Tag Archives: Capitlaism

Vaccines kill more people than sharks, alligators, bears, snakes and spiders combined

By Ethan A. Huff
July 7, 2015
Natural News

 

vaccineThe mainstream media is in a frenzy over a few shark attacks that allegedly took place in North Carolina this past week, reports of which are already triggering a wave of fear as some families rethink their summer travel plans. But the biggest threat to your children isn’t sharks, bears, alligators or any other predator — it’s vaccines.

The number of deaths that occur annually following routine vaccination is far greater than the number of people that die from sharks, alligators, bears, snakes and spiders combined, it turns out. And yet tired news outlets like The Washington Post are asking ridiculous questions like, “Are you afraid of sharks? You should be…”

Such fear-mongering distracts from a much more serious threat to your children — poison-filled injections that are associated with at least 5,000 deaths annually, according to data from the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). The International Medical Council on Vaccination (IMCV) estimates that about 3,900 of these 5,000 reported deaths, or 78%, are directly caused by vaccines.

Recognizing that VAERS data constitutes as little as 10% of actual injury and death cases, the annual death rate from vaccines swells to about 39,000, a figure leaps and bounds ahead of the handful of deaths caused by sharks and other aggressive animals every year. Take a look at the following data presented by The Washington Post about animal-caused fatalities:

Sharks: 1 person per year
Alligators: 1 person per year
Bears: 1 person per year
Venomous snakes and lizards: 6 people per year
Spiders: 7 people per year
Non-venomous arthropods: 9 people per year
Cows: 20 people per year
Dogs: 28 people per year
Other mammals: 52 people per year
Bees, wasps and hornets: 58 people per year

If you add all this up, you’re left with a grand total of 183 animal-related deaths every year — this compared to a whopping 39,000 vaccine-related deaths! Put differently, for every one person who dies from an animal, according to data presented by The Washington Post and the IMCV, an astounding 213 people die from a vaccine or combination of vaccines!

Risk of dying from a vaccine is more than 200 times higher than dying from an animal attack

If the world was an honest place, The Washington Post would have compiled a report about the dangers of vaccines rather than animals, using this word-substituted title: “Chart: Vaccines that are most likely to kill you this summer.” Instead, it decided to publish a report with the same title, except with the word animals rather than vaccines.

Comparatively speaking, the risk of dying from an animal attack is a mere 0.5% the risk of dying from a vaccine. You are more than 200 times more likely to suffer mortality following a government-recommended shot, in other words, than you are dying from a bear, shark, alligator or any of the other aforementioned animals.

And consider this: Dr. David Kessler, the former head of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), believes that the estimated 10% reporting rate to VAERS is actually too high a figure. He says the reporting rate is closer to 1%, which means the number of vaccine-induced deaths that occur annually could be much higher than even 39,000!

And yet the mainstream media is completely silent on this, all the while supporting mandatory vaccination legislation like S.B. 277 in California that eliminates personal and philosophical vaccine exemptions. Perhaps it’s time for the corporate press to reevaluate what’s important in the world, because clearly its priorities are skewed, and the information it’s presenting misleading at best.

You can read more about The Washington Post and how it’s used as a propaganda rag for the vaccine industry at TruthWiki.org.

Sources for this article include:

http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org

http://www.washingtonpost.com

http://www.whale.to

http://www.naturalnews.com

http://www.renewamerica.com

http://thinktwice.com

http://www.truthwiki.org/Vaccine_Fanaticism/

http://www.truthwiki.org/Medical_Fascism/

New Study Finds GMO Corn Makes Rats Infertile

Unlike GM corn, non-GMO corn doesn’t cause sterility

By Christina Sarich
July 01, 2015
Natural Society

 

Rat in templeStill think GMOs and their non-GMO counterparts are equivalent? Think again. Unlike GM corn, non-GMO corn doesn’t cause sterility. A new study released by Egyptian scientists found that rats fed a GMO diet suffer from infertility, among other health issues.

Researchers from the Food Technology Department, Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Anatomy and Embryology, and Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Suez Canal University, Ismailia, Egypt, have found that several unsavory changes occur when rats were fed GM corn.

The rats’ organs/body weight and serum biochemistry were altered, indicating potential adverse health and toxic effects.

“GM corn or soybeans leads to significant organ disruptions in rats and mice, particularly in livers and kidneys. In addition they found other organs may be affected too, such as heart and spleen, or blood cells. The kidneys of males fared the worst, with 43.5% of all the changes, the liver of females followed with 30.8%”

Additionally, by day 91, many of the rats fed a GM diet were completely sterile.

As reported by Sustainable Pulse:

In the third study, histopathological examination was carried out on the rats fed the GM maize, and the results were compared with rats fed non-GM maize. The study found clear signs of organ pathology in the GM-fed group, especially in the liver, kidney, and small intestine. An examination of the testes revealed necrosis (death) and desquamation (shedding) of the spermatogonial cells that are the foundation of sperm cells and thus male fertility – and all this after only 91 days of feeding.”

Read: GMO Soy Linked to Sterility, Birth Defects, Infant Mortality

How long do you think this effect will take to show up in human beings who eat GM food?

The study abstract reads:

“This study was designed to evaluate the safety of genetically modified (GM) corn (Ajeeb YG). Corn grains from Ajeeb YG or its control (Ajeeb) were incorporated into rodent diets at 30% concentrations administered to rats (n= 10/group) for 45 and 91 days…General conditions were observed daily…and serum biochemistry were measured. The data showed several statistically significant differences in organs/body weight and serum biochemistry between the rats fed on GM and/or Non-GM corn and the rats fed on AIN93G diets. In general, GM corn sample caused several changes by increase or decrease organs/body weight or serum biochemistry values. This indicates potential adverse health/toxic effects of GM corn and further investigations still needed.”

This study simply corroborates previous findings, proving the same deleterious effects. Russian biologist Alexey V. Surov and his colleagues found that Monsanto’s genetically modified (GM) soy, grown on 91% of US soybean fields, leads to problems in growth or reproduction – in many cases, causing infertility. Animals who ate GM soy were sterile by the third generation.

Years ago, Natural Society unveiled proof that hamsters fed Monsanto’s GM soy for two years had growth and development abnormalities, and also – became sterile.

If you don’t see a pattern here, you might need to look again.

 

 

Christina Sarich is a humanitarian and freelance writer helping you to Wake up Your Sleepy Little Head, and See the Big Picture. Her blog is Yoga for the New World. Her latest book is Pharma Sutra: Healing the Body And Mind Through the Art of Yoga.

The fraudulent debate over NSA reform

By Patrick Martin
May 30, 2015
World Socialist Web Site

 

The US Senate convenes May 31 in a rare Sunday afternoon session called by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to forestall the expiration of Section 215 of the USA Patriot Act. This section of the vast police-state law passed in 2001 has been used as the basis for the National Security Agency’s collection of telephone metadata on every phone call made in the United States, as well as authorizing other forms of domestic spying.

In the week leading up to the Senate session, President Obama, Attorney General Loretta Lynch and the heads of the FBI and other security agencies have depicted the potential expiration of Section 215 in apocalyptic terms. Obama made several appearances before television cameras to demand action “because it’s necessary to keep the American people safe and secure.” Lynch said that a failure to act would cause “a serious lapse in our ability to protect the American people.”

Other administration representatives were even more strident. At a press briefing of three top officials, all unidentified at the insistence of the White House, one said, “What you’re doing, essentially, is you’re playing national security Russian roulette. We have not had to confront addressing the terrorist threat without these authorities, and it’s going to be fraught with unnecessary risk.”

This scaremongering is completely cynical. The surveillance powers embodied in Section 215 have nothing to do with defending the American people from terrorist attacks. On the contrary, the American people are the principal target of Section 215, and of the Patriot Act as a whole.

On the eve of the vote, a report by the Justice Department’s own Office of Inspector General conceded that the mass collection of data on telephone metadata—the core of Section 215 as interpreted by both the Bush and Obama administrations—has played no role in any terrorism investigation or prosecution. Another of the key powers under Section 215, authorization of “roving wiretaps” of individuals who change cellphones, has been used in only a handful of cases. A provision for wiretaps of so-called “rogue” terrorists—individuals not connected with any organization—has never been used at all.

Given these facts, how is one to account for the “sky is falling” rhetoric from the Obama administration and its congressional allies, both Republican and Democrat, over the possible expiration of Section 215?

Section 215 is of enormous importance to the government—but not for the reason given. The mass data collection on telecommunications and the Internet is a key element in the development of an authoritarian state that is accumulating vast databases on the political and social views of the entire population. The state is preparing to use this intelligence in an effort to crush popular opposition to ever-growing social inequality, police violence and militarism.

The greatest threat to the democratic rights of the American people comes not from Islamic fundamentalist terrorists or their Internet sympathizers, but from the capitalist state itself, which is the main instrument for defending the profits and wealth of the super-rich against the vast majority of the population, the working class. Whatever form the Senate debate takes on Sunday, this central issue will be evaded and covered up.

The Obama administration is pushing for Senate acceptance of the USA Freedom Act, a bill which makes cosmetic changes in Section 215 while reauthorizing it and placing it on a pseudo-legal foundation. The database of call records would be maintained by the telecommunications companies, rather than directly at NSA headquarters, and the NSA would route its data searches through the telecoms.

This bill passed the House of Representatives with overwhelming bipartisan support, but fell three votes short of winning consideration in the Senate. It appears likely that a dozen or more Republican senators, who initially opposed the bill, will switch their votes in order to beat the May 31 deadline. Procedural obstacles by a handful of Republican and Democratic opponents may delay this several days, which would supposedly lead to a temporary shutdown of the call surveillance program.

There is not the slightest reason to believe that the NSA and the vast military-intelligence complex as a whole will actually take such a step. These agencies engaged in mass domestic spying without any legal authorization long before the passage of the Patriot Act in 2001. As a federal appeals court ruled earlier this month, the Bush-Obama interpretation of Section 215 as an authorization of mass call data collection has no legal basis, meaning that the entire surveillance program has been conducted unlawfully for the past 14 years. Operating outside of and in defiance of the law is second nature to the US spy apparatus.

Even the present half-hearted and thoroughly insincere discussion is only taking place in response to the revelations by whistleblowers like Edward Snowden and Thomas Drake about the massive police-state buildup under the guise of “anti-terrorism.” The same senators who claim to be concerned about the “surveillance state” have joined in condemning the actions of the courageous individuals who done the public service of exposing it.

There will be much posturing in Sunday’s debate, both from those hyping the threat of terrorism, and those, a small minority, claiming to defend constitutional rights. But Republican Rand Paul, Democrat Ron Wyden and other professed opponents of Section 215 are objecting to only a small portion of the Patriot Act, which is itself only a series of amendments to earlier police-state laws like the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The collection of telephone metadata, moreover, is only one of hundreds, if not thousands, of programs through which the US military-intelligence apparatus collects information on the American population.

Every Republican and Democratic politician defends this state machine as a whole. The struggle to defend democratic rights and to dismantle the police-state apparatus of spying and repression is the task of the working class, and it requires the building of an independent working-class political movement based on a socialist program.

 

 

Aluminum and the Neurotoxicity of Vaccines

Information that the Vaccine Industry tries to keep hidden

By Dr. Gary G. Kohls
April 30, 2015
Global Research

 

Aluminium-vaccine“No vaccine manufacturer shall be liable…for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death.” – President Ronald Reagan, as he signed The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) of 1986, absolving drug companies from all medico-legal liability when children die or are disabled from vaccine injuries.

“In young children, a highly significant correlation exists between the number of pediatric aluminum-adjuvanted vaccines administered and the rate of autism spectrum disorders.” – C. A. Shaw, MD, Vaccine safety researcher

“…no adequate studies have been conducted to assess the safety of simultaneous administration of different vaccines to young children.” Nor has there been “ any toxicological evaluation about concomitant administration of aluminum with other known toxic compounds which are routine constituents of commercial vaccine preparations, e.g., formaldehyde, formalin, mercury, phenoxyethanol, phenol, sodium borate, polysorbate 80, glutaraldehyde.” – L. Tomljenovic and C.A. Shaw, Vaccine safety researchers

In the last few decades since the “mysterious” autism epidemic began in the late 1980s, the giant pharmaceutical companies, free from the constraints of medico-legal liability, began pumping out more and more highly profitable vaccines, and their lobbyists in D.C., their well-paid spokespersons and the industry-co-opted “regulatory agencies” (like WHO, the CDC, the FDA and NIH) rejoiced.

Then, in 1996, the Big Pharma corporate machine and lobbyists got the US Congress to do its bidding and legalize direct-to-consumer advertising for its products, which up to then was illegal. And Big Pharma has also been bribing most US Congresspersons with lavish campaign donations and totally dominated the mainstream media debates that come up from time to time concerning drug and vaccine injuries, intoxication, sickness and death.. Up until now they have also succeeded in silencing the thousands of anguished parents of vaccine-injured children who are just trying to tell their tragic stories.

At least partly because of the dire financial consequences that these industries may have to face if the stories were to be widely told, these parents and their advocates have been essentially black-balled by every media outlet that takes advertising dollars from Big Pharma. The black-listing is probably welcome to everybody associated with Big Pharma’s industries, like Wall Street executives, Big Media executives and others in the investor classes that may have pharmaceutical stocks in their portfolios (or are simply on friendly terms with medical or pharmaceutical establishment types that don’t want to destabilize the gravy train).

Tens of thousands of angry and increasingly vocal “Mama Bear” mothers, are no longer willing to accept the excuse from their clinics that “the neurological catastrophe that your child suffered after the shots was just a coincidence”. And they are demanding an audience, some compassion, some help and some compensation for their losses.

These usually disrespected parents are sometimes fired from their clinics when they try to protect their afflicted child from further vaccine injury. There is no doubt in their minds that, after their child got his standard “well-child” inoculations, that previously healthy baby or toddler died of SIDS or regressed into autism (or had other developmental delays) or started having seizures or developed autoimmune disorders such as allergies or asthma or arthritis or so-called ADHD.

(It must be mentioned that the various combinations of inoculations have never been proven to be safe or even effective in unbiased, independent, well-designed, long-term studies. With no legal liability since 1986, the vaccine industry has very little incentive to make that effort.)

But these parents are persistent and they are continuing to speak out despite being routinely shouted down by the ubiquitous pro-vaccine spokespersons that are invited to appear on radio and TV shows whenever vaccine issues are discussed in the media. Pro-vaccine spokespersons are everywhere (like the multimillionaire academic pediatrician Dr Paul Offit, who developed an anti-diarrhea rotavirus vaccine (Rotateq), and then sold – for tens of millions of dollars – the patents and marketing rights to the giant vaccine manufacturer Merck & Co.

Offit has a lot of prestige to lose if the raw truth about America’s over-vaccination program came out. (Dr Offit, by the way, is the “vaccine expert” who says that all vaccines are perfectly safe and once reportedly said that infants can theoretically tolerate 10,000 of them at once: (See “Addressing Parents’ Concerns: Do Multiple Vaccines Overwhelm or Weaken the Infant’s Immune System?” Pediatrics. 2002 Jan;109(1):124-9.)

Many of the parents whose children are victims of vaccine-injuries have enough common sense to see through the absurdity of Offit’s statement. They know how to find pertinent information on PubMed that their physicians may not be aware of concerning the toxicity of vaccines and vaccine adjuvants, and they are connecting the dots and de-mystifying the causes behind the epidemic of chronic, autoimmune disorders that are occurring in fully vaccinated American children. Those chronic illnesses do not happen in unvaccinated or minimally-vaccinated children like in Amish communities or in the patients of Home First Clinic in Chicago. (For more on that see ”Make an Informed Vaccine Decision”, page 12, where author Mayer Eisenstein, MD, JD, MPH, who started the Home First Clinic [and did not force vaccinations on his 35,000 pediatric patients] discovered that, among his un-vaccinated or minimally-vaccinated patients, there were essentially zero patients with autism, asthma, allergies or diabetes.)

Knowledgeable parents of vaccine-age children correctly fear the rapidly increasing numbers of mandated vaccines all of which have many toxic ingredients in them that are being injected into the bodies of their immune-deficient infants. And the vaccine doses do not vary no matter what is the infant’s age, weight, developmental status, immune status, mitochondrial status, nutritional status, or whether or not the child is currently sick.

Because of the large amount of new basic science studies that have been done on the subject of the neurotoxic vaccine adjuvant aluminum and the recent studies about the mitochondrial toxicity of vaccine ingredients, I submit the abstracts and portions of articles below from a variety of peer-reviewed medical journals.

Aluminum, as is mercury, is a known potent mitochondrial toxin, and every cell in the body, especially the brain cells of infants, is highly susceptible to permanent damage from those two heavy metals, especially when they are used in combination and especially when they are injected – as was the case during the 1990s when the autism epidemic was escalating from rare (1/10,000 to “normal” (1/150).

The first article in annex (Excerpts) below is from the journal Lupus and the second is from Current Medicinal Chemistry. Neither journal takes pharmaceutical company advertising.


ANNEX

Mechanisms of Aluminum Adjuvant Toxicity and Autoimmunity in Pediatric Populations

Lupus. 2012 Feb;21(2):223-30. doi: 10.1177/0961203311430221.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22235057

Tomljenovic L, Shaw CA.

Abstract

Immune challenges during early development, including those vaccine-induced, can lead to permanent detrimental alterations of the brain and immune function. Experimental evidence also shows that simultaneous administration of as little as two to three immune adjuvants can overcome genetic resistance to autoimmunity.

In some developed countries, by the time children are 4 to 6 years old, they will have received a total of 126 antigenic compounds along with high amounts of aluminum (Al) adjuvants through routine vaccinations.

According to the US Food and Drug Administration, safety assessments for vaccines have often not included appropriate toxicity studies because vaccines have not been viewed as inherently toxic.
Taken together, these observations raise plausible concerns about the overall safety of current childhood vaccination programs. When assessing adjuvant toxicity in children, several key points ought to be considered:

(1) Infants and children should not be viewed as “small adults” with regard to toxicological risk as their unique physiology makes them much more vulnerable to toxic insults;
(2) In adult humans (and animals) aluminum vaccine adjuvants have been linked to a variety of serious autoimmune and inflammatory conditions (i.e., ASIA = Autoimmune [auto-inflammatory] Syndrome Induced by Adjuvants), yet children are regularly exposed to much higher amounts of Al from vaccines than adults;
(3) It is often assumed that peripheral immune responses do not affect brain function. However, it is now clearly established that there is a bidirectional neuro-immune cross-talk that plays crucial roles in immune-regulation as well as brain function. In turn, perturbations of the neuro-immune axis have been demonstrated in many autoimmune diseases encompassed in “ASIA” and are thought to be driven by a hyperactive immune response; and
(4) The same components of the neuro-immune axis that play key roles in brain development and immune function are heavily targeted by Al adjuvants.
In summary, research evidence shows that increasing concerns about current vaccination practices may indeed be warranted.
Because children may be most at risk of vaccine-induced complications, a rigorous evaluation of the vaccine-related adverse health impacts in the pediatric population is urgently needed.


Aluminum Vaccine Adjuvants: Are they Safe?

Curr Med Chem. 2011;18(17):2630-7

L. Tomljenovic, and C.A. Shaw (article accepted for publication May 12, 2011)

Neural Dynamics Research Group, Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, the Departments of Ophthalmology, Visual Sciences and Experimental Medicine, and the Graduate Program in Neuroscience, University of British Columbia, 828 W. 10th Ave, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1L8, Canada

Full journal article available at: http://www.meerwetenoverfreek.nl/images/stories/Tomljenovic_Shaw-CMC-published.pdf

Abstract

Aluminum is an experimentally demonstrated neurotoxin and the most commonly used vaccine adjuvant. Despite almost 90 years of widespread use of aluminum adjuvants, medical science’s understanding about their mechanisms of action is still remarkably poor. There is also a concerning scarcity of data on toxicology and pharmacokinetics of these compounds. In spite of this, the notion that aluminum in vaccines is safe appears to be widely accepted.

Experimental research, however, clearly shows that aluminum adjuvants have a potential to induce serious immunological disorders in humans. In particular, aluminum in adjuvant form carries a risk for autoimmunity, long-term brain inflammation and associated neurological complications and may thus have profound and widespread adverse health consequences.

In our opinion, the possibility that vaccine benefits may have been overrated and the risk of potential adverse effects underestimated, has not been rigorously evaluated in the medical and scientific community. We hope that the present paper will provide a framework for a much needed and long overdue assessment of this highly contentious medical issue.

INTRODUCTION

Aluminum is the most commonly used vaccine adjuvant and until recently the only one licensed for use in the U.S. In its absence, antigenic components of most vaccines (with the exception of live attenuated vaccines), fail to launch an adequate immune response. Paradoxically, despite almost 90 years of widespread use of aluminum adjuvants their precise mechanism of action remains poorly understood.

Furthermore, a growing number of studies have linked the use of aluminum adjuvants to serious autoimmune outcomes in humans. That concerns about aluminum adjuvant safety are indeed warranted is evident from the summary conclusions of the Aluminum in Vaccines workshop held in Puerto Rico in 2000 [Eickhoff, T.C.; Myers, M. Workshop summary. Aluminum in vaccines. Vaccine. 2002, 20 Suppl 3, S1-4.]. The written consensus amongst the participants of the workshop was listed under the rubric of “pervasive uncertainty”, a term used to denote what remained unknown regarding potential aluminum toxicity from adjuvants.

The specific areas of concern were: “1) toxicology and pharmacokinetics, specifically the processing of aluminum by infants and children, 2) mechanisms by which aluminum adjuvants interact with the immune system and 3) the necessity of adjuvants in booster doses.” In the concluding paragraphs of the summary, the report nevertheless claimed that “the use of salts of aluminum as adjuvants in vaccines has proven to be safe and effective” [2]. In light of the items of “pervasive uncertainty”, this statement remains questionable.

Given that multiple aluminum-adjuvanted vaccines are often given to very young children (i.e., 2 to 6 months of age), in a single day at individual vaccination sessions, concerns for potential impacts of total adjuvant-derived aluminum body burden may be significant. These issues warrant serious consideration since, to the best of our knowledge, no adequate studies have been conducted to assess the safety of simultaneous administration of different vaccines to young children.

Another issue of concern is the lack of any toxicological evaluation about concomitant administration of aluminum with other known toxic compounds which are routine constituents of commercial vaccine preparations, e.g., formaldehyde, formalin, mercury, phenoxyethanol, phenol, sodium borate, polysorbate 80, glutaraldehyde.

In spite of all this, aluminum adjuvants are generally regarded as safe, and some researchers have even recommended that no further research efforts should be spent on this topic despite “a lack of good-quality evidence”.

In the following paper we aim to provide an overview of what is currently known about aluminum adjuvants, their modes of action and mechanisms of potential toxicity. We first present well-established evidence that implicates aluminum in a variety of neurological disorders. We then elaborate on the unresolved controversy about aluminum adjuvant safety.

Aluminum Toxicity in Animals and Humans

Aluminum is a well demonstrated toxin in biological systems whose more specific impacts on the nervous system have been widely documented. As early as 1911, Dr. William Gies had summarized data from 7 years-worth of experimental testing in humans and animals on the effects of oral consumption of aluminum salts, then used primarily in baking powders, food preservation, and dye manufacturing. The outcome of these studies led Gies to conclude that: “the use in food of aluminum or any other aluminum compound is a dangerous practice.”

Gies’ concerns have since been borne out by experimental studies showing that oral exposure to aluminum that is at levels “typically” consumed in an average “Western diet” over an extended period of time, produce strikingly similar outcomes in rodents to those induced by intracerebral injection of aluminum salts with the exception of seizures and fatalities.

Animals intoxicated with dietary aluminum routinely show impaired performance in learning and memory tasks, impaired concentration, and behavioural changes including confusion and repetitive behaviours. Consistent with these observations, according to the most recent and elaborate toxicological report for aluminum prepared by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR): “There is a rather extensive database on the oral toxicity of aluminum in animals. These studies clearly identify the nervous system as the most sensitive target of aluminum toxicity.”

In humans, aluminum toxicity has been solidly linked to dialysis-associated encephalopathy syndrome, also known as dialysis dementia. This syndrome occurs in patients with renal failure subjected to chronic dialysis treatment and is caused by accumulation of intravenously administered aluminum from the dialysis fluid (which is derived from aluminum-treated tap water). Dialysis dementia is associated with abnormally high levels of plasma and brain aluminum and is generally fatal within 3 to 7 months following the sudden overt manifestation of clinical symptoms in patients who had been on dialysis treatment for 3 to 7 years (unless treated with chelating agent such as desferrioxamine (DFO) or reverse osmosis to remove aluminum salts from the water used to prepare the dialysis fluid). Symptoms appear suddenly and worsen either during or immediately after a dialysis session. The first symptom to appear is a speech abnormality, then tremors, impaired psychomotor control, memory losses, impaired concentration, behavioural changes, epileptic seizures, coma and death.

Although frequent ingestion of aluminum-containing medicines was also thought to be a contributing factor in dialysis dementia it should be noted that there were no incidences of this syndrome prior to introduction of aluminum salts in water supplies [21, 27]. Furthermore, symptomatic patients rapidly improved when efforts were made to remove aluminum from the dialysis fluid, despite the fact they still ingested large amounts of aluminum-containing phosphate binding gels.

In addition to dialysis dementia, a host of neurodegenerative complications and diseases such as Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) [Perl, D.P.; Moalem, S. [Aluminum and Alzheimer’s disease, a personal perspective after 25 years. J Alzheimers Dis. 2006, 9(3 Suppl), 291-300.], multiple sclerosis, Gulf War Syndrome (GWS), autism, and epilepsy may also be related to aluminum exposure. While it is likely that these diseases are of multifactorial etiologies, aluminum certainly has the potential to serve as a toxic co-factor.

CONCLUSIONS

Aluminum in various forms can be toxic to the nervous system. The widespread presence in the human environment may underlie a number of CNS disorders. The continued use of aluminum adjuvants in various vaccines for children as well as the general public may be of significant concern.

In particular, aluminum presented in this form carries a risk for autoimmunity, long-term brain inflammation and associated neurological complications and may thus have profound and widespread adverse health consequences. The widely accepted notion of aluminum adjuvant safety does not appear to be firmly established in the scientific literature and, as such, this absence may have led to erroneous conclusions regarding the significance of these compounds in the etiologies of many common neurological disorders. Furthermore, the continued use of aluminum-containing placebos in vaccine clinical trials may have led to an underestimation of the true rate of adverse outcomes associated with aluminum-adjuvanted vaccines.

In our opinion, a comprehensive evaluation of the overall impact of aluminum on human health is overdue. Such an evaluation should include studies designed to determine the short and long-term impacts of dietary aluminum as well as the potential impacts in different age groups of exposure to adjuvant aluminum alone and in combination with other potentially toxic vaccine constituents (e.g., formaldehyde, formalin, mercury, phenoxyethanol, phenol, sodium borate, polysorbate 80, glutaraldehyde).

For the latter, until vaccine safety can be comprehensively demonstrated by controlled independent long-term studies that examine the impact on the nervous system in detail, many of those already vaccinated as well as those currently receiving injections may be at risk for health complications that exceed the potential benefits that vaccine prophylaxis may provide.

The issue of aluminum-adjuvanted vaccine safety is especially pertinent in light of the legislation which might mandate vaccination regimes for civilian populations (e.g., the Biodefense and Pandemic Vaccine and Drug Development Act of 2005). Whether the risk of protection from a dreaded disease outweighs the risk of toxicity from its presumed prophylactic agent is a question that demands far more rigorous scrutiny than has been provided to date.

REFERENCES (and full article) available at:http://www.meerwetenoverfreek.nl/images/stories/Tomljenovic_Shaw-CMC-published.pdf

Dr Kohls is a retired physician from Duluth, MN. Prior to his retirement, he practiced holistic (non-drug) mental health care. He writes a weekly column for the Duluth Reader, an alternative newsweekly magazine (www.readerduluth.com). His columns often deal with issues of mental health, drug/vaccine toxicity and the epidemic of malnutrition.

Protests mount in Baltimore over police killing of Freddie Gray

By Evan Blake and Andre Damon
April 23, 2015
World Socialist Web Site

 

Protests over the police killing of 25-year-old Freddie Gray in Baltimore, Maryland continued on Wednesday, with hundreds demonstrating in front of the Western District police station where Gray was taken following his arrest on April 12. Hundreds of people also marched to nearby City Hall, where thousands are expected to protest Thursday evening. Demonstrations are also planned for Saturday.

Of the more than 350 police killings that have taken place in the US so far this year, the murder of Freddie Gray is among the most horrific. Before his encounter with Baltimore police, Gray was perfectly healthy. Within an hour of making eye contact with an officer, he was in a coma, three fractured cervical vertebrae in his neck having severed 80 percent of his spinal cord. He died on Sunday, prompting an outpouring of protest.

On Wednesday, Michael Davey, a lawyer representing the Baltimore Fraternal Order of Police, unequivocally defended the officers’ actions at a press conference, declaring that none of the cops had committed a crime. Gene Ryan, president of the Fraternal Order of Police lodge, described the protesters as a “lynch mob” and assured the police that “the union is 100 percent, completely behind the officers.”

Another police union official told the assembled reporters that those in the precinct who were hostile to the police were the “criminal elements.”

Since Gray slipped into a coma, police officials have insisted that the officers used no force whatsoever and the victim’s injuries were sustained as a result of an unspecified event in the police van that transported Gray to the Western District station house. Despite at least two videos that show Gray being brutally dragged, screaming in pain, to the police van, Davey again declared Wednesday, “Our position is something happened in that van, we just don’t know what.”

On Tuesday, a friend of Gray who witnessed his arrest told CNN anonymously that he watched officers contort Gray into “a pretzel type of move, where they had the heels of his feet to his back, and he was still in handcuffs.” On Wednesday, the same witness claimed that by the time he began filming the arrest, one officer “had their knee in [Gray’s] neck. He was like crushing his neck really hard.”

Police claim Gray was carrying a switchblade, a contention discounted by Gray’s friend. “I’ve never known Freddie to carry any type of weapon,” he said, adding, “I don’t believe for one second that he would be aggressive toward the police in any type of way, because we know that police brutality is prevalent in our neighborhood.”

Another witness and protester, Harold Perry, told CNN that he heard Gray cry out, “Get off my neck! Get off my neck! You’re hurting my neck!”

In widely viewed bystander footage, Gray can be heard screaming repeatedly as officers drag him to the back of a police van, prompting one witness to shout, “His legs are broken!” While the footage indicates that Gray had lost the use of his legs, the six officers who participated in the arrest did not request an ambulance and instead drove Gray across the city for the some thirty minutes, stopping to arrest one other man.

On Wednesday, a new cell phone video emerged showing officers putting ankle cuffs onto a motionless Gray minutes after his initial arrest a few blocks away. Witness Jacqueline Jackson told CNN that when police applied the ankle cuffs, “He wasn’t responding. His head was down.” After the ankle cuffs were secured, “They picked him up and threw him up in the paddy wagon.”

When asked by CNN’s Miguel Marquez whether Gray appeared to be unconscious, Jackson replied, “Yes. Yes, and I asked them, ‘Could they get him a paramedic?’ They told me to ‘mind my business.’ And I said, ‘It is my business!’”

From the start, the police and political establishment have sought to cover up the obvious responsibility of the police for Gray’s death. On Wednesday, Deputy Commissioner David Rodriguez said, “None of the officers describe using any force against Mr. Gray.”

The lawyer for Gray’s family, William Murphy, told CNN, “We have no confidence that the police can investigate their own. We have no confidence that the police can do this free of conflicts of interest.”

Baltimore has been ravaged by years of deindustrialization and nearly a quarter of its residents fall below the poverty line. Last month, Baltimore residents protested the city authorities’ decision to begin shutting off water service to residents who are behind on their water bills. The city’s Department of Public Works announced that it would begin shutting off water to as many as 25,000 poor residents.

Since 2011, Baltimore has paid $5,765,065 in settlements and court judgments for cases alleging officer misconduct, including the slamming of a pregnant woman into the ground, the killing of an unarmed veteran, and the beating of a church deacon. Gray’s death is the sixth killing by Baltimore police since the start of 2015.

It is the latest in a wave of police killings over the past month, including:

The April 15 shooting of unarmed Frank Shephard by Houston police, who fired up to a dozen bullets into their victim following a car chase.

The April 4 murder of 50-year-old Walter Scott, shot multiple times in the back by a South Carolina police officer. The cop was charged with murder following the release of a bystander video showing the officer shooting the fleeing, unarmed Scott and then planting a Taser next to his motionless body.

The shooting of 17-year-old Justus Howell the same day in Zion, Illinois, prompting protests by hundreds of people. The cop shot the youth in the back.

The April 2 shooting of 44-year-old Eric Harris of Tulsa, Oklahoma by a police deputy, who subsequently claimed the shooting was an accident. A video shows Harris saying he cannot breathe, to which an officer replies, “F*ck your breath” as he jams his knee into Harris’s back.

On Monday, White House press secretary Josh Earnest said the rash of police killings making national headlines did not point to an increase in police violence. He declared, “I don’t think that anybody is in a position to suggest that these incidents that are getting national attention necessarily represent a spike in more violent police activity.” It was, rather, a question of greater public awareness of violent incidents.

While Earnest was callously seeking to downplay the epidemic of police killings, it is difficult to say which scenario is more damning: a growing wave of police killings or a situation where daily police murders were long the norm in America but were covered up by the government and the media.

In any event, the Obama administration has made it a policy not to keep an official record of police killings nationwide. (Other sources put the toll of police killings last year at more than 1,100). At the same time, the administration has transferred billions of dollars in military hardware to local police departments.

In poor and working-class communities throughout the country, police function as paramilitary death squads, killing and torturing with impunity, knowing they will be protected by the government on the local, state and federal level.