According to a YouGov/Huffington Post poll, 71% of Americans are opposed to civil asset forfeiture.
Too bad their opinion doesn't matter. This is part of the problem.
Most Americans haven't even heard of civil asset forfeiture. This is why the programs have run unchallenged for so many years. An uninformed electorate isn't a vehicle for change. This issue is still a long way away from critical mass.
Without critical mass, there's little chance those who profit from it will lose their power over state and federal legislatures. Forfeiture programs are under more scrutiny these days, but attempts to roll back these powers, or introduce conviction requirements, have been met with resistance from law enforcement agencies and police unions -- entities whose opinions are generally respected far more than the public's.
California's attempt to institute a conviction requirement met with pushback from a unified front of law enforcement groups. Despite nearly unanimous support by legislators, the bill didn't survive the law enforcement lobby's last-minute blitz. They also had assistance from the Department of Justice, which pointed out how much money agencies would be giving up by effectively cutting off their connection with federal agencies if the bill was passed.
Meanwhile, Michigan lawmakers have gathered unanimous support of asset forfeiture reform, but are not introducing a conviction requirement. This will make the bill more palatable for law enforcement, as it only raises the bar from a "preponderance of evidence" to "clear and convincing evidence" that seized property is linked to criminal activity. It would also make it a little easier for citizens to fight for the return of seized property if not charged with any crimes.
A reform bill introduced in Texas died an unceremonious death back in April when the committee chairman refused to move the legislation along until more concessions to law enforcement interests were made. The legislator who introduced the bill refused to budge and the bill was killed off.
Virginia's attempt to add a conviction requirement was similarly killed off by a legislative committee, despite nearly universal support from other legislators. The Senate Finance Committe claimed the State Crime Commission needed to examine the issue first, which will buy those opposed to reform at least another year to shore up their defenses.
Wyoming's governor vetoed an asset forfeiture reform bill, claiming the seizure of property without securing convictions was "important" and "right."
On the bright side, Montana and New Mexico have both enacted forfeiture reform. Montana introduced a conviction requirement and New Mexico went even further, eliminating civil asset forfeiture altogether. (Property can only be seized in criminal cases.)
But as for the rest of the nation, there has been little movement on asset forfeiture reform. Utah -- a state that overhauled its forfeiture system 15 years ago -- rolled those reforms back just as national scrutiny was increasing. A broader movement for reform seems unlikely when less than a third of the nation is even aware of these programs.
Even if awareness increases, legislators at the top end of the food chain are more interested in appeasing law enforcement agencies and prosecutors than pushing through reform bills that arrive on their desks with nearly unanimous support. Informing the electorate may put better people in office, but it won't change the mindset that almost always believes law enforcement knows best.
This problem is compounded when the law enforcement lobby starts complaining about the budgetary shortfalls reform efforts will create. If they aren't allowed to seize anything for any reason, they won't be able to buy the things they want or offset the costs generated by their seizure efforts. Any state strapped for cash -- and that's most of them -- will be hesitant to pick up the tab for "lost" revenue.
It all adds up to little forward motion. The public may be displeased with the status quo, but the status quo has paid off so much for so long, those with the power to motivate politicians won't be in any hurry to give up their forfeiture programs.
Tuesday, 29 September 2015
Yet another auto-maker has lied.Fiat Chrysler Automobiles US says in a statement
that it has identified deficiencies in itsTREAD reporting
and has promptly notified NHTSA. One cannot help but wonder what came first, a leak or some conscience, but as NHTSA notes this means FCA under-reported the number of deaths and injuries that the automaker may be responsible for.
- *FCA US: FOUND DEFICIENCIES IN TREAD REPORTING
- *FIAT CHRYSLER NOTIFIED NHTSA OF THESE ISSUES
- *FCA INFORMS NHTSA IT FOUND SIGNIFICANT UNDER-REPORTED NOTICES
- *FCA HAD SIGNIF UNDER-REPORTED CLAIMS OF DEATHS, INJURIES: NHTSA
- *NHTSA: SIGNIFICANT FAILURE TO MEET SAFETY RESPONSIBILITIES
- *NHTSA TO TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ON FCA REPORTING ISSUES
Fiat Chrysler's Statement: TREAD Reporting
September 29, 2015 , Auburn Hills, Mich. - As a result of FCA US LLC’s heightened scrutiny of its regulatory reporting obligations growing out of its recent Consent Order with NHTSA, FCA US identified deficiencies in its TREAD reporting. FCA US promptly notified NHTSA of these issues, and committed to a thorough investigation, to be followed by complete remediation. FCA US is in regular communication with NHTSA about its progress in the investigation. FCA US takes this issue extremely seriously, and will continue to cooperate with NHTSA to resolve this matter and ensure these issues do not re-occur.
The reaction is muted for now..
The TREAD Act reporting details are as follows:
The Transportation Recall Enhancement, Accountability and Documentation (or TREAD) Act is a United States federal law enacted in the fall of 2000. This law intends to increase consumer safety through mandates assigned to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). It was drafted in response to fatalities related to Ford Explorers fitted with Firestone tires, and was influenced by automobile and tire manufacturers as well as consumer safety advocates.
There are three major components of the TREAD Act.
- First, it requires that vehicle manufacturers report to the National Highway & Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) when it conducts a safety recall or other safety campaign in a foreign country.
- Second, vehicle manufacturers need to report information related to defects, reports of injury or death related to its products, as well as other relevant data in order to comply with "Early Warning" requirements.
- Third, there is criminal liability where a vehicle manufacturer intentionally violates the new reporting requirements when a safety-related defect has subsequently caused death or serious bodily injury.
There are a number of other smaller provisions which mostly address manufacturers of vehicle tires and guidance to the NHTSA on reporting data. The "Early Warning" requirement is the heart of the TREAD Act, enabling the NHTSA to collect data, notice trends, and warn consumers of potential defects in vehicles.
Four in 10 Americans say they have "a great deal" or "a fair amount" of trust and confidence in the mass media to report the news fully, accurately and fairly. This ties the historical lows on this measure set in 2014 and 2012. Prior to 2004, slight majorities of Americans said they trusted the mass media, such as newspapers, TV and radio.
Americans' confidence in the media has slowly eroded from a high of 55% in 1998 and 1999. Since 2007, the majority of Americans have had little or no trust in the mass media. Trust has typically dipped in election years, including 2004, 2008, 2012 and last year. However, 2015 is not a major election year.
This decline follows the same trajectory as Americans' confidence inmany institutions and their declining trust in the federal government's ability to handle domestic and international problems over the same time period.
Trust in the Mass Media Has Fallen More Sharply Among Those Younger Than 50
Trust in the media continues to be significantly lower among Americans aged 18 to 49 than among those 50 and older, continuing a pattern evident since 2012. Prior to 2012, these groups' trust levels were more similar, with a few exceptions between 2005 and 2008.
Trust Among Democrats Remains Low, but Higher Than Among Republicans
For more than a decade, Republicans and independents have been significantly less likely than Democrats to trust the media. This pattern continues in the latest survey. In 2014, Gallup found that trust among Democrats fell to a 14-year low of 54%, and this figure is essentially unchanged at 55% this year. While more Democrats than Republicans continue to say they trust the media, the percentage of Republicans who report that they trust the mass media increased slightly this year, from 27% to 32%. This increase was offset, however, by a decrease in independents reporting trust, from 38% to 33%.
Americans' trust level in the media has drifted downward over the past decade. The same forces behind the drop in trust in government more generally, as well confidence in many U.S. institutions, may also be at work with the media. But some of the loss in trust may have been self-inflicted. Major venerable news organizations have been caught making serious mistakes in the past several years, including the scandal involving former NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams in 2015 that some of his firsthand accounts of news events had been exaggerated or "misremembered."
Historical data are available in Gallup Analytics.
Results for this Gallup poll are based on telephone interviews conducted Sept. 9-13, 2015, with a random sample of 1,025 adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. For results based on the total sample of national adults, the margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. All reported margins of sampling error include computed design effects for weighting.
Each sample of national adults includes a minimum quota of 60% cellphone respondents and 40% landline respondents, with additional minimum quotas by time zone within region. Landline and cellular telephone numbers are selected using random-digit-dial methods.
Monsanto has many weapons in its arsenal when it comes to eliminating competition from non-GMO and organic farmers. After more than two decades of pushing their products onto US farmland with purposely flawed safety studies, the sheer presence of genetically modified crops poses an existential threat to the business of traditional and organic farming.
A new report has come out showing the extraordinary costs that non-GMO and organic farmers incur from GMO contamination of their crops.
“Results from the newest USDA survey indicate that of the farmers who chose to answer the question, 92 had experienced monetary loss between 2011 and 2014 averaging approximately $66,395 per farmer during that timeframe. Overall, GMO presence cost organic farmers at least $6.1 million over four years. This figure is 77 times that reported during the 2006 to 2011 timeframe—a staggering increase.”
The USDA conducted its first survey this year of the financial losses suffered by non-GMO and organic farmers from contamination. They did so at the urging of rights groups such as Food and Water Watch, who conducted their own survey in 2013.
That report found that one in three farmers had dealt with GMO contamination, causing many buyer rejections at a median cost of $4,500 each rejection. Considering the 77-fold increase in financial burden since previous years, it is clear that the biotech industry is pushing their competition toward financial ruin.
But genetic contamination is only half the story. The USDA’s report excludes losses incurred from pesticide drift, which occurs when crops such as Monsanto’s “RoundUp Ready” corn are sprayed and the chemical drifts onto nearby fields. This will become a bigger burden as more chemical–resistant GMO crops are approved by friendly federal agencies.
“Regarding drift issues, one farmer we surveyed wrote, ‘my only problem comes from drift when commercial chemical sprayers spray on a windy day and the spray drifts across the road or buffer strip to kill my alfalfa or other crops. I call the company and complain but they have never compensated me for my loss as of yet.’ Regarding dicamba, another farmer wrote, ‘I’m more concerned with spray drift—especially with the effort to release Banvel-resistant soybeans. Everyone knows how volatile that chemical can be—not only to organic farmers but all farmers and home owners.’ Even Roundup, considered to be less harmful and less prone to drift than 2,4-D and dicamba has been a huge problem for organic growers. One farmer wrote, ‘in the last 16 years I have had three instances where spray drift has affected my fields. All three times it was Roundup. It has totaled $65,000 and I have had to start the three-year transition process [for organic certification] all over., Not only has spray drift negatively affected relationships between neighbors, it has resulted in organic farmers being forced to take some areas of their farm out of organic production completely.”
All of these burdens—from wind-driven pollen contamination to post-harvest seed/grain mixing to pesticide drift—are borne by the victimized farmers. They must establish buffers or adopt delayed planting regimens, and they alone bear the financial cost of rejected crops.
Meanwhile, biotech companies enjoy regulatory and financial support from their co-conspirators in federal departments, as they slowly grind the competition to dust.
Adding insult to injury, last year Monsanto persuaded their friends at the Supreme Court (including former Monsanto attorney Clarence Thomas) to grant Monsanto the ability to sue farmers whose fields are inadvertently contaminated with GMO material.
The results of these attacks on multiple fronts are being seen, with the number of organic farms decreasing over the past few years.
Athough it is true that the majority of doctors support vaccines, most of them don’t even know what vaccines contain or their dangers. Their training ends with knowing how to administer them. They are taught vaccine reactions are rare and they are quick to share the same assurances with their patients. These assurances are not based on objective science but merely on what they were told, what they were taught.
Whether layperson or scientist, high school drop out or M.D., no one can research vaccine manufacturers, vaccine laws, and vaccine injuries and then conclude that vaccines are 100% safe and effective. All you have to do is read the warning insert for any vaccine to learn that truth.
These following doctors rejected half-truths and lies. They did their own research.
Nancy Banks, M.D.
Dr. Banks earned her medical degree at Harvard Medical School. She also earned an MBA in finance from Pace university. She completed her internship and residency at Saint Luke’s Hospital and Mount Sinai Hospital and Medical Center. She is a board certified ObGyn.
If you look at the ingredients of vaccines you’ll find that they have mercury, and they have aluminum and the vaccines are polluted with other kinds of viruses and the vaccines are grown, sometimes on human tissue. So these are vaccines that have elements that are neurotoxic and then of course they have other elements that can set up autoimmune reactions. So those are the kinds of things that we’re seeing in the children; we are seeing autoimmune reactions.
We are seeing an autoimmune reaction against the brain tissue. And so these children, unfortunately even the ones who are not developing the syndrome autism, are developing other syndromes such as ADD and ADHD and of course the secondary problem is the number of allergies that we’re seeing in our young children.
…There really is no firm evidence that vaccines DO what they say they DO. They say that the introduction of vaccines actually reduced the amount of infectious diseases, but if you go back to the beginning of the century you will really see that the thing that was reducing infectious diseases was an improvement in diet, an improvement in sanitation and an improvement in education.
…I think that the idea that we can we can put toxins and poisons into a perfectly healthy immune system, a bloodstream and not expect to get complications is naive at best.
…When you’re going to medical school you actually think that you’re studying science. But you’re studying the science that someone has decided that is appropriate for you. And the science that they consider not appropriate for you, you don’t study.
… Most of the students who come out of medical school are not going toquestion that. They are simply going to say this is what I learned and so this is how I’m going to proceed. It must be true.
And they will go to the CDC or the FDA website and that website will repeat the things that they heard in medical school. And one of the things that I’ve found is that most of these doctors do not go to the original literature. They don’t read the literature that would really question whether or not these vaccines are safe.
Toni Bark, M.D.
Dr. Bark has earned a B.S. in psychology from the University of Illinois, and her M.D. from Rush Medical School. She completed her Pediatric Residency at the University of Illinois. After directing the Pediatric Emergency Room at Michael Reese Hospital, she began her study of homeopathic medicine. She has a private homeopathic practice. She has also earned a masters degree in healthcare emergency management from Boston University. In 2012 she became Vice President of the American Institute of Homeopathy. A highly educated physician, she has done the research.
So I ran a pediatric emergency room and if people came in and they weren’t vaccinated, I was quite upset. Its not that I knew much about vaccines, I did a pediatric residency and you don’t really learn anything. You’re taught the schedule, that’s really what you’re taught about vaccines. You’re taught the schedule and that it produces antibodies and that’s it.
(After learning more about vaccines, she then changed her mind about their safety and effectiveness).
…The kids that come to me from other practices and are fully vaccinated often are the kids, well they are the kids in my practice with asthma, panic disorders, OCD, PANDAS [pediatric autoimmune neuropsychiatric disorders associated with streptococcal infections], autism, Asperger’s. My kids who never have been vaccinated in my practice, I don’t see those issue. I don’t have one child who was not vaccinated who also has asthma or food allergies or Asperger’s or autism or crohn’s or ulcerative colitis. None of these chronic inflammatory or chronic autoimmune diseases, cause that’s how I kind of see them. I don’t have that in my population that never was vaccinated or even that was probably vaccinated very delayed and selectively but often those kids are in families where the first child was vaccinated fully and there was problems. There was a vaccine reaction and so the parents decided not to and those kids of course, those kids were those who reacted badly, and so those kids are the ones I’m seeing.
…Physicians are really quite naïve about how things work politically and financially, and that things are really the bottom line.
…and we have medical ethics departments that are completely funded by Pharma. That’s a huge conflict of interest. We have a vaccine medical ethics department, the only one in the United States that is completely funded by not only Pharma but by the vaccine manufacturers themselves. So when they are publishing articles, doctors see this and don’t understand who’s funding them and they believe everything when things have been cherry picked. They read a study on Gardasil vaccine they don’t understand that a placebo is not a saline injection. Most doctors don’t believe me when I tell them that the placebo used in most vaccine studies is the aluminum adjuvant or it is an experimental vaccine.
Meryl Nass, M.D., ABIM
Meryl Nass is no stranger to research. She earned a B.S. in biology from MIT. She worked as a lab technician for two years in the Immunology Department at John Curtin School of Medical Research. She earned her medical degree from the New Jersey Medical School and the University of Mississippi Medical School. She completed her internal medicine residency at the University of Mississippi Medical Center. Afterwards, she worked as an emergency room physician for 14 years. She also taught internal medicine at the University of Massachusetts Medical School. She currently works as an internist and hospitalist at Mount Desert Island Hospital in Bar Harbor Maine.
Her research interests have included vaccine-induced illnesses, chronic fatigue syndrome, Gulf War Illness, fibromyalgia, and toxicology. She also used her skills as a biological warfare epidemiologist to study the world’s largest anthrax epizootic in Zimbabwe. (An epizootic is an animal epidemic.)
Prevnar was licensed with a big clinical trial conducted at Kaiser in Northern California with 38,000 children. Half received the Prevnar 7 vaccine, and half received an experimental vaccine for Neisseria meningitidis type C – type C meningococcal vaccine.
Now, that seemed a little odd to me. I mean…the control was another vaccine. That’s a problem. But that’s pretty common, because you don’t really know what the side effect profile is if you compare one vaccine to another, because each causes side effects. You don’t have an inert placebo for comparison.
…In this case, they didn’t even take a licensed vaccine, but they took an experimental vaccine as their comparator. The experimental vaccine has never subsequently been licensed in the U.S. So, there is no real understanding. There is no published list of what the side effects are for that experimental vaccine. We don’t even know what we were comparing it to. Here we had two experimental vaccines being compared to each other. Where is the data? We have no idea really what the safety profile was. Now when they’re bringing in the Prevnar 13, they compare Prevnar 13 to Prevnar 7 and say, “Well, the side effects are about the same, so it’s okay.”
…The company is conducting all the studies. The company decides how to present them, and the company decides how to conduct them. So, whether these studies actually give you an unbiased review of the safety and effectiveness of the vaccine [or not] is open to question.
…Children don’t usually die suddenly when they’re healthy; and you have to find a reason for that. There are certainly lots of teenage girls who have died relatively suddenly after Gardasil or developed severe neurological reactions.
…The problem is that vaccines can exert their effects, positively and negatively for a very long time. So for example, if you get a live virus vaccine, one hopes that you will be protected throughout your life.
So for smallpox vaccine it was shown that people had reasonable protection even fifty years after they were vaccinated. Obviously if the immune system is still revved up to protect you against smallpox fifty years later, there’s also the chance that, that revved up immune system may be causing more autoimmune conditions than it would have otherwise. All vaccines are designed to stimulate the immune system.
Jack Wolfson, D.O.
Dr. Wolfson earned his undergraduate degree from the University of Illinois. Afterwards he earned D.O. at the Chicago College of Osteopathic Medicine. He is board certified in cardiology. Before meeting his future wife, Heather, he began to realize that conventional medicine was not preventing disease or curing disease, but merely treating the symptoms. Heather, a chiropractor, brought him into the world of holistic healing. He and Heather are now married with two kids, and neither of them are vaccinated.
I recently did an interview which was aired on NBC Phoenix. I was asked my opinion on vaccinations in response to the current measles outbreaks that have occurred at Disneyland in California. My reply has generated quite a bit of anger in thousands of people.
…I want to address all this misguided anger and see if we can re-direct it where it belongs.
Be angry at food companies. Sugar cereals, donuts, cookies, and cupcakes lead to millions of deaths per year. At its worst, chicken pox killed 100 people per year. If those chicken pox people didn’t eat cereal and donuts, they may still be alive. Call up Nabisco and Kellogg’s and complain. Protest their products. Send THEM hate-mail.
Be angry at fast food restaurants. Tortured meat burgers, pesticide fries, and hormone milkshakes are the problem. The problem is not Hepatitis B which is a virus contracted by drug users and those who sleep with prostitutes. And you want to inject that vaccine into your newborn?
Be angry at the companies who make your toxic laundry detergent, fabric softener, and dryer sheets. You and your children are wearing and breathing known carcinogens (they cause cancer). Call Bounce and Downy and let them know. These products kill more people than mumps, a virus which actually doesn’t cause anyone to die. Same with hepatitis A, a watery diarrhea.
Be angry at all the companies spewing pollution into our environment. These chemicals and heavy metals are known to cause autism, heart disease, cancer, autoimmune disease and every other health problem. Worldwide, these lead to 10’s of millions of deaths every year. Measles deaths are a tiny fraction compared to pollution.
Be angry at your parents for not breastfeeding you, co-sleeping with you, and stuffing your face with Domino’s so they can buy more Tide and finish the laundry. Breastfeeding protects your children from many infectious diseases.
Be angry with your doctor for being close-minded and not disclosing the ingredients in vaccines (not that they read the package insert anyway). They should tell you about the aluminum, mercury, formaldehyde, aborted fetal tissue, animal proteins, polysorbate 80, antibiotics, and other chemicals in the shots.
…Lack of exercise kills millions more than polio. Where are all those 80 year olds crippled by polio? I can’t seem to find many.
…Be angry with pharmaceutical companies for allowing us to believe living the above life can be treated with drugs. Correctly prescribed drugs kill thousands of people per year. The flu kills just about no one. The vaccine never works.
…Myocardial infarctions are already the leading cause of death in the world today. The situation could get much worse.
A prestigious journal reported that men who had measles and mumps as children suffered 29% less heart attacks and 17% less strokes! Women with a history of both infections had a 17% lower risk of cardiovascular disease and 21% lower risk of stroke. The journal Atherosclerosis recently published these shocking findings in the June 2015 issue (1).
By my calculations, natural infection with the measles and mumps will prevent millions of heart attacks and strokes. Why is this information not all over the TV and Internet? I will tell you why. Because mainstream media is in bed with Big Pharma who pay their bills. The politicians are slaves to their corporate masters. Our children should be exposed to every virus and bacteria for which a vaccine exists.
The polio virus led to symptoms in only 5% of those exposed. Rarely was paralysis an effect, and even then, the cause may have been pesticide induced, other viruses, or from arsenic. This was the 1940’s after all. Children who are breast fed, eat organic foods, and are not living in a cloud of chemicals will easily combat these infections.
…The sad truth is that we are too early in the mass vaccination campaign to really understand the long-term risks. The gold standard in medical research is the randomized, placebo controlled trial. That study does not exist for most vaccines and there has never been a trial on 69 doses of 16 vaccines versus a placebo. There never will be. We may never fully realize the damage done from this immune system onslaught.
You brought a child into this world. Protect them.
Lee Hieb, M.D.
Dr. Hieb received her undergraduate from Grinell College and the University of Iowa. She earned her M.D. from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry. She did her orthopedic surgical residency with the U.S. Navy. She is a former president of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, and she frequently speaks out against the perils of government-run health care. She ran for Governor in 2014 as a libertarian. Unfortunately, she lost the election.
The voices shrieking to forcibly vaccinate people are the same voices shrieking to support a woman’s right to choose abortion under Roe v. Wade. If a woman’s body is sacrosanct, if she has the right to choose to deliver a child or not, if she has total authority over her body, how can she not have the right to accept or refuse a vaccination?
Medical ethics are clear: No one should be forced to undergo a medical treatment without informed consent and without their agreement to the treatment. We condemn the forced sterilization of the ’20s and ’30s, the Tuskegee medical experiments infecting black inmates and the Nazi medicine that included involuntary “Euthanasia,” experimentation and sterilization. How can we force vaccination without consent? Vaccination is a medical treatment with risks including death. It is totally antithetical to all ethics in medicine to mandate that risk to others.
Science is never “concluded.” Mr. Obama and other ideologues may think the truth is finalized (“The science is indisputable”), but the reality is our understanding of disease and treatment are constantly being updated. Just like Newton’s mechanical paradigm of the universe was supplanted by Einsteinian physics, and physicists today modify that view, medical “truth” is not the truth for long. In an attempt to quantify change in medicine, years ago a cardiology journal discussed “The Half-life of Truth.” Cardiologists looked back in their journal at 20-year-old articles to see how much of what was believed then was still believed to be true. The answer? 50 percent. So in cardiology, at least – and in all of medicine to greater or lesser degree – only half of what we believe now will still be true in 20 or so years. The last word on vaccination is not in. It hasn’t even begun to be written.
If you believe absolutely in the benefit and protective value of vaccination, why does it matter what others do? Or don’t do? If you believe you need vaccination to be healthy and protected, then by all means vaccinate your child and yourself. Why should you even be concerned what your neighbor chooses to do for his child – if vaccination works? The idea of herd immunity is still based on the idea that in individual cases vaccines actually are protective.
Since 2005 (and even before that), there have been no deaths in the U.S. from measles, but there have been 86 deaths from MMR vaccine – 68 of them in children under 3 years old. And there were nearly 2,000 disabled, per the aforementioned VAERS data.
In countries which use BCG vaccinations against tuberculosis, the incidence of Type I diabetes in children under 14 is nearly double.
As reported in Lancet in 1995, inflammatory bowel disease (i.e. Crohn’s and ulcerative colitis) is 13 times more prevalent in persons vaccinated for measles.
…In 1982 William Torch, a prolific researcher and publisher on Neurologic topics, presented a paper (later published) at the American Academy of Neurology reviewing SIDS deaths. He reported that in 100 consecutive cases, 70 percent of SIDS deaths occurred within three weeks of pertussis vaccination.
…The dirty little secret in recent outbreaks of mumps, measles and pertussis is – they are occurring in vaccinated people in highly vaccinated populations!
…In 2008-2009, Australia had epidemics of whooping cough and measles. Health authorities there must reveal the vaccination status of children in epidemics. Eighty-four percent of Australian children who got whooping cough were fully vaccinated, and 78 percent who got measles had record of measles vaccination. In the 2010 outbreak of whooping cough in California, well over half the victims were fully vaccinated.
…Finally, it turns out that death and disability from many childhood diseases is preventable by means other than vaccination. Vitamin A has been known since the 1930s to reduce mortality from measles by 60 percent. Vitamin D is protective against viral illness. And numerous authors and studies have shown the damaging effects of chemical antipyretics (fever lowering drugs) on the natural course of disease – a practice still sadly in widespread use in America. Better understanding of disease mechanisms, utilizing nutritional support and better scientific care of the sick child are safer alternatives to widespread vaccination.
As one of today’s senior citizens who grew up in a Midwestern state in the 1930s, and as a doctor who has treated many children, I may have a special vantage point of time and experience in regard to the changes that have taken place in the health of America’s children since the relatively innocent times of the 1930s. At summer camps in the New Mexico Mountains that I was fortunate to attend, no boy had allergies, none was on medication, and no boy was ever sick with the common ailments of today. It was much the same in schools. I don’t recall ever seeing a child with easily recognized behaviors now described as hyperactivity (ADHD) or autism.
Today in stark contrast, approximately one-third of our youngsters are afflicted with the 4-A Disorders (Autism, ADHD, Asthma, and Allergies), as described and documented by Dr. Kenneth Bock. School budgets are being strained to the breaking points in providing special education classes for autistic and learning disabled children. Allergy problems are proliferating, as indicated by long lines of children at school nursing stations for their noontime medications.
…At the end of the day, the issue here is one of freedom, and freedom is the freedom to choose – even if we make a bad choice. The argument that I must vaccinate my children for the good of the community is not only scientifically questionable, it is an unethical precept. It is the argument all dictators and totalitarians have used. “Comrade, you must work tirelessly for the good of the collective. You must give up your money and property for the good of the collective, and now you must allow us to inject your children with what we deem is good for the collective.” If American’s don’t stand up against this, then we are lost. Because we have lost ownership of ourselves. Our bodies are no longer solely ours – we and our children are able to be commandeered for the “greater good.”
Michael W. Elice, M.D.
Dr. Elice graduated from Syracuse University and then the Chicago Medical School. He is is a board certified pediatrician, and he is certified in hyperbaric medicine. He has treated Autistic Spectrum Disorders, mitochondrial, immune and metabolic dysregulation for over a decade now. Dr. Elice is on the board of NYFAC –New York Families of Autistic Children, National Autism Association – New York Metro Chapter and MAPS Physician. He also teaches at New York university Medical School, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, and he is an adjunct professor at North Shore University Hospital and the Cohen’s Children’s Hospital of the Long Island Jewish Medical Center.
As a board certified pediatrician, I took the same oath as all physicians, “to do no harm.”
The latest media presentation of the measles outbreak at Disneyland as a result of unvaccinated children is very upsetting to me. We are being fed information that is essentially inaccurate by media journalists – none of whom have medical degrees – which may actually be promoting medical harm to our children.
The latest reports blaming a failure of the measles vaccine on the unvaccinated population are not accurate, and in some reports, not true at all. In fact, over the past 30 years, there have been similar numbers of measles cases reported in various areas of the United States.
…Last year 1 in every 500,000 Americans came down with the measles. Nearly all recovered in a few days without serious consequences. At the same time 1 in 68 American children were diagnosed with autism or for every case of measles there were 7000 cases of autism. I ask myself which is the real epidemic here?
…I wish these journalists, vaccinologists and infectious disease specialists spent a week in my office. I wish they would actually listen to the testimonials given to me by parents of autistic children who were obviously affected by these vaccines adversely. I wish they would tell parents that the risk of dying from the measles in the United States is around zero. I wish they would admit that they are being told by pharmaceutical companies not to report certain statistics or to cover up factual scientific information. I wish they could be free to report honestly about vaccines rather than being dependent upon drug advertising and Internet information.
This is an emotional debate for sure. If we discount emotion and fear, we would realize that a child may have a greater chance of getting struck by lightning, accidental drowning or possibly from adverse side effects of the MMR vaccination itself than from acquiring live measles infection. I wish that my pediatric colleagues would offer parents factual pros and cons of vaccines in general so that a parent can make an informed decision and then give consent to vaccinate rather than being told that if their child isn’t vaccinated they will be thrown out of school and they are guilty of child abuse!
I am not advocating that vaccines be discontinued. I am advocating that doctors and patients become aware of the ingredients of these vaccines, what they can potentially do to affect an adverse outcome in an immunologically compromised child. Adverse reactions to MMR and other vaccines have been reported in numerous clinical trials and studies. I am advocating that medical practitioners and researchers, not journalists, address the real medical epidemics of autism, asthma, GI disease and autoimmune diseases facing our society and people around the world. Stop hyping the safety of MMR vaccines which may actually be more dangerous than live measles and may be ineffective in preventing the illness which they are so anxious to report as a dangerous epidemic itself. Let’s stop believing that the mainstream media is telling us the truth when all they are doing is shutting down any intelligent and open discussion about vaccine safety and how to improve it.
Check out part 1 of this series, Doctors Against Vaccines – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research. If you’ve been vaccinated, check out How To Detoxify and Heal From Vaccinations – For Adults and Children.