Doctor Who Denounced Morcellator Dies

A medical doctor who denounced morcellators has died, likely because of a morcellator that was used on her.  Dr. Amy Reed, a mother of six children, died from cancer May 23, 2017, after fibroid removal surgery spread cancer cells throughout her body. Surgeons had used a morcellator on her to remove precancerous uterine fibroids. Dr. Reed died at her Yardley, Pa., home. She was 44.  Dr. Reed is survived by her husband and six children.

Morcellator Lawsuit
The doctor and her physician husband filed a morcellator lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson, makers of the morcellator that was used on her. Dr. Reed and her husband denounced the morcellator device which hastened the spread of her cancer. She and her husband, Dr. Hooman Noorchashm, a cardiothoracic surgeon, had held teaching posts at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, which is affiliated with Harvard Medical School. There, both Dr. Reed and Dr. Noorchashm had teaching positions. A post operation biopsy found Dr. Reed had a hidden leiomyosarcoma. Dr. Noorchashm later called the morcellator a threat to national security. As a surgeon himself, Dr. Noorchashm was incensed at the notion of shredding potentially cancerous tissue inside a body cavity. He had been trained to cut around tumors, not through them, precisely because slicing into them could spread cancer cells.

Leiomyosarcoma Death
Dr. Reed’s cause of death was listed as a type of cancer called leiomyosarcoma. This uterine cancer was greatly accelerated by a botched operation in 2013, when the doctor first went under the knife for the removal of precancerous fibroids. Dr. Reed was told that it was safe to surgically remove the fibroids with the high-powered tool called a morcellator.

Morcellator Device
The morcellator device works by slicing up tissue and vacuuming up cancerous cells piece by piece. The morcellator was approved by the U.S. FDA in 1995. The device has a spinning blade that slices up tissue so that it can be extracted through small incisions. Many surgeons regard it as a great boon to minimally invasive surgery, but if a patient has cancer, as Dr. Reed did, morcellation can worsen and spread the disease. The problem is that fibroids can’t be reliably distinguished from leiomyosarcoma.

The morcellator operation exacerbated Dr. Reed’s condition. The tool had spread harmful cancer cells inside her body. In just minutes, the slicing and dicing elevated her disease status from stage I to stage IV cancer. Days after her initial operation, biopsy reports revealed Dr. Reed had hidden leiomyosarcoma, a rare and aggressive cancerous soft tissue tumor.

Doctor Who Denounced Morcellator Dies
Dr. Reed then embarked on an extensive treatment plan that included chemotherapy radiation, immunotherapy, and experimental treatments. She also underwent several major operations. Meanwhile, the cancer kept spreading, to her lungs, spine, abdomen. Following the first surgery, both Dr. Reed and Dr. Noorchashm pushed for FDA to ban power morcellators. They sent thousands of emails to the FDA and several sectors across the country. They also emailed device makers, hospitals, legislators, professional societies, individual doctors, and news outlets.

One in 350 Women Affected
The devastated pair attained a major victory in 2014, a year after Dr. Reed’s surgery. They got the FDA to examine published and unpublished data on morcellation. Earlier estimates showed that between one in 10,000 to in one in 500 women with fibroids could have undiagnosed leiomyosarcomas or other uterine sarcomas. In April 2014, the FDA reevaluated. The agency concluded that hidden sarcomas were more common, affecting one in 350 fibroid cases. Soon afterwards, Johnson & Johnson pulled its morcellators from the market.

In November of 2014, the doctor pair gained another victory, as FDA released recommendations against using morcellators in a majority of women with uterine fibroids. The agency said that using the power morcellator on fibroid patients with hidden sarcoma could spread the cancer and reduce the patients’ mortality. The FDA also stressed that the statement should be treated as a “safety communication.” It did not issue any new regulation for morcellators.

Sadly, any victories the couple gained for morcellator safety came too late to help Dr. Reed.  But heroically, she successfully turned a personal tragedy into a crusade to save other women from the procedure that had so harmed her.

RELATED

Share

Humans not engineered to withstand Glyphosate

Dead or leukemia-strickened farmers have thrown a wrench into Monsanto’s dream to monopolize the world’s food supply. Monsanto has, unfortunately for the chemical giant, not yet learned how to genetically engineer humans to withstand  Roundup and glyphosate. Until robots can be made to drive tractors, milk cows, shovel manure, throw hay, poison fields with glyphosate, write checks to Monsanto, etc., the human farmer will remain a weak link in Monsanto’s otherwise perfect corporate process. Humans not engineered to withstand Glyphosate are threatening Monsanto’s bottom line.

Glyphosate Poisoning for All
Since it is now well known that most Americans have some cancer-causing glyphosate in their bodies, this is a subject that few, if any, can escape. Carcinogenic Glyphosate has been found in many popular foods and in all California wines. It has even been found in all vaccines.  Yes, it is now being injected directly into people’s bloodstream.  Even those not personally sickened, suffering from non-Hodgkins Lymphoma, Leukemia, stomach rot, obesity, diabetes or liver disease from glyphosate, can be deeply affected. Health insurance and medical costs rise for all when so much of the population is unhealthy from eating nutrition-stripped, glyphosated food. We all live and die by nutrients. In addition to its killing properties, glyphosate is a chelator which strips foods of their vital nutrients.

Dead Farmer Failed to Tolerate Glyphosate

California farmer Anthony “Jack” McCall was a healthy man who didn’t even use Roundup on his crops. He just used it on his property to kill weeds, right up until he was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. He died three months later, on the day after Christmas in 2015. His family thinks Roundup also killed him. The tragic irony, if it’s true that Roundup did kill Mr. McCall, is that he was so pleased with the product that he recommended it to friends and fellow farmers. Like many other farmers who have suffered non-Hodgkins lymphoma and other leukemia cancers, Mr. McCall did not realize that he needed to be genetically engineered to withstand glyphosate.

People Are Plants

Mr. McCall did not realize that the human body shares a vital number of important traits with plants. Recent science has shown that people are a whole lot more like plants than previous “wisdom” revealed.  In fact, we now now that People Are Plants. But Monsanto still does not know it, apparently. Monsanto apparently does not recognize its own lies on its own Roundup label.  More likely Monsanto scientists do know it, and either don’t care to reveal it, or know that doing so would put them out of a job. The company has recently been shown to manipulate or collude with the EPA and doctor its own studies on glyphosate safety.

Farmer vs. Monsanto
McCall vs. Monsanto is one of hundreds of Roundup lawsuits filed so far against the chemical giant from Missouri. The lawsuits have been filed by plaintiffs in California, Florida, Missouri, Delaware, Hawaii, and in other states. All the suits accuse Monsanto of hiding evidence and manipulating regulators (like the EPA) and the public into believing glyphosate is safe.

Monsanto Defends Glyphosate to the Death
Monsanto’s glyphosate brings the company some $5 billion yearly, about a third of Monsanto’s total sales. Consequently, Monsanto would appear to have little choice but to defend its most popular poison to the death. It owes it to its stockholders to continue the Big Lie. The company’s very existence could depend on success in defeating these lawsuits.

Glyphosate – Monsanto Cornerstone
Glyphosate poison is the cornerstone of Monsanto’s entire business gambit. Roundup (with glyphosate as its main active ingredient listed) is designed to kill everything which has not been engineered to withstand it. Roundup works great at killing. It kills everything with which it comes into contact. That includes monarch butterflies and bees, which Monsanto has yet to genetically engineer (so far as we know), and we can now add humans to the list. The experiment has now gone on for more than 20 years, and the results are in.

Humans not engineered to Withstand Glyphosate

Since people are also not genetically engineered (at least not by Monsanto), it hardly seems a stretch to suggest that they also could be sickened or killed by Roundup.

RELATED

Share

Shingles Vaccine Risk Benefit Analysis

Are the advertised benefits of the shingles vaccine worth the risks? Merck’s own paid-for studies show those who receive the shingles vaccine may have, at best, a 50-50 chance of avoiding shingles. Therefore, whether the vaccine can help someone is a coin flip at best. (Please keep in mind that nobody is arguing that shingles is not a potential problem. Everyone agrees on that point.) Meanwhile, Merck’s Zostavax vaccine has caused thousands of people serious “side effects.”

Shingles Vaccine Side Effects
Problems from the shingles vaccine include shingles itself, with its debilitating nerve pain (postherpetic neuralgia) and eye damage that can involve potential blindness. Many shingles vaccine lawsuits have been filed for people who were vaccinated and then developed shingles a short time afterwards. Thousands of adverse events have been reported from people who have risked taking the vaccine.

Does Zostavax prevent shingles?
Not only does Merck’s shingles vaccine provide scant protection (if any) against one’s having a shingles outbreak, it may cause problems as bad or worse than shingles itself. More than 31,000 adverse effects from Zostavax have been reported to VAERS, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. It is a well accepted fact that just one to ten percent (1-10%) of adverse reactions are reported for bad drug reactions. Consequently, it is not a stretch to estimate that more than 310,000 people have likely suffered adverse events from the shingles vaccine.

300,000 Adverse Reactions to Shingles Vaccine
Anyone considering Zostavax should take some time to read a few of these horrific reactions to the shingles vaccine.

Costly Chances, Serious Adverse Events
Seniors are the primary target for the shingles vaccine. Those on Medicare expect Medicare Part D will pay for it. But if the deductible has not been met, Zostavax’ full cost plus the fee for it can range from $190 to more than$350. The patient may need to pay it all.

A review article on herpes zoster, published in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) generated a comment by Roy Fried, MD. MHS regarding the number of serious adverse events (AE) after the shingles vaccine:

For persons over 60, there is a 36% increase incidence of serious adverse events (AEs) within the first 42 days when data from and FDA safety study was combined with data from the Shingles Prevention Study.

For persons over 80, Zostavax’ ability to prevent shingles or postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) was no better than placebo AND these seniors had nearly double the rate of serious AEs in the first 42 days after their vaccination.

Vaccination fails to Lessen Pain of Outbreak
Big Pharma’s highly lucrative vaccine industry always assisted by the CDC frequently promotes the idea that even if a vaccine fails to keep one from getting sick, one will have a “less severe case.” A most dubious claim with every vaccination, it is a patently false claim with Zostavax. The FDA reported that shingles-vaccinated people who still developed shingles suffered severity of pain at the same level as that experienced by unvaccinated people who contracted shingles. In addition, the vaccinated group reported experiencing pain for just two days less than the pain reported by the unvaccinated (20 days vs. 22 days).

Shingles Shot Ingredients
The shingles shot was recently found contaminated with carcinogenic glyphosate, though that is not declared on the label. This makes one wonder what else is not declared in the ingredients. What is contained is alarming enough, including porcine gelatin, MSG, and aborted fetal cells.

The Shingles shot contains:

Viral Particles: At least 19,400 PFU (plaque forming units) – 14 times more viral particles than in the chickenpox vaccine.

Animal cells:
•  Pig: porcine gelatin – 15.58mg – known to cause anaphylaxis and food allergies
•  Cow: bovine serum – known to cause anaphylaxis and food allergies
•  Aborted Human cells: MRC-5 cells
•  Antibiotic: Neomycin
•  Chemical: sodium chloride (table salt) – 4.0 mg
•  Chemical: MSG, 0.62mg
•  Chemical: sodium phosphate dibasic, 0.57mg
•  Chemical: potassium phosphate monobasic, 0.10mg
•  Chemical: potassium chloride, 0.10 mg
•  Chemical: sucrose, 31.16 mg

RELATED

Share

Is Monsanto Killing Oceans, Too?

Not satisfied with simply poisoning Mother Earth and its inhabitants with cancer-causing glyphosate, Monsanto may also be killing off ocean life. Monsanto’s Roundup (glyphosate) appears to be implicated in some very recent research into mass ocean die-off. Monsanto now appears to be killing off ocean life as efficiently as it kills off plant life. It sounds crazy, but this is happening right under our noses as the company continually moves to monopolize seeds and control all food life as we know it. If you think this is hyperbole, you don’t know Monsanto and you haven’t seen the latest scientific research.

Scientists who have studied the undersea horrors unleashed by Monsanto’s poisoning of the worlds’ oceans have determined that Roundup runoff into the oceans is killing them.

Related: Monsanto isn’t Feeding the World. It’s Killing our Children

Roundup Pollution Kills Great Barrier Reef
Dr. Kathi Forti has seen firsthand how Roundup pollution is killing Australia’s Great Barrier Reef. While snorkeling off Port Douglas in 2013, she found few coral areas that weren’t completely dead. Most were entirely bleached of life. Her boat captain blamed pollution. Neither of them knew then what they know now, that glyphosate runoff into the oceans was the “pollution” that was killing ocean life.

Look at these pictures of the Great Barrier Reef, before and after glyphosate poisoning.

Global Warming caused by Monsanto?
Dr. Forti says that today we have a much clearer picture of what is killing the oceans and also warming Mother Earth. We have been programmed to believe that fossil fuels, CO2 emissions, are the main culprit in global warming, she says. We may need to reconsider that hypothesis. Dr. Forti writes: “According to research by the Marine Pollution Bulletin and others, we can add glyphosate, Monsanto’s Roundup Ready herbicide, to the top of the list.”

Killing Plankton Kills Oceans
All ocean life depends on phytoplankton for its sole food source. That life includes whales, reefs, sponges, coral, and everything else in the great waters. Some fishes have their phytoplankton needs met by eating other fish. Those other fish feed off the plankton. Phytoplankton is as at the very top of the ocean food chain. ALL life is connected to it, dependent upon it. If all the phytoplankton dies, then so does everything else. The Pacific Ocean, for one, is suffering huge fish die offs: whales, dolphins, seals, and many thousands of fish are now washing up dead almost daily somewhere in the world, at ever increasing rates. One man who recently sailed thousands of miles across it was unable to catch a single fish to eat. Everything was dead.

Phytoplankton, a photosynthetic plant, is essentially ocean algae. Its biological processes parallel those of land-based plants. Dr. Forti points out that, “Ocean and coral reef death can be traced to phytoplankton die-off, which has accelerated by 40 percent since the 1950’s. It wasn’t long before some researchers started asking: What new substance was introduced in the last 40 years that kills virtually all land-based plants? The answer: Glyphosate.”

Glyphosate kills EVERYTHING
Coral reefs are primarily plant life. Glyphosate is made to kill plants. It is designed to kill all life, except that which has been genetically altered to withstand it. Run-off from agricultural spraying of glyphosate runs into our rivers, which run into the ocean, in less than 40 days. Dr. Forti says glyphosate maintains about 80% of its killing capacity, more than enough to kill phytoplankton.

Glyphosate kills Phytoplankton
According to research by the Marine Pollution Bulletin and others, the most notable phytoplankton declines are seen in waters near both poles, in the tropics, and in the open ocean. In short, everywhere. Conventional science says phytoplankton die-off is due to warmer waters from climate change. So why is the die-off also happening in the colder waters of the Arctic poles? The answer is that temperature is not the decisive factor. This kills the global warming explanation for phytoplankton die-off.

Ocean Acidification
Phytoplankton die-off triggers ocean acidification. Recent studies show ocean acidification may have a climate effect of its own. (Everything is always connected.) While climate change and ocean acidification are parallel phenomena, they also interact. Rising temperatures and changing seawater chemistry are known to impact marine life. Some of those impacts can, in turn, cause rising air and sea temperatures. It’s all one system. Affecting one thing change everything else.

Massive Fish Die-Offs
As phytoplankton is dying, so is the Earth’s once-rich marine life. Pacific salmon are disappearing at a staggering rate. Scientists believe they are starving to death. Plankton pastures that once flourished have morphed into lifeless deserts. This will continue to contribute to our already tragic increases in large-scale whale beachings and fish deaths.

Glyphosate – the Gift that Keeps on Killing
Dr. Forti explains that glyphosate’s half-life – the rate at which it breaks down – lasts much longer in the ocean than in fresh water. Glyphosate is a salt, and in the presence of ocean salts it acts as a preservative. Worse still, it gathers strength over time. This leads to massive plankton and aquatic die-off. Sadly, criminally, this news is not being reported in the mainstream “news.”

Is Monsanto Killing Oceans, Too?
The real fake news the mainstream “news” outlets carp about is delivered by them every day. The continued, wretched failure of mainstream news outlets to report important stories such as this one is as fake as fake news can get. The mainstream newsfakers fail to report on mass ocean die-offs and the probable causes of those die-offs. Instead we get 24-hour reports on the latest sports event or “movie star” scandal. Those distractions are the real fake news, while Monsanto continues to poison the world with criminal backing from the U.S. Government.

RELATED

Share

Glyphosate Doubles Risk of Lymphoma

Scientists at the International Agency for Research on Cancer found in May 2014 what appeared to be a strong link between pesticide exposure and non-Hodgkin lymphoma, a blood cancer.  Their review of dozens of studies found glyphosate doubles the risk of lymphoma.

The 2014 study analyzed 44 individual research projects published since 1980. The scientists wrote their findings in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. They found that people exposed to the weed killer glyphosate, marketed by Monsanto under the brand name “Roundup,” doubled their risk of developing non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Most significantly, they based their ruling on public and peer-reviewed studies only. All the studies which have found glyphosate safe have been done by Monsanto or paid for by the company or its proxies. Or they can be traced to some person or university which has received some sort of generous financial “contribution” from Monsanto.

In 2015, the World Health Organization declared glyphosate to be a probable carcinogen. That declaration triggered an avalanche of Monsanto Roundup Cancer Lawsuits.

Twin Killers Dow & Monsanto
People exposed to 2,4-D, another potent weed killer made and marketed by Dow Chemical, were 40 percent more likely to develop non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma.

The authors were scientists who work in the IARC Section of Environment and Radiation in Lyon, France. They theorized that these pesticides cause genetic mutations in white blood cells and weaken the immune system and the ability to fight off disease. Earlier research has shown that farmers with exposure to 2,4-D have “experienced impaired” immune systems.

Extreme Levels of Glyphosate on Soybeans
Earlier in 2014, EWG reported that research by scientists at the Arctic University of Norway had detected “extreme levels” of glyphosate on genetically engineered soybeans.

The Glyphosate Death Cycle
Monsanto and other crop scientists have been performing experiments on food and people for years. With virtually no regulatory oversight whatsoever, they have genetically engineered soy, corn and other crops to survive the assaults of glyphosate. The theory (or dream) was that farmers could use glyphosate to kill weeds near crops without harming crops or animals or people. The problem has always been that the exactly same enzyme found in the weeds Monsanto targets with glyphosate is also found in animals and in us. Besides poisoning the population and the soil, this method has also spawned superweeds grown resistant to glyphosate and grown hardier. That, in turn, has only exacerbated the death cycle, as many farmers who bought into the Monsanto theory have resorted to spraying more of the pesticide in an overkill effort to kill the superweeds.

Questions for the Day

Should it be a surprise that more and more pesticide spraying does not make healthy food? Should anyone be surprised?  Can poisoned foods ever be healthier than non-poisoned (organic) foods?

Monsanto Doubles Pesticide Poisoning
The promise of genetic engineering has not only proven to be empty, but also incredibly harmful. The promise, the theory, was also that GMO crops would require less pesticide than other types of commercial farming. (Organic farming uses no pesticides.) The U.S. Department of Agriculture recently reported that herbicide use has doubled since Roundup was unleashed across our land. Herbicide (classified by EPA as a pesticide, so it’s the same thing) doubled from 62 million pounds in 1996 to 128 million pounds in 2012.

Monsanto Market Share
Glyphosate from Monsanto now holds more than 83 percent of the chemical pesticides used in the U.S. yearly, so Monsanto has done a fine job of nearly monopolizing the market as it poisons us all.

Glyphosate Doubles Risk of Lymphoma

The IARC study was published April 23, 2014, just as the U.S. DPA was considering approving Genetically Engineered (GE) seeds of corn and soybeans engineered to withstand 2,4-D, a suspected carcinogen. If the EPA approves the new GE seeds and if 2,4-D is used to kill weeds on some of the 170 million acres of corn and soybeans grown in the U.S. annually, the USDA estimates that 2,4-D use is likely to triple, dramatically increasing people’s exposure to a pesticide that has been shown to be a probable carcinogen.

Herbicides are Pesticides
All herbicides are pesticides as defined by the Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, aka FIFRA. Later amendments from the U.S. Department of Agriculture expanded the law to cover toxic chemicals now considered consumer products. The most dangerous pesticides (and herbicides) are restricted. They can only be purchased and applied by licensed Pest Control Operators, PCOs. Unfortunately, some PCOs do not follow the required rules when applying these especially toxic chemicals. Consequently it shows up as residues on or in food, and massive amounts of glyphosate have been dumped into our water supply through uncontrolled groundwater runoff.

RELATED
•  Monsanto Lawsuit

•  Roundup non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma Lawsuit

•  Roundup Cancer Lawsuit

•  Monsanto sued for False Advertising

•  Monsanto loses $47 Million Verdict

•  Monsanto EPA Collusion?

•  Glyphosate Doubles Risk of Lymphoma

Share

First Multi-Plaintiff Talc Cancer Trial underway in Missouri

The first multi-plaintiff talc cancer trial is underway. A Missouri state court jury in St. Louis heard opening statements June 9, 2017 in a trial involving claims from the families of three dead women. All had, for decades, used talc-based products like Johnson & Johnson’s Baby Powder. The trial is the first of its kind against J&J to involve more than one dead plaintiff.

Related: Talc Powder Cancer Attorney

$300 Million in Talc-Cancer Verdicts
Overall, this is the sixth talc-related trial in St. Louis, where thousands of similar cases are pending. All previous talc cancer trials in St. Louis involved individual plaintiffs. All but one resulted in huge verdicts against J&J. The most recent trial, in May 2017, ended with a $110 million jury verdict. Three earlier verdicts resulted in juries awarding nearly $200 million.

Thousands of Talc Cancer Lawsuits against J&J
Thousands of talc cancer lawsuits have joined consolidated dockets in Missouri, California and New Jersey state courts. There is also a recently established federal multidistrict litigation court (MDL) based in New Jersey. The trial that began last week will be watched closely, as attorneys consider pushing future multi-plaintiff trials, in order to have more cases heard before a jury.

Each initial bellwether trial in any litigation can play a key role in shaping any eventual settlement for large numbers of people.

Attorneys accuse J&J of Failure to Warn
Attorneys representing the families of Shawn Blaes, 50, Angela Dawn Hershman, 46, and Eron Evans, 41, accuse J&J of continuing to sell dangerous products like Johnson’s Baby Powder and Shower to Shower. The plaintiffs’ attorneys allege that J&J knew about numerous scientific studies that showed a conclusive link between talc and ovarian cancer, yet sold the product to the women anyway. According to the attorneys, this exposure occurs when talc is applied to the genitals; talc and asbestos particles then travel up the fallopian tubes into the ovaries.

J&J accused of Marketing to Minority Women
The lawsuit also charges that J&J marketed talc products specifically to African-American women, despite knowing scientific evidence showed them more susceptible to ovarian cancer than other parts of the population.

30+ Years of Talc Use
All three women used talcum powder for more than 30 years. Ms. Blaes was a Missouri resident, while Ms. Hershman and Ms. Evans lived in Virginia and Texas. Missouri’s joinder rules allow non-resident plaintiffs to file lawsuits in the state’s courts, which has made St. Louis a popular venue for mass tort cases. However, this situation could change depending on the outcome of a U.S. Supreme Court case addressing out-of-state plaintiffs’ rights.

Defendants J&J and Imerys Talc America
J&J and its talc supplier and co-defendant Imerys Talc America maintain talc is not a carcinogen. Their lawyers argue that studies plaintiffs highlight are outdated and full of flawed methodology. The companies compare talc to products like alcohol or red meat. They argue that no government regulatory agency has called for a cancer warning label on talc-based products. That theme may have played a major role in J&J’s lone trial win in a talc cancer case earlier this year.

Corporate Image Trumps Safety?
An attorney for the women plaintiffs said in his opening statement Friday: “This case is about corporations placing their corporate image over the life of their customers and the safety of their customers, pure and simple.”

J&J Lawyer Responds
J&J has used several different powerhouse law firms in the talc litigation. The company’s lawyer for this trial told the jury: “Because it’s not toxic, and because it’s not a carcinogen, and because it doesn’t cause ovarian cancer, it’s not a hazard and therefore no warning is required.”

California Bellwether Talc Trial
Another upcoming bellwether talc trial is also set to begin this summer, on July 10 in California state court. That date was set by a Los Angeles judge for the first trial in his state.

Before that July trial, on June 26 the same judge will convene a 5-day hearing to determine the admissibility of expert testimony. Expert testimony on the alleged link between talc and ovarian cancer is crucial in these trials. A New Jersey state court judge (named Johnson) last fall arbitrarily ruled to exclude witnesses who have been permitted to testify for plaintiffs in Missouri. That decision ended a bellwether trial just days before it was to begin.

More Talc Cancer Trials
Besides the California hearing and trial set for the coming weeks, another multi-plaintiff talc trial is scheduled in July before St. Louis Circuit Court Judge Rex Burlison. He has presided all of the previous talc trials.

First Multi-Plaintiff Talc Cancer Trial underway in Missouri
The consolidated case is named Swann, et al. v. Johnson & Johnson, et al., No. 1422-CC09326-01, in Missouri’s 22nd Circuit Court in St. Louis.

RELATED

Share

Five Most Dangerous Vaccines

Vaccines are, unfortunately, not as safe as advertised. More than $3 billion in injury compensation and legal fees have been paid by the U.S. government for vaccine injuries from 1989 – 2015. That money has gone to the parents of children killed by vaccines, or for lifetime care needed for vaccine-injured children. It has also gone to lawyers who have been brave enough to face a so-called “vaccine court” decidedly stacked against people injured or killed by vaccines. (Read further for the five most dangerous vaccines.)

Secret Vaccine Court

The secret vaccine court allows no legal Discovery, no chance for plaintiffs to compare a vaccinated group with an unvaccinated one. That gold-standard exercise in safety and efficacy would decidedly prove which group is healthier and which is more likely to suffer disease or death. A control group comparison would show the real dangers and the failure of vaccination to perform as advertised. Mass vaccination promoted by the CDC, and billions of dollars in vaccine profits made by Merck Pharmaceuticals –  which makes the MMR and the highly dubious shingles vaccine – would be gravely threatened in the face of scientific evidence. No vaccine has ever been shown to be safe and effective in any legitimate epidemiological analysis. Robert Kennedy and Robert De Niro just offered a $100,000 reward to anyone who can prove any vaccine safe.

Five Most Dangerous Vaccines

All vaccinations come with potentially grave risks – especially for the 98 million Americans shot with SV40, a live cancer virus that the CDC fears has contributed to the current cancer epidemic. The CDC fears it enough to have removed that information from its web site. Just because someone doesn’t drop dead after “vaccination” doesn’t mean she hasn’t been harmed, yet. (See Dr. Andrew Moulden: Every Vaccine Produces Harm )

Though all vaccines produce harm, some vaccines have been reported to be more harmful than others. Here are the top five most dangerous vaccines by filed injury reports as of 2015. Multiply each of these by at least a factor of ten. The CDC acknowledges, and it is common knowledge, that less than 10% of these types of injuries get reported, especially when potential reporters are well aware of the hostility the vaccine court holds toward claimants:

  1. DTP – 3,982 Complaints, 696 Deaths
  2. Influenza (Flu) – 1,788 Complaints
  3. MMR – 947 Complaints
  4. Hepatitis B – 672 Complaints
  5. DtaP – 454 Complaints

Only 1,270 of the DTP cases were awarded compensation. Only 985 flu cases received compensation. The so-called “vaccine court” is entirely unaccountable, set up outside our legal system. No jury ever gets to hear the very limited evidence plaintiffs are allowed to present.

Flu Shots Loaded with Toxic Poisons

Most of the flu vaccine formulations on the market contain  toxic ingredients: squalene-based adjuvants (linked with Gulf War Syndrome), formaldehyde, monosodium glutamate, thimerosal. Thimerosal (containing mercury) is used both as a preservative and a processing agent in several vaccines, according to the FDA. The FDA itself admits that some vaccines contain up to 24.5 micrograms of mercury per 0.5 milliliter dose.

While world health authorities claim thimerosal is not harmful, that claim is ludicrous.  The World Health Organization acknowledges that studies of infant macaques monkeys and rats have found that there is indeed evidence of harm caused by clinically relevant amounts of thimerosal.  As the WHO summarizes, “preliminary evidence of behavioral neurotoxicity in infant macaques following a single dose of HBV containing a clinically relevant dose of thimerosal on day of birth.”

The same document also states “Half-life of ethylmercury in blood has been shown to be similar in human and macaque infants.” (Connect the dots, anyone?) Yet, this evidence is dismissed because of “limitations” that necessitate replication, according to the WHO. The CDC has openly admitted before Congress that they never have evaluated the toxicity of mercury in vaccines. How can it be that known neurotoxinis taint vaccinations which are increasingly forced on the public?

Thimerosal is just one of many troubling vaccine ingredients. Aluminum salts are also often used to help “stoke” the immune system into action. Aluminum is a known neurotoxic metal. It is linked with Alzheimer’s and dementia and other neurological diseases. Is a little mercury or aluminum good for us? The answer is a resounding NO; but people get right in line for their shots and continue to poison their children with them.

The society and its people are harmed by vaccinations everyday in both incremental and sometimes catastrophic ways. One would do well to study some history of vaccination to see where we’ve come from to help determine where we are headed with forced vaccination.

RELATED

Share

Xarelto Makers win First Trial

A jury in the first Xarelto Lawsuit trial found that Johnson & Johnson and Bayer AG are not responsible for a Xarelto user’s internal bleeding. Some 18,000 additional lawsuits have been filed by others who took Xarelto or by family members of Xarelto users who died after taking the blood-thinning drug. Lawsuit petitions claim Xarelto can cause irreversible bleeding and lead to a higher risk of strokes.

The jury in this trial, set in federal court in New Orleans, ruled that J&J and Bayer did not mislead a Louisiana man — Joseph Boudreaux — and his doctors about Xarelto’s health risks. Therefore, the jury found the companies not liable for his injuries and subsequent medical problems.

Related: Xarelto Lawsuit

The May 3, 2017 ruling concluded the first of more than 18,000 patient lawsuits against J&J and Bayer, which jointly developed Xarelto. The companies face separate trials this summer over three other Xarelto users’ complaints. Some users claim Bayer and J&J downplayed Xarelto’s bleeding risks.

Xarelto Top Selling Drug for Bayer

Xarelto, Bayer’s top-selling product, generated 3 billion euros ($3.24 billion) in sales last year and 2.3 billion euros in 2015 for the Leverkusen, Germany-based pharmaceutical company. Xarelto is J&J’s third-largest seller. It generated $2.29 billion in revenue in 2016.

Bayer officials said the jury’s finding affirms the safety of the blood thinner.

Xarelto Marketing Questioned

Xarelto belongs to a new class of drugs aimed at replacing Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.’s Coumadin, first used in the 1950s. Some Xarelto users accuse J&J and Bayer of falsely marketing Xarelto as better than Coumadin because the companies said Xarelto patients didn’t need frequent blood tests.

Misleading Label, say Plaintiffs

Lawyers for the NOLA plaintiff in the first trial and other former Xarelto patients, stress that the drug has no antidote. This can be fatal for some users at high risk for bleeding out if they suffer an injury. By contrast, coumadin’s blood-thinning effects can be arrested. Plaintiffs argue that J&J and Bayer officials should have warned consumers that  they could be tested to gauge their Xarelto bleed-out risk.

“They only accept science they like, and decide to ignore science they don’t like,” said one of Mr. Boudreaux’s lawyers in closing arguments. “They know if they require blood testing, they’re terrified that doctors will just use another drug.”

FDA Approval for Xarelto

J&J and Bayer attorneys argued that the FDA found Xarelto “safe and effective” for patients; the drug makers should be cleared of any liability. The lawyers also argued that millions of users have taken Xarelto without suffering bleeding side effects.

Xarelto defense attorneys also dispute the validity of the safety test designed to gauge Xarelto users’ bleeding risks. They say in court filings that the test didn’t provide useful information to doctors.

The cases are Boudreaux v. Janssen, 14-cv-2720 and In RE Xarelto Products Liability Litigation, 14-MD-2592, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana (New Orleans).

RELATED

Share

Wisconsin Explosion Kills Four

A fourth man has died from a massive explosion that occurred May 31, 2017 at a Cambria, Wisconsin corn mill. His name was not yet  released as of June 5, pending notification of his kin. The cause of the deadly blast at the Didion Milling Plant has not yet been determined.

The Dead

The third man found dead was identified last week as Pawel Tordoff, 21, a packing machine operator. Didion officials said the company had located his body beneath the ruins on Wednesday, but were not able to recover it until early Sunday, June 4. Mr. Tordoff was married, with a 3-month-old son. A GoFundMe page has been set up for his surviving family.

The explosion also killed 27-year-old Duelle Block, a mill operator, and 53-year-old Robert Goodenow, a forklift driver.

Related:  Explosion Lawsuit Attorney

Sixteen men were working at the mill when it exploded. Eleven had been taken to hospitals, according to Didion’s vice president of operations Derrick Clark.

Didion Milling Violations

Didion Milling has been cited for several “serious” violations in the last 10 years, violations that posed potential for serious injury or death. In 2013, Didion was fined $3,456 for failing to control potentially exploding dust. In 2010, it was fined $3,640 when a wooden support broke and caused a worker to fall and suffer a brain injury and broken bones. Details of violations that led to several other fines weren’t readily available, according to Wisconsin State Journal writer Steven Verberg. None of the violations fell in the “willful” category, which includes indifference to safety.

The Columbia County Sheriff’s Office and the local fire department assisted in recovering the dead in Cambria, which is located about an hour north of Madison, the Wisconsin state capital.

Wisconsin Explosion Deaths

Mr. Verberg reports that Wisconsin workplace fires or explosions killed 104 workers, including 10 in farm, fishing or forestry jobs from 2011-2014.  Three of the deaths were caused by explosions.

U.S. Explosion Deaths

More than 500 grain dust explosions have been reported in the U.S. in the last 35 years, killing more than 180 people and injuring more than 675.

Worker Protections?

The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is entrusted to enforce workplace safety standards. In grain handling facilities such as Didion, standards address controlling the highly flammable dust and sources of excess heat, flames and sparks. OSHA compliance officers usually conduct inspections only in response to complaints or reported injury accidents. OSHA does not perform regularly scheduled inspections, though it does schedule inspections in high-risk industries based on several factors. It focuses on companies with repeated violations of the highest severity.

OSHA Fines for Violations

OSHA increased fine amounts in 2016 to $12,600 for serious violations, $126,000 for willful or repeated violations.

RELATED

Share

Vaccines Ineffective, Unsafe – 2017 Study

Vaccines are ineffective and unsafe, according to the latest research. The vaccine hoax has just been unveiled by a rigorous scientific study. Completed in May 2017, the study found NO reduction in measles, mumps, rubella, influenza or rotavirus among vaccinated children. The same study of 650 kids also found the vaccinated to be less healthy than the unvaccinated. This study’s results are also consistent with recent meta-analysis of the shingles vaccination for adults. Like the other so-called “vaccines,” Merck’s Zostavax also fails to provide any level of protection which might justify or offset its considerable “side effects.”

Study shows Vaccines may cause diseases

The study was published in the Journal of Translational Science by epidemiologists from the School of Public Health at Jackson State University. In addition to finding no disease reductions among vaccinated children, the scientists — led by renowned epidemiologist Dr. Anthony Mawson — concluded that vaccines may be the culprit in the dramatic rise of neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs) and chronic illnesses such as allergies, autism, ADHD.

Vaccinated Kids trade possible outcomes for guaranteed illnesses

The Jackson State scientists analyzed data from Homeschool organizations in four states. They compared the incidence of a broad range of diseases in more than 650 children, 39 percent of whom were unvaccinated.

Vaccines Ineffective, Unsafe – 2017 Study

Vaccinated kids had an increased risk of autism (4.2 times), ADHD (4.2 times), learning disabilities (5.2 times), eczema (2.9 times), and allergic rhinitis (30 times). The vaccinated did have a lower likelihood of two (apparently) vaccine-preventable illnesses (chicken pox and pertussis); however, researchers found NO reduction of other (potentially) vaccine-preventable illnesses such as hepatitis A or B, measles, mumps, rubella, influenza, meningitis, or rotavirus.

Furthermore, the researchers noted that preterm birth itself is not associated with NDDs. When preterm birth is combined with vaccination, however, they found a 6.6-fold increased risk of NDDs. The study authors note that fully vaccinated children may be trading the prevention of certain acute illnesses (chicken pox and pertussis) for chronic illnesses and NDDs such as ADHD and autism.

CDC Fails to Act

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., writing for the World Mercury Project, explained that despite the numerous requests from parents and vaccine safety advocates for  honest research regarding vaccines, the U.S. CDC has failed to act. The Jackson State scientists are therefore calling for more trustworthy scientific studies to help explain and clarify their findings.

Dr. Mawson’s findings terrify the wildly profitable vaccine industry, so vicious push back will come from mainstream media minions for Big Pharma and CDC policy. Shortly after the publication, Dr. Mawson’s study was targeted by so-called ‘Retraction Watch’ — an industry-backed disinformation outlet — to keep the study out of the eye of the public, according to GreenMedInfo. Retraction Watch is an online blog for the Center for Scientific Integrity, which receives funding from The MacArthur Foundation and other pro-business operations.

MMR Vaccine Disinformation Campaign

The MMR – measles, mumps, and rubella – vaccine controversy began with the 1998 publication of a research paper in the medical journal The Lancet. A British gastroenterologist, Dr. Andrew Wakefield, and his team found that virtually all of the autistic children in their care were suffering from inflammatory bowel disease. Dr. Wakefield did not claim then, nor has he ever, that there was a link between the MMR vaccine and autism. What he did say was that his study suggested more research should be done on a possible link. He was widely misquoted and discredited in the mainstream press (controlled by vaccine profiteers) as claiming that there was a vaccine-autism link (There is such a link, as the latest study again shows, though Dr. Wakefield never said so). His book “Callous Disregard” covers the autism cases and his press lynching. Dr. Wakefield filed a lawsuit for defamation against a hack British journalist and a newspaper that led the charge to misrepresent, misquote, and destroy him in order to discredit his research. He has been entirely exonerated along with his fellow researcher Dr. John Walker Smith.

Vaccine Profits Drive Mainstream Coverage

Dr. Wakefield is, of course, far from alone, as the billion-dollar profits of “vaccination” forever drive mainstream press coverage on the subject. Virtually every mainstream press outlet promotes mass vaccination with disease-outbreak scare stories and other tactics, while attacking anyone who questions the party line.

Anti-Vaxxer Buzz Word promotes Vaccination Superstition

“Anti-vaxxer” is the preferred buzz word meant to dismiss scientific arguments against vaccination superstition. This rhetorical fallacy (name calling) works just as “conspiracy theorist” has since it was introduced in a secret CIA memo. In 1967, the agency instructed its media shills to tattoo that term onto critics of the ludicrous findings of the Warren Commission. These tiresome terms are always employed in an attempt to humiliate people and silence meaningful dissent and discussion. They are employed to destroy civil discourse and critical thinking. Name calling is only a rank schoolyard bully ploy that should only work on one with the mind of a tapeworm. It doesn’t work on you, does it?

RELATED

 

Share