By Jill Richardson, AlterNet
September 13, 2010

This salmon would be the first genetically engineered animal to enter the U.S. food supply, and the science behind its approval process is frightening.


201009211015.jpg

When the FDA announced it found the genetically engineered AquAdvantage salmon safe just before Labor Day, news headlines and even Alaska Senator Mark Begich called it a "frankenfish." A closer look at AquAdvantage makes it seem unlikely that Mary Shelley could have ever dreamed up anything as wild as the fast growing GE salmon. Even more worrisome is the science used to justify the salmon's safety, which Consumers Union senior scientist Michael Hansen calls "sloppy," "misleading," and "woefully inadequate."

  • Currently 5/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rating: 5/5 (2 votes cast)

The One Click Group
Pharmalot
By Ed Silverman // September 17th, 2010


201009201734.jpg

No one at Arena Pharmaceuticals could accuse ceo Jack Lief of being a rat. In a conference call yesterday with analysts after an FDA panel rejected the drugmaker’s Lorqess diet pill due to safety concerns, Lief acknowledged that different forms of cancer had been seen in rats treated with high doses. But he stressed that “when we learned of the data, we promptly discussed it with the FDA.”

But then Cowen analyst Phil Nadeau asked if the info was ever made available to the public or was the FDA briefing document released this week the first time investors might have learned of this finding. Lief replied by saying “…we believe that (Lorqess) does not pose a cancer risk to humans at the recommended therapeutic dose…There is an immense amount of data generated in drug development. We did not, and still do not believe that the data’s relevant to humans and, as such, did not believe it was material to investors.”

  • Currently 5/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rating: 5/5 (1 votes cast)

Liberty News online

USA :: Freedoms and Liberties

September 17, 2010-The Internaut

201009200926.jpg

Information has recently been posted on various internet sites claiming that Obama's Executive Order 13544 opens the door to Codex Alimentarius within the U.S. This concerned me since I am a big user of vitamins and supplements. (My motto is "Thousands for vitamins and supplements but not one cent for pharmaceutical drugs.") I did some research on the Internet and found the following press release on the National Health Federation web site:

THE OBAMA EXECUTIVE ORDER - MORE HEALTHCARE BUREAUCRACY, BUT NOT BACKDOOR CODEX

CLICK HERE TO SEE THE PRESS RELEASE!

  • Currently 4/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rating: 4/5 (4 votes cast)

BAN ASPARTAME - It Causes Rumsfeld Syndrome

| | Comments (0)



BAN ASPARTAME - It Causes Rumsfeld Syndrome
by Beldeu Singh

In December, 1965 Searle chemist James Schlatter discovered aspartame while working on an ulcer drug. The substance, comprised of 50 percent synthetic phenylalanine, 40 percent synthetic aspartic acid and 10 percent methanol, was about 200 times sweeter than sugar by weight and had no calories. By spring, 1967, Searle began conducting safety trials in preparation for petitioning the FDA for product approval.

Soon after the trials began, lab animals (monkeys and mice) began experiencing adverse effects ranging from brain lesions and tumors to seizures and death. Yet Searle petitioned the FDA for aspartame approval in February, 1973. According to Turner, Searle provided the FDA with over 100 studies claiming they proved aspartame was "safe." Independent analyses of these studies, however, proves conclusively that aspartame is actually a dangerous, neurotoxic, carcinogenic and highly-addictive drug.

Trusting Searle's promise that aspartame was safe, the FDA approved the limited use of aspartame in dry goods on July 26, 1974. Turner and Dr. Olney formally objected to the approval. Their petition triggered an FDA investigation of Searle's lab practices which proved that Searle had provided the FDA with inaccurate conclusions resulting from manipulated data derived from poorly-designed studies. The FDA reversed its decision to approve aspartame in dry goods.

On January 10, 1977, the FDA formally requested that the U.S. Department of Justice convene a federal grand jury to determine if Searle should be criminally indicted for "concealing material facts and making false statements" with regard to its petition for aspartame approval. 

Among the many charges FDA investigators made about Searle's shoddy lab practices was how rats that developed tumors would undergo surgical removal of the tumors and then be placed back into the study as if nothing had happened to them!

That describes to a large extent the signature conduct of many pharmaceutical companies - they conduct many studies but place before the FDA only the two studies that make the drug look favorable and safe. The lack of toxicity data cannot be taken as proof of safety for use in the human biological system that is driven by natural antioxidants and L-form biomolecules produced by healthy biochemistry in the body and in plants.

There are typically no studies on the toxic effects of the toxic metabolites and antibiotics including depletion of glutathione and trace minerals such as boron and chromium that could lead to disease conditions such as diabetes and insulin resistance as chromium is a critical mineral for the formation of the CRF factor that binds to receptor sites to allow the entry of glucose into cells. Natural antioxidants are required for the formation of the CRF factor. Prolonged excess glucose in the bloodstream can lead to the formation of glycated proteins that in turn generate more free radicals leading to health risks and the potential to the development of chronic conditions.

  • Currently 5/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rating: 5/5 (2 votes cast)

OMSJ

2 Sept 2010 – Last year, OMSJ identified the HIV drug Sustiva (Efavirenz) as little more than a highly addictive anti-retroviral (ARV) placebo that, when interrupted, produces withdrawal symptoms that AIDS clinicians routinely use to misdiagnose the onset of AIDS.

201009161434.jpg

According to researchers, the following symptoms are known to be caused by HIV, AIDS, or drug withdrawal syndrome:

   * Fever (hyperpyrexia)

   * Soaking night sweats

   * Shaking chills or fever higher than 100 F for several weeks

   * Headache

   * Sore throat

   * Cough and shortness of breath

   * Skin rashes or bumps

   * Chronic diarrhea

   * Weight loss

   * Persistent, unexplained fatigue

   * Blurred and distorted vision

  • Currently 5/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rating: 5/5 (2 votes cast)
The One Click Group
Study links Voltaren to strokes
By Alison Caldwell
September 14, 2010

201009160931.jpg

(Pack Shot Courtesy Of One Click)

There are calls today for one of Australia's top-selling painkillers to be banned, after another study linked it to an increased chance of stroke in healthy people.

Commonly sold as Voltaren, diclofenac is available in a number of brands and is as dangerous as the arthritis drug Vioxx, according to the author of the study.

Danish research identified Voltaren, a popular anti-inflammatory analgesic, as one of a class of drugs which increase the risk of stroke.

  • Currently 5/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rating: 5/5 (2 votes cast)

CoMeD, the Coalition for Mercury-free Drugs (mercury-freedrugs.org) a non-profit group dedicated to reducing the mercury-exposure risks from mercury-containing medical products is demanding an investigation into allegations that the US Centers for Disease Control had a hand in fraudulently skewing research which exonerates mercury contained in vaccines from playing a role in the explosive increase in the number of autistic children in the US.

According to a CoMeD release, key studies showing "no evidence of harm" for Thimerosal, the mercury-based compound still used as a preservative in flu shots, are characterized by fraud and manipulation.

Ongoing criminal investigations in Denmark of Dr. Poul Thorsen, co-author of a pivotal study dismissing the link between mercury in vaccines and autism, suggest that he may have, in conjunction with staff from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), embezzled several million dollars. Investigations also raise the specter that CDC staff inappropriately influenced the design, conclusions, and publication of that and other studies.

Details of the allegations and a demand for an independent investigation into the irregularities that characterize the studies are in a letter CoMeD, together with other anti-mercury advocacy groups, sent to Daniel R. Levinson, the Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services and others.

  • Currently 5/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rating: 5/5 (2 votes cast)

Canada: A Question of Sovereignty

| | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

A question of Sovereignty is the latest film of Kevin Miller - it is available freely on line.

Kevin Miller is widely known to those in natural health movement as a prolific producer of documentaries, such as "We become silent", exposing the Codex Alimentarius bureaucracy's threat to natural health and "Generation RX", which examines the issue of increasing psychiatric drug use, especially in children.

A Question of Sovereignty examines an important facet of the fight for self-determination. The film is about legal restrictions on the freedom of Canadians to take care of their health and nutrition as they see fit. But it also alludes to a battle waged by giant multinational corporations through the UN and its agencies, to subvert national governments and to dictate what we should eat, how to grow our food, what kind of energy technology we may use, what kind of money we must acquire to pay for stuff.

The scene of Kevin's film is Canada and the question of self-determination in health matters, but what we are witnessing there is not an exclusively North American event. The same kind of takeover has been happening in Europe, and on other continents. What is at stake are not only our choices in natural health but the very existence and function of democracy. Are we in fact determining what our governments may do, how they regulate our lives, or is people-determination being supplanted by corporate rule?

A QUESTION OF SOVEREIGNTY - a film by Kevin P. Miller from Kevin P. Miller on Vimeo.

Here are some of Kevin's thoughts about his film and about that battle it alludes to ...

  • Currently 5/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rating: 5/5 (1 votes cast)


HouseOfNumbers.jpg

House of Numbers - The movie

(NaturalNews) Did you or someone you know test positive for HIV? If so, they probably weren't told that they might test negative if a different test were used... or even if the same test were conducted in another country. HIV tests, as you'll see here, are a wishy-washy, pseudoscientific gimmickry that has unfortunately ensnared many innocent victims into a false AIDS diagnosis.

This is now being revealed in some rather shocking video footage released by Brent Leung, creator of the House of Numbers documentary (www.HouseOfNumbers.com) which tears apart the inconsistencies and dogmatic non-science found in the conventional HIV / AIDS industry.

Watch the footage yourself right now at: http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=E9FEA...

There, you'll see world-renowned scientists discussing the so-called "western blot," a highly subjective test that is now being used around the world to falsely diagnose people with HIV and, subsequently, AIDS. This western blot, as you'll learn below, is a spectacularly laughable test that seems to have been designed to make "positive" criteria as loose as possible in order to label perfectly healthy people as having AIDS.

"I don't think the western blot is a useful diagnostic test. I don't think it's worth doing," argues Dr Robin Weiss in the video clip.

Val Turner, an MD from Australia, adds, "It's ludicrous that you can be [HIV] positive in one country and not positive in another."

Neville Hodgkinson, the Medical and Science Correspondent for The Sunday Times (London) adds, "Some people argue that we have a confirmatory test in some western countries, and that repeated testing can lead you to a safer diagnosis. But if the very basis of the test is faulty, then nothing works in fact. ...Because of the different criteria that apply in different countries, you can test HIV positive in one country and be given an AIDS diagnosis as a result of that, whereas in another country you won't test HIV positive and you won't be given an AIDS diagnosis."

A full-blown AIDS patient will almost always show nine different "bands" on an HIV test. But in the 1980's, only one band was required -- P24 -- to diagnose someone as HIV positive (and subsequently having AIDS). The problem is that perfectly healthy people can also test positive for P24, even if they aren't HIV positive.

"In the early days, people developed criteria that were too much like a screening test. So if you had just P24 [band], they might have called it a positive," said Robert Redfield MD, Director, Clinical Care and Research, Institute of Human Virology.

Doctor Val Turner adds, "Many people were diagnosed using these criteria, and then it was realized that forty percent of people who are completely healthy have one or more western blot bands, most commonly a P24 band."

A few years later, the FDA changed its diagnosis criteria for HIV, upping the requirement beyond a single P24 band. But people who had already been diagnosed as having AIDS were never re-tested!

Dr Val Turner explains, "We don't know how many thousand people were testing using that western blot criteria before 1987, but ... shouldn't they all have been tested when the criteria changed in 1987 in case they were no longer positive? So there are probably people out there who would not be positive under the criteria which developed subsequently. Using the FDA criteria which existed before 1993, only 80 percent of AIDS patients had a positive HIV test, which means 20 percent were not positive."

HIV tests depend on personal opinion, not rigorous science

Even today, HIV tests are conducted in a wishy-washy, non-scientific manner where the results depend largely on the opinion of the lab technician reading the test results! (It's absurd, of course, but this is what's happening right now.)

As documented in House of Numbers, Brent Leung visited Claudia Kücherer, MD, a Molecular Biologist at the Robert Koch Institute in Berlin. There, he recorded this conversation:

Brent: "When you're looking at this western blot, how do you determine what is a positive [result]?"

Claudia: "You need a certain number of bands being present. It depends a little bit on the producer of the test."

Brent: "It depends on the manufacturer?"

Claudia: "Yes"

Brent: "Is there a different criteria for what might be a positive?"

Claudia: "Yeah, there are different criteria from the manufacturer."

Manufacturers of the HIV test, in other words, differ in how they define a "positive." You might be "HIV positive" on one test, but negative on another. And the decision on which manufacturer's test to use is based on the opinion of the clinic, hospital or doctor ordering the tests.

Astonishingly, this House of Numbers footage also includes a scene featuring two different HIV test lab technicians working in the same lab who disagree on the criteria for a positive HIV test result. While one lab workers says two bands are needed for a positive diagnosis, another worker says three are required. And they work in the same lab!

Watch this footage yourself right here: http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=E9FEA...

Western blot HIV test called into question

But some scientists feel the western blot is not just a good test, but a great one! Robert C Gallo MD, Director of the Institute of Human Virology, says "This has a margin of error if done properly that's extremely low. In other words, it's one of medicine's better tests."

One of medicine's better tests? Really? And yet it can be interpreted in different ways by different lab technicians, different definitions in different countries, different manufacturers and different medical opinions?

The HIV tests, it turns out, is more a matter of opinion than scientific fact. And if you or someone you know has tested positive for HIV, maybe they should get a second opinion.

  • Currently 5/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rating: 5/5 (1 votes cast)

Janssen-Cilag applies for adult ADHD drug approval

|

Janssen-Cilag, a subsidiary of the Johnson & Johnson pharmaceutical company, has filed an application to get methylphenidate (sold as Ritalin and Concerta) approved for ADHD - Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorder ... in adults.

Swedish investigator and publicist Janne Larsson argues that the drug approval Janssen-Cilag is seeking should be denied.

There are a series of grave concerns with the drug's safety, which Larssen has outlined in a letter to the European Medical agencies and the EU Commission. He argues that the pharmaceutical company has not fulfilled its obligations even to keep the drug on the market, much less expand its use to a new indication. The data on usage and side effects if available in Sweden, but Janssen and other manufacturers of methylphenidate drugs are trying to scrape by without actually having to look at or report the facts...

The text of the letter is available in a PDF file and is also copied here below.

The PDF of Janne Larsson's letter is Application-Concerta-Adults.pdf

  • Currently 3/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rating: 3/5 (2 votes cast)

Health Supreme News

Loading...
Powered by Movable Type 5.13-en

Receive updates

Subscribe to get updates of this site by email:

Enter your Email


Preview | Powered by FeedBlitz

Recent Comments

Other sites of ours