burial society said, "The number of funerals we have performed has fallen drastically." Meir Adler, manager of the Shamgar Funeral Parlour, which buries most other residents of Jerusalem, declared with much more certainty: "There definitely is a connection between the doctors sanctions and fewer deaths. We saw the same thing in 1983 when the Israel Medical Association applied sanctions for four and a half months."
In response Avi Yisraeli, director general of the Hadassah Medical Organization, offered his own explanation, "Mortality is not the only measure of harm to health." He goes on to say that, "Elective surgery can bring about a great improvement in a patients condition, but it can also mean disability and death in the weakest patients."
Doctor-Caused Disease
By Monte Kline
One of the most common causes of disease (if not the most common cause) is conventional medical doctors! Sad, but too often true. The medical term coined to describe this problem is iatrogenic disease, from the Greek "iatros" meaning physician and "genesis" meaning origin. Thus we have doctor-caused disease.
Specifically, iatrogenic disease is defined as:
Any adverse reaction, either major or minor, to a medical or surgical treatment.
The late Robert Mendelsohn, M.D., while Chairman of the Medical Licensing Committee for the State of Illinois and Associate Professor of Preventive Medicine and Community Health at the University of Illinois School of Medicine, wrote:
. . . the greatest danger to your health is the doctor who practices Modern Medicine. I believe that Modern Medicine's treatments for disease are seldom effective, and that they're often more dangerous than the diseases they're designed to treat . . . I believe that more than 90% of Modern Medicine could disappear from the face of the earth-doctors, hospital, drugs, and equipment-and the effect on our health would be immediate and beneficial.
DOCTORS ON STRIKE
Whenever medical doctors go on strike, a most interesting phenomenon occurs - death rates go down! In 1976 in Bogota, Columbia medical doctors went on strike for 52 days, with only emergency care available. The death rate dropped by 35%. In 1976 in Los Angeles County a similar doctors' strike resulted in an 18% drop in mortality. As soon as the strike was over, the death rate went back to normal. A 50% decrease in mortality occurred in Israel in 1973 when there was a one month doctor's strike!
HEALTH CARE CUTBACKS
Since the early 1980's we've heard a lot about the impact of "managed care" and health care cutbacks. Medical doctors and political liberals are screaming that people are dying for lack of services. Actually, just the opposite is true. Since the "downsizing" of conventional medical services in the 1980's, life expectancy has made a massive jump both in the U. S. and Canada. No drug therapy and surgical technique can be shown to have statistically increased the general life expectancy. No generation has had its life expectancy increased significantly since medical doctors began using chemical treatments. Researchers John and Sonja McKinlay found that medical intervention only accounted for 1 - 3.5% of the increase in the average lifespan in the U. S. since 1900.
DANGEROUS DRUGS
Alternative cancer treatment authority, Dr. Ralph Moss, notes that a 1999 article in The Journal of The American Medical Association stated that prescription drugs kill over 100,000 people per year in U. S. hospitals. The F.D.A. noted that back in 1978 1.5 million Americans were hospitalized as a result of taking medical drugs. One in seven hospital beds is taken up by patients suffering from adverse drug reactions. The General Accounting Office stated that 51.5% of all drugs introduced between 1976 and 1985 had to be relabelled because of serious adverse reactions found after the marketing of these drugs - reactions like heart, liver or kidney failure, birth defects, blood disorders, respiratory arrest, seizures, and blindness.
DRUG COMPANY BRIBERY
Most people are not aware that drugs companies spend thousands of dollars per year on each medical doctor "selling" them on using their particular products. Drug companies hire "detail men" to visit physicians' offices and give them drug samples. These salesmen, who are not doctors and have no medical or pharmacological training, tell your medical doctor what drugs to use for what problems. Drug companies start this process early by offering medical students gifts, free trips to "conferences," and free "educational material," which translated means propaganda on that drug company's products. In Australia drug companies spend an average of $10,000 per year per physician marketing their products. The result of all of this is a massive overprescribing of drugs.
The drug companies don't stop with just practicing M.D.s, though, but also direct major dollars toward hospitals, medical schools and supposedly "independent" research institutes. Medical schools, for example, are given grants for clinical trials, pharmaceutical research, or even buildings. These companies have sought to gain massive influence over medical teaching institutions by spreading their money around. Dr. Alan Levin, Adjunct Associate Professor of Immunology and Dermatology at the University of California states:
Pharmaceutical companies, by enlisting the aid of influential academic physicians, have gained control of the practice of medicine in the United States. They now set the standards of practice by hiring investigators to perform studies which establish the efficacy of their products or impugn that of their competitors. . .
HAZARDS OF HOSPITALIZATION
Hospitals are a hotbed of iatrogenic disease. Every year two million people are admitted to hospitals with one health problem and end up with another health problem! According to Dr. Mendelsohn these doctor-caused illnesses kill as many as 20,000 people annually. A study in the Southern Medical Journal reported that one in five patients admitted to a university hospital acquires an iatrogenic disease, and one in thirty of these lead to death. Of these iatrogenic deaths, half are complications of drug therapy and 10% result from improper diagnostic procedures.
Another study of 815 consecutive patients in a university hospital over an eight month period found that 36% had a disease caused by their doctor - in 2% of the cases the iatrogenic disease was believed to be a cause of the patient's death.
If you project that figure out, assuming 2% of all hospital patients die from an iatrogenic disease, you get 700,000 hospital/doctor-caused deaths per year - one third of all deaths!
HOSPITAL INFECTIONS
In the 1840's Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis directed a teaching hospital in Vienna, where 75% of the women giving birth were dying of puerperal fever. He observed that doctors went from dissecting cadavers to delivering babies without washing their hands. Dr. Semmelweis made the "radical" policy change of requiring doctors to wash their hands before delivery a baby. An amazing thing happened - the mortality rate drop fifteen-fold. Unfortunately, his arrogant colleagues couldn't see the connection, so they dismissed him and ostracized him. The rejection ultimately drove Semmelweis to death in an insane asylum - another great moment in the history of iatrogenic disease.
But doctors are enlightened nowadays about sanitation, aren't they? A 1981 study of washing habits in intensive care units found that only 28% of the doctors washed between patients in a teaching hospital and only 14% washed in the private hospital! Dr. Mendelsohn noted:
. . . the sanitary practices of the medical personnel are often abominable and the hospital itself is probably the most germ-laden facility in town.
Your chances of getting an infection in the hospital are one in 20 with 15,000 people dying annually from hospital-acquired infections.
SURGERY
Dr. Arthur Mannix, Jr. declared in an article in the New York State Journal of Medicine:
Errors in judgment or technique concerning either the anesthesia or the surgery, or a combination of the two, contribute to close to 50% of the deaths in the operating room.
I think what that translates to is that disease is only responsible for 50% of the deaths on the operating table, while doctors are responsible for the other 50% of deaths.
The McCarthy-Widmer study in the New England Journal of Medicine noted the following:
1. 20% of all surgery is unnecessary.
2. This unnecessary surgery costs consumers over $3 billion per year.
3. There are 2.4 million unnecessary operations annually.
4. This unnecessary surgery results in 12,000 unnecessary deaths each year.
Another study showed that when a second specialist was consulted, 18% of the time he disagreed with doing the surgery.
Hysterectomies are the most common operation today with nearly one million done per year. In six New York hospitals 43% of their hysterectomies were found on review to have been unjustified. Women with abnormal bleeding from the uterus or heavy menstrual blood flow were given the operation though other treatments or none at all would probably have worked as well.
PROTECTING YOURSELF FROM DOCTORS
"Doctors in general should be treated with about the same degree of trust as used car salesmen."
- Robert Mendelsohn, M.D.
1. Caveat emptor - "Let the buyer beware." Don't assume your doctor knows everything, or that he or she necessarily knows what's best for you. Use your doctor like your lawyer or CPA - someone to give you counsel with you making the final decision.
2. Don't panic with sickness - Sickness is an opportunity to learn about your body's needs and to seek God's direction. Remember the story of King Asa in the Old Testament who died because he only sought the physicians instead of first seeking the Lord for his illness (II Chron. 16:12).
3. Avoid treating symptoms - There would be little iatrogenic disease if people were not so intent on treating symptoms. Instead you must get down to root causes, which usually means lifesytle change.
4. Don't "quick fix" pain - Get over the idea that pain is something that has to be immediately eliminated at any cost. That view encourages a lot of symptom treatment and resulting drug iatrogenesis. Pain is a warning that something's wrong. Again, seek to fix the underlying cause and that will fix the pain.
5. Seek appropriate health care services - The old saying says: Never ask a barber if you need a haircut. Don't expect anything but a prescription drug for symptoms when you go to a medical doctor. If you want to deal with underlying causes, go to the appropriate natural medicine doctor. Of course, if you have an emergency situation or some type of acute problem, conventional medicine is best equipped to deal with that.
6. Stimulate natural healing, don't sabotage it - Symptom treatments, like the frequent use of antibiotics, destroy your natural immunity, and thus open the door for more iatrogenic problems. Focus on detoxifying, correcting nutrient deficiencies, allergic desensitizing, and exercise to free up your body to heal itself.
www.heart-disease-bypass-surgery.com/data/articles/67.htm
The June 10, 2000 issue of the British Medical journal reports on an interesting statistic that has occurred in Israel. It seems that three months ago physicians in public hospitals implemented a program of sanctions in response to a labor dispute over a contract proposal by the government. The article stated that the Israel Medical Association began an action in March to protest against the treasurys proposed imposition of a new four year wage contract for doctors. Since then, the medical doctors have cancelled hundreds of thousands of visits to outpatient clinics and have postponed tens of thousands of elective operations.
To find out whether the industrial action was affecting deaths in the country, the Jerusalem Post interviewed non-profit making Jewish burial societies, which perform funerals for the vast majority of Israelis. Hananya Shahor, the veteran director of Jerusalems Kehilat Yerushalayim burial society said, "The number of funerals we have performed has fallen drastically." Meir Adler, manager of the Shamgar Funeral Parlour, which buries most other residents of Jerusalem, declared with much more certainty: "There definitely is a connection between the doctors sanctions and fewer deaths. We saw the same thing in 1983 when the Israel Medical Association applied sanctions for four and a half months."
In response Avi Yisraeli, director general of the Hadassah Medical Organization, offered his own explanation, "Mortality is not the only measure of harm to health." He goes on to say that, "Elective surgery can bring about a great improvement in a patients condition, but it can also mean disability and death in the weakest patients."
Doctor-Caused Disease
By Monte Kline
One of the most common causes of disease (if not the most common cause) is conventional medical doctors! Sad, but too often true. The medical term coined to describe this problem is iatrogenic disease, from the Greek "iatros" meaning physician and "genesis" meaning origin. Thus we have doctor-caused disease.
Specifically, iatrogenic disease is defined as:
Any adverse reaction, either major or minor, to a medical or surgical treatment.
The late Robert Mendelsohn, M.D., while Chairman of the Medical Licensing Committee for the State of Illinois and Associate Professor of Preventive Medicine and Community Health at the University of Illinois School of Medicine, wrote:
. . . the greatest danger to your health is the doctor who practices Modern Medicine. I believe that Modern Medicine's treatments for disease are seldom effective, and that they're often more dangerous than the diseases they're designed to treat . . . I believe that more than 90% of Modern Medicine could disappear from the face of the earth-doctors, hospital, drugs, and equipment-and the effect on our health would be immediate and beneficial.
DOCTORS ON STRIKE
Whenever medical doctors go on strike, a most interesting phenomenon occurs - death rates go down! In 1976 in Bogota, Columbia medical doctors went on strike for 52 days, with only emergency care available. The death rate dropped by 35%. In 1976 in Los Angeles County a similar doctors' strike resulted in an 18% drop in mortality. As soon as the strike was over, the death rate went back to normal. A 50% decrease in mortality occurred in Israel in 1973 when there was a one month doctor's strike!
HEALTH CARE CUTBACKS
Since the early 1980's we've heard a lot about the impact of "managed care" and health care cutbacks. Medical doctors and political liberals are screaming that people are dying for lack of services. Actually, just the opposite is true. Since the "downsizing" of conventional medical services in the 1980's, life expectancy has made a massive jump both in the U. S. and Canada. No drug therapy and surgical technique can be shown to have statistically increased the general life expectancy. No generation has had its life expectancy increased significantly since medical doctors began using chemical treatments. Researchers John and Sonja McKinlay found that medical intervention only accounted for 1 - 3.5% of the increase in the average lifespan in the U. S. since 1900.
DANGEROUS DRUGS
Alternative cancer treatment authority, Dr. Ralph Moss, notes that a 1999 article in The Journal of The American Medical Association stated that prescription drugs kill over 100,000 people per year in U. S. hospitals. The F.D.A. noted that back in 1978 1.5 million Americans were hospitalized as a result of taking medical drugs. One in seven hospital beds is taken up by patients suffering from adverse drug reactions. The General Accounting Office stated that 51.5% of all drugs introduced between 1976 and 1985 had to be relabelled because of serious adverse reactions found after the marketing of these drugs - reactions like heart, liver or kidney failure, birth defects, blood disorders, respiratory arrest, seizures, and blindness.
DRUG COMPANY BRIBERY
Most people are not aware that drugs companies spend thousands of dollars per year on each medical doctor "selling" them on using their particular products. Drug companies hire "detail men" to visit physicians' offices and give them drug samples. These salesmen, who are not doctors and have no medical or pharmacological training, tell your medical doctor what drugs to use for what problems. Drug companies start this process early by offering medical students gifts, free trips to "conferences," and free "educational material," which translated means propaganda on that drug company's products. In Australia drug companies spend an average of $10,000 per year per physician marketing their products. The result of all of this is a massive overprescribing of drugs.
The drug companies don't stop with just practicing M.D.s, though, but also direct major dollars toward hospitals, medical schools and supposedly "independent" research institutes. Medical schools, for example, are given grants for clinical trials, pharmaceutical research, or even buildings. These companies have sought to gain massive influence over medical teaching institutions by spreading their money around. Dr. Alan Levin, Adjunct Associate Professor of Immunology and Dermatology at the University of California states:
Pharmaceutical companies, by enlisting the aid of influential academic physicians, have gained control of the practice of medicine in the United States. They now set the standards of practice by hiring investigators to perform studies which establish the efficacy of their products or impugn that of their competitors. . .
HAZARDS OF HOSPITALIZATION
Hospitals are a hotbed of iatrogenic disease. Every year two million people are admitted to hospitals with one health problem and end up with another health problem! According to Dr. Mendelsohn these doctor-caused illnesses kill as many as 20,000 people annually. A study in the Southern Medical Journal reported that one in five patients admitted to a university hospital acquires an iatrogenic disease, and one in thirty of these lead to death. Of these iatrogenic deaths, half are complications of drug therapy and 10% result from improper diagnostic procedures.
Another study of 815 consecutive patients in a university hospital over an eight month period found that 36% had a disease caused by their doctor - in 2% of the cases the iatrogenic disease was believed to be a cause of the patient's death.
If you project that figure out, assuming 2% of all hospital patients die from an iatrogenic disease, you get 700,000 hospital/doctor-caused deaths per year - one third of all deaths!
HOSPITAL INFECTIONS
In the 1840's Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis directed a teaching hospital in Vienna, where 75% of the women giving birth were dying of puerperal fever. He observed that doctors went from dissecting cadavers to delivering babies without washing their hands. Dr. Semmelweis made the "radical" policy change of requiring doctors to wash their hands before delivery a baby. An amazing thing happened - the mortality rate drop fifteen-fold. Unfortunately, his arrogant colleagues couldn't see the connection, so they dismissed him and ostracized him. The rejection ultimately drove Semmelweis to death in an insane asylum - another great moment in the history of iatrogenic disease.
But doctors are enlightened nowadays about sanitation, aren't they? A 1981 study of washing habits in intensive care units found that only 28% of the doctors washed between patients in a teaching hospital and only 14% washed in the private hospital! Dr. Mendelsohn noted:
. . . the sanitary practices of the medical personnel are often abominable and the hospital itself is probably the most germ-laden facility in town.
Your chances of getting an infection in the hospital are one in 20 with 15,000 people dying annually from hospital-acquired infections.
SURGERY
Dr. Arthur Mannix, Jr. declared in an article in the New York State Journal of Medicine:
Errors in judgment or technique concerning either the anesthesia or the surgery, or a combination of the two, contribute to close to 50% of the deaths in the operating room.
I think what that translates to is that disease is only responsible for 50% of the deaths on the operating table, while doctors are responsible for the other 50% of deaths.
The McCarthy-Widmer study in the New England Journal of Medicine noted the following:
1. 20% of all surgery is unnecessary.
2. This unnecessary surgery costs consumers over $3 billion per year.
3. There are 2.4 million unnecessary operations annually.
4. This unnecessary surgery results in 12,000 unnecessary deaths each year.
Another study showed that when a second specialist was consulted, 18% of the time he disagreed with doing the surgery.
Hysterectomies are the most common operation today with nearly one million done per year. In six New York hospitals 43% of their hysterectomies were found on review to have been unjustified. Women with abnormal bleeding from the uterus or heavy menstrual blood flow were given the operation though other treatments or none at all would probably have worked as well.
PROTECTING YOURSELF FROM DOCTORS
"Doctors in general should be treated with about the same degree of trust as used car salesmen."
- Robert Mendelsohn, M.D.
1. Caveat emptor - "Let the buyer beware." Don't assume your doctor knows everything, or that he or she necessarily knows what's best for you. Use your doctor like your lawyer or CPA - someone to give you counsel with you making the final decision.
2. Don't panic with sickness - Sickness is an opportunity to learn about your body's needs and to seek God's direction. Remember the story of King Asa in the Old Testament who died because he only sought the physicians instead of first seeking the Lord for his illness (II Chron. 16:12).
3. Avoid treating symptoms - There would be little iatrogenic disease if people were not so intent on treating symptoms. Instead you must get down to root causes, which usually means lifesytle change.
4. Don't "quick fix" pain - Get over the idea that pain is something that has to be immediately eliminated at any cost. That view encourages a lot of symptom treatment and resulting drug iatrogenesis. Pain is a warning that something's wrong. Again, seek to fix the underlying cause and that will fix the pain.
5. Seek appropriate health care services - The old saying says: Never ask a barber if you need a haircut. Don't expect anything but a prescription drug for symptoms when you go to a medical doctor. If you want to deal with underlying causes, go to the appropriate natural medicine doctor. Of course, if you have an emergency situation or some type of acute problem, conventional medicine is best equipped to deal with that.
6. Stimulate natural healing, don't sabotage it - Symptom treatments, like the frequent use of antibiotics, destroy your natural immunity, and thus open the door for more iatrogenic problems. Focus on detoxifying, correcting nutrient deficiencies, allergic desensitizing, and exercise to free up your body to heal itself.
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7172
Reputation : 2603
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 29
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry
by lizardking Mon Feb 01, 2016 2:17 pm
Britain’s Politicians That Corrupt Democracy
Back in February this year, a debate about MP’s second jobs dominated Prime Minister’s Questions, after an undercover investigation involving former Foreign Ministers Jack Straw, Sir Malcolm Rifkind and a bogus Chinese company. David Cameron said having people with outside interests made for a “stronger Parliament”.
The former Foreign Secretaries were filmed discussing possible payments of up to £5,000 a day for using their contacts and experience to benefit a private company in a sting by Channel 4’s Dispatches and the Telegraph in what was termed ‘cash for access’.
Both men reported themselves to the Parliamentary Standards Committee, with Straw saying he had fallen into a “very clever trap” and Rifkind acknowledging his comments had been “silly.”
However, it is not unusual for MP’s to find themselves in these kinds of circumstances nowadays. More than 100 MPs declare additional employment in the Register of Members’ Interests, without including things such as occasional TV appearances, book royalties and giving speeches. Of the 108 MPs counted using this methodology, 17 are Labour and 80 are Conservatives, according to BBC Analysis and Research.
Analysis of official data by Statista for The Independent shows that British MPs earned more than £7 million in total outside their parliamentary wages last year, with Tories accounting for the largest proportion.
MPs with the most lucrative earnings from jobs outside of politics contribute to fewer parliamentary debates, are absent for more votes and submit fewer written questions than other Members of Parliament, a report suggests.
The report reveals these high-earning politicians have participated in 22 percent fewer debates than their parliamentary peers since March 2014.
It indicated that Britain’s top-earning MPs tendered almost 40 percent fewer written questions than their colleagues who do not have second jobs. Additionally, the high-earning MPs failed to turn up for 373 votes on average – a significantly higher absentee rate than their parliamentary colleagues, the report said.
At this point, one can make assumptions or come to conclusions about how ethical second jobs for MP’s really are. You might come to the conclusion that the salary is not enough to entice the very best quality of individuals for such an important role, you might think they earn enough, or even, too much. From here though, there is a more sinister reason for peering into this opaque world of MP’s earnings and this is just one example.
In November last year, a ‘dossier of disgrace’ was published by Unite, Britain’s biggest union. It revealed that 71 MPs from the coalition government of 2010 to 2015 had links to private healthcare interests who voted to sell-off or privatise the National Health Service.
Len McCluskey, Unite general secretary said:
The report uncovered 64 Tory and 7 Liberal Democrat MPs who had recent or current financial links to companies or individuals trying to profit from the sell-off of the NHS. All of them voted for the Health and Social Care Act, which created a legal mechanism to force commissioners to put NHS services up for sale. To say that this is a conflict of interest would be a very severe understatement of fact.
The report is damning and delves deeply into the commercial links these named MP’s have. For instance, we focus on just one from the report; Andrew Lansley – former health secretary and recently awarded a life peerage.
John Nash, the former chairman of Care UK, gave £21,000 to fund Andrew Lansley’s personal office in November 2009 when he was shadow health secretary and preparing the White paper that led to the health and Social care bill. Care UK confirmed that 96 per cent of Care UK’s business, which amounted to more than £400 million last year, came from the NHS. Hedge fund boss John Nash is a regular Conservative donor with close ties to the healthcare industry. John Nash and his wife Caroline gave £203,500 to the party over the past five years. He is also a founder of City firm Sovereign Capital, which runs a string of private healthcare firms. Andrew Lansley received a donation from Julian Schild used to support his office in his capacity as Shadow secretary for health. Julian Schild’s family made £184 million in 2006 by selling hospital bed-makers Huntleigh Technology.
Andrew Lansley’s wife, Sally Low, is founder and managing director of Low Associates. A Daily Telegraph report in February records that the Low Associateswebsite lists pharmaceuticals companies SmithKline Beecham, Unilever and P&G among its clients. It also records Ms Low’s assertion that the company “does not work with any client who has interests in the health sector”. The website currently contains no reference to the drug firms listed above. In addition, Christina Lineen, a former Head of Communications at private health company Circle spent two years working for Lansley, when a shadow health secretary.
John Nash was eventually appointed education minister, then made a life peer, now Baron Nash and has already attracted controversy with some influential decisions upon public life.
Current health secretary Jeremy Hunt, also used to an investigation or two, received two donations to his constituency office from hedge fund boss Andrew Law. Law has donated over £600,000 to the Tories and his firm holds multi-million healthcare investments.
These examples demonstrate that politicians have little respect for the Ministerial Code which, is supposed to be a code of ethics and procedural guidance for ministers, introduced as a result of the first report by the committee on standards in public life in 1995, which is revised every parliament. It is based on the seven principles of public life: selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership – almost universally rejected by today’s politicians.
Does it get any better in the European Union? No really, this from Corporate Observatory – “Conflicts of interest continue to plague the European Parliament one year after elections”, finds new research released today’.
The report from Friends of the Earth Europe, Corporate Europe Observatory and LobbyControl, focuses on just nine cases of MEPs who have other jobs while holding public office. All nine MEPs hold paid positions in companies or business associations that directly or indirectly lobby EU decision-makers on current legislative files. The cases include parliamentarians from Poland, Italy, Germany, Belgium, France, the UK, Denmark and Austria – some of which had already given rise to concerns in the last parliamentary term.
Paul de Clerck of Friends of the Earth Europe said: “It is not acceptable that MEPs work for companies that are at the same time lobbying the EU. This undermines public trust in law-making and the integrity of the European Parliament. MEPs should be their electorate’s representative, not industry’s representative.”
The report authors point out that the existing code of conduct for MEPs, introduced in 2012, is insufficiently enforced and riddled with loopholes so that problematic cases keep arising.
Olivier Hoedeman from Corporate Europe Observatory said: “Voters deserve better than a weak code of conduct that has done very little to end the problem of undue influence and potential conflicts of interest. Parliament’s President Martin Schulz should act on this now and show citizens that he’s serious about tackling this threat to democracy.”
Nina Katzemich from LobbyControl said:
The aforementioned Mr Straw with his near-doubling of former MP’s pay with what he calls a “very fine, old established” commodity firm, for whom he has, (he explained to the undercover reporters) secured tweaks to sugar-refining regulations in the EU demonstrates just how insecure democracy is.
If politicians have an expectation that they can be hired or contracted out, it is inevitable that fraud and corruption will be ever-present in the end. This is now self evident with the continuing scale of scandals involving MP’s and MEP’s.
Paid-for politics has already got a grip. The private sector would have sacked employees with undisclosed conflicts of interest such as these. The principle should exist that MPs will not expect to be paid beyond their salary for intervening in public life. The problem is that the very people who could enforce this, the lawmakers, are themselves profiting in exactly these same ways.
Back in February this year, a debate about MP’s second jobs dominated Prime Minister’s Questions, after an undercover investigation involving former Foreign Ministers Jack Straw, Sir Malcolm Rifkind and a bogus Chinese company. David Cameron said having people with outside interests made for a “stronger Parliament”.
The former Foreign Secretaries were filmed discussing possible payments of up to £5,000 a day for using their contacts and experience to benefit a private company in a sting by Channel 4’s Dispatches and the Telegraph in what was termed ‘cash for access’.
Both men reported themselves to the Parliamentary Standards Committee, with Straw saying he had fallen into a “very clever trap” and Rifkind acknowledging his comments had been “silly.”
However, it is not unusual for MP’s to find themselves in these kinds of circumstances nowadays. More than 100 MPs declare additional employment in the Register of Members’ Interests, without including things such as occasional TV appearances, book royalties and giving speeches. Of the 108 MPs counted using this methodology, 17 are Labour and 80 are Conservatives, according to BBC Analysis and Research.
Analysis of official data by Statista for The Independent shows that British MPs earned more than £7 million in total outside their parliamentary wages last year, with Tories accounting for the largest proportion.
MPs with the most lucrative earnings from jobs outside of politics contribute to fewer parliamentary debates, are absent for more votes and submit fewer written questions than other Members of Parliament, a report suggests.
The report reveals these high-earning politicians have participated in 22 percent fewer debates than their parliamentary peers since March 2014.
It indicated that Britain’s top-earning MPs tendered almost 40 percent fewer written questions than their colleagues who do not have second jobs. Additionally, the high-earning MPs failed to turn up for 373 votes on average – a significantly higher absentee rate than their parliamentary colleagues, the report said.
At this point, one can make assumptions or come to conclusions about how ethical second jobs for MP’s really are. You might come to the conclusion that the salary is not enough to entice the very best quality of individuals for such an important role, you might think they earn enough, or even, too much. From here though, there is a more sinister reason for peering into this opaque world of MP’s earnings and this is just one example.
In November last year, a ‘dossier of disgrace’ was published by Unite, Britain’s biggest union. It revealed that 71 MPs from the coalition government of 2010 to 2015 had links to private healthcare interests who voted to sell-off or privatise the National Health Service.
Len McCluskey, Unite general secretary said:
“The sheer scale of this conflict of interest is staggering, but it is the ongoing sell-off of our NHS that makes this the real scandal for our democracy”. He added; “In another attempt to ignore the view of the people of Britain David Cameron is still refusing to use his veto and exempt the NHS from a US EU trade deal called TTIP. What is our NHS doing in a trade deal with America? This again exposes the Government’s real plan for the NHS – complete and irreversible privatisation.”
The report uncovered 64 Tory and 7 Liberal Democrat MPs who had recent or current financial links to companies or individuals trying to profit from the sell-off of the NHS. All of them voted for the Health and Social Care Act, which created a legal mechanism to force commissioners to put NHS services up for sale. To say that this is a conflict of interest would be a very severe understatement of fact.
The report is damning and delves deeply into the commercial links these named MP’s have. For instance, we focus on just one from the report; Andrew Lansley – former health secretary and recently awarded a life peerage.
John Nash, the former chairman of Care UK, gave £21,000 to fund Andrew Lansley’s personal office in November 2009 when he was shadow health secretary and preparing the White paper that led to the health and Social care bill. Care UK confirmed that 96 per cent of Care UK’s business, which amounted to more than £400 million last year, came from the NHS. Hedge fund boss John Nash is a regular Conservative donor with close ties to the healthcare industry. John Nash and his wife Caroline gave £203,500 to the party over the past five years. He is also a founder of City firm Sovereign Capital, which runs a string of private healthcare firms. Andrew Lansley received a donation from Julian Schild used to support his office in his capacity as Shadow secretary for health. Julian Schild’s family made £184 million in 2006 by selling hospital bed-makers Huntleigh Technology.
Andrew Lansley’s wife, Sally Low, is founder and managing director of Low Associates. A Daily Telegraph report in February records that the Low Associateswebsite lists pharmaceuticals companies SmithKline Beecham, Unilever and P&G among its clients. It also records Ms Low’s assertion that the company “does not work with any client who has interests in the health sector”. The website currently contains no reference to the drug firms listed above. In addition, Christina Lineen, a former Head of Communications at private health company Circle spent two years working for Lansley, when a shadow health secretary.
John Nash was eventually appointed education minister, then made a life peer, now Baron Nash and has already attracted controversy with some influential decisions upon public life.
Current health secretary Jeremy Hunt, also used to an investigation or two, received two donations to his constituency office from hedge fund boss Andrew Law. Law has donated over £600,000 to the Tories and his firm holds multi-million healthcare investments.
These examples demonstrate that politicians have little respect for the Ministerial Code which, is supposed to be a code of ethics and procedural guidance for ministers, introduced as a result of the first report by the committee on standards in public life in 1995, which is revised every parliament. It is based on the seven principles of public life: selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership – almost universally rejected by today’s politicians.
Does it get any better in the European Union? No really, this from Corporate Observatory – “Conflicts of interest continue to plague the European Parliament one year after elections”, finds new research released today’.
The report from Friends of the Earth Europe, Corporate Europe Observatory and LobbyControl, focuses on just nine cases of MEPs who have other jobs while holding public office. All nine MEPs hold paid positions in companies or business associations that directly or indirectly lobby EU decision-makers on current legislative files. The cases include parliamentarians from Poland, Italy, Germany, Belgium, France, the UK, Denmark and Austria – some of which had already given rise to concerns in the last parliamentary term.
Paul de Clerck of Friends of the Earth Europe said: “It is not acceptable that MEPs work for companies that are at the same time lobbying the EU. This undermines public trust in law-making and the integrity of the European Parliament. MEPs should be their electorate’s representative, not industry’s representative.”
The report authors point out that the existing code of conduct for MEPs, introduced in 2012, is insufficiently enforced and riddled with loopholes so that problematic cases keep arising.
Olivier Hoedeman from Corporate Europe Observatory said: “Voters deserve better than a weak code of conduct that has done very little to end the problem of undue influence and potential conflicts of interest. Parliament’s President Martin Schulz should act on this now and show citizens that he’s serious about tackling this threat to democracy.”
Nina Katzemich from LobbyControl said:
“Three years after the code of conduct was adopted, there are still many MEPs with potential conflicts of interest and dubious declarations of financial interest. It is high time for an overhaul. We demand the parliament bans all side jobs in companies or associations that try to influence EU legislation.”
The aforementioned Mr Straw with his near-doubling of former MP’s pay with what he calls a “very fine, old established” commodity firm, for whom he has, (he explained to the undercover reporters) secured tweaks to sugar-refining regulations in the EU demonstrates just how insecure democracy is.
If politicians have an expectation that they can be hired or contracted out, it is inevitable that fraud and corruption will be ever-present in the end. This is now self evident with the continuing scale of scandals involving MP’s and MEP’s.
Paid-for politics has already got a grip. The private sector would have sacked employees with undisclosed conflicts of interest such as these. The principle should exist that MPs will not expect to be paid beyond their salary for intervening in public life. The problem is that the very people who could enforce this, the lawmakers, are themselves profiting in exactly these same ways.
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7172
Reputation : 2603
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 29
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry
by lizardking Mon Feb 01, 2016 2:18 pm
Autism and the Health Impacts of Monsanto Glyphosate Roundup on Children, Research Scientist at MIT
Why? Evidence points to glyphosate toxicity from the overuse of Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide on our food.
For over three decades, Stephanie Seneff, PhD, has researched biology and technology, over the years publishing over 170 scholarly peer-reviewed articles. In recent years she has concentrated on the relationship between nutrition and health, tackling such topics as Alzheimer’s, autism, and cardiovascular diseases, as well as the impact of nutritional deficiencies and environmental toxins on human health.
At a conference last Thursday, in a special panel discussion about GMOs, she took the audience by surprise when she declared, “At today’s rate, by 2025, one in two children will be autistic.” She noted that the side effects of autism closely mimic those of glyphosate toxicity, and presented data showing a remarkably consistent correlation between the use of Roundup on crops (and the creation of Roundup-ready GMO crop seeds) with rising rates of autism. Children with autism have biomarkers indicative of excessive glyphosate, including zinc and iron deficiency, low serum sulfate, seizures, and mitochondrial disorder.
A fellow panelist reported that after Dr. Seneff’s presentation, “All of the 70 or so people in attendance were squirming, likely because they now had serious misgivings about serving their kids, or themselves, anything with corn or soy, which are nearly all genetically modified and thus tainted with Roundup and its glyphosate.”
Dr. Seneff noted the ubiquity of glyphosate’s use. Because it is used on corn and soy, all soft drinks and candies sweetened with corn syrup and all chips and cereals that contain soy fillers have small amounts of glyphosate in them, as do our beef and poultry since cattle and chicken are fed GMO corn or soy. Wheat is often sprayed with Roundup just prior to being harvested, which means that all non-organic bread and wheat products would also be sources of glyphosate toxicity. The amount of glyphosate in each product may not be large, but the cumulative effect (especially with as much processed food as Americans eat) could be devastating. A recent study shows that pregnant women living near farms where pesticides are applied have a 60% increased risk of children having an autism spectrum disorder.
Other toxic substances may also be autism-inducing. You may recall our story on the CDC whistleblower who revealed the government’s deliberate concealment of the link between the MMR vaccine (for measles, mumps, and rubella) and a sharply increased risk of autism, particularly in African American boys. Other studies now show a link between children’s exposure to pesticides and autism. Children who live in homes with vinyl floors, which can emit phthalate chemicals, are more likely to have autism. Children whose mothers smoked were also twice as likely to have autism. Research now acknowledges that environmental contaminants such as PCBs, PBDEs, and mercury can alter brain neuron functioning even before a child is born.
This month, the USDA released a study finding that although there were detectable levels of pesticide residue in more than half of food tested by the agency, 99% of samples taken were found to be within levels the government deems safe, and 40% were found to have no detectable trace of pesticides at all. The USDA added, however, that due to “cost concerns,” it did not test for residues of glyphosate. Let’s repeat that: they never tested for the active ingredient in the most widely used herbicide in the world. “Cost concerns”? How absurd—unless they mean it will cost them too much in terms of the special relationship between the USDA and Monsanto. You may recall the revolving door between Monsanto and the federal government, with agency officials becoming high-paying executives—and vice versa! Money, power, prestige: it’s all there. Monsanto and the USDA love to scratch each others’ backs. Clearly this omission was purposeful.
In addition, as we have previously reported, the number of adverse reactions from vaccines can be correlated as well with autism, though Seneff says it doesn’t correlate quite as closely as with Roundup. The same correlations between applications of glyphosate and autism show up in deaths from senility.
Of course, autism is a complex problem with many potential causes. Dr. Seneff’s data, however, is particularly important considering how close the correlation is—and because it is coming from a scientist with impeccable credentials. Earlier this year, she spoke at the Autism One conference and presented many of the same facts; that presentation is available on YouTube.
Monsanto claims that Roundup is harmless to humans. Bacteria, fungi, algae, parasites, and plants use a seven-step metabolic route known as the shikimate pathway for the biosynthesis of aromatic amino acids; glyphosate inhibits this pathway, causing the plant to die, which is why it’s so effective as an herbicide. Monsanto says humans don’t have this shikimate pathway, so it’s perfectly safe.
Dr. Seneff points out, however, that our gut bacteria do have this pathway, and that’s crucial because these bacteria supply our body with crucial amino acids. Roundup thus kills beneficial gut bacteria, allowing pathogens to grow; interferes with the synthesis of amino acids including methionine, which leads to shortages in critical neurotransmitters and folate; chelates (removes) important minerals like iron, cobalt and manganese; and much more.
Even worse, she notes, additional chemicals in Roundup are untested because they’re classified as “inert,” yet according to a 2014 study in BioMed Research International, these chemicals are capable of amplifying the toxic effects of Roundup hundreds of times over.
Glyphosate is present in unusually high quantities in the breast milk of American mothers, at anywhere from 760 to 1,600 times the allowable limits in European drinking water. Urine testing shows Americans have ten times the glyphosate accumulation as Europeans.
“In my view, the situation is almost beyond repair,” Dr. Seneff said after her presentation. “We need to do something drastic.”
Why? Evidence points to glyphosate toxicity from the overuse of Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide on our food.
For over three decades, Stephanie Seneff, PhD, has researched biology and technology, over the years publishing over 170 scholarly peer-reviewed articles. In recent years she has concentrated on the relationship between nutrition and health, tackling such topics as Alzheimer’s, autism, and cardiovascular diseases, as well as the impact of nutritional deficiencies and environmental toxins on human health.
At a conference last Thursday, in a special panel discussion about GMOs, she took the audience by surprise when she declared, “At today’s rate, by 2025, one in two children will be autistic.” She noted that the side effects of autism closely mimic those of glyphosate toxicity, and presented data showing a remarkably consistent correlation between the use of Roundup on crops (and the creation of Roundup-ready GMO crop seeds) with rising rates of autism. Children with autism have biomarkers indicative of excessive glyphosate, including zinc and iron deficiency, low serum sulfate, seizures, and mitochondrial disorder.
A fellow panelist reported that after Dr. Seneff’s presentation, “All of the 70 or so people in attendance were squirming, likely because they now had serious misgivings about serving their kids, or themselves, anything with corn or soy, which are nearly all genetically modified and thus tainted with Roundup and its glyphosate.”
Dr. Seneff noted the ubiquity of glyphosate’s use. Because it is used on corn and soy, all soft drinks and candies sweetened with corn syrup and all chips and cereals that contain soy fillers have small amounts of glyphosate in them, as do our beef and poultry since cattle and chicken are fed GMO corn or soy. Wheat is often sprayed with Roundup just prior to being harvested, which means that all non-organic bread and wheat products would also be sources of glyphosate toxicity. The amount of glyphosate in each product may not be large, but the cumulative effect (especially with as much processed food as Americans eat) could be devastating. A recent study shows that pregnant women living near farms where pesticides are applied have a 60% increased risk of children having an autism spectrum disorder.
Other toxic substances may also be autism-inducing. You may recall our story on the CDC whistleblower who revealed the government’s deliberate concealment of the link between the MMR vaccine (for measles, mumps, and rubella) and a sharply increased risk of autism, particularly in African American boys. Other studies now show a link between children’s exposure to pesticides and autism. Children who live in homes with vinyl floors, which can emit phthalate chemicals, are more likely to have autism. Children whose mothers smoked were also twice as likely to have autism. Research now acknowledges that environmental contaminants such as PCBs, PBDEs, and mercury can alter brain neuron functioning even before a child is born.
This month, the USDA released a study finding that although there were detectable levels of pesticide residue in more than half of food tested by the agency, 99% of samples taken were found to be within levels the government deems safe, and 40% were found to have no detectable trace of pesticides at all. The USDA added, however, that due to “cost concerns,” it did not test for residues of glyphosate. Let’s repeat that: they never tested for the active ingredient in the most widely used herbicide in the world. “Cost concerns”? How absurd—unless they mean it will cost them too much in terms of the special relationship between the USDA and Monsanto. You may recall the revolving door between Monsanto and the federal government, with agency officials becoming high-paying executives—and vice versa! Money, power, prestige: it’s all there. Monsanto and the USDA love to scratch each others’ backs. Clearly this omission was purposeful.
In addition, as we have previously reported, the number of adverse reactions from vaccines can be correlated as well with autism, though Seneff says it doesn’t correlate quite as closely as with Roundup. The same correlations between applications of glyphosate and autism show up in deaths from senility.
Of course, autism is a complex problem with many potential causes. Dr. Seneff’s data, however, is particularly important considering how close the correlation is—and because it is coming from a scientist with impeccable credentials. Earlier this year, she spoke at the Autism One conference and presented many of the same facts; that presentation is available on YouTube.
Monsanto claims that Roundup is harmless to humans. Bacteria, fungi, algae, parasites, and plants use a seven-step metabolic route known as the shikimate pathway for the biosynthesis of aromatic amino acids; glyphosate inhibits this pathway, causing the plant to die, which is why it’s so effective as an herbicide. Monsanto says humans don’t have this shikimate pathway, so it’s perfectly safe.
Dr. Seneff points out, however, that our gut bacteria do have this pathway, and that’s crucial because these bacteria supply our body with crucial amino acids. Roundup thus kills beneficial gut bacteria, allowing pathogens to grow; interferes with the synthesis of amino acids including methionine, which leads to shortages in critical neurotransmitters and folate; chelates (removes) important minerals like iron, cobalt and manganese; and much more.
Even worse, she notes, additional chemicals in Roundup are untested because they’re classified as “inert,” yet according to a 2014 study in BioMed Research International, these chemicals are capable of amplifying the toxic effects of Roundup hundreds of times over.
Glyphosate is present in unusually high quantities in the breast milk of American mothers, at anywhere from 760 to 1,600 times the allowable limits in European drinking water. Urine testing shows Americans have ten times the glyphosate accumulation as Europeans.
“In my view, the situation is almost beyond repair,” Dr. Seneff said after her presentation. “We need to do something drastic.”
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7172
Reputation : 2603
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 29
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry
by lizardking Mon Feb 01, 2016 2:19 pm
Post by ramsus
I have been studying the concepts of permaculture for several years, and nature itself for most of my life. Through my studies I have realized that nature allways strives for equilibrium, something that is allways achieved whereever nature is being left along. When walking in the forest, you never see much damage due to disease, pests, nutrient defficiancy or drought. Everything is in perfect balance. If you, on the other hand, go to a farm and watch the farmer, you see that his struggle starts the moment he puts the plow in the soil and continues throughout the growing season until he can harvest, a situation that is even more explisit in the modern industrial agriculture. The desertification process that took more than 3000 years of intensive agriculture in ancient Egypt, has been achieved in under 200 years in the American midwest, that today is a defacto desert, only kept artificially "alive" by massive amounts of artificial fertilizers and water..
Nature does not have good/bad properties, its mechanisms are designed to preserve life and stay in balance. The same can be observed with the lifeforms of nature. Question is if we understand these mechanisms and are able to abide by these absolute laws. Now, some 6 years ago, I stumbled across a medical paradigm that went straight under my skin, and I experienced a deep sense of finding truth. This doctrine described a completely new view of health and disease that fit perfectly into my view of nature and natures laws, and summed it up in 5 biological laws of nature. It replaced the concept of "disease/pathology" with the concept of sensible and explainable "processes" with the aim to preserve life, not destroy it! After studying this model for some time, ordering and studying the scientific chart, I have completely subscribed to the doctrine of "German New Medicine". And in my experience with it for 4-5 years, is that it holds 100% accuracy both with respect to cause, symptoms and prognosis!
Check it out. Do not believe a word they say, but test the hypothesis yourself. Remember, Dr. Hamer postulates laws of nature, wich means that absolutely every case must follow the principles of the 5 biological laws. I'm linking a website in english, as well as a monumental 4 and a half hour film in German, with subtitles in English, as well as a lecture dubbed in English. Enjoy!
http://www.newmedicine.ca/
PS. Please read up on Dr. Hamer and note the Ad Hominem nature of the attacks on him. Also note that his five biological laws are never discussed or refuted, but rather taken out of context and described as some sort of therapy where you do nothing. He is subjected to classical character assasination where his scientific findings are never discussed. He was ever refused a peer review from his university, something that has never happened before in the institutions 500 year history!
I have been studying the concepts of permaculture for several years, and nature itself for most of my life. Through my studies I have realized that nature allways strives for equilibrium, something that is allways achieved whereever nature is being left along. When walking in the forest, you never see much damage due to disease, pests, nutrient defficiancy or drought. Everything is in perfect balance. If you, on the other hand, go to a farm and watch the farmer, you see that his struggle starts the moment he puts the plow in the soil and continues throughout the growing season until he can harvest, a situation that is even more explisit in the modern industrial agriculture. The desertification process that took more than 3000 years of intensive agriculture in ancient Egypt, has been achieved in under 200 years in the American midwest, that today is a defacto desert, only kept artificially "alive" by massive amounts of artificial fertilizers and water..
Nature does not have good/bad properties, its mechanisms are designed to preserve life and stay in balance. The same can be observed with the lifeforms of nature. Question is if we understand these mechanisms and are able to abide by these absolute laws. Now, some 6 years ago, I stumbled across a medical paradigm that went straight under my skin, and I experienced a deep sense of finding truth. This doctrine described a completely new view of health and disease that fit perfectly into my view of nature and natures laws, and summed it up in 5 biological laws of nature. It replaced the concept of "disease/pathology" with the concept of sensible and explainable "processes" with the aim to preserve life, not destroy it! After studying this model for some time, ordering and studying the scientific chart, I have completely subscribed to the doctrine of "German New Medicine". And in my experience with it for 4-5 years, is that it holds 100% accuracy both with respect to cause, symptoms and prognosis!
Check it out. Do not believe a word they say, but test the hypothesis yourself. Remember, Dr. Hamer postulates laws of nature, wich means that absolutely every case must follow the principles of the 5 biological laws. I'm linking a website in english, as well as a monumental 4 and a half hour film in German, with subtitles in English, as well as a lecture dubbed in English. Enjoy!
http://www.newmedicine.ca/
PS. Please read up on Dr. Hamer and note the Ad Hominem nature of the attacks on him. Also note that his five biological laws are never discussed or refuted, but rather taken out of context and described as some sort of therapy where you do nothing. He is subjected to classical character assasination where his scientific findings are never discussed. He was ever refused a peer review from his university, something that has never happened before in the institutions 500 year history!
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7172
Reputation : 2603
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 29
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry
by lizardking Mon Feb 01, 2016 2:19 pm
David Gorski’s Financial Pharma Ties: What He Didn’t Tell You
His motto is “A statement of fact cannot be insolent,” yet the title of his blog reads “Respectful Insolence.” In other words, even he admits there are no facts on his blog.
He has become the online spokesperson for the vaccine industry, a member of the highly trafficked, drug-industry-sponsored “Science” Blogs where he heavily promotes the tobacco science obscuring causes of autism. Posting under the science fiction name “Orac,” David Gorski has become the most outspoken, self-styled “skeptic” in defense of mercury that exceeds EPA limits in vaccines. Another example of a cause of autism he vehemently denies is the MMR - the triple, combined live-virus vaccine implicated in measles virus infection in the ileum, peripheral blood mononuclear cells, and cerebrospinal fluid of children who have autistic enterocolitis.
In case anybody’s wondering what David Gorski’s connection is to the autism debate, he has undisclosed financial ties to the vaccine industry. He has made no mention of these connections, despite stating in one of his many defenses of millionaire vaccine industrialist Paul Offit, “A general principle is that undisclosed potential conflicts of interest (COIs) are of far more concern and potentially far more damaging to the scientific process than disclosed COIs.” However, Gorski has steadfastly denied possessing any conflicts, having once told me online without my even accusing him, “You are wrong. I receive no money from pharmaceutical companies and haven’t for 14 years.”
Well, it so happens Sanofi-Aventis – the world’s largest vaccine maker - is involved in several partnerships under which the company may be required to pay a total of €31 million ($39 million USD) from 2008 to 2013. Gorski’s employer, Wayne State University, is one of the partners, and he is conducting a clinical trial of one of the company’s drugs. Therefore, like Offit (who concealed the millions he received in Merck royalty payments because Merck paid the royalties to a third party, not Offit directly) Gorski has a reasonable expectation to receive money from a vaccine maker, even if it is through a third party. A look at the summary description of the Gorski Lab reveals that his research focus is drug discovery and development. However, he is not developing a new drug, but rather, developing new uses for an existing one. Such a process is far more profitable to the drug manufacturer as it eliminates the costs of developing a new substance from scratch, thereby maximizing profits for the company.
The potentially profitable drug Gorski is in the process of conducting a clinical trial for is the ALS drug Riluzole, made by Sanofi-Aventis and marketed as Rilutek. Amplifying the conflict further is that the same drug is also being studied for the treatment of autism. At Autism One, the National Institute of Mental Health was handing out recruitment pamphlets for children ages 7-17 to take part as subjects in a clinical trial of Riluzole for its effectiveness in the treatment of autism spectrum disorders, and repetitive and stereotypical behaviors in particular. Apparently, David Gorski has had his eye on that drug for a long time, but as a possible treatment for breast cancer. As suggested by a 2008-2009 webpage of a breast cancer website:
“Three years ago in another cancer (melanoma), Dr. Gorski's collaborators found that glutamate might have a role in promoting the transformation of the pigmented cells in the skin (melanocytes) into the deadly skin cancer melanoma. More importantly for therapy, it was found that this protein can be blocked with drugs, and, specifically, in melanoma cell lines and tumor models of melanoma using a drug originally designed to treat ALS and already FDA-approved for that indication (Riluzole) can inhibit the growth of melanoma.” HERE
Subtract three years from 2008-2009 and you get 2005-2006 – when David Gorski started blogging heavily about vaccines. Currently, the Barbara Anne Karmanos Cancer Institute of Wayne State University is sponsoring the trial for Riluzole, and Wayne State is the only university listed in the Yahoo! Finance stock summary of Sanofi-Aventis as being in a financial partnership with the company. Sanofi-Aventis owns Sanofi-Pasteur, the second largest manufacturer of vaccines in the world, including both thimerosal-preserved vaccines, and MMR vaccines. (Its first MMR vaccine, Immravax, was banned for causing viral meningitis in children.) David Gorski, while up front about the direct funding he received from drug companies 14 years ago for a patent as well as the funding he has received from the various institutions with which he has been affiliated, has not been up front about funding from drug companies received through his institution. According to the drug company’s website in 2008, “Sanofi-Aventis has entered into various other collaboration agreements with partners including Immunogen, Coley, Wayne State University, Innogenetics and Inserm, under which Sanofi-Aventis may be required to make total contingent payments of approximately €31 million over the next five years.” This is the same year it was announced that David Gorski would carry out a series of clinical trials for the company and its drug, Riluzole. HERE
In fact, one of the two primary interests of the Gorski lab is this Sanofi-Aventis drug. In the Wayne state description, the lab’s two interests are described, “First, we are interested in the transcriptional regulation of vascular endothelial cell phenotype.” Worth noting is that a patent relating to this was issued listing David Gorski as an inventor. In his blog bio, Gorski admits receiving money for the patent in 1994 from a drug company, but that was only during the provisional filing before the patent was issued. Whatever the compensation was, its timing does not suggest any licensing of the intellectual property rights.
Also, according to the Gorski lab, “Our second area of interest is the role of metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluRs) in breast cancer,” which relates directly to the therapy linking the use of Riluzole to breast cancer treatment. However, the description concludes, “In addition, we have noted that mGluR1 is expressed on vascular endothelial cells and have preliminary evidence that its inhibition is also antiangiogenic, thus linking our laboratory’s two interests and suggesting a broader application for metabotropic glutamate receptor targeting in cancer therapy.” In other words, David Gorski’s entire research focus, including a patent still listed in his name for which he admits receiving drug company money, ties into finding new uses for a drug made by Sanofi-Aventis, while the university housing his lab is in partnership with the company. HERE
In spite of this easily-accessible information about his drug industry ties, Gorski’s denial of being in the pocket of the drug industry stretches so far beyond what he is even regularly accused of, that he will from time to time actually post a handful of links to the few token, laughably transparent posts out of the thousands he’s written which are at all critical of the drug industry. None concerned ongoing, unresolved controversies such as those surrounding autism, and none are critical of Sanofi. To David Gorski, Sanofi-Aventis is apparently untouchable. When a fellow blogger wrote a post entitled “Placing a vaccine order with crooks and liars” - questioning the government’s reliance on Sanofi-Aventis developing a swine flu vaccine just after the company was forced to pay nearly $100 million in compensation for cheating Medicaid, David Gorski was not amused. “Jumpin' Jesus on a pogo stick. The antivaccine nuts will have a field day with this,” he yelped.
The blogger responded, “orac: Meaning we shouldn't call them on it?” David Gorski chastised even his fellow blogger: “I would have hoped that you would realize that that's not what I meant at all to the point where you wouldn't have even asked a question like that, but apparently I was wrong. I didn't realize your opinion of me was so low.” Apparently, the public image of Sanofi-Aventis is more important to Gorski than the fact that disabled people, including those with autism, were cheated out of millions of dollars.
His actual profession may have nothing to do with the disorder, but Sanofi-Aventis certainly plays a major role in the autism epidemic. So blogging like the kind Gorski has been engaged in would undoubtedly win him some major brownie points with the pharmaceutical company. This could be very beneficial to a researcher like him, given that he is conducting a clinical trial of Sanofi-Aventis’ drug while his employer is in a Sanofi-Aventis partnership that could be worth millions. Meanwhile, he is trashing alternative therapies for autism when the drug he is conducting a clinical trial on may become a treatment for autism. How none of this could be considered undisclosed COIs to David Gorski--while Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s connection to lawyers in relation to the retracted case report from the Lancet is a “fatal” COI--is absolutely bizarre. Gorski makes no mention of his current connections to the drug industry on his blog, including the possible application the drug he is focused on may have to autism.
Yet a number of years back, David Gorski wrote on his blog as “Orac,” “Yes, in the case of a true ‘shill’ who does not reveal that he works for a pharmaceutical company and pretends to be ‘objective,’ it is quite appropriate to ‘out’ that person.” From reading this, one would think David Gorski would be happy to know that his undisclosed connections to Sanofi-Aventis – one of the largest vaccine makers in the world - have just been outed.
So I e-mailed him:
Dr. Gorski,
This is Jake Crosby. I am doing a piece about your acknowledgment that disclosure of conflicts of interest is important, yet your lab at Wayne State University stands to benefit from Sanofi Aventis money for the breast cancer research you are conducting on a drug the company manufactures and markets, Riluzole, which is also being studied for the treatment of autism. Why isn't any of this disclosed on your blogs? I await your reply.
Sincerely,
Jake Crosby
Age of Autism
Contributing Editor with Autism
www.ageofautism.com/jake-crosby/
David Gorski, a.k.a. “Orac,” of “Science”Blogs/-BasedMedicine replied the next morning with a short, excuse-filled response:
“A more comprehensive answer will be forthcoming when I have more time, probably by tomorrow. (I have to go to work now, and because we have house guests, I will be busy when I get back.) In the meantime, suffice it to say that I receive no money from Sanofi-Aventis, nor am I likely to.
David”
He did not address my question at all; perhaps he was too busy cooking breakfast for his house guests. I never said he received any money from Sanofi-Aventis, only that his lab stood to benefit from such money since the company is in a partnership with his lab’s university, Wayne State, which is sponsoring Gorski’s clinical trial of Riluzole.
Two days later came his “more comprehensive answer.” If Dr. Jekyll wrote his previous email, Mr. Hyde wrote:
“My answer is here:
www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=5627
Since you were obviously preparing to do to me what you've done in the past with, for example, Adam Bly, Gardiner Harris, and Chris Mooney, I decided that the best defense is a good offense and that a public preemptive response was demanded.
When you write your piece, link to it if you dare. If there's one thing about AoA that I find despicable and cowardly, it's that they refuse to link to me when they slime me. J.B. is particularly guilty of this. I link to AoA because I'm not afraid of my readers going to the primary source. Are you?
David”
I’ll let the editors at Age of Autism decide whether they want to include the link or not. Age of Autism is comprised of original material that Gorski is heavily dependent on for his fits; he’s a scavenger. Plus, all our readers are perfectly capable of accessing his tantrums anyway.
Moving on to his post, it is essentially a huge rant divided up into five sections, the first of which can be summed up by this sentence: “It’s far easier for [quacks and pseudoscientists] just to put their fingers in their ears and scream ‘Conflict of interest! Conflict of interest!’ and then use that to dismiss completely their opponent’s argument.”
In fact, that’s basically the whole point of the first three sections. I have never advocated this in any of my articles, and I invite him to point out a specific example of where I have either in his case or in another example of my posts. He even lied that I accused Seed Media founder Adam Bly of being influenced by Sanofi-Aventis while he was studying at the Canadian National Research Council – I never alleged any such thing.
I do agree with him, however, that this is the proper way to take into account conflicts of interest: “…if a study is funded by big pharma, he decreases the strength of the evidence in his mind by a set amount.” That said, I do believe that conflicts of interest whenever present should be brought up, like that of Gardiner Harris, who violated the ethical guidelines of The New York Times by failing to disclose that his brother sells lab equipment to pharmaceutical companies. David Gorski does not seem to think so, despite agreeing with me that pharmaceutical funding does decrease the strength of evidence. My question for him: Which is it?
In the fourth section, Gorski congratulates himself for the research that is related to his Sanofi-Aventis connections. He brags, “If it passes clinical trials, it may well be a very useful drug for potentiating the effects of other cancer therapies, such as chemotherapy and radiation.” Beyond Gorski’s blogging about autism and his undisclosed COI, as J.B. Handley put it, “I could care less about Mr. Gorski or his career.”
Moving on to the final section, he sums up his basis for denying he has a conflict of interest:
“First, I would have to be receiving money from Sanofi-Aventis. I am not.”
I never said he was, only that Sanofi-Aventis is in a partnership with his university, which in turn is sponsoring his clinical trial of Sanofi’s drug, Riluzole.
“Second, I would have to have the reasonable expectation to receive money from Sanofi-Aventis. I do not.”
Though he may not expect to receive money from Sanofi-Aventis directly, he can expect to receive money that Sanofi has paid to his employer, Wayne State.
“I’m not even angling for money from Sanofi-Aventis to run my lab.”
He doesn’t have to; his university does the angling for him.
“Third, I would have to know that Riluzole is being tested as a treatment for autistic children.”
It does not matter if he did not know Riluzole was being studied to treat autism, he would still have a COI.
“In any case, even if I had known [of Riluzole as a possible treatment for ASD], it still wouldn’t have been a COI. I’m not a neurologist, and I don’t treat ASD or OCD. I’m never going to be doing research with Riluzole in children with ASD, OCD, or both.” Even though he does not treat autism, and even though he is not a neurologist, he still has a conflict of interest because of his Sanofi ties and the fact that he blogs about autism causes and treatments all the time.
What ultimately matters is that David Gorski is conducting a clinical trial of a Sanofi-Aventis drug (undisclosed to his readers), sponsored by his Sanofi-Aventis-partnered university (also undisclosed to his readers), and he constantly writes blog posts that are favorable to Sanofi-Aventis. To show just how important Sanofi is to Gorski, he even said in the comments section that if the drug fails his clinical trial for breast cancer, it would be a “major setback” for his research. Yet, instead of conceding that he is conflicted in this way, he attempts to talk his way out of the points I raised in the 84-word e-mail I sent to him with a 4,562-word smokescreen, followed by another 20,915 words from his loyal commenters.
His motto is “A statement of fact cannot be insolent,” yet the title of his blog reads “Respectful Insolence.” In other words, even he admits there are no facts on his blog.
He has become the online spokesperson for the vaccine industry, a member of the highly trafficked, drug-industry-sponsored “Science” Blogs where he heavily promotes the tobacco science obscuring causes of autism. Posting under the science fiction name “Orac,” David Gorski has become the most outspoken, self-styled “skeptic” in defense of mercury that exceeds EPA limits in vaccines. Another example of a cause of autism he vehemently denies is the MMR - the triple, combined live-virus vaccine implicated in measles virus infection in the ileum, peripheral blood mononuclear cells, and cerebrospinal fluid of children who have autistic enterocolitis.
In case anybody’s wondering what David Gorski’s connection is to the autism debate, he has undisclosed financial ties to the vaccine industry. He has made no mention of these connections, despite stating in one of his many defenses of millionaire vaccine industrialist Paul Offit, “A general principle is that undisclosed potential conflicts of interest (COIs) are of far more concern and potentially far more damaging to the scientific process than disclosed COIs.” However, Gorski has steadfastly denied possessing any conflicts, having once told me online without my even accusing him, “You are wrong. I receive no money from pharmaceutical companies and haven’t for 14 years.”
Well, it so happens Sanofi-Aventis – the world’s largest vaccine maker - is involved in several partnerships under which the company may be required to pay a total of €31 million ($39 million USD) from 2008 to 2013. Gorski’s employer, Wayne State University, is one of the partners, and he is conducting a clinical trial of one of the company’s drugs. Therefore, like Offit (who concealed the millions he received in Merck royalty payments because Merck paid the royalties to a third party, not Offit directly) Gorski has a reasonable expectation to receive money from a vaccine maker, even if it is through a third party. A look at the summary description of the Gorski Lab reveals that his research focus is drug discovery and development. However, he is not developing a new drug, but rather, developing new uses for an existing one. Such a process is far more profitable to the drug manufacturer as it eliminates the costs of developing a new substance from scratch, thereby maximizing profits for the company.
The potentially profitable drug Gorski is in the process of conducting a clinical trial for is the ALS drug Riluzole, made by Sanofi-Aventis and marketed as Rilutek. Amplifying the conflict further is that the same drug is also being studied for the treatment of autism. At Autism One, the National Institute of Mental Health was handing out recruitment pamphlets for children ages 7-17 to take part as subjects in a clinical trial of Riluzole for its effectiveness in the treatment of autism spectrum disorders, and repetitive and stereotypical behaviors in particular. Apparently, David Gorski has had his eye on that drug for a long time, but as a possible treatment for breast cancer. As suggested by a 2008-2009 webpage of a breast cancer website:
“Three years ago in another cancer (melanoma), Dr. Gorski's collaborators found that glutamate might have a role in promoting the transformation of the pigmented cells in the skin (melanocytes) into the deadly skin cancer melanoma. More importantly for therapy, it was found that this protein can be blocked with drugs, and, specifically, in melanoma cell lines and tumor models of melanoma using a drug originally designed to treat ALS and already FDA-approved for that indication (Riluzole) can inhibit the growth of melanoma.” HERE
Subtract three years from 2008-2009 and you get 2005-2006 – when David Gorski started blogging heavily about vaccines. Currently, the Barbara Anne Karmanos Cancer Institute of Wayne State University is sponsoring the trial for Riluzole, and Wayne State is the only university listed in the Yahoo! Finance stock summary of Sanofi-Aventis as being in a financial partnership with the company. Sanofi-Aventis owns Sanofi-Pasteur, the second largest manufacturer of vaccines in the world, including both thimerosal-preserved vaccines, and MMR vaccines. (Its first MMR vaccine, Immravax, was banned for causing viral meningitis in children.) David Gorski, while up front about the direct funding he received from drug companies 14 years ago for a patent as well as the funding he has received from the various institutions with which he has been affiliated, has not been up front about funding from drug companies received through his institution. According to the drug company’s website in 2008, “Sanofi-Aventis has entered into various other collaboration agreements with partners including Immunogen, Coley, Wayne State University, Innogenetics and Inserm, under which Sanofi-Aventis may be required to make total contingent payments of approximately €31 million over the next five years.” This is the same year it was announced that David Gorski would carry out a series of clinical trials for the company and its drug, Riluzole. HERE
In fact, one of the two primary interests of the Gorski lab is this Sanofi-Aventis drug. In the Wayne state description, the lab’s two interests are described, “First, we are interested in the transcriptional regulation of vascular endothelial cell phenotype.” Worth noting is that a patent relating to this was issued listing David Gorski as an inventor. In his blog bio, Gorski admits receiving money for the patent in 1994 from a drug company, but that was only during the provisional filing before the patent was issued. Whatever the compensation was, its timing does not suggest any licensing of the intellectual property rights.
Also, according to the Gorski lab, “Our second area of interest is the role of metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluRs) in breast cancer,” which relates directly to the therapy linking the use of Riluzole to breast cancer treatment. However, the description concludes, “In addition, we have noted that mGluR1 is expressed on vascular endothelial cells and have preliminary evidence that its inhibition is also antiangiogenic, thus linking our laboratory’s two interests and suggesting a broader application for metabotropic glutamate receptor targeting in cancer therapy.” In other words, David Gorski’s entire research focus, including a patent still listed in his name for which he admits receiving drug company money, ties into finding new uses for a drug made by Sanofi-Aventis, while the university housing his lab is in partnership with the company. HERE
In spite of this easily-accessible information about his drug industry ties, Gorski’s denial of being in the pocket of the drug industry stretches so far beyond what he is even regularly accused of, that he will from time to time actually post a handful of links to the few token, laughably transparent posts out of the thousands he’s written which are at all critical of the drug industry. None concerned ongoing, unresolved controversies such as those surrounding autism, and none are critical of Sanofi. To David Gorski, Sanofi-Aventis is apparently untouchable. When a fellow blogger wrote a post entitled “Placing a vaccine order with crooks and liars” - questioning the government’s reliance on Sanofi-Aventis developing a swine flu vaccine just after the company was forced to pay nearly $100 million in compensation for cheating Medicaid, David Gorski was not amused. “Jumpin' Jesus on a pogo stick. The antivaccine nuts will have a field day with this,” he yelped.
The blogger responded, “orac: Meaning we shouldn't call them on it?” David Gorski chastised even his fellow blogger: “I would have hoped that you would realize that that's not what I meant at all to the point where you wouldn't have even asked a question like that, but apparently I was wrong. I didn't realize your opinion of me was so low.” Apparently, the public image of Sanofi-Aventis is more important to Gorski than the fact that disabled people, including those with autism, were cheated out of millions of dollars.
His actual profession may have nothing to do with the disorder, but Sanofi-Aventis certainly plays a major role in the autism epidemic. So blogging like the kind Gorski has been engaged in would undoubtedly win him some major brownie points with the pharmaceutical company. This could be very beneficial to a researcher like him, given that he is conducting a clinical trial of Sanofi-Aventis’ drug while his employer is in a Sanofi-Aventis partnership that could be worth millions. Meanwhile, he is trashing alternative therapies for autism when the drug he is conducting a clinical trial on may become a treatment for autism. How none of this could be considered undisclosed COIs to David Gorski--while Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s connection to lawyers in relation to the retracted case report from the Lancet is a “fatal” COI--is absolutely bizarre. Gorski makes no mention of his current connections to the drug industry on his blog, including the possible application the drug he is focused on may have to autism.
Yet a number of years back, David Gorski wrote on his blog as “Orac,” “Yes, in the case of a true ‘shill’ who does not reveal that he works for a pharmaceutical company and pretends to be ‘objective,’ it is quite appropriate to ‘out’ that person.” From reading this, one would think David Gorski would be happy to know that his undisclosed connections to Sanofi-Aventis – one of the largest vaccine makers in the world - have just been outed.
So I e-mailed him:
Dr. Gorski,
This is Jake Crosby. I am doing a piece about your acknowledgment that disclosure of conflicts of interest is important, yet your lab at Wayne State University stands to benefit from Sanofi Aventis money for the breast cancer research you are conducting on a drug the company manufactures and markets, Riluzole, which is also being studied for the treatment of autism. Why isn't any of this disclosed on your blogs? I await your reply.
Sincerely,
Jake Crosby
Age of Autism
Contributing Editor with Autism
www.ageofautism.com/jake-crosby/
David Gorski, a.k.a. “Orac,” of “Science”Blogs/-BasedMedicine replied the next morning with a short, excuse-filled response:
“A more comprehensive answer will be forthcoming when I have more time, probably by tomorrow. (I have to go to work now, and because we have house guests, I will be busy when I get back.) In the meantime, suffice it to say that I receive no money from Sanofi-Aventis, nor am I likely to.
David”
He did not address my question at all; perhaps he was too busy cooking breakfast for his house guests. I never said he received any money from Sanofi-Aventis, only that his lab stood to benefit from such money since the company is in a partnership with his lab’s university, Wayne State, which is sponsoring Gorski’s clinical trial of Riluzole.
Two days later came his “more comprehensive answer.” If Dr. Jekyll wrote his previous email, Mr. Hyde wrote:
“My answer is here:
www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=5627
Since you were obviously preparing to do to me what you've done in the past with, for example, Adam Bly, Gardiner Harris, and Chris Mooney, I decided that the best defense is a good offense and that a public preemptive response was demanded.
When you write your piece, link to it if you dare. If there's one thing about AoA that I find despicable and cowardly, it's that they refuse to link to me when they slime me. J.B. is particularly guilty of this. I link to AoA because I'm not afraid of my readers going to the primary source. Are you?
David”
I’ll let the editors at Age of Autism decide whether they want to include the link or not. Age of Autism is comprised of original material that Gorski is heavily dependent on for his fits; he’s a scavenger. Plus, all our readers are perfectly capable of accessing his tantrums anyway.
Moving on to his post, it is essentially a huge rant divided up into five sections, the first of which can be summed up by this sentence: “It’s far easier for [quacks and pseudoscientists] just to put their fingers in their ears and scream ‘Conflict of interest! Conflict of interest!’ and then use that to dismiss completely their opponent’s argument.”
In fact, that’s basically the whole point of the first three sections. I have never advocated this in any of my articles, and I invite him to point out a specific example of where I have either in his case or in another example of my posts. He even lied that I accused Seed Media founder Adam Bly of being influenced by Sanofi-Aventis while he was studying at the Canadian National Research Council – I never alleged any such thing.
I do agree with him, however, that this is the proper way to take into account conflicts of interest: “…if a study is funded by big pharma, he decreases the strength of the evidence in his mind by a set amount.” That said, I do believe that conflicts of interest whenever present should be brought up, like that of Gardiner Harris, who violated the ethical guidelines of The New York Times by failing to disclose that his brother sells lab equipment to pharmaceutical companies. David Gorski does not seem to think so, despite agreeing with me that pharmaceutical funding does decrease the strength of evidence. My question for him: Which is it?
In the fourth section, Gorski congratulates himself for the research that is related to his Sanofi-Aventis connections. He brags, “If it passes clinical trials, it may well be a very useful drug for potentiating the effects of other cancer therapies, such as chemotherapy and radiation.” Beyond Gorski’s blogging about autism and his undisclosed COI, as J.B. Handley put it, “I could care less about Mr. Gorski or his career.”
Moving on to the final section, he sums up his basis for denying he has a conflict of interest:
“First, I would have to be receiving money from Sanofi-Aventis. I am not.”
I never said he was, only that Sanofi-Aventis is in a partnership with his university, which in turn is sponsoring his clinical trial of Sanofi’s drug, Riluzole.
“Second, I would have to have the reasonable expectation to receive money from Sanofi-Aventis. I do not.”
Though he may not expect to receive money from Sanofi-Aventis directly, he can expect to receive money that Sanofi has paid to his employer, Wayne State.
“I’m not even angling for money from Sanofi-Aventis to run my lab.”
He doesn’t have to; his university does the angling for him.
“Third, I would have to know that Riluzole is being tested as a treatment for autistic children.”
It does not matter if he did not know Riluzole was being studied to treat autism, he would still have a COI.
“In any case, even if I had known [of Riluzole as a possible treatment for ASD], it still wouldn’t have been a COI. I’m not a neurologist, and I don’t treat ASD or OCD. I’m never going to be doing research with Riluzole in children with ASD, OCD, or both.” Even though he does not treat autism, and even though he is not a neurologist, he still has a conflict of interest because of his Sanofi ties and the fact that he blogs about autism causes and treatments all the time.
What ultimately matters is that David Gorski is conducting a clinical trial of a Sanofi-Aventis drug (undisclosed to his readers), sponsored by his Sanofi-Aventis-partnered university (also undisclosed to his readers), and he constantly writes blog posts that are favorable to Sanofi-Aventis. To show just how important Sanofi is to Gorski, he even said in the comments section that if the drug fails his clinical trial for breast cancer, it would be a “major setback” for his research. Yet, instead of conceding that he is conflicted in this way, he attempts to talk his way out of the points I raised in the 84-word e-mail I sent to him with a 4,562-word smokescreen, followed by another 20,915 words from his loyal commenters.
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7172
Reputation : 2603
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 29
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry
by lizardking Mon Feb 01, 2016 2:20 pm
Post by hiilikeourbeard
"Dr Robert Morse ND 'No such thing as disease'":
There is no disease. Only chemistry.
Post by schpankme
Robert Morse critiqued by Durianrider:
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7172
Reputation : 2603
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 29
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry
by lizardking Mon Feb 01, 2016 2:21 pm
“Mass sterilization”: Kenyan Doctors Find Anti-fertility Agent in UN Tetanus Vaccine
According to LifeSiteNews, a Catholic publication, the Kenya Catholic Doctors Association is charging UNICEF and WHO with sterilizing millions of girls and women under cover of an anti-tetanus vaccination program sponsored by the Kenyan government.
The Kenyan government denies there is anything wrong with the vaccine, and says it is perfectly safe.
The Kenya Catholic Doctors Association, however, saw evidence to the contrary, and had six different samples of the tetanus vaccine from various locations around Kenya sent to an independent laboratory in South Africa for testing.
The results confirmed their worst fears: all six samples tested positive for the HCG antigen. The HCG antigen is used in anti-fertility vaccines, but was found present in tetanus vaccines targeted to young girls and women of childbearing age. Dr. Ngare, spokesman for the Kenya Catholic Doctors Association, stated in a bulletin released November 4:
“This proved right our worst fears; that this WHO campaign is not about eradicating neonatal tetanus but a well-coordinated forceful population control mass sterilization exercise using a proven fertility regulating vaccine. This evidence was presented to the Ministry of Health before the third round of immunization but was ignored.” (Source.)
Dr. Ngare brought up several points about the mass tetanus vaccination program in Kenya that caused the Catholic doctors to become suspicious:
Dr. Ngare told LifeSiteNews that several things alerted doctors in the Church’s far-flung medical system of 54 hospitals, 83 health centres, and 17 medical and nursing schools to the possibility the anti-tetanus campaign was secretly an anti-fertility campaign.
Why, they ask does it involve an unprecedented five shots (or “jabs” as they are known, in Kenya) over more than two years and why is it applied only to women of childbearing years, and why is it being conducted without the usual fanfare of government publicity?
“Usually we give a series three shots over two to three years, we give it anyone who comes into the clinic with an open wound, men, women or children.” said Dr. Ngare.
But it is the five vaccination regime that is most alarming. “The only time tetanus vaccine has been given in five doses is when it is used as a carrier in fertility regulating vaccines laced with the pregnancy hormone, Human Chorionic Gonadotropin (HCG) developed by WHO in 1992.” (Source.)
UNICEF: A History of Taking Advantage of Disasters to Mass Vaccinate
It should be noted that UNICEF and WHO distribute these vaccines for free, and that there are financial incentives for the Kenyan government to participate in these programs. When funds from the UN are not enough to purchase yearly allotments of vaccines, an organization started and funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, GAVI, provides extra funding for many of these vaccination programs in poor countries. (See: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Vaccine Empire on Trial in India.)
Also, there was no outbreak of tetanus in Kenya, only the perceived “threat” of tetanus due to local flood conditions.
These local disasters are a common reason UNICEF goes into poorer countries with free vaccines to begin mass vaccination programs.
Health Impact News reported last year that UNICEF began a similar mass vaccination program with 500,000 doses of live oral polio vaccine in the Philippines after a Super Typhoon devastated Tacolban and surrounding areas. This was in spite of the fact there were no reported cases of polio in the Philippines since 1993, and people who have had the live polio vaccine can “shed” the virus into sewage systems, thereby causing the actual disease it is supposed to be preventing. (See: No Polio in the Philippines Since 1993, But Mass Polio Vaccination Program Targeted for 500,000 Typhoon Victims Under Age 5.)
A very similar mass vaccination with the live oral polio vaccine occurred among Syrian refugees in 2013, when 1.7 million doses of polio vaccine were purchased by UNICEF, in spite of the fact that no cases of polio had been seen since 1999. After the mass vaccination program started, cases of polio began to reappear in Syria. (See: Are UNICEF Live Polio Vaccines Causing Polio Among Syrians? 1.7 Billion Polio Vaccines Purchased by UNICEF.)
It seems quite apparent that UNICEF and WHO use these local disasters to mass vaccinate people, mainly children and young women. Massive education and propaganda efforts are also necessary to convince the local populations that they need these vaccines. Here is a video UNICEF produced for the tetanus vaccine in Kenya. Notice how they use school teachers and local doctors to do the educating, even though the vaccines are produced by western countries.
At least in Kenya, Catholic doctors are acting and taking a stand against what they see as an involuntary mass sterilization campaign designed to control the population of Africans.
According to LifeSiteNews, a Catholic publication, the Kenya Catholic Doctors Association is charging UNICEF and WHO with sterilizing millions of girls and women under cover of an anti-tetanus vaccination program sponsored by the Kenyan government.
The Kenyan government denies there is anything wrong with the vaccine, and says it is perfectly safe.
The Kenya Catholic Doctors Association, however, saw evidence to the contrary, and had six different samples of the tetanus vaccine from various locations around Kenya sent to an independent laboratory in South Africa for testing.
The results confirmed their worst fears: all six samples tested positive for the HCG antigen. The HCG antigen is used in anti-fertility vaccines, but was found present in tetanus vaccines targeted to young girls and women of childbearing age. Dr. Ngare, spokesman for the Kenya Catholic Doctors Association, stated in a bulletin released November 4:
“This proved right our worst fears; that this WHO campaign is not about eradicating neonatal tetanus but a well-coordinated forceful population control mass sterilization exercise using a proven fertility regulating vaccine. This evidence was presented to the Ministry of Health before the third round of immunization but was ignored.” (Source.)
Dr. Ngare brought up several points about the mass tetanus vaccination program in Kenya that caused the Catholic doctors to become suspicious:
Dr. Ngare told LifeSiteNews that several things alerted doctors in the Church’s far-flung medical system of 54 hospitals, 83 health centres, and 17 medical and nursing schools to the possibility the anti-tetanus campaign was secretly an anti-fertility campaign.
Why, they ask does it involve an unprecedented five shots (or “jabs” as they are known, in Kenya) over more than two years and why is it applied only to women of childbearing years, and why is it being conducted without the usual fanfare of government publicity?
“Usually we give a series three shots over two to three years, we give it anyone who comes into the clinic with an open wound, men, women or children.” said Dr. Ngare.
But it is the five vaccination regime that is most alarming. “The only time tetanus vaccine has been given in five doses is when it is used as a carrier in fertility regulating vaccines laced with the pregnancy hormone, Human Chorionic Gonadotropin (HCG) developed by WHO in 1992.” (Source.)
UNICEF: A History of Taking Advantage of Disasters to Mass Vaccinate
It should be noted that UNICEF and WHO distribute these vaccines for free, and that there are financial incentives for the Kenyan government to participate in these programs. When funds from the UN are not enough to purchase yearly allotments of vaccines, an organization started and funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, GAVI, provides extra funding for many of these vaccination programs in poor countries. (See: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Vaccine Empire on Trial in India.)
Also, there was no outbreak of tetanus in Kenya, only the perceived “threat” of tetanus due to local flood conditions.
These local disasters are a common reason UNICEF goes into poorer countries with free vaccines to begin mass vaccination programs.
Health Impact News reported last year that UNICEF began a similar mass vaccination program with 500,000 doses of live oral polio vaccine in the Philippines after a Super Typhoon devastated Tacolban and surrounding areas. This was in spite of the fact there were no reported cases of polio in the Philippines since 1993, and people who have had the live polio vaccine can “shed” the virus into sewage systems, thereby causing the actual disease it is supposed to be preventing. (See: No Polio in the Philippines Since 1993, But Mass Polio Vaccination Program Targeted for 500,000 Typhoon Victims Under Age 5.)
A very similar mass vaccination with the live oral polio vaccine occurred among Syrian refugees in 2013, when 1.7 million doses of polio vaccine were purchased by UNICEF, in spite of the fact that no cases of polio had been seen since 1999. After the mass vaccination program started, cases of polio began to reappear in Syria. (See: Are UNICEF Live Polio Vaccines Causing Polio Among Syrians? 1.7 Billion Polio Vaccines Purchased by UNICEF.)
It seems quite apparent that UNICEF and WHO use these local disasters to mass vaccinate people, mainly children and young women. Massive education and propaganda efforts are also necessary to convince the local populations that they need these vaccines. Here is a video UNICEF produced for the tetanus vaccine in Kenya. Notice how they use school teachers and local doctors to do the educating, even though the vaccines are produced by western countries.
At least in Kenya, Catholic doctors are acting and taking a stand against what they see as an involuntary mass sterilization campaign designed to control the population of Africans.
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7172
Reputation : 2603
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 29
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry
by lizardking Mon Feb 01, 2016 2:23 pm
30 Year Cover-Up of Vaccine Dangers Exposed in UK Government Transcripts
An extraordinary paper published by a courageous doctor and investigative medical researcher has dug the dirt on 30 years of secret official transcripts of meetings of UK government vaccine committees and the supposedly independent medical “experts” sitting on them with their drug industry connections.
A Freedom of Information Act filing by a doctor in the UK, has revealed 30 years of secret official documents showing that government experts have
1. Known the vaccines don’t work
2. Known they cause the diseases they are supposed to prevent
3. Known they are a hazard to children
4. Colluded to lie to the public
5. Worked to prevent safety studies
Those are the same vaccines that are mandated to children in the US, and many other countries.
No pharmaceutical drug is devoid of risks from adverse reactions and vaccines are no exception. According to the world’s leading drug regulatory authority, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), vaccines represent a special category of drugs in that they are generally given to healthy individuals and often to prevent a disease to which an individual may never be exposed. This, according to the FDA, places extra emphasis on vaccine safety.
Universally, regulatory authorities are responsible for ensuring that new vaccines go through proper scientific evaluation before they are approved. An equal responsibility rests on the medical profession to promote vaccinations but only with those vaccines whose safety and efficacy has been demonstrated to be statistically significant. Furthermore, vaccination is a medical intervention and as such, it should be carried out with the full consent of those who are being subjected to it. This necessitates an objective disclosure of the known or foreseeable risks and benefits and, where applicable, a description of alternative courses of treatment. In cases where children and infants are involved, full consent
with regards to vaccination should be given by the parents.
Deliberately concealing information from the parents for the sole purpose of getting them to comply with an “official” vaccination schedule could thus be considered as a form of ethical violation or misconduct. Official documents obtained from the UK Department of Health (DH) and the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) reveal that the British health authorities have been engaging in such practice for the last 30 years, apparently for the sole purpose of protecting the national vaccination program.
As a result of such vaccination policy promoted by the JCVI and the DH, many children have been vaccinated without their parents being disclosed the critical information about demonstrated risks of serious adverse reactions, one that the JCVI appeared to have been fully aware of. It would also appear that, by withholding this information, the JCVI/DH neglected the right of individuals to make an informed consent concerning vaccination. By doing so, the JCVI/DH may have violated not only International Guidelines for Medical Ethics (i.e., Helsinki Declaration and the International Code of Medical Ethics) but also, their own Code of Practice.
This is what everyone has always known but could never prove before now. Pass this information on to others so they can see what goes on in Government health committees behind locked doors.
The transcripts of the JCVI meetings also show that some of the Committee members had extensive ties to pharmaceutical companies and that the JCVI frequently co-operated with vaccine manufacturers on strategies aimed at boosting vaccine uptake. Some of the meetings at which such
controversial items were discussed were not intended to be publicly available, as the transcripts were only released later, through the Freedom of Information Act (FOI). These particular meetings are denoted in the transcripts as “commercial in confidence”, and reveal a clear and disturbing
lack of transparency, as some of the information was removed from the text (i.e., the names of the participants) prior to transcript release under the FOI section at the JCVI website (for example, JCVI CSM/DH (Committee on the Safety of Medicines/Department of Health) Joint Committee on Adverse Reactions Minutes 1986-1992.
In summary, the transcripts of the JCVI/DH meetings from the period from 1983 to 2010 appear to show that:
1) Instead of reacting appropriately by re-examining existing vaccination policies when safety concerns over specific vaccines were identified by their own investigations, the JCVI either a) took no action, b) skewed or selectively removed unfavourable safety data from public reports and c) made intensive efforts to reassure both the public and the authorities in the safety of respective vaccines;
2) Significantly restricted contraindication to vaccination criteria in order to increase vaccination rates despite outstanding and unresolved safety issues;
3) On multiple occasions requested from vaccine manufacturers to make specific amendments to their data sheets, when these were in conflict with JCVI’s official advices on immunisations;
4) Persistently relied on methodologically dubious studies, while dismissing independent research, to promote vaccine policies;
5) Persistently and categorically downplayed safety concerns while over-inflating vaccine benefits;
6) Promoted and elaborated a plan for introducing new vaccines of questionable efficacy and safety into the routine paediatric schedule, on the assumption that the licenses would eventually be granted;
7) Actively discouraged research on vaccine safety issues;
Deliberately took advantage of parents’ trust and lack of relevant knowledge on vaccinations in order to promote a scientifically unsupported immunisation program which could put certain children at risk of severe long-term neurological damage.
Dr. Tomlijenovic explains; for instance, how JCVI has known since as early as 1981 that the measles vaccine, which is part of the government’s official vaccine schedule, is linked to long-term neurological damage and death. She also outlines, with full citations, evidence showing that JCVI has long been aware that many of scheduled vaccines cause permanent brain damage in children, but have continued to promote those vaccines anyway.
Educated parents can either get their children out of harm’s way or continue living inside one of the largest most evil lies in history, that vaccines – full of heavy metals, viral diseases, mycoplasma, fecal material, DNA fragments from other species, formaldehyde, polysorbate 80 (a sterilizing agent) – are a miracle of modern medicine.
A Freedom of Information Act filing in the US with the CDC by a doctor with an autistic son, seeking information on what the CDC knows about the dangers of vaccines, had by law to be responded to in 20 days. Nearly 7 years later, the doctor went to court and the CDC argued it does not have to turn over documents. A judge ordered the CDC to turn over the documents on September 30th, 2011.
The US CDC is an unreliable source of information. They constantly grossly exaggerate death and disease figures to promote vaccines. The UK Department of Health does the same. Both for example have claimed flu causes thousands of deaths each year but in fact it does not. They do that to promote the flu vaccine, which the international Cochrane Collaboration, which publishes medical research into the accuracy of claims like that, has shown that the flu vaccine is not effective.
On October 26, 2011, a Denver Post editorial expressed shock that the Obama administration, after promising to be especially transparent, was proposing changes to the Freedom of Information Act that would allow it to go beyond declaring some documents secret and to actually allow government agencies (such as the CDC) to declare some document “non-existent.”
A short summary of the most important arguments that support NON-VACCINATION:
Vaccines contain a combination of at least 39 different highly toxic metals, cancer causing substances, toxic chemicals, live and genetically modified viruses, bacteria, contaminated serum containing animal viruses and foreign genetic material, extremely toxic de-contaminants and adjuvants, untested antibiotics, none of which can be injected without causing any harm. Vaccine contaminants have included bovine (cow), avian (chicken) and monkey viruses and bacteria such as streptococcus in the DTP (diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis) vaccine [Pediatrics, Vol. 75, No. 2, Feb 1985] and Serratia marcesens in the influenza vaccines [2004 influenza season].
There is no scientific study to determine whether vaccines have really prevented diseases. Rather disease graphs show vaccines have been introduced at the end of epidemics when the disease was already in its last stages. In case of Small Pox the vaccine actually caused a great spurt in the incidence of disease before public outcry led to its withdrawal.
There are no long-term studies on vaccine safety. Very short-term tests are carried out where the vaccinated subjects are checked against another group who are given another vaccine. Technically the tests should be carried out against a non-vaccinated group. No one really knows what protocols are followed at such industry based or industry sponsored trials.
The mercury, aluminum and live viruses in vaccines may be behind the huge epidemic of autism (1 in 110 in the USA), a fact that has been admitted by the US Vaccine Court. About 83 suspected cases of vaccines causing autism have been awarded compensation.
Both the Small Pox and the Oral Polio Vaccine are made from monkey serum. This serum has helped many monkey viruses to enter the human blood stream. Out of these, the only researched virus, SV 40, has been found to be cancerous. These viruses continue to be in the vaccines. The presence of SV 40 in various human cancers has been demonstrated. Today it is known that the virus is being passed on to future generations as its presence in the mother’s milk and human sperms has been established.
The number of polio cases was declining before the widespread administration of the Salk vaccine. Cases which had previously been reported as polio are now reported as meningitis. The risk of contracting polio from the live virus vaccine is greater than the risk of acquiring the disease from naturally occurring viruses.
Many doctors argue that diseases during childhood are due to the body exercising its immune system. Suppressing these diseases causes the immune system to remain undeveloped causing the various autoimmune disorders in adults like diabetes and arthritis that have become epidemics today.
Vaccines suppress the natural immunity and the body does not have natural antibodies anymore. The mother’s milk therefore does not contain natural antibodies and can no longer protect the child against illnesses.
In the USA vaccine adverse effects are recorded and the Government offers compensation of millions of dollars to victims (the most recent case in its Vaccine Court may have received upto $200 million in damages). The courts in the USA have paid nearly $ 2 billion in damages so far.
Vaccines try to create humoral (blood related immunity) whereas it has been found that immunity is developed at various levels: humoral, cellular, and organ specific. We still do not know enough about the human immune system and therefore should not interfere with it.
In addition to childhood vaccination, new “hypes” like the Swine Flu, Bird Flu, Gardasil for HPV virus and the annual flu vaccine are continuing the to damage people’s health all throughout their life. Yves Thomas, the head of the National Influenza Centre in Geneva said that, “The debate and the arguments that surrounded the A(H1N1) influenza virus two years ago have sharpened public mistrust toward the seasonal flu vaccine.” In 2010, the World Health Organisation (WHO) was accused of dramatizing worldwide influenza cases in order to result in much higher vaccine sales since many countries had signed contracts with a stipulation to automatically buy vaccines when the WHO gave the highest alert level.
A Few Questions To Ask Your Doctor
Don’t let yourself intimidated by medical doctors, they are NOT Gods and they surely are misinformed, many of them are corrupted or don’t want to acknowledge the dangers of vaccines. Most schools will offer you a waiver if you ask for one. There is NO law that can deny you that. Exemptions are typically for people who have compromised immune systems, allergies to the components used in vaccinations, or strongly held objections. All states but West Virginia and Mississippi allow religious exemptions, and twenty states allow parents to cite personal or philosophical objections. Get yourself educated on the matter, it’s about the life of your child!
ASK QUESTIONS like these:
1. What are the serious negative health effects that these vaccines can generate? Are the risks worth the benefits?
2. Dr. Michel Odent has linked asthma to the whooping cough vaccine. Have you read his research? What do you think?
3. Professor Wakefield (UK) has linked autism and Chrones disease to the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine. What do you think? What evidence do you have to back up your opinions?
4. Why is the same dose of vaccines given to a two month old as for a 5 year old?
5. Are you aware that Japan changed the start time for vaccinating from 3 months to two years and straight away their SIDS rate plummeted?
6. Do you believe in herd immunity? If so, how is it that 98% of U.S.A. children are vaccinated yet they still have outbreaks of these diseases?
7. Most diseases were already 90% gone before any vaccines were introduced. If this is so, how can vaccines be applauded for diseases ceasing, especially when there were no vaccines for some diseases like bubonic plague and scarlet fever?
8. How can the Tetanus vaccine induce immunity, when contracting the disease naturally does not give immunity?
9. If the so-called diphtheria vaccine, which is in fact a toxoid, works against the toxin produced by the bacteria, and not against the bacteria itself, then how did this “vaccine” help in the decline in diphtheria?
To read and download the full 45 page report and its evidence by Dr. Lucija Tomljenovic, PhD see the link below.
Read & Download Full Report.
Lethal Injection: The Story Of Vaccination
An extraordinary paper published by a courageous doctor and investigative medical researcher has dug the dirt on 30 years of secret official transcripts of meetings of UK government vaccine committees and the supposedly independent medical “experts” sitting on them with their drug industry connections.
A Freedom of Information Act filing by a doctor in the UK, has revealed 30 years of secret official documents showing that government experts have
1. Known the vaccines don’t work
2. Known they cause the diseases they are supposed to prevent
3. Known they are a hazard to children
4. Colluded to lie to the public
5. Worked to prevent safety studies
Those are the same vaccines that are mandated to children in the US, and many other countries.
No pharmaceutical drug is devoid of risks from adverse reactions and vaccines are no exception. According to the world’s leading drug regulatory authority, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), vaccines represent a special category of drugs in that they are generally given to healthy individuals and often to prevent a disease to which an individual may never be exposed. This, according to the FDA, places extra emphasis on vaccine safety.
Universally, regulatory authorities are responsible for ensuring that new vaccines go through proper scientific evaluation before they are approved. An equal responsibility rests on the medical profession to promote vaccinations but only with those vaccines whose safety and efficacy has been demonstrated to be statistically significant. Furthermore, vaccination is a medical intervention and as such, it should be carried out with the full consent of those who are being subjected to it. This necessitates an objective disclosure of the known or foreseeable risks and benefits and, where applicable, a description of alternative courses of treatment. In cases where children and infants are involved, full consent
with regards to vaccination should be given by the parents.
Deliberately concealing information from the parents for the sole purpose of getting them to comply with an “official” vaccination schedule could thus be considered as a form of ethical violation or misconduct. Official documents obtained from the UK Department of Health (DH) and the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) reveal that the British health authorities have been engaging in such practice for the last 30 years, apparently for the sole purpose of protecting the national vaccination program.
As a result of such vaccination policy promoted by the JCVI and the DH, many children have been vaccinated without their parents being disclosed the critical information about demonstrated risks of serious adverse reactions, one that the JCVI appeared to have been fully aware of. It would also appear that, by withholding this information, the JCVI/DH neglected the right of individuals to make an informed consent concerning vaccination. By doing so, the JCVI/DH may have violated not only International Guidelines for Medical Ethics (i.e., Helsinki Declaration and the International Code of Medical Ethics) but also, their own Code of Practice.
This is what everyone has always known but could never prove before now. Pass this information on to others so they can see what goes on in Government health committees behind locked doors.
The transcripts of the JCVI meetings also show that some of the Committee members had extensive ties to pharmaceutical companies and that the JCVI frequently co-operated with vaccine manufacturers on strategies aimed at boosting vaccine uptake. Some of the meetings at which such
controversial items were discussed were not intended to be publicly available, as the transcripts were only released later, through the Freedom of Information Act (FOI). These particular meetings are denoted in the transcripts as “commercial in confidence”, and reveal a clear and disturbing
lack of transparency, as some of the information was removed from the text (i.e., the names of the participants) prior to transcript release under the FOI section at the JCVI website (for example, JCVI CSM/DH (Committee on the Safety of Medicines/Department of Health) Joint Committee on Adverse Reactions Minutes 1986-1992.
In summary, the transcripts of the JCVI/DH meetings from the period from 1983 to 2010 appear to show that:
1) Instead of reacting appropriately by re-examining existing vaccination policies when safety concerns over specific vaccines were identified by their own investigations, the JCVI either a) took no action, b) skewed or selectively removed unfavourable safety data from public reports and c) made intensive efforts to reassure both the public and the authorities in the safety of respective vaccines;
2) Significantly restricted contraindication to vaccination criteria in order to increase vaccination rates despite outstanding and unresolved safety issues;
3) On multiple occasions requested from vaccine manufacturers to make specific amendments to their data sheets, when these were in conflict with JCVI’s official advices on immunisations;
4) Persistently relied on methodologically dubious studies, while dismissing independent research, to promote vaccine policies;
5) Persistently and categorically downplayed safety concerns while over-inflating vaccine benefits;
6) Promoted and elaborated a plan for introducing new vaccines of questionable efficacy and safety into the routine paediatric schedule, on the assumption that the licenses would eventually be granted;
7) Actively discouraged research on vaccine safety issues;
Deliberately took advantage of parents’ trust and lack of relevant knowledge on vaccinations in order to promote a scientifically unsupported immunisation program which could put certain children at risk of severe long-term neurological damage.Dr. Tomlijenovic explains; for instance, how JCVI has known since as early as 1981 that the measles vaccine, which is part of the government’s official vaccine schedule, is linked to long-term neurological damage and death. She also outlines, with full citations, evidence showing that JCVI has long been aware that many of scheduled vaccines cause permanent brain damage in children, but have continued to promote those vaccines anyway.
Educated parents can either get their children out of harm’s way or continue living inside one of the largest most evil lies in history, that vaccines – full of heavy metals, viral diseases, mycoplasma, fecal material, DNA fragments from other species, formaldehyde, polysorbate 80 (a sterilizing agent) – are a miracle of modern medicine.
A Freedom of Information Act filing in the US with the CDC by a doctor with an autistic son, seeking information on what the CDC knows about the dangers of vaccines, had by law to be responded to in 20 days. Nearly 7 years later, the doctor went to court and the CDC argued it does not have to turn over documents. A judge ordered the CDC to turn over the documents on September 30th, 2011.
The US CDC is an unreliable source of information. They constantly grossly exaggerate death and disease figures to promote vaccines. The UK Department of Health does the same. Both for example have claimed flu causes thousands of deaths each year but in fact it does not. They do that to promote the flu vaccine, which the international Cochrane Collaboration, which publishes medical research into the accuracy of claims like that, has shown that the flu vaccine is not effective.
On October 26, 2011, a Denver Post editorial expressed shock that the Obama administration, after promising to be especially transparent, was proposing changes to the Freedom of Information Act that would allow it to go beyond declaring some documents secret and to actually allow government agencies (such as the CDC) to declare some document “non-existent.”
A short summary of the most important arguments that support NON-VACCINATION:
Vaccines contain a combination of at least 39 different highly toxic metals, cancer causing substances, toxic chemicals, live and genetically modified viruses, bacteria, contaminated serum containing animal viruses and foreign genetic material, extremely toxic de-contaminants and adjuvants, untested antibiotics, none of which can be injected without causing any harm. Vaccine contaminants have included bovine (cow), avian (chicken) and monkey viruses and bacteria such as streptococcus in the DTP (diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis) vaccine [Pediatrics, Vol. 75, No. 2, Feb 1985] and Serratia marcesens in the influenza vaccines [2004 influenza season].
There is no scientific study to determine whether vaccines have really prevented diseases. Rather disease graphs show vaccines have been introduced at the end of epidemics when the disease was already in its last stages. In case of Small Pox the vaccine actually caused a great spurt in the incidence of disease before public outcry led to its withdrawal.
There are no long-term studies on vaccine safety. Very short-term tests are carried out where the vaccinated subjects are checked against another group who are given another vaccine. Technically the tests should be carried out against a non-vaccinated group. No one really knows what protocols are followed at such industry based or industry sponsored trials.
The mercury, aluminum and live viruses in vaccines may be behind the huge epidemic of autism (1 in 110 in the USA), a fact that has been admitted by the US Vaccine Court. About 83 suspected cases of vaccines causing autism have been awarded compensation.
Both the Small Pox and the Oral Polio Vaccine are made from monkey serum. This serum has helped many monkey viruses to enter the human blood stream. Out of these, the only researched virus, SV 40, has been found to be cancerous. These viruses continue to be in the vaccines. The presence of SV 40 in various human cancers has been demonstrated. Today it is known that the virus is being passed on to future generations as its presence in the mother’s milk and human sperms has been established.
The number of polio cases was declining before the widespread administration of the Salk vaccine. Cases which had previously been reported as polio are now reported as meningitis. The risk of contracting polio from the live virus vaccine is greater than the risk of acquiring the disease from naturally occurring viruses.
Many doctors argue that diseases during childhood are due to the body exercising its immune system. Suppressing these diseases causes the immune system to remain undeveloped causing the various autoimmune disorders in adults like diabetes and arthritis that have become epidemics today.
Vaccines suppress the natural immunity and the body does not have natural antibodies anymore. The mother’s milk therefore does not contain natural antibodies and can no longer protect the child against illnesses.
In the USA vaccine adverse effects are recorded and the Government offers compensation of millions of dollars to victims (the most recent case in its Vaccine Court may have received upto $200 million in damages). The courts in the USA have paid nearly $ 2 billion in damages so far.
Vaccines try to create humoral (blood related immunity) whereas it has been found that immunity is developed at various levels: humoral, cellular, and organ specific. We still do not know enough about the human immune system and therefore should not interfere with it.
In addition to childhood vaccination, new “hypes” like the Swine Flu, Bird Flu, Gardasil for HPV virus and the annual flu vaccine are continuing the to damage people’s health all throughout their life. Yves Thomas, the head of the National Influenza Centre in Geneva said that, “The debate and the arguments that surrounded the A(H1N1) influenza virus two years ago have sharpened public mistrust toward the seasonal flu vaccine.” In 2010, the World Health Organisation (WHO) was accused of dramatizing worldwide influenza cases in order to result in much higher vaccine sales since many countries had signed contracts with a stipulation to automatically buy vaccines when the WHO gave the highest alert level.
A Few Questions To Ask Your Doctor
Don’t let yourself intimidated by medical doctors, they are NOT Gods and they surely are misinformed, many of them are corrupted or don’t want to acknowledge the dangers of vaccines. Most schools will offer you a waiver if you ask for one. There is NO law that can deny you that. Exemptions are typically for people who have compromised immune systems, allergies to the components used in vaccinations, or strongly held objections. All states but West Virginia and Mississippi allow religious exemptions, and twenty states allow parents to cite personal or philosophical objections. Get yourself educated on the matter, it’s about the life of your child!
ASK QUESTIONS like these:
1. What are the serious negative health effects that these vaccines can generate? Are the risks worth the benefits?
2. Dr. Michel Odent has linked asthma to the whooping cough vaccine. Have you read his research? What do you think?
3. Professor Wakefield (UK) has linked autism and Chrones disease to the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine. What do you think? What evidence do you have to back up your opinions?
4. Why is the same dose of vaccines given to a two month old as for a 5 year old?
5. Are you aware that Japan changed the start time for vaccinating from 3 months to two years and straight away their SIDS rate plummeted?
6. Do you believe in herd immunity? If so, how is it that 98% of U.S.A. children are vaccinated yet they still have outbreaks of these diseases?
7. Most diseases were already 90% gone before any vaccines were introduced. If this is so, how can vaccines be applauded for diseases ceasing, especially when there were no vaccines for some diseases like bubonic plague and scarlet fever?
8. How can the Tetanus vaccine induce immunity, when contracting the disease naturally does not give immunity?
9. If the so-called diphtheria vaccine, which is in fact a toxoid, works against the toxin produced by the bacteria, and not against the bacteria itself, then how did this “vaccine” help in the decline in diphtheria?
To read and download the full 45 page report and its evidence by Dr. Lucija Tomljenovic, PhD see the link below.
Read & Download Full Report.
Lethal Injection: The Story Of Vaccination
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7172
Reputation : 2603
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 29
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry
by lizardking Mon Feb 01, 2016 2:24 pm
Post by susie
go.thetruthaboutcancer.com/
DOCUSERIES FREE ONLINE FOR A LIMITED TIME
go.thetruthaboutcancer.com/
DOCUSERIES FREE ONLINE FOR A LIMITED TIME
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7172
Reputation : 2603
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 29
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry
by lizardking Mon Feb 01, 2016 2:24 pm
Post by mitch
Global Research Shows Dairy Products and Calcium Supplements Do Not Make Bones Stronger
preventdisease.com/news/15/100515_Dairy-Products-Calcium-Supplements-Do-Not-Make-Bones-Stronger.shtml
The dairy industry has finally been given one big swift kick where they need it most, in the scientific credibility department where top officials have been falsely linking dairy and bone strength for decades. The study, published by the British Medical Journal, found that people don't get stronger bones by eating dairy products or taking calcium supplements...
Global Research Shows Dairy Products and Calcium Supplements Do Not Make Bones Stronger
preventdisease.com/news/15/100515_Dairy-Products-Calcium-Supplements-Do-Not-Make-Bones-Stronger.shtml
The dairy industry has finally been given one big swift kick where they need it most, in the scientific credibility department where top officials have been falsely linking dairy and bone strength for decades. The study, published by the British Medical Journal, found that people don't get stronger bones by eating dairy products or taking calcium supplements...
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7172
Reputation : 2603
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 29
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry
by lizardking Mon Feb 01, 2016 2:25 pm
Post by mitch
Prestigious Heart Surgeon’s Confession Reveals the Truth About Heart Disease
A physician’s word is often taken very seriously and with little skepticism. An opinion from one or two doctors, when made in a professional office or hospital, can persuade a worried patient to take drugs with complex side-effects, or even undergo traumatic treatments such as radiation and chemotherapy. Yet, when the same doctors, with years of experience and thousands of satisfied customers, give an opinion that questions a therapy established by mainstream medicine, the mainstream media calls them irresponsible, or quacks, or even criminals.
Many doctors are highly admirable people, bu they are still human beings. They all make mistakes, they all learn from them, but the really good ones are willing to admit to them.
www.wakingtimes.com/2015/10/06/prestigious-heart-surgeons-confession-reveals-the-truth-about-heart-disease/
Prestigious Heart Surgeon’s Confession Reveals the Truth About Heart Disease
A physician’s word is often taken very seriously and with little skepticism. An opinion from one or two doctors, when made in a professional office or hospital, can persuade a worried patient to take drugs with complex side-effects, or even undergo traumatic treatments such as radiation and chemotherapy. Yet, when the same doctors, with years of experience and thousands of satisfied customers, give an opinion that questions a therapy established by mainstream medicine, the mainstream media calls them irresponsible, or quacks, or even criminals.
Many doctors are highly admirable people, bu they are still human beings. They all make mistakes, they all learn from them, but the really good ones are willing to admit to them.
www.wakingtimes.com/2015/10/06/prestigious-heart-surgeons-confession-reveals-the-truth-about-heart-disease/
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7172
Reputation : 2603
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 29
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry
by lizardking Mon Feb 01, 2016 2:25 pm
Post by mitch
Self Heal Herb Used For Centuries For About Every Ailment Known To Man
Prunella Vulgaris has a long history of medicinal use. It shows antiviral and antibacterial properties, and in China it is used as an anti-cancer drug. It can also be used for the prevention and treatment of cognitive impairments associated with Alzheimer’s disease or schizophrenia.
Check out close ups of Prunella Vulgaris in its true beauty.
Prunella vulgaris var. lilacina Nakai (Labiatae) is commonly known as the ‘self-heal‘ herb or heal-all. It is widely distributed in Europe, Asia and North America.
Daily consumption of extracts from Prunella vulgaris var. lilacina may enhance cognitive function in lab mice, says a new study from South Korea. It is often found growing in waste ground, grassland, woodland edges, usually on basic and neutral soils.
Continues here:
www.naturalblaze.com/2015/10/self-heal-herb-used-for-centuries-for-about-every-ailment-known-to-man.html
Self Heal Herb Used For Centuries For About Every Ailment Known To Man
Prunella Vulgaris has a long history of medicinal use. It shows antiviral and antibacterial properties, and in China it is used as an anti-cancer drug. It can also be used for the prevention and treatment of cognitive impairments associated with Alzheimer’s disease or schizophrenia.
Check out close ups of Prunella Vulgaris in its true beauty.
Prunella vulgaris var. lilacina Nakai (Labiatae) is commonly known as the ‘self-heal‘ herb or heal-all. It is widely distributed in Europe, Asia and North America.
Daily consumption of extracts from Prunella vulgaris var. lilacina may enhance cognitive function in lab mice, says a new study from South Korea. It is often found growing in waste ground, grassland, woodland edges, usually on basic and neutral soils.
Continues here:
www.naturalblaze.com/2015/10/self-heal-herb-used-for-centuries-for-about-every-ailment-known-to-man.html
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7172
Reputation : 2603
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 29
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry
by lizardking Tue Feb 02, 2016 2:05 pm
Zika? Monsanto’s Roundup associated with smaller heads
by Jon Rappoport
This is my fourth article on the Zika scam. A virus is being blamed for destruction that actually comes from other forces.
In a previous piece, I listed the top six causes for what is happening in the center of the storm, Brazil, where babies are being born with smaller heads (microcephaly) and brain damage. One of those causes is pesticides/herbicides.
Here I’m presenting information from an animal study that implicates glyphosate, the central ingredient in Monsanto’s herbicide, Roundup, in microcephaly and cranial malformations.
One of authors of this study is the late Argentine researcher, Andres Carrasco, who was subjected to scientific censorship and threats during his career.
The study was published on May 20, 2010 (Chem. Res. Toxicol.). It is titled: “Glyphosate-Based Herbicides (GBH) Produce Teratogenic Effects on Vertebrates by Impairing Retinoic Acid Signalling.” The study provoked a highly critical response from Monsanto, to which author Carrasco replied in kind, remarking that agenda-driven corporate-dominated research blankets the landscape, whereas truly independent inquiry gets short shrift.
The researchers in the study used xenopus laevis (frog) and chicken embryos. Administering glyphosate to chicken embryos produced “reduction of optic vesicles” and “microcephaly,” which is the key deformation in the so-called “Zika virus outbreak.”
The authors write, “The direct effect of glyphosate [on the embryos]… opens concerns about the clinical findings from human offspring in populations exposed to GBH [glyphosate-based herbicides] in agricultural fields.”
And if there is any doubt that the authors are talking about the birth defects now being (falsely) attributed to the Zika virus, they follow up with this comment: “There is growing evidence raising concerns about the effects of GBH [glyphosate-based herbicides] on people living in areas where herbicides are intensely used. Women exposed during pregnancy to herbicides delivered offspring with congenital malformations, including microcephaly [small heads], anencephaly [missing major parts of brain and skull in embryos], and cranial malformations.”
As I keep pointing out—and this is based on 30 years of investigation into phony epidemics—“the virus” is the best false cover story in the world. When researchers and government officials announce that so-and-so virus is loose, causing maiming and death, people automatically stand up and salute.
The cover story is used to obscure what is actually causing great harm, and when the cause is a major, major corporation, the propaganda effort to distract the population swings into high gear.
Monsanto knows how to protect itself. But the veneer is peeling from their operation. Millions upon millions of people now know what the company has been doing all these years.
In March 2015, the World Health Organization announced that glyphosate, the main ingredient in Roundup, is a probable human carcinogen. A Swiss group, the International Society of Doctors for the Environment, sent out a demand “to immediately and permanently ban, with no exceptions, the production, trade and use in all the EU territory of glyphosate-based herbicides.” And nearly two years ago, Brazil’s Federal Public Prosecutor asked for a ban on all glyphosate use in the country.
Now we have the birth-defect horror in Brazil.
That nation uses more pesticides than any country in the world. Soy is planted on more acres than any other crop—a testament to the strength of Monsanto’s operation. Soy means Roundup use.
Roundup means destruction.
by Jon Rappoport
This is my fourth article on the Zika scam. A virus is being blamed for destruction that actually comes from other forces.
In a previous piece, I listed the top six causes for what is happening in the center of the storm, Brazil, where babies are being born with smaller heads (microcephaly) and brain damage. One of those causes is pesticides/herbicides.
Here I’m presenting information from an animal study that implicates glyphosate, the central ingredient in Monsanto’s herbicide, Roundup, in microcephaly and cranial malformations.
One of authors of this study is the late Argentine researcher, Andres Carrasco, who was subjected to scientific censorship and threats during his career.
The study was published on May 20, 2010 (Chem. Res. Toxicol.). It is titled: “Glyphosate-Based Herbicides (GBH) Produce Teratogenic Effects on Vertebrates by Impairing Retinoic Acid Signalling.” The study provoked a highly critical response from Monsanto, to which author Carrasco replied in kind, remarking that agenda-driven corporate-dominated research blankets the landscape, whereas truly independent inquiry gets short shrift.
The researchers in the study used xenopus laevis (frog) and chicken embryos. Administering glyphosate to chicken embryos produced “reduction of optic vesicles” and “microcephaly,” which is the key deformation in the so-called “Zika virus outbreak.”
The authors write, “The direct effect of glyphosate [on the embryos]… opens concerns about the clinical findings from human offspring in populations exposed to GBH [glyphosate-based herbicides] in agricultural fields.”
And if there is any doubt that the authors are talking about the birth defects now being (falsely) attributed to the Zika virus, they follow up with this comment: “There is growing evidence raising concerns about the effects of GBH [glyphosate-based herbicides] on people living in areas where herbicides are intensely used. Women exposed during pregnancy to herbicides delivered offspring with congenital malformations, including microcephaly [small heads], anencephaly [missing major parts of brain and skull in embryos], and cranial malformations.”
As I keep pointing out—and this is based on 30 years of investigation into phony epidemics—“the virus” is the best false cover story in the world. When researchers and government officials announce that so-and-so virus is loose, causing maiming and death, people automatically stand up and salute.
The cover story is used to obscure what is actually causing great harm, and when the cause is a major, major corporation, the propaganda effort to distract the population swings into high gear.
Monsanto knows how to protect itself. But the veneer is peeling from their operation. Millions upon millions of people now know what the company has been doing all these years.
In March 2015, the World Health Organization announced that glyphosate, the main ingredient in Roundup, is a probable human carcinogen. A Swiss group, the International Society of Doctors for the Environment, sent out a demand “to immediately and permanently ban, with no exceptions, the production, trade and use in all the EU territory of glyphosate-based herbicides.” And nearly two years ago, Brazil’s Federal Public Prosecutor asked for a ban on all glyphosate use in the country.
Now we have the birth-defect horror in Brazil.
That nation uses more pesticides than any country in the world. Soy is planted on more acres than any other crop—a testament to the strength of Monsanto’s operation. Soy means Roundup use.
Roundup means destruction.
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7172
Reputation : 2603
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 29
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry
by ladyvelveeta Fri Feb 05, 2016 6:32 pm
Everything on this thread is excellent. My personal entree to the world of conspiracies was through vaccines. My dog suffered a vaccine injury in 1997, and from there, I started to research. I didn't start having children until 2003, so none of my (very healthy) children is vaxed. I'll be forever grateful to my dog! Anyway, I just want to add my personal favorite voice to this discussion, Dr. Suzanne Humphries, a former conventional nephrologist. She left the "medical industry" after learning the truth about vaccines. Wonderful.
This is just one video; I was unable to add the playlist. They are all great.
This is just one video; I was unable to add the playlist. They are all great.
ladyvelveeta- Posts : 3
Points : 2802
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2016-02-05
Location : Austin, Texas
Re: Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry
by lizardking Sat Feb 20, 2016 4:12 pm
Dad Arrested, His 2-yo Daughter Taken, for Successfully Treating Her Cancer with Cannabis Oil
As cannabis is taken more seriously as a medicine and a treatment, more people are taking a chance and using it as a treatment for terminal illnesses. This treatment has had overwhelmingly positive results for countless people who had no other hope of recovery. Every day more stories and scientific studies are appearing from all over the world where people of all ages, even young children, are cured of life-threatening illnesses with cannabis oil.
More often than not, these patients face legal penalties and even jail time for trying to better their lives. In the case of parents with children who have terminal illnesses, they are forced to break laws to get their kids the treatment that they need.
The father of a 2-year-old with late-stage cancer is facing jail time for using cannabis oil in an attempt to ease his daughter’s suffering.
Adam Koessler of Queensland, Austrailia is one of these parents who are facing potential prison time for attempting to save their children’s lives with cannabis oil. Koessler’s 2-year-old daughter was diagnosed with stage-4 neuroblastoma, and when chemo was not working, he began giving her doses of cannabis oil after reading about how well it did for other people. Instantly he noticed remarkable results and an extreme improvement in her condition.
“The results were amazing, what we saw when Rumer was given the medical cannabis oil what nothing short of miraculous. Her cancer ridden little body was alive again — Rumer had almost instant quality of life…Her skin color came back, her eyes were sparkling again…We were certain after seeing these results that her recovery was entirely possible,” Koessler said.
Sadly, the hospital contacted the police and told them about what was happening, and they quickly arrested Koessler at the hospital for
possessing ‘dangerous drugs’ and for supplying them to a minor. After he was released on bail the terms of his release prevented him from seeing his daughter and they have removed him from any involvement in his daughter’s treatment.
He has attempted to send his daughter organic meals so she is more healthy to fight the cancer, but the meals have been rejected from the hospital and they prevent her from receiving them.
A petition demanding that the government drop the charges against Koessler and allow him to see his daughter has received over 201,928 supporters, and his case has caught the attention of people all over the world.
Koessler attempted to see his daughter again last week and was denied by the staff at the hospital.
Although the government and law enforcement are at the root of this problem by continuing to wage the war on drugs, the hospital and their staff have played a major role in this incident. In their arrogance, they rejected the possibility of a natural cure and have used the enforcement arm of the government to prevent these potential cures from being explored.
Those who would keep a potentially life-saving medicine from a suffering 2-year-old child are nothing short of vile criminals. Nothing illustrates the insanity, immorality, and sheer evil of the drug war quite like punishing a parent for trying to save their child’s life and forcing a toddler to suffer.
As cannabis is taken more seriously as a medicine and a treatment, more people are taking a chance and using it as a treatment for terminal illnesses. This treatment has had overwhelmingly positive results for countless people who had no other hope of recovery. Every day more stories and scientific studies are appearing from all over the world where people of all ages, even young children, are cured of life-threatening illnesses with cannabis oil.
More often than not, these patients face legal penalties and even jail time for trying to better their lives. In the case of parents with children who have terminal illnesses, they are forced to break laws to get their kids the treatment that they need.
The father of a 2-year-old with late-stage cancer is facing jail time for using cannabis oil in an attempt to ease his daughter’s suffering.
Adam Koessler of Queensland, Austrailia is one of these parents who are facing potential prison time for attempting to save their children’s lives with cannabis oil. Koessler’s 2-year-old daughter was diagnosed with stage-4 neuroblastoma, and when chemo was not working, he began giving her doses of cannabis oil after reading about how well it did for other people. Instantly he noticed remarkable results and an extreme improvement in her condition.
“The results were amazing, what we saw when Rumer was given the medical cannabis oil what nothing short of miraculous. Her cancer ridden little body was alive again — Rumer had almost instant quality of life…Her skin color came back, her eyes were sparkling again…We were certain after seeing these results that her recovery was entirely possible,” Koessler said.
Sadly, the hospital contacted the police and told them about what was happening, and they quickly arrested Koessler at the hospital for
possessing ‘dangerous drugs’ and for supplying them to a minor. After he was released on bail the terms of his release prevented him from seeing his daughter and they have removed him from any involvement in his daughter’s treatment.
He has attempted to send his daughter organic meals so she is more healthy to fight the cancer, but the meals have been rejected from the hospital and they prevent her from receiving them.
A petition demanding that the government drop the charges against Koessler and allow him to see his daughter has received over 201,928 supporters, and his case has caught the attention of people all over the world.
Koessler attempted to see his daughter again last week and was denied by the staff at the hospital.
Although the government and law enforcement are at the root of this problem by continuing to wage the war on drugs, the hospital and their staff have played a major role in this incident. In their arrogance, they rejected the possibility of a natural cure and have used the enforcement arm of the government to prevent these potential cures from being explored.
Those who would keep a potentially life-saving medicine from a suffering 2-year-old child are nothing short of vile criminals. Nothing illustrates the insanity, immorality, and sheer evil of the drug war quite like punishing a parent for trying to save their child’s life and forcing a toddler to suffer.
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7172
Reputation : 2603
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 29
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Big Pharma and the Medical Health Industry
by lizardking Sat Feb 20, 2016 4:43 pm
Propaganda Machine Takes Aim at Zika Virus. The Causes of Microcephaly
By Dr. Mercolahttp://www.globalresearch.ca/propaganda-machine-takes-aim-at-zika-virus-the-causes-of-microcephaly/5508275?platform=hootsuite
It’s that time again — time for the pandemic outbreak propaganda machine to cry “Wolf!” and justify the mass use of vaccines and the necessity for chemical remediation. The World Health Organization (WHO) has already declared another global public health emergency.1 We’ve seen a string of these over-hyped virus scares over the past six years, from the bird and swine flu to Ebola — all of which died down as suddenly as they emerged, without causing the predicted widespread catastrophic damage in the real world. This year, it’s the Zika virus, which is being blamed for a rash of reports of microcephaly2,3 among infants born in Brazil. The condition, in which babies are born with unusually small heads, is said to have surged from an average of about 150 cases annually to more than 4,780 cases since October 2015.
Microcephaly Cases Vastly Over-Reported
The Brazilian government has already admitted that overly generous parameters resulted in dramatic over-reporting of the rare condition public health officials have associated with the Zika virus, which has been dubbed by the media as the “shrunken head” virus. To be on the safe side, when Zika-affected areas began seeing a rise in microcephaly, the Brazilian government asked health officials to report any case in which a child was born with a head circumference smaller than 33 centimeters. False positives were expected, and when they realized that most of these babies were in fact healthy and normal, the threshold was lowered to 32 centimeters in December. The limit may be lowered even further, to 31.9 centimeters for boys and 31.5 centimeters for girls. As reported by The New York Times:4
Of the cases examined so far, 404 have been confirmed as having microcephaly. Only 17 of them tested positive for the Zika virus… Another 709 babies have been ruled out as having microcephaly … underscoring the risks of false positives making the epidemic appear larger than it actually is. The remaining 3,670 cases are still being investigated. [Emphasis mine]
As noted by The New York Times, there’s actually very little scientific evidence tying the Zika virus to this particular condition. Still, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the Zika virus a global health emergency5 on February 1, noting that the “main worry” is the virus’ potential link to microcephaly and subsequent brain damage. According to WHO, the Zika virus may have infected as many as 4 million people in the Americas, and public health officials in Brazil, Colombia and El Salvador are reportedly all researching the effects of Zika infection in pregnant women.
Poverty, Pollution, and Vitamin Deficiencies May Affect Microcephaly Rates in Brazil
The Zika virus was initially identified in 1947 in Uganda, where it was originally limited to rhesus monkeys. It’s an arbovirus, meaning the disease is transmitted via mosquito, tick or flea bites. According to ATCC,6 a “global biological materials resource…organization whose mission focuses on the acquisition, authentication, production, preservation, development, and distribution of standard reference microorganisms,” the Zika virus7 — which they sell for about $500 — causes paralysis and death.
In humans, Zika infection typically causes only mild flu-like symptoms, if any, and there does not appear to be any prior evidence suggesting it might cause birth defects. That certainly doesn’t exclude the possibility, of course, but there are many other factors and co-factors that offer a far more likely and rational explanation for the rise in microcephaly in this area of Brazil, besides Zika-carrying mosquitoes. For starters, the “outbreak” is occurring in a largely poverty-stricken agricultural area of Brazil that uses large amounts of banned pesticides.8,9,10
Between these factors and the lack of sanitation and widespread vitamin A and zinc deficiency, you already have the basic framework for an increase in poor health outcomes among newborn infants in that area.11 Environmental pollution12,13 and toxic pesticide exposure have been positively linked to a wide array of adverse health effects, including birth defects. When you add all these co-factors together, an increase in microcephaly doesn’t seem like such a far-fetched outcome.
Vitamin A Deficiency Linked to Microcephaly
Vitamin A and zinc deficiency is considered endemic in Brazil,14,15,16 and both of these nutritional deficiencies are known to depress immune function.17,18,19 More importantly, vitamin A deficiency has been linked to an increased risk of microcephaly specifically,20,21 and zinc is known to play an important role in the structure and function of the brain.22 Even the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) lists malnutrition and exposure to toxic chemicals as two of the three known risk factors. The third is certain infections during pregnancy, including rubella, cytomegalovirus, toxoplasmosis, and others.23 Researchers24 have also noted that microcephaly follows “an apparent autosomal recessive pattern,” and may be the result of a recessed gene.
Atrazine Also Implicated in Microcephaly
The pesticide Atrazine also appears to be a viable culprit. According to research25 published in 2011, small head circumference was listed as a side effect of prenatal Atrazine exposure. Atrazine is used to prevent pre- and post-emergence weeds and is the second most commonly used herbicide after Roundup. As noted by Sott.net:26
The most obvious cause of birth defects in this area is direct contact and absorption of pesticides. A study of pesticide use on tomatoes27 in the Northern State of Pernambuco, Brazil, indicates high exposure to pesticide workers and poor application methods which threaten the ecology of the area. Women washed the pesticide application equipment, generally in the work environment, without protective clothing or without observing the recommended three-fold washing process … Of the women workers, 32% reported being pregnant more than five times … Almost three-quarters of the women (71%) reported miscarriages, and 11% reported having mentally and/or physically impaired offspring.
Why Is Brazil Overlooking Teratogenic Larvicide Added to Drinking Water in Affected Area?
A report28,29 by an Argentine physician’s organization called “Physicians in the Crop-Sprayed Towns” also challenges the theory that Zika virus is responsible for the microcephaly cases in Brazil. They note that for the past 18 months, a chemical larvicide that causes malformations in mosquitoes (pyroproxyfen) has been applied to the drinking water in the affected area of Brazil. Pyroproxyfen is manufactured by Sumitomo Chemical, long-term strategic partners of Monsanto, and has been used in a state-controlled program to eradicate mosquitoes. This chemical inhibits growth in mosquito larvae, thereby producing malformations that disable and/or kill the mosquitoes. According to “Physicians in the Crop-Sprayed Towns,” it’s also an endocrine disruptor and teratogenic, meaning it causes birth defects. The organization also points out that Zika virus has never been associated with birth defects previously, even in areas where 75 percent of the population has been infected. According to the report:
Malformations detected in thousands of children from pregnant women living in areas where the Brazilian state added Pyroproxyfen to drinking water are not a coincidence, even though the Ministry of Health places a direct blame on the Zika virus for this damage.
Aerial Spraying of Neonicotinoids Also Causes Skeletal Malformations
The list of pesticides that have the potential to disrupt fetal development is long. Yet another suspect is Imidacloprid, a neonicotinoid. In October 2012—around the same time that these women would have been getting pregnant–Brazil lifted its ban on aerial spraying of neonicotinoids. In30 2001, it was reported that Imidacloprid fed to pregnant rats and rabbits in “maternally toxic” doses caused skeletal malformation in a small percentage of fetuses.31,32 In December 2013, the U.K. Daily Mail33 also reported that neonicotinoids were suspected of causing developmental problems in babies and children. Another 2013 study34 showed adverse events with embryo development and neonicotinoids. Perhaps it’s not any single one of these pesticides that is to blame. Perhaps the rise in microcephaly cases is the result of exposure to a terrible mixture of toxic pesticides before or during pregnancy?
Mandatory Vaccination Program of Pregnant Women Took Effect 2015
Also, in October 2014 the Brazilian government mandated that all pregnant women must receive the pertussis-containing Tdap (tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis) vaccine, effective as of 2015.35 The fact that birth defects began rising toward the end of 2015 seems more suspicious in light of this mandate than the possibility that Zika infection is solely responsible — especially when you consider that pertussis vaccine has previously been linked to brain inflammation and brain damage in infants, and the safety of administering Tdap to pregnant women has never been proven.36 In the summer of 2015, Dr. Kathryn Edwards, director of the Vanderbilt Vaccine Research Program, received a $307,000 grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to study the immune responses of pregnant women receiving Tdap, the vaccine in question.37 Her conclusions remain to be seen. But a number of previous studies have demonstrated that stimulating the immune system of a pregnant woman is a very bad idea. So why mandate Tdap vaccine but not vitamin A and zinc supplementation for pregnant women? Studies showing adverse health effects from maternal immune activation include but are not limited to the following samples:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Are Genetically Engineered Mosquitoes Linked to Zika Infection?
Interestingly enough, the Gates Foundation has also financed the development of genetically-engineered (GE) mosquitoes,44designed by a biotech company called Oxitec to combat dengue fever and Zika — a project some suspect may have somehow backfired, resulting in a Zika outbreak instead.45 Considering the fact that the transgenic mosquitoes are designed to kill the offspring before they reach breeding maturity — they’re carrying a “suicide” or “self-destruct gene”46 if you will — you may wonder how such mosquitoes could possiblypromote the spread of Zika. Well, they can’t. Not intentionally, anyway, which is what some people have suggested. There are some potential problems though.
This genetic “kill switch” starts to fail in the presence of the antibiotic tetracycline.47 Brazil is the third largest consumer of antibiotics for food and animal production48 and, according to a 2009 analysis,49 an estimated 75 percent of the tetracyclines administered to farm animals end up being excreted in waste. The use of manure and sewage sludge as fertilizers is a major route of spread of antibiotics in the environment. (Little is known about the environmental impact of tetracycline, but Brazilian researchers50 have found alarming situations where the presence of these drugs in drinking water has resulted in bacterial resistance.) According to Oxitec documents,51 in the presence of tetracyclines the survival rate of the GE mosquitoes’ offspring may be as high as 15 percent. However, aside from not decimating the mosquito population as efficiently as intended, there’s really NO evidence to suggest that these GE mosquitoes are somehow intentional carriers of the Zika virus. That said, while the GE mosquitoes are supposed to be all male, which don’t bite, if females either happen to slip through the process, or for some reason survive, there may be a risk that they could transfer their modified DNA to the host. What the ramifications of this might be is unclear.
GE Mosquitoes Claim Success — Yet We Need Harsher Pesticides?
Oxitec released the first batches of transgenic Aedes aegypti mosquitoes in the Cayman Islands in September 2009.52 Malaysia releases followed in 2010. In July 2012, the company had set up a large-scale transgenic mosquito farm in Brazil. The GE mosquitoes were released into the wild in Juazeiro, Brazil in the summer of 2015, and shortly thereafter Oxitec announced53 they had “successfully controlled the Aedes aegyptimosquito that spreads dengue fever, chikungunya, and zika virus, by reducing the target population by more than 90 percent.” Research54 findings published in PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases claim the sterile breed had reduced the mosquito population in one Brazilian suburb by 95 percent. Despite such claims of successful decimation of the disease-carrying insect, Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff recently made an announcement saying: “each federal public official has to transform into a combatant against the mosquito and its reproduction.” Thousands of soldiers and state employees have been enlisted to eradicate mosquitoes wherever they may lurk. “We will do everything, absolutely everything in our reach to protect you,”President Rousseff said55 in her speech, addressing all the mothers and future mothers of Brazil — and then she turns around and orders women and children to be fumigated with toxic chemicals! Oh, the tragic irony!
‘Health Experts’ Call for Return of DDT
Groups like the Manhattan Institute are even calling for the return of DDT56 to address the mosquito problem! This is despite the fact that DDT passes freely through the placenta during pregnancy,57 where it gains direct access to the developing fetus and its brain.58 Studies have linked DDT to high blood pressure, decreased fertility, premature delivery, adult diabetes, and Alzheimer’s.59Moreover, DDT has also been linked to microcephaly,60 so using this toxin would definitely not be the answer to the current problem! As noted by STAT News:61
“The United States banned DDT in 1972 after it was found to persist in the environment for decades, build up in food chains, and kill eagles, pelicans, and other wildlife. But the pesticide was never banned globally. Though the 2001 Stockholm Convention called on countries to eliminate use of DDT and related chemicals, DDT is still used in African and other countries to control malaria-carrying mosquitoes (which, as predicted, evolved widespread resistance to the chemical). A significant concern about DDT is that when a mosquito population evolves resistance to it (as individual insects that harbor DDT-defying mutations leave countless more descendants than vulnerable insects), the creatures also develop resistance to other, safer insecticides… Epidemiologist Brenda Eskenazi, Ph.D. of the University of California, San Francisco, who led a 2009 study raising concerns about the human health effects of DDT exposure, agreed that DDT might not work in Brazil and other countries where Zika is spreading. ‘They should use whatever they can to control the virus,’ she said, ‘but they have to do it safely.’ According to news photos, ‘men in hazmat suits are spraying pesticides around women and children’ who have no protective clothing or anything else, she said, ‘which is horrible and upsetting.’”
Foggers and Mosquito Sprays Don’t Work on This Mosquito
It’s astounding how short-sighted many are, but that’s what happens when you incite panic — people don’t stop to think. In this case, recommendations to use toxic foggers and sprays is bound to do FAR more harm than good, if for no other reason than the fact that they’re ineffective against Aedes aegypti, the species of mosquito in question.62 These tiny black and white striped mosquitoes do not fly far — their range being a mere 300 to 600 feet. Since it’s so difficult to catch them airborne, insecticidal sprays and foggers are mostly useless for controlling them. Also, they feed during the daytime, not at night, which is typically when the fog-trucks will roll through the neighborhood. As noted by Medicinenet.com:63
To feed, they have to stick close to their intended targets, a.k.a. us. They live under decks, patio furniture, and in homes that don’t have cool air — they don’t much like air conditioning. They especially love the drip trays that collect extra water under potted plants … They ‘can breed in incredibly small amounts of water,’ says Joe Conlon, spokesman for the American Mosquito Control Association.‘When I was in Suriname, South America, several years ago, I saw them breeding very happily in discarded soda bottle caps,’ he says. In New Jersey, researchers at Rutgers University found them breeding in water that had pooled in discarded snack-size potato chip bags.‘These mosquitoes are in people’s backyards,’ says Dina Fonseca, Ph.D., an entomologist and associate professor at Rutgers. They live in containers, she says, and are ‘urban, domestic mosquitoes.’”
Other questionable suggestions on the table include using X-rays and/or Gamma rays to sterilize mosquitoes. According to Reuters:64
Such laboratory-bred male mosquitoes could then be released in the wild to mate with the females of the species who then bear eggs that never hatch, thus reducing the number of insects in a given area without killing any animals or using chemicals.
Emergency Declaration Begins Another Round of Massive Profiteering
The emergency declaration begins another round of massive profiteering for drug and vaccine companies. And this year, the chemical- and biotech industries get to ride gunshot too. This is how they survive — scaring the heck out of people at regular intervals while making tons of money in the process. As expected, Zika vaccines are in the works, with companies racing to become the first to deliver a remedy,65,66 no matter how poorly tested and ultimately dangerous they might be — all under the auspices of saving tons of lives, of course.
Yet it’s worth remembering that any pandemic vaccine fast tracked to market in the U.S. during a “public health emergency” is completely shielded from liability for injuries and deaths.
Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, and Merck are all looking to develop a Zika vaccine. The Indian company Bharat Biotech somehow got a head start, and began working on two Zika vaccines in November 2014.67 Would it surprise you to find out that this company is also linked to the Gates Foundation? They received $50 million from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to research and conduct human trials on a malaria vaccine.68 Merck, Syngenta, and Bayer are also partners in the Gates Foundation, as are chemical giants Monsanto69 and DuPont. This unholy alliance is just one of the reasons why I don’t trust Bill Gates’ philanthropy, he might be one of the most dangerous individual powers on the planet.70
U.S. Overreacts Based on Poorly Constructed Fear Porn
Like many other nations, the U.S. has overreacted to the news and is increasing mosquito eradication efforts. According to some models, an estimated 200 million Americans, or over 60 PERCENT of the U.S. population, may become infected with Zika this summer.71 So far, about three dozen cases of Zika virus infection have been confirmed in 11 U.S. states — most of which, according to the report, were thought to have been acquired by people while out of the country. The CDC urges pregnant women to avoid traveling to countries with reported transmissions of the infection — a total of 24 countries so far.72 As noted by Reuters:73
“With no specific federal guideline yet in place to control the spread of the Zika virus in the United States, some mosquito-heavy states like Florida are stepping up spraying and education programs. But, the North and West have yet to boost prevention. Only one out of the more than 30 confirmed cases of Zika in the country appears to have been transmitted locally, in Dallas, Texas. Public health officials are bracing for the time when warmer weather increases the number of mosquitoes that can transmit the virus by biting an infected person and spreading it to others. The types of mosquitoes carrying the Zika virus, Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus, are common in Florida, where mosquito season is year-round, and along the coast of the Gulf of Mexico, including Houston.”
Panama, India, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam, the Philippines, Costa Rica, Trinidad and Tobago, and Florida in the U.S. are also slated to receive Oxitec’s “self-destruct” mosquitoes74,75 and the longer the Zika scare continues, the more likely these little critters will be released in mosquito-ridden areas across the world. Is this wise? Chances are we may be in for some nasty surprises. As noted by Helen Wallace in 2012, a British environmentalist with the organization GeneWatch:76
This mosquito is Dr. Frankenstein’s monster, plain and simple. To open a box and let these man-made creatures fly free is a risk with dangers we haven’t even begun to contemplate.
We may not like the mosquito, but that doesn’t mean it serves no function in the ecosystem. If we successfully eradicate this mosquito, what might the ramifications be ecosystem-wide?
How Does U.S. Explain 25,000 Microcephaly Cases Annually — Without Zika?
In the U.S., approximately 25,000 infants are diagnosed with microcephaly each year.77 Brazil has about 70 percent of the population the U.S. has, and now reports just over 400 cases, 17 of which tested positive for the Zika virus. So is this reallythe global emergency it’s being made out to be? And more importantly, is Zika virus really responsible for these birth defects? Colombia reports that 3,177 pregnant women have tested positive for Zika virus, yet no cases of microcephaly have occurred.78
The evidence suggests implicating Zika virus may be a matter of convenience — leaders of the public-private partnership between industry and government are quickly blaming the rise in microcephaly on disease-carrying mosquitoes in order to sell more GE mosquitoes, to sell more toxic insecticides, and to have an excuse to develop and sell more vaccines. All the while, they are keeping hidden some of the most likely culprits — poor nutrition and toxic environmental exposures like pesticides, as well as vaccines given during pregnancy when the fetus is most susceptible to harm.
By throwing up a convenient veil in the form of Zika-infected mosquitoes, business can not only go on as usual, but grow and expand profits to boot. I have no immediate answers to this problem, other than a firm suggestion, and that is to put on your thinking cap and assess the situation based on what the actual evidence shows, and do not just go by the sound bytes regurgitated by the talking heads.
Sooner or later the insanity must end. We cannot expect a healthy infant and child population when pregnant women are assaulted with toxins at every turn.
And MORE toxins is NOT the answer! This really should be self-evident.
For all intents and purposes my review of the available evidence strongly suggests that the Zika virus is just another fabricated threat designed to support even further use of profitable but unproven and highly ineffective products like vaccines.
Notes
click here to access the references (1-78)
lizardking- Posts : 1673
Points : 7172
Reputation : 2603
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 29
Location : United Kingdom
Page 6 of 9 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
Similar topics» CoronaVirus and Forced Vaccination Manipulation
» CoronaVirus and Forced Vaccination Manipulation
» Freemasons and the music industry.
» ISS Hoax - The International Space Station Does Not Exist!
» Media & Entertainment Industry Manipulation
» CoronaVirus and Forced Vaccination Manipulation
» Freemasons and the music industry.
» ISS Hoax - The International Space Station Does Not Exist!
» Media & Entertainment Industry Manipulation
IFERS - Exposing the 'Global' Conspiracy From Atlantis to Zion :: Other Conspiracies, Hoaxes, Myths and Lies
Page 6 of 9
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum