Archive for the ‘Medical Hazards’ Category

What’s In That Syringe, Doctor?

Saturday, February 16th, 2008

The information below is a representative sample of the ingredients of many commonly used vaccines. Many vaccines still contain thimerosal (49.6% ethylmercury by weight.) While mercury is a highly toxic element second only to radioactive plutonium, when combined with other ingredients, specifically aluminum and formaldehyde, the synergistic effects increase 10,000-fold. Individuals who suffer from chronic mercury exposure will have a unique expression of symptoms. Many people, including the author of this post, believe that the evidence of vaccine injury is sufficiently compelling to make it clear that autism, neurological injuries and disorders, auto immune disorders, cancer, immune suppression and a host of other serious or lethal consequences may result from the administration of vaccines. Early and frequent administration of vaccines multiply the risks substantially.

For a representative listing of vaccines, the manufacturer of each and their component microbes, antibiotics, heavy metals, chemicals and animal by products, see Informed Choice, (http://www.oasisadvancedwellness.com/learning/informed-vaccine.html).

The list below shows the composition of some vaccines used commonly. For a discussion of the myths of vaccination effectiveness and safety, please see

The Composition of Vaccines

BCG
Freeze-dried attenuated live bacteria; Dextran glucose; Triton WR 1339 (a detergent); sodium chloride.

Chicken Pox
Live attentuated Varicella Zoster virus; human fetal tissue; neomycin; mannitol; sorbitol (an artificial sweetener); lactose; amino acids.

Diphtheria
Diphtheria bacterium; formaldehyde; aluminum phosphate or aluminum hydroxide; neomycin, streptomycin and polymyxin B (antibiotics); 2-phenoxyethanol (a preservative); medium 199 which contains polysorbate 80 (an emulsifier).

Pertussin Bordetella
Pertussis organism; formaldehyde or glutaraldehyde; aluminum phosphate or aluminum hydroxide; neomycin, streptomycin and polymyxin B (antibiotics); 2-phenoxyethanol (a preservative); polyribosylribitol (an artificial sweetener); medium 199 which contains polysorbate 80 (an emulsifier).

Tetanus Tetanus toxoid; aluminum phosphate or aluminum hydroxide; formaldehyde; neomycin, streptomycin and polymyxin B (antibiotics); 2-phenoxyethanol (a preservative); medium 199 which contains polysorbate 80 (an emulsifier).

Polio Three strains of Polio virus; formaldehyde; aluminum phosphate or aluminum hydroxide; neomycin, streptomycin and polymyxin B (antibiotics); 2-phenoxyethanol (a preservative); medium 199 which contains polysorbate 80 (an emulsifier); cultured on monkey kidney cells or calf fetus tissue. The inactivated (injectable) Polio vaccine is cultivated on Vero cells (African green monkey kidney cells)

Hib Hib saccharides cultured on cow’s brains; CRM protein; neomycin; streptomycin; polymyxin B.

Meningitis C Meningococcal group C; oligosaccharide; corynebacterium; Diphtheride CRM proteins; aluminum phosphate; sodium chloride; water.

MMR Live Measles virus; live Mumps virus; live Rubella virus; chick embryo; neomycin; sorbitol; gelatin; human albumen; monosodium glutamate; phenol red.

Rubella Live Rubella virus (which also contains lactose, sorbitol, Dextran 10 and amino acids); neomycin sulphate; human fetal tissue.

The Natural Solutions Foundation believes that you should have the right to opt out of any vaccination program for you, for your children or others for whom you make health decisions if your best judgment leads you to conclude that vaccination is either risky or harmful. That decision should be made with access to full information about the process of vaccination and the contents of vaccines as well as the long and short term risks.

We are committed to protecting your health and your health freedom. Don’t forget to support our work so that we can support your health freedom. Recurring donations (https://www.staging.healthfreedomusa.com/index.php?page_id=189) are essential for our continued support of your freedom. All donations are tax deductible.
Thanks.

Want more information on vaccinations and vaccine hazards? Join the No-Forced-Vaccination Forum today. Click here (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/no-forced-vaccination/join)
to become a member of this vital community of dedicated health freedom advocates focused on maintaining vaccination choice.
Yours in health and freedom,
Dr. Rima

Rima E. Laibow, MD
Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation

www.HealthFreedomUSA.org
www.GlobalHealthFreedom.org

Vaccine Crazies At It Again? Pediatricians Hear/See/Speak No Data

Friday, February 15th, 2008

This lucid and compelling article appeared in HSI Alert, a useful on-line publication. It offers a look at some of the nonsense purveyed by proponents of vaccination – despite the clear dangers of vaccines and the in spite of of the data or the dangers.

Want more information on vaccinations and vaccine hazards? Join the No-Forced-Vaccination Forum today. Click here (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/no-forced-vaccination/join)
to become a member of this vital community of dedicated health freedom advocates focused on maintaining vaccination choice.

Yours in health and freedom,
Dr. Rima

Rima E. Laibow, MD

Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation
www.HealthFreedomUSA.org
www.GlobalHealthFreedom.org

Posted by: “D.L. Bullock” d.l.bullock@sbcglobal.net
Thu Feb 14, 2008 7:45 am (PST)

Dear Reader,

The vaccine crazies are out in force again. Hide your children!

Seriously ? hide your children.

——————————————–
Vast wasteland
——————————————–

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) apparently doesn’t want you to
watch anything on television that runs contrary to their position in the
autism/vaccine debate.

AAP officials seem to believe that any bad news about vaccines ? even if
it’s in a completely fictional setting, such as a kooky comedy/drama ?
will prompt parents to refuse vaccines for their children.

The AAP recently attempted to goad ABC into self-censorship with an open
letter that implored ABC executives to cancel the premiere of “Eli
Stone” ? a new show that featured a subplot about a vaccine lawsuit. A
single mom, represented by lawyer and title character Eli, sues a drug
maker for producing a vaccine with a mercury-based preservative that was
given to her healthy son just before he displayed the first symptoms of
autism.

Happily, ABC execs didn’t cave (although I expect they thoroughly
enjoyed the free publicity), so I watched the show, and it was fun. Not
only did the mom win, she won big ($5.2 million), AND the drug company
executives and their smug top-dollar lawyers were completely humiliated.
In other words, it was a total fantasy.

A couple of days before the airing of the Eli Stone premiere, the AAP
issued a heavy- handed press release that included this ominous curse
(which is most effective when spoken in an overly-theatrical voice,
preferably in an echo chamber): “If parents watch this program and
choose to deny their children immunizations, ABC will share in the
responsibility for the suffering and deaths that occur as a result.”

Cue lightning effects and rolling thunder. The AAP has spoken!

——————————————–
Hiding in plain sight
——————————————–

The AAP press release also notes that no scientific link as been found
between vaccines and autism. And that’s primarily because organizations
like the AAP refuse to recognize existing evidence.

For instance, a 2003 study published in the Journal of the American
Association of Physicians and Surgeons examined extensive vaccination
data. Results showed that kids who receive just three vaccines
containing the preservative thimerosal are 27 times more likely to
develop autism compared to children who get vaccines with no thimerosal.
(Thimerosal breaks down into ethyl mercury in the body, and this is the
suspected culprit that triggers autism.)

So please ? enough with the nonsense that there’s no evidence. If you
WANT evidence, it’s there. It isn’t the ultimate evidence and it isn’t
the Last Word in this debate, but it’s there.

The mindset of “I see nothing” is evident in a new study that appears in
the current issue of Pediatrics ? the official journal of the AAP.
Researchers at the University of Rochester traveled to Argentina where
thimerosal is still used in vaccines for kids.

Researchers drew blood from more than 200 infants before and after
vaccination. Results showed that mercury levels were highest right after
the children received the vaccine, and then returned to normal within a
few weeks. This is offered as some kind of vindication of thimerosal
because mercury levels were lower than expected and dropped much faster
than expected.

But these results beg two glaringly obvious questions 1) How much
mercury might it take to trigger autism? No one knows. And 2): How long
might mercury need to be in the blood stream to trigger autism? An hour?
A year? No one knows.

The authors of the study also admit they don’t know what happened to the
mercury once it left the blood. No mercury turned up in the urine, and
the mercury content in stool samples spiked at first, but then dropped
much more slowly than mercury in the blood.

So where’s the mercury? The bones? The brain? The liver? The immune
system? All of the above? No one knows.

In addition, this study focused on one vaccination. But when U.S. kids
were getting vaccines that contained thimerosal, they routinely received
multiple shots given over a period of several years.

And here’s the best part of this thimerosal “vindication”: An Associated
Press article about the study notes that the lead author “received
research grants and served as a consultant to several vaccine makers,
but said there was no industry involvement in the new study.”

Right. In other words, any notion that this is anywhere close to a Last
Word in the autism/vaccine debate is completely out the window.

The Revolt of the Health Conscious Nations: Codex GM Working Group – Days 2 & 3

Thursday, January 31st, 2008

To read Dr. Rima’s blog on Day One of the Ghana Codex Working Group on the Labeling of Foods Obtained from Genetic Modification/Genetic Engineering, go to: https://www.staging.healthfreedomusa.com/index.php?p=512

Day Two, January 29, 2008 passed much the same way as Day One. There was a mixture of excruciating (to me) trivia intermingled with decisions that could have life and death impact on the lives of people all over the world.

As a US Citizen, I was not proud of the side that my government, through the person of the FDA’s Barbara Schneeman, consistently took. But I was proud and thrilled by the position that Norway, Japan, Russia, the EU and others consistently took in response when they defended and inserted mention of the rights of consumers to have the information they wanted against the constant pressure of the US and its allies to prevent consumer access to truthful information. (By the way, although I took verbatim notes of the 3 days, my computer will not go on line at this hotel so I do not have access to those notes right now. When I can get that computer back on line, I will post them in their entirety for you to read if you like. Some of you will find the nitty gritty of a Codex meeting fascinating, some will find it laughable. I find it both.)

See Day 1 for details of the new unilateral “background” document the US sought to use to control the event. The Working Group’s thrust was powerful to find a way to make this Background Paper an official Codex document and while other options for forward movement toward consensus would come to the floor, there was no other option presented which had so much traction or forward momentum. The other options kept flopping, as it were, off the table and gasping for air on the floor. Fish out of water.

On the afternoon of the second day, during the lunch break, the EU and other interested countries came up with some proposals to give the background paper a proper “chapeau” (French for “hat”) or heading. The US helped to craft a proposal for a chapeau which quickly became two chapeaux. The wording and concepts proposed by the US seemed benign enough: ‘Foods are safe when they come to market and labeling is not a substitute for safety.’ ‘This document was for the use of countries as they developed their own framework for the labeling of GM foods’ and other balsamic-sounding phrases. But if an official Codex document says that foods on the market (like GM “foods”) are safe by the time they get there, then a nation keeping GM foods out because of safety concerns might be creating a barrier to trade in the eyes of the WTO, mightn’t it?

If the document was for use by Codex member countries, might the use of anything not in that document constitute a barrier to trade since this document was the one that they were supposed to be guided by in such regulations? And so on. It all sounded wonderfully friendly but, looked at from the point of view of Codex/WTO trade sanction strategy which could be used to force an end to the mandatory labeling which the US opposes so strongly, it was a very dangerous document, indeed.

Yes, the day ended with the purveyors of half truths and distortions quite satisfied.

Day 3: January 30, 2008 Africa to the Rescue!

By the time the third day dawned, things were different. Norway continued to insist that the background document preamble (the “chapeau”) HAD to include the fact that preferences of consumers was a reason for regulatory requirements for labeling (the labels exist to inform consumers… duh). The US continued to reject any mention of the consumer’s needs and preferences and said that they were not relevant (Hmm, if not for the consumer, why have any label… the US position is quite batty).

Norway, in the spirit of conciliation, suggested changing “consumers” to “countries” in the statement that said that their preferences were different in different places. The US objected. But so did Nigeria, one of the authors of the Background Paper. “No”, said the Codex Contact Point of Nigeria, a fine lady who really cares about what she is doing at Codex. “No!” , Mrs. Eschiet repeated. “The issue here is not countries. The mandate of Codex is first to protect the health of consumers and it is consumers, not countries, who should be protected here. Let us change the word back to ‘consumers’ ” she said. There was nothing the US could do at that point except to state that they did not support this wording. But the US had an even bigger surprise in store. It was just about time to get out those “queasy stomach” prescriptions that Big Pharma likes to sell by the ton.

Member nations started presenting other Codex texts that the US sponsored “background” paper had left out… fancy that, people who didn’t want to inform the consumers not informing their Codex colleagues! And then the delegates began to suggest that they be included!

They began to introduce principles from CCGP, the Codex Committee on General Principles and from other Codex documents which supported the right of countries to make their own decisions, and of consumers to make theirs through adequate information.

The US delegation appeared to become quite unhappy. Sitting where I was I could see the vigorous head-shakes and the vigorous consultations between members of the Delegation including the people from the Department of Commerce, the biotech and grocery manufacturer’s people and others on the delegation whose identify I did not learn. This is not the usual demeanor of the US delegation, to say the least.

Things got more difficult for the no-right-to-know contingent as the session progressed. It was so encouraging to see people from around the world defending the consumer’s right to know.

The Natural Solutions Foundation has long maintained that concerted effort on the part of the developing nations and those who also do not see multinational corporate interests as their own can change the direction of Codex radically. We have also maintained that if this happened, Codex might become the greatest force for health and well being on the planet that the world has ever seen. If what we saw during this meeting, particularly at the end of it, is any indication of the beginning of a trend, we are right!

At the same time, we believe that, left unchanged as a playground for the greed (and worse) of the corporate interests which the US serves in all of its dealings within Codex, the impact of that organization can be disastrous to the lives and well-being of literally billions of people.

Well, what happened today, on the last day of the deliberations of this Working Group, was a confirmation that the first outcome is, in fact, a real possibility. We have been working with developing countries reminding them that, as a group, they are incredibly powerful. Acting in concert, they can control what happens at Codex and act in their own best interest, not be dragged along to act in the best interest of the developed world and the multinational corporations. That is part of the message we have been delivering at Codex meetings in our conferences with the delegates of the developing countries and on the ground, in their home countries. That is, in fact, one of the biggest reasons that we travel to these places and meet with their decision makers. The other, of course, is to promote their use of the Codex Two Step Process so that they can protect their health and avoid crippling World Trade Organization trade sanctions at the same time.

You see, many of the African states, who understand how dangerous GM foods are and fear their impact on their people and on their land, had met and had come up with absolutely brilliant modifications to the “chapeaux” (background document heading) that the US proposed. By taking out many of the future WTO mine fields (that the no-right-to-know gang had included in the initial draft of the document) while quoting from the Codex texts to get the wording precisely correct, they created a preamble to the document that protected their choices for labeling but cut the cheese from the carefully crafted mouse trap. They left out the provision about safety, leaving open the very real possibility that a food could have been brought to market which turns out not to be safe. Other countries supported them strongly. The US said that if this modification were to be adopted by the Working Group they would not be able to support the document and reiterated this several times.

When the group showed no signs of backing down, Dr. Schneeman had what would be classified, in my professional and personal opinion, as a “hissy fit”. She became (literally) red in the face and complained strongly to the chair persons that all the hard work of the past year was wasted in the face of this modification and that she was personally upset. And, indeed, she sounded personally upset. In fact, we overheard one member of the US delegation saying as he walked out for a break that the US was “getting slammed”. Dr. Schneeman certainly appeared to be aware that she, her paper, the US position and, by my estimate, its future WTO strategy, were, indeed, getting slammed.

That is not the same thing as the American people getting slammed; in fact, if the Right to Know countries succeed, Americans will be closer to having “truthful and not misleading” food labels regarding such matters as GM status, irradiation and the like. Codes, it seems, can be a double edged sword.

As they provided support for the African position, other countries as well noted relevant Codex texts which the US/Canadian/Nigerian background document did not mention, allude to or acknowledge. Principles for safety and labeling, for Risk Assessment of GM foods and for other strategies to protect the consumer’s health were brought forward to give countries latitude to protect its people and not be assaulted legally via trade sanctions. Africa became stronger and stronger and the US lost, it seemed to me, more and more ground.

At the end, the document’s chapeaux and the document itself were left for further consideration at CCFL this coming April in Ottawa. So the battle continues.

With your continuing financial help (urgently needed, by the way – make your generous tax deductible recurring donation at the link below) we can, indeed, continue to support the emergence of these alliances which can give strength to the push back against the multinational agendas. It happened here. It can happen everywhere in Codex. We need your continued support to be able to attend the Codex food labeling committee in Ottawa, where the battle will continue.

Donate here: https://www.staging.healthfreedomusa.com/index.php?page_id=189

We had the opportunity to speak at significant intensity and length to African delegates and tell them about our International Decade of Nutrition to help them feed themselves and to help them use the Codex Two Step process to make sure that their laws and food supply support health, not profit for the corporations which will exploit them… to death. We passed out our materials, the Codex Book and “Nutricide: the DVD” – the indispensable story of what Codex is, and how it came to be. The updated version contains the special video made specifically to explain the Codex Two Step to Codex delegates. You can find them on our web site, www.healthfreedomusa.org

And some wonderful news, thanks to your support!

The Natural Solutions Foundation was told that it can expect two more official letters of invitation from two more African governments to bring not only the International Decade of Nutrition, our technology and our assistance in producing clean and abundant food to these countries, but to bring our Codex information and strategy as well. We were invited by the host country, Ghana, to the Codex Committee for Africa, CCAfrica, in 2009, a year from now.

As you may recall, we will be in Ghana for a few days and then traveling to another West African country, followed by a middle eastern one and then an East African one for exactly these purposes. We are recording it all for the Codex documentary. You can easily understand that we do not want to advertise our travel plans right now since we do not want the considerable weight of the US’ 5000 lb ‘trade gorilla” to sit on these countries before they have developed their strategy for dealing with that consequence. But there is something that I will share with you. As of today, right here, right now, we do not have enough money to complete the trip. I cannot believe, however, that you will let us down. We need your generous support and we need it now.

Donate here: https://www.staging.healthfreedomusa.com/index.php?page_id=189

• We need it to build health freedom in the US and the rest of the world.
• We need it to reclaim food for you and your brothers and sisters around the world.
• We need it to change Codex into the most potent health force the world has ever seen.

You can be sure, by the way, that as that happens, the multinationals will try to kill it.

So think carefully about how much your health freedom is worth to you. $1 per week? $10 per week? $100 per month? How about a matching grant? All of your donations to the Natural Solutions Foundation are tax deductible since we are a tax exempt 501 ( c ) (3) organization.

Donate here: https://www.staging.healthfreedomusa.com/index.php?page_id=189

Oh, yes, one other thing: if you donate $100 or more to help fund our Codex/Health Freedom Video, we’ll give you a really nice “Thank you!” in the final version of this made for TV full length documentary! There is a special link on the donation page for that. Our wonderful videographers Mary Beth and Jim are getting some excellent footage and we’ll be able to show you what it is like to be where your heath and freedom are at stake.

Thanks.
Yours in health and freedom,
Dr. Rima
Rima E. Laibow, MD

Pediatricians group misleading the public about vaccination risks?

Monday, January 28th, 2008

The following Huffington Post article contains important information about recent scientific journal articles linking mercury to autism, and to the ongoing efforts by certain interested parties to misinform the public. In this case, the American Academy of Pediatrics is misinforming the public regarding the scientific evidence about the link between mercury and autism or asthma. They are doing this to promote their pro-vaccination ideology which is apparently more important to them than truth, or their obligation as physicians to “do no harm.”

In this context, though, we note the opinion of researchers such as Dr. Rebecca Carley (and our co-trustee, Dr. Laibow) who holds that even if all mercury were really removed from vaccinations, the vaccines would still cause serious harm, due to other ingredients such as squalene, and due to the repeated assault on young immune systems that multiple vaccinations cause.

We don’t want to rest our opposition to forced vaccination on the grounds that the vaccines are dangerous. Rather, without regard to risk, we hold that every individual has the fundamental human right to control what medicines are admitted to his or her body. The issue is inalienable right vs coercion. There is no “risk balance” between coerced medication and individual right. As Dr. Laibow says, “Whatever the authority of the state, it stops at my skin.” Period.

Ralph Fucetola JD, Trustee
Standing in for Dr. Laibow, on her way to Africa for a Codex meeting.

Heath and freedom advocates, join our No-Forced-Vaccination Yahoo!Group – http://groups.yahoo.com/group/no-forced-vaccination/join
——————————————-

The Huffington Post

Pediatricians, ABC and Censorship: Facts Are Scarier Than Fiction
By: David Kirby
Posted January 27, 2008 | 04:19 PM (EST)

On Monday, the American Academy of Pediatrics will release the contents of a foreboding letter sent last week to ABC/Disney executives, demanding they cancel the January 31 premiere of a new legal drama series, Eli Stone, because it features a family attorney who successfully argues in court that mercury-containing flu vaccine caused autism in one child.

The letter, signed by AAP President Renee Jenkins, borders on near-hysteria over a fictional television entertainment. It ominously warns that ABC “will bear responsibility for the needless suffering and potential deaths of children from parents’ decisions not to immunize based on the content of the episode.”

Dr. Jenkins calls on ABC to cancel the episode but, anticipating a refusal, urges executives to run a disclaimer that “no scientific link exists between vaccines and autism,” if the offending network “persists” in airing the show.

I share the AAP’s concern that parents should not be driven away from protecting their children from dangerous, even deadly diseases. But parents are far too smart to base such an important decision as immunization on the “content of the episode” of a single drama on broadcast television.

In fact, if I were Dr. Jenkins, I would be far more concerned about real news happening in the real world — events that not only suggest the possibility of some sort of link between mercury, vaccines and autism, but might alarm parents more than any fictional account written for ratings-grabbing mass entertainment.

If I were Dr. Jenkins, instead of fretting over a fake family engaged in a mock trial held in a make-believe court on some LA soundstage, I would be up at night wondering why the Federal Government recently conceded a real vaccine-autism lawsuit in a real court and will soon pay a real (taxpayer-funded) settlement to a real American family and a very real child with autism.

I would want to know why the Department of Justice agreed that mercury-containing vaccines “severely aggravated” the autism symptoms in at least one child, and I would wonder if research into what triggered that severe aggravation might provide at least some clues into the perpetual mysteries of the disorder and its causes.

And, if I were Dr. Jenkins, rather than wringing my hands and trying to censor a TV-show verdict, I would truly worry about what will happen when parents realize that the Federal Government’s concession has been sealed — preventing the public (and future plaintiffs) from viewing what could only be described as “evidence of harm.” I would be nervous that this secretive action in an actual court (itself reminiscent of science fiction) might drive parents away from vaccination far more effectively than any scripted drama.

Furthermore, if I were the top pediatrician in America, I would not be asking television networks to make sweeping statements such as, “No scientific link exists” between autism and mercury or vaccines, when highly respected publications continue to publish new (and very real) data that roundly debunk what has now become, frankly, a tired piece of misinformation.

If I were the AAP, or ABC for that matter, I would feel downright silly stating that “no scientific link exists,” so soon after the Journal of Child Neurology published a study titled, “Blood Levels of Mercury Are Related to Diagnosis of Autism: A Reanalysis of an Important Data Set.” I would also worry about parental reaction to learning that researchers had done due diligence and reanalyzed data from a prior, hugely influential study that (erroneously) found zero connection between mercury levels and autism.

Instead of trying to silence the fictional words of “Eli Stone” co-creators Greg Berlanti and Marc Guggenheim, I would pay closer attention to the real words of Journal authors M. Catherine DeSoto and Robert Hitlan, who found a major flaw in the original study that found no link. In fact, they concluded, “a significant relation does exist between the blood levels of mercury and diagnosis of an autism spectrum disorder,” and that “hair sample analysis results offer some support for the idea that persons with autism may be less efficient… at eliminating mercury from the blood,” something that proponents of the mercury-autism hypothesis have long contended.

And, I would heed this rather wise warning from the authors: “If there is any link between autism and mercury, it is absolutely crucial that the first reports of the question are not falsely stating that no link occurs.”

Another study, freshly out of Harvard, likewise shows a potential link between mercury and the autopsied brains of young people with autism. The American Journal of Biochemistry and Biotechnology reports that a marker for oxidative stress was 68.9% higher in autistic brain issue than controls (a statistically significant result), while mercury levels were 68.2% higher.

And though the mercury results did not quite reach statistical significance (probably due to the small number of autistic brains studied: 9), the authors cautioned that, “However, there was a positive correlation between (oxidative stress and mercury levels),” meaning the two might be associated.

Finally, if part of my AAP job description was to ensure that every American child is vaccinated as early and often as possible, I would be hugely apprehensive, not about a new courtroom drama, but rather about a dramatic new study soon to appear in the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology.

In the article, “Delay in DPT vaccination is associated with a reduced risk of childhood asthma,” Anita Kozyrskyj, an asthma researcher at the University of Manitoba, and other scientists combed the medical records of 14,000 children born in Manitoba in 1995 (when many Canadian shots still contained mercury, by the way).

They found that children who received the DPT (diphtheria, pertussis and tetanus) vaccine at two months of age were 2.63 times more likely to develop asthma (at a rate of 13.9%) than children who were not given the shot until after four months of age (5.9%). “We’re thinking that maybe if you delay this allergic response until a bit later, the child’s immune system is more developed and maybe you’re not seeing this effect,” Kozyrskyj told the Winnipeg Free Press, which just broke the story.

No one wants infant children to go unprotected from whooping cough (or pertussis, the “P” in DPT). But what if delaying that vaccine could have prevented more than half of the asthma cases in the United States? With millions of children currently suffering from the disease, at the cost of billions of dollars a year, would waiting another two months improve the risk-benefit ratio for society (save for the companies that market those asthma medications)?

Even more importantly, if too-early vaccination causes asthma in some kids, could the practice cause other disorders? There is absolutely nothing to link this vaccine study to autism, of course. But consider the following:

1) Many asthma cases have been linked to autoimmunity. The same with autism.

2) Childhood asthma has been dramatically increasing for two decades. The same with autism.

3) Most of the children with asthma in the vaccine study were boys. The same with autism.

Any way you look at it, this study is hardly reassuring news to parents who are about to vaccinate their kids (though think how comforting it would be to allow them to delay this shot by two months). Medicine and the media constantly tell us that all vaccines are safe for all children. When parents try to jive that information with studies that imply the opposite, their faith and trust in public health and the immunization program begin to take a nosedive, along with vaccination rates.

It’s not just the broadcast of fiction out of ABC that might drive parents away from immunization. It is the negation of fact out of the AAP as well. And if unvaccinated children get sick, will the esteemed Academy also “bear responsibility,” or just heap it all upon the network?

ABC executives could cave in and cancel the broadcast, but I don’t think they will. And even if America’s pediatricians manage to successfully censor fiction and crush artistic freedom, they will never be able to stifle the facts.

Useful Information About Electro Magnetic Fields

Monday, January 21st, 2008

How Do I Measure EMFs?

A Gauss is a common unit of measurement of magnetic field strength. A Gauss meter is an instrument which measures the strength of magnetic fields. Inside a Gauss meter there is a coil of thin wire, typically with hundreds of turns. As a magnetic field radiates through the coil, it induces a current, which is amplified by the circuitry inside the Gauss meter.

Gauss meters may vary in the strength of the magnetic field they are capable of measuring. A meter used for measuring EMFs from power lines, transformers, substations and appliances around the home, for example, should be able to measure as low as .1 mg.

Gauss meters vary widely in price and accuracy. Meters have either a single axis coil or a triple axis coil. Single axis meters are much simpler than triple axis meters to manufacture and thus, are less expensive.

To use a single axis meter you must point the meter’s one sensor in three directions — -the x, y and z axis. Then, you combine the three readings in a mathematical equation to calculate the combined field strength. Obviously, its far easier and more accurate to use a 3-axis meter. Triple axis Gauss meters are quite accurate, but they are also more expensive.

Another thing to watch out for when purchasing or renting a Gauss meter is whether or not it is frequency weighted. Most meters will read the same EMF strength no matter what the frequency.

As the human body appears to be sensitive to both the field strength AND the frequency, Gauss meters used for biological purposes should be “frequency weighted”.

This means that if the field is different than 60 Hz the meter will consider the frequency and use it in calculating and displaying the EMF’s strength. This feature is why frequency weighted meters will show a higher EMF reading than those meters typically used by electricians and engineers.

Power Lines

An enormous amount of electricity is created at power generating stations and sent across the country through wires that carry high voltages. All power lines radiate electromagnetic fields. The question is: how much are the power lines near YOUR home radiating? The amount of EMFs coming from a power line depends on its particular configuration. Power companies know which power line configurations are best for reducing EMFs but most don’t feel the evidence supports costly changes in the way they deliver electricity.

Substations

A substation is an assemblage of circuit breakers, disconnecting switches and transformers designed to substations have been blamed for causing cancer clusters among nearby residents. Paul Brodeur wrote about several such cancer clusters in the July 9, 1990 issue of the New Yorker Magazine.

Transformers

A key component of a utility’s electrical distribution network depends upon numerous, small transformers mounted on power poles. A transformer looks like a small metal trash can, usually cylindrical.

Even when the electrical service is underground, you will often see a metal box (usually square} located on the ground near the street. Many people don’t realize that when they see a transformer, the power line feeding the transformer is 4000 to 13,800 volts.

The transformer then reduces the voltage to the 120/240 volts needed by nearby homes. Since these transformers can be seen in almost every neighborhood, they are a source of concern.

EMFs near a transformer can be quite high, but due to its small structure, the field strength diminishes rapidly with distance, as it does from any point source. For this reason, having a transformer located near your home is usually not a major source of concern, although just to make sure, everyone should measure the field strength around it.

Home Wiring

If your home has high EMF readings, it is important to determine the sources of the EMF so that remedial action can be taken, if possible. Many times a particular room will have a higher EMF reading. Check to see if the electricity is coming into the house on the wall outside that room. When this is the case, it is usually a good idea to block off that room and only use it for storage purposes.

Sometimes, the source of a high magnetic field is incorrect wiring. If you suspect that your home is wired improperly, obtain the services of a licensed electrician. Warning: Do not touch electric wires, even if you think the current is turned off. If you need to disconnect electrical circuits to determine the source of magnetic fields, you should call a licensed electrician.

Computers

Computers are a complicated subject. Know this: EMFs radiate from all sides of the computer. Thus, you must not only be concerned with sitting in front of the monitor but also if you are sitting near a computer or if a computer is operating in a nearby room.

The Swedish safety standard, effective 711/90, specifies a maximum of 0.25 mG at 50 cm from the display. Many US manufactured computers have EMFs of 5 – 100 mG at this distance. And know this too: the screens placed over monitors do NOT block EMFs. Not even a lead screen will block ELF and VLF magnetic fields.

Space does not permit a more thorough discussion of computers. If you use a computer, it is important that you measure your EMF exposure with a Gauss meter and review the literature concerning the health impacts of computer use.

Electric Blankets and Water beds

Electric blankets create a magnetic field that penetrates about 6-7 inches into the body. Thus it is not surprising that an epidemiological study has linked electric blankets with miscarriages and childhood leukemia.

This pioneering work was performed by Dr. Nancy Wertheimer and Ed Leeper, who originally discovered that magnetic fields were linked to childhood leukemia. Similar health effects have been noted with users of many electric blankets and water bed heaters will emit EMFs even when turned off.

The devices must be unplugged to delete the EMF exposure Additionally, there is the issue regarding the vibrations that are generated by sleeping on standing water. There is less hard data in this area but some experts are concerned about the consequences.

Electric Clocks

Electric clocks have a very high magnetic field, as much as 5 to 10 mG up to three feet away. If you are using a bedside clock, you are probably sleeping in an EMF equivalent to that of a power line Studies have linked high rates of brain tumors with chronic exposure to magnetic fields, so it is wise to place all clocks and other electrical devices (such as telephones and answering devices) at least 6 feet from your bed.

Fluorescent Lights

Fluorescent lights produce much more EMFs than incandescent bulbs. A typical fluorescent lamp of a office ceiling have readings of 160 to 200 mg 1 inch away. Keep them at least several inches away.

Microwave Ovens and Radar

Microwave ovens and radar from military installations and airports emit two types of radiation — microwave and ELF. Microwaves are measured in milliwatt per centimeter squared (mW/cm2) As of 1/1/93, the U.S. safety limit for microwave exposure is 1 mW/cm2, down from a previous 10 mW/cm2. The Russian safety limit is .01 mW/cm2. All microwave ovens leak and exceed the Russian safety limit. In addition, recent Russian studies have shown that normal microwave cooking coverts food protein molecules into carcinogenic substances.

When measuring microwaves from military and airport radar sources, 100% accurate readings can only be found with extremely expensive digital peak-hold meters. Why? Because analog devices begin to drop their reading immediately after the radar sweep passes. Thus, while an analog meter can show whether or not you are being exposed to radar EMFs, analog meters can’t show your true exposure. Although thousands of dollars to purchase, digital-hold meters capable of accurately detecting radar EMFs can be rented for several hundred to over a thousand dollars per month.

Telephones and Answering Machines

Telephones can emit surprisingly strong EMFs, especially from the handset. This is a problem because we hold the telephone so close to our head. Place the Gauss meter right against the ear piece and the mouth piece before buying a phone.

Some brands emit no measurable fields and others emit strong fields that travel several inches….right into your brain. Answering machines, particular those with adapter plugs (mini-transformers), give off high levels of EMFs.

Electric Razors and Hair Dryers

Electric razors and hair dryers emit EMFs as high as 200 to 400 mG. This seems alarming, but we don’t know if this is worse (or better) than a chronic exposure to a 2-3 mG field. Some EMF consultants recommend that hair dryers not be used on children as the high fields are held close to their rapidly developing brain and nervous system.

Prudent Avoidance

Electricity is an inseparable part of our modern day society. This means that EMFs will continue to be all around us. But as Discover Magazine postulated, aside from making our life easier, is electricity also making our lives shorter?

Most experts agree that limited, non-chronic exposure to EMFs is not a threat. For example, it is probably acceptable for a person to be near a toaster in the morning.

BUT, it is not advisable for a person to sleep under an electric blanket, up close, live near a power line/substation, and sleep in a room where the power enters the home. This person is under an extreme case of chronic exposure. This condition, unfortunately, applies to millions of Americans.

If you wish to follows the EPA’s advice and practice “prudent avoidance” then the following advice is offered:

Measure your home, work and school environments with a Gauss meter Measure EMFs both inside and outside your home. Don’t let your children play near power lines, transformers, radar domes and microwave towers.

Avoid areas where the field is above 1 mG. Measure the EMFs from appliances both when they are operating and when they are turned off. Some appliances (like TVs) are still drawing current even when they are off.

Don’t sleep under an electric blanket or on a water bed. If you insist on using these, unplug them before going to bed (don’t just turn it off). Even though there is no magnetic field when they are turned off, there may still be a high electric field.

Don’t sit too close to your TV set. Distance yourself at least 6 feet away. Use a Gauss meter to help you decide where it is safe to sit.

Rearrange your office and home area so that you are not exposed to EMFs from the sides/backs of electric appliances and computers. In the home, it is best that all major electrical appliances, such as computers, TVs, refrigerators etc, be placed up against outside walls. That way you are not creating an EMF field in the adjoining room.

Don’t sit too close to your computer. Computer monitors vary greatly in the strength of their EMFs, so you should check yours with a meter. Don’t stand close to your microwave oven. Move all electrical appliances at least 6 feet from your bed. Eliminate wires running under your bed. Eliminate dimmers and 3-way switches.

Be wary of cordless appliances such as electric toothbrushes and razors. You may choose not to wear a quartz-analog watch because it radiates pulsating EMFs along your acupuncture meridians.

An older mechanical windup watch would be an acceptable alternative. It is also recommended to wear as little jewelry as possible and to take it off at night. Many people have metal sensitivity which can be aggravated by placing it right on the skin. Measure with a gauss meter to be sure.

And last, but not least, always always always remember that EMFs pass right through walls. The EMF you are reading on your Gauss meter could be radiating from the next room…or from outside your home.

Additional Radiation Info:

Eyeglass frames should ideally be made from plastic with no wires in them, otherwise they can serve as an antenna to focus the radio and cellular phone waves directly into your brain.

What EMF Level Is Safe?

There’s a heated debate as to what electromagnetic field (EMF) level is considered safe. Since the experts have not come to an consensus, you’ll have to decide for yourself… Many government and utility documents report the usual ambient level of 60-Hz magnetic field to be 0.5 mG.

Thus, any reading higher than 0.5 mG is above the “usual” ambient exposure. Many experts and public officials, as well as the few governments that have made an effort to offer public protection, have adopted the 3 mG cutoff point. The EPA has proposed a safety standard of 1 mG. Sweden has set a maximum safety limit of 1 mG.

Dr. Robert Becker, an MD who has been studying the effects of EMFs for 20 years, states a lmG safety limit in his book Cross Currents. When electricians try to solve a magnetic field problem they do their best to drop the level to 1 mG or below.

Dr. Nancy Wertheimer, a Ph.D. epidemiologist who has been studying EMFs for 20 years, has been looking at the epidemiological data in a different way — she is trying to associate EMF levels with health rather than disease. The level she is coming up with is a cut off of 1 mG. Russian researchers claim that 1/1000ths of a mG should be the standard.

The BioElectric Body believes that there are several stages of health between “optimum wellness”, “degenerative disease” and “Cancer”. Thus, we maintain our own living and sleeping quarters at 0.5mG and below.

Recommended Reading

“Cross Currents The Perils of Electropollution. The Promise of Electromedicine” by Robert 0. Becker, M.D.& Jeremy P. Tarcher, Inc., 1990

“Currents of Death The Attempt to Cover Up the Threat to Your Health” by Paul Brodeur; Simon and Schuster, 1989

“Electromagnetic Man Health & Hazard in the Electrical Environment” by Cyril W. Smith & Simon Best ; St. Martin’s Press. Inc. 1989