Friday, September 22, 2006

More drug-resistant TB seen in U.S.A

By JORDAN ROBERTSON, Associated Press Writer

The worst forms of the killer tuberculosis bug have been gaining ground in the United States, alarming public health officials over imported drug-resistant strains of a disease that is mostly under control in this country.

Although the number of drug-resistant TB cases in the U.S. is small compared to developing nations, health officials here warn that visitors from other countries who are unaware of their infections are bringing over the deadliest mutations.

Often those with drug-resistant strains stop taking their medicine when they feel better but aren't cured.

That's what happened with Pich Chhieng, 61, a teacher who was infected in his native Cambodia and carried it with him to this country. He took medication for eight months but abruptly stopped because he ran out of money and was feeling much better.

He didn't know until he was hospitalized while visiting family in Los Angeles that by neglecting his treatment he had allowed the disease to mutate, and the drug-resistant bacteria had overwhelmed his lungs.

"I knew it wasn't cured yet, but I thought it wasn't that strong," said Chhieng, who has been forced to stay in California until he is cured. "I thought it was gone, and when it came back like that, I felt really bad. I wanted to kill myself."

The majority of drug-resistant infections in the U.S. are brought in by legal visitors, and health officials argue that simply tightening immigration controls won't solve the problem.

The only visitors to the U.S. who are screened for tuberculosis and other medical conditions are immigrant and refugee visa applicants, and TB experts say there is no easy way to screen the millions of tourists, workers and others who aren't currently evaluated.

Worldwide, TB kills 2 million people each year, mostly in Africa and southeast Asia.
Of gravest concern is so-called "extensively drug-resistant" TB, which recently killed more than 50 people in South Africa. It's been found in limited numbers in the U.S. — 74 reported cases since 1993.

The strain is nearly impossible to cure because it's immune to the best first- and second-line TB drugs. It is as easily transmitted through the air as garden variety TB.

Health officials here also have been jolted by a spike in a milder but still-lethal form called "multi-drug resistant" TB.

That's the strain afflicting Chhieng. It responds to more treatments but can cost up to $250,000 and take two years to cure.

The number of cases of that variety are multiplying worldwide, jumping more than 50 percent from about 273,000 in 2000 to 425,000 in 2004, according to a study published in August in the Journal of Infectious Diseases.

In the U.S., 128 people were diagnosed with it in 2004, a 13 percent spike from the previous year.

Health officials say a drug-resistant outbreak like the one in South Africa is unlikely here because of stringent public health safeguards, but warned that more widespread infections are possible in the future because the disease is so easily transported.

"That's a red light flashing," said Dr. Charles Wallace, an infectious disease specialist with the Texas Department of State Health Services. "That's a warning sign that TB is becoming more difficult to manage when it goes untreated and undiagnosed. We always like to think that it can't happen here, but any disease that travels through the air could be on a plane flying here at any time."

U.S. health officials believe more money is needed for prevention and treatment abroad.
"It certainly has outbreak potential if we don't get on it right away," said Dr. Kenneth Castro, director of the CDC's Division of Tuberculosis Elimination.

The states with the highest numbers of multi-drug resistant cases in the last decade were New York, California, Texas and Florida, according to the CDC.

In New York City, a series of deadly HIV-related drug-resistant TB outbreaks ripped through prisons and hospitals in the early 1990s, killing hundreds of people, including many who had started treatment.

But mortality rates dropped dramatically after the health department created a separate unit to target the strain, stepped up education in multiple languages and improved coordination with doctors.

Last year, overall tuberculosis rates in the city hit their lowest point since the peak of the most recent epidemic in 1992; however, drug-resistant cases jumped from 18 in 2004 to 24 cases last year.

"The threat is always there," said Dr. Sonal Munsiff, director of the city's tuberculosis control bureau. "And I think it's increasing in some ways because drug-resistant tuberculosis is increasing worldwide. So it doesn't take long to get a case here."

Health officials complain that federal funding has not kept up with the increased demands of battling the disease. State and county health departments wind up paying for uninsured patients like Chhieng, who has six months left in his two-year treatment.

Chhieng praises the treatment he has received in the U.S. He says he has gained weight and is feeling better, but has not seen his wife in a year and a half. And he regrets being a burden to his daughter-in-law, who is housing him and translates for him.

"Everything's better right now," he said. "I'm going to have a long life to live. I really miss home. I miss my wife, I miss my country, I miss the weather over there. I just want to go home."

Garlic Treatment

Tuesday, September 19, 2006

Garlic beats MRSA

Garlic 'beats hospital superbug'



As modern antibiotics become less and less effective against today's "Superbugs", ancient garlic is in the forefront of defeating todays "superbugs" viruses, bacteria and parasites. Allicin occurs naturally in garlic. The ingredient which gives garlic its distinctive smell is the latest weapon in the battle to beat the hospital "superbug" MRSA.

University of East London researchers found allicin treated even the most antibiotic-resistant strains of the infection. MRSA (Methecillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus) causes an estimated 2,000 deaths in UK hospitals each year.

Researchers are now testing allicin products in a six-month study. Dr Ron Cutler and his team discovered the effectiveness of allicin in laboratory tests five years ago. They found it can cure MRSA within weeks. It is even effective against the newer strains which cannot be treated by the "last line of defence" antibiotics Vancomycin and Glycopeptides.

Fatal infections
The team have developed a nasal cream, pills and soaps. The effect of the treatment was dramatic. Deborah Brown, patient Initial trials have proved effective, so researchers will now test them in a six-month study of 200 volunteers including healthcare workers and patients.

The scientists hope the products will be used by people working in hospitals so they can prevent MRSA being passed on to patients, as well as the patients themselves. MRSA organisms can live harmlessly in humans, carried in the nasal passages and on the skin, but they can cause fatal infections in immune-suppressed patients, the elderly, the young and those with surgical implants.

Dr Cutler told BBC News Online: "My aim would be to firstly work to try and reduce the carriage of MRSA amongst healthcare workers. "But we would also hope to use allicin treatments for patients themselves." He added: "The trials we have conducted so far show that this formulation is highly effective against MRSA, and it could save many lives.

"MRSA is causing a genuine crisis in our hospital system in Britain and worldwide. Antibiotics are increasingly ineffective, but we do have a powerful natural ally. "Plant compounds have evolved over millions of years as chemical defence agents against infection. "Garlic has been used in medicine for centuries, and it should be no surprise that it is effective against this very modern infection."

'Incredibly painful'
Deborah Brown, 34, from Rainham in Kent, contracted MRSA after a major spinal operation in November 2000. Painful wounds on her spine failed to heal for two years, despite using the antibiotics and creams currently available.

But within two months of using the allicin creams and pills, her MRSA had virtually cleared and the wounds had begun to heal. She said: "The effect of the treatment was dramatic - I am making a good recovery - but it was really awful at the time.

"Having weeping wounds on my back that never healed was incredibly painful and I became increasingly depressed as the MRSA didn't respond to repeated courses of antibiotics. "If my case helps to show that allicin works against MRSA then I am glad that something good might come of it."

The research is to be published in the Journal of Biomedical Science next year.

The benefits of garlic are too numerous to mention here. For additional info:

Benefits of garlic

This info comes from the BBC News:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3344325.stm

Tuesday, June 20, 2006

High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) - Natural?

Have you seen the new 7Up advertisements that made the implausible claim that the reformulated soft drink is now "100 percent natural." Looks to me like the upside down uncola is trying to turn things on their head again. But 100% natural?? The first thing that comes to mind: Yeah, sure.

Already, a little bit of the steam was taken out of 7Up's "natural" claims with the news that the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) is planning to file a lawsuit accusing Cadbury Schweppes, who owns 7Up, of deceptive advertising.

Sure, the new 7Up formula contains no artificial ingredients or preservatives, but it does contain high fructose corn syrup (HFCS). And calling anything with HFCS in it "100 percent natural" is like calling checkers, chess.

In a statement issued by CSPI, Executive Director Michael F. Jacobson made this case against calling HFCS natural:

"High-fructose corn syrup isn't something you could cook up from a bushel of corn in your kitchen, unless you happen to be equipped with centrifuges, hydroclones, ion-exchange columns and buckets of enzymes." Studies have shown that high fructose corn syrup is far from healthy.

In early 2004, a review of fructose nutritional data was conducted by the Department of Nutrition at the University of California, Davis (UCD). In animal studies, the UCD team found plenty of problems associated with HFCS, including insulin resistance, high blood pressure, and elevated levels of triglycerides. And although data for humans is not as conclusive, the researchers report that a high intake of fructose may increase body weight and encourage insulin resistance, both of which are risk factors for type 2 diabetes.

Allan Spreen, M.D., has also pointed out another problem with HFCS: the browning reaction. Dr. Spreen explained: "The browning reaction occurs when certain carb molecules bind with proteins and cause aging. It's also called 'glycation', 'glycosylation', and sometimes the Maillard reaction. It changes the structure of enzymes and other proteins, resulting in tissue and organ damage (and it's suspected in organ damage particularly in diabetics)."

According to the Weston A. Price Foundation, the browning reaction occurs with any sugar, but with fructose it happens seven times faster than it does with glucose.

Somehow, this just doesn't sound natural to me! Purified, ice-water with a slice of lemon (or a couple drops of lemon essential oil) will be a lot healthier, more refreshing and will satisfy your thirst, rather than stimulating it.


Natural Wellness Solutions

Monday, May 29, 2006

DOCUMENTED DANGER - Cell Phones

I find it difficult to get away from using my cell phone, but after reading this, I will keep my conversations short and hope for new technology. Very scary reading - a real life horror flick? Don't be a chicken little, but be aware.

"The Largest Biological Experiment Ever"
by Arthur Firstenberg, January 2006, The Eldorado Sun

In 2002, Gro Harlem Brundtland, then head of the World Health Organization, told a Norwegian journalist that cell phones were banned from her office in Geneva because she personally becomes ill if a cell phone is brought within about four meters (13 feet) of her. Mrs. Brundtland is a medical doctor and former Prime Minister of Norway. This sensational news, published March 9, 2002 in Dagbladet, was ignored by every other newspaper in the world. The following week Michael Repacholi, her subordinate in charge of the International EMF (electromagnetic field) Project, responded with a public statement belittling his boss’s concerns. Five months later, for reasons that many suspect were related to these circumstances, Mrs. Brundtland announced she would step down from her leadership post at the WHO after just one term.

Nothing could better illustrate our collective schizophrenia when it comes to thinking about electromagnetic radiation. We respond to those who are worried about its dangers — hence the International EMF Project — but we ignore and marginalize those, like Mrs. Brundtland, who have already succumbed to its effects.

As a consultant on the health effects of wireless technology, I receive calls that can be broadly divided into two main groups: those from people who are merely worried, whom I will call A, and those from people who are already sick, whom I will call B. I sometimes wish I could arrange a large conference call and have the two groups talk to each other — there needs to be more mutual understanding so that we are all trying to solve the same problems. Caller A, worried, commonly asks what kind of shield to buy for his cell phone or what kind of headset to wear with it. Sometimes he wants to know what is a safe distance to live from a cell tower. Caller B, sick, wants to know what kind of shielding to put on her house, what kind of medical treatment to get, or, increasingly often, what part of the country she could move to to escape the radiation to save her life.

The following is designed as a sort of a primer: first, to help everybody get more or less on the same page, and second, to clear up some of the confusions so that we can make rational decisions toward a healthier world.

Fundamentals

The most basic fact about cell phones and cell towers is that they emit microwave radiation; so do Wi-Fi (wireless Internet) antennas, wireless computers, cordless (portable) phones and their base units, and all other wireless devices. If it’s a communication device and it’s not attached to the wall by a wire, it’s emitting radiation. Most Wi-Fi systems and some cordless phones operate at the exact same frequency as a microwave oven, while other devices use a different frequency. Wi-Fi is always on and always radiating. The base units of most cordless phones are always radiating, even when no one is using the phone. A cell phone that is on but not in use is also radiating. And, needless to say, cell towers are always radiating.

Why is this a problem, you might ask? Scientists usually divide the electromagnetic spectrum into “ionizing” and “non-ionizing.” Ionizing radiation, which includes x-rays and atomic radiation, causes cancer. Non-ionizing radiation, which includes microwave radiation, is supposed to be safe. This distinction always reminded me of the propaganda in George Orwell’s Animal Farm: “Four legs good, two legs bad.” “Non-ionizing good, ionizing bad” is as little to be trusted.

An astronomer once quipped that if Neil Armstrong had taken a cell phone to the Moon in 1969, it would have appeared to be the third most powerful source of microwave radiation in the universe, next only to the Sun and the Milky Way. He was right. Life evolved with negligible levels of microwave radiation. An increasing number of scientists speculate that our own cells, in fact, use the microwave spectrum to communicate with one another, like children whispering in the dark, and that cell phones, like jackhammers, interfere with their signaling. In any case, it is a fact that we are all being bombarded, day in and day out, whether we use a cell phone or not, by an amount of microwave radiation that is some ten million times as strong as the average natural background. And it is also a fact that most of this radiation is due to technology that has been developed since the 1970s.

As far as cell phones themselves are concerned, if you put one up to your head you are damaging your brain in a number of different ways. First, think of a microwave oven. A cell phone, like a microwave oven and unlike a hot shower, heats you from the inside out, not from the outside in. And there are no sensory nerve endings in the brain to warn you of a rise in temperature because we did not evolve with microwave radiation, and this never happens in nature. Worse, the structure of the head and brain is so complex and non-uniform that “hot spots” are produced, where heating can be tens or hundreds of times what it is nearby. Hot spots can occur both close to the surface of the skull and deep within the brain, and also on a molecular level.

Cell phones are regulated by the Federal Communications Commission, and you can find, in the packaging of most new phones, a number called the Specific Absorption Rate, or SAR, which is supposed to indicate the rate at which energy is absorbed by the brain from that particular model. One problem, however, is the arbitrary assumption, upon which the FCC’s regulations are based, that the brain can safely dissipate added heat at a rate of up to 1 degree C per hour. Compounding this is the scandalous procedure used to demonstrate compliance with these limits and give each cell phone its SAR rating. The standard way to measure SAR is on a “phantom” consisting, incredibly, of a homogenous fluid encased in Plexiglas in the shape of a head. Presto, no hot spots! But in reality, people who use cell phones for hours per day are chronically heating places in their brain. The FCC’s safety standard, by the way, was developed by electrical engineers, not doctors.

The Blood-Brain Barrier

The second effect that I want to focus on, which has been proven in the laboratory, should by itself have been enough to shut down this industry and should be enough to scare away anyone from ever using a cell phone again. I call it the “smoking gun” of cell phone experiments. Like most biological effects of microwave radiation, this has nothing to do with heating.

The brain is protected by tight junctions between adjacent cells of capillary walls, the so-called blood-brain barrier, which, like a border patrol, lets nutrients pass through from the blood to the brain, but keeps toxic substances out. Since 1988, researchers in the laboratory of a Swedish neurosurgeon, Leif Salford, have been running variations on this simple experiment: they expose young laboratory rats to either a cell phone or other source of microwave radiation, and later they sacrifice the animals and look for albumin in their brain tissue. Albumin is a protein that is a normal component of blood but that does not normally cross the blood-brain barrier. The presence of albumin in brain tissue is always a sign that blood vessels have been damaged and that the brain has lost some of its protection.

Here is what these researchers have found, consistently for 18 years: Microwave radiation, at doses equal to a cell phone’s emissions, causes albumin to be found in brain tissue. A one-time exposure to an ordinary cell phone for just two minutes causes albumin to leak into the brain. In one set of experiments, reducing the exposure level by a factor of 1,000 actually increased the damage to the blood-brain barrier, showing that this is not a dose-response effect and that reducing the power will not make wireless technology safer. And finally, in research published in June 2003, a single two-hour exposure to a cell phone, just once during its lifetime, permanently damaged the blood-brain barrier and, on autopsy 50 days later, was found to have damaged or destroyed up to 2 percent of an animal’s brain cells, including cells in areas of the brain concerned with learning, memory and movement. (1) Reducing the exposure level by a factor of 10 or 100, thereby duplicating the effect of wearing a headset, moving a cell phone further from your body, or standing next to somebody else’s phone, did not appreciably change the results! Even at the lowest exposure, half the animals had a moderate to high number of damaged neurons.

The implications for us? Two minutes on a cell phone disrupts the blood-brain barrier, two hours on a cell phone causes permanent brain damage, and secondhand radiation may be almost as bad. The blood-brain barrier is the same in a rat and a human being.

These results caused enough of a commotion in Europe that in November 2003 a conference was held, sponsored by the European Union, titled “The Blood-Brain Barrier — Can It Be Influenced by RF [radio frequency]-Field Interactions?” as if to reassure the public: “See, we are doing something about this.” But, predictably, nothing was done about it, as nothing has been done about it for 30 years.

America’s Allan Frey, during the 1970s, was the first of many to demonstrate that low-level microwave radiation damages the blood-brain barrier. (2) Similar mechanisms protect the eye (the blood-vitreous barrier) and the fetus (the placental barrier), and the work of Frey and others indicates that microwave radiation damages those barriers also. (3) The implication: No pregnant woman should ever be using a cell phone.

Dr. Salford is quite outspoken about his work. He has called the use of handheldcell phones “the largest human biological experiment ever.” And he has publicly warned that a whole generation of cell-phone-using teenagers may suffer from mental deficits or Alzheimer’s disease by the time they reach middle age.

Radio-Wave Sickness

Unfortunately, cell phone users are not the only ones being injured, nor should we be worried only about the brain. The following brief summary is distilled from a vast scientific literature on the effects of radio waves (a larger spectrum which includes microwaves), together with the experiences of scientists and doctors all over the world with whom I am in contact.

Organs that have been shown to be especially susceptible to radio waves include the lungs, nervous system, heart, eyes, testes and thyroid gland. Diseases that have increased remarkably in the last couple of decades, and that there is good reason to connect with the massive increase in radiation in our environment, include asthma, sleep disorders, anxiety disorders, attention deficit disorder, autism, multiple sclerosis, ALS, Alzheimer’s disease, epilepsy, fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrome, cataracts, hypothyroidism, diabetes, malignant melanoma, testicular cancer, and heart attacks and strokes in young people. Radiation from microwave towers has also been associated with forest die-off, reproductive failure and population decline in many species of birds, and ill health and birth deformities in farm animals. The literature showing biological effects of microwave radiation is truly enormous, running to tens of thousands of documents, and I am amazed that industry spokespersons are getting away with saying that wireless technology has been proved safe or — just as ridiculous — that there is no evidence of harm.

I have omitted one disease from the above list: the illness that Caller B has, and that I have. A short history is in order here. In the 1950s and 1960s workers who built, tested and repaired radar equipment came down with this disease in large numbers. So did operators of industrial microwave heaters and sealers. The Soviets named it, appropriately, radio wave sickness, and studied it extensively. In the West its existence was denied totally, but workers came down with it anyway. Witness congressional hearings held in 1981, chaired by then Representative Al Gore, on the health effects of radio-frequency heaters and sealers, another episode in “See, we are doing something about this,” while nothing is done.

Today, with the mass proliferation of radio towers and personal transmitters, the disease has spread like a plague into the general population. Estimates of its prevalence range up to one-third of the population, but it is rarely recognized for what it is until it has so disabled a person that he or she can no longer participate in society. You may recognize some of its common symptoms: insomnia, dizziness, nausea, headaches, fatigue, memory loss, inability to concentrate, depression, chest discomfort, ringing in the ears. Patients may also develop medical problems such as chronic respiratory infections, heart arrhythmias, sudden fluctuations in blood pressure, uncontrolled blood sugar, dehydration, and even seizures and internal bleeding.

What makes this disease so difficult to accept, and even more difficult to cope with, is that no treatment is likely to succeed unless one can also avoid exposure to its cause — and its cause is now everywhere. A 1998 survey by the California Department of Health Services indicated that at that time 120,000 Californians — and by implication 1 million Americans — were unable to work due to electromagnetic pollution. (4) The ranks of these so-called electrically sensitive are swelling in almost every country in the world, marginalized, stigmatized and ignored. With the level of radiation everywhere today, they almost never recover and sometimes take their own lives.

“They are acting as a warning for all of us,” says Dr. Olle Johansson of people with this illness. “It could be a major mistake to subject the entire world’s population to whole-body irradiation, 24 hours a day.” A neuroscientist at the famous Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Dr. Johansson heads a research team that is documenting a significant and permanent worsening of the public health that began precisely when the second-generation, 1800 MHz cell phones were introduced into Sweden in late l997. ( 5,6 ) After a decade-long decline, the number of Swedish workers on sick leave began to rise in late 1997 and more than doubled during the next five years. During the same period of time, sales of antidepressant drugs also doubled. The number of traffic accidents, after declining for years, began to climb again in 1997. The number of deaths from Alzheimer’s disease, after declining for several years, rose sharply in 1999 and had nearly doubled by 2001. This two-year delay is understandable when one considers that Alzheimer’s disease requires some time to develop.

Uncontrolled Proliferation

If cell phones and cell towers are really deadly, have the radio and TV towers that we have been living with for a century been safe? In 2002 Örjan Hallberg and Olle Johansson coauthored a paper titled “Cancer Trends During the 20th Century,” which examined one aspect of that question. (7) They found, in the United States, Sweden and dozens of other countries, that mortality rates for skin melanoma and for bladder, prostate, colon, breast and lung cancers closely paralleled the degree of public exposure to radio waves during the past hundred years. When radio broadcasting increased in a given location, so did those forms of cancer; when it decreased, so did those forms of cancer. And, a sensational finding: country by country — and county by county in Sweden — they found, statistically, that exposure to radio waves appears to be as big a factor in causing lung cancer as cigarette smoking!

Which brings me to address a widespread misconception. The biggest difference between the cell towers of today and the radio towers of the past is not their safety, but their numbers. The number of ordinary radio stations in the United States today is still less than 14,000. But cell towers and Wi-Fi towers number in the hundreds of thousands, and cell phones, wireless computers, cordless telephones and two-way radios number in the hundreds of millions. Radar facilities and emergency communication networks are also proliferating out of control. Since 1978, when the Environmental Protection Agency last surveyed the radio frequency environment in the United States, the average urban dweller’s exposure to radio waves has increased 1,000-fold, most of this increase occurring in just the last nine years. (8) In the same period of time, radio pollution has spread from the cities to rest like a ubiquitous fog over the entire planet.

The vast human consequences of all this are being ignored. Since the late 1990s a whole new class of environmental refugees has been created right here in the United States. We have more and more people, sick, dying, seeking relief from our suffering, leaving our homes and our livelihoods, living in cars, trailers and tents in remote places. Unlike victims of hurricanes and earthquakes, we are not the subject of any relief efforts. No one is donating money to help us, to buy us a protected refuge; no one is volunteering to forego their cell phones, their wireless computers and their cordless phones so that we can once more be their neighbors and live among them.

The worried and the sick have not yet opened their hearts to each other, but they are asking questions. To answer caller A: No shield or headset will protect you from your cell or portable phone. There is no safe distance from a cell tower. If your cell phone or your wireless computer works where you live, you are being irradiated 24 hours a day.

To caller B: To effectively shield a house is difficult and rarely successful. There are only a few doctors in the United States attempting to treat radio wave sickness, and their success rate is poor — because there are few places left on Earth where one can go to escape this radiation and recover.

Yes, radiation comes down from satellites, too; they are part of the problem, not the solution. There is simply no way to make wireless technology safe.

Our society has become both socially and economically dependent, in just one short decade, upon a technology that is doing tremendous damage to the fabric of our world. The more entrenched we let ourselves become in it, the more difficult it will become to change our course. The time to extricate ourselves, both individually and collectively — difficult though it is already is — is now.

NOTES

1. Leif G. Salford et al., “Nerve Cell Damage in Mammalian Brain After Exposure to Microwaves from GSM Mobile Phones,” Environmental Health Perspectives 111, no. 7 (2003): 881-883.

2. Allan H. Frey, Sondra R. Feld and Barbara Frey, “Neural Function and Behavior,” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 247 (1975): 433-439.

3. Allan H. Frey, “Evolution and Results of Biological Research with Low-Intensity Nonionizing Radiation,” in Modern Bioelectricity, ed. Andrew A. Marino (New York: Dekker, 1988), 785-837, at 809-810.

4. California EMF Program, The Risk Evaluation: An Evaluation of the Possible Risks From Electric and Magnetic Fields (EMFs) From Power Lines, Internal Wiring, Electrical Occupations and Appliances (2002), app. 3.

5. Örjan Hallberg and Olle Johansson, “1997 — A Curious Year in Sweden,” European Journal of Cancer Prevention 13, no. 6 (2004): 535-538.

6. Örjan Hallberg and Olle Johansson, “Does GSM 1800 MHz Affect the Public Health in Sweden?” in Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop “Biological Effects of EMFs,” Kos, Greece, October 4-8, 2004, 361-364.

7. Örjan Hallberg and Olle Johansson, “Cancer Trends During the 20th Century,” Journal of Australian College of Nutritional and Environmental Medicine 21, no. 1 (2002): 3-8.

8. David E. Janes Jr., “Radiofrequency Environments in the United States,” in 15th IEEE Conference on Communication, Boston, MA, June 10-14, 1979, vol. 2, 31.4.1-31.4.5.


Vital Wellness Resources

Friday, May 26, 2006

MEDICALIZATION - The Drugging of America

How did mankind ever survive without drugs? Think about it, are we getting healthier because of all the drugs we are taking? Why are drugs more expensive in the USA than any other country (most are made here)? Personally, my father has been hospitalized over 6 times for "medication" complications. Yeah, if you mix 10 prescriptions, who knows what drug interactions will happen. But, doctors know best, right?


May 14, 2006
THE PRESIDENT'S NEW FREEDOM COMMISSION ON MENTAL HEALTH
The Plan to Drug American School Children
by George Stone

(Note: George Stone has a master's degrees in anthropology and social work. He is a licensed clinical social worker with 35 years experience in therapy and supervision specializing in family &brief therapy and has practiced privately and publicly with patients ranging from poor to middle class, with urban and rural families, and with Black, Hispanic, White, Asian American, Native American and Alaska Native families. He is dedicated to keeping families together by helping them solve their own problems without using psychiatric medication or hospitalization, and to returning children home if they are in psychiatric custody.)

MEDICALIZATION: Convincing Healthy People They Are Sick
This paper outlines the deliberate marketing of harmful drugs to children as a direct result of the drug industry take over of the American mental health system. My point of departure is Ivan Illich's broader assertion that "The medical system has become a major threat to health." (1976) Time has proven Illich to be a prophet: medicine is now the leading cause of death in America. (Null 2005) What is wrong in American medicine is also wrong in psychiatry. Pharma marketeers claim psychiatric drug treatment is a scientific miracle. However, the outcome evidence on psychiatric treatment shows otherwise: the recovery rate for treated schizophrenia has fallen from 70% in the mid-nineteenth century to 11% today, while the death rate for the "new" atypical antipsychotic drugs is double that of the older typical class. These outcomes contrast with 49-51% recovery Third World countries, like India and Nigeria, where these drugs are not used consistently. (Whitaker 2004) The suicide rate for treated schizophrenia in the UK has increased 20 fold since the introduction of antipsychotic drugs in 1954. (Healy et al 2006) Five times as many people are being defined as permanently mentally ill (disabled) today than before the introduction of drug treatment. (Whitaker 2005) Yet, inspite of these ominous facts, millions of American children are routinely being given these dangerous drugs.

How did this happen?

The drugging of American children is not accidental. It is a part of the larger problem of the premeditated medicalization of modern life discussed by Illich (1976), McKnight (1999) and others. However, the issue goes beyond the use of drugs: it is about freedom. The massive pharmaceutical corporations, which barely existed before World War II, are the most profitable legal businesses in human history. They have the money, the plan and the ruthless determination to medicalize our lives to sell us as many drugs as possible. They are a major threat to the basic human rights, as well as the health, of every person on the planet.

By "medicalization" I mean Pharma is deliberately and systematically promoting ideas about illness and disease to explain everyday life. (Summerfield 2002) By blurring the boundaries between sickness and health, Pharma convinces healthy people they are sick (Moynihan &Cassels 2005), and that "lifestyle" drugs, like Viagra, are necessary to happiness as well as health. (Abramson 2004)
Medicalization is an iatrogenic disaster of unbelievable proportions: it is inflicting harm on the lives of tens of millions of people. As our culture becomes a biomedical folktale we are being robbed of our traditional ways of managing illness and meeting death. And, in addition, the high cost of drugs threatens to bankrupt the American health care system, if not the entire American economy.

Pharma has used its economic power to create an effective lobby, which controls U.S. public health policy as well as watchdog agencies like the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

More frightening still, as I will show, the President's New Freedom Commission on Mental Health (NFC) is a creation of pharmaceutical interests. Two of its central policy recommendations are bald-faced drug marketing schemes. The first targets 52 million American school children for mental health screening by a program known as "TeenScreen." While the second irrevocably links the mental health treatment psychiatric drugs - - not coincidentally, the most expensive and dangerous psychiatric drugs - - using the pseudo-scientific Texas Medication Algorithmic Program or TMAP.

Let's begin with a look at the money trail of legal drugs and some Pharma history.
"The US government contributes more money to the development of new drugs in the form of tax breaks and subsidies than any other government. Of the 20 largest pharmaceutical corporations, nine are based in the United States. Yet drugs are more expensive in the United States than in any other part of the world, and the global drug companies make the bulk of their profits in the United States.
"The pharmaceutical and health products industry has spent more than $800 million in federal lobbying and campaign donations at the federal and state levels in the past seven years.No other industry has spent more money to sway public policy in that period.its combined political outlays and lobbying and campaign contributions is topped only by the insurance industry." (Ismail 2005)

Pharma's huge profit margin has allowed it to buy control of the FDA.
"Most of the industry's political spending paid for federal lobbying. Medicine makers hired about 3,000 lobbyists, more than a third of them former federal officials, to advance their interests before the House, the Senate, the FDA, the Department of Health and Human Services, and other executive branch offices." Yet, "The drug industry's huge investments in Washington [are] meager compared to the profits they make [from].a series of favorable laws on Capitol Hill and tens of billions of dollars in additional profits.They have also fended off measures aimed at containing prices, like allowing importation of medicines from countries that cap prescription drug prices, which would have dented their profit margins.In 2003 alone, the industry spent $116 million lobbying the government.Congress passed, and President George W. Bush signed, the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003, which created a taxpayer-funded prescription drug benefit for senior citizens.[in] Medicare, the government program that provides health insurance to some 41 million people, the [drug] industry found a reliable purchaser for its products. Thanks to a provision in the law for which the industry lobbied, government programs like Medicare are barred from negotiating with companies for lower prices .Critics charge that the prescription drug benefit will transfer wealth from taxpayers, who provide the funding for Medicare, to pharmaceutical companies." (Ismail 2005)

Pharma's influence saturates every aspect of our lives and culture with harm like DDT once saturated our physical environment. Here's how it began.

THORAZINE: The First Pill to Create Its Own Ill
David Healy (2002), the British psychiatrist and drug researcher, believes that the marketing of Thorazine in the US in 1954 created the modern drug era and ultimately gave us everything from Valium to Viagra. Smith-Kline-French (SKF, now Glaxo-Smith-Kline GSK) was a small, $50 million dollar pharmaceutical house, when it obtained the rights to market Thorazine. The drug was originally used as an anesthetic; however, it was introduced in the U.S. as an antinausea drug, which then made $75 million dollars (in 1954 dollars) as an antipsychotic in its first year on the market. Within five years it had elevated SKF to a $350 million dollar a year house. Thorazine taught the pharmaceutical industry how to market an ill for every new pill it discovers.

I should add that Doctor Healy also sounded the alarm on the danger that Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor antidepressants (SSRI) posed for children. Read as, "Pharma is so powerful in the U.S. it prevented FDA action on SSRI's, so warnings had to come from the outside."

GADSDEN'S GANG: Double Your Pleasure, Double Your Fun.
Thirty years ago, when the late Henry Gadsden was CEO of Merck pharmaceuticals, he candidly told Fortune magazine how unhappy he was that his company's potential markets were limited to sick people. He wanted Merck to be like "Wrigley's, chewing gum," so that "Merck would be able to 'sell to everyone.'"(Moynihan &Cassels 2005) Gadsden's dream did not die with him: although Americans make up only 5 percent of world population, they consume 50 percent of world pharmaceutical production. This kind of consumption isn't a social accident. The gang Gadsden left behind made this happen through careful planning, hard work and the infusion of obscene amounts of cash. One must admire Pharma's achievements, even while condemning the consequences they have brought down on us.

Pharma marketing has not only convinced Americans their drugs are necessary, but that Americans have the best health care system available. But according to John Abramson, while we have the most expensive health care system it is far from the best. Although we spend twice as much on health per person than any other nation, our healthy life expectancy ranks twenty-second out of twenty-three industrialized countries, better only than the Czech Republic. Two-thirds of American medicine is beneficial. However, one-third is ineffective, unnecessary and even deadly, as well as expensive. This one-third of medicine adds $500 billion dollars annually to the cost of our health care, while shortening our lives and even killing us outright. And, shamefully, America is the only industrialized nation that does not offer universal health coverage to all its citizens, 43 million Americans do not have health insurance benefits. This leads Abramson to conclude, "Putting the pharmaceutical industry in charge of our health is like putting the fast food industry in charge of our diet." (2004)

MEDICINE AS MIRACLE: Modern Alchemy
A recent Glaxo-Smith-Kline (GSK) TV drug ad proudly claimed, "Today's medicines finance tomorrow's miracles." This five-word marketing slogan is a revealing self-portrait of the industry. In fact, drug sales finance three main activities: 1) drug research and medical research, 2) drug marketing and public relations, and 3) drug lobbying. These are Orwellian processes, not miracles, and they are larger, more complex and better coordinated than the invasion of Normandy. Allen Jones, who exposed the illegal influence that drug companies exerted on the state of Pennsylvania (and was fired for it), puts the matter this way:
"This isn't a David verses Goliath battle. There is no stone big enough to whack the pharmaceutical industry in the forehead and knock it over. These guys are operating in the shadows. They are operating in the dark. They are operating by buying off decision-makers in an illegal manner. There needs to be exposure of that. It's like fighting vampires, not fighting giants.It's an industry that is very organized and an industry that is ruthless. It is an industry with a long-term view and a long-term plan." (Whitehead 2005)

Similarly, Moynihan and Cassels say:

The extent of the pharmaceutical industry's influence over the health system is simply Orwellian. The doctors, the drug reps, the medical education, the ads, the patient groups, the guidelines, the celebrities, the conferences, the public awareness campaigns, the thought-leaders, and even the regulatory advisors - - at every level there is money from drug companies lubricating what many believe is an unhealthy flow of influence. Industry does not crudely buy influence with individuals and organizations - - rather its largesse is handed out to those considered to be most commercially helpful. The industry's sponsorship is strategic, systematic, and systemic. It is designed primarily to engender the most favorable view of the latest and most expensive products. But it is also used to maximize the size of the markets for those products, by portraying conditions like [Irritable Bowel Syndrome] IBS as widespread, severe, and above all, treatable with drugs. And, who is supposed to be fearlessly regulating this mess? The public agencies who themselves rely on the very same industry for much of their funding. (2005:171-172)

THE FINGER PRINTS OF PHARMA MARKETING STRATEGIES
Pharma's marketing strategies leave unmistakable fingerprints. For a more complete discussion of these fingerprints see Moynihan and Cassels 2005. The Pharma "miracle" is an alchemy predicated on expanding the definition disease itself, while narrowing the treatment of any given disease to a specific drug or class of drugs. By using these simple strategies, Pharma can redefine a risk factor, like osteoporosis (the natural reduction in bone density that occurs with age) as a dreaded disease that affects millions of women. The transformation of a disease usually takes place under the cover of an "expert consensus process." Pharma convenes a panel of "experts" under the banner of a prestigious university or organization. (Whitehead 2005) The experts reach a "consensus" about a particular disease or drug that favors the drug companies. The consensus then becomes the "standard of treatment" for the disease or drug in question. Moynihan &Cassels outline this process with osteoporosis. (2005) To put a favorable marketing spin on osteoporosis, Merck donated money to the World Health Organization (WHO) to "study" the "disease." In return, WHO allowed Merck to hand-pick a panel of friendly experts, who then created the definition of osteoporosis Merck wanted. That is, the panel concluded that the bone density of a healthy 30-year-old woman should be the diagnostic standard. This means any woman with a bone density less than that of a healthy 30-year-old can be said to be have osteoporosis. By raising the diagnostic standard, Merck was able to increase the number of women who could be "diagnosed" with the treatable "disease" of osteoporosis. The panel's consensus was written into the medical lore as a research project sponsored by WHO and is now the standard of practice for treating osteoporosis. Merck's guiding hand is invisible to the casual observer. (Moynihan &Cassels 2005)

But Merck did not stop there. In Western medicine there can be no treatment without diagnosis: a drug cannot be sold without a diagnosis to justify its use. In addition to expanding the definition of a disease, Merck also insured that the means to diagnose the millions of allegedly afflicted persons would also be available. Merck stacked the deck by promoting diagnostic procedures, which would lead to a dramatic increase in the number people actually diagnosed with a problem. For osteoporosis, x-rays are the means to determine bone density levels for individual diagnoses. Therefore, Merck subsidized the purchase of x-ray machines to conduct screening exams. Radiologists, who would benefit from a boom in business, were natural allies in promoting screening exams. (Moynihan &Cassels 2005, chapter

Two distinctive fingerprints of Pharma marketing are: 1) The ability to redefine a "disease" and 2) the ability to develop the means for "diagnosis" of the newly expanded disease. These provide the rationale for "treatment," in this case, with a drug like Fosamax. Presto! With this alchemy Pharma can spin any disease/drug combination into a winner that insures billions of dollars in bottom line profits - - before the drug is even approved for sale!
The problem is, of course, that to achieve this goal everyday human unhappiness must be deliberately and wrongly transformed into a medical problem, and unnecessary, ineffective and even harmful drugs must be promoted to treat the new problem.

Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD) is another example. SAD was a rare problem prior to its treatment.
_________________

We cannot become healthy if we attempt to drug and continue to pollute our bodies with medicines and dead deranged "foods."

* Almost every drug or medicine is poison and has no healing power.


Detox your body

Tuesday, May 23, 2006

Vacine Magic - The Grand Finale

While controversial, step back and think about the implications of this article. You have to keep your eyes open and use your mind. Don't be a sheep lead to slaughter. World domination has been attempted several times. Do you think there are no evil people today? You have a mind - use it. Don't be told what to think, make up your own mind.

The Future of Civilization and 21st Century Medicine Rests with Vaccinations According to Health Officials and Drug Industrialists. Here's An Opposing View by An Award-Winning Author and Internationally-Renowned Public Health Expert

Vaccine Magic: The Grand Finale
by Leonard G. Horowitz, DMD, MA, MPH

Magicians do slight-of-hand-routines. Now you see it; now you don’t. Theirs is a deceptive trade. You watch the active hand. It fools every time. Before their trick they bate you with what appears real and solid. You know you’re not a fool, but you’re left wondering, “How did that happen?”

Vaccine magic is performed consistently by the mainstream media. Spin-doctors and medical deities weave webs of deception only sorcerers might suspect. Vaccines are heralded as cancer cures, required for frightening flus, vital for children’s health, and scientifically-certified as risk free.

Grab the Bate
“A federal advisory panel recommended that the Food and Drug Administration approve a vaccine that has been shown to prevent cervical cancer, the second most prevalent cancer among women worldwide,” the LA Times’s act heralded nationally.(1)
The story didn’t explain the many certified causes of cancer including lifestyle risks, chemical exposures, and vaccines containing foreign genetic material from various species.
This bate said, “The FDA almost always follows the recommendations of its advisory panels and is expected to do so in this case, . . .”

I went to see “The Shaggy Dog,” rated-G, with my 11-year old daughter the other night. The villain, lusting for wealth and power, developed a human vaccine for longevity by mutating animals. He said, “The FDA is never a problem that money can’t handle.” My laugh was tempered by the long list of FDA-approved drugs, and previous vaccines for polio, smallpox, anthrax, Lyme, hepatitis B and more, condemned by class-action lawsuits.

Speaking for their cervical cancer vaccine, Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) said, “It is common sense, good medicine and a groundbreaking step forward in the fight against cancer.”

Odd, I thought, Planned Parenthood traditionally plans population control not cancer prevention. Richards presides over the world’s second leading proponents of population reduction.

In recent publications, PPFA heralded its collaboration in drug trials with the Population Council of New York involving RU-486, the “abortion pill.” Following years of violating the health of millions of women with under-the-skin progestin implants called Norplant, these same parties now advance “Are You For 86?” When you “86” something, it means you “get rid of it,” “trash it,” or “disappear it.” Are you interested in disappearing life? Obviously, these family and population planners seek ways of getting rid of “excess” humans.(2)

Financially influenced by Rockefeller’s leading petrochemical–pharmaceutical institutions, history shows these powerful “population planners” consistently working to manage global eugenics—the science of racial hygiene and “ethnic cleansing.”(3) Desperately seeking ways to control “excess populations,” how do you suppose they might magically disappear half of us now targeted for elimination?

Meanwhile, Newsweek (May 19, 2006), and the same day Honolulu Star Bulletin, said direct injection of mercury known to be neurologically toxic, while in vaccines has little, if anything, to do with sky-rocking rates of brain damage called “autism” in our nation’s youth. Through their message affiliate, MSNBC, researchers from Cambridge University—a virtual central intelligence agency for governing royalty—encourage you to test yourself for this myserious “mindblindness.” (4)

Why would magicians want to extinguish “mindblindness?”
To solve this mystery, Occum’s Razor is not prescribed. It states the simplest explanation for anything is usually correct. Magicians don’t want you to look here, especially with “Vaccine Magic.” The sky-rocking rates of neurological disease in our children, coinciding in time with accumulating heavy metals and toxic chemicals injected with vaccines far exceeding the Environmental Protection Agency’s toxic dose limits, has nothing to do with vaccine poisoning says the medical serpent.Now You See It, Now You Don’t.

Hawaii Governor, Linda Lingle, is not immune to these tricks of magic. Medical organizations nationwide have urged her to “veto a bill [SB2133] that would ban vaccines with any mercury . . . except in cases of shortage.” (Honolulu Star-Bulletin, May 19, 2006) Her compliance is assured as medical deities tell us important mercury-preserved vaccines are in short supply.

Using words carefully chosen and echoed internationally by health officials, state Health Department deputy director, Dr. Linda Rosen, said “Our concern is this will make more people afraid of immunizations and reluctant to immunize children.” The audience doesn’t perceive the deception—the difference between vaccination and immunization. “Immunization” is not man-made toxin-injection. It is the natural body-guarding response to foreign proteins and germs, the most lethal of which have been transmitted to humanity through contaminated vaccines and blood supplies.

Classic immunology draws an important distinction between these two terms. Casually substituting “immunization” for “vaccination” mystifies the masses. More accurately, in reality, vaccinations cause hypersensitizations. Simply put, white blood cell body guards begin to attack far more than desired. Myriad auto-immune diseases and childhood injuries result from vaccinations warns package inserts rarely studied by medical deities.

But pseudo-scientists and ignorant health officials confuse this matter with the “immunization” misnomer. Similarly, they repeat the myth that vaccines, not improvements in hygiene and nutrition, caused the great reduction, or alleged elimination, of deadly human diseases.
These are crucial tricks of the “public health” trade.

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), allied medical associations, and Kaiser Permanente oppose Hawaii’s SB2133. Their audience doesn’t see the revolving door between prestigious AAP pharmaceutical prostitutes, our medical associations profiteering as drug-dealers, and their common markets developed from diseases induced by vaccinations (including numerous cancers, auto-immune diseases, HIV/AIDS, hepatitis C, and more). Add to this unholy alliance Kaiser Permanente—America’s leading vaccine testing institution—organizationally rooted in the genocidal practice of eugenics for white-Anglo-American-supremacy.
Foolish Heresy or Reality?

Before your imagination runs wild considering my view of “Vaccine Magic,” consider Kaiser’s history with the Rockefeller family cooperatively pioneering “managed care” in America along with the Kaiser Institute for Eugenics, Anthropology, and Human Heredity in pre-Nazi Germany. In essence, these contemporary powers spearheaded Hitler’s racial hygiene program, its genetic experiments for unnatural selection, and propaganda methods in advancing their “master race.”(5)(6)

“Everything has changed today!” you say?
Maybe not. Victims then were persuaded to enter gas chambers for “public health” and “disinfection.” Come get your free vaccines! But officials assure us, “vaccines are safe and effective.”

“If you tell a lie long enough eventually it will be believed as truth,” Hilter said. “And the greater the lie, the more people will believe it.” Are today’s hospitals and school-based vaccination policies kin to the concentration camps of yesteryear?

Given the magnitude of this issue, don’t you think it might be prudent to view who might be pulling the strings behind stage, and ask some serious questions? It would be radical to do less.
Doctors, nurses, and public health pundits rarely consider who or what’s behind the “curtain.” Blind bias says this is heresy. They never learn this history, not foolish conspiracy theory, but a living dynasty, largely because the Rockefeller’s established monopoly over American medicine, public health, and academic programming started early last century.

Have you seen the movie Manchurian Candidate? Medical deities may be, likewise, well-trained assassins; clueless of their lethal actions, and the diabolical jobs they perform for their shadow governors. Viewed under this microscope, such malfeasance and political corruption are tricks vaccine magicians prefer not revealed about their trade.

The Grand Finale: Saving Their Best for Last
A few years go, among his final acts, Lance Burton made a 330,000 pound Stealth Bomber disappear on prime time television. The mirage involved hundreds of military and civilian personnel each performing with limited knowledge of the total scheme. The camera never blinked. The aircraft disappeared none-the-less.

Near the Bible’s end, with the final world war afflicting terrorized humanity, great plagues erupt along with weather changes and natural disasters. Pharmaceutical magicians are then indicted (literally in older Bible versions of Revelation 18:23) for hypnotizing the planet’s mystified masses. This pagan deception kills billions of people who put their faith and trust in lesser deities. A third of all life on Earth disappears as a result of the magicians’ economic and geopolitical poisonings.

If you were to write the grand finale for a movie called “Vaccine Magic,” how would it end?
Here’s my version. . . .
Set in tropical Hawaii, natives are decimated. Less than 8,000 remain. Anglo-American cult[l]ure has afflicted them like a plague. Immigrants fare little better. Economically privileged citizens neglect ancient wisdom and their moral roots. They grow stressed, demoralized, and diseased by their addiction to spiritually-constraining and ecologically-unsustainable living. Their ocean is crying and dying. Traditional strength in aloha ohana (i.e., the loving family) is replaced by an engrossing virtual reality projected by a controlled-media promoting individualism, immorality, lust for sex, social dominance, and drug delirium. This infuses all pastimes and pleasures.

As this magical distraction and trance-state spreads, the government, directed from the shadows by demonic humanoids, grows in power and possessions. Sovereign spiritual temples, children’s bodies, are decreed state properties. Philosophical and religious exemptions to vaccinations, blood testing, genetic tracking, and micro-chipping are terminated. Access to schools and workplaces is blocked pending compliance with state "immunization" statutes.
In the final scene, a flu fright or bioterrorist attack is loosed by the shadow governors. People line up, like sheep to the slaughter, for “required immunizations” and FDA-approved drugs. The frenzy provides opportunity for government orders for "medical microchips," produced by the “Digital Angel Corporation”(7) to be seeded into the population.

Most government officials and medical operatives are unaware of the total scheme. The company’s literature decrees these “sensors” beneficial in identifying, monitoring, and, if necessary, incapacitating “high-value assets” including “pets, fish, poultry, humans and livestock.” The hair-sized microchips are dispensed, along with the vaccines, in military-style operations. Recipients are told they are "lucky" to get the treatments given their "limited supply." Soon thereafter, the “medical biochips” are triggered (as viewed in the new release of Mission Impossible). Millions of "lucky" persons die. Survivors are terminally enslaved.
END
______________________________________________
Posted courtesy of Dr. Len Horowitz and Tetrahedron, LLC
For more information about Dr. Horowitz and his many archived articles link to: www.tetrahedron.org, or visit his website www.drlenhorowitz.com.
To order the doctor's many books, DVDs, CDs, and recommended health products, link to www.healthyworlddistributing.com, or call toll free 1-888-508-4787.


http://www.vitallywell.net

Thursday, May 11, 2006

Thimerosal Logic?

From Health Sciences Institute (HSI)

In several e-Alerts I've told you about the controversy concerning thimerosal use. The medical mainstream, backed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), maintains that there's no link between thimerosal and the sharp rise in autism over the past 15 years.

Here are a few highlights of the controversy:
The mercury exposure to children through vaccines has dramatically increased since the early 90s. During the same period, the rate of autism in the U.S. jumped from 1 in 10,000 children to 1 in 150, according to CDC research.

A 2003 study published in the Journal of the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons examined extensive CDC data on vaccines in children. The conclusion: Children who receive just three vaccines containing the mercury-based preservative thimerosal are 27-times more likely to develop autism, compared to children who get vaccinations containing no thimerosal.

More than three years ago, William Campbell Douglass II, M.D., warned of the danger of multiple vaccines coupled with the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine. In his Daily Dose e-letter he wrote: "The mercury in thimerosal mounts a two-pronged attack: it impairs brain development and, at the same time, damages the child's immune system and gastrointestinal tract. So these vaccines cause the initial damage to the immune system. Then, because the damaged immune system cannot cope with three live viruses at once, the triple vaccine triggers autism."

--------------------------------------------
Enigma wrapped in a riddle
--------------------------------------------

A recent article in the Los Angeles Times features the newest twist in the debate over thimerosal's link to autism.

This coming July, a new California law will take effect, limiting the thimerosal content in vaccines for pregnant women and children under the age of three. The Times notes that other states attempting to pass similar laws are meeting resistance from the CDC and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP).

Here's where it gets interesting. In fact, it gets downright odd.

According to the Times, the AAP has a "zero tolerance stance" regarding mercury, and the academy recognizes that "mercury in all of its forms is toxic to the fetus and children."

Okay - so far so good. In fact the AAP position is quite clear AND accurate.

But Dr. Louis Z. Cooper, chairman of the AAP Center for Child Health Research, tells the Times that the scientific evidence doesn't justify the need for a ban of all mercury-containing vaccines.

But don't spend too much time mulling over that paradox, because this is where Dr. Cooper starts stretching logic to the extreme.

The Times notes that Dr. Cooper "voiced concern" about World Health Organization (WHO) immunization programs. Dr. Cooper told the Times that these programs rely "heavily" on thimerosal-containing vaccines for millions of kids in poor nations, and WHO "could face cost and logistical problems" if those vaccines were abandoned.

Well heck! We wouldn't want to inconvenience WHO officials over a little thing like the safety of millions of poor children!

And then - to complete the perfect torture of this logic - Dr. Cooper tells the Times that if thimerosal vaccines are banned in the U.S., it would make it "a lot harder to explain" to other countries why they should accept them.

That's his defense! Keep using vaccines with mercury here at home so that WHO officials won't have to explain to third-world leaders why their kids are getting shots that are considered a significant health risk in the U.S.

But here's what will be the hardest thing to explain: Why we put their children AND our children at risk when the evidence clearly warned us not to.

--------------------------------------------
Exercise your options
-------------------------------------------

Here in the U.S., one of the many luxuries we enjoy is the availability of options.

In recent years, thimerosal content of children's vaccines has been reduced, but the preservative is still used in most flu vaccines and tetanus boosters. So if you have a young child or grandchild, when it comes time for those required shots, ask your pediatrician for assurance that the vaccines contain no thimerosal. In some cases, your insurance may not cover it, but it is definitely worth it to protect kids from the increased risk of autism. (Just don't tell the WHO if you decide to pay for it yourself. How would they ever explain THAT to the rest of the world?)

Mercury Detox - What you can do


Wednesday, February 01, 2006

The Danger of Household Insecticides Confirmed in Recent Study

A study by French researchers has found that using insecticides -- either in the home or garden -- increases the risk of childhood leukemia.

Your child's risk of harm from pesticide exposure is highest while you're pregnant and in the early years of his or her life. The study, published in Occupational and Environmental Medicine, included 280 children who had been newly diagnosed with acute leukemia and another 288 children without the disease. After interviewing each child's mother it was found that:
• Children exposed to home insecticides while in the womb or after birth had almost twice the risk of acute leukemia as those who were not.

• Children exposed to garden insecticides and fungicides had double the risk of acute childhood leukemia.

• Children who had been exposed to insecticidal shampoos to treat head lice had almost double the risk.

A 2002 study published in Environmental Health Perspectives found similar findings. Along with noting that children exposed to professional pest control from one year before birth to three years after birth had a significantly increased risk of leukemia, the study found that:

• Insecticide exposure early in life appears to be worse for the child than exposure later in life.

• The highest risk came from exposure during pregnancy.

• The more frequent the exposure, the higher the risk.

Pesticides Increase Risk of Non-Hodkin Lymphoma. Yet another study, published in the journal Cancer, found that children exposed (either in utero or after birth) to household insecticides or professional extermination chemicals within the home were three to seven times more likely to develop non-Hodgkin lymphoma than children not exposed.

The risk of one type of lymphome, lymphoblastic lymphoma, increased by 12.5 times after exposure to household pesticides. "A limited number of these compounds may be capable of inducing lymphoma, particularly when used around the home," said chief researcher Jonathan D. Buckley, M.B.B.S., Ph.D., from the Department of Preventative Medicine at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles.

Children Especially at Risk from Insecticides Exposure to pesticides, says Dr. Donald Mattison, of the March of Dimes, can cause many short- and long-term problems, including:

• Nervous system disturbances
• Nervousness
• Agitation
• Insomnia
• Muscle weakness
• Respiratory agitation
• Irritability
• Forgetfulness
• Confusion
• Depression

"Children are more vulnerable to the effects of pesticide exposure because their internal organs are still developing and maturing," said Dr. Mattison. Further, because they play on the floor or lawn and put objects into their mouths, they may be exposed to increased amounts. And the List Goes On:

The potential health effects of pesticide exposure do not end yet. Studies by the National Academy of Sciences and the Environmental Working Group have found that children exposed to carcinogenic pesticides are at a high risk of future cancer. And animal and human studies of individual pesticides have also uncovered the following risks:

• Fertility problems
• Brain tumors
• Birth defects
• Irritation to skin and eyes
• Hormone or endocrine system problems

Protecting Your Child and Family From Dangerous Insecticides
While it would be difficult to reduce your child's pesticide exposure to an absolute zero, you can significantly reduce it. One of the most important things to be aware of is to avoid using conventional lice treatments on your child.

"Commercial Preparations like (brand X)... are definitely toxic to people," says Dr. Andrew Weil, MD. That's because they contain pediculicides, which are potent pesticides and insecticides designed to poison lice, but that can be absorbed directly into your child's scalp.

If your child does come home with a case of head lice, we recommend you use Lice B Gone™, a safe, non-toxic, 100 percent pesticide-free multi-enzyme shampoo made from natural plant sources. This extra-strength formula has been clinically proven to effectively remove lice and nits without harmful pesticides or irritating chemicals.
Along with avoiding conventional lice treatments, we also recommend using the following strategies:

• Buy certified organic fruits, vegetables and meats (be sure to wash produce, particularly commercially grown produce, thoroughly before eating using a diluted soap solution).

• Avoid the use of toxic pesticides in your home and yard (opt for natural pesticides that you can find in your local health food store instead).

• If you are pregnant, nursing or have children in your home, never use pesticides in your home or garden.

• Avoid using conventional flea and tick collars and sprays on your pets. Instead, we recommend the 100 percent non-toxic and pesticide-free Flea 'n Tick B Gone.

• Don't use pesticides for aesthetic purposes like dandelions in your lawn.

• Don't use chemical bug repellants or lice shampoos.

Pesticides and herbacides are just 2 products out of thousands of toxic chemicals that create havoc with our bodies. To address toxins that are already in our bodies:

Body Detox - chelation therapy


http://www.vitallywell.net

Monday, December 26, 2005

TAMIFLU DEATHS AND THE TAP-DANCE

Date: 12/22/05 Author: Jon Rappoport Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com

TAMIFLU DEATHS AND THE TAP-DANCE

DECEMBER 22, 2005. Below you will find an excerpt from the Sydney Morning Herald, reporting two cases of "death from bird flu," despite treatment with Tamiflu, the drug that is being stockpiled all over the world against the hoax-pandemic.

I was reminded of an interview I did some years ago with retired propaganda pro Ellis Medavoy, who, in his time, worked the press to spread lies about medical issues.

Here is a piece from that Medavoy interview:

Q: So you're saying that when people die after a drug is given, there is a standard spin that is published.

A: Of course. The words "resistance" and "mutation" are hauled out and used. They are painted on the story.

Q: And how are these words employed?

A: "The germ has developed resistance to the drug." "The germ mutated rapidly, so the effective drug was no longer effective."

Q: Which means the drug can't be blamed for not working.

A: Not only that, but the drug can't be blamed for killing the patient. "It was the germ."

Q: What about proof that the germ really did mutate?

A: Try and find it. Normally, the mutation cover story is announced to the press with no proof at all. It's just a tale. They simply assume the germ must have evolved into a new form---overnight---and that's why the drug didn't work.

Q: There is another question, too. Did they ever really find the germ in question in the ill patient?

A: Right. Or did they find antibodies to the germ---

Q: Which are a sign of health.

A: Yes. In most cases, they don't isolate the actual germ at all. And when they do, they don't show that the germ existed in sufficient numbers in the body to cause any harm. It's all nonsense and obfuscation.

Q: So you could get a patient who is mildly ill, no real problem. Then he is given a drug and he dies. The story is spun so that the patient is said to have died from some germ, whereas the only logical explanation of death is that the drug killed him.

A: Absolutely. See, the drug makers always have a theory about how a drug works to cure a disease. They have a technical step-by-step story about the mechanism of cure. This happens, then that happens, then that happens over there, and then you have a cure. But they don't have a step-by-step story about how the drug can kill someone, because they don't want to know about THAT. So when a patient does die after being given a drug, the manufacturer always says, "There is no step-by-step chain of evidence that the drug actually led to the patient's death. There could have been other factors involved. Therefore, we're exempt from blame." It's a tap dance.

end of interview excerpt

In the case of Tamiflu, it's interesting to note that even conventional assessments of the effeciveness of the drug admit that it only shortens the length of the flu by 1.5 to 2.5 days, if it is given after the person already has the flu.

However, the proponents of the drug don't want to bring this up as a reason for a flu death after treatment with Tamiflu. "Hey, it only shortens the length of the illness by a little bit, so yes, people can die anyway." No, instead they want to say the germ mutated and developed resistance to the drug. That suits them better. Otherwise, people might begin to say, "Why are we bothering with this drug at all? It does almost nothing."

Yeah. Almost nothing. Except it can have dire negative effects.

Here is an excerpt from the Sydeny Morning Herald article. Notice how closely it follows the pattern Medavoy laid down:

Deaths of treated patients alarm bird flu experts
By Mark Metherell and agencies
December 23, 2005

THE deaths of two bird flu patients in Vietnam who had been treated with Tamiflu has raised questions about the drug Australia has stockpiled as a front-line medicine to combat an influenza pandemic.

To the dismay of medical experts and those responsible for the worldwide efforts to fight a pandemic occurring, the H5N1 bird flu virus in the bloodstream of the two patients in Vietnam rapidly developed resistance to the drug.

Concerns about resistance problems with Tamiflu suggested by an earlier case in Vietnam had already prompted the Australian Government to acquire more stocks of a rival antiviral drug, Relenza, a Health Department official revealed yesterday.

In one of the latest cases, a 13-year-old girl appeared to be stable but then rapidly worsened as the virus mutated, became more aggressive and eventually killed her.

Reports of the deaths are published in the New England Journal of Medicine by doctors funded by the British Wellcome Trust working in Vietnam. They urge changes to the global plans for fighting a flu pandemic. Other antiviral drugs are needed alongside Tamiflu, they say. [NOTE: THE WELLCOME TRUST IS VERY CLOSELY TIED TO GLAXO. GLAXO WAS GLAXO WELLCOME, UNTIL 2000, WHEN IT MERGED WITH SMITH KLINE BEECHAM TO BECOME GLAXO SMITH KLINE BEECHAM. WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT? BECAUSE GLAXO MANUFACTURES RELENZA, ANOTHER "ANTI-FLU DRUG," WHICH IS IN COMPETITION WITH TAMIFLU. SO WE HAVE A SITUATION WHERE THE WELLCOME TRUST TRASHES TAMIFLU AND CALLS FOR OTHER FLU DRUGS TO BE USED. SUCH AS RELENZA, WHICH HAD FALLEN ON HARD ECONOMIC TIMES. IT HELPS GLAXO TO TRASH TAMIFLU.---JR]

An Australian authority on influenza, Graeme Laver, said: "What is so worrying is that it looks as though it [the mutation] happened very quickly."

Dr Laver, whose research contributed to the development of the antiviral drugs, said while it was not surprising that a flu strain should develop resistance to the drug, the speed of the mutation was surprising as it was very difficult to develop resistant strains, even in the laboratory.

He said one possible comfort was that any future flu pandemic may not be the same as the current H5N1 strain, meaning it might not have the same potential to develop resistance rapidly.

The H5N1 strain has so far killed 71 people in South-East Asia, most of whom have been in close contact with infected birds. Scientists say the risk of a pandemic of the lethal disease would arise if the strain were to develop the ability to spread easily from human to human.

The Health Department's spokeswoman, Kay McNiece, said officials had been told of an earlier case of apparent resistance to Tamiflu and that was one of the reasons for the recent decision to order 1.81 million courses of the alternative antiviral, Relenza.
Australia has 3.95 million courses of antivirals held in secret stockpiles, most of them Tamiflu, as part of the 5 million anti-pandemic measures...

end Sydney Morning Herald excerpt

JON RAPPOPORT www.nomorefakenews.com

As you can see, Tamiflu or any other "anti-virals" are not the answer to the bird flu. The only true defense is a strong immune system. The people who survive illnesses all have a strong immune system in common. Drugs don't cure disease, your body does when provided with the tools of nutrition. Strengthen your immune system.

Monday, October 24, 2005

Curcumin Halts Spread of Breast Cancer In Mice




Date: 10/17/05 Source: MedicalNewsToday.com

Curcumin halts spread of breast cancer in mice - Early study shows spice stunts deadly spread to lungs. 17 Oct 2005

Curcumin, the main ingredient of turmeric and the compound that gives curry its mustard-yellow color, inhibits metastasis to the lungs of mice with breast cancer, report researchers at The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center.

The study, to be published in the Oct. 15 issue of the journal Clinical Cancer Research, reports that the spice appears to shut down a protein active in the spread of breast cancer to a major target for metastasis.

Though the study results are early, researchers found that the nontoxic natural substance not only repelled progression of the disease to the lungs, but also appeared to reverse the effects of paclitaxel (TaxolTM), a commonly prescribed chemotherapy for breast cancer that may trigger spread of the disease with use over a long period of time.

Because Taxol is so toxic, it activates a protein that produces an inflammatory response that induces metastasis. Curcumin suppresses this response, making it impossible for the cancer to spread. In fact, researchers found that adding curcumin to Taxol actually enhances its effect. Curcumin breaks down the dose, making the therapy less toxic and just as powerful while delivering the same level of efficacy.

"We are excited about the results of the study and the possible implications for taking the findings into the clinic in the next several years," says Bharat Aggarwal, Ph.D., professor of cancer medicine in M. D. Anderson's Department of Experimental Therapeutics. "At this time, advanced breast cancer is a difficult foe to fight with few proven treatments available after surgery, chemotherapy and radiation therapy."

Taxol is currently used as the front-line chemotherapeutic agent in breast cancers, but because the drug frequently induces drug resistance after prolonged use, it is not effective in treating metastatic breast cancer, says Aggarwal.

Researchers studied 60 mice with breast cancer, which were randomly assigned to one of four groups: control group, Taxol only, curcumin only and the combination of Taxol and curcumin. After the tumors grew to 10 mm (about the size of a pea), they were surgically removed, and the mice were fed a powdered curcumin diet.

Macroscopic lung metastasis, or metastasis that is visible to the naked eye, was seen in 96 percent of the mice in the control group. Treatment using Taxol alone only "modestly reduced" the incidence of metastases, while the group using curcumin alone and curcumin plus Taxol "significantly reduced" both the incidence and numbers of visible lung metastases.

Microscopic metastasis, or metastasis that is visible only when using a microscope, was found in the lungs of 28 percent of mice treated with the combination of curcumin and Taxol, and there was no macroscopic disease present. The micrometastases present consisted of only a few cells, suggesting that the combination inhibited the growth of breast cancer tumor cells that were in the lung before the tumors were removed.

In a previous study published in the Aug. 15 issue of the journal Cancer, M. D. Anderson researchers found that when the nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-kB) (a powerful protein known to promote the inflammatory response necessary to cause breast cancer to spread) is shut down, cancer strains are unable to grow and cells are pushed to commit suicide.

The mechanism in this curcumin study works the same way. Taxol activated the NF-kB in breast cancer cells, while curcumin stopped this activation by blocking the protein known as "IKK" that switched on the NF-kB, demonstrating how curcumin and Taxol work against one another. Taxol produced the inflammatory response, triggering metastasis, and curcumin suppressed it, causing cell death.

Extracted from the roots of the curcuma longa plant, curcumin is a member of the ginger family. While it is not used in conventional medicine, it is widely prescribed in Indian medicine as a potent remedy for liver disorders, rheumatism, diabetic wounds, runny nose, cough and sinusitis. Traditional Chinese medicine uses curcumin as a treatment for diseases associated with abdominal pain, and it is used in ancient Hindu medicine as a treatment for sprains and swelling.

According to the American Cancer Society, the chance of a woman having invasive breast cancer sometime during her life is one in eight. About 211,240 women in the United States will be diagnosed with invasive breast cancer in 2005, and approximately 40,410 women will die from the disease this year.

The study was funded by the United States Department of Defense. Co-authors include Shishir Shishodia, Ph.D.; Yasunari Takada, Ph.D.; Sanjeev Banerjee, Ph.D.; Robert A. Newman, Ph.D.; Carlos Bueso-Ramos, M.D., Ph.D.; and Janet E. Price, Ph.D.

Heather Sessions, hrsessions@mdanderson.org
University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, http://www.mdanderson.org
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=32147

Where to Buy Curcumin


Click on our sister site "Alive and Be Well"

Friday, October 14, 2005

Conspiracy Theory - Bird Flu

Avian Flu



Dr. Len Horowitz's Avian Flu Fright Commentary
To: All grassroots activists, health and vaccination networkers.
Please forward this urgent e-mail, to help save lives, to everyone in your network.

Avian Flu Fright: Politically Timed for Global "Iatrogenocide"
A Public Health Warning and Political Essay by a Harvard-trained Author of Fifteen Books Including the American bestseller, Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola-Nature, Accident or Intentional?


Leonard G. Horowitz, DMD, MA, MPH

Abstract
If avian flu becomes more than a threatened pandemic, it will have done so by political and economic design. This thesis is supported by current massive media misrepresentations, profiteering on risky and valueless vaccines, gross neglect of data evidencing earlier similar man-made plaques including SARS, West Nile Virus, AIDS and more; continuance of genetic studies breeding more mutant flu viruses likely to outbreak, inside trading scandals involving pandemic savvy White House and drug industry officials, curious immunity of these pharmaceutical entities over the past century to law enforcement and mainstream media scrutiny, and published official depopulation objectives. With the revelations and assertions advanced herein, the public is forewarned against this physician assisted mass murder best termed "iatrogenocide."* This genocidal imposition is expected to serve mainly economic and political depopulation objectives.

Background
In April, 2003, a social experiment called SARS, said to have arrived from Asia, heavily struck Toronto. I was there throughout most of this Asian flu-foreshadowing fright. This bizarre new pneumonia-like illness was named Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome. It was said to be the latest threat in an ongoing series of attacks on humanity by mysteriously mutating "supergerms."

A careful study of the scientific and medical-sociological correlates and antecedents of this "outbreak" revealed something amiss far more insidious than SARS. I critically considered Toronto’s media reaction as any Harvard-trained public health expert in media persuasion behavioral science might. The scourge had all the earmarks of a novel social experiment conducted by white-collar bioterrorist.
It seemed clear to me that this unprecedented population manipulation effectively indoctrinated the mass mind in support of a grossly ineffective, albeit legislated, public health response in advance of the arrival of "the Big One." Throughout the "SARS Scam,"(1) repeated references were made to biological agents that might facilitate decimation of approximately a third to half of the world's population. Having extensively reviewed political population control literature and contemporary objectives of leading global industrialists, I noted these predictions were in close keeping with current official population reduction objectives.(2)
Canada’s response to SARS in 2003 was, for the first time in history, directed by the United Nations and World Health Organization (WHO). Having reviewed the intimate financial and administrative ties between these organizations, the Rockefeller family, Carnegie Foundation, and the world’s leading drug makers, "the fox," in essence, reigned over Canada’s "chickens."
The truth about plagues includes the fact that "no grand pandemic ever evolved divorced from major socio-political upheaval." SARS advanced a political agenda more than a public health emergency. If public health officials earnestly intended to prevent these new emerging diseases, or successfully treat them at their roots, I repeated, they would study their obvious origins from the merged military-medical-biotechnology arena. A basic course in medical sociology simply justifies this utilitarian counsel.

"Experts" had been predicting the arrival of a super-plague for decades.
What was HIGHLY SUSPICIOUS about the mysterious and terrifying arrival of SARS, however, was its timing. It synchronously arrived with the global war on terrorism, and the Anglo-American war with Iraq. It seemed a convenient distraction from the fact that the earlier Bush administration had shipped Saddam Hussein most of his deadly biological weapons arsenal including anthrax and West Nile Virus. SARS was pathognomonic (i.e., symptomatic and
characteristic) of what I had predicted and explained in the book, Death in the Air: Globalism, Terrorism and Toxic Warfare (Tetrahedron Publishing Group, 2001; http://www.healthyworlddistributing.com/), a prophetically-titled text that predated the 9-11 attacks on America by several months, and provided a contextual analysis of certain globalists’
links to recent "outbreaks."

In essence, I provided insight into the broad application of a new form of institutionalized "bioterrorism" consistent with state sponsored biological warfare. Saddam Hussein was said to have exposed populations in his and adjacent lands with biological and chemical weapons of mass destruction.

SARS and the current avian flu fright is sanctioned by military-medical-pharmaceutical-petrochemical industrialists likewise operating above the law in many documented instances. Having testified before the U.S. Congress, I personally experienced how premiere pharmaceutical industrialists direct our political-economic representatives in government. Emerging diseases complement the political "War on Terrorism," and our bioterror-influenced culture. This agenda serves two primary objectives: profitability and population-reduction.

Political Reality Versus Mass-Mediated Myths
The ever increasing madness around us is eerily consistent with globalist think tank recommendations for the current "conflicts short of war."
Beginning in the late 1960s, "economic substitutes for standard militarization" were sought and found by leading global industrialists. New biological threats, the "war on terrorism," and increasing numbers of "natural disasters" including space-based threats and superstorms were considered economically and politically expedient compared with the first and second world wars. These "conflicts short of war" were decidedly more manageable and economically viable. For this reason, especially their profitability, they were leading options among Anglo-American policy makers.
Nelson Rockefeller’s protégé, Henry Kissinger, for instance, as National Security Advisor (NSA) under Richard Nixon, oversaw foreign policy while considering Third World population reduction "necessities" for the U.S., Britain, Germany, and other allies. This Bush nominee to direct the 9-11 conspiracy investigation, a reputed war criminal, then selected the option to have the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) develop biological weapons, according to the U.S. Congressional Record of 1975. Among these new man-made biological weapons were germs far deadlier than the avian flu.

For example, by 1968, when Kissinger requested and received updated intelligence on useful "synthetic biological agents" for germ warfare and population control, mutant recombinant flu viruses had just been engineered by Special Virus Cancer Program researchers O’Conner, Stewart, Kinard, Rauscher and others.(3) During this program, influenza and parainfluenza viruses were recombined with quick acting leukemia viruses (acute lymphocytic leukemia) to deliver weapons that potentially spread cancer, like the flu, by sneezing. These researchers also amassed avian cancer
(sarcoma) viruses and inoculated them into humans and monkeys to determine their carcinogenicity. In related efforts, Raucher et al. used radiation to enhance avian virus’s cancer-causing potential. These incredible scientific realities have been officially censored and generally neglected by the media’s mainstream.

Similarly, the Institute of Science in Society (IoSS) in London raised the genetic engineering question in the origin of SARS. "Could genetic engineering have contributed inadvertently to creating the SARS virus?"
they asked. "This point was not even considered by the expert coronavirologists called in to help handle the crisis, now being feted and woed by pharmaceutical companies eager to develop vaccines." Those living in glass houses should not throw stones. The above emphasis is added to show IoSS they had "not even considered" intentional SARS deployment in their scientific, allegedly unbiased, purview.(4)
Conflicts short of war, like the "War on AIDS," "War on Drugs," "War on Terrorism," "War on Cancer," and now "War on the Avian Flu" require sophisticated propaganda programs employing fear campaigns for social acceptance and popular support of legislated policies. These psychological operations (officially termed PSYOPS) for "command and control warfare"
(technically called C2W), experts advise, best support the emerging "Revolution in Military Affairs" (RMA). The RMA‘s capabilities include "a form of human slavery" in which the world’s captive populations would not know they are enslaved.(2)
The RMA undoubtedly incorporates the use of debilitating biologicals and chemical agents most generously on behalf of drug and vaccine makers. A classic example is the toxic carcinogenic organophosphate pesticides deployed against human populations, said to target "mosquitoes," in the "War Against the West Nile Virus." Such "non-lethal warfare" agents, as these are militarily termed, are indeed deadly, but mortality results slowly from toxic exposures allowing more profits to be made by allied pharmaceutical and medical industrialists. Victims of the "non-lethal"
exposures die slowly from chronic debilitating diseases. Expensive hospitals and long-term care facilities are virtual concentration camps.

The ailments generated for "iatrogenocide" include the plethora of autoimmune diseases and newer cancers virtually non-existent 50 years ago.
This fact, alone, strongly suggests a genocidal socio-economic and political agenda.

Avian Flu for Profit
In response to SARS, senior fellow at the Hudson Institute in Washington, Michael Fumento, published an economic thesis in Toronto related to the one I advance here. The "Super-bug or Super Scare," he wrote was published in Canada’s National Post. Canadians were warned to "quarantine themselves,"
wear masks, and in some cases stay home. The Ontario Health Minister declared a "health emergency," as the media dubbed the "mysterious killer"
a "super-pneumonia." Recoiling from the hype, Fumento asked and answered a few "real questions . . . How lethal, how transmissible, and how treatable is this strain?" The answers, he concluded, "leave no grounds for excitement, much less panic." The same may be said for this new curse of avian flu.(1)
Lethal?

At this writing, the avian flu is said to have killed "about 65 people" in Southeast Asia during the past two years! Little to no data is available on these individuals who most commonly had immune-compromising medical conditions. Further, all deaths were in Asian countries with questionable health services.
Conversely, other forms of flu kill more than 40,000 North Americans annually, generally the immune-compromised elderly.

Transmissibile?
According to USA Today (October 9, 2005), "European health officials are working to contain the [avian flu] virus, which so far has not infected anyone in the region." Although, allegedly "more than 140 million birds have died or been destroyed, . . . and financial losses to the poultry sector have topped $10 billion." This propaganda actually admits, "the current virus, known as H5N1, has not yet mutated to the point at which it can easily spread from person to person." In fact, it is likely to have never spread from person to person other than during laboratory
handling!(5)

Treatability?
"The U.S. Senate has already approved a $3.9 billion package to buy vaccines and antiviral medications, and the Administration is also preparing a request for an additional $6 billion to $10 billion," according to a current BusinessWeek report.( 6)

"Beam me up Scottie, there is no intelligent life on this planet." This largely explains why the public puts up with this deadly deception. Even USA Today bemons, "there is no human vaccine yet." So how come the U.S.
Senate is rushing to spend all these billions for an avian flu vaccine?
I suppose we should overlook the fact that the current frightening strain of H5N1 avian flu virus has never readily jumped from human to human, and not commonly from birds to humans either. Thus, an effective vaccine can only be prepared by mutating this virus, thus creating what the world fears most. Let me explain. . . .
To make the human vaccine specific for the H5N1 mutant virus, you must start with the human virus which does not yet exist, except in perhaps military-biomedical-pharmaceutical laboratories. In fact, this is precisely what is being prepared based on news reports. To produce the human pathogen, the avian virus must be cultured for lengthy periods of time in human cell cultures, then injected into monkey and ultimately humans to see if these experimental subjects get the same feared flu.
Thus, the flu virus the world currently fears most is either: 1) now being prepared in labs paid by industrialists with massive wealth-building incentives to "accidentally" release the virus; or 2) has already been prepared in such labs to take advantage of this current fright and future sales following the virus’s release.
Remember, to be effective against a virus, a vaccine is said to require specificity. If authorities were to now have the main H5N1 avian flu strain feared to spread at some future date there’s no assurance by the time they developed the vaccine the strain would remain sufficiently the same for the vaccine to be effective anyway due to expected viral mutations. Viral mutations over time is a function of the agent’s newness. New man-made viruses, laboratory creations, like the ones currently being prepared for vaccine trials, are less stable not having evolved over the millennia.
Thus, the entire vaccine effort is largely, if not entirely, a sham with ulterior motives.

Remember too, that a vaccine’s reliability requires years, or at least months, of testing in the targeted population. Vaccine injury data must, or should, be meticulously collected over this period to assure the vaccine is not killing and maiming more persons than it is helping or saving. Can you seriously believe this assurance will be provided by government or pharmaceutical industry officials in this pandemic’s wake? FEMA’s failed Katrina response pails by comparison to this public health liability and vaccine-injury certainty.
I say "vaccine-injury certainty" because of the extensive list of newly developed vaccinations, highly touted when brought to market, that caused horrific results. This list includes the first swine flu vaccine, polio vaccines, smallpox vaccine, anthrax vaccine, hepatitis B vaccine, and most recently Lyme disease vaccine that crippled approximately 750,000 people within months of its release and prior to its recall by the FDA.

Most people fail to realize all vaccines carry a list of ingredients that typically increase human disease and death (i.e., morbidity and mortality).
These include toxic elements and chemicals such as mercury, aluminum, formaldehyde and formalin (used to preserve corpses), MSG, foreign genetic material, and risky proteins from various species of bacteria, viruses, and animals that have been scientifically associated with triggering autoimmune disorders and certain cancers. A growing body of scientific evidence strongly suggests vaccines are largely responsible for increasing cases of autism and other learning disabilities, chronic fatigue, fibromyalgia, Lupus, MS, ALS, rheumatoid arthritis, asthma, hay fever, allergies, chronic draining ear infections, type 1 autoimmune diabetes, and many, many more pandemics. These chronic ailments are said to require long-term medical care for the patients’ management causing toxic side effects resulting in America’s leading killer--iatrogenic disease. That is, vaccines and other pharmaceutical industry inventions are literally killing or disabling millions with little effort on the part of government officials and their drug industry cohorts to arrest this scourge.

For all we know, governments are ordering an avian flu vaccine that will precisely deliver this pandemic to the world to affect population control.
Absurd thesis? Read on.
BusinessWeek expects avian flu vaccine stockpiling by government officials will help the Sanofi-Pasteur company on behalf of Sanofi-Aventis and Chiron. "Tamiflu," it reported is an antiviral manufactured by Roche, . . .
considered effective against avian flu. . . . The U.S. owns enough for 4.3 million people, with more on order." BusinessWeek failed to report: 1) Tamiflu’s safety and effectiveness has not been determined in people with other chronic medical conditions--a significant percentage of the U.S.
population-- and common side effects of this drug include nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, bronchitis, stomach pain, dizziness, headaches, and much, much more; 2) Roche (Hoffman-LaRoche) was found guilty of price fixing the world’s supply of vitamins in 1999 as part of the global petrochemical/pharmaceutical cartel evolved from Nazi-Germany‘s I.G. Farben organization;(2)(6) and 3) Sanofi-Aventis’s corporate colleagues include Merck, a company that received a lion’s share of the Nazi war chest at the end of WWII, whose earnings plunged after the withdrawal last year of its deadly Vioxx arthritis drug. According to recent news reports, Merck is partnering with Sanofi-Aventis to produce the world’s first sexually-transmitted-cancer vaccine to be given to prepubescent boys and
girls.(7)

Merck is infamous for having developed the first hepatitis B vaccines that triggered the international AIDS pandemic according to published scientific research and stunning documents reprinted in this author’s national bestselling book.(3)(8)

In the weeks and months following the 9-11 attacks on America, I traced the widely publicized anthrax mailings "mystery" to U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) commissioned biological weapons contractors with ties to Britain's MI6, Porton Down, and this same Anglo-American pharmaceutical cartel.(9)

The anthrax mailings fanned fears of bioterrorism throughout America and economically served primarily vaccine and drug makers with administrative and financial links to these avian flu profiteers.(10)
People willingly relinquish their civil rights and personal freedoms in the wake of such engineered frights. The passage of the infamous "Homeland Security Act" in America, and its counterpart in Canada, are classic examples of this societal direction, forced legislation, and egregious manipulation.

Why Asia?
How convenient that Asia is said to be the origin, as with SARS, of this latest plague when Chinese-Anglo-American relations are strained to say the least.
In the days preceding the emergence of the first SARS cases, America raced to the Pacific Rim to impact escalating aggressions on the Korean peninsula. Communist China--a "most favored" trading partner with America--is politically allied with several American enemies, including those said to possess weapons of mass destruction, including Iraq.

Coincidental? Not likely when viewing the larger political picture involving the Ango-American oligarchy's RMA, its global enterprises, and instigated planet-wide "conflicts short of war." Consider also the fact the media's mainstream has been heavily influenced, if not entirely controlled, by multi-national corporate sponsors protecting and advancing the interests of a relatively small number of global entities. Also recall that the focus of news providers, on any given day or hour, results from intelligence agency directives, according to reputable authorities including myriad retired news officials and intelligence officers.

So ask and answer the following intelligent questions:
* Why have American military officials, beginning with Secretary of Defense William Cohen during the Clinton years, publicized America's greatest vulnerability lies in the realm of biological weapons wielded by terrorists? Is this not a form of treason against the United States to relay such sensitive intelligence to potential enemies through the mainstream press?
* Why does the mainstream media continue to foretell of the expected arrival of the "Big One"-an influenza virus that will produce a super-flu that will kill billions of people, like the "Spanish flu" did between 1918-19, while totally disregarding the individuals, organizations, and laboratories that have labored to produce these weapons of mass destruction? Even the devastating Spanish Flu virus has been, literally, unearthed for further study and, do you suppose, deployment?
* Why was the "Spanish flu" influenza virus called the "Spanish flu" when it originated, by historic accounts, in Tibet in 1917? It is said that Spanish newspapers were the only ones reporting on the great plague due to their neutrality over World War I politics. However, Spain was as dear to America then as Communist China is to the United States today. The "Spanish flu" was named such following two decades of disputes between America and Spain over colonization of the Caribbean Islands, Hawaii and the Philippines beginning with the Spanish American war that ended in the Philippines in 1902. In fact, the grand Spanish flu began in military camps. Does this history appear to be repeating?

*Doesn't it make sense that America is being manipulated, if not targeted, for the purpose of advancing globalistic agendas, central among them is population reduction?
The "Big One"
As mentioned above, during the 1960s and early 1970s, military biological weapons contractors with intimate ties to leading drug industrialists prepared mutants of influenza and para-influenza viruses recombined with acute lymphocytic leukemia viruses. In other words, they stockpiled a quick spreading cancer virus which may also be deployed.(3)

Alternatively, many infectious disease experts and government health officials oblivious to this scientific reality say this avian flu might be the 'Big One." Several days ago, the United Nations released a report that stated as many as 150 million people worldwide might die from this avian flu.

Emma Ross of the Associated Press reported on SARS as the World Health Organization (WHO) launched its "crisis plan to attack" the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome. WHO, as you may recall, is a U.N. sponsored organization that is rumored to have helped spread AIDS to Africa by way of contaminated hepatitis B and/or polio vaccinations. There is a reasonable amount of evidence to support this contention.(1)
More disconcerting, the U.N. is known to be heavily influenced by Rockefeller family members and their petrochemical-pharmaceutical interests. History shows Rockefeller fortunes built the U.N. building in New York City. During WWII, the Rockefeller family and their Standard Oil Company supported Hitler more than they did the allies according to court records. One federal judge ruled Rockefeller committed "treason" against the United States. Following WWII, according to attorney John Loftus-an official Nazi war crimes investigator-Nelson Rockefeller persuaded the U.N.'s South American voting block to favor Israel's creation only to assure secrecy regarding his support for the Nazis. Earlier that century, John D. Rockefeller joined Prescott Bush and the British Royal Family in sponsoring the eugenics initiatives that gave rise to Hitler's racial hygiene programs. During the same period the Rockefeller family virtually monopolized American medicine, American pharmaceutics, and !
the cancer and genetics industries.(2, 3)

Today, the Rockefeller family, its foundation, U.N. and WHO remain at the forefront of administering "population programs" designed to reduce world populations to more manageable levels. As per an advertisement in Foreign Affairs--a prestigious political periodical published by the David Rockefeller directed Council on Foreign Relations--the U.S. population is being targeted for a 50% reduction.(2)
"We've never faced anything on this scale with such a global reach," said Dr. David Heymann, of the WHO, not regarding the avian flu, but SARS.
"This is the first time that a global network of [Rockefeller-directed infectious disease ‘surveillance’ outposts and] laboratories are sharing information, samples, blood, pictures," added Dr. Klaus Stohr, a WHO virologist coordinating labs internationally. "Basically overnight, there are no secrets, there is no jealousy, there is no competition in the face of a global health emergency. This is a phenomenal network."(1) ____________________
* The term "iatrogenocide" is derived from the combination of words "iatrogenesis," meaning physician induced illness, and "genocide," defined as the mass killing and/or enslaving of people for economics, politics, and/or ideology.

About the Author Leonard G. Horowitz, D.M.D., M.A., M.P.H., is an internationally known authority in the overlapping fields of public health, behavioral science, emerging diseases, and bioterrorism. He received his doctorate in medical dentistry from Tufts University School of Dental Medicine in 1977, was awarded a post-doctoral fellowship in behavioral science at University of Rochester, earned a Master of Public Health degree from Harvard University, and another Master of Arts degree in health education from Beacon College, all before joining the research faculty at Harvard. Dr. Horowitz is best known for his national bestselling book, Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola - Nature, Accident or Intentional?
(Tetrahedron Press, 1998; 1-888-508-4787) which recently resulted in the United States General Accounting Office investigating the man-made origin of AIDS theory. (See: http://www.healingcelebrations.com/gao.htm) Dr.
Horowitz's work in the field of vaccination risk awareness has prompted at least three Third World nations to change their vaccination policies. His stunning testimony before the United States Congress' Government Reform Committee, literally brought the hearing to a halt. (See:
healingcelebrations.com) Dr. Horowitz questioned government health officials regarding a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) secreted report showing a definitive link between the mercury ingredient (i.e., Thimerosal), common to most vaccinations, and the skyrocketing rates of autism and behavioral disorders affecting our children and the future of our nation.
Incredibly, Dr. Horowitz alerted the FBI, in writing and in person, one week before the first anthrax mailing was announced in the press, that a "major anthrax fright" was in the process of unfolding that demanded the FBI's urgent attention. Needless to say they did not heed Dr. Horowitz's prophetic warning.
Moreover, three months before the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, Dr. Horowitz released his thirteenth book, prophetically titled Death in the Air: Globalism, Terrorism and Toxic Warfare. The book focuses on the West Nile Virus as an act of Bioterrorism, and considers what and who is really behind this and other recent outbreaks. Dr. Horowtiz argues that his disclosures expose the roots of global terrorism, along with the individuals and organizations at the heart of what he calls "the petrochemical-pharmaceutical cartel". He believes this "multi-national corporate beast" is in the process of committing global genocide, profiting from engineered frights, and at the same time, most efficiently culling targeted populations considered excessive.

As you may have heard, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, called for an investigation into the links between recent West Nile Virus outbreaks and bioterrorism. Dr. Horowitz is among the leading pioneers of this theory.

Dr. Horowitz's most recent book is DNA: Pirates of the Sacred Spiral, a reference text on the electro-genetics of biology, disease therapy, and human spirituality. This work also details links between the anthrax mailings and human genome project heist, and leading intelligence agency, genetics industry, and pharmaceutical company officials.

For more information about Dr. Horowitz’s books, videos, CDs and DVDs link to www.healthyworlddistributing.com and www.tetrahedron.org, or by calling 1-888-508-4787. His official website is www.drlenhorowitz.com.
This article was provided courtesy of Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz and Tetrahedron Publishing Group. It’s copyright is relinquished for widespread distribution.

References:
1) Horowitz LG. SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome): A Great Global Scam. Available at: http://www.healingcelebrations.com/SARS.htm
2) Horowitz LG. Death in the Air: Globalism, Terrorism and Toxic Warfare.
Sandpoint, ID: Tetrahedron Publishing Group, (Spring) 2001.
3) Horowitz LG. Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola, Nature, Accident or Intentional? Sandpoint, ID: Tetrahedron Publishing Group, (Spring) 2001.
4) The Institute of Science in Society. SARS and Genetic Engineering?
London, England. Article available at:
http://www.tetrahedron.org/articles/health_risks/sars_engineering.html
5) Knox N. Europe braces for avian flu. USA TODAY, October 9, 2005; Manning A.Government to stock up on avian flu shots. USA Today, Oct 8, 2005.

6) Wang P. Avian Flu: Inoculate Your Portfolio. BusinessWeek. Online edition. Available at:
http://www.businessweek.com/investor/content/oct2005/pi2005110_4988_pi015.ht
m
7) CNNMoney. Merck shares jump on cancer drug vaccine. October 6, 2005.
Available at: http://money.cnn.com/2005/10/06/news/fortune500/merck.reut/
8) For more scientific background on the link between the hepatitis B vaccine and the AIDS pandemic link to http://www.originofAIDS.com.
9) Horowitz LG. The CIA's Role in the Anthrax Mailings: Could Our Spies be Agents for Military-Industrial Sabotage, Terrorism, and Even Population Control? A Special Report. Article available at:
http://www.tetrahedron.org/articles/anthrax/anthrax_espionage.html
10) Horowitz LG. DNA: Pirates of the Sacred Spiral. Sandpoint, ID:
Tetrahedron Publishing Group, 2004.

Avian Flu Pandemic Health Resources