Category Archives: Public

MONSANTO EMPLOYEE ADMITS AN ENTIRE DEPARTMENT EXISTS TO “DISCREDIT” SCIENTISTS

Published: May 28, 2015

CHRISTINA SARICH, NATURAL SOCIETY

Dare to publish a scientific study against Big Biotech, and Monsanto will defame and discredit you. For the first time, a Monsanto employee admits that there is an entire department within the corporation with the simple task of ‘discrediting’ and ‘debunking’ scientists who speak out against GMOs. The WHO recently classified glyphosate, a chemical in Monsanto’s best-selling herbicide Roundup, as carcinogenic – news that is really heating things up with biotech. So Monsanto has been demanding that the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) retract their statements about the poisons’s toxicity to human health. The company demands this even though a peer-reviewed study published in March of 2015 in the respected journal, The Lancet Oncology, conducted a analysis proving that glyphosate was indeed ‘probably carcinogenic.’ Monsanto’s vice president of global regulatory affairs Philip Miller told Reuters the following in interview:

“We question the quality of the assessment. The WHO has something to explain.”

It has already been explained, Mr. Miller. The study states:

“Glyphosate is a broad-spectrum herbicide, currently with the highest production volumes of all herbicides. It is used in more than 750 different products for agriculture, forestry, urban, and home applications. Its use has increased sharply with the development of genetically modified glyphosate-resistant crop varieties. Glyphosate has been detected in air during spraying, in water, and in food. There WAS limited evidence in humans for the carcinogenicity of glyphosate. Glyphosate has been detected in the blood and urine of agricultural workers, indicating absorption. Soil microbes degrade glyphosate to aminomethylphosphoric acid (AMPA). Blood AMPA detection after poisonings suggests intestinal microbial metabolism in humans. Glyphosate and glyphosate formulations induced DNA and chromosomal damage in mammals, and in human and animal cells in vitro. One study reported increases in blood markers of chromosomal damage (micronuclei) in residents of several communities after spraying of glyphosate formulations.”

In a recent talk attended mostly by students hoping to get decent paying internships in their field, a student asked what the company was doing to negate “bad science” concerning their work. Monsanto’s employee, Dr. William “Bill” Moar, who gives talks on Monsanto’s products to reassure everyone that they are safe, perhaps forgot the event was public when he openly revealed that Monsanto had:

“An entire department” (waving his arm for emphasis) dedicated to “debunking” science which disagreed with theirs.”

Likely, this is the first time a Monsanto employee has publicly admitted that they have immense political and financial weight to bear on scientists who dare to publish against them. Of course they don’t list this discrediting department anywhere on their website. The company will stop at nothing to discredit and devalue the contributions of unimpeachably respected Lancet and the international scientific bodies of WHO and IARC, among others. The stakes are high – after all, an entire industry of GMO seed (for which they currently hold more than a three-fourths monopoly share) is based on being Roundup ready. Glyphosate is their hallmark product, and it accounts for billions in sales when you account for the seed they sell to go with their best-selling herbicide. In a single publicly made phrase, Moar has admitted that the Monsanto-funded science is sheer propaganda – essentially that they indeed have dozens, if not hundreds of employees out making sure that no science which tells the truth about their cancer-causing products ever garners any credibility whatsoever in the information age. Monsanto has also held up the findings of regulatory bodies, particularly in the United States where the revolving door between agrochemical corporations and government seems never ending.

Advertisements

Viewed through Proving: Platina – overview

In the proving of Platina, the section on Lower Extremities stands out, with approximately 64 symptoms, followed closely by emotional symptoms, clocking in at 41 symptoms.  Upper and lower extremities taken together constitute over 100 symptoms, roughly 20% of the entire proving.  Stomach and abdominal symptoms, sleep issues and headaches also play a prominent part.

The emotional symptoms are noticeable not just in their number, but also in the number of  bold symptoms in this section of the proving.  Around 10 bold symptoms in 41, roughly a quarter of all the emotional symptoms in the proving.  Note – I am referring to the symptoms relating to the emotions only, not symptoms relating to intellect and sensorium.

The most extreme emotional symptoms are those relating to what we are used to hearing about Platina – the loftiness and contempt shown to others deserving of respect etc.  But these are only 4 symptoms out of 41.  However, many of the other symptoms reported by Gross relate to a total misery and depression, often expressed in weeping, and sometimes resulting in a paralysis of action.

Three of the symptoms in this section are from Hahnemann, and even just these three present a picture of dejection and sensitivity:

4.            Anxiety and palpitation, especially during a walk.
16.          Sensitive mood.
24.          Very much inclined to weep, and too much affected by the least cause.

Another area where there is a high proportion of bold symptoms is where the facial appearance of the prover is described.  We see that a patient needing Platina could have a very pale face with coldness and numbness, but could also be red with burning heat.  Here are the symptoms – notice the ones in bold:

125.        Face, pale and sunken. [Gr.].
126.        Pale, wretched appearance ; for several days. [Gr.].
127.        Intense heat of the face ; the eyes burned and itched violently.
128.        Burning heat of the face with glowing redness, with great dryness of the mouth, with violent thirst, pressive headache, – and dizzy quivering before the eyes, with lachrymation ; for several evenings ; from 5 to 9 o’clock. [Gr.].
129.        Heat of the face and of the whole head, sultriness and dull pain in the forehead ; she cannot contain herself. [Gr.].
130.        Sensation of coldness, formication and numbness in the whole of the right side of the face. [Gr.].

A further characteristic to be seen in the proving is an aggravation while sitting.  This is particularly pronounced in the section on lower extremities – 19 symptoms showing aggravation while sitting, almost a third of the total.  This is one of the most pronounced aggravations in the proving, and a symptom that can be very helpful to the prescriber.  We are more familiar with the patient who talks of weariness in the legs and just wants to sit down – this patient will say that sitting down does not help, and may even make it worse.

So if the more extreme emotional symptoms are put to one side, if we use Carroll Dunham’s view that this is more about depression than about erethism (see previous post for description and definition),  the physical symptoms alone will probably lead to more frequent consideration of Platina as the remedy of choice in more prosaic, less lofty emotional, mental and physical pictures of disease.

Free Speech Rights Under Attack in Australia

Free Speech Rights Under Attack in Australia

March 29, 2013 by admin in Featured, Politics, Vaccines with 0 Comments

Whatever you believe about vaccination, surely those who disagree with forced inoculations and medical treatment have the right to their views and to choose whether they’ll be subjected to medical treatments of any sort, including vaccination. But the right is under siege in Australia, as the Australian Vaccination Network struggles against obvious attempts to shut them down.

Australian Flag with Fist-Held Syringe Superimposed

Australian Flag (by erjkprunczýk) with Fist-Held Syringe Superimposed

by Heidi Stevenson

The Australian Vaccination Network (AVN) has actively advocated for vaccination choice and provided information about vaccine risks for many years. Suddenly, the New South Wales Department of Fair Trading (DFT) has decided that their name is misleading and demanded that they change it. They have refused to state how it’s misleading and provided no advice about what change is required. They simply demand that the name be changed.

This may seem like a minor problem, but when an organization has existed for a long time, has a website based on their name, and trades under that name, being forced to change it is onerous. Nonetheless, AVN has done its best trying to cooperate, but they haven’t even been informed of how their name is supposed to be misleading! They have sent polite letters stating that they want to cooperate and asking the DFT to provide guidance. You can see three of them by clicking on these links: 27 December 201318 February 2013, and 6 March 2013.

They’ve gotten no response to their requests. So AVN requested a stay of the order, which is normally a fairly routine procedure. But their response was to declare that they must change their name immediately because it’s an emergency! AVN has existed since 1994—nearly 20 years—and it’s suddenly an emergency that they change their name?

After all, their actions against AVN clearly demonstrate that the Department of Fair Trading is most assuredly not living up to its name. It is, in fact, doing the oppositve—attempting to shut down a legitimate organization that is precisely what it claims, an organization that is a network of people in Australia on the subject of vaccination.

Obviously, there’s more to this than the desire to see their name changed. This is nothing less than part of an ongoing program designed to destroy the AVN. What reason could there be, other than to silence their voice?

So, AVN’s president, Greg Beattie, attended a hearing on 20 March 2013 regarding their request for a stay. Note that this now has moved into a legal matter requiring attorneys and their costs. Clearly, there’s no reason for doing this. After all, the AVN indicated willingness to cooperate, but they don’t know what needs to be done to satisfy the DFT—and the DFT has refused to advise them.

For this hearing, the DFT paid a group of people as expert witnesses. Why would they need expert witnesses for a simple extension hearing? And how much was paid to them? In any case, their expertise—whatever it is—seems not to have come into play, or if it did, it wasn’t clarified to AVN. Perhaps they should, instead, look inward and consider changing their name. I’ll even help them out: The Department of Speech Suppression would be ever so much more accurate!

AVN’s barrister laid out the reasons for granting a stay to allow the AVN staff time to consult with the membership. The government’s solicitor didn’t respond to what was said, merely stated that the public’s interest requires that AVN change it’s name now! Why, though, wasn’t explained.

To save money, both Beattie and AVN’s barrister appeared by telephone, since they are not located in New South Wales. DFT’s solicitor, though, in a show of pettiness, complained that it was an imposition, and the Member—Australian term for a judge—went along with it. Therefore, AVN’s barrister must show up in person, which means that AVN must cover the cost of flights and expenses.

Lest you have any doubts about DFT’s attitude towards AVN, the night before the hearing, AVN’s barrister was contacted by DFT’s legal representative. He treated AVN”s barrister extremely rudely and called AVN “fucking wackos”. They don’t like having their actions pointed out to the public, so deny AVN’s right to post the fact of this abominable behavior.

Attack on the Right to an Independent Viewpoint

AVN is clearly under attack. It isn’t because of any actual crime. It’s simply because they’re espousing a viewpoint that runs counter to the government’s. What’s under attack is the right to free speech. The point that needs to be understood is that this is not about whether vaccinations are good or bad. It’s about whether an organization or individual has the right to espouse a point of view that’s different from the government’s.

As it now stands, the government is acting as an enforcer of corporate interests. Big Pharma and Big Medicine want to promote and sell vaccines. AVN, apparently, is making headway against their profit machine … so the government is attacking AVN in the pettiest manner possible. There can be little doubt that the goal is to shut them down, to quiet their voice.

This is not the first attack on AVN. As reported earlier, a vicious attack on Meryl Dorey, AVN’s founder, was launched. She was subjected to vile pornographic messages and threatened over and over by phone. A distributed denial of service attack was launched against their website. Yet, the police and agencies that are supposed to protect people from such treatment failed to respond.

Last year, on the basis of two complaints, the Health Care Complaints Commission (HCCC) launched an investigation of AVN. They ordered AVN to include a statement on their site that states:

the Australian Vaccination Network’s purpose is to provide information against vaccination in order to balance what it believes is the substantial amount of pro-vaccination information available elsewhere;
the information should not be read as medical advice and;
the decision about whether or not to vaccinate should be made in consultation with a health care provider.

Obviously, only the medical monopoly is granted the right to make statements about health issues. It matters not if they’re right or wrong, the general public is not supposed to question them.

The HCCC also stripped their right to fund raise. AVN fought back and that right was returned to them.

Current Status

The AVN has won an extension until June to consult with members, but have been forced to place a consumer warning notice on their website reading:

Consumer Warning: NSW Fair Trading has directed Australian Vaccination Network to change its name because it regards the name to be misleading. The Australian Vaccination Network is challenging this Direction and the challenge is currently before the NSW Administrative Decisions Tribunal.

AVN was quite happy to do so. It clearly indicates to anyone who isn’t completely blinded to the corporate-owned government that freedom of speech is no longer considered a right. You can see it posted proudly at the top of every page on their site.

If you can possibly help AVN, please do. It’s clear that they’re in a battle for their existence, and equally clear that they’re also fighting for our right to hear the other side of the vaccine debate. Surely it’s obvious that this is everyone’s cause. Whether you agree with AVN or disagree vehemently, surely it’s obvious that they have the right to express their point of view. If the suppression doesn’t stop here, where will it stop?

You can contact the New South Wales Department of Fair Trading and tell them that their function is not defined as suppression of speech. It’s to provide a fair ground for everyone to trade. The right to free speech belongs to us all, not only those who agree with the government.

The phone number is (02) 9228 5276.

As AVN has stated, “You can act now—or you can wait for the knock on your door telling you your right to say no to drug-based therapies and medical vaccination has been taken away for good. The choice is yours.”

THE U.S. MEDICAL SYSTEM IS THE NATION’S NUMBER ONE KILLER

 

 

By Rob Pell
March 11, 2013
NewsWithViews.com

Ideas for reducing unnecessary, preventable deaths in this country have been in the news a lot lately. Where shall we begin? Annual gun related homicides total about 11,000 and automobile fatalities are about 35,000 per year.

Would you be surprised to learn that the leading cause of death in the US appears to be the medical system itself. This is the startling conclusion reached in a report published by medical researchers: Gary Null, PhD; Carolyn Dean MD, ND; Martin Feldman, MD; Debora Rasio, MD; and Dorothy Smith, PhD.

Deaths resulting from inadvertent, adverse effects or complications from medical treatment or diagnostic proceedures are known as Iatrogenisis, meaning: Brought forth by a healer (from the Greek iatros, healer).Their report places the number of annnual iatrgenic (brought forth by a healer) deaths in the US at 783,936.

Hippocrates is often regarded as the father of western medicine and 98% of American medical students swear to some form of the Hippocratic Oath before practicing medicine. One of the underlying principals of the Oath is: “first, do no harm.” I’m not sure if that’s sad or ironic.

The largest single contributor to iatrogenic deaths are prescription drugs, being used as directed. According to a report issued by Medical News Today, over 4 billion prescriptions were written for drugs in America in 2011 . That’s an average of over 13 for each man, woman and child. The average number of prescriptions written annually for a senior citizen is 28 per year. That doesn’t include over- the-counter medications or vaccines. If these drugs could successfully treat and cure disease, the United States would have the healthiest inhabitants on the planet.

The possible adverse reaction warnings on TV drug commercials have become a punch line for comedian’s routines, but, life-threatening side-effects are no laughing matter. Common side-effects of individual drugs are well publicized but it’s impossible for physicians or pharmacists to reliably predict what possible side-effects will occur when combining three, four, 13 or 28 different drugs.

I was recently saddened to read the obituary of one of my customers, a strongly-built Military Veteran in his mid-seventies, who appeared to me to be in excellent health five years ago. His son told me that he had reviewed his Dad’s prescriptions with him and was shocked to discover that 9 of the 12 drugs his father was taking had been prescribed to treat side-effects from one of the other drugs. His father was found dead, lying on the floor of his residence. No autopsy was performed.

The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) published a study by Dr. Barbara Starfield, an MD with a Master’s degree in Public Health, revealing the extremely poor performance of the United States health care system in a number of areas.

One of Starfield’s main concerns is the lack of systematic recording and studying of adverse events stemming from prescription drugs. If a patient dies, there is no routine procedure to notify their physician, even if the patient is autopsied. Therefore, there is almost no way for the average doctor to link a patient’s death to a possible adverse reaction to a prescribed medication.

This is especially troubling because another article published in JAMA concluded prescription drugs, being used as directed, cause about 106,000 deaths a year and over two million serious injuries annually in the U.S. This makes prescription drugs the single largest factor in deaths induced by the medical establishment.

Nationally, only about 20% of all deaths are subject to investigation by a coronor or medical examiner. If the cause of death was made certain in all cases by autopsy, I’m quite sure that the number of deaths actually caused by prescription drugs, being used as directed, would dwarf the 106,000 per year the JAMA report acknowleged.

I’ve seen enough to believe that in many cases Big-Pharma is far more concerned with creating repeat, lifetime customers rather than finding cures. Joining the drug companies, the FDA and insurance companies are the kingpins behind this profit-driven business model. Some call doctors well-meaning, unsuspecting pawns of Big-Pharma. Others call them street level pushers for FDA sanctioned drug cartels. Either way, the kingpins couldn’t do it without medical doctors helping them complete the drug delivery system.

Due to concerns about dangerous side-effects from long-term use, many prescription drugs were, at one time, specifically prescribed only for short-term use Now, just a few years later, many of the same drugs are routinely prescribed, indefinitely, for the rest of your life.

Further, the Null-Dean report showed that the number of people exposed to unnecessary hospitalization annually is 8.9 million per year. This is cause for concern because a 2008 study issued by the Office of Inspector General for the Department of Health and Human Services, reported that one in seven Medicare beneficiaries who is hospitalized will be harmed as a result of the medical care they receive in the hospital.

Prescription drugs and hospital visits are very risky business. Unlike with other more well publicized causes of death, simply taking greater personal responsibility for our own health and well-being could save hundreds of thousands of lives every year. Unfortunately, more gun or traffic laws will do nothing to save us from what is actually the Nation’s number one killer, the U.S.medical system.

This vaccine regime is being made mandatory all over the world.

Vaccinated Children Have More Than Twice the Diseases and Disorders Than Unvaccinated Children

50-Reasons-NOT-to-Vaccinate-your-Children1This survey was A German study released in September 2011 of about 8000 UNVACCINATED children, newborn to 19 years, show vaccinated children have more than twice the diseases and disorders than unvaccinated children.

The results are presented in the bar chart below; the complete data and study results are here. The data is compared to the national German KIGGS health study of the children in the general population. Most of the respondents to the survey were from the U.S. (Click on the chart to see it better)


Salzburger Study

Results: of 1004 unvaccinated children, had

Asthma, 0% (8-12% in the normal population)

A-topic dermatitis 1.2% (10-20% in the normal population)

Allergies 3% (25% in the normal population)

ADHD 0.79% (5-10%) in children

Longterm Study in Guinea-Bissau (1 Kristensen I, Aaby P, Jensen H.:“Routine vaccinations and child survival: follow up study in Guinea-Bissau, West Africa”, BMJ 2000; 321: 1435–41)

The children of 15,000 mothers were observed from 1990 to 1996 for 5 years.

Result: the death rate in vaccinated children against diphtheria, tetanus and whooping cough is twice as high as the unvaccinated children (10.5% versus 4.7%).

New Zealand Survey (1992) (http://www.ias.org.nz)

The study involved 254 children. In which 133 children were vaccinated and 121 remained unvaccinated.

Result:

Symptom vaccinated unvaccinated
Asthma 20 (15%) 4 (3%)
Eczema or allergic rashes 43 (32%) 16 (13%)
Chronic otitis 26 (20%) 8 (7%)
Recurrent tonsillitis 11 (8%) 3 (2%)
Shortness of breath and sudden infant death syndrome 9 (7%) 2 (2%)
Hyperactivity 10 (8%) 1 (1%)

 

 

 

 

Download and read the IAS1992study now.

Allopathic treatment of whooping cough.

PertussisMainstream medical treatment of whooping cough is using antibiotics and “palliative” care.

First up…., it doesn’t work.  They know that…, I know that…, but they won’t tell you that, for the simple reason that… they have NOTHING else to offer you.

When you walk into your doctor’s office, the first thing they do- assuming they are even able to diagnose whooping cough correctly in the first place, is to rake you over the coals, if you’ve not vaccinated.

You will be told that, “Your child will be MORE infectious to other people and the symptoms far more serious”. Both of which are untrue, but who’s going to doubt the word of the doctor, other than those of us, who have been there done that, and proven them wrong?.

The second thing some parents experience, is being told that… “if they don’t use antibiotics their children will be much sicker”. Which is also a load of bollocks.  The reality is the opposite.  If you use antibiotics, you can just about guarantee your child WILL BE sicker.

Put simply, in terms of the infection process itself, antibiotics do not change the outcome of infection in any way, or make it better…. something confirmed by the 2007 Cochrane Review. However, it has been known since Trollfors 78, that antibiotics are useless. Tozzi 03 was one of many researchers who confirm that actually, antibiotics make whooping cough WORSE. Discussion of that is here.  While the medical profession talks about antibiotics making the infection less severe if you catch it very early, the real world reality is that because most of the carriers of whooping cough don’t know they have it, most often parents don’t know their children have it until about six week month AFTER they first contacted it:

Whooping cough is spread by carriers. The real world reality, is that most of the carriers of whooping cough don’t know they have it; most are asymptomatic (no symptoms) and most often parents don’t know their children have it until about four to six weeks AFTER they first contacted it:

Looking at the time frames, incubation is listed as 5 – 15 days . This is followed by an insignificant cold which lasts about a week, then goes away = 12 – 22 days.

After about a one week pause, = 19 – 31 days, the cough starts.

Most parents don’t get concerned until about two weeks into the cough, when it’s getting worse, and NOT going away.

So usually a parent doesn’t usually get the child to the doctor until around 33 – 45 days after initial contact.

If the mantra is that antibiotics only “work” to reduce severity within 3 weeks of contact, what parent is actually going to make it to the doctor in that time frame?

Because parents don’t usually know when or where a first contact was – or even the medically proven time frames above, they don’t know that diagnosis is usually made well after the three week period stated in the medical literature.

AFTER that time, the medical literature clearly shows that antibiotics made whooping cough worse, and prolong the duration.

Nevertheless, it’s very common for people who are prescribed antibiotics more than three weeks after contact, to praise the antibiotics for reducing it to just a serious disease. They proudly say, “Oh, but if I hadn’t taken antibiotics, I might have died.” A great advertorial, but the comment is a totally  non proveable, brainwashed assumption.

And as said before, we are ASSUMING that a doctor KNOWS how to diagnose whooping cough, which test to use, AND we are assuming that the tests are accurate, which they are not.  You can be in full bore whooping cough which eventually lasts for 100 days, yet all the tests can come back negative.

Doctors also say that antibiotics clear the bacteria from the bronchials and prevent it’s spread.   Yet, even were that true, antibiotics don’t shorten the time of the cough – the studies say antibiotics actually LENGTHEN the time of the cough by around 5 days.

Isn’t that odd?

Wouldn’t you think that if antibiotics “cleared” the bacteria they would shorten the cough?  I think there is something else going on, but have no proof for my theories so will stay silent on that.

That antibiotics don’t work, is probably not something your average GP will either know, or …. tell you, if they do know.

Until this year, erythromycin was considered the antibiotic of choice for whooping cough, even though…. it doesn’t work.

For parents, the biggest problem with Erythromycin, wasn’t that it didn’t work.  Erythromycin trashes the gut something awful, with huge numbers of babies and children having serious gut ache, diarrhoea – and their commensal gut flora trashed to oblivion. Not that anyone in the 1990s needed someone like Langley 04 to tell them that.  Parental “compliance” with erythromycin has always been very low. Parents could plainly see their kids were much worse off than just having whooping cough, even if doctors tried to pretend that the deterioration was just the whooping cough. Often, because these side effects were very quickly obvious, parents ditched the antibiotics so quickly, they never twigged that it wouldn’t have made any difference had they continued them. The fact that the medical literature says that antibiotics make whooping cough worse, is really embarrassing to the medical  profession, so they rely on the fact that most parents or doctors don’t KNOW that and assume that disease severity is determined by the individual.  The blame the patient game, is part of the medical profession’s tactics of “unproveable diversion”.   Yet, when parents toss the antibiotics within 48 hours, they notice the difference.  But of course, we are only the walking “anecdotes”.

As a result of the high rate of side effects with Erythromycin, and resultant “poor compliance”, a newer, much more expensive antibiotic, Azithromycin has been given the green light…, which doesn’t work either.  The NZ Governemtn is now promoting it “free”, to all and sundry with whooping cough . Note the word “free”.  You just pay out the back pocket of your taxes instead of the front pocket of your wallet.  No-one is being told that there is a new alert out about azithromycin regarding heart problems. Supposedly, that only relates to people with diabetes or heart problems, but nowhere can I find an explanation as to what it is that Azithromycin “does” in those people, which supposedly it doesn’t also do in everyone else.  And this doctor’s comment is quite accurate:

“Azithromycin is as effective and is able to be given once a day, as well as in a shorter course for both treatment and prevention if a little baby is exposed to whooping cough,” …

As “effective” a treatment as erythromycin, …which in terms of “fixing” the whooping cough is as useful as tits on a bull. So yes. Azithromycin fixes whooping cough, as badly as erythromycin ever did.

This of course, ignores the fact that Azithromycin has been known since 2007, not only to drive long term bacterial resistance, BUT to spread that to the rest of the family as well. Charming. And why would you want to do that, when the medical literature makes it perfectly clear that in terms of “fixing” whooping cough, antibiotics don’t work in the first place, and makes things worse?

Perhaps it all comes back to creating an illusion that the medical system is “doing something” — useful. After all, a medical profession that “does nothing useful” – isn’t much cop is it? Parents might start asking sticky questions, like, “What? In this day and age, you haven’t a clue how to deal usefully, with something like whooping cough?” Sobering thought, eh?!!!

Of course, if you start talking about using “alternative medicine”, then the medical system brings out all it’s cauldrons of brimstone and hellfire. “That stuff doesn’t work. It’s dangerous. It’s a placebo. It’s not tested. It’s not trialled.” The whining is legion.

Never mind that doctors prescribe antibiotics which they know are useless, and worse, which create far worse problems than the KNOWN lack of benefit for the poor kid coughing their guts up. Like:

Increasing the chances of asthma.

Permanently altering Gut Flora.

Causing serious metabolic disarray

These are just a FEW of the known problems which have led some doctors to start PLEADING with other doctors to stop using antibiotics.

How did we get to the point, or irony…. where NOW doctors blame parents for the unnecessary use of antibiotics?

For DECADES from about 1955, doctors started product branding antibiotics as the treatment of choice for all “normal” parents who cared about their children.  It’s called “social norming” .  Now the medical profession is back-peddling and blaming parents whereas in reality it was the medical profession who promoted, nurtured and cultivated parental acceptance of antibiotics, and created a generation who even to this day, assume antibiotics are as harmless as water. Social norming.  Everyone uses them.  You do it because everyone else does and because you “love” your children.  I know.  I’m the child of a scientist who was conned into believing just that, and thought that a prescription of antibiotics for his daughter was proof that he “cared”.

Social Norming, is also the current strategy all vaccine pushers use, to try to coerce high vaccine-compliance, and conformity levels.  Sorry. “Vaccine acceptance”, is their term. Like “Antibiotic acceptance”….  Vaccination social norming, though, creates problems for them when they find that it’s the better educated who are less likely to vaccinate.

NON-conventional treatment of whooping cough: Fortunately, there are two sorts of non-“medical” modalities which considerably reduce the coughing intensity and number of coughing spells per day.  Parents are usually delighted with the results.  If you expect your doctor to know them, you may be disappointed.  However, there are a few doctors who do, so if you happen to have your butt on the right chair, in the right surgery at the right time, and make the right unthreatening and encouraging noises, both methods may be whispered to you on the sly, but not written into your medical records.

The first is those dreaded two words which the conformed in the medical profession hates to hear. Wait for it. Vitamin C. Some doctors have actually incorporated this into their practices in New Zealand, and one overseas doctor, has written a very good paper on whooping cough treatment with vitamin C. She at least is grateful that there is a tool available to her which actually WORKS.

The second idea sounds even more far fetched. It involves going for a scenic flight in an unpressurised aircraft to 10,000 feet and staying up there, for at least half an hour. This treatment, which Auckland’s paediatrician, Dr Cameron Grant, famously called “a myth” is standard treatment for whooping cough in the British Military – and has been for over 60 years, as described in these articles from the BMJ. Why?

Because it works. How does it work? No-one knows. Those who know it works, don’t care how it works. A lot of older people in this country know that it works, and quite a few doctors have seen the evidence of it. Again, you have to have your butt in the right place, right seat, right surgery, right doctor to be told to go flying. They keep their heads below the parapet, obviously. Ask around. You’d be surprised how many ordinary people know, even if your regular Azithromycin-doctor falls off his chair laughing at your patently fruitloop ideas, and suggests a psychiatric evaluation instead.

What have you got to lose by flying?

Some money. Oh, yeah, and a cough.

What have you got to gain? Probably a decent educational aerial viewing of your local disrtict which you’ve never seen before. Not to mention the thanks of your aerodrome club pilot, who, after finding out it works, knows what to do with his vaccinated family when they come down with whooping cough.

There are of course, other modalities such as homeopathy, but in my experience, they are “hit and miss” and mostly “miss”.  The most commonly recommended remedy is Drosera, yet in reality the possible list is very long, and not easy to navigate.  I’ve had little success with homeopathy, but with vitamin C, we’ve always managed to get it under control within 24 hours.

BUT… you have to know how to do it.  And to know how to do it, you have to read the instructions CORRECTLY, do the maths CORRECTLY and apply the method CORRECTLY.  Fortunately, it’s certainly not rocket science. It requires the correct formulation of vitamin C, not the sugary pills or the ones with calcium  It just requires reading the directions ACCURATELY, a dose of commonsense, a bit of nouse, and a calm careful approach.

And remember.  Silence is golden.  Know when NOT to tell a doctor what you are doing

Editors note: Your lack of success with homoeopathy is simply the fact that you are not trained to deal with whooping cough using the homoeopathic method of application. Sadly, homoeopathy today has shot itself in the proverbial foot by not training practitioners properly.

http://www.beyondconformity.co.nz/_blog/Hilary%27s_Desk/post/Whooping_cough_treatment/

 

Bookmark and Share


 

There is no one left to trust with your health.

Pediatricians: Keep Thimerosal in Vaccines

article-2191181-149F3528000005DC-929_233x300By Todd Neale, Senior Staff Writer, MedPage Today

Published: December 17, 2012
Reviewed by Robert Jasmer, MD; Associate Clinical Professor of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco

 

The American Academy of Pediatrics has endorsed the World Health Organization’s stance that thimerosal — a mercury-based preservative — should be left in vaccines and should not be subject to a ban contained in a draft treaty from the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP).

In a brief statement published online inPediatrics, the academy supported the recommendations drafted by the WHO’s Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on immunization at an April meeting. An AAP spokesperson said that the endorsement was adopted unanimously by the academy’s infectious diseases committee.

The Pediatrics Infectious Diseases Society and the International Pediatric Association have also thrown their support behind the guidance.

In 2009, UNEP requested that an Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee develop a binding treaty to reduce the hazards of environmental mercury. Included in the draft treaty, which will be debated and possibly finalized next month, is a provision banning the use of thimerosal in vaccines.

The WHO has called for the removal of that provision, with SAGE concluding that although it supports efforts to reduce environmental mercury, “it is essential that access to thimerosal-containing vaccines is not restricted under this global initiative.”

An Evolving Position on Thimerosal

Thimerosal has been used to prevent the growth of bacteria and fungi in multidose vials of vaccines since the 1930s. In recent decades, concerns have been raised about the potential neurotoxic effects of the preservative and a possible association with autism because it contains mercury in the form of organic ethyl mercury.

The FDA tackled the issue in the late 1990s, and its review showed that the cumulative amount of mercury from vaccines included in the routine immunization schedule for infants could exceed the safety threshold set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency based on studies of inorganic methyl mercury. The amount did not, however, rise above the thresholds established by federal guidelines from the Agency for Toxic Substance Disease Registry and the FDA.

Based on those findings, and in addition to growing public pressure driven by congressional hearings and increasing media attention on potential adverse neurodevelopmental effects of thimerosal, the AAP and the U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) in 1999 called for the removal of mercury from all vaccines.

“Once the FDA calculations revealed that even one federal guideline was exceeded, the AAP and USPHS were obligated to full public disclosure,” explained Louis Cooper, MD, of Columbia University in New York City, and Samuel Katz, MD, of Duke University in Durham, N.C., in a commentary accompanying the academy’s current endorsement.

“With that disclosure, it was important to demonstrate a response that could prevent exceeding the guideline levels and also to continue to protect infants by still ensuring full immunization,” wrote Cooper, a member of the AAP board of directors in 1999, and Katz, a former chair of the academy’s infectious diseases committee. “The joint statement met those obligations while demonstrating an abundance of caution: putting safety first.”

By 2001, thimerosal had been removed from most vaccines in the U.S. and other high-income countries; it can still be found in some seasonal influenza vaccines and other adult vaccines. In areas of the world with fewer resources, however, thimerosal is still widely used as a vaccine preservative.

At the time of the joint statement by the AAP and USPHS, there were no studies that had evaluated the potential harm of ethyl mercury — as opposed to its inorganic counterpart, methyl mercury — obtained through vaccines.

Since then, however, studies looking for harms from thimerosal-containing vaccines have failed to find such associations, whereas research has consistently demonstrated serious neurotoxic effects from methyl mercury.

The consistent lack of evidence of any harm from thimerosal in vaccines formed the basis of the AAP’s reversal of its 1999 stance, and Cooper and Katz suggested that the academy would not have issued the original statement with than knowledge in-hand.

Potential Fallout from a Thimerosal Ban

In another commentary, Walter Orenstein, MD, of Emory University in Atlanta, and colleagues explained the benefits of keeping thimerosal as an option for vaccines.

“Thimerosal allows the use of multiuse vials, which reduce vaccine cost and the demand on already constrained cold-chain systems,” they wrote.

They said banning use of the preservative could harm the world’s vaccine supply by increasing manufacturing costs, reducing manufacturing capacity because of the need to switch to single-dose vials, increase waste from single-dose packaging, and strain transportation and storage space.

“The resulting cold-chain requirements would be untenable in many areas of the world because of programmatic challenges and increased workload,” Orenstein and colleagues wrote.

“The continued benefits of thimerosal use in vaccine manufacturing clearly outweigh any perceived risks,” they added.

In its recommendations, the WHO’s SAGE noted that there are no viable alternatives to thimerosal.

“Replacement of thimerosal with an alternative preservative may affect the quality, safety, and efficacy of vaccines; re-registration would be required by the National Regulatory Authority in each jurisdiction where a reformulated product was intended to be used; currently available alternative preservatives interacted in unpredictable ways with existing vaccines, and there are no consensus alternative preservatives for the near- or mid-term,” according to the guidance.

Ultimately, it stated, a thimerosal ban could threaten access to certain vaccines — such as tetanus toxoid, diphtheria-tetanus-whole cell pertussis, and hepatitis B vaccines — around the world, particularly in developing countries.

“There would be a high risk of serious disruption to routine immunization programs and mass immunization campaigns if thimerosal-preserved multidose vials were not available for inactivated vaccines, with a predictable and sizable increase in mortality, for exceedingly limited environmental benefit,” the statement read.

In a third commentary, Katherine King, PhD, of St. Michael’s Hospital in Toronto, and colleagues noted that “some nongovernmental organizations oppose [removing the ban on thimerosal from vaccines from the draft treaty], arguing that it would be unjust to allow thimerosal to be used in low- and middle-income countries when its use has been all but phased out of wealthier nations.”

“This critique is misplaced,” they wrote, adding that there is no threat of injustice because of the lack of evidence of health risks.

“Rather,” they wrote, “the real threat of injustice comes from considering the removal of this currently necessary and irreplaceable compound from the global vaccine supply, and the avoidable increases in morbidity and mortality that would inevitably result from disruptions to vaccination programs targeting already marginalized populations in low- and middle-income countries.”

All authors of the AAP’s statement of endorsement have filed conflict of interest statements. Any conflicts have been resolved through a process approved by the academy’s board of directors. The AAP said it has neither solicited nor accepted any commercial involvement in the development of the content of the statement.

Cooper and Katz reported that they had no conflicts of interest.

King and colleagues reported that they had no conflicts of interest.

Orenstein and colleagues reported that they had no conflicts of interest.

 

Primary source: Pediatrics

Source reference:
Cooper L, Katz S. “Ban on thimerosal in draft treaty on mercury: why the AAP’s position in 2012 is so important”Pediatrics 2013;131:152-153.

Additional source: Pediatrics
Source reference:
AAP. “Statement of endorsement: recommendation of WHO Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on immunization” Pediatrics 2012.

Additional source: Pediatrics
Source reference:
King K, et al. “Global justice and the proposed ban on thimerosal-containing vaccines” Pediatrics 2013;131:154-156.

The Vaccine Hoax is Over

29Sep2012

By Andrew Baker
Freedom of Information Act in the UK filed by a doctor there has revealed 30 years of secret official documents showing that government experts have

1. Known the vaccines don’t work
2. Known they cause the diseases they are supposed to prevent
3. Known they are a hazard to children
4. Colluded to lie to the public
5. Worked to prevent safety studies

Those are the same vaccines that are mandated to children in the US.

Educated parents can either get their children out of harm’s way or continue living inside one of the largest most evil lies in history, that vaccines – full of heavy metals, viral diseases, mycoplasma, fecal material, DNA fragments from other species, formaldehyde, polysorbate 80 (a sterilizing agent) – are a miracle of modern medicine.

Freedom of Information Act filed in the US with the CDC by a doctor with an autistic son, seeking information on what the CDC knows about the dangers of vaccines, had by law to be responded to in 20 days. Nearly 7 years later, the doctor went to court and the CDC argued it does not have to turn over documents. A judge ordered the CDC to turn over the documents on September 30th, 2011.

On October 26, 2011, a Denver Post editorial expressed shock that the Obama administration, after promising to be especially transparent, was proposing changes to the Freedom of Information Act that would allow it to go beyond declaring some documents secret and to actually allow government agencies (such as the CDC) to declare some document “non-existent.”

Simultaneous to this on-going massive CDC cover up involving its primary “health” not recommendation but MANDATE for American children, the CDC is in deep trouble over its decades of covering up the damaging effects of fluoride and affecting the lives of all Americans, especially children and the immune compromised. Lawsuits are being prepared.  Children are ingesting 3-4 times more fluoride by body weight as adults and “[t]he sheer number of potentially harmed citizens — persons with dental fluorosis, kidney patients tipped into needing dialysis, diabetics, thyroid patients, etc — numbers in the millions.”

The CDC is obviously acting against the health of the American people. But the threat to the lives of the American people posed by the CDC’s behavior does not stop there. It participated in designed pandemic laws that are on the books in every state in the US, which arrange for the government to use military to force unknown, untested vaccines, drugs, chemicals, and “medical” treatments on the entire country if it declares a pandemic emergency.

The CDC’s credibility in declaring such a pandemic emergency is non-existent, again based on Freedom of Information Act. For in 2009, after the CDC had declared the H1N1 “pandemic,” the CDC refused to respond to Freedom of Information Act filed by CBS News and the CDC also attempted to block their investigation.  What the CDC was hiding was its part in one of the largest medical scandals in history, putting out wildly exaggerated data on what it claimed were H1N1 cases, and by doing so, created the false impression of a “pandemic” in the US.

The CDC was also covering up e financial scandal to rival the bailout since the vaccines for the false pandemic cost the US billions. And worse, the CDC put pregnant women first in line for an untested vaccine with a sterilizing agent, polysorbate 80, in it. Thanks to the CDC,  “the number of vaccine-related “fetal demise” reports increased by 2,440 percent in 2009 compared to previous years, which is even more shocking than the miscarriage statistic [700% increase].

The exposure of the vaccine hoax is running neck and neck with the much older hoax of a deadly 1918-19 flu. It was aspirin  that killed people in 1918-19, not a pandemic flu. It was the greatest industrial catastrophe in human history with 20-50 million people dying but it was blamed on a flu. The beginning of the drug industry began with that success (and Monsanto was part of it). The flu myth was used by George Bush to threaten the world with “another pandemic flu that could kill millions” – a terror tactic to get pandemic laws on the books in every state and worldwide. Then the CDC used hoax of the pandemic hoax to create terror over H1N1 and to push deadly vaccines on the public, killing thousands of unborn children and others.  (CDC will not release the data and continues to push the same vaccine.)

The hoax of the vaccine schedule is over, exposed by FOIAs in the UK. 

The hoax of the CDC’s interest in children’s lives has been exposed by its refusal to respond to a doctor’s FOIAs around its knowledge of vaccine dangers.

The 1918-19 pandemic hoax has been exposed by Dr. Karen Starko’s work on aspirin’s role in killing people.

And despite refusing to respond to FOIAS, the CDC’s scandalous hoax of a 2009 flu pandemic and its part in creating it, was exposed by CBS NEWS. 

And the Obama administration, in attempting to salvage the last vestige of secrecy around what is really happening with vaccines, by declaring agency documents non-existent, has made its claim of transparency, non-existent.

But pandemic laws arranging for unknown vaccines to be forced on the entire country are still in place with HHS creating a vaccine mixture that should never be used on anyone and all liability for vaccines having been removed. Meanwhile, a Canadian study has just proven that the flu vaccine containing the H1N1 vaccine which kills babies in utero, actually increases the risk of serious pandemic flu.

Americans who have been duped into submitting their children to the CDC’s deadly vaccines, have a means to respond now. People from every walk of life and every organization, must

1. take the information from the UK FOIAs exposing 30 years of vaccine lies, the refusal of the CDC to provide any information on what it knows about those lies, and the Obama Administration’s efforts to hide the CDC’s awareness of those lies, and go to their state legislatures, demand the immediate nullification of the CDC vaccine schedule and the pandemic laws.

2. inform every vet. active duty military person, law enforcement people, DHS agents and medical personnel they know, of the vaccine hoax, for their families are deeply threatened, too, but they may not be aware of it or that they have been folded into agency structures by the pharmaceutical industry (indistinguishable from the bankers and oil companies) that would make them agents of death for their country with the declaration of a “pandemic” emergency or “bio-terrorist” attack. It is completely clear now that the terrorism/bioterrorism structures are scams so that any actions taken to “protect” this country using those laws would in fact be what threatens the existence of Americans.

It was aspirin that killed millions in 1918-19.  Now it is mandated and unknown, untested vaccines with banned adjuvants in them that threaten the country with millions of deaths.  At the same time, the CDC is holding 500,000 mega-coffins, built to be incinerated, on its property outside Atlanta.  Not to put to fine a point on this, but it’s clear now that the CDC should not be involved in any way with public health.

Thanks to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), we know that vaccines are not a miracle of modern medicine.  Any medical or government authority which insists vaccines prevent diseases is either ignorant of government documents (and endless studies) revealing the exact opposite or of the CDC’s attempts to hide the truth about vaccines from the public, or means harm to the public.

Thanks to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), we know the vaccine schedule is a hoax.

The health danger to American children and adults are vaccines.

Marty Makary. A cancer surgeon and researcher at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine and the School of Public Health.

 

“…1 in 4 hospital patients are harmed by a mistake.”

“A cardiologist in Wisconsin was fired for pointing out that EKGs were misread more than 25% of the time.”

“We [doctors] are also evaluated by the number of ‘value units’ at the end of each fiscal quarter. Our management will sit down with us and say your work units are down or up and in order for you to receive a large bonus you need to increase the number of operations you do…”

“There is New England Journal of Medicine-level data that suggests that almost half of [health] care is not compliant with evidence.” [In other words, almost 50% of all health care in America isn’t even based on published mainstream studies…and, I should add, there is conclusive evidence that half of these studies are untrustworthy in the first place. Therefore, to say that conventional doctors are winging it is a vast understatement. JR]

“…up to 30% of health care in unnecessary…”

“I saw cases where a patient was not told about a minimally invasive way of doing a particular surgery because of physician preference or training, and the doctor would just hope the that he [the patient] wouldn’t find out.”

“Medical mistakes are fifth-or-sixth-most common cause of death in the United States, depending on the measure.”

“…The desire and reflex of docs to offer something to patients, even when there’s not much more else they can offer. There’s a strong financial incentive. Doctor groups pay for new equipment that they purchase on borrowed money.” [In other words, ‘we have this expensive equipment, we have to use it to pay for it.’

Symptoms and using the Repertory.

Firstly, this brief overview is not for people of the Sankaran or Scholten school of thought. This website is solely for the real practitioners of homoeopathic medicine as defined by Samuel Hahnemann and enlarged upon over his lifetime in his writings. The repertorial work here is based on the 125 remedies contained within the 1846 edition of the Therapeutic Pocket Book, authored by Boenninghausen and approved by Hahnemann. The methodology can be adapted to use with any Repertory, however the accuracy of the Repertory you choose must be checked against the Materia Medica, For the honest and accurately observing practitioner, this will exclude most, if not ALL modern Repertories due to the inherent, uncorrected and false entries placed within its pages. More is not always better where health is concerned.

It is not within the scope of this article to discuss the merits or pitfalls of only having 125 medicines to work with. Suffice it to say that for those that use the Therapeutic Pocket Book, it is a very rare occasion that a case necessitates the use of a medicine outside of its contained medicines for evaluation.

It is also not in the remit of these brief notes to explain the Organon directives for case taking. For those wishing to discuss the whole methodology, we offer training courses over one or two days in the UK for groups of 10 or more.

Case example:

16 year old female, not yet started regular menses. Had intermittent flow of an hours duration perhaps 3 times in 2 years, presented in the clinic with a cough. No obvious causation. Spontaneous cough, would come and go. Patient was under stress with high volume schoolwork.

Patient came home from school yesterday after a concert. Mother observed child was glassy eyed, irritable, and mild redness of throat. Gave a dose of Belladonna. No change. I was consulted later that evening via SKYPE for advice.

SX presented. Cough.  Bitter taste. A white coated tongue. Irritable mood. Cough increased when lying down. The patient reported in passing that she had a brown vaginal discharge for the last 2 weeks.

These are Symptoms. What is the importance of each?

Cough. as a symptom, complete rubric,  in the T.P.B. has 121 medicines listed.

Bitter taste has 123 medicines listed.

Aggravated from lying down has 124 medicines listed.

Irritability has 62 medicines listed.

Tongue coated has 85 medicines listed.

If you look at each of the rubrics individually, and then collectively, it does not help. At least not on the information collected from observation, and from the patient. Its pretty useless as far as a prescribing case goes. Its a Cough. The modalities do not differentiate enough to choose a medicine. There are 50 remedies in the Materia Medica that cover the case.

Now Hahnemann in the Organon:

§ 6 Fifth Edition
“The unprejudiced observer – well aware of the futility of transcendental speculations which can receive no confirmation from experience – be his powers of penetration ever so great, takes note of nothing in every individual disease, except the changes in the health of the body and of the mind (morbid phenomena, accidents, symptoms) which can be perceived externally by means of the senses; that is to say, he notices only the deviations from the former healthy state of the now diseased individual, which are felt by the patient himself, remarked by those around him and observed by the physician. All these perceptible signs represent the disease in its whole extent, that is, together they form the true and only conceivable portrait of the disease.”

He writes clearly that the true picture of the disease is the observation of the signs and symptoms that have CHANGED. He did not say, that the signs and symptoms of the know pathology of a process, he said that the perceptible signs represent the disease in its whole extent, that is, together they form the true and only conceivable portrait of the disease.

So this means, that a composite picture of a DISEASE STATE, might include symptoms that are present, and appear to have no relationship with a known disorder.

As an observer of disorder, it is important to look at situations and symptoms EXACTLY as they are. I saw that the symptom, of recent origin, that prevailed, was a discharge, brown in colour from the vagina. Can I ignore it? Not really. This is a young girl who has not yet established her natural cycle, and thus her hormonal regulation is not fully functioning. It is a symptom, an expression of her body that is observable. It is fairly recent. On top of that, she now has developed a cough.

It is not for me to speculate regarding hormonal interaction, or indeed IF the discharge is related to the cough. It is for me to note that a clear alteration to her normal state is present. I HAVE to take it into account.

In adding this concomitant Symptom to the disease picture, The Therapeutic pocket book pointed me to one remedy that covered all the symptoms of the case.

This combination of expressed symptoms, albeit, apparently, not related to each other in allopathic terms, would be the totality of the disease.

One dose of 0/1 was administered to the coughing patient, and immediately, with 30 seconds, the coughing ceased. The patient was able to lie down and go to sleep. In the morning the patient awoke, had a mild cough, and was given another dose of the Nitric Acid upon which all coughing ceased. The patient was instructed to repeat the dose in the evening. All irritability is gone and the patient feels a lot more rested and like her old self.

Having used the SYNOPSIS and the T.P.B exclusively for a few years, and having a knowledge how the system works, in my analysis of this case, I only looked at the SX of leucorrhea brown. It has 2 medicines. I knew that Ammonium Muriaticum did not have a coated tongue in its symptom production. As stated, the other symptoms are general symptoms of a cough. Repertorization took no more than 70 seconds including a brief check in the Materia Medica.

For those of us that practice medicine the Hahnemannian way, these cases do not involve hours of questioning. The entire episode took no more than 10 minutes. Chronic cases in the main take only 40 -60 minutes if the directions of Hahnemann are followed accurately.

Unfortunately, the profession of Homoeopathy, in the Western world no longer exists in the schools and colleges, due to the establishment of guru like worship of self professed leaders. Time will prove them incorrect. Sadly for those seeking treatment, the chances of getting proper professional homoeopathic help are receding by the day.

G. W.