Mary Tocco wrote a well reasoned and articulate summation of the dangers of thimerisol, which is 50% mercury by weight, in vaccinations. This article should be shared with anyone, whether a doctor, parent, school official or public health official, who thinks that it might be good public policy to vaccinate anyone, including children.
When they have digested this information, please let them know that the other components of vaccines, including stray DNA from aborted fetuses and animals, genetically modified DNA, aluminum, squalene, formaldehyde, polysorbagte 80 (a known cause of infertility), FDA-acknowledged “steal viruses”, including some that cause leukemia and other cancers and a witches’ brew of other poisons are regularly introduced into humans despite the irationality of doing so from a health or logic point of view.
Let me know what happens!
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.Organics4U.org
www.NaturalSolutionsMedia.tv
www.NaturalSolutionsMarketPlace.org
To the Editors of Scientific American
Tue, August 26, 2008
Dear Editors,
I am continually shocked at the misinformation your magazine perpetuates about toxic vaccines. Consider the following FACTS pertaining to mercury/thimerosal:
• Manufactured by Eli Lilly in 1930 and put in vaccines and other topical agents in 1930 as a disinfectant.
• 1948 Blue Ribbon Panel appointed by Washington deemed it “very toxic” and ordered it removed from all topical and biological. They removed all topical applications and supposed to remove all biological with mercury. Dr. Frank Engly, only living member of that panel. Their recommendations were ignored due to “POLITICS”.
• 1956 – CD gets reports on the toxicity of thimerosal, removed murcuralate, mecurocome and other topical applications.
• Thimerosal is toxic and accumulates in the brain. (Dr. Boyd Haley, University of Kentucky, mercury specialist)
• Department of Defense during WW2 said Eli Lilly must label it “POISON”
• 1971 Eli Lilly’s own study said it was “Toxic to tissue cells in concentrations as low as one part per million”.
• That is 100 times weaker than what has been given to babies for the last 20 years.
• 1997 10 babies died when thimerosal was dabbed on their umbilical cord after birth, Toronto, Canada
• Russia banned thimerosal in vaccines 20 years ago as did Denmark, Great Brittan and all Scandinavian countries.
• Prior to 1999- 2003 Congressional Hearings, doctors did not know the level of thimerosal in vaccines and any doctor in their right mind would NEVER say that mercury in any form is safe at any level.
• Children got between 40 to 60 times the EPA safety level injected with vaccines. (Dept. of Biologic, Evaluation and Research, 2003 Congressional hearings.)
• It took until late 2003 to use up all the vaccines containing the full dose of mercury, they were never recalled and Con. Dan Burton said in 2000, “Every day these vaccines are given, 8000 children are at risk”. Over the next 3 1/2 years over 11 million children were at risk from those vaccines.
• When mercury/thimerosal is combined with Aluminum, the two act synergistically and drive the mercury deeper into the brain tissue. (Dr. Boyd Haley)
• Mercury is absorbed into fatty tissue very quickly…that is why is it not in the blood for long. To say that it is eliminated quickly is a total outright lie. Autistic children suffer with toxic metal injury from mercury and aluminum. It is not found in the blood after a few days because it has been absorbed by the fatty tissue including the brain. When you challenge the body to “dump the toxic metals”, their tests are off the charts!!! A blood test will not show that.
Having given you some of the FACTS on mercury keep in mind this does not even consider other toxic ingredients found in all vaccines: Aluminum, Formaldehyde, Alum, Acetone, MSG, Glycerin, foreign viruses from growth mediums, much more all listed on http://www.novaccine.com/
I think that anyone who believes that vaccines are safe needs to step up, drop their britches and bend over, and get the very same vaccines they recommend for the babies, only make them WEIGHT APPROPRIATE! Then get them every 2 months for the next 2 years. A one year old baby weighing 30 pounds will get the same flu shot that a 300 pound man will get, with 25 micrograms of mercury. One doesn’t need to be a MD to see that this policy is terribly flawed… to put it mildly.
WAKE UP! We are not so easily led anymore! We want true science and not bias, junk science. Parents are smarter than you think and you just made your magazine lose credibility once again.
Mary Tocco
Private Vaccine Investigator for the last 28 years
Public Speaker
Producer of, “Are Vaccines Safe?”
The article quoted at the end of this post says:
“Admittedly, there is something very odd, and slightly disturbing, in the spectacle of a fight over who owns the DNA of a virus that could kill millions of people around the world. Should a country retain property rights to the strains of diseases that plague its citizens? There is also, as always, the niggling question of how the world is to fund the development of new vaccines if the few companies that are capable of producing the medicine aren’t compensated for their efforts. Finally, it would seem to me that there is a clear difference between a U.S. government agency owning a patent and a company such as GlaxoSmithKline staking the claim.”
DNA as property is a terrifying reality. When the US Supreme Court opined that genomes could be patented, the risk to the global biosphere was generally little recognized. Given the unstable and unpredictable consequences of biotechnology insertion of genes into host genomes, and the novel (and potentially harmful or lethal) molecules coded for by this process, the “ownership” of viral DNA sequences is even more ominous.
Weaponization of the avian flu has already taken place through
1. Combining the genome of “seasonal flu” viruses with the then-harmless H5N1 avian flu to find the combinations which yielded enhanced pathogenicity (NIH, 2006),
2. Reconstruction of the genome of the most successful bio weapon in history, the 1918 pandemic flu virus (NIH, Mt Sinai Med. Coll, 2000 – 2006)
3. Intentional combination of the H5N1 virus with the newly reconstructed 1918 pandemic flu genome (NIH, Mt. Sinai School of Medicine, 2006).
Vaccines allegedly protective against this novel virus are then developed and, like the Sanofi-Pasteur vaccine manufactured in China after approval in the absence of formal human trials, sold to governments for vast sums of money (e.g., 100M doses @$15 US per dose) for stock piling.
Indonesia now says that it owns its valuable resource, the supposedly deadly Avian Flu virus. The United Nations issued a special report on the thorny question of whether a virus that kills someone in a particular country “belongs” to that country.
Besides the absurdity of owning life, and creating a totally artificial geographic demarcation through which to exercise control of that organism, the impetus to commercialize pathogens for nation states and predatory companies will, I fear, prove irresistible. Now add organized crime and rogue states (large or small) into the mix and you have a recipe far, far more toxic than the supposed pandemic Avian Flu.
Greed and technology are a deadly mix. If you doubt that, look at the so called “Health Care” system in the West and consider that since it makes no money if you are well, its best interest is served by the weaponization of food (i.e., Codex Alimentarius – see my video “Nutricide” on our website, www.HealthFreedomUSA.org or www.YouTube.com/NaturalSolutions) and the demonization of natural prevention and treatment so ubiquitous in the West.
Ownership of life forms, pathogenic or otherwise is, in short, a massive error and a monstrous reality which must be reversed for everyone’s benefit.
On August 21, Andrew Leonard wrote an article called Biopiracy and Bird Flu. That article, which follows, discusses the consequences of the confluence of the US Supreme Court’s decision to allow ownership of organisms, the unbridled greed and lack of ethics of the pharmaceutical/illness care industry and the horrifying reality of the depopulation agenda which, thanks to blatant hubris and Freedom of Information Act suits, is no longer speculation but fact.
Prince Phillip yearning to “come back” as an Ebola virus so that he can help depopulate the planet and Henry Kissinger’s Memo 200, the Council on Foreign Relations documents, the Phillipine Supreme Court’s finding that WHO vaccines did, indeed, contain permanent sterility agents which sterilized some 3 million unsuspecting women (and the use of the same technology in Africa, South and Central America, South East Asia and elsewhere) followed by the tardy admission of the World Health Organization that they were using such agents mixed into vaccines are part of a patchwork of death and global supremacy which is horrifyingly plain to see, yet tragically, criminally, perhaps, overlooked by the MMD (Media of Mass Deception).
The worm, or perhaps the virus, is turning now, though. Those very countries which would first be the targets of these depopulation plans and programs (the developed world is in the plan, too – Kissinger stated that depopulation should be the US’s first foreign policy priority starting with the third world, remember) have noticed that at least short term gains, but very substantial ones, can come from controlling, weaponizing and commercializing those lethal viruses among themselves. After all, once exposed to deadly agents like dioxin, ordinary viruses can mutate into very profitable killers. The US obligingly contaminated large parts of South East Asia with dioxin and other deadly poisons.
Moreover, vaccinated birds, not outside flocks, develop avian flu through mutations since they are raised in toxic environments (the birds in their industrialized chicken coops and the viruses in their poison-rich test tubes and growth bottles) and induced to mutation by those toxic conditions.
Now nations like Indonesia, Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Viet Nam and a host of others are ready for the Big Time: ready to develop, sell or license their deadly dollar cargo to the even bigger boys: the US, WHO or Big Pharma. All of this falls apart, of course, if the Bigger Boys get their hands and microscopes and vats on these “resources” first.
As events would have it, the fears that they will be done out of their valuable resources is quite accurate. Indonesia is not going to like the fact that a WHO affiliate, the CDC, has applied for a patent on the genome of the Indonesian Avian Flu. Nor will it be happy with the fact that GlaxoSmithKlein is manufacturing a “preventive” Avian Flu vaccine using strains from Viet Nam and elsewhere. So these fears about loosing significant revenue are not unfounded.
Do you find something wrong with this picture? The Natural Solutions Foundation certainly finds the trend, and the mindset, beyond ominous.
Let’s say you’ve got a lab, a virus and a hereditary tribe your people have been warring with for a thousand years. Like the “Islamic Nuclear Bomb” (or the Capitalist Nuclear Bomb), or Depleted Uranium or any other weapon of mass destruction, the mutated, weaponized virus in your tanks could be used on your enemies with the ever present justification that people build for themselves in situations like this. Or, if vaccines were to actually work, you could imagine giving the vaccine to your people and unleashing the disease on the other tribe.
Or, if you are the US, you could stockpile untested, not particularly safe or effective vaccines which would cause widespread… what? Illness? Death? Cancer? Infertility? Adult Autism? Novel vulnerabilities or diseases? Remember, there is no liability in the US for whatever a previously approved drug or vaccine does to you or your child or your mother or your ….
Merchants of death, indeed. Is this the world we want to leave to our children? What are you ready to do about it?
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.Organics4U.org
www.NaturalSolutionsMedia.tv
www.NaturalSolutionsMarketPlace.org
Become a supporter. Make a regular, recurring tax deductible donation here (http://drrimatruthreports.com/index.php?page_id=189) or contact Ralph Fucetola, J. D., ralph.fucetola@usa.net, to learn how to make other types of tax deductible gifts to the Natural Solutions Foundation.
Now, here is the Salon.com article referred to above:
In late 2006, Indonesia sparked a furor in the international public health community when the country announced it would no longer supply samples of the H5N1 strain of bird flu to the World Health Organization. It wasn’t fair, complained the developing nation, which is second only to Vietnam in recorded cases of human deaths from bird flu: Indonesia was providing crucial data for researchers working on vaccines, but prices for proprietary pharmaceutical products resulting from that data were too high for most Indonesians to afford. If you want to understand why citizens of developing nations get aggrieved about biopiracy, there’s a clue.
After a flurry of worldwide publicity, Indonesia relented, and in March announced it would resume sending samples to the W.H.O., provided that the samples were not made available to commercial organizations. The debate over how best to serve the interests of both developing nations and pharmaceutical companies was by no means resolved, and according to the New York Times, Indonesia received only a tepid promise from W.H.O. “not to pass their samples on to commercial manufacturers without consulting the health minister of the country that provided the sample,” but a clear point had been made.
Now in what appears to be something of a scoop, a freelancer writer and specialist in patents has revealed that even as Indonesia was threatening to withhold its samples, the United States government was applying for an international patent on a new vaccine that incorporates genetic code derived from Indonesian avian influenza samples.
Writes Edward Hammond, in the Aug. 15 issues of SUNS:
In a development that is likely to raise more pressing questions about reform of the WHO Global Influenza Surveillance Network (GISN), an international patent application has surfaced in which the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and U.S. National Institutes of Health claim ownership of Indonesian influenza genes.
A recent patent search has revealed that the CDC, which is a WHO collaborating centre, is applying for a patent for a new vaccine against influenza, particularly for bird flu (H5N1). The vaccine incorporates genes from a H5N1 strain isolated from an Indonesian human victim of bird flu in 2005.
The strain that contains the genes was transferred to the WHO GISN by Indonesia for characterization for public health purposes, but may wind up as the property of the US government.
Under U.S. law, the U.S. government agencies would offer licenses to the technology to pharmaceutical companies. The patent application indicates that the US government intends to pursue the claim in most countries of the world, including Indonesia itself, as well as neighboring countries.
One follower of intellectual property and public health at the blog IPMed found the patent application “troubling”:
The patent application raises specific questions about the US CDC, which is a WHO Collaborating Center for influenza virus studies. The WHO Collaborating Centers receive influenza viruses from donor countries for public health characterization purposes, and not for the purposes of making proprietary claims. The Global Influenza Surveillance Network’s effectiveness rests on the prompt sharing of and access to viruses from all donors. However, one wonders how many donor countries will wish to continue to share influenza viruses for research and vaccine development if it is that Governments who operate Collaborating Centers are minded to make proprietary claims over the materials which they have received as a result of the GISN system. Obviously this patent application built on the back of the GISN system of virus sharing will call into question the entire system and may very well undermine its effectiveness.
Admittedly, there is something very odd, and slightly disturbing, in the spectacle of a fight over who owns the DNA of a virus that could kill millions of people around the world. Should a country retain property rights to the strains of diseases that plague its citizens? There is also, as always, the niggling question of how the world is to fund the development of new vaccines if the few companies that are capable of producing the medicine aren’t compensated for their efforts. Finally, it would seem to me that there is a clear difference between a U.S. government agency owning a patent and a company such as GlaxoSmithKline staking the claim.
Unless, of course, the U.S. does end up licensing its patent to Big Pharma without requiring some developing nation equity, in return.
http://www.salon.com/tech/htww/2008/08/21/biopiracy_and_bird_flu/index.htm
http://darwiniana.com/blogzone/2008/08/31/who-owns-the-bird-flu-virus/#comment-251
The Pharmaceutical Cartel is concerned… people are not dying to take their latest concoction: a “pre-pandemic” vaccine!
In an extraordinary announcement, the Wellcome Trust, is providing funding to find out why the H5N1 Virus, widely advertised as the organism that would create the mother of all pandemics, has so far failed to live up to its billing.
Before looking at the remarkable interest which this Trust has supporting this study, we should know a bit about the Wellcome Foundation. A quick visit to its web site, http://www.wellcome.ac.uk, tells us a heart warming story:
In 1880, two young Americans – Silas Mainville Burroughs and Henry Wellcome – established a pharmaceutical company, Burroughs Wellcome & Co. In 1895, Silas Burroughs died, leaving the company in the hands of his partner. The firm flourished under Wellcome’s leadership.
Henry Wellcome set up several research laboratories loosely linked to the drugs company – a highly original step at the time – and employed some of the most outstanding scientists of the day. He also indulged his passion for collecting artefacts related to medicine.
In 1924, Henry Wellcome consolidated all his commercial and non-commercial activities under one corporate umbrella: The Wellcome Foundation Limited. He died in 1936, at which time the Wellcome Trust was established.
In his will, Wellcome vested the entire share capital of the drug company, The Wellcome Foundation Limited, in individual Trustees. The Trustees were charged with spending the income according to Sir Henry’s wishes.
http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/About-us/History/index.htm
We also learn that “The Wellcome Trust remained the sole shareholder of The Wellcome Foundation Limited until 1986. In that year, the Foundation became a public limited company, Wellcome plc, and was floated on the London stock market. The company merged with Glaxo plc in 1995, to form a new company, Glaxo Wellcome plc, and merged again with SmithKline Beecham plc in 2000 to form GlaxoSmithKline. “http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/About-us/History/Wellcome-business/index.htm
A look at GlaxoSmithKline tells us that in July, 2006 it announced in a Washington Post article that a new version of a vaccine against a strain of H5N1 virus that killed people in Viet Nam in 2004 was worthless without a new, secret adjuvant but people developed antibodies to very low doses of the vaccine with the adjuvant. Adjuvants are immune irritants like aluminum (associated with Alzheimer’s Disease), sqalene (associated with lethal auto immune responses) and other highly toxic substances. No mention is made of safety or safety testing for this secret adjuvant in the article.
The same article goes on to say that authorities generally require 70% of a population to develop antibodies to a vaccine if it is to be accepted as “safe and effective” medicine for us (throwing the entire “theory” of “herd immunity” into a very cocked hat, indeed, by the way). The same article also mentions, very close to the bottom, that it is not at all certain the vaccine against the 2004 Viet Nam H5N1 strain would confer immunity or protection in the event of an avian flu pandemic contagion, noting, “A key unanswered question is whether the antibodies against that strain would protect a person against other strains.” http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/26/AR2006072601716.html
On May 19, 2008, Medical News Today noted that “Many experts believe it is only a matter of time before the deadly H5N1 bird flu virus, which currently humans can only catch from infected birds, mutates into a form that spreads easily from human to human and when it does so it will kill millions of people all over the world.” and enthused that “Global pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) is the first to get the go ahead for a wide spectrum vaccine to protect humans ahead of a possible future bird flu pandemic now that the European Commission (EC) is giving the drug giant approval today, Monday, to market its pre-pandemic vaccine Prepandrix in all 27 member states of the European Union (EU), according to various media reports.”
The same article notes, ” Chief executive of GSK, Jean-Pierre Garnier said that:
‘This vaccine marks a significant step in the world’s ability to cope with an influenza pandemic.”
“It is testament to GSK scientists who have pioneered the approach to pre-pandemic vaccination, demonstrating our commitment to doing everything we can to help prevent the devastating effects of a pandemic,” he added.
Although Prepandrix has only just received its first regulatory approval, countries such as the US, Switzerland and Finland have already started stockpiling the vaccine, sales of which last year topped 200 million US dollars (102 million GB pounds). GSK said stockpiling means countries will be able to deal with an outbreak sooner rather than waiting for a vaccine to be developed for a particular strain….
“This drug represents one of the swing factors affecting us in 2008.” http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/107910.php
This means, of course, that the US is already stockpiling a vaccine which it has neither tested nor approved. A vaccine created on a premise which is totally untried and tested: that a vaccine against something that killed somebody will provide protection for somebody else if they encounter another type of pathogenic (disease causing) organism. It’s an interesting, and apparently highly profitable theory, but does it have much to do with reality? And just how safe is this vaccine with the super secret adjuvant? [Using an untested drug is treated as a crime in the US. How has this law been circumvented? REL]
Next it is instructive to note that, having already made a great deal of money on a unvetted vaccine based on an untested premise from the US and other countries where it has not been approved, the ever ethical GlaxoSmithKlein announced at ClinicalTrails.Gov a US clinical trial in adults for a vaccine already being stockpiled in the US:
July 2008
Sponsors and Collaborators: GlaxoSmithKline [and] Department of Health and Human Services
Information provided by: GlaxoSmithKline
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00719043
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to determine whether [emphasis added – REL] GSK’s avian flu vaccine GSK 1557484A is immunogenic [that is, does it produce an immune response, not whether it is safe or works – REL] when given to adults aged >=18 years.
http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00719043
Before we go on, we should recall that Avian Flu vaccines are rich plums and are pretty low hanging as well: the vaccines do not have to be particularly safe or effective, just profitable. Very profitable, with Congress providing the “insurance” against vaccine induced injury (supported by a special vaccine tax vaccine “consumers” are forced to pay) that guarantees these endless profits.
The standards for vaccines are bargain basement science: some sort of immunological response has to be produced, but the person does not necessarily wind up being “protected” (which is why most epidemics occur in totally or nearly totally vaccinated populations) and safety is assessed so lightly and so poorly that, in the context of guaranteed immunity from any prosecution or liability findings in any court in the US, vaccine companies have little trouble picking those fruits. See, for example,
GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis and Iomi Land Avian Flu Vaccine Contracts
January 17, 2007 · Filed Under Generalby H.S. Ayoub
BioHealth Investor.comThe Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) has awarded GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics (NVS) and Iomi (IOMI) all a total of $133 million in funding for the development of H5N1 Avain Flu vaccines.
GSK’s contract will total $63 million over 5 years, while Novartis will receive $55 million over the same period.
http://www.biohealthinvestor.com/2007/01/glaxosmithkline-novartis-and-iomi-land-avian-flu-vaccine-contracts.html
Now on to the search for the Perfect Pandemic storm: Here is the press release provided a few days ago to hail the generous funding of the Wellcome Trust to help scientists figure out what is taking the pandemic H5N1 flu so long to get started. Considering that in 2006 the US Government is reported to have mailed unprotected, unmarked vials of the newly reconstituted Pandemic 1918 flu virus to labs and hospitals all over the world (was that genome inserted in an H5N1 strain of Avian Flu or not? – the Natural Solutions Foundation does not yet have that information but would greatly appreciate knowing whether it was; we know people from government sites read this blog… won’t one of you become a whistle blower and save the lives of millions?). The media reports that several people are reported to have died from various strains of H5N1. It is remarkable, indeed, that after all that research, and all that hype, there is no H5N1, or H7N1 or any other Avian Flu Pandemic – YET.
Does the Welcome Trust aim to do something about that?
————
“Scientists examine bird flu infections to monitor for ‘pandemic’ mutations”
Scientists funded by the Wellcome Trust are to examine what is preventing the H5N1 avian influenza virus from causing a human pandemic and what mutations are required to realise its deadly potential. The research could hold the key to early identification of a potential influenza pandemic, and to developing drugs and a vaccine.
Since its reappearance in 1997, the H5N1 influenza virus has caused disease and death in millions of birds around the globe. The number of infections in humans is still relatively small, however: from 2003 to the end of June 2008 there had been 385 known cases in humans, 243 of them fatal(1). So far, there appear to have been very few cases of human-to-human transmission.
Professor Ten Feizi at Imperial College London believes one reason why H5N1 has not yet evolved into an effective pathogen capable of widespread transmission between humans lies in how the virus attaches itself to the respiratory tract. She is leading an international research project which has received over £720,000 from the Wellcome Trust to identify the receptor molecules in the human respiratory tract to which viruses attach and to look at how changes in the binding protein on the surface of the virus might increase its ability to attach to the tract and cause infection.
Professor Feizi will work with Professors Menno de Jong and Jeremy Farrar from the Wellcome Trust’s South East Asia Programme in Vietnam, Dr Alan Hay and Dr Steve Gamblin at the Medical Research Council National Institute for Medical Research, London, and Dr Mikhail Matrosovich at the Philipps University of Marburg, Germany.
“Over the last few years particularly in Asia we have seen just how deadly the H5N1 virus can be,” says Professor Farrar from the Oxford University Clinical Research Unit in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, where a number of people have been treated for infection by the virus. “So far, we have been relatively fortunate and there has been only limited evidence of the virus transmitting from human to human. The more we understand about the virus, how it interacts with the body, the better we will be prepared for any serious mutations that may arise.”
In humans, influenza infection occurs via the respiratory tract, or airway. In order to cause disease, the virus must enter the body’s cells where it can replicate and spread, but it must first find a site to which it can attach, known as a receptor. The virus can only attach to and enter the cells if the receptor fits into the binding proteins, or haemagglutinins (the “H” in H5N1), on the surface of the virus.
Previous research has shown that the haemagglutinin on H5N1 favours a particular form of receptor known as a “2,3 receptor”. These are abundant on cells of birds, but in humans are found mostly on cells of the lower respiratory tract (the lungs). Professor Feizi and colleagues have shown that mucus in the upper airway in humans also contains 2,3 receptors, but here the mucus acts as a defence mechanism to which the virus binds, blocking its progress and enabling the body to “sweep out” the virus. Both factors suggest that huge doses of the virus are required in order to infect humans, a theory supported by evidence that those who have become infected have spent large amounts of time in close proximity to infected fowl.
As with all viruses, H5N1 is continually mutating, and it is changes that allow the virus to attach to “2,6 receptors” in the human upper airway which may enable the virus to become more infectious to humans.
“If the bird flu virus evolves to favour the receptors in our nose and throat like normal flu, the results could be devastating,” says Professor Feizi from the Division of Medicine at Imperial College London. “We could have a virus which is not only highly infectious but is easily transmissible by coughing and sneezing.”
Dr Hay and Dr Gamblin will isolate haemagglutinin from samples of the virus taken from the patients in Vietnam, and Dr Matrosovich will grow cultures of human airway cells and isolate cell-membrane receptors and secreted mucus. Then, using a technique known as neoglycolipid (NGL) microarray analysis developed by Professor Feizi and her colleagues, the team at Imperial College will identify which of the various receptor structures the haemagglutinins bind most strongly to. Dr Gamblin’s team will then use X-ray crystallography to probe, at the molecular level, how mutations might cause the bird virus to change into a human virus.
“If we can find out which mutations of haemagglutinin prefer which receptors, we may be able to identify quickly or even predict which mutations give the virus pandemic potential,” says Professor Feizi.
Current antiviral treatments for influenza, such as Tamiflu, target neuraminidase (the “N” in H5N1), which is responsible for allowing the virus to jump off receptors on one cell and bind to those on another cell, and to replicate and spread once inside the body.
“Targeting the virus’s ability to bind to the receptors – which until now has proved far more difficult – may provide an alternative, more effective way of preventing infection,” says Professor Feizi. “We hope that our work will make this process simpler and faster.”
###
1. Cumulative Number of Confirmed Human Cases of Avian Influenza A/(H5N1) Reported to WHO, 19 June 2008. http://www.who.int/csr/disease/avian_influenza/country/cases_table_2008_06_19/en/index.html
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-08/wt-seb082908.php
————
Here is my question to you, dear reader: Are you convinced by the tag line which comprises the very last paragraph of this press release? Or, given the financial investment of the drug companies in having, not preventing, a pandemic, would you put your money on the “Where did that super Pandemic get to? By George, let’s go find it!” horse?
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.Organics4U.org
www.NaturalSolutionsMedia.tv
www.NaturalSolutionsMarketPlace.org
Become a supporter. Make a regular, recurring tax deductible donation here (http://drrimatruthreports.com/index.php?page_id=189) or contact Ralph Fucetola, J. D., ralph.fucetola@usa.net, to learn how to make other types of tax deductible gifts to the Natural Solutions Foundation.
Thinking people are the greatest danger to totalitarina regimes. Thinking people who share their thoughts compellingly are a danger which no totalitarian regime tolerates. Repression and supression of independent thinking is vilified in what can be seen as the central unifying principle of all fascist states: dissent is a crime and thinking wrong thoughts is a crime as well.
The current administration is determined to increase the characteristics that make it look like a totalitarian state with our without the consent of Congress.
The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 has not even been passed yet but the Department of Homeland Security is implementing it, at public expense, at to great public shame, despite the lack of Congressional mandate.
Passed by the House, but not even voted on by the Senate, the audacious and very likely unconstitutional acts described below should give any real patriot the “screaming meemies”. And, if they have their way untammelled, you may be screaming your meemies on the inside of a solitary confinement cell in a thought reeducation camp.
Now would be a good time to get involved to make sure this atrocity never, never comes to fruition in the US, a country which at least in theory, has a Constitution to protect your rights from invasions like this one.
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.NaturalSolutionsMarketPlace.org
www.Organics4U.org
www.YouTube.com/NaturalSolutions
www.NaturalSolutionsMedia.tv
Thought Crimes Agenda Already Being Implemented
08-07-2008
Lee Rogers
The Department of Homeland Security is moving towards implementing a provision of the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 otherwise known as the “Thought Crimes Bill”. This is despite the fact that the legislation has not been signed into law. The House version of the bill HR 1955 was passed by a margin of 404-6 where as the Senate version of the bill S 1959 is still awaiting action.
One of the bill’s provisions gives the Department of Homeland Security the authority to fund a University based Center of Excellence to study ways to thwart what the government believes are extremist belief systems and radical ideologies of individual Americans. In other words, if the government doesn’t like the way you think, they are going to have teams of social scientists and behavioral experts trying to figure out the best way to deal with you.
As it turns out, the Department of Homeland Security is already funding a Center of Excellence to study thought criminals in the United States at the University of Maryland. This shows that it doesn’t matter if S 1959 is defeated or not, as they are moving forward with this agenda with or without Congressional approval. In reality, Congress is nothing more than a staged circus to make people falsely believe that they actually have a say in what the government does.
The Department of Homeland Security is funding research to setup an Orwellian system to deal with political dissenters under the guise of fighting terrorism and they care not if it is in accordance with what the people want. Another words, be prepared for the possibility of a future with re-education camps as a real life Ministry of Love system is implemented.
The following is taken from Security Products Online detailing the Department of Homeland Security’s funding of this Center of Excellence that will study thought crimes or as they like to call it the threat of homegrown terrorism and violent radicalization:
A team of more than 50 social scientists, armed with new federal funding, will extend its research into radicalization and the formation of terrorist groups in the United States and abroad. The researchers will also study the effectiveness of counter-terror strategies, as well as efforts to build community resilience to attacks.
Now, let’s take a look at section 899D of HR 1955 and we’ll see that what’s proposed in the bill has for all intents and purposes already become a reality.
`SEC. 899D. CENTER OF EXCELLENCE FOR THE STUDY OF VIOLENT RADICALIZATION AND HOMEGROWN TERRORISM IN THE UNITED STATES.
`(a) Establishment- The Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish or designate a university-based Center of Excellence for the Study of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism in the United States (hereinafter referred to as `Center’) following the merit-review processes and procedures and other limitations that have been previously established for selecting and supporting University Programs Centers of Excellence. The Center shall assist Federal, State, local and tribal homeland security officials through training, education, and research in preventing violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism in the United States. In carrying out this section, the Secretary may choose to either create a new Center designed exclusively for the purpose stated herein or identify and expand an existing Department of Homeland Security Center of Excellence so that a working group is exclusively designated within the existing Center of Excellence to achieve the purpose set forth in subsection (b).
`(b) Purpose- It shall be the purpose of the Center to study the social, criminal, political, psychological, and economic roots of violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism in the United States and methods that can be utilized by Federal, State, local, and tribal homeland security officials to mitigate violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism.
`(c) Activities- In carrying out this section, the Center shall–
`(1) contribute to the establishment of training, written materials, information, analytical assistance and professional resources to aid in combating violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism;
`(2) utilize theories, methods and data from the social and behavioral sciences to better understand the origins, dynamics, and social and psychological aspects of violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism;
`
(3) conduct research on the motivational factors that lead to violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism; and
`(4) coordinate with other academic institutions studying the effects of violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism where appropriate.
The Department of Homeland Security is providing roughly $12 Million over 3 years to fund this research. Among the planned research includes building a database of U.S. extremist crime, studying how social networks spread thought crime, tracking sympathy and support for terrorism in the United States among various communities, studying the phony European white Al-Qaeda threat and much more.
The government has no business funding research studying the political beliefs of people and determining who may or may not be a potential terrorist based upon a vague definition of homegrown terrorism and violent radicalization. In fact, the definitions of these terms as defined in HR 1955 and S 1959 are up to the interpretation of the government.
This means that a homegrown terrorist could potentially be anybody the government doesn’t like. Not only is it unconstitutional, but it opens up the flood gates for a tyranny only theorized in novels like George Orwell’s 1984. The social scientists that are being funded in this program could potentially suggest the implementation of programs that could include the round up of people for re-education based upon any sort of criteria even if no real crime has been committed.
Literally, the Department of Homeland Security is funding research to go after people who have political beliefs and ideologies that are contrary to the agenda of the establishment. Unfortunately for the American people, they are employing the services of some very smart people to do this. Who knows what these people will come up with but considering what they’ve already done, it won’t be in the best interest of freedom.
In the Soviet Union, political dissidents and intellectuals were labeled crazy and put in mental institutions or slave labor camps. Could the same thing happen in the United States? [The largest detention center, located outside of Fairbanks, Alaska, is said to hold an astonishing 2.5 million people, and alleged to be designated for “mentally ill people”. Whether such mental illness is that which is recognized by the psychiatric profession or political dissent is an opent question at this point. Dr. Rima]
After these scientists finish their research, it very well could considering what we see with the militarization of police and growing technological spy grid here in the United States. How can we assume that their recommendations will defend liberty when everything else the government has done in order to fight this phony terror threat has been contrary to the principles of freedom?
Particularly interesting is how they are concerned about activity on the Internet. Many freedom oriented radio networks and web sites have been formed over the past decade to protest what is becoming an increasingly corrupt and criminal government. The free flow of information is a real threat to the establishment and they are scrambling for ways to determine how to put the lid on it.
In closing, it is disturbing that the Department of Homeland Security would fund a program before a bill authorizing the action is signed into law. The provisions in the thought crimes bill represent the potential for total despotism and tyranny and even if a few of the provisions are implemented like this Center for Excellence funding, it marks a severe threat for liberty. These government terrorists must be defeated and there needs to be an investigation into the funding of this research which is unconstitutional on its face.
www.roguegovernment.com
August 21, 2008
Codex Alimentarius is a friend to Genetically Modified (GM) foods since it allows the US to replicate its devastatingly dangerous lack of labeling for GM foods. Here in the US, such labeling is forbidden since, in 1992, George H. W. Bush, then President, issued an Executive Order granting, as if by the magic of lobbying, equality to natural foods and those produced by biotechnology. Once equivalent, the GM foods not only did not have to be labeled, they MAY not be labeled, according to the ever corporate-friendly FDA — “GM Free” labels are not lawful, according to the FDA.
Not only that, but, playing the heavy at Codex, the US has managed to overcome the resistance of nearly all African countries, the EU and a host of other nations with grave reservations about both the safety of these “foods” and the ethical nature of denying consumers information they overwhelmingly say that they want to have — whether their food has been genetically tampered with or not.
A New York Times – CBS Poll earlier this summer indicated that 87% of Americans want GM labeling; over half would not buy GM food if it were so labeled: http://ecopreneurist.com/2008/05/23/half-of-all-americans-wouldnt-buy-frankenfoodsif-they-could-tell-the-difference/
Prince Charles, Heir Apparent to the throne of England, Wales and Scotland, however, got it right and did so in the face of the Press. Read what the Prince had to say below.
Natural Solutions Foundation commends Prince Charles for his stand on Genetically Modified foods and crops. The prince has long been an advocate of natural food production and a champion of organic farming. He notes, as does the Natural Solutions Foundation, that the industrialization of food production leads not only to inferior food, but drives the subsistence or peasant farmers off their lands creating social devastation along with the devastation of the environment and health for which GM foods are responsible.
The Prince warned that the bio tech corporations are taking us all towards a grim environmental disaster of unprecedented magnitude.
Whatever else the Royal Family of the UK may be engaged in, on this particular battle, they are on the right side and must be welcomed to the Natural Solutions Foundation Hall of Fame.
Congratulations, Prince Charles!
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.NaturalSolutionsMarketPlace.org
www.Organics4U.org
www.YouTube.com/NaturalSolutions
www.NaturalSolutionsMedia.tv
Charles in GM ‘disaster’ warning
BBC News August 13, 2008
Prince Charles has his own organic farm at his Gloucestershire estate
Companies developing genetically modified crops risk creating the biggest environmental disaster “of all time”, Prince Charles has warned.
GM crops were damaging Earth’s soil and were an experiment “gone seriously wrong”, he told the Daily Telegraph.
A future reliance on corporations to mass-produce food would drive millions of farmers off their land, he said.
The government said it welcomed all voices in the “important” debate over the future potential role of GM crops.
However, Dr Julian Little, chairman of the Agricultural Biotechnology Council, said he was “disappointed” by the Prince’s comments because “they do not seem to be based on any solid evidence”. *
“Our experience from over 10 years of GM cultivation shows that GM technology has been [sic] found to deliver real environmental and economic benefits,” he said. *
Mr Little added: “At a time when demand for food and fuel is rising and in the face of growing environmental challenges, we need to find ways to feed an ever-increasing global population.”
FROM THE TODAY PROGRAMME
More from Today programme
BBC royal correspondent Nicholas Witchell said the Prince’s “robust” comments were “likely to rankle with the government”, which has given the go-ahead to a number of GM crop trials in the UK since 2000.
“Even for a prince who’s a long-established champion of organic farming and critic of GM crops, these are comments which verge on the extreme,” our correspondent said.
Prince Charles told the newspaper that huge multi-national corporations involved in developing GM foods were conducting a “gigantic experiment with nature and the whole of humanity which has gone seriously wrong”.
Relying on “gigantic corporations” for food would end in “absolute disaster”, he warned.
“That would be the absolute destruction of everything… and the classic way of ensuring there is no food in the future.”
What should be being debated was “food security not food production”, he said.
He said GM developers might think they would be successful by having “one form of clever genetic engineering after another”, but he believed “that will be guaranteed to cause the biggest disaster environmentally of all time”.
Prince Charles, who has an organic farm on his Highgrove estate in Gloucestershire, said relying on big corporations for the mass production of food would not only threaten future food supplies but also force smaller producers out of business.
“If they think this is the way to go, we will end up with millions of small farmers all over the world being driven off their land into unsustainable, unmanageable, degraded and dysfunctional conurbations of unmentionable awfulness,” he said.
The prince also told the Telegraph he hoped to see more family-run co-operative farms, with producers working with nature and not against it.
The Prince’s comments come at a time of rising world food prices and food shortages.
The biotech industry says that GM technology can help combat world hunger and poverty by delivering higher yields from crops and also reduce the use of pesticides.
‘Untenable’
In June, Environment Minister Phil Woolas said the government was ready to argue for a greater role for the technology.
But green groups and aid agencies have doubts about GM technology’s effectiveness in tackling world hunger and have concerns about the long-term environmental impact.
Responding to the prince’s comments, a spokeswoman for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said: “Safety will always be our top priority on this issue.” …
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7557644.stm
——————————–
* In the opinion of the Natural Solutions Foundation, the statements made by Dr. Little are disingenuous at the least. We know of no conclusive evidence that GM products are safe; certainly no long-term studies have been undertaken. Further, there are many suggestive developments, such as the upsurge in Morgellon’s-like syndrome, the reported devastation of the bee population, and similar instances that suggest the long term safety of GM products is not proven. Under the usual Precautionary Principal GM products cannot be deemed safe.