A MINISTRY OF SICKNESS
(A Nonny Mouse,1989)
1 The great historian of the Twentieth Century, Dr. Oswald Spengler, was one of those seemingly rare scholars who saw what American Liberals refuse to see - that the Left is controlled by its alleged enemy, the malefactors of great wealth. He wrote in his monumental Decline of the West (Modern Library, New York, 1945):"There is no proletarian - not even a Communist - movement that has not operated in the interest of money, in the direction indicated by money, and for the time being permitted by money - and that without the idealists among its leaders having the slightest suspicion of the fact."This is also true of today's socialized medicine, which purports to be a share-the-wealth program, though in fact it concentrates wealth and empowers an Establishment (via taxation), eliminating its free market competitors through the police power of the State, all to the detriment of health. The following quotation gives the horns of the dilemma:" ... While monopoly control of INDUSTRIES was once the objective of J.P. Morgan and J.D. Rockefeller, by the late nineteenth century the inner sanctums of Wall Street understood that the most efficient way to gain an unchallenged monopoly was to "go political" and make society go to work for the monopolists - UNDER THE NAME OF THE PUBLIC GOOD AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
This strategy was detailed in 1906 by Frederick C. Howe in his Confessions of a Monopolist. Howe, by the way, is also a figure in the story of the Bolshevik Revolution..." - Prof. Anthony Sutton, Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution, Hoover Institute of War, Revolution and Peace, Stanford University Press,1974. (See also: Sutton, A. Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler)In his book Howe had stated:"These are the rules of big business. They have superseded the teachings of our parents and are reducible to a single maxim: Get a monopoly; let society work for you; and remember that the best of all BUSINESS is POLITICS, for a legislative grant, franchise, subsidy or tax exemption is worth more than a Kimberly or Comstock lode, since it does not require any labour, either mental or physical for its exploitation..."
2
Some Plain Speech
A French physician, Prof. Maurice Delort, did some plain talking at the inaugural session of the Academy de Bourges (December 16, 1962): "Today's medicine is at the end of its road. It can no longer be transformed, modified, re-adjusted. That's been tried too often. Today's medicine must die in order to be reborn. We must prepare for its complete renovation."
Dr. Bruce Halstead, who was jailed for 5 years for prescribing some herbal remedies to his patients by the Medical Establishment, spoke even more plainly: "There will be a medical edition of the Nurnberg Trials. The atrocities now being committed in the name of orthodox medicine, the suppression of life-giving scientific data, the needless loss of lives, mutilation of bodies, and excessive suffering... will not continue to be tolerated... Ultimately, these criminals and their political lackeys will be brought to justice...." - quoted in R. Hovnavian, Medical Dark Ages.
3
'Necessary Illness'
Dr. med. Steintl - International Medical Policy (1938, Berlin): " The prerequisite for today's medical policy is naturally the currently predominant system of medicine. The sick are the source of income, therefore it is necessary for sick people to be there, yes, it proves advantageous if one makes the people artificially sick."
A typical news item, appearing any year: "A new U.S. study challenges claims made for the last 35 years that women can prevent breast cancer by regularly taking estrogen pills.... the report seems to indicate the drug actually may cause the disease.... Physicians have been prescribing estrogen for an estimated 5 million to 6 million middle-aged women in the United States alone." - (International Herald Tribune, August 17, 1976).
In the USA at least one-and-a-half million people are hospitalized every year due to the intake of prescribed drugs, and some 220,000 die, according to the latest (2002) report from JAMA. For the first time in history, medicine causes disasters instead of curing illness!In May 1961, Dr. Pierre Bosquet had written in France's Nouvelle Critique: "Research is subordinated [not to a long-term social benefit but] to an immediate commercial profit. Currently, disease [not health] is one of the major sources of profit for the pharmaceutical industry, and the doctors are willing agents of those profits."In the weekly magazine Welt am Sonntag ( July 29, 1973), Dr. Werner Lehmpfuhl, general practitioner in Hanover, wrote that: "Every month, millions are in fact being damaged by treatments which are supposed to be helping them."
Dr. med. Steintl: 'International Medical Policy' (1938, Berlin): "In order to practice their 'gentle art of healing', the doctors require millions of animals for torture, on whose suffering their so-called 'science' is based.""There really exists no logical basis for translating the results of animal experiments to man." - (Dr. L. Goldberg, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm. Quantitative Method in Human Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Pergamon Press, London, 1959)
"Practically speaking, all animal experiments are untenable on a scientific basis, for they possess no statistical validity or reliability whatsoever. They merely perform an alibi function for pharmaceutical companies, who hope to protect themselves thereby (from legal liability)." - From Tierversuch and Tierexperimentator (Vivisection and Vivisector) by Herbert Stiller, MD and Margot Stiller, MD, Hanover, 1976.
"... It is the outrageous lie of the supporters of vivisection, a lie serious in its consequences, that animal experiments take place for the good of mankind. The opposite is the case: animal experiments only have an alibi function for the purpose of obtaining money, power and titles. Not one single animal experiment has ever succeeded in prolonging or improving, let alone saving, the life of even one single person." - (from a paper published by Dr. med. Heide Evers, D-7800 Freiburg, 1982)Dr. med. Steintl, Berlin: "International Medical Policy" - "But when it dawned on some people that the system was rotten, and clear-sighted individuals fought against it, the doctors also saw that their livelihood was being threatened. Their medical policy is primarily the line of withholding information. ' The amount of information to be given will be determined by us', said Dr. med. Neustedter (a contemporary official).""In my opinion there exists a conspiracy of the medical-pharmaceutical interests on an international basis to eradicate alternative health (not disease) care from the people of the world with a total disregard for the health and life of the people. I feel that the major motivation of this potentially destructive scheme is the desire to make money and I call the condition of this utter sickness of man... "The Greed Disease". Here in the United States I observe the conspiracy is interwoven with the American Medical Association, the federal government, especially the Federal Drug Administration, the Federal Trade Commission, the Pharmaceutical Advertising Council, and the entire media including television networks, radio networks, newspapers, magazines and book publishers. The media domination prevents the majority of people from being conscious of these negative forces and focuses their minds on the propaganda that alternative health-care is "quackery". However, the Office of Technological Assessment reported to the Congress in the late 1970's that only 10-20% of the methods utilized in allopathic (official, orthodox) medicine are proven safe and efficacious. Quackery is defined as using unproven methods for a profit. So who are the real quacks, anyway?"Much of the enlightenment of the extremely cruel vivisection portion of this cartel is revealed by the writings of Swiss medical historian Hans Ruesch in the books 'Slaughter of the Innocent' and 'Naked Empress', which have both suffered international suppression (by the corporate mass-media and the Medical Power). Vivisection is a paramount symptom of the "Greed Disease" and of the inhumane, unscientific, ignorant individuals who perpetuate it throughout the world. Animals are not human beings and do not react in a similar fashion to a drug. What might be beneficial in an animal might be lethal to the human, and conversely. Where is the logic to transfer information from animal experimentation to human usage of toxic chemicals? It is in the pocket-books of the members of the conspiracy - the Greed Disease!" - (Roy Kupsinel, MD, medical magazine editor in Oviedo, FL 32765, November 22, 1986)Dr. med. Franz Hartmann, Hallein: "Vivisection and sex murder stand on one and the same level, they are the product of spiritual blindness and moral depravity... The alleged objective of working for the good of mankind is a lie. I know that most vivisectors are seeking more to satisfy their vanity than their scientific curiosity. Each of them hopes somehow to make some discovery which, even though it be worthless, is nevertheless a discovery with which one can boast before everyone and throw sand into the eyes of the stupid." - (From a letter to Dr. Ludwig Fliegel, dated April 22, 1895)
Dr. H. Boucher, physician, Issy-les-Moulineaux, France: "In all ages Man has sought to justify the cruelty of his actions by decking them out under the mantle of a lofty ideal...
"In our present age, in which cruelty has in fact only changed its form, but in which we profess to be more enlightened than in former times, living creatures are tortured in the name of the higher interests of humanity, in the name of Science... It goes without saying that today's torturers, like their predecessors, boast of the gratifying results of their cruel methods. Thus, in all the journals at their disposal, in all their classical works, they turn the heads of the young by asserting that it is thanks to vivisection that Harvey discovered the circulation of blood, Galvani electricity, Claude Bernard the causes for the formation of sugar in the human organism, and so forth. Finally, in order to prove the triumph of their method, they remind us that it resulted in the invention of the "healing" sera for disease. Well, we are not afraid to say that all these statements are in fact false, and that tortures, whether religious, legal or scientific purposes, have always produced only hideous results, and that they have led only to error, disaster and degeneration..." - (From his lecture at the Fifth International Anti-Vivisection Congress in Zurich, 1912)
Dr. med Gustav Riedlin, Freiburg im Breisgau (Der Versuch am Lebenden Tier [Research on The Living Animal]): "We anti-vivisectionist doctors oppose the abuse of pure research, the "scientific" animal torture, and we demand its banning under criminal law. We demand its total abolition and would also demand this even if - which is not the case - some great use for suffering mankind were to emerge from it. Apart from the depraving cruelties and the impossibility of carrying out most experiments without causing pain, experimentation on the weak body, i.e. the torture of the defenseless animal, is unreliable and misleading in its results on the part of ambitious pushers and illusionists with no moral scruples."....But we do not content ourselves with condemning animal experiments from the standpoint of sympathy, moral laws and religion; we wage our fight against animal torture also from the purely scientific standpoint, and can prove that it is superfluous, useless, harmful and disastrous for our race."- (From Der Arzt, August 1930, No. 8, special issue)
Dr. Eduard Reich, a well-known public health specialist, replied to an invitation to attend a congress against vivisection in Amsterdam: "There can be nothing more pressingly necessary than for the barbarity of vivisection to be fought precisely from the scientific angle. Vivisection is not only the most cruel and loathsome, but also the worst way of conducting research, a shameful discredit to science, the surest path to the brutalization of doctors and of the whole of society... Every doctor who casts a stone at vivisection is performing a service to science, civilization, religion and mankind." - (Der Tier-und Menschenfreund, 1924, issue 2)
Dr. med. Hugo Knecht, Ear, Nose, Throat and Chest Specialist: "Doctors who speak out in favour of vivisection do not deserve any recognition in society, all the more so since their brutality is apparent not only during such experiments, but also in their practical medical lives. They are mostly men who stop at nothing in order to satisfy their ruthless and unfeeling lust for honours and gain." - (Linz, October 5, 1909)
Dr. med. Arthur Laab, Graz, in his paper Fort mit der Vivisektion! ( Away with Vivisection!) (Graz, 1905): "Any doctor is dishonorable who, contrary to his finer feelings as a person, contrary to the inner voice of his conscience and of what is right, and contrary to his convictions as a scientist, gives approval to, defends, or even merely silently accepts physiological experiments on animals, otherwise known as vivisection, instead of courageously and uncompromisingly fighting against an extremely deplorable scientific aberration...."Under the mask of 'science', under the protective wings of a State which is dazzled and blinded by the hypocritical lustre of a brutalized, egotistical and self-seeking science of falsehood, thousands, whole hecatombs of mostly highly-developed and sensitive animals are tortured to death every year, by the day and hour and every minute of the day and night, in a cruel and brutal manner which is hardly conceivable by the normal human imagination, without - as we shall hear shortly - even the very slightest actual use of any kind emerging from this barbaric so-called 'method of enquiry'."Vivisection is unscientific, useless, misleading."... Vivisection has never, ever served an actual truly incontestable scientific purpose, it is not doing so today and it will never do so, because it is incapable of doing so. But vivisection certainly has to be described and branded as unscientific; for it has conjured up the most gross errors, it has produced the most calamitous fallacies! Vivisection has never served the purpose of true science, but in fact only the contemptible purpose of self-advancement, ambition and personal gain."Vivisectors are known to suffer from a scientific epidemic, one which is furthermore steadily on the increase: from a rampant and contagious obsession with knowledge. They are no longer fully of sound mind, no longer competent to judge..."Dr. M. Beddow Baily, M.D., IRCP, Member Royal College of Surgeons, in his book "More Spotlights on Vivisection" (London, 1958) "Vivisection appeals to the basest instincts of fear and cowardice and is rooted in the unjust principle that 'might makes right' and that 'the end justifies the means', thus permitting any cruelty on the tyrant's plea of necessity."Before the bar of human justice, vivisection stands condemned on three main counts: cruelty to animals, uselessness to Man, and obstruction on the path of true knowledge."
5
An Undercover Dictatorship
" Unless we put Medical Freedom into the Constitution, the time will come when medicine will organize into an undercover dictatorship. To restrict the art of healing to one class of men and deny equal privileges to others will constitute the 'Bastille' of medical science. All such laws are un-American and despotic. They are fragments of monarchy and have no place in a republic. The Constitution of this Republic should make special provisions for Medical Freedom as well as for Religious Freedom." - Dr. Jonathan Rush, an original signatory of the American Declaration of Independence, 1776.
Dr. Rush's warnings went unheeded, and his words have proved dramatically prophetic:"The hearings have revealed police-state tactics ... possibly perjured testimony (by the government) to gain a conviction... intimidation and gross disregard for Constitutional Rights.... The FDA is bent on using snooping gear to pry and invade." - U.S. Senator Edward Long, Hearings, U.S. Senate,1965. "...There is not one but many cures for cancer available. Yet they are all being systematically and ruthlessly suppressed..." - Robert C. Atkins, M.D.
6 THE INVISIBLE GOVERNMENT
"Competition is a Sin."
- John D. Rockefeller Sr., quoted by Gary Allen,
The Rockefeller File, Concord Press, 1976. Woodrow Wilson, during his first presidential campaign in 1912, had no intention of keeping his promise to right the wrongs which he could so well describe, having himself for many years "lived within the shadow of Wall Street." The President was not a free man:"The MASTERS of the government of the United States are the combined capitalists and manufacturers of the United States. It is written over every intimate page of the record of Congress, it is written all through the history of conferences at the White House, that the suggestions of economic policy in this country have come from one source, not from many sources. The benevolent guardians, the kind-hearted trustees who have taken the troubles of government off our hands have become so conspicuous that almost anybody can write out a list of them... The big bankers, the big manufacturers, the big masters of commerce, the heads of railroad corporations... The government of the United States at present is a foster child of the special interests." - The New Freedom, 1913, Doubleday & Co., New York, pp.57/58Woodrow Wilson's words have remained as true today as they were when he pronounced them from his campaign train. The American Presidents, unless they want to end up like John Kennedy, do not rule their country anymore than the official governments in the other so-called democracies, for the big boys in industry and finance have long since taken over that task."...Corporate power has become the dominant force in our society...All attempts to check the mounting power of the corporate giants have failed. Consider the two most important instruments forged by the progressive forces of the country in their crusade to curb the march of monopoly: the regulatory system and the anti-trust program... The regulatory system lies in shambles, and the corporations which were intended to be regulated in the public interest now dominate these regulatory agencies. The betrayal of the public trust is virtually complete... The anti-trust laws are virtually dead letters. It is clear from recent disclosures that the Anti-Trust Division of the Justice Department is almost immobilized because of deals made over its head and behind its back in the White House and other corridors of power.." - From a January 1977 article by Morris H. Rubin, Editor and Publisher of The Progressive, the monthly founded by the late Senator LaFollette.
7
"GOD GAVE ME MY MONEY." - John D. Rockefeller - G. Allen, The Rockefeller File, '76 Press, CA., 1976
"It has long been demonstrated that the Rockefeller interests have created, built up and developed the most far-reaching industrial empire ever conceived in the mind of man. Standard Oil (ordered dissolved by the courts in 1911 for monopolistic crimes, but today the giant Exxon Corporation -ed) is of course the foundation industry upon which all of the other industries have been built. The story of Old John D., as ruthless an industrial pirate as ever came down the pike, is well known."The keystone of this mammoth empire is the Chase National Bank with 27 branches in New York City and 21 in foreign countries (now renamed the Chase Manhattan Bank with more than 200 branches in the U.S. and abroad.-ed). Not the least of its holdings are in the drug business. The Rockefellers own the largest drug manufacturing combine in the world and use all of their other interests to bring pressure to increase the sale of drugs. The fact that most of the 12,000 separate drug items on the market are harmful is of no concern to the Drug Trust..." - Morris Bealle, The Drug Story, Bi-World Publishing, 1949.The trend of using animals on a massive scale in medical research was started in America, by John D. Rockefeller, who had learned from his pappy, a horse-thief, bigamist and traveling salesman of snake-oil as a sure-fire cancer-remedy, the limitless gullibility of the general public, and how to exploit it. JDR's evil genius gave him the idea to involve governments ("free" monopoly medicine) in the profits from the sale of lucrative but deadly "miracle" drugs, which had constantly to be replaced by new ones, after the advertised "miracles" had not only failed to materialize but had furthermore opened big scars, mental and physical ones, in the nation's health. Exactly how the Rockefeller principle was organised and sold to all other industrialized countries has been exhaustively described by Morris Bealle in The Drug Story (1949) and by Hans Ruesch in Naked Empress or The Great Medical Fraud (1982).After giving instances of the fabulous profits from the sale of these drugs, Bealle writes: "... Is it any wonder that the Rockefellers and their stooges in the Food and Drug Administration, The U.S. Public Health Service, the Federal Trade Commission, the Better Business Bureau, the Army Medical Corps, the Navy Bureau of Medicine, and thousands of health officers all over the country, should combine to put out of business all forms of therapy that discourage the use of drugs?"The last annual report of the Rockefeller Foundation itemizes the gifts it has made to colleges and public agencies in the past 44 years and they total somewhat over half a billion dollars (when the dollar was worth something - ed). These colleges, of course, teach their students all the drug lore the Rockefeller pharmaceutical houses want taught. Otherwise there would be no more gifts, just as there are no gifts to any of the 30-odd drugless colleges in the United States."Harvard, with its aristocratic background and well-publicized medical school, has received $8,764,433 of this Drug Trust money. Yale got $7,927,800, John Hopkins $10,418,531, Stanford $947,505, Washington University in St. Louis $2,842,132, New York's Columbia University $5,424,371, Cornell University $1,709,072, etc." - from M. Bealle, The Drug Story, 1949, pg. 19.
8
AMERICA'S MEDICO - DRUG CARTEL
The medico-drug cartel was summed up by J.W Hodge, M.D., of Niagara Falls, N.Y., in these words:"The medical monopoly or medical trust, euphemistically called the American Medical Association, is not merely the meanest monopoly ever organized, but the most arrogant, dangerous and despotic organization which ever managed a free people in this or any other age. Any and all methods of healing the sick by means of safe, simple and natural remedies are sure to be assailed and denounced by the arrogant leaders of the AMA doctors' trust as "fakes, frauds and humbugs". Every practitioner of the healing art who does not ally himself with the medical trust is denounced as a "dangerous quack" and "imposter" by the predatory trust-doctors. Every sanitarian who attempts to restore the sick to a state of health by natural means without resort to the knife or poisonous drugs, disease-imparting serums, deadly vaccines or toxins is at once pounced upon by these medical tyrants and fanatics, bitterly denounced, vilified and persecuted to the fullest extent." (Quoted by Morris Bealle in The Drug Story)The American Medical Association (AMA) has a long history of corruption. Its most infamous leader was Morris Fishbein who reigned from 1924 until 1949. He had failed anatomy in medical school and had never practiced medicine a day in his life, but during his years in power he was recognized as the virtual dictator of American medicine. Journalist and scholar Ruth Mulvey Harmer, Ph.D., characterized Fishbein as having the "ruthlessness of a shark" and concluded that he "managed to hold back the twentieth century for 50 years for the benefit of organized medicine". ( American Medical Avarice, 1975)
9
A VAST CONSPIRACY
"The Inquisition is still with us. It is called the Food and Drug Administration. It is called the National Cancer Institute. It is called the American Cancer Society and the AMA. They are allied together to destroy innovation in modern times." - Robert G. Houston, Cancer Scandal - video."The people think the FDA is protecting them. It isn't. Whatthe FDA is doing and what the public thinks it's doing are as different as night and day...Key individuals are...granting special favours...similar to the 'protection racket' of organized crime..." -(former) FDA Commissioner Herbert Ley, M.D. quoted in Medical Dark AgesScholar Robert G. Houston has warned us ( Cancer Scandal, video): "Probably today, more than any time in modern history there is a strike force, a hit force, that is coordinated by some of the agencies - the FDA, the National Cancer Institute, the Post Office, the Justice Department - and now the Narc squads too. The Drug Enforcement Agency is involved in it, working hand in hand with the FDA to raid doctor's offices, to raid health food stores, to harass, intimidate and to show the power of the gun... This is such a profound violation of rights... so characteristic of totalitarian terror tactics. There is evidence that this is all coordinated in a massive movement to stamp out all alternative doctors...At least 50 and probably more like a 100 doctors in the past two years have undergone such treatment..." (Video available from Patient Rights Legal Action Fund, 202 W. 78th St., # 3E, New York, N.Y. 10024)Dr. Robert C. Atkins provides additional testimony against this enemy that has brought the Gestapo to birth within America:"There's a war going on... The War Against Quackery is a carefully orchestrated, heavily endowed campaign sponsored by extremists holding positions of power in the orthodox hierarchy..."The multimillion-dollar campaign against quackery was never meant to root out incompetent doctors; it was, and is, designed specifically to destroy alternative medicine... The millions were raised and spent because orthodox medicine sees alternative, drugless medicine as a real threat to its economic power."And right they are...The majority of the drug houses will not survive." - Dr. Atkins' Health Revolution, 1988, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston.
10
"Miracle" Drugs or Deadly Duds?
An editorial in The Economist, London, January 6, 1973, opened thus: "Thalidomide is not the first nor the last drug to have brought heartbreak where it was meant to bring help. There have been quite a number of other tragedies since Thalidomide went wrong 13 years ago.""A new U.S. study challenges claims made for the last 35 years that women can prevent breast cancer by regularly taking estrogen pills...The report seems to indicate the drug actually may cause the disease...Physicians have been prescribing estrogen for an estimated 5 million to 6 million middle-aged women in the United States alone." - (International Herald Tribune, August 17, 1976)
"...Facts incontrovertible in the [animal] laboratory are applied to clinical medicine in a manner quite unwarranted. The best examples are the indiscriminate use of hormones and the ready acceptance of the biased blurbs of [animal] research propagated by commercial travellers." - (Dr. Ffrangcon Roberts, British Medical Journal, June 16, 1945, p. 848)"When oestrogen first became available for clinical use, there was an understandable over-enthusiasm for its application...If one depends on the beautifully-embossed brochures which exhort the practitioner with every mail, one falls, unhappily, into the security of the illusion that there are neither contra-indications nor side-effects in the use of estrogen." - (Drs. Robert A. Kimbrough and S. Lion Israel, Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 138, December 25, 1949, p.1216)"I cannot over-emphasize the fallacies inherent in the efforts to apply directly to man the results of animal experiments in the field of hormones!" - (From the testimony of Don Carlos Hines, M.D., before the Delaney Committee of the House of Representatives, Jan. 31, 1952)On December 13, 1975, under the title "The Medicine Bluff", an interview was published in the French weekly Paris-Match with Dr. Henri Pradal, a specialist in pharmaceutical toxicology, concerning whom Paris-Match stated:"Henri Pradal spent twelve years in the camp of the industrial laboratories, before leaving it in order to say what he could no longer keep silent about."
Dr. Pradal:"The medical profession is not informed, or, rather, it is instructed almost exclusively by the journals and brochures from the [animal] laboratories, and thus by advertising."A certain messianic belief in progress has persuaded us that an increased use of drugs represents man's victory over disease, a proof of his power, a sign of progress. Whence comes this blind trust, when intelligence should surely lead us rather towards mistrust? It stems from an illusion which has been imposed on us by the all-powerful pharmaceutical industry, by a giant brewing- house of poisons that makes billions out of it. The guilt for all this lies with the powers-that-be in the Public Health Department, the Government Ministry and the health insurance associations, whose apathy and negligence have resulted in the sanctioning of no less than 11,000 medicaments (in France), although only a couple out of 100 are of any provable worth, as has been confirmed by the World Health Organization."The doctors can't see further than their own noses. They have become convinced by the laboratory-financed medical literature that medicines have turned them into demi-gods, and that attacks on the pharmaceutical industry mean attacks on medicine."When the people finally discover the cause of their illnesses, the sale of medicaments will abruptly drop. But we must first get them to understand it..."
"Medicine-induced illness has become a public health menace of major and alarming proportions, producing more deaths annually than are caused by breast cancer, and ranking among the top ten causes of hospital admissions." - (Medicine in Society, Vol. 7, 1981)
Some 10% (or 400,000) of the nearly 4 million yearly admissions to Canadian hospitals result from the intake of prescribed drugs. But once in hospital people are still not safe from mis-prescribing and adverse reactions to drugs. More than 200,000 serious injuries (including death) result from drug therapy in Canadian hospitals every year. Studies have determined that adverse drug reactions can contribute to 36% of all deaths in hospitals, and 25% of such deaths may be due to directly fatal poisoning. Most adverse effects will double the time of the average stay in hospital. See: Joel Lexchin, M.D., The Real Pushers: A Critical Analysis of the Canadian Drug Industry, New Star Books, Vancouver ( p. 58-161, etc.).Already many years ago, Dr. Walter Modell of Cornell University's Medical College, whom Time magazine had described as "one of America's foremost drug experts", wrote in Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics:"When will they realize that there are too many drugs? No fewer than 150,000 preparations are now in use. About 15,000 newmixtures and dosages hit the market each year, while about 12,000 die off...We simply don't have enough diseases to go around. At the moment the most helpful contribution is the new drug to counteract the untoward effect of other new drugs." - (Time, May 26, 1961)In the German medical journal Muenchener Medizinische Wochenschrift (No. 34, 1969), Dr. W. Chr. Mueller of the 1st University Hospital for Women, Munich, reported after one of the most comprehensive studies in this area of medicine that: "... 61 percent of all deformities in new-born infants and 88 percent of all stillbirths must be attributed to the effects of medicaments."In Die Weissen Magier (The White Magicians), Bertelsmann Verlag, 1974, Kurt Bluechel gives the following figures for West Germany: "Only 25 years ago, among every 100,000 children born in the Federal Republic there were 3 cases of malformation. Today, 5 children are malformed for only 1,000 births. Within a quarter of a century, therefore, the malformations have increased more than a hundredfold." (page 259)And on page 257 Bluechel states:"The average German citizen today consumes about five times as many medicines as in the years immediately preceding the Second World War. Is he also five times healthier? Of course not. On average the West German population is far more frequently ill today than it was in those days... Unexpectedly, an industry which was created to heal diseases has become the starting point for new ailments."Swiss State News on TV on May 30, 1988: "The use of Accutane, a Hoffman-LaRoche product, has caused hundreds of defective births. The packages containing this drug will henceforth have to display the picture of a malformed newborn."A.D.Dayan, who represented the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries at the European Parliament of Strasbourg in 1982 and also works for the Wellcome Research Laboratories, revealed: "Practocol was prescribed over 4 years before doctors realised that it caused corneal damage including blindness - a side effect not predicted by animal experiments." - (C.T. Dollery in Risk-Benefit Analysis in Drug Research, Ed. J.F. Cavalla, 1981, MTP)Mr. Dayan overlooked many tens of thousands of other drugs that had all been withdrawn from the market by the health authorities of various nations who had first approved them on the basis of these phony "safety" tests on animals. Those "health authorities" included Mr. Dayan himself!
Dr. med. Karlheinz Blank, West Germany, in Der Tierschutz, Nr. 62, 1985, Journal of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Deutscher Tierschutz (German Animal-Defense Society): "A drug that is tested on animals will have completely different effects in man. There are uncounted examples that could be cited."For example:
A single Amanita Phalloides mushroom can wipe out a whole human family, but is a staple food of the rabbit, one of the favorite laboratory animals...Prof. Bruno Fedi, M.D., Director of the City Hospital of Terni, Italy, anatomist, pathologist, specialist in urology, gynecology and cancerology: "All our current knowledge of medicine and surgery derives from observations of man following especially the anatomical-clinical method introduced by Virchow: symptoms of the patient while alive and the alternations found in the dead body.
"These observations have led us to discover the connection between smoking and cancer, between diet and arteriosclerosis, between alcohol and cyrrhosis, and so on. Even the RH factor has not been discovered on the macacus rhesus [monkey]. The observations of Banting and Best on diabetes, attributed to experiments on dogs, were already well known. Every discovery derives from observations on humans, which are subsequently tested in animals, and whenever the findings happen to concur, the discovery is attributed to animal experimentation...
"Everything we know today in medicine derives from observations made on human beings. The ancient Romans and Greeks gained most of their knowledge from epidemiological studies of people. The same goes for surgery. Surgery can't be learned on animals.
"Animals are anatomically completely different from man, their reactivity is completely different, their structure and resistance are completely different. In fact, exercises on animals are misleading. The surgeon who works a lot on animals loses the sensibility necessary for operating on humans." - Abstract from various TV interviews and articles by Prof. Fedi in the course of 1986."The great surgeons of the past have not been vivisectors. Some of the most famous surgeons such as Bigelow and Lawson Tait, expressed their opposition to and detestation of vivisectional practices.
"Like every other member of my profession, I was brought up in the belief that almost all our most valued means of saving life and diminishing suffering had been obtained from experiments on the lower animals. I now know that nothing of the sort is true concerning the art of surgery; and not only do I not believe that vivisection has helped the surgeon one bit, but I know that it has often led him astray. - Dr. Lawson Tait. Birmingham Daily Post, Dec.12, 1884)"...It must be perfectly clear that to answer all these questions specific instances must be given, and that they must be analyzed historically with great care. This has already been done in many instances, and I am bound to say, that in every case known to me, there was the utter disestablishment of the claims of vivisection...
"As a method of research it has constantly led those who have employed it into altogether erroneous conclusions, and the record teems with instances in which not only have animals fruitlessly been sacrifice, but human lives have been added to the list of victims by reason of its false light. - (Dr. Lawson Tait. Paper read to the Birmingham Philosophical Society, April 20, 1882)
11
Vaccination Fraud
Dr. med. Gerhard Buchwald, West Germany, specialist of internal diseases and participant in about 150 vaccination-victim trials:"Vaccination is not necessary, not useful, does not protect. There are twice as many casualties from vaccination as from AIDS." - From a speech to the third Symposium of the ILDAV (International League of Doctors Against Vivisection, founded in 1987, Hans Ruesch Honorary Chairman) held in Woudschoten, Holland, April 15/16/17, 1988.- Dr. Charles Henry Kempe, University of Colorado. - After a 20-year study, Dr. Kempe recommends abolishing smallpox vaccination. Since 1948 there have been no deaths from smallpox in the United States. In the same period more than 300 persons have died from smallpox vaccinations, including vaccine-induced encephalitis. (The Evening Bulletin, Philidelphia, May 7, 1965)"The public is surely entitled to convincing proof, beyond all reasonable doubt, that artificial immunization is in fact a safe and effective procedure, in no way injurious to health, and that the threat of the corresponding natural diseases remain sufficiently clear and urgent to warrant mass inoculation of everyone, even against their will if necessary. Unfortunately, such proof has never been given." -- Richard Moskowitz, M.D., Journal of the American Institute of Homeopathy, March 1983 (76:7)Professor J. Clausen of the Institute of Preventive Medicine at the University of Odense stated in March 1973: "Millions of people have been vaccinated with the polio vaccine, which contains the cancer-forming SV-40 virus originally found in monkeys. It is possible that it will take 20 years or still longer before the possible damaging effects of this virus come to light."They have already come to light...
Article in Weekly World News (U.S.A.) May 28, 1985:
Million People Doomed? Brain-Cancer Virus Found in Polio Vaccine -"Experts say 98 million Americans who took polio shots in the 1950's and 1960's may get a deadly brain-cancer from the inoculations. Researchers at the University of Chicago Medical Center say that a monkey virus contaminated the polio vaccine and they have now found genetic material from the virus in a number of brain-cancer victims..."A recent book out in Great Britain, Vaccination and Immunization: Dangers, Delusions and Alternatives (Publ: C.W. Daniel, 1987) by Leon Chaitow, one of the world's best-informed practioners of natural medicines, includes up-to-date evidence against vaccination from vaccine-researchers themselves, like the fact that even Dr. Jonas Salk, who developed the "killed" polio vaccine that bears his name, cannot agree with his rival Dr. Alfred Sabin on the merits of "live" and "killed" vaccine, and each one accuses the other of being responsible for uncounted death among the gullible patients!
How can there be such varying views? Mainly, vaccination programs and antibiotics have deliberately and wrongly been given all the credit for naturally-occurring declines in killer diseases such as smallpox, cholera, typhoid, tuberculosis, dysentery, etc., whereas most or all the credit belongs to better hygiene, sanitation, housing, and greater resistance to disease thanks to improved economic conditions - better nutrition being particularly important in the case of tuberculosis.London's typhoid epidemics were being halted by changes in the water supply before the "bug" was discovered, let alone a vaccine was developed - according to a 1923 report in the British Medical Journal. But tendentious legends has it that the vaccine saved the lives of thousands of troops in the Boer War and the 1914-1918 war. The documented truth is that typhus hit vaccinated soldiers and citizens with about the same frequency as unvaccinated ones, with the only difference that an unspecified number of vaccinated people developed the well known post-vaccinal effects - immediate insurgence of the disease against which they had been vaccinated, meningitis, and death.The issue is also confused by health professionals' consistent inability or unwillingness to identify vaccine-related deaths. A University of California study has shown that at least 1,000 deaths a year, described as the mysterious SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome), are in fact caused by vaccines."Vaccines are made from: mucus of infected children (whooping cough), excrement from typhoid victims (typhoid), fermented chick embryos, and until recently vaccines for polio were got from the (artificially) diseased kidneys of monkeys, and cause: leukemia, encephalitis, Multiple Sclerosis - and: "Now I believe the smallpox-vaccine theory is the explanation to the explosion of AIDS". - World Health Organization, advisor, Times 11.5.87Dr. med. Guttman (extract from Biologische Heilkunst, 1932/10): "Barn-yard medicine has not given us any vaccination procedure that really protects against illness, but many that endanger the body, that even bring death."Excerpt from a 3-page article by Daniel Jack Chasman in Science, April 1986, titled "The Polio Paradox" and subtitled, "One of the two polio vaccines has been largely abandoned in the U.S., the other is the leading cause of the disease":"...Presumably, when Kay NcNeary changed her daughter's diapers, a reactivated virus was transmitted to her. She sued the manufacturer of the vaccine and the public agencies that administered it. In 1982, a Seattle jury awarded her $1.1 million. Neither McNeary nor her lawyer, Daniel Sullivan, claimed that the vaccine had been manufactured improperly. The "live" vaccine is currently the "vaccine of choice" in the United States. It is also the nation's LEADING CAUSE OF POLIO. In 1982 and 1983, according to the federal Centers for Disease Control's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, it was the ONLY cause." (emphasis added.)So... to manufacture a highly lucrative pseudo-vaccine like Sabin's, which has been recognized as being the sole cause of polio in the U.S.A. today, an entire species of animals, the highly sensitive and intelligent rhesus monkey, has been nearly wiped out. The same pseudo-researchers who were responsible for that erstwhile fiasco are now trying to get hold of the last individuals of chimps left, to manufacture an AIDS vaccine which is likely to be equally ineffective and dangerous, but even more lucrative for the profession and the industry than the Salk and Sabin products.Polio has practically disappeared also in those countries where no vaccination had taken place; and countries, which of course, were spared the huge damages that the vaccinations had caused wherever they were employed."Hygiene is not consistent with the injection of poison into the body...The occurence of some piece of scientific foolishness may appear insignificant, for what one of us is always wise? But the constant creation of a disease through a system whose purpose is to cultivate it is no small matter; it is also no small matter when market criers are engaged in turning the heads of those who have the fine task of working for the good of ALL mankind..." - (Dr. E. Haughton. In Animal's Friend, London, August 1895, p.215)
"Some 50,000 people earn a living in Germany as doctors, and they are joined by an additional 15,000 each year, so that there will soon be 60,000 doctors. Can that mean that we are healthy? In order to feed the doctors, to provide them with work through illnesss, one has to get sicker and sicker. The number of doctors must be reduced if this situation is to be ended."In order to practise their "gentle art of healing", the doctors require for torture millions of animals, on whose suffering their so-called 'science' is based."But when it dawned on some people that the system was rotten, and clear-sighted individuals fought against it, the doctors also saw that their livelihood was being threatened. Their medical policy is primarily the line of withholding information. "The amount of information to be given out will be determined by us", said Dr.Neustadter."The prerequisite for today's medical policy is naturally the currently predominant system of medicine. The sick are the source of income, therefor it is neccesary that there be sick people, yes, it proves advantageous if one makes the people artificially sick."Hundreds and thousands of perjuries have been committed via scientifically falsified reports. I say this because I can prove it. In this way the high standing of the doctors is forced onto the public. Damage and death thus come about as a result of vaccination, and is continuously proven! But it is portrayed in very toned-down terms by official sources. Since 1930, many doctors have declared themselves opposed to vaccination.But the vaccination law continues to prevail. In many German states there is compulsory vaccination, although even the supporters of vaccination were originally against compulsion. In 1929 it so happened that a father abducted his own child to save it from the persecutions of those who wanted to use force so as to vaccinate the child. But the fourth time, officials succeeded in taking the child for vaccination. They dragged it out of the car. After the vaccination, encephalitis (inflamation of the brain) set in, and within eight days the child was dead! In this way, vaccination has at times become a legally-sanctioned, judicial murder, committed by custodians of the law. Vaccination can, as has been proven, cause encephalitis... (Dr.med. Steintel, on "International Medical Policy ": Berlin, 1933)"It's not one-sided causes that we have to champion here; opponents of vaccination and anti-vivisectionists must work hand in hand. The planned dyphtheria law will have really disastrous consequences! All schoolchildren are to be vaccinated three times a year. By multiplying the number of schoolchildren by three or nine injections a year, anyone can himself calculate the dividends that this flood of vaccinations must yield!
"The fear of the bacillus is a pathway to intimidation. In what direction are we going? Goodness and wholesomeness have always triumphed, the world will get better, it must get better! The medical political edifice will undoubtedly topple, many doctors will have to take thought within themselves and humbly resign. We need doctors who preserve health." - Dr.med. Steintel."I have witnessed the rise and fall of Pasteur's quackery, the failures of Koch's tuberculin and the dyphtheria serum (antitoxin). Every day I become increasingly convinced that vivisection, which is based on cruelty, supported by lies and practised out of self-interest, is not a suitable method for furthering the merciful art of healing. It can also not be shown that any malady can be healed by a method arrived at through vivisection." - Dr. Edward Berdoe, M.R.C.S., M.R.C.P.. Letter to BUAV."Animal experiments has helped lead us into the errrors of vaccination and serum therapy, it has helped the growth of surgery without rendering any service to surgery itself, it has provided mankind with a stream of drugs and with a hundred mishaps, which it would have been better for mankind never to have got acquainted with; vivisection has not in any way shown how to heal disease, or pointed the way to natural healing...In hospitals one gets used to violence being carried out on the sick for experimental purposes..." --Dr.med.Wolfgang Bohn. Aertzliche Mitteilungen, 1909, No.7/89
"Animal experimentation leads inevitably to human experimentation. That is the final verdict, sad as it is. And the toll mounts on both sides." (Dr.Moniem Fadali, M.D., Diplomate American Board of Surgery, Diplomate American Board of Thoracic Surgery. Foreword, Heart Research on Animals, by Brandon Reines, 1985)"From the ethical viewpoint, vivisection is an atrocity. From the theoretical standpoint, it is a proven piece of nonsense, shown up as such by the most extreme contradictions of its findings and real facts. From the practical viewpoint, it is quite useless, due to being damaging, because the young students are demoralised by it. People who torture an animal for no purpose are committing an inexcusable crime...I am an opponent of every vivisectional experiment in any circumstance." - Dr.Josef Kroo, GP, Buczacz, Galicia. Nov.16,1909. Declaration to Parliament."26 years ago, as I recall, when I was a medical student, things were demonstrated to me on a laboratory animal which any normal brain could have expressed and understood with ten words." (Dr. med. Rud. Roubal, district doctor in Wamberg, Bohemia. Sept. 30, 1908. Declaration to Parliament)"In order to prove extremely unimportant, so-called scientific facts to us students, poor helpless animals were tormented in the most irresponsible way." --Dr.med. Hans v. Hepperger-Hoffenstal, specialist in nervous diseases and psychiatry, Bolzano. Oct.4, 1909. Declaration to Parliament)"I dismiss at once the employment of experiments on living animals for the purpose of instruction as absolutely necessary, and to be put an end to by legislation without any reservation whatsoever." --Dr.Lawson Tait. From a paper read to the Birmingham Philosophical Society, April 20, 1882)"I would shrink with horror from accustoming large classes of young men to the sight of animals under vivisection. Science would gain nothing, and the world would have a set of young devils let loose upon it." --Dr. E Dudgeon. From Animal's Friend, London, August 1985, p.231"The vivisections performed before students are useless and harmful. I have noticed that vivisection gave pleasure to certain students in whom the sadistic instinct had been slumbering." --Dr.J.Pawels, Strombeek, Belgium."Vivisection awakens cruelty in the young doctor and destroys in him the noblest human sentiments: compassion and humanity." --Dr.Julius Winkler, GP, Abbazia. Sept.19, 1908. Declaration to Parliament.The cruel demonstration experiments on animals carried out in front of students are useless. They learn nothing from them, and stand guilty and bewildered before the bound and groaning animals. The greatest discoveries in Science and Medicine owe nothing to vivisection, which for many teachers and students has become a cruel sport rather than a necessity..." (Dr. Hiard, Chenee, Belgium)"I was always an opponent of vivisection before the big lecture hall. It is nothing but a pointless and cruel torture of animals, which every student who has any heart must abominate." (Dr Josef Ritter v. Lachmueller, doctor and dentist, Brixen, Tyrol. Nov. 16, 1908. Declaration to Parliament)'Only a good person can be a good doctor', said Nothnagel. I cannot consider those who remove half of a dog's thorax wall - in order to demonstrate the movement of the heart - good people. (Dr. Karl Petschaur, Prague. Oct. 5, 1909. Declaration to Parliament)"I am opposed to vivisection in principle, for true science should never resort to criminal activities. - (Dr Heinrich Deluggi, GP, Bolzano. Oct.20, 1908. Declaration to Parliament)"It still torments my conscience to have joined in looking at those demonstrations of long-known facts without protesting, and to have taken part in what is a crime." (Dr.Josef Fuchs, district physician in Brandt, Lower Austria. Nov.16, 1908. Declaration to Parliament)Dr.med. Seiss,of Frankfurt,delivered a lecture at the Palmensaal in Berne on March 21, 1907. This included the following passages: "The young doctors are repeatedly required to join in animal experiments. Any feeling in the hearts of the students is systematically killed. The medical world is degenerating. Compassion is systematically being taken away from the students at the universities. A certain professor has stated that he would like to lead the young people to the point where they take pleasure in vivisecting. Young, pushy types who want to be on top in everything use animal experiments to acquire cheap scientific fame."Vivisection is absolutely not a scientific method. The practising physician does not need it. Many a doctor who spurned this suggestion in his youth has, in later years or on his deathbed, looked back with remorse and desperation at the atrocities he perpetrated on animals in the past.""The fact that all these experiments are repeated for the hundredth time in the lecture-hall is irresponsible and quite certainly a brutalising influence on our young doctors, many of whom quite definitely carry over their hardened attitude toward the tormented animals into their subsequent medical practice." (Dr.med Marie Heim-Voegtlin, Zurich. From a letter dated Aug. 1912)"It is extremely urgent that vivisection disappear from the instruction given to students." (Dr. Levoisin, physician, Paris. New York Herald Tribune, March 20, 1904)Dr.med.Eckhart, Hanover: "I have been an opponent of vivisection ever since my student days, when I had to witness this terrible cruelty to animals which I had to look at with the utmost revulsion, without being able to prevent it. The images of vivisection I saw then, which still appear before my mind's eye, have so far lost nothing of their dreadfulness for me...
"Today's orthodox medicine has, on the basis of a vivisection-oriented method of treatment and as a result of the disastrous effects of big capitalistic influences, led medical science onto totally false paths; it has established the purely materialistic, soulless therapeutic treatment for which the human being is seen merely as a product of chemistry and physics, in which everything is only measured and weighed..." (from his speech to a Anti-Vivisection Congress in Locarno, May 4, 1931)"Our entire medicine is today dominated, practically terrorized by analytical science, which is heartless and unfeeling. Its medical research has nothing to do with health. The stifling of symptoms is erroneously considered as the restoration of health, but has nothing to do with it. A child whose fever has been hastily eliminated by administering antibiotics is more ill than before, becomes more susceptible to diseases and to chronic sickness. Analytical science has formed doctors whose mental abilities do not extend beyond the equation 2+2=4. They are blind to the most elementary observation, which they despise as "subjective". This ignorant attitude is also responsible for the disgusting animal experiments, which are only a sign of spiritual deafness."- Prof. Dr. med. Helmut Mommsen, pediatrician, Frankfurt am Main, in CIVIS-SCHWEIZ Aktuell, Zurich, December, 1980
Dr. Duekow, GP, Poltawa, Russia. 'On the Need for Reform of Current Medical Training at Universities.' Leipzig, 1912: "...Brought up in this unhealthy atmosphere of both clinical and experimental violence, the doctor gradually loses all compassion for living creatures and gets a quite perverted conception of his extraordinary superiority, which enables him to consider himself the sole master of all creation and to sacrifice everything to his supposed Science. This feeling of superiority finally becomes habitual to him, so that he also looks down upon his fellow men, the sick, as mere objects for scientific investigation and experiments, and considers them as clinical material which he can handle just as he chooses for the purpose of settling his "scientific doubts". So it is not at all strange or unusual if the doctors, in this atmosphere so destructive to all human feeling, seize on the new vaccination method with pleasure, in order to use it both on healthy as well as on ailing "human material", as they think fit, partly for experimental purposes...""...Physiological experimentation is unreliable and falacious, like all physiology. It lacks the necessary conclusiveness possessed by experimentation in physics.
"...When one considers that vivisection is becoming commoner everyday, and that hundreds of the cruelest experiments are carried out, both secretly and publicly, by students and professors day by day; that these experiments often last for hours and even days; that the animals which survive the experiment do not receive a merciful death but are kept for new experiments, and that the intrinsic uncertainty of the results spurs the researchers with their belief in the almightiness of Science, to think up ever newer and ever more abominable experimental procedures...one feels that one is dealing here with a moral monstrosity the existence of which can only fail to be noticed by those who no longer, or not yet, distinguish between what is monstrous and what is normal..." - Dr. med Jatros. From his tract Die Vivisektion, ihr wissenschaftlicher Wert und ihre ethische Berechtigung)From a report in Der Tier-und-Menschenfreund, Issue No.2,1926, on the lecture "Doctors, Brutality and Animal Experiments" held by Dr. Rudolph Bussman (Doctor of Medicine and Law) at the Hohenzollern Highschool, May 3, 1926: "Dr. Bussman, himself a practicing physician, who runs his practice on the basis of reformed medicine, and who studied law only in order to be able to defend himself against the medical hierarchy, gave shattering insights into the present-day medical practices of the medical training establishments; almost every clinic and almost every hospital had their own laboratories for practising vivisection; by means of observing and practising vivisection, every feeling the young student had for living beings was systematically destroyed; it was no wonder that any sensitivity towards suffering human beings, and the human contact between doctor and patient also disappeared. The custom of carving up animals like a lump of inanimate matter was by nature neccesarily transmitted to the treatment of patients, who were in many cases no longer seen as persons to be healed, but only as objects to study, or, when they were well-to-do, as sources of income."The professional tribune, which was trying to muzzle Bussman himself, saw to it, with its draconian fines and its ostracism of those who did not think likewise, that no member of the profession dared speak out against these gruesome practices..."After a few striking words against the daily press, which suppresses any criticism of the medical hierarchy and its vivisection methods, but on the other hand broadcasts every supposed success - which afterwards has often turned out to be a dismal and deadly failure (diphtheria serum, tuberculin, etc...) - as the greatest scientific achievement, the speaker came to the conclusion that the opponents of vivisection could only achieve their goals by joining forces with the representatives of the alternative schools of healing, which served the well-being of mankind without animal experiments."The uninformed critic might well ask how the deception of the usefulness of vivisection could be kept alive within the medical community itself, considering that there have always been prominent dissenters among them.Walter Hadwen, one of the most eminent British MDs in the first half of the 20th century, explains this phenomenon in the preface of a book he wrote about one of those dissenting MDs, titled "The Difficulties of Dr.Deguerre."The conditions that Dr. Hadwen describes are no less true today.
"No medical man during his student days is taught to think. He is expected to assimilate the thoughts of others and to bow to authority. Throughout the whole of his medical career he must accept the current medical fashions of the day or suffer the loss of prestige and place. No public appointments, no coveted preferments are open to the medical man who declines to parrot the popular shibboleths of his profession. His qualifications may be beyond reproach, he may himself possess qualities that command respect, but unless he is prepared to think and act within the narrow circle of accepted dogmas, he must be prepared for a more or less isolated path.
The public press today is largely governed by the orthodox rulers in the medical profession. The ubiquitous 'Medical Correspondent', who draws his inspiration from the pages of current fashionable medical literature, is expected to supply only such copy as will gratify the tastes of the mysterious power that stands supreme behind the editorial chair. The views of the unorthodox are, with rare exceptions, refused. So rigid is the control which medical orthodoxy holds over the public mind, that not a word upon health matters, however important and interesting, is even allowed to be broadcast by wireless unless it is approved and sanctioned by the bureaucrats of the Health Ministry.Every now and then some new medical "discovery" is proclaimed with clamorous voice. The public eye is arrested by commanding headlines in the leading organs of the popular press. The simultaneousness of appearance and the similarity of the announcements leave no doubt as to how the whole scheme has been engineered. It may be a new cancer-germ discovery; a new serum, vaccine or chemical inoculation; a new theory concerning some old-fashioned disease dressed up in a new garb; a new outcry against flies, fleas, lice, cockroaches, dogs, cats, parrots, rats, or goats; but upon reflection, it will always be found that these "discoveries" are entirely devoid of originality.It is safe to say that among all these flaming pronouncements no real discovery has been made, no original medical idea has been promulgated, no permanent contribution to medical science has been furnished, no advancement of medicine has been achieved. The public press has been utilized for the propagation of little else than medical sensationalism, proved to be such in time by clinical and statistical experience.Practically all the modern claims of medicine are based upon the theories of Jenner and Pasteur, who have been exalted almost to the position of deities, whose dicta it is held to be impious to question. Those theories, in spite of a strenuous and increasing struggle to fix them upon a scientific basis, remain without foundation."Modern medicine's scientific basis may be missing, but its financial profits are healthy, and anybody who jeapardizes them is in for trouble, or worse. Who is "the mysterious power that stands supreme behind the editorial chair" which Dr. Hadwen hints at? The answer stands recorded in at least two books, Morris Bealle's The Drug Story, first published in the '40s and reprinted thirty-six times and maybe more since then, although no American bookstore ever dared handling it; and in Swiss medical historian Hans Ruesch's Naked Empress or The Great Medical Fraud, published and republished in the '80s.Dr. George Wilson, President, British Medical Society. Speech to the Society's Annual General Meeting, 1889. Quoted in the British Medical Journal.
...I say frankly that we should call a break in the practice of these cruel experiments, so as to gain a considered, unprejudiced overall picture of the whole position of the bacteriological procedure,,, I have not joined the ranks of the anti-vivisectionists, but I accuse my profession of misleading the public as regards the cruelties and horrors perptrated on animals.Pasteur's anti-rabies vaccine is - I believe, and others with me - a piece of deception... The much-praised serum treatment for diphtheria does not even enjoy the general approval of the doctors in the hospital in our capital city... The whole of bacteriological theory and practice is closely bound up with commercial interests. Behring has had his diphtheria serum patented on the Continent, Koch has made a princely income from his Tuberculin...Dr.Herbert Snow, eminent physician at the London Cancer Hospital: "Due to the powerful control exercised by business interests, the prospects for the public are all the more gloomy and bad the more the power of these basically selfish money interests is centered on the large-scale manufacturing chemists. The latter holds a despotic rule over doctors, hospitals, teaching establishments, pharmacies, charitable foundations. It is unnecessary to add that his guiding star is vivisection, in other words, the exploitation of the animal world under the guise of "scientific research" ...
Every day we hear of some "wonderful discovery" in the field of remedies produced in this way, which achieves enormous sales for a while, after which its harmfulness and uselessness becomes apparent. Then the demand drops...But it matters not how worthless the alleged "remedy" may be; despite the harmfulness which many cases have amply proved it to represent, the artificially-created reputation which it enjoys continues for many years, in fact it never ends. As long as it is worthwhile for the chemical factories to make and sell the medicament, the serum, the vaccine and so on, the business goes on and on. "- (from: The Starry Cross, Philadelphia, Apr.1927, p.57)After a 20-year study, Dr. Charles Henry Kempe (University of Colorado) recommends abolishing smallpox vaccination. Since 1948 there have been no deaths from smallpox in the United States. In the same period more than 300 persons have died from smallpox vaccinations, including vaccine-induced encephalitis. (The Evening Bulletin, Philidelphia, May 7, 1965)(Dr.med.Eckhard, Hanover. Der Tier-und-Menschenfreund, 1925, No.4)...It is scientifically certain that almost all the medicines and serums produced in the world with so much hullaballoo and discovered through so-called animal experimentation have in reality turned out to be a total failure. I would point out the damage caused by insulin, the injuries from Vigantol, the failure of Koch's tuberculin injections, of the measles and scarlet fever serums and many others. Also, the fact that cancer research and treatment has not made one step forward despite more than 25 years of experimentation on millions of animals, that the views of the leading cancer researchers of all countries do, on the contrary sharply conflict with each other. Even a procedure anchored in law, such as the small-pox vaccination, is now the subject of such strong doubts that Holland has abolished compulsory vaccination for an initial period of two years...Reports on the crushing failures which one has in fact had most recently with diphtheria serum and vaccination have been provided by, among others, Prof.W.Stoelzner, Director of the University Hospital in Koeniigsberg (DMW, 1929) and Prof.Dr.Friedberger, Head of the Institute of Public Health and Immunity Studies in Dahlem. Friedberger stressed to the Pediatrics Association the total uncertainty about the scientific justification for diphtheria inoculation, the unreliability of the figures in support of inoculation, and quoted in evidence of the failure of the inoculation the fact that out of 100 inoculated children who nevertheless contracted the disease, precisely as many died as did died as did from children who contracted the disease without being inoculated. An accusation made by Prof. Czerny at the Association for Internal Medicine and Pediatrics in Berlin also casts a revealing light on the question of diphtheria inoculation: "All doctors have been dragged into the diphtheria inoculation, because a pressure was applied which was almost a compulsion. Such a procedure is unusual, and indeed had never existed before."The tuberculin put into the hands of allopathic medicine, acclaimed at that time as a triumph of vivisection research, killed thousands of people, so that special cemeteries had to be created for the victims of this renowned medicament. With regard to the inoculation against canine rabies, I would refer to Pastuer's "death lists". Over two thousand victims succumbed, but not as a result of the dog-bites, which were subsequently found to be non-rabid, but due to the rabies injected into them at the Pateur Institute. The remedies against plague and cholera have proved to be useless.A much wider field of animal cruelty is found in the chemical factories in the production of serum from various animal species, allegedly for the purpose of healing human suffering which would not otherwise be curable. And the same rule applies here. The doctors answer: Are we to let mankind perish, to let the child suffocate with diphtheria, or are we to spare the horses?...The fact that there is another system of healing, with hundreds of doctors in Germany, which does not use serums and yet cures those diseases without the medicaments which the majority of doctors obtain from the sacrificing of the animal world - that also goes against the time and its way if viewing things...On top of all this comes the fact that capital is at work in the entire pharmaceutical manufacturing industry, capital that is interested in achieving profit and, therefor, also interested in combatting everything that can reduce this profit.The public must therefor not learn too much about the fact that one can heal without medicine obtained from animal torture, and the Press is commanded to ridicule the animal welfarists. Who is aware that this Press is not allowed to publish anything favourable to the animal welfarists? (Dr. Rudolph Bussman, Berlin, doctor of medicine and law. "Why the Animal Protection Movement Encounters Surreptitious Opposition. 1926)
Chapter 12
THE CANCER ESTABLISHMENT
"There are still people who feel that the laboratory rat will guide us to the perfect diet. As for me, I think it merely guides us to the garbage heap." (Dr. Franklin Bicknell, The English Complaint, Jan, 1956)."It must first be realized that the output to work on cancer research is enormous. It may be true that from this mountain of labour nothing so far has emerged but a cancer-bearing mouse." - Dr. Henry Woglom.............
Every half-hour, 30 people die of cancer in America, one every minute. Every day, 1400 people die of cancer in America. Every year, almost 500,000 people die of cancer in America. Approximately 900,000 Americans will learn this year that they have cancer. Of those, only 40% will be alive in 5 years. (Critics of the national cancer program say only 20-25%.)
THE AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY DOES NOT TELL THE TRUTH
"Cancer is one of the most curable of the major diseases in this country"
-American Cancer Society booklet
"They (American Cancer Society officials) lie like scoundrels."
-Dr. Dean Burk, Ph.D., 34 years at the National Cancer Institute
____________________________________________________________________________"Everyone should know that most cancer research is largely a fraud, and that the major cancer research organisations are derelict in their duties to the people who support them." - Linus Pauling, Ph.D., two time Nobel Prize winner, in Outrage (magazine), Oct/Nov 1986"Between 1962 and 1982, the numbers of people who contracted or died of cancer both increased. Cancer deaths rose 8.7%... The bottom line is that despite all the billions of dollars, and the promises, and the claims of success, more people are dying of cancer than ever before..." - Dr. John C. Bailer III, biostatistician, Harvard University School of Public Health. Co-author of Report on Cancer in the New England Journal of Medicine, May 1986."...the simple unadulterated truth is that they are neither winning the fight against cancer nor are they about to find a cure. They have been claiming that a cure is just around the corner for a good 50 years or more, but the sad fact remains that in spite of the countless millions being collected, cancer in its most serious forms - in the lung, breast and bowel - is no nearer to being beaten today than it was at the turn of the century."Indeed, in some cases - breast cancer for example - the exact opposite is true; the scientists are actually losing the fight." - Cancer Control Society, Great Britain, in Outrage (magazine), Oct/Nov, 1986Why?The answer is simple. The cancer industry, including treatment and research, is conservatively estimated to be an annual $50 billion to $75 billion industry (in the U.S. alone). It is a powerful monster out of control that government officials and media barons fear to confront. Hospitals blithely install multi-million dollar radiation devices, knowing they will profit from them while ignoring their murderous effects. Surgeons cut and cut and cut, with meagre results, but high fees. Chemotherapists promote more expensive and more toxic cancer "cocktails" which have little effect, as detailed research proves. The few voices of protest are lost in the huge, obscene feeding of the cancer industry profiteers.According to Arizona State University professor Edward J. Sylvester:"The physical plant of what is called the University of Texas (UT) System Cancer Center here covers two million square feet... Current investment in the building is $152 million. The operating budget, separate from physical-plant cost, was $254,389,314 ($254 million!) ... for fiscal 1984-85... All for cancer. The UT System Cancer Center treats no other disease..."A noted cancer specialist in Boston said he believed that if some simple and inexpensive replacement for chemotherapy for the treatment of cancer were found tomorrow, all U.S. medical schools would teeter on the verge of bankruptcy, so integral a part of their hospital revenues is oncology, the medical specialty of cancer treatment." - Dread Disease, 1972In 1989 the average cost per cancer patient was $50,000-$75,000 (US) and rising. Yet many die of the treatment! As is admitted by a few of the more courageous physicians and researchers.As early as 1956, Hardin Jones, Ph.D., a professor of medical physics and physiology at the University of California, Berkeley, argued that orthodox cancer treatment (radiation, surgery and chemotherapy) was suspect. In 1969, Jones declared that, according to his carefully researched statistics, the cancer patient who received no treatment lived four times longer than the patient who underwent the orthodox regimen of "therapies"."For a typical type of cancer, people who refused treatment lived an average of twelve-and-a-half years. Those who accepted surgery and other kinds of treatment lived an average of only three years. I attribute this to the traumatic effect of surgery on the body's natural defence mechanism. The body has a natural kind of defence against every type of cancer." - Hardin Jones, A Report on Cancer, University of California, Berkeley (library).
During the 1970's period, the ACS collected more than $1 billion from the American public. At one point, the California branch of the ACS had accumulated over $8 million which was collecting interest in California banks. At another point, the national ACS had over $200 million invested in New York banks. Its emergency fund for hot research projects was a "big" $5 million! Yet every year the drum is rolled out and two and a half million volunteers go forth to beg for more money for the "Lasker relief charity". The spectacle is sickening.Samuel S. Epstein, professor of preventive medicine and community health at the University of Illinois Medical Society in Chicago described how the "War on Cancer" began:"The cancer lobby, headed by the late Sydney Farber, politically astute director of the Children's Cancer Research Foundation, Boston, and including the American Cancer Society and Mary Lasker, a New York philanthropist who had close contacts with the administrations of successive Presidents, exerted a powerful influence on Congress and the public. Both were exhorted by hard-sell techniques (to believe) that the cure for cancer was just around the corner, and only needed more support and funding for the American Cancer Society and NCI. In the naive search for the 'magic bullet,' the NCI financed a huge and ill-conceived Cancer Chemotherapy Program for mass-screening of hundreds of chemicals, selected on tenuous pretexts, for anticancer activity in tissue culture and 'animal tumour systems'."A full page ad was put in the New York Times on December 9, 1969 to start the "War on Cancer" campaign. It read, "We are so close to a cure for cancer. We lack only the will and the kind of money and comprehensive planning that went into putting a man on the moon."Four or five months later, Mary Lasker (whose advertising-tycoon husband had made his fortune with the Lucky Strike commercials) contacted her friend Mathilde Krim (now in control of the 'fight against AIDS'...hold on to your wallets, America), a research biologist (vivisector) at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center and also politically-connected through her friendship with ex-President Lyndon Johnson. Together Lasker and Krim went off to Washington and soon had a Senator interested in the "war on cancer". An outside panel, composed mainly of people associated with the American Cancer Society, was assigned to draft a report. Mathilde Krim became fascinated with Interferon during her preparation of a major portion of the report.Once the report was completed, a bill was offered in the Senate. Then the newspaper advice columnist Ann Landers joined the crusade. (Landers, whose husband is a doctor, has ever since published an annual pro-vivisection column for the benefit of her millions of naive readers.) Soon a public groundswell was created. Many scientists in cancer research were opposed to the notion of billions of dollars going to cancer. They rightly surmised that most of it would be wasted (on vivisection). But Mary Lasker never paid much attention to the scientists. At the end of 1971, President Nixon signed the "war on cancer" into law. Mary Lasker's public relations campaign had succeeded. Now the public funds were in the water and the sharks moved in for the feast.Lucy Eisenberg provided the following insights in a November 1971 article in Harper's: "The so-called Conquest of Cancer Act is the product of a high-powered PR campaign and a rather deceptive one at that..."Mrs. Lasker's opinions on research policy do not always coincide with those of many research scientists or even top NIH (National Institute of Health) officials, but when they don't, it is often Mrs. Lasker's that prevail..."She arranged to have a Senate panel appointed to study cancer... Most of the panel members, it turned out, were past or present members of the American Cancer Society board."Maryann Napol's 1982 book, Health Facts, reported: "According to Washington-based observers of the medical politics scene, the NCI has both the money and the prestige within the scientific community, and the ACS has the political clout."The American Cancer Society's political clout is exercised via the extremely influential ACS board members - some of the country's leading philanthropists, bankers and corporate executives - who also sit on key committees at the NCI. The ACS is the largest PRIVATE 'philanthropic' institution in the United States." (emphasis added)
But remember Mathilda Krim?...in February 1985, France's biggest publishing house, Hachette, brought out Les Mensonges de la Medecine (The Lies of Medicine), by Roger Dalet, M.D., who filled 228 pages with what he defines as "lies" propagated as truths by the medical establishment. We shall cite here just one single item; on page 40, Dr. Dalet recalls the Interferon bluff, which we remember made the title page of Time, Newsweek etc., and consequently also of most European publications. Dr. Dalet writes: "The word gets around. Some experiments seem hopeful. Rats, to which Interferon had been administered, healed of their cancer. The media spread the news that the miracle was imminent, that cancer would soon be defeated. There was a rush on this new substance... Numerous drug manufacturers pitched into the production of Interferon to fill the orders from the USA, Switzerland, Japan etc...."But suddenly, the crash! Interferon doesn't keep its promises... And then... the tops, the bubble bursts. France's medical journal, Quotidien du Medicin (No 3671, April 21, 1982, p. 11) reports: An American doctor, Shelby Berger, of the NCI, announces that Interferon, rather than retarding the development of cancer, favours its growth..."
"It is not possible to apply to the human species experimental information derived from inducing cancer in animals." - Dr. Kenneth Starr, of the New South Wales Cancer Council, reported in the Sydney Morning Herald, April 7, 1960.
"Experts often assert that it is senseless to compare a tumour which has been artificially provoked in an animal with a tumour that has spontaneously developed in a human being." - Dr. Peter Schmidsberger, Medical Correspondent of the German weekly Bunte, No. 21, 1982.Prof. Hasting Gilford, surgeon, in The Lancet, 1930: "That research into the cause and nature of cancer is making no headway is obvious to everyone who has followed its drift since the movement began with the beginning of this century."And now, after thirty years of research, all that it has to show is a prodigious heap of facts and inductions got by much industry from animal sources, but, so far as man is concerned, no better than a tumour - an innocent tumour - useless to man, and most decidedly of no use to mice... Laboratory cancer research has gone on for so many years, contentedly grinding out data and spinning inductions, without attention being drawn to the fact that it never produces any useful results. And now, after a quarter of a century of research, we can see to what a deplorable waste of energy and ability and money this academic, aimless toil may lead. One useful, if negative, conclusion, however, emerges; which is that the problem of the causation of human cancer is not to be solved by experiments on lower animals in laboratories."
"Over a 25-year period, the United States National Cancer Institute screened 40,000 species of plants for anti-tumour activity and, as a result, several proved sufficiently safe and effective on the basis of animal tests to be included in human trials. Unfortunately, all of these were either ineffective in treating human cancer or too toxic to consider for general use. Thus, in 25 years of this extensive programme, not a single anti-tumour agent safe and effective enough for use by patients has yet emerged." - N.R. Farnsworth and J.M. Pezzuto, paper presented at the University of Panama workshop sponsored by the International Foundation for Science, 1982. Reproduced in The Cruel Deception by Dr. Robert Sharpe, 1988.Dr. Irwin D.J. Bross, PhD, (fired) Director of Biostatistics, Roswell Park Memorial Institute for Cancer Research, Buffalo,NY, in Fundamental and Applied Toxicology. Nov. 1982: "Animals in Cancer Research: A Multi-Billion Dollar Fraud" - "...From a scientific standpoint, what is pertinent is that what are called "animal model systems" in cancer research have been a total failure."...The tens of millions of animals killed in the mass-screening for new cancer drugs died in vain. The hundreds of millions spent by the National Cancer Institute on this futile effort were diverted from genuine cancer research that might have provided useful drugs."When NCI enthusiastically supported the mass-screening using animals there was plenty of good evidence that the mass-screening program would fail. There was almost no factual evidence to suggest that it was going to succeed. The money was spent and the animals were killed for two main reasons. First, it was a highly profitable undertaking for certain medical schools and research institutes that were incapable of doing any genuine cancer research. Second, it was sustained by a superstitious belief in a grossly unscientific notion: that mice are miniature men..."Since there is no way to defend the use of animal model systems in plain English or with scientific facts, they resort to double talk in technical jargons...".... From the standpoint of current scientific theory of cancer, the whole mystique of animal model systems is hardly more than SUPERSTITIOUS NONSENSE..."The virtue of animal-model systems to those in hot pursuit of the federal dollars is that they can be used to prove ANYTHING - no matter how foolish, or false, or dangerous this might be. There is such a wide variation in the results of animal model systems that there is always SOME system that will "prove" a point. Fraudulent methods of argument never die and rarely fade away. They are too useful to promoters..."The moral is that animal-model systems kill not only animals, they also kill humans. There is no good factual evidence to show that the use of animals in cancer research has led to the prevention or cure of a single human cancer." (emphasis added)"Various species of animals react differently to the same drug. Not only do the variations in the metabolism of a drug make it difficult to extrapolate results of animal experiments to man but they CREATE A SERIOUS OBSTACLE to the development of new therapeutic drugs." (emphasis added) - Dr. Barnard B. Brodie in Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 1976)Dr. Herbert Ley, former FDA Commissioner, in the San Francisco Chronicle, Jan. 2, 1970: "People think the FDA is protecting them. It isn't. What the FDA is doing and what the public thinks it's doing are as different as night and day."First, it is providing a means whereby key individuals on its payroll are able to obtain both power and wealth through granting special favours to certain politically influential groups that are subject to its regulation. This activity is similar to the 'protection racket' of organized crime: for a price, one can induce FDA administrators to provide 'protection' from the FDAitself.
"Secondly, as a result of this political favouritism, the FDA has become a primary factor in that formula whereby cartel-oriented companies in the food and drug industry are able to use the police powers of government to harass or destroy their free-market competitors."And thirdly, the FDA occasionally does some genuine public good with whatever energies it has left over after serving the vested political and commercial interest of its first two activities." (quoted in Medical Dark Ages, by R.Hovnavian)"There have already been many cancer cures, and all have been ruthlessly and systematically suppressed with a Gestapo-like horoughness by the cancer establishment. The cancer establishment is the not-so-shadowy association of the American Cancer Society, the leading cancer hospitals, the National Cancer Institute, and the FDA. The shadow part is the fact that these respected institutions are very much dominated by members and friends of members of the pharmaceutical industry, which profits so incredibly much from our profession-wide obsession with chemotherapy..."The health field is the only field where inequity, conflict of interest, and gross public deception can remain unchecked. After all, the people in the FDA and in all the branches of government that deal with health come from the same orthodox school of thought as the heads of the AMA...
"The damage done to the body by an unsuccessful course of chemotherapy is often so great that the patient's immune system never recovers sufficiently for him to stand a fighting chance..."Chemotherapy, when it has no chance, or only a remote chance, to work is at best stupid and at worst criminal." - - Dr. Robert C. Atkins, Amygdalin Therapy, 1972Ernst T. Krebs, Jr., a prominent biochemist from San Francisco, co-discoverer of vitamin B-17 (commonly called 'Laetril' ), and discoverer of vitamin B-15 (pangamic acid), speaking before a seminar in Newark, New Jersey, in 1988, said: "Chemotherapy and radiotherapy will make the ancient method of drilling holes in a patient's head to permit the escape of demons look relatively advanced...."Toxic chemotherapy is a hoax. The doctors who use it are guilty of pre-meditated murder, and the use of cobalt and other methods of cancer treatment popular today effectively closes the door on cure."In November 1985, Dr. John Cairns of the Harvard School of Public Health, wrote in Scientific American that chemotherapy was useful for only a few RARE cancers. Dr. Cairns found no significant gains against the PRIMARY cancers since the 1950's. He estimated that of the almost half-a-million Americans who die of cancer each year, only 2% to 3% were being saved by chemotherapy treatment! Dr. Cairns wrote:
"It remains a depressing truth that fewer than 50% of cancer patients can be cured by surgery... It is not possible to detect any sudden change in death rates for any of the major cancers that could be credited to chemotherapy... Those who organize cancer centers and supervise the many clinical trials of chemotherapy look for ways to circumvent these relentless statistics.... A six or twelve month course of chemotherapy not only is a very unpleasant experience but also has its own intrinsic mortality... treatments now avert... perhaps 2 or 3 per cent... of the 400,000 deaths from cancer that occur each year in the U.S."Not only have health officials ignored such findings, but, they encourage treatments which are questionable. In 1987, Dr. Vincent DeVita, Jr., the head of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) from 1980 to 1988, "issued a controversial recommendation to 13,000 cancer specialists in North America to give chemotherapy and surgery to all women with breast cancer, regardless of whether it has spread." (Lawrence Surtees, "Getting Nowhere", Globe and Mail, Toronto, June 11, 1988)DeVita was a chemotherapy specialist. As such, he conveniently ignored the evidence against his speciality. There were lots of facts which ought to have got in the way of 13,000 cancer specialists recommending to millions of women, "on the highest medical authority," that chemotherapy was needed and in their best interest. Dr. Alan Levin of the University of California San Francisco put the argument against DeVita bluntly: