Daily Archives: January 16, 2012

Gardasil: Child Abuse by Big Pharma

There is something deeply wrong with a giant pharmaceutical company spending hundreds of millions of dollars to manipulate women and influence legislation in order to generate a revenue stream of billions of dollars a year for themselves at the expense of a gullible public.

progressiveradionetwork.com | Jan 12, 2012

By Gary Null, PhD and Nancy Ashley, VMD

In 1987, I was asked to debate a group of 6 scientists about the very promising AIDS drug, AZT.  Signs around NYU Medical School exhorted everyone to “Put Time on Your Side”, and the vast majority of activists, including ACT UP, were pushing the government to allocate all available funds to get this drug into as many people as possible who had been diagnosed with AIDS.  I was the only one who was dissenting and there was a simple reason:  I had spoken with John Lauritsen.

Lauritsen, an investigative journalist who wrote for the New York Native in the 1980s and 1990s, knew that AZT was a fraud.  Originally a chemotherapy drug that was rejected due to excessive toxicity, AZT was resurrected for use as an AIDS treatment and fast tracked by the FDA for approval in just six months.  Lauritsen looked closely at the one single study used as a basis for this approval, and found:  “the description of methodology was incomplete and incoherent.  Not a single table was acceptable according to statistical standards – indeed, not a single table made sense.  In particular, the first report, on “efficacy” was marred by contradictions, ill-logic, and special pleading.”  Lauritsen discovered that this poor-quality study was unblinded early, allowing both doctors and patients to know whether AZT or the placebo was being taken, thus completely invalidating the study.  Then the study itself was terminated early, ostensibly so that all participants would be able to take AZT, which appeared so effective at preventing death from AIDS.  The real-life follow up, however, at no time repeated the stunning results of this mangled study.  Instead, according to Lauritsen, “More than 96% of all “AIDS” deaths in the U.S. occurred after AZT was approved for marketing in 1987. Those deaths were not caused by a virus, but by AZT. “

Lynn Gannet, a researcher overseeing one of the AZT trials in Syracuse, contacted me and showed me reports proving everything about the study was wrong.  She showed me that this entire fast tracking was all political — it was based on a large push by the pharmaceutical company, Burroughs-Welcome, and by the AIDS groups that the Burroughs-Welcome’s foundation was supporting.  Gannet stated:  “I was an eyewitness to gross negligence and fraud in the Phase III clinical trials of AZT (1987 to 1990).  I’ve been saying to people for years that AZT was NEVER proven to be safe or effective.  From the particular studies in which I was involved, it would have been impossible to prove anything:  the data was such a mess!  I now realize that AZT is a deadly poison.  All AIDS drug trails since that time have been based on the same flawed model.  The big difference is that now there is even LESS meaningful oversight, and even MORE of an economic incentive for physicians to enroll patients. … My belief is that the data which came from the Syracuse site is ABSOLUTELY WORTHLESS!  I would never trust my health or my life to the results of this so-called “research” or in the hands of these so-called “medical professionals.” The level of medical incompetence, unprofessionalism, unethical, dishonest, corrupt, illegal and immoral behavior was shocking and inexcusable.  The data was so inaccurate and so full of holes  …  If there was a rule that could be broken – they broke it!  Gannet told me she had attempted to inform those in charge of the study in North Carolina and all way up to the National Institutes of Health of all the violations, but no one was interested in the gross discrepancies she had uncovered.

As we would later find out, this drug was devastating.  It was one of the most toxic drugs ever created, yet people were told to take 400 mg four times a day, and that was when we began to see otherwise healthy people who had been diagnosed with AIDS dying quickly.  And here’s the irony:  the more AZT you took the sicker you got, but the more AZT they told you to take.  It would be like taking arsenic and getting sick, and then being told the remedy is more arsenic.  This to me was one of the greatest scientific tragedies and frauds in history.  The number of people who died from taking AZT ended up in the hundreds of thousands, yet despite this, thousands of new foundations started to emerge promoting AZT.  AIDS was redefined as purely a sexually transmitted disease, and people with AIDS were told they had better take AZT or they were going to die.

Yet they never looked at people who had been diagnosed with AIDS and HIV infection who weren’t taking AZT, but instead were taking a natural approach — and were doing just fine.  They didn’t want to know about that.  It became down and dirty politics.  If you went to the conferences on AIDS each year the largest group of people would be the pharmaceutical companies and the AIDS activists who in reality were their supporters.  If you were a gay journalist and you didn’t support this approach — and I interviewed many, like Charles Ortlieb,  and Neenyah Ostrom of the New York Native — you were attacked.    Not only were you attacked for being an AIDS denialist, but you were attacked for promoting the death of people with AIDS by preventing them from taking the therapy that would save their lives.  Then all your funding would dry up or your magazines would go out of business.  In San Francisco, in LA, no matter where I was, I kept getting the same feedback.  And yet the media would not touch this.  No one would touch it.  The result was only one doctrine, and this became the official doctrine.

Read More

How Genetically Modified Foods Could Affect Our Health in Unexpected Ways

AlterNet | Jan 11, 2012

By Ari LeVaux

Chinese researchers have found small pieces of rice ribonucleic acid (RNA) in the blood and organs of humans who eat rice. The Nanjing University-based team showed that this genetic material will bind to receptors in human liver cells and influence the uptake of cholesterol from the blood.

The type of RNA in question is called microRNA (abbreviated to miRNA) due to its small size. MiRNAs have been studied extensively since their discovery ten years ago, and have been implicated as players in several human diseases including cancer, Alzheimer’s, and diabetes. They usually function by turning down or shutting down certain genes. The Chinese research provides the first in vivo example of ingested plant miRNA surviving digestion and influencing human cell function in this way.

Should the research survive scientific scrutiny — a serious hurdle — it could prove a game changer in many fields. It would mean that we’re eating not just vitamins, protein, and fuel, but gene regulators as well.

That knowledge could deepen our understanding of many fields, including cross-species communication, co-evolution, and predator-prey relationships. It could illuminate new mechanisms for some metabolic disorders and perhaps explain how some herbal and modern medicines function.

This study had nothing to do with genetically modified (GM) food, but it could have implications on that front. The work shows a pathway by which new food products, such as GM foods, could influence human health in previously unanticipated ways.

Monsanto’s website states, “There is no need for, or value in testing the safety of GM foods in humans.” This viewpoint, while good for business, is built on an understanding of genetics circa 1960. It follows what’s called the “Central Dogma” of genetics, which postulates a one-way chain of command between DNA and the cells DNA governs.

The Central Dogma resembles the process of ordering a pizza. The DNA codes for the kind of pizza it wants, and orders it. The RNA is the order slip, which communicates the specifics of that pizza to the cook. The finished and delivered pizza is analogous to the protein that DNA codes for.

We’ve known for decades that the Central Dogma, though basically correct, is overly simplistic. For example: miRNAs that don’t code for anything, pizza or otherwise, travel within cells silencing genes that are being expressed. So while one piece of DNA is ordering a pizza, it could also be bombarding the pizzeria with RNA signals that can cancel the delivery of other pizzas ordered by other bits of DNA.

Researchers have been using this phenomena to their advantage in the form of small, engineered RNA strands that are virtually identical to miRNA. In a technique called RNA interference, or RNA knockdown, these small bits of RNA are used to turn off, or “knock down,” certain genes.

Read More