• Resources
    • Videos/Speeches/Articles
    • The Art of Health Freedom
    • Good Books
    • Recommended Videos
    • Recommended Links
    • Radio Show Archives
    • Trustee Interviews
    • Newsletter Archives
    • Internet Links
  • Rave Reviews
    • Testimonials
    • Video Testimonials
  • Take Action
    • Create Pushback
    • Tell Your Friends
    • Become an Organizer
    • Send Letters
  • Wellness Stores
    • Buy our products
    • Valley of the Moon Coffee
  • 5 Big Lies
    • Drugs & Vaccine
    • Chemtrails
    • G.M.O.
    • Radiation
    • Food
  • Home
  • Support
    • Support Health Freedom
    • Coffee
  • Events/Press/Media
    • POD Casts/Radio Shows
    • Webinars
    • Press Release
  • About Us
    • Mission Statement
    • Accomplishments
    • Board of Trustees
    • NSF History/Vision
    • Contact Webmaster
    • Customer Service
  • Dr. Rima’s Blog/Vlog
    • GDS
    • Codex Alimentarius
  • eBook Download

Archive for Miscellaneous – Page 34

Prescription Privacy? Fugeddaboutit!

By Administrator on January 11, 2008 No Comments

The idea that your medical history and facts are private is offensive to the illness care industry, which trades on your data without your knowledge or consent. So does the US Government and so do a host of companies and marketers who buy and sell your information as a matter of course. Of course, if your doctor or anyone in the office tells you that your records have been accessed by the government, that is a felony for which the doctor and whomever it was that told you can both go to jail.

Data mining, and the sale of prescription information has become routine and offers Big Pharma and others interested in your health (and lack thereof) a huge source of profit.

Now the US Courts are weighing in on whether you have a right to your prescription privacy and, as of right now, the answer is a resounding “NO!”.

This madness is just one more reason that it is imperative to fight for our health and health freedom, including health privacy NOW! Join the Natural Solutions Foundation’s Health Freedom eAlert list and donate generously to the Natural Solutions Foundation so we can protect all of your health freedoms with your active help. Remember: Big Pharma and its friends have more money than God. We don’t need that much. But we do need to raise $1Million in 2008 to bring the battle to the level it requires for significant forward motion on all fronts. If you donate just $10 per month, and so does everyone else reading this, we have what we need. Please make your recurring donation now if your health, privacy and freedom is worth as much as 2.5 Starbuck’s Medium Cappuccinos each month (even if you don’t drink coffee!)

Yours in privacy and health and freedom,
Dr. Rima
Rima E. Laibow, MD
Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation

Prescription Privacy?
January 2nd, 2008
Michele Cagan

Chalk up another win for Big Pharma, as we lose our privacy so they can make more sales. Apparently, a federal district judge believes – and has ruled – that a corporation’s first amendment rights trumps our human right to privacy.

That’s right. According to that judge, prescriptions aren’t private, at least from the doctor’s side of things. In fact, keeping a doctor’s prescription-writing habits private and confidential “violates the Constitution.” And, in his opinion, so did the Maine law that allowed that information to remain confidential.

How did this all end up in court? Some corporations that make a practice of selling information about people’s prescriptions got pretty ticked off when the Maine courts said those records were confidential. Those medical data corporations (namely IMS Health, Wolters Kluwer Health, and VeriSpan) took their case to a higher court and won. After all, they can’t make any money if they don’t sell our private medical information to Big Pharma, who need it so they can better direct-market unnecessary and possibly dangerous drugs to us and our doctors.

But, really, they’re doing all of this for our own good. Here’s one “important” reason, cited by the corporations, that they need access to this information (and permission to trade on it): It will help “monitor the safety of new drugs.” That sound you hear, it’s me laughing so hard I’m crying. Because we all know a system designed to sell information about doctors’ prescription-writing habits to the drug companies is really focused on selling more (and more expensive) drugs…and not on protecting us from the problems associated with those drugs.

The federal district court judge on this case followed a similar ruling from earlier this year that struck down a New Hampshire prescription privacy law. And now another similar case involving a Vermont law is being tried in federal court. In the mean time, Maine intends to appeal this ridiculous, scary ruling. And hopefully someone in the federal government will realize that the constitution is supposed to protect people, not profits.

Categories : Blog / Vlog, Miscellaneous, Privacy

What Has the Natural Soluitons Foundation Been Up To? Where are We Headed?

By Administrator on January 7, 2008 No Comments

November 26, 2007

Here is a look a the projects underway right now or being initiated in the near future by the Natural Solutions Foundation.

1. eDeclaration of Planetary Health and Freedom Rights

Giving due reference to the UN Declaration of Rights, The World Health Organization Declaration of Health Rights and the WHO Global strategy for Diet, Physical Activity and Health, the World Medical Association’s Declaration of Helsinki, the Wilmont Declaration and common law principles such as the The Herbalist’s Charter of Henry VIII, this document sets forth basic health and freedom principles for humanity to serve as a guide for national policy, organizational focus and NGO activity.

2. Protection Against Compulsory Vaccination and Drugging

a. A State By State Compulsory Drugging and Vaccination Exemption Handbook (in eBook and hard copy format) will be available to guide people wishing to apply for exemptions for themselves and other people

b. A Personalized Legal and Medical Consultation Program providing necessary information, guidance and documetation will be available for those whishing to have personalized help in securing exemptions to vaccination and drugging at the State levels.

c. a No Forced Drugging Forum will be created to allow people to share information and ideas to prevent forced drugging and vaccination

3. Legislator’s Health and Freedom eHandbook

In conjunction with the internationally significant Codex Two Step Process developed by our Codex Working Group and building on the existing legislative language which the natural Solutions foundation, in conjunction with advisors from other health and freedom organizations, the Natural Solutions Foundation proposes the creation of a Legislative Handbook to guide Federal and State legislators in reforming and “reframing” the legislative landscape to support health and freedom choices for consumers, purveyors and practitioners. Just as the Natural Solutions Foundation Codex Book (“Codex two Step Process”) () provides an example of the application of the legislative and regulatory framework which nations can use to protect their people and food supply from the errors embodies in Codex, so this handbook would provide a framework from which legislators can work. Other handbooks are in the planning stage.

4. New Media Communication Strategies for Effective Penetration of Information and Options

Tapping into the new internet expertise and creativity available to us, we have developed a program to capitalize on the working principles of the internet to shift from old media communications to new media ones at, as Bill Gates would say, “…the speed of thought…” Simply putting the equivalent of a page of printed matter up on the internet is no longer sufficient for effective communication. These new strategies, which the Natural Solutions Foundation is currently implementing (but which we propose for sharing with other members of the health and freedom community) include:

a. Participatory New Media Health Freedom Symposium where creatives and organizations which need their creativity can come together to create a synergistically productive outcome unforeseen by either segment before the meeting.
b. Social Networking to attract and hold the attention of the internet user community world-wide. Through video, “FaceBook” – like virtual communities, YouTube postings and other “New Media” options, the Natural Solutions Foundation is radically changing its place on the internet and becoming a world leader in Health Freedom New Communications with the highest internet traffic ratings of any health freedom site or organization.
c. Documentary film making can be part of either the old media or the new. We have chosen, with the collaboration Ecological Options Network to make it part of the new media through an innovative programmatic multimedia strategy. Instead of commissioning a full length DVD on Health Freedom and the Codex Agenda, we have instead evolved a program of stand-alone segments in a Health Freedom Library dealing with each of the current “hot button’ issues relevant to health freedom. This will allow the health freedom movement and the wellness industry to have information rapidly and accurately become available allowing us to build our circle of influence’s awareness and energy, generate funds, spur debate and educate decision makers on these issues. After completion of the rapidly generated health Freedom Library modules, the final interactive documentary/eresource will be produced as a permanent part of the new media.

5. Development of the Natural Solutions foundation’s virtual web store, www.Organics4U.org.

Because we see the potential so clearly to simultaneously support the Wellness Industry and the health Freedom Advocates and practitioners who depend on its products through the use of the virtual store that we have created, we would like to develop-p an affiliate program allowing all health freedom organizations who are members of the working coalition to participate and help fund their activities while showing their strong support for clean, unadulterated health products and services. A Supporter’s Emporium is currently being developed to allow other goods and services to become available to the growing member base of the health freedom movement.

6. Defending against CODEX: International Health Freedom Advocacy Coalition of Health Friendly Countries and NGOs

The Natural Solutions Foundation has developed an unparalleled network of health friendly developing countries through their on-the-ground advocacy at Codex and in the home countries of the members of this emerging power center. We have developed exceptional access to health decision makers (e.g., Dr. Laibow addressing 43 Health Ministers in Mombasa, Kenya on HIV and Avian Flue prevention strategies and other related issues as well as Codex implications for their people’s health and longevity). These nations actively seek our participation in their decision making process.

For example, a large and important developing nation sought our legal and medical review of its new supplement regulations and we were able to significantly influence the proposed very low upper limits to alter them to much more liberal ones). The Natural Solutions Foundation has been invited by the entire West African bloc to conduct a series of training and policy meetings in Africa prior to codex meetings to assist that bloc in developing their positions and their choreographed responses to Codex items at the forthcoming meetings. In fact, such a meeting was scheduled which included the Presidents and Ministers of health of all 16 west African nations just prior to the last Codex Alimentarius Commission meeting (July, 2007). Funding was promised but failed to materialize so the meeting was never held. The trust and faith which the emerging pro health collation of developing nations’ places in us was exemplified when, because of scientific information provided by the Natural Solutions foundation to our friendly countries, fluoride was prevented from being approved as an additive in infant formula for healthy babies. This decision was taken through our advocacy, over the vigorous objection of the United States, the EU, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, thus demonstrating the power of the model. and

While many issues pertain most strongly to the developing nations, there is an urgent need for leadership domestically as well as internationally on issues like vaccination, especially compulsory vaccination; other forms of compulsory drugging and limitation of factual information about the health benefits of food and traditional, natural and advanced therapies. The Natural Solutions Foundation has played a pivotal role in alerting and activating consumers and decision makers to these issues.

It is important to note that the Natural Solutions foundation’s continuing presence at Codex has allowed the Health Freedom voice to have a clear window on the interrelationship between adverse policies brought forward in Codex and the implementation of those same adverse policies through domestic regulation and legislation.

7. Creative Legislator Education (incorrectly sometimes called “lobbying”) and Litigation programs to preserve, protect, defend and restore Health and Freedom domestically and internationally.

With sufficient financial support from industry and interested donors, we believe that the legal recourses open to us are of significant potential in establishing case law to solidify health Freedom domestically and internationally.

a. The Natural Solutions Foundation has retained an experienced legislative consultant, Charles Frohman. Ideally, this activity, which currently employs the Trustees of the Foundation for 4 days a month in Washington DC . The relationships being developed have allowed us to engage in productive dialogues on a number of issues with Members of Congress.

b. We have supported the co-sponsorship of legislation to prevent parents from being forced to vaccinate or medicate their children (the importance and timeliness of which was tragically demonstrated on November 17 when 1600 parents were threatened with jail and fines if they failed to vaccinate, or in some cases, re-vaccinate, their children when either the school had lost their records or the parents did not wish to have them vaccinated.

c. The Natural Solutions Foundation has taken the lead in calling for hearings on the process of divesting the FDA of its food regulatory responsibility and numerous legislators are now seeking our input for legislative language for bills of interest to them.

8. Health Freedom Score Card

Working on the conviction that Health Freedom must be a topic of vigorous debate in the Presidential election discussion, the trustees of the natural Solutions Foundation were delighted to comply with the request they received from a Presidential Campaign to draft the Candidate’s Health Freedom Plank. Through a Health Freedom Score Card, which asks 19 tough questions of the Candidates regarding their public health freedom policies we have brought the issue into greater prominence through nearly 100,000 emails and faxes to the Presidential Candidates.

9. Citizens petitions

Authorized by the First Amendments, Citizens Petitions are a legal mechanism to challenge government policies. We have initiated a Citizens Petition to force the FAD to abandon its declared harmonization policy with Codex restrictions on nutrient values. About 125,000 Americans have joined the Citizens Petition through signed documents.

Additional Citizens Petitions are in the planning stage.

10. International Decade of Nutrition: Hope for the Word through dynamic empowerment and the dissemination of natural solutions to the ancient twin scourges of mankind: hunger and disease.

Part of the solution to the health freedom threats lies in the Natural Solutions Foundation dynamic and far-reaching “International Decade of Nutrition”. Because we understand that there is enough information already available to solve the world’s hunger problems and to eliminate most of the diseases of under-nutrition and water-born, parasite and other organism-based diseases, the Natural Solutions foundation has inaugurated a program to

a. Reclaim sustainable organic farming and disseminate the necessary advanced and under-utilized, low-tech, high impact technologies to allow farmers to gain the economic advantage to resist Agribiz and stay in their communities and on their farms while growing food without pesticides and other chemicals

b. Apply already existing, but little known technologies to eliminate parasitic and other organism-based diseases without the use of dangerous and expensive pharmaceuticals, pesticides, fungicides and other toxic chemicals through the use of inexpensive, effective and easily managed options

c. Widespread dissemination of information which empowers and reinforces the autonomy of populations currently disenfranchised from access to traditional, natural and advanced therapies.

Conclusion: the time has never been more opportune for strategically significant alliance by serious and successful groups in the health Freedom movement to exploit the opportunities developed by the Natural Solutions Foundation (supported by astute and sophisticated donors who understand the gravity of the threat and the potency of the opportunity which we bring to the planetary community and the domestic one as well).

Categories : Activism, Blog / Vlog, Citizen's Petition, International Cooperation, International Decade of Nutrition, Miscellaneous, Promising Developments, Vaccination

Marrying Your Mother-In-Law

By Administrator on January 4, 2008 No Comments

It is an old saying that when you marry a woman, you marry her mother: she will be part of your family because, alive or dead, she is part of your wife and will, with time, make her presence in your life and hers clearer and clearer. The outstanding political analysis below (outstanding, that is, except for the fact that it totally omits Ron Paul and his candidacy) makes that point very well within the political family.

The Natural Solutions Foundation is a not for profit 501 (c) (3) organization and therefore cannot engage in activities which are intended to impact directly the outcome of elections. However, we can provide information and education. In that spirit, we are providing the analysis below. We believe it is of great importance.

Please share this with your contacts and urge them to sign up for the Natural Solutions Foundation Health Freedom eAlerts.

Yours in health and freedom,
Dr. Rima

Rima E. Laibow, MD
Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation
www.HealthFreedomUSA.org
www.GlobalHealthFreedom.org

Bill Clinton’s academic mentor Prof. Carroll Quigley provided the definitive analysis of the USA’s bi-polar, bi-partisan system:

“The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can ‘throw the rascals out’ at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy….

But either party in office becomes in time corrupt, tired, unenterprising, and vigorless. Then it should be possible to replace it, …by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies.

. . .The policies that are vital and necessary for America are no longer subjects of significant disagreement, but are disputable only in detail, procedure, priority, or method…. ”

Carroll Quigley in Tragedy and Hope – 1966

JH ]

====================
Democracy Now! January 3, 2008

http://www.democracynow.org/2008/1/3/vote_for_change_atrocity_linked_us

Guests:

Allan Nairn, Independent journalist. Runs the web-blog “News and Comment.” http://newsc.blogspot.com

Kelley Beaucar Vlahos, Freelance journalist in Washington. Her article on presidential advisers titled “War Whisperers” appeared in the American Conservative.

* Allan Nairn’s Blog “News and Comment” http://newsc.blogspot.com/

AMY GOODMAN: Presidential candidates are scrambling to win last-minute support in Iowa ahead of tonight’s caucus. Thousands of reporters have also descended on Iowa this week, covering everything from Mike Huckabee’s haircut to John Edwards’s rally with singer John Mellencamp.

But little attention has been paid to perhaps one of the most important aspects of the candidates: their advisers, the men and women who likely form the backbone of the candidate’s future cabinet if elected president. Many of the names will be familiar.

Advisers to Hillary Rodham Clinton include many former top officials in President Clinton’s administration: former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, former National Security Adviser Samuel Berger, former UN Ambassador Richard Holbrooke. Senator Barack Obama’s list includes President Carter’s National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, former counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke, former Middle East negotiator Dennis Ross.

Rudolph Giuliani’s advisers include Norman Podhoretz, one of the fathers of the neoconservative movement. John McCain’s list of official and formal policy advisers includes former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, General Colin Powell, William Kristol of The Weekly Standard, and former CIA Director James Woolsey. One of Mitt Romney’s top advisers is Cofer Black, the former CIA official who now serves as vice chair of Blackwater Worldwide. Vice President Dick Cheney’s daughter Elizabeth is advising Fred Thompson.

As for Mike Huckabee, it’s not clear. In December, Huckabee listed former UN Ambassador John Bolton as someone with whom he either has “spoken or will continue to speak,” but Bolton then revealed the two had never spoken. Huckabee also named Richard Allen, but the former National Security Adviser also admitted he had never spoken to Huckabee.

To talk more about the advisers behind the presidential campaigns, I’m joined by two guests. Kelley Vlahos is a freelance journalist in Washington. Her article on presidential advisers called “War Whisperers” appeared in The American Conservative in October. Investigative journalist Allan Nairn joins us here in the firehouse studio. We welcome you both to Democracy Now!

I want to begin by going to Washington, D.C., to our guest there, to the author of “War Whisperers.” Talk about why you focused, Kelley, on the advisers of the presidential candidates.

KELLEY BEAUCAR VLAHOS: Well, it was becoming clear to me and to others here in Washington in certain circles that the advisers that were emerging for the campaigns, whether it be Democratic or Republican, were part of some seriously pro-establishment cliques. And I say “cliques,” because there is really no other way to describe it. But these cliques generally can be categorized as not only pro-establishment, but more pro-interventionist, whether it be the so-called liberal interventionists on the Democratic side or your war hawks on the Republican side.

But what became clear is that the candidates weren’t reaching outside of these establishment cliques and that they were getting no fresh ideas, no vision outside of these pretty standard parameters. And we thought—me and the editors thought it might be a good idea to explore a little bit under the surface about where these of advisers were coming from, in hopes of maybe deciphering where foreign policy might be going in the future.

AMY GOODMAN: Let’s begin with Hillary Clinton, Kelley Vlahos.

KELLEY BEAUCAR VLAHOS: OK. Well, Hillary Clinton’s—her foreign policy team can be best described as—and I hate to use this word so casually, but—“throwbacks” of her husband’s administration. We have, you know, Richard Holbrooke, Madeleine Albright, you have Sandy Berger as your sort of top-tier advisers, your key advisers, the most recognized faces. And then, beyond that, as I say in the article, you have this newer generation—I want to say newer generation, but a generation of former Clinton types who you might not recognize their names, but they’ve been around for a long time and are seriously scrambling for position in what they see as a new Clinton administration. So you’re seeing a lot of old faces, old names, who haven’t really changed their ideas from, you know, what I and others can see, in terms of doing the research, haven’t changed their real vision of the world and foreign policy since the 1990s.

AMY GOODMAN: Let me bring Allan Nairn into this conversation. You have just written about the advisers, as well, on your blog, newsc.blogspot.com. Elaborate further on Hillary Clinton’s advisers.

ALLAN NAIRN: Well, I think one thing you could say about the advisers for all the candidates who have a chance is that the presence of these advisers makes it clear that these candidates aren’t serious about enforcing the murder laws and that they’re willing to kill civilians, foreign civilians, en masse in order to advance US policy. And they’re not serious about law and order. They’re soft on crime.

And start with Clinton. Madeleine Albright, she was the main force behind the Iraq sanctions that killed more than 400,000 Iraqi civilians. General Wesley Clark, he was the one who ran the bombing of Serbia in the former Yugoslavia, came out and publicly said that he was going after civilian targets, like electrical plants, like the TV station there. Richard Holbrooke, in the Carter administration he was the one who oversaw the shipment of weapons to the Indonesian military as they were invading—illegally invading East Timor and killing a third of the population there, and he was the one who kept the UN Security Council from enforcing its resolution against that invasion. Strobe Talbott, he was the one who, during the Clinton administration, oversaw Russia policy, a backing of Yeltsin, which resulted in turning over the national wealth to the oligarchs and a drop in life expectancy in much of Russia of about fifteen years—massive, massive death. And you have various backers of the Iraq invasion and occupation and the recent escalation, people like General Jack Keane, Michael O’Hanlon and others. That’s just Clinton.

AMY GOODMAN: Barack Obama?

ALLAN NAIRN: Well, Obama’s top adviser is Zbigniew Brzezinski. Brzezinski gave an interview to the French press a number of years ago where he boasted about the fact that it was he who created the whole Afghan jihadi movement, the movement that produced Osama bin Laden. And he was asked by the interviewer, “Well, don’t you think this might have had some bad consequences?” And Brzezinski replied, “Absolutely not. It was definitely worth it, because we were going after the Soviets. We were getting the Soviets.” Another top Obama person—

AMY GOODMAN: I think his comment actually was, “What’s a few riled-up Muslims?” And this, that whole idea of blowback, the idea of arming, financing, training the Mujahideen in Afghanistan to fight the Soviets, including Osama bin Laden, and then when they’re done with the Soviets, they set their sights, well, on the United States.

ALLAN NAIRN: Right. And later, during Bill Clinton’s administration, during the Bosnia killing, the US actually flew some of the Afghan Mujahideen, the early al-Qaeda people—the US actually arranged for them to be flown from there to Bosnia to fight on the Muslim/NATO side.

Another key Obama adviser, Anthony Lake, he was the main force behind the US invasion of Haiti in the mid-Clinton years during which they brought back Aristide essentially in political chains, pledged to support a World Bank/IMF overhaul of the economy, which resulted in an increase in malnutrition deaths among Haitians and set the stage for the current ongoing political disaster in Haiti.

Another Obama adviser, General Merrill McPeak, an Air Force man, who not long after the Dili massacre in East Timor in ’91 that you and I survived, he was—I happened to see on Indonesian TV shortly after that—there was General McPeak overseeing the delivery to Indonesia of US fighter planes.

Another key Obama adviser, Dennis Ross. Ross, for many years under both Clinton and Bush 2, a key—he has advised Clinton and both Bushes. He oversaw US policy toward Israel/Palestine. He pushed the principle that the legal rights of the Palestinians, the rights recognized under international law, must be subordinated to the needs of the Israeli government—in other words, their desires, their desires to expand to do whatever they want in the Occupied Territories. And Ross was one of the people who, interestingly, led the political assault on former Democratic President Jimmy Carter. Carter, no peacenik—I mean, Carter is the one who bears ultimate responsibility for that Timor terror that Holbrooke was involved in. But Ross led an assault on him, because, regarding Palestine, Carter was so bold as to agree with Bishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa that what Israel was doing in the Occupied Territories was tantamount to apartheid. And so, Ross was one of those who fiercely attacked him.

Another Obama adviser, Sarah Sewall, who heads a human rights center at Harvard and is a former Defense official, she wrote the introduction to General Petraeus’s Marine Corps/Army counterinsurgency handbook, the handbook that is now being used worldwide by US troops in various killing operations. That’s the Obama team.

AMY GOODMAN: John Edwards?

ALLAN NAIRN: Well, Edwards is a little different. The list of his foreign advisers is not as complete, so it’s not as clear exactly where they may be coming from, but it’s interesting. Last night on TV, one of the top Edwards advisers, “Mudcat” Saunders, was complaining about the fact that there are 35,000 lobbyists in Washington. And it appears, from the Edwards list, that many of the military lobbyists are working on the Edwards foreign policy team, because the names that—the Edwards names that are out there mainly come from the Army and the Air Force and the Navy Material Command. Those are the portions of the Pentagon that do the Defense contracts, that do the deals with the big companies like Raytheon and Boeing, etc. One of those listed on the Edwards team is the lobbyist for the big military contractor EADS. So, although Edwards talks about going after lobbyists, if he tries to go after the military lobbyists, he may get a little blowback from his own advisers.

AMY GOODMAN: Are you saying that there’s no difference between these candidates?

ALLAN NAIRN: Well, fundamentally, there’s no difference on the basic principle of, are you against the killing of civilians and are you willing to enforce the murder laws. If we were willing to enforce the murder laws, the headquarters of each of these candidates could be raided, and various advisers and many candidates could be hauled away by the cops, because they have backed various actions that, under established principles like the Nuremberg Principles, like the principles set up in the Rwanda tribunals, the Bosnia tribunals, things that are unacceptable, like aggressive war, like the killing of civilians for political purposes. So, in a basic sense, there is no choice.

But there is a difference in this sense: the US is so vastly powerful, the US influences and has the potential to end so many millions of lives around the world, that if, let’s say, you have two candidates that are 99% the same—there’s only 1% difference between them—if you’re talking about decisions that affect a million lives—1% of a million is 10,000—that’s 10,000 lives. So, even though it’s a bitter choice, if you choose the one who is going to kill 10,000 fewer people, well, then you’ve saved 10,000 lives. We shouldn’t be limited to that choice. It’s unacceptable. And Americans should start to realize that it’s unacceptable.

But that’s the choice we have at the moment. In Iowa, I think there are steps people could take to start to challenge that system, if they wanted to.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’ll talk about that in a minute, and we’ll continue to talk about the advisers. Our guests are Allan Nairn and Kelley Beaucar Vlahos. We’ll be back with them both in a minute.

[break]

AMY GOODMAN: We continue this discussion about the advisers to the presidential candidates, the men and women behind the men and women who are running today. Our guests are Kelley Beaucar Vlahos, a freelance journalist in Washington, wrote a piece in The American Conservative called “War Whisperers: The 2008 Hopefuls Promised a Change in Foreign Policy Then Hired the Old Guard.” We are also joined by independent investigative journalist Allan Nairn. He writes a blog called newsc.blogspot.com. His piece today on this issue is called “The US Election is Already Over. Murder and Preventable Death Have Won.”

Kelley Beaucar Vlahos, would you like to add to any of the advisers Allan just talked about? And then we’ll move on to the Republicans.

KELLEY BEAUCAR VLAHOS: Well, I think Allan has covered most of it and pretty thoroughly. I agree with him that there is very little difference among these people, and I think what he said really speaks to the idea and the challenge that there is no incentive for these candidates to reach out beyond any of this orbit or galaxy of foreign policy advisers who have been linked in, you know, we’re talking decades of war and events and actions and operations. And there seems, whether it be John Edwards reaching out to the Defense contracting community or Hillary Clinton reaching out to her husband’s former security advisers and operatives or whether it’s Obama reaching out to former Clinton types, there doesn’t seem to be any incentive to reach out beyond that. It seems like there is a stranglehold in this town on the kind of advisers that one is supposed to be linked with.

And I think a lot of that is linked to money, where, you know, the candidates have big names, big lobbyists; that in turn brings them in more funders, more bundlers. And it’s sort of like this hand-in-glove symbiotic relationship, where the bigger names you have, the more familiar names, the more entrenched you have in these cliques I spoke to previously, the more money you’re bringing into your campaign. So there’s no incentive to go beyond that, unless you’re ready for some amount of rebuke and some of the spigot being turned off.

AMY GOODMAN: I mean, actually, in terms of money, Allan Nairn, someone like Obama raises an enormous amount of money from just the grassroots.

ALLAN NAIRN: Yeah, Obama—that’s a very telling example. Like Dean in the last campaign, Obama has the ability to get all the money he needs from the middle class through the internet, through $50, $80, $100 contributions. He actually doesn’t need to finance his campaign, to go to the hedge funds, to go to Wall Street. But he does anyway. And he does, I think, because if he doesn’t, they wouldn’t trust him. They might think that he’s on the wrong team, and they might start attacking him. He is someone who, in terms of the money he needs for his campaign, he could afford to come out for single-payer healthcare, for example, but he doesn’t. He doesn’t need money from the health insurance industry, that’s wasting several percentage points of the American GDP in a way that no other industrial rich country in the world does, yet he chooses not to do that, because he doesn’t want to be attacked by those corporations.

AMY GOODMAN: And is Edwards and Clinton any different on those issues?

ALLAN NAIRN: Not as far as I can tell. None of them have come out for single payer. The only one who came out for single payer was Kucinich. Campaign contributions is just one of many tools that rich people have to get their way. There are basically two parallel factors in any democracy. One is one person, one vote. The other is one dollar, one vote. And those two are mixed together. So, although the people do have some say, there are usually a lot more dollars out there than people, and they find ways of prevailing in the end, unless the people become aggressive and disruptive and demanding and threaten to shake the system so that big concessions are made.

AMY GOODMAN: Kelley Beaucar Vlahos, let’s go to the Republicans: Giuliani, Mitt Romney, Fred Thompson, Mike Huckabee, John McCain. Give us a few of their advisers.

KELLEY BEAUCAR VLAHOS: Well, Giuliani, as you had mentioned, and you had a pretty thorough list of people, but Giuliani is probably strikingly—strikingly is reaching out to the most strident neoconservatives on the scene today. He has familiar neoconservatives on his team, like you said: Norman Podhoretz, also Daniel Pipes, who—and I don’t remember if you had mentioned, but—has been leading the charge against “Islamofascism” on college campuses, has put out his Campus Watch, in terms of going after professors that he deems are not pro-Israel enough. He has other less familiar names, like Martin Kramer, Stephen Rosen, Peter Berkowitz of the Hoover Institution. He has basically a small galaxy of neoconservatives from familiar think tanks as the American Enterprise Institute, the Heritage Foundation, Hoover, the Hudson.

And basically, I mean, just to start, you know, with Giuliani, because I think he has the most poignant list of people in terms of where you would think that his foreign policy strategy is moving, he has basically—and I said this in my article—has taken the Bush Doctrine, has just pumped it up with steroids. He is fully on board—he always has been—with the Bush Doctrine. His people behind him are. We’re talking about no-holds-barred forward with the war on terror, the war against “Islamofascism.” He believes that the war on terror is a grand war versus good and evil. He is not shy to say that, his people aren’t shy to say that. He’s fully in grip of these people and the Bush Doctrine.

And, you know, if you want to see where the Rudy Giuliani—President Rudy Giuliani will take us, you just look at the Bush Doctrine as if the Iraq war never happened or, better yet, the problems that have arisen from the Iraq war have never happened, because Rudy Giuliani doesn’t seem to acknowledge any of that. Any issues before the surge are incidental. You know, everything is moving forward, and his policy team is right there backing him.

AMY GOODMAN: Allan Nairn, more on Rudolph Giuliani, and then to Mitt Romney.

ALLAN NAIRN: Giuliani, as was mentioned, his big adviser is Norman Podhoretz. Podhoretz’s new book is World War IV, which he seems to like. Podhoretz says, bomb the Iranians. And he’s not just talking about pinpoint Iranian nuclear installations; he’s saying bomb the Iranians. And he says he prays that this will happen. Ex-Senator Robert Kasten, an old major backer of the Pakistani military dictatorships and the Suharto dictatorship in Indonesia, he’s another key Giuliani adviser.

McCain has General Alexander Haig, who oversaw the US policy of mass terror killings of civilians in Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua and Honduras, when American nuns and religious workers were abducted, raped and murdered by the Salvadoran National Guard. General Haig said those nuns died in an exchange of gunfire, the pistol-packing nuns. He has a younger—McCain has a younger adviser, Max Boot, who now points to El Salvador, where 70,000 civilians were killed by American-backed death squads, as a model counterinsurgency, a model for what the US should be doing today. Henry Kissinger advises McCain, as he advises many others. And Kissinger, of course, was responsible for mass death in Cambodia, Vietnam, Chile, countless other places. Bud McFarlane from the Reagan administration, who was a key backer of the Contras. Brent Scowcroft, who these days is popular with some liberals because he opposes—he opposed the Iraq invasion, who is a leader of the realist school—the realist school basically says, yes, kill civilians, but make sure you win the war, as opposed to the Bush-Cheney school, which has been killing civilians but losing the war, as the US has been doing until recently in Iraq and is now starting to do in Afghanistan—Scowcroft was the one who, during the Bush 1 administration, went to China right after the Tiananmen Square massacre and reassured the Chinese leadership, “Don’t worry about it, we’re still behind you.”

Romney, as you mentioned, Romney has Cofer Black, a longtime CIA operative who was one of the key people behind the invasion of Afghanistan. During the course of that, according to Bob Woodward, he went in and said, “We’re going to go into Afghanistan. We’re going to cut their heads off.” He’s the one who organized Detachment 88 in Indonesia just recently, the supposed antiterrorist outfit that recently went after a Papuan human rights lawyer. Two key figures in backing the old US policy in Central America, Mark Falcoff and Roger Noriega, are also on the Romney team. And Dan Senor, who viewers probably remember as the voice of the early invasion and occupation of Iraq, he’s one of the Romney guys. Now, as you mentioned—

AMY GOODMAN: Dan Senor is one of the spokespeople in Iraq, is married to, I think it is, Campbell Brown, who’s just been hired by CNN to replace Paula Zahn.

ALLAN NAIRN: Huckabee, who you mentioned, it’s not clear who his advisers are. Huckabee recently was attacked by Romney for being soft on crime. So Huckabee responded, “Soft on crime? I executed sixteen people in Arkansas. How many people did you execute in Massachusetts?” Well, Massachusetts didn’t have the death penalty. But if Huckabee were really tough on crime, he would have used his post as governor of Arkansas to extradite Bill Clinton to Arkansas to stand trial before the courts there, as is permissible under international law, for the hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths brought on by the Iraqi sanctions during the Clinton administration. But that’s unthinkable in American politics. It probably didn’t even occur to Huckabee. But if we had a civilized political order and we defined crime and murder objectively, something like that would have been on the table, and Huckabee would have been challenged on it.

Bloomberg, who may step in as the independent, using his money, he’s an interesting example of another aspect.

AMY GOODMAN: The current mayor of New York.

ALLAN NAIRN: Yes. One is, we ought to be enforcing the murder laws evenhandedly, so that anyone who facilitates the killing of civilians faces trial and jail, just like any street criminal, even if they’re a CIA operative, even if they’re an American general, even if they’re American president.

Two, we ought to be preventing preventable death if we can. Kids who are defecating to death, kids who are dying from malnutrition for the lack of a couple of dollars, we should be stopping that every single time it can be stopped in the world. Last year in the world, there were anywhere from three to five million deaths of children under the age of five, children who were suffering from malnutrition. If he had so chosen—and he chose not to—Bloomberg could have personally prevented those deaths, because according to Forbes magazine, he’s worth $11.5 billion, and that’s more than enough money, if distributed properly, to prevent that many deaths, millions of one year’s deaths of entirely preventable, entirely inexcusable malnutrition deaths. But it probably never even occurred to him, and he was certainly never challenged on it politically.

But we can start to challenge people on this politically. For example, in the Iowa caucuses, we’re now in a situation where, you know, we have very bitter choices. So what are you going to do? I mean, Kucinich, who has good positions on many of these issues, he’s decided to throw in his lot with Obama. Ralph Nader, who has good positions, he’s implying support for Edwards. OK, these are tactical choices. But one thing that people can do in the Iowa caucuses tonight, they can go in there and say, OK, I’m caucusing for whomever, but I am making my support conditional on you renouncing support for the murder of civilians, on you firing all of your advisers who have been involved in the killing of civilians in the past, you turning them over to the International Criminal Court if you can get the International Criminal Court to accept it, you signing a pledge that says no more killing of civilians, you signing a pledge that says we will prevent preventable death.

You know, the right wing has been doing this for years on the issue of taxes. They make—they go around, they make all the Republican candidates sign a no-tax pledge. That’s been somewhat effective. A very similar thing could be done, and I think it could have appeal, left and right, to anyone who is decent to have candidates pledge no more support for killing civilians, tough on crime, enforce the murder laws, prevent preventable deaths. Let’s not have kids dying of diarrhea. If we have spare dollars floating around that people only want, give them to people whose bodies need them.

AMY GOODMAN: You know, it’s interesting, there is an Occupation Project, and a group of people were just arrested in Huckabee’s offices, among them the longtime peace activist, Nobel Peace Prize nominee several times over, Kathy Kelly, who founded Voices in the Wilderness.

ALLAN NAIRN: Right. That’s a good tactic. I think we have to try many tactics from many directions. And one possible one is, you know, getting inside things like the Iowa caucus, getting inside things like the conventions of both parties and threaten to create a disturbance on the floor, ruckus on the floor, if the candidate for whom you are there as a delegate doesn’t back these simple things that should be the basis of any civilization: no murder, save someone if you can save them.

AMY GOODMAN: Final question, this is on a totally different issue, Allan Nairn, our top headline, the Justice Department launching a formal criminal investigation to the destruction of the videotapes documenting the interrogation of two prisoners. You have long been writing about investigating the CIA and US policy, whether it’s in Central America or Asia. What are your thoughts on the destruction of these videotapes?

ALLAN NAIRN: Well, one—and who knows?—I’m skeptical that they’ve actually been destroyed. I mean, anyone, you know, who works with computers knows that it’s almost impossible to truly eliminate something from a hard disk and also that when there’s a document, there are always multiple copies made, especially when you’re in a network system. So I’d be surprised if this thing was really destroyed.

But, anyway, it’s unfortunate that the issue of torture—I mean, it’s good that the issue of torture has finally been put on the table of American politics and people talk about it to some extent, but it’s unfortunate that it’s been put on the table in the context of the torture of these al-Qaeda people, these people who were openly proud killers, mass murderers of civilians. In that context, a lot of people look at it and say, “Well, yeah, look at these lowlifes. Maybe they should be tortured.”

But the fact of the matter is, 90% , at least, worldwide of cases of torture are not of people like this who are open mass murderers. They are usually of dissidents, of rebels, or of common criminals. And often, it is done by regimes that are armed, trained or financed by the United States. This was the case in El Salvador. In El Salvador, I interviewed Salvadoran military people who told of torture training classes they got from CIA officials, and they talked about how the CIA people would be in the room as the torture sessions were going on. And these were not al-Qaeda types that they were torturing; these were labor organizers, these were people who were speaking for justice, these were peasants.

That’s what most torture is in the world, and it should be completely banned and abolished, not in the soft rhetorical way that McCain is talking about it, but actually stopping it by stopping support for all the forces that make a practice of torture. And that would involve completely rewriting the Foreign Operations Appropriations Bill, the Defense Appropriations Bill, and it would also involve calling in the authorities and carrying out many US officials in chains, because they’ve been backing this illegal stuff for years.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to leave it there. In talking about, by the way, the occupation of offices, it was not only Huckabee’s office, it was also Barack Obama’s Iowa office, as well as Mitt Romney’s Iowa office, people occupied yesterday. Allan Nairn, I want to thank you for being with us. Your blog at “newsc” for “News and Comment,” newsc.blogspot.com. And Kelley Beaucar Vlahos, thank you for joining us from Washington, D.C. Her article appeared in The American Conservative. The piece was called “War Whisperers.”

Creative Commons License The original content of this program is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. Please attribute legal copies of this work to democracynow.org. Some of the work(s) that this program incorporates, however, may be separately licensed. For further information or additional permissions, contact us.

Categories : Blog / Vlog, Health Freedom Blog Home Page, Home Page, Miscellaneous

Must Read Documentation of US Government Mercury Cover UP

By Administrator on December 22, 2007 1 Comments

This extremely important document about the mercury vaccine cover up knowingly being carried out by the FDA, CDC, Institute of Medicine, scientists and the pharmaceutical industry is extremely important to you whether you have a child or not.

Since compulsory vaccination is becoming the order of the day in an increasing number of contexts (University of Maine students were locked out of their dormitories and dining halls, classes and libraries if they refused to submit to vaccination with the measles/mumps/rubella vaccine on December 10, 2007: 2300 children in Prince George’s County MD were vaccinated at gun point – or re-vaccinated because the school lost their records! – with vaccines that the lead States Attorney on the case, Glen Ivey, said were too toxic to give to his own children on December 11, 2007, New Jersey pre-schoolers must receive additional mercury containing flu vaccines as of December 11, 2007, for example). But more and more adult and pediatric compulsory vaccinations are in the offing: adults and children will be confronted with these assaults in the days and weeks to come as the population is “softened up” for mass vaccination with who knows what for who knows what.

The Natural Solutions Foundation believes that information is power. We believe that you need this information. Please read it and ask each of the people you forward it to to take the following actions:

1. Join the secure Natural Solutions Health Freedom eAlert list (http://drrimatruthreports.com/index.php?page_id=187)

2. Tell your Congressional and State legislators that you and your family want to be protected from any form of compulsory drugging or vaccination. Click here (http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/568/t/1128/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=21833) to send an email to your elected representatives demanding this protection.

Yours in health and freedom,
Dr. Rima

Rima E. Laibow, MD
Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation


Back to Deadly Immunity

ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR.

June 20, 2005

In June 2000, a group of top government scientists and health officials gathered for a meeting at the isolated Simpsonwood conference center in Norcross, Georgia. Convened by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the meeting was held at this Methodist retreat center, nestled in wooded farmland next to the Chattahoochee River, to ensure complete secrecy. The agency had issued no public announcement of the session — only private invitations to fifty-two attendees. There were high-level officials from the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration, the top vaccine specialist from the World Health Organization in Geneva and representatives of every major vaccine manufacturer, including GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Wyeth and Aventis Pasteur. All of the scientific data under discussion, CDC officials repeatedly reminded the participants, was strictly “embargoed.” There would be no making photocopies of documents, no taking papers with them when they left.

The federal officials and industry representatives had assembled to discuss a disturbing new study that raised alarming questions about the safety of a host of common childhood vaccines administered to infants and young children. According to a CDC epidemiologist named Tom Verstraeten, who had analyzed the agency’s massive database containing the medical records of 100,000 children, a mercury-based preservative in the vaccines — thimerosal — appeared to be responsible for a dramatic increase in autism and a host of other neurological disorders among children. “I was actually stunned by what I saw,” Verstraeten told those assembled at Simpsonwood, citing the staggering number of earlier studies that indicate a link between thimerosal and speech delays, attention-deficit disorder, hyperactivity and autism. Since 1991, when the CDC and the FDA had recommended that three additional vaccines laced with the preservative be given to extremely young infants — in one case, within hours of birth — the estimated number of cases of autism had increased fifteenfold, from one in every 2,500 children to one in 166 children.

Even for scientists and doctors accustomed to confronting issues of life and death, the findings were frightening. “You can play with this all you want,” Dr. Bill Weil, a consultant for the American Academy of Pediatrics, told the group. The results “are statistically significant.” Dr. Richard Johnston, an immunologist and pediatrician from the University of Colorado whose grandson had been born early on the morning of the meeting’s first day, was even more alarmed. “My gut feeling?” he said. “Forgive this personal comment — I do not want my grandson to get a thimerosal-containing vaccine until we know better what is going on.”

But instead of taking immediate steps to alert the public and rid the vaccine supply of thimerosal, the officials and executives at Simpsonwood spent most of the next two days discussing how to cover up the damaging data. According to transcripts obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, many at the meeting were concerned about how the damaging revelations about thimerosal would affect the vaccine industry’s bottom line. “We are in a bad position from the standpoint of defending any lawsuits,” said Dr. Robert Brent, a pediatrician at the Alfred I. duPont Hospital for Children in Delaware. “This will be a resource to our very busy plaintiff attorneys in this country.” Dr. Bob Chen, head of vaccine safety for the CDC, expressed relief that “given the sensitivity of the information, we have been able to keep it out of the hands of, let’s say, less responsible hands.” Dr. John Clements, vaccines adviser at the World Health Organization, declared that “perhaps this study should not have been done at all.” He added that “the research results have to be handled,” warning that the study “will be taken by others and will be used in other ways beyond the control of this group.”

In fact, the government has proved to be far more adept at handling the damage than at protecting children’s health. The CDC paid the Institute of Medicine to conduct a new study to whitewash the risks of thimerosal, ordering researchers to “rule out” the chemical’s link to autism. It withheld Verstraeten’s findings, even though they had been slated for immediate publication, and told other scientists that his original data had been “lost” and could not be replicated. And to thwart the Freedom of Information Act, it handed its giant database of vaccine records over to a private company, declaring it off-limits to researchers. By the time Verstraeten finally published his study in 2003, he had gone to work for GlaxoSmithKline and reworked his data to bury the link between thimerosal and autism.

Vaccine manufacturers had already begun to phase thimerosal out of injections given to American infants — but they continued to sell off their mercury-based supplies of vaccines until last year. The CDC and FDA gave them a hand, buying up the tainted vaccines for export to developing countries and allowing drug companies to continue using the preservative in some American vaccines — including several pediatric flu shots as well as tetanus boosters routinely given to eleven-year-olds.

The drug companies are also getting help from powerful lawmakers in Washington. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, who has received $873,000 in contributions from the pharmaceutical industry, has been working to immunize vaccine makers from liability in 4,200 lawsuits that have been filed by the parents of injured children. On five separate occasions, Frist has tried to seal all of the government’s vaccine-related documents — including the Simpsonwood transcripts — and shield Eli Lilly, the developer of thimerosal, from subpoenas. In 2002, the day after Frist quietly slipped a rider known as the “Eli Lilly Protection Act” into a homeland security bill, the company contributed $10,000 to his campaign and bought 5,000 copies of his book on bioterrorism. The measure was repealed by Congress in 2003 — but earlier this year, Frist slipped another provision into an anti-terrorism bill that would deny compensation to children suffering from vaccine-related brain disorders. “The lawsuits are of such magnitude that they could put vaccine producers out of business and limit our capacity to deal with a biological attack by terrorists,” says Dean Rosen, health policy adviser to Frist.

Even many conservatives are shocked by the government’s effort to cover up the dangers of thimerosal. Rep. Dan Burton, a Republican from Indiana, oversaw a three-year investigation of thimerosal after his grandson was diagnosed with autism. “Thimerosal used as a preservative in vaccines is directly related to the autism epidemic,” his House Government Reform Committee concluded in its final report. “This epidemic in all probability may have been prevented or curtailed had the FDA not been asleep at the switch regarding a lack of safety data regarding injected thimerosal, a known neurotoxin.” The FDA and other public-health agencies failed to act, the committee added, out of “institutional malfeasance for self protection” and “misplaced protectionism of the pharmaceutical industry.”

The story of how government health agencies colluded with Big Pharma to hide the risks of thimerosal from the public is a chilling case study of institutional arrogance, power and greed. I was drawn into the controversy only reluctantly. As an attorney and environmentalist who has spent years working on issues of mercury toxicity, I frequently met mothers of autistic children who were absolutely convinced that their kids had been injured by vaccines. Privately, I was skeptical.

I doubted that autism could be blamed on a single source, and I certainly understood the government’s need to reassure parents that vaccinations are safe; the eradication of deadly childhood diseases depends on it. I tended to agree with skeptics like Rep. Henry Waxman, a Democrat from California, who criticized his colleagues on the House Government Reform Committee for leaping to conclusions about autism and vaccinations. “Why should we scare people about immunization,” Waxman pointed out at one hearing, “until we know the facts?”

It was only after reading the Simpsonwood transcripts, studying the leading scientific research and talking with many of the nation’s pre-eminent authorities on mercury that I became convinced that the link between thimerosal and the epidemic of childhood neurological disorders is real. Five of my own children are members of the Thimerosal Generation — those born between 1989 and 2003 — who received heavy doses of mercury from vaccines. “The elementary grades are overwhelmed with children who have symptoms of neurological or immune-system damage,” Patti White, a school nurse, told the House Government Reform Committee in 1999. “Vaccines are supposed to be making us healthier; however, in twenty-five years of nursing I have never seen so many damaged, sick kids. Something very, very wrong is happening to our children.”

More than 500,000 kids currently suffer from autism, and pediatricians diagnose more than 40,000 new cases every year. The disease was unknown until 1943, when it was identified and diagnosed among eleven children born in the months after thimerosal was first added to baby vaccines in 1931.

Some skeptics dispute that the rise in autism is caused by thimerosal-tainted vaccinations. They argue that the increase is a result of better diagnosis — a theory that seems questionable at best, given that most of the new cases of autism are clustered within a single generation of children. “If the epidemic is truly an artifact of poor diagnosis,” scoffs Dr. Boyd Haley, one of the world’s authorities on mercury toxicity, “then where are all the twenty-year-old autistics?” Other researchers point out that Americans are exposed to a greater cumulative “load” of mercury than ever before, from contaminated fish to dental fillings, and suggest that thimerosal in vaccines may be only part of a much larger problem. It’s a concern that certainly deserves far more attention than it has received — but it overlooks the fact that the mercury concentrations in vaccines dwarf other sources of exposure to our children.

What is most striking is the lengths to which many of the leading detectives have gone to ignore — and cover up — the evidence against thimerosal. From the very beginning, the scientific case against the mercury additive has been overwhelming. The preservative, which is used to stem fungi and bacterial growth in vaccines, contains ethylmercury, a potent neurotoxin. Truckloads of studies have shown that mercury tends to accumulate in the brains of primates and other animals after they are injected with vaccines — and that the developing brains of infants are particularly susceptible. In 1977, a Russian study found that adults exposed to much lower concentrations of ethylmercury than those given to American children still suffered brain damage years later. Russia banned thimerosal from children’s vaccines twenty years ago, and Denmark, Austria, Japan, Great Britain and all the Scandinavian countries have since followed suit.

“You couldn’t even construct a study that shows thimerosal is safe,” says Haley, who heads the chemistry department at the University of Kentucky. “It’s just too darn toxic. If you inject thimerosal into an animal, its brain will sicken. If you apply it to living tissue, the cells die. If you put it in a petri dish, the culture dies. Knowing these things, it would be shocking if one could inject it into an infant without causing damage.”

Internal documents reveal that Eli Lilly, which first developed thimerosal, knew from the start that its product could cause damage — and even death — in both animals and humans. In 1930, the company tested thimerosal by administering it to twenty-two patients with terminal meningitis, all of whom died within weeks of being injected — a fact Lilly didn’t bother to report in its study declaring thimerosal safe. In 1935, researchers at another vaccine manufacturer, Pittman-Moore, warned Lilly that its claims about thimerosal’s safety “did not check with ours.” Half the dogs Pittman injected with thimerosal-based vaccines became sick, leading researchers there to declare the preservative “unsatisfactory as a serum intended for use on dogs.”

In the decades that followed, the evidence against thimerosal continued to mount. During the Second World War, when the Department of Defense used the preservative in vaccines on soldiers, it required Lilly to label it “poison.” In 1967, a study in Applied Microbiology found that thimerosal killed mice when added to injected vaccines. Four years later, Lilly’s own studies discerned that thimerosal was “toxic to tissue cells” in concentrations as low as one part per million — 100 times weaker than the concentration in a typical vaccine. Even so, the company continued to promote thimerosal as “nontoxic” and also incorporated it into topical disinfectants. In 1977, ten babies at a Toronto hospital died when an antiseptic preserved with thimerosal was dabbed onto their umbilical cords.

In 1982, the FDA proposed a ban on over-the-counter products that contained thimerosal, and in 1991 the agency considered banning it from animal vaccines. But tragically, that same year, the CDC recommended that infants be injected with a series of mercury-laced vaccines. Newborns would be vaccinated for hepatitis B within twenty-four hours of birth, and two-month-old infants would be immunized for haemophilus influenzae B and diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis.

The drug industry knew the additional vaccines posed a danger. The same year that the CDC approved the new vaccines, Dr. Maurice Hilleman, one of the fathers of Merck’s vaccine programs, warned the company that six-month-olds who were administered the shots would suffer dangerous exposure to mercury. He recommended that thimerosal be discontinued, “especially when used on infants and children,” noting that the industry knew of nontoxic alternatives. “The best way to go,” he added, “is to switch to dispensing the actual vaccines without adding preservatives.”

For Merck and other drug companies, however, the obstacle was money. Thimerosal enables the pharmaceutical industry to package vaccines in vials that contain multiple doses, which require additional protection because they are more easily contaminated by multiple needle entries. The larger vials cost half as much to produce as smaller, single-dose vials, making it cheaper for international agencies to distribute them to impoverished regions at risk of epidemics. Faced with this “cost consideration,” Merck ignored Hilleman’s warnings, and government officials continued to push more and more thimerosal-based vaccines for children. Before 1989, American preschoolers received eleven vaccinations — for polio, diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis and measles-mumps-rubella. A decade later, thanks to federal recommendations, children were receiving a total of twenty-two immunizations by the time they reached first grade.

As the number of vaccines increased, the rate of autism among children exploded. During the 1990s, 40 million children were injected with thimerosal-based vaccines, receiving unprecedented levels of mercury during a period critical for brain development. Despite the well-documented dangers of thimerosal, it appears that no one bothered to add up the cumulative dose of mercury that children would receive from the mandated vaccines. “What took the FDA so long to do the calculations?” Peter Patriarca, director of viral products for the agency, asked in an e-mail to the CDC in 1999. “Why didn’t CDC and the advisory bodies do these calculations when they rapidly expanded the childhood immunization schedule?”

But by that time, the damage was done. At two months, when the infant brain is still at a critical stage of development, infants routinely received three inoculations that contained a total of 62.5 micrograms of ethylmercury — a level 99 times greater than the EPA’s limit for daily exposure to methylmercury, a related neurotoxin. Although the vaccine industry insists that ethylmercury poses little danger because it breaks down rapidly and is removed by the body, several studies — including one published in April by the National Institutes of Health — suggest that ethylmercury is actually more toxic to developing brains and stays in the brain longer than methylmercury.

Officials responsible for childhood immunizations insist that the additional vaccines were necessary to protect infants from disease and that thimerosal is still essential in developing nations, which, they often claim, cannot afford the single-dose vials that don’t require a preservative. Dr. Paul Offit, one of CDC’s top vaccine advisers, told me, “I think if we really have an influenza pandemic — and certainly we will in the next twenty years, because we always do — there’s no way on God’s earth that we immunize 280 million people with single-dose vials. There has to be multidose vials.”

But while public-health officials may have been well-intentioned, many of those on the CDC advisory committee who backed the additional vaccines had close ties to the industry. Dr. Sam Katz, the committee’s chair, was a paid consultant for most of the major vaccine makers and was part of a team that developed the measles vaccine and brought it to licensure in 1963. Dr. Neal Halsey, another committee member, worked as a researcher for the vaccine companies and received honoraria from Abbott Labs for his research on the hepatitis B vaccine.

Indeed, in the tight circle of scientists who work on vaccines, such conflicts of interest are common. Rep. Burton says that the CDC “routinely allows scientists with blatant conflicts of interest to serve on intellectual advisory committees that make recommendations on new vaccines,” even though they have “interests in the products and companies for which they are supposed to be providing unbiased oversight.” The House Government Reform Committee discovered that four of the eight CDC advisers who approved guidelines for a rotavirus vaccine “had financial ties to the pharmaceutical companies that were developing different versions of the vaccine.”

Offit, who shares a patent on one of the vaccines, acknowledged to me that he “would make money” if his vote eventually leads to a marketable product. But he dismissed my suggestion that a scientist’s direct financial stake in CDC approval might bias his judgment. “It provides no conflict for me,” he insists. “I have simply been informed by the process, not corrupted by it. When I sat around that table, my sole intent was trying to make recommendations that best benefited the children in this country. It’s offensive to say that physicians and public-health people are in the pocket of industry and thus are making decisions that they know are unsafe for children. It’s just not the way it works.”

Other vaccine scientists and regulators gave me similar assurances. Like Offit, they view themselves as enlightened guardians of children’s health, proud of their “partnerships” with pharmaceutical companies, immune to the seductions of personal profit, besieged by irrational activists whose anti-vaccine campaigns are endangering children’s health. They are often resentful of questioning. “Science,” says Offit, “is best left to scientists.”

Still, some government officials were alarmed by the apparent conflicts of interest. In his e-mail to CDC administrators in 1999, Paul Patriarca of the FDA blasted federal regulators for failing to adequately scrutinize the danger posed by the added baby vaccines. “I’m not sure there will be an easy way out of the potential perception that the FDA, CDC and immunization-policy bodies may have been asleep at the switch re: thimerosal until now,” Patriarca wrote. The close ties between regulatory officials and the pharmaceutical industry, he added, “will also raise questions about various advisory bodies regarding aggressive recommendations for use” of thimerosal in child vaccines.

If federal regulators and government scientists failed to grasp the potential risks of thimerosal over the years, no one could claim ignorance after the secret meeting at Simpsonwood. But rather than conduct more studies to test the link to autism and other forms of brain damage, the CDC placed politics over science. The agency turned its database on childhood vaccines — which had been developed largely at taxpayer expense — over to a private agency, America’s Health Insurance Plans, ensuring that it could not be used for additional research. It also instructed the Institute of Medicine, an advisory organization that is part of the National Academy of Sciences, to produce a study debunking the link between thimerosal and brain disorders. The CDC “wants us to declare, well, that these things are pretty safe,” Dr. Marie McCormick, who chaired the IOM’s Immunization Safety Review Committee, told her fellow researchers when they first met in January 2001. “We are not ever going to come down that [autism] is a true side effect” of thimerosal exposure. According to transcripts of the meeting, the committee’s chief staffer, Kathleen Stratton, predicted that the IOM would conclude that the evidence was “inadequate to accept or reject a causal relation” between thimerosal and autism. That, she added, was the result “Walt wants” — a reference to Dr. Walter Orenstein, director of the National Immunization Program for the CDC.

For those who had devoted their lives to promoting vaccination, the revelations about thimerosal threatened to undermine everything they had worked for. “We’ve got a dragon by the tail here,” said Dr. Michael Kaback, another committee member. “The more negative that [our] presentation is, the less likely people are to use vaccination, immunization — and we know what the results of that will be. We are kind of caught in a trap. How we work our way out of the trap, I think is the charge.”

Even in public, federal officials made it clear that their primary goal in studying thimerosal was to dispel doubts about vaccines. “Four current studies are taking place to rule out the proposed link between autism and thimerosal,” Dr. Gordon Douglas, then-director of strategic planning for vaccine research at the National Institutes of Health, assured a Princeton University gathering in May 2001. “In order to undo the harmful effects of research claiming to link the [measles] vaccine to an elevated risk of autism, we need to conduct and publicize additional studies to assure parents of safety.” Douglas formerly served as president of vaccinations for Merck, where he ignored warnings about thimerosal’s risks.

In May of last year, the Institute of Medicine issued its final report. Its conclusion: There is no proven link between autism and thimerosal in vaccines. Rather than reviewing the large body of literature describing the toxicity of thimerosal, the report relied on four disastrously flawed epidemiological studies examining European countries, where children received much smaller doses of thimerosal than American kids. It also cited a new version of the Verstraeten study, published in the journal Pediatrics, that had been reworked to reduce the link between thimerosal and autism. The new study included children too young to have been diagnosed with autism and overlooked others who showed signs of the disease. The IOM declared the case closed and — in a startling position for a scientific body — recommended that no further research be conducted.

The report may have satisfied the CDC, but it convinced no one. Rep. David Weldon, a Republican physician from Florida who serves on the House Government Reform Committee, attacked the Institute of Medicine, saying it relied on a handful of studies that were “fatally flawed” by “poor design” and failed to represent “all the available scientific and medical research.” CDC officials are not interested in an honest search for the truth, Weldon told me, because “an association between vaccines and autism would force them to admit that their policies irreparably damaged thousands of children. Who would want to make that conclusion about themselves?”

Under pressure from Congress and parents, the Institute of Medicine convened another panel to address continuing concerns about the Vaccine Safety Datalink Data Sharing program. In February, the new panel, composed of different scientists, criticized the way the VSD had been used in the Verstraeten study, and urged the CDC to make its vaccine database available to the public.

So far, though, only two scientists have managed to gain access. Dr. Mark Geier, president of the Genetics Center of America, and his son, David, spent a year battling to obtain the medical records from the CDC. Since August 2002, when members of Congress pressured the agency to turn over the data, the Geiers have completed six studies that demonstrate a powerful correlation between thimerosal and neurological damage in children. One study, which compares the cumulative dose of mercury received by children born between 1981 and 1985 with those born between 1990 and 1996, found a “very significant relationship” between autism and vaccines. Another study of educational performance found that kids who received higher doses of thimerosal in vaccines were nearly three times as likely to be diagnosed with autism and more than three times as likely to suffer from speech disorders and mental retardation. Another soon-to-be published study shows that autism rates are in decline following the recent elimination of thimerosal from most vaccines.

As the federal government worked to prevent scientists from studying vaccines, others have stepped in to study the link to autism. In April, reporter Dan Olmsted of UPI undertook one of the more interesting studies himself. Searching for children who had not been exposed to mercury in vaccines — the kind of population that scientists typically use as a “control” in experiments — Olmsted scoured the Amish of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, who refuse to immunize their infants. Given the national rate of autism, Olmsted calculated that there should be 130 autistics among the Amish. He found only four. One had been exposed to high levels of mercury from a power plant. The other three — including one child adopted from outside the Amish community — had received their vaccines.

At the state level, many officials have also conducted in-depth reviews of thimerosal. While the Institute of Medicine was busy whitewashing the risks, the Iowa legislature was carefully combing through all of the available scientific and biological data. “After three years of review, I became convinced there was sufficient credible research to show a link between mercury and the increased incidences in autism,” says state Sen. Ken Veenstra, a Republican who oversaw the investigation. “The fact that Iowa’s 700 percent increase in autism began in the 1990s, right after more and more vaccines were added to the children’s vaccine schedules, is solid evidence alone.” Last year, Iowa became the first state to ban mercury in vaccines, followed by California. Similar bans are now under consideration in thirty-two other states.

But instead of following suit, the FDA continues to allow manufacturers to include thimerosal in scores of over-the-counter medications as well as steroids and injected collagen. Even more alarming, the government continues to ship vaccines preserved with thimerosal to developing countries — some of which are now experiencing a sudden explosion in autism rates. In China, where the disease was virtually unknown prior to the introduction of thimerosal by U.S. drug manufacturers in 1999, news reports indicate that there are now more than 1.8 million autistics. Although reliable numbers are hard to come by, autistic disorders also appear to be soaring in India, Argentina, Nicaragua and other developing countries that are now using thimerosal-laced vaccines. The World Health Organization continues to insist thimerosal is safe, but it promises to keep the possibility that it is linked to neurological disorders “under review.”

I devoted time to study this issue because I believe that this is a moral crisis that must be addressed. If, as the evidence suggests, our public-health authorities knowingly allowed the pharmaceutical industry to poison an entire generation of American children, their actions arguably constitute one of the biggest scandals in the annals of American medicine. “The CDC is guilty of incompetence and gross negligence,” says Mark Blaxill, vice president of Safe Minds, a nonprofit organization concerned about the role of mercury in medicines. “The damage caused by vaccine exposure is massive. It’s bigger than asbestos, bigger than tobacco, bigger than anything you’ve ever seen.”

It’s hard to calculate the damage to our country — and to the international efforts to eradicate epidemic diseases — if Third World nations come to believe that America’s most heralded foreign-aid initiative is poisoning their children. It’s not difficult to predict how this scenario will be interpreted by America’s enemies abroad. The scientists and researchers — many of them sincere, even idealistic — who are participating in efforts to hide the science on thimerosal claim that they are trying to advance the lofty goal of protecting children in developing nations from disease pandemics. They are badly misguided. Their failure to come clean on thimerosal will come back horribly to haunt our country and the world’s poorest populations.

NOTE: This story has been updated to correct several inaccuracies in the original, published version. As originally reported, American preschoolers received only three vaccinations before 1989, but the article failed to note that they were innoculated a total of eleven times with those vaccines, including boosters. The article also misstated the level of ethylmercury received by infants injected with all their shots by the age of six months. It was 187 micrograms – an amount forty percent, not 187 times, greater than the EPA’s limit for daily exposure to methylmercury. Finally, because of an editing error, the article misstated the contents of the rotavirus vaccine approved by the CDC. It did not contain thimerosal. Salon and Rolling Stone regret the errors.

An earlier version of this story stated that the Institute of Medicine convened a second panel to review the work of the Immunization Safety Review Committee that had found no evidence of a link between thimerosal and autism. In fact, the IOM convened the second panel to address continuing concerns about the Vaccine Safety Datalink Data Sharing program, including those raised by critics of the IOM’s earlier work. But the panel was not charged with reviewing the committee’s findings. The story also inadvertently omitted a word and transposed two sentences in a quote by Dr. John Clements, and incorrectly stated that Dr. Sam Katz held a patent with Merck on the measles vaccine. In fact, Dr. Katz was part of a team that developed the vaccine and brought it to licensure, but he never held the patent. Salon and Rolling Stone regret the errors.

CLARIFICATION: After publication of this story, Salon and Rolling Stone corrected an error that misstated the level of ethylmercury received by infants injected with all their shots by the age of six months. It was 187 micrograms – an amount forty percent, not 187 times, greater than the EPA’s limit for daily exposure to methylmercury. At the time of the correction, we were aware that the comparison itself was flawed, but as journalists we considered it more appropriate to state the correct figure rather than replace it with another number entirely.

Since that earlier correction, however, it has become clear from responses to the article that the forty-percent number, while accurate, is misleading. It measures the total mercury load an infant received from vaccines during the first six months, calculates the daily average received based on average body weight, and then compares that number to the EPA daily limit. But infants did not receive the vaccines as a “daily average” – they received massive doses on a single day, through multiple shots. As the story states, these single-day doses exceeded the EPA limit by as much as 99 times. Based on the misunderstanding, and to avoid further confusion, we have amended the story to eliminate the forty-percent figure.

Correction: The story misattributed a quote to Andy Olson, former legislative counsel to Senator Bill Frist. The comment was made by Dean Rosen, health policy adviser to the senator. Rolling Stone and Salon.com regret the error.

Categories : Activism, Blog / Vlog, Hall of Shame, Health Freedom Blog Home Page, Medical Hazards, Miscellaneous

New Jersey First to Require Mercury-Laden Flu Shots

By Administrator on December 13, 2007 1 Comments

On December 11, 2007, outgoing New Jersey Health Commissioner Fred Jacobs gave a gift to Merck, the vaccine and pharmaceutical giant: every pres schooler in New Jersey must receive the flu-enriched shot along with other dangerous vaccines. Parental objections were over ridden by Jacobs who dismissed. Councilwoman Charlotte Vandervalk (R-Bergen) opposed the regulations and has introduced a bill to make exemptions on conviction alone an option for parents. Merck’s Corporate headquarters is in Whitehouse Station, New Jersey.

You can let the Commissioner know how you feel about this by going to the following NJ state link and completing the Comment Form, selecting “General Feedback” in the Program field: http://www.nj.gov/health/feedback.shtml – please be polite…

We’ll also be following these developments through our fellow foundation trustee Ralph Fucetola JD and his blog,
http://vitaminlawyerhealthfreedom.blogspot.com

And you can Take Action here:
http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/568/t/1128/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=21833

———————————————-
Here is the article from the Jersey Journal:

The Jersey Journal
PRE-K FLU VAX
Jersey order to be first some parents oppose it
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
TRENTON – New Jersey moved yesterday toward becoming the first state to require flu shots for preschoolers after a health advisory board backed new vaccine mandates over the opposition of worried parents.
The Public Health Council voted to require New Jersey children attending preschool or licensed day care to get annual flu shots, and to get three additional vaccines for youngsters starting Sept. 1, 2008.
No other state requires preschool, day care or older students to get flu shots, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics.
The state’s health commissioner, Dr. Fred M. Jacobs, has until next Tuesday to sign off on the mandates, though they have already been approved by Gov. Jon S. Corzine. Health Department spokesman Tom Slater said Jacobs was expected sign off on the proposal.
Besides the flu shots, New Jersey also will require preschoolers to get a pneumococcal vaccine and sixth-graders to get a whooping cough booster shot and a meningitis shot.
“Implementation of these rules will save lives and prevent disease and suffering in children, their families and the community,” deputy health commissioner Dr. Eddy Bresnitz told the council yesterday.
The Council voted in favor of the requirements 5-2, with one abstention, with member Dennis San Filippo saying he would like to see studies done on whether it’s safe for young children to get so many doses of different vaccines.
All four vaccines are recommended by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Academy of Pediatrics and other medical groups.
Parents concerned about possible dangers of the new vaccines and government intrusion in family medical decisions have been trying to block the new shots.
They note that flu vaccines contain trace amounts of mercury, a toxic heavy metal, and that mercury-free shots can be difficult to obtain.
According to the CDC and other scientific groups, there’s no convincing evidence the trace amounts of mercury in flu shots cause harm.
Following the vote yesterday, concerned parents said they will keep urging support for a bill that would give parents a right to a “philosophical objection” to vaccine mandates, as many other states have.
The new vaccines will be available for free for low-income families through the federal Vaccines for Children program, and private insurers generally will cover the cost, Bresnitz said.
———————————

And this is what the Star Ledger reported about Assemblywoman Vandervalk, leading the opposition to forced vaccinations:

“I’m gravely concerned about what’s happening here today,” said Assemblywoman Charlotte Vandervalk (R-Bergen), a sponsor of a bill (A165) that would allow parents to opt out of the vaccine mandates by filing a “conscientious exemption” form with the local health department.

“With New Jersey reporting the highest incidence of autism and a cause yet to be identified, we don’t know what will happen,” she said. “What happened to our freedom?”
——————————–

It is our hope that lots of Jersians and others concerned with this issue will send strong messages of support for Assembly member Vandervalk’s strong, principled stands against the “clout” of Big Pharma. Her bill has been “prefiled” for the new legislature that starts meeting in January. We’ve spoken to her office and she appreciates all the support that can be generated for this bill.

Please check back for updates and new Action Items.

And, of course, we need your generous help to make this possible:
http://drrimatruthreports.com/index.php/index.php?page_id=189

———————————————–

UPDATE

The following is a sample of information we’re continually receiving about the Compulsory Vaccination issue and is reprinted here to give you an idea of how important this issue is becoming. With your help, we can magnify our “netroots” (Internet grassroots) impact on public policy. Please make sure you get your friends and email contacts to join the eAlert list at www.healthfreedomusa.org today!

From our DC advocate, Charles Frohman – http://www.cfrohman.com/

1. Alberta Health halts mumps inoculations
Posted by: “C. F.” cfroh@yahoo.com cfroh
Date: Thu Dec 13, 2007 3:37 pm ((PST))

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/
Alberta Health halts mumps inoculations

The Canadian Press
December 12, 2007

Edmonton — Alberta has suspended its campaign to vaccinate young
people against mumps because of severe allergic reactions to the vaccine.

Alberta Health says it is holding off on inoculating 17- to
26-year-olds after five young people with a history of allergies had
bad responses.

All five have recovered.

The campaign was undertaken because of an outbreak of mumps around the
province.
________________________________________________________________________

Maryland Mass Forced Vaccination Update –

2. 700 Maryland parents exposed to jail for nonvaccination
Posted by: “C. F.” cfroh@yahoo.com cfroh
Date: Thu Dec 13, 2007 3:37 pm ((PST))

http://www.washingtonpost.com/

More Students Are Vaccinated

The number of Prince George’s County students who have not met the
state’s immunization requirements dropped by more than half over the
past month after State’s Attorney Glenn F. Ivey (D) threatened
students’ parents with fines and possible jail time, a school system
spokesman said Monday.

Spokesman John White said that 1,084 students had not received a full
program of shots for chicken pox and hepatitis B as of Saturday. This
was a significant improvement over the situation Nov. 13, when Ivey
and school officials sent a letter to the parents of more than 2,300
students warning that they could face a $50 fine for each day they
were out of compliance or up to 10 days in jail.

“The letter certainly got people’s attention,” White said. “It had the
desired effect.”

Many parents reported to free clinics to get their children the
vaccines; others provided proof that they’d gotten the immunizations
in the past. Parents may also request medical and religious exemptions
from the immunization requirement, which the state put into effect in
January.

Of those who have not gotten immunized, White said slightly more than
700 students’ parents — what White called “chronic” cases where there
is no sign that they have made an effort to get immunized or provide
an exemption — have been referred to Ivey’s office for possible legal
action.

Ramon V. Korionoff, a spokesman for Ivey’s office, said last week that
no parents had been fined or jailed.

________________________________________________________________________

3. Merck recalls over 1m doses of children’s vaccine
Posted by: “C. F.” cfroh@yahoo.com cfroh
Date: Thu Dec 13, 2007 3:37 pm ((PST))

http://www.blacklistednews.com/view.asp?ID=4989

Merck recalls over 1m doses of children’s vaccine
Published on Thursday, December 13, 2007.

AddThis Social Bookmarking Widget

Source: AP – Media Monarchy

merck recalls over 1m doses of children’s vaccine
More than a million doses of a common vaccine given to babies as young
as two months was being recalled Wednesday because of contamination
risks, but the top U.S. health official said it was not a health threat.

The recall is for 1.2 million doses of the vaccine for Hib, which
protects against meningitis, pneumonia and other serious infections,
and a combination vaccine for Hib and hepatitis B. The vaccine is
recommended for all children under 5 and is usually given in a
three-shot series, starting at two months.

Drug maker Merck & Co., which announced the recall after testing
showed a sterilization problem in a Pennsylvania factory, said
concerned parents should contact their child’s doctor.

“The potential for contamination of any individual vaccine is low,”
said Merck spokeswoman Kelly Dougherty.

Dr. Julie Gerberding, head of the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, echoed that in a news conference.

“This is not a health threat in the short run, but it is an
inconvenience,” she said.

________________________________________________________________________

5. Re: Bush Set To Veto To Remove Mercury From Infant Vaccines
Posted by: “Charles D. Frohman” cfroh@yahoo.com cfroh
Date: Thu Dec 13, 2007 3:37 pm ((PST))

Thanks! I blogged about this and would love it if you commented: click
www.CommonInterest.info and scroll down to “pre-holiday threats to liberty”

Jessica Frohman wrote: Since you seemed interested
in the subject and its one I am informed about as well… thought you might be
interested in this…
Bush Set To Veto To Remove Mercury From Infant Vaccines Infant Vaccines

President Bush would veto the HHS-Labor-Education Appropriations Bill because of
the cost and “objectionable provisions” such as a measure to ban the use of
childhood flu vaccines that contain thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative.

Autism advocacy groups are outraged because President Bush stated in a
questionnaire during his 2004 campaign: “I support the removal of Thimerosal
from vaccines on the childhood national vaccine schedule. During a second term
as President, I will continue to support increased funding to support a wide
variety of research initiatives aimed at seeking definitive causes and/or
triggers of autism. It is important to note that while there are many possible
theories about causes or triggers of autism, no one material has been definitely
included or excluded.”

But since 2005, President Bush has steadfastly refused to issue an Executive
Order banning high amounts of mercury in vaccines that would protect children
and pregnant women despite repeated requests from the autism community that he
uphold his campaign promise. Under his current administration, mercury has been
and will continue to be knowingly injected into the youngest of American
citizens. The controversial mercury-containing preservative thimerosal has been
linked by thousands of parents as being the cause of their children’s mercury
poisoning and autism.

The flu vaccine which continues to be manufactured with mercury is recommended
for all pregnant women, infants and children despite the fact that the Institute
of Medicine in 2001 recommended against the policy of exposing these same
sensitive groups to thimerosal containing vaccines. According to the EPA, one in
every six women of childbearing age already has blood levels of mercury high
enough to cause neurological damage to their unborn children due to
environmental exposures alone.

“Injecting even more mercury into the bodies of pregnant women, infants and
children when it is not a necessary component of vaccines is just bad medicine,”
said Lyn Redwood, president of SafeMinds and parent of a mercury-injured child.
“It defies logic that a flu vaccine must be disposed of as a hazardous waste if
it is not used, but somehow injecting the same mercury-containing vaccine into a
baby is safe.”

Charles D. Frohman
202-536-4346 (office)/202-258-8027 (mobile)
________________________________________________________________________
6. Vaccine Politics
Posted by: “C. F.” cfroh@yahoo.com cfroh
Date: Thu Dec 13, 2007 3:37 pm ((PST))

http://infowars.net/articles/december2007/131207Vaccine.htm

Vaccine Politics

Rick Fisk
Lew Rockwell.com
Thursday December 13, 2007

The first vaccine mandated by governments was the small pox vaccine.
Today, you’ll hear any number of medical professionals refer to the
vaccine as proof of Western military medicine’s superiority over any
other discipline. The World Health Organization proclaims proudly to
anyone who will listen that the vaccine has eradicated smallpox (yet
for a disease “indistinguishable from smallpox,” apply the same
vaccine used to protect against smallpox).

So prevalent is the favorable view of vaccines, that people who
question this “truism” are ridiculed. But, when the vaccine had been
about 100 years old (it is now over 200 years old), it had its
detractors. One of them was a scientist, Alfred Russel Wallace.

Wallace was an interesting man. His list of accomplishments is
stunning. Sometimes referred to in England as the “Grand Old Man of
Science,” he continued to produce papers into his 90s. A reluctant
socialist, he felt that science and government didn’t mix and had no
problem arguing against government involvement in science.

Wallace focused on biology and zoology in his early career and turned
to social issues later in life. One such social issue was vaccination.
He noted in 1906 that doctors were not the best judges of a vaccine’s
efficacy though they were continuously consulted on vaccination policy
by government officials.

In the first place they are interested parties, both pecuniarily
and in a much greater degree on account of professional training and
prestige. Only three years after vaccination was first introduced, on
the recommendation of the heads of the profession, and their expressed
conviction that it would give lifelong protection against a terrible
disease, Parliament voted Jenner [the scientist who created the
smallpox vaccine derived from cowpox] £10,000 in 1802, and £20,000
more in 1807, besides endowing vaccination with £3,000 a year in 1808.
From that time doctors as a body were committed to its support; it has
been taught for nearly a century as an almost infallible remedy in all
our medical schools; and has been for the most part accepted by the
public and the legislature as if it were a well-established scientific
principle, instead of being as the historian of epidemic diseases –
Dr. Creighton – well terms it, a grotesque superstition.

This quote is from a summary of his original arguments against
mandatory use of the smallpox vaccine in 1889: Vaccination: Proved
Useless & Dangerous. (Wallace wasn’t one for mincing words.) The 1889
work was an epidemiological study which showed that smallpox rates in
London and the rest of England were not reduced at all by the
mandatory use of the vaccine. In fact, other illnesses increased
during the time that the smallpox vaccination was forced on the
population suggesting that the effect on immunity was negative rather
than positive as vaccination proponents kept asserting.

The 1889 study was instrumental in influencing public opinion and
ultimately forcing the repeal of laws making smallpox vaccination
mandatory in England. Other European nations followed suit. The U.S.
government’s medical and scientific organizations and the World Health
Organization have disregarded Wallace’s findings, as well as a long
list of subsequent papers and corroborations, and have proclaimed that
the smallpox vaccine was a smashing success.

This has occurred, in spite of the fact that there have been no
counter-examples to disprove the contrary view. There have been many
examples since which tend to support Wallace’s conclusions however.

For instance, one of the most stunning antidotes to the idea that
smallpox was eradicated due to mandatory vaccination is the Japanese
example. The practice of “revaccination” was prevalent there (and in
the British Navy) until their vaccination rate exceeded 100%! In spite
of this, Japan faced huge smallpox epidemics. All told, the Japanese
lost 48,000 people to smallpox, most of them vaccinated at least once.
When the government stopped the mandatory vaccinations, the epidemics
were finally arrested. Were the smallpox vaccination truly effective
as a prophylactic, such an example could not exist. Unfortunately,
there are dozens just like it all over the world.

In 1904, the U.S. Army decided to forcibly vaccinate the Philippine
population ostensibly to improve health conditions but more likely
intended to protect military personnel. They touted its success when
in the following two years smallpox appeared to be under control.
However, from 1917 to 1919, in a population of 11 million that had a
reported 100% vaccination rate, smallpox epidemics claimed over 70,000
lives out of 163,000 reported infections.

By contrast, Australia, from 1900 to 1915, which never instituted a
mandatory vaccine program, reported 3 deaths due to smallpox over the
entire period.

A doctor who treated smallpox victims in San Antonio near the turn of
the century wrote of his experiences. Charles Campbell became so
trusted by his patients and coworkers that they agreed to allow him to
expose them to smallpox to help him prove his own theories about how
smallpox was transmitted, treated and how its effects could be minimized.

Only one of his patients received the pock marks so customarily
associated with the disease and that patient’s pock marks were “done
intentionally.” Dr. Campbell’s belief, based on his observations and
experience, was that smallpox was spread by bed bugs, a pest most of
us haven’t had to experience in our lifetimes but is making a
comeback. That the bed bug could be a vector makes logical sense given
what we know about the spread of smallpox to Native American
populations via blanket distributions. Viruses do not live for long
periods of time absent a host; unlike bacteria which can lay dormant
for decades while retaining viability. Bed bugs, like fleas, offer a
convenient host for a virus and can live for weeks without food in
unwashed bedding. Campbell’s work has been mostly ignored by the
establishment medical community and the press.

Why haven’t Campbell’s experiences, treatment results and the general
knowledge of the smallpox vaccine’s danger been more prevalent instead
of the current view that vaccines are a modern miracle?

This puzzling contradiction doesn’t just apply to the smallpox
vaccine. We’re told that polio’s low current rate of infection is due
to the vaccine. However, a closer look tends to discredit that idea as
well. Those who track world health statistics do not consider
vaccination as having reduced disease rates by any more than 3%
world-wide during the 19th and 20th centuries. The reduction in
infectious disease has been attributed to sanitary improvements or
natural immunity and natural disease cycles, not vaccination.
Furthermore, since 1970, there have been no cases of polio in the U.S.
which are not attributed to the vaccine itself.

In spite of the overwhelming evidence against the benefits of
vaccination, our own government health officials continue to recommend
a growing battery of vaccinations, starting with infants at birth. The
CDC’s recommended vaccination schedule(pdf) is staggering compared to
what it was just 20 years ago. If you strictly followed the CDC’s
recommendations, your child would have twenty-five vaccine injections
by the time they reached four years of age. What justifies such a number?

To be fair, the growing list of vaccinations is suggestive rather than
mandatory. That being said, there are government officials who use
these suggestions to augment the list of “mandatory” vaccinations that
children must have before attending public school. Think about that
for a second. How are state school boards qualified to mandate
vaccination schedules?

Doubts over the efficacy of vaccines appear to be increasing as
information has been made available. Until the internet, many of the
contrary studies were not available to the general public. We are only
recently discovering that what we’re told by our own government
agencies and the drug companies they appear to represent, are not
exactly representative of the facts.

The list of additives and basic ingredients found in many vaccines
would be otherwise advised against by ethical medical professionals,
but we are told repeatedly by our own FDA that there is no evidence to
suggest that injecting mercury (thimerosal) and other additives
directly into the bloodstream is harmful. Meanwhile, the EPA will send
in armed police to shut down somebody’s private business as an
immanent threat to the population if some bureaucrat happened to
detect mercury on or about the premises.

Why the disparity? Quite frankly, it is because the corporations who
create the vaccines have gained control over our regulatory agencies
and legislative bodies. The FDA’s regulations have been continuously
augmented internally and by Congress to protect pharmaceutical
companies from litigations. The Vaccine Adverse Effects Reporting
System has been put in place to protect the public, but is really a
way to protect the drug companies from lawsuits.

Apathy and lack of confidence in ourselves has led to an irrational
reliance upon government experts employed by the, FDA, CDC and WHO to
inform us about the causes of disease and to control how our
government responds to health crises. That is a lot of power
concentrated in one place.

What has resulted from this unholy marriage of corporate interests and
the government is not public health but political medicine. Both
figuratively and literally, political medicine is poison that seeks to
destroy common sense, customer choice and too often, lives. When it
isn’t denying medication that has been proven useful to cancer
patients, it is attempting to mandate medicine and ban food supplements.

If one didn’t know any better, one might conclude that the FDA and
related health agencies of the federal government, want you to get sick.

________________________________________________________________________

And from Dr. Rebecca Carley –

Soldiers being trained to give immunizations to base civilians
http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=50931

By Jimmy Norris, Stars and Stripes
Pacific edition, Thursday December 13, 2007

YONGSAN GARRISON, South Korea — With even more family members on the way to
South Korea as part of the transformation of U.S. forces on the peninsula, the
18th Medical Command had some good news for those who will be seeking
immunizations.

Thanks to a team of instructors from Walter Reed Army Medical Center in
Washington, 19 more 18th Medical Command soldiers will be qualified Friday to
administer immunizations to civilians.

The instructor team was in South Korea to give a five-day immunology course to
medics.

Prior to the course, the medics were qualified to give immunizations only to
active-duty soldiers. The five days of training are normally part of Walter
Reed’s 5½-week immunization and allergy technician course.

But the cost and loss of manpower involved in sending them on temporary duty
for that training would not have been practical, said Master Sgt. Desmond Smith,
18th Medical Command spokesman.

“It’s easier to bring someone here than to send 19 soldiers to the States,”
he said.

The visiting instructors did not cover the allergy portion of the 5½-week
course, so students will not receive what the Army calls an additional skill
identifier. They will, however, receive a certificate of completion for their
training and a memorandum verifying they have completed the training necessary
to give immunizations to children.

“There was clearly a need at 121 [Combat Support Hospital] to increase the
number of people who could give pediatric immunizations,” said Maj. Cecilia
Mikita, who led the team from Walter Reed.

The training covered 20 types of immunizations and six ways to administer them.
It also included lectures on record keeping, the effects of various vaccines on
the body, and the proper handling and storage of vaccines.

Included in the hands-on portion of the course were stations at the hospitalÂ’s
pediatric immunization clinic, 1st Replacement CenterÂ’s medical in-processing
area, and Yongsan GarrisonÂ’s Troop Medical Clinic.

“A lot of stuff I learned on the job, but this course gives you a real
standard,” said student Pfc. David Dasilma. “I can educate my patients now and
tell them why they need a shot and what it does to their body.”

Smith said the training should lead to a decrease in wait times at immunization
clinics.

“It helps because if you come in for a shot there’s more than one person
available to give it now,” he said.

Dr. Carley Responds:

The idea that a 5 day course could prepare anyone to handle the consequences of
inoculations (which include anaphylactic shock and death) is insane. Worse yet,
“The visiting instructors did not cover the allergy portion”. As is explained
in my documents on www.drcarley.com, the corruption of the immune system caused
by inoculations with disease is what causes allergies, as well as all autoimmune
diseases and cancer.

This is the beginning: soldiers will now be shooting diseases, as well as
bullets. As you all know from the MSNBC links on my site, the bird flu vaccine
has already been licensed. The model state health emergency powers act gives
the governors of every state the authority to order inoculations be given to
citizens. The bird flu vaccine will cause the bird flu pandemic, which will
give the traitor in the white house an excuse to proclaim martial law. One of
his executive orders gives him the power to cancel the 2008 election in the case
of such a situation.

I tell you this not to scare you, but prepare you. Each of you must decide what
you will do when the knock comes on the door and you are ordered to take the
bird flu vaccine. The only way this can be stopped is to wake up enough people
that the plan does not work due to mass refusal, as occurred a couple of years
ago when Bush wanted all health workers to be inoculated with smallpox.

I ask each of you to send your own lists this e-mail, so they can send it out to
theirs, and so on. Let the truth spread like a virus, so the obvious plan is
not successful. There is nothing to fear but fear itself…the truth will set
us free. I do not believe this; I KNOW it.

Let’s roll….

Dr. Carley
—
Dr. Rebecca Carley
http://www.drcarley.com

*** Dr. Carley’s information is not intended to diagnose, treat or cure any
diseases. Rather, it is for educational purposes only. ***

Categories : Blog / Vlog, Hall of Shame, Legislation to Oppose, Medical Hazards, Miscellaneous
« Previous Page
Next Page »