[Information4U] Vaccine mandate? and other things

[Guest guest]

At 09:15 AM 2/20/07, you wrote:

> Vaccine mandate? and other things

>Posted by: " VoiceAnalysis " VoiceAnalysis soundstonedchick

>Mon Feb 19, 2007 7:27 am (PST)

>Zyprexa Injury Clock Keeps Ticking Away

>The on-going legal battle over the disclosure of secret Eli Lilly documents

>that reveal the serious health risks associated with Zyprexa and the

>company's

>off-label promotion of the drug involves a matter of grave public concern.

>

>But observers on the sidelines of this courtroom circus say the conduct of

>the judge in helping Lilly keep documents secret that give the specific

>details

>of an illegal marketing scheme that is literally killing people is almost as

>disturbing as the underlying acts.

>

>The off-label prescribing of Zyprexa has created a public health crisis.

>According to the New York Times, the secret documents show a pattern of

>unlawful

>activities that may have left the 20 million individuals who have taken

>Zyprexa

>with incomplete information regarding the side effects of the drug.

>

>Harvard trained psychiatrist, Dr Stefan Kruszewski, reports that Zyprexa

>increases the risk of obesity, diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular

>complications, heart attacks and stroke.

>

>Keeping in mind that the FDA says that only between 1% and 10% of adverse

>events are reported to the agency, a study conducted 5 years ago, in the July

>2002, issue of Pharmacotherapy, reviewed the adverse event reports

>submitted on

>Zyprexa and found that of the 289 cases of diabetes reported, 225 of the

>patients were newly diagnosed.

>

>The review also identified 100 Zyprexa patients who had developed ketosis, a

>serious complication of diabetes, 22 cases of pancreatitis, a

>life-threatening

>inflammation of the pancreas, and 23 deaths associated with the drug.

>

>Zyprexa is an antipsychotic approved by the FDA to treat adults with

>schizophrenia and bipolar disorder only. But doctors are prescribing the

>drug for

>conditions, treatment durations, and patient populations for which it was

>never

>intended and worst of all it is being widely prescribed for children.

>

>For instance, in February 2006, public health officials in Florida ordered an

>investigation into why the number of children who are prescribed

>antipsychotics billed to Medicaid in Florida had nearly doubled in five

>years, from 9,500

>children to almost 18,000.

>

>The lawsuits filed against Lilly to recover the money paid for Zyprexa by

>state Medicaid programs due to the company's off-label promotion say the

>drug is

>being sold for unapproved uses such as anxiety and other mood disorders,

>sleep

>disruption, autism, attention deficit disorders, hyperactivity, and dementia.

>

>According to the attorney general of Mississippi, about 10% of Zyprexa

>patients on Medicaid in that state, have developed diabetes. In fact, the

>health

>problems associated with Zyprexa have become so prevalent, that one class

>action

>lawsuit is demanding money to cover the medical monitoring of all patients

>who

>took Zyprexa but have not yet been diagnosed with high blood sugar, diabetes,

>or pancreatitis.

>

>Children on Zyprexa are developing life-long injuries. At the annual meeting

>of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry in Washington, DC,

>on October 20, 2004, researchers from the Johns Hopkins Children's Center

>reported that atypical antipsychotics were found to trigger insulin

>resistance in

>children. The researchers evaluated 11 children who gained significant

>amounts

>of weight while taking the drugs.

>

>Weight gain is a known risk factor that contributes to insulin resistance.

>Insulin is produced by the pancreas to help cells absorb glucose and provide

>energy. When resistance occurs, the pancreas tries to keep up with the

>demand by

>producing more insulin until it eventually cannot keep up, and excess glucose

>builds up in the bloodstream which can increase the risk of type-2 diabetes,

>heart disease, and stroke.

>

>All six children in the John Hopkins study who were on moderate or high doses

>of an antipsychotic developed symptoms of insulin resistance, and three of

>the 5 children on low doses did as well.

>

>The study's lead author, Dr Mark Riddle, director of the division of child

>and adolescent psychiatry at the Center, said, " The insulin resistance

>seen in

>these children was greater than what would be expected from weight gain

>alone,

>suggesting there is a factor distinct from excess weight that directly

>induces

>insulin resistance. "

>

>Experts say Zyprexa is poison for some people. According to Dr Louis Caplan,

>Professor of Neurology at Harvard Medical School, there is overuse of

>antipsychotics in patients admitted to hospitals. " These drugs, " he said,

> " are often

>given in high doses to very sick patients in intensive care units or on

>medical

>and surgical units, " in the February 21, 2006, journal Neurology.

>

> " They cause symptoms and neurological dysfunctions that are a common reason

>for neurological consultations in the hospital, " Dr Caplan warns.

>

> " Old sick people with abnormal brains do not tolerate these drugs well, " he

>says. " In patients with Lewy-body disease and some Parkinsonian syndromes,

>their use is a disaster, setting patients back for weeks, " he warns.

>

>When the FDA approves a drug, it also approves the labeling which explains

>the manner in which the drug is to be prescribed. While doctors may prescribe

>drugs as they see fit, its illegal for drug companies to promote drugs for

>uses

>outside the labeling.

>

>However, as vividly evidenced here, drug makers do it and get away with it

>all the time and the leaked Lilly documents prove that the US court system is

>aiding and abetting drug companies in hiding their illegal marketing schemes.

>

>For instance, in one article, the Times quotes a sealed document that served

>as a script for a company meeting in 2001, where a Mr Bandick praised sales

>representatives for the number of new Zyprexa prescriptions they got

>doctors to

>write. According to the script, more than 100 representatives convinced

>doctors to write at least 16 extra prescriptions.

>

>The legal battle over the documents began in December 2006, when Dr David

>Egilman, provided the documents to Alaskan attorney, Jim Gottstein, and Mr

>Gottstein turned them over to Alex Berenson, a reporter for the New York

>Times.

>

>Dr Egilman first learned about Lilly's illegal conduct when he reviewed the

>documents a few years back as an expert witness in the Zyprexa litigation.

>However, when Lilly was successful in the settling the cases out of court, Dr

>Egilman was forcibly silenced because the court allowed Lilly to continue

>to keep

>the documents hidden with a protective order.

>

>As soon as the articles began to appear in the New York Times, describing an

>off-label marketing scheme called, " Viva Zyprexa, " Lilly got a judge to issue

>a mandatory temporary injunction on December 18, 2006, ordering Mr Gottstein

>to return the documents and list the names of everyone he disclosed them

>to or

>discussed them with.

>

>After he supplied the list, Lilly got the court to issue a second temporary

>injunction on December 29, 2006, to prohibit the dissemination of the

>documents

>by Terrie Gottstein, Jerry Winchester, Dr Peter Breggin, Dr Grace Jackson, Dr

>David Cohen, Bruce Whittington, Dr Stefan Kruszewski, Laura Ziegler, Judy

>Chamberlin, Vera Sherav, Robert Whitaker, and Will Hall.

>

>The above list reads like a Big Pharma hit list. It includes about every

>well-known expert on the side effects of psychiatric drugs in the US, as

>well as

>the journalists and authors who have investigated and written most

>extensively

>about the misconduct of drug companies when it comes to the off-label

>promotion of drugs, and specifically Zyprexa.

>

>Conspicuously absent from the injunction is the New York Times and the

>reporter who actually used the documents when writing five articles on the

>matter.

>Most curious is the fact that Lilly has never even asked the court to

>issue an

>injunction for the Times.

>

>On January 3, 2007, a hearing was held on a request by Lilly to extend the

>temporary injunction, and to force Mr Gottstein to appear in New York City

>for a

>deposition within 5 days, as a prelude to charging him with civil and

>criminal contempt of court for publicizing the documents.

>

>As a result of that hearing, several more entities were added to the

>injunction list including Eric Whalen and his web site at www.joysoup.net;

>the

>MindFreedom web site at www.mindfreedom.org, and the Alliance for Human

>Research

>Protection (AHRP) web sites at www.ahrp.org and www.ahrp.blogspot.com.

>

>Once again, the Times and Alex Berenson were not added, and in fact, during

>the hearing, Judge Jack Weinstein said he was not about to issue an

>injunction

>against the Times.

>

>By its own estimate in the media, Lilly produced approximately 11 million

>documents in discovery for Zyprexa litigation thus far, and has designated

>them

>all confidential pursuant to Case Management Order 3, a protective order

>entered on August 9, 2004.

>

>When issuing CMO-3, the court gave Lilly the right to designate documents

>confidential, as long as Lilly " in good faith " believed that they were.

>However

>legal experts say the secret documents at issue here never should have been

>covered by a protective order.

>

>According to attorneys in the case, in entering CMO-3, the court did not

>articulate the reasons why a protective order was necessary or set forth any

>criteria to use when determining whether a document was actually

>confidential and

>deserving of protection.

>

>Yet instead of keeping the focus on why the 11 million documents were ever

>permitted to remain hidden in the first place, Judge Weinstein is allowing

>Lilly

>to hammer away at the messengers who gave the documents to the press, after

>deciding that the information needed to be circulated before more people were

>injured and killed.

>

>In a January 17, 2007, hearing, Mr Gottstein was asked: " In this particular

>case involving Zyprexa, at the time you subpoenaed Dr. Egilman, had you the

>impression that Eli Lilly had deliberately withheld from the public and from

>physicians adverse side effects of Zyprexa? "

>

>He answered: " Absolutely. "

>

>Mr Gottstein was then asked whether it was his impression that there were

>thousands of cases of harm to people from Zyprexa, while Lilly was in the

>process

>of settling cases out of court, and he said yes and that was why he wanted

>the documents out there " to protect people from this drug. "

>

>He had nothing to gain personally by providing the documents the Times. Mr

>Gottstein testified that he does not represent clients who were injured by

>Zyprexa for money damages and that his sole interest was protecting patients.

>

>On January 25, 2007, in response to a request for Dr Egilman to appear at a

>deposition in preparation for Lilly to file civil and criminal contempt of

>court charges against him, though his attorney, Dr Egilman informed

>Lilly's legal

>team that he will refuse to testify under the protection of the Fifth

>Amendment.

>

>A number of persons restrained by the injunction have obtained attorneys to

>file briefs with First Amendment arguments including the public's right to

>know

>what is in the documents and some people appeared at the last court hearing.

>

>Ms Sharav and Dr Cohen point out in their brief, that they are not

>ex-employees of Lilly who have stolen trade secrets. They are merely a

>public health

>advocate and a professor who seek to share Lilly's own words with the

>public and

>they view exposing the information that " Lilly wants so desperately to keep

>hidden " as their primary public role.

>

>Ms Sharav testified at the January 17, 2007, hearing, and when asked why she

>was interested in the documents by a Lilly attorney, said because they

>document the fact that Lilly knew in 2000, that Zyprexa caused diabetes,

> " from a

>group of doctors that they hired who told them you have to come clean. "

>

> " And instead of warning doctors who are widely prescribing the drug, " she

>testified, " Eli Lilly set about in an aggressive marketing campaign to

>primary

>doctors. "

>

> " Little children are being given this drug, " she said, " Little children are

>being exposed to horrific diseases that end their lives shorter. "

>

> " Now, I consider that a major crime, " she stated, " to continue to conceal

>these facts from the public is I think really not in the public interest.

>This is

>a safety issue. "

>

>Lilly's attorney asked the court to strike her comments from the record but

>the request was denied.

>

>Attorney, Alan Milstein, appeared on behalf of Ms Sharav, the AHRP, and Dr

>Cohen, and toward the end of the hearing noted that in handling the

>underlying

>Zypexa litigation, the judge had had occasion to look at the documents in

>question or at least to read the Times articles and stated: " What is

>abundantly

>clear is that they are not trade secrets. "

>

> " Lilly in no way fears dissemination of these documents to their competitors,

>to Merck or to Glaxo, " Mr Milstein told Judge Weinstein.

>

> " What Lilly wants to prevent, " he said, " is the public at large, the

>consumers of its products, from seeing these documents and learning the

>truth about

>the product that Lilly produces and the way it markets it. "

>

> " Documents like that are not confidential and should not be marked

>confidential, " he stated.

>

>At the end of the hearing, the judge instructed the parties to file more

>briefs and another hearing is scheduled for February 7, 2007, for oral

>arguments.

>

>In the latest turn of events, right out of the blue, Judge Weinstein issued

>an order this week with an " invitation " for Mr Berenson to appear in court to

>give testimony and be cross-examined on whether he participated in a

>conspiracy

>with Mr Gottstein and Dr Egilman to violate the original court order that

>sealed the documents.

>

>In the meantime, while this circus plays out in the courts, every day

>thousands of doctors and patients are making uninformed decisions on

>whether to use

>Zyprexa. And the injury clock is ticking. Allen Jones, a former fraud

>investigator in the Pennsylvania Office of Inspector General, states: " My

>best effort

>at correlating dollars spent with deaths suggests that people may be dying

>from

>side effects at the rate of at least one death for each one million dollars

>spent on the drug. "

>

>Evelyn Pringle, evelyn-pringle

>Authors Bio: Evelyn Pringle is a columnist for OpEd News and investigative

>journalist focused on exposing corruption in government and corporate

>America.

>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

>http://video.google.fr/videoplay?docid%3d-8996055986353195886

>A recent Italian research study on GMO (OGM) or Growth Modified Organisms

>showed that 2 groups of mice, one fed natural soja and the other GMO soja,

>resulted in the group fed GMO soja had noteworthy tissue modification in the

>Pancreas and Testicles. At this point the government pulled the plug on

>funding and

>stopped research. The associated European governments now say the information

>is " confidential " and will not make research findings available to the

>public.

>Nevertheless, you see interviews with several researchers who actually

>performed the experiment.

>

>Hope you can view this video soon as it may be removed from the internet.

>Unfortuneately for those of you who do not understand the French

>language...its

>in French!

>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

>IS TEXAS GOVERNOR SUBJECTING CHILDREN TO QUESTIONABLE VACCINE?

>By Donna Voetee February 8, 2007

>In the short time we have been residents of Lockhart, one of the most

>beautiful things we have noticed about families here is the respect that

>children

>have for their parents and adults in general. Young people are courteous and

>well-mannered, and comport themselves with modesty and aplomb.

>

>What a shock yesterday to learn that Gov. Perry has insulted these precious

>children by mandating a medical procedure that presumes the young girls of

>Texas to be sluts.

>

>King Perry’s intrusive executive order bypassed the legislature and the

>proper means of enacting a new law. In a political move usually reserved for(

>tyrants and dictators, he has unilaterally decreed that all 11- and 12-

>year old

>girls shall submit to a controversial vaccine for sexually-transmitted

>cervical

>cancer, Gardasil. Since these children are minors and depending on their

>parents for their protection and well-being, essentially this is an edict

>for all

>parents to surrender their children to the state for medical experimentation.

>

>As a Counselor of Natural Health, I oppose vaccines in principle. Vaccines

>cause an imbalance in humoral and cellular immunity, and violate the body’s

>God-given way of handling disease through the mucous membranes and white

>blood

>cells. With the possible exception of tetanus, no disease ever goes

>directly into

>the bloodstream—vaccines do. Vaccines contain toxic chemicals like

>formaldehyde, methyl mercury, MSG, foreign DNA from monkeys, rotten eggs,

>dogs, and yes,

>even lung tissue from aborted babies. Each dose of Gardasil (the full

>protocol requires three doses) contains 225 micrograms of aluminum, known

>to cause

>tangles of nerve fibers that can lead to Alzheimer’s disease. That’s

>675 mcg

>aluminum just from one vaccine. Add this to the cumulative total from all the

>other shots, and maybe it becomes clear why the Center for Disease Control

>tells

>us that 30% of young people have chronic illness of some kind.

>

>I also oppose any form of mixing the DNA of one species and splicing it into

>another. This is an abomination called genetic engineering, and is

>supplanting

>the mark of God on His creation (“after their kindâ€) with the mark of a

>technological, proud beast who thinks he can wage war on the Omnipotent

>One with

>impunity. Gardasil contains genetically engineered bacteria. GE bacteria

>in our

>food has caused an unprecedented rise in allergies, asthma, and other chronic

>disease in children. What in the world can we expect when these mutated

>concoctions are injected into the bloodstream of pre-adolescent children?

>

>Prudence and common sense demand an answer before making decisions for little

>ones whose lives depend on us. There have already been 82 cases (read:

>children) of serious illness due to Gardasil since this past June reported

>to the

>Vaccine Events Reporting System. The FDA tells us that only 10% of all

>reactions

>are reported, so this means there could well be 800- 900 cases of injury.

>This is just short-term. Long-term consequences are immeasurable. Dr. John

>Martin

>of the Center for Complex Infectious Diseases has spent his life trying to

>undo the harm done by the SV40 virus from African green monkeys that was in

>polio vaccines given to children in the late 1950’s and early 60’s.

>Many of those

>children, mostly women in middle-age, now have autoimmune disorders like

>lupus, chronic fatigue syndrome, MS, and forms of mental illness heretofore

>unseen.

>

>As a Constitutionist, I oppose any political trumping of the separation of

>powers. The Founding Fathers’ brilliance of bequeathing our political

>system

>with checks and balances has never been equaled. Ben Franklin told us that

>they

>gave us a Republic, “if we can keep it.†Ambitious men like Perry

>should be

>immediately removed from office, as he has violated his oath to uphold the

>Constitution and our sacred heritage of rule by law.

>

>As an American, I oppose any usurping of my inalienable rights to life and

>liberty. Vaccines have been used worldwide as devices of population

>control. In

>the early 1990’s in Mexico, Nicaragua, and the Philippines, women (not the

>men, who are presumed to be more careful not to encounter rusty nails)

>between 12

>and 49 were given tetanus shots that contained the pregnancy hormone hCG.

>This means that the ladies would develop antibodies to the fetus when they

>conceived, and a ‘spontaneous’ abortion would occur. Did these women

>receive full

>disclosure that they were submitting to sterilization when they got in

>line for

>“protection†from disease? The same good ol’ boys in the United

>Nations who

>carried out this travesty are the same ones dictating policy for our

>government. How do we know that Gardasil is not the “tetanus shot†for

>American women?

>

>As a Christian, I oppose being a victim on the altar of Pragmatism. This is

>the doctrine that all truth and concepts are defined by their practical

>consequences. Good and evil are arbitrary, because right and wrong are not

>constant

>absolutes but evolving with society. When our government does not defer to a

>sovereign, holy God who says that life is sacred, but to the dollars of Big

>Pharma, we are on a slippery slope indeed. We, our children, and all

>Americans

>become mere chattel to be used at the whim of spurious scientists and greedy

>politicians. Thus, the fact that Merck lost billions on the Vioxx scandal

>last

>year and is hungrily looking to appease stockholders should be weighed

>carefully.

>

>As a mother, I am mad as hell. How dare anyone give any kind of unproven

>medication to my daughter or granddaughter that could have unknown

>repercussions?

>How dare they! Does the state have a womb? Would the state lay down its life

>for my child? Even nature itself cries out against this, as most sentient

>beings know better than to disturb a mother bear with cubs, or a lioness,

>or even a

>dumb dog with her pups. Are American mothers, yea, even Texian mothers, less

>caring than brute animals? I think not, and I believe—I hope†political

>regime is going to get a good dose of maternal righteous indignation from

>El Paso to Port Arthur and Brownsville to Perryton.

>

>Let’s not forget Texian dads and grandpas. What an insult to holy

>fatherhood

>to think that this wannabe monarch, a minion of cruel, greedy drug pushers,

>would presume that the men of this State would passively stand by while

>their da

>ughters are medically mauled! There’s a road sign here in this great state

>that says it all for this Grandma, “Don’t Mess With Texas.â€

>

>Donna Voetee and her husband have just left their native California and

>relocated to Texas where their children and grandchildren live. Donna

>believes that

>her son's encounter with aplastic anemia was due to a compromised immune

>system due to vaccines. Donna is a Counselor of Natural Health and the

>author of

>Supermarket Survival, a series of classes she will soon be teaching in

>Lockhart, Texas. E-Mail: nike5855 or (512) 398-7800 March 1 on.

>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

>QUESTIONING VACCINES IS NOT " FUELED BY IGNORANCE "

>Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, DO, February 7, 2007

>

>The vaccine debate is escalating. With 18 states currently considering laws

>to mandate the new HPV (cervical cancer) vaccine for school entry, the number

>of persons questioning the necessity of vaccination is at an all-time high.

>Those promoting vaccination seem to be pulling out all the stops to defend

>their

>positions.

>

>On February 4, 2007, New York Times Online published a review of a new

>book, “

>VACCINE: The Controversial Story of Medicine’s Greatest Lifesaver, by

>Arthur

>Allen. Here is a portion of David Oshinsky’s review:

>

> > “Allen is sympathetic to parental fears regarding the dangers of various

> > vaccines, though he remains skeptical that scientific studies of these

> dangers,

> > no matter how rigorous, will open many minds. At this point, he writes,

> much

> > of the “antivaccinist†leadership is composed of countercultural

> types who

> > view life through the prism of conspiracy theory: the government lies, the

> > drug companies are evil, the medical profession is corrupt; trust the

> Internet

> > instead….To a large extent, says Allen, this antivaccination i > fueled

> by an ignorance of the past. Vaccines have done their job so well that most

> > parents today are blissfully unaware of the diseases their children are

> > being inoculated against.

>

> > “The end result is a culture that has become increasingly risk-averse

> > regarding vaccination because people have greater trouble grasping the

> reward. The

> > problem appears to be growing. As more children go unvaccinated in the

> > United States, there has been a rise in vaccine-preventable diseases.

> Meanwhile,

> > fewer pharmaceutical companies are now producing vaccines, citing the high

> > cost of testing, diminishing markets and a fear of litigation. For

> Allen, a

> > reversal of these trends will require something long overdue: a frank

> national

> > discussion about the risks and benefits of vaccination. His splendid

> book is a

> > smart place to begin.â€[1]

>

>Allen’s book is one more in a recent series of books that give tribute

>to the

> " wonder of vaccines. " The author and reviewer promote their views by

>disparaging intelligent adults and dedicated physicians who have

>researched the

>problems associated with vaccines and consider mass vaccination to be the

>casualty-causing loss-leader of the pharmaceutical industry. The drug

>companies count

>vaccine injuries as few, at least in part, because safety is concluded

>through

>the use of large epidemiological studies. The larger one makes the

>denominator,

>the easier it is to discount the size of the numerator. For example, 231

>injured in a study that involved 679,900 persons makes the percentage of

>those

>injured appear unarguably small.[2] But vaccine injuries are real despite

>claims

>that occurrences are rare. Fears of developing autism as a result of

>vaccination have been dismissed by mainstream medicine which prefers to

>attribute the

>increase incidence of autism, currently at 1 in 166 children, to a “better

>diagnosis.â€[3] Thimerosal (mercury) in vaccines has received much

>attention in the

>association with autism. Undoubtedly, many children have been damaged by

>mercury in vaccines as the numbers of successful recoveries using chelation

>therapy attest. However, the rate of autism in California has continued to

>escalate

>despite the removal of mercury from most of the childhood vaccines.[4] The

>rest of the ingredients in the vaccines need to be investigated with the same

>intensity as mercury. The answers regarding these toxic substances are still

>forthcoming. [see Dr. Tenpenny's DVD: " Vaccines, the Risks, the Benefits, the

>Choices " ] Another avenue being heavily investigated is the search for genetic

>causes of autism spectrum disorders.[5] The identification of a corrupted

>gene

>will point an incriminating finger at defective parents as the “causeâ€

>of their

>child’s autism. A better use of scare research funds would be to

>investigate

>which bio-medical treatments are most effective for these ill children. An

>exponential growth of childhood illnesses such as allergies/asthma, diabetes,

>ADD-ADHD and cancer has occurred over the last 10 years. Instead of

>suspecting the

>large numbers of vaccines now being injected into children by the time they

>enter kindergarten, drugs designed for adults have been given expanded

>approval

>for treatment of children. Healthcare providers continue to view vaccination

>in the same way as described by Mr. Allan’s catchy book title:

>“Medicine’s

>greatest lifesaver.†This accolade is attributed to the reduction of

>childhood

>infectious diseases such as chickenpox, mumps and three-day measles. But

>can a

>negative truly be proven? The assumption of conventional medicine is that all

>children will be exposed and if exposed, all unvaccinated children will get

>sick. This is a faulty assumption. If a vaccinated child does not contract

>chickenpox, is it due to the protection of the vaccine? Or was it because

>the child

>was never exposed to the virus? What if an unvaccinated child is exposed but

>does not become sick? Isn’t that a testament to the health of the child’s

>immune system? Not every child in a classroom exposed to influenza comes down

>with the flu. Studies comparing the health of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated

>populations of children are very much needed. A patient population from

>which this

>type of data could be accessed is the nearly 35,000 unvaccinated children

>cared

>for by Homefirst Health Services in metropolitan Chicago. The good health of

>these children can be assumed; there have been no reported cases of autism

>among this group.[6] Examining the health histories of these children

>would be a

>telling exercise. Discovering that large numbers of these unvaccinated

>children

>have not contracted “vaccine-preventable diseases†would deliver a

>serious

>blow to the concept that vaccination is needed to keep children healthy. An

>even more provocative study would be to examine how many drugs and other

>health

>problems exist among these 35,000 unvaccinated children. If vaccines were

>safe,

>manufacturers would not require federal legislation to protect them from

>liability. If vaccines were effective, no one would question the value of

>their

>use. If vaccines were good for us, state mandates would not be necessary to

>force them upon children. A growing number of adults are investigating

>vaccines

>and discovering the truth about their contents. Vaccines are grown on monkey

>kidneys, chicken embryos and contain bovine (cow) serum. Vaccines contain

>particles of viruses, bits of bacteria and measurable amounts of aluminum,

>gelatin,

>polysorbate 80, MSG and other chemicals. A responsible adult who concludes

>that

>this combination of pathogens and chemicals can be harmful is not a “

>countercultural type who views life through a prism of conspiracy

>theory†as Mr. Allen

>contends. Understanding that autoimmune reactions can be the consequence of

>injecting animal cells and foreign chemicals into the body does not require a

>medical degree or PhD. Instead of calling them names, parents and physicians

>who question and challenge the dogma that has been spoon-fed to the general

>population for nearly two centuries should be commended. In his book, Mr.

>Allen

>apparently calls for “a frank national discussion about the risks and

>benefits

>of vaccination.†I wholeheartedly agree. The real health risks of

>vaccination

>are well documented but rarely discussed. Beyond the impact of vaccines on

>health, the economic ramifications of vaccine injuries need to be exposed.

>Vaccine

>manufacturers and government officials attempt to justify the cost of vaccine

>programs by showing a correlation between dollars spent on immunization

>compared to healthcare dollars saved. For example, in 2005 it was reported

>that

>vaccinations saved more than $52 billion in total health care costs and

>33,000

>childrens’ lives.[7] Because injuries are reported as rare, dollars

>spent to

>care for those who are injured are never published. However, the medical

>expenses

>of a vaccine-injured person can be substantial and needs to be included in

>the economic profile. A distinct example comes from a study of VAERS reports

>between 1990 and 1995. A total of 697 patients were identified who

>experienced

>syncope (fainting spell) within 12 hours following vaccinations. Six patients

>had falls that resulted in a serious head injury, including skull fracture,

>cerebral bleeding and cerebral contusion. All six patients experienced the

>episode

>within 15 minutes of vaccination and were injured either in, or just outside,

>the office or clinic where the vaccination was given three of these patients

>required surgery, and two were left with substantial residual deficit at six

>months to two years after follow-up.[8] Even though the number of patients in

>this report is small, these costs of their life-time care could be in the

>millions of dollars. Keep in mind this report encompasses only one injury

>example.

>Similar analyses for all other injuries should be undertaken. The expenditure

>of healthcare dollars to care for injured individuals could negate any

>meaningful " savings " touted by vaccine pundits.

>

>Since the government is the largest purchaser of vaccines, the cost to the

>American taxpayer for mandated state vaccination programs needs to be

>discussed.

>The Vaccines For Children Program (VFC) allows children and teens to get

>vaccines through Federally Qualified Health Centers or Rural Health Centers,

>purchased by government dollars, if their private health insurance does

>not cover

>the vaccine. In addition, mandated vaccines increase the cost of insurance

>for

>everyone, even those who do not have children or do not want to receive the v

>accines. These costs, in addition to the requirement to vaccinate children in

>exchange for a public education, must be part of that “frank national

>discussion.†Yes, Mr. Allen, a nationwide open discussion is long overdue.

>www.drtenpenny.com

 

******

Kraig and Shirley Carroll ... in the woods of SE Kentucky

http://www.thehavens.com/

thehavens

606-376-3363

 

 

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.859 / Virus Database: 585 - Release 2/14/05