From: Jan Drew on 8 May 2010 20:59
On May 8, 12:17ï¿½pm, dr_jeff <u...(a)msu.edu> wrote:
> mainframetech wrote:
> > On May 2, 2:15 pm, dr_jeff <u...(a)msu.edu> wrote:
> >> Donna wrote:
> >>> On May 2, 8:23 am, dr_jeff <u...(a)msu.edu> wrote:
> >>>> Kevysmom wrote:
> >>>>>> You now know the reason that most people in America (including myself) do
> >>>>>> NOT waste our time watching PBS shows. PBS has to rely mainly on the gov't
> >>>>>> for funding. They do collect donations but as far as I know--most of their
> >>>>>> funding comes from the government. If it was not for gov't funding, PBS
> >>>>>> would have gone out of business many years ago. Most all of their
> >>>>>> producers and directors are very liberal
> >>>>> Major funding for PBS is from tax payers donating moent to the
> >>>>> government by force, Then the government forces parents to vaccinate
> >>>>> their babies,
> >>>> No one forces anyone to be vaccinated.
> >>> REALLY?? Maybe you live under a giant rock??
> >>> Parents Face Fines, Jail Time for Failure to Immunize
> >>> School District Orders Parents to Appear in Court for Failure to
> >>> Immunize
> >> The parents have the right to have their kids homeschooled. And if
> >> immunization conflicts with a parent's or kid's religious beliefs, the
> >> kid is exempt from immunization in the state of Maryland.
> >>>>> The babies become severely injured or die,
> >>>> Actually, that very rarely happens. What also very rarely happens is
> >>>> that people get serious problems or die from vaccine-preventable
> >>>> diseases like measles, mumps, rubella, chicken-pox, tetanus, Hib
> >>>> menigitis and pneumonia. That amounts to thousands of lives saved a year.
> >>> YOU dont know if those children died from chicken-pox or from an
> >>> adverse reaction to some drug the child was prescribed,
> >> If the child has bacteria growing in his blood and dies with signs and
> >> symptoms of an infection, you can be almost 100% certain.
> >>> MY severely
> >>> disabled son, did get dehydrated when he had the chicken-pox, he has
> >>> severe swallowing problems, and when hes sick its just a total night
> >>> mare to get him to drink at all... so he spent time in the
> >>> hospital....... NO MEDICATION just fluid IV.
> >> What about kids who don't get to the hospital on time? Kids get severely
> >> dehydrated very fast, especially when they are sick.
> >>> He was happy and joyful
> >>> within a day!
> >> What about the kids who die from chicken-pox? They will never be happy
> >> and joyful.
> >>> So, about these babies that have a severe reaction to
> >>> vaccines, The seizures these children suffer from are HORRIFIC many
> >>> are placed in medicine induced comas just to prevent the seizures from
> >>> causing more brain damage or death.
> >> How many are "many?" Numbers and evidence, please.
> >>> I KNOW this, BUT why didnt PBS
> >>> show the world what happens to a vaccine injured baby? Dont you think
> >>> parents should have the RIGHT to know what could happen to their baby
> >>> for allowing Dr Joe-Blow to vaccinate their little one?
> >> Ask PBS. However, the risks of the diseases are far more than the risks
> >> of the vaccines.
> >>> WHY keep hiding the TRUTH from parents?
> >> You mean like when the antivaccine liars tell how dangerous vaccines are
> >> and fail to tell about the lives saved?
> >>>>> The parents
> >>>>> cant sue the pharmectutical company, it has to sue the government
> >>>> Good! Unfortunately, juries tend to find for the families, regardless of
> >>>> the facts, because drug companies are perceived to have deep pockets and
> >>>> feel sorry for the kids.
> >>> Thats not true.
> >> Bull. Juries find for kids even when there is no evidence that the
> >> vaccines did cause anything.
> >>> The parents that have wone, WHAT the hell did they
> >>> win? Dont forget Jeff, I belong to a support group that has MANY
> >>> parents who have "won" their lawsuit for vaccine injured babies.
> >> Good, ask those parents what they won.
> >>> NO,
> >>> they cant talk about the "winning the case" BUT they can talk about
> >>> their child, and right now a friends child that "won" her case years
> >>> ago is in the hospital, fighting for her life from the seizures, she
> >>> has a feeding tube, cant walk, cant communicate, and has her fragile
> >>> body ravished by horrible seizures that are strong enough to shut down
> >>> your organs. Thats what a vaccine INJURED child deals with for LIFE!
> >>> Chicken-pox is a blessing, and so is measles and polio compared to a
> >>> severe vaccine injury, and thats the TRUTH!
> >> Unless the child dies from the infection.
> >>>>> Oh, and Eli Lilly is the maker of thimerosal(Mercury that was/is being
> >>>>> injected into newborn babies and pregnant women)
> >>>> Was. Thimerosal is no long in childhood vaccines. In the very small
> >>>> doses that were used, thimerosal has never been shown to be harmful.
> >>> THATS not true, Thimerosal has never been shown to cause Autism, But
> >>> its NEVER
> >>> been shown that it doesnt cause harm. JUST the oppoiste.
> >> When was it shown to cause harm in the doses used?
> >> Real evidence please.
> >>> ï¿½In
> >>>> fact, kids get more mercury, in a more harmful form (methylmercury) from
> >>>> eating fish. In addition, after thimerosal was removed from vaccines, no
> >>>> reduction in diseases that were conjectured to be caused by vaccines was
> >>>> seen.
> >>>> Jeff
> >>> Im NOT talking about autism!
> >> Who said you were? Regardless, people get more mercury from fish than
> >> they do from vaccines.
> >> JEff- Hide quoted text -
> >> - Show quoted text -
> > ï¿½ ï¿½ Hmm. ï¿½I had seen a news program that announced that Thimerosal was
> > going to be used in Swine Flu vaccines during the recent phony H1N1
> > 'pandemic'.
> Almost 17,000 people died from it.
> > ï¿½That would make perfect sense, since the drug companies
> > have protection from suits when shooting up the populace with vaccines
> > in a pandemic. ï¿½Of course, the constant reminders we all got were that
> > pregnant women and babies should get the flu vaccine first! ï¿½Yep,
> > shoot it into the most vulnerable groups.
> Protect the most vulnerable groups is more like it.
Wrong. Newborns, and pregnant are very vulnerable.
> > ï¿½ ï¿½We might also consider that the FDA websaite shows clearly that
> > they still allow Thimerosal in some vaccines. ï¿½And I would suspect
> > that some unscrupulous middlemen of vacines might still be unloading
> > their old vaccines from storage.
> What middle men? Do vaccine makers use middle men or do they sell
> directly to docs and health care facilities?
Well, since you claim to be a doc, you should know.
Of course all who are honest can read you own words, where you posted
the proof that you are not, but continue to lie.
Now, have a nice evening.....................................
From: Jan Drew on 8 May 2010 21:19
Quack Barrett is sue happy and has lost many times for claims he
never could prove.
Here is the photo of the man behind the web site http://www.quack
(http://www.quack/) quack.com/index.html. He often
attacks various health products and practices by making false claims
about them, as if those claims
came FROM them, and then knocks down these straw men of his own
One of the most ***evil*** people on the web is a former psychiatrist
who lashes out against just
about every possible alternative health product or practice. It is, in
fact, a hall of fame. If you
are mentioned in his pages you can assume you are doing a good job!
He attacks chelation therapy, of course, but he selects a "straw man"
to attack. In other words, the
early explanation of how chelation therapy works is well proven to be
false, even though many people
are still repeating those lies. But, the more thoughtful intravenous
doctors have discarded this
early theory and gone on to the second theory, mentioned on another
page (Click Here).
From: Jan Drew on 8 May 2010 22:04
On May 8, 7:23ï¿½pm, Mark Probert <mark.prob...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 8, 5:54ï¿½pm, Peter Bowditch <myfirstn...(a)ratbags.com> wrote:
> > Mark Probert <mark.prob...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > >On May 7, 6:24ï¿½pm, Peter Bowditch <myfirstn...(a)ratbags.com> wrote:
> > >> Donna <kevysmo...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >So, are you saying some can ingest poison chemicals and not have a
> > >> >reaction, while others can die from it? You dont make any sense.
> > >> The chemical most commonly used for suicide attempts in Australia is
> > >> acetaminophen. If this chemical was invented today it would probably
> > >> not be allowed to be sold without a prescription from a doctor because
> > >> of its toxicity to the liver, but right now a lethal dose can be
> > >> purchased in supermarkets for a few dollars.
> > >> The reaction that most people have to the millions of doses consumed
> > >> around the world each day is that their headaches and other pains go
> > >> away.
> > >> The dose makes the poison.
> > >Interestingly, APAP has one of the narrowest margines between the
> > >therapuetic dose and the toxic dose.
> > That's what I meant by my comment about prescription only. Actually,
> > if it was invented today it probably wouldn't even make it to market
> > because it is so dangerous. It would have to be a better painkiller
> > than opiates.
> Agreed. It has become one of the many home brew suicide pills. I have
> seen several claims for liver failure when the workers comp
> beneficiary overused APAP which resulted in the failure. One of my
> clients does not even bother to invesitgate the claim and just pays.
****Anecdotes are not facts. They are, at best interesting stories.
worst, outright lies.**** Mark Probert
From: Peter B. on 8 May 2010 23:25
"Mark Probert" <mark.probert(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
On May 8, 1:44 pm, "Peter B." <.@.> wrote:
> "mainframetech" <mainframet...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
> On May 1, 7:10 am, dr_jeff <u...(a)msu.edu> wrote:
> > john wrote:
> > > Dr. Rashid Buttar (who was interviewed for 'Vaccine Wars' but never
> > > seen
> > > on
> > > program) speaks out:
> > >http://www.drbuttar.com/blog/?p=1110#more-1110
> > > Doctor Accuses PBS Frontline of Selling Out on Vaccine Concern
> > > (I-Newswire) April 29, 2010 - What price journalistic integrity? That
> > > may
> > > well be the question that PBS needs to answer after this week's airing
> > > of
> > > its top rated show Frontline. Entitled "Vaccine Wars", the episode
> > > offered a
> > > decidedly one-sided viewpoint on the issue of vaccine safety.
> > I disagree. The show was well-rounded, and examined the risks of
> > vaccines. The reason why it came to the conclusion that vaccines are
> > safe and the risks of vaccines are small is because vaccines are safe
> > and the risk of vaccines are small.
> > > Dr. Rashid
> > > Buttar, a renowned physician who has received worldwide attention for
> > > his
> > > innovative and groundbreaking work in ridding the human body of
> > > toxicities
> > > that cause illness and disease, gave the program's producers access to
> > > his
> > > clinic, his patients, and himself.
> > Really? Groundbreaking? I guess that's true in the sense that he
> > therapies do get people in the ground sooner, either by delaying real
> > medical care or by killing people outright. He says, "We offer 39
> > different IV Therapies oriented towards the principles of detoxification
> > and immune modulation including heavy metal chelation, oxidative
> > therapies, nutritional IV's, and many other treatments that detoxify and
> > enhance the immune system." None of these therapies have any proven
> > benefit for patients in proper studies, risk the patient's lives and
> > effectively steal money out of patients' pockets. You can read about how
> > hurtful these therapies are at quackwatch.org.
> > > As Buttar recollects, "Frontline's film crew spent over seven hours in
> > > my
> > > offices, extensively interviewed three of my patients, and then spent
> > > almost
> > > three hours interviewing me one-on-one." Not one single second of this
> > > was
> > > shown on-air. Instead, Frontline recycled dated video footage
> > > previously
> > > released on the internet. Frontline violated Buttar's trust and wasted
> > > his
> > > valuable time; producing a slanted report designed to intimidate and
> > > scare
> > > the public.
> > Just because he was interviewed doesn't mean that he had anything
> > worthwhile to say. Apparently, the producers came to that conclusion.
> > > While disappointed at their lack of ethics, Dr. Buttar is not really
> > > surprised.
> > Proper ethics requires that only worthwhile stories make it to the air.
> > They followed their ethics properly.
> > > He and his colleagues continue to crusade against a medical
> > > profession that hides behind antiquated theories and ineffective,
> > > costly
> > > treatments; and media outlets such as Frontline who further the agenda
> > > of
> > > the lucrative vaccine industry.
> > Costly therapies, like the millions of lives saved by vaccines?
> > > Buttar also questions what role lobbying by the U.S. Department of
> > > Heath
> > > &
> > > Human Services played in Frontline`s decision to air such a skewed
> > > report.
> > > In a recent Readers' Digest interview, HHS Secretary, Kathleen
> > > Sebelius,
> > > admitted to meeting with media in an effort to undermine vaccine
> > > detractors
> > > saying, "We have reached out to media outlets to try to get them to
> > > not
> > > give
> > > the views of these people equal weight in their reporting to what
> > > science
> > > has shown and continues to show about the safety of vaccines."
> > Public health officials have a duty to inform the public about the
> > truth. That is what she was doing.
> > > Concerns about vaccines are legitimate and growing. Once proclaimed as
> > > one
> > > of greatest achievements of modern medicine, vaccines, their frequency
> > > and
> > > the combinations, have become the subject of increasing unrest within
> > > the
> > > medical and scientific community since 1989.
> > Really? Vaccines have been the subject of unrest only because the
> > medical and scientific community is concerned about outbreaks of
> > diseases, like the outbreaks of measles that we see in unimmunized
> > communities.
> > > Parents questioning the need
> > > and the prudence of their child receiving so many shots, and the
> > > administration of previously singularly administrated vaccines
> > > combined
> > > into
> > > "super shots" (such as the MMR Triple Shot) are often met with scorn,
> > > derision, and admonishment from doctors.
> > Really? Which doctor would rather have a patient get three pokes rather
> > than one? Very few.
> > > The fact is that vaccines do contain dangerous toxic substances. One
> > > of
> > > the
> > > most dangerous of these is mercury, which is present as a preservative
> > > in
> > > most vaccines, including the flu shot. While many believe mercury was
> > > removed from vaccines in 2002, Thimerosal � or ethyl mercury � is
> > > still
> > > used
> > > in the manufacturing process of almost all vaccines, but that fact is
> > > no
> > > longer disclosed on the vaccine labels.
> > Yet only trace amounts remain. Patients are exposed to much organic
> > mercury, in a much more dangerous form, from eating fish. The thimerosal
> > in vaccines has never been shown to be harmful in the doses used. And,
> > the rates of autism and other diseases that people were saying were
> > caused by thimerasol did not go down after it was removed.
> > > Dr. Buttar is not alone in his Frontline experience; fellow vaccine
> > > critics
> > > Dr. Jay Gordon and Dr. Robert Sears were also interviewed extensively
> > > but
> > > then edited out of the piece. "The show made a mockery of journalism,"
> > > says
> > > Buttar, "because it showcased the opinions of a group of "experts",
> > > some
> > > of
> > > whom benefit financially from vaccine developments, while at the same
> > > time
> > > it minimized the real concerns in question as nothing more than
> > > unsubstantiated hysteria." Why didn't they show a single physician who
> > > agreed with the parents who were against vaccinations?
> > The show showed good judgment in using only reliable sources.
> > > Frontline purposely pitted pro-vaccine doctors, painted as tireless
> > > advocates for children, against anti-vaccine parents who were
> > > portrayed
> > > as
> > > selfish, irrational and paranoid individuals lacking medical knowledge
> > > and
> > > common sense.
> > That's correct. And the show got it right.
> > > The end result was a biased piece of tabloid journalism that
> > > only serves to further confuse, frighten and divide those who question
> > > vaccines from those who blindly follow medical rhetoric; creating
> > > needless
> > > controversy rather than an intelligent forum for discussion.
> > Well, we'll have to disagree on that.
> > > Dr. Buttar remains steadfast in the challenge he made during his
> > > unaired
> > > interview with Frontline. "Tell the NIH, CDC, FDA or any vaccine
> > > manufacturer that I publicly challenge them to select any 20 cases of
> > > autism, send them all to an independent university and have that
> > > university's
> > > independent pediatric neurologists evaluate all 20 children. Let those
> > > neurologists identify the 10 most severe cases and I will take them on
> > > as
> > > patients and treat them using my methods. Let the other 10 cases be
> > > treated
> > > with whatever conventional "standard of care" treatment they see fit.
> > > But it
> > > all must be filmed and followed so that the world can determine the
> > > truth
> > > for itself," says Buttar. "After having treated over a thousand
> > > patients
> > > in
> > > my own clinic, and having tens of thousands of children treated using
> > > our
> > > methodologies all over the world, I already know what the results will
> > > be.
> > > The problem is - so do they!"
> > If this guy's treatments are so good, why doesn't he do proper
> > scientific studies to prove it?
> > Because they don't work!
> > The guy is a crook who is ranting and raving because he feels endangered
> > by the truth.
> > Jeff
> Using the Quackwatch site as if it had validity is not too wise in
> today's world. That fellow has been sued and lost so many times for
> his foolish games, that I'm surprised he has any income left. Maybe
> someone or some corporation is funding him?
> Oh my Chris, what an ignorant unrational twit you are.
> Using your "logic" you have just voided everything you wrote here
I disagree., Chris was void ab initio.
Heh heh, sadly true.
> elsewhere. Unless your income falls out of the sky you just nullified
> yourself. ..........Hearty scoffing laugh ensues.- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
From: Peter B. on 8 May 2010 23:31
"Jan Drew" <jdrew63929(a)aol.com> wrote in message
> Quack Barrett is sue happy and has lost many times for claims he
> never could prove.
<snipped remaing cut n pasted trash>
You have no understanding of law, your comments are invalid.