Issues & News From STSSA Friends 10/31/2010

The Shifting Balance of Powerhttp://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_shifting_balance_of_power_20101026/Posted on Oct 26, 2010

By William Pfaff

MARRAKECH, Morocco—As those bewitched (or intimidated) by China’s contemporary growth and new political claims know all too well, the world has been run by the Western powers since the Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution. World pre-eminence once belonged to China, from the high civilization of Hsuan Tsung in the eighth century to the Sung Dynasty in the 10th, as it once did to the contemporaneous Arab Caliphates, at a time when feudal Europe was a backwater. But times change (as modern American tea partyers, among others, are noticing).

The practice of those who run the modern world is to hold conferences to talk about what’s happening, what the future is likely to bring and what if anything can be done about it. These, in my professional lifetime, have always been conceived, organized and dominated by Westerners, mainly American and West European. Since 1973, when the rise of Japanese economic power made it imperative, Japan has been incorporated into these discussions, but has rarely asserted a claim to share the management of global affairs.

 

In short, the modern world’s political and economic systems have been controlled by the West since at least the end of the Thirty Years’ War in 1648, which ended the Holy Roman Empire that was Rome’s successor and established the modern system of individual sovereign states, and the beginning of the 19th century and the Congress of Vienna, which ended the Napoleonic system. What was left of the great Christian and Muslim empires was finished off by the first and second world wars.

The Cold War proved to be a fluke, taken seriously because of the existence of nuclear weapons and the modern addiction to ideological violence, and finished in 45 years. It was a trivial historical event.

 

It left the United States to conduct what must now be concluded the misrule of what remained, with military interventions to “create democracy,” so that America’s own survival as a functioning and competent democracy must now be considered in doubt.

Americans today are in deep distress about their national future, with a belief (plausible, but in my opinion without serious substance) that China is shortly going to take the place of the most powerful state in the world.

Today, China is near to becoming the nation with the largest gross domestic product. Since most of what China produces is of foreign design or technology, this could be compared with saying that China produces more coal than any other country on earth. So what? It is quality of civilization and culture, and the nature of a nation’s actions in international society, that affords historical greatness.

Nonetheless, an epoch of Western world political domination is coming to an end. This is not simply an end to imperialism (new or old), but quite possibly the beginning of a probably long decline in the West’s primacy in industry, technology and scientific innovation. The political rise of Asia is obvious. China, Korea, India, Pakistan and the major Arab states (leaving out Mexico, Brazil, Argentina and rising states elsewhere) now are major influences upon the future not simply in their own regions but in the world. The American military eruption into Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, if it continues to fail, could easily end by destroying America’s global claims.

Europe has played a largely passive role in all of this since the two world wars, and the future of the European Union remains very different to assess, on the political level at least. But in Western Europe there is now serious recognition that the world is assuming an entirely new shape in which the Europeans, collectively or as individual nations, will be part of a system in which Turkey, Iran, China, Japan, Korea, a new Russia and certain Latin American and other states will have an importance they have not possessed since 1940, and in which the present institutions of global “governance”—the U.N. system of functional organizations, the economic assumptions embodied in the post-Bretton Woods and“Washington consensus” economy, the G-20 and its parallel meetings—are clearly inadequate to the new era, intellectually as well as organizationally.

 

In Marrakech, the third World Policy Conference has just concluded, in which nearly half the participants were from countries other than those of Western Europe and North America. This is all but unprecedented for a meeting with such eminent contributors and speakers. Although current events and politics intruded into the discussion, particularly concerning the economic crisis and the emerging powers, the program dealt with basic matters affecting the common future: food, population, climate, health, monetary and financial governance, energy and cyberspace. The affair, which is annual, is the work of the French Institute of International Relations, and its director, Thierry de Montbrial. It has been needed, is overdue and will make a difference.

Visit William Pfaff’s website for more on his latest book, “The Irony of Manifest Destiny: The Tragedy of America’s Foreign Policy,” at www.williampfaff.com.

© 2010 Tribune Media Services Inc.

Firefly (Lilia Adecer Cajilog)Tawo Seed CarrierPOB 1456South Pasadena, CA 91031@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

GRUESOME SYMPTOMS OF BP DISPERSANTS SICKNESS

Pathways of exposure to the dispersants are inhalation, ingestion, skin, and eye contact. Health impacts include headaches, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pains, chest pains, respiratory system damage, skin sensitization, hypertension, central nervous system depression, neurotoxic effects, genetic mutations, cardiac arrhythmia, and cardiovascular damage.

 countercurrents.org  BP Dispersants 'Causing Sickness'By Dahr Jamail27 October, 2010
AljazeeraDenise Rednour of Long Beach, Mississippi, has been sick with chemical poisoning since July [Photo/ Erika Blumenfeld] Two-year-old Gavin Tillman of Pass Christian, Mississippi, has been diagnosed with severe upper respiratory, sinus, and viral infections. His temperature has reached more than 39 degrees since September 15, yet his sicknesses continue to worsen.His parents, some doctors, and environmental consultants believe the child's ailments are linked to exposure to chemicals spilt by BP during its Gulf of Mexico oil disaster.Gavin's father, mother, and cousin, Shayleigh, are also facing serious health problems. Their symptoms are being experienced by many others living along the coast of the Gulf of Mexico. Widely banned toxic dispersants Injected with at least 4.9 million barrels of oil during the BP oil disaster of last summer, the Gulf has suffered the largest accidental marine oil spill in history. Compounding the problem, BP has admitted to using at least 1.9 million gallons of widely banned toxic dispersants, which according to chemist Bob Naman, create an even more toxic substance when mixed with crude oil. And dispersed, weathered oil continues to flow ashore daily.Naman, who works at the Analytical Chemical Testing Lab in Mobile, Alabama, has been carrying out studies to search for the chemical markers of the dispersants BP used to both sink and break up its oil.According to Naman, poly-aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) from this toxic mix are making people sick. PAHs contain compounds that have been identified as carcinogenic, mutagenic, and teratogenic.Fisherman across the four states most heavily affected by the oil disaster - Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida - have reported seeing BP spray dispersants from aircraft and boats offshore."The dispersants are being added to the water and are causing chemical compounds to become water soluble, which is then given off into the air, so it is coming down as rain, in addition to being in the water and beaches of these areas of the Gulf," Naman added."I’m scared of what I'm finding. These cyclic compounds intermingle with the Corexit [dispersants] and generate other cyclic compounds that aren’t good. Many have double bonds, and many are on the EPA's danger list. This is an unprecedented environmental catastrophe."Commercial fisherman Donny Matsler also lives in Alabama."I was with my friend Albert, and we were both slammed with exposure," Matsler explained of his experience on August 5, referring to toxic chemicals he inhaled that he believes are associated with BP's dispersants. "We both saw the clumps of white bubbles on the surface that we know come from the dispersed oil." Gruesome symptoms"I started to vomit brown, and my pee was brown also," Matsler, a Vietnam veteran who lives in Dauphin Island, said. "I kept that up all day. Then I had a night of sweating and non-stop diarrhea unlike anything I’ve ever experienced."He was also suffering from skin rashes, nausea, and a sore throat.At roughly the same time Matsler was exposed, local television station WKRG News 5 took a water sample from his area to test for dispersants. The sample literally exploded when it was mixed with an organic solvent separating the oil from the water. Naman, the chemist who analyzed the sample, said: "We think that it most likely happened due to the presence of either methanol or methane gas or the presence of the dispersant Corexit.""I'm still feeling terrible," Matsler told Al Jazeera recently. "I'm about to go to the doctor again right now. I'm short of breath, the diarrhea has been real bad, I still have discoloration in my urine, and the day before yesterday, I was coughing up white foam with brown spots in it."As for Matsler's physical reaction to his exposure, Hugh Kaufman, an EPA whistleblower and analyst, has reported this of the effects of the toxic dispersants:"We have dolphins that are hemorrhaging. People who work near it are hemorrhaging internally. And that’s what dispersants are supposed to do..."By the middle of last summer, the Alabama Department of Public Health said that 56 people in Mobile and Baldwin counties had sought treatment for what they believed were oil disaster-related illnesses."The dispersants used in BP's draconian experiment contain solvents such as petroleum distillates and 2-butoxyethanol," Dr. Riki Ott, a toxicologist, marine biologist, and Exxon Valdez survivor, told Al Jazeera.

"Solvents dissolve oil, grease, and rubber," she continued, "Spill responders have told me that the hard rubber impellors in their engines and the soft rubber bushings on their outboard motor pumps are falling apart and need frequent replacement.""Given this evidence, it should be no surprise that solvents are also notoriously toxic to people, something the medical community has long known," Dr. Ott added."In 'Generations at Risk', medical doctor Ted Schettler and others warn that solvents can rapidly enter the human body. They evaporate in air and are easily inhaled, they penetrate skin easily, and they cross the placenta into fetuses. For example, 2- butoxyethanol (in Corexit) is a human health hazard substance; it is a fetal toxin and it breaks down blood cells, causing blood and kidney disorders." Pathways of exposure to the dispersants are inhalation, ingestion, skin, and eye contact. Health impacts include headaches, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pains, chest pains, respiratory system damage, skin sensitization, hypertension, central nervous system depression, neurotoxic effects, genetic mutations, cardiac arrhythmia, and cardiovascular damage.Even the federal government has taken precautions for its employees. US military officials decided to reroute training flights in the Gulf region in order to avoid oil and dispersant tainted-areas.Growing number of casesAnd Al Jazeera is finding a growing number of illnesses across the Gulf Coast.Denise Rednour of Long Beach, Mississippi, has been taking walks on Long Beach nearly every day since the disaster began on April 20, and she is dealing with constant health issues."I've had health problems since the middle of July," she said. "At the end of August, I came home from walking on the beach and for four days had bloody, mucus-filled diarrhea, dry heaves, and blood running out of my ear."Karen Hopkins, in Grand Isle, Louisiana, has been sick since the middle of May. "I started feeling exhausted, disoriented, dizzy, nauseous, and my chest was burning and I can’t breath well at times," she said.Dean Blanchard, who runs a seafood distribution business in Grand Isle, is Hopkins' boss. He too is experiencing similar symptoms."They [BP] are using us like lab rats," he explained, "I'm thinking of moving to Costa Rica. When I leave here I feel better. When I come back I feel bad again. Feeling tired, coughing, sore throat, burning eyes, headaches, just like everyone around here feels."Lorrie Williams of Ocean Springs says her son's asthma has "gotten exponentially worse since BP released all their oil and dispersants into the Gulf.""A plane flew over our house recently and sprayed what I believe are dispersants. A fine mist covered everything, and it smelled like pool chemicals. Noah is waking up unable to breath, and my husband has head and chest congestion and burning eyes," Williams said.Like others, when Lorrie's family left the area for a vacation, they immediately felt better. But upon coming home, their symptoms returned.Wilma Subra, a chemist in New Iberia, Louisiana, recently tested the blood of eight BP cleanup workers and residents in Alabama and Florida. "Ethylbenzene, m,p-Xylene and Hexane are volatile organic chemicals that are present in the BP Crude Oil," Subra said,"The blood of all three females and five males had chemicals that are found in the BP Crude Oil. The acute impacts of these chemicals include nose and throat irritation, coughing, wheezing, lung irritation, dizziness, light-headedness, nausea and vomiting."Indications of exposureSubra explained that there has been long enough exposure so as to create chronic impacts, that include "liver damage, kidney damage, and damage to the nervous system. So the presence of these chemicals in the blood indicates exposure." Testing by Subra has also revealed PAHs present "in coastal soil sediment, wetlands, and in crab, oyster and mussel tissues."Trisha Springstead, is a registered nurse of 36 years who lives and works in Brooksville, Florida."What I'm seeing are toxified people who have been chemically poisoned," she said, "They have sore throats, respiratory problems, neurological problems, lesions, sores, and ulcers. These people have been poisoned and they are dying. Drugs aren’t going to help these people. They need to be detoxed."Chemist Bob Naman described the brownish, rubbery tar balls that are a product of BP's dispersed oil that continue to wash up on beaches across the Gulf:"Those are the ones kids are picking up and playing with and breathing the fumes that come off them when you crush them in your hand. These will affect anyone who comes into contact with it. You could have an open wound and this goes straight in. Women have a lot more open mucus membranes and they are getting sicker than men. They are bleeding from their vagina and anus. Small kids are bleeding from their ears. This stuff is busting red blood cells."Dr Ott said: "People are already dying from this… I’m dealing with three autopsy’s right now. I don’t think we’ll have to wait years to see the effects like we did in Alaska, people are dropping dead now. I know two people who are down to 4.75 per cent of their lung capacity, their heart has enlarged to make up for that, and their esophagus is disintegrating, and one of them is a 16-year-old boy who went swimming in the Gulf."

Firefly (Lilia Adecer Cajilog)Tawo Seed CarrierPOB 1456South Pasadena, CA 91031@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Ten Questions for Tea Partiers

by Ralph Nader

Here are ten questions for Tea Partiers that they want or do not want to answer. I say it this way because people who call themselves Tea Partiers do not have the same view of politics, government, Big Business or the Constitution. Their opinions range from pure Libertarian to actively furthering the privileges of plutocracy. Their income and occupational background vary as well, though most seem to be middle-income and up. 

My guess is that most Tea Partiers come from the conservative wing of the Republican Party who are fed up with both the corporate Republicans like Bush and Cheney, as well as the Democrats like Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi.

With the above in mind, the following questions can serve to go beyond abstractions and generalizations of indignation and get to some more specific responses.

1. Can you be against Big Government and not press for reductions in the vast military budgets, fraught with bureaucratic and large contractors’ waste, fraud and abuse? Military spending now takes up half of the federal government’s operating budgets. The libertarian Cato Institute believes that to cut deficits, we have to also cut the defense budget.

2. Can you believe in the free market and not condemn hundreds of billions of dollars of corporate welfare-bailouts, subsidies, handouts, and giveaways?

3. Can you want to preserve the legitimate sovereignty of our country and not reject the trade agreements known as NAFTA and GATT (The World Trade Organization in Geneva, Switzerland) that scholars have described as the greatest surrender of local, state and national sovereignty in our history?

4. Can you be for law and order and not support a bigger and faster crackdown on the corporate crime wave, that needs more prosecutors and larger enforcement budgets to stop the stealing of taxpayers and consumer dollars so widely reported in the Wall Street Journal and Business Week? Law enforcement officials estimate that for every dollar for prosecution, seventeen to twenty dollars are returned.

5. Can you be against invasions of privacy by government and business without rejecting the provisions of the Patriot Act that leave you defenseless to constant unlawful snooping, appropriation of personal information and even search of your home without notification until 72 hours later?

6. Can you be against regulation of serious medical malpractice (over 100,000 lives lost a year, according to a study by Harvard physicians), unsafe drugs that have serious side effects or cause the very injury/illness they were sold to prevent, motor vehicles with defective brakes, tires and throttles, contaminated food from China, Mexico and domestic processors?

7. Can you keep calling for Freedom and yet tolerate control of your credit and other economic rights by hidden and arbitrary credit ratings and credit scores? What Freedom do you have when you have to sign industry-wide fine print one-sided “contracts” with your banks, insurance companies, car dealers, and credit card companies? Many of these contracts even block your Constitutional access to the courthouse. 

8. Can you be for a new, clean system of politics and elections and still accept the Republican and Democratic Two Party dictatorship that is propped up by complex state laws, frivolous litigation and harassment to exclude from the ballot third parties and independent candidates who want reform, accountability, and stronger voices for the voters?

9. If you want a return to our Constitution—its principles of limited and separation of power and its emphasis on “We the People” in its preamble—can you still support Washington’s wars that have not been declared by Congress (Article I Section 8) or giving corporations equal rights with humans plus special privileges and immunities. The word “corporation” or “company” never appears in the Constitution. How can you support eminent domain powers given by governments to corporations over homeowners, or massive week-end bailouts by the Federal Reserve and Treasury Department of businesses, even reckless foreign banks, without receiving the authority and the appropriations from the Congress, as the Constitution requires?

10. You want less taxation and lower deficits. How can you succeed unless you stop big corporations from escaping their fair share of taxes by manipulating foreign jurisdictions against our tax laws, for example, or by letting trillions of dollars of speculation on Wall Street go without any sales tax, while you pay six, seven or eight percent sales tax on the necessities you buy in stores?

Let’s hear from you Tea Partiers. Meanwhile, see the work of video-journalist, Steve Ference, who has interviewed and given voice to those among you in his new paperback “Voices of the Tea Party” published by Lulu.com on July 4, 2010. ContactVoicesoftheTeaParty@gmail.com.

 

Ralph Nader [1] is a consumer advocate, lawyer, and author. His most recent book - and first novel -  is, Only The Super-Rich Can Save Us [2]. His most recent work of non-fiction isThe Seventeen Traditions [3].

---

Article printed from www.CommonDreams.org

URL to article: http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/10/22-9

Firefly (Lilia Adecer Cajilog)

Tawo Seed Carrier

POB 1456

South Pasadena, CA 91031

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Don't forget our Brother John T. Williams! 
YouTube - Deaf Native American Man killed by cops! 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWvLST_Qojw

 

There are a mere 681 signatures for this petition!  TAKE A STAND IN UNITY NOW!  If you won't do it, who knows, maybe you remain silent & this very thing happens to you or your loved one by racist cops.  Brother John T. Williams was posing NO threat whasoever!  He wasn't even facing that cop & was shot four times thru his side!!!!!  Please lend your signature support: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/deafmankilled

-----

 

Teresa Anahuy
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FirstPeoplesNews

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Urge BLM to Set Humane Standards in Augusta Mts., NV Treat-and-Release PlanThe Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is proposing a roundup of 294 wild horses living in the Augusta Mountains Herd Management Area (HMA) in Nevada. Unlike other capture plans,  the BLM's Winnemucca District Office intends to treat mares with PZP fertility control and release all horses captured from within the HMA back to the range.The agency is accepting public comments on an Environmental Assessement of the plan. Help us let the agency know that the treat-and-release proposal is a step in the right direction toward managing our wild horses on the range and reducing or eliminating the need for future removals. We must urge the agency to set the humane bar high by postponing the roundup until after the dangerous winter months and ensuring that any capture plan is designed to keep wild horse family bands in tact. We also need to  oppose the plan to remove 50 horses living outside the HMA and urge the BLM to seek on-the-range management alternatives for these horses as well.Although the agency has a long way to go to address the fundamental flaws in its wild horse program -- including the artificially-low allowable population numbers, unfair allocation of resources to livestock within designated wild horse and burro areas, and failure to protect predators that provide natural population control -- the Winnemucca District Office's treat-and-release plan for horses within the Augusta Mountain HMA is an encouraging sign that our letters, emails and phone calls are beginning to have an effect . . . let's keep them coming!
The deadline for comments is Friday, November 5, 2010, so please don’t delay.Click here to take action.

Back to topWatch the Video: Rescued Calico Stallions Have Fun with Buddy!Last week, we reported that two Calico horses returned safetly to Nevada to join 18 rescued stallions who were also captured and removed from their homes and family in the Calico Complex. All have been rescued by Return to Freedom. We'd like to share some homevideo of Buddy - one of the recent arrivals. Buddy, a very friendly and outgoing youngster, spent his first days back in Nevada playing, grooming and making friends with a number of the Calico stallions. Click here to watch the video.@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Aay Sisters & Brothers.....I write to ask you to please visit a web site called Brothers Who Care, by Brother Andy Smith.  For near fifteen years he has have been freely aiding our young ones & families in the Maryland community & across the states, at this time, the org is in desperate need of contributions, which are a tax write off. 

His org is unique in the fact he does not limit services to Blacks only, but to this lands indigenous, Latino & Asians also.  Something we all know is very rare indeed.  He is a generous & tireless man. 

Among the many things the org does to lend a hand up, he has contributed computers to a few people I know who were in need, (myself included), ones who actually work hard for our Sisters & Brothers, quite the expense, but in hard economic times, is in danger of closing for good, which would not be good at all.

If able to provide assistance, please visit the site for contact information, & please pass this far & wide. 

BROTHERS WHO CARE: http://www.blackmenwhocare.org/home.html 

If I didn't know him or of his org, I would not be asking of any of you, but truly he has a good spirit about him & it would be horrible for the org to close down, leaving many in need without assistance.

His email is included below. 

Thank you for all you do!  Many blessings to all,

Teresa Anahuy
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FirstPeoplesNews  

 

Sister Teresa,

can you get the word out that our organization is preparing to raise funds for our next program year, and while United Way is competing for donations, we are not a part of them because our overhead is so low, people do not take us seriously.

Unfortunately, I will have to come out of my pocket for these expenses and it may have me shut down after about 15 years of helping the community.

We have to raise only $5,000 to allow us to maintain cost of our monthly news publication Speak Up and our computer outreach program which cost us about $100 to rebuild the machines that we give away in exchange for receipent volunteering 10 hours in their community.

 

Please let folks know about our work and our need.

 

Brother Andy Smith

Brothers Who Care*

Speak Up Community News

131 W. North Avenue, 2nd floor

Martin Luther King Jr. Community Center

Hagerstown, Maryland 21740

www.blackmenwhocare.org

(301) 393-9290

 

 

*Brothers Who Care is a division of Brothers United Who Dare To Care

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Good Shield Aguilar, Lakota-Yaqui Musician, Sings about Origin and Honor

Good Shield Aguilar

With all the terrible things going on around us every day, we sometimes need to be reminded of our identity, origins, connections and relatedness.   After all, it is only our world view and spirituality that distinguishes us from the wasichus(whites).   

One of the best ways to take a step back, contemplate, reflect upon and remember who we really are is through music.  

Good Shield Aguilar - Lakota-Yaqui Musician is a native singer-songwriter living in "Yurok Country" who says and does it very well, indeed.  To see a video of his performance of the following two songs, click on the YouTube link below.  Better yet, click on his name and visit his MySpace page.

From Origin Song:
I am sitting here in my place of connection, a connection that indigenous creatures have as our flesh and features are mirrored within the geography, within the soil and our relatives, those who nourish us so that we'll go on, those who teach us so we'll understand, and those who remind us so that we won't forget our origin.

From Honor Song:
Awake.  May the dream begin again from its dormant state as the great floodwaters have now parted.  Rebirth is eminence, turbulence, inevitable. Part of the way of creation and perpetual balance, chaos and beauty.  Awake now and carry the responsibilities of endlessness, messengers of timelessness.


 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROJ0LHkl1Zs&NR=1

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

BP's Environmental Disaster: Fishermen Report Louisiana Bays Filled With Oil
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=21653

Tags: 
GULF OIL DISASTER 
Lt. Cmdr. Chris O'Neil said a pollution investigator for the Coast Guard collected samples from the area, and while they had yet to be tested, said, "based on his observation and what he sees in the sample jars, he believes that to be an algal bloom."Fishermen who have traveled through and fished in the area over the weekend, however, refute these Coast Guard claims.

Webmaster's Commentary: 
Governmental officials cannot continue to lie to the American people about this environmental disaster, and believe for one moment that the US public is buying any of it.This PR campaign is simply to enable Obama's administration the best political cover possible for one of his largest political contributors, BP.It is transparently obvious that there is absolutely zero concern for the health and welfare of the people living through this tragedy in the Gulf region, nor the safety of food harvested from the region.

» 
1 comment 
^


Oct 28 09:23 

Reappearance of Huge Plumes of Oil is Making It Hard to Pretend that the Problem Has Disappeared 
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2010/10/gulf-oil-spill-news-update.html

Tags: 
GULF OIL DISASTER 
There is a flood of information coming out on the Gulf oil spill.

Why?

The reappearance of huge plumes of oil is making it hard to pretend that it has all gone away.

Here's a roundup of some of the Gulf oil headlines from just the last 4 days:


 Oct 28 07:13 

Environmental expert for the City of Gulf Breeze, Florida: “I would not recommend going into the water.”
http://www.gulfbreezenews.com/news/2010-10-28/Front_Page/Fort_McRae_oil_very_toxic_to_humans.html

By: Caldwell
Tags: 
GULF OIL DISASTER 

Test results are in for oil material found in Pensacola Bay late last month, and the numbers are frightening.A lab experienced in testing petroleum products determined that the oil’s toxicity levels are sky-high.“In its natural state, the numbers are off the chart,” said Heather Reed, the environmental expert for the City of Gulf Breeze who made the discovery. “It’s extremely toxic to human health.”Lab workers had to dilute the sample 20 times just to get a reading. Reed said samples are usually diluted only once.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

-- 
"When crazy people call you crazy, you know you're sane. 

When evil people call you evil, you know that you are a good person. 

When lairs call you a liar, you know that you are truthful. 

Know who you are and don't let others tell you who you are." - Dave Kitchen

Hi I'm A T-Partier

News From Indian Country - Bloody, Bloody Andrew Jackson: The exhumation of a monster

News From Indian Country - Bloody, Bloody Andrew Jackson: The exhumation of a monster

By Albert Bender - Oct. 2010

There is a monstrous specter haunting  Indian Country – a specter that when it last appeared sentenced tens of thousands of Native Americans to hideous, agonizing deaths. A specter that American Indians would  have never imagined to rise  again from the depths of Hades to anguish Native people; Andrew Jackson has been exhumed.

The wraith has taken the profile of an art form – the play Bloody, Bloody Andrew Jackson. This iniquitous, malevolent production  parading itself as historical “satire” arose in Los Angeles  in 2008,  and after a “successful” run at the Public Theater in New York is now set gracing the lights of Broadway  at the Jacob’s Theater.  Its current run began on September 20.

This foul creation is replete with the most  racist anti-Indian lines passed off as “humor” and the most flagrant, biased stereotypes of Native people. This drama was meant to appeal to an undercurrent of anti-Indian hatred flowing through  white America. It has been  a sold out show and the subject of rave reviews including those appearing in the New York Times. In fact one reviewer said   “The last ten minutes are best, when Jackson offers Native Americans a final solution. This comment refers to Jackson’s statement to a Native character  “What I know to be true is that the extinction of your people is inevitable”. 

Sound familiar – Hitler’s “final solution” was to send the Jewish people to the crematoriums.  The Nazi leader was the first to use the term the “Final Solution,” and now incredibly it is resurrected in reference to Native Americans by  mainstream journalism. 

Native characters are caricatured and degraded. Historic Indian leaders are portrayed as slow-witted and dull-minded, ever ready to sell their tribal homelands for a few paltry blankets and dream catchers.

The great Muscogee Creek leader Menawe, who fought Jackson’s forces at the Battle of Horseshoe Bend in 1814, and was wounded seven times, is depicted wearing a dime store headdress and signing a treaty to which he never even considered affixing his hand.

The valiant, iconic Sauk leader Black Hawk, who fought a war to hold his ancestral lands in 1832, against the American military steamroller, is seen as a traitorous collaborator disposing of his tribe’s lands. 

This production is the result of anti-Indian racism that has seen an apparent  increase in recent years. The writers and producers of this despicable drama realized this and knew how to craft a play to appeal to the worst in the European American mentality.

Parallels can be made with Hitler’s Germany, in the 1930’s when the Nazis’ antics were first viewed with amusement and disdain by Jews as being too absurd to pose a menace. But, in a few years  they  found themselves the victims of the most horrendous and extensive genocide campaign of the 20th Century.

What is also so disturbing is that this “play” has been running to sell-out crowds in urban areas where one would expect to find sophisticated theater-goers and not advocates  and enablers  of the most crude, artless anti-Indian racism.

Moreover, to increase crowd appeal and to make the racism more palatable Jackson is presented as a rock star. But, the Indian hater side is always at the forefront of this so-called “satire” with other classic Jackson lines addressed to an Indian leader, “You  people are despicable creatures! You show no loyalty  to anything, your music is terrible, your table manners suck, and your painting skills are absolutely dreadful. You savages, you’re soul-less.” 

You get the point. These  are crude racist insults covered in a mask of so-called “satire” and so-called artistic license - there is no humor. Satire by definition is a literary exercise using irony and wit to expose folly or wickedness. But what this play needs is satire on its satire.   

But even more telling is an omission by the writers and producers, that indicates out how eager they were to single out, to target Native Americans.

Some critics point out that other groups are also lampooned – Spaniards, gays , Southerners  and rich whites. But, where are the Black people?

Jackson was as much pro-slavery as he was anti-Indian and he in fact owned a large plantation. The Hermitage, his Nashville, Tennessee home, was maintained  by the toil of  numerous  African American slaves. Further, there were tens of thousands of enslaved African Americans in the South during Jackson’s heyday.

Obviously, the writers were afraid to have any Black characters in the drama with demeaning stereotypes or to have Black characters in the play at all. The writers were palpably afraid of an uproar from the politically powerful Black community.

If there had been even one demeaning stereotype of a Black character, I repeat, even one there would have been a national uproar. Obviously, Native Americans deserve the same respect accorded other races in this country, but, if it is not forthcoming.

 

In Bloody, Bloody, did the producers decided to “pick on’ American Indians because Native people are politically too weak to make a difference? Can anyone imagine a white audience in this day and  time sitting in a theater and emitting  knee-slapping laughs at the portrayal of demeaning stereotypes of African Americans or any other race in this  country?

Can anyone imagine a play entitled the Bloody, Bloody Slave Owners  with white actors in blackface? 

I might add that all the Indian roles in Bloody are played by white actors.

Or how about a drama entitled Bloody, Bloody Adolf Hitler with derogatory, demeaning stereotypes of Jewish people? How far would that play  go in the U.S.?  It certainly would never make it to Broadway. Or what about a similar play depicting Hispanics, or Asians? Again, it would not go to Broadway and certainly would never  have gotten off the ground in of all places, Los Angeles.

Let’s take a look at the real Andrew Jackson. Actually his so-called Indian fighting  career   began rather late in life.  Jackson moved to Nashville in 1788, at a time when battles between white  settlers and  allied Cherokees and  Creeks were raging in the area , but there is no record of his having fought any Indians  at all, during this period. This seems somewhat odd in light of his later advocacy.

He was forty-six when the Creek War began in 1813. In the first two campaigns against the Creek Nation, his armies were actually repulsed by grimly determined, intrepid Creek warriors who were vastly  outnumbered and massively outgunned by Jackson’s forces.

According to Anglo history Jackson defeated the Creeks at Horseshoe Bend, with the Creeks losing over 800 warriors. But, there is a Creek version that Jackson’s forces actually slaughtered hundreds of women and children after making sure that most of the warriors were absent from the fortified village in the bend of the Tallapoosa River. 

As for the Trail of Tears, Jackson was the evil architect and enforcer of Indian removal. He signed the Indian Removal Bill on May 28, 1830 and militarily enforced fraudulent treaties resulting  in the agonizing deaths of tens of thousands of Native American men, women, children and elderly. 

Jackson carried out the most murderous removal campaign against American Indians in U.S. history. The most egregious of the so-called  treaties was the infamous Treaty of New Echota that brought death to thousands of Cherokees.

So bent was Jackson on Indian extermination that he even tried to prevent the issuance of soap to Cherokees on the Trail.  This was after he was no longer president, and his successor Martin Van Buren was carrying out his wishes. 

Jackson  was a racist devil incarnate – an early day American Hitler whose deadly legacy for Native Americans remains extant to this day .

This loathsome production idolizing  this monster  should  be canceled. There should be a massive militant, mad, angry, furious, enraged Indian  demonstration at the Jacob’s Theater.  This abominable tribute to that racist villain, Andrew Jackson, must be stopped!

‘Bloody Andrew Jackson’ puts the pop in populism 

Your Donation Is More Than Appreciated. It has Kept This Site Alive, Helped Train Native Students, Help Buy New Equipment and Underwritten Live Broadcasting of Native Programming That You WATCH HERE. Even a $2 donation,"MAKES A DIFFERENCE". Thank you! 

 

 

http://indiancountrynews.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=10262&Itemid=56

-----

 

Contributed by Sister Josie Tamez - josietamez@yahoo.com

 

Teresa Anahuy
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FirstPeoplesNews

HOW HIGH ARE THE RATES OF SUICIDE AND HOMICIDE FROM "ANTIDEPRESSANTS?"

HOW HIGH ARE THE RATES OF SUICIDE AND HOMICIDE FROM "ANTIDEPRESSANTS?"

"In the agency's most recent internal review of the antidepressant studies, FDA scientist Tarek Hammad concluded in August that children taking Effexor had 8.84 times the risk of suicidal behavior or thinking compared with children taking sugar pills."

Effexor carries the words "Homicidal Ideation" on its label (This is one of the meds that Andrea Yates was on when she killed her kids. See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pecCbMtqjos). When will the FDA study the rate of homicide?

According to Dr. Healy's book, Let Them Eat Prozac, a person taking Zoloft is 2,000 times more likely than anyone in the general population of becoming suicidal (including suicidal thinking, not just attempts or completed suicides). How high are these rates, really? Personally I am appalled that the FDA and drug companies show such a lack of concern for patients. They have known about this since before Prozac was approved in 1987 (the same year that Postpartum Support International was founded). Here is an interesting video about the financial conflicts of interest which prevented a warning from being issued in 1991: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxJomeak4V4

The black box warning came out in late 2004, the same year that I suffered my nightmare experience on Zoloft. This was the same year that Elizabeth Torlakson committed suicide on Celexa, and countless other moms killed their babies that year and since then (including Dena Schlosser of McKinney, Texas, who cut off her baby's arms). If the FDA had warned sooner, many lives would have been saved. We must warn others, because doctors and drug companies are doing a very poor job, and they consistently put profits over people.

Many of these articles were sent to us by Dr. Fred Baughman, and have his comments in brackets. You can check out his website at: www.adhdfraud.com

THE FDA AND DRUG COMPANIES FAILED TO WARN

Friends and Associates,

The following notes of the recent FDA hearings on antidepressant use in
children are provided by C Brockman.

As you will see, the consensus was for the FDA to issue a warning to
physicians and the public BEFORE their analysis is completed, which won't
happen before this summer.

The FDA has yet to follow the consensus of the advisory panel....

Please distribute.

Dawn

===============================================================================

FDA PSYCOPHARMACOLOGIC DRUG ADVISORY COMMITTEE
OPEN PUBLIC MEETING NOTES - 2/2/4

NORMAN FOST, M.D., M.P.H.

Dr Norman Fost warned that doctors are to uphold the 'principle of first do
no harm' and that as a first response it is more important not to harm than
to fail to help. He defended this principle further by questioning the
effectiveness of the SSRI's since there is tremendous ambiguity about
whether or not kids are even being helped. He challenged the suggestion
that doctors not telling patients about harm of SSRI's but only telling them
about the benefits would put the patients at risk because people and some
doctors do not know that there is a real possibility that patients can be
made worse by SSRI's. He went on to urge the PDAC to get the message out
that the FDA has a level of concern about SSRI's while they are evaluating
the data.

MARY P. GLODE, M.D.

Dr. Mary P. Glode does not believe that the benefits of not telling patients
about SSRI adverse effects outweigh the risks of telling them even though
the patients might not want to be treated for depression with the SSRI's.
She asked what is the risk of informing versus the benefit of informing?
One benefit of informing might be that the patient would most likely be
reevaluated for other treatment.

ROBERT J. FINK, M.D.

Dr. Fink along with other committee members expressed a serious concern for
the off-label use of SSRI's and the administration of SSRI's by non-mental
health trained doctors.

P. JOAN CHESNEY, M.D.

Dr. Chesney referenced the testimony of Corey Baadsgaard when she inquired
about the medical terminology for 'waking up not knowing' what one had done
when experiencing an ADE. The committee responded that the term for that
condition is 'dissociative fugue' state. She stated, 'hostile behavior is
too much of a risk,' and recommended that the clinical trials look at
homicide as well as suicide risk factors, specifically with measures for
blood levels while on SSRI's. She further recommended that the studies look
at activation syndrome. Also, she requested that committee representation
from the medical community be expanded since there was no one on the
committee here from the American Physician Association nor from a nurses' or
pediatrician's association.

JUDITH R. O'FALLON, PH.D.

As a statistician, Dr. O'Fallon emphasized that in all her years of
experience one never gets good results from bad data, except that there are
lessons learned on how to better construct a superior model for future
clinical trials so as not to make the same mistakes. There was nothing in
the original data set to evaluate ADE's if the dose was raised or lowered.
In other words, no measures for blood levels were designed into the original
model. She stated, 'Identifying harm is more important to doctors than
identifying benefits because doctors otherwise have to wing it,' and that is
a very undesirable medical practice. Furthermore, new models for clinical
trials must have placebo studies and polypharmaceutical studies.

MARK HUDAK, M.D.

Dr. Hudak questioned the validity of the data from the original clinical
trials. The concern is that, as a result of variations in measuring and
methods in obtaining the data, suicide thought and attempts were equal. He
asked, ' Is this the final plumbing (of the data)?'

ELIZABETH B. ANDREWS, PH. D.

Dr. Andrews wanted to look at 'more objective end points' since study
generalizability does not compare well. She recommended end points studying
dose titration changes and clinical trials monitoring more closely.

IRENE E. ORTIZ, M.D.

Dr. Ortiz pointed out that developing measures for blood levels alone might
give rise to flawed implications. She clarified that 'different dosages
cause different reactions which are not predictable' and therefore, we 'must
also watch behavior with more precision'.

SAMUEL D. MALDONADO, M.D. M.P.H.

Dr. Maldonado was concerned about issues of 'bad data' and wanted to know
about 'other signals' in the data.

RICHARD GORMAN, M.D. FAAP

Dr. Gorman had questions about what is found 'when we are data mining.' He
asked, 'What got one company to voluntarily label?' Dr. Laughren responded
that they 'found a signal' and that 'they are allowed to modify labeling if
it strengthens labeling'.

ANDREW C. LEON, PH. D.

Dr. Leon requested that clinical trials look at treatment emergent symptoms.
He is concerned about the changed scores from the data.

RICHARD P. MALONE, M.D.

Dr. Malone asked about the efficacy in OCD. He stated that with the high
placebo response rate, it is difficult to find an effect.

CYNTHIA R. PFEFFER, M. D.

Dr. Pfeffer wanted to look at the clinical trial data of who improved and
who did not improve in placebo trials of SSRI groups, and what are the
predictors of that. She also emphasized that it is important to determine
whether or not randomization worked in suicidality.

DANIEL S. PINE, M. D.

Dr. Pine warned that the differences in the studies' measures may have
created some inconsistencies in analysis between studies, and therefore,
there should not be a rush to judgment that the SSRI's are not beneficial to
children.

CHARLES E. IRWIN, JR. M. D.

Dr. Irwin suggested that patients themselves seem to be more 'ahead of the
curve than clinicians' since the patients are the ones taking the
medications and since the clinicians no longer seem to be practicing a
protocol for watching and waiting when dispensing SSRI's.

Others on the committee raised concerns about the mistaken impression from
an FDA disclosure that 'Efficacy has not been established' since this phrase
leads one to assume that the studies have not been done even though they
have been done. The recommendation when using this phrase is 'to show that
the studies were done.'

MATTHEW V. RUDORFER, M. D.

Dr. Rudorfer summarized the committee's conclusions to endorse an SSRI
warning for doctors and consumers indicating the FDA's concern about SSRI's
link to suicide while further research is being conducted to measure the
connection to suicidality to see if there is a link. He further emphasized
that the warning should include language to urge doctors not to dispense
SSRI's liberally since the FDA does not yet have the data that they want and
need to determine a link. He also mentioned that akathisia, activation
syndrome and other signals should be further investigated.


===================


http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/11/international/europe/11DRUG.html?pagewanted=print&position=


December 11, 2003

British Warning on Antidepressant Use for Youth

By ERICA GOODE

British drug regulators yesterday recommended against the use of all but one of a new generation of antidepressants in the treatment of depressed children under 18.

In a letter sent to doctors and other health professionals, the government regulators said a review of data on the safety and effectiveness of the drugs, known as S.S.R.I.'s, indicated that their benefits did not outweigh their potential risks. [[[[[[[[basis of informed consent and this the case, there is no justification to prescribe]]]]]]]]]

Their effectiveness in treating depression in children, they said, has not been sufficiently demonstrated, and some drugs have been linked with suicidal thoughts and self-harm in children and adolescents [[[[[[[[[as have all sched II stimulants]]]]]]]]]]. A summary of the findings was published on the Web site of the British Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (www.mhra.gov.uk).

The agency, the equivalent of the Food and Drug Administration in the United States, said it was issuing a strong signal to doctors but was not barring the drugs completely because there were cases when their use might still be warranted.

The agency exempted Prozac, from Eli Lilly, but recommended against the use of six drugs: Paxil, from GlaxoSmithKline; Zoloft, from Pfizer; Effexor, from Wyeth; Celexa and Lexapro, from Forest Laboratories Inc., and Luvox, from Solvay.

The F.D.A. is investigating whether the data support a link between suicide and the S.S.R.I.'s — selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors —in children and adolescents. On Feb. 2, an advisory committee for the agency will hold public hearings on the issue. But Dr. Russell Katz, director of the division of neuropharmacological drug products, said that for many reasons, finding whether such a link exists was no easy task. "Our view at the moment is that the risk is not particularly well-understood or defined," Dr. Katz said. "It is not at all a straightforward matter to figure this out." [[[[[[[[[[[FDA now bought paid for, no longer protector of the public—my view but I have no hesitation in concluding this.]]]]]]

He said there was no indication that the British regulators had access to any studies beyond those already under review by the F.D.A. [[[[[[[[[Brits more protective of their public, FDA, US psychiatry of big pharma]]]]]]]]

In June, the American agency warned doctors that they should not prescribe Paxil for depressed children and adolescents until it had sorted out the issue. In October it issued a health advisory noting that doctors should use caution in prescribing S.S.R.I.'s to young patients and should closely monitor those taking the drugs.

Only a few of the drugs — including Prozac, Paxil and Zoloft — have been tested in large trials as a treatment for depression in young people.

One big problem for outside researchers, and for the public, is that the data that seems to show a link between the drugs and suicide is privately held by drug companies, though it has been provided to the government agencies.

Even for those who have the data, determining if a link exists is complicated, Dr. Katz and other experts said, because it is not always clear that the patients described as suicidal actually are. For example, experts say, some teenagers may cut or harm themselves but do not intend to commit suicide.

There are no reliable estimates of how many American children and teenagers are on antidepressants, but studies indicate the number has risen sharply over the past decade. Experts on the British agency's advisory committee estimated that 40,000 Britons under 18 were taking such drugs, with about half taking Prozac.

The British agency exempted Prozac, the regulators said, because studies have shown it to be effective for treating depression in children and adolescents.

Some experts said the British action was extreme.

"I think they're really overreacting," said Dr. Jeffrey A. Lieberman, a professor of psychiatry and pharmacology at the University of North Carolina. "This is really going way too far, and in the process doing more harm than good."

Dr. David Shaffer, a professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at Columbia University who sent a letter on the issue at Pfizer's request to the British drug agency, said he had concluded that there was insufficient data to restrict the use of the drugs in adolescents. "The bottom line is that suicidal ideation and suicide attempts are very common in depressed kids," he said.

Dr. David Healy, of the University of Wales College of Medicine, who has been outspoken about the need for more unbiased testing of antidepressants, said the British agency had not addressed larger questions about the drugs.

"The issue isn't necessarily that these drugs should be banned for children," he said. "The question is, `What is the safest way they can be used?' "

Other researchers said the British action was helpful in calling attention to the unanswered questions about the effectiveness and safety of antidepressants for children.

"Right now there is a large question of whether the standard of treatment for children diagnosed with depression" should be the inhibitors, said Dr. Julie Magno Zito, associate professor of pharmacy and medicine at the University of Maryland.

Alison Langley, a spokeswoman for the British agency, said the recommendation was issued because the drugs "don't work in the majority of cases for children under 18 with depressive illnesses."

Although the regulators cautioned doctors that the S.S.R.I.'s should not be prescribed "as new therapy," they added that if a child was already taking one of the drugs and doing well, "the normal completion of the planned treatment course should be considered as an option in the management of the illness."

They also said that the drugs might still be appropriate for some children — those who cannot tolerate Prozac, for example — and cautioned only that in such cases the medication should be prescribed and supervised by a specialist rather than by a general practitioner.

In addition, the regulators noted that their recommendation did not apply to the use of Luvox and Zoloft for children and adolescents who suffered from obsessive-compulsive disorder, citing research that demonstrated the effectiveness of the two drugs for the condition.

Children and adolescents who are currently taking the drugs, the regulators cautioned, should not stop taking them abruptly or change their treatment without medical supervision.

[[[[[[[[[[at best, the risk benefit ratio remains unknown. I believe the suicidal ideation and risk and suspect it is there for prozac as well. ]]]]]]]]]



Heather Timmons contributed reporting from London for this article.

===================
Lawsuits - Only Weapon Available Against Giant Big Pharma Pushers

Evelyn Pringle 7/10/06

Over the past several years, new studies have shown the new generation of psychiatric drugs to be not only extremely dangerous but also ineffective, and the majority of these medications in fact now carry black box warnings about a number of life-threatening side effects associated with their use.
The drugs include selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors antidepressants (SSRIs), like Paxil, Prozac, Zoloft, and Effexor, and the atypical antipsychotics, that include Zyprexa, Risperdal, Geodon, Seroquel, Clozaril, and Abilify.
Hidden studies dating back to before many of the drugs were even FDA approved have also surfaced, many as a result of litigation, that demonstrate that Big Pharma knew all about the problems with the drugs, but concealed the adverse event reports, and only allowed the findings from positive clinical trials to become public.
GlaxoSmithKline has now lost several lawsuits because it knowingly concealed years of negative information about the serious adverse reactions to Paxil
In one lawsuit it was shown that GSK deliberately misled both physicians and patients to believe that Paxil was not addictive and had no withdrawal reactions with a question and answer pamphlet distributed to doctors' offices to be disseminated to patients, in which GSK asks the question: "Is Paxil addictive?"
And, in response, the pamphlet states: "Paxil has been studied both in short-and-long-term use and is not associated with dependence or addiction."
By the time the lawsuit was filed on August 21, 2001, the plaintiffs' attorneys had been individually contacted by approximately 500 Paxil withdrawal victims.
As a result of GSK‘s fraudulent marketing of Paxil as non-addictive, the Las Angeles based Baum Hedlund law firm won a major settlement in this class action filed on behalf of patients who got hooked on the drug, and in many instances, found they were unable to stop taking it.
The documents that surfaced during litigation showed that since before Paxil was approved, GSK had known about the withdrawal affects from it own clinical trials and from many others conducted by prominent scientists, in addition to receiving thousands of complaints by individuals who used Paxil.
According to the lawsuit’s complaint, “GSK’s motive of deliberately failing to advise physicians and the public of the adverse effects that can lead to withdrawal problems (and that it knew a percentage of users of the drug inevitably would experience) was for financial gain and its fear that, if properly labeled the drug, Paxil would lose its share of the SSRI market.”
The complaint alleges that GSK over-promoted Paxil in order to increase sales at the expense of revealing the truth about the addictive and dependency nature of Paxil and fraudulently conveyed to all health care providers in the US that Paxil's side effects were only "mild," when in fact GSK knew the drug's withdrawal effects were severe.
It also claims that GSK fraudulently conveyed to health care providers in the US that a British study involving 13,741 patients found that all SSRI's exhibited a similar rate of withdrawal reactions, when in fact GSK knew that the study found Paxil to have the highest rate of withdrawal reactions of any SSRIs. [[[[[[[including Prozac]]]]]]]]
Over the last several years, evidence has surfaced that also proves that GSK concealed negative information and studies that demonstrated that Paxil drastically increases the risk of suicide and self-harm, especially with children.
A report by psychiatrist, Dr Peter Breggin, a court certified expert and author of numerous books on psychiatric drugs, written years earlier when he served as an expert witness in a Paxil lawsuit, reveals how GSK not only concealed negative studies, but also manipulated data about Paxil-induced suicidality so that actual suicide attempts in clinical trials were underreported, while attempts by subjects taking a placebo were inflated.
The report also notes how GSK hid the events related to akathisia (agitation with hyperactivity) and stimulation, which Dr Breggin says, are known risk factors for suicidality and violence.
Excerpts from the report were recently published by Dr Breggin, in the Spring 2006 issue of Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry, Vol 8.
His original report was attached to a July 21, 2001, affidavit submitted in the California case of Lacuzong v GSK, filed by the widow of a man who drowned the couple's 2 children, before drowning himself in a bathtub, after taking Paxil for only three days.
After the Lacuzong case was resolved, at GSK’s insistence, the report was sealed under a protective order. However, in the more recent case against the company, Moffett v Glaxo SmithKline, in Mississippi the protective order was lifted and the report was entered in the public record. Dr Breggin has also made it available on his web site at www.breggin.com.
“The publication of a previously sealed report is rare,” he says, “the first in my experience.”
According to Dr Breggin, drug companies settle almost all lawsuits out of court in order to seal incriminating scientific data. “This deprives the FDA, medical profession and public of critical information on drug safety and efficacy,“ he says.
He wants the laws changed so that they require drug makers to publish all of the safety and efficacy information they generate regarding their products.
In March, 2006, Baum Hedlund’s leading SSRI attorney, Karen Barth Menzies, filed another class action lawsuit against GSK, in federal court in the company’s hometown of Philadelphia, this time on behalf of patients under the age of 18, who attempted suicide while on Paxil, and on behalf of the family members of children who committed suicide while taking the drug.
Its important to note that Paxil has never been approved by the FDA for any use with children, and so therefore, every prescription written for the children involved in this lawsuit was for off-label use.
One suicide in the case involves 11-year-old Trevor Blain who was prescribed Paxil for "separation anxiety disorder" by his pediatrician in October 2000, and immediately began having trouble sleeping and exhibited angry outbursts. His family knew nothing about the connection between Paxil and these adverse events and so Trevor continued to take the drug.
In early November 2000, Trevor hanged himself with his dog's leash in the family laundry room and although he initially survived the suicide attempt, he remained in a coma for several weeks before he died on December 7, 2000.
Another plaintiff in the case, is 17-year-old Tonya Brooks whose family doctor diagnosed her with "social anxiety disorder" and prescribed Paxil in 2004. While taking the drug, Tonya became agitated, aggressive and had difficulty sleeping.
She first attempted suicide by taking an overdose of Paxil and sleeping pills. After surviving the first attempt, 2 days later Tonya gouged a hole in her leg with a pair of scissors and was hospitalized for several days.
Recounting the horror when she found her daughter sprawled on the bathroom floor after her second suicide attempt, with blood everywhere, Tonya's mother, Cheryl Brooks, says, "no parent should have to go through what we did."
According to Attorney Menzies, this is another case where GSK concealed information to protect profits. "Through our Paxil litigation," Ms Menzies states, "we've obtained documents that show a seriously troubling mentality of profit over safety and a callous disregard for the welfare of children."
"That's about as reprehensible as you can get," she adds.
"Governmental regulators around the world have now analyzed the actual data from the clinical trials, not GSK's version of it," she notes, "and have found an increased risk of suicidality."
"We wanted to make sure the rights of all of these kids," she says, "are protected by filing this lawsuit."
Pfizer's SSRI, Zoloft is no better than Paxil. There were also clear indications of probable suicidality risk in clinical trials on this drug long before it was approved.
For instance, in a "healthy volunteer" Zoloft study conducted by Ian Hindmarch in 1983 in which 12 volunteers were randomized to either a placebo or Zoloft, every volunteer but one, who took Zoloft dropped out within days, due to severe agitation, after making comments such as “I was running like a machine inside” and “I have never felt as bad as this in my life”
In 2003, the Journal of the American Medical Association published the results of 2 trials on children treated with Lustral (Zoloft) in which 17 children who were given the drug were pulled out of the trial because of side effects, compared with five children who received a placebo, and only 10% more children improved on Zoloft than on a placebo.
And yet the authors of the study wrote: "the results of this pooled analysis demonstrate that sertraline (Lustral) is an effective and well-tolerated short-term treatment for children and adolescents with major depressive disorder."
This drug has also been linked to severe violent behavior in children. On January 26, 2006, a psychologist on Court TV announced that 14-year-old, Cody Posey, was on Zoloft when he killed his parents and sister. He started taking the drug on April 20, 2004, and committed the murders on July 5, 2004.

Cody's father was the range manager for well-known TV reporter Sam Donaldson.
As for the granddaddy of SSRIs, Eli Lilly’s Prozac, the first to be approved back in 1987, within one decade of the drug's arrival on the market, there were 39,000 adverse event reports submitted to the FDA's Medwatch, according to award-winning investigative reporter, Robert Whitaker. And that number is said to represent only about 1% of the actual number of adverse events, he reminds people.
"So, if we get 39,000 adverse event reports about Prozac," Mr Whitaker said in an interview for Street Spirit in August 2005, "the number of people who have actually suffered such problems is estimated to be 100 times as many, or roughly four million people."
"There were more adverse event reports received about Prozac in its first two years on the market," he told Street Spirit, "than had been reported on the leading tricyclic antidepressant in 20 years."
"This makes Prozac the most complained about drug in America, by far," he said.
Linda Hurcombe, an American citizen who resides in the UK, lost her 19-year-old daughter, Caitlin, to suicide as a result of Prozac.
She describes how 8 years ago, her "undepressed daughter saw an ad for antidepressants on television while visiting the US."
"Caitlin decided she wanted this pill," Ms Hurcombe explains, "because she was nervous about final exams and had heard at the university too that Prozac made you lose weight and feel great."
Caitlin got a prescription from the doctor, she said, with no problem.
"After 63 days on this medication," Ms Hurcombe says, "during which time her behavior descended into chaos, Caitlin hanged herself from a beam in the guest bedroom of our home."
Ms Hurcombe has written a book titled, "Losing a Child," and says, most shockingly, during the research for the book, "I have found that Caitlin was just one of thousands whose lives have been snuffed out in a similar manner."
On February 2, 2004, investigative reporter, Kelly O'Meara, wrote an article that reported on the first clinical trial of its kind, by Dr David Healy, director of the North Wales Department of Psychological Medicine at the University of Wales, in which Prozac was given to a volunteer group of mentally healthy adults.
The study determined, apparently just as in the case of Ms Hurcombe's "undepressed" daughter, that even mentally healthy adults were adversely affected by the drug.
According to Ms O'Meara, between one in 20, and one in 10, people in the study on Prozac experienced akathisia, "whereby they become mentally restless or manic and lose all inhibitions about their actions."
"People don't care about the consequences as you'd normally expect," Dr Healy explains, "they're not bothered about contemplating something they would usually be scared of."
He said the study showed that: "We can make healthy volunteers belligerent, fearful, suicidal, and even pose a risk to others."
Kelly O'Meara's coverage of the adverse effects of psychiatric drugs is virtually unmatched by any other journalist in the US. During her 6-year stint with the Washington Times' Insight magazine, she wrote more than two dozen investigative articles about the link between SSRIs and the bizarre, violent acts committed by patients taking the drugs, which include the majority of children involved in school shootings in the US.
Her new book, "Psyched Out: How Psychiatry Sells Mental Illness and Pushes Pills That Kill," is about informed consent. "The people need and deserve the whole truth about their psychiatric diagnosis," Ms O'Meara advises, "and the mind-altering drugs that are prescribed as treatment."
Experts say the book is a must read for patients considering whether to take psychiatric drugs. The “chemical imbalance in the brain” theory that drug maker’s tell patients they have when marketing the drugs, is debunked in the book by some of the nation’s leading experts, and according to Ms O'Meara, the drug companies themselves have been forced to admit that they do not understand how the drugs work in the human brain during the treatment of an alleged mental illness.
"In fact," she says, "a test that measures a person’s brain chemicals does not exist."
"Never in the history of the world has science discovered what the correct brain chemical levels are for any living person," Ms O'Meara explains, "making it impossible to know if these naturally occurring chemicals are out of balance."
"If confirmable proof of a chemical imbalance were required prior to filling a prescription for any antidepressants," she says, "not a single prescription would be written because to date the only known method of determining chemical levels in the brain is during autopsy."
Over the last decade the drug companies have conned doctors into writing millions of prescriptions to children for these SSRIs, under the guise of protecting them from suicide, and yet the suicide rates for kids during this time period have remained statistically unchanged, with boys varying by at most one suicide up or down, and the rate for girls not moving an inch, according to a review of statistics put out by the Department of Health and Human Services.
Even though the atypical antipsychotics are not FDA approved for any use with children, and their package inserts specifically state that their safety and effectiveness with children have not been established, Big Pharma has doctors prescribing them off-label to children of all ages for a long list of so-called mental disorders.
According to a study in the March-April 2006, Ambulatory Pediatrics journal, between 1995 and 2002, the rate of children receiving antipsychotics increased five-fold, to an estimated 2.5 million, or an increase from 8.6 prescriptions for every 1,000 children in the mid-1990s, to nearly 40 in every 1,000 in 2002.
A recent review by USA Today of the FDA’s adverse reporting system from 2000 to 2004, found at least 45 deaths in children under 18 listing atypicals as the "primary suspect." There were also an additional 1,328 reports of other side effects, including many that were life-threatening.
Other life-long physical adverse effects of these drugs are beginning to emerge in children. The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia recently found that 19% of newly diagnosed Type 2 diabetic children were being treated with atypical drugs, according to Robert F Kennedy Jr vs the Medical Elite, by Mark Sircus Ac, OMD, on June 22, 2005.
"The most studied adverse effect of the newer generation of antipsychotics,” he notes, “is their association with hyperglycemia, in some cases leading to ketoacidosis, coma, or death.”
“Many of these drugs carry black box warning to alert MD's about the dangers of diabetes," according to Mr Sircus.

Psychiatrist, Dr Stefan Kruszewski, also says the atypicals substantially increase the risk of other serious physical illnesses such as heart attack, hypertension, and stroke.
For the past 30 years, Dr Breggin, has served as a medical expert in lawsuits involving psychiatric drugs and has testified in cases involving tardive dyskinesia.
All antipsychotics also now carry a warning about the extremely serious condition of tardive dyskinesia. According to Dr Breggin, the condition is a drug-induced movement disorder that is usually irreversible and there are no adequate treatments for the disorder.
“Tardive dyskinesia often looks so "strange" or "bizarre," Dr Breggin says, “that it is mistaken for a mental illness rather than a neurological disorder.”
The abnormal movements, he says, can afflict any muscle group of the body and can impair the ability to walk, speak, breathe and swallow.
“It is highly variable in expression and severity,” according to Dr Breggin. One variety involves painful spasms of muscles, he says, that can literally torture the victim, and another involves an agonizing inner agitation that drives people to move their arms or legs, or to pace.
“Some cases,” he advises, “are painful, disfiguring, exhausting and ultimately disabling.”
Dr Breggin has served as an expert in a half dozen tardive dyskinesia cases that resulted in verdicts for the plaintiffs including several cases in which Risperdal caused tardive dyskinesia in children, where the drug was prescribed to control behaviors that were in fact, he says, caused by stimulant ADHD drugs that the child was already taking.
According to Dr Breggin, tardive dyskinesia occurs at a cumulative rate of 4-7% per year in otherwise healthy patients treated with antipsychotics and after only a few years, 20% or more of patients will be afflicted. In older patients, he says, the rate is even higher.
Overall, according to estimates by a 20-year career FDA scientist and researcher, Dr David Graham, the use of atypicals antipsychotics increases the annual death rate in the US by more than 12,000 people a year.
They are approved for a very limited number of psychiatric disorders but once again, drug makers have found way to get doctors to prescribe them off-label for a multitude of unapproved illnesses for age groups that they were never intended..
The off-label prescribing of these drugs is so out of control that according to a July 7, 2006 report by Decision Resources, Inc, a leading research and advisory firm on pharmaceutical and healthcare issues, antipsychotics represented the fourth-highest-ranking class of drugs in worldwide sales in 2005, and two of the top ten drugs in sales are atypicals.
But the icing on the cake as to the absurdity of their widespread use, come from a government study published in the September 22, 2005, New England Journal of Medicine, that determined that the new atypicals are only barely more effective than no drugs at all.
Another increasingly popular class of dangerous drugs being over-prescribed to children of all ages are the ADHD medications, commonly known as “speed“ to addicts. Information released by the FDA in February 2006, showed that between 1999 and 2003, seventy-eight million prescriptions were written for ADHD drugs for children ranging in age from one to 18.
On March 14, 2006, the FDA posted a review on its web site of reported adverse events between January 2000, and June 30, 2005, that found nearly 1,000 reports of psychosis or mania possibly linked to ADHD drugs. Psychosis is defined as a mental disorder characterized by the inability to distinguish real and imaginary events.
"The most important finding of this review is that signs of psychosis or mania, particularly hallucinations, can occur in patients with no identifiable risk factors, at usual doses of any of the drugs used to treat ADHD," according to a March 3, 2006, memo from 2 members of the agency's ADHD psychiatric review team.
The FDA also disclosed reports of 25 deaths in children and adults between 1999 and 2003, and 54 cases of serious cardiovascular problems, including heart attack, stroke, hypertension, palpitations and arrhythmia.
Yet experts say that the FDA is stalling at best, and refusing at worst, to add appropriate warnings to the labels of ADHD drugs to alert all the parents of the ever growing number of children being placed on these drugs, about their numerous life-threatening adverse effects, that experts predict, would no doubt result in a decrease in use.
Psychiatrist, Dr Grace Jackson, author of, “Rethinking Psychiatric Drugs: A Guide for Informed Consent,” says that “whether by ignorance or design, the regulators remain oblivious to the evidence-based limitations of the prescription pad: at least 40% of all children fail to tolerate or respond to stimulant therapy; about twice as many respond at least as well to non-pharmacological interventions.”
“The long term outcomes for medicated children,” she notes, “demonstrate diminishing returns over time, persistent suppression of growth (about 1 cm per year), and artificial behavioral improvements which dissipate when treatment is withdrawn."
“The connection between stimulants, cardiovascular disability, and death,” Dr Jackson says, “has long been documented in the medical literature, but physicians and government regulators have refused to acknowledge the hazards associated with prescriptions.”
Dr Breggin, warns that all stimulant drugs can cause “a continuum of stimulation, including agitation and irritability, anger, hostility, disinhibition, hypomania and mania.”

The stimulant or activation syndrome, he advises, was observed decades ago with stimulant drugs such as amphetamines, Adderall, and Dexedrine, and methylphenidates such as Ritalin and Concerta.
In addition, Dr Breggin brings up an all too common situation with children who are recruited by the mental health industry. "As the child's emotional control breaks down due to medication effects, mood stabilizers may be added," he explains.
"Eventually, these children end up on four or five psychiatric drugs at once and a diagnosis of bipolar disorder by the age of eight or ten," he warns.
According to pediatric neurologist, Dr Fred Baughman, another well-known expert and author of the new book, “ADHD Fraud, How Psychiatry Makes Patients Out of Normal Children,” in addition to the deaths listed by the FDA between 1999-2003, in persons using ADHD drugs, the MedWatch database also contains 186 more deaths between 1990 and 2000.
According to Dr Baughman, drugging kids has become rampant. "Its happening all across country,” he says, “not by thousands but tens of thousands, picking most on the disenfranchized, powerless.”

"These children become for-profit receptacles for psychiatric drugs," he warns, "which will undoubtedly alter their bodies and brains."
Dr Baughman’s alarming prediction is apparently becoming a reality. According to a study by Medco Health Solutions, a managed-care firm, there was an 85% increase in the use of sleeping pills among children between 2002 and 2004 and about 15% of the children who took sleeping pills were also taking ADHD drugs. Since stimulant drugs cause insomnia, experts say, the sleeping pills are obviously being used to counteract their side effects.
Due to the fact that only between 1% and 10% of all adverse drug reactions are ever reported to the FDA, experts point out that the actual combined number of deaths and serious injuries associated with psychiatric drugs each year is much, much higher than FDA statistics indicate.
Sources
Interviews and court and legal documents from Breggin, Menzies, Baughman, Jackson, Hurcomb, and O’Meara.
FDA web site.

================




ALLIANCE FOR HUMAN RESEARCH PROTECTION (AHRP)
http://www.ahrp.org
Contact: Vera Hassner Sharav
212-595-8974
e-mail: veracare@ahrp.org

FYI

GlaxoSmithKline, Britain's biggest pharmaceutical company
will change the label in the UK to reflect the severe
withdrawal that its antidepressant drug, Seroxat (Paxil in US)
generates in many patients. In Britain, the package
label will no longer claim that the Seroxat is not addictive.

The change comes as a result of thousands of complaints
received by the BBC following its October documentary on Panorama.
See transcript at:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/2310197.stm

On May 11 (Mother's Day), the BBC will present a follow-up to
that documentary which elicited phenomenal viewer response.
The BBC said it received 67,000 phone calls and 1,400 emails.
See: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/2982797.stm

Among the responders to the October expose were families who
reported 16 suicides, 11 of them in the past two years,
that they say have never been reported to the UK Medicines
and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
The agency said it knows of only seven suicides of people on
Seroxat over the past two years.

In the U.S. the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) acknowledges
that it receives only 1% to 10% reports of adverse drug effects
suffered by patients. Doctors--many of who receive financial
inducements from drug companies, simply don't report adverse drug
reaction.

When will the FDA act to protect the American public by requiring
drug companies to disclose fully the severe side effects induced
by their drugs? Psychoactive drugs such as the SSRI antidepressants,
the 'atypical' antipsychotics, and the psychostimulants such as,
methylphenidate (Ritalin). To varying degrees they all induce severe
physical and behavioral adverse side effects--including addiction.
The SSRIs and antipsychotics induce extreme restlessness (akathisia)
which leads some people--including children--to become violent.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,952072,00.html

GPs accused of not reporting Seroxat suicides
Sarah Boseley, health editor
Friday May 9, 2003

At least 16 suicides of people who took the
antidepressant Seroxat have gone unreported by their
doctors in the past few years, it will be revealed
this weekend, raising serious questions about the
monitoring capabilities of the medicines regulator.

Concerns that Seroxat and others in the SSRI
(selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitor) class, such
as Prozac, could tip a minority towards suicide have
been raised for a while.

In the US, two years ago, a jury awarded a family
pounds 4.6m damages after concluding that the drug,
known there as Paxil, caused Donald Schell to kill his
wife, daughter, baby granddaughter and then himself.

The medicines and healthcare products regulatory
agency, part of the Department of Health, collects
reports from doctors on any side-effects or adverse
reactions that might be linked to a prescription
medicine. Neither patients nor their relatives can
fill out a "yellow card" - recording problems - and
not every doctor participates in the scheme as it is
voluntary.

The BBC's Panorama programme Emails from the Edge will
reveal on Sunday that the phenomenal response - 67,000
phone calls and 1,400 emails - to its October
documentary on Seroxat threw up reports of 16
suicides, 11 of them in the past two years, that have
never been reported to the MHRA, as far as relatives
are aware. The agency knows of only seven suicides of
people on Seroxat over the past two years.

"In retrospect, when it is fully conceded that the
drug can cause problems, this is going to look like a
very serious failure," said David Healy, director of
the North Wales department of psychological medicine,
who has taken evidence to the agency linking suicides
to this class of drug.

He added: "Doctors have been getting the mantra from
the drug companies for 12 years that it is the disease
[causing the suicide] and not the drug. It does
provide a nice way out for GPs who just don't want to
contemplate the possibility that a drug they prescribe
could cause death."

One of those who contacted Panorama was Graham Aldred
from Cheshire, whose wife killed herself after 11 days
on Seroxat. Rhona, 53, suffered nightmares and then
began to behave out of character.

In a statement, the MHRA said the safety of
anti-depressants was closely monitored but it would
look at any data from the Panorama study that was made
available to it.


GPs accused of not reporting Seroxat suicides

Related articles
03.05.2003: Seroxat maker abandons 'no addiction' claim
13.03.2003: Coroner calls for inquiry into Seroxat
27.07.2002: Antidepressant Seroxat tops table of drug withdrawal symptoms
28.04.2002: Seroxat: The real story
28.04.2002: Seroxat: The real story (part two)
10.07.2001: Suicide fear over anti-depressant

Big issue
Mental health

Glossary
A-Z guide to public services and voluntary sector speak

Useful sites
Department of health: mental health
MIND
The Royal College of Psychiatrists
Institute of Psychiatry

Copyright © 2003 The Guardian.

~~~~~~~~~~
Letters:
Drug safety

Saturday May 10, 2003
The Guardian

Mind is critical of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency
for failing in its duty fully to investigate the extent to which people
experience side effects from Seroxat, including suicides that bereaved
relatives believe are directly linked to the drug (GPs accused, May 9). For
eight years Mind has campaigned for consumer reporting of side effects to
psychiatric drugs. The MHRA is extending the yellow card scheme to the
public through NHS Direct, but this is still too little too late. Whenever
Mind campaigns on the safety of drugs, and the right for patients to be
given full and unbiased information on the potential side effects, we are
criticised by some groups who say we are scare-mongering. Why should we, and
programme makers like Panorama, be silenced, when there is a real issue of
public safety at the heart of our concerns? Millions of pounds are spent
advertising psychiatric drugs, but who has the money to balance these
messages? Panorama has given us, and the many people who have experienced
horrific side effects or lost a loved one, the opportunity to get this issue
the attention it deserves. We understand that many people say they find
Seroxat beneficial, so we are not calling for an all-out ban. We are calling
on the MHRA to stop doctors prescribing it to new patients until they
undertake a full and independent review that includes the experiences of
people taking it.
Richard Brook
Chief Executive, Mind


Seroxat maker abandons 'no addiction' claim

Firm agrees to alter leaflet to patients after complaints

Sarah Boseley, health editor
Saturday May 3, 2003
The Guardian

The drug company which makes Seroxat, the antidepressant which thousands of
people say they cannot give up because of severe withdrawal effects, is to
drop the claim on its patient leaflet saying the drug is not addictive.

The admission of a change of policy from GlaxoSmithKline, Britain's biggest
pharmaceutical company, comes in a BBC Panorama programme to be shown on May
11.

Emails from the Edge examines the big response from Seroxat users to its
first investigation, in October, of its withdrawal problems.

Seroxat is a commonly prescribed antidepressant of the SSRI (selective
serotonin re-uptake inhibitor) class, to which Prozac also belongs.

Many people say it has changed their lives by lifting them out of
depression, but some experience distressing side-effects when they try to
reduce the dose and stop taking it. These effects are said to include
sensations comparable to electric shock.

Last July the Guardian revealed that Seroxat topped the league table for
complaints of side-effects made by doctors to the government's committee on
the safety of medicines under the yellow card scheme. A total of 1,281
complaints were filed - more than the combined amount for the rest of the
top 20 most cited drugs.

The watchdog group Social Audit complained at the time about the wording on
the Seroxat patient information leaflet. It states that "these tablets are
not addictive", and that withdrawal problems "are not common and not a sign
of addiction".

Alastair Benbow, head of European clinical psychiatry at GSK, says in the
film that the wording was poorly understood by patients. Yesterday he told
the Guardian that he accepted that the drug, like other medicines, did cause
physiological changes. "It is absolutely right, some people have symptoms
and for some those are very troubling."

But GSK is unlikely to head off the mounting criticism because it intends to
keep the advice issued in a separate information sheet to doctors which says
the drug does not cause dependence.

David Healy, director of the North Wales department of psychological
medicine, has long argued that the company should change its advice to
doctors.

"If there is withdrawal, then there is physical dependence. There will be
some people who will never be able to halt this drug, there will be some for
whom halting will not be awfully difficult and some for whom it is a real
issue." The SSRIs were not like opiates such as heroin which causes drug
depmcency as opposed to physical dependency, he said. They were more
comparable to the benzodiazepines such as Valium, which is now prescribed
only with great caution because of withdrawal problems.

Charles Medawar, of Social Audit, was not impressed by GSK's move. "My
feeling is that the changes GSK proposes could and should have been made at
least five years ago and will not tell patients anything they don't know.
They are glossing over the reality. This is far too little, too late."

Sarah Venn, of the Seroxat users group which has 4,000 members, said: "We
are pleased to have this news but it doesn't address the information
provided to doctors. It doesn't go anywhere near helping patients who are on
this drug and can't get off it."

Some patients complain of doctors lacking sympathy when told about the
side-effects.

But Dr Benbow said GSK's "feedback" showed doctors did understand what was
meant and he could see no reason to spell out the difference between
"physical dependency" and "drug dependency".

"I think we would start to get into difficulties of definition." He said the
wording of the doctors' leaflet should only be changed "if we think there is
a clear lack of understanding [by] the doctors," he added.


FAIR USE NOTICE: This may contain copyrighted (© ) material the use of which
has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such
material is made available to advance understanding of ecological,
political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical,
and social justice issues, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair
use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the
US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this
material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior
general interest in receiving similar information for research and
educational purposes. For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml If you wish to use
copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you
must obtain permission from the copyright owner.











› This site exists out of a genuine concern for others">


› This site exists out of a genuine concern for others, unlike some "mental health" groups funded by pharmaceuticals. Use the information on this site as you see fit. This website is intended to help existing groups work together to combat psychiatry and psychiatric drugs as well as their influence on our society and lives. Individuals with websites or blogs and existing organizations are invited to list their information on this site as well as to publicize their latest projects or concerns here. Please contact amy@uniteforlife.org or send an email to our yahoo group to get involved.

› Consider bookmarking this online medical dictionary to use when deciphering drug labels or studies: http://www.kmle.com/


Visitors Since 5/13/08




Firefly (Lilia Adecer Cajilog)
Tawo Seed Carrier
POB 1456
South Pasadena, CA 91031