The German European Economic Community
By Phillip Day

Following Phillip Day's previous EClub article on the EU's new Food Supplements Directive, comes this shocking passage from his forthcoming book, which cites documentation that should be of concern to all Britons and their Commonwealth cousins. Is the answer simply to combat the new directive, or is the EU itself not the correct target on which we should be focussing?

Adolf Hitler's policy of 'divide and rule' is still the definitive template for overcoming a conquered nation's sovereignty and setting up a federalised system of government. Federalisation itself is not inherently evil or wrong. It has worked successfully for America, Canada and Australia, where individual states have ordered their states with regional governments, over which presides a central, or federal government adjudicating the whole.

However some basic conditions need to exist for this form of government to work. The United States of America, perhaps the most successful example of the federal model, was brought together through the common bonds of culture, language, religion, currency and heritage. More importantly, the formation of the US came about through its people's desire to order their affairs in this manner. In other words, the federalisation of the USA, Canada and Australia was citizen-driven.

ROME
Efforts to federalise by force have also been undertaken down through history. Perhaps the most noteworthy of these was the Roman Empire. The steps taken to expand the influence of Rome across the known world were as follows:

Step 1: Justify the premise for taking action against the target nation.
Step 2: Conquer the target nation militarily.
Step 3: Take the defeated nation, shatter it into several little regions, and rule it from Rome.
Step 4: Integrate these different conquered regions of the known world economically and politically.
Step 5: Bring prosperity to the people to keep them from revolting.

Roman citizenship, even to the conquered, meant prosperity, food and, to a lesser extent, a continuation and survival of their indigenous culture and protection from their enemies, as we saw with Greece and Gaul (France). It is this plan that Hitler attempted to implement. Sometimes referred to as the Hegelian Dialectic, this method uses a three-step process to lead and 'educate' populations into accepting measures, a loss of sovereignty and emergency procedures they normally would not tolerate.

Step 1: Create a problem in the target state (the thesis).
Step 2: Engineer a huge emotional reaction to the problem (the antithesis).
Step 3: Move in militarily and offer only those solutions that result in an expansion and power of government (the synthesis). This is, of course, done in the name of the people and for their benefit, effectively silencing any opposition to the strategy.

This is the classic battle-plan of socialism, whether it is used militarily, economically or politically by the Big Government of the 'fascist right', or by the Big Government of the 'Communist left'. Either way, it's Big Government controlling all aspects of the citizen's life, with all the power and the money under control of a governing 'élite'.

THE EU - UNPOPULAR MODERN SOCIALISM
Today, those ruling the European Union privately recognise that the federalisation of Europe is deeply unpopular with the people. Chief among the problems is the fact that the nations involved have an extreme diversity of culture, religion, currency, language and heritage. Unlike the popular movement of USA federalisation, the steps being taken today to re-implement the plans for a European state are glaringly not people-driven. Compare the two systems: ask any American to name five of America's Founding Fathers and they will happily reel off ten. Ask any Spaniard or Dutchman to name five Founding Fathers of the EU, and all you get is a blank and questioning stare. If you get any names at all, they will invariably be ex-Nazis.

Today, the EU strategy for integration is constantly pursued, not militarily at the moment, but by stealth and coercion. It's still divide and rule. The same strategy, drawing heavily from the Nazi model which inspired it, has been planned for Britain, which is to be broken up into 12 regions, all to be centrally ruled by a centralised government in Brussels dominated by Germany and France and the countries prepared to vote with them.

Note that the EU solves the historical problems for German and French politicians, who have been traditional enemies:

* The Union secures their borders, puts them in the driving seat of the Union by expanding their influence over the less powerful countries of Europe.

* For France and Germany, the EU keeps each under the other's nose so these traditional enemies can watch each other.

* The EU forms a mighty power block to rival the only remaining superpower, America.

* By bringing Britain into the EU by coercion and deceit, the EU effectively destroys NATO's ability effectively to guard against future military ambitions on the Continent. No doubt, once Britain is safely swallowed up in the new European superstate, America and her UK bases will be told to pack up and go home by the hostile, unelected politicians in Brussels.

* Finally, and perhaps significantly, the EU can deal the ultimate death blow to Britain's traditional political and economic dominance. Britain is unfinished business for Europe, stretching back centuries. Britain must be broken up for all time and her spoils handed to the masters of the EU, dominated by France and Germany.

As we will learn, this was planned decades ago by Nazi ministers and economists, even after they expected to lose the war.

Political researcher Ashley Mote records:

"By 1938, Henri Spaak, one of the founding fathers of the EU, was openly calling himself a 'national socialist' (Nazi). He talked of Hitler's 'magnificent achievements'. He was one of the activists who encouraged Belgian rail workers to strike when Germany invaded in 1940, and he helped ensure that the British and French troops failed to establish a defensive line against the invaders.

On 22nd June 1940, Hermann Goering made the first reference to what he called 'the European Economic Community'. At a conference held in Germany at that time, it was suggested that 'England has to be evicted from the continent once and for all, and the new Europe keep its distance from the United States.'"

That same year, the former Kaiser Wilhelm wrote: "We are becoming a United States of Europe under German leadership, a united Europe."

The Nazis were making a clear distinction between the Anglo-Saxon economies on the one hand, and their own and those of the rest of the world on the other. The United States and the British Empire nations of Britain herself, South Africa, Canada, Australia and New Zealand were depicted as the liberal usurpers and economic bulldozers of the dreams and happiness of the rest of mankind. Nazi Germany had taken it upon herself to redress the balance.

By the end of 1941, Nazi domination of Europe was solidifying, with the glaring exception of Britain. To save on manpower, Hitler allowed the southern area of France to be run by the French Vichy government, which openly collaborated with the Nazis. To this day in France, the collaboration wounds are still deep. That same year, Hitler's minister Joachim von Ribbentrop commented on Germany's plan to dominate Europe economically as well as militarily, confidently proclaiming: "…[European] integration is inevitable… It is impossible to stop the trend." Where have we heard that before?

REINHARD HEYDRICH
One of the chief architects of a future, integrated Europe was SS-General Reinhard Heydrich, Heinrich Himmler's deputy, head of the Reich security apparatus, and perhaps one of the most feared men in Germany. It was Heydrich's task to solve the economic problems of the expanding Reich. Later he would pioneer his infamous Endlösung, or Final Solution, to what Hitler termed 'the Jewish Problem'.

Heydrich is Hitler's Wunderkind - an operations genius who has just been appointed 'Reich Protector' of Bohemia and Moravia in September 1941. Heydrich's career with the Nazis has been spectacular and meteoric. Having organised the entire Nazi secret police and intelligence services (SS and SD) even before his party gained power, Heydrich is trusted by the Nazis for his incredible capacity for organisation on a large scale. It was Heydrich who had removed Nazi opponents quietly and effectively to the Dachau camp near Munich. It was Heydrich who, by 1934, had all the political police of the Reich under his iron control. It was Heydrich who had organised four special task forces to follow Operation Barbarossa, Hitler's invasion of Russia, liquidating all Communist officials, saboteurs, agitators and Jews as the Nazis advanced. By the time Heydrich convenes his famous meeting of 15 senior Nazi officials at a villa at the beautiful lakeside retreat of Wannsee, ostensibly to examine the options of ridding Europe of 'parasitic Jewry', wholesale murder of the Jews in Russia has become routine. Historian Martin Gilbert tells us:

"From the first days of the German invasion of the Soviet Union, the SS Special Task Forces took Jews out of their homes to the nearest wood or ravine, and shot them down. Tens of thousands of Jews were murdered in the first few weeks; hundreds of thousands in the months ahead; as many as a million by the end of the year. As the executions spread from town to town and village to village, babies and small children were thrown into the deep pits in which their parents had been shot."

In spite of the brutality of his command, there is compelling evidence that Heydrich, born in Prussian Saxony the son of a music director and minor composer, is secretly disgusted with the scale of the worst tasks he is called upon to perform. That Heydrich is not just the simple Nazi monster he is often painted to be is evident when one studies the amazing social reforms the SS-General is able to introduce into Czech society through his own initiatives.

Heydrich understands that the carrot and the stick are both of use in maximising the productivity of conquered European people brought under the heel of the Reich. Heydrich discovers that Czech farmers have been holding out on the true number of cattle they have registered. He orders all surplus animals to be slaughtered and the meat added to the rations of the factory workers. On Labour Day 1942, Heydrich distributes thousands of free cinema, theatre and football tickets to the working population to reward them for their hard endeavours. New national insurance cover, pension rights, new wage levels and holiday entitlements are agreed with the Czech trade unions. Ignoring the safety risks, Heydrich often tours the factories of his protectorate, telling the dumbfounded workers to their faces what an inspiration they all are - even to the Nazis.

WANNSEE -
MURDER OVER CIGARS AND COGNAC
It is this complex Heydrich, part monster, part operations genius, that sits down at the conference table at the villa at Wannsee in January 1942 to discuss what is to be done permanently with the 'inferiors, mental degenerates, habitual criminals and the Jews' across the new German empire. Heydrich's mind has no moral conflict with what it has to do. The minutes of this meeting have survived and from them we can piece together a chilling montage of what was agreed and understood between the various parties attending.

Clear is the fact that Hitler himself will issue no such order sanctioning the murder of eleven million Jews, although clearly the mass exterminations which follow can never go ahead without the Führer's approval. Hitler's quandary and subsequent refusal to issue a written order for the exterminations, according to researcher Ernst Klee, appears to be centred on the fact that it is actually still illegal at this time in Nazi Germany to murder people:

"Everyone involved knows that Hitler rejects a legal ruling for political reasons."

Heydrich himself makes this expressly clear at Wannsee when some of the incredulous attendees, after hearing of Heydrich's proposal for the extermination of the Jews, timidly request the whereabouts of an official written order from the Führer. Heydrich once again pointedly reminds his audience of the need to purge Germany of undesirables. He is counting on their unanimous support to overcome the logistic problems of ceasing the propagation of 'inferior stock'.

In his book, The Villa, The Lake, The Meeting: Wannsee and the Final Solution, British scholar Mark Roseman uses the minutes from the infamous meeting to paint an almost unbelievable portrait of cultured men gathering in a stately, picturesque location, eating superb food, smoking cigars and sipping cognac, discussing the fate of such 'mental degenerates' as remain, along with the removal of up to 11 million Jews from European society. The meeting, conducted in cultured tones, begins with the question of deportation of undesirables. References are made to the success of the previous T4 euthanasia program which was used to murder the Reich's mentally ill.

Although the question of sterilisation is openly discussed in connection with the desire to prevent 'inferior races' from propagating, it is quite evident from the minutes that Heydrich is dissatisfied with the costs and manpower associated with extending this kind of operation. At Wannsee, we see the indomitable Heydrich presenting the top brass with a fait accompli with his Endlösung, his Final Solution for the Jews - a package of measures already thoroughly planned, costed down to the last detail, and bearing the Heydrich stamp of approval.

Heydrich also drew up "The Reich Plan for the Domination of Europe". This proposal was published and circulated in 1942 and bears a striking similarity to the 1957 Treaty of Rome, on which the European Union is based today.

Ashley Mote takes up the story:

"Heydrich's plan coincided with a conference organised by the University of Berlin in 1942, entitled "Europaische Wirtshaftgemeinschaft" - the European Economic Community (or EEC). Some of the papers had particularly chilling titles, which still resonate today: "The Economic Face of New Europe", "Development of the EEC", "European Agriculture", "European Transport", "A European Currency", "European Trade and Economic Treaties", "Is Europe a Geographical Concept or a Political Fact?"

The introductory comments to the conference included the observation, "The age-old doctrine of the balance of power has been militarily smashed". There were references to "the political union of Europe."

But one of the first of many blows strikes Hitler on 27th May 1942. As Reinhard Heydrich takes the beautiful drive from his villa at Panenske Brezany to his headquarters in the Czech capital Prague, his Mercedes slows to negotiate a hairpin bend in the city suburbs. Two British-trained Czech agents, Kubis and Gabcik attack Heydrich's vehicle with a Sten gun that jams, and a specially prepared fragmentation grenade that doesn't. Heydrich is mortally wounded, his spleen and diaphragm pierced by shrapnel as well as cloth and leather fragments from the vehicle's upholstery. Nine days later, on 4th June, Heydrich dies in agony from his wounds. Hitler has lost his European architect.

WAGNER AND PAGEANTRY
Heydrich is buried with all Nazi honours in the Veteran's Cemetery in Germany's capital. The Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra plays Wagner's funeral march. Heydrich's state funeral, designed to be broadcast to the world as a great show of Nazi solidarity and power, features all the Nazi leadership and literally thousands of black-uniformed SS guarding the awesome pageantry of the procession. Hitler gives an emotional eulogy of the dead man. Himmler praises Heydrich as a "…gentleman of breeding and bearing" who had been "feared by lower racial types and sub-humans, hated and defamed by Jews and criminals."

As Heydrich's coffin, draped in the swastika, is drawn by four jet-black horses in procession towards the Veteran's Cemetery, the retaliation hundreds of miles to the south in Czechoslovakia has already begun. The Führer is beside himself with rage. Hundreds of Czechs of doubtful political allegiance are rounded up and shot. The entire village of Lidice, thought to have sheltered Heydrich's assassins at some point during their five-month preparation, has its entire male population machine-gunned and its women and children driven away to concentration camps.

The assassins are eventually tracked down to an Orthodox Church in Ressel Street, Prague. Hundreds of SS surround the building while their officers puzzle out how to finish the stand-off. Finally the pride of Heydrich's officer corps orders the Prague fire department to pump water from the River Vltava into the crypt to drown 'the vermin'. Later the bodies of the priests, assassins and collaborators are recovered. All are found to have died either fighting or having committed suicide with the last of their bullets before the water could reach them.

THE TIDE TURNS
And then, Stalingrad. Hitler's invasion of Russia bogs down in the impossible winter and grinds to a halt, unable to take the inscrutable Russian city from the Soviets. Stalingrad signals the turn of the tide of war for the Nazis. Soon after, the language of many German officers and ministers changes to the cadence of defeat, although none dare voice their predictions aloud. The prevailing feeling in the corridors of power though is that the war is already lost, it's only a matter of when.

Nazi economists grimly press on, nonetheless. In March 1943, von Ribbentrop invites 13 countries to join a European federation under German leadership. The nations invited are Holland, Belgium, Luxembourg, Italy, France, Denmark, Norway, Finland, Greece, Portugal and Spain. As all are either already under Nazi domination or known sympathisers to the Reich, the 'invitation' seems spurious, but is indeed telling. Here we see proof that efforts are still being made, even at this late hour, to pull together a workable political and economic union under control of the Reich.

D-DAY
On 6th June 1944, Operation Overload commences with the Allied invasion of the Continent. D-Day and the weeks that followed are grim and hard fought as the Allies bludgeon, bomb, and blast their way inland with tanks, flamethrowers and infantry assaults against a well-trained and well-armed Nazi opposition determined to halt and repel the assault. Each town is contested. Every overgrown hedgerow hides the possibility of attack. The sheer inertia of the Allied invasion boggles the mind. Hundreds of thousands of American and Allied troops continue to pour through the established Normandy beachheads in the weeks that follow, and thousands of tons of armour, bridge equipment, munitions, weapons and supplies are landed and ferried inland to support the advance.

By August 1944, the Germans recognise that certain defeat is staring them in the face. Another conference is convened, this time with the theme: "How will Germany Dominate the Peace When it Loses the War"?

A secret conference took place between the heads of the German Nazi government and top German industrialist at the Hotel Rotes Haus in Strasbourg. They laid plans to salt away finance to continue the fight for control of Europe by stealth. It was a plan on a grand scale, set in the context of decades. It was a plan to be implemented so slowly that no-one would realise what was happening….

The agenda included the exporting of large sums of capital, and the establishment of German industrial concerns in countries that were not overly antagonistic to the Nazi aims. Massive funds left Germany shortly afterwards, much of them via Madrid.

This was a careful attempt to hide and put on ice the Nazis' dreams of world domination, perhaps for generations. The price demanded was that these industrialists would then support the Nazi Party when it came out of hiding, which it was estimated would be at least 40 years after the eventual defeat of the Third Reich. Elan Steinberg, of the World Jewish Congress, has recently asked: "The central question is whether it has been carried out."

* * * * *
Supporters of today's European Union claim that an integrated Europe will prevent future war. Yet true democracies do not provoke war, whereas forced or premature conglomerations of disparate nations have a proven history of causing turmoil and bloodshed (e.g. the Roman Empire, the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia and much of Africa). Every once in a while, one gets a tantalising glimpse into the EU's true agenda, sometimes voiced in an unguarded moment of political zeal:

"The European parliament and the commission are allies against the member states. Together we have to prevent the member states from taking back power." President of the European parliament, speaking on Radio 4, July 1999

"When we build the house of Europe, the future will belong to Germany." Helmut Kohl, speaking in Germany, unaware that reporters were present

"Germany, as the biggest and most powerful economic member state will be the leader [of Europe] whether you like it or not." Theo Waigel, former German finance minister, 1997

"The top priority is to turn the EU into a single political state." Joshka Fischer, German foreign minister, quoted in The Times, November 1998

"Never again must there be a destabilising vacuum of power in central Europe. If European integration were not to progress, Germany might be called upon, or tempted by its own security constraints, to try to effect the stabilisation on its own and in the traditional way." German CDU parliamentary committee on European affairs, September 1994

"Why does Europe need fifteen foreign ministers when one is enough? Why do member states still need national armies? One European army is enough." Hans Eichel, German finance minister, November 1999

IS THIS FOR REAL?
There is a tremendous conflict in many people's minds over the ultimate goals and intentions of the new European superpower. Many Britons doubt, or are uncomfortable with, the idea that a supranational 'Nazi' connection might still exist after all these years. Actually, true Nazism in the form our grandparents knew it, is readily identifiable by all the hallmarks of brutish totalitarianism history has repeatedly elucidated. Less well known today however are the ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL GOALS the Nazi movement espoused, which appear never to have died, and are thus of striking relevance to all today.

The ultimate issue Britons must face, when contemplating joining or rejecting the EU's governance over their country, boils down, in the final analysis, to the worth of the fundamental freedoms traditionally enjoyed by the British individual. We must ask ourselves, does any government actually have the right to legislate into every corner of our lives, citing as the reason for its blizzard of directives, 'One Death (caused by oak trees, conkers, vitamins, donkeys on Bogner Beach, etc.) is One Death too Many' ?

The EU sees the vitamin issue as just another area where a loophole needs closing. When one truly understands the core nature of how the EU operates, can one any longer be certain that if, for instance, measures such as metrication, a common currency or the Food Supplements Directive could be defeated by an outraged British populace, this will, in any realistic way, GUARANTEE that no future efforts will be made to reintroduce these laws over and over again until they are passed?

Of course, those working with the best of intentions within the European Union are themselves not evil or wicked. They honestly believe they are legislating for the common good in the way the powers of Europe have always done. Yet this way is atavistically alien to the way the British have gone about the business of governing themselves and others, which ultimately begs the REAL question: Could the British people, with their strikingly different way of doing things, ever be successfully governed by such a domineering European autocracy, with which it has traditionally been prepared to go to war and spill its own blood to defeat?

Time, and the reaction of the British people to what is happening to them, will tell.

Next EClub: The True and Shocking Face of the European Union

Why Brussels Wants to Clear the Herbalists' Shelves
By Daniel Hannan

You may be one of the 20 million people in this country who, at one time or another, have taken a natural remedy. There is even a fair chance that you are one of the two million who regularly buy herbal medicines.

If so, your life is about to become a lot more complicated. Two directives are clanking their way through the EU machine which, taken together, will outlaw a good deal of what you are doing.

The Food Supplements Directive has passed through all its Brussels stages - although not without fierce opposition from Conservative MEPs - and is now awaiting implementation into British law.

It will ban hundreds of vitamin and mineral products, and restrict the dosage of others. The Traditional Herbal Medicinal Products Directive is scheduled to become law in 18 months' time. It will affect thousands of natural medicines.

The combined result of these two laws will be to prohibit many substances that have been on the market for years without the slightest evidence that they are deleterious to our health. Natural remedies will be reclassified as medicines, making them subject to a rigorous testing regime.

It is not only each substance that must be tested, but every single product. In other words, if a herbalist wants to sell echinacea, it will not be enough to prove that echinacea is safe. He - or, more often, she - will also be required to submit her particular version of it, at a cost of several thousand pounds.

Thousands of products will be driven off the market. The bigger firms will be all right: some form of St John's wort will still be available at Boots. But many smaller herbalists, unable to meet the compliance costs, will be driven out of business.

Even by the EU's standards, the criminalisation of an activity engaged in by millions of consumers may seem rather heavy-handed. To grasp why it is happening, you need to understand a little about the Brussels system.

MEPs are rarely happier than when telling others what to do. In the three years since I was elected, we have restricted the amount of time you can spend on a tractor, demanded that you wear ear plugs in noisy places, and laid down an approved way of holding ladders against walls. The idea that herbal medicine is "unregulated" is, to most Euro-MPs, simply a loophole that needs closing.

This is not because of any suggestion that the supplements in question pose a health risk. Rather, the EU is following what it calls "the precautionary principle".

At the beginning of the 19th century, it was widely believed that the noise of a passing train would cause pregnant women to miscarry. Had we applied the precautionary principle, we would never have laid a single inch of track. After all, the rail operators of the day couldn't prove that they wouldn't cause miscarriages, any more than today's health stores can prove that their wares are not poisonous.

Most of the products in question have been used in parts of the world for hundreds of years without evidence of harmful side effects. One of the threatened substances, for example, is cat's claw, which is traditionally prescribed in my native Peru as a cure for inflammation and rheumatism. If it were dangerous, Peruvians would surely have noticed by now.

There is more to this, though, than an addiction to regulation. Whenever you see an apparently insane Brussels directive, ask yourself: cui bono? Someone, somewhere, stands to gain. Thus, the attempt to ban the British double-decker was largely driven by a handful of continental bus manufacturers who had their eye on our lucrative export market. The campaign against British lettuce was enthusiastically supported by Spanish lettuce growers.

And so it is with the directives on herbal medicines, which will allow the large pharmaceutical corporations to squeeze out their smaller competitors. These firms, like other multi-nationals, have discovered that Brussels is a lobbyist's paradise. Because the people who pass the laws are almost untouched by public opinion, measures can be pushed through which would never withstand the scrutiny of a democratic national parliament.

The EU is thus, in many ways, the opposite of a common market. The essence of a market is mutual product recognition. In other words, if a widget is sold freely in Britain, it ought to be available in Germany, and vice versa.

Instead, more often than not, the EU's approach is to lay down highly prescriptive rules on the size, shape and contents of widgets, which can have the effect of banning products which were never intended for export in the first place. And you'd be surprised by how often those standards turn out to have been proposed by some European widget manufacturer who happened to meet all the specifications anyway.

For what it's worth, I am rather sceptical about most herbal remedies - although my wife, a regular user, has converted me to echinacea. But that is not the point.

The essence of liberty, and the focus of this newspaper's Free Country campaign, is that we stand up for rights which we do not ourselves want to exercise. Even if you have never been inside a health store before, go into one now and sign the petition on the counter. This is not about science; it's about freedom.

Conversely, if you are a regular buyer of natural remedies, but have never before campaigned against an EU measure, try extrapolating from this experience.

You are now being treated as fishermen, art dealers, abattoir workers, hauliers and countless other victims of EU meddling have been treated before. It is not just this law that is wrong; it is the system that spawned it.

Daniel Hannan is a Conservative MEP for south-east England
Daily Telegraph, 3rd September 2002

Breast Cancer Unawareness Month

The following is released by the Cancer Prevention Coalition.

Commenting on the anniversary of National Breast Cancer Awareness month (NBCAM), Dr. Samuel Epstein, Chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition (CPC) stated, "A decade-old multi-million dollar deal between National Breast Cancer Awareness Month sponsors and Imperial Chemical Industries (ICI) has produced reckless misinformation on breast cancer." Dr. Epstein, a leading international authority on cancer causing effects of environmental pollutants, spoke on breast cancer prevention at a conference, "Women, Health, & the Environment" in Albuquerque, New Mexico on October 14-15, 2001. It was sponsored by CPC, in conjunction with Greenpeace and Women's Environmental and Development Organization (WEDO).

Zeneca Pharmaceutical, a U.S. subsidiary and recent spinoff of ICI, has been the sole fiunder of National Breast Cancer Awareness Month since 1984. ICI is one of the largest manufacturers of petrochemical and chlorinated organic products, such as acetochlor and vinyl chloride, and the sole manufacturer of Tamoxifen, the world's top-selling cancer drug used for breast cancer. Financial sponsorship by Zeneca/ICI gives them editorial control ove every leaflet, poster, publication, and commercial produced by NBCAM. NBCAM is promoted by the cancer establishment, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and the American Cancer Society (ACS) with their corporate sponsors.

ICI has supported the NCI/ACS blame-the-victim theory of the causes of breast and other cancers. This theory attributes escalating cancer rates to heredity and faulty lifestyle, rather than avoidable exposures to industrial carcinogens contaminating air, water, food, consumer products, and the workplace.

Dr. Epstein will summarize the evidence on avoidable environmental and other causes of breast cancer ignored in NBCAM promotional materials:

Since the 1950's scientific evidence incriminated chlorinated organic pesticides as breast cancer risk factors because of their carcinogenicity, estrogenic effects, and accumulation in body fat, particularly the breast.

The unregulated use of growth promoting hormonal cattle feed additives has resulted in near universal contamination of meat products. This results in life-long exposure to carcinogenic estrogens, and poses a major avoidable risk of breast cancer.

Where you work increases your breast cancer risks. Excess breast cancers were found in the 1970's in women working with vinyl chloride. There is similar evidence among petrochemical and electrical workers. In spite of more women working in such industries, NCI recently admitted that it has still not investigated these risks among working women.

Where you live increases risks of breast cancer. Based on a review of 21 New Jersey counties, and more recently 339 nationwide counties, statistically significant associations were found between excess breast cancer mortality and residence in counties where hazardous waste sites are located.

Living near a nuclear facility increases your chances of dying from breast cancer. Based on a nationwide survey of 268 counties within 50 miles of 51 military and civilian nuclear reactors, CPC member Dr. Jay Gould, showed that breast cancer mortality in these "nuclear counties" has increased at 10 times the national rate from 1950 to 1989. Counties near military reactors, such as Hanford, Oak Ridge and Savannah River, have registered the greatest increases, ranging from 27 to 200%. Dr. Gould charged NCI with "misrepresentation of such findings."

Premenopausal mammography increases your risk of breast cancer. Increases in breast cancer mortality have been consistently reported following repeated mammograms in younger women in six randomized controlled clinical trials over the last decade. Based on this evidence, NCI has recently withdrawn recommendations for pre-menopausal mammography. ACS, with financial support from Dupont and General Electric (both heavily invested in mammography equipment), and self-interested radiologists are still promoting this dangerous practice.

Participation in the 1972 NCI/ACS reckless, high dose mammography experiments has increased breast cancer risks for the 400,000 women involved.

Breast implants, particularly polyurethane foam, pose serious risks of breast cancer. Evidence on the carcinogenicity of polyurethane foam dates back to the early 1960's. One breakdown product of polyurethane is 2,4-toluenediamine which was removed from hair dyes in 1971 following discovery of its carcinogenicity. Frank admission of these risks are found in internal NCI, FDA and industry documents.

The Tamoxifen 'chemoprevention' trial is a travesty! Since 1992, the cancer establishment recruited 16,000 healthy women in a Tamoxifen 'chemoprevention' trial. NCI and ACS claimed in their patient consent forms that Tamoxifen could substantially reduce breast cancer risks, while trivializing risks of drug complications. There is strong evidence of Tamoxifen's toxicity, including high risks of uterine, gastrointestinal and fatal liver cancer. "This trial is scientifically and ethically reckless, and participating institutions and clinicians are at serious risk of future malpractice claims," warned Dr. Epstein.

"The ICI/NBCAM public relations campaign has prevented women from knowing of avoidable causes of breast cancer," concluded Dr. Epstein.

Samuel S. Epstein, M.D. emeritus Professor environmental and occupational medicine at the University of Illinois School of Public Health, and Chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition 2121 W. Taylor Street, MC 922, Chicago, IL 60612 email: epstein@uic.edu website: www.preventcancer.com

THE HEALTHY AT 100! TOUR
Australia and New Zealand 2002
By Phillip Day

My subject is Life Management: all the things we should have been taught at school about how to survive in the outside world, but weren't. How many of us are dying unnecessarily? How many of us are not living, but just existing? How many are crippled with the misery of illnesses to which we know the answers? How many enslaved by debt when a simple strategy can move us through the woods to the green pastures beckoning? Who among us is terrified by what is happening in the world today? How many are fearful of violence, fearful of what our nations have become, fearful of losing our security.… How many are just plain fearful?

This is a wake-up call to all the ordinary, decent citizens out there who want to take their precious country back from the violence, the sleaze, the pop-pornography, the fiscal rape of the tax-payer and from a healthcare system still following the wrong course with the maximum of precision. If you feel outraged over what your nation has become, do you know that millions of people think the same way you do, but have stayed silent over issues our grandfathers took for granted? These millions are now stirring and are determined to say 'Enough!' Come along and discover how you can join us and make a difference.

THE WORKSHOP - (Bring a notepad and a sharp pencil!)
Come prepared! I will give you the simple tools you can use IMMEDIATELY to make incredible, positive and lasting changes in your life. WHATEVER YOU DO, don't miss this chance to hear the talk that has been educating and ENTHRALLING AUDIENCES EVERYWHERE. This information can literally change your life!

DON'T PANIC IF YOU CANNOT WRITE FAST ENOUGH! BOOKS AND TAPES WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR SALE AT THE MEETING VENUES.

SO WHAT'S IT ABOUT?

Find out the SIX ASTOUNDINGLY SIMPLE REASONS why the Karakorum, Abkhasians and Hunzakuts are routinely LIVING TO A HEALTHY AND MOBILE 100+ in the absence of Western healthcare, and how you can too!

Why are 1 in 2 over 70 years of age expected to get Alzheimer's disease and other 'mental impairment problems'? WHAT CAN YOU DO to prevent this? How does the liver play a vital role?

What are the twelve foods you must AVOID LIKE THE PLAGUE?

Find out the ten ways you can BURN BODY FAT RAPIDLY!

How can the number one killer, heart disease, BE SO EASILY AND CHEAPLY PREVENTED? Why is this life-saving information, researched to the highest levels of biochemistry, NOT BEING CIRCULATED?

What can you do naturally to PREVENT AND TREAT CANCER, according to leading experts? Why is the public deliberately denied this life-saving protocol?

Discover the HARMFUL TOXINS we innocently allow into our bedrooms and bathrooms that are contributing to our misery, physical handicap and early death.

Why are women today SUFFERING an astonishing increase in hormonal problems, breast cancer, cysts, fibroids and gynaecological problems? WHAT CAN BE DONE simply to remove this misery from so many lives?

How is psychiatry behind the DAMAGING OF OUR SOCIETIES today? Why can this branch of 'medicine' justifiably be labelled A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY?

Who are the 'Dark Gods' of psychiatry, who spawned two world wars, have revolutionised the educational system TO PREVENT CHILDREN LEARNING CORRECTLY, introduced political correctness, LEGALLY REPLACED PARENTS as the arbiters of the family, maimed and brain-damaged HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF TRUSTING PATIENTS with drugs, psychosurgery and electrocution, and today preside over the DOPING UP OF OUR SCHOOLKIDS AND ELDERLY, the destruction of our RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS, the non-effectiveness of our political and legal systems and THE SUBVERTING OF OUR LAWS? What can be done to expose them and GET SOCIETY BACK ON TRACK?

What's really behind 'mental illnesses', such as ADD/ADHD, Aspbergers, autism, schizophrenia, over-eating, epilepsy, addictions, depression, insomnia, anxiety, anorexia, bulimia, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, ALS (motor neuron) and others? Are there SIMPLE AND STRAIGHT-FORWARD MEASURES you can use for yourself to help or reverse these conditions?

What about AIDS, multiple sclerosis, arthritis, osteoporosis, asthma, heartburn, diabetes, Crohn's, vaccination mania, stroke, foot and mouth disease, mad cow and other ailments afflicting our societies today? What is the GREAT NEWS we can bring to bear to eradicate these from our own bodies, our families and our nations?

Why do people do what they do? Why are some MOTIVATED AND SUCCESSFUL and some aren't? Why are some POPULAR and some aren't? Why do people get addicted to moods and destructive behaviour in relationships and business? What can be done to coach ourselves to avoid these painful blights on our lives and set ourselves on the road to peace, laughter and progress? What can we do TODAY to TURN THE CORNER, climb out of the rut and enjoy a healthier, wealthier, happier, fulfilling and LONGER life and RECLAIM OUR NATIONS?

My job for the past 17 years has been to understand human behaviour and assist people to develop the TOOLS AND SKILLS to HELP THEMSELVES, regardless of the condition in which I found them. My message to you for 2002 is simple: Whether you are sick, unhealthy, depressed, demotivated, disliking your job, fed up with a relationship, broke, fearful, beset by feelings of doom or just plain, flat-out BORED WITH YOUR EXISTENCE, if you do only ONE POSITIVE THING for 2002, start the revolution in your life and your nation with a visit to any one of my meetings for a complete mental and physical 60,000-MILE SERVICE! Let's get you up on the rack, change your oil and get the wheel nuts off to see WHAT CAN BE DONE. Get ready for some action and let's have some fun!

NON-GOVERNMENT HEALTH WARNING:
ATTENDING THESE LECTURES COULD SERIOUSLY
IMPROVE YOUR HEALTH AND HAPPINESS

To find out more, view my tour schedule here
www.credence.com.au/tour/healthy.php

Coffee, Tea, or Stress-Free?

85% of U.S. adults consume caffeine daily and they are prone to increased blood pressure, meaning greater chances of heart disease, and feeling more stressed than if they didn't drink their coffee, cola or tea.

The Duke University research team found that even if people don't consume caffeine after 1pm, the effects remain until they go to sleep. That's because caffeine takes a long time to deteriorate in the body - twelve hours after consumption, the body still contains one-eighth of the original amount of caffeine. With regular consumption, these long-lasting effects could increase the risk of heart disease.

In addition, any disorder related to stress, such as the type 2 form of diabetes or social anxiety, can be adversely affected by caffeine consumption.

In the study, 47 regular coffee drinkers consumed 500 milligrams of caffeine - about the same as four 8 ounce cups of coffee -- in the form of two pills, and no later than 1pm. They took these active pills one workday, and inactive pills the next day, never knowing which type of pill they were consuming. The researchers monitored their blood pressure, heart rate, and quality of specific substances in their urine.

The subjects showed higher stress levels on days they consumed the caffeine pills, and produced 32% more epinephrine, a stress hormone. They also had slightly higher blood pressure with the caffeine pills.
Psychosomatic Medicine 2002;64:593-603

DR. MERCOLA'S COMMENT: Previous studies have shown that caffeine worsens insulin sensitivity, one of the major causes of chronic illness.

Coffee is one of the most heavily sprayed crops, with plenty of toxic pesticide residue present on the beans. Even if you use organic coffee, you still have to contend with the dioxins on most coffee filter paper and the chlorine and fluorine in most water used to make it.

Other studies have shown that caffeine leads to a loss of aortic elasticity, and raises blood pressure.

Caffeine is the most widely used drug in the world. While I believe that coffee and caffeine are far less dangerous than fruit juice or soda, it is still wise to limit, and if possible, eliminate its use.

This is becoming increasingly clear for women, as coffee should NEVER be consumed during pregnancy. It also appears that coffee consumption is associated with increased estrogen levels, which means an increase in the risk of breast and endometrial cancer.

Coffee has also been associated with increased risk of stroke and rheumatoid arthritis.

To wean yourself off coffee, I suggest a product called "Water Joe" that is basically bottled water with caffeine added. If you stop coffee "cold turkey," note that you will likely develop a severe headache from going through caffeine withdrawal.

If you simply MUST drink coffee, here are a few tips to help reduce the chance of harmful effects:

Use organic coffee - Coffee is a heavily sprayed crop, so drinking organic coffee might reduce or eliminate the exposure to toxic herbicides, pesticides, and fertilizers. The only drawback is that the countries where coffee is produced probably have less control and monitoring for compliance to organic practices. You will also be helping to protect the health of the people working in the coffee fields, as you will be helping to reduce their toxic exposure as well.

"Swiss Water Process" decaf - If you are going to drink decaffeinated coffee, be sure that it uses a non-chemical based method of decaffeination. The "Swiss Water Process" is a patented method and is the best choice. Most of the major brands are chemically decaffeinated, even if it says "Naturally Decaffeinated" right on the container. If you are unsure of the methods, contact the manufacturer.

Avoid sugar and/or milk - These are actually much worse for you than the coffee itself. Don't compound the detrimental health effects by adding milk or sugar to your coffee.

Unbleached filters - If you use a "drip" coffee maker, be sure to use non-bleached filters. The bright white ones, which most people use, are chlorine bleached and some of this chlorine will be extracted from the filter during the brewing process.
www.mercola.com

Curing the Tiny Terrors

Dr Patrick Cosgrove is no ordinary psychiatrist.

He flouts government guidelines, but is unrepentant. He defies manufacturers' recommendations, but doesn't care.

And Dr Cosgrove's controversial - but entirely legal - services are in huge demand.

This week's Five Live Report focuses on the private psychiatrist who has treated over 1500 children, some as young as two, with powerful anti-psychotic medication not licensed for use on children.

Dr Cosgrove claims "bad genes" cause the behaviour of toddlers to spiral out of control and has diagnosed all the children as suffering from Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.

With at least 73,000 children in the UK being diagnosed with ADHD, Five Live reporter Esther Armah finds that Dr Cosgrove's legal but unorthodox services are proving very popular.

Join her as she finds out more about his pioneering use of new drugs on ADHD children which were developed to treat schizophrenia and which have been linked to serious heart conditions.
BBC RADIO FIVE LIVE

PHILLIP DAY'S COMMENT: Patrick Cosgrove is the drug companies' ideal psychiatrist. If you are six years of age and can fog a mirror, there's a psychiatric condition for you and a corresponding drug with your name on it. Remember, this same 'professional', who has access to your kids, is the one who uttered in the same Five Live interview:

"Oh, I do think there ought to be some other body [other than the GMC] that looks at complaints of psychiatric practice. The current bodies are only really interested in deaths - particularly under surgery - and most of the consultants that are reported to these various bodies happen to be surgeons, simply because they're in a much more risky position. I guess physicians would come next, but psychiatrists will always get away with it, because no one can ever prove that what they did or what they didn't do was responsible for the patient killing themselves."

For a full exposé of the abuses of psychiatry, and the real information on so-called 'mental illnesses', please obtain a copy of my latest release, The Mind Game. Available through www.credence.org.

PSYCHIATRISTS: DON'T LET THEM GET AWAY WITH IT.

Death By Lethal Vaccine Injection
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 mothers 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 friends' 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 http://www.vaccineinfo.net/

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 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 http://frist.senate.gov/contact.cfm 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!
http://www.vaccineinfo.net/national_issues/oppose_Frist_bill_s2053.htm

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

PHILLIP DAY'S COMMENT: Many know about the vaccine controversy, but a lot more don't. If you are not educated on this subject, the following books have been written and published by Credence specifically to provide much needed, life-saving information on this subject:

Health Wars - Phillip Day
Plague, Pestilence and the Pursuit of Power - Steven Ransom
Available from www.credence.org

EU Commission in Trouble over Accounting Practices
and Harrassment of Whistleblowers

Little has changed since charges of fraud, mass resignations and Kinnock's promise of radical reform, writes Ambrose Evans-Pritchard in Brussels.

Neil Kinnock has had three years to deliver on promises of "root-and-branch" reform in Brussels and to get a grip on the £62 billion of taxpayers' money that passes through European Union hands. But yesterday it appeared that little had changed since the disgrace and mass resignation of the Santer Commission on charges of fraud, mismanagement and misuse of the security service for dirty tricks against whistle-blowers.

A withering report by the EU's most powerful watchdog, the Court of Auditors, excoriated the current commission for clinging to eccentric bookkeeping and a defective computer system that created "obvious risks" for the diversion of money. "No account has been taken of generally accepted accounting standards," said the leaked draft. "Failures abound and are a waste of public funds. [It is impossible to put a figure on the amount involved.] The commission has been warned about them, but to date has not taken any remedial action."

"There is no allegation of fraud. No official is being accused of dipping into the cookie jar."

This is not a repeat of Edith Cresson, steering fictitious contracts to her live-in male "dentist". The report merely hints that crooks could exploit the system to shift money without leaving an electronic fingerprint, a suggestion denied yesterday by the commission.

But after such a verdict, Mr Kinnock must regret pledging to make the EU's bureaucracy so squeaky clean that British Euro-sceptics would no longer have their favourite political football to kick around. Plainly, his new-fangled "Activity Based Management", imported from America, has yet to gain traction. He may also regret a two-month campaign of vilification against Marta Andreasen, his chief accountant, after she refused to sign off the Commission's books, deeming them "out of control". Since May she has been sacked from her post, hauled up on disciplinary charges for "defamation" and smeared in a well-crafted whispering campaign. Just last week he told the Brussels press corps that Mrs Andreasen's claims were "so far unsubstantiated". He insisted that "Mrs Andreasen has been the object of entirely fair procedures". She begs to differ after having been harassed by goons in Brussels. "Every time I left the building, they followed me," she said yesterday. "There were usually two of them, one just in front and one behind, and they made it so obvious that I assumed it was meant to be intimidation. Maybe they wanted to stop me meeting anybody." The allegations are devastating; far worse than the dispute itself over the budget. They also have the ring of truth.

Bernard Connolly, a British economist, suffered similar treatment when he blew the whistle on abuses in the 1990s. He said his house was staked out by men at night whenever he was away, clearly in an attempt to frighten his wife.

The campaign against Mrs Andreasen fits into a pattern of harassment in recent months against whistle-blowers alleging misconduct in EU institutions or against the officials defying pressure to compromise their work.

A Danish civil servant working for Eurostat, the EU's statistical office, said she was removed from her post this March after trying to stop fraudulent contracts being awarded to outside consulting companies. The case has prompted a criminal inquiry by the anti-fraud office, Olaf.

Earlier this summer the director-general in charge of fisheries, Steffen Smidt, was summarily fired on orders of the Spanish government as a punishment for trying to save Europe's declining stocks from catastrophic over-fishing, much of it by Spanish vessels. The move was a breach of EU treaty law. But what most irked Euro-MPs was the way that the commission hierarchy tried to cover up the deed by presenting it as part of long-term reshuffle.

The Danish reformer Jens Peter Bonde said it was scandalous. "Kinnock's people put out an orchestrated lie, and that is something that can never be tolerated," he said.

A time-bomb waiting to go off is Paul Van Buitenen, the whistle-blower who brought down the Santer Commission. In August he submitted a fresh 234-page report, backed by 5,000 pages of documents, alleging that fraud was still endemic.

The secret dossier claimed that the old cases had been swept under the carpet, while corrupt officials were still at their posts. Mr Van Buitenen has kept silent so far, agreeing to give the commission more time to respond, but he is now said by close friends to be deeply disillusioned.

For three years Mr Kinnock has enjoyed the benefit of the doubt on his reforms. The Andreasen affair has almost certainly put an end to that.

Euro-MPs already sniff a hint of fin de regime in the air - the moment when the facade starts to crumble. Chris Heaton-Harris, a Tory MEP on the budget committee, said the European Parliament was now going to flex its muscles. "This Commission hasn't learned anything in the past three years, except how to do cover-ups," he said. "There's very old practices being used and no one's really interested in change."

The report now provided "first-hand ammunition" to tackle the "malaise" in the commission.

PHILLIP DAY'S COMMENT: And Britain wants to continue being a part of this shower? At least let's open up our eyes and recognise criminal activity, thuggishness and corruption when we see it. Is this really the future government we want ruling over us?

How Cola, Coffee and Chocs Can Help Beat Cancer
By Michael Leventhal

Coffee, cola and chocolate could be good for us after all, say scientists.

Common compounds in all three may form the basis of new drugs to tackle cancer and heart disease.

New research suggests that caffeine and theophylline may help block cell growth and blood clotting. They appear to target an enzyme which helps trigger signals that control the growth, movement and survival of cells.

Scientists recently found that the enzyme, p110 delta, is also responsible for orchestrating the body's response to infection. It is thought to be linked to inflammation and irritable bowel disease. Researchers at University College London genetically engineered insect cells to produce the p110 delta.

In laboratory tests they found that caffeine and theophylline both blocked a key biochemical process crucial to the functioning of the enzyme.

Professor Peter Shepherd, at the university's Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, said: "We've shown that caffeine-like compounds play a novel role in blocking enzymes known to play a critical role in a range of cellular functions in the body."

"Alongside possible advances in cancer treatment, this research suggests that caffeine-type drugs could be used to treat heart disease and inflammatory illnesses." Theophylline was already known to have anti-inflammatory properties and has been used for many years as an asthma treatment.

However, Professor Shepherd warned people not to overdose on coffee, tea, cola or chocolate. "The study relied on using high concentrations of caffeine that would be unhealthy for human use," he said.

The research is published in the August edition of the Journal of Biological Chemistry.
Daily Express 21 August 2001

PHILLIP DAY: Once again science sends out those mixed messages! Compare this article with the one on coffee also in this bulletin and you will gain an appreciation of why the public gets so thoroughly confused on these issues.

Here's the bottom line: If you are seriously ill, coffee is a definite NO. If you are healthy, NOT drinking coffee will continue to assist in your remaining so. If you wish to indulge anyway, then at least know what the dangers are. Dr Joseph Mercola does a great job of educating us on this subject in this EClub edition article entitled Coffee, Tea or Stress-Free?

Let's Celebrate Another Victory

Dear All,

I usually end my public presentations (on waste-resource management and fluoridation) with three messages.

1) To Citizens: Don't let the experts take your common sense away.
2) To Politicians: Put your faith back in people.
3) To Activists: Have Fun!

"Having fun" may sound a strange message since it is a pretty grim process fighting against the odds every day, but, in my view, it is the only way to fight unless you are going to burn out with bitterness or cynicism.

There are several, ways we can have fun.

First, it is fun to work with such wonderful people around the country and around the world -some we have never even seen or met. Second, if we are not seen to be enjoying this, people won't want to join us. Third, it is fun to celebrate others' victories as our own. Hence this message.

By a dreadful oversight I forgot to publicly celebrate an important victory which occured at the beginning of August (at about the time I was getting back from Australia/Japan).

In early August, the councillors of Oneida, NY, voted not to fluoridate their water. Below I have reproduced the report that appeared in the Oneida Daily Dispatch and printed on the FAN web page (http://www.fluoridealert.org).

The 5-1 vote surprised even active opponents of fluoridation. According to Don Behr, one of the people who worked so hard to get this result, it was "overwhelming". He added, "The councillor whom I thought would surely be in favour of fluoridation, voted solidly against it and two councillors explained that THEY would not prescribe medication for the populace when the dentists who could, would not do so. "

One asked publicly, (and said he had discussed with dentist friends of his), "what business have I, a retired tire dealer, prescribing medication for 20,000 people, especially since you won't?"

I am sure Don Behr would appreciate your letters in our belated celebration and share them with all the people who worked with him to make this possible. His e-mail address is: <dahbehr@americu.net>.

Let's have more victories and more celebrations! Have fun!

Paul Connett.
Sept. 19, 2002.

Oneida Council Votes 5-1 Against Change in Water
By Mike Bilodeau

ONEIDA - Fluoridation of the city's water supply was defeated at Tuesday night's Common Council meeting, ending a city-wide debate that was started last year.

Only Third Ward Councilman Erwin Smith voted "no" to the resolution that sought to decline the authorization from state agencies to introduce fluoride into the city's water.

The way the resolution was worded, a "yes" was a vote against fluoridation, while a "no" was a vote in favour of it.

Smith said that he was concerned about area children who might not have access to dental care. Smith said he spoke to teachers and nurses about children in area schools.

"Teachers have said that children are coming into school with toothaches, and they can't concentrate on their school work," Smith said. "I see fluoridation like the seat belt and helmet laws. People don't like wearing seat belts or helmets while riding bicycles, but we know they save lives."

The rest of the council voted "yes" to the resolution, which defeated the idea of fluoridating the city's water by a 5-1 margin.

After the vote, Oneida Mayor James Chappell, who does not get a vote, said he would have also voted "no" along with Smith. Chappell said that over 160 million people in the U.S. have fluoridated water.

"I can't believe that state and federal agencies have us all hoodwinked, and have ignored the health concerns and the side effects of fluoride," Chappell said. "My most important concern is the children."

Second Ward Councilman Ted Hanifin said that he didn't want to force fluoridation on people who did not want it.

"I don't believe it's right to vote on what people are going to ingest," Hanifin said.

Sixth Ward Councilman James Griffing said his house is serviced by a well, and he was not directly affected by fluoridating the water supply. He voted "yes," because he said he didn't feel it was right to force fluoridation on people who did not want it.

Fifth Ward Councilman Donald Moore thanked city residents who gave their opinion on the measure.

Chappell said that as education improves on fluoridation, the city may entertain another vote on fluoridation in the future.
Oneida Daily Dispatch (Oneida, New York)
August 8, 2002

INTERNATIONAL FLUORIDE INFORMATION NETWORK
The fourth monkey

Dear All,

Below we have reprinted two e-mails we have received from the New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation (NYSCOF, <NYSCOF@aol.com>).

The first is a NYSCOF news release distributed by PRNewswire on August 27, 2002. This describes a report by Indian researchers who describe the ill-effects caused by exposure to naturally occurring fluoride and how they could reverse some of those ill-effects by first removing their patients from exposure to the source of fluoride and then treatment with diets adequate in calcium, vitamins C and E and other antioxidants.

The second is the response NYSCOF got from the "dentist-public-health listserve" when they tried to circulate this report to its members.

Most people are familiar with the "three monkeys: see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil". To this we must add the fourth monkey, "circulate no evil"!

Who is going to rescue the dental community from the dangerous practice of fluoridation, if listserves such as this refuse to inform their members of the ill effects documented in the published literature?

Paul Connett
_______________________________________________________________
1) NYSCOF PRESS RELEASE AUGUST 27, 2002.

CAUTION: Fluoride Can Be Hazardous To Your Health, Researchers Report

NEW YORK, Aug. 27 /PRNewswire/ -- Research from India shows that fluoride can make people sick; but improved diet and complete fluoride withdrawal can relieve symptoms, according to the May-June, 2002, issue of "Molecular and Cellular Biochemistry"(a), reports the New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation (NYSCOF).

Fluoride's harmful health effects, except to teeth, are rarely studied in the U.S. and, in fact, are often discouraged(b). Also never studied, incredibly, are the most widely-used artificial fluoride chemicals Americans drink daily(c) - silicofluorides, derived from fertilizers, purposely added to water supplies, at about 1 milligram fluoride per quart of water, in an attempt to reduce tooth decay.

In areas of India, where food and water are naturally fluoride-abundant, severe fluoride toxicity is common and manifests as debilitating and disfiguring diseases(d). Well-known is that fluoride excess irreversibly cripples bones and crumbles teeth (fluorosis).

Lesser-known are early fluorosis warning signs, or soft tissue toxicity, whose manifestations and resulting clinical complaints are reversible with a diet adequate in calcium, vitamins C, E, other antioxidants and withdrawal of all fluoride sources (the intervention), report researchers Madhu Bhatnager and Professor (Dr.) A.K. Susheela, the CEO and Director of India's Fluorosis Research and Rural Development Foundation.

Susheela and Bhatnager examined ten patients (6 males, 4 females; ages ranging from 8-60 years) having clinical symptoms suggestive of fluoride poisoning. Blood, urine and drinking water samples were collected. Water samples contained 0.l4, 0.38, 0.90, l.06, 2.00, 1.74, 3.00, 5.80, 26.07 and 29.00 milligrams fluoride per liter (approximately a quart). Some patients with fluorosis consumed safe water but ingested fluoride through food and/or other fluoride sources.

After a year on the intervention, serum and urine fluoride levels dropped significantly with patients' complete relief from joint pain and rigidity, polyuria (frequent urination), polydipsia (constant thirst), muscle weakness, and gastrointestinal complaints, some alleviated after only 10-15 days.

Dr. Susheela researches fluoride extensively
(http://education.vsnl.com/fluorosis/publication.html).
In this study, Susheela and Bhatnager write:

"It is now an established fact that fluoride ingestion over a period of time can affect the structure and function of cells, tissues, organs and systems resulting in a variety of clinical manifestations." (For example:)

1) aches and pain in the joints, i.e. neck, back, hip, shoulder and knee without visible signs of fluid accumulation
2) non-ulcer dyspepsia such as nausea, vomiting, pain in the stomach, bloated feeling or gas formation in the stomach, constipation followed by diarrhea
3) polyurea (frequent urination) and polydipsia (excessive thirst)
4) muscle weakness, fatigue, anemia with low hemoglobin level
5) complaints of repeated abortions/still birth
6) complaints of male infertility with abnormality in sperm morphology, oligospermia (spermatozoa deficiency in the semen), azoospermia (spermatozoa absence in the semen) and low testosterone levels."

Susheela and Bhatnager recommend physicians consider fluoride toxicity for the above-listed patient complaints and/or any loss of shine or discoloration in the patient's front row of teeth, which may be due to dental fluorosis.

"Americans are unaware that their arthritis, irritable bowel syndrome or other symptoms may be fluoride-related", says attorney Paul Beeber, President, NYSCOF. "This information should be heeded by physicians and members of the medical and scientific communities. Dr. Susheela is a world authority on the health effects of fluoride to the human body," says Beeber.

"Pediatricians need to be educated about fluorosis. Perhaps water fluoridation and indiscriminate promotion of fluoridated dental products in the name of prevention of dental caries (cavities) need to be reviewed," writes Susheela and Bhatnager

To arrive at a definitive fluorosis diagnosis, Susheela and Bhatnager:

(1) measure fluoride levels in drinking water, blood (serum), and urine. Twenty-four hour urine is ideal. Samples are collected in plastic, not glass, containers because fluoride reacts with silica in glass resulting in unreliable data.
(2) take radiographs of the region or joint where the patient had complaints such as pain and stiffness
(3) take forearm X-rays to look for interosseous membrane calcification. The forearm X-ray is essential for diagnosis of fluorosis at early stages and to distinguish fluorosis from other orthopedic conditions.

"This is an important message as forearm X-ray is only requested for diagnosing fluorosis. In patients with fluorosis and osteomalacia, increases in bone mass and bone density may not appear, but ligaments would reveal calcification." they write.

"U.S. studies show American children are fluoride saturated, ruining their teeth with dental fluorosis; yet cavity rates are rising," says Beeber. "These children should be studied for fluoride, other adverse health effects and correlated to essential nutrient consumption and cavities."
(a) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12162452&dopt=Abstract
(b) http://www.fluoridealert.org/mullenix.htm
(c)
http://ntp-server.niehs.nih.gov/htdocs/Chem_Background/ExSumPDF/Fluorosilicates.pdf
(d) http://www.fluoridealert.org/fluorosis-india.htm

Contacts:
Paul Beeber, NYSCOF, nyscof@aol.com, P.O. Box 263, Old Bethpage, N.Y. 11804 http://www.orgsites.com/ny/nyscof

Paul Connett, Ph.D., Professor of Chemistry, St. Lawrence University, Canton, NY, ggvideo@northnet.org Fluoride Action Network http://www.fluoridealert.org
______________________________________________________________

2) NYSCOF e-MAIL dated AUGUST 29, 2002.

We posted our latest news release (fluoride can make you sick) to the dentist-public-health listserv so that when the lawsuits come, and these dentists are put on the stand, they can't say something like the tobacco people claimed to the effect "we have no knowledge of the ill health effects of fluoride"

NYSCOF has been repeatedly dropped from this list. However, whenever NYSCOF thinks they have something to educate these "fluoride experts" with, we re-apply. Apparently they don't know how to permanently exclude people from their list.

Since these are the guys/gals telling our legislators that fluoride is safe for all people, all the time in all ways, and in any new way they can think of to make more money and apply for federal grants, we thought knowing about the ill health effects of fluoride to be very relevent to their discussions.

But, apparently, they don't. Here is their reply:

Subj: Re: Fluoride Can Make People Sick, Researchers Report
Date: 8/29/2002 6:59:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time
From: rjw1@pitt.edu (Robert Weyant)
To: NYSCOF@aol.com

I have removed you from the DPH listserve and request that you do not attempt to re-subscribe. The intent of the list has always been to facilitate discussion among DPH professionals - not to debate fluoridation issues. My recent vote of listmembers showed overwhelming support for excluding non-DPH professionals from the list, particularly when they continue to disrupt the list's intent with postings such as these.

A Wonderful Offer from North Carolina.

Dear All,

We have just received a copy (via NYSCOF) of this wonderful offer from Jan Petit in North Carolina. She is prepared to play host for a national gathering for fluoridation fighters at this time (Labor weekend) next year. I would certainly like to go and to support it in any way I can. The set up sounds fantastic, with plenty of opportunities for making it a fun weekend for the whole family, in addition to providing a venue for brainstorming on how we can help each other end this fluoridation nonsense once and for all. I don't suppose that our friends from outside North America will be able to afford to come to this meeting, but hopefully some of them will organize national meetings of their own - and give us feedback on the outcomes.

If you are interested in attending this proposed meeting, please let Jan know, and if you would, please send us a copy of your e-mail (ggvideo@northnet.org) so that we can keep track of how much interest there is in such a gathering.

Jan Petit's e-mail address is jpettit@tds.net

Paul Connett.
August 30, 2002.

Jan Petit of North Carolina (USA) writes:
"We are all fighting this bailiwick by bailiwick touching base with each other haphazardly, intermittently or not al all. I would personally like to meet and get to know those other lay people and professionals around the country (the world?) who have fought this fight so diligently through the years, discuss what works, how we could better coordinate our efforts and what methods we could use to bring the fluoridation dangers to the consciousness of America."

"It's no secret that the ultimate goal must be to get fluoridation and fluoride pollution and pesticide use eliminated (well, decreased anyway) nation-wide and world-wide. We may get it out of local water systems but it is still in the air and an unknown entity when we travel, buy pesticide-laden groceries, or eat out. There are symposia primarily for intellectual discussions and dissemination of recent research, etc. but these are for the elite and aren't meant for us everyday, practical, political action groups. In your NYSCOF efforts to coordinate and disseminate, could you put out feelers and see if there is any interest in having a weekend (say,... the Labor Day weekend of 2003?) in which everyone able and willing could get together with one or more of the professional folks, (Connett, Limeback, Mullinex, etc.) for a few days of exchanging ideas, developing strategies, boosting flagging morales, reinvigorating a long and frustrating odyssey which seems to have no end?."

"I would be willing to host an informal get-together on my property. NC is fairly centrally located at least for those in the East. I have rental houses, two in particular that I could offer free, of course, and my own home all on about 85 acres suitable for RVs and tents with bed and breakfast inns and a motel nearby for those who prefer more luxury. I could put up quite a number of people (families welcome) on the property which have a couple ponds with a paddle boat, streams, hiking area and a swimming pond up here in the mountains of western NC. We live quite simply about 2 1/2 miles from the small community of Saluda (pop. 650) 40 miles south of Asheville on I-26 near the SC border. It is normally cool (2,400 ft. elev.) and virtually mosquito-free year round (Did I mention the ccasional copperhead snakes and black bears?). I use no pesticides and only manure to reassure those who are chemically sensitive. The 85 acres are in two parcels about 1 mile apart suitable for bike riding between. I could meet incoming planes from Greenville, SC or Asheville, NC (we're about equal distance from each). We flew Hardy Limeback here for about $250 round trip this June. It's a one day road trip to here from virtually anywhere this side of New Orleans, Nashville, Detroit, Boston, or Tampa."

"If anyone would like to comment pro or con on this idea, please e mail me: jpettit@tds.net. Even if we have just a few come next year it might be the beginning of a much needed, more coordinated, concerted, nationwide (world-wide?) effort. Or maybe it's: Too expensive? Unnecessary? Everyone too busy? Let me know if you're interested."
Jan Petit jpettit@tds.net

Obesity Fight

The US healthcare system is not serious enough about tackling the rapidly growing "obesity epidemic." Experts call for better doctor training and, perhaps, government regulation of the food industry.

It is ironic that obesity, the most easily observed and measured risk factor for cardiovascular disease, has not been taken seriously by a majority of physicians. As a result, the health problems associated with obesity, including cardiovascular disease and diabetes, continue to grow.

The investigators suggest that the US government, physicians, insurance companies and the food industry all bear responsibility for ignoring the seriousness of the national obesity problem.

The authors stress that the dimensions of the problem are hard to overstate. Current estimates put the number of Americans now either obese or overweight at about 97 million.

The researchers point out that since 1997, the World Health Organization, the American Heart Association, the National Institutes of Health, the US Surgeon General and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have all issued statements and nutrition guidelines highlighting the grave health risks associated with obesity.

Excess weight is a major risk factor for high blood pressure and diabetes. Along with sedentary lifestyle, obesity is associated with more than 300,000 deaths due to heart disease each year in the US.

Despite the fact that US consumers spend more than $33 billion on diets each year, they are getting fatter. This is particularly true among those 18 to 29 years old.

The fact that US doctors don't typically initiate discussions on nutrition and weight control may be at least partly behind the nation's failure to trim its bulging waistline.

Physicians tend to focus more on the drug management of a patient's high blood pressure, rather than working with patients to lose the extra pounds that may be responsible for the problem. Most obese persons have not been advised by their physicians to lose weight.

The lack of insurance coverage for patient-doctor consultations, obesity programs further undercut any incentive for an obese patient to seek help. This problem is compounded by the limited range of healthy food options found in the restaurants many Americans patronize, particularly popular fast-food chains.

The authors propose a serious public health discussion on the feasibility of establishing either voluntary or government food industry regulations. They suggest that doing so could have a public health impact similar to that of laws governing seat belt and tobacco use.

An urgent "plan of action" is required to help people combat obesity, based on cooperation among scientists, insurance companies, healthcare professionals and the government.
American Journal of Hypertension 2002;15:655-659

PHILLIP DAY'S COMMENT: Perhaps one of the most significant reasons for continued obesity is the greatly increased consumption of high-glycaemic processed carbohydrates sold to the public by the slick, pony-tailed ad jockeys from Madison Avenue as so-called health foods: bread, biscuits, health bars, breakfast cereals, rice, etc. Drop these out of the diet, exercise and increase water intake and you end up with a fat-burning machine. Lots of high-fibre organic salads, vegetables, lower intakes of organically raised animal products, seeds and nuts. Small meats, eaten often. Ladies, 6 meals times 200 cals a day. Fellas, 6 meals times 300 cals a day of high-nutrient-density foods.

Go!

Parents Pressured to Put Kids on Ritalin

N.Y. court orders use of medicine

Some public schools are accusing parents of child abuse when they balk at giving their kids drugs such as Ritalin, and as judges begin to agree, some parents are medicating their children for fear of having them hauled away.
By Karen Thomas, USA TODAY 8.8.2002
more at http://www.usatoday.com/life/health/child/lhchi193.htm

Psychotropic drugs to be administered to defendants
On August 20th, 2002, the Center for Cognitive Liberty & Ethics (CCLE) filed an amicus curiae brief before the U.S. Supreme Court in support of a St. Louis dentist. Dr. Charles Sell is appealing to the Court to stay a lower court's decision to have him forcibly drugged in order to stand trial. In May, the Eighth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals ruled that Dr. Sell could be injected with psychotropic drugs in order to make him "mentally competent" to stand trial for insurance fraud. More at http://www.alchemind.org/News/sell_ussc1.htm

School lunches making 'em sick
The US spends over $7 billion on foods for school lunches that are sickening children. More at http://mercola.com/2002/aug/17/school_lunches.htm

Quarter-million doctor-induced deaths annually: Iatrogenocide?
Idaho Observer, March 2002

IATROGENIC [Gk., iatros, physician, genein, to produce], caused by treatment or diagnostic procedures. An iatrogenic disorder is a condition caused by medical personnel or procedures or through exposure to the environment of a health care facility, including fears instilled in patients by remarks or questions of examining physicians. See also: 'nosocomial', (iatrogenesis, iatrogeny, n.) ~Mosby's Medical Dictionary, 5th Edition, 1998

It is well known that many new drugs, devices, surgeries and treatments are touted as miracles of modern medicine. However, there are two sides, possibly two hundred sides to such claims. This article focuses on a dark side. Caveat Emptor: Buyer Beware.

Ninety-five percent of the people I know are doctors, scientists or activists in health care issues and/or victims of iatrogeny -- including myself. They have commanded my honor and respect since many of these people are addressing epidemic iatrogeny in their work.

A generation ago, people trusted their doctors blindly and implicitly. The personal bonds people used to form with their doctors have largely been replaced with the cold hard contemporary reality that medicine has become a $multi-billion per year business with little room for compassion. The healthcare market place is not kind and people have lost trust. Iatrogeny plays a large and ugly role in this.

A recent study published in The Journal of The American Medical Association (2000:284:94) by Barbara Starfield, MD, MPH, showed that in the U.S. there are:

· 12,000 deaths/year from unnecessary surgery
· 7,000 deaths/year from medication errors in hospitals
· 20,000 deaths/year from other errors in hospitals
· 80,000 deaths/year from nosocomial infections in hospitals
· 106,000 deaths/year from adverse effects of medications

This totals 225,000 deaths per year from iatrogenic causes, placing iatrogeny as the third leading cause of death in the U.S., second only to heart disease and cancer. The scary part is that this does not include disabilities and disorders; just deaths in hospitalized patients. In any event, when one ponders that more than four times as many people die in one year from doctors' mistakes than died in the entire Vietnam War, one is aghast at why this information isn't making headlines or why huge think tanks funded by medicopolitical interests haven't formed.

We have the American Heart Association to address heart disease, Richard Nixon's "War on Cancer," and even groups like "Mothers Against Drunk Driving." Organizations have been formed to address almost every sort of issue, save iatrogeny.

My guess is that medicopolitics have not figured out a way to capitalize on of all these deaths and disorders, ... yet. There is, however, a small "experts" consortium that does address iatrogeny in the journals, but such studies are few and far between. Funding such studies doesn't appear to be sound business practice.

Iatrogeny is not exclusive to the U.S. The British Medical Journal stated March 18, 2000 that, "In Australia, medical error results in as many as 18,000 unnecessary deaths, and more than 50,000 patients become disabled every year."

Studies released in the last 10 years show similar trends in the UK, Canada and New Zealand. New Zealand has a large percentage ratio of adverse drug reactions comparable to the U.S. It should be noted that the U.S. and New Zealand are the only countries that allow aggressive pharmaceutical drug advertisements.

One very interesting statistic are deaths attributed to addictive drugs in the UK between 1990 and 1995:
· Benzodiazepines - 1,810
· Methadone - 676
· Heroin - 291

This emphasizes my point that millions of dollars are given to organizations for deaths and disabilities from a myriad of causes, except iatrogeny. Here we have two legal prescription drugs causing more deaths each, than heroin.

Many can pooh-pooh these statistics and claim that to err is human, etc., however there comes a point when one must look deeper. The facts and statistics are too overwhelming to ignore. Those in power have choices to make. They can rationalize, deny or take responsible action against epidemic iatrogeny.

The latter seems to be slow in genesis. There has been much denial and silence from the allopathic medical industrial complex. Since medicine has become an arm of business and since business and politics are such passionate bedfellows, one must look at some other interesting facts.

Drug companies spend huge fortunes for political influence. In fact lobbying for pharmaceutical interests in the first half of 2000 reached $42.9 million; and it was estimated that $230 million would be spent during the election. George Bush welcomed $1.7 million from drug companies just for his inauguration celebrations (British Medical Journal January 27, 2001).

Drug companies are a business and have always been a business. They do not give such an investment without an expected return with profits. Perhaps this is why officials turn a blind eye to the fact that doctors and hospitals are responsible for nearly a quarter-million deaths in the U.S. per year. Or perhaps this is why the pharma-companies manufacture pesticides and chemicals that cause cancer and disease and then manufacture drugs to treat diseases they cause that can cause even more disorders to create a market for more drugs -- and more profit.

The scenario above describes a very lucrative cycle. Perhaps this is why funding for disease research successfully diverts attention from the pharmocartels' own carcinogenic and deadly products. One need not look too hard for reasons why doctors' and hospitals' mistakes are the third leading cause of death in America -- with no end in sight.

Many believe that Barbara Starfield's study cited earlier is just the tip of the iceberg. After all, the study only looked at hospitalized patients. What of the in home and outpatient errors? There are more people to consider in these groups, and certainly more iatrogeny. Could it be that iatrogeny is the leading cause of death in the U.S.? In the World?

As startling and unsupported as that sounds, it may very well be true. At any rate, the iatrogenic holocaust makes World War II deaths pale in comparison. Yet only patronizing and minimal attempts to recognize and correct iatrogeny have been made.

Murder Or Mistake?
The fine line between murder or mistake is a hot potato. If you saw your neighbors being killed one by one or en masse, yet did nothing about it, or took up for the killers, you could be guilty of "accessory to murder" or "accessory to murder after the fact." Many analogies and ethical juxtapositions could be generated in such a debate. One could even make the argument for a global elitist plan at population control allowing iatrogeny to gain such momentum.

Regardless of etiology, Iatrogeny is real. It is rampant and far from being under control. By making iatrogeny, through semantics, sound as if it is an infectious disease beyond the control of physicians and hospitals, we allow the medical profession and pharmaceutical cartels to distance themselves from responsibility and relieve them from the culpability for what mirrors negligent homicide.

It would be humanly impossible to eliminate genuine mistakes entirely. "But how many times does a mistake happen until it's not just a mistake anymore, but negligence?"

This author believes that 225,000 deaths every year may be an example of when mistakes cross over to the darkness of negligence. If so, then we are witnessing the greatest holocaust to befall mankind ever.

In closing, I leave you with my own definition of a freshly coined word:
Iatrogenocide - [Gk, iatros, physician, genein, to produce, cide, killing] The extermination of a population in a systematic fashion through medical error.

For more information on iatrogeny, contact me at freeyurko@bizland.com
Originally published in The Journal of Degenerative Disease, February/March 2002: 3(3rd); pages 37-38

PHILLIP DAY COMMENT: CTM is committed to educating citizens on the dangers of turning to drugs to solve every ill. No one believes they will be a victim of medication or doctors until they become one. And then they notice the blank, suspicious stares of others who disbelief their stories.

The figures quoted above on iatrogenic death from America were published in my book Health Wars, which came out last year. Since then, across the world, other examples of this catastrophic death toll have been repeatedly shown. The drug industry knows it, which is why it now seeks, by stealth, to seize control of the alternative health market. What else can you do when your brightest marketing boys have so appallingly misjudged the public's intelligence and will?

Another Reason to Avoid Shellfish

A shrimp cocktail is a culinary delight, but scientists warn that cooked and ready-to-eat shrimp bought at supermarkets may still harbor dangerous food pathogens.

Douglas Marshall, a professor of food science at Mississippi State University was surprised that he could isolate so many pathogens on a popular ready-to-eat product. The pathogens should have been killed when the shrimp were processed as ready-to-eat food, he said.

Marshall speculated that the problem could be caused by inadequate cooking of shrimp at plants, poor sanitation, contamination by workers or poor water quality in Third World countries where some of the products were processed.

Some of the pathogens he found, he explained, are not normally found in seafood, but are commonly found carried by humans or animals.

The Institute of Food Technologists earlier this year warned that supermarket trends towards ready-to-eat products could lead to outbreaks of food-borne diseases. Some scientists recommend that, as a precaution, prepared foods be re-cooked to kill any pathogens that might have developed.

Marshall and graduate student Gianna Duran launched their study to see if shrimp might have antibiotic-resistant bacteria. They purchased 13 packages of ready-to-eat shrimp from different manufacturers at local grocery stores. Some were refrigerated products, and others frozen. The frozen shrimp were then thawed for the study.

The scientists concluded that 42 percent of the bacteria cultured from the shrimp were drug-resistant. Marshall said fish and shrimp farms use drugs to treat diseases in their stock, and that it is not surprising there should be drug-resistant strains in the shrimp sold at supermarkets.

But the study also found pathogens that should have been killed in the preparation process, including a waterborne agent called vibrio vulnificus. Cases of diarrhoea and even death have been linked to raw oysters and clams tainted with the pathogen.

Other pathogens, like E. coli, staphylococcus and shigella, were also found in the shrimp, although they are carried in the intestines of warm-blooded animals. The study said that this suggests fecal contamination of shrimp, probably after cooking by workers using unsanitary practices.

Marshall suggested that people with compromised immune systems should re-heat prepared foods before consuming them.

Annual Meeting of the American Society for Microbiology in Salt Lake City May 2002

PHILLIP DAY'S COMMENT: Regularly during my talks, I advise against the consumption of shellfish because of contamination and also because these creatures are carrion-eaters or filter feeders. Aside from parasitic or bacterial infections, shellfish can contain unacceptable levels of mercury and other heavy metal contamination from the surrounding seas.

Best avoid.

FYI - Here's What Dr. Epstein Has to Say About SLS

Phillip Day: "During recent months, a number of members of the public have challenged my assertions over the dangers of the shampoo toxin, sodium lauryl sulphate (SLS). So, who better to issue a rebuttal and clear up the matter than perhaps one of the world's leading toxicologists, Professor Samuel Epstein."

There is no evidence that SLS is carcinogenic. However, SLS is a harsh ionic detergent which is a strong irritant to skin, depending on concentration and the duration of exposure. The Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) 2000 Compendium, of the Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Association, admits that SLS "Causes severe epidermal changes -- of the skin of mice -- (indicating) a need for tumor-enhancing activity assays,"(1). The Compendium also admits that SLS containing products are "designed for brief discontinued use, following which they are thoroughly rinsed from the surface of the skin."

Furthermore, as reported in model studies, published by the Danish Institute of Public Health, a single 24-hour exposure of SLS to human skin damages skin protein and causes prolonged disruption of "the skin barrier integrity of the skin," to allow the penetration of carcinogens such as nickel and chromate (2,3). Thus, skin absorption of the multiple carcinogenic ingredients commonly found in mainstream industry cosmetics and toiletry products (4), including shampoos, could be greatly increased by SLS type detergents.

Clearly, the American Cancer society is unaware of this information, beside the fact that mainstream industry cosmetics and toiletries contain a wide range of carcinogenic ingredients, precursors, and contaminants, besides ingredients that break down to release carcinogens such as formaldehyde. Furthermore, laureths, besides other ethoxylated alcohols, are generally contaminated by the volatile carcinogen 1,4-dioxane, as admitted by the CIR Compendium (1), and also the carcinogen ethylene oxide.

Samuel S. Epstein, M. D.

PHILLIP DAY'S COMMENT: Does this sound like the sort of chemical you and your family should be using? SLS gets into products everywhere. SLS is a very harsh detergent found in almost all shampoos and more than a few toothpastes. Pick up a cross-section of these products next time you visit the supermarket and you will find SLS or SLES in pride of place under the ingredients label. SLS started its career as an industrial degreasant and garage floor cleaner. When applied to human skin it has the effect of stripping off the oil layer and then irritating and eroding the skin, leaving it rough and pitted.

If you are using a shampoo with this chemical in it, best change your brand for one that doesn't. This subject is covered in detail in my book: "Cancer: Why We're Still Dying to Know the Truth" complete with annotated studies and suggested product sources.

1. CTFA. Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) Compendium 2000.
2. Nielsen, G. D. et al. Effects of Industrial Detergents on the Barrier Function of Human Skin. Int. 1, Occup. Med. 6(2):138-142, 2000.
3. Neilsen, G. D. Effects of Four Detergents on the In-Vitro Barrier Function of Human Skin. Int. 3, Occup. Med. 6(2):143-147, 2000.
4. Epstein, S. S. and Steinman, D. The Safe Shopper's Bible. Macmillan/Hungry Minds, Inc., New York, 1995.

The American Medical System is Nearing Collapse
By Tommy G. Thompson

We are living in the most amazing era of medicine in human history. Yet as we all know too well, all is not well with American medicine. In point of fact, we are dealing with a system of healthcare delivery that is, at its root, dysfunctional.

The problem - the crisis - is the system by which care is delivered, which has simply not matured at the same pace as the technologies and treatments now available.

I've traveled all over the country. I've traveled to Spain and Germany. I've been to Canada. I've discussed healthcare with some of the leading policymakers and caregivers in the world. And sadly, I have to report that in Western society broadly, the various systems of care are eroding with ever-greater rapidity.

I've come to one central conclusion: The way we provide care is in jeopardy of collapse. It is clouded by regulatory burdens that are confusing, duplicative and extremely time-consuming. Physicians and nurses almost have to obtain advanced degrees in business administration, accounting and jurisprudence just to run their offices from day to day. Patients have to fill out endless forms; get transferred from place to place; worry about what insurance will pay for what treatment and at what cost.

We have to fundamentally change the current healthcare delivery system in our country. The myriad rules, regulations and restrictions that make obtaining good healthcare difficult, if not impossible, have to be reviewed carefully and, when necessary, jettisoned like useless ballast.

But there's another area of reform that must - I repeat, must - be among the highest priorities we can develop: malpractice reform. America is experiencing a medical malpractice insurance coverage crisis that is increasing the cost of healthcare, decreasing access to doctors and hospitals for many patients and lowering the overall quality of care provided to patients.

Tommy G. Thompson is U.S. secretary of health and human services. This is excerpted and condensed from his remarks July 18 in Chicago to the American Medical Association

DR. MERCOLA'S COMMENT: I believe my journalist friend Nick Regush summarized the problem quite nicely earlier this year:

"There is no way to be nice about this. There is no point in raising false hopes. There is no treatment or vaccine in sight. There is no miracle breakthrough on the horizon.

Medicine, as we know it, is dying. It is entering a terminal phase.

What began as an acute illness reached the chronic stage about a decade ago and its progression towards death has been remarkably swift and well beyond anything anyone could have predicted.

The disease is caused by conflict of interest, tainted research, greed for big bucks, pretentious doctors and scientists, lying, cheating, invasion by the morally bankrupt marketing automatons of the drug industry, derelict politicians and federal and state regulators - all seasoned with huge doses of self-importance and foul odor."

As the article above documents, and as many of us have predicted, the traditional system is ready to collapse.

I do not share this to be the purveyor of bad news, but to announce that a new day is dawning. As many of you are already aware, the drugs and surgery the existing medical establishment has foisted on you are not the solution to better health, but merely their methods of making more money off of you by treating only diseases - diseases their paradigm helped to foster in the first place. Consider that:

Retail pharmacies filled 3 billion prescriptions in the U.S. in 2000.

We are currently spending 1.4 trillion dollars for healthcare in the US, or 14% of our current overall budget. That is projected to double in the next 8 years to 3 trillion dollars, a staggering 17% of our total national output.

Folks, those are figures in trillions, not billions. Three trillion dollars is 3,000 billion dollars.
"The consequences of this shift of resources will be enormous for companies, workers and the government. It will mean a massive transfer of the nation's income, including profits, wages and tax dollars, to disease-oriented traditional medical care.

"Employees will face an increasingly stark situation: the more money they receive in on-the-job benefits, the less they'll receive in wages, pensions, or vacation time."
From Business Week August 26, 2002 p 144.

The sad tragedy is that we are spending all of this money on disease management focused on drugs and surgery and our return on this investment is profoundly poor.

Business Week further comments:

"Perhaps one-third of all medical spending-some $600 billion dollars-may be unnecessary, out-of-date, or even dangerous treatments."

The recent articles below, each of which discusses $3 billion dollar wastes of your money, evidence this.

We are not achieving the high levels of health that we could be. Increasing amounts of people do not have the energy they need to get through the day, while millions of others are suffering with painful crippling diseases because they have violated basic health principles.

Many of you know that my goal is to facilitate the transformation of the current system that is on the verge of collapse. The approaches I have described in over 20,000 pages on mercola.com over the last five years offer the solution to this crisis.

We can solve well over 90% of the all chronic diseases with simple, inexpensive natural therapies.

Following the eating plan and radically reducing grain and sugar intake while optimizing omega 6:3 fat ratio will likely reduce over 50% of the health problems Americans currently experience.

I know this is true because I have successfully treated many thousands of patients from all over the country with these techniques.
www.mercola.com "An outstanding resource." - Phillip Day