MUMPS THE WORD -- Are Vaccines Necessary?

By: William Campbell Douglass II, M.D.


As you know, I'm not exactly a fan of vaccinations. At best, they're unnecessary. At worst, they're downright deadly. But the fact is that the medical community (read: BIG PHARMA) has done such a bang-up job of convincing everyone that they're an absolute necessity that in many cases, you are LEGALLY REQUIRED to be vaccinated.

This gross violation of personal freedom was on full display recently when the University of Southern Maine sent out notices to 400 students that they were being banned from campus for failing to meet the latest vaccination requirements for mumps. Yes, banned. This isn't anything new, you understand. In the not-so-politically correct past, lepers were cut-off from society and left to literally rot in colonies on remote islands. But these students don't have mumps--they just haven't been vaccinated against mumps.

Anyone else think this is a violation of personal rights?

These notices went out after a recent mumps outbreak throughout the state of Maine (officials believe this spread down out of Canada). Among the 400 who've been banished from the halls of learning (you'd have to wonder exactly what they'd learn at a university that's so willing to employ these kinds of extreme, Draconian tactics) are 20 students who have declined the vaccinations on religious or philosophical grounds. In other words, those that stood up for their rights.

How seriously is the University of Southern Maine taking this "dangerous" mumps health threat? So seriously that students who are medically exempt from the vaccination are allowed on campus with "special passes." (Reminds me of the Nazis in old movies: "Show me your papers, please!") So now you're thinking, "Hold on, Douglass -- there's got to be a very good reason for this. Mumps must be a deadly virus, right?"

Wrong.

The mumps are painful. There's fever. There's a swelling of the salivary glands around the jaw. It's not pleasant, and it's another of those childhood diseases like chicken pox which is much more painful to weather as an adult. But to be clear: it's not gonna kill you. In fact, most common treatment for the mumps is an ice bag and a couple of aspirin.

In the rarest of rare cases, the results could be a mild form of meningitis, organ infections, Encephalitis (rarely fatal), and sterility in men. And I suppose these "risks" could be considered serious if the University of Southern Maine happened to be located somewhere in the Congo where disease is rife, sanitation poor, and medical aid practically nonexistent. But this is Maine -- and last I heard, that was one of the forty-eight contiguous States. Hardly the wilds of Africa.

So where did the University get the wrong-headed idea that they needed to treat 400 of their student body like disease-ridden pariahs? From Maine's state government, of course (I love putting blame where it so often belongs: in the laps of unthinking, butt-covering bureaucrats). The Maine Center for Disease Control and Prevention recommended that these actions be taken, and they have amended the health codes on states college campuses to require two doses of the vaccine. Most people receive their first and only mumps vaccination not long after birth -- it's known as the MMR (the same one that has been linked to the rise in the number of cases of autism in
children...).

The campus ban has caused all kinds of issues, especially for the University, since it's now their responsibility to work to find off-campus housing for the 400 affected students, and to make special arrangements to allow these students to complete their coursework for the semester.

Of course, I'm probably the lone voice in the wilderness decrying this act -- yet another case of something stupid and dangerously wrong being enacted in the name of "the common good." But as if to underscore my point, there have been a whopping eight laboratory-confirmed cases of mumps in the entire state of Maine, and just thirty-five suspected cases. So I know who's being ridiculous here. It's not the students -- especially not the 20 students who stood firm against the vaccination fascists. And it certainly isn't me. Who's left? You do the math.

A sweet solution for kids' coughs.

Fortunately, not all research concludes that the best cure is always found at the business end of a hypodermic needle. In a nice counter to that enraging vaccination story, there's a new study out about a simple, non-medical, and darn tasty solution for children's coughs: a teaspoon of honey. According to a study published in the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, this homey folk remedy was better than cough medicine for children. It calmed the cough, helped kids sleep better, and coated and soothed the irritated throat.

This report is like a breath of fresh air. There have been recent warnings about the dangers of over-the-counter cough and cold medicines for children younger than age six, and (shockingly) some Big Pharma companies even removed their baby cough-and-cold products from the market. Of course, many parents already know that honey shouldn't be given to kids from birth until after age one (there's a rare but serious danger of botulism).

I love it when grandma's old remedies are verified by research. This particular study used 105 kids with upper respiratory infections, some were given honey, others a honey-flavored cough medicine. All the kids got better but plain-old honey consistently scored higher than the drugs at combating the symptoms.

Pretty sweet, huh? Helping to keep the needles at bay.

CELEBRITY DOCTOR SAYS HEALTH CARE REFORMERS ARE TRAITORS COMMITTING GENOCIDE

Washington, D.C.- Celebrity Dr. Leonard Horowitz says President Obama's health care reformers are acting like drug pushers, vaccine junkies, and population controllers, neglecting alternatives that Americans really want, including low-to-no-cost solutions to common health problems, with many cures immediately available online for free.

Citing "pharmaceutical prostitution" on Capitol Hill, and "blind, deaf, and mute" governors neglecting available remedies to urgencies brought on by population intoxication and corporate-controlled media deceptions, the public health and natural healing expert has launched a video website along with an international campaign featuring a dozen YouTube programs to promote alternatives to mass murder in medicine, technically called "iatrogenocide."

"Americans have already paid with their tears and voted with their dollars for alternative health care reform," Dr. Horowitz says, citing substantial science proving families spend more out-of-pocket dollars for natural, alternative, and complementary care than they do for medical doctors visits. Beyond this, he cites statistics showing the leading causes of death in the United States are all linked to drugs or vaccinations, and their side effects.

"Now that every family has sustained tragic injuries, witnessed medical murders of their mothers and fathers, and suffered toxic poisonings of gifted children, people are waking up and dropping out of this sick system," Dr. Horowitz observes.

The doctor is convinced that 70 million people without health insurance are safer, and probably healthier, than those covered by insurance served by medical doctors, hospitals, and long term care facilities he calls "concentration camps." Here, toxic chemicals and deadly drugs, reminiscent of the experimental poisonings advanced by Nazis, are exclusively prescribed, he explains.

Indicting Obama's administration for "gross criminal neglect" of alternative and complementary healing practices, and a deadly fixation on vaccinations and medical intoxication for corporate controlled depopulation, he says everyone needs to take personal responsibility for prevention through vaccine risk awareness, drug risk avoidance, and generally healthier living.

Booming growth in the alternative and complementary care industries has ignited grass roots actions advancing legislation to free practitioners and health product manufacturers from stifling regulations imposed by federal officials on behalf of pharmaceutical interests. In New Mexico, for instance, the "Unlicensed Health Care Practice Act," started July 1, 2009, frees alternative healers, equipment manufacturers, and nutritional supplement providers to practice responsibly. This increases access to quality care, promotes prevention, and in many cases early diagnosis and treatment of life threatening conditions.

"Vested interests are trying to maintain public ignorance," Dr. Horowitz wrote for AlternativeHealthCareNow.org. Drug companies despise their competitors--alternative and complementary health care practitioners. That is why Codex Alimentarius is being advanced to kill all competition and block people's access to natural healing methods and materials. Big Pharma can't claim natural and safe effective solutions to improving health, patient satisfaction, employee benefits, corporate savings through reduced absenteeism, better morale in workplaces, and growing employment and economic development in many communities. These are the benefits of alternative and complementary care exclusively."

Dr. Horowitz's new website provides many links to natural healing information and free online resources, including YouTube videos, audios, and articles for saving lives. Featured here is s new video titled "Health Care Reform Fraud," that responsible adults will want to watch and share with others.

COMPLIMENTARY MEDICINE RECEIVES BROAD SUPPORT IN SWITERZERLAND

On May 17, 2009, the people of Switzerland voted in favor of a constitutional amendment that supports the use of complementary medicine (CAM). A total of 67 percent of the population voted in favor. Thus Switzerland becomes the first country in Europe to set out in its constitution authority for the national government and its constituent states to take CAM into consideration in its health services. It is an astonishing victory and may set the model for other countries as well.

As the United States examines what needs to change in an effort to drive down cost and raise accessibility, do you think there is any chance special interests, Big Pharma or the playground's bully known as the FDA will allow U.S. citizens access to complimentary medicine as part of their health care plan? I think not but I am pleased to note there is a country which is coming around. Of course Switzerland is always ahead of the rest of the world.

THE SWINE FLU SWINDLE


The new swine flu vaccine should be coming to a clinic near you just in time for Halloween. It seems appropriate, given the bizarre nature of the entire Pigs can Fly panic being spread by WHO and CDC, that the first H1N1 approved vaccine should be ready by Halloween. Can anyone say “Trick or Treat”? No doubt, the government will ask that I produce my children as a pin cushion or they will be denied entrance to school.

Hysteria is good for business – that is most certainly true when the hysteria surrounds a highly contagious flu and your business sells anti-viral drugs. As the World Health Organization raises the threat level for the H1N1 flu to 6 (and there is no 7) several companies are preparing for a golden harvest come fall 2009.

The US government recently made available one billion dollars to help big vaccine makers like Sanofi-Aventis and GlaxoSmithKline rush to market new vaccines. Novartis leads the pack with $289 million in federal support, followed by Sanofi Aventis with $191 million and GlaxoSmithKline set to receive a respectable$181 million. In addition the US Government has decided to ‘de-risk' the vaccine production, presumably removing usual safeguards for new vaccines. Can anyone say “Swine Flu of ‘76”?

The US Health and Human Services Department (HHS) is placing orders with manufacturers with which it already has contracts to produce a pandemic vaccine for the never-turned pandemic H5N1 avian flu. More than $3 billion in federal funds since 2005 have gone toward developing, building manufacturing and stockpiling a vaccine to fight that disease. How long do such vaccines hold in stock? No doubt they will find some way to keep their investment from going to waste! Perhaps some 3rd world country could be used for their test market.

It is disturbing to learn that many drug makers are using techniques of genetic manipulation to produce their new vaccine offerings in a race to market. The Maryland drugmaker Novavax which reported severe annual income losses prior to the current Swine Flu scare, now is preparing a genetically modified vaccine they claim is suitable for H1N1 flu.

Free from Liability?

It may surprise you to learn that insurance companies historically have refused to insure vaccine manufacturers against lawsuit for vaccine-related illnesses or deaths. However, under rulings made during the Bush Administration, vaccines can be labeled as “unavoidably unsafe” meaning that when a product is ‘carefully designed, manufactured and marketed, but is dangerous nonetheless,' it is not a defective product, even though it might cause injury. Clear as mud pigs love to frolic in! Today drug makers need have little fear of damages from product liability lawsuits for, ironically, the drug manufactures are now “immune” from any lawsuits. In fact, some might argue this particular immunity is the only one effectively conveyed when someone is vaccinated.

Is Mandatory Vaccination Coming to a Clinic Near You?

At least three US federal laws should concern all Americans and suggest what may be coming - mandatory vaccinations for hyped, non-existant threats, like H1N1 (Swine Flu). Vaccines and drugs like Tamiflu endanger human health but are hugely profitable to drug company manufacturers.

The Project BioShield Act of 2004 (S. 15) became law on July 21, 2004 "to provide protections and countermeasures against chemical, radiological, or nuclear agents that may be used in a terrorist attack against the United States by giving the National Institutes of Health contracting flexibility, infrastructure improvements, and expediting the scientific peer review process, and streamlining the Food and Drug Administration approval process of countermeasures."

In other words, the FDA may now recklessly approve inadequately tested, potentially dangerous vaccines and other drugs if ever the Secretaries of Health and Human Services (HHS) or Defense (DOD) declare a national emergency, whether or not one exists and regardless of whether treatments available are safe and effective. Around $6 billion or more will be spent to develop, produce, and stockpile vaccines and other drugs to counteract claimed bioterror agents.

The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act slipped under the radar when George Bush signed it into law as part of the 2006 Defense Appropriations Act (HR 2863). It lets the HHS Secretary declare any disease an epidemic or national emergency requiring mandatory vaccinations. Nothing in the Act lists criteria that warrant a threat. Also potential penalties aren't specified for those who balk, but very likely they'd include quarantine and possible fines.

The HHS web site also says the Secretary may "issue a declaration....that provides immunity from tort liability (except for willful misconduct) for claims of loss caused, arising out of, relating to, or resulting from administration or use of (vaccine or other pharmaceutical) countermeasures to diseases, threats and conditions determined by the Secretary to constitute a present, or credible risk of a future public health emergency...."

The industry-run US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) notoriously rushes inadequately tested drugs to market, putting their efficacy and safety into question, and turning those who use them into lab rats. It includes everyone if a mass vaccination is ordered on the mere claim of a public emergency - no proof required.

The Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act (S. 3678) is the other worrisome law, effective December 19, 2006. It amended "the Public Health Service Act with respect to public health security and all-hazards preparedness and response, and for other purposes." Even its supporters worry about issues of privacy, liability, and putting profits over public health. Critics express greater concerns about dangerous remedies for exaggerated or non-existant threats as well as mass hysteria created for political purposes.

At least one other measure is also worrisome - The Model State Emergency Health Powers Act (MSEHPA). So far it's just a proposal by the Center for Law and the Public's Health - "A Collaborative at Johns Hopkins and Georgetown Universities (as) a primary, international, national, state, and local resource on public health law (and) policy for public health practitioners, judges, academics, policymakers, and others."

MSEHPA is now "track(ing) legal responses to the emerging international response to the 2009 H1N1 (swine flu) outbreak, including declarations of public health emergency at the international, national, state, and local levels...." even though forensic evidence can't confirm any H1N1 deaths. No emergency exists anywhere, and reporting one is all hype to sell dangerous drugs to unsuspecting people globally.

On its web site, the ACLU says this about MSEHPA:

It's "written in a way that doesn't adequately protect citizens against the misuse of the tremendous powers that it would grant in an emergency. (It's) replete with civil liberties problems. Its three top flaws are that:

(1) It fails to include basic checks and balances (by) grant(ing) extraordinary emergency powers (that) should never go unchecked. (It) could have serious consequences for individuals' freedom, privacy, and equality."

(2) "It goes well beyond bioterrorism (with) an overbroad definition of 'public health emergency" that may be anything a local or national authority declares for any reason with no conclusive evidence for proof.

(3) "It lacks privacy protections (and) undercut(s) existing protections for sensitive medical information."

MSEHPA worries other organizations besides the ACLU, both conservative and progressive - including the Free Congress Foundation, American Legislative Exchange Council, conservative association of state legislators, Human Rights Campaign, and Health Privacy Project.

The Real Threat of Dangerous, Mandatory Vaccinations

In the wake of the hyped Swine Flu scare, media reports suggest mass vaccinations are coming. The May 6 Kimberly Kindy – Ceci Connolly Washington Post one, for example, headlined "US May Add Shots for Swine Flu to Fall Regimen" without saying they'll be mandatory but reading between the lines suggests the possibility this year or later.

The writers report that "The Obama administration is considering an unprecedented fall vaccination campaign" to include regular and Swine Flu shots, the latter because it's "spreading across the globe."

HHS' Dr. Robin Robinson said "We are moving forward with making a vaccine," and if the government proceeds with a national program, enough supply will be produced to provide two doses for all Americans with spokespersons like National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Anthony Fauci, claiming adverse reactions aren't to be expected and adding another shot for Swine Flu "should not present a problem."

The New York Times also hypes the scare with reports of city schools closed after unconfirmed Swine Flu cases, a few adult deaths blamed on H1N1 bringing the claimed total in the city to seven, and the World Health Organization (WHO) saying on June 3 that it's moving closer to declaring a worldwide (Level 6) Swine Flu pandemic - even though none exists.

With all the hype, misinformation, and willful lies WHO's Dr. Keiji Fukuda, in charge of flu, said only 117 deaths globally have been "blamed" on Swine Flu and any warning may include the caveat that the virus isn't very lethal. A more accurate statement would explain that no forensic evidence links any deaths to H1N1, and influenza annually kills about 30,000 people in America alone - something the major media never report or that scattered accounts of any type flu deaths worldwide are no cause for alarm or reason for scary headlines.

It's also unconscionable for the WHO, US and other nations' officials to spread lies, deception, and hysteria so major pharmaceutical companies can foist dangerous vaccines and other drugs on unsuspecting people, harming their health and making them vulnerable to later diseases and possible early deaths.

Massachusetts May Be A Forerunner of What's to Come

On April 28, the Massachusetts Senate unanimously passed a pandemic flu preparation bill that rises to the level of martial law. If approved by the House and signed into law, it will mandate among other measures:

-- "vaccination, treatment, examination, or testing of" all individuals involved in providing health care - as perhaps step one before ordering the same process for all state residents;

-- owners or occupiers of all premises "to permit entry into and investigation of the premises;"

-- closure, evacuation, and decontamination of all suspected facilities; and

-- restricting or prohibiting "assemblages of persons."

Other states may be planning similar measures as precursors to mandatory nationwide vaccinations and overall suspension of civil liberty protections.

Adverse Vaccination Effects on Gulf War Troops

Before deploying to the Persian Gulf in 1990 - 91 (and thereafter to the present), all US troops got a standard series of inoculations against infectious diseases - the same ones given to all US citizens traveling to the region. After arriving, 150,000 also got anthrax vaccinations and 8,000 botulinum toxoid ones even though concerns were raised about adverse long-term health consequences.

A National Academy of Sciences' Institute of Medicine (IOM) study was conducted to assess them with results released in September 2000. In December 1997, the Department of Defense (DOD) announced that all US military forces would receive anthrax vaccinations. The Anthrax Vaccine Immunization Program (AVIP) began in March 1998 even though IOM found little published peer-reviewed scientific information on its safety.

In its study, IOM reported evidence of an association between vaccinations studied and transient acute common health effects, including redness, swelling, and fever commonly associated with other vaccinations. However, conclusive proof of long-term problems wasn't determined - likely because study findings were skewed not to find them. More on that below.

IOM also studied botulinum toxoid vaccines and found evidence of an association between the vaccine and transient acute local and systemic effects similar to anthrax vaccinations. Again, conclusive proof of long-term adverse health effects wasn't found - another very dubious conclusion as evidence below explains.

Military personnel usually get multiple vaccinations. IOM studied their effects but didn't prove or disprove any long-term adverse effects. However several independent studies of British Gulf War veterans found some link between multiple vaccinations and later health problems.

Gary Matsumoto is a New York-based award-winning investigative journalist. His 2004 book, "Vaccine A: The Covert Government Experiment That's Killing Our Soldiers and Why GIs are Only the First Victims" took sharp issue with IOM results and the Pentagon's denial of Gulf War syndrome.

Investigating the shadowy vaccination development world, he discovered US military-employed doctors and scientists conducted secret medical experiments on US citizens in violation of the Nuremberg Code and fundamental medical ethics.

For its part, Nuremberg established legal medical experimental standards now incorporated into ethical medical codes, including:

-- requiring voluntary consent of human subjects without coercion, fraud, deceit, and with full disclosure of known risks;

-- experiments should avoid "all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury;"

-- experiments should never be conducted if there's "an a prior reason to believe death or disabling injury will occur;"

-- risk "should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved..;" and

-- experiments should be terminated if there's reason to believe they'll cause "injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject."

According to Matsumoto, the Pentagon violated these and other standards, betrayed the troops, and the fundamental duty of military and civilian leaders to protect them. Since at least 1987, biowarfare development trumped the welfare of tens of thousands of GIs used as human guinea pigs for inoculation with experimental unlicensed anthrax vaccines containing squalene – an oil-based adjuvant (to enhance immunity) known for decades to cause severe autoimmune diseases in lab animals, yet administered involuntarily without disclosure of its harmful effects to human health.

Matsumoto wrote:

"The unethical experiments detailed in this book are ongoing, with little prospect of being self-limiting because they have been shielded from scrutiny and public accountability by national
security concerns." He suggested the "writing (was) on the wall" of what's to come with prospects now it may be soon.

"When UCLA Medical School's Michael Whitehouse and Frances Beck injected squalene combined with other materials into rats and guinea pigs back in the 1970s, few oils were more effective at causing the animal versions of arthritis and multiple sclerosis."

In 1999, immunologist Dr. Johnny Lorentzen at Sweden's Karolinska Institute found that on injection, an "otherwise benign molecule like squalene can stimulate a self-destructive immune response," even though it occurs naturally in the body.

Other research shows that squalene is the experimental anthrax vaccine ingredient that caused devastating autoimmune diseases and deaths for many Gulf War veterans from the US, UK, and
Australia, yet it continues in use today and for new vaccines development in labs. There's a "close match between the squalene-induced diseases in animals and those observed in humans
injected with this oil: rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis and systemic lupus rythematosus."

Other autoimmune diseases are also linked to humans injected with squalene. "There are now data in more than two dozen peer-reviewed scientific papers, from ten different laboratories in the US, Europe, Asia and Australia, documenting that squalene-based adjuvants can induce autoimmune diseases in animals...observed in mice, rats, guinea pigs and rabbits. Sweden's Karolinska Institute has demonstrated that squalene alone can induce the animal version of rheumatoid arthritis. The Polish Academy of Sciences has shown that in animals, squalene alone can produce catastrophic injury to the nervous system and the brain. The University of Florida Medical School has shown that in animals, squalene alone can induce production of antibodies specifically associated with systemic lupus erythematosus."

Micropaleontologist Dr. Viera Scheibner conducted research into the adverse effects of adjuvants in vaccines and wrote:

Squalene "contributed to the cascade of reactions called "Gulf War syndrome". (GIs developed) arthritis, fibromyalgia, lymphadenopathy, rashes, photosensitive rashes, malar rashes, chronic fatigue, chronic headaches, abnormal body hair loss, non-healing skin lesions, aphthous ulcers, dizziness, weakness, memory loss, seizures, mood changes, neuropsychiatric problems, anti-thyroid effects, anaemia, elevated ESR (erythrocyte sedimentation rate), systemic lupus erythematosus, multiple sclerosis, ALS, Raynaud's phenomenon, Sjorgren's syndrome, chronic diarrhea, night sweats and low-grade fever."

Matsumoto's book includes numerous case studies of GIs afflicted with one or more of the above syndromes, their devastating effects, and the outlandish US government reaction - failing to acknowledge their existence or a connection between them and administered vaccines. Also denying the effects of other toxic Gulf theater exposures (like depleted uranium) as well as withholding meaningful treatments or protocols.

US Army Captain George L. Skypeck spoke eloquently for many when he said:

"Was the character of my valor less intense than those at Lexington? Was the pain of my wounds any less severe than those at Normandy? And was my loneliness any less sorrowful than those at Inchon? Then why am I forgotten amongst those remembered as 'heros?'"

If mass vaccinations are ordered, millions of Americans may ask: Why do you keep using unsafe vaccines and other drugs when clear evidence shows their dangers? Why do you jeopardize all Americans by unleashing a future plague of serious illnesses, diseases, and disabilities? Why have you willfully and maliciously ruined my health?

From inception, vaccines have always been dangerous enough for some experts to call them biological weapons undermining health, manipulating and crippling the immune system, and creating the possibility of future debilitating diseases. So Big Pharma's solution is new, more potent genetically engineered vaccines and drugs that may end up harming or killing many who take them, especially people with weakened immune systems.

Matsumoto and others sounded the alarm to alert everyone to avoid these poisons masquerading as protective drugs. In fact, they benefit only the bottom lines of companies that manufacture them and scientists reaping generous royalties.

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization. He lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

ENFORCING CHEMOTHERAPY

By: Paula Rothstein

Following today's health freedom news story of Daniel Hauser and his mother's run from the law to avoid gunpoint medicine makes me feel as though magically transported to a place known as Bizarro World where a new moral code has been established that makes one view everything upside down. It is one thing to have pharmaceutical drug companies bent on making billions no matter who they harm along the way wish to force a sale upon us but it is quite another to have a population at large buying what they are selling in bulk, no questions asked, along with a supportive and tyrannical government.

When did we become so preoccupied with the health choices of an individual family? Imagine 100 years ago the government beating on the door of a family and threatening the arrest of a mother for not taking a doctor's advice with respect to the health of her child? Perhaps my libertarian views are so far out of step with mainstream that I cannot even begin to comprehend the preoccupation our government and its citizens have with an individual's private health choice. I have fought for one's right to decide whether or not to vaccinate and I will fight for one's right to make all health decisions short of a parent's right to pray over a child and hope he or she survives through divine intervention. But to dispute the validity and effectiveness of alternative and natural treatments of disease is one borne of ignorance and manipulation, most likely by the drug cartel running the cancer industry.

It is an undisputable fact that chemotherapy if given long enough will kill the individual. A positive outcome is one where the cancer is killed off by the poison before the cancer patient. There are numerous alternative therapies that offer a higher rate of survival and greater degree of safety than chemotherapy, however, no drug company would profit from these therapies because they are natural and therefore cannot be patented. If Mrs. Hauser would be "allowed" by our government to make use of these therapies she would have every reason to be optimistic. I believe she is trying to exercise her right to pursue these choices. This story is not about a family choosing no treatment for their child but rather the safest, most effective treatment. But can she make one of those choices? Apparently she cannot and this should frighten every parent in this country that once boasted it was the "land of the free, home of the brave". Mrs. Hauser is brave as is Daniel. My well wishes go out to the both of them. Unfortunately, today freedom is but a tattered dream feebly twisting in the dry winds of a country that has lost its way.

THE AUTISM/VACCINE CONNECTION: Could the Government be Dead Wrong?

by: Paula Rothstein

What happened on February 12, 2009 in Washington, D.C.?

Whenever I discuss vaccine safety with those influenced solely by today's news coverage I am quickly put on the defensive, being asked to explain why our government's vaccine courts have ruled against the vaccine link to autism as they did most recently on February 12, 2009. The safety of vaccines as determined by a vaccine court is fraught with conflict of interest and lack of appropriate research. The government mandates vaccines and therefore it is not in their interest to find fault with these vaccines and since decisions cannot be determined in a civil court unless first decided in vaccine court, it is hard to get a decision which calls into question the CDC's agressive vaccination schedule.

Wendy Fournier, president of the National Autism Association, explains the recent court decision quite well in the following short video as she was recently interviewed for a news station on this subject: http://www.abc6.com/news/39518632.html

You need to first understand that no independent studies (i.e. one not funded by the pharmaceutical drug companies) have ever been performed on vaccines and no studies have ever been performed comparing the unvaccinated to the vaccinated to weigh both benefits and risks. Without these studies the government can declare these vaccines to be safe. As so often is the case with our government, the fox is in charge of the hen house. Also lacking are studies weighing the cumulative effects of all these toxins as injected via vaccines. And we wonder why parents' stories appear purely speculative! As a non-believer of the connection one can easily dismiss the link of vaccine leading to autism for lack of proof but it is the parent who knows their child best, carefully observing their child following vaccination, one day later, one week later, one month later and so on until finally one day their doctor gives a diagnosis of autism. Yet the parent noted almost immediately a change in behavior and speech -- they witnessed their precious child's withdrawal from the world that started almost immediately after a round of vaccinations but it is months of regression before anyone will confirm that, yes, their child is changed. And then they are told that the timing is merely a coincidence! Thousands of stories that read almost exactly the same and yet it is just a coincidence!

Whether or not to vaccinate is indeed a complex issue. When first deciding to approach vaccines differently with my second child I spent numerous hours researching a subject that I previously knew nothing about. It is an enormous hurdle to dismiss years of one-sided information on an issue, one which involves the health of a child vs. the trust of both our government and medical profession. This is huge! It is a very personal decision and it is that very decision that must be protected. With each passing day, as we march towards universal health coverage and an ever intrusive government, it appears this personal decision must be protected against the very government that was designed to safeguard its citizens.

You can argue whether or not vaccinations are a useful tool against disease but the argument stops when it becomes whether or not a parent should have the right to make health decisions for a child. I have yet to find one single parent who chooses not to vaccinate be anything less than the most conscientious parent for it is the parent who decides to go against her doctor's wishes who has read a great deal on the subject, usually to the point of great proficiency -- most often surpassing her own doctor's knowledge on the subject. Whereas it is the parent who vaccinates who has read nothing more than the pamphlet found in their pediatrician's office - the pamphlet published by the pharmaceutical company marketing the vaccine. Sometimes their knowledge does not even go this far. Unfortunately, it often takes a personal tragedy before a parent comes to question the legitimacy of allopathic medicine.

If one can be so quick to believe that a large group of parents are mislead on the issue of vaccinations why is it so difficult to imagine that the government and drug companies could be dead wrong on this issue?

These are unique times in the history of modern medicine as we have come to lean so heavily upon pharmaceuticals for our health and less and less upon our natural ability to fight disease. It is time to start listening to the instincts of thousands upon thousands of parents who say their children regressed into autism shortly after receiving a round of vaccinations at least to the extent we provide them with independent research to confirm the truth.

As parents considering whether or not to vaccinate, the autism connection cannot be over simplified, blaming one ingredient used in vaccines or even one shot in particular. It is most likely the cumulative damage of too many vaccines as mandated by the CDC possibly acting as the trigger of this disease as well as many other diseases suspiciously on the rise in our children. A parent should spend as much time researching the safety of vaccines as they would on any other issue involving the health and well being of their child.

Forcing Kids Into a Mental Health Ghetto

By: Congressman Ron Paul

A presidential initiative called The “New Freedom Commission on Mental Health” has issued a report recommending forced mental health screening for every child in America, including preschool children. The goal is to promote the patently false idea that we have a nation of children with undiagnosed mental disorders crying out for treatment.

One obvious beneficiary of the proposal is the pharmaceutical industry, which is eager to sell the psychotropic drugs that undoubtedly will be prescribed to millions of American schoolchildren under the new screening program. Of course a tiny minority of children suffer from legitimate mental illnesses, but the widespread use of Ritalin and other drugs on youngsters who simply exhibit typical rambunctious, fidgety, and impatient behavior is nothing short of criminal. It may be easier to teach and parent drugged kids, but convenience is no justification for endangering them. Children’s brains are still developing, and the truth is we have no idea what the long-term side effects of psychiatric drugs may be. Medical science has not even exhaustively identified every possible brain chemical, even as we alter those chemicals with drugs.

Dr. Karen Effrem, a physician who strongly opposes mandatory mental health screening, warns us that “America’s children should not be medicated by expensive, ineffective, and dangerous medications based on vague and dubious diagnoses.” She points out that psychiatric diagnoses are inherently subjective, as authors of the diagnostic manuals admit. She also is concerned that mental health screening could be used to label children whose attitudes, religious beliefs, and political views conflict with the secular orthodoxy that dominates our schools.

The greater issue, however, is not whether youth mental health screening is appropriate. The real issue is whether the state owns your kids. When the government orders “universal” mental health screening in schools, it really means “mandatory.” Parents, children, and their private doctors should decide whether a child has mental health problems, not government bureaucrats. That this even needs to be stated is a sign of just how obedient our society has become toward government. What kind of free people would turn their children’s most intimate health matters over to government strangers? How in the world have we allowed government to become so powerful and arrogant that it assumes it can force children to accept psychiatric treatment whether parents object or not?

Parents must do everything possible to retain responsibility and control over their children’s well-being. There is no end to the bureaucratic appetite to rule every aspect of our lives, including how we raise our children. Forced mental health screening is just the latest of many state usurpations of parental authority: compulsory education laws, politically-correct school curricula, mandatory vaccines, and interference with discipline through phony “social services” agencies all represent assaults on families. The political right has now joined the political left in seeking the de facto nationalization of children, and only informed resistance by parents can stop it. The federal government is slowly but surely destroying real families, but it is hardly a benevolent surrogate parent.

DEATH BY LETHAL VACCINE INJECTION (a Mother's Story)

By Christine Colebeck

Today is my daughter's sweet 16th birthday but we will not be celebrating. Instead I will light a candle and when I blow it out I will make a wish in my daughter's memory. My wish is for all mother's worldwide, that you will educate yourselves and that you make informed choices so that you may prevent unnecessary tragedy and be spared from my pain.

Laura's Story

After 41 weeks of pregnancy, on July 27th, 1986, a perfect and healthy little baby, Laura Marie, made her entrance into the world. We were welcomed home by family and friends anxiously waiting to meet the new family member. They showered her with so many beautiful, little tiny, pink dresses, we joked that she would never be able to wear them all in one lifetime.

Our lives changed completely and now revolved around stroller walks in the park, visiting friends, changing diapers, night feedings and shopping for more little pink dresses. We were parents now, we had a family and life was absolutely perfect.

I took Laura for several baby check-ups at the pediatrician. She was a kind and gentle older woman. At 3 months old, the pediatrician was very pleased with Laura's development and weight gain and vaccinated her with DPT OPV. I didn't even question her, I knew that all my friend's babies had this same vaccine and "all good mothers" vaccinated their children to protect them. I left the pediatrician's office and walked home.

Laura was very fussy, which was unusual. She was crying loudly all the way home in the stroller. When we got home, I realized she had urinated so heavily she wet everything in the stroller. Then her cry turned into screaming and she developed a fever, her leg was very swollen and red, and felt hot. I called the pediatrician who told me this was "normal" and to give her Tempra. I gave her baby Tempra and I felt better, the pediatrician had assured me this was normal.

Laura continued to scream and I could no longer console her. My every instinct told me this was not normal but I was young with my first child and trusted the doctor. I could not hold Laura in my arms because she screamed louder as any movement of her leg seemed to cause her terrible pain. I put her in the swing and she cried herself to sleep. I was so relieved, the Tempra was working and the doctor must have been right. I began to feel silly for all my worrying. A short time later, Laura woke up screaming and spent the evening screaming and sleeping on and off.

She had no appetite and nothing made her stop crying. Finally it was bedtime and she cried in her crib, until she fell asleep. She had never cried herself to sleep before and I felt very bad for letting her but if I held her, she screamed louder. My husband came home from work and I told him about everything that had happened that day. Laura was sleeping soundly in her crib and we were both relieved that she seemed to be feeling better and decided not to worry... I should have worried.

In the morning I awoke and was startled to realize my husband had slept in for work. I immediately knew something was wrong and the worry from the previous night came rushing back to me. I quickly ran to her crib, with a feeling of dread. She did not look right. I closed my eyes tight and opened them again, and considered the possibility that this was a dream, but when I opened my eyes she looked dead.

I went into shock and after that, much of this day remains a blur. I touched her and she was very warm. I screamed for my husband to call 911.

I watched as he performed CPR, my body was frozen and I couldn't move. He tried to revive our child to no avail. He was shouting for me to open the door for the paramedics, I was temporarily jolted back to reality and I went and opened the door. I could now move but couldn't speak. I just stood there numbly shaking my head, feeling completely helpless as dozens of paramedics, police and firemen rushed past me into our home. I didn't cry, and I wanted to scream at them to leave her alone but I couldn't speak. She was on the floor and they were shocking her tiny body, in the little bedroom with the yellow painted walls and clown wallpaper. I stood there praying in my head that they would just leave her alone, that they would get out of her bedroom and that I would wake up from this horrible dream.

Then I heard someone saying there was a faint pulse and I suddenly felt hopeful. She was rushed from the house in an ambulance. It was then that the homicide detectives led us into another room and the interrogation began.

They decided that my husband and I needed to be questioned in separate rooms. I immediately realized they suspected that we had done this to our child. We all know that perfect children do not suddenly die for no reason. I was silent, I had already decided in my own mind that this was somehow all my fault and although I wasn't quite sure what I had done to kill her, I was convinced that I had somehow caused this to happen. Perhaps, I was being punished by god for a sin or perhaps it happened because I had let her cry herself to sleep that night. The fact remained that my child was dead and "good mothers" do not have dead children.

My husband began to protest loudly about the line of questioning and he demanded we be taken immediately to the hospital, to see our child. The detectives finally took us to the hospital and put us in the "bad news room." The doctor came and insisted we sit down before he spoke to us. He began telling us that they had tried this and that and then finally he said the words that would echo in my ears for a lifetime:

"She is dead."

The pediatrician whom I so respected and adored broke down and cried when I gave her the news on the phone. She went back and forth defending the vaccine that she was told was safe, and blaming it for killing my child and those who told her it was safe.

She then told me that she also had another patient, an infant boy, die after this same vaccination.

Then the detectives took us home for more questions, often repeating the same questions several times until they grew tired of asking them. The questions constantly centered around our involvement, then they searched the house and checked for signs of forced entry. My husband repeatedly told them that he thought the vaccine had killed our child and told them over and over about her unusual behavior since she was vaccinated.

Everyone we knew arrived at our house. I made coffee and tidied the house, like it was any other day and we were having "guests". Shock is a strange and wonderful thing and of course you don't know you are in it.

My parents finally insisted on taking me to their house for a few days, while my husband and his friends had the horrendous task of packing up the nursery because I couldn't stand to look at it any longer. The room I had so lovingly made was now empty and a source of great pain.

Several days later, after the funeral and the tiny white coffin that was so small my husband carried it alone, I finally came out of shock and allowed myself to cry a river. I cried for all the things I would never do with my daughter. All the ballet classes I would never take her to, the wedding I would never attend, the grandchildren I would never know and all the dreams I would never realize with her. I cried for all that was and all that would never be. There was an emptiness inside of me that threatened to swallow me up whole, as I fell into the depths of grief during the darkest days of my life.

The detectives eventually became satisfied that we had not harmed our daughter in any way and the investigation into her death ended. We were then left without answers.

The doctors did not want to talk about her death being related in any way to the vaccine and, one after the other, refused to answer our many questions. I was repeatedly told that vaccines were for "the greater good." I was even told that loss of life through immunization was "expected" in the war against disease but these losses were considered to be at "acceptable" levels. However, this did not feel very acceptable or good to me as a mother with empty arms that ached for my child. The coroner finally told us months later that the cause of death was determined to be "SIDS" (sudden infant death syndrome), meaning "no known cause," and refused to release a copy of the autopsy report to us.

It took almost a year for us to obtain this report and to our great horror, we realized that the autopsy summery was copied directly from the vaccine product monograph under the heading "Contraindications" as follows:

"Sudden infant death syndrome has been reported following administration of
vaccines containing Diphtheria, tetanus toxoids, and pertussis vaccine. However, the significance of these reports is not clear. One common factor is the age where primary immunization was done between the age of 2 to 6 months, a period where most sudden infant death syndromes are found to 1occur with a peak incidence being at 2 to 4 months."

There was no toxicology testing performed and the pediatrician never filed an adverse vaccine reaction report with health authorities. I later learned that most vaccine-induced deaths in this country are listed as SIDS and SIDS statistics are NOT included in vaccine adverse reaction data, even if a child dies only a few hours after receiving inoculation. This data is presented to physicians and the public to reassure them that vaccines are
safe.

The government's own literature advises that there has been little or no testing in the area of vaccine safety or efficacy. Essentially, our children are the test. According to their literature, immunization is "the most cost effective" way to prevent disease. Nowhere in their literature does it claim to be the safest. We are trading our children's lives to save the government money. We are told that the benefits outweigh the risks but many of the diseases that we vaccinate for are not even life threatening; however, the vaccine itself has the potential to kill.

Vaccines kill at a much higher rate than we are led to believe. We play vaccine roulette with our children's lives and we never know which child will fall victim next.

If the odds are 1 in 500 thousand for death, 1 in 100 thousand for permanent brain injury, 1 in 1700 for seizures and convulsions or one in 100 for adverse reaction, are you willing to take that chance? Are any odds acceptable enough to convince you to gamble with your child's life?

I can assure you that death from vaccination is neither quick nor painless. I helplessly watched my daughter suffer an excruciatingly slow death as she screamed and arched her back in pain, while the vaccine did as it was intended to do and assaulted her immature immune system. The poisons used as preservatives seeped through her tiny body, overwhelming her vital organs one by one until they collapsed. It is an image that will haunt me forever and I hope no other parent ever has to witness it.

A death sentence considered too inhumane for this county's most violent criminals was handed down to my beautiful, innocent, infant daughter, death by lethal injection.

Today, on my daughter's birthday, I will grieve not only for the loss of my own child but for all the innocent children for which the benefits of vaccines do not outweigh the risks and are unnecessarily sentenced to death by lethal injection, under the guise of "the greater good." The true war is not against disease; we have somehow become our own worst enemy by putting our faith in science instead of nature. Today, I call on all mothers across the world to join me in putting an end to this senseless slaughter of our most precious resource, our children.



Response from Dawn Richardson, President, PROVE

Dear PROVE Members

I am forwarding this … as a tribute to baby Laura and all the other children who have been injured or killed by a vaccine so that parents can learn another side to the vaccine story.

When I was almost 8 months pregnant with one of my daughters, I had volunteered to go to the Travis County Morgue with Karin Schumacher who, for years before she went to Law School, ran the NVIC news-list. Karin asked me to help her go through autopsy reports of infants listed as SIDS deaths and look at vaccination information. I will never forget the experience. We sat there in this basement buried in infant autopsy reports as my own baby kicked and turned inside of me.

Here were two of our observations:

1) A highly disproportionate amount of SIDS deaths clustered at 2, 4, and 6 months -- which are the very times infants are vaccinated. If vaccines had nothing to do with these, the numbers should have been randomly spread throughout the first 6 months of life. Not so. I challenge the naysayers to go to any morgue in the country and to be honest and see what I'm talking about.

2) It was shocking at how rare it was for the vaccine information to be recorded and how little investigating into the cause of death of these babies was actually done. It floored me that the when the vaccine information was even mentioned, it was often so incomplete. Medical examiners routinely missed asking for this indispensable information and failed to note the correlation of the date when the child died to even raise the question.

One of the things that struck me when reading Christine's story … is that here we are 16 years later and so many doctors are still downplaying and denying the risks of vaccines and healthy babies are still dying after being vaccinated.

One of the most offensive things that Senator Frist has in his vaccine bill which shields the drug companies from all liability when a vaccine injures or kills someone is that he is proposing that the federal government increase the amount of money that a parent receives from the government compensation program when their child is killed by a vaccine. Parents are not willing to be bought off with this blood money. Elected officials like Frist who want to eliminate the financial responsibility of the drug companies all together and throw the bone to parents that the government will pay them more if the government mandated vaccine kills their kid need to be voted out of Congress. If you haven't sent your email notes to your senators to oppose S 2053 yet - PLEASE do! If drug companies have ZERO threat of liability, the one thing we can be certain of is that stories like [Laura's] will become far more common.

The key to change is education. Fortunately, the Internet allows parents to educate parents. Please stop for a quiet moment after reading the note and say a prayer for all the babies whose lives were ended before they even got a chance to really start … and then take the time to forward this on to other parents.

Sincerely, Dawn Richardson
President, PROVE

THE FAILINGS OF MODERN MEDICINE

Just exactly what does two trillion dollars purchase the United States when it comes to quality and reliability of our health care system? For that money, we should have the best medicine in the world – preventing and reversing disease, and knowing how to do minimal harm. Instead we are getting buried prematurely.

According to the World Health Organization, the U.S. is ranked a paltry thirty-seven, sandwiched between Slovenia and Costa Rica. Not exactly where you would imagine our “great nation” to be.

Despite the fact that the United States spends more on medicine than any other nation, the country is facing a health care crisis as its health care system is in danger of collapse.

The system is not working. There are numerous reasons for the unnecessary deaths at the hands of modern medicine. Here are just a few:

● Sloppy handwriting [by doctors] is the cause of 7,000 patient deaths each year

● Preventable medication mistakes hurt 1.5 million patients.

● Every year 7.5 million unnecessary medical and surgical procedures are performed.

● At least 106,000 people die every year from adverse drug reactions.

● A mere 6% of all adverse drug reactions are properly identified. (Most side effects are instead mistaken for new disease symptoms, leading to further drugging and unnecessary medical procedures, increasing the risk of death even further. Of these deaths, many are from expected adverse reactions because they are an extension of the drug reaction.)

● The mortality rate for people between the ages of 45 and 64, who took their prescription drugs correctly, rose 90% in just five years.

● The deaths caused by conventional medicine, in just one decade, equate to approximately eight million. That’s more than all the casualties from all the wars America has fought in its entire history.

● Simply put, the American health care system is the number one killer in the United States.

Add to the errors of medicine, deceptive marketing has led to consumer consumption of highly processed foods. Sugar in soft drinks is the number one source of calories in the U.S. which now causes one in three Americans to have diabetes, or pre-diabetes, and two in three Americans to be overweight. Toxic medicine will never reverse poor health that is due to poor food choices.

What stands in the way of change are powerful pharmaceutical companies, medical technology companies, and special interest groups with enormous vested interests in the business of medicine. They fund medical research, support medical schools and hospitals, and advertise in medical journals. With deep pockets they entice scientists and academics to support their efforts. Such funding can sway the balance of opinion from professional caution to uncritical acceptance of a new therapy or drug.

Modern medicine is no longer about health but rather it is a for-profit disease industry that can only survive if millions of people get sick, and stay that way. It is an industry that refuses to consider vitally important aspects of health, like how stress lowers the immune system, how processed foods, alcohol, excessive calories and insufficient exercise are recipes for disease, how exposure to tens of thousands of toxins in our environment and in our food supply have direct links to the illnesses you suffer.

The cancer industry actually informs people to stay out of the sun yet more than 50,000 people die each year because they do not get enough sun exposure!

Instead profits come before health. More than half of the United States has received unnecessary medical treatment. That’s about 50,000 people each day. 42% have been directly affected by a medical mistake, from a procedure or a drug, and 84% of our population personally know someone who has been a victim of a medical error.

These medical errors and deaths equate to six jumbo jets falling out of the sky every day. The only difference is the media coverage – there’s no public displays of grief for those who die of faulty medicine.

The error rate of intensive care units is like the post office losing 16,000 pieces of mail every hour of every day or banks deducting 32,000 checks from the wrong account each and every hour – every day, year in and year out.

You, however, do not have to become a statistic. Natural therapies exist for every illness, disease prevention and immune support.

This information is presented in memory of the millions of people who placed their trust in a corrupt medical system that took their lives for profit, bankrupted their life’s savings, and when they had no money left to give, left them for dead.

The following article was authored by United States Congressman Ron Paul and Presidential candidate, a truly heroic individual who takes on big government, pharmaceutical drug companies, corruption and greed, including that demonstrated by agencies, such as the FDA and FTC.

DIETARY SUPPLEMENTS AND HEALTH FREEDOM

By: Congressman Dr. Ron Paul, U.S. Presidential Candidate

Millions of Americans take dietary supplements every day, and the numbers are growing as the Baby Boom generation ages. More and more Americans understandably are frustrated with our government-controlled health care system. They have concluded that vitamins, minerals, and other supplements might help them stay healthy and less dependent on the system. They use supplements because they can buy them freely at stores and research them freely on the internet, without government interference in the form of doctors, prescriptions, HMOs, and licenses. In other words, they use supplements because they are largely free to make their own choices, in stark contrast to the conventional medical system.

But we live in an era of unbridled government regulation of both our personal lives and the economy, and Food and Drug administration bureaucrats burn to regulate supplements in the same manner as prescription drugs.

The health nannies insist that many dietary supplements are untested and unproven, and therefore dangerous. But the track record for FDA-approved drugs hardly inspires confidence. In fact, far more Americans have died using approved pharmaceuticals than supplements. Not every dietary supplement performs as claimed, but neither does every FDA drug.

The FDA simply gives people a false sense of security, while crowding out private watchdog groups that might provide truly disinterested consumer information. It fosters a complacent attitude and a lack of personal responsibility among people who assume a government stamp of approval means a drug must be safe, and that they need not study a drug before taking it.

The FDA, like all federal agencies, ultimately uses its regulatory powers in political ways. Certain industries and companies are rewarded, and others are punished. No regulatory agency is immune from politics, which is why the FDA should not be trusted with power over our intimate health care decisions.

The real issue is not whether supplements really work, or whether FDA drugs really are safe. The real issue is: Who decides, the individual or the state? This is the central question in almost every political issue. In free societies, individuals decide what medical treatments or health supplements are appropriate for them.

Over the past decade the American people have made it clear they do not want the federal government to interfere with their access to dietary supplements. In 1994, Congress bowed to overwhelming public pressure and passed the Dietary Supplements and Health and Education Act, which liberalized the rules regarding the regulation of dietary supplements. Congressional offices received a record number of comments in favor of the Act, which demonstrates how strongly Americans feel about health freedom.

The FDA simply has thumbed its nose at Congress and ignored the new rules in many instances, by attempting to suppress information about health supplements. But in 1999 a federal appellate court affirmed that the American people have a First Amendment right to such information without interference from the FDA. However, members of Congress have had to intervene with the FDA on several occasions to ensure that they followed the court order.

My regular listeners already know about another looming threat to dietary supplement freedom. The Codex Alimentarius Commission, an offshoot of the United Nations, is working to “harmonize” food and supplement rules between all nations of the world. Under Codex rules, even basic vitamins and minerals will require a doctor’s prescription. As Europe moves ever closer to adopting Codex standards, it becomes more likely that the World Trade Organization will attempt to force those standards on the United States. This is yet another example of how the WTO threatens American sovereignty. By cooperating with Codex, the FDA is blatantly ignoring the will of Congress and the American people.

To learn more about how the government is threatening your freedom to use health supplements, please take 30 minutes and watch the video "We Become Silent: The Last Days of Health Freedom".