March 13, 2012
By Paul Joseph Watson
“Don’t by into the Kony 2012 hype. It’s propaganda at its very best.” –KTRN
While the political left and an army of Hollywood trendies are clamoring for a U.S. Military invasion of Uganda to capture Joseph Kony, a man who has not even been in the country for six years, Ugandan authorities, backed by the World Bank and British carbon trading companies, are slaughtering Ugandan villagers and stealing their land in a brutal new form of neo-colonialism that has gone largely unnoticed.
Forget Kony, Ugandans Are Being Slaughtered By Their Own Western Backed Government Bildschirmfoto 2012 03 07 um 12.13
Following the release of Kony 2012, a film made by a shadowy charity with links to USAID, the Tweetosphere exploded with a deluge of leftist politicos and clueless celebrities jumping on the bandwagon to call for Barack Obama to launch yet another act of “humanitarian” bloodletting to go after Kony, leader the of Lord’s Resistance Army (LRC).
In their haste to appear trendy and in vogue with a viral trend that was all over the social networks like a bad rash within the space of 24 hours, those advocating an increased military intervention on top of the 100 US troops already sent into Uganda last year, most notably habitual “humanitarian” warmonger Angelina Jolie, didn’t concern themselves with the facts.
The propaganda campaign that has put Joseph Kony on a par with Osama Bin Laden and Hitler is a crude hoax to legitimize the US military-industrial complex’s agenda to re-colonize Africa under Africom.
“Not surprisingly, the [film] is seriously misleading, falsely implying there’s war raging in Northern Uganda when there’s not. In fact, Kony has not been in the country for six years; his group is a much-depleted rump, numbering a few hundred people at most,” writes ABC Australia’s Jeff Sparrow.
Ugandan journalist Angelo Izama calls Kony 2012 a “misrepresentation,” noting that the film’s “portrayal of [Kony's] alleged crimes in Northern Uganda are from a bygone era,” and that the problems facing the country in 2012 are AIDS, Hepatitis, prostitution and unemployment, none of which would be alleviated by a U.S. military invasion on the pretext of hunting a man who is not even in the country.
February 21, 2012
(CBS/AP) Hepatitis C deaths are on the rise, according to a new report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The report found baby boomers are especially at risk because they account for two-thirds of all hepatitis C cases.
The worrisome news has prompted health officials to wonder whether anyone born between 1945 and 1965 should get a blood test for hepatitis C, because many of these boomers may have had the disease for decades without even realizing it.
“One of every 33 baby boomers are living with hepatitis C infection,” says Dr. John Ward, the CDC’s hepatitis chief. “Most people will be surprised, because it’s a silent epidemic.”
Some baby boomers may not think they’re at risk because sharing a needle while injecting illegal drugs is the biggest risk factor for becoming infected with this blood-borne virus. But before 1992, when widespread testing of the blood supply began, hepatitis C commonly was spread through blood transfusions. Plus, a one-time experiment with drugs way back when could have been enough.
“Asking someone about a risk that happened 20 to 30 years ago is a lot to ask,” says Ward. That’s why officials are seeking a new strategy.
About 3.2 million Americans are estimated to have chronic hepatitis C, but at least half of them may not know it. The virus, which affects 170 million people worldwide, can gradually scar the liver and lead to cirrhosis, liver failure, or liver cancer. It is a leading cause of liver transplants.
For the CDC’s study, published in the Feb. 21 issue of the Annals of Internal Medicine, researchers analyzed a decade of death records and found an increase in death rates from hepatitis C. In fact, in 2007 there were 15,000 deaths related to hepatitis C, higher than previous estimates – and surpassing the nearly 13,000 deaths caused by the better-known AIDS virus. Perhaps more surprising, three-fourths of the hepatitis deaths occurred in the middle-aged, people 45 to 64-years old.
May 23rd, 2011
By: Ethan A. Huff
Coffee addiction may not be the detriment to health many people think it is, according to a new study published in the journal Breast Cancer Research. Postmenopausal women over 50 who drink five or more cups of coffee every day may be as much as 57 percent less likely to develop estrogen-receptor (ER) negative tumors, say researchers from the Karolinska Institute (KI) in Sweden.
Dr. Jingmei Li and her colleagues from KI evaluated 6,000 women, some of whom drank no coffee, and others who drank five cups or more. After adjusting for outside factors like age at menopause, weight, family history of breast cancer, and others that affect results, the research team observed that women who drank the most coffee were least likely to develop some of the most serious forms of breast cancer.
On the other hand, coffee consumption played no role in reducing the risk of ER-positive cancers, indicating that something unique to the ER-negative varieties is sensitive to coffee. ER-negative breast cancers are typically the most difficult to treat with conventional medicine, as many breast cancer drugs have no effect on them.
“A high daily intake of coffee was found to be associated with a significant decrease in ER-negative breast cancer among postmenopausal women,” wrote the team in their report. “We believe that this may have something to do with the way the coffee was prepared, or the type of bean preferred.”
Previous research has shown that drinking coffee may also help to reduce the risk of developing liver fibrosis, hepatitis, type-2 diabetes, prostate cancer, stroke, and Alzheimer’s disease.
However, drinking too much coffee can lead to dehydration, hypertension, and even mineral leeching from the bones. The high acidity of coffee can also upset proper digestive function, leading to various other health problems.
March 1st, 2011
By: Mike Stobbe
Shocking as it may seem, U.S. government doctors once thought it was fine to experiment on disabled people and prison inmates. Such experiments included giving hepatitis to mental patients in Connecticut, squirting a pandemic flu virus up the noses of prisoners in Maryland, and injecting cancer cells into chronically ill people at a New York hospital.
Much of this horrific history is 40 to 80 years old, but it is the backdrop for a meeting in Washington this week by a presidential bioethics commission. The meeting was triggered by the government’s apology last fall for federal doctors infecting prisoners and mental patients in Guatemala with syphilis 65 years ago.
U.S. officials also acknowledged there had been dozens of similar experiments in the United States – studies that often involved making healthy people sick.
An exhaustive review by The Associated Press of medical journal reports and decades-old press clippings found more than 40 such studies. At best, these were a search for lifesaving treatments; at worst, some amounted to curiosity-satisfying experiments that hurt people but provided no useful results.
Inevitably, they will be compared to the well-known Tuskegee syphilis study. In that episode, U.S. health officials tracked 600 black men in Alabama who already had syphilis but didn’t give them adequate treatment even after penicillin became available.
These studies were worse in at least one respect – they violated the concept of “first do no harm,” a fundamental medical principle that stretches back centuries.
“When you give somebody a disease – even by the standards of their time – you really cross the key ethical norm of the profession,” said Arthur Caplan, director of the University of Pennsylvania’s Center for Bioethics.
Some of these studies, mostly from the 1940s to the ’60s, apparently were never covered by news media. Others were reported at the time, but the focus was on the promise of enduring new cures, while glossing over how test subjects were treated.
Attitudes about medical research were different then. Infectious diseases killed many more people years ago, and doctors worked urgently to invent and test cures. Many prominent researchers felt it was legitimate to experiment on people who did not have full rights in society – people like prisoners, mental patients, poor blacks. It was an attitude in some ways similar to that of Nazi doctors experimenting on Jews.
“There was definitely a sense – that we don’t have today – that sacrifice for the nation was important,” said Laura Stark, a Wesleyan University assistant professor of science in society, who is writing a book about past federal medical experiments.
The AP review of past research found:
-A federally funded study begun in 1942 injected experimental flu vaccine in male patients at a state insane asylum in Ypsilanti, Mich., then exposed them to flu several months later. It was co-authored by Dr. Jonas Salk, who a decade later would become famous as inventor of the polio vaccine.
Some of the men weren’t able to describe their symptoms, raising serious questions about how well they understood what was being done to them. One newspaper account mentioned the test subjects were “senile and debilitated.” Then it quickly moved on to the promising results.
-In federally funded studies in the 1940s, noted researcher Dr. W. Paul Havens Jr. exposed men to hepatitis in a series of experiments, including one using patients from mental institutions in Middletown and Norwich, Conn. Havens, a World Health Organization expert on viral diseases, was one of the first scientists to differentiate types of hepatitis and their causes.
A search of various news archives found no mention of the mental patients study, which made eight healthy men ill but broke no new ground in understanding the disease.
-Researchers in the mid-1940s studied the transmission of a deadly stomach bug by having young men swallow unfiltered stool suspension. The study was conducted at the New York State Vocational Institution, a reformatory prison in West Coxsackie. The point was to see how well the disease spread that way as compared to spraying the germs and having test subjects breathe it. Swallowing it was a more effective way to spread the disease, the researchers concluded. The study doesn’t explain if the men were rewarded for this awful task.
January 19th, 2011
Alliance for Natural Health
The FDA has just notified one pharmacy that it will no longer be allowed to manufacture or distribute injectable vitamin C—despite its remarkable power to heal conditions that conventional medicine can’t touch. Please help reverse this outrageous decision!
Let’s get this straight. The government acknowledges the risk of a worldwide flu pandemic. It acknowledges that conventional drugs cannot cure big viruses-like the mononucleosis and hepatitis viruses, many influenza viruses, and many others. It acknowledges that many bacteria have become resistant to antibiotics and are killing increasing thousands. It acknowledges the risk of a worldwide drug-resistant TB pandemic.
Despite acknowledging all this, it now insists on wiping out one of the best potential treatments for these conditions and for certain cancers as well. And why is this being done? What possible rationale is offered? Because it’s dangerous? No. Because it can’t be patented and therefore won’t be taken through the standard FDA approval process. No matter that vitamin C is one of the least toxic components of our food supply and liquid forms of it have been used safely for decades.
By the way, here is what is not safe. Don’t substitute home-made vitamin C solution for pharmaceutical grade liquid. That is not safe for injection. If the FDA action leads someone to do that, the FDA should be held responsible for the results.
The government, instead of banning intravenous vitamin C, should instead be supporting research into it. Even though IV C is being used in burn units around the world, including in the US, and has been adopted by the military for this purpose, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) refuses to fund any studies using intravenous C in patients. There are privately funded studies currently underway, but of course these cannot continue if the FDA bans the substance.
With this pharmacy, the FDA also banned injectable magnesium chloride and injectable vitamin B-complex 100. These two substances are routinely added to intravenous C to make the “Myers Cocktail,” used especially for conditions such as chronic fatigue syndrome, and infectious diseases such as hepatitis, AIDS, mononucleosis, and flu. The FDA is not going after the Myers Cocktail directly, but is rather attacking each individual substance used to make the cocktail, and may conceivably be going after injectable vitamins and minerals in general, despite such injections being given under the care of a qualified physician.
Please contact the FDA right away, and tell them to stop this foolish war on intravenous vitamin C!
Each of us reading this should think, “Intravenous C could someday save my life.” Dr. Jonathan Collin, editor of the Townsend Letter, discusses the case of a man in New Zealand who nearly died from swine flu. After developing a severe fever and upper respiratory infection, his condition deteriorated and he became comatose. Eventually even a ventilator was insufficient to keep him breathing because his lungs were so compromised by pulmonary edema. After weeks of heroic intervention, doctors decided there was no chance of survival and nothing further should be done for him.
The family asked the hospital to administer intravenous vitamin C. After much disagreement, the hospital gave him 25 grams of vitamin C every 6 hours. There was so much improvement over the next two days that the hospital decided to reinstate his intensive care—but they discontinued the vitamin C, saying that he had improved only because they had rolled him onto his side or his stomach instead of keeping him on his back! Not surprisingly, his condition once again deteriorated.
June 30, 2010
(CNN) — A Missouri VA hospital is under fire because it may have exposed more than 1,800 veterans to life-threatening diseases such as hepatitis and HIV.
John Cochran VA Medical Center in St. Louis has recently mailed letters to 1,812 veterans telling them they could contract hepatitis B, hepatitis C and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) after visiting the medical center for dental work, said Rep. Russ Carnahan.
Carnahan said Tuesday he is calling for a investigation into the issue and has sent a letter to President Obama about it.
“This is absolutely unacceptable,” said Carnahan, a Democrat from Missouri. “No veteran who has served and risked their life for this great nation should have to worry about their personal safety when receiving much needed healthcare services from a Veterans Administration hospital.”
The issue stems from a failure to clean dental instruments properly, the hospital told CNN affiliate KSDK.
April 20, 2010
By: Ethan A. Huff
Accutane, an anti-acne drug manufactured by Roche, is in the spotlight once again for causing a New Jersey man to have to get his colon removed. Following a lawsuit filed against Roche, alleging that Accutane gave him a severe inflammatory bowel disorder, the man was awarded a $25 million verdict.
The man is not the first to have had his colon removed because of Accutane. Accutane, also known generically as isotretinoin, can cause a whole host of serious problems that are far worse than having acne. The drug label warns that women should not get pregnant while taking the drug because the baby may develop birth defects or die. Accutane may even kill its users.
A few of the other serious side effects caused by Accutane include miscarriages, psychosis and other serious mental problems, suicidal tendencies, acute pancreatitis, “unknown” cardiovascular consequences, hepatitis, night blindness and sight loss, and increased internal skull pressure, just to name a few.
There have been so many lawsuits against Roche for damage caused by Accutane that the company has ceased all marketing for the drug. Rather than make the responsible choice to pull the dangerous drug off the market, Roche instead decided to keep Accutane on the market without promoting it.
In typical fashion, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is nowhere to be found in response to Accutane’s numerous reprehensible side effects. The agency has decided to ignore the growing list of patients who become seriously injured or die from taking Accutane. Some patients have actually reported that their acne got worse when they started taking Accutane, leaving them with permanent scars.
People with severe cystic acne, the type for which Accutane is typically prescribed, are often told that they have no alternative to taking Accutane if they want to cure their acne. Truth be told, the active ingredient in Accutane is simply a synthetic form of vitamin A. Rather than take the synthetic form, acne sufferers would be better off researching natural, carotene forms of vitamin A that are safe and non-toxic.
Sweet potatoes, carrots, spinach, goji berries, kale, collard greens, cilantro, broccoli, and many other fruits and vegetables are rich in natural vitamin A. Red palm oil, the richest natural source of beta-carotene, a precursor of vitamin A, is an excellent food for combatting acne.
Since there are many natural approaches to fighting severe acne that are highly effective, there is no reason for anyone to put their health in jeopardy by taking Accutane.
March 23, 2010
By: Michael Sharidan
FOR Wang Mingliang, the birth of a son should have been the start of a season of joy in his village at the rural heart of northern China.
But his little boy, Xiao’er, lived just seven months before he suffered convulsions and a fever, then died. Wang said Xiao’er fell ill after vaccinations against tuberculosis and hepatitis. “My whole family is plunged in sorrow,” he said.
“Our son was vaccinated by the hospital and they sterilised my wife to conform to the birth control policy. Now my son is dead and my wife can have no more children.”
His son was among thousands of children given tainted vaccines in a scandal that reporters and medical staff allege has left four dead and 74 handicapped.
Wang is one of more than 70 parents who have tried to sue the health authorities in Shanxi province. The courts and health officials have rejected their claims, saying that an inquiry found no connection between vaccines and the children’s health problems.
In response to public outrage, however, the health ministry has ordered an inquiry after Wang Keqiang, one of China’s top investigative reporters, revealed a web of alleged corruption and incompetence that put many children at risk.
The vaccines were stored without refrigeration by a firm that had won a distribution monopoly, said his report in the China Economic Times.
Other cases listed by the paper included Yan Yan, a girl of two, in a vegetative state; Qiang Qian, a boy of eight who suffers convulsions; and Jun Jun, a boy with brain damage.
The scandal has put the press in open conflict with bureaucrats and has led censors to banish the original story from the internet.
The report was “basically not true”, said Li Shukai, the local deputy health director, in an interview with Xinhua, the state news agency.
Doctors and a whistleblower, who was a senior official at the provincial disease control centre, have backed the journalist. “Our report was based on a six-month inquiry and interviews with the families of 36 victims plus testimony, videos and documents,” the reporter said. “I knew before writing the article they’d try to hush it up.”
Chen Tao’an, the whistleblower, said he had watched millions of batches of vaccines dumped “like potatoes” in the open air, exposed to sunlight or kept in hot rooms by the Beijing Huawei Biomedical company. Vaccines should be kept at tightly controlled temperatures.
“I reported this to higher officials more than 30 times but every time my report sank into oblivion,” Chen said.
Officials were unable to stem a tide of criticism as more alleged instances of contaminated medicine came to light. These included 400,000 people in the eastern city of Hangzhou who were given fake hepatitis vaccine and an official report that 210,000 faulty batches of rabies vaccine had been found in 27 provinces.
March 18, 2010
By: E. Huff
There is a double standard in Western medicine when it comes to assessing the efficacy of vitamins compared to pharmaceutical drugs. While medical science recognizes that dose levels affect how well a drug works, the same principle is not considered valid for vitamins. As a result, 75 years of physician reports and clinical studies about the success of high-dose vitamin C therapy has been largely ignored.
When it comes to the effectiveness of simple vitamins and minerals at curing diseases, many ill-informed doctors still scoff at the idea, citing studies that allegedly verify that vitamins are ineffective. Most studies conducted on vitamins, however, either use really low doses or synthetic forms which negate any positive results.
High-dose vitamin C therapy, the kind that uses upwards of 1,000 times the U.S. Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) or Daily Reference Intake (DRI), has been shown in legitimate clinical studies to cure all sorts of illnesses.
Dr. Albert Szent-Gyorgyi first isolated ascorbic acid (vitamin C) back in the late 1800s and, almost immediately, medical professionals realized that high doses of the vitamin were effective in treating a host of diseases.
In 1935, Dr. Jungeblut, then professor of bacteriology at Columbia University, published vitamin C’s effectiveness at preventing and treating polio and inactivating the diphtheria toxin. He later found that the vitamin C ascorbates inactivated tetanus as well.
In the 1940s, Dr. Frederick Klenner, a specialist in chest diseases, successfully cured 41 cases of viral pneumonia using high doses of vitamin C. He published his extensive findings in the February 1948 issue of the Journal of Southern Medicine and Surgery. Dr. Klenner ended up publishing 28 articles in various scientific publications.
Other findings included vitamin C as a cure for kidney stones, cardiovascular disease, hepatitis, AIDS, and even cancer. By administering tens of thousands of milligrams of vitamin C a day, the ability of these diseases to run their course is disabled.
Though the body can only assimilate a certain amount of vitamin C at a time when taken orally, high-dose, time-released oral vitamin C supplementation is a great way of maintaining health and preventing disease. When it comes to combatting serious diseases, intravenous vitamin C therapy is the most effective method because the body is able to more effectively assimilate very high doses of the vitamin this way.
Though generally rejected by most mainstream oncologists, intravenous vitamin C treatments for cancer have proven to be highly effective at eradicating the disease.
February 22, 2010
By Jim Edwards
A New Jersey man won a $25 million verdict after he alleged that Roche (RHHBY.PK)’s acne drug Accutane gave him an inflamatory bowel disorder that required the removal of his colon.The verdict raises a question: If Accutane (generic name isotretinoin) has such dramatic side effects, why is it still on the market? The question is not trivial. Taking Accutane can kill you. Or, if you get pregnant, it can kill your baby. Literally. That graphic on the right is not me being sarcastic. It’s the actual graphic used on the top of the FDA’s official patient information sheet for this drug.
Here is an incomplete list of its side effects:
-miscarriages (patients must be on birth control when using it)
-birth defects (facial and nervous system deformities, mental retardation)
-increased internal skull pressure
-bone mineral density
-aggressive or violent behaviors
-“unknown” cardiovascular consequences
-excessive bone growth
-night blindness and sight loss
All this for a drug that cures acne. Even Roche gave up marketing this drug after the cost of lawsuits became greater than its profits. One is tempted to conclude that Accutane essentially functions as a poison that kills acne before it kills you, but only just.
Now, before my readers fire up their emails, I know this drug is not a cure for the minor zits accompanying adolescence. It’s a last resort for people who experience acne as an intractable, socially debilitating skin condition. These pictures of “Kelli,” who kept a photo blog of her Accutane experience, demonstrate that kind of medical misery that acne can bring in extreme cases. Her blog ends with her getting married — aw! — and looking lovely so only a real grinch would want this drug banned, right?
The problem is that an underclass of less-than-great generic companies is now churning out Accutane, much of it in the Third World where medical safety is less well regulated than it is in the U.S. Ranbaxy, (RANB.BO) the disastrous Indian generics maker that was named BNET’s Worst Drug Company of 2009, had two lots of generic Accutane recalled last year. And that was just in the U.S.
There are alternatives to Accutane. And acne is not a fatal disease. The FDA should look again at whether this drug’ benefits are worth the risks.