Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Drugging America

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

RENSE.COM

By Lynne Born

International Socialist Review

Issue 33, January-February 2004

2-2-4

 

Lynne Born is a longtime alternative health care

activist, writer and independent medical researcher.

 

The Bush administration's policies in the " war on

terror " are substantially enriching the pharmaceutical

corporations while subjecting the public to

dangerously explosive consequences. The pharmaceutical

industry spent over $262 million to bring George W.

Bush to power during the 2000 election cycle,

investing more than any other industry to solidify

their power in both Congress and the White House.1 The

pharmaceuticals have recouped their investment many

times over as Bush has signed into law the Public

Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and

Response Act of 2002 and Project BioShield, 2

providing over $7 billion to develop and warehouse

millions of doses of new vaccines and drugs as

" countermeasures " to biological weapons such as ebola,

plague, anthrax and smallpox.

 

These new drugs and vaccines are exempt from the

regular approval process and can be fast tracked to

market with no human testing at all,3 an unprecedented

step for an industry already responsible for hundreds

of thousands of deaths per year. The fact that the

current system that produces " standard " pharmaceutical

drugs is the third leading cause of death in the

United States has been completely overlooked in the

rush to bring the pharmaceutical industry into the

biowarfare business.4

 

While the drug companies would like us to believe that

these deaths are the unfortunate side effects of a

careful and caring industry, they are actually the

direct result of the ways in which pharmaceuticals

manipulate drug trials and skew research data to

produce the positive efficacy and safety results they

need to bring new products to market. Building a new

class of drugs and vaccines on the foundation of the

current flawed and corrupt system, combined with the

fact that the pharmaceuticals will be working with

ever more infectious and lethal biowarfare agents, has

the potential to " fast track " the creation of

catastrophic epidemics of the very diseases they are

attempting to prevent.

 

Pharmaceuticals profit from the Homeland Security Act

 

While the bioterrorism laws provide a new and

guaranteed income stream to the pharmaceuticals,

Bush's Homeland Security Act of 2002 completes the

giveaway by making any bioterror countermeasures

mandatory for the entire population of the United

States at the sole discretion of the president or the

secretary of health and human services.5 In

combination with state laws titled Model Emergency

Health Powers Act (MEHPA), the government is

authorized to quarantine, isolate, imprison or fine

anyone who refuses to take these untested drugs and

vaccines.6 Detailed plans have already been drawn up

by the Pentagon and Department of Defense to use the

military to enforce these compulsory injections and

medical treatments,7 and state public health

departments have used portions of their bioterrorism

budget to identify large sites such as stadiums, malls

and cinemas to hold mass vaccinations.8

 

Despite the creation of a massive new market paid for

with guaranteed government subsidies and exempt from

the usual approval process, the pharmaceuticals pushed

for and received even more special treatment. The

Homeland Security Act provides full liability

protection for the vaccine manufacturers in the first

pilot program to be sponsored by Bush under the

legislation, the smallpox vaccination program. This

liability protection was clearly needed, as the

vaccine has caused a vastly higher rate of death and

injury than was officially anticipated. But with

blanket liability protection, what incentives remain

for the pharmaceuticals to develop biowarfare drugs

and vaccines that are safe for human use?

 

Dangers of " standard " pharmaceutical drugs

 

The pharmaceutical industry already kills well over

100,000 people every year from correctly prescribed

drugs in hospitals alone.9 This does not include

deaths occurring outside the hospital or from

incorrectly prescribed medications, or the millions of

disabilities each year. To further put this in

perspective, the death rate from illegal drugs is

20,000 per year; the initial death rate from the Union

Carbide chemical disaster in Bhopal, India was 20,000;

and 58,000 Americans died in the Vietnam War.

 

Contrary to what most people believe, drug companies,

not the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or

independent researchers, finance and control virtually

the entire process of testing and bringing new drugs

to market. Because pharmaceutical companies finance

the vast majority of all drug trials, they design and

structure the studies, select and pay researchers,

choose the patients, analyze the test results, closely

oversee the writing and publication of the final

studies and release the drugs through their massive

sales network to the medical profession. No

independent source confirms or oversees the research,

analysis or final conclusions.10

 

The subjects of drug trials are generally young

healthy men, even though the target market for the

drug may be women, children or the elderly. Many of

the paid subjects are " regulars " who supplement their

income by hiding their participation in multiple drug

trials when not enough time has passed for the

previous drugs to fully leave their systems. The fraud

begins at the onset of the drug trial, as drug

companies will frequently drop large numbers of

subjects who show what the industry classifies as a

" sensitivity " or " bad reaction " to the drug. In other

words, test subjects who experience exactly the kind

of toxic reaction the trial is supposed to be tracking

are dropped from the results simply because it occurs

early in the trial.

 

Drugs are frequently tested on much smaller numbers of

people and for shorter periods than is generally

thought. Psychiatric drug trials typically last only

four to six weeks, and no psychiatric drug has ever

been shown (i.e., tested) to be safe for long-term

use. In many drug trials, only one or two dozen

subjects actually finish the trial. Doctors who

regularly prescribe Prozac believed that the drug had

been tested on more than 10,000 patients before they

prescribed it to their patients, a figure they had

read in Eli Lilly marketing material. In fact, Dr.

Peter Breggin went to great lengths to count the

actual number of patients who had completed the trials

and found the total number to be 286, a far cry from

the thousands that the public had been led to

believe.11

 

While most people believe that a drug that gains FDA

approval has gone through many successful drug trials

that have proven it to be substantially more effective

than the placebo, in fact the entire drug trial system

works on a simple " pass/fail " basis. When the company

submits the trial results to the FDA and the FDA finds

the drug insufficient or even harmful and rejects it,

the company can simply drop and manipulate portions of

data from the very same trial, submitting different

permutations of the numbers over and over again until

the FDA finally accepts the drug. It takes only two

successful trials, even with small numbers of

patients, and includes trials that had been previously

rejected by the FDA but later passed with reworked

numbers, for the FDA to approve a drug. And the drug

does not have to show a substantial benefit over the

placebo, only that it is " marginally " better than the

placebo.12

 

Drug companies also systematically obscure adverse

drug reactions and even deaths that occur during the

trials by simply deleting or mislabeling them in the

data submitted to the FDA. Suicides that occurred

during the testing of Prozac were systematically

mislabeled as " no drug effect " or " depression, " so

that when the FDA examined the drug data, patient

suicides could not be found and counted.13 Suicide was

one of the first major problems encountered when

Prozac was released on the market, leading to multiple

deaths and lawsuits. Most of the very symptoms fueling

the current debate about the dangers of

anti-depressant drugs were known and documented by the

drug companies during the trials, but the drugs were

released anyway.

 

Manipulating research results

 

Until 1991, 80 percent of drug testing was done by

medical university research departments, giving the

pharmaceutical companies " brand names " such as Harvard

or Stanford Medical School to associate with their

research data. Since the 1990s, however, the

pharmaceutical companies are cutting costs by using

commercial for-profit centers to perform the majority

of all drug testing.

 

It is well documented that if for-profit centers do

not produce positive results for pharmaceutical

companies, the drug companies take their lucrative

contracts to another of the hundreds of competing

centers. An analysis of 70 studies of specific cardiac

drugs showed that 96 percent of authors with ties to

the pharmaceutical company produced favorable results,

while only 37 percent of independently funded studies

of the same drugs showed favorable results.14

Additionally, many of these centers have been found to

have financial stakes in the outcome of their own

trials, standing to benefit financially from a drug's

approval and subsequent marketing. Many have been sued

for deaths and injuries that occurred during

fraudulently structured drug trials after producing

poor quality data and using inadequately trained

investigators to test drugs on subjects who were not

informed of the drugs' known dangers or told of the

financial conflicts of interest.15

 

Drug companies retain the right to stop the

publication of any study that does not show favorable

results, including studies that show dangerous or

deadly reactions. Should a company-funded study show

negative results, drug companies have been known to

delay the publication of the negative study, quickly

fund a new study that produces a favorable response

and then publish only the positive results.16 Dr.

James O. Kahn conducted a study that concluded an AIDS

vaccine didn't work and had a multimillion dollar

lawsuit initiated against him by the corporate funder

of the study after it tried unsuccessfully to block

publication of the data.17 And since both negative

drug data studies and information on the frequency of

these heavy-handed tactics are suppressed, we have no

way of knowing how many drug studies with negative

results have been censored by the very pharmaceutical

companies that sponsored them in the first place, even

if the drug's release ends up causing multiple

injuries and deaths.

 

Adverse reaction reporting system designed to fail

 

Most people don't know that the release of a new drug

is actually the final phase of the drug trial-Phase

IV. After the drug has been approved by the FDA,

thousands and even millions of patients taking the

newly released drug are unknowingly participating in

the largest, most poorly controlled medical experiment

in the world.

 

The fraudulent and deceptive practices of the

pharmaceuticals continue during Phase IV when adverse

reactions of injury and death are supposed to be

tracked and reported to determine if the drug should

be pulled from the market. However, not only is the

adverse reporting system entirely voluntary, but 90-99

percent of all adverse reactions are never reported,

according to the head of the FDA for most of the

1990s, David Kessler.18 Imagine the true death rate if

this fact were taken into account. Forty percent of

all doctors don't know that an adverse reporting

system even exists. When a group of doctors was

studied to determine how many adverse reactions they

reported, it was found that only 6 percent of all

reactions were reported-and these doctors knew that

their rate of reporting adverse reactions was being

monitored. And no program or oversight of any kind

exists to ensure that reports made directly to the

pharmaceutical companies are then reported to the

FDA-the process is run entirely on the " honor system. "

 

 

On the rare occasions when adverse reactions are

reported, as much as 50 percent of the basic

information, such age or sex, is simply left blank.

Additionally, the reporting system is divided into

thousands of highly delineated classifications, such

as " insomnia, " " restlessness, " " hyperactivity " -160

different terms exist for central nervous system

symptoms alone. While it may be good science to have a

record of all the various gradations of side effects,

this system artificially lowers the percentage of side

effect occurrences so the FDA or drug company can say

that " less than 1 percent " suffer from any given

symptom, making the probability of side effects seem

very small. A more accurate use of the classifications

would be to tally related symptoms in a family of side

effects, for example, adding together " insomnia,

restlessness and hyperactivity " for a total percentage

of nervous system side effects that would result in

higher but more accurate numbers. Eli Lilly classified

sexual side effects for Prozac as " decreased libido

1.6 percent, ejaculatory problems 1.9 percent,

impotence 1.7 percent, " etc., but if you add the

numbers of sexual side effects together, the total is

closer to 18 percent, a vastly higher number. However,

even those numbers are inaccurate, as subsequent

studies of Prozac have shown the real percentage of

sexual side effects is between 50 and 70 percent of

all users.19

 

Although the number of dangerous effects and deaths

are vastly underreported by the drug companies, people

notice the problems and stop taking their medications.

Fifty to 75 percent of patients quit taking their

blood-pressure and cholesterol-lowering medications

within one to two years, but the FDA and drug

companies keep no record of the vast numbers of

patients who drop their medications due to adverse

effects.

 

Marketing department controls drug recalls

 

These problems are built into the system itself, as

the pharmaceutical companies have used their

considerable financial muscle to defang the FDA

through their powerful congressional lobby, reducing

its role to a minimum. Because it works on an honor

system, the FDA simply assumes that the drug companies

are giving it accurate information. The FDA reviews

only a small sample of data, asks a few questions,

rarely checks the original data from the trials,

accepts the drug label as written verbatim by drug

company executives, rarely issues warnings of

dangerous effects and has to be bullied and pushed by

consumer groups into pulling a drug off the market,

even after multiple deaths have already occurred.

 

The obvious conclusion is that because drugs involve

the health and welfare of the public, reporting and

tracking adverse drug reactions should be mandatory

and all data from the drug trials open to public

scrutiny. Currently, only the laborious process of a

Freedom of Information Act request will open the drug

trial data to the public. Even then, much of the

information on adverse reactions or deaths is blacked

out by the drug companies as " proprietary trade

secrets. "

 

In a profound conflict of interest, as the marketing

department attempts to bring sales of a new drug to

" blockbuster " status for potential billions of dollars

per year, this same marketing department is

responsible for tracking and reporting any evidence of

harm or death that would take their

multimillion-dollar investment off the market.

Clearly, this is a system designed to fail with no

incentive for change, since the end result has been to

produce massive profits for the pharmaceuticals, even

at the expense of our lives.

 

Homeland Security: forced vaccinations and drugs

 

The existing dangers of standard pharmaceutical

medicines can only increase exponentially with the

lack of human testing and fast track approval of the

newly created class of bioterror drugs and vaccines.

Bush's Homeland Security Act allows any untested drug

and vaccine to be forced on the public, making refusal

a crime. Along with the MEHPA laws20 and already

existing public health laws, the government is then

authorized to enforce the quarantine of individuals

and entire cities, confiscate property from anyone who

resists and take control of roads into and out of your

city and state, in case anyone might try to leave town

to avoid being medicated or vaccinated. The government

can also confiscate all communication devices such as

telephones or computers, and can seize your house,

car, food, clothing and firearms.

 

The military is authorized to enforce the law,

presumably holding down anyone who resists vaccination

and escorting resisters or those too ill to take the

shots to jail or the quarantine area for isolation,

with the length of time to be determined by the state.

An " actual " event of bioterrorism isn't even

necessary; a " potential " emergency will suffice, and

the power to declare this emergency resides entirely

with the secretary of health and human services and

the president.

 

Bush's smallpox debacle

 

The first program deployed through the draconian

Homeland Security Act was Bush's smallpox vaccination

program. While not mandatory for civilians,

vaccination was mandatory for military personnel under

threat of court martial, dishonorable discharge or

jail. With great fanfare, Bush announced that 500,000

health-care workers would be vaccinated beginning in

January 2003, to be followed shortly by 10 million

emergency personnel. Right from the start, hundreds of

hospitals and health-care unions across the nation

refused to participate, citing concerns about adverse

effects and compensation problems. By summer 2003, the

program had ground to a halt. Numerous states had

suspended it due to the high number of deaths and

injuries and a lack of volunteers willing to subject

themselves to the very real danger of the vaccine with

no credible threat of an actual smallpox attack.

 

While the public was repeatedly told that the expected

death rate from the vaccine would be one to two per

million, in fact, there have been three deaths among

the approximately 36,000 civilians vaccinated

(including the few hundred embedded reporters). This

makes the actual death rate 80 times higher than what

the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)

told the public to expect. Serious adverse reactions

such as brain swelling, heart inflammation, heart

attacks, uncontrolled ulceration of the skin and more,

are one in 583, seven times higher than the CDC's

original guesstimate of one in 4,000. It is virtually

certain that even these numbers are vastly

underreported since, once again, the adverse reporting

system for the program was not mandatory, mirroring

the same shoddy and incomplete tracking system that

benefits the pharmaceutical industry.

 

Before the program began, many health-care

professionals expressed grave misgivings about

reintroducing the live virus in the smallpox vaccine

back into the population and accurately predicted the

higher rates of death and injury. The National

Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases has

called the smallpox vaccine the most dangerous of all

vaccines ever produced, because it contains a live

virus of unknown origin. In fact, while the virus in

the vaccine is supposed to be cowpox, even the CDC

admits that it is not. Several independent labs have

analyzed the vaccine and cannot identify the virus, a

terrifying fact that is actually verified by the CDC

while simultaneously ignored by mainstream medicine.21

 

 

Historically, the smallpox vaccine was responsible for

so many side effects and deaths during its use that a

medical diagnosis " Vaccination Disease " was actually

created during the 1800s. Vaccination Disease was

diagnosed when the vaccinated patient exhibited

exactly the same kinds of skin, heart and lung

problems that we see today in Bush's vaccination

program. These historical facts are readily uncovered

from 200 years of medical literature and were cited by

the many voices expressing concern about reintroducing

the smallpox vaccine into the public body before the

program began.

 

Bush and the CDC continue to deny the extent of deaths

and injuries even at the expense of people's lives,

and the media began to minimize and censor the actual

death and injury rates only weeks after they occurred.

As the deaths followed one after another in March and

April 2003, headlines read " First death: Nurse dies

after smallpox vaccination " ; " Second worker dies of

heart attack after smallpox vaccination " ; and " Coroner

rules [smallpox] vaccinations contributed to

reservist's death. " Yet, by June 2003, mainstream

media articles were not only ignoring the earlier

deaths, they continue to use the old, inaccurate

figure of one or two deaths per million rather than

the newly updated, more truthful numbers.

 

Even if the program were to end, it is clear that the

pharmaceutical industry and the White House have

invested considerable political capital in the future

of smallpox vaccinations. The first countermeasure,

Project BioShield, calls for is the development of

millions more doses of yet another smallpox vaccine.

Mysteriously, the National Institutes of Health is

also investing millions of dollars in eight to 10

additional treatments for smallpox itself, money that

increases pharmaceutical profits at the expense of the

real, pressing and urgent health-care needs the public

faces today.

 

Bad drugs on steroids

 

The deadly manipulation and fraud so prevalent in the

current pharmaceutical system could lead to explosive

consequences when fewer safeguards, less testing and

the intentionally fraudulent adverse tracking system

are combined with the terrible power of deadly

pathogens such as ebola, plague and anthrax. One of

the many hazardous provisions of Project BioShield

calls for a massive expansion of America's biological

and chemical warfare production by building a network

of several dozen new bioweapons laboratories all over

the United States. This would turn pharmaceuticals

into bioweapons factories, but without the government

oversight and safety regulations normally accorded

these dangerous pathogens. Because the pharmaceuticals

will have to create and store these infectious agents,

it is the drug companies in partnership with the U.S.

government that are endangering the public, and a

groundswell of resistance from the cities where the

new labs are to be built has already begun.22

 

It is an unfortunate fact that the pharmaceutical

companies cannot protect us from chemical and

biological warfare attacks. Any number of agents could

be used, from simple small releases of readily

available chemicals to complex, genetically engineered

viruses against which no vaccine could ever be created

and mass produced in time, even if the vaccines

worked. The only effective way to reduce or end the

threat of biological and chemical attacks against the

United States is to develop " right relations " with

other nations around the world by stopping America's

ceaseless march toward imperialist domination.

 

The next phase of the pharmaceutical " war on terror "

will take place in the media and the minds of the

public, where more and more " emerging diseases " will

be sensationalized in an atmosphere of hysteria and

fear, justifying the giveaway of billions of dollars

to the drug companies. From the recommendation of the

smallpox vaccine for the monkey pox outbreak when the

vaccine has never been proven to stop monkey pox

infection, or the quarantine of individuals who had

only a cough and a mild fever out of fear of SARS,

every new cough can be classified as a deadly disease,

and every new fever will create fear of an unknown

illness to move the public one step closer to

acceptance of total vaccination or force feeding of

drugs never before tested on humans.

 

For Bush to purchase millions of doses of a

30-year-old, untested, ineffective and deadly smallpox

vaccine without even a threat of a smallpox attack,

jeopardizing the lives of uninformed citizens, is a

criminal act of biowarfare directed against the

American public. Unfortunately, the next round of

" protection from biowarfare agents " may not be

voluntary, and the newly created pharmaceutical war

machine will needlessly drug the American public to

death for corporate profits.

 

------

 

 

1 Public Citizen's Congress Watch, The Other Drug War:

Big Pharma's 625 Washington Lobbyists (Washington, DC:

Public Citizen, July 2001), p. i. The full report is

available online at

http://www.Citizen.org/congress/ " campaign/ " special_interest/reports_da

te/articles.cfm?ID=6537. The pharmaceutical industry

spent $177 million on lobbying, $65 million on issue

ads and $20 million on campaign contributions. Of the

contributions directly to political parties, the

majority (68 percent) went to Republicans.

 

2 The $5.6 billion for the Project BioShield was

included in the Homeland Security Appropriations bill

signed by Bush on October 1, 2003. See the

http://www.whitehouse.gov press release of October 1,

2003.

 

3 Marc Kaufman, " FDA acts to speed bioterror

medicines, " Washington Post, May 31, 2002.

 

4 After a definitive review and close study of medical

peer-review journals and government health statistics,

these authors found that the American medical system

is responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths and

millions of adverse events each year. By Gary Null

PhD, Carolyn Dean MD ND, Martin Feldman MD, Debora

Rasio MD, Dorothy Smith PhD, available online at

http://www.mercola.com/2003/nov/26/death_by_medicine.htm.

 

 

5 " The secretary shall specify in such [bioterror

emergency] declaration the substance or substances

that shall be considered covered countermeasures. . . "

Homeland Security Act of 2002, Section

304©(p)(2)(A)(ii).

 

6 Model Emergency Health Powers Act (commonly referred

to as MEHPA). See Center for Public Law and the

Public's Health for State Legislative Activity Table

available online at

http://www.publichealthlaw.net/Resources/ " Modellaws.htm;

see also

http://www.909shot.com/ActionAlerts/ " what_you_need_to_know.htm

for updates on which states have passed these

draconian laws.

 

7 Ellen M. Grossman, " U.S. officials mull a military

role in enforcing smallpox quarantine, " Inside the

Pentagon, December 19, 2002; Pamela Hess, " Pentagon

plans for smallpox outbreak, " United Press

International, December 13, 2002.

 

8 Michelle Hillman, " Smallpox program may be sick, "

Metro West Daily News, May 17, 2003.

 

9 Jason Lazarou, Bruce H. Pomeranz and Paul N. Corey,

" Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized

patients: A meta analysis of prospective studies, "

Journal of American Medical Association, April 15,

1998, 279(15): 1200-05. This study found more than

100,000 deaths per year and 2,000,000 severe side

effects in U.S. hospitals alone. However, this study

did not include deaths from pharmaceutical drugs that

occur outside the hospital, or deaths from

prescription errors by doctors or pharmacists.

Additionally, because 90-99 percent of all adverse

drug reactions are never reported (see footnote 18),

this figure should be adjusted substantially upwards.

 

10 Thomas Bodenheimer, " Uneasy alliance-clinical

investigators and the pharmaceutical industry, " New

England Journal of Medicine, May 18, 2000,

342(20):1539-44.

 

11 Dr. Peter Breggin, The Anti-Depressant Fact Book:

What Your Doctor Won't Tell You About Prozac, Zoloft,

Paxil, Celexa, and Luvox (Cambridge, Mass.: Perseus

Publishing, 2001), p. 148.

 

12 Dr. David Ginsberg, The Investigators Guide to

Clinical Research, CenterWatch, Inc.; 3rd edition

(January 2002); Dr. Jay Cohen, Overdose, Jeremy P.

Tarcher/Putnam (2001); Stephen Fried, Bitter Pills,

Bantam (April 1998).

 

13 Breggin, p. 6.

 

14 Henry Thomas Stelfox, Grace Chua, Keith O'Rourke

and Allan S. Detsky, " Conflict of interest in the

debate over calcium-channel antagonists, " New England

Journal of Medicine, January 8, 1998, 338(2):101-06.

 

15 Thomas Bodenheimer and Ronald Collins, " The ethical

dilemmas of drugs, money, medicine, " Seattle Times,

March 15, 2001.

 

16 Bodenheimer, " Uneasy alliance. "

 

17 Bodenheimer and Collins, " Ethical dilemmas. "

 

18 David Kessler, " Introducing MedWatch: A new

approach to reporting medication and device adverse

effect and product problems, " Journal of American

Medical Association, July 2, 1993, 269(21): 2765-68.

 

19 M.J. Gitlin " Psychotropic medications and their

effects on sexual function: diagnosis, biology and

treatment approaches. " Journal of Clinical Psychiatry,

September 1994, 55(9):406-13.; J.G. Modell, C.R.

Katholi, J.D Modell and R.I DePalma, " Comparative

sexual side effects of bupropion, fluoxetine,

paraxetine and sertraline, " Clinical Pharmacology and

Therapeutics, April 1997, 61(4):476-87; A.L.

Montejo-Gonzalez, G. Llorca, J.A. Izquierdo, A.

Ledesma, M. Bousona, A. Calcedo, J.L. Carrasco, J.

Ciudad, E. Daniel, J. De la Gandara, et al;

" SSRI-induced sexual dysfunction: fluoxetine,

paroxetine, sertraline and fluvoxamine in a

prospective, multicenter and descriptive clinical

study of 344 patients, " Journal of Sex and Marital

Therapy, Fall 1997, 23(3):176-94; " Dutch study

attempts to quality sexual dysfunction profiles among

SSRIs, " Primary Psychiatry, 1997, 4(7):22-3; M.D.

Waldinger, M.W. Hengeveld, A.H. Zwinderman and B.

Oliver, " Effects of SSRI antidepressants on

ejaculation: a double-blind, randomized,

placebo-controlled study with fluoxetine, fluvoxamine,

paroxetine, and sertraline, " Journal of Clinical

Psychopharmacology, August 1998, 18(4):274-81; M.H.

Pollack, S. Reiter and P. Hammerness, " Genitourinary

and sexual adverse effects of psychotropic

medication, " International Journal of Psychiatry in

Medicine, 1992, 22(4):305 27; K.J. Bender, " New

antidepressants: a practical update, " Psychiatric

Times, February 1995, 12(1):2; and R.M. Hirschfeld,

" Management of sexual side effects of antidepressant

therapy, " Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 1999, 60

Suppl 14:27-30, discussion 31-5.

 

20 See

http://archive.aclu.org/issues/privacy/Model_health_feature.html

for an analysis by the American Civil Liberties Union

of the repressive MEHPA laws.

 

21 Jonathan B. Tucker, Scourge (Grove Press, New York,

2001), p. 37. " The vaccine strain being employed

around the world was not cowpox virus that Jenner had

used, but an entirely different orthopoxvirus that did

not exist in nature and became known as " vaccinia. " In

1939, Allan Downie of the University of Liverpool in

England determined that vaccinia was genetically

distinct from both variola and cowpox. Where vaccinia

virus had come from, and when it had become the

primary virus used to vaccinate against smallpox,

remained a mystery. " And " Public Forum on Smallpox "

meeting held by the CDC on June 8, 2002 in St. Louis,

Missouri in which Dr. Harold Margolis, CDC senior

adviser for smallpox preparedness, stated that

vaccinia is not cowpox, but rather a completely

different virus.

 

22 Mark Martin, " Bioweapons proposal worries

neighbors, " San Francisco Chronicle, February 5, 2003.

 

 

Back to top

http://www.isreview.org/issues/33/druggingtodeath.shtml

 

 

 

 

 

New Photos - easier uploading and sharing.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...