Actemra Deaths, Injuries Unreported

Actemra was introduced to the public with all the usual glowing recommendations from people paid to promote it. Actemra ads called it a “unique” breakthrough that would “transform expectations” for patients and doctors. A young woman happily boating crowed in one blurb: “If I knew then what I know now about rheumatoid arthritis, I would have been more proactive.”

Actemra Falsely Promoted?

Treatments for an estimated 1.5 million Americans afflicted with arthritis can have terrible side effects. Therefore, doctors and patients were understandably excited when Actemra hit the U.S. market in 2010. Actemra was promoted as not being linked with heart attacks, heart failure, or life-threatening lung complications, unlike competing arthritis drugs.  Was Actemra falsely promoted?

Hundreds Dead after taking Actemra
Despite the promises that it was safer than competitors’ similar drugs, hundreds of people who took Actemra died from the very same problems.  Many others have suffered harm. STAT (statnews.com) analyzed more than 500,000 side-effect reports on rheumatoid arthritis drugs. It found clear evidence that the risks of heart attacks, strokes, heart failure, and other conditions were as high or higher for Actemra patients than for patients taking competing drugs.

No Warning for Actemra
Most of those other arthritis medications warn about those risks on their labels. Actemra does not warn about those risks.

What is Actemra?
Taken by injection or intravenously, Actemra is primarily used to treat rheumatoid arthritis, an autoimmune disease that causes pain, swelling, and stiffness in joints. Doctors also prescribe Actemra “off-label” for about 60 other conditions for which it has not completed testing for safety and efficacy. Actemra has been given to more than 760,000 patients worldwide. It generated sales of $1.7 billion in 2016 for Roche, becoming the company’s fifth highest-grossing drug.

1,128 Deaths Follow Actemra Use
People are peppered every day with drug ads tailed by laundry lists of so-called “side effects.” (They’re REAL effects all right, despite the euphemism.) Nevertheless, STAT’s investigation shows that risks to patients may be greater than they are led to believe. The FDA has received reports on 1,128 people who died after taking Actemra. Considering that it is a well-known fact that just 1-10% of adverse events are ever reported to FDA, the real Actemra death toll could easily top 10,000. Curiously, FDA has reviewed Actemra’s safety profile several times since the drug was approved, and has never proposed a label change. Sadly, the agency doesn’t have the tools to determine whether Actemra was the cause of, or a mere coincidence in, all those (reported) deaths.

FDA Limitations
The FDA is charged with monitoring the safety of prescription drugs, but the agency does not verify the side-effects’ reports it receives. The documents often lack crucial information. In the case of Actemra, they don’t prove the drug caused the deaths. But close inspection of some reports can allow one to reasonably determine the cause of a death or injury.

Two Deaths Causally Linked with Actemra
In one striking example – found through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request from Charles Piller for STAT – the reporting doctor said, “[N]o factor other than the drug could have explained a 73-year-old man’s fatal brain bleed two days after he received an intravenous Actemra treatment.”  Another reported on a 62-year-old German woman’s heart attack in 2014: “The company assessed fatal myocardial infarction as related to (Actemra).”  That company was Roche, Actemra’s maker.

Despite these and other reports, neither Roche nor the FDA has ascted to change Actemra’s label to alert patients and doctors that potential risks have turned up, along with clinical studies completed after Actemra hit the market in 2010.

Actemra and Heart Failure, Pancreatitis
Experts who examined the data at STAT’s request said the FDA should immediately consider warnings for heart failure and pancreatitis – an inflammation of the pancreas that in its acute form can kill up to half of patients. They said the evidence that Actemra might increase the risk of heart attacks, strokes, and interstitial lung disease – a potentially fatal scarring of lung tissue – is less convincing, but it warrants further review.

The failure to warn the public, experts say, highlights the FDA’s inability to adequately scrutinize the safety of drugs after they have been approved, and to act promptly when potential danger signs appear.

“The system is broken, and all the financial incentives are linked up to keep it broken.”   – Dr. Vinay Prasad, Oncologist, Medical Ethicist.

Actemra Deaths, Injuries Unreported

“We’ve done a very good job of making it easier to approve drugs, often based on very preliminary evidence. But we haven’t ramped up the standards of post-marketing surveillance to make sure that what’s been out there for several years is safe and effective,” said Dr. Vinay Prasad.  The  oncologist and medical ethicist at the Oregon Health and Science University added:  “The system is broken, and all the financial incentives are lined up to keep it broken.”

Related

Share

Editor on Monsanto’s Payroll Retracted Roundup Cancer Study

A journal editor was secretly on Monsanto’s payroll when he retracted a damning Roundup cancer study.  A. Wallace Hayes was being surreptitiously paid by Monsanto when he retracted the now famous Gilles Seralini rat cancer study.  That groundbreaking research showed that rats fed corn grown with glyphosate developed hideous tumors and also died quicker than (more fortunate) rats who drank untainted water and ate non-GMO corn.

Monsanto Threatened by Cancer Study
The Seralini study was, and is, so dangerous for Monsanto, because it threatens the company’s entire business model.  Monsanto’s herbicide (pesticide) products earned the company $1.9 billion in gross profits in 2015.  Consequently, Monsanto acted quickly when the Seralini study began to pull back the dark GMO curtain that hides the awful truth.

Related:  Monsanto Lawsuit | Lawyer

The Seralini study gives the lie to the notion that GMO foods are safe.  This is why Monsanto went immediately into overdrive to discredit and destroy it.  Monsanto also dispatched its minions in the press (like Stanford academic Henry I. Miller) and blogosphere to destroy the messenger.  It was the same ploy the nasty biotech industry had pulled with Italian researcher Dr. Arpad Pustzai and any others who have found serious health problems linked with GMO foods.

GMO Foods are the New Cigarettes
In the book, Seeds of Deception, Jeffrey M. Smith records these alarming quotes from Dr. Arpad Pusztai, who was roundly attacked and discredited (by biotech minions) after he tested GMO foods and began telling the truth about them.  Dr. Pusztai compares the current GMO food deception with the tobacco industry deception that dragged on for decades. That subterfuge was largely made possible with the help of medical doctors (along with hucksters like Morris Fishbein and propaganda promoter Edward Bernays).  The Journal of the American Medical Association even used AMA doctors to promote cigarettes.

Dr. Pustzai: GM Problems may be Irreversible
“The problems with GM foods may be irreversible and the true effects may only be seen well in the future,” said Dr. Pusztai.  “The situation is like the tobacco industry.  They knew about it but they suppressed that information. They created misleading evidence that showed that the problem wasn’t so serious.  And all the time they knew how bad it was.  Tobacco is bad enough. But genetic modification, if it is going to be problematic, if it is going to cause us real health problems, then tobacco will be nothing in comparison with this.  The size of genetic modification and problems it may cause us are tremendous.”

GMO Freak Show
Dr. Pustzai also blew the whistle on early GMO experiments which continue on us all today:
“In 1985 pigs were engineered with a human gene that produces human growth hormone. The scientists’ goal was to produce a faster-growing pig. What they got was a freak show… In one of the first litters born with the growth hormone genes, a female piglet had no anus or genitals. Some of the pigs were too lethargic to stand. Others had arthritis, ulcers, enlarged hearts, dermatitis, vision problems, or renal disease.”

GMO foods are a hydra-headed monster that undoubtedly contribute substantially to all those maladies in humans today.  Several studies have already linked Roundup with kidney and liver problems. The World Health Organization has announced that glyphosate is a probable carcinogen, triggering thousands of Monsanto Roundup Cancer Lawsuits.

Editor on Monsanto’s Payroll Retracted Roundup Cancer Study
Prior to Gilles Seralini’s study on GMO-fed rats, as well as other studies which are beginning to leak out, Monsanto had been the world’s biggest winner in the suicidal pesticide-based farming methods in vogue since the end of WWII.  The ever-growing problem is that runaway chemical farming dumps greater and greater amounts of cancer-causing pesticides on the earth and into the groundwater. In addition, Monsanto’s pesticide-based farming methods, along with the company’s toxic seeds, deplete soils of necessary nutrients.  Meanwhile, farmers around the world have sadly dumped greater and greater amounts of Roundup and glyphosate into the earth, as pesticide-based farming has given rise to bigger and bigger “superweeds” that have overwhelmed thousands of acres of once-rich farm land.

Editor in Chief a Monsanto Shill
And now recently released court documents reveal what many people have long suspected: Monsanto reverse engineered the retraction of Dr. Seralini’s groundbreaking study on the carcinogenic potential of glyphosate.

The Editor in Chief of the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology was being secretly paid by Monsanto when he oversaw Seralini’s damning study’s retraction.  Monsanto may have gotten away with this subterfuge had their lawyers succeeded in preventing internal company documents from being released.  Monsanto lawyers tried to stop the documents’ release in a lawsuit filed against Monsanto by people who claim they were stricken with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma or other cancers as a result of using Roundup.

Mainstream News Misinformation
Bill Gates, a heavy Monsanto shareholder, was one of the first to point to the Monsanto-engineered retraction as proof that GMOs are safe and its detractors are misinformed.  Mr. Gates failed to mention (perhaps he didn’t know) that the retraction was engineered by Monsanto. A google search of the subject will show google’s own corporate agenda in line with biotech’s.  Google search engine results coyly downplay Monsanto collusion and promote the phony story that the Seralini study retraction was somehow legitimate.

Editor paid $400 per hour by Monsanto
The documents disclosed in a Roundup cancer lawsuit show that the journal’s editor, A. Wallace Hayes, had been involved in a consulting agreement with Monsanto prior to his involvement in the Seralini study’s retraction.  Mr. Hayes was paid $400 an hour by Monsanto for his “services.” The documents show that he was contracted to help establish a network of “experts,” participate in meetings, and deliver a seminar about regional issues in Latin America related to glyphosate toxicology.

Mr. Hayes hid his Monsanto ties. He failed to recuse himself from involvement in the Seralini study. Instead, he oversaw a “review” of the study that was carried out by unnamed parties who also failed to disclose whether or not they, too, were paid by Monsanto, or had some vested interest in helping the company. Mr. Hayes then used the findings of these unnamed parties to retract the Seralini study.

Monsanto.News.com
Monsanto.News.com reported that in a letter to Seralini, Hayes, the journal’s Editor in Chief at the time, wrote that although the study’s results were not fraudulent, he felt they were “inconclusive, and therefore do not reach the threshold of publication.”  His conclusion came despite the fact that the study had passed a thorough peer review process prior to being published in the first place.

Monsanto Fears Long-term Glyphosate Studies
Further emails show Monsanto felt the Seralini study’s publication would leave Monsanto vulnerable to the possibility of other scientists and regulators calling for long-term studies on the effects of GM crops and the pesticides used to proliferate them.

Monsanto employee Dan Goldstein expressed concern that a third party would set out to verify the Seralini study’s red flags.  Why would that be a concern to Mr. Goldstein unless he felt that further studies could further damage Monsanto?  If the Seralini study really were as flawed as Monsanto minions claimed, why would the company not welcome other parties to perform further studies that could disprove it, or show the Seralini study to be an aberration?

Mr. Hayes’ relationship with the journal was not tarnished, however.  The publication now names him an “emeritus editor”.  Monsanto money for hungry writers, like its glyphosate gift to the world, is something that just keeps on giving, apparently.

Monsanto MO: lie, bribe, bully, deny, deceive
The truth revealed in the Monsanto Roundup lawsuit documents show a systematic effort by the corporation to deceive people into believing Roundup is not carcinogenic. Monsanto has and will use any means possible to defend its flagship product.  Monsanto will pay off scientific journal authors (like the unconscionable shill Henry I. Miller), editors (like A. Wallace Hayes), and so-called expert panel members. Monsanto will counter negative comments on social media with fake science.  Monsanto will smear the reputation of real journalists (like Mike Adams and many others), and it will smear real researchers (like Dr. Armed Putszai and Dr. Gilles Seralini).  There is almost nothing Monsanto won’t do to anyone who threatens the company’s bottom line, which depends on the continued poisoning of the land, people, and civil discourse.

Monsanto’s maneuvering is helping show more and more people that Roundup is indeed toxic and terrible for the earth and for us all.  If Roundup were as safe as Monsanto claims, the company wouldn’t need to lie, bribe, bully, deny and deceive the public.  And farmers and homeowners stricken with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and other cancers would not need to take the pesticide king to court.

Related

Share

Sixth Talcum Powder Trial set in Missouri

A Missouri court will convene its sixth talcum powder trial on October 16, 2017. A September 18 hearing in the 22nd Circuit Court for St. Louis set the date.

The wrongful death lawsuit filed was brought by a Missouri man on behalf of his deceased wife. Michael Blaes claims that his wife’s death from ovarian cancer was a direct result of her using Johnson & Johnson’s talcum powder products.  Mrs. Blaes used J&J talc products for decades as part of her feminine hygiene routine.

Related: Talcum Powder Cancer Attorney

Mrs. Blaes’ case was one of three that went before a Missouri jury in July 2017.  The judge in that action declared a mistrial after five days of testimony.  The legal move came in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California. That case held (in an 8-1 vote) that state courts lack jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants when plaintiffs allege injuries which did not occur in the state.

Mrs. Blaes was the only Missouri resident in that aborted trial.  During the Sept. 18 hearing, the Court indicated Mr. Blaes’ case would proceed to trial October 16th; but the judge has yet to rule on certain jurisdictional issues that could affect the trial setting.

5,000 Talc Powder Ovarian Cancer Lawsuits
Johnson & Johnson faces nearly 5,000 talcum powder ovarian cancer lawsuits nationwide. Plaintiffs pursuing these claims cite numerous studies dating back to the 1970s. The studies suggest the regular and repeated application of talc-based powders to a woman’s genitals may increase her risk of developing ovarian cancer. They also highlight internal documents that show Johnson company executives had prior knowledge of this research, but placed profits over safety. The lawsuits charge that J&J selfishly decided against adding warning labels to its Baby Powder or Shower-to-Shower talcum powder products.

Missouri Verdicts top $400 Million
Missouri has already concluded five talcum powder ovarian cancer trials. Four juries awarded plaintiffs compensatory and punitive damages that ranged from $55 million to $100 million. Only one of five Missouri juries has returned a verdict for Johnson & Johnson.

California Talc Cancer Verdict – $417 Million
At least 300 similar cases are pending against Johnson & Johnson in California’s Los Angeles Superior Court. In August 2017, a jury that heard evidence in the state’s first talcum powder trial ordered Johnson & Johnson to pay $417 million to a woman diagnosed with terminal ovarian cancer. That verdict included $300 million in punitive damages. That trial included much of the evidence presented during earlier talcum powder trials in Missouri. It also marked the first time a jury saw evidence that some of Johnson’s competitors were now including ovarian cancer warnings on their talcum powder labels.

Sixth Talcum Powder Trial set in Missouri

Besides the sixth talcum powder trial set in Missouri, talcum powder litigation involving J&J  products is also underway in New Jersey and Delaware state courts, as well as in New Jersey federal court.

RELATED

Share

Train Engineers’ Sleep Apnea undiagnosed before crashes

Two New York City-area engineers who crashed their trains in 2016 suffered from undiagnosed sleep apnea.  Neither has a memory of the crash he caused.  That was the finding of the National Transportation Safety Board.  The crashes – in Hoboken, New Jersey and Brooklyn, New York – killed one person and injured 200.

Both trains were moving faster than double the posted speed limit, the Associated Press reported. Each crashed at a station that had been exempted from federal regulations which require automatic speed controls that could have slowed or stopped them. The NTSB documents were made public Sept. 21, 2017.

NTSB Report will Combine Findings

NTSB said the common circumstances of the two accidents – the Sept. 29, 2016 New Jersey Transit crash in Hoboken, New Jersey; and the Jan. 4, 2017 Long Island Rail Road crash in Brooklyn – warranted combined findings and recommendations into one report slated for release in 2018.

The 2,500 pages of documents released Sept. 21 included medical reports and interview transcripts.  They show what investigators have learned but don’t include crash causation conclusions.

Sleep Apnea Controversy Rages
The sleep apnea findings inflame the debate over whether or not to require testing for the malady in train engineers and OTR semi-truck drivers. Sleep apnea harms one’s ability to get needed rest, which most reasonable people would agree is important for a train engineer or a truck driver.

The Obama administration had introduced legislation to require train engineers and truck drivers to be screened for sleep apnea; but the Trump administration reversed course.  Many OTR truckers have fought the screening measure because they would suffer the costs of it, estimated at $1,000-$2,000 per person.  Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has pushed for government-mandated screenings.  Mr. Schumer called the Trump administration’s decision to abandon a plan to enact a sleep apnea testing requirement “unconscionable.”

“We can’t have train engineers with undiagnosed sleep apnea at risk of falling asleep at the switch,” said Mr. Schumer.

Sleep Apnea affects Waking Hours
Sleep apnea can affect the afflicted even during waking hours, leading to drowsiness.  Sufferers are repeatedly awakened as their airways close and breathing stops.

Former Federal Railroad Administrator Weighs In
Former Federal Railroad Administrator Sarah Feinberg issued a safety advisory in December 2016 that urged railroads to test for sleep apnea.  Ms. Feinberg argued that the Hoboken and Brooklyn crashes were “further confirmation” that undiagnosed and untreated sleep apnea “is a danger to rail passengers, subway commuters and everyone on America’s highways.”

NTSB – Sleep Apnea caused Highway, Rail Accidents
The NTSB has blamed sleep apnea as the probable cause of ten highway and rail accidents in the past 17 years.

Morbid Obesity raised Sleep Apnea Risk
NTSB records show the Hoboken and Brooklyn engineers both had the sleep apnea risk factor of morbid obesity, but neither had been diagnosed with that disorder either, until after their crashes.  Both engineers are now being treated with pressurized breathing masks.

NJ Transit engineer Thomas Gallagher – 6 feet tall and 322 pounds – told investigators he only remembered looking at his watch and the speedometer and activating the horn and bell before his packed rush-hour train slammed into Hoboken Terminal.  Then 48, he told investigators the next thing he remembered was a “loud bang.”  Meanwhile, a conductor standing on a platform told investigators he couldn’t see the engineer through the cab window as the train hit the station at more than double the 10 mph speed limit.  That means Mr. Gallagher may have slumped down or fallen.

Falling debris killed a woman on a platform, and the crash hurt 110 people aboard the train.

The morbidly obese train engineer in the Long Island Railroad crash told investigators he only remembered approaching the terminal and then getting thrown from his seat in the crash. His train was going 13 mph in a 5 mph curve when it hit a bumping post at the end of the tracks.
The engineer said he was unaware of the impending crash, which launched the lead car into the air and on top of the concrete platform. His crash hurt more than 100 people.

“I didn’t know what the hell was going on,” the engineer said. “I remember being thrown from the seat because I was into the dashboard area, and just, you know, screaming and smoke, and people were laying on the floor in front of me.”

Train Engineers’ Sleep apnea undiagnosed before crashes
Train Engineers and OTR truckers should not have to pay for their own sleep apnea screenings, but neither should train passengers or drivers of cars on the road, when undiagnosed sleep apnea injures or kills them.

RELATED

Share

Flu vaccines don’t work for elderly, says latest science

Flu vaccines don’t work for elderly people, says the latest science.   Tracey Watson reported on Sept. 19, 2017 that there has been a total media blackout over this news.  One can only wonder why.  Don’t the elderly deserve to know this information?  There has also been a near total  blackout on the troubling shingles vaccine that fails 98-99% of the elderly.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC),  decides the national vaccination schedule “recommended” for children.  The CDC notes that those most at risk of complications from the flu virus are children younger than 5, and especially those under 2; pregnant women; people in nursing homes; and adults over 65.  The elderly are therefore among the most vulnerable members of society to influenza. The problem is that the flu shot last year was again determined to be ineffective for the elderly.

Public Health England (PHE) released a recent report that says, even though the flu shot seems to have been slightly more effective at preventing influenza among children than in the past, last year’s flu shot was totally ineffective for the elderly.

Flu Vaccine fails to thwart most common Strain

Vaccine “experts” believe the shot was ineffective because it failed to protect against the H3 strain, the most common circulating flu strain.  The flu shot is at best a game of chance each year.  “Experts” must attempt to predict which of three strains of the flu virus will be in circulation the next winter.  Even in a good year, their strike rate is a woeful 50 percent.

But that doesn’t mean CDC officials ever admit when a vaccine is ineffective or even useless.  In the case of the elderly, vaccine health professionals blame the elderly themselves.  A representative of PHE told BBC News: “As people age, their immune systems are often weaker and therefore their bodies may not respond as well to a vaccine as younger people’s bodies.”

Doubling Down on a Failed Flu Vaccine
Instead of admitting defeat, then, and encouraging seniors to pursue proven natural flu prevention paths, health officials just continue to push the flu shot.  Yes, despite the flu vaccine’s failure to help the elderly, vaccine “experts” still recommend older people take the flu jab again and again.

Mr. Watson points out that this is like saying, “The flu shot is useless for you and we know it, but you need to have it anyway.”  The so-called medical “experts” have even decided to double down on the insanity.  They have introduced “high-dose jabs that work to boost the body’s immune response to receiving the vaccine.”

Doubly Useless Flu Shots for Elderly
It’s hard to follow the logic, because there’s no logic to follow.  This is like saying, “The flu jab is useless for you and we know it, so we’re going to make it twice as useless.  Just keep quiet and take the jab.”  Meanwhile, thanks in part to the levels of mercury and/or aluminum and other “adjuvants” in flu shots, one’s risk of suffering from Alzheimer’s tends to rise with the number of flu shots one has taken over the years.

Flu vaccines don’t work for elderly, says latest science

Tracy Watson does offer some helpful news, “at least four easy, natural and effective ways to work with your body to build up your immune system and prevent the flu”: 1.) sunlight (Vitamin D3); 2.) Astragalus (a staple of ancient Ayurvedic and Chinese medicine); 3.) Echinacea and golden seal (powerful immune boosters); 4.) lifestyle and dietary changes (exercise, clean water, good sleep, controlled stress, fresh, organic fruits and vegetables).

RELATED

Share

20 Vaccine Documentaries that show the Big Picture

Scientists, doctors, researchers, writers and parents have produced at least 20 vaccine documentaries that show the big picture of this troubling controversy.  More and more parents are starting to figure out the anomalies and the contradictions and the outright lies of vaccination promoters as they watch their vaccinated children descend into chronic sickness. Recent studies show unvaccinated children are healthier than vaccinated ones; but you won’t find that story in mainstream “news.”

Related:  Vaccine Lottery:  Sacrifice the Children

More and more people who take the time to study the issue are figuring out that the CDC has lied to them. They have figured out that many of their doctors have unwittingly lied to them, mostly because their doctors don’t know anything about the history of vaccination or what is actually contained IN the vaccinations.  Talking television heads have lied to them.  Local newscasters have lied to them.

Vaccines are not the panacea they’ve been painted to be in the mainstream press controlled by drug company profits. The only way anyone can find the truth about vaccines is to see the injuries in their own children, which thousands and thousands of parents have done.  Or else they can research the web, study the history of vaccination, and look to see if anyone has ever done a legitimate double-blind study that proves the safety and effectiveness of even one single vaccine.

Related:  Shingles Vaccine Lawsuit

The vaccination blitz may not have begun as a cash cow making test monkeys out of most of its citizens.  The initial putsch for vaccination seems to have started with good intentions.  But do good intentions translate to positive results?  If only it were so!

“Most of the evil in this world is done by people with good intentions.” ― T.S. Eliot

Drug company executives extorted Congress back in the 1980s to give vaccine makers immunity from criminal prosecution or civil liability when they make vaccines that injure or kill children. Congress blinked and gave the vaccine profiteers virtual blanket immunity from liability, passing the so-called 1986 National Childhood Immunization Act.  Like the infamous “Citizen’s United,” or the notorious “Clean Skies” initiative, or “Operation Iraqi Freedom” (changed from the too-coy “Operation Iraqi Liberation” or OIL), the nomenclature is a duplicitous shield hiding a more troubling agenda.

Related:  Five Most Dangerous Vaccines

The so-called National Childhood Immunization Act shields drug companies from liability when their vaccines injure or kill children forced to take vaccines.  One dollar of profit from every vaccine goes into a fund, supposedly to help the children injured by vaccines.  This already creates an immediate problem for vaccine pushers an profiteers like Paul Offit, who endlessy tell us vaccines are completely safe and that autism is not caused by vaccines.  This big lie obtains today despite the fact that more than $3 billion has been paid from this fund to vaccine-injured children and their families.  Sadly, the fund recompenses only a tiny percentage of  parents and children injured or killed by vaccines.  The government realized early on that the fund didn’t collect enough money to compensate all the vaccine victims ; so it quickly moved to disallow Legal Discovery in vaccine cases and to simply deny some 80% of the claims in the secret and demonstrably undemocratic “Vaccine Court.”

Vaccine injuries are wiping out more and more families, crippling them emotionally and financially by autism and other vaccine-related injuries.  But those unfortunates do have one advantage over many.  They have seen the light.  They KNOW what caused their children’s injuries. Their eyes have been opened to how the world works (or doesn’t).  The rest of us need to open our own eyes before it’s too late for us and for our children, or our neighbor’s children.  We will all continue to pay as the rate of autism and vaccine injuries increases exponentially every year, in direct proportion to CDC mandates that require more and more childhood vaccinations be forced into our pin-cushion kids.  Rather than work as a watchdog for taxpayers, the CDC works as a partner with vaccine makers to promote vaccine policy and continue to raise the number of vaccines it requires children to take.

At least 20 must-see vaccine documentaries have been noted by Natural News, a web site that  Google and Facebook are trying to silence as Fake News.  Wise people will decide for themselves what fake news is, instead of getting censored search engine results.

20 Vaccine Documentaries that show the Big Picture

Please watch these documentaries and decide for yourself.

1. Vaccination – The Silent Epidemic

2. The Greater Good

3. Shots In The Dark

4. Vaccination The Hidden Truth

5. Vaccine Nation

6. Vaccination – The Truth About Vaccines

7. Lethal Injection

8. Bought

9. Deadly Immunity – Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

10. Autism – Made in the USA

11. Beyond Treason

12. Trace Amounts

13. Why We Don’t Vaccinate

14. Autism Yesterday

15. Denmark Documentary on HPV Vaccine

16. Vaxxed

17. Man Made Epidemic

18. 50 Cents A Dose

19. Direct Orders

20. Dtap – Vaccine Roulette

21. Truthstream News: About All Those Vaccines

RELATED

Share

Cook IVC Filter Lawyers can depose ex-Cook President, says Judge

Cook IVC filterCook Blood Clot Filter Lawsuits lawyers can depose an ex-Cook president, a judge ruled on September 13, 2017.  Cook defense lawyers had moved to block the deposition.  Attorney David Matthews of Matthews & Associates Law Firm will handle the deposition for the plaintiff in the case.  Mr. Matthews represents the plaintiff in the first Cook IVC filter case scheduled for trial this fall.

U.S. District Judge Richard L. Young issued an order that overruled Cook’s appeal from the denial of a Motion for Protective Order Barring Proposed Deposition of former Cook Group, Inc. president Kem Hawkins.  The Court ordered that Cook must produce its former executive for a deposition by September 27, 2017.

In early 2017, Matthews & Associates requested the deposition of Kem Hawkins to question him over IVC filter documents that included emails from his personal email account.  Plaintiffs contend those documents reveal Mr. Hawkins was intimately involved in the decision-making process and strategy regarding critical issues in the case.  The issues included decisions regarding the testing, design, marketing, and production of the Gunther Tulip and Celect IVC filters.

Defendants had filed a Motion April 27, 2017 for a Protective Order to prevent the Plaintiffs from deposing Mr. Hawkins.  However, on June 30, 2017, the Magistrate Judge denied Cook’s request. He stated: “Hawkins was involved in the decision-making process and strategy regarding the testing, design, marketing, and production of the [Gunther Tulip and Celect] filters.”

The judge rejected Cook’s attempt to thwart potentially damaging discovery:
“… Hawkins is the better source for information related to this litigation because he was the president of Cook during the time the Gunther Tulip and Celect IVC filters were manufactured and sold in the United States. Moreover, Hawkins regularly communicated on a personal email account, which Plaintiffs suspect the Cook Defendants did not search when producing responsive documents to their discovery requests. This all suggests that Hawkins has relevant knowledge that is not already available to Plaintiffs.”

The District judge agreed, adding that a review of the sealed documents shows Mr. Hawkins was involved in “strategic decisions regarding the enhancement of the Tulip filter and the development of the Celect filter to increase market share. He was aware of the timetable for the Celect clinical trials and sought to speed up the process to get Celect on the market. Most importantly, the documents reflect that he was aware of the risk that both IVC filters could perforate the wall of the vena cava.”

Cook IVC Filter Lawyers can depose ex-Cook President, says Judge
The Cook Defendants in the case must produce Mr. Hawkins for deposition within two weeks of the Court’s September 13, 2017 Order.  The ruling means Plaintiffs are entitled to seek relevant documents from Mr. Hawkins and ask him questions about his personal email account.

The first Cook IVC Filter trial is scheduled for an Indiana courtroom in November, 2017.

RELATED

Share

Chemical Farming Kills Earth, Animals, People

Chemical based farming kills earth, animals, and people – are we leaving anything out? Oh, yes, it also kills the beauty that mother nature developed over thousands of years before man came along and thought he could steamroll her into submission.

What kind of an animal thinks it can poison its own food supply and remain healthy? How can something be sprayed on plants to kill weeds and bugs without harming everything else around it? What kind of an animal would even believe such a thing possible?

Related:  Roundup non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma

Probably one enamored of technology.  Probably one convinced he is special, somehow outside the bounds of plant and animal life, of nature. Probably an animal capable of superstitious “reasoning,” or what psychologists call “magical thinking,” at least where his own pocketbook is concerned. Probably an animal who thinks he’s not an animal, but some sort of superior being. Probably some animal who read in the bible that he has dominion over the other animals, and he takes that to mean that he can kill them or use them or torture them or whatever he likes without any consequences.

Silent Spring
Silent Spring author Rachel Carson, whose famous book launched the environmental movement, noted that in 1947 “DDT is good for me” was a little piece pushed by TIME magazine. “Public health” announcements ran film of children being sprayed with the carcinogenic neurotoxin while they ate and swam and played. Doctors for decades hawked cigarettes, declaring them good for us, maybe even a great way to help relax (and not think about what could be silently killing us). It was propaganda, plain and simple, just like Monsanto’s declarations today – its false advertising – about how wonderful Roundup is, about how safe glyphosate is.

Chemical Farming Kills Earth, People, Animals
Ms. Carson spoke presciently about our chemical-based farming methods.  The corporate model of farming – which tortures animals and poisons so many of us today, while denying us needed nutrients – didn’t gain a foothold until after WWII.  That’s when chemical companies that made killing weapons (and killings in sales) realized they could also make a “killing” in farming, in killing pests in the mass production of food.  The problem, of course, is that farming based on toxic chemicals kills indiscriminately, just like Roundup today.  Rachel Carson was an early critic of this chemical model of farming.

Balance of Nature Unbalanced by Monsanto
Ms. Carson said: “Now to these people, apparently, the balance of nature was something that was replaced as soon as man came on the scene. You might as well assume you could repeal the law of gravity. The balance of nature is built on a series of inter-relationships between living things and their environment. You can’t just step in with some brute force and change one thing without changing many others.”

You’re Headed for Disaster
Ms. Carson added, “That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to tilt the balance of nature in our favor; but unless we do bring these chemicals under better control, you’re certainly headed for disaster.”

GMOs Poisoning Most of Us Most the Time
GMO foods are now poisoning most of us most the time.  Some 80 percent of our food supply is genetically modified.  There’s a clear parallel between our increasing use of glyphosate and rising increases in infertility, thyroid disease, liver disease, kidney problems, and other life-threatening maladies.

Inadequate Regulatory System
The problem is that we have an inadequate regulatory system, says Claire Robinson, editor of GM Watch.  That system doesn’t explore all the risks of GMO foods, leaving that task mostly for the same companies like Monsanto that profit from GMO proliferation. The pesticide lobby is very strong.  Monsanto, Syngenta and others steadily push to weaken pesticide regulation at the same time that they are profiting more and more from the sale of GMO seeds, which are made to be sold with their pesticides.

Low Dose Glyphosate damages Kidney, Liver Function
The regulation is overrun by Monsanto sycophants and government shills like Michael Taylor, as well as EPA officials both past and present.  Some EPA officials were recently unmasked in a Monsanto lawsuit. They can be seen in emails colluding with Monsanto to help the company push the phony claim that glyphosate is safe.  Glyphosate is decidedly NOT safe.  In fact, ultra-low doses of glyphosate, thousands of times below what regulators says is completely safe, have been shown to cause increased incidents of liver and kidney damage over the long term. That is the way glyphosate is working on virtually all of us – long term.  A study led by London, UK geneticist, Dr. Michael Antoniou has shown this long-term, low-dose effect.  Given that most people in the U.S. have been found to be contaminated with glyphosate, even those of us trying to eat organic foods and avoid all the poisoned Monsanto food that we can, are at risk.

Buy Organic, Buy Local
The best answer is to buy organic, which is the food most likely not to be contaminated with glyphosate.  Buy from local producers when you can. Get to you know your food producers. Then join an action group.  Since our regulators are captured by Monsanto and other industry giants, and our politicians are captured or gutless, we are largely on our own to start citizen movements to save ourselves, our children, and our planet earth for future generations.

RELATED

•  Pesticide Action Network, North America
www.panna.org

•  Moms Across America
www.momsacrossamerica.com

•  Moms advocating Sustainability
www.momsadvocatingsustainability.org/resources

•  Environmental Working Group
www.ewg.org

•  Slow Food USA
www.slowfoodusa.org/about-us

•  US Right to Know
www.usrtk.org

•  GMWatch
www.gmwatch.org

•  The Detox Project
www.detoxproject.org

•  Independent Science News
www.independentsciencenews.org

•  Dr. Joseph Mercola
www.mercola.com

•  Center for Food Safety
www.centerforfoodsafety.org

•  www.AllergyKids.com

•  American Nutrition Association
www.AmericanNutritionAssociation.org

•  www.organicconsumersassociation.org

•  www.HealthAndEnvironment.org

•  www.ResponsibleTechnology.org

Books

•  GMO Myths and Truths

•  Altered Genes, Twisted Truth

Share

Stanford Academic unmasked as Monsanto Shill

Take a good look at this picture of Stanford Academic, Henry I. Miller.  Would you trust this man to serve you honest advice about healthy food?  Look closer. Would you be more or less likely to take that advice if you learned that he was being paid by Monsanto to promote it?  This Stanford academic has been unmasked as a Monsanto shill.

A longtime ally of large agricultural companies (as well as the tobacco industry), Stanford’s Henry I. Miller has been unmasked as a Monsanto shill.

Forbes Magazine Op-Ed Fraud
According to documents recently released in a Monsanto lawsuit that charges a man’s lymphoma was caused by Roundup, Mr. Miller – a prominent Stanford University academic – allowed Monsanto to write an op-ed for Forbes magazine in his name.

Mr. Miller is a Robert Wesson Fellow in Scientific Philosophy and Public Policy at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. Monsanto called him into service after the world began to notice Roundup is linked with lymphoma and other cancers, as well as liver and kidney damage.

Carcinogen Maker Monsanto 

In 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a branch of the World Health Organization (WHO), ruled that glyphosate used in Roundup and other Monsanto poisons, was a “probable carcinogen.” Monsanto promptly sent an email to Mr. Miller through Eric Sachs, a Science, Technology & Outreach Lead at Monsanto. The company invited Miller to write about the decision.

Eric Sachs wrote:

“Henry,
Are you interested in writing more on the topic of the IARC panel, its process, and controversial decision? I have background and can provide information if needed. The outcome is embargoed but will be communicated as early as next week.
Eric”

This brief email proves Miller and Sachs knew each other well, and that Monsanto directly asked Miller to help fight the IARC pronouncement.  Miller’s response shows his complicity and willingness to let Monsanto control him, for a price.  He wrote back to Monsanto :

“I would be if I could start from a high-quality draft,” he responded, adding a bloated note that he was “inundated with projects.” (The poor man wasn’t just busy like most people; he was ‘inundated.’)

Sachs then greased the skids for Miller’s easy slide into prostitution: “We have a draft nearly done and will send to you by tomorrow,” Sachs wrote.  Then just hours later, Sachs sent Miller a draft with a patronizing note to further help Miller slide down: “Here is our draft…It’s still quite rough… but a good start for your magic…” .

Miller later passed this draft on to Forbes magazine without disclosing that Monsanto had written most of it. When Forbes learned of Miller’s 2015 arrangement in the summer of 2017, Forbes removed the piece from its web site, though CBS preserved and published most of it in a PDF.

Miller attacks IARC for Monsanto
In his Monsanto-ghostwritten article, Milller cautioned against trusting any U.N. agency. He argued that the EPA and ECHA (European Chemical Agency) had not previously found the active ingredients to be likely carcinogens. Miller never noted agrochemical have strongly undermined and influenced these agencies. Miller also failed to note U.S. EPA used Monsanto’s own research to approve glyphosate products.

Miller echoes unsubstantiated Monsanto Claims
After comparing “hazard” and “harm,” Miller dutifully repeated unsubstantiated the Monsanto claim: “[T]he reality is that glyphosate is not a human health risk even at levels of exposure that are even 100 times higher than the human exposures that occur under conditions consistent with the product’s labeling.”

More and more research disputes this Monsanto claim, as do plaintiffs in several Roundup cancer lawsuits.

The Case of Henry I. Miller
The case of Henry I. Miller is emblematic of just how Monsanto works with writers to both massage and manipulate public opinion for profit and also protect itself from liability. It is hardly the first time Monsanto has tried to manipulate media and control spin on scientific research.

Monsanto Works to Spin IARC Decision
According to other Monsanto emails about a month before the 2015 IARC decision, Monsanto Product Safety Assessment Strategy Lead William Heydens promoted ghost-writing research for academics to sign as their own. Mr. Heydens wrote in an email to toxicologist Donna Farmer titled “IARC planning”:

“An option would be to add Greim and Kier or Kirkland to have their names on the publication, but we would be keeping the cost down by us doing the writing and they would just edit & sign their names so to speak. Recall that is how we handled Williams Kroes & Munro, 2000.”

Monsanto Lies in Plain Sight as Evidence Mounts
Monsanto has repeatedly denied that this email proves they ghost-wrote the Williams, Kroes, and Munro article. Monsanto claims that any evidence which shows Monsanto collusion with writers or EPA officials has been taken out of context.

Stanford Academic unmasked as Monsanto Shill

The problem for Monsanto is that email is far from the only evidence that Monsanto attempted to control controversy surrounding its poison products. Meanwhile, Monsanto continues to spin and obfuscate as its own company emails show it to be a manipulator trying to save itself from what any half wit can see is the truth. Faced with the truth over anything, Monsanto lies and denies what the whole world can see, and then attacks anyone and any agency that attempts to shine the clean light of truth.

RELATED

 

Share

Fake Vaccine News, Fake Studies, Fake Advocates

Fake vaccine news, fake studies, fake advocates dominate so-called real news.  First and most pointedly, in California.  The golden state is ground zero for the mandatory (Read: forced) vaccination of schoolchildren.  The state was the first to kill informed consent for parents and their children.  Led by Merck Pharmaceutical darling Senator Richard Pan, the state decided to do away with the first rule of medicine.  This is more than a little ironic, seeing as how Mr. Pan is also a medical doctor.  Unless one can afford to home school one’s children in California, they are, for all intents and purposes, forced to take a huge dose of vaccinations, of whatever type and dose the state – as directed by drug companies and the CDC – decide that they “need.”

Why is no adult discussion of vaccines allowed in the mainstream media?  What gives?

It is easy to spot pro-vaccine politicians and how they got that way.  All one needs do is look at their campaign contributions. Even in the insane age of Citizen’s United, one can still follow the money trail, most of the time.

Follow the Money Trail

It can be harder to follow the money for vaccine advocates working in academia.  Sometimes they  write such prolific trash supporting drug companies, it is almost impossible NOT to spot them.  When an academic like Dorit Reiss of UC Hastings College of Law and Kaiser Permanente, posts 1,000 (or so) blogs to attack parents of children injured by vaccines and promotes mass vaccination, it is not so difficult.  She repeats, ad nauseam, that thousands of vaccine safety studies have been done to prove vaccine safety and efficacy, and it simply is not true.  Who or what is paying Ms. Reiss to support industry and attack vaccine-injured children’s parents and other critical thinkers?  How does she possibly find the time if she has a real job?  In this case, one need look no further than her stated employers, and the money behind UC Hastings and Kaiser.

Why is no adult discussion of vaccines allowed in the mainstream media?  What gives?

Monsanto Money earns UW-Madison Seal of Approval

It is also instructive to learn just how industry captures some academic institutions in order to do its bidding.  The University of Wisconsin, for one example, fairly rolled over for Monsanto when the company “donated” a $10 million commercial biotech plant laboratory that helped develop genetically modified plants.  That “donation” has made UW-Madison “the hub of a new crop research center,” gushed the Wisconsin State Journal on Jan. 31, 2017.  Gee, I wonder if the UW will continue to support GMO foods as they have so dutifully in the past after receiving multi-milllon-dollar “gifts” from Monsanto.  Is the UW aware that hundreds of Roundup Lymphoma lawsuits are being filed against its great benefactor, Monsanto?  (Maybe all that dough will buy some helpful studies “proving” the safety of Roundup.)

The UW-Madison also got nicely behind Monsanto’s  awful bovine growth hormone (rBST) after Monsanto donated a couple million to the UW just as it also gifted the world with rBST.  Not to pick on the Badger state’s flagship school.  Most land-grand universities are hot for donations, and  will do almost anything to keep them coming.

Sometimes the payments for those supporting corporate profits at the expense of people are harder to spot, at least until one looks closer.

Professor Dorit Reiss of Hastings Law School in San Francisco seems to have gotten her start in the blogging business after Katie Couric had the temerity to question the safety of Merck’s Gardasil vaccine.  It seems several girls were dying after their Gardasil injections, or catching auto-immune diseases; so Ms. Couric investigated.  Ms. Reiss was then keen to demonstrate her loyalties to her state’s Draconian vaccination policy, and to her university and its Big Pharma backers.  She even had the gall to write in defense of the “advantages” of a school’s being captured by industry, or a regulatory agency’s working closely and “cooperatively” with industry.  (You can’t make this stuff up.)  The word “capture,” she wrote, has negative connotations, and therefore should not be used.  Put lipstick on a pig, she might have added, and it might look beautiful, at least to Ms. Reiss.

With Professor Reiss’ considerable help, Katie Couric was wildly attacked when she ran a nationally televised story covering Gardasil dangers.  Robert De Niro – the father of an autistic son whose Black mother says he was made that way by vaccination – was likewise savaged for questioning American children’s massive vaccination schedule.  Jim Carey (who said he was not anti vaccine) was also attacked, as was Jenny McCarthy, Rob Schneider, and anyone else who has had the temerity to question America’s increasingly heavy childhood vaccine schedule, and the forced vaccination of school children.

Why is no adult discussion of vaccines allowed in the mainstream media?  What gives?

Vaccine Comedy Dutifully Promotes Vaccination

Comedy Central’s John Oliver has devoted more and more of his time to savaging anyone who questions the “prevailing wisdom” of vaccination.  Mr. Oliver’s audience guffaws as dutifully as a laugh track as he pretends to have all the answers, to know that all vaccinations are safe and effective and necessary.  His dismissive views are oddly solidly backed by the likes of strange bedfellows, Republican stalwarts such as The Wall Street Journal and Forbes.   This is quite curious, considering that Mr. Oliver’s show is decidedly slanted to the liberal side of the aisle.  (One might be wise to pay special attention when the entire mainstream media is all behind something, or all uniformly against it.)

Why is no adult discussion about vaccines allowed in the mainstream media?  What gives?

The fact that President Donald Trump has questioned the prevailing wisdom of shooting as many vaccines into children as Merck and the CDC say they need is used to further marginalize vaccine skeptics.  The fact that Mr. Trump is (by many critical accounts from close observers) a sociopathic narcissist, is used by mandatory vaccine supporters as one more reason that ALL and ANY discussion of vaccination should not even be allowed.  What if Mr. Trump were right about something?  Is it possible?

Why is no adult discussion of vaccines allowed in the mainstream media?  What gives?

Fake Vaccine News, Fake Studies, Fake Advocates

Do those who so viciously attack “anti-vaxxers” really think or believe that every vaccine is safe and effective, and that every vaccine should be used any time Merck or the CDC say so?  What if they are wrong?  What if every vaccine is not safe and effective?  What if every vaccination batch needs a careful inventory of chemical components and a field trial?  What if they should all be monitored for safety and effectiveness?  What if that vaccine they want to put directly into your kid’s bloodstream, bypassing her immune system, is made in China, where the FDA is not allowed inside the plants to investigate?  What if the shingles vaccine has blinded several people and given them repeat cases of shingles?  Is that something you would like to know? What if the flu vaccine doesn’t work this year, or isn’t worth the risk?  What if more people died of the flu after taking the flu shot last year than unvaccinated people who got the flu?  Is that something you’d like to know? What if vaccine makers don’t lose sleep over safety issues because they know that the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act protects them from liability; so that they have very little incentive to make safe vaccines?  Why do vaccine makers or their shills – like Professor Dorit Reiss of Hastings Law School in San Francisco, or Comedy Central’s John Oliver, or vaccine-profiteer Paul Offit (aptly named) – think the 1986 Act was necessary if vaccine injuries don’t occur?

What gives? Why is no adult discussion of vaccines allowed in the mainstream media?

All one needs do is follow the money.

RELATED

Share