Standard Product Quality

So, you decided to buy an electric can opener for your kitchen. You see an ad for this new product promising an easy opening, where the edges of the can are rounded to prevent serious injury from the sharp edges traditional openers leave. A fast, clean and safe can opening experience without all the labor needed to open cans in the past! Awesome right? You then get a Consumer Report on this can opener that says...

• This model opens only 15%-25% of the cans on the market.


• Of the 15%-25% it only works with cans of a specific diameter.


• There is a possible, but rare, risk of electrocution and death.


• A possible, less rare, risk of permanent damage to your counter top.

Would you buy this product?
I am going to go out on a limb here and speak for most people... NO. You are going to be passing on this patented kitchen aid.

But do most people understand this applies to medicine as well?
In my experience, no. There is a one size fits all attitude and if you ask a question you are just displaying your ignorance. This model, that I used above, is actually based on factual data from the standard yearly flu vaccine. The information was obtained from the CDC's (Center for Disease Control) own website on the flu and separate vital statistics area.

When looking at the statistical evidence from the flu vaccine. The CDC's prediction for the 1992-3 flu season was off by 84%. This is also the same for the 1997-8 year as well. So we are at our "25%" or rather 16% of cans...

Then if you happen to be one of the 16% that actually has a flu strain covered by the vaccine that you received you have a 70% chance of immunity to it, and we have our special diameter...

Next we have side effects. The flu shot indicates that there is a risk of Guillain-Barré, this is listed separately from other side effects. Another side effect is anaphylaxis if you are allergic to anything in the vaccine. For anyone who does not know Guillain-Barré is is a neurological condition which can paralyze and/or kill you. So here we have our small chance of electrocution and death.

Lastly, there have been a number of studies which show those who have received 5 or more flu shots have a 15% increased risk of degenerative neurological disease, like Alzheimer's. This final issue is our permanent counter top damage... Sounds funny and stupid when we are talking about a can opener. Not so funny and not so stupid when talking about a flu shot.

Why the H1N1 hype?
I think that a lot of this has to do with the fact that billions of dollars, of our money, were spent to fatten the pharmaceutical wallet in the sky. How stupid does everyone in the Government look if they say... "Well we panicked, but we have all these vaccines now. Lets just bury them somewhere?" So to combat this they have to pretend that this is still some 12 Monkeys/Outbreak scenario where we should be afraid to go outside or breathe in public. The CDC is even recommending a shot to those who have already had the virus?

This is the ONLY area of science that is so blatantly biased. The only area I have come across which is allowed such liberties and lack of accountability. American's all over the country are saying they will not allow a doctor near their arm with the H1N1 vaccine, 65% of Americans are planning on refusing it. It shows that people are paying attention to what is really going on here, more than the medical community would like. So their response? Make it compulsory for adults and children. My only hope is that people will see this situation, understand how unsafe the whole thing is and start the question: "Wait, if this one is unsafe what about the 48 shots we require children under 6 to have?"

Even health care workers are up in arms about this. This is not some global response by millions of uneducated people who have suddenly become Christian Scientists. These are people who see that there is evidence out there that does not answer the questions they are asking. But this whole situation feels like some Orwellian fugue. I hear people saying things like:

• "People who are not vaccinated should be required to wear red id bands which clearly identify them."


• "People who do not get the shot should lose their jobs."


• "Unvaccinated health care workers should be sued if anyone around them gets sick."


• "Unvaccinated people who get sick should be quarantined and refused all medical care."


• "Parents should have their children removed from custody if they refuse the swine flu shot."

AND MY ALL TIME FAVORITE:

• "Unvaccinated people put the rest of us at risk."

This one is my favorite because it is so commonly spouted by individual, doctor and government alike. I have written before that a vaccine's purpose is to expose you to a small dose of an illness which has been modified or killed so that your body will be immune to the illness if you encounter it naturally. So if you are vaccinated and you get sneezed on while you are on your way home from work using the subway - you are SAFE. What a stupid and ineffective device a vaccine would be if you got a shot and were at an increased risk for contracting the illness if someone around you got sick.

Problem is intelligent educated people are repeating this line over and over again. People that have degree's and even Ph.Ds. The two concepts are actually opposing arguments... opposite sides of a coin. You cannot have both, either a vaccine allows you to resist the disease or it makes you more susceptible to it: period. IF a flu shot will make you more susceptible to the flu why on earth would you take it?

Take the flu shot if you want to - by all means. Just get away from me and my family because we are not going to take it. Not until years of research, PROPER research is performed and we have recourse, medical and legal, if there is an injury. Because as it stands now you cannot get medical, financial or legal compensation if you are injured by a vaccine. The Patriot Act saw to that last loophole for manufacturer's.

You need to do the legwork for yourself when it comes to this. I have talked to Doctors and been intentionally or unintentionally misled. My son has a milk allergy and I recently found out the DTap vaccine is cultured in milk proteins, says so right on the insert. I spoke to my son's doctor about it and he stated that I was 100% incorrect. This confused me since I had just downloaded a copy from the Merck website before coming in. He also would not give me a copy of the insert and I had to ask several times for the Manufacturer, Lot and Exp details on the shot my son was getting. Course I had to sign his "liability form" in order to see him...

SO Get online, go to the manufacturer's website and get a copy of the insert for yourself. Read it. Go to the National Vaccine Information Center website, NVIC.org, and read the information and statistics about side effects, diseases and injury compensation. Do not rely on what people are telling you... go and find out for yourself. Use this as a source for more information... not your first and last stop



Read more...

Fact Checking: Formaldehyde

Good evening everyone, time to put on your tin-foil hats and curl up with a cup of hot cocoa. This is another post in part one, additives, of my vaccine series. This post is dedicated to the vaccine ingredient: formaldehyde.

Basic Facts: Vaccines contain mercury, formaldehyde and aluminum. A full listing of vaccine ingredients can be found on the CDC.gov website¹, see references.

Formaldehyde: The EPA indicates that formaldehyde is an important chemical. It is heavily used in manufacturing. It goes on to talk about the numerous products this chemical is used in. The most common source of formaldehyde exposure, after embalming (and who cares if it is toxic then), is pressed wood products. There is also a section that talks about serious health effects of formaldehyde exposure including throat irritation; wheezing and coughing; fatigue; skin rash; severe allergic reactions².

Wikipedia indicates that "Formaldehyde can be toxic, allergenic, and carcinogenic.", "Several European countries restrict the use of formaldehyde, including the import of formaldehyde-treated products and embalming. The European Union is considering a complete ban on the use of formaldehyde as a biocide³." A biocide is a chemical that can kill living organisms, including humans.

The CDC indicates that the formaldehyde used in vaccines is used to kill the viruses and bacteria used in the production of the vaccines as well as a precaution against unwanted viruses and bacteria which regularly contaminate vaccines⁴. They also point you to another document, if you have more concerns not addressed by them, on 'Addressing Parents Concerns' about vaccine additives. The paper talks about how the dose of formaldehyde in vaccines is harmless and we have years of studies on vaccines which prove that it is harmless. However there are also several alternate sources which indicate that it is the cause of severe allergic reactions, asthma and eczema type skin problems; in addition there are also more acute and serious health affects if larger concentrations are involved, like coma and death.

In the final analysis the document wants to make it clear we should all be confident because:

According to the AAP, "Parents should be reassured that quantities of mercury, aluminum and formaldehyde contained in vaccines are likely to be harmless on the basis of exposure studies in humans or experimental studies in animals."(emphasis added)

This paper systematically dismisses ANY and EVERY concern you might have about any number of additives. This paper is also co-authored by Dr. Paul Offit. Some notes on Dr. Offit: he is the co-inventor and a patent holder of the Rotovirus vaccine and is also on the vaccine advisory council the CDC uses to define the youth vaccination schedule. He is granted a waiver by the CDC for a conflict of interest when serving on the vaccine advisory council. He has also stated that children can receive upwards of 10,000 vaccines at one time without adverse effects.

But it should be the least of your worries. "Children have an enormous capacity to respond safely to challenges to the immune system from vaccines," says Dr. Offit. "A baby's body is bombarded with immunologic challenges - from bacteria in food to the dust they breathe. Compared to what they typically encounter and manage during the day, vaccines are literally a drop in the ocean." In fact, Dr. Offit's studies show that in theory, healthy infants could safely get up to 10,000 vaccines at once.

When looking at Infarex, the DTaP vaccine by GlaxoSmithKline, we are told that there is less than 100 mcg of residual formaldehyde per injection and CHOP has a chart indicating that no injection contains more than 0.2mg of the chemical⁸. But again, like trans fat ads, we need to tally the amount of formaldehyde with the number of shots at once. We need a cumulative count when the doctor comes in with 7 vaccines at the same time...

According the the NJ Vaccine Schedule, which has the largest number of vaccines in the country, a 3 month old child should have the following: 1 dose DTaP - 0.1mg, 1 dose Hib - 0.1mg. So that is actually 0.2mg of formaldehyde, that is not less than 100mcg. Now the safe level, according to the CDC is, 0.1ppm but does anyone know what that translates to mcg or mg?

There is also a discrepancy between these numbers and the actual effects that are measured. Some of the numbers are for carcinogenic effects, allergic reactions, breathing problems. They also vary greatly based on inhaled forms or consumed forms. There is no information on injected formaldehyde within the OSHA, EPA, and CDC details. There is also evidence that the EPA is re-evaluating the current standard for toxicity⁹.

You can also find another MSDS, Material Safety Data Sheet, on Formaldehyde from the Science Lab group which indicates that formaldehyde is an skin irritant, corrosive on skin and in the eyes, can cause death and has carcinogenic and mutagenic properties which can affect humans. The sheet also indicates that it is toxic to kidneys, liver, skin, central nervous system (CNS) and dangerous if ingested¹³.

But again...
This is not your run of the mill dangerous formaldehyde that is used in children's vaccines. This is the special human, child, friendly version of the chemical that comes with a basket full of puppies when you order it online with a special code...

Small Tangent...
The Associated Content article, The DTaP Vaccine: What the Manufacturer's Insert Tells Us, brings an interesting fact to the surface as well. The DTaP vaccine is cultivated with milk protein. The insert indicates that children with milk protein allergies should not receive the vaccine. However, the document provided by doctors about the vaccine, entitled: Vaccines, What You Need To Know¹², does not contain this information. What else is missing from these fact sheets you are provided with... quite a lot actually, but that is another post.

My thoughts...
We know that formaldehyde is dangerous to all life forms however there is a clear argument between how much is too much and at what level is exposure going to cause what complications. I know that personally we had a pressed wood dresser and standard infant mattress in my sons room. He had asthma symptoms every day, mostly at nap time and night time. These symptoms were continual for several months. He needed constant treatment with a nebulizer. We removed the dresser and then later the mattress and his asthma symptoms have disappeared. The doctors assure me emphatically and without any room for argument that the dresser and the mattress had nothing to do with it, even though both are made with formaldehyde. One doctor went so far as to say that using sheets on the mattress would reduce the chemicals coming out of the mattress, like some sort of filter.

If this chemical can cause illness just breathing it what business does it have being injected into our children at any level?

---

References:
1. "Vaccine ingredients sorted by ingredient" Centers for Disease Control, CDC.gov. Accessed 09-21-2009.

2. "# Basic Information: Formaldehyde" Environmental Protection Agency, EPA.gov. Accessed 09-21-2009.

3. "Formaldehyde," Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Accessed 09-21-2009.

4. "Ingredients of Vaccines - Fact Sheet" Centers for Disease Control, CDC.gov. Accessed 09-21-2009.

5. "Addressing Parents’ Concerns: Do Vaccines Contain Harmful Preservatives, Adjuvants, Additives, or Residuals?" Pediatrics, Medical Journal. Accessed 09-21-2009.

6. "Formaldehyde (CASRN 50-00-0)." Environmental Protection Agency, EPA.gov. Accessed 09-21-2009.

7. "Formaldehyde." National Safety Council. Accessed 09-21-2009.

8. "Hot Topics: Formaldehyde." Vaccine Information Center, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. Accessed 09-21-2009.

9. "Formaldehyde in Vaccines: Toxic Substance Poses Threat" Associated Content. Accessed 09-21-2009.

10. "Infanrix Prescribing Information. GlaxoSmithKline. US.GSK.com. Accessed 09-21-2009.

11. "The DTaP Vaccine: What the Manufacturer's Insert Tells Us" Associated Content. Accessed 09-21-2009.

12. "Vaccines, What You Need To Know" Centers for Disease Control, CDC.gov. Accessed 09-21-2009.

13. "Parents Pack Newsletter." October 2005 Issue. Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. Accessed 09-21-2009.

14. "Material Safety Data Sheet: Formaldehyde" Science Lab. Accessed 09-21-2009.
Read more...

Fact Checking: Aluminum

This is a new series of posts based on vaccines. This is part one, additives. After further research on more vaccine issues I have found more information, convoluted (from either side), as most of it tends to be. I have tried to navigate between these two sides with a 6 foot salt shaker (and an extra bottle of salt on the side). I have come up with some interesting and conflicting information. Right now I am going to talk about the additives, specifically aluminum.

Basic Facts: Vaccines contain mercury, formaldehyde and aluminum. A full listing of vaccine ingredients can be found on the CDC.gov website¹, see references.

I am going to focus on 1 of these additives, aluminum.

Aluminum: When you look up aluminum on the CDC website you get several items, one is a vaccine page. If you have concerns about aluminum use in the vaccines the CDC directs you to a document, created and sponsored by CHOP, called Aluminum in Vaccines². This document goes to great length to assure you that the amount of aluminum in vaccines is of no concern and clearly not harmful to anyone. They illustrate how we consume aluminum everyday thought a multitude of sources and our babies are getting such a small amount in their vaccines. This is equated to drinking a bottle or a feeding of breast milk. They do not differentiate between eating foods which contain aluminum and injecting aluminum directly into the body or blood stream.

But why is this important?
This specific difference has caused many "peer reviewed" scientific studies to be discarded as injection is NOT the same as consumption. They do talk a bit about the aluminum used in intravenous fluids but emphasis is placed on the fact that toxicity numbers are for patients with compromised kidneys.

The FDA indicates that aluminum content over 5 micrograms per kilogram of body weight in a day can cause toxic reactions in an adult with compromised kidney function. Dr. Sears points out that this would be 10 to 20 mcg for an infant, in a daily dose³. The Eengerix-B Hepatitis B vaccine⁴, given at BIRTH, contains 250 mcg in one shot. The Pediarix vaccine⁵, which is for DTaP-Hepatitis B-Polio, a combination vaccine has a dose of 850 mcg of aluminum. Pediarix would be considered toxic for a 375lb adult according to the FDA's information.

Breakdown:
Pediarix 375lbs = 170kg x 5mcg = 850mcg aluminum
Eengerix-B 110lbs = 50kg x 5mcg = 250mcg aluminum

Again, there is a lot of emphasis that this relates to people with impaired kidney function, but do they check your infant for impaired kidney function at birth? What is proper kidney function in a 8 hour old child? How much aluminum can a 24 hour kidney excrete without causing physical or neurological damage? Do they run a test to see what a toxic level of aluminum looks like on someone without impaired kidney function?

If you look on the internet there are tibits out there. One source talks about about content over 100 mcg per liter of water being unsafe for consumption⁶. This is noteworthy since aluminum compounds are used by water treatment facilities to clarify water. But there are no real studies on toxicity on healthy people since it is immoral to test toxicity levels on humans by poisoning them. There is also a lot of jabber that vaccines cannot be withheld from people since they are considered 'life saving' and to do so would be to deny treatment and that is unethical... However, the EPA indicates that aluminum toxicity has been linked to pulmonary and developmental problems⁷.

The Dr. Sears' article talks, in detail, about how no one really knows how this amount of aluminum affects infants³. The studies that he has personally looked at just do not have the answers. The assumption is that aluminum is safe. And again, like so many other aspects relating to vaccination, there is aggressive and vehement opposition (by the medical community, the government and pharmaceutical companies) to any suggestion that it could be otherwise. There is only one thing that is clear: parents are not so sure it is safe.

Another nice tibit out there is that fluoride also can affect aluminum. Thats right, the fluoride we put in the water to keep our teeth healthy. The general process is that aluminum is excreted by the body and in most cases this is true, however studies show that fluoride combines with aluminum allowing it to pass into your body, from the blood stream, and collect in the bone and brain tissue.

A fluoride/activist group, ActionPA, cites a news release from the medical journal Brain Research about the connection to Alzheimer's disease⁸. There is also document from the Department of Health and Human Services which recommends that this substance be watched and studied because of its neurotoxic properties⁹. Another bit, the National Toxicology Program goes into great detail on the toxicity of aluminum and its controversial link in studies. Saying that there are several studies which show a clear connection to illness and then others that show opposing results to those same studies¹⁰. There is even an MSDS, which is a Material Saftey Data Sheet¹² (required by 'Big Brother' for most substances people are exposed to), which talks about some serious effects:

It is a poison that accumulates in the brain and tissues of the body ("target organs"). Ingestion: "Chronic ingestion of aluminum may cause Aluminum related Bone Disease or aluminum-induced Osteomalacia with fracturing Osteodystrophy, microcytic anemia, weakness, fatigue, visual and auditory hallucinations, memory loss, speech and language impairment (dysarthria, stuttering, stammering, anomia, hypofluency, aphasia, and, eventually, mutism), epileptic seizures (focal or grand mal), motor disturbances (tremors, myoclonic jerks, ataxia, convulsions, asterixis, motor apraxia, muscle fatigue), dementia (personality changes, altered mood, depression, diminished alertness, lethargy, ‘clouding of the sensorium’, intellectual deterioration, obtundation, coma), and altered EEG.

Awesome hu?
Don't worry, I thought so too. Can you think of anything else that might be as toxic and pervasive as aluminum? As it relates to vaccines? Come on! I gave you a list at the beginning... the CDC, AAP, and FDA want to ASSURE you that this is a special child friendly version of aluminum (you can request in pink or blue to match your child's gender) which is used in vaccines; not this scary nasty aluminum we are talking about here...

So where does that leave you and me?
I simply do not understand why the EPA, FDA, and other governmental agencies are "watching" this neurotoxin if a dose of 850mcg is safe or a newborn. How can aluminum even be classified as a neurotoxin if it is so safe? The fact is that it is not. The information I found is spread out between several agencies and most of the agencies are not in charge of vaccines or their production. The studies are also in water treatment, not pediatrics... aluminum miner and foundry workers, not children's daycare...

One of the most interesting things about this additive, or adjuvent as such things are called in the medical community, is that medical science cannot even explain what it does. All we really know is that it 'seems' to increase the immune response to the vaccine, thus making the vaccine more effective.

My thoughts...
I personally believe that the money involved in a guaranteed nationwide government contract helps gray areas like this. If you follow the methodology - we all know that trusting companies to do their own saftey testing is like putting a fox in charge of chickens, but it happens everyday. I want to be able to vaccinate my child. I want to believe that if I do this my children will be safe from illness that could kill them or even some that would just annoy them and cause a lot of discomfort that they do not have to otherwise go through. The problem is the facts are all wrong. How can we be assured that aluminum is safe when liturature spread accross agencies and other medical sources shows it is not?

Lets be realistic here, I am not talking about having too much butter with a meal or giving my daughter an extra cookie after dinner. We are talking about injecting a known neurotoxic metal into the body of a child, that in conjunction with ADA advocated water fluoridation, will deliver that neurotoxin directly to her brain.

Ironically the CDC also has a document called the Toxicological Profile for Aluminum¹¹. This document has test after test of damaging affects on every manner of animal accept humans. No Studies, No Studies, No Studies.... this is like a mantra in the document and yet at the same time there is a document sponsored by them saying studies show that aluminum is safe. It is almost laughable that a study used to dispute a connection with Alzheimer's disease consisted of a telephone call to patients to determine the number of people affected with Alzheimer's who used aluminum containing deodorant vs. those who did not.

WOW.
I know I'm sold.

---

References:

1. "Vaccine ingredients sorted by ingredient" Centers for Disease Control, CDC.gov. Accessed 09-17-2009.

2. "Aluminum in Vaccines: What you should know"" Centers for Disease Control, CDC.gov. Document Created and Published by CHOP (Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. Accessed 09-17-2009.

3. "Is Aluminum the New Thimerosal?" Mothering Magazine, Dr. Robert W. Sears. Issue 146, January/February 2008. Accessed 09-17-2009.

4. Eengerix-B Prescribing Information. GlaxoSmithKline. US.GSK.com. Accessed 09-17-2009.

5. Pediarix Prescribing Information. GlaxoSmithKline. US.GSK.com. Accessed 09-17-2009.

6. Aluminum Toxicity: A misdiagnosed epidemic. Idaho Observer. Ingri Cassel. December 2007. Accessed 09-17-2009.

7. Ecological Toxicity Information. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA.gov. Accessed 09-17-2009.

8. Fluoride Combines with Aluminium in Drinking Water. ActionPA, Actionpa.org. Accessed 09-17-2003.

9. Federal Register Online via GPO Access. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. Accessed 09-17-2003.

10. Aluminum Compounds　Review of Toxicological Literature. The National Toxicology Program, The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. NTP.NIEHS.NIH.gov Accessed 09-17-2009.

11. Toxicological Profile for Aluminum. Centers for Disease Control, CDC.gov. Accessed 09-17-2009.

12. Aluminum MSDS. Science Lab, ScienceLab.com. Accessed 09-17-2009.

Read more...

Vaccination Fundamentalists & the Rest of Us.

I have not broached this topic as of yet in my blog. Today seems like a good day. School is starting and millions of children are going to return to school and basically receive a shot as they go through the door. Schools across the country are now flu clinics for a disease that is shown continually to be mild and less harmful than the regular strain of influenza which, as we all know, is an epidemic killing millions; like something out of "The Stand."

I have my own, strong, opinions about vaccination and in my "quest" to find more information and educate myself I have been harassed, ignored, retaliated against, and generally opposed in all ways. Now mind you, I did not say that I refused to vaccinate my children. What I said was, I wanted MORE information and to educate myself.

It is a sad fact that almost NO ONE in the country believes their doctor fully anymore, just as "empty promises" has become the standard tag line for our faith in politicians. Many people believe that their doctors recommendations are not motivated by our best interests any longer, but the fear of litigation and greater good of the public health. This is not to say that doctors on a personal level are not trustworthy or deliberately deceiving us... but there is a pattern here.

When my daughter was born she was whisked away within minutes of her emergence from my post-operative body. She was washed and her cord cut, then some industrial blue dye was put on her cord, (for reasons I still do not understand...) and a vaccine for Hepatitis B was given to her. Those of you not “in the know” may not know that Hepatitis B is a sexually transmitted disease that pregnant women are regularly screened for during pregnancy. So since I did not have Hepatitis B pre or post pregnancy I am not sure how my daughter could have contracted Hepatitis B vaginally within hours of her birth. However, the AAP (American Academy of Pediatrics) feels that all children are in terrifying danger of Hepatitis B from the rampant infant sex happening in hospitals across the nation that they need the life saving protection of a vaccine within hours of birth. They are also to receive another 3 shots as a “booster” before they are 18 months of age. Because again, the rampant sexual deviance of toddlers is a well known “elephant in the room,” do not get me started on all the needle sharing that goes on in this age range as well. You may think that they cannot handle that sippy cup but that is just a deception – those little buggers can manage a hypodermic without a hitch.

I then, of course, brought my daughter in for her scheduled visits to the pediatrician so we could monitor her development and of course get more vaccines. When she was 3 months old the doctor entered the room with 5 vaccines and got ready to “get started,” requiring that I even hold my own child down, immobilized, so that she could have the nurse do the shots. I objected to this. I uttered the words “Wait a minute, she is getting 5 shots at once?” The room went icy. I did not know that I had just told the doctor that my husband and I were wanted war criminals... terrorists to the public good... I thought that I had shown concern and good judgment as she thrust a stack of papers at me explaining the complications vaccines could cause and trying to administer them before I could even count the pages let alone read them. For one of the main things I could see in all of the papers was, “if you have a reaction to this vaccine...” The first thought I had was, “How will I know which vaccine my daughter has had a reaction to if you are giving her 5 shots at a time?” and the second was “Why does she need all of these right now? I am breastfeeding her and she is not in daycare.” The doctor did not answer any of these questions but stated, mechanically, that she was administering the recommended vaccines and that I was putting my child at risk by not allowing her to proceed. In my eyes she was putting my child at risk from the number of vaccines she wanted to give at the same time. In the end I stated flatly that I would not allow more than two vaccines administered at the same time. She left the room without looking at me or saying another word and the nurse took over.

So much for patient informed consent.
So much for parental rights.

I had this battle EVERY time I brought my daughter in for a checkup. EVERY TIME. I was branded a problem parent and my questions were NEVER answered. My daughter, like most children, got a fever after all her vaccines. I have learned that this is a common side effect of vaccines, and hardly the worst, however doctors do not even record this information in the chart. A fever of 100.99 degrees, is now, not even a fever in their eyes. There is also another thing that the doctors office never recorded... the manufacturer, lot number or expiration date on the vaccines administered to my daughter or my son. I know this because I needed to obtain copies. There is a space for that information on both charts... in fact it is the only information “collected.” The name of the vaccine, manufacturer, expiration and lot number... a standard spread sheet style paper... it determines if my child can go to school or not... and it looks like a post-it with illegible handwriting on it.

Another thing that I am shocked about is the vehemence that other mothers have toward people who question vaccination or do not vaccinate their children. They pull their kids closer and glare at you, like you are somehow causing disease by your mere presence. How dare you show up at the playground with “typhoid mary” in tow. I got in a conversation with about 5 other mothers one day on the subject and I was equally shocked about the ignorance they all had about vaccination as a whole. Every mother was under the impression that an un-vaccinated child put their own child at risk for an illness they had been vaccinated against. That is asinine. Why would millions of people be required to vaccinate their children if simply being around an un-vaccinated child put them at risk...? It is the opposite of what vaccines were invented for. A vaccines purpose is to expose you to a calculated dose of an illness which has been modified or killed so that your body will be immune to the illness if you encounter it naturally. It tricks the body into thinking that you have already had the illness, even though you did not have all the vomiting, shitting and delirium which comes from many of the illnesses themselves. It is really an ingenious idea when you get down to it. I think it is up there with one of the most innovative and practical inventions that mankind has thought up. That does not mean that I want to inject my child, required by law, with thirty-five doses of vaccines before she is three years of age.

The doctors push a piece of paper in front of you to sign as if to imply you are “giving consent” to vaccinate... you are not. In fact the doctor has the legal right to administer the vaccines without your consent and over your objections.

Another issue is the toxic conversation that “pro-vaccine,” a term I loath, people push. The vehemence and scathing contempt for those who do not want to vaccinate or want to take it slower is just over the top. There is no middle ground in this debate and to those who are “pro-vaccine” there is no debate – you are just fucking stupid. You must be one of those fundamentalist religious people who will not allow the cooking of green vegetables on Tuesday if Venus is in the 5th house of Mars... or you live in some compound hidden in the desert were one man fathers 45 children in the name of God... But I am not, and no one else that I know, who objects to vaccination, is either. In fact most of us are well educated and smart. We have questions which are not answered and we see connections which have not been explained adequately (or explained away without real assessment). I also find it telling that the pro camp use the same terms and statements in their propaganda. They sound like the same person... humm...

There is a series of articles on a group of Somali refugees that are living in Minneapolis. The rates of autism in this group is staggering, one in twenty-three children out of the Somali group has developed autism. The comments on these articles are very telling of peoples opinions and illustrate a lot of the “pro camps” intolerant and aggressive disdain for anyone who disagrees with them. The Fundamentalist Vaccinators we will call them... The TFV's... There was a comment from a user named “Viewpoint” last night which talked about how he used to be employed by a Pharmaceutical company and how his job was actually to create posts and comments which would curb the conversation to the company perspective. He talked about how he was instructed to create multiple accounts so that it appeared as though there were a number of users who all felt the same way, the majority... I went back to quote the comment today for this blog and it has been “flagged” and removed... that is odd don't you think?

I have learned, through my journey to educate myself:

• That doctors are now rejecting patients from their practice for questioning and desiring to space vaccines out, a practice that the CDC and AAP openly discourage.



• That there are no studies which confirm or deny a link between thimerisol (ethyl-mercury) and autism.



• That VAERS, Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, is not used by 90% of doctors and that even those who do use it are not recording most basic reactions, like fevers.



• That most parents of autistic children have watched their children “become” autistic within days of a vaccination.



• That vaccine patent holders are on the Vaccine Advisory Council that determines the youth vaccine schedule.



• That the CDC grants a waiver for the conflict of interest that those on the Vaccine Council clearly have.

  Five, that the CDC grants conflict of interest waivers to every member of their advisory committee a year at a time, and allows full participation in the discussions leading up to a vote by every member, whether they have a financial stake in the decision or not. So they’re discussing it, influencing other members possibly, whether they have a financial stake or not.

• Most doctors do not receive a flu shot.



• While thimerisol is not recommended for use in vaccines it is still used in multi-dose vials.



• The widespread rhetoric that thimerisol is no longer in single use vaccines is untrue. While the new vaccines manufactured no longer contain thimerisol the older versions were never removed from the market and those marketed to other countries also do contain it.



• Young children are now required to obtain an annual, thimerisol containing, flu shot in order to attend school.



• Pregnant women and children are encourages to refrain from eating deep sea fish because of the risk of mercury poisoning.



• BUT... Pregnant mothers and infants as young as 6 months are encouraged to get a thimerisol containing flu shot, even though the information provided with the flu shot indicates that it should only be done as an emergency precaution.

Pardon me if I think you might be smart enough to draw your own conclusions to this information... I doubt you need me to "sum up" for you. I will post a warning now, my comments are moderated and I will not allow insulting or abusive comments. If you think people who do not vaccinate should be burned or have their kids removed from custody... go somewhere else, there are enough sites out there for you. Comments will not degrade into some flaming war here. That does not mean I will not publish opposing views.


References:
Somali's Autism Epidemic:
Minneapolis and the Somali Autism Riddle

Somali Autism Mom: "We Thought America Was the Last and Best Stop in this World"

The Minnesota Somali Autism Study: That and a dollar will buy you a hot dog.

CDC Documentation:
CDC Hepatitis B Information

CDC Vaccine Schedule (PDF File)

Other:
VAERS Reporting Site

Conflict of Interest & Vaccine Development (PDF File) Read more...

Better Homes & Pharmacies

So, I have yet another subscription lovingly provided by my mother-in-law. This one is the Better Homes and Gardens magazine. Or rather, as I have found, Better Homes and Pharmacies. Who says direct advertising has no impact?

I was flipping through this "magazine" (and I use the term loosely) the other day at breakfast and made a snide comment about not being able to find any of the articles. The whole thing seemed to be ads. My husband made a suggestion: tear out all the pages with ads and see how much is left of the magazine.

There are about 200 pages in the magazine and I could barely find any content. I noticed that throughout the magazine there were ads on the facing page (sometimes multiple and many full page) and you then turned the page to read any content on the back page. This tactic is used on almost every page. There is a tiny block of content on the rear of the page... surrounded by more ads.

Out of the 200 pages there were only 20 pages left once I removed all the ads. Most of the ads were full page ads but there were also several pages blocked out for several advertisements ringing a small portion of text. Most of the ads had some reference to scientific studies or research done on their product to insinuate its superiority over any alternative.

200 Pages - Ads = 20 Pages

20 Pages

There were only twenty pages (20) out of 200 that were ad free. No wonder I could not find any of the articles.

While I was going through the pages and removing the ads I noticed that they had a similar theme that the Ladies Home Journal had, in that they were for junk food and pre-made meals, but there was a sharp increase in the number of pharmaceutical ads. A considerable number of the ads were for very serious pharmaceutical drugs...

200 Pages - Content = 180 Pages

180 Pages - Medicines = 150 Pages

30 Pages

That is right... thirty (30) pages of ads for pharmaceutical drugs. This count includes the full page ads, and in some cases 2 page ads, and the prescribing information following the ads... so that you can be sure to get "all the facts" about the medication... or at least enough to make you ask your Doctor to prescribe it. And it is no wonder that drug companies spend about 4 billion, 4 BILLION, dollars a year on "direct-to-consumer-marketing." So if they are spending $4 billion, what do you think they are making? (They also spend about $16 billion to get your doctor to recommend them too...)

Now, I do not know about you, but when I was growing up someone paid you to advertise their products for them... However, in this new modern age Better Homes and Gardens is charging for the ads and making you pay for them too? Sounds like a sweet deal to me. Kinda like that tax on used cars that you pay over and over again...

If you are feeling saucy, just skip the subscription and buy it off the news stand, that way you can be sure to get ripped off properly! Read more...

The Not So Angry Oatmeal Post

After my Breastfeeding Crimes post, and a dozen others, you may be thinking that I am off my rocker... Notwithstanding the rocker part this is still -yes- a short non-angry post about oatmeal. But such oatmeal...

Some of you, who have followed other posts, may know that our family is attempting to get a little greener in our daily lives, mainly spawned by the allergies my youngest child has. In an attempt to join the "Slow Food" movement we have started making a number of things from scratch. I purchased a bag of Bob's Red Mill Rolled Oats the other day since the other stuff has maybe 15 ingredients and 2-3 that my son cannot have and 10 that I do not want him to... I looked at the directions and sighed, annoyed, at the 10-20 minute estimated cook time - and bought them anyway.

Never have 20 minutes been more worth the wait.

I have eaten "quick oats" and "instant" oatmeal most of my life - never again. In fact as I got older the idea of oatmeal texture, akin to mucus, took root in my mind and I began to have aversions to it. I found excuses to eat something else when it was for breakfast. The slow cooked oatmeal was perfect and as oatmeal should be. I could feel that the oats were whole and the texture was firm and they tasted great - not some pile of gelatinous chemicals with "natural peach flavor" somewhere at the end of the list.

Preparation:

Bob's Red Mill Rolled Oats Oatmeal
Cream of Coconut (to taste)
Organic Non-Salted Butter
Organic Half'n Half (or Milk for you Fatophobes)

Make the oats according to the package - boil the water first, it will allow the oats to maintain their shape better. Once the oats are finished put them in serving dishes, drizzle the cream of coconut on top (to taste), add a pat of butter and a tablespoon or two of cream. Mix. Enjoy.
Read more...

Breastfeeding Crimes

Okay, I did not want to write about this mainly because when I first read about this case it seemed it would blow over once anyone with a brain got involved. Well, it didn't. Stacy Anvarinia is being charged with Child Endangerment and faces 5 years in prison. Her daughter has already been taken away from her and is in foster care.

I first read about this on the Eco Child's Blog and followed it as it was quickly picked up throughout the "Mom Blogs." My first impressions of this case are that this woman has been terribly wronged and the whole thing should be dismissed. It will blow over damnit.

It didn't.

It still hasn't.

If you want to read anything about it type in Stacy Anvarinia in any search engine. you can also take a look here: Drunken Breastfeeding

This poor woman has pleaded GUILTY to child endangerment and faces 5 years in PRISON for breastfeeding her daughter while the police were at her house. Let us take a look at the reported facts in this situation:

1.) She called the police about domestic violence. Her boyfriend had beaten her about the head and neck. The police noted injuries to the face on arrival.

2.) During the interview she breastfed her child.

3.) She was arrested for child endangerment, police allege she was drunk during the interview and while breastfeeding her child.

4.) There was no breathalyzer or blood test taken to determine if she was intoxicated.

5.) It is not a crime to breastfeed a child after consuming anything - even substances like anti-depressants, street drugs, and opiate derived medications prescribed by a physician.

6.) The boyfriend who beat her has not been brought up on charges.

So, looking at these facts I would think, well she was beaten about the head and seemed to be drunk... maybe she was HIT IN THE HEAD REPEATEDLY? Or MAYBE - JUST MAYBE after being BEATEN by someone she cared for she had a few DRINKS. I know that if it was me, I probably would do the same. Of course, I am speculating about the drinks because no tests were performed. I do not know about you - but if you plan to put me away for 5 years for having a beer and feeding my child you better have more than your "say so" to convict me. OH WAIT it is not illegal to breastfeed after drinking.

What REALLY gets me about this entire situation is the obtuse and ignorant statement that the police released on the issue:

"It is quite unusual for a mother to be breast-feeding her child as we are conducting an investigation, whether she was intoxicated or not."

So does that mean that infants should not get hungry when the police are involved? Would it be just as unusual if she had to go to the store to buy more formula for her child while they were there? Isn't it more abusive to NOT feed your child because the police are there?

Now we know that breastfeeding after consuming alcohol is NOT a crime - but what is a crime is Assault and Battery even if sober and bottlefeeding your child... so why is no one looking to the boyfriend now?

I am saddened that no Women's Rights or Breastfeeding groups have rallied to Stacy's aide. It is pathetic that they are all cowing behind their "recommendations about drinking while breastfeeding" which is NOT the issue here. THERE IS NO PROOF THAT THIS WOMAN WAS EVEN INTOXICATED so that this issue has even become about breastfeeding and alcohol is evasive and cowardly.

I believe that Stacy Anvarinia's rights have been trampled severely and I cannot imagine what threat they hung over her head that convinced her to PLEAD GUILTY to this overwhelmingly inappropriate charge. This entire situation should be reviewed by internal affairs and Women's rights groups should be involved in her defense. I believe they have an OBLIGATION to get involved in this and not just with commentary about how drinking and breastfeeding are "not recommended." I mean a real legal defense fund to get this woman's charges dismissed and to return her child to her.

I am not even going to get INTO THE MINUTE AMOUNT OF ALCOHOL IN BREASTMILK because I will probably have a stroke while writing about it. Let us keep this about the abuse of power local police enacted over a BATTERED woman (with a prior crime on her record) trying to take care of her newborn.

Would anyone have looked twice if she had taken prescribed percocet? or vicodan? NO. It would have been a non-issue. There is also the fact that they keep returning to this "prior crime" issue. They have not released information on what the "prior crime" was and seem to allude to it having something to do with why they decided on their current charges. But as far as I know... prior crimes cannot be used against you in court. Maybe she stole something... does that make you an unfit parent? Problem is no one knows.

This woman had a horrible day and maybe she had a beer or two... just like you and me. OR MAYBE SHE HAD A HEAD INJURY. Or maybe she is being harassed by the police who do not like "repeat offenders," "poor people," or "suspicious behavior." And in a day and age where breastfeeding rates drop by 80% after children turn three months of age, no wonder they were shocked to see a woman do such a thing in their presence.

Addition: I have since found a copy of the police report for this. It is hard to read, however, you can make out that this is indeed all she was arrested for. They "rushed" the baby to a nearby hospital for "evaluation" and "subsequent medical care." My loathing cannot even be portrayed properly in words.

Read more...

Headlines, Trees and Disease

So I was out driving around today and saw one of those newspaper dispensers on the corner near my house. The HUGE headline, that filled the entire page, was "LOVER STRANGLED BY BOYFRIEND." Now do not get me wrong... I am sure that this matters a great deal to her and her family but is it "National News?" Similar to the 6th death in the state from Swine Flu? Why is this on the front page?

Why is this more important that the fact that the USDA intends to approve a full scale planting of genetically engineered eucalyptus trees...


What?

Your serious... GE Trees are more important?
Actually, yes. Would you like to know why they are more important? I thought so... I am going to tell you. There is a pathogen called Cryptococcus gattii which is a fungal pathogen. This fungus causes meningitis in people and animals. This fungus really likes these trees. This "new and improved" version of the eucalyptus tree is a known host for this fungal species and the planting of these trees will result in wide spread contamination of forests and areas where they are planted. Lets not forget cross pollination and wind blown pollination either. There are estimates of pollination occurring 1,000 kilometers from the initial planting sites.

The entire project hinges on the fact that these trees can survive in colder climates. The EPA and USDA have not put together a Environmental Impact Statement or EIS to review any relevant problems that this might cause. The eucalyptus is actually considered a "pest" species or invasive non-native species in many areas and is removed when found.

As far as I am concerned I have yet to read any material which explains WHY we need eucalyptus trees which can thrive in cold climates. And honestly, even if there was a good argument I would argue that the risk of meningitis is not an acceptable risk. Everyone talks about progress and science being the key -- no one is talking about progress towards what or the key to what... doesn't anyone else find that odd?

If you would like more information on this issues or would like to take action to stop these trees from being planted please visit the Center for Food Saftey @ http://ga3.org/campaign/GEtrees

==

image source: wikimedia.org, public domain.
Read more...

Welcome to Dr. [BLANK]'s office, please take a seat.

So...a friend of mine wrote a blog post the other day about a recent trip to the doctors office that almost any of us can identify with. It got me so heated I have to vent about it myself. This is an area with the worst set of office policies and accountability that I have ever seen and really makes a statement about the "health" of the system we use.

In future generations the terms HMO and PPO will be ticket offenses and history books will be rewritten to stamp out the very mention of them to preserve peace for future... Dramatic? Well whoever thought up an HMO has obviously never had to use one and can probably afford private home care from a physician on retainer.

One of the things that I find so aggravating about this is that now "we" have become the "enemy." I called a doctor's office once to let them know that I was running late and did not know if I would make it in time - but that I was coming - due to an accident on the road. Why? Because it is courteous. Well I was penalized for this courtesy as I had to wait an additional hour to see the doctor, no one told me anything, I just waited... and waited... Finally I stood up and went to the window to complain and the "office administrator" (they do not even sound like humans anymore, G.B. Carlin...) informed me casually, "Well what do you expect, you were late."

When I explained s l o w l y that even though I had called to let them know I was running late I still arrived 10 minutes before my scheduled appointment time, never mind the fact that I had never been seen before 20 minutes after the scheduled time, and had waited through TWO patients with appointments after mine. She said, "But you were late."

Another doctor's office had me wait through a nurses personal phone call and lunch break at her desk - 2 hours after my scheduled "nurse" appointment. When I complained to the front desk I was told that she had gone for the day and that I would need to reschedule my appointment for a later date. Did I mention the nurse was watching the exchange the whole time? Oh, and smiling. I stayed in that office an additional two hours to talk to the managing doctor about the situation and how rude they had been. She stated that she did not believe me because that "just doesn't sound like my girls."

And, since I have already started, there was an OB/GYN office that I used to go to and I once made an appointment for 8AM. I had planned to go to work after since I did not need to be in the office till 9:15AM. I walked in the office at 7:45 and saw 2 other women sitting there. Another walked in while I was waiting. So that is three (3) other women, four (4) including myself. I asked the clerk if there was another doctor on that day and was informed that "No, only him." We were all called within 5 minutes of each other and sent to our respective "rooms," I was called last, which were cold as hell... and asked to put on a tissue paper robe. At 8:50AM I had still not seen the doctor. I took off my robe and got dressed. I went out to the main desk to complain and the girl at the front desk, bless her, looked like she was going to flinch. I asked her what the problem was and why I had not been able to see the doctor yet. She apologized and told me the doctor would be with me as soon as possible but that he was with another patient. I asked her how that was possible since I had called and was told that 8AM was the first appointment she shrugged and said "I'm sorry."

While I was talking to her my doctor rounded the corner and said "What, you aren't staying for your appointment?" I lost it. I yelled that my appointment had been at 8AM and that I had specifically asked if it was the first one so I would not be late to work and arrived early so I did not set back his schedule for the day and that NOW I had to go to work... a full hour PAST my appointment time, not that he gave a shit, because his time was SO much more valuable than mine. He shrugged and turned away from me handing someone else some files and walked away. But after he walked away the girl at the counter gave me a quiet golf clap and said "Good for you!"

The last one I will share with you is when I was pregnant with my first child. Actually no... that one is too personal for this venue... maybe another time. Suffice it to say that I have since learned the name for my encounter has been dubbed, recently, as "Medi-wife" or "Medwife." This term is used now to identify nurse practitioners who are registered nurse midwives. There have been studies on this group of women and they show that they perform more unnecessary risks and surgeries on laboring women than other midwives and even Ob/Gyn doctors themselves. I think it is safe to assume that they have gotten a little taste of the "God" complex so many doctors are accused of... STAT!!!!


Read more...

Reclaiming my yard.

When we moved into the house we are in now there was a lot of landscaping which had been done around the house. After having another child I realized I cannot keep up with the weed pulling and spraying, not to mention that it is just chemicals upon chemicals -some of which supports my least favorite company- so NO MORE.

I have seen several articles about people in CA letting their yards "go back to nature" by planting some indigenous plants and grasses which lower their carbon footprint, attract local birds and bees, and just look damn nice. For some reason "Western" thinking implies that anything in its natural state cannot be beneficial. You can see this all over the place: how we give birth, medications, and food are some obvious examples. I think though that our gardens are also affected. We do not know what indigenous plants are or even what they look like - assuming that if it is not at the grocery store you can't get it or it is too much trouble. Most grass actually flowers and even common plants like clover can look beautiful when allowed to grow to proper size and proportions.

I found a few links for local, for me local is NJ, plants and species in my area. I have listed them in case you are interested in looking at them at all. The gentleman who runs the Easyliving Wildflowers site only deals in indigenous species and has a wide selection. I am going to get the following from him:

New Jersey Tea or Ceanothus americanus which has nice white flowers when it blooms. It is a shrub so I am going to plant it around the fence areas.



I also intend to use Lonicera flava or Native Yellow Honeysuckle. These are really nice and are not the Japanese Honeysuckle you see all over the place. I intend to plant these along the chain link fence as crawlers so they use the fence as a trellis and block out the ugly thing.



There is another I want to find more about and it is Crimson Clover or Trifolium incarnatum. I do not know if this clover is indigenous or even regional if it is, but it is very pretty and would be nice for ground cover when it flowers, as opposed to the gravel we have in place now.



Another resource I found is native trees and shrubs at http://njaes.rutgers.edu/njriparianforestbuffers/projects/mtholly.htm, which is a Rutgers site promoting and supporting the restoration of forest areas in NJ. I will post photos in an ongoing thread on this as it happens.
Read more...

Soap Box Step Down...

I am just f#%&ing tired of talking about food issues. I think most of it has tapped out now... The keg is kicked... But, it is one of those things that you need to work out to exhaustion or it will eat at you (no pun intended). So, you all know how I feel about the topic and beating the dead rotting horse has gotten annoying at this stage. I am going to move on now to new and equally annoying things about being an Angry Mom. Just not tonight. Read more...

Who's afraid of Naomi Wolf

So I have watched an interesting film called The End of America. This is a film I suggest you see and you can for free. I have included it at the end of the blog if you want to watch it. Naomi Wolf talks about some serious issues we are facing and the terrifying changes that the Bush administration pushed through. I know we are mostly rooting for Obama to fix many of the issues caused by Bush - but one of the key things is getting those laws REMOVED from the books.

We can cheer all we want for Barack Obama but maybe the next president is not as "people oriented" and decides that he really wants to make use of some of those new laws just ripe for the picking. Like charging you with sedition because you did not vote for him. That of course is really just too dramatic... This is America after all. We do not have those issues here.

Ms. Wolf goes back several times to talk about the accountability of Bush and those he supported in the White House. How many times did your or I watch the news or an inquiry into an event that ended in a semantic argument? What do you mean by that? Well... what I mean is did you fire the gun. "Well I am not sure I fully understand what you are asking - when you say "fire" are we talking about a BBQ?"

And I wonder if this has anything to do with why so many real (not the new industry approved factory version) organic farmers and "back to basics" farmers are being mistreated.

What the hell does this have to do with farming?
I would like to tell you that... This has to do with farming because until very recently, the last 20 years or so, farmers had an ENORMOUS influence in Washington. Policies were made or broken by stubborn farmers everywhere.

We have been forced to take a path that down plays the importance of food and those who make it. There is power in food. That sounds really stupid doesn't it, however even Sun Tzu wrote about it 2,000 years ago in the Art of War.

Quote #1:
If the enemy is taking his ease, he can harass him; if well supplied with food, he can starve him out; if quietly encamped, he can force him to move.

Quote #2:
Bring war material with you from home, but forage on the enemy. Thus the army will have food enough for its needs.

Starve the enemy that is well stocked with foods and feed your troops by taking food from the enemy to further deplete his stores. There is power in food but the message has been muted because of the plenty we have and because we ourselves do not get involved in the process, unless it is to pick up a box at the store. Indeed many of us would not even know where to start if we wanted to get involved in the process. This leaves us dependent on a few powerful groups that now supply us with what we need... the farmers are no longer part of that group.

One of the things I appreciate is that President Obama also recognizes this grossly ignored aspect of our society. Here is a fantastic statement from him on the subject:

"Our entire agricultural system is built on cheap oil. As a consequence our agriculture sector actually is contributing more greenhouse gases than our transportation sector. And in the mean time it is creating monocultures that are vulnerable to national security threats. That are also now vulnerable to sky high food prices or crashes in food prices. Huge swings in commodity prices and are partly responsible for the explosion in our healthcare cost. Because they are contributing to type II diabetes, stroke and heart disease, obesity, all the things that are driving our huge explosion in healthcare cost."

While he does not say specifically that the treatment of Farmers needs to be addressed he does talk about the results of their mistreatment. Here are some articles that I have collected about the current gross mistreatment of farmers today. This excludes the standard mistreatment that they already experience regularly (such as subsidies for only 4 types of crops) these go even further beyond what most have come to expect.

Percy Schmeiser vs. Monsanto (Patent infringement on natural cross pollination and wind blown seeding)

Police Raid on Organic Co-Op (Armed agents, Department of Health, Police perform a forceful raid, search & seizure on family farm)

Lose your property for growing food? (He who controls the food really makes the rules. )

Trafficking in Raw Milk (After illegal drugs, raw milk is the underground commodity in America. Illegal in most areas and benefiting only Big Dairy)

Which came first, the egg or the permit? (Health Bureau requires small-scale egg producers to get new documentation, the cost of which can put them out of business.)

This one is just fun.

Big Agriculture takes umbrage at Michelle Obama's Organic victory garden

By not allowing you or I to take charge of our food we are being denied more than just constitutional rights - but fundamental human rights. Ms. Wolf talks about the closing of society and how normal citizens are being treated as criminals. I believe that this is an extension of that, an mostly overlooked extension. When we think about constitutional rights and violations we need something major to bring it into view... something like mass arrests of students or immigrants - certainly not a bunch of hippie farmers who should be buying their food like everyone else.



Read more...

Monsanto guilty of Crimes Against Humanity?

I have been doing a lot of thinking lately and I want to know if what Monsanto is doing is considered a crime against humanity as defined by the International Criminal Court (ICC). Guess what... it is. Letter "k" in the definition of a crime against humanity is: (k) Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.

There are a number of studies, now coming to light, that the FDA and companies like Monsanto covered up the fact that their products (Genetically Modified Organisms) could cause health problems or complications when consumed by animals and humans. There are doctors who now recommend that their patients not consume GMO's at all since the rate of allergy is so high and other effects are unknown. One article that references this is Doctor's Warn Against GMO's, by Jeffrey Smith. Be sure that you catch the one part of that sentence. There are now hundreds of articles out there on this topic and millions of people are still unaware that we are even eating the damn things. There is evidence that the modified DNA is passing into our bodies and may be altering our own DNA.

You can also visit the ISIS website, which I have spoken about in several other posts, they have a huge GMO section on the site. And we are just talking now about the physical health issues caused by eating GMO's not what the company is actually doing to farms and farmers the world over. We are not talking about any anti-trust, political, or human rights issues - just health.

We, the People of the United States of America, are taking part in the biggest trial study ever conducted and it is being done:

1. Without your consent
2. Without your knowledge
3. Without compensation
4. Without consideration for your health risks
5. Without consideration for the environmental risks

And it is still going on right now. Companies like Monsanto are trying to get MORE AND MORE AND MORE SEEDS out there with their patented GMO process. They know that their products cause health problems, disease (to animals and plants alike) and economic hardship to those who use their products and they do not care. They have released a GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISM into the "wild" with no thought to the consequences only their bottom line.

We are paying the price and when the shit hits the fan I want to know who will pay the bills. When we are affected with diseases like Morgellon's or Allergies so severe we cannot eat most foods at the store - I want to know how we are going to live and who is going to pay for the medical bills. There is even a suggestion that the many auto-immune diseases we are seeing spike so dramatically are being caused by the GMO foods. The problem is WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE DO but we are all going to find out what they have done soon enough.

When that happens:
Will Monsanto executives be held liable? Will the Government compensate us since they did not regulate it properly? Will Monsanto executives go on trial? to jail? Will Monsanto be required to pay us individually? collectively? at all?

If you are laughing at my optimism then you actually feel the same way I do, because apparently I can't make my sarcasm come through in my writing. These people are profiting billions of dollars off of this and in the end I think we will have no recourse. How dare someone even think that they can do this to me and my family. Visit the Center for Food Saftey if you actually want to get involved...

And someone tell me how you charge someone with crimes against humanity...
Read more...

Poll Results: GMOs

So... the latest poll results are in. This poll was regarding Genetically Modified foods and labeling of these foods as such. I also found that I have 7 regular readers (wahoo)! Anyway, the results of this poll are actually a pretty accurate representation of how America at large feels. According to a study quoted by The Campaign to Label Genetically Engineered Foods 89% of Americans want GMO's labeled. This report funded by the USDA, conducted by Rutgers University, found that only 10% of the population thought that GMO labeling should not be required. In 2007 Senator John Edwards, Governor Bill Richardson, and Senator Chris Dodd went "on the record" for their support of GMO labeling. So with this OVERWHELMING support support why aren't they?

The companies that make GMO's are not paying attention. They are doing their best to lobby in Washington to keep labels and restrictions off their foods. And yes, I know I sound like a f#@%ing activist. The problem with this is that if you are ignorant about what is going on people who have learned about it really do seem like activists or conspiracy theorists. Unfortunately that is not the case, it sounds like science fiction or a Ludlum book but it is all out there in the open, it is just that no one is drawing attention to it. Although I would also like to know how many people reading know that we have been eating GMO foods, without our knowledge, for the better part of 10 years -because I had no idea and I was furious when I found out.

So to the results:


71% of you indicate that you would want a label on GMO foods so that you could avoid purchasing them. 28% percent of you want a label on GMO foods and might consider something else, depending on the options available... but not one of you said that GMO labels did not matter. Here is an example of an imposed breakdown of supply and demand. By the rules of "supply and demand" lack of consumer demand would make GMO's a defunked product but it makes up something like 80% of the corn and soybean market.

We cannot be alone in this...
You are right, we are not alone in wanting GMO foods labeled. The United States is however only one of about 4-5 countries which does not have laws governing the introduction of GMO crops and the labeling of GMO foods. Our FDA did not even require safety testing of GMO foods before introducing them to the consumer market place, hard to even fathom if you ask me. The European Union requires labeling and as a whole are doing more to stop the GMO market than any other group. There have also been a number of studies deemed "illegal" and "infringement" which are being done in other countries showing serious health problems with animals fed GMO foods. Of course we do not acknowledge these studies here in the US and the scientists involved are probably crackpots you know... never mind that Monsanto has actually threatened some and funding has been cut on all projects involved. Several scientists have paid for their own studies in order to continue the research in these areas despite being threatened and denounced by others in their field.

I have found an incredible resource called ISIS or The Institute of Science in Society. This institute promotes "layman" understanding and responsible science, to benefit people not just companies, and communication with the public on advancements in language they can understand. They are based in England and really have put themselves in the "line of fire" as it were... The website is at http://www.i-sis.org.uk/index.php and has articles and studies related to GMO foods, documentation on "life" patents and the aggressive lobby to globalize patent law by companies such as Monsanto. There is a lot of good science on this site. We lack a lot of impartial science in the US, unfortunately most studies here reflect the outcome that the paying party wants, no matter the subject.

I urge you to visit ISIS and read more on what the rest of the world already knows... and also to visit the Campaign website to make labeling GMO foods mandatory. We have been eating GMO foods in the United States for over 10 years, think about that, we are part of an experiment being conducted at our expense. You probably did not even know and if you did know - did you also know that 70% of the foods in the grocery store have GMO ingredients? I sure as hell didn't.

Not again...
You have heard me talk about a company called Monsanto a lot... What have I got against them? What did they ever do to me? Well they are a seed company. They also own the majority of "life" patents and have developed the most GMO's to date. One of the main issues I have with this company is the conflict of interest our own government has when dealing with and creating regulations regarding its practices. There are over 17 former Monsanto employees currently holding high positions in our government, including EPA officials and FDA officials. Check out the list at the Organic Consumers Association for more details on the jobs they held and what they do now, or don't do properly, now.

What they hell can I do about it?
Get out your soap box!!! I am... if this is the first time you learned about this topic then pass it on, write your own blog, write your representatives. There are a number of senators and assemblypeople that already have concerns about this... urge them to keep going. Print out articles and include them in your letter as resources. Sign petitions and join ISIS. There are a number of things you can do, while you are checking your email...

Check out Congress.org to find your local legislative contacts: http://www.congress.org/congressorg/dbq/officials/

Keep going... post suggestions and comments about what you want to know and I will find out the information or find out where you can start to get information for yourself. Educate yourself first and that is the best way to do something about it...
Read more...

Dora: a pox upon us.

You all know it... the saccharine sweet half singsong quasi educational "I need your help!" from the eternally youthful lips of Dora. Aahhh, children's television. How torn can one person be on such a topic? This seemingly innocuous thing that acts like a sedative on the mind of a high strung hyper active child, it is so sweet... And with just enough alternate language to be considered "educational" why not?

[INSERT SHOW NAME] seems to be okay to me, so what is the problem? I do not know exactly, I guess it is like anything else that seems to good to be true or that kids tend to like too much of. There has to be some fallout somewhere right? I mean aside from being eternally annoying, of course.

Thing #1 learned her ABC's, numbers (Spanish and English), animals and objects, and some emotional words with the help of Sesame Street, not that we had her hooked in Clockwork Orange style or anything or refused to teach her "manually" (techie humor, sorry) but she just seemed to enjoy it. Thing #2 also seems entranced by the swirling lights and sounds, if only for a minute or two, and not as much as his sister at this age...

I admit that I have often used this crutch because, lets be honest, because it helps. When I am sick, really stressed out or even just can't take the parenting thing anymore. Sometimes it is obvious when you have reached the "too much" stage or what shows are inappropriate and sometimes it is harder to tell.

For example, Thing #1 is terrified of Dungeons & Dragons and the Smurfs, my husband says he can understand because the Smurfs are pretty scary... but on the other hand she likes Danger Mouse and Bleach. She will crawl in our bed and ask if we can "watch itchy-go" and then snuggle up with me not batting an eye when the monsters come out.

We try not to let them watch too much and allow them to be active physically and use their imaginations (Tangent: which I really love to watch! I mean really, because this stage of parenting - the imagination stage is just the best. Each day a new and more interesting story arises from a empty can of oatmeal and a dish towel... It is just wonderful and fun to see.) But the damn thing is like a siren in the house, we always have to say "no" or "enough" or even forcefully turn it off because there is never enough. No matter how sunny or what else there is to offer the desire is still there.

AAP (American Academy of Pediatrics) says that kids should watch no more than 2 hours of TV per day and kids under 5 not at all... That is a lot when you get down to it. There are a lot of hours in the day and two may not seem like a long time when you view it in a 24 hour scope -but that is generally 3-4 shows. And lets not forget the studies show all kinds of developmental problems: real, speculated and suggested that can arise if Thing #1 watches Dora too much.

So why is it so hard to say "No"?
Because she likes it... more than her cat, her brother, mommy or daddy, or even the sun and the sand. But she also listens to the information in a way she cannot seem to listen to us. I am ashamed to admit that we have even resorted to saying things like "Dora says we need to wear our seat belts to stay safe, right?" or "Dora eats her vegetables to stay strong and healthy, you know..." The "kicker" is that if these tactics didn't work I would not mind keeping her out of my house for good. Personally I hate the football headed brat and her voice is like nails on a chalkboard to me. Thankfully Thing #1 seems to be growing out of her "Noggin" phase and I have been replacing her daily caloric intake with shows from PBS instead.

Sid the Science Kid and Super Why! are her favorites now. She even likes Word World... and you know what, I think they are actually teaching her to read. I know that I have not taught her how to spell "Yes" and "Smile" even though I have attempted to get her to learn and write her own name as well as other letters and numbers... But she picks things up from these shows that you would not imagine.

Some, I guess, would argue that this is a reason not to allow her to watch anything at all. I think I prefer to monitor what she is watching and make myself, no matter how I loathe it, watch it too. You need to make yourself aware of these things. They are learning every second of every day and I need to know what so: 1. I can help her understand 2. I can make sure it is appropriate 3. I can ease her fears should she have any.

I do wish I could get her to be as active in other area, like reading and even just playing with her toys. When I look around I realize we have more books than videos and more toys than money in the bank... but she has to be prompted to play or read whereas the TV is a "no brainer" if you will, pun included.

Read more...