Must read

[Guest guest]

Hyperbaric Oxygen Review,

Undersea Medical Society, Inc.

October 1982,

Volume 3, Number 4

Plenum press - New York and London

HOXRD6 3(4) 193-256 (1982)

ISSN 0195-9263

Page 226

Other Applications: Pregnancy and Neonates

Baiborodov, B.D.

Some Peculiarities in Application of Hyperbaric Oxygenation During the

Treatment of Acute Respiratory Insufficiency in Newborn

Infants.

In: Abstracts VII Int. Cong. HBO Medicine, Moscow, Sept. 2-6, 1981;

p368.

HBO was used in 830 newborn infants: in 555 infants with asphyxia, in

165 infants with syndrome of respiratory disturbances (SRD) and 110

infants with the aspiratory syndrome (AS). During the treatment of

asphyxia an early use of HBO, 1-5 min after artificial pulmonary

ventilation (APV), as compared with a late use of HBO, 10-30 min after

APV, leads to a decrease of cerebral circulatory disorders by 4 time a,

and or mortality rate by 8 times. During the treatment of SRD, the

employment of HBO in the First 1-3 hrs of life led to recovery of 75% of

infants. The delayed use of HBO, 12-48 hrs after birth is ineffective.

HBO applied in the first hour of life during the treatment of AS

prevented the development of aspiratory pneumonia in 92.7% of cases.

HBO should be used during the treatment of neonatal asphyxia in

combination with APV, infusion " alkalizing " therapy, and during the

treatment of SRD and AS it should be combined with cardial,

anti-bacterial, infusion, " alkalizing " therapy. The duration of

sessions should not be less than 1.5-2 hrs and not more than 3 hrs at

2-3 ATA for 10-15 min and at 1.4-1.5 ATA for 1.5-2.5 hrs. When these

conditions are met acid-base balance and blood gases normalize. If

necessary, such sessions are repeated in 6-9 hors; to delay them for

12-30 hors is not advisable. Thus, effectiveness of HBO during the

treatment of acute hypoxic states in new-born infants depends on its

early, complex and repeated application under safe resuscitation and

therapeutic regimes.

[Guest guest]

Csvillars@... wrote: From: Csvillars@...Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 08:16:17 ESTSubject: Re: I received this from Trisha's DoctorReply-to: Trisha's Doctor forwarded this to me and I thought I would share with all of you.Subject: Quote from Chair of President Bush's Commission on SpecialEducationGov. Branstad (former governor of Iowa) has been appointed to serve aschair of the Administration's new special education commission. Following is a quote from Gov Branstad (Iowa) from an interview transcript. The entire transcript is available at:http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/education/schools_1-16.htmlGOV. TERRY BRANSTAD: In our state nearly 60 percent of the budget goesfor education. And what we find is people are willing to invest inquality education, but they are also fiscally conservative. They want tosee results. They want to see achievement for the dollars that they putin. I think that the federal government in its mandates in the area ofspecial ed has driven up costs needlessly. I think that needs to bereviewed.I want to see every child have an opportunity to learn. All specialed children do have a right to an education, but to spend tensoft thousands of dollars on kids that really are not going to be able tosupport themselves or be able to really learn a great deal at theexpense of the general education of the rest of the students is notfair.And so that has to be addressed. A lot of people are afraid of it,of being, you know, accused of being insensitive or whatever. I wasin Sioux City, Iowa, yesterday, and I heard from a Teacher of the Year, Mounts, who had been Teacher of the Year, and thesuperintendent there about how their school is being squeezedbecause of the federal mandates in the area of special ed andhow there needs to be more flexibility and latitude given to localschool districts in that area.********************************************************************Please distribute this widely. The disability communityneeds to be aware of Chairperson Branstad's attitude towardsspecial education.The President needs to hear your concerns about this commission'sleadership.President W. BushThe White House1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NWWashington, DC 20500202-456-1414Fax: 202-456-2461E-mail: president@...CarolShe isn't Typical, She's Trisha!

[Guest guest]

Friends, The following message is long, but critical reading. Please act upon this as your time and conscience dictates. We have already discovered that Satcher (US Surgeon General), is no friend to our cause.. Now, we discover that Tommy (Health & Human Services), is not our friend, either... Israel's Warrior 1601 N. Tucson Blvd. Suite 9Tucson, AZ 85716-3450Phone: (800) 635-1196Hotline: (800) 419-4777Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, Inc.A Voice for Private Physicians Since 1943Omnia pro aegrotoAAPS ANALYSIS (DRAFT):EMERGENCY HEALTH POWERS ACT TURNS GOVERNORS INTO DICTATORSBackgroundHHS Secretary Tommy is urging State legislatures to adopt the ModelState Emergency Health Powers Act, prepared by the Center for Law and thePublic's Health at town and s Hopkins Universities for the Centersfor Disease Control and Prevention. This Act grants unprecedented andunchecked powers to the Governors of the 50 States. It can be downloadedfrom www.publichealthlaw.net.It is likely that HHS will tie passage of the Act to billions of dollars infederal funding: the usual method of bribery/coercion to get States to passlegislation that would otherwise never be considered. Weyrich of the Free Congress Foundation said: "Tommy , whom Ihave considered a friend for thirty years, should be ashamed of himself foradvocating this kind of Big Brother legislation. This is not the Tommy we knew as a four-term governor of Wisconsin."HHS is using the 9/11 emergency as a pretext to rush passage of an Act thathas been in the works for more than a year. Its main author, Lawrence O.Gostin, was a member of Clinton's Task Force on Health Care Reform, whosesecret documents were exposed to public view as a result of the AAPS lawsuit(AAPS et al v. Hillary Rodham Clinton et al.) He was a member of WorkingGroup 17, Bioethics, of Cluster V, The Ethical Foundations of the NewSystem, and also a member of the informal group promoting Single Payer. Itis odd that Tommy should be urging adoption of a plan originatingwith the most radical left wing of Clinton's Health Care Task Force.This legislation is a serious threat to our civil liberties. Indeed, "thislaw treats American citizens as if they were the enemy," stated s, chairman of the Health Law Department at the Boston University Schoolof Public Health (San Francisco Chronicle, 11/25/01). It must be exposed tothe light of day in the next month and a half."If protests are sufficient and if conservative legislators in statelegislatures are properly alerted, perhaps there is a chance to beat backthis monster," Weyrich said.Major ProvisonsCalling an Emergency: Under this Act, any Governor could appoint himselfdictator by calling a "public health emergency." He doesn't even have toconsult anyone. The Act requires that he "shall consult with the publichealth authority," but "nothing in the duty to consult ... shall beconstrued to limit the Governor's authority to act without such consultationwhen the situation calls for prompt and timely action." The legislature ispowerless to intervene for 60 days, after which it may terminate the stateof emergency by a two-thirds vote of both chambers. (Apparently, it does nothave the authority to declare that the state of emergency never reallyexisted.) Article III, Section 305 ©. There is also the possibility thatthe Governor could declare a new emergency as soon as his powers were aboutto expire.What is a public health emergency? It is whatever the Governor declares itto be. By the definition in the Act, it could be an "occurrence"-or just an"imminent threat"-of basically any cause that involves a biological agent orbiological toxin that poses a "substantial risk" of a "significant number"of human fatalities or disability. Article I, Section 104 (g).The Act does not define "substantial risk." Could it mean a 1-in-1,000,000chance? Risks of that magnitude are already being invoked as a cause foralarm, say of a measles outbreak with transmission through an unvaccinatedchild, and a rationale for removing exemptions to mandatory vaccines.Is a "significant number" five (the number of deaths from anthrax as of thedate of this writing); 24 (the number of deaths from chickenpox in 1998 and1999 combined, 12 of them in persons under the age of 20, used as arationale for mandatory childhood vaccination); 100 cases of AIDS; or is itthousands of deaths from smallpox, as most readers may assume-or a singlecase? It could be any of these because the definition is at the solediscretion of the Governor.The most plausible of the dire threats generally cited to promote suchlegislation is a smallpox outbreak. However, given the nature of the diseaseand advanced medicine and sanitation, such an outbreak could be containedwithout any of the radical measures in this Act, just as in the 1970s. (See,for example, "Super Smallpox Saturdays?" by Arnold Glueck, M.D., and J. Cihak, M.D., http://WorldNetDaily.com, Nov. 15, 2001.) Because ofthe adverse side effects of the vaccine (including death), more harm thangood could be done by an ill-advised, unnecessary mass vaccination campaign.Patient Privacy Demolished: The Act would impose significant new reportingrequirements on physicians and pharmacists, further diminishing theconfidentiality of medical records. Personal identifying information wouldhave to be reported in writing, without patient consent, in the event of "anunusual increase" in prescriptions related to fever, respiratory, orgastrointestinal complaints that might represent an epidemic disease orbioterrorism, or of any illness or health condition that could representbioterrorism or epidemic or pandemic disease. Such conditions are legion.Unlimited Power: How would the Governor handle the emergency? By whatevermeans he chose. He is under no obligation to use scientifically validmethods, or to choose the least destructive method, or to perform any kindof risk-benefit analysis. He may suspend any regulatory statute, or therules of any state agency, if they would "prevent, hinder, or delaynecessary action." Article III, Section 303 (a)(1). Among the laws to besuspended would probably be those permitting religious, medical, orphilosophical exemptions to mandatory vaccines.The Governor may not only utilize all the resources of the State and itspolitical subdivisions, but commandeer any private facilities or resourcesconsidered necessary, and "take immediate possession thereof. Such materialsand facilities include, but are not limited to, communication devices,carriers, real estate, fuels, food, clothing, and health care facilities."Article IV Section 402 (a). He may "compel a health care facility to provideservices," but it is not clear what means he may use to compel its personnelto work (Article IV Section 402 (), except that any physician or otherhealth care provider who refuses to perform medical examination or testingas directed shall be liable for a misdemeanor. Article V Section 502 (.The Governor may destroy any material or property "of which there isreasonable cause to believe that it may endanger the public health." ArticleIV Section 401 (. And while the State shall pay just compensation to theowner of any facilities that are "lawfully taken" or appropriated (ArticleIV Section 406), compensation "shall be made only if private property islawfully taken" (Article VIII Section 805(a), emphasis added), apparentlynot if seized unlawfully by a rogue agency. Moreover, there is a hugeexception:"Compensation shall not be provided for facilities or materials that areclosed, evacuated, decontaminated, or destroyed when there is reasonablecause to believe that they may endanger the public health pursuant toSection 401." Article IV Section 406.The Governor is in charge of determining "reasonable cause." There is astrong incentive for him to declare any losses to private owners to benoncompensable. "Reasonable cause" might mean "contaminated." Is the SenateHart Office Building contaminated with anthrax? Yes. Should it therefore bedestroyed, or subjected to fumigation with chemicals that will destroy muchof the equipment and furnishings? Most think not.The problem is that given a sufficiently sensitive testing method,everything is probably "contaminated" with almost everything else. Moreover,every testing method has some level of false positives. The late ConradChester of Oak Ridge National Laboratory stated that any place that has eversupported cattle has anthrax contamination (lecture before Doctors forDisaster Preparedness annual meeting, 1996). The same probably applies toany land that has supported sheep or goats, or any land that has had thewind deposit soil from such an area. In other words, anthrax spores areprobably ubiquitous, though at a concentration that very rarely causes anyharm. Such harm as was done may have been misdiagnosed by physicians whowere unfamiliar with anthrax and not specifically looking for it.Under this law, nothing would stop the Governor from ordering a citizen toturn over his house to be used as an isolation facility, and laterdestroying the house on the grounds that it is contaminated. This order,like any other, could be enforced at gunpoint by any law enforcementofficer.In a time of public hysteria, fanned by press coverage based on the "if itbleeds, it leads" policy, common sense is likely to be an early casualty. Itis even possible that terrorists could deliberately raise a false alarm andinfluence a Governor to take action that would result in more damage tofreedom than the terrorists themselves could ever accomplish. Or radicalenvironmentalists (who haven't, to date, generally had the label ofterrorist applied to them) could bring about the destruction of an activitythat they object to (such as logging, cattle raising, or modern farming).There are no checks and balances in this Act to prevent such an occurrence,and no meaningful accountability for the public officials who carry out abasically misguided policy, however destructive.Command and Control: The Act assumes that the best method to use in anemergency is force. There is no evidence that force works better thanleadership, which can bring out the best in citizens coming together to meetthe crisis, just as firefighters, police, medical professionals, hotelowners, and other businessmen did in New York City. Totalitarianism is notonly evil but has had uniformly disastrous results.Although the world has 40 centuries of experience to show that the effect ofprice controls on the economy is comparable to that of a large asteroidimpact on the earth, the Act empowers the Governor to ration, fix prices,and otherwise control the allocation, sale, use, or transportation of anyitem as deemed "reasonable and necessary for emergency response." Thisspecifically includes firearms. Article IV Section 402 © and Section 405(. Moreover, the Governor can simply seize such items Article IV Section402 (a).Criminalizing Refusal of Medical Treatment: The Act empowers the publichealth authority to decide upon medical treatment or immunizations and toimpose its view on individuals, who are liable for a misdemeanor should theyrefuse. Article V Section 504 (. Although it might in some circumstancesbe prudent and justified to quarantine a person who refuses immunizationduring an outbreak, it is outrageous to criminalize a medical choice todecline a treatment. An immunization or treatment might well cause seriousharm to certain individuals even if the public health authority does notrecognize that it is "reasonably likely" to lead to "serious harm"-anothertwo important undefined terms. Article V Section 504(a)(4).The Act gives the public health authority the right to isolate or quarantinea person on an ex parte court order, with no hearing for at least 72 hours.If the public health authority decides that an unvaccinated person is a riskto others, even if uninfected, he could be quarantined. Article V Section503 (e). It is quite possible that public health authorities could forcesuch a person from his home to a place of quarantine, where he will beexposed to infected persons. Such places shall be maintained in a safe andhygienic manner "to the extent possible," and "all reasonable means shall betaken to prevent the transmission of infection among isolated or quarantinedindividuals." Article V Section 503(a). The Act itself thus implies that anuninfected person is at risk by being placed in such a facility; it is quitelikely that he could be at greater risk than if he had the freedom toprotect himself as he saw fit. It is assumed that public health authoritieswill be "reasonable"; however, this assumption is questionable. Even now,children not vaccinated against hepatitis B are being excluded from schooleven though there is NO risk that an uninfected child can transmit thedisease and a minuscule risk that he can acquire the disease at school.Zero Accountability: If the State does more harm than good throughunfettered use of its draconian power, it can rely on the state immunityclause: "Neither the State, its political subdivisions, nor, except in casesof gross negligence or willful misconduct, the Governor, the public healthauthority, or any other State official referenced in this Act, is liable forthe death of or any injury to persons, or damage to property, as a result ofcomplying with or attempting to comply with this Act or any rule orregulations promulgated pursuant to this Act." Article VIII Section 804.SummaryThis Act would broaden government access to private medical records; greatlyweaken protections against the taking of private property withoutcompensation; criminalize refusal to be conscripted for public service or totake medical treatment; potentially increase the risk of infection to manyindividuals on the pretext of protecting the common good; subjugatescientific analysis and deliberation to the raw assertion of power; greatlyexpand the power of government to interfere with commerce; and immunizestate officials from sanctions against gross abuses of power.Although certain extraordinary government interventions might be warrantedin a true emergency, the government already has significant emergency powersas well as the ability to convene a special session of the legislature. Itis highly inadvisable to completely suspend our delicate system of checksand balances upon the word of a Governor that an emergency requires it.This Act, in effect, empowers the Governor to create a police state by fiat,and for a sufficient length of time to destroy or muzzle his politicalopposition. The most telling sentence is: "The public health authority shallhave the power to enforce the provisions of this Act through the impositionof fines and penalties, the issuance of orders, and such other remedies asare provided by law, but nothing in this Section shall be construed to limitspecific enforcement powers enumerated in this Act." Article VIII Section802.It is highly unlikely that the vast expansion of governmental powers wouldbe restricted to combatting a smallpox outbreak. Once the precedent isestablished, it could be expanded to other types of "emergencies."This proposal violates the very principles that its author, Lawrence OGostin, has previously outlined, while giving them lip service. His articlerecommends that "public health authorities should bear the burden ofjustification and, therefore, should demonstrate (1) a significant riskbased on scientific evidence; (2) the intervention's effectiveness byshowing a reasonable fit between ends and means; (3) that economic costs arereasonable; (4) that human rights burdens are reasonable...." (see JAMA2000;283:3118-3122).An Alternate ProposalAlthough this Act should be rejected, there are certain measures that Stategovernments might want to consider:A reevaluation of the procedures for effectively quarantining persons whoare a significant demonstrable risk to others, while preserving due processand substantive rights;Measures to protect private citizens, including physicians, against civilliability resulting from efforts to aid others in an emergency (suggested inArticle VIII Section 804);Permitting the State to waive certain licensure requirements for theduration of the emergency to permit recruitment of additional personnel(Article V Section 507(a)); andSuspending State or federal regulations that interfere with prudent responseto an emergency while providing no scientifically proven significantbenefit.There are many EPA requirements, for example, that are not based on goodscientific evidence and could be disastrous in a real emergency. At the timeof the World Trade Center fire, the EPA had to acknowledge that asbestoscontrols were totally excessive, in order to prevent a public panic aboutinhaling the white dust. (Indeed the ban on the use of asbestos above the64th floor might have hastened if not caused the collapse of thebuildings-see Jon Dougherty, http://WorldNetDaily.com, November 20, 2001).The ban on DDT (imposed despite the overwhelming preponderance of scientificadvice and evidence opposed to this action) would severely inhibit thecontainment of an outbreak of mosquito or other insect-borne diseases. Theban on incinerators because of hysteria over insignificant releases ofdioxins would prevent the safest and most expeditious method of destroyingdangerously contaminated materials.ConclusionsStates can and should improve their ability to respond to disaster,including bioterrorism. However, having the Governor play doctor anddictator is not the right response. Citizens should distribute informationabout the actual content of the Model Emergency Powers bill to opinionleaders, newspaper editors, columnists, the Chamber of Commerce, businessgroups, medical society officials, and legislators._________________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

Friends, The following message is long, but critical reading. Please act upon this as your time and conscience dictates. We have already discovered that Satcher (US Surgeon General), is no friend to our cause.. Now, we discover that Tommy (Health & Human Services), is not our friend, either... Israel's Warrior 1601 N. Tucson Blvd. Suite 9Tucson, AZ 85716-3450Phone: (800) 635-1196Hotline: (800) 419-4777Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, Inc.A Voice for Private Physicians Since 1943Omnia pro aegrotoAAPS ANALYSIS (DRAFT):EMERGENCY HEALTH POWERS ACT TURNS GOVERNORS INTO DICTATORSBackgroundHHS Secretary Tommy is urging State legislatures to adopt the ModelState Emergency Health Powers Act, prepared by the Center for Law and thePublic's Health at town and s Hopkins Universities for the Centersfor Disease Control and Prevention. This Act grants unprecedented andunchecked powers to the Governors of the 50 States. It can be downloadedfrom www.publichealthlaw.net.It is likely that HHS will tie passage of the Act to billions of dollars infederal funding: the usual method of bribery/coercion to get States to passlegislation that would otherwise never be considered. Weyrich of the Free Congress Foundation said: "Tommy , whom Ihave considered a friend for thirty years, should be ashamed of himself foradvocating this kind of Big Brother legislation. This is not the Tommy we knew as a four-term governor of Wisconsin."HHS is using the 9/11 emergency as a pretext to rush passage of an Act thathas been in the works for more than a year. Its main author, Lawrence O.Gostin, was a member of Clinton's Task Force on Health Care Reform, whosesecret documents were exposed to public view as a result of the AAPS lawsuit(AAPS et al v. Hillary Rodham Clinton et al.) He was a member of WorkingGroup 17, Bioethics, of Cluster V, The Ethical Foundations of the NewSystem, and also a member of the informal group promoting Single Payer. Itis odd that Tommy should be urging adoption of a plan originatingwith the most radical left wing of Clinton's Health Care Task Force.This legislation is a serious threat to our civil liberties. Indeed, "thislaw treats American citizens as if they were the enemy," stated s, chairman of the Health Law Department at the Boston University Schoolof Public Health (San Francisco Chronicle, 11/25/01). It must be exposed tothe light of day in the next month and a half."If protests are sufficient and if conservative legislators in statelegislatures are properly alerted, perhaps there is a chance to beat backthis monster," Weyrich said.Major ProvisonsCalling an Emergency: Under this Act, any Governor could appoint himselfdictator by calling a "public health emergency." He doesn't even have toconsult anyone. The Act requires that he "shall consult with the publichealth authority," but "nothing in the duty to consult ... shall beconstrued to limit the Governor's authority to act without such consultationwhen the situation calls for prompt and timely action." The legislature ispowerless to intervene for 60 days, after which it may terminate the stateof emergency by a two-thirds vote of both chambers. (Apparently, it does nothave the authority to declare that the state of emergency never reallyexisted.) Article III, Section 305 ©. There is also the possibility thatthe Governor could declare a new emergency as soon as his powers were aboutto expire.What is a public health emergency? It is whatever the Governor declares itto be. By the definition in the Act, it could be an "occurrence"-or just an"imminent threat"-of basically any cause that involves a biological agent orbiological toxin that poses a "substantial risk" of a "significant number"of human fatalities or disability. Article I, Section 104 (g).The Act does not define "substantial risk." Could it mean a 1-in-1,000,000chance? Risks of that magnitude are already being invoked as a cause foralarm, say of a measles outbreak with transmission through an unvaccinatedchild, and a rationale for removing exemptions to mandatory vaccines.Is a "significant number" five (the number of deaths from anthrax as of thedate of this writing); 24 (the number of deaths from chickenpox in 1998 and1999 combined, 12 of them in persons under the age of 20, used as arationale for mandatory childhood vaccination); 100 cases of AIDS; or is itthousands of deaths from smallpox, as most readers may assume-or a singlecase? It could be any of these because the definition is at the solediscretion of the Governor.The most plausible of the dire threats generally cited to promote suchlegislation is a smallpox outbreak. However, given the nature of the diseaseand advanced medicine and sanitation, such an outbreak could be containedwithout any of the radical measures in this Act, just as in the 1970s. (See,for example, "Super Smallpox Saturdays?" by Arnold Glueck, M.D., and J. Cihak, M.D., http://WorldNetDaily.com, Nov. 15, 2001.) Because ofthe adverse side effects of the vaccine (including death), more harm thangood could be done by an ill-advised, unnecessary mass vaccination campaign.Patient Privacy Demolished: The Act would impose significant new reportingrequirements on physicians and pharmacists, further diminishing theconfidentiality of medical records. Personal identifying information wouldhave to be reported in writing, without patient consent, in the event of "anunusual increase" in prescriptions related to fever, respiratory, orgastrointestinal complaints that might represent an epidemic disease orbioterrorism, or of any illness or health condition that could representbioterrorism or epidemic or pandemic disease. Such conditions are legion.Unlimited Power: How would the Governor handle the emergency? By whatevermeans he chose. He is under no obligation to use scientifically validmethods, or to choose the least destructive method, or to perform any kindof risk-benefit analysis. He may suspend any regulatory statute, or therules of any state agency, if they would "prevent, hinder, or delaynecessary action." Article III, Section 303 (a)(1). Among the laws to besuspended would probably be those permitting religious, medical, orphilosophical exemptions to mandatory vaccines.The Governor may not only utilize all the resources of the State and itspolitical subdivisions, but commandeer any private facilities or resourcesconsidered necessary, and "take immediate possession thereof. Such materialsand facilities include, but are not limited to, communication devices,carriers, real estate, fuels, food, clothing, and health care facilities."Article IV Section 402 (a). He may "compel a health care facility to provideservices," but it is not clear what means he may use to compel its personnelto work (Article IV Section 402 (), except that any physician or otherhealth care provider who refuses to perform medical examination or testingas directed shall be liable for a misdemeanor. Article V Section 502 (.The Governor may destroy any material or property "of which there isreasonable cause to believe that it may endanger the public health." ArticleIV Section 401 (. And while the State shall pay just compensation to theowner of any facilities that are "lawfully taken" or appropriated (ArticleIV Section 406), compensation "shall be made only if private property islawfully taken" (Article VIII Section 805(a), emphasis added), apparentlynot if seized unlawfully by a rogue agency. Moreover, there is a hugeexception:"Compensation shall not be provided for facilities or materials that areclosed, evacuated, decontaminated, or destroyed when there is reasonablecause to believe that they may endanger the public health pursuant toSection 401." Article IV Section 406.The Governor is in charge of determining "reasonable cause." There is astrong incentive for him to declare any losses to private owners to benoncompensable. "Reasonable cause" might mean "contaminated." Is the SenateHart Office Building contaminated with anthrax? Yes. Should it therefore bedestroyed, or subjected to fumigation with chemicals that will destroy muchof the equipment and furnishings? Most think not.The problem is that given a sufficiently sensitive testing method,everything is probably "contaminated" with almost everything else. Moreover,every testing method has some level of false positives. The late ConradChester of Oak Ridge National Laboratory stated that any place that has eversupported cattle has anthrax contamination (lecture before Doctors forDisaster Preparedness annual meeting, 1996). The same probably applies toany land that has supported sheep or goats, or any land that has had thewind deposit soil from such an area. In other words, anthrax spores areprobably ubiquitous, though at a concentration that very rarely causes anyharm. Such harm as was done may have been misdiagnosed by physicians whowere unfamiliar with anthrax and not specifically looking for it.Under this law, nothing would stop the Governor from ordering a citizen toturn over his house to be used as an isolation facility, and laterdestroying the house on the grounds that it is contaminated. This order,like any other, could be enforced at gunpoint by any law enforcementofficer.In a time of public hysteria, fanned by press coverage based on the "if itbleeds, it leads" policy, common sense is likely to be an early casualty. Itis even possible that terrorists could deliberately raise a false alarm andinfluence a Governor to take action that would result in more damage tofreedom than the terrorists themselves could ever accomplish. Or radicalenvironmentalists (who haven't, to date, generally had the label ofterrorist applied to them) could bring about the destruction of an activitythat they object to (such as logging, cattle raising, or modern farming).There are no checks and balances in this Act to prevent such an occurrence,and no meaningful accountability for the public officials who carry out abasically misguided policy, however destructive.Command and Control: The Act assumes that the best method to use in anemergency is force. There is no evidence that force works better thanleadership, which can bring out the best in citizens coming together to meetthe crisis, just as firefighters, police, medical professionals, hotelowners, and other businessmen did in New York City. Totalitarianism is notonly evil but has had uniformly disastrous results.Although the world has 40 centuries of experience to show that the effect ofprice controls on the economy is comparable to that of a large asteroidimpact on the earth, the Act empowers the Governor to ration, fix prices,and otherwise control the allocation, sale, use, or transportation of anyitem as deemed "reasonable and necessary for emergency response." Thisspecifically includes firearms. Article IV Section 402 © and Section 405(. Moreover, the Governor can simply seize such items Article IV Section402 (a).Criminalizing Refusal of Medical Treatment: The Act empowers the publichealth authority to decide upon medical treatment or immunizations and toimpose its view on individuals, who are liable for a misdemeanor should theyrefuse. Article V Section 504 (. Although it might in some circumstancesbe prudent and justified to quarantine a person who refuses immunizationduring an outbreak, it is outrageous to criminalize a medical choice todecline a treatment. An immunization or treatment might well cause seriousharm to certain individuals even if the public health authority does notrecognize that it is "reasonably likely" to lead to "serious harm"-anothertwo important undefined terms. Article V Section 504(a)(4).The Act gives the public health authority the right to isolate or quarantinea person on an ex parte court order, with no hearing for at least 72 hours.If the public health authority decides that an unvaccinated person is a riskto others, even if uninfected, he could be quarantined. Article V Section503 (e). It is quite possible that public health authorities could forcesuch a person from his home to a place of quarantine, where he will beexposed to infected persons. Such places shall be maintained in a safe andhygienic manner "to the extent possible," and "all reasonable means shall betaken to prevent the transmission of infection among isolated or quarantinedindividuals." Article V Section 503(a). The Act itself thus implies that anuninfected person is at risk by being placed in such a facility; it is quitelikely that he could be at greater risk than if he had the freedom toprotect himself as he saw fit. It is assumed that public health authoritieswill be "reasonable"; however, this assumption is questionable. Even now,children not vaccinated against hepatitis B are being excluded from schooleven though there is NO risk that an uninfected child can transmit thedisease and a minuscule risk that he can acquire the disease at school.Zero Accountability: If the State does more harm than good throughunfettered use of its draconian power, it can rely on the state immunityclause: "Neither the State, its political subdivisions, nor, except in casesof gross negligence or willful misconduct, the Governor, the public healthauthority, or any other State official referenced in this Act, is liable forthe death of or any injury to persons, or damage to property, as a result ofcomplying with or attempting to comply with this Act or any rule orregulations promulgated pursuant to this Act." Article VIII Section 804.SummaryThis Act would broaden government access to private medical records; greatlyweaken protections against the taking of private property withoutcompensation; criminalize refusal to be conscripted for public service or totake medical treatment; potentially increase the risk of infection to manyindividuals on the pretext of protecting the common good; subjugatescientific analysis and deliberation to the raw assertion of power; greatlyexpand the power of government to interfere with commerce; and immunizestate officials from sanctions against gross abuses of power.Although certain extraordinary government interventions might be warrantedin a true emergency, the government already has significant emergency powersas well as the ability to convene a special session of the legislature. Itis highly inadvisable to completely suspend our delicate system of checksand balances upon the word of a Governor that an emergency requires it.This Act, in effect, empowers the Governor to create a police state by fiat,and for a sufficient length of time to destroy or muzzle his politicalopposition. The most telling sentence is: "The public health authority shallhave the power to enforce the provisions of this Act through the impositionof fines and penalties, the issuance of orders, and such other remedies asare provided by law, but nothing in this Section shall be construed to limitspecific enforcement powers enumerated in this Act." Article VIII Section802.It is highly unlikely that the vast expansion of governmental powers wouldbe restricted to combatting a smallpox outbreak. Once the precedent isestablished, it could be expanded to other types of "emergencies."This proposal violates the very principles that its author, Lawrence OGostin, has previously outlined, while giving them lip service. His articlerecommends that "public health authorities should bear the burden ofjustification and, therefore, should demonstrate (1) a significant riskbased on scientific evidence; (2) the intervention's effectiveness byshowing a reasonable fit between ends and means; (3) that economic costs arereasonable; (4) that human rights burdens are reasonable...." (see JAMA2000;283:3118-3122).An Alternate ProposalAlthough this Act should be rejected, there are certain measures that Stategovernments might want to consider:A reevaluation of the procedures for effectively quarantining persons whoare a significant demonstrable risk to others, while preserving due processand substantive rights;Measures to protect private citizens, including physicians, against civilliability resulting from efforts to aid others in an emergency (suggested inArticle VIII Section 804);Permitting the State to waive certain licensure requirements for theduration of the emergency to permit recruitment of additional personnel(Article V Section 507(a)); andSuspending State or federal regulations that interfere with prudent responseto an emergency while providing no scientifically proven significantbenefit.There are many EPA requirements, for example, that are not based on goodscientific evidence and could be disastrous in a real emergency. At the timeof the World Trade Center fire, the EPA had to acknowledge that asbestoscontrols were totally excessive, in order to prevent a public panic aboutinhaling the white dust. (Indeed the ban on the use of asbestos above the64th floor might have hastened if not caused the collapse of thebuildings-see Jon Dougherty, http://WorldNetDaily.com, November 20, 2001).The ban on DDT (imposed despite the overwhelming preponderance of scientificadvice and evidence opposed to this action) would severely inhibit thecontainment of an outbreak of mosquito or other insect-borne diseases. Theban on incinerators because of hysteria over insignificant releases ofdioxins would prevent the safest and most expeditious method of destroyingdangerously contaminated materials.ConclusionsStates can and should improve their ability to respond to disaster,including bioterrorism. However, having the Governor play doctor anddictator is not the right response. Citizens should distribute informationabout the actual content of the Model Emergency Powers bill to opinionleaders, newspaper editors, columnists, the Chamber of Commerce, businessgroups, medical society officials, and legislators._________________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

From Dr. Duffy:

Here is a report with my comments in red.

This should be kept alive and passed out all over the world,

over and over and over until we begin to bring the medical

criminals and their conspirators to justice.

Dr H Duffy Sr

www.duffyslaw.com

From: DRM1983@...

Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 06:36:17 EDT

Subject: Dr Mannion's Internet-Article of the Week - Fighting the

System...and WINNING

DRM1983@...

ARTICLE 10/05/02:

Girl gets $4.7M for vaccine injuries

Friday, August 16, 2002

By LINDY WASHBURN

Staff Writer

a New Jersey girl whose mental development stopped at 2 months old after a

routine immunization has received a $4.7 million settlement from a national

trust fund.

The money comes out of MY pocket, it's a tax supported fund, it is NOT paid

for by the perpetrator of the crime, it is paid by the abused citizens. We

can thank our legislators for that.

More than $3 million of the award will go to an annuity that will pay for

the child's care as long as she lives. Its payout could exceed $61 million

if she lives to 71, said Mindy s Roth, the Glen Rock attorney who

brought the case in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.

So my children and probably grandchildren will be paying off that bill.

The payment to the girl, now 9 years old but with the mental ability of a

2-month-old, comes from the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program

(NVICP), funded by a 75-cent tax on each vaccination. Congress created the

fund in 1986, at a time when a growing number of lawsuits against vaccine

manufacturers was driving them out of the marketplace, and more parents were

choosing not to immunize their children because they feared harmful side

effects.

Why are not the perpetrators of this crime brought to justice? Would not an

auto manufacturer or toy manufacturer be brought to trial for such a

travesty? Why are medical doctors and vaccine manufacturers immune from the

laws of this country?

Are the legislators responsible? Are we sleepy people responsible? Is the

consensus of medical opinion, driven by drug company profit responsible? Do

we ALL share in the blame?

" It removes a tremendous weight as to how we'll care for [our daughter]

financially,'' said the girl's father, who lives in Central Jersey and asked

that the family not be identified. " As finite human beings, we die. Who's

going to care for her? This eliminates that burden'' because her eventual

care in a nursing home is provided for, he said.

You bet, it's all paid for by our hard earned tax dollars rather than by the

perpetrators of this heinous crime.

Congress established the program to stabilize the supply of vaccines and

free

money for research on safer alternatives.

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A SAFER ALTERNATIVE- THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A

SAFE VACCINE - THAT IS A CLEVER OXYMORON. EVERY VACCINE IS LIKE PLAYING

RUSSIAN ROULETTE. Congress established that program at the insistence of the

vaccine makers lobbyists who were lobbying the legislators and paying them

money for their campaigns to get themselves off the malpractise HIT LIST.

They succeeded!! The tax payor, the poor slob that suffers from the

ENFORCED, MANDATORY QUACK MEDICINE FROM THE MIDDLE AGES pays for it!!

The program also created a less expensive method to resolve claims outside

the normal court system.

Less expensive? I'd say that in the long run, protecting criminals from

engaging in criminal activity is a LOT more expensive. And don't kid

yourself with any idea about the humanitarian nature concerning the practise

of medicine.

Since its inception, the fund has settled more than 5,500 claims, and

awarded

nearly $1.4 billion. Awards range up to $9.1 million. This year's average

has

been $800,000.

All paid for by the tax payors, not the criminals.

The fund provides compensation for injuries from all vaccines mandated by

the

federal government: diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis (DTP); measles,

mumps,

and rubella (MMR); polio, hepatitis B, chickenpox, and H. influenza Type B.

The key here is MANDATED - THIS IS THE MOST HEINOUS CRIME OF ALL, THE IDEA

OF MANDATING A FORCED INJECTION OF A FOREIGN PROTEIN INTO THE BODY OF A FEE

CITIZEN DEFIES ALL COMMON SENSE. IT VIOLATES THE MOST BASIC GUARANTEE OF OUR

CONSTITUTION. THAT IS THE POWER OF MEDICINE............WAKE UP TO

IT........IT WILL GET WORSE BEFORE IT GETS BETTER!!!!

This month, the pneumococcal vaccine was added to the list, and it became

easier for parents whose babies suffered a bowel blockage following the

rotavirus vaccine to secure compensation. Injuries from smallpox and anthrax

vaccines are not covered by the fund.

Can you imagine an educated person injecting a foreign protein into an

infant that would cause such a condition under the guise of protecting them

from some disease that began to disappear long before the vaccines were ever

used? DOES ANYONE

EVER READ ANY HISTORY????

Legislation is also pending, Roth said, to consider autism as a possible

vaccine-related injury.

WHAT A JOKE!! If you don't understand how and why vaccines caused AUTISM,

you're brain dead! 62.5 times the toxic dose of mercury in every booster the

kids received!! And some people are still wondering about the cause of

AUTISM???

This is the crime of the century folks and the perpetrators have yet to be

brought to justice. Let's get them along with the ENRON criminals and let

them all hang together!

Some people believe the rising incidence of autism is partly attributable to

the growing number of vaccines administered before a child's immune system

is

mature. In particular, they cite the mercury used as a component in some

vaccines as a possible toxin.

DUHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!

However, a recent Institute of Medicine report concluded there was

insufficient evidence to accept or reject a link between thimerosal, a

mercury component in some vaccines, and autism and other developmental and

neurological disorders.

Everyone who was part of that panel belongs behind bars. Everyone on that

committee should be brought to justice and tried for the crimes of

conspiracy and at the very least, involuntary manslaughter.

Of the 4 million children each year who receive multiple vaccines, about

0,000 adverse reactions are reported to the federal Centers for Disease

ontrol and Prevention. (But it must be noted that according to the AMA's own

research only 10% of all injuries ever get reported.)

Most of those reactions are minor, but about 15 percent report incidents of

hospitalization, disability, life-threatening illnesses, or death. Those

reports do not prove the vaccine caused the problem, however.

DUHHHHHHHHH!!!!

The Central Jersey girl, the youngest of four children, was a bright,

healthy

2-month-old when she visited a pediatrician in September 1993, her mother

said. While there, she was given a vaccination for diphtheria, tetanus, and

pertussis (DTP).

Eleven hours later, her mother noticed odd eye movements as she changed the

baby's diaper. She put the baby to bed and went to sleep, she said. When she

awoke the next morning, she realized her daughter hadn't cried for her 3

a.m.

feeding.

She found the baby " red in the face, foamy at the mouth, and having

difficulty breathing,'' the mother said. The baby didn't have a fever,

however, and the pediatrician advised her to keep an eye on the situation.

That pediatrician belongs in jail as does ANY pediatrician giving ANY baby

ANY vaccine for ANY reason IN FACE EVIDENCE - PRESENT AND PAST.

The baby was very lethargic, her parents said. Later, as her father held her

in his arms, she started to shake - the first of many seizures. As the

seizures increased, she was hospitalized.

" It was very frightening,'' the girl's mother said.

At first, neither the family nor the doctors connected her problems with the

vaccination. " It's a highly emotional state,'' the father said. " It takes

time to wrestle with this. ... There are all sorts of different

distractions.''

At first, they didn't know her condition would be permanent. Health-care

professionals tried to give them hope.

Only through careful questioning did the parents learn the likely long-term

prognosis for their daughter. They hoped that her condition would not be

permanent, but they realized they had to plan as if it were.

When a pediatric neurologist told them he believed the girl's problems were

linked to the vaccine, he suggested they might seek compensation from the

fund. That was when they learned the urgency of filing such a claim.

The fund operates with strict time limits, and the family said it spoke

publicly to help make others aware of the potential for compensation and its

timetables.

There is no statute of limitations on CAPITAL CRIMES - this was a capital

crime committed by the pediatrician. The pediatrician and his co

conspirators belong on trial for criminal negligence and for children who

die, for murder or at the very least, involuntary manslaughter

A child injured by a vaccine must file a claim within three years after the

first symptoms appear.

The family of a child who dies must file within two years of the death.

There is no statute of limitations on CAPITAL CRIMES - this was a capital

crime committed by the pediatrician. The pediatrician and his co

conspirators belong on trial for criminal negligence and for children who

die, for murder or at the very least, involuntary manslaughter

No lawsuits concerning vaccine injuries can be filed in a civil court, the

law says, until after a claim has been filed with the vaccine compensation

program and the litigant has decided to reject its award.

Another way the legislator protected the real criminals in this situation.

As a result, the number of lawsuits filed against vaccine manufacturers has

plunged since the fund's inception: four suits against DTP makers in 1997,

compared with 255 in 1985.

Of course - this is what they wanter, no more litigation!!! And we allow

that to happen - that is the REAL problem here.

In New Jersey, four attorneys are listed by the Court of Federal Claims for

iling vaccine-related claims with the program. Roth and her partner, Drew

ritcher of Britcher, Leone & Roth, are two of them.

" People need to know to get to the fund,'' Roth said. " They have this child.

They have huge medical bills.

They'll be capped-out on their insurance. There is a place to go. If you

don't go there, you aren't going to go anywhere. You will be dismissed from

state court, and have no recourse.''

The program, which operates with a special master, pays attorney fees

regardless of whether the claim succeeds or fails. The fees are based on an

hourly rate of $175, plus expenses - not a percentage of the settlement, as

in malpractice cases. Awards for pain and suffering are capped at $250,000.

The child is the sole beneficiary of the award, not the family. If the child

dies, the annuity established as part of the award reverts to the

compensation fund.

Another ripoff - who has damage claims here besides the abused child?

Nine years after the Central New Jersey girl's DTP shot, she continues to

suffer seizures and to be affected by swelling in the brain.

" In physical development, she's a 9-year-old girl,'' said her father,

chuckling that she may turn out to be the tallest member of the family.

Mentally, or cognitively, however, " her development was arrested at two

months.''

She cannot control her own movements, and is blind. The family cares for her

at home.

Among their first purchases from the settlement is a specially equipped van,

with a ramp and space for her wheelchair.

The girl weighs 47 pounds; lifting her in and out of the car has become

increasingly difficult.

The van hasn't arrived yet, her mother said, " but we feel better already,

just having ordered it.''

COMMENTS:

So, is this a success story or not? I think the parents of this young girl

would rather have a normal healthy child. They would have preferred to know

the possible consequences and then be allowed to choose whether they would

take the risks.

What this story doesn't tell is the hell these parents had to go through

just

to get this case to court. Thanks to the NVIC and this special group of

lawyers for their tenacity and courage to fight a powerful system.

This article should serve as a wake up call to all of you who think it can't

happen to you. As this article pointed out their are at least 10,000

reported

injuries and this accounts for only 10% of all injuries ever being reported.

This lack of reporting is mostly due to ignorance on our part. But hopefully

with seminars and info such as this you will be able to pass on to others

that these things can and do happen. Even more importantly I would rather

see

all of you learn ALL of the facts and then decide whether it is worth the

risks of getting these shots at all. This article only discusses the short

term ramifications but there are long term problems as well, which we have

discussed in past articles and seminars. These problems may not show up till

years later.

I still have not been able to find an open date to hold this years

vaccination seminar, but once I find an empty (?) time slot I'll let you

know.

Thanks and please feel free to pass this article on to others who may need

to

know!

DRM

PS

Just a couple of reminders. I will be out of town this weekend. I will be in

Pennsylvania starting our college search for my son, .

The first of the new monthly 3-part seminars will start next Tuesday,

10/8/02. If you have any inclination of attending sign up now. There is only

limited seating available at this time. Remember these seminars are FREE and

are open to EVERYONE.

Stay well!

Sandy from Alaska

http://www.vaccinationnews.com/

http://www.vaccinationnews.com/Scandals/past_scandals.htm

http://www.whale.to <http://www.whale.to/>

http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/vaccine.htm

http://www.909shot.com <http://www.909shot.com/>

http://www.redflagsweekly.com <http://www.redflagsweekly.com/>

http://www.thinktwice.com <http://www.thinktwice.com/>

http://home.san.rr.com/via/

http://www.vaccine-info.com <http://www.vaccine-info.com/>

http://www.vaccine-info.com http://healing-arts.org/children/vaccines/

ALL INFORMATION, DATA, AND MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE

IS FOR GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS

REFLECTING THE KNOWLEDGE OR OPINIONS OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE

CONSTRUED OR INTENDED AS PROVIDING MEDICAL OR LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION

WHETHER OR NOT TO VACCINATE IS AN IMPORTANT AND COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE

MADE BY YOU, AND YOU ALONE, IN CONSULTATION WITH YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.

IN ADDITION, THE FACT THAT THIS EMAIL HAS BEEN FORWARDED IN NO WAY

NECESSARILY IMPLIES ENDORSEMENT OF THE POINT OF VIEW OF THE AUTHOR OR

AUTHORS OF THE ARTICLE OR EMAIL.

[Guest guest]

"mndelise" <nancymike@...> Add to Address BookDate: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 04:02:36 -0000Subject: [mscured] MS & colloidal silverMy name is DeLise, I have written my story here, but I do not have time to keep up with all of the letters here,especially since I no longer need your help. A friend told me that someone wrote back on this list to say they tried CS for three weeks and didn't have any change. If she had seen a change I would have been surprised.How long has she had MS???? How much CS did she take? What PPM did she use? Where did she get her CS? A teaspoon or two a day for three weeks won't do a thing for a sick person. If you are just trying to keep your immune system working well then 1-2 teaspoons is fine.I have been drinking colloidal silver, 16 oz. of 10ppm, for nearly 4 years. I am 95% cured. I have some very minor symptoms left(slight numbness in the tips of my fingers and toes). I could not walk without help in Aug of 2000. Today I can walk miles with no trouble. No one would know I have these slight symptoms left. These symptoms were with me since 1962! How could sopmeone possibly think they would go away in three weeks???? Use your common sense. It took from 1962 til 2000 to practically put me in a wheel chair. I think four years to get rid of all that is quite amazing...The CS causes the virus to suffocate. While it dies, it is putting up a fight so you may even feel worse for awhile. I call these "healing crisis". They can last from a few hours to a few days or weeks. In fact the tips of my toes have been feeling very strange since february, and just last week the numbness in my toes has gone away. Now I have only the tips of my fingers to get rid of the numbness. I drink 16 0z. of colloidal silver every day. I add 1 drop of 3% hydrogen peroxide for each 2 oz. of CS. That would be 8 drops of H202 added to the CS. The H2o2 causes the silver particles to break up into very tiny particles. When the CS is broken down into such tiny particles they ae able to get into your blood stream and get to the virus. After the virus dies you will still not even know anything has happened, but it is! The silver is now helping to regenerate the myelin. I like to compare this to a scraped knee. First you get a scab, but somehow without you feeling anything your knee is healed in a few days. The CS is doing the same thing. It is VERY SLOW AND VERY SUBTLE. However, the other choice is to get slowly worse, so my choice is to get slowly better.You have everything to gain and NOTHING TO LOOSE. My phone # is 708-442-6229, I live in a suburb in Chicago. I would love to talk to anyone who truly wants to get well.If you think you should be cured in three weeks, don't bother to call me. Or you can email me at nancymike@... If it happened to me, it can happen to you. DeLise