“Reality star” doesn’t vaccinate her kids: the world ends

“Reality star” doesn’t vaccinate her kids: the world ends

by Jon Rappoport

March 17, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

Need to up your blood pressure? Watch talking TV heads wax eloquent on medical subjects.

Someone somewhere says she isn’t vaccinating her kids? Boom. The talking heads go to work.

Oh my God! That’s terrible! This mother obviously doesn’t care about her children and the safety of other children!”

The thing is, the talking TV heads know as much about vaccines as a dead duck on Jupiter knows. Nothing. They seem to occupy a position of authority owing to the fact that they’re on television. And that’s it.

As for the venal doctors the talking heads bring on to back them up, there is a different bottom line: these doctors won’t engage in a real protracted public debate about vaccines. They’ll just pontificate like aristocrat-nobles talking down to their serfs.

It’s all a charade.

So now we have the case of “reality star,” Kristin Cavallari, who told the host of the FOX show, The Independents, that she and her husband, Chicago Bears quarterback, Jay Cutler, don’t vaccinate their kids.

Uproar. Then the Chicago Tribune goes out and grabs an expert to comment on this threat to the future of the human race and the solar system.

Any association between vaccines and autism has long been disproven,” said Dr. Kenneth Alexander, chief of the section of Pediatric Infectious Diseases at the University of Chicago. “Her [Cavallari’s] words are dangerous, will result in the under-immunization of children, and an increase in morbidity and mortality due to vaccine preventable diseases.”


Studies proved there was no link between vaccines and autism? Nonsense.

First of all, autism doesn’t have a definitive physical diagnostic test. The diagnosis is done using a menus of behaviors, period.

Second, you work a shell game with studies. I’ll give you the simplest version of the con. You assume, based on no proof, that autism is a distinct condition with one and only one cause. Then you demonstrate that some children who have never had vaccines, or never had mercury with their vaccines, have been diagnosed with autism.

Therefore, you conclude, vaccines (or vaccines containing mercury) couldn’t be the cause of autism.


The Matrix Revealed


But if you take a much more correct and honest position, you acknowledge you’re not just talking about “autism,” you’re talking about a whole host of various neurological effects of vaccines on young brains and nervous systems. You don’t need labels for that.

Then you list the toxic ingredients in vaccines. Ingredients that could and do certainly cause very negative neurological problems, when injected directly into the body:

Mercury, formaldehyde, aluminum, Polysorbate 80, yeast extract/MSG, to name a few. And don’t forget incidental germs that aren’t supposed to be in the vaccines, but arrive there through contamination.

It’s easy to show the reality when you set aside the deceptive disease labels.

As for Dr. Alexander’s other claim, that under-immunization increases illness and death, we’ll save that subject for the 20-hour public debate on the Net. He’ll bring his experts and I’ll bring mine.

Contact me at your earliest convenience, Doc. I’m ready to go.

What’s that? You’re too busy to stoop down and engage in honest argument? What a shock.

As a sidelight, I was also hoping to engage you on the murderous effects of pharmaceuticals in America. 106,000 deaths per year, from FDA-approved medicines. (See Dr. Barbara Starfield, Journal of the American Medical Association, July 26, 2000, “Is US health really the best in the world?”). That’s over a million deaths per decade, Doc.

So let me know when you’re not too busy. It’ll be interesting.

I’ll probably end up dragging the whole stench-ridden corrupt corpse of modern medicine into the light, for public viewing. But that’s just me. You can do whatever you want to.

Jon Rappoport

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

How doctors make fake diagnoses for diseases

How doctors make fake diagnoses for diseases

by Jon Rappoport

March 17, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

I never grow tired of explaining this issue, because people write to me with the assumption that they understand disease diagnosis. And they don’t. They’re not off by a little bit. They’re off by a mile.

Two of the most prevalent tests for diagnosing diseases are antibody tests and what’s called the PCR.

Prior to 1984, it was well understood by most doctors that the presence of antibodies specific to a given germ meant: the patient’s body had contacted and successfully thrown off the germ.

Antibodies are scouts for the immune system. They “go hunting” for germ invaders and ID them, so other troops can knock them out. That’s the conventional view.

Therefore, if a test shows that antibodies are present, it’s taken to mean: victory. The body IDed and rejected the germ in question.

That view was turned upside down in the mid-1980s. All of a sudden, the presence of antibodies meant: the patient was ill or would get ill.

Actually, the presence of antibodies simply indicates that the body’s immune system contacted the germ in question. That’s all it means.

To say that a positive antibody test means a patient has a certain disease is fatuous, wrong, and absurd. Yet, that is what doctors do every day.


The PCR diagnostic test takes tiny genetic fragments of what are assumed (but not always proven) to be germs and enlarges them, amplifies them, so they can be observed.

That very fact tells you why the test is useless for diagnosing disease. Even by conventional medical standards, you need lots and lots and lots of a given germ in the body to even begin to assume the germ is causing the patient any harm.

And the PCR test is based on the idea that there is so little of the germ available that you need to enlarge it fantastically, just to be able to see it.


The Matrix Revealed


There is a medical term that refers to the quantity of a given germ in the body: titer. It is usually ignored in today’s medical “science.” But it is vital.

Saying a germ is present in the body is irrelevant to disease, unless you can show there are lots and lots of that germ doing harm.

When researchers say, “We found germ X in the patient,” people tend to assume that means the germ is causing disease, but this isn’t necessarily so.

When researchers are trying to discover whether there is a new disease they haven’t seen before, they must isolate the previously unknown germ as the first step. This isn’t done indirectly by antibody or PCR test.

For example, in my last article about hepatitis C, I mentioned Nick Regush, the late ABC News medical reporter, and his discovery that the so-called virus reputed to cause hepatitis C had never been properly isolated.

Not properly isolated=never really discovered.

Doctors and researchers, in a stunning display of incompetence and/or dishonesty, are misdiagnosing patients every hour of every day. They are using tests that don’t work. They are misinterpreting the meaning of the tests they run. They are lying.

And the general public blithely accepts these false diagnoses.

To put the cherry on the cake, on top of everything I’ve written here, it is really the individual’s immune system that determines whether a germ causes disease. It’s not the germ all by itself. The medical establishment has it backwards.

There may be exceptions to this rule, as in the case of certain bioengineered germs. But for the wide range of typical diseases which are said to plague humankind, it’s all about immune systems, and whether they are strong or weak.

And that is not a medical issue. It’s an issue involving nutrition, environmental toxins, poverty, sanitation, overcrowding.

No conventional doctor deploys tests to assess these vital factors, and he doesn’t have drugs to treat them.

False diagnosis of disease is huge problem and a huge hoax.

Jon Rappoport

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Disease hoax, disease game

Disease hoax, disease game

by Jon Rappoport

March 17, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

At Gilead Sciences, they’re popping champagne corks. They’ve got a blockbuster drug, a once in a lifetime winner, Sovaldi. As FiercePharma reports:

With a revolutionary approach to hepatitis C and a price tag of $84,000 per 12-week treatment course, analysts expected big sales from Gilead’s Sovaldi. Some even forecast it would reach $9 billion or more by 2017, at which level it would surpass Pfizer’s Lipitor to take the crown for biggest-selling drug of all time. But none expected the exponential growth the drug is posting right now…”

A drug for hepatitis C. What a drug, what a price. $84,000 for 12 weeks of treatment.

So…what is hepatitis C?

Back in the day, there was one US mainstream reporter who wrote unflinchingly about medical matters. The late Nick Regush, at ABC News. He had serious questions about hepatitis C. In his weekly column, he wrote:

Consider this a challenge in progress. This scientific adventure raises the question of whether the hepatitis C virus, blamed for a major silent epidemic of liver disease and even cancer, actually exists. That’s right. You read this correctly: I am raising a question that may disturb scientists and hepatitis C patients alike. But I’m raising it anyway because it is vital to do so in the interests of public health. I’m issuing a challenge to the scientific community to present me with the published, peer-reviewed scientific evidence that such a virus actually exists— namely that it has been properly isolated, according to accepted, fundamental principles of virology.”

If the medical community decides a particular disease exists, then they are also saying there is a particular germ that causes it.

Regush was challenging the medical community to offer proof that the hepatitis C virus exists.

Regush pulled no punches: “Thus far, I should tell you, I’m underwhelmed by the evidence for the existence of such a virus… I’ve decided to offer those who believe the science supporting the virus is adequate the opportunity to educate me on the subject…You can do this by providing me with key references for proof that hepatitis C virus is real and not some meaningless biotech concoction posing as a real virus. I plan to ignore any speculative theories, pole-vaults in reaching conclusions and the usual harangues from the medical and scientific community about the stupidity and irresponsibility of journalists.”

Regush provides background: “In 1987, a scientific research team went on the hunt for a virus to explain liver disease linked to what was then called non-A non-B hepatitis. The team, including scientists from the CDC, Chiron Corp. and others, claimed to have detected HCV [hepatitis C virus].”

Then Regush applies the real daggers:

“But to this day, no one has ever been able to isolate such a virus in an intact form, nor has anyone been able to grow it in a culture. And no one has been able to fish out such a virus, purify it (meaning separate it from a cell), inject it into an animal and cause hepatitis. No one has ever been able to document, according to basic long-held standards of virology, that such a proposed virus is infectious. No one.

From the beginning, the researchers presumed too much in making their claim. They began by injecting blood from hepatitis patients into chimps. In half of the animals, they noted signs of infection in the form of a biological marker of hepatitis called alanine aminotransferase. The injected blood, however, did not cause hepatitis [disease]. That should have been a big red flag. The marker they detected may have had nothing to do with a virus. In any case, the scientists began fishing in liver tissue to find one.

What they found, with the use of high-tech amplification tools, was essentially a small piece of genetic information (encoded in ribonucleic acid, or RNA). On the basis of tests to reconstruct pieces of what they believed was a virus, they presumed that this bit of RNA was foreign and viral — even though they had no basic evidence that their ‘catch’ behaved like a virus. [And they could take pictures of this unidentified material with an electron microscope and publish them, calling them ‘the hepatitis C virus.’]

But never mind. Just clone the pieces of genetic information; work out the genetic sequences; using indirect methods, generate proteins presumably coming from a virus’s genetic code; create an antibody test against this genetic information; test many patients who turn out to be positive against this genetic information — and lo and behold, you have an epidemic.”


The Matrix Revealed


Regush challenged researchers to come forward and debate him, publicly, on the question of whether the hepatitis C virus actually exists. To my knowledge, no one did.

Instead, Regush received a flood of letters from hepatitis C patients and groups. Many of these letters attacked him, and he even received death threats.

But, no problem. Hepatitis C and its virus exist merely because the medical cartel says they do, and they just keep driving their steamroller over doubts and questions.

And Sovaldi, the latest and greatest drug for treating hepatitis C, is a $$ blockbuster for the ages.

Invent a disease for which there is no convincing proof, label it with a name, develop a drug to treat it, and make billions.

Yes, there are millions of people with liver problems. But that in itself is no proof that the hepatitis C virus exists.

Jon Rappoport

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

New zombie medical drug to hit the streets

New zombie medical drug to hit the streets

by Jon Rappoport

March 14, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

It’s called Zohydro.

Clinical Psychiatry News (3/13) has the story. West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin is protesting FDA approval of the drug. He’s written a stunning letter to US Health and Human Services head, Kathleen Sebelius.

…Sen. Manchin noted that the FDA approved the drug ‘despite strong opposition from its own Anesthetic and Analgesic Drug Products Advisory Committee.’”

This is highly significant. The FDA turned its back on its own panel of new-drug reviewers.

Senator Manchin continues:

Simply put, the FDA’s approval of Zohydro ER, in its current form, must be stopped before this dangerous drug is sold to the public… [Zohydro] has up to 10 times as much hydrocodone as Vicodin and Lortab and will come in a formulation that can be easily crushed, snorted, and injected.”

In other words, Zohydro, used as a pain killer, is a nightmare. If you’ve ever taken Vicodin, imagine a pill with ten times the strength.

In his letter, Manchin raised questions about the drug’s approval. ‘I am deeply troubled that the reason for Zohydro ER’s approval may be linked to allegations that the FDA gave manufacturers of prescription drugs the opportunity to pay thousands of dollars for the privilege to attend private meetings with FDA officials,’ he wrote, citing news reports. ‘Allegations have been raised that a new, scientifically questionable methodology for drug approval was created at these pay-to-play meetings.’”

The FDA has denied any improprieties regarding those private meetings, which the agency has said were intended to help the FDA better evaluate evidence from clinical trials.”

Then let’s see every word of those private meetings. The FDA is a public agency. Let’s see exactly what went on in those secret meetings.


For background: On July 29, 2012, Martha Rosenberg published her interview with former FDA drug reviewer, Ronald Kavanagh, for Truthout. The subject was FDA retaliation against its own people who didn’t follow orders on approving new drugs, but instead relied on evidence.

Kavanagh: “…widespread [FDA] racketeering, including witness tampering and witness retaliation.”

I was threatened with prison.”

One [FDA] manager threatened my children…I was afraid that I could be killed for talking to Congress and criminal investigators.”

Kavanagh reviewed new drug applications made to the FDA by pharmaceutical companies. He was one of the holdouts at the Agency who insisted that the drugs had to be safe and effective before being released to the public.

But honest appraisal wasn’t part of the FDA culture, and Kavanagh swam against the tide, until he realized his life and the life of his children was on the line.

What was his secret task at the FDA? “Drug reviewers were clearly told not to question drug companies and that our job was to approve drugs.” In other words, rubber stamp them. Say the drugs were safe and effective when they were not.

Kavanagh’s revelations are astonishing. He recalls a meeting where a drug-company representative flat-out stated that his company had paid the FDA for a new-drug approval. Paid for it. As in bribe.

He remarks that the drug pyridostigmine, given to US troops to prevent the later effects of nerve gas, “actually increased the lethality” of certain nerve agents.

Kavanagh recalls being given records of safety data on a drug—and then his bosses told him which sections not to read. Obviously, they knew the drug was dangerous and they knew exactly where, in the reports, that fact would be revealed.


The Matrix Revealed


We are not dealing with isolated incidents of cheating and lying. We are not dealing with a few isolated bought-off FDA employees. The situation at the FDA isn’t correctable with a few firings. This is an ongoing criminal enterprise, and any government official, serving in any capacity, who has become aware of it and has not taken action, is an accessory to mass poisoning of the population.

Fourteen years ago, the cat was let out of the bag. Dr. Barbara Starfield, writing in the Journal of the American Medical Association, on July 26, 2000, in a review titled, “Is US health really the best in the world,” exposed the fact that FDA-approved medical drugs kill 106,000 Americans per year.

In interviewing her, I discovered that she had never been approached by any federal agency to help remedy this tragedy. Nor had the federal government taken any steps on its own to stop the dying.


And now we have Zohydro, a new drug ready to hit the streets. You’ll know it when you see more zombies walking.

Senator Manchin has just introduced a bill to slap down the FDA approval of Zohydro (official press release and copy of bill here).

Here are official black-box warnings contained in Zohydro packaging:

* Long-acting hydrocodone exposes patients and other users to the risks of opioid addiction, abuse, and misuse, which can lead to overdose and death.

* Serious, life-threatening, or fatal respiratory depression may occur.

* Instruct patients to swallow Zohydro ER capsules whole; crushing, chewing, or dissolving capsules can cause rapid release and absorption of a potentially fatal dose of hydrocodone.

* Accidental consumption of even 1 dose of hydrocodone, especially by children, can result in a fatal overdose of hydrocodone.

* For patients who require opioid therapy while pregnant, be aware that infants may require treatment for neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome.

* Prolonged maternal use during pregnancy can result in neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome, which may be life-threatening and requires management according to protocols developed by neonatology experts.

Your FDA at work.

Jon Rappoport

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

RIP, psychiatry: the “chemical-imbalance” theory is dead

R.I.P., psychiatry: the “chemical imbalance” theory is dead

by Jon Rappoport

March 7, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

This one is big.

Dr. Ronald Pies, the editor-in-chief emeritus of the Psychiatric Times, laid the theory to rest in the July 11, 2011, issue of the Times with this staggering admission:

In truth, the ‘chemical imbalance’ notion was always a kind of urban legend — never a theory seriously propounded by well-informed psychiatrists.”

Boom.

Dead.

The point is, for decades the whole basis of psychiatric drug research, drug prescription, and drug sales has been: “we’re correcting a chemical imbalance in the brain.”

The problem was, researchers had never established a normal baseline for chemical balance. So they were shooting in the dark. Worse, they were faking a theory. Pretending they knew something when they didn’t.

In his 2011 piece in Psychiatric Times, Dr. Pies tries to cover his colleagues in the psychiatric profession with this fatuous remark:

In the past 30 years, I don’t believe I have ever heard a knowledgeable, well-trained psychiatrist make such a preposterous claim [about chemical imbalance in the brain], except perhaps to mock it…the ‘chemical imbalance’ image has been vigorously promoted by some pharmaceutical companies, often to the detriment of our patients’ understanding.”

Absurd. First of all, many psychiatrists have explained and do explain to their patients that the drugs are there to correct a chemical imbalance.

And second, if all well-trained psychiatrists have known, all along, that the chemical-imbalance theory is a fraud…

…then why on earth have they been prescribing tons of drugs to their patients…

…since those drugs are developed on the false premise that they correct an imbalance?

Here’s what’s happening. The honchos of psychiatry are seeing the handwriting on the wall. Their game has been exposed. They’re taking heavy flack on many fronts.

The chemical imbalance theory is a fake. There are no defining physical tests for any of the 300 so-called mental disorders. All diagnoses are based on arbitrary clusters or menus of human behavior. The drugs are harmful, dangerous, toxic. Some of them induce violence. Suicide, homicide. Some of the drugs cause brain damage.

Psychiatry is a pseudo-pseudo science.

So the shrinks have to move into another model, another con, another fraud. And they’re looking for one.

For example, genes plus “psycho-social factors.” A mish-mash of more unproven science.

New breakthrough research on the functioning of the brain is paying dividends and holds great promise…” Professional gibberish.

Meanwhile, the business model demands drugs for sale.

So even though the chemical-imbalance nonsense has been discredited, it will continue on as a dead man walking, a zombie.

Big Pharma isn’t going to back off. Trillions of dollars are at stake.

And in the wake of Aurora, Colorado, and Sandy Hook, and the Naval Yard, the hype is expanding: “we must have new community mental-health centers all over America.”

More fake diagnosis of mental disorders, more devastating drug prescriptions.


The Matrix Revealed


As Dr. Peter Breggin explains in his classic, Toxic Psychiatry, half a century ago the psychiatric profession and the drug companies began to shape a deal.

Psychiatry was dying out. Patients didn’t want to talk about their problems to MD shrinks.

So the deal was this: psychiatry would go along with and promote chemical-imbalance propaganda. In turn, the drug companies would turn out the pharmaceuticals, and they would bankroll psychiatry, sponsoring conferences, taking out massive numbers of ads in journals, offering grants to universities.

The deal paid off.

Psychiatry experienced a resurgence. “Talk therapy is useless. Mental problems are all about the brain, and the brain must be drugged.”

But now, the charade is exposed.

You can be sure major Pharma players are meeting behind closed doors with leaders of the American Psychiatric Association (APA). The mafia is making a house call.

They are reminding the APA that they have a deal. No cancellation allowed.

You guys promoted the chemical-imbalance theory. That was the arrangement. So keep promoting it. We don’t care how many lies you have to tell. Don’t try to develop a conscience all of a sudden. This is business.”

The mafia doesn’t like it when people try to interrupt business.

Jon Rappoport

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Dr. Breggin rides again: the dangers of psychiatric drugs

Dr. Breggin rides again: the dangers of psychiatric drugs

by Jon Rappoport

February 24, 2014

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)

In court, the tide may be turning against psychiatric-drug damage.

A recent jury decision, in which Dr. Peter Breggin testified as an expert witness, highlighted the extreme danger of the drugs.

The civil case was filed on behalf of a boy diagnosed with autism, who was then dosed with antidepressants and anti-psychotic medications (Risperdal and Zyprexa).

The boy developed two conditions, called tardive dyskinesia and tardive akathisia. Dr, Breggin’s website (www.breggin.com) depicts these conditions:

“Tardive dyskinesia describes a group of persistent or permanent movement disorders caused by antipsychotic (neuroleptic) drugs including Risperdal, Zyprexa, Invega, Abilify, Geodon, Seroquel, Latuda, Fanapt and Saphris. In addition to typical tardive dyskinesia spasms and twitches of his face, eyelids, and tongue, the youngster developed a severe case of tardive akathisia involving torturous internal agitation that drove him into constant, unrelenting motion.”

Tardive dyskinesia can most definitely indicate motor brain damage. (See Breggin, Toxic Psychiatry)

In this civil suit, the Chicago jury came back with a judgment against the treating psychiatrist, Howard Segal.

The jury award was $1.5 million.

(Angel v. Segal, State of Illinois, Circuit Court, Cook County. Law Division No.09L 3496)

Dr. Breggin was an expert witness in an even more surprising case (2012), in which a psychiatric-drug-induced suicide was acknowledged by a Syracuse, New York, jury.

The jury awarded $1.5 million to the family of Joseph Mazella.

Dr. Breggin, on his Huffington Post blog, offers this description:

“Mr. Mazella was a 51-year-old revered high school basketball coach, teacher and assistant principal; and his self-inflicted death was unexpected and shocking to those who knew him and to the Syracuse community.

“…I found that a glaring negligence had been committed in the case. Family physician William Beals, M.D., who had a reputation for treating psychiatric and addiction patients, had prescribed Paxil for Mr. Mazella for 10 years without seeing him. When Mr. Mazella began to feel anxious and depressed again, on Aug. 9, 2009 he and his wife telephoned the doctor, who was reportedly on vacation on Cape Cod. Despite having no contact with the patient for a decade, by telephone Dr. Beals doubled his Paxil from 20 mg to 40 mg and added the antipsychotic drug, Zyprexa (olanzapine). This began an escalating decline in his mental condition that ended a little more than one month later with his suicide.”

Both these cases were suits against doctors. They weren’t built to go up against the drug manufacturers.

However, in significant measure owing to Dr. Breggin’s work, millions and millions of people are waking up to the fact that the drug companies are engaged in a form of chemical assault against the global population.

The medical front men for these companies affect an arrogant pose of certainty about the drugs’ benefits.

But the charade is falling apart.


the matrix revealed


As I’ve demonstrated in previous articles, none of the conditions (“mental disorders”) for which these destructive chemicals are prescribed are legitimate. That is, there are zero objective and defining tests for any mental disorder diagnosis.

No saliva, blood, urine, or hair test. No brain scan. No genetic assay.

If there were such tests, they would listed as definitive in the bible of the psychiatric profession, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM).

They’re not there.

Everything else is PR: “getting closer;” “new breakthrough;” “promising progress;” “step forward;” “innovative technology.”

Psychiatrists have been uttering these homilies for 40 years.

They’re no more compelling than, “Buy one now and get the second one free. And that’s not all…”

Warning: sudden withdrawal from any psychiatric drug can create highly dangerous effects on a patient. See Breggin.com for information about this subject.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Mental illness is the new normal

Mental illness is the new normal

by Jon Rappoport

February 14, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

The strategy is as old as the hills.

Show people an extreme example of something, and thereby convince them to accept a compromise.

In this case, parade before the public—along with assured pronouncements from “mental health experts”—images of James Holmes, Aaron Alexis, Adam Lanza, etc.—and say:

“Look, these are people who committed unspeakable crimes because they were suffering from mental disorders, and we must do something about it…in fact, at least half of all Americans have some sort of mental disorder…”

It’s a nudge, a coax, a veiled threat, an invocation of fear.

“Gee, maybe I have a mental disorder and I don’t even know it.”

It softens up the population.

“If you have a mental disorder, you should get diagnosed and treated. Otherwise, later on, you could go off the rails and commit a horrible act. It’s inconsiderate and dastardly to stay outside the psychiatric system.”

With 300 official labels of such disorders, a shrink (dealer) will be more than happy to stick a label on you, and prescribe you a toxic drug to start you out.

“Let’s try Ritalin… and oh, you’re feeling sad now because the drug made you crash?…no, that’s clinical depression…here, take Zoloft…oh, and now you’re going up and down?…that’s bipolar…here, do a little Valproate…”

You’re on your way.

But at least you’re not a James Holmes. Whew. Avoided that one.

And if DARPA or the National Institutes of Health says they’re breaking ground on a new brain-mapping project (only 750 trillion neurons to catalog and explain), you’re on their side.

“Well, sure, nothing harmful about more research, go to it, boys, and bring home the bacon.”

Even the idea of using this data trove to control the mind doesn’t sound bad.

“Of course we need to control it. Look what happened at Sandy Hook when we didn’t.”

The extreme advertisement at work.

Never mind that there is no laboratory test for any of the 300 official mental disorders.

Just a minor glitch.

Never mind that all the prescribed psychiatric drugs are toxic and some actually cause violent behavior (suicide, homicide).

You’re going to see more statements about “left untreated” coming down the pipeline. As in: “We can now manage mental illness quite well. But early-stage onset, if left untreated, accumulates and grows into something far more dangerous. So we need people to recognize signs and symptoms in themselves and others (snitch culture based on nothing).”

And in case you hadn’t noticed, early onset can mean babies. That’s right. Diagnosis in younger and younger children is the trend.

You thought your two-year old was staring out the window because he was, well, staring out the window?

Not necessarily. He might be clinically depressed, in which case he’s a candidate for drugs that can make scrambled eggs out of his neurotransmitters. But it’s all in the service of science, and ensuring he doesn’t grow up to be a mass murderer.

“Yes, we have little Jimmy on Paxil. We as parents feel it’s the responsible thing to do. He’s…different these days, but our psychiatrist says he’s making progress.”

You bet little Jimmy is different, and you’re going to find out what that means later on.

But don’t worry, be happy. The shrink will assure you the bizarre drug-induced behavior is actually the spontaneous emergence of another mental disorder.

And the State will stand firmly behind that shrink. Welcome to the medical industrial complex.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

The Starfield Revelations

By Jon Rappoport

February 9, 2014

(To join our email list, click here.)

Barack Obama and his allies have done everything they can to bring more people into the US medical system. Changing that system has never occurred to these politicians.

Like much of America, they accept the cliches and slogans about American medicine. “It’s the best in the world.” “People are being denied treatment.” “We must take care of our citizens.”

How about this far more accurate slogan: “Let’s force more Americans to die in the care of doctors.”

The American healthcare system, like clockwork, causes a mind-boggling number of deaths every year.

On July 26, 2000, the US medical community received a titanic shock, when one of its most respected public-health experts, Dr. Barbara Starfield, revealed her findings on healthcare in America. Starfield was associated with the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health.

The Starfield study, “Is US health really the best in the world?”, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, came to the following conclusions:

Every year in the US there are:

* 12,000 deaths from unnecessary surgeries;

* 7,000 deaths from medication errors in hospitals;

* 20,000 deaths from other errors in hospitals;

* 80,000 deaths from infections acquired in hospitals;

* 106,000 deaths from FDA-approved correctly prescribed medicines.

The total of medically-caused deaths in the US every year is 225,000. That’s 2.25 MILLION deaths per decade.


The Starfield paper can be downloaded freely (as a .pdf) from here (via www.drug-education.info). The paper is fully cited as Starfield B. Is US health really the best in the world?. JAMA. 2000; 284(4):483-4. Dr. Barbara Starfield’s wiki page is here.


This makes the medical system the third leading cause of death in the US, behind heart disease and cancer.

The Starfield study is the most disturbing revelation about modern healthcare in America ever published in the mainstream.

On the heels of Starfield’s astonishing findings, media reporting was rather perfunctory, and it soon dwindled. No major newspaper or television network mounted an ongoing “Medicalgate” investigation. Neither the US Department of Justice nor federal health agencies undertook prolonged remedial action.

All in all, those parties who could have taken effective steps to correct this situation preferred to ignore it.


On December 6-7, 2009, I interviewed Dr. Starfield by email. Here are excerpts from that interview.

What has been the level and tenor of the response to your findings, since 2000?

The American public appears to have been hoodwinked into believing that more interventions lead to better health, and most people that I meet are completely unaware that the US does not have the ‘best health in the world’.

In the medical research community, have your medically-caused mortality statistics been debated, or have these figures been accepted, albeit with some degree of shame?

The findings have been accepted by those who study them. There has been only one detractor, a former medical school dean, who has received a lot of attention for claiming that the US health system is the best there is and we need more of it. He has a vested interest in medical schools and teaching hospitals (they are his constituency).

Have health agencies of the federal government consulted with you on ways to mitigate the [devastating] effects of the US medical system?

NO.

Since the FDA approves every medical drug given to the American people, and certifies it as safe and effective, how can that agency remain calm about the fact that these medicines are causing 106,000 deaths per year?

Even though there will always be adverse events that cannot be anticipated, the fact is that more and more unsafe drugs are being approved for use. Many people attribute that to the fact that the pharmaceutical industry is (for the past ten years or so) required to pay the FDA for reviews [of its new drugs]—which puts the FDA into an untenable position of working for the industry it is regulating. There is a large literature on this.

Aren’t your 2000 findings a severe indictment of the FDA and its standard practices?

They are an indictment of the US health care industry: insurance companies, specialty and disease-oriented medical academia, the pharmaceutical and device manufacturing industries, all of which contribute heavily to re-election campaigns of members of Congress. The problem is that we do not have a government that is free of influence of vested interests. Alas, [it] is a general problem of our society—which clearly unbalances democracy.

Can you offer an opinion about how the FDA can be so mortally wrong about so many drugs?

Yes, it cannot divest itself from vested interests. (Again, [there is] a large literature about this, mostly unrecognized by the people because the industry-supported media give it no attention.)

Would it be correct to say that, when your JAMA study was published in 2000, it caused a momentary stir and was thereafter ignored by the medical community and by pharmaceutical companies?

Are you sure it was a momentary stir? I still get at least one email a day asking for a reprint—ten years later! The problem is that its message is obscured by those that do not want any change in the US health care system.

Are you aware of any systematic efforts, since your 2000 JAMA study was published, to remedy the main categories of medically caused deaths in the US?

No systematic efforts; however, there have been a lot of studies. Most of them indicate higher rates [of death] than I calculated.

What was your personal reaction when you reached the conclusion that the US medical system was the third leading cause of death in the US?

I had previously done studies on international comparisons and knew that there were serious deficits in the US health care system, most notably in lack of universal coverage and a very poor primary care infrastructure. So I wasn’t surprised.

Did your 2000 JAMA study sail through peer review, or was there some opposition to publishing it?

It was rejected by the first journal that I sent it to, on the grounds that ‘it would not be interesting to readers’!

Do the 106,000 deaths from medical drugs only involve drugs prescribed to patients in hospitals, or does this statistic also cover people prescribed drugs who are not in-patients in hospitals?

I tried to include everything in my estimates. Since the commentary was written, many more dangerous drugs have been added to the marketplace.


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


INTERVIEWER COMMENTS:

This interview with Dr. Starfield reveals that, even when an author has unassailable credentials within the medical-research establishment, the findings can result in no changes made to the system.

Many persons and organizations within the medical system contribute to the annual death totals of patients, and media silence and public ignorance are certainly major factors, but the FDA is the assigned gatekeeper, when it comes to the safety of medical drugs.

The buck stops there. If those drugs the FDA is certifying as safe are killing, like clockwork, 106,000 people a year, the Agency must be held accountable. The American people must understand that.

As for the other 119,000 people killed every year as a result of hospital treatment, this horror has to be laid at the doors of those institutions. Further, to the degree that hospitals are regulated and financed by state and federal governments, the relevant health agencies assume culpability.

It is astounding, as well, that the US Department of Justice has failed to weigh in on Starfield’s findings. If 225,000 medically caused deaths per year is not a crime by the Dept. of Justice’s standards, then what is?

To my knowledge, not one person in America has been fired from a job or even censured as result of these medically caused deaths.

Dr. Starfield’s findings have been available for ten years. She has changed the perception of the medical landscape forever. In a half-sane nation, she would be accorded a degree of recognition that would, by comparison, make the considerable list of her awards pale. And significant and swift action would have been taken to punish the perpetrators of these crimes and reform the system from its foundations.

The pharmaceutical giants stand back and carve up the populace into “promising markets.” They seek new disease labels and new profits from more and more toxic drugs. They do whatever they can—legally or illegally—to influence doctors in their prescribing habits. Many studies which show the drugs are dangerous are buried. FDA panels are filled with doctors who have drug-company ties. Legislators are incessantly lobbied and supported with pharma campaign monies.

Nutrition, the cornerstone of good health, is ignored or devalued by most physicians. Meanwhile, the FDA continues to attack nutritional supplements, even though the overall safety record of these nutrients is excellent, whereas, once again, the medical drugs the FDA certifies as safe are killing 106,000 Americans per year.

Physicians are trained to pay exclusive homage to peer-reviewed published drug studies. These doctors unfailingly ignore the fact that, if medical drugs are killing a million Americans per decade, the studies on which those drugs are based must be fraudulent. In other words, the whole literature is suspect, unreliable, and impenetrable.

Jon Rappoport

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Keep this in mind when they try to sell you a pandemic

Keep this in mind when they try to sell you a pandemic

by Jon Rappoport

February 7, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

Researchers are making noises about a possible new pandemic. One or more variations of bird flu. And of course, in all these ramp-ups, the bottom line is: get vaccinated.

The so-called pandemics train you to obey, so you’ll take all the shots they recommend for every disease, like a good little muffin.

Seasonal flu? Pandemic flu? Meningitis? Hepatitis? Whooping cough? Measles? Polio? Martian Traveler’s Disease? Venusian Restless Leg? Gimme everything you’ve got. Inject me! Protect me!”

Here are few items to consider when the pandemic professionals start grinding out media warnings.

How many confirmed cases of the disease in question are there, at that moment? Ten? Fifty? A thousand? Out of a population of eight billion?

For example, as Peter Doshi pointed out in BMJ online, when the big push on Swine Flu started, in the spring of 2009, there were only 20 purported cases of Swine Flu. Twenty. (BMJ Online, v.339, b3471)

This is a pandemic?

The mere claim that “a novel virus,” never before seen, has emerged in humans is NOT a slam-dunk for a pandemic. Not by a long shot.

Swine flu was supposed to be one of those, and it was a dud. The number of deaths reported was far lower than the numbers traditionally reported for seasonal flus.

Number 2, how are doctors or researchers testing patients to confirm they have “pandemic flu?” This is a big issue. If, for example it’s antibody testing, they’re conning you straight out. Why? Because the presence of antibodies (a scouting component of the immune system) is not a sure sign that the person has been ill, is ill now, or will become ill.

Antibodies only indicate a person has contacted the virus in question. That’s it. And until the mid-1980s, when the science was turned upside down for no good reason, a positive antibody test was normally taken to mean the person’s immune system was healthy and had kicked out the virus.

If doctors and researchers are testing people for some purported pandemic virus using the PCR method, there are other problems. The PCR is a procedure that takes tiny, tiny fragments of organic matter from a patient and amplifies them, blows them up, so they can be recognized and read.

However, there is no sure-fire guarantee these fragments are really pieces of viruses. And if the original extraction of such organic material yielded so little from the patient, how on earth would one assume it was causing illness?

Which brings us to the next point. In determining whether a patient has some pandemic illness, and especially early in the game when researchers are still trying to figure out what’s going on, they need to actually isolate that virus from the patient and show it is present in huge numbers in his body. Otherwise, there is no reason to infer the virus is causing disease.

The purported cases of flu in patients could be coming from a number of different factors. A person might be ill as a result of: toxic chemicals, environmental or pharmaceutical; nutritional deficits; stress; parasites, etc.

The biggest issue is: the strength or weakness of that person’s immune system.


The Matrix Revealed


In devastated areas, where poverty, contaminated water supplies, starvation, lack of basic sanitation, and overcrowding are chronic, many germs can sweep through the population and cause death, because these people’s immune systems are shot, compromised, on the way out, and can’t defend against the germs.

The same germs, in an affluent area, would cause little harm.

The bottom-line is, to know what is making a person ill, you have to examine that person for many different factors. You can’t just say, “Well, we found a virus in him and therefore that’s why he is sick.”

That’s not science, that’s hype. That’s not research, that’s PR.


Exit From the Matrix


As the hype expands and health agencies like the CDC and WHO announce there are thousands of cases of pandemic flu and deaths, they don’t tell you how they’re counting.

That’s a gross omission. For instance, in the summer of 2009, the CDC stopped testing patients who walked into clinics and hospitals with generalized “flu symptoms.” The CDC just assumed they were all suffering from Swine Flu. CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson reported this fact and it caused a firestorm, until the story was cut off at the knees by the CBS news division.

You want to know what really happens when so-called flu patients are tested?

Here’s a quote from Peter Doshi’s BMJ review, “Influenza: marketing vaccines by marketing disease” (BMJ 2013; 346:f3037):

…most ‘flu’ appears to have nothing to do with influenza. Every year, hundreds of thousands of respiratory specimens are tested across the US. Of those tested, on average 16% are found to be influenza positive.”

Boom.

Doshi then states: “…It’s no wonder so many people feel that ‘flu shots’ don’t work: for most flus, they can’t.”

In other words, even if you believe in vaccines, even if you think they’re wonderful and the world would collapse without them, when it comes to the flu, things are not what they seem. 84% of supposed or suspected or diagnosed flu patients are falsely labeled. Even by loose conventional standards, they don’t have the flu. It’s a mirage.

Jon Rappoport

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Vaccines-aluminum-autism: but don’t worry, go back to sleep

Vaccines-aluminum-autism: but don’t worry, go back to sleep

by Jon Rappoport

February 6, 2014

www.nomorefakenews.com

Christina England, writing at vactruth.com, has the story: “This Study Reveals Children are Being Vaccinated With Toxic Levels of Aluminum Causing Neurological Damage and Autism.”

Here are quotes from her article:

“A recent study conducted by Canadian scientists Professor Christopher Shaw and Dr. Lucija Tomljenovic revealed that the more vaccines that children receive containing the adjuvant [additive] aluminum, the greater their chance is of developing autism, autoimmune diseases and neurological problems in the future.

“In 2013, in their paper, published by Springer Science+Business Media, titled Aluminum in the Central Nervous System: Toxicity in Humans and Animals, Vaccine Adjuvants, and Autoimmunity, they revealed that during a 17-year period, the rates of autism had increased significantly in countries that had the most vaccinations containing the adjuvant aluminum.

“The researchers compared the number of vaccines recommend by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) during the period from 1991 – 2008 and the changes in the autism rates during the same period. They wrote:

‘The data sets, graphed against each other, show a pronounced and statistically highly significant correlation between the number vaccines with aluminum and the changes in autism rates. Further data showed that a significant correlation exists between the amounts of aluminum given to preschool children and the current rates of autism in seven Western countries. Those countries with the highest level of aluminum-adjuvanted vaccines had the highest autism rates.‘”

Later in the article, we find a list of vaccines whose aluminum content is high: DtaP (diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis); Hepatitis A; Hepatitis B (given to babies at birth); PedVaxHib (for meningitis); HPV; Pediarix (DtaP-Hepatitis B-polio); Pentacel (DtaP-Hib-polio); Pneumococcus. The list is not presented as exhaustive. Other vaccines may contain high levels of aluminum.


The Matrix Revealed


This correlation between aluminum in vaccines and autism is more than disturbing. But vaccine manufacturers and their government allies have a counter-argument ready at all times:

“Correlation alone is not enough. There may be other undiscovered causes for autism. And unless the exact series of events by which aluminum in vaccines causes autism is shown, the anti-vaccine case is dismissed and ignored.”

Then, if researchers provide some details for that chain of causation, the vaccine companies will say: “The chain is still incomplete. It has gaps. We need more details.”

And so forth and so on. Whenever new elements emerge demonstrating a causal chain, they will be rejected on the same basis: “Not enough. Still lacking. Imprecise.”

You should read about a researcher named Tyrone Hayes (twitter), who for years has been making a compelling case against the Syngenta herbicide/pesticide atrazine. At each step of the way, as Hayes exposes more of the toxic story, he’s told, by Syngenta and the EPA, “It’s not enough. You’re not demonstrating the causal connection between atrazine and human illness.”

On the other hand, when it suits them, researchers and government agencies will accept correlation and run with it. A most challenging example is the field of retroviral illness:

“Well, we don’t know everything about which cells in the body the virus is attacking. It’s hiding. It’s clever. It sits there for a long time, quiescent, and then it strikes. We do know that when people harbor the virus, they will eventually get sick…”

Pharma players and governments operate on both sides of the fence, adjusting their positions to mesh with their agendas.

They’ll say, “The correlation is overwhelming. We don’t need to know anything else.”

Or they’ll say, “Correlation is never adequate. You have to show each and every step in the causal chain of events.”

It’s a game. It’s a crime. And people are treated and suffer the toxic destructive consequences.

Oh, and one more thing. Aluminum is known to be toxic to the human body, especially when it’s injected. So whether you call its effects autism or Alzheimer’s or delayed development or a number of other names, what’s the difference?

Poison is poison.

Jon Rappoport

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com