A Petition To Keep Pfizer Exec Off Canadian Board

Re-posted from www.pharmalot.com

By Ed Silverman // November 25th, 2009

Last month, Canada’s Health Committee appointed Bernard Prigent, Pfizer Canada’s vp and medical director, to the Governing Council of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, which sets policy, directions, and strategies for publicly funded health research. At the time, CIHR president Alain Beaudet said he hopes to create closer ties with industry to ensure involvement and investment.

But the move has not gone over well with some Canadians, who fear the appointment creates ethical quandaries. And so a petition is being circulated in hopes of convincing the committee, which meets on Monday, Nov. 30, to change its collective mind and rescind the appointment. Two reasons are cited for drawing up the the petition:

1 – Pfizer has a “well-documented history of transgressions against the integrity of science,” according to the petition, which cites various fines, including the recent $2.3 billion settlement, paid for improper marketing. “It is both empirically and symbolically troublesome that an official of a company renowned for its egregious behaviour would be honoured with an appointment to the CIHR Governing Council.”

2 - “CIHR has a mandate to facilitate the commercialization of health research and promote economic development through health research. Until now, this mandate has been met by including members of the business sector (but not the pharmaceutical industry) on Governing Council and by consulting with the pharmaceutical industry on an as-needed basis,” the petition states. “…the interests of the pharmaceutical industry are not and cannot be aligned with the interests of the public. The appointment of any individual who is an active member of a pharmaceutical company therefore cannot be justified by reference to the commercialization mandate.”

Sign the petition here: http://gopetition.com/online/32371.html

AN OPEN LETTER: FCHC’s Brief to the Senate Hearings on C-6

FREEDOM IN CANADIAN HEALTH CARE
National Office

November 24th, 2009

TO: The Honorable Members of
the Senate Standing Committee for Social Affairs,
Parliament, Ottawa, ON
Senators:

Re: Bill C-6 – The Canada Consumer Protection Act
The Concerns of Canadians have not been heard by this Committee

It is with dismay that we received a note from Ms. Keli Hogan, Clerk of the Senate, informing us that our organization would not be welcome to give viva voce testimony to this Committee, but that we might instead send a written brief. We were further distressed that while the Committee would indeed hear from Mr. Shawn Buckley, his was the only citizen voice to be heard in actual representation of what Canadians have to say about this egregious bill.

Our own organization at least received the courtesy of a reply; however, Canadians for Health Freedom, which is an umbrella group of several large grass-roots organizations (including this one), thereby representing a great many Canadian citizens, was completely ignored, and did not even receive an invitation to submit a brief! This situation was echoed throughout the hearings: those opposed to C-6 were not invited to appear.

Since there are other matters in which the Senate Committees have allowed many, many witnesses to appear before them, we are struggling to understand why it is that in the matter of Bill C-6, which contains several blatant abrogations of rights enshrined in the Constitution Act, and the Quasi-Constitutional acts which, together, form the basis of Canada’s Rule of Law, citizen voices have been SILENCED.

We do not feel we have to enlighten this Committee as to the majority of Constitutional concerns, as we are confident that Mr. Buckley’s testimony will in fact alert you all to most of them. That said, we state for the record that we are of one mind with Mr. Buckley in the matter of how Bill C-6 extends unreasonable, unwarranted and worrisome powers to Health Canada, which is, by mandate, merely an ADVISORY agency, not a regulatory one, and which, without the benefits of permissions granted by Bill C-6, is ALREADY violating the rights of ordinary Canadians on its “mission” to “protect” Canadians from “dangerous” health products, namely vitamins, minerals, and essential nutrients: witness the case of Dr. Eldon Dahl, of Alberta, whose family was HELD AT GUNPOINT, while officers ransacked their home, on this same “mission”. You have all read about him in other submissions. Can you, in all honesty, proclaim that these actions are acceptable in a free society? Is this what government agencies are set up to do? And is Health Canada to be trusted not to abuse such powers, when they are abusing them already, before they are even granted?

Our concern goes even deeper than these issues, because at least, we have the ability to issue Constitutional challenges to the application of Bill C-6, should the Senate be foolish enough to pass this Bill as it stands, challenges which we, and our advisors, are assured will succeed in a court of law.

But there is one clause in Section 2 of the Bill which we feel has been left largely unaddressed, except in passing, and it is the most egregious of all the clauses that concern us with respect to our Constitutional rights, and in fact has the ability to override our national sovereignty, irrevocably and irretrievably. This is the analysis made by Shawn Buckley on this particular section, to which we refer in hopes the Committee will recognize exactly what sort of damage this clause can do:

EXCERPT FROM: http://nhppa.org/?page_id=70#29

Section 2 includes following definition of “government”:
“‘Government’ means any of the following or their institutions:
(a) the federal government;
(b) a corporation named in Schedule III of the Financial Administration Act,
(c) A provincial government or a public body established under an Act of the legislature of a province,
(d) an aboriginal government as defined in subsection 13(3) of the Access to Information Act,
(e) a government of a foreign state or of a subdivision of a foreign state, or
(f) an international organization of states.
(emphasis added)
Defining “government” to include foreign states or international organizations of states such as the United Nations, is important because subsection 36(2) adds the following to the regulation making power of the federal government:
36(2) A regulation made under this Act may incorporate by reference documents produced by a person or body other than the Minister including by
(a) an organization established for the purpose of writing standards, including an organization accredited by the Standards Council of Canada;
(b) an industrial or trade organization; or
(c) a government.
36(4) A regulation made under this Act may incorporate by reference documents that the Minister produces jointly with another government for the purpose of harmonizing the regulation with other laws.
These additions allow the federal government to make documents prepared by foreign governments or bodies (of) law in Canada by simply passing a regulation incorporating the document.

END EXCERPT

PARLIAMENT DOES NOT HAVE SCRUTINY OVER REGULATIONS. That means, should the Senate pass Bill C-6 without removing this, and other clauses which offend the Constitution, Canadians will have no ability to defend their sovereignty against intrusion from foreign bodies. This flies in the face of the concept of a “sovereign nation”, and changes forever the description of Canada as a free democracy.

We point out to you, Honorable Members, that there are rules which this august body of Senators must follow in order to secure the Constitutional rights and freedoms of all, or it fails in its duty and its mandate to serve and protect all Canadians. Among them, we refer to these passages from the “Law-making Framework” guiding your deliberations:

“The Constitution is the most fundamental law. If another law is inconsistent with the Constitution, it has no force. The second group of laws is called quasi-constitutional because they too express fundamental values and they generally override other inconsistent laws. However, they are not subject to the rules for amending the Constitution since they can be amended by another Act of Parliament. The third and fourth groups include Acts and other rules of law that generally apply, unless another Act clearly says otherwise.”

AND:

“The Canadian Bill of Rights provides that every law of Canada is to be interpreted so as not to infringe the recognized rights or freedoms, unless it expressly says otherwise. The only explicit derogation from the Canadian Bill of Rights took place during the October Crisis. It was included in the Public Order (Temporary Measures) Act, 1970, which replaced the regulations made in 1970 under the War Measures Act.”

(http://www.pco-bcp.gc.ca/index.asp?lang=eng&page=information&sub=publications&doc=legislation/chap1.2-eng.htm)

Canadians are not so naïve as not to be able to see the danger of the Constitutional offences, ladies and gentlemen, nor are they pleased to see their government, in plain view of the nation, altering, abridging, and abrogating the rights they were born with, the rights they enjoy as members of Canadian society, and the freedoms of living in a democratic country.

We call upon your HONOUR, as Canadians, and as Senators. You have the right and the ability either to protect these freedoms, or to ignore the pleas of great numbers of Canadians who wait upon your deliberations but are denied the opportunity of speaking to them. If you are honorable people, you will respect the Rule of Law in this nation, and your conclusions will echo our own; if you are not, you will be, in our minds, committing an offence against those you are privileged to serve, and in whose largesse you will share, for life.

We do not believe, ladies and gentlemen of the Senate, that you are foolish people. We do not believe that you would deliberately alter our Canadian way of life, the tenets of our justice system, or the provisions of our treasured Constitution. However, we do believe that there are political interests which are bringing pressure to bear upon you to make decisions which ultimately can negatively affect those whom you directly serve, your constituents, the citizens of Canada (witness the fast-tracking of this “routine bill”, in that Bill C6 and its regulations are exempted from the requirements of the Statutory Instruments Act, as per Sec. 64: General provisions & sect. 37 Interim orders ). We do believe that vested interests are capable of swaying things to their own benefit, and that you, and only you, stand in the way of such vested interests being able to achieve hegemony over our nation and our laws.

Again, we call upon your honour and your conscience. We ask that you be Canadians FIRST and legislators SECOND. We ask that you refuse to give short shrift to matters of concern to your compatriots, and in so doing, refuse to pass Bill C-6 in any form which alters, amends, abrogates, or otherwise removes or diminishes the rights of ordinary Canadians in a bill which promises to use a cannon to kill flies.

We call upon you to REJECT BILL C-6. None of us is opposed to protection from hazardous products, and never were. However, we demand, with the force of Canadian law behind us, that you FIND ANOTHER WAY, and make Health Canada, and any other agency of the Canadian government, adhere to the Rule of Law, the Constitution, and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, in any activity they undertake under the rubric of the “protection of Canadians”.

Thank you for your time and attention to this most critical matter, which can alter the very fabric of the nation we all love.

Sincerely yours,

Dee Nicholson

National Director of Communications,
Freedom in Canadian Health Care,
Charter Group Member of
Canadians for Health Freedom
www.canadiansforhealthfreedom.org

Eldon Dahl’s Story – Why We MUST Stop Bill C-6 !

Mr. Dahl sent the following letter to the Senate and to others on his list, asking that it be circulated widely. We are happy to oblige.

The Dahl story provides an excellent example of what we can expect to become common place, once Bill C-6 is passed. It it will go to third reading in the Senate soon. We are appealing to Canadians again to write to every member of the Senate and demand that this Bill be sent back to the House. It has many provisions that are unconstitutional on the face of it, which violate our rights and also affect Canadian sovereignty, and by extension, our democracy.

****

Dr. Eldon G. Dahl

Calgary, Alberta

November 11, 2009

To: Social Affairs Committee, Senate of Canada

My Voice Needs to be Heard

Health Canada raided my loving family – at gunpoint – and kept us prisoners in our own home for 11 hours while they confiscated both business and personal property. I am a naturopathic doctor who sells 100% safe natural products. One of the excuses for the raid was that the totally harmless folic acid (a vitamin) that I sell did not conform to regulations. Instead of informing me by letter or phone call, Health Canada used swat team tactics, which caused us extreme emotional distress as well as irrecoverable financial loss. This unreasonable search and seizure is proof positive that Health Canada cannot be trusted with the powers it already has.

We Need to be Heard

The steering committee of the Social Affairs Committee has excluded witness appearance days for opponents of Bill C-6 and from consumer groups who have an interest in the consequences of this unprecedented piece of legislation. Instead of democracy, there is another agenda in motion. C-6 is fatally flawed in that it unlawfully violates both the constitution and our charter rights as Canadians. Outspoken advocates of this position, including Dr. David Rowland, Trueman Tuck, Shiv Chopra, Helke Ferre and myself have been refused witness days.

In order not to run the risk of hastily enacting an unlawful piece of legislation, the Committee needs to lift its time constraints. It needs to give equal air time to learned opponents of C-6. True democracy demands it. It should be the right of every citizen to participate in any legislative process that would deny our fundamental rights as Canadians.

Health Canada’s Hidden Agenda

I read with interest the testimony of Health Canada officials before you on 21 October 2009. They basically told you to “trust” them: that they would not abuse the sweeping powers given to them by Bill C-6. I don’t believe them. Neither will you when you read how Health Canada conducted an armed raid on my loving family and treated us as criminals, keeping us prisoners in our own home for 11 hours.

Subsection 23(1)(d) of the Food and Drugs Act gives Health Canada the power to “seize and detain for such time as may be necessary any article by means of or in relation to which the inspector believes on reasonable grounds any provision of this Act or the regulations has been contravened.” Health Canada has for many years been using this clause as an excuse to remove from the market entirely safe products which are incapable of harming anyone, and in our case are products that many count on to build and maintain their health. By means of C-6, Health Canada intends to extend its confiscatory powers to every industry that sells consumer goods of any kind.

Note that subsection 23(1)(d) above doesn’t even mention safety or harm. It gives total discretion to inspectors to remove from the market any product which they believe contravenes the Food and Drugs Act. C-6 gives to Health Canada the power to do this (and much more) to those whose consumer products simply may not happen to conform to bureaucratic dictates.

Whenever a product is unjustifiably removed from the market, consumers of it are adversely affected by being deprived of its benefits and by having their rights to enjoy it taken away. Until now, Health Canada has been using its rogue powers to restrict the freedoms of health consumers. If C-6 becomes law, then every consumer in Canada will be affected by this runaway bureaucracy.

All of the products that I sell are totally 100 per cent safe. All are freely available for sale in health foods stores in the U.S. There has never been a single documented fatality nor even one documented case of harm caused by any of the products I sell, not ever, not in the entire history of the planet. Clearly, Health Canada has for many years been using safety as a smokescreen to hide its true agenda. What is worse, now Health Canada is using safety as the banner they wish you blindly to follow.

What happened to me and my family on 15 January is shocking and incredible, especially given that it happened in Canada and in 2009. My wife and I are still affected adversely by its impact. I wish I were able to tell you about it face-to-face rather than through the written word. If you would like to connect more personally with the events and injustices of that day, feel free to watch any or all of these four short segments recorded on YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/user/media109#p/u/15/SBCHlTxUqNM

http://www.youtube.com/user/media109#p/u/14/C0Qc_njYdjE

http://www.youtube.com/user/media109#p/u/11/i75LovKvKVk

http://www.youtube.com/user/media109#p/u/10/THt0ClMp7FQ

My True Story – Bill C-6 in Action

Health Canada is already doing what they say they won’t do:

On 15 January 2009, at our home in Calgary, my wife answered the door. Four RCMP officers, one with his gun drawn and finger on the trigger burst through. The sheer force of entry damaged the locking mechanism, which lay on the floor. I will never forget the terrifying look on the face of my wife; I have never seen her so afraid. To describe the panic that I felt is nearly impossible. My wife raised her hands over her head in surrender, as an armed RCMP officer pointed his gun to her chest yelling, “That is not cool, that is not cool!” I thought she was going to be killed.

Unbeknown to us, at our daughter’s house across town, our daughter’s roommate was experiencing the same treatment. The RCMP and Health Canada broke into our daughter’s house without her name appearing on any warrant. This is her private residence totally unrelated to our business. The raiding party forced themselves into my daughter’s house and even kicked in her bedroom door.

That day’s events have permanently scarred my memory, and I live with the terror that it may happen again. I heard my wife say, “Please put the gun away! We are no harm to any of you. We are humanitarians, not criminals.” The RCMP kept us confined for the “protection” of Health Canada agents who arrived shortly thereafter, under the supervision of drug inspector Kim Seeling.

I was handed a search warrant and told of our right to remain silent, because anything said could be used against us in a court of law. The search warrant was for Folic Acid, the amino acid L-carnitine, plant based progesterone cream and other ultra safe supplements that are available over the counter in the USA or for export. I asked the officer for clarification, “You raided our home at gunpoint for common vitamins?” He answered, “We have a search warrant for these products.”

My wife asked the officers for their names and badge numbers; they refused her request. My wife, daughter and I were sequestered to sit in our living room for 11 hours. I asked the officer if I could photograph or film the investigative proceedings. He said, “You need to sit where you are. We are treating you very low key. We could place you in a holding cell till the search and investigations are concluded, but we don’t think it’s necessary if you cooperate.” Next I was supervised by two RCMP officers who forced me to open our home safe. Once opened, Kim Selling photographed its contents.

Whenever washroom breaks were needed, a male RCMP officer went with us and stood at the door and listened. Having my wife and daughter victimized in our own home clearly violated our Canadian Charter Rights. And why? Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure.

Storm trooper tactics were never required. The decent and humane thing would have been for Health Canada to notify me in writing or by phone call that they suspected some of my products may not have been in compliance, the let me respond and make good on any alleged noncompliance. After all, my products are 100% safe, as Health Canada well knows.

Present Day

November 15, 2009 marks 11 months. No charges have been laid against me. My entire finished products inventory (not only those listed in the search warrant) continues being seized, my case files are sealed, the RCMP Incident Report refused, and our Access of Information report has been denied. My ability to make an income remains severely restricted because I am unable to conduct any business.

Health Canada also seized my family’s personal computers plus a tax refund cheque that was in my desk. I am an author, and two of my books that were to be published are on the hard drives that were confiscated. Thus, I am also unable to earn an income from my writing.

In seizing my entire inventory, Health Canada violated Section 37 of the Food and Drugs Act, which exempts products that are not manufactured or sold for consumption in Canada. Many of the products I sell are destined for foreign countries and fully comply with the regulations in those countries.

Health Canada also went way beyond its authority by deliberately damaging my international trade reputation. This is an abuse of power with intent to harm. They questioned Slovakia Health, stating that they had concerns about our company’s reliability. When I asked what the enquiry entailed, the inspector at Slovak Health would not say what Health Canada was asking for nor if they divulged any of my confidential information to him.

Health Canada is already destroying businesses and livelihoods. C-6 would give them the power to escalate and expand their police powers exponentially, across many industries, including every retail store in Canada. Since Health Canada has a history of abusing the powers given to it by the Food and Drugs Act (the armed raid on my home being only one example), there is reason to believe that they will also abuse the even greater powers given them by C-6.

It is one thing to examine the wording of C-6 and yet another to see and feel its dire consequences. That is why it is so important for you to appreciate what happened to me and my family. Incidents like this will become commonplace if C-6 becomes law.

I write to you on Remembrance Day. My father, like many others, fought overseas in WW II for our freedom. Who would think that in 2009 we would be fighting again for freedom, only this time within our own borders and with a rogue department of our own government?

I am not a complainer. I can take punches like anyone else; but I ask you Canadian gate-keepers, how would you feel if this treatment happened to your family in your home? Do the right thing and protect Canadian citizens from harm, but in so doing, don’t take away our constitutional rights and freedoms.

Mine is just one story about Health Canada’s abuse of power over small businesses. There are many others.

Constitutional Concerns about Bill C-6:

- Scientific Ignorance. In the total absence of scientific evidence of harm, Health Canada intends to take action against product vendors.

- Allegiance to Foreign Governments. Health Canada intends to ignore Canadian

Sovereignty.

- Disclosure of Confidential Information. The Health Minister may

disclose personal and confidential business information to third parties

without the consent of the concerned person.

- Unreasonable Search and Seizure. Inspectors may enter any premises where

they believe there are products relating to the Act. They may examine and seize anything deem relevant.

- Trespassing. Inspectors may enter on or pass through or over private

property, without being liable for so doing.

- Use of Force. Inspectors may be accompanied by peace officers authorized to

use force.

- Confiscation. Goods seized may never be returned to their owner. Anything

seized may become forfeited to Her Majesty in right of Canada.

- Lack of Training. The Minister may designate any person to be

enforcers of the Act, regardless of their qualifications, training, or

experience.

- Unlimited Powers. Inspectors may take any measures they consider necessary

to remedy non-compliance with the Act, including putting the person out of

business.

- Excessive Penalties. Anyone who contravenes a provision of the Act may be

fined up to $5,000,000 and imprisoned for up to five years.

- Presumed Guilty. Anyone whom is believed to have contravened sections of

the Act is deemed guilty of an offence – even if their products are totally

safe. Anyone who pays a fine is deemed to have committed the violation in

respect of which the amount is paid.

- No Defense. Those named in a notice of violation are not allowed to defend

themselves by truthfully claiming that they exercised due diligence to

prevent the violation. Innocence and truth are irrelevant.

- Bypassing Parliament. Health Canada intends to expand the powers of C-6

even further by issuing Orders in Council which will not be subject to

parliamentary debate.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

10. Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public

hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of

his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

11. Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be

presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at

which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defense.

12. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his

privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and

reputation.

17(2). No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

Canadian Bill of Rights:

1. It is recognized and declared that in Canada there have existed and

shall continue to exist without discrimination by reason of race, national

origin, colour, religion or sex, the following human rights and fundamental

freedoms, namely,

1(a). The right of the individual to life, liberty, security of

person and enjoyment of property and the right not to be deprived thereof

Except by due process of law.

1(b). The right of the individual to equality before the law and the

protection of the law.

2. Every Law of Canada shall, unless it is expressly declared by

an Act of Parliament of Canada that it shall operate notwithstanding the

Canadian Bill of Rights, be so construed and applied as not to abrogate,

abridge or infringe or to authorize the abrogation, abridgment or

infringement of any of the rights or freedoms recognized and declared, and

in particular, no law o f Canada shall be construed or applied so as to

2(e). Deprive a person of the right to a fair hearing in accordance

with the principles of fundamental justice for the determination of his

rights and obligations.

2(f). Deprive a person charged with a criminal offence of the right

to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a fair and

public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, or of the right to

reasonable bail without just cause.

Charter of Rights and Freedoms:

8. Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable

search or seizure.

11. Anyone charged with an offence has the right

11(d). To be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a

fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal.

*****

Please see the other posts on this blog regarding C-6 for more information and analysis.

Note: in your letters to Senators, while we are certain that this bill will be used to limit access to health supplements, vitamins and nutriceuticals, it makes no mention of them. Indeed, if you read be tween the lines, you can see that this bill could also be used to mandate vaccinations, but also does not mention them. Therefore, do NOT bring that up, as they will reject your letter out of hand. Focus instead on the constitutional issues and the issue of foreign governments and entities making regulations that will apply to Canadians! Please also demand that the Canadians for Health Freedom be allowed to present our objections to the committee before it goes to 3rd reading.

Thanks!

How strange it is…to be loved by WHO.

By: Christopher-Peter: Maingot

How strange it is; that other, World Wide Web-sites, other than governmental, receive more complaints from a growing number of people every day, having had some form of an adverse reaction, from the swine flu shot. Some of which would no doubt, be considered a “severe adverse reaction” (SAR).

Of an even stranger occurrence: H1N1/Swine Flu…Virus pandemic reporting has all but dropped off the radar screen, coincidentally if you will…especially since the alarming turn of events with the pandemic vaccine on November 20, 2009 in Manitoba, Canada…reporting by mainstream media (MSM) services, now resemble drought conditions.

It’s slowly and, perhaps intentionally, becoming more an more curiously evident, that many of these current, and perhaps past, other “SAR” events, may also have been attributed to H1N1 pandemic vaccines.

During the same periods in time, and of a more serious nature…human beings also died…we’re still not sure exactly how many. But the deaths were shortly thereafter…having received a swine flu vaccine. And, our public health authorities seem to view this tragedy, simply as unconfirmed or, “coincidental” situations.

Baring the recent lack, of local and regional H1N1 news coverage, since the 20^th of this month, CANADA’S media services appear to have stumbled even further, perhaps from the sublime and, into the ridiculous. MSM has virtually displayed total nonchalance regarding any reports of a mutant 2009 Swine/Spanish flu, type virus…existing for some time now, in the Ukraine and, presently in Norway as well.

The World Health Organization (WHO) said the mutation does not appear to spread, and the public health significance of the finding, is unclear.

The agency also said; “although further investigation is under way, no evidence currently suggests that these mutations are leading to an unusual increase in the number of H1N1 infections, or, a greater number of severe or fatal cases.”

Although the World Health Organization claimed there were no significant changes of the genetic sequences from the Ukraine, none of the Ukraine’s situation updates excluded receptor binding domain changes.

It most certainly did become more apparent; there was clear evidence of an association of D225G with the fatal cases.

Herein perhaps lies the love hate relation with the World Health Organization.

According to a November 21, 2009 report by Recombinomics, reference is made to a receptor binding domain change “D225G” (the same receptor binding domain-RBD…found in the virus that caused the 1918 Spanish flu outbreak) having also been cited as position 222 in some reports, using H1 numbering.

This concern was based on published data on gene sequences from samples coming  from 1918 patients. As with the 1918 Spanish Influenza, the same changes occurred; the H1N1 virus usually had a D at position 225, but some of the later isolates had D225G…paralleling the data from the 2009 swine H1N1 isolates.

“Between the extremes of panic and complacency, lies the solid ground of vigilance.” Margaret Chan, director general of the World Health Organization (WHO)

Spanish Flu?

Speculation exists; whether or not the Spanish flu was the earliest attempt at biological weapons…it caused an extremely high death rate with symptoms that included bleeding in the lungs.

In 1948 – Heinrich Mueller, the former head of the Gestapo, told his CIA interrogator; the most devastating plague in human history was man-made.

As with all infectious disease, not all infections are fatal. If the initial dose is low, and or the hosts’ mount and effective early defense, the clinical course may be mild. This has been seen with virtually all influenza infections…including the H5N1 (BIRD FLU) outbreak in Egypt.

Information provided without prejudice, malice aforethought, ill will, vexation, or frivolity.

ADVERSE REACTIONS to the H1N1 VACCINE

A Bullet to the Head

November 17, 2009

Article by Dr Sherri Tenpenny

It seems people often need to experience a bullet to the head before they will believe bullets can be deadly…and then they rue the day they ignored warnings about playing with loaded guns.

Vaccination seems to hold a similar place. People ignore words of caution and roll up their sleeves to get a flu shot. It seems they think getting a vaccine is the same as taking a multivitamin, and equally as benign.

But when serious adverse events occur, such as Guillain-Barre paralysis, a seizure disorder or even a death, a jolt of reality lays bare just how damaging a “simple vaccine” can be.

continues here

ADVERSE REACTIONS TO THE H1N1 VACCINE:

a smattering of articles from various sources, published in recent days…

BREAKING – Nov 23: Provinces stop certain H1N1 vaccine after ’severe’ reactions

WINNIPEG, Manitoba (Reuters) – Some Canadian provinces have stopped using a particular batch of the H1N1 flu vaccine after six people experienced severe allergic reactions, the country’s health agency said on Monday.

The Public Health Agency of Canada and vaccine manufacturer GlaxoSmithKline Plc have asked the governments of Manitoba, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario and Prince Edward Island — nearly half the country’s 13 provinces and territories — to stop using a batch of 172,000 doses.

Family questions if H1N1 shot caused Manitoba woman’s death

GBS a Side Effect of H1N1 Vaccine?
CBS News
Teen was diagnosed with a rare disease, Gillian Barre Syndrome, shortly after receiving the H1N1 vaccine. Dr. Jennifer Ashton reports. …

VIDEO Teen Athlete Crippled By H1N1 Shot
By labvirus
More than half of Britons being offered vaccination against pandemic H1N1 flu are turning it down because they fear side-effects or think the virus is too mild to bother, a survey of doctors showed on Wednesday. …

Adverse reactions to the Swine Flu vaccine soar.…
American Chronicle
However, elsewhere around the world, reports flood in of severe adverse reactions and deaths linked to the Swine Flu Vaccine….

Swine Flu Vaccine Complications: H1N1 Vaccination Symptoms and …
Swine flu vaccine safety has sparked controversy and debates rage. This article looks at the possible complications and side effects of vaccinations.

Canadian health officials pull doses of gsk’s H1N1 vaccine
Bizjournals.com
One or two allergic reactions are expected in a batch of that size. Canadian health officials reported six adverse reactions. In a written statement issued

GlaxoSmithKline shelves lot of H1N1 vaccine
Vancouver Sun
WINNIPEG — Canada’s H1N1 flu vaccine manufacturer has asked the provinces to temporarily discontinue vaccinating Canadians from a lot of vaccine shipped in …

Penny for your thoughts: H1N1 vaccine batch recalled after bad …
By Penny
More than 100000 doses of the H1N1 vaccine are being withdrawn across the country, after Manitoba health officials announced Thursday they’d noticed a higher-than-usual number of allergic reactions from the batch.

H1N1 vaccine: The official list of side effects – Germany
By swine flu news
The most common adverse reactions: pain and redness at the injection site and general reactions such as headache, fever, fatigue and muscle pain. 53 messages were classified as serious, including two deaths. …

Kids Receive Wrong H1N1 Vaccine Dose – Health News Story …
LIVONIA, Mich. — A local clinic says approximately 40 children received the wrong dose of H1N1 nasal vaccine after a misunderstanding about dosing. Friday, November 20, 2009.

H1N1 infection rates ‘have peaked’
Irish Times
At least 11000 pregnant women have also been vaccinated at this stage. A total of 213 adverse reactions to the vaccine have now been reported to the Irish …

WHO Update Re: Safety of Pandemic Vaccines
eNews Park Forest
Given this scale of vaccine administration, at least some rare adverse reactions, not detectable during even large clinical trials, could occur, …

Swine/avian flu,the story so far.: H1N1 Vaccine Ingredients …(from various H1N1 vaccines world wide)
By living in dread
H1N1 Vaccine Ingredients, Packages’ Inserts and Warnings. The following are the ingredient lists, warnings and side effects for vaccines currently scheduled to be administered to populations worldwide for the H1N1 swine flu. …

PHAC – Posted on: Nov. 21, 2009 This statement provides a summary of the epidemiology of pandemic H1N1 human influenza (pH1N1), as well as information on the pH1N1 vaccines approved for use in Canada and their recommended usage.

Guidance on the Use of H1N1 Flu Vaccine (Revised November 20, 2009) on Public Health Agency of Canada – H1N1 Influenza Updates

CANADIANS – Please post reports of adverse reactions and side-effects to the H1N1 Vaccine here!