Natural Solutions Foundation
www.GlobalHealthFreedom.org
www.HealthFreedomUSA.org
www.NaturalSolutionsEurope.org
Once again, the Natural Solutions Foundation wants to thank the Environmental Working Group for their outstanding work. For 5 years the EWG has published a list of the safest, and most dangerous, types of produce, focusing on pesticide levels.
Here is this year’s list. Numbers in front of the item indicate how bad it is (higher is worse), numbers after the item indicate its pesticide load. So eat from the bottom of the list if you are not buying organic. If you are eating organic, you can enjoy the whole bounty of spring’s harvest.
But think for a moment, before you begin to plan your shopping this season, what it means to have foods like peaches, apples and sweet peppers so contaminated that eating them is, quite literally, taking your life onto your fork and into your hands.
That is what the industrialized food producers have done so far: introduced, with the blessings of our weak and dangerous government regulators who allegedly are keeping our food safe, chemicals and genetic alterations, irradiation and other degredations which have made our food not only unwholesome, but downright dangerous.
But WAIT!! There’s more. HR 875, S 425 and the associated bills working their way rapidly through our clueless (or worse!!!) Congress are fixing to make the current level of contamination look like Grandma’s home grown goodies. Click here to tell Congress in no uncertain terms that this set of bills must not pass and, if pass, MUST be ammended to protect home and organic food production, growing and farming.
HR 875 and S 425 (and their associated bills) provide for a level of industrial control of our food supply that will, not might, may, could or can, but WILL guarantee that you and your family WILL get sick from even more poisoned food. Maybe not this week, maybe not until a few years down the road, but nutritional under supply (from foods grown in soil fertilized with synthetic fertilizers and depleted from de mineralization never really corrected) and toxic overload WILL weaken your immune system, divert you from your life pursuits with chronic and often lethal illness. Freedom? You’ll be too sick to care.
Your food WILL be genetically modified. GMO crops require 4 times more pesticide than conventional ones and a great many of them require huge amounts of herbicides (like glyphosate or Roundup(C), a wildly dangerous chemical which is associated with cancer, infertility, auto immune diseases and more.
Roundup(C) is, of course, just one of a wide variety of horrifically toxic chemicals whose regulation these new laws put into the hands of unelected bureaucrats whose discretion is breathtaking. Their interest is not in food safety. Their interest is in serving the needs of their corporate masters, and their corporate masters’ masters.
If that does not ring right with you, take a look at the lethal mess our food supply is in today. And then consider that it is the US FDA and USDA, again serving their corporate masters, who run the show at Codex Alimentarius, bringing us horrific standards and guidelines which have the potential to degrade the health, and shorten the life, of every man, woman and child on the planet who eats food grown inside the corporate corral. Of course, for you and me, NOT doing so will be a crime. Saving seeds will be a crime. Growing pristine organic food (or better) will, if the laws currently under consideration are implemented, quickly become a criminal act. The SWAT teams who raided the Ohio family organic cooperative a couple of months ago, the raw milk farmer in Pennsylvania who was taken to jail for selling his clean product and a host of other food atrocities will look, I am afraid, like the “Good Old Days” should these laws reach their logical – and lethal – consequences.
Remember, the law is one thing. Contaminated food is quite another.
Government regulatory agencies regulate for the sake of corporate interests. Yours are nowhere to be seen, unless, of course, you are Monsanto. In fact, the Representative who introduced HR 875 is married, as was a previous, and deeply destructive long-time US Codex delegate, to a Monsanto lawyer. No accident.
The proposed new food agency and the new food powers (under these laws) are nothing short of cataclysmic and over the line insane from a health perspective. The Natural Solutions Foundation proposes removing ALL food regulatory power from the federal government which has, for about 80 years now, proven itself to be increasingly unable to push back the demands of industry, whether Big Pharma, Big Agribiz or Big Chema (or Big Medica, for that matter) weighed against the public good. Deadly drugs, deadly food, deadly environmental contamination and an unrelenting, accelerating assault on health aids like supplements and Nano silver are the result.
Click the link below to tell Congress that, while you want the FDA, USDA, EPA and other inept and dangerous government agencies stripped of their food regulatory powers and those powers returned to newly constructed agencies at the State level controlled by consumers, statutorily devoid of corporate impact or connection, with harsh penalties for any breech of the perimeter keeping industry out of food regulation, we oppose the pending bills, HR875 and S425 which do not contain language to protect family farms and ranches; organic and natural products.
http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/568/t/1128/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=26714
More about this at: http://drrimatruthreports.com/?p=2287
When an agency or program has failed, the typical political situation is to throw money at it to “reform it”, making it bigger, giving it more powers and then watch it fail worse – followed by more money and more power.
This is precisely what has happened with the latest FDA modernization and revitalization bills. More money, more power, more curruption, less safety of either food or drugs.
Drugs you can avoid voluntarily. Food you cannot.
The Natural Solutions Foundation has been warning for several years that home grown and produced food, and organic food, would be coming under sustained and terminal attack. Unfortunately, we were right and that attack is being mounted now. Therefore, the counter thrust must be mounted now, and it must be swift, effective and decisive.
Food MUST be taken out of the hands of the corrupt federal agencies and given back to the people. And saved seed, a corner stone of liberty, along with clean, unadulterated food, MUST not be taken out of your hands and mine.
If you love fascism, sit back and do nothing. If you want to see farmers forced to leave their land and their livlihoods, unable to produce clean food for you, sit back and do nothing. If you want to be forbidden to grow, can, preserver or share your own good food in the US of farmland from sea to shining sea, sit back and do nothing.
If you want the laws of the US “HARMonized” with the draconian food laws of Europe, where a cucumber cannot be sold unless its curvature is correct and where the hundreds of seed companies that once flourished have been reduced to a rapidly dwindling handful, please, sit back and do nothing.
But if you, like me, are aghast at these options, then stand up and be counted. Start disseminating and rousing support for the following action items as if your very life (and that of your children and grandchildren) deepened upon it. Your life and their does depend upon it.
Click below to read a detailed analysis of HR 875 and S 425 and their frighteningly (and absurdly) vague permissiveness giving industry full reign over your food and therefore, your health.
Alarm Bells Ringing in Europe and the US – http://drrimatruthreports.com/?p=2349
Yours in health and freedom,
Dr. Rima
Rima E. Laibow, MD
Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation
www.HealthFreedomUSA.org
www.GlobalHealthFreedom.org
www.NaturalSolutionsFoundation.org
www.ValleyoftheMoonCoffee.org
www.Organics4U.org
www.NaturalSolutionsMarketPlace.org
The Full List: 47 Fruits & Veggies
RANK Lower numbers are worse
SCORE Higher numbers are worse
1 (worst) Peach 100 (highest pesticide load)
2 Apple 93
3 Sweet Bell Pepper 83
4 Celery 82
5 Nectarine 81
6 Strawberries 80
7 Cherries 73
8 Kale 69
9 Lettuce 67
10 Grapes – Imported 66
11 Carrot 63
12 Pear 63
13 Collard Greens 60
14 Spinach 58
15 Potato 56
16 Green Beans 53
17 Summer Squash 53
18 Pepper 51
19 Cucumber 50
20 Raspberries 46
21 Grapes – Domestic 44
22 Plum 44
23 Orange 44
24 Cauliflower 39
25 Tangerine 37
26 Mushrooms 36
27 Banana 34
28 Winter Squash 34
29 Cantaloupe 33
30 Cranberries 33
31 Honeydew Melon 30
32 Grapefruit 29
33 Sweet Potato 29
34 Tomato 29
35 Broccoli 28
36 Watermelon 26
37 Papaya 20
38 Eggplant 20
39 Cabbage 17
40 Kiwi 13
41 Sweet Peas – Frozen 10
42 Asparagus 10
43 Mango 9
44 Pineapple 7
45 Sweet Corn – Frozen 2
46 Avocado 1
47 (best) Onion 1 (lowest pesticide load)
The careless, industry controlled FDA has been happy to approve drugs made from genetically modified molecules, including many from plants, since 1985 when it approved GMO insulin. These drugs are called “Biologicals”. A new analysis, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, shows that biologicals are twice as dangerous as chemical (non GMO) drugs. We know how dangerous they are (over 100,000 deaths per year and 3 million hospitalizations per year for adverse events from properly used drugs in the US each year. Now multiply that danger by at least two and see what you get: a profit-driven disaster.
The excellent summary below makes it clear that while it is essential to divest the FDA and USDA of their food regulatory responsibilities, the dangerous and industry-supported FDA is not doing any better with their regulatory responsibilities on drugs than they are on food. At least with drugs, however, you have a chance, for the moment, of saying “yes” or “no” to their use. Food is compulsory. Drugs are [usually] voluntary. And that is why, of course, natural medicine options, in all their forms, are under such vigorous attack.
That is also why the Natural Solutions Foundation continually asks you to make sure that everyone in your contact list becomes aware of these issues and that you request that they take the actions that you take to prevent the loss of our health freedoms and to separate this dangerous agency (and the USDA) from your table and your health.
Here is the link to send to your contact list so they can sign up for the free, secure and vitally important Health Freedom Action eAlerts: http://drrimatruthreports.com/?page_id=187. And here is the link for you – and your contacts – to make a tax exempt donation to the Natural Solutions Foundation: http://drrimatruthreports.com/?page_id=189.
Yours in health and freedom,
Dr. Rima
Rima E. Laibow, MD
Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation
www.HealthFreedomUSA.org
www.GlobalHealthFreedom.org
www.NaturalSolutionsFoundation.org
www.ValleyoftheMoonCoffee.org
www.Organics4U.org
www.NaturalSolutionsMarketPlace.org
‘Biologicals’, Wonder Drugs with Problems
Protein drugs produced by genetic engineering cause adverse events including death more frequently than synthetic chemical drugs; yet they are being produced in transgenic crops grown in open fields Prof. Joe Cummins
‘Biologicals’ more dangerous than chemicals
‘Biologicals’ are drugs in which the active substance is produced by or extracted from a biological source (in contrast to synthetic chemicals). Biologicals are relatively recent, being for the most part, recombinant proteins produced by genetic engineering. The first biological was recombinant human insulin produced in recombinant bacteria and commercially approved in 1982. Currently, there are more than 250 biologicals on the market, including recombinant blood products, monoclonal antibodies and vaccines that have been approved by regulatory agencies in the United States and European Union (EU). Between 2003 and 2006 biologicals represented 24 percent of all new approvals in the US and 22 percent of new approvals in the EU [1]. Ten biologicals are listed among the top selling ‘blockbuster’ drugs valued at 1 to 3.2 billion dollars in sales. These drugs included treatments for red blood cell disorders, immune system disorders, cancer and insulin analogues [2].
Newly approved drugs are frequently found to cause unexpected problems; but biologicals are incurring problems even more frequently than synthetic chemical drugs. A recent study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association confirms that the biological drugs have provoked significantly more regulatory actions than newly introduced synthetic chemical drugs. The researchers, based in The Netherlands, followed up a group of biologicals approved in the US and EU between 1995 and 2008, and found that 24 percent of these have prompted safety regulatory actions. New chemical drugs have an 8.5 percent chance of safety warning within ten years of approval, compared to 17 percent for biologics [2]. The regulatory actions included warnings on general disorders and administration site conditions, infections and infestations, immune system disorders and cancers (benign, malignant and unspecified). Adverse events included many serious complications of the drug treatment such as increased mortality, anaphylaxis, cancer, heart failure, stroke, and infections [1]. However, industry representatives implied [2] that the diseases being treated were very serious, and the drugs were efficacious and the adverse events relatively rare. The study concluded [1]: “The nature of safety problems identified after approval for biologicals is often related to the immunomodulatory effect (infections). Because the biologicals first to be approved in a class were more likely to be subjected to regulatory action, close monitoring is recommended.”
FDA blaming the victims rather than the drugs?
A review of the Netherlands study published in Nature Biotechnology acknowledges the significance of the study and the problem of adverse events related to biologicals. The article mentions a caveat to the study’s conclusions added by Sandra Kweder, deputy director of FDA’s office of new drugs at the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research [2]: “Biological therapeutics are more likely to be developed to treat serious illnesses, she points out, and serious illnesses themselves are fertile ground for ‘toxicity’ whether related to the drug or disease, so interpreting data on the drug’s or biological’s risk must take that into account.” That seems to lay the blame for the adverse outcomes on those being treated rather than the drugs; and looks like an attempt to protect the billion-dollar industry.
The Nature Biotechnology review [2] further comments that industry insiders agree long-term safety monitoring will be crucial for biologics. While the antibody producing company InNexux’s chief scientific officer is reported to have said: “That long-term use may lead to problems I think is a given,” – a suspicion borne out by the latest study – the company’s chairman and ceo Jeff Morhet, finds at least one important consolation: “the study showed that no biological was pulled from the market for safety reasons.”
Lax FDA regulation and a profit-hungry industry
If anything, Morhet’s remark should offer no consolation to those being treated; as it exposes the lack of adequate regulation to protect the public in face of ‘miracle cures’ being offered by an industry whose primary concern is profit.
Significantly, no one has commented on the 2005 case of the drug Tysabri (natalizumab) a treatment for multiple sclerosis that was suspended following two deaths of patients from leukoencephalopathy (progressive damage or inflammation of the white matter of the brain) [3]. Nor indeed has anyone mentioned the catastrophic London drug trial of a biological monoclonal antibody drug that left six healthy young volunteers seriously ill [4] (London Drug Trial Catastrophe – Collapse of Science and Ethics, SiS 30).
The Institute of Science in Society (ISIS) has long been critical of the manner in which biological are tested and used in treatment. The adverse event, ‘cytokine storm’ unleashed in the immune system of the volunteers, was not exactly a surprise. The FDA had issued a long list of warnings on similar monoclonal antibody drugs [5] (Warnings on FDA Approved Monoclonal Antibody Drugs, SiS 30); but that seemed to have been ignored [6] (Post Mortem on the TGN1412 Disaster, SiS 30).
Pharm crops with dangerous biologicals in open field trials put the public at risk
Even more seriously, the secret trials of food crops (pharm crops) in open fields modified with mammalian genes expressing proteins used to treat human or animal disease continue unabated [7] (Drug Trial Catastrophe & Safety of Secretly Tested Pharm Crops, SiS 30). Pharm crops for vaccines and therapeutic antibodies have been trialed since 2004 and earlier [8] (Pharm Crops for Vaccines and Therapeutic Antibodies, SiS 24). Antibodies are produced in tobacco plants [9] (Antibodies from Hybrid GM Tobacco Plants, SiS 35) and in maize [10] (Transgenic Maize with Monoclonal Antibodies Grown in France, SiS 35). Biologicals are well known to have severe side effects on patients and on healthy people. There is no justification for exposing the unsuspecting public to these drugs produced in pharm crops grown in open fields.
References
1. Giezen TJ, Mantel-Teeuwisse AK, Straus SM, Schellekens H, Leufkens HG, Egberts AC. Safety-related regulatory actions for biologicals approved in the United States and the European Union. JAMA. 2008, 300(16), 1887-96.
2. King J. JAMA casts cloud over biologic safety. Nature Biotechnology 2009, 27,11-12.
3. FDA Public Health Advisory Suspendec Marketing of Tysabri (natalizumab) 2005 updated 2007 http://www.fda.gov/cder/drug/advisory/natalizumab.htm
4. Ho M-W and Cummins J. London drug scandal catastrophe, collapse of science and ethics Science in Society 30, 41-43. 2006.
5. Cummins J. Warning on FDA approved monoclonal antibody drugs Science in Science in Society 30, 46-47. 2006.
6. Saunders PT. Post mortem on the TGN1412 disaster. Science in Society 30, 44-45+47,. 2006.
7. Cummins J and Ho M-W. Drug trial catastrophe & safety of secretlytested pharm crops Science in Society 30, 50, 2006.
8. Cummins J. Pharm crops for vaccines and therapeutic antibodies Science in Society 24, 22-23, 2004.
9. Cummins J and Ho M-W. Antibodies from hybrid GM tobacco plants. Science in Society 35, 51, 2007.
10. Cummins J, Ho M-W and Saunders PT. Transgenic maize with monoclonal antibodies grown in France Science in Society 31, 4, 2006.
ttp://www.i-sis.org.uk/biologicalsWonderDrugsWithProblems.php
Barbara Loe Fisher is a tireless advocate of both vaccine truth and choice and the Natural Solutions Foundation nominates her for our Hall of Fame. Barbara continues to examine carefully the vaccine industry, its products and its corruption. Her site, www.NVIC.org, is a mine of information and assistance on vaccine and vaccination issues. She is an ally and a resource of great value.
Barbara’s latest commentary on the corrupt – and corrupting – vaccine industry is a very important read.
In it she points out that vaccine safety and effectiveness have not been demonstrated by the studies published about them even in prestige journals. Those studies are of poor quality and show little that can be relied upon scientifically, but are, none the less, used as the evidence relied upon by vaccine courts to determine whether vaccines have harmed or killed anyone.
The Natural Solutions Foundation has filed a Citizens Petition with the Federal Trade Commission demanding hearings on whether vaccines are safe and/or effective and asking for a ban on any advertising or materials which suggest that they are either safe, effective or both until that fact is established.
And click here (http://drrimatruthreports.com/?p=2220) to read the latest news on the “accidental” Baxter International contamination scandal in which live, virulent Avian Flu H5N1 virus was somehow mixed with seasonal flu vaccine shipped to 18 countries. This mixture would allow re-assortment or mutation of the Avian Flu virus which currently is very ineffective in causing human disease. Such alteration of the virus could potentially allow it to become as deadly as the Avian Flu has been predicted to be when it causes the next “inevitable” pandemic. Of course, if it is mixed in with other flu viruses and injected “by accident”, the next pandemic really IS inevitable.
Please share this information as widely as possible, and make a tax deductible donation (http://drrimatruthreports.com/?page_id=189) as generously as possible so that the Natural Solutions Foundation can continue to bring you vitally important information and fight for your health and freedom.
Yours in health and freedom,
Dr. Rima
Rima E. Laibow, MD
Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation
www.HealthFreedomUSA.org
www.GlobalHealthFreedom.org
www.NaturalSolutionsFoundation.org
www.ValleyoftheMoonCoffee.org
www.Organics4U.org
www.NaturalSolutionsMarketPlace.org
Vaccine Studies: Under the Influence of Pharma
Barbara Loe Fisher
If you take more than a casual look at the way the mass vaccination system in the U.S. works, you see that pharmaceutical companies marketing vaccines have a lot of clout.
It was the pharmaceutical industry that told Congress in 1982 that they were going to leave the nation without vaccines if they didn’t get liability protection but have opposed making it less difficult for vaccine victims to obtain federal compensation in the U.S. Court of Claims under a 1986 law that gave them liability protection.
It is Pharma lobbyists, who bully the FDA into fast tracking vaccines like Gardasil and who sit at the CDC’s policymaking tables urging that new vaccines be recommended for use by all children so they can persuade state legislators to mandate vaccines like influenza vaccine.
How Big Pharma Influences Medical Journals
A recent study published in the British Medical Journal reveals the clout that Big Pharma has in the world of medicine journal publishing, specifically the publishing of scientific articles about vaccines. In a Cochrane Collaboration review and analysis of published influenza vaccine studies found that influenza vaccine studies sponsored by industry are treated more favorably by medical journals even when the studies are of poor quality.
This analysis confirms that drug companies marketing vaccines have a major influence on what gets published and is said about vaccines in medical journals. It is no wonder that there are almost no studies published in the medical literature that call into question vaccine safety.
The preferential treatment of Pharma-funded studies also explains why the risks of an inappropriately fast-tracked vaccine like Gardasil are underplayed in the medical literature and why a physician like Andrew Wakefield, M.D. who dared to publish a study in 1998 in a medical journal (The Lancet) calling for more scientific investigation into the possible link between MMR vaccine and regressive autism, has been mercilessly persecuted for more than a decade, by both Pharma-funded special interest groups, as well as public health officials maintaining close relationships with vaccine manufacturers.
Study Finds No Correlation Between Quality of Study and Publication
This recent review identified and assessed 274 published studies on influenza vaccines for their methodological quality and found no relationship between study quality, publication in prestige journals or their subsequent citation in other articles.
The researchers also found that most influenza vaccine studies are of poor quality but those with conclusions favorable to influenza vaccinations are of significantly lower methodological quality. The single most important factor determining where the studies were published or how much they were cited was sponsorship, with those partially or wholly funded by the pharmaceutical industry having higher visibility.
The authors commented: “The study shows that one of the levers for accessing prestige journals is the financial size of your sponsor. Pharma sponsors order many reprints of studies supporting their products, often with in house translations into many languages. They also purchase advertising space in the journal. Many publishers openly advertise these services on their website. It is time journals made a full disclosure of their sources of funding”.
The HPV Vaccine — Just One Example of Inappropriate Influence Endangering Public Health
Last month the National Vaccine Information Center (www.NVIC.org) called on the Obama Administration and Congress to investigate Gardasil vaccine risks. NVIC has long questioned the inappropriate influence of vaccine manufacturers in federal vaccine licensing and policymaking and state vaccine mandates.
In 2006, Merck’s Gardasil vaccine was fast tracked by the FDA at Merck’s request and in 2007 Merck lobbyists mounted an aggressive lobbying campaign to get Gardasil mandated by state legislators for all sixth grade girls, which would have assured the big drug company a predictable market.
The Pharma lobbying effort in 2007 to get all states to mandate Gardasil failed but every other vaccine produced by drug companies and licensed by the FDA in the past quarter century has been mandated. Those new mandates were added to state vaccine laws by legislators and public health officials at the urging of vaccine manufacturer lobbyists and Pharma funded organizations touting vaccine studies published in the medical literature.
Massive Increase in Number of Vaccines Given
In the past three decades, the numbers of doses of government recommended vaccines for children and medical organizations like the American Academy of Pediatrics has tripled to 69 doses of 16 vaccines, with 48 doses of 14 vaccines targeted to children under age six.
Pharma lobbyists have persuaded most states to pass laws requiring two to three dozen doses of most of the 16 government recommended vaccines. Last year New Jersey became the first state to mandate influenza vaccine for children attending daycare and school.
In the past few years, Dr. Jefferson has authored several independent reviews of influenza studies published in the medical literature for the Cochrane Collaboration, which have been published in the British Medical Journal, questioning the quality of published scientific evidence for influenza vaccine effectiveness and safety for the elderly as well as children.
Clearly, if the makers and marketers of vaccines can influence the quality and quantity of the scientific evidence published in the medical literature proving that vaccines are safe and effective — evidence that is used by states to mandate vaccines and by the U.S. Court of Claims to deny compensation to vaccine injured children — then Congress was wrong in 1986 to protect the makers and marketers of vaccines from liability for injuries and deaths caused by those vaccines.
Government Vaccine Recommendations Based on Tainted Evidence
The U.S. Court of Claims vaccine injury compensation awards, and state vaccine mandates are justified on the strength of scientific published in medical journals. It is time for medical journals to disclose all financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry. It is time for studies questioning the safety and effectiveness of vaccines to receive a fair hearing in scientific journals rather than editors confining themselves to primarily publishing studies funded by the pharmaceutical industry maintaining that every vaccine is totally safe, effective and necessary.
Kudos to the British Medical Journal for having the integrity to publish Dr. Jefferson’s comprehensive analysis of pharmaceutical money influence on vaccine studies published in the medical literature. Hopefully, this will be a wake-up call for the scientific community, Congress and the public to put an end to the undue influence the pharmaceutical industry has on the science and policy of mass vaccination in the U.S.
https://mail.google.com/mail/#inbox/11fdd8a33299201c
www
HIV kills people. Sure enough. HIV “Medications” kill people, too, and make a lot of money while they do. That’s sure enough, too. But what if the rumors circulating that the “HIV Virus” is not the causative factor in HIV/AIDS are true? What if HIV is another political tool, manufactured in the biological weapon laboratories of the US and its insane allies in bio-engineered death? And what if the proof were presented to you.
What would you do?
Where would you take that information?
If you continue reading, you may have to confront those decisions.
I hope you do continue reading.
Then let’s talk.
Write to us at dr.laibow@gmail.com with “HIV SCAM” in the subject line and let’s figure out collectively where to go from here.
And if you don’t think for a moment that this battle will take resources, think again.
So I am asking you to include in the email you send some suggestions for resources: human time (volunteer, research assistance, writing, website, etc.), financial resources (donations, fund raisers), dissemination strategies, resources to bring to the table (scientists, organizers, musicians, etc.).
You can donate to the Natural Solutions Foundation at http://drrimatruthreports.com/?page_id=189. All US donations are tax deductible.
Spread the word and ask everyone you know to join the Health Freedom eAlerts, http://drrimatruthreports.com/?page_id=187, for up to the minute information and Action Items.
Yours in health and freedom,
Dr. Rima
Rima E. Laibow, MD
Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation
www.HealthFreedomUSA.org
www.NaturalSolutionsFoundation.org
www.ValleyoftheMoonCoffee.org
www.GlobalHealthFreedom.org
www.Organics4U.org www.NaturalSolutionsMarketPlace.org”>www.Organics4U.org
www.NaturalSolutionsMarketPlace.org
THE AIDS APOSTATES
Anthony Brink
“To overturn orthodoxy is no easier in science than in philosophy, religion,
economics, or any of the other disciplines through which we try to
comprehend the world and the society in which we live.”
Ruth Hubbard US biologist b.1924
Considering how AIDS saturates our public discourse, galvanises our
politicians, thrills our gee-whiz journalists, inspires our musicians,
worries our clergy, agitates our AIDS-activist lawyers, perturbs the judges
of even our highest court, engages the South African Law Commission’s
energies in cooking up imaginative new bills, dominates our medical research
effort, infuses exciting new relevance into tired careers in virology
departments, and siphons off our tax rands into the pockets of our condom
missionaries and ‘AIDS counselors’ proselytizing indefatigably to a stubborn
public, your regular guy might be excused for believing that our country and
the world were in the throes of a dire public health crisis, a new Black
Death, and for thinking that the fact of it was as certain as any in science
about which there obtains a universal consensus.
In fact, hundreds of scientists of the highest rank disagree with the
HIV-AIDS causation hypothesis. They think ‘AIDS’ as a medical construct is a
passing fad, a fashionable new name for age-old ills, and that boiled down,
AIDS is just money spinning political kitsch. In their most assiduous
dissents they emphasize that ‘HIV’ has never been isolated under the
well-settled rules for viral isolation, assert that ‘HIV’ has never been
shown to exist as an infectious entity of exogenous origin, and demonstrate
that every protein claimed uniquely to be constituent of ‘HIV’ is actually
cellular, not viral – in other words, that all HIV-positive test results are
false positives. In short, they consider the HIV-AIDS paradigm a scientific
blunder of biblical proportions, and its experts foolish quacks. These AIDS
dissidents include professors emeriti at the pinnacle of their specialities
in cell-biology, virology and related fields. They also include leading
mathematicians, actuaries, and law and history professors. Among them are
two exceptionally distinguished Nobel laureates in our time, Walter Gilbert
(Chemistry 1980), and the Einstein of modern biology, Kary Mullis (Chemistry
1993).
Dr Peter Duesberg, professor of cell-biology, University of California at
Berkeley, member of The National Academy of Sciences: Before Duesberg’s
wrecking-ball challenge to Gallo’s HIV-AIDS theory was published as an
invited paper in the prestigious journal Cancer Research in 1988, Gallo had
observed, “No one knows more about retroviruses than Peter Duesberg.” Once
acclaimed as a widely published and extensively cited Nobel candidate, but
now ‘delegitimated’ as a scientist, Duesberg was the recipient of the
largest annual research grant in biology for years – awarded for the pursuit
of whatever avenue of scientific enquiry took his fancy. Stripped of his
grant and his post-graduate classes, practically barred from researching and
publishing, and reduced to chairmanship of his faculty’s annual picnic
committee, he continues to point out the fundamental anomalies, deficiencies
and paradoxes of the 15 year old theory that the 29 old diseases renamed
AIDS in the presence of HIV antibodies could have any causal link to a
retrovirus. However, Duesberg finds himself increasingly alone in the AIDS
dissident camp too, eclipsed by Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos et al (below)
whose more fundamental tack in impeaching the HIV-AIDS theory is winning
over its best heterodox scientists, most recently, Kary Mullis (below),
pathology and epidemiology specialist Gordon Stewart (below), and Etienne de
Haarven, pathology professor emeritus at Toronto, renowned for his published
work in the electron photomicrography of viruses.
Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos, bio-physicist, department of medical physics,
Royal Perth Hospital, Australia: Collaborating with, among others, John
Papadimitriou, a practicing pathologist and professor at University of
Western Australia’s medical school, David Causer, senior physicist, head of
the department of medical physics and professor at Royal Perth Hospital, and
Valendar Turner, consultant emergency physician at the Royal Perth Hospital,
Papadopulos-Eleopulos has raised the most radical and dramatic challenges to
the HIV-AIDS theory, by highlighting the lack of a proper gold standard for
the HIV antibody tests, in that unlike other known viruses, HIV has never
been isolated according to the classical procedure for the isolation of
viruses, often referred to as the Pasteur Rules.
Dr Walter Gilbert, formerly molecular-biology professor at Harvard: One of
contemporary science’s most outstanding and accomplished scientists, Gilbert
won his Nobel for inventing the now foundational modern technique for DNA
sequencing. He considers Duesberg to be “absolutely correct in saying that
no one has proven that AIDS is caused by the AIDS virus. There is no animal
model for AIDS, and without an animal model, you cannot establish Koch’s
postulates (to prove the role of the suspected pathogen).” He observes, “The
community as a whole doesn’t listen patiently to critics who adopt
alternative viewpoints. Although the great lesson of history is that
knowledge develops through the conflict of viewpoints.”
Dr Kary Mullis, molecular biologist: Nobel winner Mullis’ watershed
invention of the Polymerase Chain Reaction technology for amplifying minute
DNA fragments for identification has so revolutionised biology that one
might fairly speak of two epochs, the dark ages before and the enlightenment
after it. He deplores the misapplication of his invention to measure “HIV
viral load.” He predicts that, “Years from now, people will find our
acceptance of the HIV theory of AIDS as silly as we find those who
excommunicated Galileo.” Endorsing Duesberg’s rejection of the orthodox
model of infectious AIDS, he says, “As applied, the HIV theory is
unfalsifiable, and useless as a medical hypothesis… I can’t find a single
virologist who will give me references which show HIV is the probable cause
of AIDS. If you ask…you don’t get an answer, you get fury.” The HIV-AIDS
hypothesis, he thinks, is “one hell of a mistake.”
Dr Harry Rubin, retrovirologist, professor of molecular biology, University
of California at Berkeley, member of National Academy of Sciences: “I don’t
think the cause of AIDS has been found. I think (that in) a disease as
complex as AIDS…there are likely to be multiple causes. In fact, to call it
a single disease when there are so many multiple manifestations seems to me
to be an oversimplification.”
Dr Richard Strohman, emeritus professor of cell-biology, University of
California at Berkeley: The HIV-AIDS hypothesis is “bankrupt.”
Dr Beverly Griffin, director and professor of virology, Royal Postgraduate
Medical School in London: “I do not believe HIV, in and of itself, can cause
AIDS.”
Dr Gordon Stewart, emeritus professor of epidemiology, University of
Glasgow, and former AIDS advisor to the World Health Organisation: “AIDS is
a behavioural disease. It is multifactorial, brought on by several
simultaneous strains on the immune system – drugs, pharmaceutical and
recreational, sexually transmitted diseases, multiple viral infections…
there is no specific etiologic agent of AIDS… the disease arises as a
result of a cumulative process following a period of exposure to multiple
environmental factors… Nobody wants to look at the facts about this
disease. It’s the most extraordinary thing I’ve ever seen. I’ve sent
countless letters to medical journals pointing out the epidemiological
discrepancies and they simply ignore them. The fact is, this whole
heterosexual AIDS thing is a hoax.”
Dr Albert Sabin, discoverer of live-virus polio vaccine, National Institutes
of Health: “The basis of present action and education is that everybody who
tests positive for the virus must be regarded as a transmitter and there is
no evidence for that.”
Dr Bernard Forscher, former managing editor of the journal, Proceedings of
the National Academy of Sciences: “The HIV hypothesis ranks with the ‘bad
air’ theory for malaria and the ‘bacterial infection’ theory of beriberi and
pellagra (caused by nutritional deficiencies). It is a hoax that became a
scam.”
Dr Simon Wain-Hobson, immunologist, Institut Pasteur, France: “… an
intrinsic cytopathic effect of the virus (HIV) is no longer credible…”
Dr Alfred Hassig, immunologist, former emeritus professor of immunology,
University of Bern, and former director of a Swiss blood transfusion
laboratory: “The sentences of death accompanying the medical diagnosis of
AIDS should be abolished.”
Sir John Maddox, editor, Nature Magazine: “(Luc) Montagnier said clearly
what he meant. HIV (alone) is… not… a sufficient cause of AIDS.”
Dr Fabio Franchi, specialist in infectious diseases and preventive medicine,
Trieste, Italy: “I am not an agnostic. I am well convinced HIV is harmless.”
Dr Charles Thomas, former professor of molecular biology at Harvard and
Johns Hopkins universities: “It is widely believed by the general public
that a retrovirus called HIV causes the group of diseases called AIDS. Many
biomedical scientists now question this hypothesis. We propose that a
thorough reappraisal of the existing evidence for and against this
hypothesis be conducted by a suitable independent group.” He himself has no
doubts. He rejects the HIV-AIDS hypothesis as a “fraud”.
Dr Phillip Johnson, senior professor of law, University of California at
Berkeley: “The establishment continues to doctor statistics and misrepresent
the situation to keep the public convinced that a major viral pandemic is
under way when the facts are otherwise.”
Dr Serge Lang, professor of mathematics, Yale University and member of the
National Academy of Sciences: “There does not even exist a single proper
definition of AIDS on which discourse or statistics can reliably be based…
the CDC calls these diseases AIDS only when antibodies against HIV are
confirmed or presumed to be present. If a person tests HIV negative, then
the diseases are given another name… I do not regard the causal relationship
between HIV and any disease as settled. I have seen considerable evidence
that highly improper statistics concerning HIV and AIDS have been passed off
as science, and that top members of the scientific establishment have
carelessly, if not irresponsibly, joined the media in spreading
misinformation about the nature of AIDS.”
Dr Joseph Sonnabend, South African born New York physician: “The marketing
of HIV, through press releases and statements, as a killer virus causing
AIDS without the need for any other factors, has so distorted research and
treatment that it may have caused thousands of people to suffer and die.”
Dr Harvey Bialy, editor of the science journal Nature Bio/Technology: “From
both my literature review and my personal experience over most of the AIDS –
so called AIDS centres in Africa, I can find absolutely no believable
persuasive evidence that Africa is in the midst of a new epidemic of
infectious immunodeficiency.”
Dr Charles L. Geshekter, professor of African History, California State
University: … From “Cameroon to California, sex education must no longer
be distorted by terrifying, dubious misinformation that equates sex with
death… African poverty, not some extraordinary sexual behavior, is the
best predictor of AIDS-defining diseases… A 1994 report in the Journal of
Infectious Diseases concluded that HIV tests were useless in central Africa,
where the microbes responsible for tuberculosis, malaria, and leprosy were
so prevalent that they registered over 70% false positive results…in
people whose immune systems are compromised for a wide variety of reasons
other than HIV…”
Dr Hiram Caton, ethicist, head of the School of Applied Ethics at Griffith
University, Brisbane, Australia: “The AIDS epidemic was a mirage
manufactured by scientists who believed that integrity could be maintained
amidst the diverting influences of big money, prestige and politics.”
Dr Ralph Moss: author of The Cancer Industry: “The paradigm that was laid
down for how to milk the cancer problem is basically the same paradigm which
is being followed in milking the AIDS problem.”
Dr Frank Buianouckas: professor of mathematics, Bronx New York: “I suspect
everything involved in this AIDS epidemic. If HIV causes anything, it
certainly causes fund-raisers. It sells stocks. It supports dances. It sells
condoms. And it keeps the AIDS establishment going.
http://aidsinfobbs.org/apostates.html
We have Another Friend in Congress!
Powerful Congresswoman Rosa L. DeLauro (D-CT) has adopted a position in line with what the Natural Solutions Foundation has been calling for over the last months: the FDA cannot regulate drugs and their major economic competitor, foods. She also applauds our oft-repeated assessment of the FDA’s performance in food safety is beyond dismal and cites the recent – and damning – Government Accountability Office (GAO) study to document just how dismal it is.
Up to now, the solution of the Federal Government to repeated exposure of how dangerous, corrupt and damaged the FDA is has been two fold: either Congress took away powers and responsibilities to set up new agencies (e.g., EPA, Consumer Protection Agency, Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs, etc.) or they passed new legislation which gave the failed, and deadly, agency more money and more power to do a worse job with (e.g., 2008 FDA Reorganization Act). The current food safety crisis, with melamine approved for infants, GMO foods and cloned meats and milk approved without scientific studies showing they are safe, fluoridation of water permitted and encouraged despite massive scientific evidence documenting its dangers, irradiation of everything it can find a way to irradiate, including raw nuts and salad greens approved regardless of rational thought, growth hormones, pesticides, veterinary antibiotics permitted in outrageous doses, a relentless assault on dietary supplements, herbs and other non-drug health strategies, multinational servitude in Codex with disastrous results to the world food supply, etc., etc., etc., must be laid solely at the doorstep of one of the most dangerous and corrupt agencies in the history of the United State.
It is time to stop the losses and get food out of the dirty hands of the FDA. The same, of course, is true of the USDA. How? By giving food regulations back to the States where the local interest influences of consumers and the impact of local certification programs can help us to reclaim the production of safe, wholesome food and make it accessible for all of us once again.
Industrial food is killing us.
Let’s kill the messenger and get government out of food and food out of government.
Visit www.HealthFreedomUSA.org to sign up for the Health Freedom Action eAlerts (http://drrimatruthreports.com/?page_id=187) so you can add your voice to the netroots telling Congress and President Obama that Health Freedom Is Our First Freedom and the FDA threatens our health and our freedom.
Click Health Freedom IS Our First Freedom; Divest the FDA of Food Regulation I‘ ><a href=\'http://vitaminlawyerhealthfreedom.blogspot.com/2009/02/health-freedom-is-our-first-freedom.html\' >Health Freedom IS Our First Freedom; Divest the FDA of Food Regulation I</a> (Health Freedom IS Our First Freedom; Divest the FDA of Food Regulation I) to watch Natural Solutions Foundation’s Trustee Ralph Fucetola’s stirring address on Divesting the FDA and click here (http://drrimatruthreports.com/?page_id=189) to make a tax deductible recurring donation to help Natural Solutions Foundation divest the FDA.
Now scroll down to read Congresswoman DeLauro’s stinging condemnation of the FDA.
Thanks for your support.
Yours in health and freedom,
Dr. Rima
Rima E. Laibow, MD
Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation
www.HealthFreedomUSA.org
Valley of the Moon GMO-Free Coffee
www.ValleyoftheMoonCoffee.org
International Decade of Nutrition
Valley of the Moon(TM) Eco Demonstration Project
www.NaturalSolutionsFoundation.org
www.Organics4U.org
www.NaturalSolutionsMarketPlace.org
Food Safety Mustn’t Be Left In FDA’s Hands
Congresswoman ROSA L. DELAURO
February 8, 2009
For years now, the American people have learned to live with the possibility that their food may not be safe. The list of incidents has grown month after month, from spinach to shellfish from ground beef to peppers.
Now, a devastating salmonella outbreak has been tied to the Peanut Corp. of America and its Blakely, Ga., plant. It has killed eight people and sickened more than 500 people across the country, and a criminal investigation is underway to determine whether the producer knowingly sold a dangerous, contaminated product.
But this is not just a case of one bad actor. This salmonella outbreak is just the latest — and it represents the full-scale breakdown of a patchwork food safety system. When we look at recent headlines, it is hard not to see a food safety system in crisis — a dysfunctional federal agency, the Food and Drug Administration. unable to perform its mission and protect the American public.
Last month, the Government Accountability Office deemed that the regulatory activities governing food safety continue to pose a “high risk” to the economy and public health — the consequence of a fragmented legal and organizational structure with insufficient authority and too few resources to protect the American people.
While innocent people continued to get sick from contaminated peanut butter, the case lingered in jurisdictional limbo between the FDA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, causing critical delays. And when the salmonella’s source was finally identified, FDA officials had to wait for industry approval before they could go live with the recall. That is not how a fully functioning regulatory agency is supposed to operate.
To truly fix inherent problems in our food safety system, we must fundamentally restructure the food safety bureaucracy at the FDA. Today, food safety is divided among multiple, separately managed units at the FDA — the Office of the Commissioner, the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, the Center for Veterinary Medicine, the field force (Office of Regulatory Affairs) and the National Center for Toxicological Research. As a result, there is no one single individual to be held accountable for food safety at the FDA or anywhere else at the federal level.
Separating food safety regulation from drug and device approvals would go a long way toward restoring the balance that has long been missing at the federal Department of Health and Human Services, and give food safety the attention it deserves. By establishing a Food Safety Administration within Health and Human Services, headed by its own commissioner, we can give food safety experts and researchers the room and the resources to do their jobs.
Because we need an agency fully committed to actively preventing food-borne illness, not just reacting to it, I have introduced the Food Safety Modernization Act. In addition to establishing a new, separate Food Safety Administration, this legislation would provide the regulatory tools to access important records, recall products and penalize companies for knowingly selling tainted products. It also would require traceability, mandate regular inspections, demand that imported food meet our safety standards and require companies to take preventive measures.
While these are not new ideas, the push for change could not be more urgent. With every recall, the American people grow more concerned and the momentum for reform grows. I know this is an important issue for many of my colleagues in Congress and I look forward to working with them to ensure food safety is a priority.
Ultimately, though, it starts at the top. For eight years, our food safety system has been crippled by disinvestment, mismanagement and a failure to meet its most basic regulatory responsibilities. True reform is going to require strong leadership from our president.
I am confident, at last, that we have a government that understands its obligation to its citizens and is ready to modernize our food safety system to better protect public health.
• U.S. Rep. Rosa L. DeLauro, D-New Haven, represents Connecticut’s 3rd Congressional District and serves as the chairwoman of the Agriculture-FDA Appropriations Subcommittee.
http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/editorials/hc-delauro0208.artfeb08,0,41679.story