|DISCLAIMER: The following work was taken from a Source that may have altered the contents of the articles. It has been brought to my attention that typos, some content additions and possibly a copyright infringement may have occurred. As time allows I will research the articles below, compare with the original works of the individual authors, proof and edit the contents. However, since I believe this information continues to be vital to the education of families, I will leave this page in tact for now. Please do not copy the material for redistribution as it will only complicate our goal of correcting any and all errors. THANK YOU..... ~ Vickie Barker|
Here is just a partial list of congressional and administrative representatives in the U.S. government who hold stock in pharmaceutical companies (not that their stockholding would indicate a conflict of interest necessarily). Listed are approximate dollar amounts held in shares as of winter, 2001:
McClatchy Newspapers Washington bureau reviewed 180 (out of over 500) congressmen's
latest financial disclosure statements and found that 36 of the 180 or their families
owned drug company stocks.
Just in case any of you have a doubt about the extent to which pharmaceutical companies are involved in spreading their wares, please read the articles that follow. The scientific literature is replete with adverse side effects from vaccines and drugs, FDA "blindness" as well as clear evidence that improvement of hygiene and resulting healthy immune systems has been the factor in decline of diseases and not vaccines, laden as they are with mercury, aluminum and dead viruses. For example, washing one's hands removes any anthrax spores. Indeed, a healthy immune system completely eliminates anthrax bacillus. In fact, if your immune system is unhealthy, garlic works better than antibiotics as do many other natural remedies.
MEDICAL RESEARCH, & PHARMACEUTICALS: FOR HEALTH OR BANK ACCOUNTS?
In September 2001, the world's top medical journals established a new policy designed to give medical researchers what the public thought they already had: the right to publish the findings of their studies. In fact, most medical research is funded, at least in part, by companies that stand to benefit from the results, and, to that effect, the companies require researchers to sign agreements stating that they will not publish any data without say so from corporate head office.
In 1999, Eli Lilly, the maker of Prozac, received the results of one such study,
which looked at the drug Olanzapine˜the best selling antipsychotic drug in the U.S.
Eli Lilly had hoped to show that their drug was useful for Parkinson‚s patients.
When the result came back negative, they did not alert doctors of this discovery.
Rather, they put the data in a vault. The consequence, according to Joseph Friedman,
a professor at Brown University Medical School, is that "the drug continues
to be used inappropriately, harming unknown numbers of patients."
Drug companies provide huge sums to universities...and researchers know that negative results will put them at the end of the money train. As such, the move by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors to give greater rights to researchers seems more akin to PR than radical change. As long as research is funded by drug companies, such policies mean only that more pressure will be placed on making sure the results are positive.
David Healy, a research psychiatrist in North Wales, found that a certain antidepressant
can increase suicidal and homicidal behavior in some users. When he reported this
in a talk at the University of Toronto, the university retracted its job offer to
him. Not surprisingly, the university receives millions of dollars in funding from,
you guessed it, Eli Lilly.
PUSHING DRUGS TO THE WORLD The World Health Organization (WHO) (?) is poised to push psychiatric drugsSinto every corner of the planet. The [medical-pharmaceutical] industry needs to convince developing nations that their citizens areSill. The industry has had plenty of practice, for example with the well-documented ADHD fiasco. In 1970, less than one percent of North American children were on medications for attention deficit disorder. Today, thanks to broad diagnostic criteria combined with aggressive promotional work by psychiatric associations and pharmaceutical companies [watch out, they lobby your legislators too and then the Centers for Disease Control is controlled and establishes national policies˜like flu vaccines], there are regions in North America where nearly 20 percent of kids are being treated with stimulants.
Many other "epidemics"are outright fabrications or old diagnoses with brand new hype.
Last year, fears of "Sudden Wealth Syndrome"spread rapidly from the Los Angeles Times to the New York Times. This "disease"was actually concocted by two California psychologists claiming to cure newly rich people of "money-related ruminations"and anxiety about market indexes.
Similarly, PR News reported that media references to "social anxiety disorder"increased from 50 in 1998 to an astounding one billion in 1999, following promotions by Paxil pharmaceutical manufacturer GlaxoSmithKline. The "fear of one or more social or performance situations"is now one of America‚s most commonly diagnosed mental illnesses.
Eli Lilly and Pfizer now claim their antidepressants, Prozac and Soloft, also cure social anxiety disorder. Indeed, a glance through the promotional materials of all three companies turns up claims that those antidepressants alternately cure disorders characterized by sleeping too much or too little, eating too much or too little, feeling apprehensive or bored, and being obsessive or inattentive. [Where is the FDA in this game? It may not surprise some to know that pharmaceutical company representatives sit on most committees within the FDA. Perhaps this fact is why former FDA head Herbert Ley noted on retirement: "People think the FDA is protecting them; what the FDA is doing and what people think it is doing are as different as night from day.
Next, the same drugs are going to cure the world. WHO director general Dr. Gro Harlem Brundtland has signaled a dramatic shift in the way global leaders interpret human misery. Acknowledging that psychological pain, stress and debilitation are increasing worldwide, Brundtland has looked away from the likely causes and solutions and instead redefined the problem: How do we get the suffering back into the workforce? Having consulted "with chief executives of the largest pharmaceutical corporations"and "the main purse-holders of this world,"Brundtland is convinced that the tired, the poor and the huddled masses are in need of psychotropic drugs.
"Forget the fresh water, food and clean air,"remarks Dr. Tana Dineen, author of Manufacturing Victims, a critical study of the field of psychology. "It‚s tyrannical nurturance. Instead of Big Brother, it‚s Big Mother˜the Caring Mother.
In October, the WHO will unveil a $75-billion, 15-year mental-health action plan with support from agencies like the World Bank, U.S. Surgeon General, World Psychiatric Association and United Nations. But there‚s a growing consumer-insurgency.
An ongoing class-action lawsuit surrounding ADHD charges Ritalin‚s manufacturers and the American Psychiatric Association with fraud. And in June, a Wyoming jury found the antidepressant Paxil largely to blame for a murder-suicide that left four dead; GlaxoSmithKline was ordered to pay $6.4 million in damages. The number of similar cases accusing drug manufacturers of suppressing research that shows their antidepressants are addictive and can cause homicidal or suicidal outbursts has been rising since the mid 1990s.
Meanwhile, in July, protesters gathered in Vancouver outside the World Assembly for Mental Health conference to "demonstrate resistance to the globalization of psychiatric human rights violations."The protest was organized by Support Coalition International (SCI), an alliance of 100 grassroots organizations from 13 countries fighting against forced psychiatric treatment and the pharmaceutical industry's "social"agenda.
"There are more mental health professionals than ever challenging the mental health system,"says SCI director David Oaks. "It‚s definitely a ray of hope."Still, he questions whether critics inside the pharmaculture industry will "get to the root problems.
Dineen also wonders. "Focusing on the Œillnesses‚ prevents us from focusing
on the kind of society we‚ve created, and are perpetuating,"she argues. "[It]
is a consumer society. And [people are running on] empty."
JUST SAY NO TO DRUGS
You have drug addiction centers where individuals can get detoxed˜some from crack, heroin and cocaine, and others from pharmaceutical pills. It's okay to take a Valium, or two or three. If you‚re feeling really bad, take four or five˜not a problem. Drink a little drink afterward, not a big deal. But when you get to the point where you can‚t handle it anymore, you come to us and we‚ll put you into a detox center and get you all better so you can go back out and do it again. And we call this health.
Take a look at your health system. In Canada alone last year over two billion dollars was spent on prescription drugs. [In the U.S. it is more.] We assure you that the Mafia would love to get a piece of that. But the government isn‚t smart enough to say to the Mafia, "Let‚s take a piece of you instead. Let‚s legalize cocaine. Let‚s legalize heroin."Why? Because heroin and cocaine are seen as bad drugs, but Valium is seen as a good drug. And never mind Valium, let‚s take AZT, let‚s take a number of other drugs and drug cocktails. Let‚s take chemotherapySa little dioxin, digoxin and a little Agent Orange and stick it into your veins
. Take a look at the pharmaceutical basis of the drugs used for chemotherapy. We assure you [these drugs] are based on insecticides, pesticides and fungicides. Same basis. Slightly different chemical compound, but the same basis. So you stick a little Agent Orange up your arm˜hey, no problems. That takes away all of your immune system. It stops the cancer in your body. Of course, it ruins your immune system, it ruins your body‚s ability to replicate itself, its ability to heal itself. But, what the heck, at least you don‚t have cancer. "Look at us, we did a good job, didn‚t we? Got rid of your cancer. Now, you can go˜you can leave here. When you walk out the door and when your bones break because you have no more calcium in your body, it‚s not our fault. We cured you of cancer˜you didn‚t come to us about the broken bones, you came to us for the cancer."And this is what your doctors do. This is what your health-care system does.
Your health-care system and your politicians have been convinced by the chemical companies that theirs is the only way to heal. Your doctors have been convinced of this too˜go take a look at your medical schools, where they teach doctors. One doctor teaches the next doctor, who teaches the next doctor the same thing, over and over and over again. "Take a pill, send him home. If you haven‚t got a pill, then you can‚t cure them. If you can‚t cure them, then you‚re not doing your job. You‚re not a doctor, you might as well quit.
You[‚re] giving away your empowerment. You convince yourselves that doctors, the medical profession, the pharmaceutical companies and your government have your best interest at heart. They know better, they‚ll take care of you. They are the ones who will help you surviveS. [The pharmaceutical companies] make drugs because they make money. They make money because people have invested in the company, and those people who invested in the company want a return on their money. By the way, who are the people who invested in the company? It‚s you. [The people.] You take your money, you put it into the company and you say, "I‚m giving you $100 and I want $120 back."
The company says, "To get you $120 back, we‚ve got to go out and sell this many drugs."So, what do they do? They convince other people to buy the drugs. How do they do that? They do it through advertising. They do it through manipulation. They do it through coercion. They convince the doctors, the doctors convince the health-care officials, the [legislators], the [state] governments, and everybody sits there and happily says, "Look at me, I‚m making money."
Of course, when the system collapses [and it will soon] then everybody will be
screamingSnot that people are dying [but that it‚s] costing too muchSnot enough return
on the money. We assure you that this particular scenario will simply continue until
you choose to stop it. And the only way to stop it is to say, "No more."
At this moment I can only offer as a solution (to remaining free to refuse vaccines/drugs) to become informed about this issue of vaccines, drugs, and this proposed legislation (see www.publichealthlaw.net/MSEHPA/MSEHPA.pdf) and speak about it to others, and have everyone concerned call, write, fax your representatives. Make their phones hot with calls. Make it possible for them to vote for legislation that supports our freedoms. It seems the money changers want into the temple again with this proposed legislation. This time, it is your temple, and mine and our families and loved ones they want to enter. I think the best defense at this time needs to include an offensive. We have published a fair amount of research in the past showing the dangers of vaccines and pharmaceuticals in the Well Being Journal. I am asking our webmistress today (Nov. 20, 2001) to put that information on our website linked to our home page at www.wellbeingjournal.com. It may take a few days to do, but we welcome you to look and see the information as well as references to other sources.
All the best
Article Source: http://www.lightparty.com/Health/VaccinesPharmaceuticals.html
ADDITIONAL REFERENCE MATERIAL:
(See C.J. Puotinens article in the Winter, 2002 issue of Well Being Journal "Anthrax: Fear Not, Natural Remedies Work," 1-888-532-3117.)
(Providence Journal, March 9, 2001.)
(˜Richard Degrandpre, in Adbusters: Journal of the Mental Environment, November/December, 2001, 1243 West 7th Ave., Vancouver, BC V6H 1B7, Canada, 604-736-9401, www.adbusters.org.)
(˜Rob Wipond, in Adbusters: Journal of the Mental Environment, November/December, 2001, 1243 West 7th Ave., Vancouver, BC V6H 1B7, Canada, 604-736-9401, www.adbusters.org.)
(Let‚s All Get Well, by Réné Gaudette, Maggie McGuffin-Gaudette and the Wonders, 2001; paperback; $16.95; 289 pages; The Wonders Press, Inc., 8361 11th Line, R.R. #2, Thornton, Ontario, Canada LOL 2N0, 1-705-721-0238, firstname.lastname@example.org; www.thewonders.com.)
A Gift of Life for You
From our Featured "LifeSavers" of the month!
" The Citizens Against Corruption Network "