Gut Biota Never Recover from Antibiotic Use: Loss Extends to Future Generations

Evidence shows the mass antibiotics experiment is devastating our children's health. It may be the reason so many struggle for breath and can't assimilate food properly.

by Heidi Stevenson

29 August 2011

Emerging research shows that the harmful effects of antibiotics go much further than the development of drug resistant diseases. The beneficial bacteria lost to antibiotics, along with disease-inducing bacteria, do not recover fully. Worse, flora lost by a mother is also lost to her babies. The missing beneficial gut bacteria are likely a major factor behind much of the chronic disease experienced today. The continuous use of antibiotics is resulting in each generation experiencing worse health than their parents.

Martin Blaser, the author of a report in the prestigious journalNature writes:

Antibiotics kill the bacteria we do want, as well as those we don't. These long-term changes to the beneficial bacteria within people's bodies may even increase our susceptibility to infections and disease.

Overuse of antibiotics could be fuelling the dramatic increase in conditions such as obesity, type 1 diabetes, inflammatory bowel disease, allergies and asthma, which have more than doubled in many populations.

Aside from the development of superbugs, we're now seeing clear documentation that the overall long term effects of antibiotics are devastatingly harmful to our health. Speaking to ABC News, Blaser said:

Antibiotics are miraculous. They've changed health and medicine over the last 70 years. But when doctors prescribe antibiotics, it is based on the belief that there are no long-term effects. We've seen evidence that suggests antibiotics may permanently change the beneficial bacteria that we're carrying. [Emphasis my own.]

Notice that term, permanent. Without considering the potential risks in the casual use of antibiotics, it now looks like conventional medicine is creating several pandemics of some of the worst chronic diseases known.

Mass Use of Antibiotics

By the time a child reaches age 18 in the industrialized world, the chances are he or she has been given 10-20 courses of antibiotics. That misuse continues into adulthood, and they're casually prescribed to pregnant women.

That's where the situation grows ever worse. Part of a normal childbirth is a baby's passage through the birth canal—where it's exposed to its first dose of beneficial bacteria. (This should give pause to anyone considering a caesarian birth that isn't absolutely necessary.)

When a mother's microbiota is deficient, her child is born to a deficiency. The evidence now appears to show that, once a probiotic deficiency exists, it is never recovered—and it's passed down the generations. Therefore, each generation is likely to suffer from poorer health than the parents enjoyed.

Costs of Antibiotic-Induced Chronic Conditions

Healthcare costs rise and rise in treating this chronic ill health. Consider the pandemic status of diabetes and asthma in children today. Those diseases were extremely rare 50 years ago, and now they're literally routine. Yet, the focus continues to be on treatment—which increasingly lines the pockets of Big Pharma and doctors.

The search for cause has practically been ignored, even in the face of rising rates of chronic illness. Instead, treatment is the touchstone. Ever more toxic methods of suppressing symptoms, while hiding adverse effects, are researched and pushed on conventional medicine's victims.

Two of the most critical functions in health are drastically compromised in enormous numbers of today's children. The ability to metabolize food and the ability to breathe are being stolen from this generation. Yet the treatment they're receiving for this poor health does nothing to make them well. It only masks the symptoms and makes their children even sicker!

On top of those losses, children suffer from allergies, their bodies' inability to distinguish between disease-inducing agents and harmless substances. They suffer from autoimmune disorders, their bodies' inability to distinguish between foreign substances and parts of their own bodies.

Has there ever been a generation of children whose inherent health has been so devastated by the very medical system that is supposedly responsible for their health?

Iatrogenic Disease

Iatrogenic disorders are health problems caused by medical errors. They are now officially the third-leading cause of death in the United States. But those numbers do not include early deaths from diabetes, asthma, allergies, chronic bowel disorders, or cancer—all of which have been documented as results of antibiotic use—nor are the miseries suffered by the people burdened with them reckoned in the iatrogenic toll.

If we were to add all those early deaths to the iatrogenesis numbers, as should be done, it would be obvious that conventional medicine is the greatest killer and thief of health the world has ever known. And apparently, one of the most significant causes of iatrogenic illness is antibiotics, that most common of treatments handed out like candy.

http://gaia-health.com/articles501/000520-gut-bacteria-antibiotic.shtml

Tumors love junk food

By WC Douglass MD

Sugar is food for tumors: The more you eat, the bigger they get. 

You'll get bigger too, of course -- but if there's anything worse than a swollen gut, it's a swollen tumor. 

Now, a new study confirms that a diet high in carbs is a cancer's best friend. 

Canadian researchers bred mice with both human and mouse tumors, then put them onto either a high-carb diet (like the one the feds say you should be eating), or a diet of just 15 percent carbs -- like the one I've been telling you to eat. 

All I can say is I hope you've been listening to me and not the feds: The mice with the most carbs gained more weight on the same number of calories, and their tumors grew like weeds. 

Next, the researchers bred mice predisposed to breast cancer and put them on the same choice of diets. And again, the cancers progressed faster on the carb-heavy diet, with nearly half of those mice getting the disease in their first year. 

Care to guess how many of the low-carb mice got cancer in that year? 

Remember, these are mice predisposed to the disease... yet NONE of them actually got it in that time! 

Overall, only 30 percent of the low-carb mice eventually developed cancer before they died versus a whopping 70 percent of mice on the high-carb diet. 

If that's not enough to get you to swear off sugar and bread for good, consider this: Only one of the high-carb mice reached the expected two-year lifespan, versus more than half of those in the low-carb group. 

I don't know why anyone would be stunned by this -- research as far back as the 1920s showed that tumor cells gobble up glucose like an SUV guzzles gas. 

But no one heeded the warning then... and they're certainly not heeding it now as Americans swallow more carbs and suffer more cancers than ever before. 

And with the feds still relentlessly pushing carbs on the American people, you can expect even more cancers in the coming years.

Food Inc.

Know where your food is coming from and vote for change through your food choices and with your wallet!

Chernobyl- like radiation found in Tokyo

Life with a newborn: Identifying food allergies

By Modern Alternative Mama

I hate to say it, but I have more knowledge on this topic than I ever wanted.... Primarily with my first two babies, although I've noted that Jacob is sensitive to food additives. It's not too bad because I basically can eat anything I make at home (no 'food groups' to avoid), but I do have to prepare everything myself!

These days, a lot of babies are allergic to foods, and these allergies or sensitivities show up within days to weeks of birth. It can happen in formula-fed babies (which can require trying several different types of formula, including special hydrolyzed formulas in severe cases), but it can also happen in breastfed babies. That's what my experience has been with -- allergies in breastfed babies.

Why Are Breastfed Babies Allergic?

Babies cannot be allergic to breastmilk itself. They can, however, be allergic to something that the mother is eating and passing along in her breastmilk.

This can happen when a mother's gut health is not optimal. What she eats doesn't get fully digested before some of it is absorbed through a leaky gut wall ("leaky" because there are places that aren't populated by the beneficial bacteria that should be there). These undigested proteins get into the breastmilk and get passed to the baby, whose system can't handle it. This leads to sensitizing the baby and causing allergies. The baby's gut is open at birth and remains that way until at least 18 weeks of age, which means any large proteins are absorbed immediately into the bloodstream (which causes the sensitizing and allergies).

Breastfeeding is still crucial, because breastmilk contains IgA, a substance that coats the intestines and helps them to mature and close properly. It also protects against allergies by preventing properly digested proteins in mother's milk from getting out of the gut. If formula is used instead because baby is reacting to mother's milk, then the IgA is lost and baby's gut is sensitized automatically by whatever baby is eating (usually milk or soy based formulas).

Signs of Allergies

There are many different signs of allergies. It depends on the baby and the severity of the reaction. For example, when my gut health wasn't optimal, I noted a lot more of these signs. Now that my gut health is pretty good, I note only a couple (and then only if I've eaten something I really shouldn't have anyway).

• Eczema (yes, it is a sign of allergies!)
• Fussiness/crying/screaming
• Gas (especially if it causes baby a lot of discomfort)
• Spitting up (a tiny bit is normal, a lot or if it causes discomfort is not)
• Projectile vomiting
• Diarrhea
• Difficulty nursing (baby pulls back, chokes, screams, arches back)
• Red ring around anus
• Diaper rash
• Failure to gain weight/slow weight gain
• Red, itchy palms
• Night waking/disturbed sleep

You may notice some or all of these. With Daniel I noted spitting up, gas, fussiness, difficulty nursing, red ring around the anus (irritated red, not pale pink, which is normal), and later diaper rash. Eczema was a major sign for Bekah, along with night waking, diaper rash, and diarrhea. Every baby is different, but these signs clearly say "something's not right."

Determining the Culprit

Unfortunately, it's not always easy to figure out what's causing the problem, especially if it's multiple things. Dairy, soy, and wheat are the top culprits and should always be suspected first. Corn and nuts are also major issues. However, it can be any number of foods. I've heard of pomegranates (that was an issue for Daniel), bell peppers, and all kinds of other obscure foods being a major problem, so if none of the main suspects seem to be the cause, try other things.

Foods can get into your milk from almost immediately to 12 - 18 hours after ingesting it. I know that foods usually get into my milk 5 - 6 hours after ingestion (with Daniel this was true). It clears your system 18 - 24 hours later.

For this reason, it's helpful to keep a food diary. Write down what you've eaten and also what baby's reaction is, if any. After a few days or a week, patterns should emerge -- when you eat certain food(s), baby reacts poorly. Eliminate these foods and you should see changes.

It's important to note that while the foods can clear your system in about 24 hours, resulting in improvement in baby's reactions, if you've been eating the regularly they won't clear your system completely for up to 2 months. Therefore, if you note some improvement but not complete reversal of symptoms, continue with the elimination diet.

Elimination diets aren't fun, but they are necessary for your baby's health. These reactions are also a huge indicator that your gut health isn't right, and that you probably have food sensitivities too. It's best if you don't eat them, for your own health.

Helping Food Allergies

Are you or your baby just destined to suffer from these food allergies forever, now that it's started? No!

Fortunately, you can move past these allergies. I have done it with two babies and now have a third that doesn't have any "regular" allergies (just the minor reactions to food additives...which really has just driven home the point that these are not actually foods and we should not eat them!).

Here's the best way to handle it (in my experience):

1. Keep breastfeeding -- Your baby needs that IgA to help his/her gut mature properly. Formula will hurt his/her gut when it is already sensitized.
2. Eliminate the offending food(s) -- Stop consuming the foods that are causing the reactions in order to prevent further damage
3. Begin GAPS -- This is a special diet that eliminates grains and dairy and focuses heavily on meats, stock, probiotic foods, and fats to heal and seal the gut lining. This diet is how we achieved healing from allergies, and we still go back to it frequently.
4. Delay solids -- Your baby shouldn't have solids until his/her gut is sealed properly through breastfeeding while you eat according to GAPS. This should be around 9 - 10 months (assuming you discover allergies in the first few months, not later in baby's life). First foods should be stock, fats, meat, and probiotic foods.
5. Shore up your gut health with GAPS -- Stay on GAPS until your gut health is better in order to prevent problems with future babies!

Food allergies in infants aren't fun. And it's not easy to handle. But you can do it, and still help everybody be as healthy as possible!

Biohazard potential for live viral vaccines containing naked or free nucleic acids from contaminating (adventitious) viruses

Victoria and colleagues have identified the contamination of live viral vaccines for use in healthy children, with viral nucleic acids; the findings have since been confirmed by the vaccine manufacturers and the data reported to the FDA. Contaminating nucleic acids include retroviral sequences from the producer chicken and primate cells. Specifically, Avian leucosis virus (ALV) was present as RNA in viral particles while simian retrovirus (SRV) was present as genetically defective DNA. Rotarix, an orally administered rotavirus vaccine, contained nucleic acids from porcine circovirus-1 (PCV1), virus.[1] Since this report, a second rotavirus vaccine (RotaTeq) has been shown to contain nucleic acids from both PCV1 and PCV2, a pathogen in pigs that is associated with wasting and immunodeficiency. The circumstances in which PCV2 induces disease are discussed below.

Based upon the initial report1 Rotarix, containing PCV1 (which is not known to be a pathogen in pigs), was temporarily suspended by FDA. Following the discovery of both pathogenic and non-pathogenic PCV strains, the FDA advisory committee in an emergency public session on Friday May 7, 2010, recommended the continued use of both Rotarix and RotaTeq in the US childhood immunization schedule.

Recent investigations associated with gene therapy and vaccines leave little doubt that naked and free nucleic acids are readily taken up by the cells of all species including human beings, and may become integrated into the cell’s genetic material. There is also abundant evidence that the extraneous nucleic acids (ENA) taken up can have significant and harmful biological effects including cancers in mammals.[2]

Because they can be incorporated into the genetic material of the host or microbes, for example, colonizing the host intestinal tract, these ENA can be greatly amplified, and at the same time introduced into foreign genomes where recombination with host genes and the genes of the host’s viral pathogens may readily occur. Environmental contamination with large amounts of free or potentially free ENA will be released unregulated and unmonitored for their presence and effects.

Many assumptions about the safety of naked DNA have been proven false in light of the appropriate scientific investigations.

1. It has been argued that rapid degradation of naked DNA would reduce their biohazard potential. It is now known that naked or free DNA persists in all natural environments and is readily taken up by cells of all organisms. Of particular relevance to orally administered rota virus vaccines, DNA persists in the digestive tract of mammals[3], where it may be taken up and incorporated by the resident microbes, and by the cells of the mammalian host.

As noted by Ho et al2 in their review, viral DNA fed to mice is found to reach white blood cells, spleen and liver cells via the intestinal wall, to become incorporated into the mouse cell genome. When fed to pregnant mice, the viral DNA ends up in cells of the wall[4]. The authors remark that "The consequences of foreign DNA uptake for mutagenesis and oncogenesis have not yet been investigated." Recent developments in gene therapy demonstrate how readily naked nucleic acids can gain access to practically every type of human cells and cells of model mammals.

2. It has been argued that subgenomic viral nucleic acids are not infectious: one of the key findings is that naked viral DNA is more infectious and have a wider host range than the intact virus. Human T-cell leukaemia viral DNA formed complete viruses when injected into the bloodstream of rabbits[5].

3. It was argued that PCV1 and 2 are not infectious in humans. This is irrelevant since host range cannot be predicted from the behavior of the intact virus and modifications to viral genomes can have unexpected effects on virulence and the host range[6]. For example, naked DNA from the human polyomavirus BK (BKV) gave a full-blown infection when injected into rabbits, despite the fact that the intact BKV virus is not infectious[7]. This hazard is particularly relevant to PCV 2, which is already known to cause an AIDS-like disease in pigs.

4. Naked DNA can also trigger autoimmune reactions, in which the body’s immune system attack and kill its own tissues and cells. New research shows that any fragment of double-stranded DNA or RNA introduced into cells can induce these reactions which are responsible for many diseases[8].

5. Insertion mutagenesis – mutations in the host gene resulting from insertions of non-host genetic material - is now found to be associated with a range of cancers, including lung[9], breast[10], colon[11] and liver[12] cancers. Finally, unintended modification of germ-cells may result from exposure to naked and free DNA[13] [50].

The hazards of horizontal gene transfer

Horizontal gene transfer (HGT) refers to the direct uptake and incorporation of genetic material from unrelated species, in this instance from adventitious viral contaminants in live viralvaccines into a human host or a host-related bacteria such as those colonizing the gut. HGT is uncontrollable. Unlike chemical pollutants which break down and become diluted out, nucleic acids are infectious, they can invade cells and genomes, to multiply, mutate and recombine indefinitely.

Potential hazards of HGT of naked/free nucleic acids include:

· Generation of new viruses that cause disease

· Generation of new bacteria that cause diseases

· Spreading drug and antibiotic resistance genes among the viral and bacterial pathogens, making infections untreatable

· Random insertion into genomes of cells resulting in harmful effects including cancer

· Reactivation of dormant viruses, present in all cells and genomes, which may cause diseases

· Multiplication of ecological impacts due to all the above

It is relevant to the issue of regulatory oversight that while the technology to detect these adventitious agents and their “cryptic” consequences was not available until relatively recently, boththe dangers of generating new viruses and bacteria that can cause diseases, and spreading drug and antibiotic resistance among the pathogens, were foreseen by the pioneers of geneticengineering. That was why they called for a moratorium in the Asilomar Declaration of 1975. But commercial pressures cut the moratorium short, and guidelines were set up based on assumptions, every one of which has been invalidated by scientific findings since[14].

The presence of dormant and relict viral sequences in the human and other animal genomes has been known for at least 20 years[15]. These include human retroviral sequences that have been identified in live viral vaccines grown in human cells. In addition Victoria et al1 have confirmed the presence of viral particle-associated avian leucosis virus in the MMR vaccine. The combination of three RNA viruses with the enzymatic machinery to convert RNA into complementary DNA (cDNA) that is then capable of causing all the aforementioned problems with naked/free DNA, presents a particularly worrying biohazard. Not only are endogenous viruses such as HRV able to exert this effect on RNA vaccine viruses, as shown by Klennerman and Zinkernagel for lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV)[16], but also viral transgenes have been found to recombine with defective viruses such as HRV, to generate infectious recombinants[17]. In turn, recombination between exogenous and endogenous viral sequences are associated with animal cancers[18] .

PCV Type 2: presence and pathogenesis

PCV Type 2 is a lymphotropic virus that infects primary lymphoid tissues[19]. Its detection in exposed (vaccinated) children should be focused on these tissues. They are available in intestinal biopsies from children with a variety of conditions including autism. They are also available from rhesus macaques exposed to the current vaccine schedule as part of ongoing safety studies. These tissues should be screened using the same metagenomic and pan-microbial array technology used by Victoria et al to identify adventitious sequences in vaccines.

The pathogenic potential of PCV Type 2 to cause an AIDS-like disease in pigs is unleashed when there is simultaneous immune system activation (e.g. concurrent vaccination) in these animals[20]. Thus, the concurrent ingestion of rotavirus vaccine and PCV Type 2 DNA sequences provides a high-risk scenario for disease – delayed or otherwise - in humans.

[1] Viral nucleic acids in live-attenuated vaccines: detection of 1 minority variants and an adventitious virus. Joseph G. Victoria, Chunlin Wang, Morris S. Jones, Crystal Jaing, Kevin McLoughlin , Shea Gardner, Eric L. Delwart. J. Virol. doi:10.1128/JVI.02690-09

[2] Ho MW, Ryan A, Cummins J, Traavik T. Unregulated Hazards - ‘Naked’ and ‘Free’ Nucleic Acids

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/naked.shtml

[3] Schubbert, R., Lettmann, C. and Doerfler, W. (1994). Ingested foreign (phage M13) DNA survives transiently in the gastrointestinal tract and enters the bloodstream of mice. Molecular and General Genetics 242, 495-504; Schubbert, R., Rentz, D., Schmitzx, B. and Doerfler, W. (1997). Foreign (M13 DNA ingested by mice reaches peripheral leukocytes, spleen and liver via the intestinal wall mucosa and can be covalently linked to mouse DNA. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 94, 961-6.

[4] Doerfler, W. and Schubbert, R. (1998). Uptake of foreign DNA from the environment: the gastroinestinal tract and the placenta as portals of entry, Wien Klin Wochenschr. 110, 40-44

[5] Zhaqo,T., Robinson, M., Bowers, F. and Kindt,T. Infectivity of chimeric human T-cell leukaemia virus type I molecular clones assessed by naked DNA inoculation. Proc. Natnl. Acad Sci. USA 93,6653-8 (1996).

[6] Ho, M.W., Traavik, T., Olsvik, R., Tappeser, B., Howard, V., von Weizsacker, C. and McGavin, G. (1998b). Gene Technology and Gene Ecology of Infectious Diseases. Microbial Ecology in Health and Disease 10, 33-59; Traavik, T. (1999b). An orphan in science: Environmental risks of genetically engineered vaccines. Reported to the Directorate of Nature Management, Norway.

[7] Rekvig, O.P. Fredriksen, K., Brannsether, B., Moens, U., Sundsfjord, A. and Traavik, T., Antibodies to eucaryotic, including autologous, native DNA are produced during BK virus infection, but not after immunization with non-infectious BK DNA. Scand. J. Immunol. 36, 487-495 (1992).

[8] 45. Suzuki, K., Mori, A., Ishii, K.J., Singer, D.S., Klinman, D.M., Krause, P.R. and Kohn, L.D. (1999). Activation of target-tissue immune-recognition molecules by double-stranded polynucleotides. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 96, 2285-90

[9] Fong KM et al (1997) FHIT and FRA3B 3p14.2 allele loss are common in lung cancer and preneoplasic bronchial lesions and are associated with cancer related FHIT cDNA splicing abberations. Cancer Res. (CNF), 57 (11) ; 2256-67.

[10] Asch HL (1996) Comparative expression of the LINE-1 p40 protein in human breast carcinomas and normal breast tissues. Oncol. Res (BBN) 8 (6): 239-47.

[11] Miki Y. (1992). Disruption of the ARC gene by retrotransposal insertion of L1 sequence in a colon cancer. Cancer Res (CNF), 52 (3):643-5

[12] Buendia, M.A. (1992). Mammalian hepatitis B viruses and primary liver cancer. Semin. Cancer Biol. 3, 309-20.

[13] Verdier, F. and Descotes, J. (1999). Preclinical safety evaluation of human gene therapy products. Toxicological Sciences 47, 9-15; Jane, S.M., Cunningham, J.M. and Vanin, E.F. (1998). Vector development: a major obstacle in human gene therapy. Annals of Medicine 30, 413-5.; Spadafora, C. (1998). Sperm cells and foreign DNA: a controversial relation. BioEssays 20, 955-64.

[14] Ho, M.W., Traavik, T., Olsvik, R., Tappeser, B., Howard, V., von Weizsacker, C. and McGavin, G. (1998b). Gene Technology and Gene Ecology of Infectious Diseases. Microbial Ecology in Health and Disease 10, 33-59; Traavik, T. (1999b). An orphan in science: Environmental risks of genetically engineered vaccines. Reported to the Directorate of Nature Management, Norway.

[15] See note 14 above

[16] Klennerman P and Zinkernagel R. A non-retroviral RNA virus persists in DNA form. Nature 1997;390:298-301

[17] Greene, A.E. and Allison, R.F. (1994). Recombination between viral RNA and transgenic plant transcripts. Science 263, 1423-5; Wintermantel, W.M. and Schoelz, J.E. (1996). Isolation of recombinant viruses between cauliflower mosaic virus and a viral gene in transgenic plants under conditions of moderate selection pressure. Virology 223, 156-64.

[18] See note 14 above.

[19] Choi C, Chae C, Clark EG. Porcine postweaning multisystemic wasting syndrome in Korean pig: detection of porcine circovirus 2 infection by immunohistochemistry and polymerase chain reaction. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation, 2000;12:151-153

[20]S. Krakowka, J. A. Ellis, F. McNeilly, S. Ringler, D. M. Rings and G. Allan Activation of the Immune System is the Pivotal Event in the Production of Wasting Disease in Pigs infected with Porcine Circovirus-2 (PCV-2) Vet Pathol2001 38: 31

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3Ax8bTeKdfBw0J%3Awww.coalitionforvaccinesafety.org%2Fdocs%2FBiohazard_vaccines%2520contaminant-CVS.doc+vaccines+biohazard&hl=en&gl=uk

As Fighting Continues in Tripoli, A Look at Role of the U.S., NATO and Oil Firms in Libya Uprising

By Democracy Now!

Fighting continues in parts of Tripoli, the capital of Libya, where rebels are reportedly battling with Muammar Gaddafi’s forces outside his heavily fortified compound. Reports by the Libyan Rebel Council that Gaddafi’s son, Saif al-Islam, had been captured were contradicted late Monday when he emerged amongst supporters in front of foreign journalists in Tripoli. The International Criminal Court had claimed he had been in the custody of anti-Gaddafi fighters for the past 24 hours. The rebels have also claimed that two of Gaddafi’s other sons were detained but have provided no evidence. Meanwhile, details have emerged that U.S. andNATO forces played a key role in the Libyan rebel push into Tripoli, carrying out 17 Predator drone strikes and 38 air strikes since August 10. Overall, the U.S. has carried out 1,210 air strikes and 101 Predator drone strikes in Libya since April 1. NATO says it will keep up pressure on Gaddafi and that its "mission is not over yet." We are joined by Phyllis Bennis, who is a fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies.

Covering Up Wall Street Crimes: Matt Taibbi Exposes How SEC Shredded Thousands of Investigations

By Democracy Now!

An explosive new report in Rolling Stone magazine exposes how the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission destroyed records of thousands of investigations, whitewashing the files of some of the nation’s largest banks and hedge funds, including AIG, Wells Fargo, Lehman Brothers, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America and top Wall Street broker Bernard Madoff. Last week, Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa said an agency whistleblower had sent him a letter detailing the unlawful destruction of records detailing more than 9,000 information investigations. We speak with Matt Taibbi, the political reporter for Rolling Stone magazine who broke this story in his latest article, "Is the SEC Covering Up Wall Street Crimes?" 

Over 160 Arrested in Ongoing Civil Disobedience Against Keystone XL Tar Sands Oil Pipeline

By Democracy Now!

Fifty-two environmental activists were arrested Monday in front of the White House as part of an ongoing protest calling on the Obama administration to reject a permit for the 1,700-mile Keystone XL pipeline project, which would deliver Canada tar sands oil to refineries in Texas, and rather focus on developing clean energy. An estimated 2,000 people have signed up to hold sit-ins and commit other acts of civil disobedience outside the White House every day for the next two weeks — 162 have already been arrested since Saturday. Also joining the protest are indigenous First Nations communities in Canada and landowners along the Keystone XL pipeline’s planned route. An editorial in Sunday’s New York Times joined in calling on the State Department to reject the pipeline, noting that the extraction of petroleum from the tar sands creates far more greenhouse emissions than conventional production. Meanwhile, oil industry backers of the project emphasize what they say are the economic benefits of the $7 billion proposal. As the Obama administration remains undecided whether to approve the Keystone XL pipeline, we speak with Bill McKibben, who joins us from Washington, D.C., where he was released Monday after spending two nights in jail. He is part of Tar Sands Action, a group of environmentalists, indigenous communities, labor unions and scientific experts calling for action to stop the project. "This is the first real civil disobedience of this scale in the environmental movement in ages," McKibben says.

Saif al-Islam: Libya is a piece of cake

Gardasil® Developer Claims Vaccine Prevents Abnormal Pap Tests, Not Cervical Cancer

By Truth About Gardasil.org

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America (Free-Press-Release.com) February 14, 2011 -- “A pap smear never harmed anyone,"says Dr. Diane Harper, lead developer of Gardasil®, the HPV vaccine manufactured by Merck Pharmaceuticals. In this segment we delve deeper into that and other statements made by Dr. Harper. She also was involved heavily in the development of Cervarix®, the HPV Vaccine manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline. In this segment some interesting comments pertain to both HPV vaccines.

In our first segment, Harper made some startling clarifications about the use of Gardasil® in boys and men, and how, "Unfortunately, the FDA has given Merck a blanket approval to use Gardasil® in males 9-26." She further admitted neither Gardasil® nor Cervarix® would cure or treat a current diagnosis of HPV, but that some have hypothesized that these vaccinated people instead may "react poorly" to these vaccines.

When asked to clarify her statement about pap smears, she stated, “The best way to prevent cervical cancer is with routine Pap screening starting at age 21 years. Vaccination cannot prevent as many cervical cancers as can Pap screening. Pap screening with vaccination does NOT lower your chances of cervical cancer - Pap screening and vaccination lowers your chances of an abnormal Pap test. Gardasil® is associated with GBS [Guillian-Barre Syndrome] that has resulted in deaths. Pap screening using a speculum and taking cells from the cervix is not a procedure that results in death.” She further tells us,"Gardasil® can be offered along with Cervarix® as an option to prevent abnormal Pap test results in those women who can make an informed decision about how much they value this benefit compared to the rare risk of GBS. If a woman has no access to Pap screening, receiving HPV vaccines may help reduce cervical cancer IF the vaccines last long enough. At this time, Gardasil® is proven to last for at least 5 years, and Cervarix® for at least 8.5 years. Health policy analyses show that there will be no reduction in cervical cancer unless the vaccine lasts at least 15 years."

In our time with Dr. Harper, we learned that she feels that those who participate in male with male sex may have some protection against anal cancer. However, she also states that in order for Gardasil® or Cervarix ® to truly make a difference, they must be effective for at least 15 years. At this time, neither HPV vaccine fits this description. She also admits there is the connection of serious side effects and deaths with these vaccines. In fact, we asked Harper if she had a statement she would like to make to those who have suffered side effects. She replied, “Please push for full disclosure in consent forms so that parents and potential vaccinated persons can weigh the benefits and risks of the HPV vaccination from their own perspective. Having federal funding to researchers to aid in setting up full disclosure consent forms will help the process of decision making." 

We then asked about the possible side effects that can be caused by Gardasil®, and her response was,“The side effects are many; most require only time to reverse. For the severe autoimmune demyelinating diseases, working with a neurologist is often helpful.” However, when we asked her how much time she thought it would take for these side effects to wear off, as some of those affected are approaching three and four years of being injured, Harper stated, “I do not know of a time frame in which the side effects will wear off.” 

This interview has raised some serious questions. If the HPV vaccines need to be last a minimum of fifteen years in order to be effective and lower the incidence of cervical cancer in women, why are they being so heavily marketed when the developer states Gardasil® lasts five years and Cervarix® lasts just over eight?

In our next segment, Dr.Harper will go into detail about the use of placebos in the HPV vaccines, and if there was one used in the HPV vaccine trials. 

http://www.free-press-release.com/news-gardasil-developer-claims-vaccine-prevents-abnormal-pap-tests-not-cervical-cancer-1297697975.html

http://truthaboutgardasil.org/gardasil%C2%AE-developer-claims-vaccine-prevents-abnormal-pap-tests-not-cervical-cancer/

Big pharma: Define "better"

Featuring Chill EB - Psycho/pharma spends billions of dollars a year marketing mental 'disorders' & drugs for kids -- yet these drugs are documented by international drug regulatory agencies to cause mania, psychosis, hallucinations, suicide, violence, homicidal ideation, heart attack, stroke and death. What's more, they are being prescribed for psychiatric disorders that are simply a checklist of behaviors. Get the facts here http://www.cchrint.org/psychiatric-disorders/

The Cost Of Vaccinating Against Sexually-Transmitted Diseases

By Marcella Piper-Terry

VaxTruth

Over the last few days there has been a lot of discussion about Texas’ Governor Rick Perry and his mandate that all girls in Texas receive the HPV vaccine. For those who don’t know, the HPV vaccine is supposed to protect against cervical cancer. Cervical cancer is not a big killer in the U.S. It is very treatable with early detection and the best protection is to get regular pap smears. The vaccine has not been tested with regard to its effect on reproductive health. It has also not been shown to work they way it is advertised to work. The only sure thing about the HPV vaccine (brand names Cervarix and Gardasil) is that since being licensed in the U.S., more young girls and young women have been injured or killed by the vaccine than the number of women who die from cervical cancer in this country during a typical year. This is a clear example of an instance where the “cure” is most definitely more damning than the disease it is meant to prevent. Given these facts, why would Governor Rick Perry mandate the HPV vaccine for all young girls in Texas? One simple word: Money. Governor Perry is strongly connected with Merck, the drug manufacturer that produces Gardasil.

Guess what? Governor Perry is a contendor for the republican nomination for president in 2012. Part of the “attraction” to Rick Perry is what he (and his predecessors) has done for the economy in Texas over the last 21 years. (Governor Perry is taking credit for Texas’ “economic strength” – but when you really look at the data, you can see that the trend was started long before he took office.) What governor Perry has achieved in Texas comes largely at the expense of the most vulnerable citizens in the state. Texas has a very high percentage of children without health insurance, and the environmental quality of the state sucks. Funding for schools is terrible, and Texas ranks right there with Mississippi for the percentage of its citizens working for minimum wage. The reason Texas is in such great shape financially is the same reason Indiana is in “good” financial shape, compared to our neighbors. Our governors have sold us out while courting big business and giving those who pollute our states carte blanche to do so. But this post is not about the environment. It’s about the cost of vaccinating against sexually-transmitted diseases. Governor Perry apparently believes Texas is in such great shape that the state can afford the cost of vaccinating every female child living below the poverty level with three doses of a vaccine that has not been shown to be effective, and which carries a price tag of more than $300 per person. Just imagine what could be done with that money.

The rest of this post was written several months ago. This is not just about the HPV vaccine; it also contains information about the Hepatitis B vaccine. I propose we do away with both. Actually, I propose we do away with lots more than just these; however, for the sake of argument, let’s just do away with Hep B and HPV vaccines. If we did that, we wouldn’t have a debt crisis.

Read on…

Do you know how much money we are paying (as U.S. taxpayers) to vaccinate infants and children against sexually-transmitted diseases?

I spent some time looking at the numbers. Here is what I found:

In 2008, there were 4,247,695 births in the United States according to the National Vital Statistics report (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr59/nvsr59_01.pdf ).

Nationally, in 2008, the percentage of children between the ages of 19-35 months of age who lived below the poverty level (and therefore qualified for government-funded vaccinations) was 28.7 (http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/stats-surv/nis/nis-2008-released.htm ).

Assuming the percentage of children born in 2008 and living below the poverty level is similar to the percentage of other preschool children in the U.S. who are living in poverty, we can estimate the number of government-funded vaccinations for children born in 2008 by multiplying the total number of births (4,247,695) by the percentage rate (.287). This gives us an estimate of 1,219,088.

According to data gathered by the CDC, among those children whose vaccinations were funded through the Vaccinations For Children (VFC) program (government-funded vaccines), 95.1% received all three Hepatitis B Vaccinations (http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/stats-surv/nis/nis-2008-released.ht ).

This means that 1,159,353 American children were vaccinated in 2008 against Hepatitis B (three times each) at tax-payers’ expense.

What does this mean?

According to the CDC’s Vaccine Price List, the cost of the Hepatitis B Vaccine (CDC cost per dose) is $10.25 (http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/programs/vfc/cdc-vac-price-list.htm )

Three doses (as recommended in the 2010 Childhood Schedule) would cost $30.75 (3 x 10.25) (http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/recs/schedules/downloads/child/2010/10_0-6yrs-schedule-pr.pdf )

So, the United States’ taxpayers paid a total of approximately $35,650,105 to vaccinate infants against a sexually-transmitted disease. IN ONE YEAR!

Our government spent more than thirty-five million dollars (our tax dollars) vaccinating children against hepatitis B. IN ONE YEAR!

Hepatitis B is a sexually transmitted disease. It is spread through sexual contact and sharing of infected needles, just like HIV/AIDS. Recent studies reveal that ANY immunity conferred through vaccination is GONE in 2-5 years. So, those children who have been vaccinated as infants will no longer have ANY immunity from vaccination by the time they become sexually active (unless they are crib-hopping in the hospital nursery!).

This is a complete waste of money. However, this is money that has already been spent. What we may want to ask ourselves at this point is, what do we have to look forward to in the future?

The Hepatitis B vaccine is a vaccine that is designed and marketed as protection from a sexually-transmitted disease. Another vaccine that has been recently developed and heavily marketed as protection against a sexually-transmitted disease is the HPV vaccine, known as Gardasil or Cervarix. Assuming that our government will continue to fund vaccination according to the recommended schedule for all U.S. children living at or below the poverty level, we can expect our taxpayer dollars to fund the vaccination of these children against HPV in the future.

The current cost (12/2010) of Gardasil (CDC cost per dose) is $108.72.

The current cost (12/2010) of Cervarix (CDC cost per dose) is $96.08.

Splitting the difference, we can expect to pay AT LEAST $ 102.40 per injection. At three injections, that means we (the U.S. taxpayers) will spend approximately $307.00 per child to vaccinate against HPV.

At $307.00 per child, it will cost us (the United States’ Taxpayers) $374,260,016.00 to vaccinate the children born in 2008, and living at or below the poverty level, against HPV virus. Of course, by the time children who are born in 2008 reach the age where they are required to receive the HPV vaccination in order to attend school, the cost of the vaccine may be much higher than it is now.

This is nuts.

The only ones who are benefiting from this are the vaccine manufacturers and the government officials who support them and benefit from them. Meanwhile, more and more children are dying from the vaccines, which are not only expensive, but have never been proven to be safe or even effective.

WE ARE FOOTING THE BILL WHILE THE GOVERNMENT IS KILLING OUR CHILDREN!

Why are we allowing this to happen?

http://vaxtruth.org/2011/08/the-cost-of-vaccinating-against-sexually-transmitted-diseases/

Pfizer to Pay $75 Million to Settle Nigerian Trovan Drug-Testing Suit

By Joe Stephens

Washington Post Staff Writer 

Friday, July 31, 2009

Pfizer signed a $75 million agreement Thursday with Nigerian authorities to settle criminal and civil charges that the pharmaceutical company illegally tested an experimental drug on children during a 1996 meningitis epidemic.

Nigerian authorities say Pfizer's test of the antibiotic Trovan killed 11 children and disabled scores more. Pfizer says the deaths and injuries were the result of meningitis.

An attorney for the state of Kano, where the charges were lodged, said the settlement was a long time in coming but welcome because it set the record straight about Pfizer's culpability. "People and entities can and must be held accountable for the consequences of their conduct," the attorney, Babatunde Irukera, said. "People around the world are no different and must be accorded the same levels of protections, always."

Charges filed against Pfizer by Nigeria's federal government, which is seeking about $6 billion in damages, are unaffected by the settlement, Irukera said. Two lawsuits related to the Trovan experiment also remain pending in New York.

In a news release, Pfizer said that it "specifically denies" any wrongdoing or liability. The company said its researchers conducted the clinical trial of the antibiotic Trovan legally, with the approval of the Nigerian government and the consent of guardians of the children. The company said the settlement was the best way to "allow Pfizer and the Nigerian governments to focus on what matters -- improving healthcare for all Nigerians."

Under the agreement, the world's largest drug company agreed to pay $30 million over two years toward health-care initiatives chosen by the Kano state government. It will reimburse the state for $10 million in legal costs. And Pfizer agreed to create a fund that will pay up to $35 million toward "valid claims" for financial support submitted by patients who took part in the clinical trial. A panel appointed by Pfizer and Kano state will determine eligibility and levels of support.

In return, Kano officials agreed to drop civil and criminal actions against the company. Kano and the Nigerian federal government originally filed legal actions naming as defendants Pfizer and 10 individuals, including former Pfizer chief executive William C. Steere Jr. The actions sought $9 billion in restitution and damages and included 31 criminal counts, including homicide.

Details of the drug trial were first made public in December 2000 in a Washington Post investigative series. The articles reported that the trial did not conform to U.S. patient-protection standards and that the oral form of the drug used in the trial had not been previously tested in children. Pfizer had no signed consent forms for the children, the articles said, and the company relied on a falsified ethics approval letter.

Five years later, in May 2006, The Post obtained and published a confidential report that concluded that Pfizer violated Nigerian and international law in the experiment. That set in motion the criminal charges.

Trovan was never approved for use by children in the United States. The Food and Drug Administration approved it for adults in 1998 but later severely restricted its use after reports of liver failure. The European Union banned it in 1999.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/30/AR2009073001847.html

Steen Thottrup - If you were here tonight

270 000 organic farmers sue Monsanto

By Danielle Magnuson

Grow Switch Organic Blog

More than 270,000 organic farmers are taking on corporate agriculture giant Monsanto in a lawsuit filed March 30. Led by the Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association, the family farmers are fighting for the right to keep a portion of the world food supply organic—and preemptively protecting themselves from accusations of stealing genetically modified seeds that drift on to their pristine crop fields.

Consumers are powerful. For more than a decade, a cultural shift has seen shoppers renounce the faster-fatter-bigger-cheaper mindset of factory farms, exposéd in the 2008 documentary Food, Inc. From heirloom tomatoes to heritage chickens, we want our food slow, sustainable, and local—healthy for the earth, healthy for animals, and healthy for our bodies.

But with patented seeds infiltrating the environment so fully, organic itself is at risk. Monsanto’s widely used Genuity® Roundup Ready® canola seed has already turned heirloom canola oil into an extinct species. The suing farmers are seeking to prevent similar contamination of organic corn, soybeans, and a host of other crops. What’s more, they’re seeking to prevent Monsanto from accusing them of unlawfully using the very seeds they’re trying to avoid.

“It seems quite perverse that an organic farmer contaminated by transgenic seed could be accused of patent infringement,” says Public Patent Foundation director Dan Ravicher in a Cornucopia Institute article about the farmers’ lawsuit (May 30, 2011), “but Monsanto has made such accusations before and is notorious for having sued hundreds of farmers for patent infringement.”

Even as the megacorporation enjoys soaring stock, the U.S. justice department continues to look into allegations of its fraudulent antitrust practices (The Street, June 29, 2011):

Monsanto, which has acquired more than 20 of the nation’s biggest seed producers and sellers over the last decade, has long pursued a strict policy with its customers, obligating them to buy its bioengineered seeds every year rather than use them in multiple planting seasons. Farmers who disobey are blacklisted forever.

It’s a wide net Monsanto has cast over the agricultural landscape. As Ravicher points out, “it’s actually in Monsanto’s financial interest to eliminate organic seed so that they can have a total monopoly over our food supply.”

Imagine a world devoid of naturally vigorous traditional crops and controlled by a single business with a appetite for intellectual property. Did anyone else feel a cold wind pass through them? Now imagine a world where thousands of family farmers fight the good fight to continue giving consumers a choice in their food—and win.

via Organic v. Monsanto – Environment – Utne Reader.

Thanks to Charles Councill for this story.

http://www.growswitch.com/blog/2011/07/270000-organic-farmers-sue-monsanto/

Dr Blaylock: Vaccines, brain develoment and autism

To read more on the possible causes of autism and its cure, please click here:
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/08/13/new-scientific-review-shows-vaccines-and-autism-are-linked.aspx?e_cid=20110813_DNL_art_3

Death by doctor

Third leading cause of death in the US is an MD directed treatment. That means 15 000 Medicare patients a month !!! .. and no one goes to jail...

Careful where you swing that axe, doc

Maybe my standards are unreasonably high -- but I fully expect every surgeon in the country to be able to find the body part he's supposed to operate on.

Apparently, this is too much to ask... because years after being declared a "never event" because they should "never" happen, wrong-site surgeries keep right on happening.

And now, one new report estimates that they happen 40 times a week in the United States alone.

Looks like "never" ain't what is used to be, because that's more than 2,000 cases a year where docs operate on the wrong body part -- or pick the right part... but on the wrong patient.

You'd think the first thing a surgeon would do in the OR is check his patient's name -- you're allowed to ask, you know -- but I've heard of men going in for minor procedures and coming out sans prostate.

Look, this isn't brain surgery -- at least brain surgeons know which part of the body they're operating on (I hope). The screw-ups often happen during far more routine procedures when complacent docs, nurses and everyone else simply stop paying attention to who's on the table, who's in what room, and even crucial details like which way the X-ray is supposed to face.

Some of these docs literally can't tell left from right anymore.

The Joint Commission Center for Transforming Healthcare, which came out with the new numbers, says it hopes for improved communication between doctors and the rest of the staff as well as a "timeout" before each operation.

What is this, some kind of game?

You want to know what'll really change this once and for all? Give a surgeon the ultimate timeout when he botches the job this badly -- lock him up and and throw away his license... one strike, and you're out!

Trust me, the threat of some quality time in the clink alone would have these guys quadruple-checking every last detail before they even look at the scalpel.

But that's not going to happen -- so before you go under the knife, go under the magic marker first. Turn yourself into the Illustrated Man if you have to, with a roadmap on your body leading the surgeon right to the spot he's supposed to operate on.

'X' marks the spot,

William Campbell Douglass II, M.D.

We can be much kinder

We Can Be Much Kinder from The Other Side of the Glass on Vimeo.
"My brain and my heart are my temples; my philosophy is kindness." -- Dalai Lama

This is a revision of the short that was originally done for the Birth Matters Virginia contest in May, 2009. We Can Be Much Kinder is also a chapter in the film, The Other Side of the Glass and expands upon this video short.

This short is about the importance of leaving the mother and baby intact -- cord intact -- until the mother feels she and baby are ready to be separated.

This film has brief images of a woman's breast and nipple as she is with her newborn baby as his cord is cut and as he crawls to the breast to self-attachment. This process, called Self-Attachment and/or Breast Crawl is becoming known now as a very critical part of human development that has been disrupted by modern, medicalized birth.

Burn baby burn - Riots in the UK

Over 1,000 Arrested in UK as Anger Over Inequality, Racism Boils Over Into "Insurrection".

Vaccine Induced Inflammation Linked To Epidemic Of Type 2 Diabetes And Metabolic Syndrome

Medical News Today

Article Date: 05 Apr 2008

Newly published data by Dr. J. Barthelow Classen in The Open Endocrinology Journal shows a 50% reduction of type 2 diabetes occurred in Japanese children following the discontinuation of a single vaccine, a vaccine to prevent tuberculosis. This decline occurred at a time when there is a global epidemic of type 2 diabetes and metabolic syndrome, which includes obesity, altered blood cholesterol levels, high blood pressure, and increased blood glucose resulting from insulin resistance.

Classen proposes a new explanation for the epidemic of both insulin dependent diabetes (type 1 diabetes), which has previously been shown to be caused by vaccines and non insulin dependent diabetes (type 2 diabetes). Upon receipt of vaccines or other strong immune stimulants some individuals develop a hyperactive immune system leading to autoimmune destruction of insulin secreting cells. 

 

Other individuals produce increased cortisol, an immune suppressing hormone, to suppress the vaccine induced inflammation. The increased cortisol leads to type 2 diabetes and metabolic syndrome. Japanese children have increased cortisol secretion following immunization compared to White children and this explains why Japanese have a relative high rate of type 2 diabetes but low rate of insulin dependent diabetes compared to Whites. The lower cortisol response attributed to type 1 diabetes and the higher cortisol response attributed to type 2 diabetes explains why type 1 diabetics are generally leaner than type 2 diabetics since elevated cortisol causes weight gain.

"The current data shows that vaccines are much more dangerous than the public is lead to believe and adequate testing has never been performed even in healthy subjects to indicate that there is an overall improvement in health from immunization. The current practice of vaccinating diabetics as well as their close family members is a very risky practice," says Dr. J. Barthelow Classen.

Classen's research has become widely accepted. To view the published papers and to find out the latest information on the effects of vaccines on autoimmune diseases including insulin dependent diabetes visit the Vaccine Safety Web site http://www.vaccines.net/newpage11.htm

Classen Immunotherapies, Inc.
http://www.vaccines.net

 

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/102927.php

"There is growing evidence that immunization cause a large number of other chronic diseases including diabetes, obesity, metabolic syndrome, autoimmune diseases, allergies, asthma, cancers, and Gulf War Syndrome. Data linking these diseases to vaccines includes human and animal data. In some cases the increased risk of developing these diseases following immunization exceeds the risk of the infectious complications prevented by immunization."

 

To access peer-reviewed studies, please click on the link below:
http://www.vaccines.net/newpage11.htm

‘Sad day’ for whistleblowers, union warns as board rules on fired scientists

Mike Blanchfield

The Canadian Press

OTTAWA—Two of three scientists fired by Health Canada in a long-running whistleblowing saga have lost a bid to get their jobs back.

And one of the country’s largest public service unions is calling it a “sad day” for bureaucrats who want to raise concerns about public safety.

In a decision released without fanfare last week, the Public Service Labour Relations Board dismissed the grievances of Shiv Chopra and Margaret Haydon, who were fired for insubordination in 2004.

It did, however, rule that Gerard Lambert was wrongly dismissed.

The three scientists — probably the country’s best-known whistleblowers — have sparked headlines since the 1990s in a series of high-profile disputes over food safety. They have said publicly they were pressured by their bosses to approve drugs despite human safety concerns.

In the late 1990s, they publicly opposed rBST, a bovine growth hormone, which enhances milk production in cows. Their criticism led to a Senate inquiry and a decision not to approve the drug.

The Professional Institute of the Public Service says it will likely appeal the 208-page decision, which followed 150 days of hearings over nearly five years.

“Today is a sad day,” PIPS President Gary Corbett said Monday. “The government of Canada offers little protection to whistleblowers.”

“Their only defiance is that they resisted commercial pressure and provided evidence to official parliamentary committees. Cases of dismissal like these do nothing good to help public-service whistleblowers to come forward and denounce wrongdoing within their departments.”

Chopra, perhaps the most outspoken of the group and the author of a book that is scathingly critical of Health Canada, echoed the sentiment.

“The issue here is not just some employees losing their jobs or whistleblowing,” said Chopra. “We’re not talking about our rights ... the public’s right to know from the people they pay to protect their health and safety — that is the issue.

“All you Canadians — everybody is involved here.”

Lambert greeted the ruling with mixed feelings. The ruling reinstated his job, and an adjudicator will have 90 days to determine how much compensation he is eligible to receive.

Speaking in a soft, halting voice, Lambert estimated that he is owed “$250,000 at least,” but that the ordeal has left him stressed and unhealthy. Neither he nor his two fellow colleagues found other work over the last seven years.

“I was sorry for them and my wife asked me why you are not smiling about the decision because you will be reinstated,” Lambert said.

Still, he said he would like to return to work, “as soon as possible.”

Prior to their firings in June 2004, the scientists raised numerous concerns.

They warned that carbadox, a drug used to promote growth in pigs, could produce carcinogenic residues. They said that Baytril, used to promote growth in cows and chickens, could produce antibiotic resistance in humans.

Chopra criticized then-health minister Allan Rock’s response to the anthrax scare that followed the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks. The scientist questioned the expenditure of millions to stockpile antibiotics, saying the fear of bioterrorism was overblown.

Chopra and Haydon warned in 2003, before Canada’s first case of mad cow disease, that measures to prevent the disease were inadequate. They called for a total ban on the use of animals parts in the feed of other animals.

Chopra criticized the board for not directly addressing the broader issue of public safety in its ruling last week.

“Meanwhile the damage to public health continues, and companies keep on selling the same stuff,” he said.

Chopra cited last week’s recall of 36 million pounds of ground turkey by American meat company Cargill as evidence of a continuing problem.

“This is a global problem, right now, of food safety.”

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/1036200--sad-day-for-whistleblowers-union-warns-as-board-rules-on-fired-scientists