In latest vaccine marketing fraud, CDC says Gardasil shots should be ‘routine’ for boys

Every male between the ages of 11 and 21 should get a Gardasil vaccine for cervical cancer, and those between the ages of 13 and 21 should also get “catch-up” shots later down the road. This is only the opinion of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s…

Strawberries can counter the negative effects of alcohol

A team of European researchers has proven that eating strawberries will protect the stomach lining from damage caused by ethyl alcohol. “A diet rich in strawberries might exert a beneficial effect in the prevention of gastric diseases related to generation of reactive…

Hospitals in Houston requiring unvaccinated employees to wear face masks during entire flu season if they refuse flu shot

(NaturalNews) Memorial Hermann (MH), a major hospital system in Houston, Tex., that employs 20,000 workers at 11 area hospitals, is currently pushing a campaign that aims to vaccinate 100 percent of its workers with the flu shot by Nov. 18. And one of the ways this medical group is not-so-subtly attempting to force full compliance is by threatening those who have not gotten their shots with having to wear face masks at work throughout the entire flu season. NaturalNews was able to locate a Flu Update email that MH sent to all of its employees notifying them that 14,000 employees, or 72 percent, have already gotten their flu shots as part of the hospital system’s “new flu prevention policy.” But with only a few days left in the campaign and roughly 5,000 employees still not vaccinated, the group is apparently hoping that the threat of having to wear a face mask will convince the rest to surrender. “[W]ith only four days remaining in the campaign, approximately 5,000 employees still must either get the flu vaccination or complete a declination form, requiring that they wear a mask during the during (sic) flu season,” says the email alert. MH declination form forces those who do not want the flu shot to lie But the MH Declination of Mandatory Influenza Vaccination itself is illegitimate, as it forces employees to agree with a number of lies about the flu. The form states, for instance, that influenza kills an average of 36,000 people and injures more than 200,000 others every year in the US. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), however, admitted just last year that these common statistics are flawed and untrue (http://www.naturalnews.com/030170_seasonal_flu_death_estimates.html). The form also forces those who do not want the flu shot, to admit to the false statement that the “consequences of my refusing to be vaccinated could have life-threatening consequences to my health and the health of those with whom I have contact.” Flu vaccines have never been conclusively proven to be safe or effective, and a recent study shows that only 1.5 out of every 100 people who get a flu shot derive any perceived benefit (http://www.naturalnews.com/033998_influenza_vaccines_effectiveness.html). Nowhere on the form is there any admission about the potentially deadly side effects that accompany the flu shot, or any admission that many people who get the flu shot still get the flu. But the form does warn that if employees fail to wear their masks as instructed, they could be fired from their jobs. You can view a copy of the ridiculous MH declination form here: https://insite.mhhs.org/employee_resources/my_benefits/healthserviceplan/Flu_Vaccination_Declination.pdf This flu hysteria stunt being promoted by MH is really nothing more than medical mafia coercion predicated on lies and pseudoscience. And the nonsensical punishment for those who refuse to comply with such nonsense is even more egregious, as it basically “brands” non-compliers as villains. Face masks, after all, do not necessarily prevent the transmission of flu — but they sure do embarrass and ostracize those who decide to embrace health freedom of choice and think for themselves by refusing the flu shot!

CDC admits not a single person has died from consuming raw milk products in 11 years

(NaturalNews) The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) refuses to acknowledge that, based on all available statistics, raw milk produced on clean, small-scale farms is actually far safer than pasteurized milk from factory farms. But the agency did admit earlier this year, after being pressed and warned of a potential Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request if it failed to comply, that not a single person has died from raw milk consumption in over a decade. This may come as a shock to some who, because of all the propaganda about the alleged dangers of raw milk, are convinced otherwise, but it is true — one of the two deaths often cited by the CDC as evidence that raw milk is dangerous was actually linked to the consumption of raw queso fresco cheese, which is currently outlawed by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). And the other is likely linked to an adulterated raw milk product as well, rather than to raw milk. After repeatedly petitioning the CDC for clarification about its questionable raw milk statistics and getting nowhere, Mark McAfee, owner of Organic Pastures Dairy Company (OPDC) in California, finally threatened to file a FOIA request to get to the truth. Shortly thereafter, he received a response from an unidentified official at the CDC’s information office explaining that the one “raw milk” death that occurred between 1998 and 2008 was actually linked to illegal raw queso fresco cheese. The agency has not yet provided details about the other death, but it is likely that it, too, was linked to some adulterated raw milk product rather than to raw milk itself. If and when the agency finally fesses up to the truth about that case, it will also be inadvertently admitting that it has lied to the public for many years about the nature of raw milk. The CDC’s continual avoidance of talking about the much worse dangers associated with pasteurized milk further illustrates its raw milk bias. In 2006 alone, there were at least 1,300 people who got sick from pasteurized milk just in California — and yet the CDC only talks about the roughly 39 reported illnesses every year in the Golden State that are alleged, but not necessarily proven to be, linked to raw milk. To learn more about the safety of raw milk versus pasteurized milk, check out this FREE chapter from Dr. Ron Schmid’s book The Untold Story of Milk: Green Pastures, Contented Cows and Raw Dairy Products : http://newtrendspublishing.com/PDFS/15MilkFinal.pdf Sources for this article include: http://www.thecompletepatient.com/journal/2011/2/18/the-power-of-numbers-in-the-war-over-raw-dairy-how-the-cdc-c.html

Exposed: CDC deliberately manipulated, covered up scientific data showing link between vaccines containing mercury and autism

(NaturalNews) Deniers of the link between mercury-laden vaccines and autism are going to have a hard time denying the latest findings by the Coalition for Mercury-Free Drugs (CoMeD). The nonprofit group has obtained critical documents via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request that exposes the US Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) role in deliberately lying about and manipulating a key Danish study that showed a clear link between vaccines containing mercury and autism. In 2003, the journal Pediatrics published a study conducted in Denmark that observed a significant decline in autism rates following the country’s elimination of Thimerosal, a mercury-based component, from vaccines. But thanks to the CDC’s corrupting influence, the published version of the study in Pediatrics actually claimed the opposite, and alleged that removal of Thimerosal brought about an increase in autism rates. According to the documents, CDC officials removed large amounts of data from the study that showed a decline in autism rates following the removal of Thimerosal. The agency then twisted the remaining data to imply an increase in autism rates following the removal of Thimerosal, and suggested that there was no link between Thimerosal and autism. Upon submission of the CDC’s tainted version of the study to Pediatrics , the study’s authors contacted CDC officials to let them know that the agency had incorrectly interpreted the data. They tried to tell the CDC that its figures and conclusions were wrong, and that corrections needed to be made. The CDC allegedly responded by saying that it would take a look at the incorrect data, but proceeded to submit the corrupted version of the study to Pediatrics anyway. After encouraging the editors of Pediatrics to perform an expedited review of the corrupted study, the CDC ended up convincing the journal to publish the fraudulent study, which it did in 2003. Now that this critical information has been officially released for the world to see, CoMeD is pressing the CDC to conduct a full criminal investigation into the matter, and make a formal declaration about whether or not scientific fraud was involved. CoMeD is also calling for a full, immediate retraction of the corrupted study from Pediatrics . “This should not be tolerated by those who are entrusted with our children’s health and well-being,” says Lisa Sykes, President of CoMeD. To learn more, visit: http://mercury-freedrugs.org/ Sources for this article include: http://www.anh-usa.org/cdc-mercury-in-vaccines/

CDC advisory panel declares that young boys should be vaccinated against HPV, cervical cancer

(NaturalNews) In a shocking display of utter corruption and ignorance, a US Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) advisory committee has officially declared that young boys and men between the ages of 11 and 21 should be vaccinated against human papillomavirus (HPV), the viral infection supposedly linked to causing cervical cancer in women. Despite the fact that males do not even have a cervix, 12 of the 14 CDC committee members decided that vaccinating boys as young as nine against the virus is still a good idea. And in a separate vote, the majority of the committee members also decided that men as old as 26 should be vaccinated against HPV as well, which encompasses practically all young men. The decision is founded in the CDC’s belief that Merck and Co.’s Gardasil and GlaxoSmithKline’s (GSK) Cervarix, the two vaccines approved for HPV, also help to prevent genital warts and various types of cancers in males. Such claims, though, have never actually been proven. The studies used as proof are skewed, and all of them were funded by the vaccine manufacturers. There really is no solid medical proof that either Gardasil or Cervarix prevent HPV infections, cancer, or the transmission of HPV from men to women, as proponents of the vaccines claim. “Though about 40 other countries have approved the vaccine (Gardasil) for males, there is still no medical proof Gardasil prevents penile cancer or other HPV-associated cancers in men,” says an Associated Press (AP) report from 2008. “There also is no evidence the vaccine prevents the spread of HPV from men to women” (http://www.nj.com/business/index.ssf/2008/11/study_mercks_gardasil_may_prev.html). But the CDC advisory committee cannot let the facts get in the way of the pro-HPV vaccine agenda. A recent CNN report on the announcement even admits that the sudden push to vaccinate boys against HPV has little to do with actually stopping the spread of disease, and everything to do with getting as many people vaccinated as possible. “One reason for the push now is that girls aren’t getting vaccinated in the numbers doctors had expected,” says the report. And the reason girls are not getting vaccinated is because HPV vaccines are linked to a host of very serious and deadly side effects, and have never been proven to be effective at preventing or treating anything (http://www.naturalnews.com/Gardasil.html). To learn more about the dangers of Gardasil, visit: http://sanevax.org/ Sources for this article include: http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/25/health/hpv-vaccine/index.html

TSA deploys ‘VIPR’ teams throughout Tennessee to set up illegal security checkpoints on interstates

(NaturalNews) When the US Transportation Security Administration (TSA) announced last year that it would soon begin setting up security checkpoints in places other than just airports, it definitely was not joking. News Channel 5 in Nashville, Tenn., has announced that Tennessee is the official inaugural state for the launch of TSA’s new Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response (VIPR) program, which will be setting up security checkpoints along interstates to conduct random (illegal) searches of vehicles. TSA set up one of its first VIPR checkpoints in Tampa, Fla., last December after announcing to the world its plans to expand illegal searches to all aspects of American life. Presumably a test to see how the public would respond. VIPR teams groped and patted down passengers at a local Greyhound bus station, and they even brought in sniff dogs to add an extra layer of intimidation (http://www.naturalnews.com/030596_TSA_security_checkpoints.html). Later on during the summer of 2011, TSA announced again its plans to search innocent Americans at train stations, bus stops, and truck stops. At that time, TSA requested 12 more units to add to its fleet of VIPR teams, most of which had still not necessarily been deployed (http://www.naturalnews.com/032778_TSA_groping.html). Just a few months after that, the National Football League (NFL) announced that it would be implementing TSA VIPR checkpoints at all 32 NFL stadiums across the country. The procedures at these checkpoints subjected football fans to full-body pat downs similar to what air travelers face at US airports (http://www.naturalnews.com/033598_NFL_enhanced_pat-downs.html). And now an entire state has succumbed to the encroachment of the illegitimate US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and its unlawful violations of the Fourth, Fifth, and Tenth Amendments to the US Constitution. VIPR teams have already been deployed to five truck weigh stations and two bus stations across Tennessee, with more soon to come. Random security checkpoints, perpetual paranoia about terrorists around every corner, a rogue government that is pressing citizens to spy on each other and report their activities to authorities — these are all protocols that took effect in Nazi Germany during the rise of Hitler, and they are all protocols that are now in effect in the US today. Think about it. Sources for this article include: http://www.newschannel5.com/story/15725035/officials-claim-tennessee-becomes-first-state-to-deploy-vipr-statewide

Study: Vegetarian diet may help children stay fit, avoid obesity

(NaturalNews) With the poor quality of many of today’s conventional meat products, a vegetarian diet just might be an appropriate fit for some modern children, one of three that are now overweight in the US. A new study published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition suggests that people of all ages, including children, that adhere to a vegetarian diet generally have lower average body mass indexes (BMI) than others, and are generally leaner than their meat-eating counterparts. The report explains that obesity is less prevalent among vegetarians, and that average BMI increases progressively higher depending on how much meat a person eats. Vegans, for instance, generally have the lowest BMI, while vegetarians that eat dairy and eggs have a slightly higher average BMI. Meat eaters, suggest study authors, have the highest average BMI of all. Besides simply the visible weight benefits, adhering to a vegetarian diet may also improve lipid profile, say the authors, which means that a person is less likely to experience coronary heart disease. This means that vegetarians may have a lowered risk of developing high cholesterol, or having a heart attack or stroke. Because a plant-based diet can contain far more nutrients, complex carbohydrates, fiber, and water, than a meat-based diet, it is more likely to promote lean body mass rather than added fat, says the team. The extra fiber found in plant-based diets also contributes to making a person feel “full” more quickly than a meat-based diet would, which results in less food being eaten. “[O]besity represents a significant threat to the present and future health of children and leads to a wide range of physical and psychological consequences,” write the study authors. “(A) plant-based diet appears to be a sensible approach for the prevention of obesity in children.” The report does not, however, differentiate between meat-based diets that include pastured meats, and meat-based diets that include conventional, feedlot-derived meats. The two differ greatly, as pastured meat contain higher levels of beneficial nutrients than does conventional meat, and is also higher in healthy fats and amino acids like omega-3s (http://www.naturalnews.com/027199_meat_fat_cattle.html). Also, when choosing a vegetarian diet, it is important to carefully select foods, especially when children are involved, that contain a full profile of necessary vitamins and minerals. Some vegetarian diets lack crucial nutrients like B vitamins, vitamin D, zinc, iron, and calcium, as well as protein, which is essential for the growth and development of healthy muscle mass. Sources for this story include: http://newhope360.com/vegetarian-diet-helps-kids-stay-slim

Exposed: California officials manipulated safety data on methyl iodide, ignored scientist warnings against approving deadly strawberry chemical

(NaturalNews) Many of those plump, juicy strawberries found on produce section shelves are hiding a deadly little secret. In 2010, regulators in California, where over 90 percent of conventional strawberries are grown, quietly approved the use of toxic methyl iodide as a fruit pesticide after the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approved it nationally. But new evidence has now surfaced that government officials twisted study data to make the chemical falsely appear safe in order to get it approved — and individuals everywhere are now increasingly demanding that methyl iodide be banned. A recent report from Mother Jones explains that the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) cherry-picked data from varying studies on methyl iodide in order to paint the chemical in an artificially positive light. The agency then used this deceptive data to justify allowing smaller buffer zones between farms that use methyl iodide and farms that do not use methyl iodide. DPR also used the flawed data to increase the permitted spray concentration maximum for the chemical. Early on, DPR’s own scientists decried the agency’s intended actions, having noted in an internal memo that numbers cited in the agency’s report endorsing methyl iodide had been extracted from “different risk assessment methodologies that are not interchangeable.” They added that such data was “not scientifically credible,” and that any data of that type is only accurate when compiled from the same source. But DPR refused to listen to these scientists, and instead approved methyl iodide in spite of the evidence against it. Not long after, environmental protection groups, farmers, and ordinary citizens together sparked a burgeoning battle to force the state to ban methyl iodide, including a recent rally that took place on the steps of the California State Capital. Methyl iodide causes miscarriages, thyroid dysfunction, cancer Arysta LifeScience, the chemical company that produces methyl iodide, claims that it is largely safe, and that the neurotoxic damage it can cause is “transient.” But according to data cited by leading scientists, this is simply not the case, and permanent brain damage can ensue from exposure to methyl iodide. Back in 2007 before methyl iodide’s approval, a group of more than 35 esteemed scientists wrote a letter to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) urging it to deny approval for the chemical on the grounds that it is “highly toxic,” and has a “significant adverse impact on public health.” After methyl iodide was approved anyway, the same group sent another letter to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson once again urging the agency to withdraw approval for the chemical (http://www.panna.org/sites/default/files/Jackson_MeI_5-7-11_Final-1.pdf). “Due to the potent toxicity of methyl iodide, its transport and ultimate fate in the environment, adequate control of human exposure would be difficult, if not impossible,” wrote scientists from California’s Scientific Review Committee (SRC) concerning methyl iodide. “We have concluded there is little doubt that the compound possesses significant toxicity.” SRC’s thorough report also notes that, despite claims made by Arysta about methyl iodide’s supposedly transient neurotoxicity, “no robust studies of neurotoxicity (were) actually conducted.” If they had been, it would have been revealed, of course, that methyl iodide is a highly neurotoxic substance that is known and recognized by the state of California to cause cancer (http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/prop65_list/files/P65single061308.pdf). Methyl iodide, of course, is the same chemical that scientists have used to deliberately create cancer cells in laboratories for research purposes that is how powerfully dangerous it is! The Pesticide Action Network – North America (PANNA) also notes that methyl iodide is responsible for causing late-term miscarriages as well, especially at the 100 pounds (lbs) per acre spread rate to which it has been approved for California strawberries (http://www.panna.org/cancer-free-strawberries). Methyl iodide has no legitimate place in American agriculture On December 30, 2010, Earthjustice and California Rural Legal Assistance, Inc. filed a lawsuit against DPR for approving of methyl iodide, which ignored all available evidence against the chemical, as well as the more than 53,000 comments submitted by Californians against the chemical’s use. The use of methyl iodide violates the California Environmental Quality Act, the California Birth Defects Prevention Act, and the Pesticide Contamination Prevention Act, according to the suit. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of PANNA and numerous other groups representing farmers and consumers, many of whom stand to be affected most by the pumping of soils with toxic methyl iodide gas. Many of the farm fields that spray methyl iodide are located directly near homes and schools, where high-risk individuals like pregnant mothers and young children face routine exposure. In truth, there really is no need to use methyl iodide on strawberries, peppers, or any of the other varieties of produce for which it has been approved. Several large strawberry growers, including Swanton Berry, Driscoll’s, and Martinez Farms, have been able to develop thriving organic strawberry operations that require no pesticides — surely the rest can make modifications to avoid pumping toxic poisons into the soils of one of America’s major produce production regions. Sources for this story include: http://motherjones.com/blue-marble/2011/08/california-methyl-iodide-scientists http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/07/methyl-iodide-controversy_n_602904.html http://www.pesticidereform.org/article.php?id=342

Prenatal exposure to common chemicals called phthalates linked to brain damage

(NaturalNews) According to the American Chemistry Council, a family of plasticizer compounds called phthlates are fine and dandy additions to everything from wall coverings, flooring, toys, perfumes, shampoos and IV tubes. In fact, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) studies show average phthalates exposures are below levels set by U.S. federal agencies to be protective of human health. So that means they must be safe and nothing to worry about, but this is not true. Although the federal government and the chemical industry lobbyists may want you to believe phthalates are innocuous, scientists have found that these widepread chemical contaminants are potent endocrine system disrupters. And now a newly published study by researchers at Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health links phthalate exposure while still in the womb to changes in the brain and increased behavioral problems in children by the age three. Previous studies of school-age children have already pointed to a strong association between prenatal exposure to phthalates and developmental problems. However, the new study, just published in Environmental Health Perspectives , is the first to investigate phthalate exposure before birth and the prevalence of mental, motor and behavioral problems in children during their preschool years. The children of 319 non-smoking inner city women who gave birth between 1999 and 2006 were followed for several years by the research team, headed by Robin M. Whyatt, DrPH, deputy director of the Columbia Center for Children’s Environmental Health. The scientists documented prenatal exposure by measuring metabolites of four phthalates in the mothers urine. Then the researchers evaluated links between pre-birth exposures to these phthalates and the mental, motor and behavioral development of toddlers when they were 3 years old. The scientists used a well-known developmental test, the Bayley Scales of Infant Development II, to document the mental and motor development of the children. In addition, behavioral problems were assessed by asking the moms who participated in the research to complete the widely used Child Behavior Checklist (used for kids between one and a half and 5 years of age). The results showed that higher prenatal exposures to two of the phthalates significantly increased the odds of motor delay, an indication of potential future problems with fine and gross motor coordination. But the news gets even more troublesome. One of the phthalates appeared to cause significant decreases in mental development in girls. Prenatal exposures to three of the phthalates were also significantly associated with behavior problems including anxiety and depression and withdrawn behavior in both little boys and girls. “Our results suggest that prenatal exposure to these phthalates adversely affects child mental, motor and behavioral development during the preschool years,” Dr. Whyatt said in a statement to the media. “The results add to a growing public health concern about the widespread use of phthalates in consumer products.” So how could phthalates affect the developing brain? No one knows for sure yet. But Dr. Whyatt, who is also professor of clinical Environmental Health Sciences, pointed out that phthalates disrupt the body’s hormone systems, including the function of the thyroid gland. They also lower production of testosterone, which is needed for the brain to develop normally. “The results are concerning since increasing exposures from the lowest 25 percent to the highest 25 percent among the women in our study was associated with a doubling or tripling in the odds of motor and/or behavioral problems in the children,” Pam Factor-Litvak, PhD, the senior epidemiologist on the study, explained in the press statement. For more information: http://www.mailman.columbia.edu/news

Next Page »