A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » misc.kids » Pregnancy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

MDs forcing kids to take poison



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old August 7th 05, 11:27 PM
Jeff
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Todd Gastaldo" wrote in message
...
AZT AND WACKO AMERICAN MDs...

They are still promoting the DNA-chain-terminator AZT...

In 1995, Duesberg and Bialy asked of HIV/AIDS scientists:

"Are they aware that the manufacturer of AZT says in the Physician's Desk
Reference that 'it was often difficult to distinguish adverse events
possibly associated with zidovudine [AZT] administration from underlying
signs of HIV diseases...'?... Are they aware that the DNA chain
terminators
were developed 30 years ago to kill growing human cells for chemotherapy,
not as anti-HIV drugs?..."
http://www.sumeria.net/aids/howei.html


what is not hard to distinquish is that people who have AIDS and take AZT
live a lot longer than people who have AIDS and are not treated.

I recently quoted from a woman child care worker who observed what
happened
when children were forced to take AZT:

"[Child care worker] Mimi Pascual gave the children drugs every day and
every night,on schedule, as the doctors ordered...

"The drug Mimi remembers giving most often...is the
nucleoside analog AZT...
snip
"More and more of
the kids were there for compliance. They didn't want to take
drugs, or their parents didn't want to give them, so they got
put in ICC.


I don't think anyone wants to take AZT. It is like chemotherapy for patients
with cancer. No one would want to take chemotherapy either. But it is much
better than the alternative of not taking AZT or chemotherapy: death.

"'None of us ever blamed the kids for refusing. We all saw them
throw up like clockwork after taking the pills, and then the
diarrhea that followed...'
snip"


Sounds like chemotherapy. And, just like thousands of children and adults
are alive because of chemotherapy, thousands of people are alive because of
AZT. The side effects stink. But it is better than than the alternative:
death.

(...)

Jeff


  #12  
Old August 8th 05, 12:16 AM
Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Todd Gastaldo wrote:
In one study MDs refused hepatitis B vaccination - even when it was offered
free of charge:

"...the majority of physicians...failed to be vaccinated even when offered
the hepatitis B vaccine free of charge." [Clancy CM, Cebul RD, Williams SV.
Guiding individual decisions: a randomized controlled trial of decision
analysis. Am J Med, 1988;84(2):283-8]



COMMENT:

That was back when it was made from the blood of pooled donors. But it
had been carefully tested for HIV and put through 3 different rounds of
treatments, each of which was sufficient to kill HIV (not possible to
do for blood factor products, but possible for the vaccine). Finally,
the donor pool for the hep B vaccine protein was a closed one
consisting of carefully chosen HIV-neg chronic hepatitis B patients,
and not the same group of lowlife plasma donors that donated for factor
concentrates, and who were more likely to have HIV (and who ended up
transmitting HIV in factor concentrates in 1982-3). So many a doc made
the opposite decision for hep B. Including me, who had my first Hep B
vaccination shots in 1985.

By the time for my next booster in 1990, I believe a genetically
engineered product had been around, which had never seen human blood.
You could get one or the other, and I don't remember which one I chose.
Since then, the issue you bring up has been a non-issue. The vaccine
from human donors is long off the market.

SBH

  #13  
Old August 8th 05, 07:04 AM
Todd Gastaldo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I wrote:

In one study MDs refused hepatitis B vaccination - even when it was offered
free of charge:

"...the majority of physicians...failed to be vaccinated even when offered
the hepatitis B vaccine free of charge." [Clancy CM, Cebul RD, Williams SV.
Guiding individual decisions: a randomized controlled trial of decision
analysis. Am J Med, 1988;84(2):283-8]



Steve B. Harris, MD commented:


That was back when it was made from the blood of pooled donors. But it
had been carefully tested for HIV and put through 3 different rounds of
treatments, each of which was sufficient to kill HIV (not possible to
do for blood factor products, but possible for the vaccine). Finally,
the donor pool for the hep B vaccine protein was a closed one
consisting of carefully chosen HIV-neg chronic hepatitis B patients,
and not the same group of lowlife plasma donors that donated for factor
concentrates, and who were more likely to have HIV (and who ended up
transmitting HIV in factor concentrates in 1982-3). So many a doc made
the opposite decision for hep B. Including me, who had my first Hep B
vaccination shots in 1985.

By the time for my next booster in 1990, I believe a genetically
engineered product had been around, which had never seen human blood.
You could get one or the other, and I don't remember which one I chose.
Since then, the issue you bring up has been a non-issue. The vaccine
from human donors is long off the market.



Steve,

A non-issue?

You snipped the bigger issue: Most African children with evidence of Hep B
had no Hep B disease - and no (?) evidence that Hep B vaccine prevents
hepatocellular carcinoma.

Also, you snipped the part about Hep B vaccinations injected into Third
World children as American MDs refused the same Hep B vaccinations.

Maybe American MDs ("many a doc") made a public protest that Third World
children should not be injected with a Hep B vaccine that American MDs
weren't taking for fear of catching AIDS?

Maybe I just missed it?

I mention this because - recently - American MDs didn't go public about
thimerosal going into Third World bloodstreams...

Or maybe they did and I just missed it?

Robert Kennedy writes:

"Vaccine manufacturers had already begun to phase thimerosal out of
injections given to American infants -- but...CDC and FDA...[bought] up the
tainted vaccines for export to developing countries..."
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0616-31.htm

Whatever happened in those instances, there are the REALLY obvious crimes
American MDs are committing.

For example...

Your fellow MDs are immediately clamping umbilical cords - temporarily
asphyxiating babies/forcing them to breathe with their lungs before they are
ready - and in the process robbing babies of up to 50% of their blood
volume.

This is happening to EVERY CESAREAN BABY, according retired obstetrician
George Malcolm Morley, MB ChB FACOG.

See again: ACOG's 2005 edition: How NOT to birth
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3606

Steve, are you doing anything to stop your fellow MDs from asphyxiating
babies and robbing up 50% of their blood?

Or are you just going to stand on your valid observation...that if
you MDs can get away with crime, in effect, you aren't committing crime?

Just curious.

Sincerely,

Your friend,

Todd

Dr. Gastaldo
Hillsboro, Oregon


  #14  
Old August 8th 05, 10:59 PM
Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Todd Gastaldo wrote:

You snipped the bigger issue: Most African children with evidence of Hep B
had no Hep B disease - and no (?) evidence that Hep B vaccine prevents
hepatocellular carcinoma.



COMMENT:

There's lots of evidence the vaccine will prevent some fraction of
hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), though it's indirect evidence, since
the virus takes 30-40 years or more to do this, and so the study would
need to be a run a very long one. Very occasionally one sees in
children, and the rates of this have declined a great deal in countries
like Taiwan where vaccination was instituted first.

If you know anything about hepadnaviruses in animals and how they are
connected with liver cancer, you'll have little doubt that the
epidemiology in humans vis a vis our own particular hepadnavirus (hep
B) is real.

In any case, the vaccine is of very very little risk (as seen in
controlled studies in China), and there are many many reasons other
than cancer to give it. Such as prevention of acute and chronic
hepatitis B . Duh.


Also, you snipped the part about Hep B vaccinations injected into Third
World children as American MDs refused the same Hep B vaccinations.



COMMENT:
They weren't done at the same time, you ninny. Please look at your
facts. While hep B was being made from human blood it was WAY to
expensive to be shipping to Africa, I assure you.


Maybe American MDs ("many a doc") made a public protest that Third World
children should not be injected with a Hep B vaccine that American MDs
weren't taking for fear of catching AIDS?

Maybe I just missed it?



COMMENT:

Yeah, you missed it. There was nothing to miss. The two cases didn't
involve the same vaccine.

I personally, BTW, wouldn't give a patient any standard preventive
thing I wasn't willing to take myself. I've had every vaccine you can
name, and some you've never heard of.


COMMENT:
I mention this because - recently - American MDs didn't go public about
thimerosal going into Third World bloodstreams...

Or maybe they did and I just missed it?



Thimerosol's a political problem. Epidemiologically it's a no-show.

Robert Kennedy writes:

"Vaccine manufacturers had already begun to phase thimerosal out of
injections given to American infants -- but...CDC and FDA...[bought] up the
tainted vaccines for export to developing countries..."
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0616-31.htm


COMMENT:

Robert Kennedy's a no-show, too. Sucked into one of the stupider
liberal causes, when the world is full of very genuine problems that
need fixing. Such as how to vaccine the third world cheaply. Here we
have one child die of preventable measles EVERY MINUTE OF EVERY DAY in
Africa, and this moron JFK,Jr is worried that we might be giving them
**autism**? Of the 1.8 million vaccine preventable deaths in the third
world, HALF are measles. Screw the thimerosal. Those kids need MMR and
they need it *yesterday.* And RFK,Jr seems something to keep him busy,
like organized crime.

Say, if he could just get a brother elected president, maybe he could
get to be attorney general.... Meanwhile he's a pretty pathetic
characature of his relatives.

This is where liberalism really bugs me. Liberals are the poison
paranoia people. Somebody finds some kind of politically correct
"poison" like thimerosal, and regardless of the evidence for, or
against, liberals will try to hamstring a program that will save 3/4
million kids a year, to keep it from being used. Unintended
consequences. They don't care. If the solution doesn't fit their
utopian vision, they'd rather *prevent* a reasonable version of it used
at all.

Disgusting!


SBH



1: Baillieres Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 1999 Dec;13(4):511-7.

Prospects for hepatitis B virus eradication and control of
hepatocellular
carcinoma.

Chang MH, Chen DS.

Department of Pediatrics and Internal Medicine, College of Medicine,
National
Taiwan University, Taipei.

Hepatitis B virus infection is the most common cause of chronic
hepatitis, liver
cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma worldwide. In areas hyperendemic
for HBV
infection, the related complications occur mostly during adulthood.
However,
nearly half of all primary infection in chronic carriers occurs in the
perinatal
period through maternal transmission, the other half arising from
horizontal
transmission mainly through intrafamilial spread or injection using
unsterilized
needles. A universal vaccination programme is better than immunization
for
at-risk groups. Hepatitis B vaccination should be integrated into the
Expanded
Programme on Immunization in children. Universal immunization against
hepatitis
B virus has proved to be effective in reducing the hepatitis B carrier
rate to
one-tenth of the prevalence before the vaccination programme in highly
endemic
areas, and the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma in children has
also been
shown to be significantly reduced. Continued efforts to implement
universal
vaccination programmes worldwide will very likely reduce the incidence
of
hepatitis B virus-related diseases, particularly liver cirrhosis and
hepatocellular carcinoma.

Publication Types:
Review
Review, Tutorial

PMID: 10654916 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

2: JAMA. 2000 Dec 20;284(23):3040-2.

Hepatitis B vaccination and hepatocellular carcinoma rates in boys and
girls.

Chang MH, Shau WY, Chen CJ, Wu TC, Kong MS, Liang DC, Hsu HM, Chen HL,
Hsu HY,
Chen DS; Taiwan Childhood Hepatoma Study Group.

Department of Pediatrics, National Taiwan University Hospital, No. 7,
Chung-Shan
S. Road, Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China.

CONTEXT: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has a male predominance and is
closely
related to hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. Hepatitis B virus
vaccination was
launched in 1984 in Taiwan for neonates of mothers carrying hepatitis B
e
antigen, resulting in a decreased incidence of HCC in children. The
effect on
boys vs girls is not known. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association
between a HBV
vaccination program with incidence of childhood HCC by sex. DESIGN AND
SETTING:
Analysis of data collected from Taiwan's National Cancer Registry
System and the
Taiwan Childhood Hepatoma Study Group between 1981 and 1996.
PARTICIPANTS:
Children aged 6 to 14 years who were diagnosed as having HCC (201 boys
and 70
girls). MAIN OUTCOME MEASU Incidence of HCC in boys and girls before
and
after implementation of the vaccination program. RESULTS: The boy-girl
incidence
ratio decreased steadily from 4.5 in 1981-1984 (before the program's
introduction) to 1.9 in 1990-1996 (6-12 years after the vaccination
program was
launched). The incidence of HCC in boys born after 1984 was
significantly
reduced in comparison with those born before 1978 (relative risk [RR],
0.72; P
=.002). No significant decrease in HCC incidence was observed in girls
born in
the same periods (RR, 0.77; P =.20). The incidence of HCC in boys
remained
stable with increasing age, while an increase of HCC incidence with age
in girls
was observed. These age and sex effects remained the same regardless of
birth
before or after the vaccination program. CONCLUSION: Our results
suggest that
boys may benefit more from HBV vaccination than girls in the prevention
of HCC.

PMID: 11122592 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

3: Cancer J. 2004 Mar-Apr;10(2):67-73.

Hepatocellular carcinoma: paradigm of preventive oncology.

O'Brien TR, Kirk G, Zhang M.

Viral Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and
Genetics,
National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of
Health
and Human Services, Rockville, Maryland 20852, USA.


Morbidity and mortality from hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), which is
primarily
caused by hepatitis B virus or hepatitis C virus, can be prevented.
Public
health interventions have eliminated transfusion transmission of these
viruses
and, in endemic countries with effective hepatitis B virus vaccination
programs,
have greatly reduced incident hepatitis B virus infections (and HCC) in
children. Antiviral treatment can eliminate detectable hepatitis C
virus in
50%-80% of chronically infected patients, presumably reducing their
risk of
cancer. HCC survival rates remain universally poor, but early detection
and
treatment in developed countries has improved survival in selected
patients.
Despite these advances, worldwide HCC rates remain high, and additional
preventive efforts are needed. The most important opportunity is wider
distribution of hepatitis B virus vaccine in endemic areas. Development
of an
HCV vaccine, improved antiviral therapies, and better methods for HCC
detection
would also help decrease morbidity and mortality from HCC. HCC
prevention
efforts provide a paradigm for preventive oncology in cancers of viral
etiology.

Publication Types:
Review
Review, Tutorial

PMID: 15130266 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

4: Zhonghua Min Guo Xiao Er Ke Yi Xue Hui Za Zhi. 1998
Nov-Dec;39(6):366-70.

Hepatocellular carcinoma in children.

Chang MH.

Department of Pediatrics, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei,
Taiwan.


Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most frequent malignancies
in
humans. Although it occurs mainly in adults of 40 to 60 years of age,
it may
develop in children. It mainly occurs in children older than six years
of age,
with male predominance. Children with chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV)
infection
and underlying metabolic diseases are the two main high risk groups for
childhood HCC. HBV infection is the main cause of childhood HCC in
areas
hyperendemic for HBV infection. In Taiwan, nearly 100% of HCC children
were
hepatitis B surface antigen seropositive. Maternal transmission (94%)
is the
most important route of transmission of HBV infection in HCC children.
For HBV
related HCC in children, immunization is the most effective way for the
control
of childhood HCC. The first universal vaccination against HBV in the
world was
launched in Taiwan in July 1984. The prevalence of hepatitis B surface
antigenemia in children declined from 10% in 1984, prior to the
vaccination
program, to 1% in 1994, 10 years after the implementation of the
program, in
children less than 9 years of age. The annual incidence of HCC in
children aged
6 to 9 years of age also decreased from 0.52 per 100,000 born in
1974-1984 to
0.13 per 100,000 born in 1984-1986.

Publication Types:
Review
Review, Tutorial

PMID: 9926508 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

5: N Engl J Med. 1997 Jun 26;336(26):1855-9.

Comment in:
N Engl J Med. 1997 Jun 26;336(26):1906-7.

Universal hepatitis B vaccination in Taiwan and the incidence of
hepatocellular
carcinoma in children. Taiwan Childhood Hepatoma Study Group.

Chang MH, Chen CJ, Lai MS, Hsu HM, Wu TC, Kong MS, Liang DC, Shau WY,
Chen DS.

Department of Pediatrics, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei.

BACKGROUND: A nationwide hepatitis B vaccination program was
implemented in
Taiwan in July 1984. To assess the effect of the program on the
development of
hepatocellular carcinoma, we studied the incidence of this cancer in
children in
Taiwan from 1981 to 1994. METHODS: We collected data on liver cancer in
children
from Taiwan's National Cancer Registry, which receives reports from
each of the
country's 142 hospitals with more than 50 beds. Data on childhood liver
cancer
were also obtained from Taiwan's 17 major medical centers. To prevent
the
inclusion of cases of hepatoblastoma, the primary analysis was confined
to liver
cancers in children six years of age or older. Data were also obtained
on
mortality from liver cancer among children. RESULTS: The average annual
incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma in children 6 to 14 years of age
declined
from 0.70 per 100,000 children between 1981 and 1986 to 0.57 between
1986 and
1990, and to 0.36 between 1990 and 1994 (P0.01). The corresponding
rates of
mortality from hepatocellular carcinoma also decreased. The incidence
of
hepatocellular carcinoma in children 6 to 9 years of age declined from
0.52 for
those born between 1974 and 1984 to 0.13 for those born between 1984
and 1986
(P0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Since the institution of Taiwan's program of
universal
hepatitis B vaccination, the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma in
children
has declined.

PMID: 9197213 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

6: Semin Oncol. 2001 Oct;28(5):441-9.

The epidemiology and prevention of hepatocellular carcinoma.

Monto A, Wright TL.

GI Research, San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San
Francisco, CA
94121, USA.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a common cancer. Its incidence is
higher in
countries where hepatitis B is endemic. HCC is substantially a
complication of
liver cirrhosis. Hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV)
are the
predominant causes of cirrhosis, and as such, HCC. The link between HCC
and
alcoholic cirrhosis is less strong. Other less common forms of chronic
liver
disease can also lead to HCC. HBV is the HCC-determining disease
worldwide. In
endemic regions, it tends to be acquired early in life. The largest
strides in
prevention of HCC have been made with the HBV vaccine. HCV has a lower
global
prevalence than HBV, but HCV causes the most HCC in economically
developed
regions. In these areas, where the incidence of HCC is low, HCV now
accounts for
more than 50% of HCCs. There is no vaccine for HCV, so prevention of
HCV-associated HCC will focus on prevention of initial infection and
elimination
of infection through antiviral therapies. HBV-HCV coinfection, and the
combination of either with alcohol abuse or aflatoxin exposure seems to
raise
the risk of HCC development further. Liver transplantation and other
adjuvant
therapies may offer better options for secondary prevention of HCC than
resection alone. Copyright 2001 by W.B. Saunders Company.

Publication Types:
Review
Review, Tutorial

PMID: 11685737 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

7: Cancer Detect Prev. 1991;15(4):313-8.

Design and compliance of HBV vaccination trial on newborns to prevent
hepatocellular carcinoma and 5-year results of its pilot study.

Sun Z, Zhu Y, Stjernsward J, Hilleman M, Collins R, Zhen Y, Hsia CC, Lu
J, Huang
F, Ni Z, et al.

Cancer Institute, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Beijing, PRC.

A large-scale, controlled study of universal immunization of newborns
against
HBV infection has been conducted in the high incidence area of
hepatocellular
carcinoma, Qidong County of China. This area has a stable population,
standardized cancer registration system, and an epidemiological base
for
measurements of liver cancer prevention by vaccine. Randomization was
done on
the community level. The vaccination and the control group each will
consist of
38,000 children by the end of 1990. It is anticipated that the design
will
provide high statistical power to detect 50% reduction in the
prevalence rate of
chronic hepatitis among the vaccinees vs. the controls at 6 to 10 years
of age,
and 50% reduction in the incidence rate of hepatocellular carcinoma at
35 to 40
years of age. The vaccine used is Hep-B Vax, donated by Merck and Co.
through
WHO. The vaccine was administered at 0, 1, and 6 months after birth,
the dosage
of 5 or 2.5 micrograms in the pilot study as used before 1985 and of 5
micrograms dose level during the main study starting from January 1,
1985. About
85% of the cohorts have now entered the protocol. The vaccination
coverage
during 1984 to 1989 was 98.0% (35,064/35,789). Follow-up of the
vaccinees and
the age-matched controls at 5 years has exceeded 97%. The cumulative
mortality
in the vaccinated group up to 1988 was 1.29% (354/27,450). No single
death nor
serious adverse reaction was found that was associated with
vaccination. The use
of HBV vaccine at a reduced dose was especially important for the
developing
countries at the present time in order to achieve widespread
immunization.
Five-year results of the pilot study of this vaccination project showed
that
significant protection against HBV infection was achieved with the 5 or
2.5
micrograms per dose regimen plus a booster of 5 micrograms given at 3.5
to 4
years of age.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Publication Types:
Clinical Trial
Randomized Controlled Trial

PMID: 1665400 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]



Sincerely,

Your friend,

Todd

Dr. Gastaldo
Hillsboro, Oregon


  #15  
Old August 8th 05, 11:48 PM
Eric Bohlman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com" wrote in
oups.com:
This is where liberalism really bugs me. Liberals are the poison
paranoia people. Somebody finds some kind of politically correct
"poison" like thimerosal, and regardless of the evidence for, or
against, liberals will try to hamstring a program that will save 3/4
million kids a year, to keep it from being used. Unintended
consequences. They don't care. If the solution doesn't fit their
utopian vision, they'd rather *prevent* a reasonable version of it
used at all.


Don't tar all liberals with the same brush. The subset you're correctly
railing against are largely motivated by Romantic ideology and would more
correctly be described as "pseudo-liberals" just as many authoritarians
have been described as "pseudo-conservatives." Their world-view is
actually rather comparable to that of nineteenth-century aristocrats who
looked down on anyone who acquired wealth through "trade" rather than his
ancestors' use of the battle-axe (they're anti-capitalist not because
they think there are better alternatives to capitalism that could be
implemented in the future, but because they think that the better
alternatives *were* implemented in the past).

One similarity is that they tend to view third-world people in "noble
savage" terms, worrying greatly that their "traditional ways of life"
might come to an end. They never seem to ask the objects of their
concern whether or not they *want* to continue living the same way they
did millennia ago (I'm reminded of a quote from a woman in Africa who
said she wished she could afford (gasp!) *herbicides* to spray on her
crops. When asked why, she said she wanted her children to go to school
and learn to read and write instead of spending their days stooping in
the fields picking weeds). They consist largely of upper-middle-class
women, but they idealize societies in which women spend most of their
time barefoot, pregnant, and completely at the mercy of men. They take
at face value the claims of the most reactionary and authoritarian
elements of any "oppressed" society, oblivious to the fact that those
"leaders" are simply third-world equivalents of Jerry Falwell and Pat
Robertson (www.butterfliesandwheels.com discusses this in great detail).

This branch of the Left really consists of reactionaries in
progressives' clothing. Romanticism has historically rather quickly led
to authoritarianism, even fascism. It contains a streak of anti-urbanism
that often has a sub-streak of anti-semitism. Ultimately, it stems from
the conviction that humans are inherently evil. How it came to be seen
as part of the Left is unclear, though it appears that a lot of it
entered through the 1960s counterculture; old-school leftists and their
ideological descendants don't seem to be much affected by such nonsense.

I've become convinced that when neo-Romantics talk about "health,"
they're actually talking about achieving a sense of personal *purity*. I
think much of the "poison paranoia" is actually a feeling of being
ritually unclean.


  #16  
Old August 9th 05, 11:32 AM
Jeff
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com" wrote in message
oups.com...
(...)

This is where liberalism really bugs me. Liberals are the poison
paranoia people. Somebody finds some kind of politically correct
"poison" like thimerosal, and regardless of the evidence for, or
against, liberals will try to hamstring a program that will save 3/4
million kids a year, to keep it from being used. Unintended
consequences. They don't care. If the solution doesn't fit their
utopian vision, they'd rather *prevent* a reasonable version of it used
at all.

Disgusting!


And then you have conservatives who sent people to war in Iraq because of
weapons of mass destruction that don't exist. I think the estimate of the
number of people who have died has to be around 15,000 directly and around
200,000 directly and indirectly.

This is where labels really bug me. Not all conservatives are in favor of
the war. And not all liberals are against thimerasol. I am quite liberal and
in favor of vaccination. In fact, because of vaccination, I have yet to see
a case of Hib menigitis. And there are thousands of kids who are in high
school would have otherwise been in the ground. I am also in favor of using
GM foods and dislike organic foods.

I guess logic can overcome my liberalism.

Jeff


SBH



1: Baillieres Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 1999 Dec;13(4):511-7.

Prospects for hepatitis B virus eradication and control of
hepatocellular
carcinoma.

Chang MH, Chen DS.

Department of Pediatrics and Internal Medicine, College of Medicine,
National
Taiwan University, Taipei.

Hepatitis B virus infection is the most common cause of chronic
hepatitis, liver
cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma worldwide. In areas hyperendemic
for HBV
infection, the related complications occur mostly during adulthood.
However,
nearly half of all primary infection in chronic carriers occurs in the
perinatal
period through maternal transmission, the other half arising from
horizontal
transmission mainly through intrafamilial spread or injection using
unsterilized
needles. A universal vaccination programme is better than immunization
for
at-risk groups. Hepatitis B vaccination should be integrated into the
Expanded
Programme on Immunization in children. Universal immunization against
hepatitis
B virus has proved to be effective in reducing the hepatitis B carrier
rate to
one-tenth of the prevalence before the vaccination programme in highly
endemic
areas, and the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma in children has
also been
shown to be significantly reduced. Continued efforts to implement
universal
vaccination programmes worldwide will very likely reduce the incidence
of
hepatitis B virus-related diseases, particularly liver cirrhosis and
hepatocellular carcinoma.

Publication Types:
Review
Review, Tutorial

PMID: 10654916 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

2: JAMA. 2000 Dec 20;284(23):3040-2.

Hepatitis B vaccination and hepatocellular carcinoma rates in boys and
girls.

Chang MH, Shau WY, Chen CJ, Wu TC, Kong MS, Liang DC, Hsu HM, Chen HL,
Hsu HY,
Chen DS; Taiwan Childhood Hepatoma Study Group.

Department of Pediatrics, National Taiwan University Hospital, No. 7,
Chung-Shan
S. Road, Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China.

CONTEXT: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has a male predominance and is
closely
related to hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. Hepatitis B virus
vaccination was
launched in 1984 in Taiwan for neonates of mothers carrying hepatitis B
e
antigen, resulting in a decreased incidence of HCC in children. The
effect on
boys vs girls is not known. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association
between a HBV
vaccination program with incidence of childhood HCC by sex. DESIGN AND
SETTING:
Analysis of data collected from Taiwan's National Cancer Registry
System and the
Taiwan Childhood Hepatoma Study Group between 1981 and 1996.
PARTICIPANTS:
Children aged 6 to 14 years who were diagnosed as having HCC (201 boys
and 70
girls). MAIN OUTCOME MEASU Incidence of HCC in boys and girls before
and
after implementation of the vaccination program. RESULTS: The boy-girl
incidence
ratio decreased steadily from 4.5 in 1981-1984 (before the program's
introduction) to 1.9 in 1990-1996 (6-12 years after the vaccination
program was
launched). The incidence of HCC in boys born after 1984 was
significantly
reduced in comparison with those born before 1978 (relative risk [RR],
0.72; P
=.002). No significant decrease in HCC incidence was observed in girls
born in
the same periods (RR, 0.77; P =.20). The incidence of HCC in boys
remained
stable with increasing age, while an increase of HCC incidence with age
in girls
was observed. These age and sex effects remained the same regardless of
birth
before or after the vaccination program. CONCLUSION: Our results
suggest that
boys may benefit more from HBV vaccination than girls in the prevention
of HCC.

PMID: 11122592 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

3: Cancer J. 2004 Mar-Apr;10(2):67-73.

Hepatocellular carcinoma: paradigm of preventive oncology.

O'Brien TR, Kirk G, Zhang M.

Viral Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and
Genetics,
National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of
Health
and Human Services, Rockville, Maryland 20852, USA.


Morbidity and mortality from hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), which is
primarily
caused by hepatitis B virus or hepatitis C virus, can be prevented.
Public
health interventions have eliminated transfusion transmission of these
viruses
and, in endemic countries with effective hepatitis B virus vaccination
programs,
have greatly reduced incident hepatitis B virus infections (and HCC) in
children. Antiviral treatment can eliminate detectable hepatitis C
virus in
50%-80% of chronically infected patients, presumably reducing their
risk of
cancer. HCC survival rates remain universally poor, but early detection
and
treatment in developed countries has improved survival in selected
patients.
Despite these advances, worldwide HCC rates remain high, and additional
preventive efforts are needed. The most important opportunity is wider
distribution of hepatitis B virus vaccine in endemic areas. Development
of an
HCV vaccine, improved antiviral therapies, and better methods for HCC
detection
would also help decrease morbidity and mortality from HCC. HCC
prevention
efforts provide a paradigm for preventive oncology in cancers of viral
etiology.

Publication Types:
Review
Review, Tutorial

PMID: 15130266 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

4: Zhonghua Min Guo Xiao Er Ke Yi Xue Hui Za Zhi. 1998
Nov-Dec;39(6):366-70.

Hepatocellular carcinoma in children.

Chang MH.

Department of Pediatrics, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei,
Taiwan.


Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most frequent malignancies
in
humans. Although it occurs mainly in adults of 40 to 60 years of age,
it may
develop in children. It mainly occurs in children older than six years
of age,
with male predominance. Children with chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV)
infection
and underlying metabolic diseases are the two main high risk groups for
childhood HCC. HBV infection is the main cause of childhood HCC in
areas
hyperendemic for HBV infection. In Taiwan, nearly 100% of HCC children
were
hepatitis B surface antigen seropositive. Maternal transmission (94%)
is the
most important route of transmission of HBV infection in HCC children.
For HBV
related HCC in children, immunization is the most effective way for the
control
of childhood HCC. The first universal vaccination against HBV in the
world was
launched in Taiwan in July 1984. The prevalence of hepatitis B surface
antigenemia in children declined from 10% in 1984, prior to the
vaccination
program, to 1% in 1994, 10 years after the implementation of the
program, in
children less than 9 years of age. The annual incidence of HCC in
children aged
6 to 9 years of age also decreased from 0.52 per 100,000 born in
1974-1984 to
0.13 per 100,000 born in 1984-1986.

Publication Types:
Review
Review, Tutorial

PMID: 9926508 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

5: N Engl J Med. 1997 Jun 26;336(26):1855-9.

Comment in:
N Engl J Med. 1997 Jun 26;336(26):1906-7.

Universal hepatitis B vaccination in Taiwan and the incidence of
hepatocellular
carcinoma in children. Taiwan Childhood Hepatoma Study Group.

Chang MH, Chen CJ, Lai MS, Hsu HM, Wu TC, Kong MS, Liang DC, Shau WY,
Chen DS.

Department of Pediatrics, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei.

BACKGROUND: A nationwide hepatitis B vaccination program was
implemented in
Taiwan in July 1984. To assess the effect of the program on the
development of
hepatocellular carcinoma, we studied the incidence of this cancer in
children in
Taiwan from 1981 to 1994. METHODS: We collected data on liver cancer in
children
from Taiwan's National Cancer Registry, which receives reports from
each of the
country's 142 hospitals with more than 50 beds. Data on childhood liver
cancer
were also obtained from Taiwan's 17 major medical centers. To prevent
the
inclusion of cases of hepatoblastoma, the primary analysis was confined
to liver
cancers in children six years of age or older. Data were also obtained
on
mortality from liver cancer among children. RESULTS: The average annual
incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma in children 6 to 14 years of age
declined
from 0.70 per 100,000 children between 1981 and 1986 to 0.57 between
1986 and
1990, and to 0.36 between 1990 and 1994 (P0.01). The corresponding
rates of
mortality from hepatocellular carcinoma also decreased. The incidence
of
hepatocellular carcinoma in children 6 to 9 years of age declined from
0.52 for
those born between 1974 and 1984 to 0.13 for those born between 1984
and 1986
(P0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Since the institution of Taiwan's program of
universal
hepatitis B vaccination, the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma in
children
has declined.

PMID: 9197213 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

6: Semin Oncol. 2001 Oct;28(5):441-9.

The epidemiology and prevention of hepatocellular carcinoma.

Monto A, Wright TL.

GI Research, San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San
Francisco, CA
94121, USA.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a common cancer. Its incidence is
higher in
countries where hepatitis B is endemic. HCC is substantially a
complication of
liver cirrhosis. Hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV)
are the
predominant causes of cirrhosis, and as such, HCC. The link between HCC
and
alcoholic cirrhosis is less strong. Other less common forms of chronic
liver
disease can also lead to HCC. HBV is the HCC-determining disease
worldwide. In
endemic regions, it tends to be acquired early in life. The largest
strides in
prevention of HCC have been made with the HBV vaccine. HCV has a lower
global
prevalence than HBV, but HCV causes the most HCC in economically
developed
regions. In these areas, where the incidence of HCC is low, HCV now
accounts for
more than 50% of HCCs. There is no vaccine for HCV, so prevention of
HCV-associated HCC will focus on prevention of initial infection and
elimination
of infection through antiviral therapies. HBV-HCV coinfection, and the
combination of either with alcohol abuse or aflatoxin exposure seems to
raise
the risk of HCC development further. Liver transplantation and other
adjuvant
therapies may offer better options for secondary prevention of HCC than
resection alone. Copyright 2001 by W.B. Saunders Company.

Publication Types:
Review
Review, Tutorial

PMID: 11685737 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

7: Cancer Detect Prev. 1991;15(4):313-8.

Design and compliance of HBV vaccination trial on newborns to prevent
hepatocellular carcinoma and 5-year results of its pilot study.

Sun Z, Zhu Y, Stjernsward J, Hilleman M, Collins R, Zhen Y, Hsia CC, Lu
J, Huang
F, Ni Z, et al.

Cancer Institute, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Beijing, PRC.

A large-scale, controlled study of universal immunization of newborns
against
HBV infection has been conducted in the high incidence area of
hepatocellular
carcinoma, Qidong County of China. This area has a stable population,
standardized cancer registration system, and an epidemiological base
for
measurements of liver cancer prevention by vaccine. Randomization was
done on
the community level. The vaccination and the control group each will
consist of
38,000 children by the end of 1990. It is anticipated that the design
will
provide high statistical power to detect 50% reduction in the
prevalence rate of
chronic hepatitis among the vaccinees vs. the controls at 6 to 10 years
of age,
and 50% reduction in the incidence rate of hepatocellular carcinoma at
35 to 40
years of age. The vaccine used is Hep-B Vax, donated by Merck and Co.
through
WHO. The vaccine was administered at 0, 1, and 6 months after birth,
the dosage
of 5 or 2.5 micrograms in the pilot study as used before 1985 and of 5
micrograms dose level during the main study starting from January 1,
1985. About
85% of the cohorts have now entered the protocol. The vaccination
coverage
during 1984 to 1989 was 98.0% (35,064/35,789). Follow-up of the
vaccinees and
the age-matched controls at 5 years has exceeded 97%. The cumulative
mortality
in the vaccinated group up to 1988 was 1.29% (354/27,450). No single
death nor
serious adverse reaction was found that was associated with
vaccination. The use
of HBV vaccine at a reduced dose was especially important for the
developing
countries at the present time in order to achieve widespread
immunization.
Five-year results of the pilot study of this vaccination project showed
that
significant protection against HBV infection was achieved with the 5 or
2.5
micrograms per dose regimen plus a booster of 5 micrograms given at 3.5
to 4
years of age.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Publication Types:
Clinical Trial
Randomized Controlled Trial

PMID: 1665400 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]



Sincerely,

Your friend,

Todd

Dr. Gastaldo
Hillsboro, Oregon




  #17  
Old August 9th 05, 11:53 PM
Todd Gastaldo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

THE MD WHO SLAPPED THE NURSE...

See the very end of this post.

Steve B. Harris, MD verbally slapped a nurse online years ago...

Steve B. Harris, MD LIED to the nurse.

Again, see the very end of this post.


A NATION OF "NINNIES"

Steve B. Harris, MD just called me a "ninny." (See below.)

Dictionary.com says: Ninny: A fool; a simpleton. [Perhaps alteration of
innocent.]

Part of the reason Steve B. Harris, MD suggests I am a "ninny" is because I
believe that law enforcement should enforce laws and stop obvious MD crimes.

Steve wrote:

"Without enforcement, there is no law. Without law, there is no
crime...These are elementary principles. Get an adult to explain them to
you."

I replied:

"You make a good point...I am learning only late in life that MDs can
blithely commit crime because law enforcement doesn't prosecute it...I just
don't think it fair (for example) that babies have to pay with their
lives and limbs for such MD arrogance...I am particularly concerned that
MD-obstetricians are closing birth canals up to 30% and lying to cover-up...

NOTE: For the Four OB Lies (they are whoppers)... See ACOG's 2005 edition:
How NOT to birth
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3606 "

I wrote further to Steve that I am also concerned that his fellow MDs are
immediately clamping umbilical cords - temporarily asphyxiating
babies/forcing them to breathe with their lungs before they are ready - and
in the process robbing babies of up to 50% of their blood volume.

This latter massive MD crime is being committed against EVERY CESAREAN BABY,
according retired obstetrician George Malcolm Morley, MB ChB FACOG.

See again: ACOG's 2005 edition: How NOT to birth
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3606

Dr. Morley recommends TEMPORARY asphyxiation experiments with babies
(temporary strangulation of the umbilical cord) to help obstetricians
understand that they should not rob massive amounts of blood from babies...

"[T]he umbilical cord [is] immediately closed between finger and thumb...The
[fetal heart rate/FHR] will decelerate quickly to about 60 bpm...the color
will change from purple-pink (normal at birth) to pallid blue
(vaso-constriction and asphyxia.)...Few midwives or obstetricians will be
able to observe, without interference, a deep, prolonged FHR deceleration on
a non-breathing newborn for a period of 60 seconds.* Common sense will soon
release the finger and thumb."
http://www.cordclamping.com/acog-cp.htm

Dr. Morley has admitted that he is protecting obstetricians...

See Michigan Baby Strangler George Malcolm Morley, MB ChB FACOG
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3739

To my knowledge, NO MDs are reporting the obvious child abuse.

Steve B. Harris, MD GLOATS ("get an adult to explain it to you") as his
fellow MDs "earn" BILLIONS abusing babies and treating the grisly effects of
their abuse.

The massive criminal enterprise called medicine can commit obvious crime,
tell obvious lies to cover-up, and (I say) manufacture and publish
"scientific" studies which support the crime and the lies after the fact.

I cannot prove that the "scientific" studies are manufactured - but I can
prove the obvious crime and obvious cover-up lies - and I know full well
that failing to disclose such obvious bias in "scientific" studies is
unethical.

For example, it was unethical of MDs to fail to disclose in celebrating
their recent "Circumcision prevents HIV/AIDS transmission" study that -
years ago - American MDs anti-scientifically embraced the HIV/AIDS
hypothesis to stay out of prison after I exposed the fact that they were
ripping and slicing infant penises and using phony "babies can't feel pain"
neurology to obtain "informed" consent from parents.

This obvious bias (MDs stand to go to prison) should be included in any
discussion of the notion that their ripping and slicing of infant penises
prevents transmission of HIV/AIDS. But the obvious bias is always excluded.
That's the "scientific" game.

Steve B. Harris, MD may be - wittingly or unwittingly - proffering
manufactured "scientific" studies to support his Hep B argumentation below.

Steve B. Harris, MD is DEFINITELY ignoring obvious mass child abuse -
snipping it - failing to report it - which is a crime.

Without suspected child abuse reports from **MDs** (and RNs) - law
enforcement is unlikely to act. We live under a medico-"legal" "just us"
system where the legal profession studiously protects the medical profession
from CRIMINAL prosecution.

CIVIL actions - where insurance companies lose money - are the norm. Only
rarely do MDs lose their licenses and only VERY rarely do they risk being
imprisoned/subjected to criminal prosecutions.

It happened in 1995...doctors were "frightened out of their wits."

In 1995, after an MD (Einaugler) was prosecuted and imprisoned, American
Medical Association (AMA) executive vice-president, Dr.
James S. Todd stated that doctors were "frightened out of their wits" - they
feared criminal prosecution for their medical decisions. [Nossiter A. A
mistake, a rare prosecution, and a doctor is headed for jail. New York Times
(Mar16)1995:front page]

According to the New York Times article, Dr. Einaugler contended
that he shouldn't have been criminally prosecuted - in part because criminal
prosecution of doctors is "unprecedented."

AMA general counsel Kirk Johnson (who resigned in the AMA/Sunbeam
fiasco) echoed Einaugler's sentiment, telling the Times that physicians have
"never before" been subject to criminal prosecution in New York; and that
criminal prosecution is "extraordinarily uncommon" anywhere in the nation.

AMA executive vice-president James Todd, MD chimed in, assuring the Times
that "Society has been poorly served by this decision" - doctors
"traditionally" handle such matters through "peer review and malpractice,"
he said.

LOL!

Traditional "peer review" resulted in NO Medical Board penalty for
Einaugler, because the Medical Board found that his "clear and obvious"
failure to act - after subjecting his patient to an "enormous anatomical
insult" - was not a "flagrant or dramatic departure from standards." (!)

FACT: MDs are a protected class - able to commit obvious (sometimes fatal)
crime with impunity. To my knowledge, it isn't written anywhere that MDs
are above the law. That's just the way it is. I suspect I am not the only
one reading who was not aware of this. I suspect I am not the only one who
(paraphrasing Steve B. Harris, MD) needs an adult to explain it.

We are a nation of "ninnies"...Paying BILLIONS to have our children abused
by trusted cultural authorities called MDs.

Again, Steve B. Harris, MD may be - wittingly or unwittingly - proffering
manufactured "scientific" studies to support his Hep B argumentation below.

My responses are interspersed...

in article ,
Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com at
wrote on 8/8/05 2:59
PM:


Todd Gastaldo wrote:

You snipped the bigger issue: Most African children with evidence of Hep B
had no Hep B disease - and no (?) evidence that Hep B vaccine prevents
hepatocellular carcinoma.



COMMENT:

There's lots of evidence the vaccine will prevent some fraction of
hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), though it's indirect evidence, since
the virus takes 30-40 years or more to do this,


Three medical physicians [Ganiats et al. 1993] concluded that hepatitis B
vaccination failed four of five criteria - criteria which, according to
Frame [1986], must be satisfied before a preventive measure is accepted as a
public health measure. *[Ganiats et al. Universal neonatal hepatitis B
immunization - are we jumping on the bandwagon too early? J Fam Prac
1993;36(2):144-9. *Citing Frame PS. A critical review of health
maintenance... J Fam Pract *1986;22:341-6.]

Ganiats et al. [1993] concluded that up to 37,000 vaccinations are needed to
prevent one case of hepatitis B carrier state....

Since hepatitis B carrier state ostensibly can lead to hepatocellular
carcinoma, Ganiats et al. [1993] noted ("for those who believe that
hepatocellular carcinoma is a valid rationale") that up to 6 million
vaccinations are necessary to prevent one case of hepatocellular
carcinoma....

Have the numbers changed since Ganiats et al. published in 1993?

and so the study would
need to be a run a very long one.


MDs rushed in to declare that Hep B vaccine prevents cancer.

Neither CDC nor WHO have gotten back to me regarding my request that
they stop DISHONESTLY promoting hep B vaccination as having "demonstrated
important benefits including the prevention of cirrhosis and cancer..."
http://www.who.int/gpv-safety/hottop/hepb.htm --URL no good anymore

Very occasionally one sees in
children, and the rates of this have declined a great deal in countries
like Taiwan where vaccination was instituted first.


Steve, you simply ignored the fact that researchers reported that African
children weren't showing symptoms of Hep B disease.

How do you account for that? Did children in Taiwan show symptoms of Hep B
disease?

The campaign to show that Hep B virus causes cancer seems as strange as the
campaign to show that HIV causes a new disease called "AIDS."

Can it be possible that the Taiwanese children who were jabbed with Hep B
vaccine did not really need to be jabbed?

Can it be possible that the Africans who recently had their penises sliced
did not really need to endure the penile slicing?

In regard to the latter, it may be that MDs are slicing ADULT penises in
Africa to help cover-up their mass INFANT penis ripping and slicing crime
here in America....

See UW surgical HIV/AIDS vaccine hoax - and HIV/AIDS Clergyman PF Riley, MD
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3776

I'm still wondering about CDC (and WHO) minimizing the 1998 French decision
to stop Hep B vaccinating adolescents for fear that Hep B vaccination is
causing multiple sclerosis...

If you know anything about hepadnaviruses in animals and how they are
connected with liver cancer, you'll have little doubt that the
epidemiology in humans vis a vis our own particular hepadnavirus (hep
B) is real.


Steve, you snipped this statement from HIV/AIDS hypothesis critic Peter
Duesberg, PhD:

"there is no convincing evidence that hepatitis B viral DNA is functionally
relevant for the initiation and maintenance of hepatomas."
[Duesberg PH and Schwartz JR: Latent viruses and mutated oncogenes: no
evidence for pathogenicity. Progress in Nucleic Acid Research and Molecular
Biology, 1992;43:135-204]

I know very little about hepaDNAviruses and how they are connected to liver
cancer - and experts may also know very little - I quoted HIV/AIDS
hypothesis critic Duesberg as above - and you simply snipped that...

Duesberg is a member of the National Academy of Sciences and an expert on
viruses.

HepaDNAviruses may NOT cause cancer - just like HIV virus may not cause
AIDS.

Like most Americans, I blindly accepted the HIV/AIDS hypothesis until I
exposed American medicine's mass infant penis ripping and slicing using
phony "babies can't feel pain" neurology.

I blindly accepted the HIV/AIDS hypothesis until I saw that, to stay out of
prison, California MDs ignored their own Scientific Board and by voice vote
abruptly changed their "no medical indications" infant penis ripping and
slicing to a "we've-been-preventing-tranmsission-of-HIV/AIDS all along"
"effective public health measure.

THAT'S when I discovered Duesberg's criticisms of the shaky HIV/AIDS
hypothesis.

How shaky is the HIV/AIDS hypothesis?

VERY shaky...

See James P. Hogan's Kicking the Sacred Cow: Questioning the Unquestionable
and Thinking the Impermissible [July 2004]...
http://www.duesberg.com/viewpoints/a...esy-hogan.html --EXCERPT

Copied to: Kicking the Sacred Cow author James P. Hogan via


Incidentally, the year after California MDs lied to stay out of prison, the
American Academy of Pediatrics committee looking into routine infant
circumcision failed to mention the California Medical Association's brand
new "effective public health measure" in reporting there were still no
medical indications - amid a "potential medical indications" media scam...

The media scam was so successful that MDs had to be informed:

MEDICAL TRIBUNE 30:16 (8 June 1989)
* * * * *FORGET THOSE HEADLINES ABOUT CIRCUMCISION
* * * * * * AAP IS AGAINST ROUTINE CIRCUMCISION
http://www.cirp.org/CIRP/news/ 1989.06.08%3aMedicalTribune

There are STILL no medical indications for American medicine's grisly most
frequent surgical behavior toward males - which may explain why those
African gentlemen had their penises sliced recently - for fear of HIV -
which likely does not cause AIDS...

See again Kicking the Sacred Cow...

And see (again): UW surgical HIV/AIDS vaccine hoax - and HIV/AIDS Clergyman
PF Riley, MD
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3776

In any case, the vaccine is of very very little risk (as seen in
controlled studies in China), and there are many many reasons other
than cancer to give it. Such as prevention of acute and chronic
hepatitis B . Duh.


DUH? "MANY MANY" reasons?

I say again...you simply ignored the fact that researchers reported that
African children weren't showing symptoms of Hep B disease.

I also say again...

Three medical physicians [Ganiats et al. 1993] concluded that hepatitis B
vaccination failed four of five criteria - criteria which, according to
Frame [1986], must be satisfied before a preventive measure is accepted as a
public health measure. *[Ganiats et al. Universal neonatal hepatitis B
immunization - are we jumping on the bandwagon too early? J Fam Prac
1993;36(2):144-9. *Citing Frame PS. A critical review of health
maintenance... J Fam Pract *1986;22:341-6.]

Ganiats et al. [1993] concluded that up to 37,000 vaccinations are needed to
prevent one case of hepatitis B carrier state....

Since hepatitis B carrier state ostensibly can lead to hepatocellular
carcinoma, Ganiats et al. [1993] noted ("for those who believe that
hepatocellular carcinoma is a valid rationale") that up to 6 million
vaccinations are necessary to prevent one case of hepatocellular
carcinoma....

Have the numbers changed since Ganiats et al. published in 1993?



Also, you snipped the part about Hep B vaccinations injected into Third
World children as American MDs refused the same Hep B vaccinations.



COMMENT:
They weren't done at the same time, you ninny. Please look at your
facts. While hep B was being made from human blood it was WAY to
expensive to be shipping to Africa, I assure you.


I may be wrong - but I suspect that the Hep B vaccine used in The Gambia was
made from human blood - and they kept using it as American MDs refused it...

Here again is what I wrote...

In 1987, while they were still trying to figure out hep B vaccine efficacy
against liver cancer, James E. Maynard, MD wrote:

"...[O]ver the next 5 to 10 years...[Third World countries] will need 350
million doses a year...By the year 2000 we will have accomplished our task
if we see hepatitis B incorporated as the seventh universal immunogen for
infant immunization in the Expanded Program on Immunization that is
sponsored by the World Health Organization." [James E. Maynard, M.D.,
executive director of a nine physician international task force run by the
Seattle-based Program for Appropriate Technology and Health (PATH),
discussing the hepatitis B vaccine produced by Alfred M. Prince, M.D. of
the New York Blood Center. *In Marwick C: JAMA, Sept.18, 1987;258(1):1439]

As hundreds of millions of Third World children were being injected with
hepatitis B vaccine, most of the world¹s physicians were refusing hepatitis
B vaccine injections - for fear of catching AIDS....

Dr. AM Prince, developer of the hepatitis B vaccine, wrote in 1991:

"[M]any high-risk individuals...do not wish to be vaccinated. *This applies
surprisingly to about 50% of physicians and nurses in many countries, who
despite all assurances remain unconvinced that HBV vaccine will not
transmit unknown agents of disease." [Prince AM: Hepatitis B virus: active
and passive immunization. In Cryz SJ (ed.): Vaccines and immunotherapy,
1991, New York: Pergamon Press.]

In one study MDs refused hepatitis B vaccination - even when it was offered
free of charge:

"...the majority of physicians...failed to be vaccinated even when offered
the hepatitis B vaccine free of charge." [Clancy CM, Cebul RD, Williams SV.
Guiding individual decisions: a randomized controlled trial of decision
analysis. Am J Med, 1988;84(2):283-8]

Even stranger than doctors not taking their own hepatitis B vaccine is the
fact that Hepatitis B vaccine researchers discovered early on that nearly
all the African children on whom they were experimenting, were testing
positive for hepatitis B virus [The Lancet, May12, 1989, p. 1057-60] - but
were almost never expressing symptoms of the disease called hepatitis.
[Cancer Res, 1987;47:5782-87]


Maybe American MDs ("many a doc") made a public protest that Third World
children should not be injected with a Hep B vaccine that American MDs
weren't taking for fear of catching AIDS?

Maybe I just missed it?



COMMENT:

Yeah, you missed it. There was nothing to miss. The two cases didn't
involve the same vaccine.


You sound sure. I say again: I may be wrong - but I suspect that the Hep B
vaccine used in The Gambia was made from human blood - and they kept using
it as American MDs refused it...

There is a THIRD case - children in the US.

Since American MDs were refusing their own hep B vaccine for fear of
catching AIDS - American MDs should have spoken out.

I personally, BTW, wouldn't give a patient any standard preventive
thing I wasn't willing to take myself.


Yet you remain silent as your fellow MDs make infants scream and writhe and
bleed through the bogusly NEW "standard preventive thing" not yet officially
recognized - except in the 1988 California Medical Association
stay-out-of-prison "effective public health measure" resolution alluded to
above (CMA Res. 305-88, still in force I believe.)

You also remain silent as your fellow MDs temporarily asphyxiate babies and
senselessly rob them of massive amounts of blood volume.

Meanwhile you gloat about your profession's ability to commit crime:

"Without enforcement, there is no law. Without law, there is no
crime...These are elementary principles. Get an adult to explain them to
you."



I've had every vaccine you can
name, and some you've never heard of.


That's nothing. Most children have had vaccines they CAN'T name - vaccines
they've never heard of.

These vaccines are being obviously fraudulently promoted. See below.


...
I mention this because - recently - American MDs didn't go public about
thimerosal going into Third World bloodstreams...

Or maybe they did and I just missed it?



[COMMENT:] Thimerosol's a political problem. Epidemiologically it's a no-show.


I believe thimerosal is a political STUNT.

Robert Kennedy writes:

"Vaccine manufacturers had already begun to phase thimerosal out of
injections given to American infants -- but...CDC and FDA...[bought] up the
tainted vaccines for export to developing countries..."
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0616-31.htm


COMMENT:

Robert Kennedy's a no-show, too. Sucked into one of the stupider
liberal causes, when the world is full of very genuine problems that
need fixing.


I believe Robert Kennedy is a political STUNTMAN.

One of the "very genuine problems" that need fixing is the problem with
vaccines themselves (see below) - thimerosal just diverts attention from the
genuine vaccine problem.

Tim O'Shea, DC has written that thimerosal is a 'safe scapegoat/whipping
boy'...
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3729

I agree.

THE GENUINE VACCINE PROBLEM...

I wrote to Leon Jaroff of TIME magazine:

"You concluded your article about two chiropractors expressing their
views/promoting vaccination by stating that both chiropractors believe that
chiropractors should not express their views about vaccination!...Be
advised: *Vaccination as it is currently performed - without obtaining
informed consent - is rather obvious mass battery...Even GOOD medicine
administered without consent is a battery...See the California Supreme
Court's 1993 THOR decision...The fact that the vaccination mass battery
isn't being prosecuted does not mean it is not a crime."

That's when you (Steve B. Harris, MD) wrote:

"Without enforcement, there is no
law. Without law, there is no crime...These are elementary principles. Get
an adult to explain them to you."

You ignored the following in my Open Letter to Leon Jaroff of TIME
magazine...

MDS have hijacked the power word "immunization" to promote their
vaccinations. *(MDs are mostly anti-immunization - effectively denying
massive numbers of babies massive numbers of free daily immunizations by
concealing the fact that BREASTFEEDINGS are immunizations - more on this
below.)

Vaccinations are not immunizations. *Vaccinations are ATTEMPTED
immunizations. *Many children are not immunized by their vaccinations - yet
MDs behave as if their vaccinations are 100% effective.

It is a fraudulent vaccination promotion - a financial cattle prod. *MDs are
telling parents seeking vaccine exemptions that only THEIR children will be
sent home during disease outbreaks - only THEY will have to bear the
financial burden of staying home from work and/or hiring tutors during
disease outbreaks.

CDC's maximum vaccination cheerleader Deborah Wexler, MD:

"What if you don't [vaccinate] your child?...During disease outbreaks,
[unvaccinated] children may be excluded from school or child care until the
outbreak is over...for their own protection...This causes hardship for the
child and parent."
--Wexler's Immunization Action Coalition/IAC
http://www.immunize.org/catg.d /p4017.htm

Here is the fraudulent vaccination promotion as stated by the largest
pediatric trade union:

"Parents should be advised of state laws...which may require that
[unvaccinated] children stay home from school during outbreaks."
--American Academy of Pediatrics/AAP^^^

^^^From Informing patients and parents. In: Pickering LK, ed. 2000 Red Book:
Report of the Committee on Infectious Diseases, 25th ed. Elk Grove Villiage,
IL: American Academy of Pediatrics 2000:4. Quoted in Frederickson et al.
Pediatric Annals. (Jul)2001;30:401

Parents are asked to SIGN the obvious fraud:

"If my child does not receive the vaccine(s)...consequences may
include...the need for my child to stay out of daycare or school during
disease outbreaks."
--American Academy of Pediatrics 2002
http://www.cispimmunize.org/pr o/pdf/RefusaltoVaccinate2.doc

THE OBVIOUS SOLUTION Since many children are not immunized by their
vaccinations, ALL parents should be told that ALL children will be sent home
during disease outbreaks.

It is simply wrong for MDs to endanger vaccinated children not immunized by
their vaccinations in their fraudulent "disease outbreak" vaccination
promotion scenario.

I should note here that the "herd immunity" reply of Jeff P.Utz, MD to my
criticisms was good...Jeff usually doesn't come up with good replies...
http://health.groups.yahoo.com /group/chiro-list/message/3569

But MDs need to finally openly admit their vaccination promotion fraud - and
the fact that they are mostly anti-immunization.

MDs ARE MOSTLY ANTI-IMMUNIZATION - LYING BY OMISSION

As indicated above, organized medicing is lying by omission thereby denying
massive numbers of babies massive numbers of free daily immunizations.

Organized medicine is failing to inform pregnant women that if they
breastfeed they will automatically scan for pathogens and manufacture
specific IMMUNIZATIONS for their babies on a daily basis - and these
immunizations reportedly make MD-needle-vaccinations work better.

MDs are ignoring a SIMPLE way to make the breastfeeding (immunization) and
vaccination rates skyrocket.

What woman, informed that she can IMMUNIZE her baby daily and (reportedly)
make MD-needle-vaccinations work better is going to fail to at least ATTEMPT
to breastfeed/immunize her baby daily?

VACCINE SAFETY: *TRULY BIZARRE FRAUDULENT VACCINATION PROMOTION BY MDs...

One of the saddest commentaries on organized medicine's attitude regarding
establishing vaccine safety is pediatrician Martin Smith's essay about the
passage of the "National Childhood Vaccine Injury Compensation Act,"
published in the journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics. [Pediatrics
1988;82(2):264-9]

In his essay, Smith [1988] wrote that "members should be informed of the
necessity that led to the inclusion of some of the provisions in the act as
they now exist."

Specifically, Smith [1988] noted that "many [vaccine] administrators have
not heretofore practiced" reporting adverse events; but that "these
requirements *had to be accepted* in the process of negotiations through the
years - because "Congress had *demanded* the inclusion of the reaction
reporting requirement as a condition to the legislation." (Emphasis added.)

In noting that Congress's adverse reaction reporting requirement will give
"a better epidemiologic store of information," Smith [1988] admitted a key
point: *No one knows "the real facts" about vaccine reactions/vaccine
safety! [Smith M. National Childhood Vaccine Injury Compensation Act.
Pediatrics 1988;82(2):264-9]

According to the subsequent National Academy of Sciences vaccine safety
report mandated by the Act, "many gaps and limitations of knowledge
bear...directly and indirectly on the safety of
vaccines...[including]...limit ed capacity of existing surveillance systems
of vaccine injury..." [Howson CP, Howe CJ, Fineberg HV. Adverse effects of
pertussis and rubella vaccines. National Academy Press 1991]

How bad are existing physician surveillance systems of vaccine injury?

Hopefully they are better than they were in 1993 when former FDA
commissioner David Kessler, M.D. reported evidence that physicians fail to
report up to 99% of serious adverse events.
[Kessler DA. Introducing MEDWatch: a new approach to reporting medication
and device adverse effects and product problems. JAMA
(Jun2)1993;269(21):2765-68]

Kessler [1993] said that in spite of the fact that reports from health
professionals are "essential" to ensure safety of medicines, physicians "do
not think to report adverse events."

Also according to Kessler [1993], physician reporting of serious adverse
events "is not in the culture of US medicine" because, as of 1985, only 14%
of US medical schools had required courses in "therapeutic decision making."

The CDC's Vaccine Information Sheet for Measles, Mumps and Rubella
(MMR) states, "As with any medicine, there are very small risks," which
implies that "any medicine" carries "very small risks"

Given FDA commissioner Kessler's statement that one study found that
physicians fail to report 99% of serious adverse events, "any medicine"
might actually be quite risky. *And since the CDC Vaccine Information Sheet
compares vaccine risk with the risk of "any medicine," vaccines might be
just as risky as "any medicine." *Thus the CDC Vaccine Information Sheet
"warning" (that vaccines carry "very small risks") is worthless.

Incidentally, although the courts claim that parents are "warned" about
vaccines, the word "warning" does not appear anywhere on the CDC MMR Vaccine
Information Sheet; nor, incidentally, does the MMR Vaccine Information Sheet
state that some states have "religious" and "philosophical" exemptions.

FDA Commissioner Kessler's 1993 report states, "If an adverse event occurs
in perhaps one in 5000 or even one in 1000 users, it could be missed in
clinical trials but pose a serious safety problem when released to the
market."

END excerpt of Gastaldo's Open Letter to TIME magazine


Steve B. Harris, MD continued - offering his version of a "genuine vaccine
problem"...

Such as how to vaccine the third world cheaply. Here we
have one child die of preventable measles EVERY MINUTE OF EVERY DAY in
Africa, and this moron JFK,Jr is worried that we might be giving them
**autism**? Of the 1.8 million vaccine preventable deaths in the third
world, HALF are measles. Screw the thimerosal. Those kids need MMR and
they need it *yesterday.* And RFK,Jr seems something to keep him busy,
like organized crime.


Steve, regardless whether vaccines and thimerosal are as safe as you
indicate, many children in Africa need FOOD, SHELTER AND CLEAN WATER.

Food, shelter and clean water would certainly be my priorities were I an
African child.

Until I had those needs met, I would not want foreigners injecting poison
into me to MAYBE prevent liver cancer 60 years later - and to prevent a
disease (Hep B) that I am not suffering from.

The Hep B/liver cancer campaign seems strange on its face.

As I noted (and you snipped):

"...the world public is unaware that millions
(billions?) are being spent to innoculate children to MAYBE prevent the
adult cancer called hepatocellular carcinoma - as 50% of African children in
some areas starve to death. [50% mortality rate is from Sachs MY and Martin
AS (Eds.): Worldmark Encyclopedia of the Nations, Volume 2: Africa, 7th ed.,
1988, New York: Worldmark Press, Ltd., John Wiley & Sons, Inc.]"

Say, if he could just get a brother elected president, maybe he could
get to be attorney general.... Meanwhile he's a pretty pathetic
characature of his relatives.


Medicine is a pretty pathetic caricature of science.

This is where liberalism really bugs me. Liberals are the poison
paranoia people. Somebody finds some kind of politically correct
"poison" like thimerosal, and regardless of the evidence for, or
against, liberals will try to hamstring a program that will save 3/4
million kids a year, to keep it from being used. Unintended
consequences. They don't care. If the solution doesn't fit their
utopian vision, they'd rather *prevent* a reasonable version of it used
at all.

Disgusting!


Your fellow American MDs are making babies scream and writhe and bleed and
sometimes die and lose their penis - and you are silent.

Your fellow American MDs are temporarily asphyxiating babies and robbing
them of up to 50% of their blood - and you are silent.

THAT is disgusting.

Thanks for the Hep B references - but I think they are suspect as the
African penis studies which as noted above I believe are being conducted
because American MDs stand to go to prison.

Readers, after Steve's Hep B refs, there are a few last notes below from
when he slapped the RN online...




1: Baillieres Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 1999 Dec;13(4):511-7.

Prospects for hepatitis B virus eradication and control of
hepatocellular
carcinoma.

Chang MH, Chen DS.

Department of Pediatrics and Internal Medicine, College of Medicine,
National
Taiwan University, Taipei.

Hepatitis B virus infection is the most common cause of chronic
hepatitis, liver
cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma worldwide. In areas hyperendemic
for HBV
infection, the related complications occur mostly during adulthood.
However,
nearly half of all primary infection in chronic carriers occurs in the
perinatal
period through maternal transmission, the other half arising from
horizontal
transmission mainly through intrafamilial spread or injection using
unsterilized
needles. A universal vaccination programme is better than immunization
for
at-risk groups. Hepatitis B vaccination should be integrated into the
Expanded
Programme on Immunization in children. Universal immunization against
hepatitis
B virus has proved to be effective in reducing the hepatitis B carrier
rate to
one-tenth of the prevalence before the vaccination programme in highly
endemic
areas, and the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma in children has
also been
shown to be significantly reduced. Continued efforts to implement
universal
vaccination programmes worldwide will very likely reduce the incidence
of
hepatitis B virus-related diseases, particularly liver cirrhosis and
hepatocellular carcinoma.

Publication Types:
Review
Review, Tutorial

PMID: 10654916 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

2: JAMA. 2000 Dec 20;284(23):3040-2.

Hepatitis B vaccination and hepatocellular carcinoma rates in boys and
girls.

Chang MH, Shau WY, Chen CJ, Wu TC, Kong MS, Liang DC, Hsu HM, Chen HL,
Hsu HY,
Chen DS; Taiwan Childhood Hepatoma Study Group.

Department of Pediatrics, National Taiwan University Hospital, No. 7,
Chung-Shan
S. Road, Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China.

CONTEXT: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has a male predominance and is
closely
related to hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. Hepatitis B virus
vaccination was
launched in 1984 in Taiwan for neonates of mothers carrying hepatitis B
e
antigen, resulting in a decreased incidence of HCC in children. The
effect on
boys vs girls is not known. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association
between a HBV
vaccination program with incidence of childhood HCC by sex. DESIGN AND
SETTING:
Analysis of data collected from Taiwan's National Cancer Registry
System and the
Taiwan Childhood Hepatoma Study Group between 1981 and 1996.
PARTICIPANTS:
Children aged 6 to 14 years who were diagnosed as having HCC (201 boys
and 70
girls). MAIN OUTCOME MEASU Incidence of HCC in boys and girls before
and
after implementation of the vaccination program. RESULTS: The boy-girl
incidence
ratio decreased steadily from 4.5 in 1981-1984 (before the program's
introduction) to 1.9 in 1990-1996 (6-12 years after the vaccination
program was
launched). The incidence of HCC in boys born after 1984 was
significantly
reduced in comparison with those born before 1978 (relative risk [RR],
0.72; P
=.002). No significant decrease in HCC incidence was observed in girls
born in
the same periods (RR, 0.77; P =.20). The incidence of HCC in boys
remained
stable with increasing age, while an increase of HCC incidence with age
in girls
was observed. These age and sex effects remained the same regardless of
birth
before or after the vaccination program. CONCLUSION: Our results
suggest that
boys may benefit more from HBV vaccination than girls in the prevention
of HCC.

PMID: 11122592 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

3: Cancer J. 2004 Mar-Apr;10(2):67-73.

Hepatocellular carcinoma: paradigm of preventive oncology.

O'Brien TR, Kirk G, Zhang M.

Viral Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and
Genetics,
National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of
Health
and Human Services, Rockville, Maryland 20852, USA.


Morbidity and mortality from hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), which is
primarily
caused by hepatitis B virus or hepatitis C virus, can be prevented.
Public
health interventions have eliminated transfusion transmission of these
viruses
and, in endemic countries with effective hepatitis B virus vaccination
programs,
have greatly reduced incident hepatitis B virus infections (and HCC) in
children. Antiviral treatment can eliminate detectable hepatitis C
virus in
50%-80% of chronically infected patients, presumably reducing their
risk of
cancer. HCC survival rates remain universally poor, but early detection
and
treatment in developed countries has improved survival in selected
patients.
Despite these advances, worldwide HCC rates remain high, and additional
preventive efforts are needed. The most important opportunity is wider
distribution of hepatitis B virus vaccine in endemic areas. Development
of an
HCV vaccine, improved antiviral therapies, and better methods for HCC
detection
would also help decrease morbidity and mortality from HCC. HCC
prevention
efforts provide a paradigm for preventive oncology in cancers of viral
etiology.

Publication Types:
Review
Review, Tutorial

PMID: 15130266 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

4: Zhonghua Min Guo Xiao Er Ke Yi Xue Hui Za Zhi. 1998
Nov-Dec;39(6):366-70.

Hepatocellular carcinoma in children.

Chang MH.

Department of Pediatrics, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei,
Taiwan.


Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most frequent malignancies
in
humans. Although it occurs mainly in adults of 40 to 60 years of age,
it may
develop in children. It mainly occurs in children older than six years
of age,
with male predominance. Children with chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV)
infection
and underlying metabolic diseases are the two main high risk groups for
childhood HCC. HBV infection is the main cause of childhood HCC in
areas
hyperendemic for HBV infection. In Taiwan, nearly 100% of HCC children
were
hepatitis B surface antigen seropositive. Maternal transmission (94%)
is the
most important route of transmission of HBV infection in HCC children.
For HBV
related HCC in children, immunization is the most effective way for the
control
of childhood HCC. The first universal vaccination against HBV in the
world was
launched in Taiwan in July 1984. The prevalence of hepatitis B surface
antigenemia in children declined from 10% in 1984, prior to the
vaccination
program, to 1% in 1994, 10 years after the implementation of the
program, in
children less than 9 years of age. The annual incidence of HCC in
children aged
6 to 9 years of age also decreased from 0.52 per 100,000 born in
1974-1984 to
0.13 per 100,000 born in 1984-1986.

Publication Types:
Review
Review, Tutorial

PMID: 9926508 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

5: N Engl J Med. 1997 Jun 26;336(26):1855-9.

Comment in:
N Engl J Med. 1997 Jun 26;336(26):1906-7.

Universal hepatitis B vaccination in Taiwan and the incidence of
hepatocellular
carcinoma in children. Taiwan Childhood Hepatoma Study Group.

Chang MH, Chen CJ, Lai MS, Hsu HM, Wu TC, Kong MS, Liang DC, Shau WY,
Chen DS.

Department of Pediatrics, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei.

BACKGROUND: A nationwide hepatitis B vaccination program was
implemented in
Taiwan in July 1984. To assess the effect of the program on the
development of
hepatocellular carcinoma, we studied the incidence of this cancer in
children in
Taiwan from 1981 to 1994. METHODS: We collected data on liver cancer in
children
from Taiwan's National Cancer Registry, which receives reports from
each of the
country's 142 hospitals with more than 50 beds. Data on childhood liver
cancer
were also obtained from Taiwan's 17 major medical centers. To prevent
the
inclusion of cases of hepatoblastoma, the primary analysis was confined
to liver
cancers in children six years of age or older. Data were also obtained
on
mortality from liver cancer among children. RESULTS: The average annual
incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma in children 6 to 14 years of age
declined
from 0.70 per 100,000 children between 1981 and 1986 to 0.57 between
1986 and
1990, and to 0.36 between 1990 and 1994 (P0.01). The corresponding
rates of
mortality from hepatocellular carcinoma also decreased. The incidence
of
hepatocellular carcinoma in children 6 to 9 years of age declined from
0.52 for
those born between 1974 and 1984 to 0.13 for those born between 1984
and 1986
(P0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Since the institution of Taiwan's program of
universal
hepatitis B vaccination, the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma in
children
has declined.

PMID: 9197213 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

6: Semin Oncol. 2001 Oct;28(5):441-9.

The epidemiology and prevention of hepatocellular carcinoma.

Monto A, Wright TL.

GI Research, San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San
Francisco, CA
94121, USA.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a common cancer. Its incidence is
higher in
countries where hepatitis B is endemic. HCC is substantially a
complication of
liver cirrhosis. Hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV)
are the
predominant causes of cirrhosis, and as such, HCC. The link between HCC
and
alcoholic cirrhosis is less strong. Other less common forms of chronic
liver
disease can also lead to HCC. HBV is the HCC-determining disease
worldwide. In
endemic regions, it tends to be acquired early in life. The largest
strides in
prevention of HCC have been made with the HBV vaccine. HCV has a lower
global
prevalence than HBV, but HCV causes the most HCC in economically
developed
regions. In these areas, where the incidence of HCC is low, HCV now
accounts for
more than 50% of HCCs. There is no vaccine for HCV, so prevention of
HCV-associated HCC will focus on prevention of initial infection and
elimination
of infection through antiviral therapies. HBV-HCV coinfection, and the
combination of either with alcohol abuse or aflatoxin exposure seems to
raise
the risk of HCC development further. Liver transplantation and other
adjuvant
therapies may offer better options for secondary prevention of HCC than
resection alone. Copyright 2001 by W.B. Saunders Company.

Publication Types:
Review
Review, Tutorial

PMID: 11685737 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

7: Cancer Detect Prev. 1991;15(4):313-8.

Design and compliance of HBV vaccination trial on newborns to prevent
hepatocellular carcinoma and 5-year results of its pilot study.

Sun Z, Zhu Y, Stjernsward J, Hilleman M, Collins R, Zhen Y, Hsia CC, Lu
J, Huang
F, Ni Z, et al.

Cancer Institute, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Beijing, PRC.

A large-scale, controlled study of universal immunization of newborns
against
HBV infection has been conducted in the high incidence area of
hepatocellular
carcinoma, Qidong County of China. This area has a stable population,
standardized cancer registration system, and an epidemiological base
for
measurements of liver cancer prevention by vaccine. Randomization was
done on
the community level. The vaccination and the control group each will
consist of
38,000 children by the end of 1990. It is anticipated that the design
will
provide high statistical power to detect 50% reduction in the
prevalence rate of
chronic hepatitis among the vaccinees vs. the controls at 6 to 10 years
of age,
and 50% reduction in the incidence rate of hepatocellular carcinoma at
35 to 40
years of age. The vaccine used is Hep-B Vax, donated by Merck and Co.
through
WHO. The vaccine was administered at 0, 1, and 6 months after birth,
the dosage
of 5 or 2.5 micrograms in the pilot study as used before 1985 and of 5
micrograms dose level during the main study starting from January 1,
1985. About
85% of the cohorts have now entered the protocol. The vaccination
coverage
during 1984 to 1989 was 98.0% (35,064/35,789). Follow-up of the
vaccinees and
the age-matched controls at 5 years has exceeded 97%. The cumulative
mortality
in the vaccinated group up to 1988 was 1.29% (354/27,450). No single
death nor
serious adverse reaction was found that was associated with
vaccination. The use
of HBV vaccine at a reduced dose was especially important for the
developing
countries at the present time in order to achieve widespread
immunization.
Five-year results of the pilot study of this vaccination project showed
that
significant protection against HBV infection was achieved with the 5 or
2.5
micrograms per dose regimen plus a booster of 5 micrograms given at 3.5
to 4
years of age.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Publication Types:
Clinical Trial
Randomized Controlled Trial

PMID: 1665400 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]



When Rick Churcher, RN wrote:

"I didn't say nursing has nothing to do with medicine. I said nursing
wasn't part of the medical profession, and it isn't."

First you LIED to Mr. Churcher: "[A]n insurance company...doesn't want its
money going for quackery,religion...or whatever..."^^^

Then you verbally SLAPPED him:

"You'll do as you're told...or somebody (and it may even be me) will get
your frigging ass fired. I promise."

See MD slaps RN/Two MDs on nurse practitioners (Clergyman Harris and High
Priest Borao)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ chiro-list/message/867

^^^If insurance companies didn't want their money going for "quackery,
religion...or whatever" - THEY would help expose the the Four OB Lies.

To read the Four OB Lies (they are whoppers)...

See ACOG's 2005 edition: How NOT to birth
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3606

Part of the reason MDs can get away with their lies and obvious crimes is by
professionally slapping RNs.

I was pleased when various RNs contacted me to indicate their appreciation
of my "ACOG's 2005 edition" post.

Thanks for reading Steve.

Sincerely,

Your friend,

Todd

Dr. Gastaldo
Hillsboro, Oregon


This response to Steve B. Harris, MD will be archived for global access in
the Google usenet archive.

Search
http://groups.google.com for "The MD who slapped the nurse/A nation
of 'ninnies'"

  #18  
Old August 10th 05, 09:24 PM
David Wright
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article .com,
Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com wrote:

This is where liberalism really bugs me. Liberals are the poison
paranoia people. Somebody finds some kind of politically correct
"poison" like thimerosal, and regardless of the evidence for, or
against, liberals will try to hamstring a program that will save 3/4
million kids a year, to keep it from being used. Unintended
consequences. They don't care. If the solution doesn't fit their
utopian vision, they'd rather *prevent* a reasonable version of it used
at all.

Disgusting!


Actually, trying to tag the anti-thimerosal crowd as "liberals" is
rather disgusting in its own right. The anti-thimerosal people are
a mixture of Luddite nitwits and relatives of autistic children who
are looking for someone to blame. This sort of thing crosses all
ideological boundaries -- or are you going to tell me that good ol'
Dan Burton (R-Ind) is a "liberal"?

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"I believe that sex is one of the most beautiful, wholesome and
natural things that money can buy."
-- Steve Martin
  #19  
Old August 11th 05, 12:27 AM
Caledonia
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com wrote:

This is where liberalism really bugs me. Liberals are the poison
paranoia people.



I always thought liberals were the people who wanted to extend
healthcare benefits to cover all individuals living in the U.S. Or at
the very least, expand government programs serving uninsured children
and provide childhood immunizations regardless of
nationality/immigration status, sort of like the Kennedy/Kerry
proposal.

Caledonia

  #20  
Old August 11th 05, 11:45 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Eric Bohlman wrote:
"Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com" wrote in
oups.com:
This is where liberalism really bugs me. Liberals are the poison
paranoia people. Somebody finds some kind of politically correct
"poison" like thimerosal, and regardless of the evidence for, or
against, liberals will try to hamstring a program that will save 3/4
million kids a year, to keep it from being used. Unintended
consequences. They don't care. If the solution doesn't fit their
utopian vision, they'd rather *prevent* a reasonable version of it
used at all.


Don't tar all liberals with the same brush. The subset you're correctly
railing against are largely motivated by Romantic ideology and would more
correctly be described as "pseudo-liberals" just as many authoritarians
have been described as "pseudo-conservatives."


COMMENT:

Thanks for the thoughtful message.


Don't tar all liberals with the same brush. The subset you're correctly
railing against are largely motivated by Romantic ideology and would more
correctly be described as "pseudo-liberals" just as many authoritarians
have been described as "pseudo-conservatives.


COMMENT:

I'm of course using the words conservative and liberal as we use them
in the US, which is not the same way they are used in the UK or Canada
(say). I don't think the US conservative even has a counterpart in
politics in most places (maybe the Israeli Likud). The US liberal in
most places would be a called conservative, and the liberal of Canada
and the UK, would be closer to a US socialist. The John Stuart Mills
classical liberal (my own affiliation) is nowadays called a
libertarian, and isn't understood by any major party, except in bits.

"Conservative" classically means somebody who harkens back to the past,
but if we're stuck in post-modernism, it's rather difficult to tell
what conservatives are supposed to believe in. You can call properly
them reactionaries, since they are usually to be found opposing the
"progressive" ideas of the progressives, where the progressive idea is
usually to make the central government responsible for it (whatever it
is), at some cost in your taxes. Note the "conservative" politicians
can have "progressive" ideas, with the classic one here in the US being
Bush's idea to have the Feds more closely control K-12 education (now
there's a brilliant idea-- Feds on your schoolboard). Mostly in the
US, we just use the term "conservative" for religious Christians who
don't trust the government, but (as with that Bush K12 initiative, not
to mention Homeland Security) they can be confusing when they get into
office. Our "conservatives" often don't include the Roman Catholics,
who may be religious and Christian, but who have as much faith in
government as Teddy Kennedy or author Tom Clancey does. Which is a lot.
Teddy is not a conservative. As for Tom Clancey, who knows? He does
have the Catholic love of, and faith in, bureaucracy, including
military bureaucracy, so is hard to place. Teddy has the same, but
hates the military, so is easy to place.

One similarity is that they tend to view third-world people in "noble
savage" terms, worrying greatly that their "traditional ways of life"
might come to an end. They never seem to ask the objects of their
concern whether or not they *want* to continue living the same way they
did millennia ago (I'm reminded of a quote from a woman in Africa who
said she wished she could afford (gasp!) *herbicides* to spray on her
crops. When asked why, she said she wanted her children to go to school
and learn to read and write instead of spending their days stooping in
the fields picking weeds). They consist largely of upper-middle-class
women, but they idealize societies in which women spend most of their
time barefoot, pregnant, and completely at the mercy of men. They take
at face value the claims of the most reactionary and authoritarian
elements of any "oppressed" society, oblivious to the fact that those
"leaders" are simply third-world equivalents of Jerry Falwell and Pat
Robertson (www.butterfliesandwheels.com discusses this in great detail).



COMMENT:

Yes, yes. But I think you're wrong to view this as "pseudo-liberalism."
It's real gold-standard liberalism, a part of the maternalistic
liberalism of Hilary "It takes a village to raise a child" Clinton and
a lot of others. And sure, they're reactionaries when it comes to
technology--- that doesn't mean they're not "progressives" when it
comes to everything else. But that doesn't make them pseudo-liberals.
Ralph Nader is not a pseudo-liberal. Nader didn't split the Republican
party in the 2000 election, he split the Democratic party. He split the
liberals and the Left. The Right paid no attention to him at all,
except to thank Jesus for him.


This branch of the Left really consists of reactionaries in
progressives' clothing.


COMMENT:
Nah, it consists of progressives who happen to be reactionary when it
narrowly comes to matters of technology, because they don't understand
it. And, often, because being female they are missing any love of
technology for its own sake (which I think is written into the genes of
most men). But that's it. I don't think they distrust technology
because they're romantics. As often as not, they're romantics for
entirely different reasons (like the Nazis) and *would* be lovers of
technology if they had the gonads for it (like the Nazis).

Romanticism has historically rather quickly led
to authoritarianism, even fascism. It contains a streak of anti-urbanism
that often has a sub-streak of anti-semitism.



COMMENT
Oh, that's WAY overgeneralized. A romantic moment was part of an
authoritarian process in France, Germany and Italy, but not in England
or America. Peoples have their own personalities and make each
influence their own. Every country has its romantic movements in the
arts or politics. Sometimes it leads to violence and authoritarianism,
and sometimes not. Certainly fascism was built on a peculiar
romanticism in Italy and (if you insist on calling Nazis fascists) in
Germany also. But the emotionalism and idealism of romanticism is
merely a way of controlling the masses and getting the votes,
especially when times are hard and the past is easy to look to.
Romanticism is also a way of resurrecting any country or people from
the past. Romantic movements gave us modern Poland, and some of those
same Romantic Poles gave us modern Israel.

As for antisemitism, I would argue that it was most often a feature of
German romanticism merely because the Germans themselves were so often
antisemitic. So if the German romantics happened not to like Jews, like
Wagner and Wagner's major fan Hitler, you find it in their work. But
you don't find it in Nietzsche, and I don't think it's particularly
somehow necessary or promoted by Romanticism. Yes, you'd think it would
be natural in pastoral movements to vilify urbanites like Jews. Thus
I've heard Rousseau accused of antisemitism, and it's a good myth, but
as I read him there's no truth in it.

Ultimately, it stems from
the conviction that humans are inherently evil. How it came to be seen
as part of the Left is unclear, though it appears that a lot of it
entered through the 1960s counterculture; old-school leftists and their
ideological descendants don't seem to be much affected by such nonsense.

I've become convinced that when neo-Romantics talk about "health,"
they're actually talking about achieving a sense of personal *purity*. I
think much of the "poison paranoia" is actually a feeling of being
ritually unclean


COMMENT:

Ritual unclean if the paranoics are Jewish, but just "unclean" if they
aren't. Yes, indeed, it's handwashing-type personal purity. We hear of
people who worry if the inside of their colons aren't clean. Clearly
nuts. But how did this get to be part of the Left? Because there was
no other place to put these folks. These people usually think of
themselves as progressives, and what else do you call them? Are you
going to argue with them? Asking people about nuclear power or
pesticides is nearly a perfect litmus test for which side of the
political spectrum they're going to be on. The same with liability law.
When somebody sues his way into being a governor like Sid McMath, or a
Senator like John Edwards, he's never a Republican. Injury lawyers are
not high on the list of people Republicans admire.

It isn't the evangelicals that form the core of the right who seem to
be too worried about being detoxified and having poisons in their
environments. They are washed in the Blood of the Lamb, don't you know,
so they don't need the EPA. I can only conclude that they've been
inoculated against such fears by their particular brand of
protestantism. Neither Catholics nor Jews, and certainly not
secularists, trust providence to protect them from this stuff. And
that's the left-right divide in the US: Do you really believe in an
imminent god, who's good against toxins? Or do you actually have to
(tikkun; Kashrit) "do-it-yourself"?

SBH

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
misc.kids FAQ on Good things about having kids [email protected] Info and FAQ's 0 May 30th 05 05:28 AM
misc.kids FAQ on Good things about having kids [email protected] Info and FAQ's 0 March 30th 05 06:34 AM
misc.kids FAQ on Good things about having kids [email protected] Info and FAQ's 0 July 29th 04 05:16 AM
misc.kids FAQ on Good things about having kids [email protected] Info and FAQ's 0 June 28th 04 07:42 PM
Do Plant and Droaner claim insufficient spanking for Klebold and Harris caused Columbine? Kane Spanking 13 May 21st 04 03:29 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.