From: john on
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. 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.

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.

While disappointed at their lack of ethics, Dr. Buttar is not really
surprised. 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.

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."

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. 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.

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.

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?

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. 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.

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!"


From: dr_jeff on
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
From: Jason on
In article <OZmdnbqMFoJ5QUbWnZ2dnUVZ8hudnZ2d(a)bt.com>, "john"
<nospam(a)bt.com> 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. 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.
>
> 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.
>
> While disappointed at their lack of ethics, Dr. Buttar is not really
> surprised. 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.
>
> 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."
>
> 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. 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.
>
> 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.
>
> 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?
>
> 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. 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.
>
> 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!"

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.


From: dr_jeff on
Jason wrote:

<...>

> You now know the reason that most people in America (including myself) do
> NOT waste our time watching PBS shows.

Many people choose not to be informed, too.

> PBS has to rely mainly on the gov't
> for funding.

About 40 to 45% of their funding comes from federal and state sources.

> 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.

Prove that the news that they report has a liberal bias.

And wouldn't supporting vaccines and the drug industry, as in this case,
be supporting a conservative bias, not a liberal one?

Jeff
From: Kevysmom on

> 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, The babies become severely injured or die, The parents
cant sue the pharmectutical company, it has to sue the government




Oh, and Eli Lilly is the maker of thimerosal(Mercury that was/is being
injected into newborn babies and pregnant women)


Interesting



http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/


PBS show Religion and Ethics is funded by Eli Lilly makers of
thimerosal



Funding
Funding for RELIGION & ETHICS NEWSWEEKLY is provided by Lilly
Endowment Inc. with additional support from the Corporation for Public
Broadcasting and Mutual of America Life Insurance Company.
The Indianapolis-based Lilly Endowment Inc. was founded in 1937 by
three members of the Lilly family through gifts of stock in their
pharmaceutical business, Eli Lilly and Company. The Endowment is a
separate entity from the company, with a distinct governing board,
staff and location, and is devoted to the causes of religion,
education and community development.

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/about/funding/205/

*****Major funding for RELIGION & ETHICS NEWSWEEKLY is provided by
Lilly Endowment Inc. with additional support from Mutual of America
Life Insurance Company, The Henry Luce Foundation, the Corporation for
Public Broadcasting and individual supporters.**********
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Prev: A grade of D
Next: Jeff Utz is not a doctor