CDC establishes vaccine ‘task forces’ in local communities to intimidate parents of unvaccinated children, coerce them into compliance

(NaturalNews) Obviously unnerved with the growing number of parents that are choosing to avoid vaccinations for their children, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has decided to establish localized vaccine “task force” squads that go door-to-door in local communities in order to harass parents into compliance. Every state in the Union has provisions on the books that recognize the freedom of individuals to opt out of getting vaccinated for medical, religious, or philosophical reasons — and in many cases, states recognize exemptions for all three (http://www.nvic.org/Vaccine-Laws/state-vaccine-requirements.aspx). But in an attempt to satisfy its Big Pharma overlords and reverse this trend, the federal government is resorting to bullying tactics in order to stem the anti-vaccine tide. Jeffry John Aufderheide from Vactruth.com reports that the federal government’s recent passage of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which allows for the US government to arbitrarily detain, and even murder, American citizens that it deems to be a threat to national security (http://www.naturalnews.com/034291_SB_1867_war_on_terror.html), goes hand in hand with the new vaccine task forces. Both strip individuals of their God-given and constitutionally-protected liberties, and instead force tyranny on them in the name of public safety. Door-to-door vaccination efforts have already begun in California, where school officials from the Natomas School District recently went on a witch hunt in pursuit of unvaccinated children. Conveniently leaving out the fact that parents are not required by law to have their children vaccinated, these officials tried to strong-arm parents into compliance with intimidation tactics — naturally, most of the parents rejected the ploy. In 2009, the US Senate passed HR 3590, which provisioned for the CDC to create “Community Preventive Services Task Forces” — this being the politically-correct name for the vaccine-enforcement mafia groups that would soon result. And this Big Pharma-driven agenda, which is, of course, funded by taxpayer dollars, tasks local school and health officials with doing the dirty work. Fortunately, most of the parents who opt out of vaccines for their children in the first place are smarter than the system, and they know their rights. But many parents in general still falsely believe that vaccines are mandatory, and that they have no freedom of choice to refuse them. And taxpayer-funded vaccine enforcement squads only make the situation worse, as they utilize fear, intimidation, and lies to maintain the status quo. Sources for this article include: http://vactruth.com/2011/12/08/vaccine-teams-vaccinate-your-child/

Mammograms produce more false positives than legitimate tumor detections in young women

(NaturalNews) Mammograms deliver overwhelmingly more false positive results than true positives in women under the age of 40, according to a new study conducted by researchers from the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill and published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute . In a false positive result, a mammogram detects signs of a tumor that turns out to be non-cancerous or otherwise not dangerous to a woman’s health. “In a theoretical population of 10,000 women aged 35 to 39 years, 1,266 women who are screened will receive further workup, with 16 cancers detected and 1,250 women receiving a false-positive result,” the researchers wrote. “Harms need to be considered, including radiation exposure, because such exposure is more harmful in young women; the anxiety associated with false-positive findings on the initial examination; and costs associated with additional imaging.” The researchers examined the medical records of more than 117,000 U.S. women who got their first mammograms between the ages of 18 and 39. In the ensuing year, not a single woman under the age of 25 was diagnosed with breast cancer. For women between 35 and 39, 12.7 percent were called back for further tests but only 0.16 percent actually had cancer. Because breast cancer rates in young women are so low, screening them is like “looking for a needle in a haystack,” lead researcher Bonnie Yankaskas said. Nonetheless, 29 percent of U.S. women between the ages of 30 and 40 say they have had at least one mammogram. Reacting to the study, the American Cancer Society reiterated that it does not recommend screening in women under the age of 40. “We have been concerned that some have been encouraging that screening begin at younger and younger ages, when the science does not support it as beneficial,” chief medical officer Otis Brawley said. Due to the risks associated with radiation and false positives, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force now only recommends screening for women aged 50 and older. Sources for this story include: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6424VY20100504; http://pagingdrgupta.blogs.cnn.com/2010/05/03/mammograms-in-your-30s-%E2%80%98a-needle-in-a-haystack%E2%80%99/.

Prostate Cancer Screening: 50 Percent False Positives

(NaturalNews) As many as 50 percent of all prostate cancer diagnoses may be cases of over-diagnosis, according to a study published in the British Medical Journal . Over-diagnosis refers to the detection of a cancer that, if left untreated, would never have any negative effects on a person’s life. This happens with cancers that grow slowly and do not spread to other organs, so that a patient dies of other causes before ever experiencing any symptoms. Because prostate cancers tend to be very slow growing, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force has recommended against screening men over the age of 74 for prostate cancer. Treatments for the disease can have severe side effects, including impotence and incontinence, and may even increase the risk of early death. Another paper, published in the same issue of the journal, found that the prostate specific antigen (PSA) test commonly used to assess prostate cancer risk cannot reliably predict this risk in most cases. The PSA is a marker of prostate inflammation, which in turn is believed to be a risk factor for prostate cancer. Yet in a study on 1,540 Swedish men, researchers found that PSA levels were not correlated with prostate cancer risk. The only exception was levels below 1 nanogram per mililiter, which suggest a prostate cancer risk of almost zero. The British National Health Service recommends referral for cancer screening such as biopsies for men between the ages of 50 and 59 who have a PSA level of 3 nanograms per mililiter or higher, and for older men who have levels of 5 nanograms per mililiter or higher. Another recent study found that regular PSA screenings did not decrease men’s risk of dying from prostate cancer. The British Parliament has been considering promoting more regular PSA screening, but so far has declined to do so. According to general practitioner James Kingsland, a member of the government advisory group on prostate cancer risk management, the new studies lend support to this decision. “It is using a test for something which it was never designed for, which is always dangerous,” he said. Sources for this story include: news.bbc.co.uk.