Who Is The Real Snake Oil Salesman?

[Guest guest]

beware, very long article.

 

http://www.cancer-coverup.com/news/cancer-coverup-news-04-2002.html

 

 

Monthly Newsletter | April 2002

Who Is The Real Snake Oil Salesman?

On September 11th, our nation was subjected to the most devastating attack since

Pearl Harbor. In the months that followed, we set aside our petty differences

and came together in common cause to defend our freedom. What many of us do not

realize, however, is that on September 10th, the day before Osama Bin Laden’s

thugs killed thousands in the World Trade Center bombing, another vicious

assault on our freedom occurred.

 

The perpetrator of this crime, however, was not some fanatical group of foreign

extremists. Nor was it some homegrown radical organization. It was the United

States Senate. Louisiana Senator John Breaux and his colleagues on the Senate

Select Committee on Aging held a hearing on September 10th that was in fact the

opening shot in a battle to deny Americans one of their most precious freedoms –

the freedom to choose the form of medical therapy they would employ to ensure

their own health.

 

The failure of the committee to provide even a semblance of balance in the

representatives it selected to testify would dismay any American. All but two of

the dozen witnesses either represented federal agencies with a vested interest

in expanding the scope of their influence and power, or were long-standing

critics of dietary supplements and alternative medicine. Indeed, the very title

of the hearing “Swindlers, Hucksters and Snake Oil Salesmen, the Hype and Hope

of Marketing Anti-Aging Products to Seniors” clearly demonstrates that Senator

Breaux and his colleagues had made up their minds well in advance of any

testimony that might have been presented. Similarly, the Government Accounting

Office report you commissioned was titled “Health Products for Seniors,

Anti-Aging Products Pose Potential for Physical and Economic Harm.” Most

Americans have the impression that the GAO, like the Congress, was supposed to

present balanced analyses of issues. The title of the GAO report hardly

meets this standard.

 

Even more unsettling was the selection of Glen Braswell and his associate as the

sole representatives of the supplement industry. Breaux must have been aware

that both of these individuals would exercise their rights under the Fifth

Amendment and refuse to testify. Clearly, they were not called in an effort to

seek information but rather as a theatrical prop to discredit all companies in

the industry.

 

Had Breaux so chosen, the hearing could have provided the American public with

important information about the alternatives available to them when conventional

medicine fails. Instead, he used the forum as nothing more than a thinly

disguised attempt to expand federal regulatory authority. It was little more

than a Kangaroo Court aimed at pillorying the dietary supplement industry. This

tactic can be effective, but few would have expected a body as august as the

United States Senate to engage in such a charade. Especially given the track

record of conventional medicine in regard to cancer.

 

It is now 30 years since President Nixon declared “war on cancer”. Despite

spending vast amounts of money on traditional medicine, current statistics paint

a chilling picture:

 

 

One person dies every minute from cancer.

 

 

Three people are diagnosed with cancer every minute.

 

 

It is anticipated that within a few years one person out of every two will be

diagnosed with cancer during their lifetime.

 

 

The fifth leading cause of death in America is from prescription drugs used as

directed.

 

 

Perhaps the committee’s energies could be redirected to address the real problem

facing our Senior citizens, the abject failure of traditional medicine to

successfully treat chronic diseases.

Who Is The Real Snake Oil Salesman?

(part 2)

The biased, disingenuous and misleading character of the testimony presented is

exemplified by the presentation of Maryland Attorney General J. Joseph Curran.

It is also of particular interest to the author as it concerns the case Mr.

Curran brought against Neal Deoul regarding the marketing of two dietary

supplements, a highly concentrated form of aloe vera and the mineral cesium.

 

In order to fully appreciate Mr. Curran’s duplicity, it is important to

understand certain essential facts.

 

1) Aloe vera has been employed in medicine since Homeric times. Indeed,

Alexander the Great directed his troops to carry aloe vera with them and today

it is a common ingredient in many balms and lotions. The healing and immune

system boosting properties of aloe vera are well established in science and

widely recognized by the medical community.

 

2) Cesium is a naturally occurring mineral with the number 55 on the

periodic table of elements. It is the most alkaline mineral so far discovered.

Also, the form of cesium discussed here should not be confused with its

radioactive isotope, a substance commonly used as a “marker” for various forms

of intravenous medical therapies.

 

3) Authority to regulate dietary supplements is vested in the Food and Drug

Administration. Authority to regulate advertising for products in interstate

commerce is the responsibility of the Federal Trade Commission. Neither of these

agencies found fault with the products or advertising of the firm, T-Up, that

was marketing the aloe vera and cesium products.

 

4) Neal Deoul never profited from the sale of either aloe vera or cesium.

Indeed, he suffered significant financial losses from his efforts to make these

products available to the public.

 

5) Neal’s case was not brought in a court of law where it could be heard by

a jury of his peers. Rather, it was brought before an administrative tribunal

where the conventional constitutional guarantees and rules of evidence do not

apply.

 

6) There were no consumer complaints in the State of Maryland at the time

Curran brought his action.

 

Yet, Curran’s testimony fails to reflect any of these fundamental facts.

Rather, it is a compendium of half-truths, misstatements and outright lies. In

his ongoing effort to discredit the successful use of alternatives within his

State, Curran clearly goes beyond the pale. A careful analysis of Curran’s

statement before the Committee makes clear the truth of this assertion.

 

In paragraph 1, of his prepared testimony Curran states:

 

“… Because many of the product benefits that were claimed by the seller,

including that their products were powerful immune boosters, were false and as a

result, consumers were severely harmed.”

 

The hearing record, however, does not support this assertion. Not one single

witness ever contested the fact that the Aloe (one product not products) was a

powerful immune booster – and, further, no consumers were ever shown to be

“severely harmed” by the oral Aloe.

 

In paragraph 2, Curran makes one of his most egregious misstatements:

 

" This case, Consumer Protection Division v. T-Up, Inc., involved the sale of two

products, a concentrated aloe product called " T-Up " and a mineral called cesium

chloride, which were offered and sold to consumers to both generally improve

immune function and to treat cancer, AIDS and other diseases. Although most of

the sales of these products were for oral consumption, the company also sold

products for intravenous administration at a cost of $12,000 to $20,000. The

company's claims that their products would help consumers were grossly

misleading, if not false, because they were unsubstantiated. Similarly, the

company's claims concerning the safety and quality of their products were

baseless. Many of the consumers who purchased these products were particularly

vulnerable because they were facing life threatening diseases such as cancer or

AIDS. They paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for these products hoping to be

cured, and instead received little or no benefit, and in some

cases were actually harmed. Moreover, some consumers chose these products over

other more proven treatments or therapies that might have otherwise helped

them. "

 

This passage constitutes a classic deception by the Attorney General. It was a

doctor in Virginia who charged $12,000 to $20,000 for the two to three week

course of treatment and who performed the intravenous administration. The

company T-Up, Inc. only provided the Aloe to the doctor at a price comparable to

the oral aloe – i.e. a bit more than $75 per bottle. Very few people ever paid

thousands of dollars for the products – and – bear in mind – all products came

with an unconditional money back guarantee – for any reason whatsoever! In

fact, in the Attorney General’s State of Maryland, only $16,000 worth of

products were sold and over $11,000 of that amount was refunded – no questions

asked. This whole “egregious fraud” as the Attorney General so dramatically

called it, was over a matter of just $5,000 – and not one single consumer

complaint!!

 

Paragraph 3

 

" This case needs to be viewed against the background of federal regulation of

dietary supplements. In 1994, Congress passed the Dietary Supplement Health and

Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA). Among the stated purposes of the Act was to

promote the right of access of consumers to safe dietary supplements. Since

passage of DSHEA, the dietary supplement industry has experienced enormous

growth. In 1994 the industry’s sales were estimated to be at least $4 billion

annually. More recent estimates place the industry’s annual sales between $10

and $12 billion.”

 

The real area of the Attorney General’s concerns – dietary supplements -- does

pose a viable threat. That threat, however, is not to consumers, but rather to

the profits of the pharmaceutical industry! It is important to remember that

the original role of the FDA was safety – let us ask the FDA to rule on the

safety of nutritional supplements. If they are found to be safe an individual

should have the right to choose to use anything they desire. Don’t forget that

aspirin – because of its toxicity – could probably not, today, pass the FDA’s

stringent Phase I, II, III trials!!

 

One last thought relative to the Attorney General’s comments on DHSEA. Much was

made of the need for more regulation to protect consumers from false and

misleading claims on the part of dietary supplement manufacturers. The

justification for this demand was that consumers might be harmed. If protecting

the consumer is the Committee’s concern, then it should perhaps look at how the

pharmaceutical industry is regulated.

 

Over the past three years, more than a thousand deaths have been reported in

connection with pharmaceutical products approved by the Food and Drug

Administration.

 

Nearly 400 people died in an NIH sponsored trial of the diabetes drug Rezulin –

a trial which was overseen by an official who had an $80,000 per year contract

with the drug’s manufacturer. Thousands of others were injured. Worse, according

to published reports, the manufacturer withheld research data concerning the

drug’s potential risks.

 

 

Over 300 people died from drug interactions related to Propulsid, many of them

children.

 

 

Redux killed at least 123 people and injured thousands of others before being

withdrawn.

 

 

Posicor killed 100 people.

 

 

Duract killed 68 people.

 

 

Raxar killed 13 people.

 

 

Lotronex killed 5 people.

 

 

And these are just some of the 17 drugs that have had to be withdrawn over the

past three years! Worse, in virtually every case, clinical trials had provided

advance warning that problems could arise – warnings that were ignored.

 

Was any one punished or just fined? Of course not. Was anyone punished or

fined when Jesse Gelsinger was killed in a gene trial at the University of

Pennsylvania after not being given appropriate informed consent? How about in

the Attorney General’s State of Maryland – was anyone punished or fined when

Johns Hopkins killed a healthy 24-year-old trial volunteer – again without her

receiving appropriate informed consent? Where was the Attorney General on that

one?

 

For that matter, what has the Attorney General done about Relenza? Relenza has

the singular distinction of being the only drug approved by the FDA after being

rejected by an FDA Advisory committee. The panel reviewing Relenza voted 13 to 4

against approval for two reasons. First, it didn’t work. Second, it posed a

significant risk to people who had asthma or other upper respiratory problems.

Despite these concerns, the FDA approved Relenza, and its manufacturer,

Glaxo-Wellcome, embarked on an aggressive advertising campaign featuring a

character from the popular “Seinfeld” television show. The extravagant claims

made in these ads by Glaxo-Wellcome proved too much for even a complacent FDA to

take.

 

On November 23, 1999, the FDA wrote Glaxo-Wellcome saying in part:

 

“…The overall presentation in the advertisement is misleading because it

suggests that Relenza is more effective than has been demonstrated by

substantiated evidence.”

 

Although Glaxo-Wellcome eventually withdrew the offending ads, it replaced them

with equally misleading materials. As a result, the FDA sent yet another warning

letter citing the pharmaceutical giant in part for promotional materials:

 

“…that lacks fair balance, contains misleading safety and efficacy claims,

unsubstantiated comparative claims, misleading drug resistance claims and

misleading productivity and pharmaeconomic claims.”

 

Even more disturbing, however, was another failure cited in the FDA letter

concerning Glaxo-Wellcome’s failure to notify patients that:

 

“… This product (Relenza) has not been shown to be effective, and may carry a

risk in patients with severe or decompensated chronic obstructive pulmonary

disease or asthma. Any patient who develops bronchospasm or decline in lung

function should stop the drug and contact their physician promptly…”

 

And what punishment was meted out for these false, misleading and potentially

dangerous misrepresentations? None. No fines, no penalties, no criminal

sanctions were imposed. Instead the company was simply told to withdraw the

offending materials. Meanwhile, consumers had spent $450 million to purchase a

drug which the FDA admits didn’t work! Worse, some 22 deaths have been linked to

Relenza.

 

Where was Attorney General Curran when countless thousands of Maryland consumers

were being sold a worthless and potentially lethal pharmaceutical at exorbitant

prices? How quick was Attorney General Curran to jump to the defense of Maryland

senior citizens victimized by Glaxo-Wellcome’s grossly exaggerated claims? Or

perhaps Mr. Curran believes that knowingly selling a product that doesn’t work

at inflated prices while concealing its potentially dangerous side effects isn’t

a matter of concern when it involves a huge pharmaceutical company. It would

seem so, because not only has Attorney General Curran ignored the case of

Relenza, he has ignored all the other instances where Glaxo-Wellcome and other

pharmaceutical firms have been cited for false and misleading advertising – the

same charge he leveled at T-Up, Inc.

 

When it comes to manufacturers of dietary supplements, however, his attitude is

entirely different.

 

In the last paragraph on page 2 of Mr. Curran’s testimony, he states:

 

“In 1997 we learned that a company located in Baltimore, Maryland

was marketing products as treatments or even cures for diseases that included

cancer, AIDS, herpes, arthritis, chronic fatigue syndrome, lupus, multiple

sclerosis, pneumonia, Chron’s disease, emphysema, and a wide variety of other

human diseases and illnesses.”

 

Once again, a blatant falsehood by the self-styled champion of the consumer.

T-Up, Inc.’s products were never offered as cures for cancer and AIDS. In fact,

the concept of a cure for cancer is somewhat ludicrous – how do you cure

something when you don’t know its’ cause? How do you prevent it from

re-occurring? As for AIDS, everyone knows it goes into hiding – it is never

cured by any presently known techniques.

 

Further if, as Mr. Curran asserts in the paragraph cited above – if T-Up, Inc.

was owned and operated by “Dr.” Allen Hoffman on what basis was the undersigned

– the financier – and only the financier, of T-Up, Inc. – made a party to the

Attorney General’s action against Hoffman? What doctrine of American

Jurisprudence allows a stockholder of Microsoft to be sued for the actions of

its officers? What ever happened to due process in America, and, in particular,

Maryland?

 

In the first paragraph of page 3, the Attorney General says:

 

“According to T-Up, Inc. its T-Up aloe vera product could be used to boost the

human immune system and fight cancer and all diseases associated with either a

weakened or malfunctioning immune system. The company further claimed that its

cesium chloride product could attack and kill cancerous cells by altering the

body’s pH on a cellular level.”

 

These claims are absolutely true – and were in fact never contested by the

Attorney General. Indeed, in arguing before the administrative hearing

concerning T-Up, Inc., Mr. Curran’s prosecutor, Philip Ziperman said:

 

“…we are not asking experts … to … give any opinion testimony … whether or not

the product worked … They’re giving an opinion that the literature doesn’t

support their claims.”

 

This is a truly remarkable admission. The prosecutor is saying in effect he

doesn’t care whether there is any evidence that these products work! He is only

concerned with the literature. What he doesn’t say, however, is that as soon as

his questions were raised concerning the literature, it was voluntarily

withdrawn from distribution. But this is only the least of the Attorney

General’s misleading and false statements.

 

In the second paragraph on page 3, Mr. Curran says:

 

“The T-Up aloe product was typically sold in two ounce bottles for oral

consumption. Each bottle of T-Up also was sold for $75 and was supposed to last

one week. Each bottle of cesium was also sold for $75 and would also last about

one week if the optimal dosage was used. Accordingly the typical consumer using

T-Up, Inc.’s products would spend $150 a week to treat their illness or disease.

The length of treatment could last years depending on the nature, course and

severity of the disease or illness that was being treated. Consumers were also

encouraged by T-Up’s advertisements to continue using their products after their

diseases were cured in order to prevent them from recurring.”

 

Again, Mr. Curran is being disingenuous. The Attorney General knows very well

that the $75 bottles of Aloe and Cesium last two weeks, not one as he alleges –

so it costs $150 for two weeks of treatment. At this time clarification is in

order since the Attorney General obviously has no idea as to what he’s talking

about. Aloe, when concentrated sufficiently, can be used to treat a very wide

variety of immune disorders – a fact never challenged by the Attorney General!

Cesium, on the other hand, is used only for cancer and only for a limited time –

typically 12 to 16 weeks (a total cost of $450 to $600!!). Once the cancer has

hopefully been eliminated the Cesium is discontinued. Always remember –

eliminating the cancer – as conventional medicine knows only too well – is often

a temporary respite – it is no assurance that it will not return – often in a

relatively short time frame.

 

In the third paragraph on page 3, Mr. Curran makes one of his most egregious

misrepresentations alleging:

 

“T-Up, Inc. also sold sterile aloe vera products that were designed for

intravenous administration. The intravenous treatments usually lasted two to

three weeks and sold for between $12,000 and $20,000.”

 

Once again we have a deliberate obfuscation by the Attorney General. It is

important to be very clear – T-Up, Inc. did not do sterile Aloe intravenous

procedures – an orthopedic surgeon with 35 years of experience performed them.

T-Up’s sole participation was the sale of sterile Aloe at a price somewhat in

excess of the $75 per bottle for oral Aloe. The $12,000 - $20,000 fee was paid

directly to the orthopedic surgeon – a licensed MD - who performed the protocol.

Clearly, Mr. Curran is attempting to mislead the public into believing that T-Up

was selling aloe vera at outrageously inflated prices – an assertion that is

simply false.

 

In the fourth paragraph on page 3 Mr. Curran continues to twist and misstate the

facts in an attempt to justify his otherwise unjustifiable actions:

 

“Although T-Up, Inc. never provided my Office with its complete sales data, the

evidence that we were provided established that between April 1, 1997 and

October 16, 1998, T-Up, Inc. sold products costing $2,364,783 to 3,706

consumers. These sales figures did not include the larger amounts paid by

consumers for T-Up, Inc.’s intravenous treatments. Many of the consumers who

used T-Up, Inc.’s products were middle or lower income families who could ill

afford to spend the amounts they spent on T-Up, Inc.’s products, but

nevertheless chose to do so based on the company’s promise of a cure.”

 

Here we go again. Mr. Curran’s assertion that T-Up, Inc. failed to provide all

records is flatly untrue. T-Up, Inc. voluntarily provided the Attorney General’s

office with its complete – I emphasize – complete computer list of customers –

3706 in total. Isn’t it amazing that after contacting all the people on the

list the Attorney General’s office could only find one or two consumers who used

the oral Aloe to testify? Those few consumers merely testified that they didn’t

think the Aloe helped them – no one – again it is important to understand – no

one testified that it harmed them! In fact, one man who had been given four

months to live, and was now testifying one year later, said he “didn’t think it

helped him”!! The Attorney General’s entire case was based on the testimony of

people whose loved ones had died following the intravenous treatment. Please

note, however, that these patients had been considered very terminal by orthodox

medicine. Moreover, since those who did

testify had been encouraged by the Attorney General’s representatives to file

civil suits in the matter, they had a very significant pecuniary interest in the

outcome of the Attorney General’s case.

 

Further, not only did T-Up, Inc. voluntarily turn over its complete computer

list but, as noted earlier, T-Up, Inc. also voluntarily discontinued sending out

the brochure that the Attorney General had alleged made deceptive statements.

 

All this for a case involving five thousand dollars of net oral Aloe sales in

Maryland at a time when a major pharmaceutical firm is defrauding thousands of

Maryland consumers with a flu drug that the FDA says doesn't work. All this

while healthy volunteers are dying in drug trials in Maryland. All this when

Maryland’s leading medical institution has been cited 21 times for failure to

protect patients in medical experiments – most often for not informing them of

potential risks --by the government committee set up to review medical trials!

 

In paragraph 5 on page 3 of his testimony, Mr. Curran asserts that:

 

“T-Up, Inc. promised consumers that its products could boost the human immune

system. One of its primary advertisements, a brochure entitled “the Most

Powerful and Natural Way to Boost Your Immune System,” promised consumers that

T-Up aloe vera can boost and strengthen the human immune system. A copy of the

brochure is attached to this written testimony. However, when asked to produce

any scientific evidence to support this claim, the company was unable to do so.”

 

The last sentence is another example of the Attorney General’s tailoring the

record to his satisfaction. T-Up, Inc. produced over 50 papers supporting their

claims – not one witness, expert or otherwise, was produced by the Attorney

General to challenge the efficacy of Cesium. However, T-Up, Inc.’s case was not

heard in a real court where there are rules of evidence and constitutional

protections. Rather, it was heard in an administrative tribunal, a kangaroo

court, before an Administrative Law Judge, who works for him. The deck was

stacked from the beginning, and it is no surprise that T-Up, Inc. was found

guilty on all counts including those concerning Cesium, except one. Somehow the

Administrative Law Judge found the courage to determine that the State did not

show Cesium to be unsafe. Of course that didn’t deter the Attorney General – he

merely had his subordinate, the head of the Consumer Protection Agency, overrule

the Judge’s finding in his final opinion – again, without

any evidence in the record!

 

Consider this fact: There are 770,000 listed MDs in the United States as well as

hundreds of thousands of Ph.D. scientists – and from this million person pool

the Attorney General cannot find one witness to challenge the safety and

efficacy of Cesium. And yet, in the best traditions of due process in American

Jurisprudence he finds T-Up, Inc. and its officers guilty on all counts

vis-à-vis Cesium!

 

As to the Aloe claims – the Attorney General produced three expert witnesses to

challenge the supporting papers. Two admitted, under oath, that they knew

nothing about Aloe – the third stated he knew nothing about Aloe in humans!

Understand, the Attorney General's dutiful Administrative Law Judge found T-Up,

Inc. and its officers guilty on all Aloe counts! It is one thing for this

committee to be concerned about nutritional supplements – it is a totally

different matter to allow this collection of half-truths and outright lies to

serve as a centerpiece for your investigation.

 

In footnote 8 on page 3 Mr. Curran states that:

 

“Although Allen Hoffman claimed in his advertisements that he was a former Johns

Hopkins medical researcher, the evidence showed that Hoffman had never performed

medical research and that his doctorate was fraudulent.”

 

This constitutes yet another total distortion of the record. The State’s

witness, who barely remembered Hoffman, couldn’t recall if he did any research.

The company’s witness – Hoffman’s immediate boss – testified quite explicitly

that he had, in fact, performed medical research. Her testimony was not

challenged.

 

In footnote 9 on page 3, the Attorney General contends that:

 

“The intravenous administration of aloe vera into humans has not been approved

by the United States Food and Drug Administration. However, despite the lack of

FDA approval for its IV product, T-Up, Inc. referred consumers to physicians

willing to illegally perform the intravenous procedure, or Allen Hoffman

performed the procedure himself”

 

The FDA has not approved IV Aloe for humans – although it is approved for

animals. However, nowhere has it been disapproved. Here again is a perfect

example of democracy in action in Maryland – the Administrative Law Judge

admitted an affidavit from an FDA individual – who we could not cross-examine –

who stated that the FDA has not approved the use of IV Aloe in humans. She

offered no substantiation for her assertion. We submitted an affidavit from an

attorney who is also an RN, who in essence said there is nothing in any

regulations that prohibits the IV use of Aloe in humans. Guess what? The

Administrative Law Judge refused to allow our affidavit to be entered into

evidence – with no explanation offered. So much for the concept of due process

in the Attorney General’s personal kangaroo court. Are the members of the

committee starting to understand why the Attorney General has never lost a case

in his personal court?

 

A few other thoughts relative to footnote 9:

 

An IV Aloe drug trial is now entering Phase III – it is for the treatment of

Cancer, AIDS and Hepatitis C among other diseases.

The USDA has approved the use of IV aloe for treating feline Leukemia among

other cancers.

The statement that “Allen Hoffman performed the illegal procedure himself”

was never proved in court.

 

Page 4 of Mr. Curran’s testimony is such a succession of misstatements, outright

falsehoods and manipulations of fact it’s difficult to know where to begin.

Curran says:

 

“Even more outrageous than the company’s claim that its aloe vera product could

boost the human immune system were its claims that its products would

effectively treat or cure cancer.”

 

Curran also cites claims concerning soft tissue cancers, breast cancer, lung,

esophagus, colon and stomach cancer in his litany of condemnations of what he

says were T-Up, Inc.’s extravagant promises.

 

Sure sounds like the company made some “outrageous” claims doesn’t it? It’s

even more outrageous that the Attorney General did not produce a single witness

to dispute the Cesium claims – and the Attorney General produced three expert

witnesses to challenge Aloe – three witnesses who admitted under oath that they

knew nothing about Aloe in humans! A fact the Attorney General’s prosecutor’s

statement to the court makes all too clear:

 

“…we are not asking experts … to … give any opinion testimony … whether or not

the product worked … They’re giving an opinion that the literature doesn’t

support their claims.”

 

In other words, in complete contradiction to what the Attorney General brazenly

told this committee the State never challenged the truth of T-Up Inc.’s claims –

they only said the claims were not supported by the papers provided to them by

the company. Understand – while one person dies every minute from cancer – the

Attorney General and his minions could care less if the products actually

worked!

 

The last sentence on page 4 is particularly disturbing. In it Curran states:

 

“Dr. Robert Knudsen, a California resident testified that when he approached

T-Up, Inc. concerning its products he was told they ‘will kill … [malignant]

cells every time.”

 

First of all let’s expose the clever use by the Attorney General of the term Dr.

Robert Knudsen. Knudsen is a PhD, not a medical doctor as one might surmise

from the Attorney General’s presentation. Knudsen, not even one of the 3706

consumers, (i.e. he was only seeking information for a friend who never ordered

the products) was the only witness to link the undersigned to the business, as

opposed to merely being the financier of T-Up, Inc. When questioned via phone

by the Attorney General’s prosecutor, Knudsen acknowledged he spoke to Neal

Deoul at his home, not at the office, and was referred by him to talk to Hoffman

for an explanation of the products mode of operation. Most important – Cesium,

we have known since 1984 (in a published paper by A. Keith Brewer Ph.D.) does in

fact “kill malignant cells every time.” As pointed out earlier, with over 1

million trained professionals at his disposal the Attorney General could not

produce one single witness to challenge the truth of

that statement!!

 

Instead of going on witch-hunts, the Committee should:

 

Investigate why Cesium has never been used by conventional medicine when we

learned in 1984 that 30 humans were treated and, in the words of the study’s

author, A. Keith Brewer, PhD, “…in each case the tumor masses disappeared.”

Ask the Attorney General why, with his vast injunctive power, he has never,

to this date, removed the products from the Maryland marketplace. What an

outrageous sham – what an “egregious fraud”!!

 

In the second paragraph on page 5, Curran says:

 

“Obviously all of these efficacy claims were false.”

 

On what basis does the Attorney General make this assertion? The Attorney

General’s prosecutor, as pointed out earlier, stated they were not challenging

the efficacy of the products. An even more flagrant abuse of the facts was the

Attorney Generals’ statement that 45 witnesses testified at the trial. The

State, despite interviewing literally thousands of consumers, could only produce

twelve witnesses – several were used to assail Hoffman’s credibility and others

were addressing IV Aloe only. In contrast, T-Up, Inc. had 37 witnesses and 80

affidavits (covering examples of the many conditions successfully treated with

concentrated Aloe Vera.) The Administrative Law Judge arbitrarily limited T-Up

to 12 witnesses and, incredulously, refused to admit the 80 affidavits into

evidence!! It would be most significant if this committee launched an

investigation into the judicial process in the State of Maryland!

 

Another of Curran’s misleading and questionable assertions on page 5 is evident

to anyone who reads it carefully. He states:

 

“…n fact, very few of the consumers who utilized T-Up, Inc.’s products

reported any positive effects from the products”

If this is true, why is it that the Attorney General could only produce a few

witnesses concerning the efficacy of oral aloe vera? If the products were as

ineffective as he asserts, it would seem that out of 3,706 consumers, countless

witnesses, or at least their affidavits, should abound! Where were they? Most

deceitful of all, did anyone complain about the products? Was anyone harmed?

Did T-Up, Inc. kill any healthy 24-year olds? Did T-Up, Inc. add to the

horrendous one death per minute statistic for cancer? Even the Attorney General

with all his half-truths and lies never alleged a death due to oral aloe –he

couldn’t go that far beyond the pale! However, the last sentence on page 5 does

go beyond the pale!

On page 5, Mr. Curran states that:

“Moreover, evidence during the case demonstrated the potential for very serious

side-effects caused by T-Up, Inc.’s products.”

Not only was there never any evidence developed at the trial to demonstrate the

potential for serious side effects caused by T-Up, Inc.’s products but, in fact,

as was pointed out earlier, even the Attorney General’s hand picked

Administrative Law Judge found the State failed to show any safety problem with

Cesium (they never even questioned the safety of aloe). What did the Attorney

General do? He had his subordinate overrule the Administrative Law Judge –

without benefit of any supporting evidence! Can we allow a man like this to

represent the American legal system before a select Senate subcommittee? Can we

allow him unfettered access to our “vulnerable senior citizens” without an

appropriate response? Any thinking American would say no. Indeed, the

committee should instead move to stop this outrage! It has a responsibility to

sanction him – he has dishonored this committee, the United States Senate and

all honorable citizens of our great democracy!

One final word about page 5. The Attorney General cites the example of a

consumer who delayed chemotherapy until it was too late. Anyone familiar with

the subject knows that the success rate for chemotherapy utilized to treat

metastasized cancer is 1% - yes, 1%! How many people taking chemo, whether

delayed or not, have found that to be a viable treatment option – to say nothing

of the horrendous side effects?? After 30 years of the total failure of the

ludicrous concept of putting toxins in an already toxic body, shouldn’t this

committee be investigating what – besides pharmaceutical profits – perpetuates

this barbaric affront to the bodies of our senior citizens?

As with page 5, page 6 continues a litany of lies and slander proffered by the

AG that go beyond the pale! A few examples will suffice.

In the first sentence on page 6, Mr. Curran states:

“Existing scientific research establishes that cesium chloride causes cardiac

arrhythmia in animals.”

The statement is a complete, unmitigated, deliberate, carefully thought out lie.

A State witness, a cardiologist, said he was told of cesium tests on animals –

he actually had no personal knowledge of the studies. The truth is that the

tests in question were conducted to induce cardiac arrhythmia in dogs in order

to observe the phenomena so that proper treatment protocols might be

established. How was the arrhythmia induced? By injecting huge amounts of

Cesium directly into the main artery leading to the dog’s heart! Injecting huge

amounts of anything – sodium, for example – in that manner would produce a

similar result!

Two additional thoughts:

The cardiologist mentioned in paragraph 1, page 6, the one who testified

that he heard about the dog tests, stated under cross-examination, that he never

measured the patient’s Cesium level – but that he did measure his potassium

level, and it was low. He acknowledged that the low potassium level could have

caused the irregular heartbeat of the patient! When it was her turn, the

patient’s wife testified that her husband had stopped taking the Cesium many

weeks prior to his being taken to the hospital!

In the seminal paper by A. Keith Brewer, Ph.D., he describes, in the last

paragraph, other uses for Cesium, besides the potential for treating cancer.

You guessed it – he states that Cesium can be used to control arrhythmia!

part 10)

In paragraph 4 on page 6, Mr. Curran states:

“In its [T-Up, Inc.’s] brochure that is attached to this testimony, T-Up, Inc.

claimed its aloe vera was superior to other products because of its

concentration, a claim the company was also unable to substantiate.”

This is nothing less than an outright lie by the Attorney General. What he

conveniently and deliberately failed to tell the committee is that his

prosecutor selected 7 competitive aloe products from various Internet ads and

challenged T-Up, Inc. to prove that its product was superior to them. T-Up,

Inc. accepted the challenge and sent samples of all the products to a renowned

testing laboratory – the results – overwhelming, uncontested data showing the

total superiority of T-Up aloe in all categories tested! Why didn’t the

Attorney General tell the committee of these tests? Because they totally

undermined his ludicrous charges!

This committee cannot – must not – allow these flagrant lies to remain part of

its permanent record!

One statement in particular bears special attention. The Attorney General stated

in unprepared remarks that one person is in jail, one person is going to jail

and the third person will be paying a fine and penalty totaling 4.7 million

dollars. Let us examine those statements:

The person in jail is Dr. Donald MacNay, the veteran orthopedic surgeon from

Manassas, Virginia, who gave the aloe IV. He was told by his court appointed

lawyer that a plea bargain had been worked out which would preclude his serving

jail time. What Dr. MacNay was not told was that the Judge was not obligated to

accept the plea bargain! So, much to his surprise and dismay, he found himself

sentenced to two years in jail!

The person alleged to be going to jail is Allen Hoffman. Now note – this

statement was made by the Attorney General, a senior Officer of the Court

concerning a probable verdict in a case not scheduled to commence until October

1, 2001, and before Hoffman agreed to a plea arrangement on September 21, 2001.

Remember that under Rule 3.6 of the Maryland Legal Cannon of Ethics, “A lawyer

shall not make any extrajudicial statement that a reasonable person would expect

to be disseminated by means of public communication if the lawyer knows, or

reasonably should have known that it will have a substantial likelihood of

prejudicing an adjudicative proceeding.” It would be hard to imagine a statement

more prejudicial than a declaration of guilt by Maryland’s highest legal

official. Moreover, it would also be hard to imagine a circumstance more certain

of assuring dissemination of that statement by public communication than to make

it in the course of a nationally televised hearing before

a congressional committee! How is it that for a deliberate effort to influence

a jury? Of course, such outrageous conduct is no surprise where J. Joseph

Curran is involved. In Hoffman’s first criminal trial brought by the Justice

Department, he was acquitted on the main count of mail fraud – all other charges

ended in a hung jury. The Attorney General, in direct violation of the same

section of the Maryland Legal Canon of Ethics, couldn’t wait to try to influence

the outcome of that trial. When he received word that his kangaroo court had

dutifully returned his required verdict, he couldn’t wait to make a major

statement to the press. Baltimore’s only newspaper then published his

inflammatory statement – while an unsequestered criminal jury was deciding the

fate of Hoffman in the nearby Federal Courthouse in Baltimore. As the

highest-ranking legal official in Maryland, could he possibly find an even

better way to assault the Canons of Ethics? It’s doubtful. Now, on September

10th, he repeats his disgusting performance, telling this committee that a man

will soon be going to jail – a man whose trial isn’t even scheduled to begin

until October 1! Is this committee going to be part of such a flagrant

disregard of the Canons? I sincerely hope not!

The person about to be assessed the massive fine is, of course, the author of

this article. Immediately that tells you why I was sued in the first place –

not because I was an active participant in the business – remember I was only

the financier – but because I was perceived to have the “deep pockets.”

Who Is The Real Snake Oil Salesman?

(Conclusion)

First, consider the fine. The Attorney General imposed his maximum allowable

fine of $1,000 for each of the 3,706 consumers listed in our computer files –

many of whom only received literature and never ordered the product. In

addition, many of these people had returned the products – remember, for any

reason whatsoever – and received a full refund within 30 days. Know any drug

companies or pharmacies that provide full refunds for drugs? Most disgusting of

all, no consumers complained about the benefits of oral aloe – and yet I’m going

to be fined the maximum $1,000 for every name on a computer list!

Lastly, the Attorney General is assessing 1 million dollars for a restitution

fund – a fund for those seeking restitution for an alleged deception. Nobody is

seeking restitution – anyone who wanted his or her money back asked for and

received it. The Attorney General is now in he process of talking people into

wanting their money back! Remember, in the State of Maryland, only $5,000 was

not refunded to consumers – yet we have a million dollar restitution fund! One

gets the feeling that this is merely a means for generating money to pay for the

Attorney General’s staff to continue whatever witch-hunt will help promote his

career at that moment!

Worst of all is the Attorney General’s blatant effort to influence the outcome

of the Maryland Appellate system. As noted earlier, the Attorney General has

never lost a case in his kangaroo court – it remains for the appellate process

to restore a semblance of due process to the Attorney General’s target of the

moment. And yet – incredulous as it may sound – we have the Attorney General

blatantly telling the appellate judges that I will be fined this unconscionable

sum of money. How about that for interference in the judicial process by the

chief law enforcement official for the State of Maryland?

One final thought regarding the Attorney General’s total lack of concern for due

process – by selecting his personal court to hear the case he insures that it is

impossible for those accused to ever receive a jury trial. That’s correct – I

can only appeal the decision of the Administrative Law Judge (as modified by the

Attorney General’s trusted subordinate) – I can never present my side of the

story to a jury of my peers. So much for justice in Maryland – so much for the

constitutional guarantees of due process in America!

With the very fabric of our way of life under attack from without, this august

committee cannot allow such a thinly disguised attack from within to go

unchallenged!

The committee members should search their souls – ask the fundamental question –

If these products are unsafe – if these products are not efficacious – why are

they still on the market?

While the press coverage Breaux and his colleagues envisioned never materialized

– overshadowed by the events of September 11th – they have not given up their

crusade to take away our medical freedom of choice. Indeed, the National

Institute on Aging has embarked on a nationwide campaign to discredit the very

notion that alternative and complementary medicine have any role in society.

Using the field of anti-aging medicine as an excuse, they are funding seminars,

issuing reports and conducting other government-sponsored activities with one

purpose in mind: to gain control over your health care choices. More will be

written about this in a subsequent newsletter, but bear in mind, like the war on

terrorism, the battle to defend your right to medical choice will be a long one.