A defective hip Billion">implant verdict of $1 billion came last week. On Dec. 2, 2016 a Texas federal jury found Johnson & Johnson’s DePuy Orthopaedics Inc. unit liable for more than $1.04 billion in a six-plaintiff trial. The plaintiffs had all claimed injury from DePuy metal-on-metal artificial hips, which were part of the company’s Pinnacle line. In a previous bellwether trial over the same product, a jury awarded a $150 million verdict.
Metal on Metal Product Problems
The multi district litigation court in the DePuy hip litigation has been assembled over allegations that friction between the device’s metal socket and metal ball head rubs away billions of microscopic particles. Those particles pollute the bloodstream and surround tissue with “wear debris.”
The jury deliberated less than a day after a two-month trial. The jury found J&J and DePuy had negligently designed the hip implant, failed to warn surgeons about dangerous conditions related to it, and concealed the implant’s risks.
The verdict included $4 – $6 million per person in damages for injuries, pain and suffering; $1 million to each of four spouses for loss of consortium; $504 plus million against both defendants in punitive damages. The punitive damages came after the jury found the companies had acted with malice or fraud.
Negligent Design, Failure to Warn
Both DePuy and J&J were found liable for negligent design defect, negligent failure to warn, strict liability failure to warn, failure to recall, negligent misrepresentation, intentional misrepresentation, fraudulent concealment. The jury found J&J did not conspire with DePuy on the design defect claim, but did find J&J liable for conspiracy on the other six claims. J&J was also found liable for aiding and abetting DePuy, in seven different causes of action.
The jury awarded $4 million plus medical costs to each of four people who had a single hip replaced, and $6 million plus medical costs to each of two plaintiffs who had both hips replaced. Each of the plaintiffs was awarded $84 million in punitive damages against J&J and DePuy.
$84 Million Headache Money for Illegal Kickbacks
In closing arguments the plaintiffs’ lawyer reminded jurors of J&J testimony related to an $84 million settlement J&J made to end an investigation into allegations it paid doctors kickbacks. A witness for Johnson had said J&J wasn’t admitting wrongdoing, but had paid the money to make a headache go away.
A headache? $84 million is aspirin money to them,” the attorney said during closing arguments. He urged the jury to impose a penalty stiff enough to make Johnson & Johnson change its future behavior with medical devices.
Plaintiffs are from California; therefore, they are not subject to the same punitive damages cap that slashed by more than two-thirds the $502 million verdict from the second bellwether trial, which involved Texas plaintiffs.
J&J did win the first metal-on-metal hip trial, which involved a Montana plaintiff.
DePuy Responds to Verdict
DePuy said it would challenge the verdict on appeal. The company claimed it has strong grounds for appeal.
The attorney on the losing side complained that the, “[billion-dollar] verdict provides no guidance on the merits of the overall Pinnacle litigation because the court’s rulings precluded a fair presentation to the jury.” (Now) the appellate court will need to review errors repeated in two trials, and we will continue to urge that no further trials be conducted until we receive appellate court guidance.”
Defective Hip Implant Verdict $1 Billion
The cases involved six plaintiffs from California who had each undergone “revision surgeries” after being fitted with metal-on-metal artificial hip systems of DePuy’s Pinnacle Ultamet variety.
Roundup is much more toxic than glyphosate alone. Most studies of Roundup have focused solely on glyphosate, ignoring its so-called “inert” ingredients. Nothing in our world is inert. When glyhosate is mixed with the other ingredients in Roundup, which it always is before being sprayed on food crops – like corn, soy, beets – then it becomes carcinogenic.
Roundup not tested
Glyphosate herbicide formulations with Roundup have never been tested for long-term safety. The only industry testing prior to regulatory authorizations for glyphosate were carried out with glyphosate alone. The glaring problem is that commercial glyphosate herbicide formulations (as sold and used) contain many other chemicals, or adjuvants. Not only are these adjuvants toxic in themselves; their toxicity increases with glyphosate, up to 1,000 times.
Toxic Adjuvants not inert
These toxic adjuvants partly increase the toxicity of glyphosate by enabling it to penetrate plant and animal cells more easily. These adjuvants are widely found in the environment, so people and animals are likely to be affected by them. The half-life of the Roundup adjuvant POEA is (21–42 days), for one example, longer than the life of glyphosate alone, which can be 7–14 days.
Examining glyphosate toxicity in itself is patently absurd. In real life, humans and animals are never exposed solely to glyphosate; we are exposed to the complete formulations. Sadly, and criminally, Roundup and other glyphosate formulations have never been tested for long-term safety.
Fundamental Regulatory Flaw
Testing so-called active ingredients separately instead of in the witches brew formulations to which we are all exposed is a fundamental regulatory flaw. It’s also a flaw that applies to all regulatory authorizations of pesticides worldwide. The presumed active ingredients are the only ingredients tested and assessed for safety, before they are mixed into the complicated formulations that are released on us all.
Formulations up to 1,000 times more toxic
In one in vitro study, eight out of nine major pesticides tested in their complete formulations – including Roundup – were up to 1000 times more toxic to human cells than their isolated active ingredients or adjuvants. This increased toxicity of the complete formulation compared with the active ingredient alone was found to be a general principle of pesticide toxicology.
Roundup more Toxic than Glyphosate
This principle has been confirmed by experiments in mammals. An in vivo study in pigs showed the adjuvant POEA and commercial glyphosate herbicide formulations were toxic and lethal to the pigs, whereas glyphosate alone had no such effects. An in vivo study in rats showed POEA and Roundup formulations containing POEA were more toxic than glyphosate by itself.
Professor Gilles-Eric Séralini also found that other, supposedly “inert,” ingredients associated with Roundup are even more dangerous than its primary toxin, glyphosate. Séralini and others have shown that Roundup is much more toxic than glyphosate alone. Any true assessment of glyphosate toxicity must be considered with its so-called inert ingredients which mix in the real world.
WHO declares Glyphosate probably carcinogenic
In 2015, the World Health Organization finally declared glyphosate a “probable carcinogen.” The state of California also labeled Roundup a probable carcinogen. Monsanto promptly sued the state because it could. If something Monsanto makes causes cancer, it simply hires lawyers so that it can continue spraying Roundup on the public and its food crops. Hence, many know the company as Monsatan.
Adjuvants hidden from Public Scrutiny
Regulators evaluate the safety of a pesticide or herbicide mainly by looking at the active ingredient – such as glyphosate – while commercial versions of pesticides contain other adjuvants which Monsanto and other companies may keep confidential, with the help of corporate-friendly judges.
Companies say that they add ingredients to pesticides other than the active ingredient in order to make the product easier to spray, easier to stick to plants, easier to store longer, easier to stick if it rains. These “additives” (as if they aren’t really there at all) can make up as much as 95 percent of a given pesticide. Based on this study, how much longer will Monsanto get away with keeping the whole Roundup formulation untested. This study shows ‘adjuvants’ are part and parcel of the whole poison package, despite the fact that companies are not required to list inert ingredients on most pesticide labels.
EPA Regulations Woefully Inadequate
EPA regulations regarding glyphosate and other poisons are obviously woefully inadequate. The EPA requires that only the active ingredient be studied for medium- and long-term toxicity. This must change. We deserve better from our government agencies, and the politicians who work for and with Monsanto to poison us all.
Healthcare workers are fighting back against the mainstream media push to promote their Big Pharma advertisers’ amazing vaccine profits. We’re again in flu season, which means we are going to hear the usual growing chorus of reasons why we all need a flu shot.
What MSM will not tell us
We will not hear about how last year’s flu shot was virtually worthless for anyone over 60, or how the shot works at best half the time for others. We will not hear about the horrors of mercury in the flu shot, or how flu shot batches consist of a guess as to how the influenza virus has mutated and how that guess, at best, stems from vague and uncertain “science.”
We won’t hear from the MSM that the flu shot accounts for more deaths than any other vaccine, at least as reported in the VAERS database, which is estimated to publish only 1-10% of the actual total of adverse vaccine events. We won’t hear that most Americans killed or injured by vaccines have virtually no chance to be compensated for their injuries, save for a visit to the arcane “vaccine court”, which denies some 80% of the vaccine injury claims made to it. We won’t hear any mention at all of the Vaccine Adverse Events Reports (VAERS) database which proves just how dangerous, even fatal, a “simple” flu shot can be. We certainly won’t be given links to the VAERS site by the newsfakers at the Washington Post, or the New York Times, or any other MSM “news” outlet, which all now seem to be in the process of warning us about “real fake news” elsewhere.
“Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. . . The Constitution was made to guard against the dangers of good intentions.” – Daniel Webster
$50 Billion Industry insulated from Liability
Vaccines bring in more than $50 billion annually for vaccine makers like Merck – maker of the arguably fraudulent MMR vaccine (the subject of a civil lawsuit by former Merck scientists), the veritably worthless Shingles vaccine, and the nightmarish HPV vaccine, among others. And because vaccine makers are vaccinated against liability (by our loyal government) for any harms they cause, Big Pharma is creating more and more vaccines every year. Who would not like a piece of this business model? You get government to force people to take whatever “shots” you choose to give them, and then you get complete immunity when those shots sicken or kill the hapless fools.
In the MSM, you will only read how millions of Americans will catch the flu in a given season, and that perhaps 200,000 will be hospitalized, according to the Big Pharma-corrupted Centers for Disease Control, which is financed by your tax dollars.
You will not read about how many people get the flu from the flu shot. You will read that that idea is a myth. You will not be directed to look at the 2013 story of Piers Morgan given a flu shot by Dr. Oz on the latter’s television show, as the pleasant doctor told the hapless Morgan that he could not get the flu from the shot. You will not be given a link to the Youtube video which demonstrates how Oz proves the converse is true – that the myth was all his and the MSM’s, that the flu shot CAN and does give some (at least Piers Morgan, to be sure) the flu.
CDC shills for Big Pharma Vaccines
The CDC says a few thousand to perhaps tens of thousands of Americans get the flu each year and die from it. The CDC does not keep records, or at least does not tell you, how many of those people got the flu after getting the flu shot. The CDC does like to say that the elderly, infants and the immunocompromised are at higher risk than others.
Citing those statistics, which it would be very interesting to see verified somewhere, if we only knew where, the CDC in 1981 recommended all health care workers be vaccinated annually. In 2005, a Seattle hospital became the first to remove the right of informed consent from its staff. It required that all of its workers take vaccination or be fired. In 2010, the Department of Health and Human Services called for 90 percent of healthcare workers take vaccination by the end of the decade.
Healthcare Workers Fight Forced Shots
As hundreds more hospitals move toward forced vaccination for flu and God knows what else (Big Pharma decides that, then lobbies in D.C. to pass laws that help its business model), more human beings are claiming a religious exemption. Like others who have relied on religious objections because they are treated like children by this government and cannot simply stand on their informed consent rights guaranteed by the constitution, some hospital workers are turning to Title VII protections to avoid forced vaccination.
EEOC Lawsuits opposing Forced Vaccination
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has seen a spike in complaints from people who say they were fired for refusing a flu vaccine. The EEOC has filed several lawsuits for them, in a fight that is only just beginning.
Vaccine Efficacy & Informed Consent
Let’s not let this discussion degrade into a religious rights affair. This is about human rights. It is about the U.S. constitution’s guaranteed right of informed consent. Nazis were put to death at Nuremberg (those that weren’t smuggled into the USA or elsewhere to work for CIA black projects) for prisoner experiments which violated human beings’ rights of informed consent.
Vaccination Experiment Continues
Vaccination of every kind is an unproven experiment for anyone who has time to look into the matter. Ask those who have been blinded by the shingles vaccine, or who have contracted shingles AFTER taking the vaccine. Ask those who have seen a loved one die of the flu after taking the flu vaccine. Ask those who have seen a loved one die after taking the HPV vaccine. Are those people all expendable for the vaccine lottery? The only winners in forced vaccination are the vaccine makers and the mainstream media raking in billions in advertising monies for these ongoing human experiments.
The Ninth Circuit Court on Nov. 18, 2016 ruled that citizens of a given county have no inalienable right to reject so-called herbicides and toxic, genetically modified crops. The court’s ruling also kept the door open for continued secret crop spraying experiments by Monsanto and other chemical companies on the island of Maui.
Exposed local residents are the unwilling subjects of at least some of those secret experiments. The court’s ruling will help keep them in the dark about what is being sprayed on them, and for what purpose. (Imagining these pesticides are not being sprayed on us all is to imagine a no-peeing section in a swimming pool.)
The court rejected regulations in three Hawaii counties which had voted to keep Monsanto’s cancerous glyphosate from being sprayed at Monsanto’s leisure on the Hawaiian island paradise. The court agreed with Monsanto and other pesticide companies and industry groups that Hawaii’s local rules are preempted by state and federal laws. Controlled by Monsanto and other chemical company money, those who run Hawaii’s state government welcome Monsanto with open arms.
Right to Self Determination Rejected
The appeals court – which made five rulings in separate appeals over the regulations in Kauai County, Maui County and Hawaii County – found federal and state regulatory schemes that regulate harmful plants and pesticides don’t allow counties to make their own rules. Forget about the right to self determination, forget the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The rights of individuals to keep their food, lands, themselves, their pets and livestock from being poisoned was denied on this court’s watch.
Court kills Hawaii GMO Pesticide Regulations
In the case, Alika Atay et al. v. County of Maui et al., the Ninth Circuit closed the door on an appeal from citizens groups, despite the fact that a Maui ordinance had banned genetically modified crops and the use of Monsanto’s toxic glyphosate.
The judges ignored arguments made by the Shaka Movement and other groups that they had banned Monsanto and GMOs. The judges ruled that such a ban was preempted by the U.S. Plant Protection Act, to the extent that it banned crops already regulated by the U.S. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service as “plant pests.” Judges, unlike people, are able to bend the law anyway they prefer. These judges also apparently ignored the fact that Monsanto made a secret arrangement with a prior judge in the case to keep secret its arguments as to why the company should be able to force its poisons onto people who voted against being exposed to them.
The Maui citizens’ groups had argued that the local law wasn’t preempted because it meant to prevent harms associated with transgenic contamination and pesticides. These are not “plant pest harms” under the PPA.
The judges found that what matters under the PPA’s preemption clause is whether a local law seeks to control, wipe out or prevent the dissemination of plants regulated by APHIS.
The judges wrote: “The fact that APHIS regulates such plants for reasons other than second-order concerns that motivated the local law, such as concern with transgenic contamination, is irrelevant as far as the express preemption clause is concerned.”
Rape of Hawaii Continues
If you can’t follow that logistical legalese it is with good reason; this is Sophist reasoning at its finest. These laws were put in place to be bent by such judges to remove people’s rights of self determination. The whole history of the islands is a horrendous nightmare of rape and central control used to wipe out or at least neutralize indigenous peoples.
Law 360 reports that, “For genetically engineered crops that had been deregulated by the APHIS, the panel held Hawaii’s comprehensive state statutory scheme for the regulation of potentially harmful plants preempted any further regulation by the county.”
Similar reasoning carried over to Hawaii County’s ban, the appeals court wrote in a memoradum opinion in Hawaii Papaya Industry Assn. et al v. County of Hawaii. that court also rejected that county’s ban on Monsanto and GMOs.
In Syngenta Seeds Inc. et al. v. County of Kauai et al., the appeals court issued another memorandum opinion shutting down provisions in Kauai’s Ordinance 960 that regulated GMO crops, using the same reasoning as Atay.
Kauai’s Ordinance 960 had also imposed regulations on commercial farm operations that utilized restricted-use pesticides. The Ninth Circuit, in a separate published opinion in the case, also wiped out that argument, finding the state’s pesticide laws also preempted self determination.
The judges wrote: “In sum, we find that the Hawaii Pesticides Law comprehensively regulates pesticides and creates a clear inference of legislative intent to preempt local regulations of pesticides.”
Chemical companies sue Maui County
A coalition of chemical companies — which included Syngenta Seeds Inc., Syngenta Hawaii LLC, Pioneer Hi–Bred International Inc., Dow AgroSciences and BASF Plant Science LP — had sued Maui county in 2014 over the ordinance.
U.S. District Judge J. Barry M. Kurren agreed with their claim that the county had no authority to enact the ordinance because pesticide use was already covered by Hawaii state law.
The appeals court agreed. It said in its ruling last week that a local law is preempted under Hawaii law if it covers the same subject matter covered within a “comprehensive state statutory scheme” that shows an intent to be “exclusive and uniform” throughout the state.
The panel also upheld the lower court’s decision not to ask the Hawaii Supreme Court to offer its opinion on the issue of “implied preemption,” finding the state’s test “rather well-defined.”
Attorney Paul Achitoff of Earthjustice represented the Center for Food Safety and other environmental groups who intervened in the Syngenta case. He said the court interpreted Hawaiian law wrong and that the county rules should have been allowed to stand.
Mr. Achitoff said that despite striking down the specific ordinances because of Hawaii’s laws, the Ninth Circuit was generally supportive of the ability of states to pass their own regulations on genetically engineered crops and pesticides.
“It makes it clear that Hawaii’s Legislature, if it chooses, can solve these problems,” he said. “So we’ll continue working in that direction.”
A Fight for us All
God bless you, Mr. Achitoff, and the poisoned peoples of Maui. You are fighting for all of us born with the God-given right to refuse to be poisoned in an ongoing experiment that violates rules established at Nuremburg. We never consented to becoming subjects in Monsanto’s experiment in mass poisoning.
Total information awareness has at last reached critical mass. The whole world is now well aware of the conflicts of interest between those who own the mainstream media and those who profit from endless wars and bank fraud against working people all over the world. The whole world now knows, beyond any doubt: those who own the major networks are the same people making billions of dollars from war and misery. They are the same people who game the banks and financial markets at the expense of working people. We know you, CBS. We know, CNN. We know, MSNBC. We know, Fox “News.” Fake news indeed!
Journalist admits Mainstream News Faked
Mainstream Pot calls Kettle Black
Ludicrous is the only word that comes to mind when one hears the chorus of hair-sprayed mainstream media (MSM) heads purporting to tell us what is and what is not fake news. This latest disinformation appears to be the first salvo in a long-game movement to shut down real news outlets in favor of the Corporatocracy-sponsored ones spoon fed from our giant home screens. Google and other corporate-controlled information platforms are beginning to announce (which is something of an improvement, as they formerly worked more in secret) that they are taking steps to prevent users from accessing “news” not sanctioned by the state.
Google decides What is and What is not Fake News
Google recently announced it will be prohibiting “fake” and “misrepresentative” sites from using its AdSense program.
Google told Reuters: “Moving forward, we will restrict ad serving on pages that misrepresent, misstate, or conceal information about the publisher, the publisher’s content, or the primary purpose of the web property.” This policy, Google said, will include websites labeled as “fake news.” Can you say censorship? Can you say the First Amendment is not dead?
Follow the Money
Who gets to do the labeling? Whoever has the most ad money, right Google? Has it ever been any other way? Give Google enough money and they’ll give you a Pay-Per-Click position on the top of any web page you like, as long as you are not deemed politically unpalatable.
Google, if it’s “serious,” needs to get and give us full disclosure from CBS or NBC when those networks are flying the flag to cheer the latest American-sponsored war crimes. It bears repeating what this whole game has made clear: The same people that make billions in war also own the networks they use to frighten, manipulate, propagandize the public. This is only common knowledge to any educated or well-read peoples of the world; but to Google, is that ‘fake news’? (We report, you decide.)
Corporatocracy spokesmodel Barrack Obama has even been drawn into the act. The Hill reported that during a press conference in Germany last week, Mr. Obama said that if Americans can not “discriminate between serious arguments and propaganda, then we have problems.” We do have problems, all right.
President Obama argued that because websites containing misinformation are often packaged “very well” it may “inappropriately” affect voter attitudes towards political candidates. Whoever uses the word “inappropriately” is, of course, the grand-prize winner of any PC argument in our upside-down world. Just use the word “inappropriate” and you can demand whatever treatment you want.
We Know What to Fight For, if President Obama doesn’t
“If everything seems to be the same and no distinctions are made, then we won’t know what to protect,” President Obama said. “We won’t know what to fight for.”
We know what to fight for, if Mr. Obama doesn’t. It’s called the right to free speech; everyone always seems to be in favor of it until someone whose view they don’t like tries to exercise it. Hello! Do we all understand that “appropriate” speech is not free speech?
Mr. Obama continued the “appropriate” Obamaganda: “Part of what’s changed in politics is social media and how people are receiving information. (It’s) easier to make negative attacks and simplistic slogans than it is to communicate complex policies. But we’ll figure it out.”
Independent and alternative media sites have always been a thorn in the side of the military-industrial complex that uses the U.S. as its own private Murder, Inc. Those outlets that have worked tirelessly to expose the lies of the corporate media may eventually be blocked or even banned, if we don’t keep an eye on the ever-unfolding Orwellian nightmare. The truth is always a threat to those in power, to the oppressor.
Enjoy this moment in history. It’s fun to watch some of these mainstream media outlets running scared. Their biggest fear is that they’ve failed to serve their corporate masters of the universe by continuing to hoodwink the great unwashed, the rabble, the rest of us. Will they lose their seat at the adults’ table and be forced to join all of us working stiffs? Do they fear being dis-invited to meetings of the Trilateral Commission, the Bilderbergs, the Bohemian Grove “picnics,” or to the lairs of those grand reptilian creatures who gather to discuss the Project for a New American Century (PNAC).
A quick glance at history will suffice to show that real fake news is the news we’ve all been getting for decades.
“The CIA owns everyone of any significance in the major media.”
– former CIA Director William Colby
The CIA’s Operation Mockingbird, first run by Cord Meyer, was and is a concerted effort by the agency to spin news events, or to create the news itself from whole cloth, to manipulate information however they see fit.
Propagandizing (Lying) made Legal for U.S. Government
The United States Government recently passed a bill which allows it to propagandize, lie, to us all. They do it in the name of “national security,” the oldest ruse of all. (You can’t make this stuff up.) Michael Hastings reported on it shortly before he met his end is a strange “accident” in which his car exploded and burned him to cinders.
The mainstream media has gotten high on its own supply for so long, in its great echo chamber, talking to itself, that it apparently believes its own spiel. CNN recently tried to tell us that reading Wikileaks is illegal, that the only acceptable way to read Wikileaks was to have it filtered through CNN. Yes, you have been instructed to let CNN read Wiki and tell you what it found; then they won’t put you in Guantanamo, you enemy of the state, you.
CNN News Fakers
Anderson Cooper and CNN are well-known liars. In an ironically reverse Pinocchio tableaux, you can watch Cooper’s nose disappear in telltale Green screen evidence in front of a fake set, as he pretends to stand in front of Sandy Hook school, in a tableaux which the controllers floated to disarm the public. CNN was also caught pretending to have reporters in Saudi Arabia during a Scud missile attack. The CNN clowns were in reality on the roof of a Florida hotel. One put on a gas mask. It’s really quite amusing, if you don’t mind fake news being passed off as real.
CBS News Fakers
CBS and Dan Rather lied to us all after JFK was slaughtered in Dallas. The network had Rather tell us all that he had seen the Zapruder film and that it proved Kennedy was shot from behind. A few years later, the whole WORLD could see Kennedy’s head jerk violently backwards, proving he was hit from the front, and thereby proving there was a conspiracy in his murder. CBS and all the other mainstream news fakers also failed to report on the FACT that the House Committee on Assassinations declared in 1978 that JFK was killed in a “likely conspiracy.”
Fox News Fakers
George Bush’s cousin was running Fox “News” in 2000 when the state of Florida had not yet counted all its votes. While the country waited to see who would be elected President, Fox struck. The foxy news fakers decided they would call the state for Bush, facts be damned. All the other news fakers followed suit, not wanting to be seen as “scooped,” hence setting Al Gore up to look like a sore loser. Gore, in fact, won the total vote count in Florida, and hence won the election, but Fox’ fake news nevertheless carried the day. The network’s subterfuge also helped bury the deeper story, of how the state and hence the entire election was stolen by, among other criminals, Katharine Harris and then Florida Governor Jeb Bush, who presided over the illegal and immoral purging of some 90,000 Black voters from the rolls. Greg Palast has had that story well documented since it was happening in 2000. Did you know that? Of course you didn’t. You were watching “real news” fakers.
To get any real “news,” one needs to go directly to the source. Every idiot knows one must look directly to the source. Wikileaks is the only outlet which does that, printing emails verbatim, which are time-stamped and easily verifiable. News from anywhere else that you haven’t witnessed yourself is nothing but spin, or dis- or misinformation.
Grade School Lesson Revisited
You remember that grade school game where the kid in the front corner whispers a story secretly and then that kid passes it to the next kid, and so on down the line through the whole class. You remember the final story bears no resemblance to the truth. You remember that little exercise in truth telling? If you learned nothing else in school, you did learn that, right?
Power morcellators are not the only option for hysterectomy, myomectomy, or the removal of uterine fibroids, which some 80% of women can develop in their lifetimes.
In April 2014, the FDA announced in a safety alert that it wants to discourage the use of power morcellators. the problem is that some women may have undiagnosed uterine cancer which a morcellator can upstage, magnify, and make more dangerous, even deadly.
FDA warned on April 17, 2014:
“Based on an analysis of currently available data, the FDA has determined that approximately 1 in 350 women who are undergoing hysterectomy or myomectomy for fibroids have an unsuspected type of uterine cancer called uterine sarcoma. If laparoscopic power morcellation is performed in these women, there is a risk that the procedure will spread the cancerous tissue within the abdomen and pelvis, significantly worsening the patient’s likelihood of long-term survival.”
Risk of Power Morcellaton
Power morcellation is less invasive than traditional forms of surgery; but it also carries the risk of spreading benign or malignant tissue when used during myomectomies or hysterectomies for fibroid treatment or uterus removal.
Alternatives to Power Morcellation
The FDA acknowledged that power morcellators are less invasive (as advertised) than traditional approaches. They require fewer sutures; but nonetheless the FDA’s Obstetrics and Gynecology Devices Advisory Panel recommends that women seek, and that surgeons use, alternative methods. Several non-surgical treatments exist for fibroids, including expectant management, pharmaceutical therapy, uterine artery embolization, endometrial ablation.
Surgical Options for Fibroid Treatment
If a woman does require surgery, she and her doctor can decide between a hysterectomy, complete removal of the uterus; or a myomectomy, which targets only the fibroids. Many factors enter into this decision, including age, a (possible) desire for pregnancy, history of atypical cervical or endometrial cells, family history of cancer, risk of fibroids’ return.
Traditional Options: Hysterectomy & Myomectomy
The traditional option for removing the uterus is total abdominal hysterectomy, which the FDA says is the most common surgical choice. This involves a surgical incision in the wall of the lower abdomen, compared with laparoscopic hysterectomy, which takes less time and usually produces fewer urinary tract injuries.
Supracervical, or subtotal, hysterectomy and total vaginal hysterectomy are other options. According to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, vaginal hysterectomy is the most preferred option due to benefits it provides compared with alternatives. FDA says vaginal hysterectomy allows faster recovery and less of a chance of inducing infections than abdominal hysterectomy.
When fibroids are removed instead of the entire uterus, an open abdominal myomectomy is a traditional option. This involves an abdominal wall incision similar to an abdominal hysterectomy, and it precludes the need for morcellation.
Risks of Laparoscopic Treatment
According to FDA, compared with vaginal hysterectomy, the laparoscopic alternative may cause more complications during surgery, more transfusions, and a longer time spent in the operating room. Laparoscopic hysterectomy uses multiple small incisions in the abdomen wall along with gas and visualization instruments. It is during these types of procedures that surgeons often use power morcellators to allow large tissue to be extracted.
The types of laparoscopic hysterectomy include laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy, total laparoscopic hysterectomy, and laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy. Each of these types may, at some point during the procedure, require some form of morcellation to allow for complete uterine removal.
In minimally invasive laparoscopic myomectomy, power morcellation or the extending of incisions are ways of removing the cut fibroids. Morcellation may also be used during hysteroscopic myomectomy, a transvaginal procedure that does not require an abdominal incision, for fibroids found within the endometrial cavity and inner myometrium.
Alternative Surgical Techniques
To promote surgical techniques that mitigate the risks of power morcellation, various options have been suggested as possible ways to prevent spreading of tissue while maintaining the claimed benefits of minimally invasive procedures.
En-bloc resection techniques remove tissue completely intact, hoping to avoid power morcellation and the risk of spreading tissue pieces. To that end, methods could be used such as minilaparotomy, a surgically enlarged ancillary port; or transvaginal extraction. Each of those procedures comes with its own set of potential complications, however, and it is unclear whether any alleviate the risk of tissue dissemination.
Containment Bags and Other Strategies
Some industry representatives argue that leaving power morcellators on the market will drive companies to find new solutions to mitigate their risks. Proposed methods include vaginal morcellation and transvaginal extraction. Most common are techniques that involve containment bags.
Morcellator Options for Fibroids
Techniques in “bag morcellation” have been floated as a means of reducing the risk of spreading (potentially) cancerous tissue. But after the FDA examined the limited data for the permeability, integrity, and ability to execute various morcellation techniques within various surgical bags and other “containment strategies,” the agency could not verify the efficacy of any of those methods for reducing the morbid and cancer-spreading risks of power morcellators.
A California man received a talc powder mesothelioma verdict of $18.06 million last month. A jury in Los Angeles gave the award to the former aide of ex-Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley. After being exposed for decades to asbestos in talcum powder, the man was diagnosed with aggressive cancer last year. The latency period for mesothelioma can be 30-40 years.
Following a six-week trial, a jury of 12 people delivered the verdict against talc supplier Whittaker Clark & Daniels on Oct. 19, 2016. The jury found the company 30 percent at fault for the man’s mesothelioma cancer.
Superior Court Judge Charles Palmer dismissed the jury after the plaintiff and the talc maker reached a confidential settlement after the verdict, but before the case’s punitive damages phase, which would also have been in the hands of the jury.
Talc Powder contained Asbestos
The plaintiff, Philip Depoian, 68, of West Hills, California, said he was diagnosed with mesothelioma in May 2015. He blamed his meso diagnosis on his exposure to asbestos over several decades. His exposure began in 1948, he testified, when he visited his father’s barber shop for haircuts in Pasadena, Calif.
Mr. Depoian worked as Mayor Bradley’s assistant for 20 years. He is also a retired political operative, a veteran of several campaigns. With his cancer at the advanced stage, he has undergone 30 rounds of chemotherapy so far. He is also taking part in a clinical trial at the National Cancer Institute in Maryland.
Multiple Talc Exposures
Mr. Depoian filed his personal injury lawsuit in Los Angeles County Superior Court in January, 2016. His legal petition claimed he was exposed to asbestos or products that contained asbestos from about 1948 to 1993. Mr. Depoian said he used several products containing talc, including Old Spice, Clubman, Kings Men, Mennen Shave Talc.
Talc in Cosmetics, Foods, Gums, Tablets
Talc is a hydrous magnesium silicate that is part of many cosmetics, foods, gums, and tablets. According to the FDA, asbestos can be found close to talc during the mineral’s mining process.
FDA: Talc Suppliers Declined to Provide Samples
In 2009-10, FDA conducted a survey of four talc suppliers and analysis of various products including eye shadow, blush, foundation, face powder, and body powder. The agency found no asbestos contamination in those products, but it also acknowledged product samples were limited, and that five of the nine suppliers it contacted declined to provide any samples. A Statement on the FDA’s web site reads:
“For these reasons, while FDA finds these results informative, they do not prove that most or all talc or talc-containing cosmetic products currently marketed in the United States are likely to be free of asbestos contamination. As always, when potential public health concerns are raised, we will continue to monitor for new information and take appropriate actions to protect the public health.”
Asbestos fibers can still be found in plenty of products on store shelves. No adequate testing methodology has been designed which can assure the public talcum powders do not contain asbestos.
Talc Powder Mesothelioma Verdict $18 Million
The jury deliberated for one day before arriving at its verdict. The jury found that Whittaker, Clark & Daniels marketed its talc as asbestos free without conducting proper testing.
Clubman Talc maker American International Industries was found 10 percent at fault, Colgate-Palmolive as successor to Men Shave Talc 10 percent at fault, Cyprus Amax Minerals 40 percent at fault, and Old Spice talc maker Shutlon 10 percent at fault.
According to a news release, the parties reached a confidential settlement Oct. 26, after the verdict but before the trial’s punitive damages phase.
Attorney David Matthews, whose law firm handles talc cancer cases nationwide, said the company must have anticipated a very large punitive damage award in order to settle the case.
Whittaker Clark & Daniels was the only named defendant by the trial’s end.
Mr. Depoian’s original complaint listed defendants as American International Industries; Brenntag North America; Brenntag Specialties; Calaveras Asbestos; Colgate-Palmolive; Cyprus Amax Minerals; Dana Classic Fragrances; Georgia-Pacific; Helen of Troy; Kaiser Gypsum; Metropolitan Life Insurance; Pfizer; Procter & Gamble; Shulton; Soco-West; Unilever United States; Union Carbide; Whittaker Clark & Daniels; Wyeth Holdings.
Technology runs amok today. Most people seem to accept that the “latest” technology, whatever it is, should be embraced and celebrated. Each new apple product or so-called “Smart phone”or appliance is trotted out with a public relations blitzkrieg that seamlessly blends “news” with advertising. Many of us and our friends and relatives become salespeople ourselves, promoting the latest gadgets to one another.
Machines Ascend as Humanity Descends
Mahatma Gandhi was still alive as the industrial revolution began to alter the values of the world. Technology began to make human beings less important in the means of production, as in Henry Ford’s assembly lines. Machines were made to seem increasingly indispensable, human beings less and less so.
Machines replace and delimit Humanity
Human survival becomes more and more dependent upon our ability to run machines, while increasingly the machines run us. More and more jobs are replaced by machines. People become secondary. Human labor is needed primarily to keep the machines going, while liquid capital from labor is used to pay for “new and improved” or “upgraded” machines: smart phones (not so smart for us), televisions, automobiles, dishwashers and other so-called “Smart” appliances and “Smart” meters, which are not smart at all. Meanwhile, credit cards replace cash so that everything is cleverly calibrated to track our every move, purchase, emotion, to corral us for advertisers who want to understand and manipulate us in order to sell us more machines.
Hate Not The Machines
Mahatma Gandhi said, “I hate not the machines, but this growing passion for machines. I hate the passion for the machines which work upon diminishing man power. (I) want the wealth to be accumulated not just in a few hands but for all the people in the world.”
The Worship of Technology
Gandhi was not against technology. He was against worshiping technology as a means of salvation. He thought salvation could not come from outside; it could only be attained internally. Gandhi thought that technology encouraged the soul to be led astray by greed.
The dishwasher, the leaf blower, the so-called “Smart” TV, cell phone or computer – we quickly buy whatever new technology is thrown at us. Most hold a decided prejudice that whatever is newer must necessarily be better. Old bad, new good, seems to be the prevailing “wisdom” with all new technologies. Those who aren’t using the latest whatever are seen as fools or losers. Why wouldn’t one want to “take advantage” of the latest gadget?
Medical Device Technology runs Amok
In the world of medicine, there may be no better example of technology run amok than with IVC blood clot filters. Thousands of IVC filter lawsuits have been filed because any risk-benefit analysis shows they are clearly not worth their risks. Anyone taking a few minutes to handle and examine one of the flimsy IVC filter devices could readily see that the notion of jamming one into a human being’s vena cava is a terrible idea.
Studies show IVC filters fail to improve anticoagulant therapy, while studies also show they are not being retrieved in timely fashion. The longer they remain in the body, the more difficult they are to remove. In addition, the longer they remain implanted, the more likely they are to cause problems, including life-threatening complications.
Morcellator Lawsuits are being filed because power morcellators were sold as less invasive for hysterectomy or uterine fibroid removal than prior methods of surgery for women; however, power morcellators can spread undetected cancer that can kill the woman who has been unwittingly talked into having one used on her.
Plastic mesh was sold to gynecologists primarily as a money-making scheme. Johnson & Johnson, Bard, AMS, and other mesh makers used very well-funded advertising blitzes to convince doctors that this product was a good idea. It was easier to put plastic mesh into a woman to treat pelvic organ prolapse or stress urinary incontinence than it was to find a surgeon with the surgical chops to do the job the way it had been successfully done for more than 100 years.
Metal on metal hip implants were, at one time, the latest, greatest thing. The problem was and is that they grind against each other and eventually cause tiny shards of metal to enter the bloodstream. Cobalt and other metal poisoning results, in addition to enormous pain as the metal on metal hip replacements fail.
Technology runs Amok
Here’s a short list of technological “advances” trotted out as advances that are questionable at best, and nothing of the sort if one looks closely at them, and what their real cost is to human beings.
Each of these fails a risk-benefit test. Each was meant to replace something that already worked just fine. Each of these cost more than the thing it was meant to replace. Each causes at least as many problems as it solves. Each nullifies or belittles the human element, the man power of which Gandhi spoke. Each takes more from us than it gives. Would that we could turn them all off, or stop using them, and take back some of the humanity that we’ve allowed their makers to steal from us.
Many people who supported Hillary Clinton for President apparently didn’t know or perhaps don’t care that she is a longtime supporter of Monsanto and GMO foods. (Bernie Sanders, by contrast, is most decidedly NOT a GMO Yes man.) Monsanto’s bid to monopolize the world’s seed supply is part and parcel of the globalists’ attempt to eliminate all viable borders between nation states. Proponents of Monsanto’s carcinogenic glyphosate know no borders, recognize no fence lines, abide no dissent.
Monsanto, which is in process of being bought by the war criminal Bayer Company (if corporations are people, as the US Supreme Court ruled, why can’t they be prosecuted as people?), collects politicians around the world with various campaign donations, personal favors, and a long list of tit for tat arrangements under the table.
Mrs. Clinton – Monsanto Lawyer
In Mrs. Clinton’s case, her Monsanto connections began above board when she represented the company as a lawyer with the Rose Law Firm in Little Rock. She has since, for good reason, been called the queen of Monsanto, taking some $335,000 for just one speaking fee from a Monsanto front group.
Monsanto is tight with both the Democrat and Republican parties. When the US illegally invaded Iraq in 2004, part of the conditions of our “helping” that country rebuild was that Iraqi farmers plant only Monsanto’s GMO seeds, the kind with the pesticide engineered inside (so that you eat it), the kind the company prosecutes farmers for collecting and trying to replant.
U.S. Government forces Monsanto on Iraqis
Yes, the US Government and Monsanto dictated that in Mesopotamia, where man first tilled the soil thousands of years ago – and so presumably knew something about farming – Iraqi farmers could henceforth sew only GMO seed. They could use only Monsanto or other chemical and biotech business’ poison products; that was the condition for our “help” in rebuilding the mess we made of their country. By any measure, this forcing them to farm only Monsanto crap is a war crime. The results have been predictably terrible in Iraq’s arid soil. Studies have long shown that GMO seeds need more water, not less, and more pesticide, not less, unlike the promotional brochures’ promise. For many decades, Iraq produced the finest produce in the Middle East, until Monsanto and its toxic glyphosate was forced on the decimated and shell-shocked population.
New World Order for Monsanto
For the uninitiated, this is how the New World Order works. It uses the US government to wage war, murder a country’s people and leaders, all in order to take their resources (oil, opium, shipping port access, what else you got?) and also make the country safe for Monsanto, Coca-Cola, United Fruit, and other international mega-business concerns. (Required Reading: General Smedley Butler’s War is a Racket).
The NWO uses our military to secure big paydays for military contractors, Monsanto, Big Pharma (it’s the liability-free vaccines, stupid), Wal-Mart and other giant business monsters. The NWO uses our military to do it all in the name of Democracy. It’s a very transparent, duplicitous ploy, and it shows no signs of slowing.
The dark punch line is that not one single country that our CIA and military have been used to destabilize has made a success of any sort of Democracy, which has always been the ruse we operate under. Not Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, The Phillippines, Grenada, Haiti, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Lybia, not one single country which we have invaded to “help” has been improved by our “help.”
Murder Inc. – coup d’états r us
In fact, the opposite is true. Since 1953 when CIA pulled its first major coup, orchestrating the overthrow of Iran’s leader and elected government, everything the CIA and US government has meddled in has turned out for the worse for that country. The 1953 Iranian coup d’état was the CIA-orchestrated overthrow of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh. He had committed the unpardonable sin of imagining his oil should be owned by his people. He sought to audit the documents of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC), a British corporation (now part of BP, which destroyed our Gulf Of Mexico forever, adding Corexit to finish the poisoning job) and to limit the company’s control over Iranian petroleum reserves. When AIOC refused to co-operate with the Iranian government, the parliament (Majlis) voted to nationalize Iran’s oil industry and expel foreign corporate representatives. That triggered a CIA-sponsored bloodbath.
U.S. Oil CIA Ties
Britain instigated a worldwide boycott of Iranian oil, while using Iranian agents to undermine Mosaddegh’s government. In August 2013, 60 years after, CIA finally admitted it was in charge of both the planning and the execution of the Iranian coup, including the bribing of Iranian politicians, security and army high-ranking officials, as well as pro-coup propaganda. The agency justifies it on its web site “as an act of U.S. foreign policy, conceived and approved at the highest levels of government.”
The CIA and US Government pulled a similar trick in 1954, this time with a democratically elected leader. The American version of Murder Inc. (Eh, Michael Hastings?) destroyed the government of Guatemala and orchestrated the murder (falsely ruled a suicide) of its leader, Jacobo Arbenz. The CIA even admits on its own web site that their role in this horror “came to be widely seen as shameful. (The) governments that followed the 1954 coup in the subsequent five decades were far more repressive than Arbenz’s elective government. Even intelligence scholar Christopher Andrew, an Eisenhower admirer, describes the Guatemala affair as a “’disreputable moment.’”
A Disreputable Moment
Hillary Clinton’s Monsanto association has been more than a disreputable moment, but hopefully her pro Monsanto stance takes some of the sting out of her defeat for democrats. If you care about our food supply, care about a government-connected company dictating what kind of food a nation can or cannot grow, her defeat is hopefully some sort of defeat for Monsanto. Maybe Trump will do something about the unconscionable way that FDA was steamrolled by Michael Taylor and other Monsanto-FDA turn-style turncoats who used their positions with FDA and their executive jobs with Monsanto to blur the lines between the fox and the henhouse.
The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) has still not issued any statement regarding its investigation into power morcellators used for hysterectomy or uterine fibroids. The GAO announced in Sept. 2015 that it would investigate controversy which had stemmed from wide use of power morcellators, and subsequent morcellator lawsuits. These gynecological devices are known to spread undetected cancers during hysterectomies and myomectomies.
Congressional Letter to GAO
The GAO’s action came after a dozen members of Congress wrote a letter requesting that the agency investigate. The legislators wrote the GAO a letter dated August 2, 2015:
“Hundreds, if not thousands, of women in America are dead because of a medical device known as a laparoscopic power morcellator. (This) device can take a Stage 1 treatable cancer immediately to a Stage 4 terminal cancer. For too many women, this routine procedure ended with a death sentence.”
The representatives’ letter was signed by Reps. Mike Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.), Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.), Ralph Abraham (R-La.), Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), Bill Pascrell, Jr. (D-N.J.), Lou Barletta (R-Pa.), Doug LaMalfa (R-Calif.), Anna G. Eshoo (D-Calif.), Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), Chris Smith (R-N.J.), Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.), and Rick Larsen (D-Wash.).
FDA Limits Morcellator Use
FDA severely limited power morcellator use in November 2014, a year after doctors and patient advocates Amy Reed and Hooman Noorchashm launched a vigorous campaign against the device.
Morcellator National Security Threat Dr. Amy Reed became a power morcellator victim after one was used on her for a hysterectomy. Her husband, Dr. Hooman Noorchashm then became something of a whistleblower. He announced that morcellators were a national security threat, given that 1 in 350 women have undetected uterine cancer prior to hysterectomy or fibroid removal. When that woman with undetected cancer undergoes surgery with a morcellator, her cancer can be morcellated – sliced and diced – into millions of pieces which are then spread everywhere throughout the uterus. The result can be aggressive uterine cancer or other type of cancer that can be fatal.
Doctors push Back
Some doctors, meanwhile, have pushed back against the proposed morcellator ban. The morcellator offers the convenience of a less invasive procedure. Fewer sutures are needed in using the morcellator, compared with the old methods used for hysterectomy and myomectomy or fibroid removal. The problem remains, however, that the ovarian cancer testing which doctors have used prior to surgery in order to diagnose possible cancer has not proven reliable.
Against this backdrop, morcellator lawsuits have been filed across the country for women with undetected cancer who then underwent surgery with a power morcellator, only to find that the machine spread and worsened their undetected cancer.
Power Morcellator Investigation by Government
Meanwhile, the power morcellator investigation by the U.S. government continues. Stay tuned for further developments. . .