Month: April 2001

Medical Profession & “Business As Usual”

Ushering in The “Golden Age” of Chiropractic
by Sid Mouk, D.C.

Opportunity #2
The Medical Profession Is Still Doing “Business As Usual”

Basic thinking in medicine seems to have always been that the human body is a poorly designed mechanical structure that is prone to breakdowns and attacks from without (with several unneeded parts such as the tonsils, the appendix, the gall bladder, the uterus after a certain age, etc.). The MD’s tend to think of themselves as the only ones who can repair this easily broken-down machine and protect it from these ever increasing attacks coming from the environment. The majority of medical doctors in this country still believe in and practice this absurd philosophy.

The world of healing and life philosophy is changing rapidly but the medical profession is changing very slowly (as usual) and the world is not willing to wait for it to change. The MD’s, with a few exceptions such as Andrew Weil, are still doing business as usual — apparently hoping against hope that the world will “come to its senses” and come back to their way of thinking. They’re going to be sadly mistaken and, at the rate they’re going, they will inevitably be washed into the backwaters of healing by the incredible tide of change that is sweeping this planet. Most MD’s continue the gross overuse of drugs and surgery and we see the results of this tragedy throughout the US, especially in every nursing home. People on 8 to 10 or more drugs, simply existing without any dignity while their body rapidly breaks down (quite probably more from the toxicity of the drugs than from old age), they progressively lose control of their bodily functions, and their minds go off into la-la land — and we are told that this is all a part of the “aging process.” No Way! The medical profession as a whole has not learned that the principles which served them well in applying First Aid do not work and will never work in the treatment of dis-ease or disease. They end up continually “chasing symptoms” — which is often needed in First-Aid work to save lives — and, as a result, their patients become grossly over-medicated (we once worked with a patient who was on 16 different prescription drugs–and was getting sicker every day.)

Not only do we continue to see the tragedies of the nursing homes and the worsening health of all the people in this country, but it is reliably estimated that 120,000 to 200,000 people die each year in the US from the taking of prescription drugs. Not from taking the wrong drugs, but from the taking of drugs that have been prescribed for them. That’s the equivalent of a fully loaded 747 airplane crashing with no survivors every day of the year. Can you imagine the public outcry against the airline companies if that were to actually take place? And yet, the public remains totally unaware of this situation and, as a result, never makes a fuss about it. However, it’s only a matter of time before this kind of information does get to the public.

There has also recently been a stir in Congress about the large number of medical mistakes that take so many lives each year in this country. MD’s are working with powerful poisons (drugs) and mistakes can so often be disabling and/or fatal. How sad if even one person dies because they were prescribed a drug that was not even necessary and then a fatal mistake was made in administering it.

We all realize one thing, the drugs of the medical establishment are poisons — plain and simple. At a recent surgical conference, it was revealed that the need for liver transplants is increasing rapidly in this country — and that the major cause of this dramatic increase is the taking of large doses of Tylenol. And yet we now see the big drug companies being allowed to advertise directly to the public on TV in an apparent attempt to pressure MD’s to prescribe even more drugs for their patients.

So the majority of M.D.’s continue to be a part of the problem (if not the entire problem) and not a part of the solution to the problem. The world has passed them by and most of them are not even aware of it. Which leaves the leadership of the field of Healing wide open for the Chiropractic profession. All we have to do is to “Listen” and “Learn” the powerful philosophy of Chiropractic and the healing techniques that this profession has to offer, and then JUST DO IT!!! The world is waiting for us.

Dr. Sid Mouk
—–
Post Office Box 66483
Baton Rouge, LA 70896
[email protected]
225-924-6533

planetc1.com-news @ 7:31 am | Article ID: 987604274

Children, Drug Research & Dollars

By Michael Dorausch, D.C.

Are clinical drug trials involving children the right thing to do?

Perhaps you have heard the news, more drugs are now being tested on kids in the U.S. since a 1997 law was passed giving pharmaceutical companies greater incentive to do so. Some in the medical community, along with parents, question whether testing is focused more on dollars rather than children’s health.

Today’s Los Angeles Times features an article titled, “Putting Children to the Test” and it talks about the risks and dilemmas associated with having kids participate in drug testing.

An interesting point brought up in the article is that if a drug is being tested for the first time, how do you know what side effects may result? As an example, the article sites the drug Propulsid, which was involved in a study for gastroesophageal reflux in 1999. According to the FDA, 24 children undergoing treatment, died.

There is also quite a bit of information regarding the question of profiting from child drug testing. The Times article suggests, “establishing separate pediatric research facilities is a lucrative business move on the part of many hospitals.” Several U.S. children’s hospitals are reportedly creating such facilities.

There is a lot of good information in the article and I suggest you read it. The link will be below along with some other related articles you may not have seen before.

Coming from a medical perspective I hope I can understand correctly the “dilemma” which parents and doctors face. Do we give untested drugs to children or do we test the drugs on those children? In both cases we are potentially risking the child’s health and/or life. That’s two choices from a medical view. Now suppose there is another choice, let’s call that choice C.

In choice C, a child is raised in an environment in which they have never had a drug, quite possibly have never been in a hospital, and may very likely never be exposed to drugs unless a crisis situation arose that required their use. Is that child at greater or lesser risk when it comes to drug testing on children?

Here are some related topics that I was able to gather on the subject. The first is from the Boston Globe and asks, Should a Healthy Child Ever Be a Test Subject? A quote from the article reads, “The biggest question is whose children are being sought as subjects. Do those who profit from research volunteer their own children?”

The second is also from the Boston Globe and is titled, Drug Research on Children Raises Concerns. This article contains a questionnaire to help in asking about signing children up for a clinical trial. One of the questions is… “Is the researcher being paid by the drug maker to recruit or test my child? Does the researcher have a personal financial stake in the outcome of the tests?”

L.A. Time article link: Putting Children to the Test

planetc1.com-news @ 11:58 am | Article ID: 987447524

Unvaccinated Victim Of Medical Hysteria

By Tim O’Shea, D.C.

In every state of the union except two, parents have the legal right to exempt their children from all vaccinations. Whether or not anyone disagrees with their decision is immaterial to that right. In light of the social and political opposition to such a choice, parents who would embark upon such a course of action often have to face much greater obstacles than just learning about the dangers of vaccines. The parents can be victimized by uninformed people in authority who think they can enforce their own illegal opinions upon the public.

Dr. (name witheld) and Dr. (name witheld) recently found themselves in just such a situation. They have a nine year old son, (name witheld), who is in the fifth grade at a local school here in San Jose, California. On 27 Feb 01, they get a call from the principal of the school, with whom they have a good relationship. The principal informs them that they have a choice: either (name witheld) must be put back into the fourth grade class, or else he must be kept at home, indefinitely. Reason: (name witheld)’s teacher is pregnant and her ob/gyn has just informed her and the principal that being exposed to an unvaccinated child would place her fetus at risk of birth defects.

This is a reference to the extremely rare possibility of birth defects supposedly possible for a woman who contracts rubella in the first four months of pregnancy. The pregnant teacher had been vaccinated for rubella, with the standard MMR shot.

Not wishing their child to retrogress by being put down a grade, the parents opted to keep the child at home. For the next week they agonized about the situation, trying to find some legal or scientific way out of the dilemma. It was shocking and baffling to them that their child could be suddenly deprived of his education just because they had exercised their legal right not to vaccinate.

During this time the parents contacted the Santa Clara County Health Department to see what its stance was. The department responded immediately with a letter which stated that in all of Santa Clara County there have only been two cases of rubella since 1992, with the exception of a small epidemic that occurred in a local jail. Two cases in 9 years – in a county with over a million people.

The letter goes on to quote California Health and Safety Codes, Section 12035, that provides for a child to be excluded from school if he has been exposed to a communicable disease. And in this case, Santa Clara County Health Dept. stated that obviously “there is no reason to believe an exposure to rubella has occurred.”

Still the school persisted in excluding the child. The principal was relying on the incorrect and wildly unscientific opinion of the ob/gyn who had sent the school a letter apparently claiming that there was a high likelihood of birth defects from (name witheld) being in the same classroom with the vaccinated pregnant teacher. The parents were at their wit’s end, and were given no time estimate about how long this arbitrary and illegal exclusion was to continue.

Finally on 6 Mar 01, the principal called from school and informed the Drs. (name witheld) that (name witheld) could now come back to school because the teacher had left, apparently at the advice of the ob/gyn. It seems likely that the school’s lawyers had informed the principal of the school’s tenuous legal position in excluding a legally exempted and perfectly healthy child from attending school.

So now everything is fine, right? This family has to suffer great emotional trauma and the child loses part of his education while those in authority figure out what the law is. No harm, no foul, right?

Let’s take a closer look at what really happened here. The unconscionable situation that this doctor imagines he can arbitrarily impose upon these parents calls up two areas of concern:

Issues of Law & Issues of Science

Law
Article 3 Section 6025 of the California Health and Safety Code reads as follows

“Any pupil age 18 months or older who has received all the immunizations – required for his/her age .. or who has documented a permanent medical exemption or a permanent beliefs exemption to immunization – shall be admitted unconditionally as a pupil to a given public or private elementary or secondary school, [or] child care center.”

This law is very clear. These parents have signed the California exemption form, as provided by state and federal law. These laws are not subject to interpretation by unilateral, arbitrary self-appointed guardians of the public health. The issues of exemption from vaccination have been decided in meticulous detail by the US Dept of Public Health, as well as by the state of California Department of Health and Safety, after years of study. This doctor seeks to place himself above state and federal law by imagining that he has had some new insight into the whole med-legal arena of immunization which heretofore has never occurred to any of the experts, and luckily he has arrived just in time to save us.

Such hubris is egregious enough in itself, but what is even more remarkable is that the school principal followed this ill-considered course of action without question, and immediately removed the child from the classroom. This action is a second, independent decision for which the school may now bear responsibility and liability for violations of these parents’ rights to education without discrimination.

Outside New York City there is an attorney named James Filenbaum, who specializes in cases involving violations of parents’ rights to exemption from immunization and in vaccine damages compensation cases. In a recent telephone conversation with Mr. Filenbaum, (845-357-0020), discussing the case of (name witheld) (name witheld), Mr. Filenbaum explained some of the possible dangers such a school may be looking at by relying on an incorrect and untenable medical opinion. For a school to deprive a perfectly healthy child of his legal right to education because of some highly speculative and very eccentric medical opinions may violate civil rights that are specifically defined in federal law (Federal Title 28, Section 1983).

Science
The doctor’s position may be summarized as follows: he has the notion that since the teacher is pregnant, she is susceptible to getting rubella from the unvaccinated child, and thus of transferring the disease to her unborn fetus, resulting in a likelihood of birth defects. And this is in spite of the fact that the teacher herself has been vaccinated with MMR.

Trying to follow the logic of such reasoning is a daunting task. Since the teacher is vaccinated, shouldn’t that make her immune to the disease? If she is immune to the disease, what difference does it make even if this child gets the disease? Wasn’t that the purpose of the vaccine – to protect her from the disease? So now the doctor wants the child to be vaccinated with that same vaccine in order to protect the child from the disease, right? But if vaccination didn’t protect the teacher, why would it protect the student?

First of all, this doctor is creating undue hysteria by imagining multiple events each of which has only a remote possibility of occurring alone. The chances of them occurring in sequence is geometrically infinitesimal. Those events are

1. That the child will get rubella in the next few weeks, before the teacher becomes 4 months pregnant.

2. That the teacher would catch rubella from the child before he stayed home sick.

3. That the teacher would spread the disease to the fetus, and that would cause a birth defect.

Let’s look at the first one. The student is not sick now. In his county of a million people, there have been only two cases of rubella in the past 9 years. What are the chances that (name witheld) gets rubella in the next few weeks? Very small – much less than Maverick making an inside straight. Incidence of rubella in the US is now at its lowest rate in history. (Merck, p237) The rare dangers of a mother getting rubella during pregnancy are only in the first 16 weeks, as far as a fetus is concerned. (Merck, p 2185) The teacher is already at 12 weeks. So what are the chances of this healthy student being one of the two in a million cases of rubella in 9 years during the next four weeks? You couldn’t place the bet!

One can’t help but wonder – where would (name witheld) get the rubella from if all the other kids in the school are vaccinated? Doesn’t their vaccination work?

Now for the second event — the teacher catches rubella from the student. But how could that happen? She’s already been vaccinated. And let’s not forget the prime fact here: this child is totally healthy. It would take a lot more than medical paranoia to make him sick.

Finally the third event — birth defects. What are the chances? According to the latest edition of the Merck Manual, the chances of birth defects are less than 3% as a result of the mother getting the vaccine during early pregnancy. (Merck, p 2328) The chances of birth defects from the mother contracting natural rubella disease are so low they have not been calculated. No figure is even estimated in Merck.

So taking all three of these events together, they would all have to happen in sequence in order for this student to cause a birth defect in this teacher’s fetus. Such a likelihood is astronomically low. The chances are much greater that the woman would be killed in an auto accident during the same time period. It would make more sense to take away her driver’s license.

Let’s introduce some rational discourse into this overblown situation. Virtually all medical sources agree that rubella has historically been a mild, self-limiting disease of childhood which required no treatment. Most boomers got the diseases, had slight discomfort for a week, and now have full immunity for life.

In the early 60s, along came the MMR vaccine, a trivalent that was never tested as such. (Wakefield) Mendelsohn estimates an 85% immunity to this mild disease before the vaccine was introduced. So they needed a selling point – a big scare. Suddenly with no solid statistics of incidence, the remote possibility of fetal damage became the slogan that won FDA approval and inclusion into the mandated schedule. Since then we’ve never looked back.

All these shenanigans still wouldn’t be so bad if the vaccine were harmless. Unfortunately that’s not the case. Even Merck admits that the vaccine only confers immunity for “about 11 years.” That’s not immunity. Real immunity is for life. Real immunity is something only the human body can create after getting a disease. The problem with rubella is that the vaccinated can still contract rubella after the artificial immunity wears off. But by that time they’re usually adults, and the atypical version is a much more serous disease in adulthood.

Remember, atypical rubella is a manmade disease; it never existed before the vaccine.

The other problem with the vaccine is side effects. Here is a partial list of rubella vaccine side effects taken from the 2001 Physicians Desk Reference, page 1967:

Fever, Syncope, Headache, Dizziness, Vasculitis, Diarrhea, Vomiting, Nausea, Thrombocytopenia, Leukocytosis, Lymphadenopathy, Anaphylaxis, Bronchiosopasm, Arthritis, Myalgia, Encephalitits, Paresthesia, Guillain Barre, Skin Rash, Burning at injection site, Death

Don’t believe this? Good. Check the references, and the rest of the discussion that follows in The Sanctity of Human Blood. You may be surprised to learn that we traded a mild disease that has been around for centuries causing very little trouble for a serious mutation that is doing its part in the de-evolution of the human genome.

The premier Australian researcher in the area of vaccinations is of course Viera Scheibner, PhD. Viera hammers home the most devastating side effect of
experimental vaccines like MMR and DPT. Worse than the above list of side effects, even including the occasional death, is the evolutionary cul de sac in which our disregard of the scientific method is enmiring us. Viera likens what vaccines are doing to overall human DNA – our genome – to making a Xerox of a Xerox of a Xerox of something. Look at it after 10 generations. Then 50. Constant de-evolution, diluting, and weakening the DNA that took our species a million years to evolve. Truly messing with the good stuff.

So what do we learn from case of (name witheld) (name witheld)? It is hoped that we will learn the rules, the rules of law and the rules of science that come to bear on this situation. These parents had a sovereign right to choose not to vaccinate their son. Even those of us who may not agree with that decision had better agree at least to their right to make it. Because those personal freedoms that we do not defend are inexorably eroded away, day by day, by a thousand little media slurs, and a thousand shrugged shoulders. What would be the chances of the first 10 Amendments making it through Congress today? Slim to none. Most people don’t even know what the Bill of Rights is. We were the only country in the history of the world that would even consider placing all that freedom, all that power in the hands of the people. And now? Most Americans seem to think it’s fine to hand these hard-won, precious rights back to the government, because they’re too busy to educate themselves about the principles involved.

Study vaccines? That’s my doctor’s job. I can’t be bothered to learn what’s good for my children, and to demand it. Right to choose chiropractic care? That’s up to my insurance. I can’t be bothered to learn what’s good for my body, and to demand it.

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

Tim O’Shea, D.C.
—–
Dr. Tim is the author of “The Sanctity of Human Blood: Vaccination is Not Immunization”
Click here to buy the book.

planetc1.com-news @ 8:40 am | Article ID: 987435631

Where Should Chiropractic Be?

By Dr. James Sigafoose

Where should the Texas Chiropractic Association be in five years? One national organization to protect this profession, create a profession that is truly portal of entry, primary care physician that most of us want? Training for pharmaceuticals, etc…

In 10 years, entrenched as the family practitioner being recognized by the medics, dispensing drugs, setting fractures, performing iv therapies, be able to suture and cast etc… Is this just the desire of the Texas people, or the whole profession?

Since the schools quit teaching chiropractic, and our associations have been un-interested in the philosophy and principle of chiropractic, and our coaches and mentors seem to be interested in only how to make more money or see more people, will chiropractic exist in 10 years as chiropractic or as allopathic medicine called chiropractic?

We need more people in the Systems and the Gathering. We need more people at D.E., New Beginnings, and Parker programs. We need more people at Rob Schiffmans and Sharon Gormans meetings, then maybe we can salvage principled chiropractic, for our future offspring, and the welfare of the world.

It all starts with YOU, unless you don’t care about Chiropractic as it was and is meant to be. Call me about a great info-mercial that talks chiropractic 410 272-4349. If it is to be it’s up to me. – Sigafoose

planetc1.com-news @ 8:39 am | Article ID: 987435595

Planet Chiropractic Forum is Back!

By Michael Dorausch, D.C.

It has been nearly a year since the Planet Chiropractic forum was taken down from the site. I was not prepared for the amount of work involved and the original forum pages eventually went un-maintained.

After months of your requests for a place to discuss topics ranging from news articles, vaccine issues, and help with the audio and video on the site, I have finally gotten around to getting the forum back online again. Those of you that had registered user accounts will need to re-register if you plan to use the registered areas.

This new forum is currently a work in progress so please be patient as the topic areas evolve into active communities. Several factors prompted me to bring back the forum and a few are:

Your News Feedback
I get emails everyday (many regarding news articles) and very often the same questions are asked. With teamwork, the forum will provide a way for you to communicate with the authors of news articles, ask news related questions, get sources for articles, etc…

Your Help Questions
While I try and respond quickly to emails regarding audio and video on the site, (you really are missing out if you can’t listen) I do urge you to begin posting your questions to the new Help: Multimedia forum so that others can hopefully find answers to their questions and possibly even assist you with your questions.

Coaches & Speakers
Several chiropractors, chiropractic coaches and speakers have offered to host specific forums on the site. This will provide a great way for you to open discussions related to office procedures, technique, pediatrics, Chiropractic Assistant programs, etc…

If you have particular people or ideas in mind, post them to the forum so that we can get started on this. I am on the road for the next month and will be speaking with those I would like to see host specific groups. I’d like to get this started soon.

Non DCs
Many folks come to planet chiropractic and send me emails asking questions about chiropractic. This is an area in which I think many of you could assist me in getting their questions answered in a prompt and professional manner.

That’s it for now, there is more to discuss but currently I just need your input so I can add the categories that you are requesting. So what are you waiting for? Click Here to visit the discussion forum and leave me a message.

Post a Topic!

planetc1.com-news @ 8:26 pm | Article ID: 987391563

An Autism & Vaccine Link

Originally Posted Via – VRAN- Vaccination Risk Awareness Network (Canada)

“When you have a child you realize that your heart now walks around outside your body.”

Dr. Edward Yazbak has done a lot of work with mothers who received live virus vaccines either just before and during pregnancy, and postpartum. He found that rubella virus is transmitted to the infant in breastmilk, and can heighten a baby’s risk of developing autism spectrum disorders if he/she is subsequently vaccinated. Our recent newsletter reported on his lecture on this topic given at the NVIC Conference last September. For more insight into Dr. Yazbak’s work, please refer to Gary Null’s website.

Dr. F. Edward Yazbak, MD – Maternal Vaccination – Before During and After Pregnancy – opens a new area of research that begins to explore the impact of vaccinations given to mothers, and the disastrous cascade of events that follow when infants are pre-sensitized. Dr. Yazbak was a pediatrician in private practice and also worked as a school physician in Rhode Island for 35 years where he assisted the department of health in coordinating mass vaccination campaigns against polio, measles and meningitis.

“The group of children we have now is the most vaccinated group ever. We have never seen more children vaccinated with more vaccines than the ones that are living right now. But more importantly, and this is where my study comes in, the mothers of these children are the most vaccinated ever, and have the most immune diseases ever in the history of the world.”

Dr. Yazbak showed a photo of a beautiful baby – his grandson, saying, “I can assure you this boy does not have any chromosomal aberrations or metabolic defects. He has one problem though. He has already received two hepatitis B shots, that unfortunately, with shame, I gave to him.” He talked with passion about his grandson, who on returning to France was given 3 more hepatitis B shots because the French authorities refused to believe he had already been vaccinated. “But we had to wait for the MMR – four weeks after the MMR, the life is gone – the eyes are gone. So anyone who comes and tells me that MMR did not precipitate this disease, I’d be glad to talk with them.”

In a voice laden with emotion, Dr. Yazbak showed another slide of his grandson eight weeks after the MMR saying “This picture shows the full throws of an immune insult. He is fighting – look at his face – he is fighting. Eight weeks after his MMR shot he is gone. This boy is a hero. He went to Royal Free Hospital in July 1999, and was diagnosed with what you have heard about from Dr. Wakefield – autistic enterocolitis.”

His grandson’s vaccine injury has inspired Dr. Yazbak to find out why some children are predisposed to developing autism. Dr. Yazbak’s daughter had postulated that the mother who needs to be re-vaccinated in adulthood because of failing or absent antibodies to a vaccine she has already received denotes that she has an immune problem and predisposes her children to autism, proving two things – that if in the future we find women who have been vaccinated and have no titers, or have developed titers and have lost them, we should not revaccinate them and that the problem is not with the vaccine, but with the recipient, the vaccinee.

Dr. Yazbak devised a questionnaire that was posted on the internet by Dawn Richardson, president of PROVE (Parents Requesting Open Vaccine Education). He received 400 responses in a few weeks. “Very quickly I realized that some women had been vaccinated just around pregnancy with disastrous results.” His research has focused on what happens to children whose mothers have been vaccinated before or during pregnancy and shortly after birth. The vaccine challenge to the mother’s immune system can subsequently impact on her children, predisposing them to immune and neurological insult when they themselves are then vaccinated in infancy and childhood.

He talked about immune fragility around pregnancy. Women whose rubella titers have declined are told they should get rubella vaccine after birth but are not told that the live rubella virus is secreted in her milk. The immunological consequences to infants exposed to live rubella virus during breastfeeding, and who are then subsequently vaccinated with live virus vaccine has not been studied, until Dr. Yazbak began to investigate these cases. Not a single woman of the 400 he studied was informed that rubella virus passes through to the baby in her breast milk. According to Merck’s product monograph, it is not known whether live measles and mumps virus is also secreted during lactation, but caution is urged during nursing.

“What happens to women that are vaccinated postpartum? This is what I have found – totally new findings. Several healthy mothers get vaccinated and horrible things begin to happen. They develop symptoms of arthritis, of thyroid, and other immune difficulties, but more importantly they start having still births and miscarriages. I’m saying this for the first time. I’m relating obstetrical failure to immune insults from a vaccine. After all this is said and done, they are still rubella and measles susceptible and even worse, they have an unbelievable incidence of autism in their children, plus other disabilities. So we have to have serious studies that look at the immune fragility of women around pregnancy. This is not a good time to give vaccines to anybody. She has enough on her mind having a baby.”

As an example of what can happen when the mother’s immune system has been tampered with, Dr. Yazbak related the tragic events in one family. This mother’s first pregnancy resulted in a daughter who is now 22 years old, in good health and in college.

Her second child, a boy, died at the age of three months of SIDS which Dr. Yazbak emphasized is a huge red flag for immune problems. Her next child a boy was born in 1979. The following day, the mother received an MMR vaccine.

The boy was breastfed for six months and received his first MMR vaccine at 15 months. “The circuit closes and he now develops autism at the age of 18 months – bang! bang! We’re now starting to see that when the child gets the MMR, it closes the circuit – that’s the concept.” The child stopped talking – he became withdrawn, refused to be held, and reacted to any change with severe temper tantrums. Simultaneously, he also started with prolonged diarrhea. His chromosomal analysis is normal.

“Then this mother has two children, age 17 and 19 with serious learning disabilities. And then this poor woman has three boys back to back with diagnosed PDD (pervasive developmental disorder) with reduced IQ’s. And things don’t stop there. She then she gives birth to a small preemie, a little girl with hypo-plastic left heart syndrome. She has only one kidney, she lives two days and then she dies. The family history, after a very extensive workup, on both sides is totally negative for autism and the mother’s chromosomal studies were normal.”

In the following case, Dr. Yazbak draws our attention to breastfed babies’ vulnerability on exposure to live rubella virus in their mother’s milk. “This mother who was born in 1953 delivered her first child in November 1984 and was given a rubella vaccine shortly thereafter. This girl was not breastfed and is normal. The mother then had three miscarriages before conceiving her second child, a boy who was born 9/8/1987. Again the mother was given a rubella vaccine shortly after delivery, and this time she breastfed her baby for four months. This child develops autism after getting an MMR. The third child, a daughter was born on 11/28/1988. The mother was given yet a third postpartum rubella booster and also breastfed this child who now has severe dyslexia, ADHD and learning disabilities. This woman was given 3 rubella vaccines within 4 years.

The CDC (Center for Disease Control and Prevention in the U.S) recommends that women be screened prenatally for rubella susceptibility, and should be vaccinated post partum to ‘protect’ them in future pregnancies from contracting rubella. It cautions that women should not be vaccinated during pregnancy with a live virus vaccine, and should not be vaccinated 1-3 months before pregnancy. Dr. Yazbak revealed that they had conducted a registry of vaccines given in pregnancy for 17 years – “a huge registry, in which they wanted to look at the possibility of the vaccine causing congenital rubella syndrome. In 17 years, they found no cases of damage from the vaccine. But they were ONLY look for congenital rubella syndrome”, not for any other health problems that could have arisen from vaccinating pregnant women.

Dr. Yazbak soon found 18 cases of women who were vaccinated around pregnancy. Every one of them but one, had serious, disastrous results. “The first one was a woman who had been previously vaccinated, and received an MMR in college and another one in post graduate training and was still measles susceptible. They then proceeded to give her another MMR shot when she was pregnant with twins. One infant was stillborn, and the other child also had problems with sensory integration difficulties, and multiple social difficulties also. After all this, the mother is still susceptible. So this woman was given more vaccine – 6 measles vaccines and she is still susceptible.”

“The following one is a disastrous case. This woman had a premature baby, and the obstetrician said, “next time you’re pregnant we’re going to put a band around your cervix.” She gets pregnant, and at 13 weeks he takes her in to put a band around her cervix, and gives her a rubella vaccine. Fourteen weeks later, she delivers a premature baby girl – a very stormy start and the baby is in intensive care with two bouts of sepsis, one bout of necrotizing enterocolitis, continuous apnea spells, continuous bradychardiac problems – bells and sirens ringing as these things are happening. In the middle of all this, the baby is injected with the first shot of vaccines. She survived the first set. The second one almost killed her causing hyporesponsive- hyporeflexive attacks. Eventually the baby is sent home on oxygen and monitors, and very quickly is noted to have developmental delays, and had early onset autism (autism that sets in before the age of one).”

He spoke of 76 women he has been studying who were vaccinated around pregnancy. “Fifty eight of these mothers have children with ASD (autistic spectrum disorders) diagnosed. 76% of the total number are diagnosed with ASD, and another 13% are on their way to be diagnosed, and of these, I know already that a good 12% have been diagnosed already. These children have the same findings involving the gut as Dr. Wakefield has found in England. Four mothers have other problems, and one mother has an intact and only daughter.”

“There are 9 mothers who were vaccinated before conception, and 9 who were vaccinated during pregnancy. Of the first group, 8 received the MMR vaccine – 7 had children with autism, of which there were 6 boys and one girl. Five of these had early onset autism, before the age of 7 months. One boy had severe developmental delay and will be diagnosed with autism very soon. The ninth mother who received rubella vaccine had a girl with decreased muscle tone, and hypotonic – nothing serious, and is not autistic.”

“This is a very important group because for the very first time, I’m revealing to you that measles vaccine causes more trouble than rubella vaccine if given pre-conception. This has never been reported before. Now in the second group, nine mothers were vaccinated during pregnancy. Two had MMR, three had the measles, three had the rubella, and the last one who went to Thailand was bitten by a dog and was given live virus rabies vaccine. After two shots, she realized she was pregnant and the vaccine was discontinued. Seven of these children had early onset autism (5 boys and two girls), and two have ASD.”

“Of the 76 cases, there are 18 who were vaccinated around conception, and 58 just after delivery. Thirty mothers had the MMR and 28 had the rubella vaccine. Forty four had children with autism – either regular autism, Asperger’s syndrome or PDD – 76%. Nine had children with developmental delays and severe ADHD, four had children with immune and other difficulties, and one had the girl who was not breastfed and is intact. Thank God I have one child in my study who is okay.”

“Let us look at those 44 with autism. Twenty resulted from that pregnancy, and 23 from the following pregnancy. In one case the woman had two children, the one just before the vaccination and the following one. Looking at postpartum cases only, I’m looking at 20 mothers with only one child. Thirteen out of twenty have diagnosed autism, and 4 are ready to be diagnosed, and I’m sure will be diagnosed. Two have immune issues, and the last one is that pretty girl that thank God came out scott free.”

“Now what happens to subsequent children – here you are. Thirty eight mothers had more than one child. Twenty three out of 38 have been diagnosed with autism. These are horrible numbers!!! Four have developmental delays, 3 have immunological issues, and 10 were normal. There were two sets of twins, so there is a total of 40, not 38. There are always more boys affected than girls.”

“Breastfeeding after the mother has received live virus vaccine is dangerous to the baby – it’s not the fault of the breastfeeding – but you cannot breastfeed and be vaccinated. So the best thing you can do is Do Not Get Vaccinated If You Want To Breastfeed.”

He spoke of another tragic case of a woman who is HIV positive, and according to HIV protocol, she has to get MMR every 2 -3 years. “They give her the first one when she was 3 months pregnant. The child is born and has no HIV, but they give him an MMR at the age of six months –although there is absolutely no need – but he is on the HIV protocol. At 18 months they give him another one and he becomes autistic at two years. Then the mother has 2 miscarriages, is pregnant again and has to get another MMR. This is what happens when the mother has immune problems – she gets vaccinated again and again and her child develops autism -and she now has lupus.”

“In summary, this presentation shows you an evident connection between live virus vaccination. Vaccination of women with live virus vaccine is contraindicated just before and during pregnancy and any doctor who vaccinates women in such conditions should be sued for malpractice. He should be sued – he should be put in jail! The next one is postpartum vaccination, which until now, by everybody standards was okay. I’m telling you today it is risky and it should be stopped immediately.”

Dr. Yazbak called for research to launch large independent studies to examine the autism vaccine link in the second generation vaccinees – to examine the mother and examine the child is of critical importance. He concluded with “Ladies and gentlemen, as far as I’m concerned, there is a vaccine-autism connection!” A review of Dr. Yazbak’s research and case histories of these families can be found on the internet at: http://www.garynull.com/Documents/autism99b3.htm

—–
Thank you to Dr. Jeanne Ohm for providing this information.

planetc1.com-news @ 1:27 pm | Article ID: 987193654

Good Friday by James Sigafoose

I was driving thru a thick tree lined road leading to my house. I also noticed the green grass and wild flowers blooming, and I took in all this beauty, this expression of life, and a thot came to mind.

If we look at things natural we find every thing is cyclic. Look at the moon, sun, climates, the earth itself. The trees and grass and flowers and the creeping, crawling, flying things, all seem to die, or become dormant, and yet at a certain time they cycle back again and it is a new expression of life, for a time.

This happens over and over and has for ions of time, and will continue to do so, unless we interfere to such a degree we cause a break in these cycles, and with our educated minds it appears we might do that. If everything is cyclic, then why not man? Does mankind, die or do we simply become dormant and re-cycle, when the time is right? The neuro-scientists are saying there is a God spot in the right temporal lobe, and it’s here that we connect to the universe, and if we clean ourselves dietetically, correct our thinking, and thru meditation, prayer and fasting, we can contact that spot, while living.

People with near death experiences are actually having spiritual experiences in that lobe of the brain and it changes their style of life even from a child, who has that near death experience. So lets take a good look at ourselves and see if you would prefer a more spiritual experience, or are you O.K. as a limited body, that expects to expire with all the limitations of the body and it’s educated mind. What goes around, comes around, it is the wheel of fortune.

Just as Jesus re-cycled and lives actively in many peoples mind and heart, so shall you and I.
Happy Easter, this being good Friday, in 3 days, he re-cycled.

Love Sigafoose

planetc1.com-news @ 12:40 pm | Article ID: 987190858

Superbugs vs. Superdrugs

By Michael Dorausch, D.C.

Nature makes bugs, man makes drugs to kill the bugs. Nature makes stronger bugs to resist the drugs that man makes to kill the bugs. Man makes stronger drugs to kill the stronger bugs that resist man’s drugs. Nature makes superbugs to resist the stronger drugs. Man makes superdrugs to kill the superbugs. Nature makes super duper bugs that resist man’s strongest super drugs. Should man make super duper drugs?

And the saga continues…

Yesterday’s MSNBC news reported that a new superbug fighting drug has reportedly been defeated. According to the MSNBC article, “Multi-drug resistant bacteria, or so-called superbugs, seem to have defeated one of the newest antibiotics.”

According to the article, the latest drug to be beaten by the bugs is known as Zyvox, one of the first of a new class of antibiotics that is designed to work differently from older drugs. According to researchers, the bacteria the drug is supposed to kill, eventually became resistant.

There is a statement in the article, “Superbugs have flourished because doctors have overused antibiotics and scientists have failed to realize just how dynamic bacteria are.”

Just how dynamic are bacteria? Do bacteria have innate intelligence? Can bacteria comprehend and adapt to their environment?

MSNBC: New superbug-fighting drug defeated – Germs develop resistance to Zyvox

Planet Chiropractic: Superbugs are Superkillers
Planet Chiropractic: Just Say No to Antibiotics
Planet Chiropractic: More Superbugs Resisting Antibiotics

planetc1.com-news @ 10:20 am | Article ID: 987182421

Subluxation Validity & Skepticism

Note: The commentary below is in response to recent articles appearing in various publications regarding subluxation “theory.” It is authored by Dr. Sal Martingano.

In reading Dr. Homola’s article in “Skeptic Magazine” and “The Scientific Review of Alternative Medical & Aberrant Medical Practices,” one has to wonder about his motives. His was not an expose on whether Chiropractic affords non-medical healthcare benefits but was instead a throw back to the 1960’s rhetoric that preceded the Wilk’s decision.

In 1969 Ralph Lee Smith produced a book entitled “At Your Own Risk,” the case against Chiropractic, in which much of the same statements Dr. Homola speaks about, can be found. The decade or so that determined the outcome of the Wilk’s decision also dealt with the subject of Dr. Homola’s article.
I will not comment on his statements validity because this is not the proper forum. Surely he can be taken to task “ad nauseum.”

The subject of the subluxation validity however, intrigues me. Many in our profession speak liberally about subluxation, its virtues and what effect it has on the human body and perhaps, as Dr. Homola points out, can not be proven to the exacting standards of scientific knowledge.

However, it must be recognized that science, by definition, is only valid based on the knowledge it has at the moment. Science is forever changing and perhaps has not yet found the words or technology to properly assess the subluxation. My point is that we must not equate the subluxation with science, as Dr. Homola and his predecessors have. The fact is that there is a preponderance of scientific evidence expounding the validity of the subluxation as evidenced through the work of Dr. Christopher Kent, in his review of “science” from peer reviewed medical journals. It appears that medicine is more enamored with the subluxation than Dr. Homola.

As a student of research and history in the Chiropractic profession, I find it interesting that Dr. Homola has taken such literary license. However, some of what he said had merit, however certain definitions need to be applied and understood.

1- Chiropractic is not a treatment for disease even though disease processes often change under its’ care.
2- Chiropractic is a profession and the adjustment is not a treatment for anything.
3- Chiropractic is not a subset of medicine.
4- The subluxation, has scientific validity.
5- The subluxation is the end product of a series of Chiropractic analysis’ that differ from traditional medical diagnosis.

Dr. Homola stated, “the name of the game is indoctrination in the belief that spinal adjustments are superior to medical treatment for many forms of disease.” Chiropractic philosophy says no such thing.

Dr. Homola repeatedly equates subluxation correction with disease. However, his implication that “unless the subluxation theory evolves into a properly limited medical specialty for the care of musculoskeletal problems,” is dubious at best. Unless Dr. Homola lives in an igloo, he surely must realize that the record of traditional medicine, although brilliant in times of trauma, has a dismal performance in “maintaining” the health of mankind.

We live in a disease care model therefore, if Chiropractic and the subluxation theory needs to be a limited specialty of medicine, then Dr. Homola is implying that subluxation correction does exist and can be considered a treatment of disease. This kind of rhetoric only demonstrates the inconsistencies in the nature of Dr. Homola’s remarks.

In terms of safety, Dr. Homola states, “the use of spinal adjustments as a method of prevention is unnecessary treatment that subjects patients to unnecessary risk.” I can only say that if Chiropractic and the Subluxation theory were so destructive and dangerous to the public, than why do the actuarial charts of every major malpractice insurance carrier rate Chiropractic at a fraction of the liability of traditional medicine?

I wonder why Dr. Homola became a Chiropractor? Surely with his in depth insights into what Chiropractic and the subluxation theory are not, he could have chosen a more honorable profession. To say that “there is no credible evidence that spinal subluxations play a significant role in health conditions,” is basically accurate. The philosophy of Chiropractic states that a body free from interference to the nervous system will be a better expression of life. If better health falls into this category, so much the better but to infer that subluxation correction WILL play a significant role in health conditions demonstrates Dr. Homola’s limited knowledge of Chiropractic philosophy.

Surely we all can agree that people seem to express a better adaptation to life under Chiropractic care, when Chiropractic care is properly employed. Even Dr. Homola must have experienced this phenomenon at least once in his 40 years of practice. Even if the subluxation theory is only partially accurate, how can you justify 100+ years of continued growth with the profession?

You see, this whole discussion is not about the word subluxation, it is about the concept that people express life at a higher potential when adjustments are justified and employed.
It is my opinion that there are forces at play that keep us content arguing over the type technology, the generation of new drugs or the degree of proficiency in scientific understanding of the subluxation theory while never really addressing the problem of diversity in the different approaches to healthcare. In other words we are content discussing the “candy” while the issue of running the “candy store” goes undetected. Dr. Homola’s obvious lack of understanding of basic human physiology, let alone his Chiropractic philosophy, leads us all to the inevitable conflicts that keeps our healthcare system in turmoil. I respect his right to freedom of speech in various journals but not at the expense of my profession. I have yet to hear a better explanation of why the human body performs better after receiving “whatever those mysterious things that chiropractors do.”

Face it Dr. Homola, your argument is old and weak. Let’s hear what you do think is happening when an adjustment is given. A fool is one who questions the essence of life. A bigger fool is one who tries to prove it.

planetc1.com-news @ 7:21 am | Article ID: 986998886

The Chiropractic Position On Vaccines

By Tim O’Shea, D.C.

Now there’s a scary title. An audible inbreath from those bastions of chiropractic academia who are trying so hard to maintain the obsequious appearance of cooperation and subservience… Please let us play doctor too… we’ll be good… we’ll be a drugless profession, but you guys are the real masters of the universe… So would you mind referring us your back pain cases, please?

Don’t worry. We all know there is no chiropractic position on vaccines. Even though certain schools and certain national organizations have come out overtly in favor of orthodox vaccine policy, so far such pronouncements are arbitrary and unilateral, and reflect only the opinions of those in a position to expound them.

What do chiropractors really think about vaccines? Although it’s impossible to know the exact numbers, it’s more than likely that the majority of DCs are in favor of the standard immunization schedule for their own patients and their own children. How could it be otherwise? Our education was created in the image and likeness of the medical model. Do you remember any questions about the inborn healing capabilities of the human body on state or national boards? Did we ever have to buy any textbooks written by Mendelsohn, E.D. Hume, Scheibner, Richard Moskowitz, Deepak Chopra, Laurie Garrett, Hans Ruesch, Harris Coulter, Antoine Bechamp, Alexis Carrel, Sir MacFarlane Burnet, or even BJ Palmer?

Adrift in the real world, what is the actual value of all that hoop-jumping? What is it that we know that no other profession knows that will make people walk through the front door? Is it the nine pathognomic symptoms of AIDS? Is it the correct antibiotic protocol for bronchial pneumonia? Or when to administer the Mantoux test? Or refer for prednisone?

Well, no. There are other specialists for all that. OK, but what about us? What do we stand for? Crumbs from the musculoskeletal table? Many are grateful for just that. Beyond these types of cases we better refer out, right? Just to be on the safe side. Will we ever get in trouble thinking of chiropractic as a subspecialty of medicine? How about a subspecialty of massage?

So, having learned nothing that would antagonize our duly accredited medicaloid taskmasters throughout the entire course of our education, we think we’re cool now. Only we’re not. Something got lost – something essential: our uniqueness. Our specialty, our worldview, our knowledge – something that BJ knew all about.

To discover this Something, we have to take an active interest outside the medical model. Along the way, somehow we must get that first glimpse of the parallel hidden universe that coexists right beside the medical universe. We have to hear it or see it, firsthand. Can the body really heal itself, or is it born with a deficiency of experimental manmade chemicals which it needs in order to attain homeostasis and survival? Is the cause and cure of disease really within the body, or is that just something those fanatics made us memorize? Is natural health, is chiropractic really a stand-alone health model that can take us through life without invasive procedures or potions, except in the case of trauma or life-threatening infection? A heavy question. How do our leaders answer it in public? I don’t hear many of them even address it these days. No wonder we’re on our own to discover our own secret.

There are basically 3 kinds of people: lazy people, stupid people, and people who seek out their own answers. The first category is by far the largest. In his new book Trust Us We’re Experts, Jim Stauber explains in great detail how conventional wisdom on practically all subjects these days is programmed into our brains through the assiduous scientific efforts of the most sophisticated PR firms in history. These East Coast spin doctors specialize in the installation of the opinions and values of their clients into the public hard drive: they create public opinion. Their clients? The multinationals. The guys who really run things; the people with the money, enough money for five years of full page ads in every glossy magazine. Enough money to control the content of articles printed in newspapers, popular magazines and in professional journals, and to make paid advertisements look like hard news stories. Enough money to bring about new legislation. Enough money to discredit a universal environmental concern. Enough money to control peer review. Enough money to control medical education. Enough money to make rational discourse obsolete. Enough money to do all this and more and still be invisible. Conspiracy theory? Hardly. It’s just the way the world works.

This set-up easily controls the first two groups – the Lazy and the Stupid. There are enough people in these two groups to maintain status quo in education, healthcare, and the retail market by their predictable programmed choices. The first group is too lazy to research beyond what everybody thinks, what everybody is told in the magazines. The second group is too stupid to know there is any other point of view. Only the third group has a chance of finding the truth, after overcoming immense inertia.

Vaccines. What are we taught? That vaccines came on the scene just in time to save civilization from the ravages of infectious diseases. That vaccines are scientifically formulated to confer immunity to certain diseases; that they are safe and effective. That if we stop vaccinating, epidemics will return. That children must be vaccinated in order to get into school. You can have 10 years of university education and still be in the Lazy group and accept everything that is presented about immunity in all your science courses, and think you understand the importance of vaccines. After all, this is real scientific, medical education here, right?

And then one day you’ll be shocked to discover that thousands of medical doctors and scientists throughout the world no longer agree that vaccines are safe and effective. That your “medical” point of view is unscientific, according to many of the world’s top researchers and scientists. That many state and national legislatures all over the world are now passing laws to exclude compulsory vaccines. And the ludicrous position we’ll be in of trying to be more medical than the medical doctors by insisting on this outmoded scientific view of immunization. Opposition to vaccines today is not coming from the chiropractic arena; it’s coming from mainstream science, medicine, and politics. The least we can do is find out about it.

Chiropractic. What are we taught? That chiropractic is an interesting system of cracking the neck and back joints to bring relief from pain. That the real obstacle to total health is some unresolved childhood conflict that resides somewhere in the meninges. Or that if we hook up the right machines to people and find the right ICD code, we may be able to pay off our student loans. That we really don’t need X-rays to analyze the spine – we can just sense the misalignments. That the real power of chiropractic is simply the laying on of hands – general human contact. That our low tech cosmology is inherently inferior to the high tech medical science world of pharmaceuticals and sophisticated diagnostic machines. That physical therapists should be taught to incorporate spinal manipulation into their routine, because after all, it can’t hurt.

And then one day, if you’re extremely lucky, you’ll discover that for thousands of patients out there, chiropractic has literally saved their lives, or at least has given them a new life. And that for thousands of people, after all else failed, chiropractic has been their only hope in life, and their faith in what we do is much stronger than our own. And that chiropractic has brought something to the world that it has not seen before: namely the confidence that the body is a self-healing organism that can solve most of its problems if given the opportunity to operate without restriction.

Is there another profession founded on the idea that in matters of health, people should first trust their body’s own powers? Is there another profession that was originally focused on promoting a person’s full health potential? No one thinks like this today; almost no one. Fear is the tool of the clever that keeps the weak in line – fear of disease, fear of microorganisms, fear of the unknown. Fear is the golden button, polished to perfection by the East Coast PR pushers. They’ve made it politically incorrect to disagree, and we all know which is the most PC state in the Union.

But just because we read something a million times a day doesn’t make it true. And just because our leaders follow along still doesn’t make it true. Physical reality is not really affected. The body is still a self-healing organism; human blood is still sacred. So for those of us who imagine ourselves as members of that third group, the seekers, what can we do? Stop watching TV. Stop reading the homogenized sheep-dip Matrix-scripted media. Check sources. Follow the money. At every turn, question integrity. Look at the agenda of the speaker. Come to a rational conclusion. That’s what everyone is looking for today.

I don’t want to hear who thinks vaccines are safe and effective. I already know that. What do you think? Where did you get the information? I don’t want to hear who says chiropractic makes extravagant therapeutic claims. I already know that too. What do you think? Where did you get the information?

This is not really the Age of Information, like they say it is. This is the Age of Too Much Information. The problem is that 99% of it is self-generated, recycling the same spin in endless combinations of interchangeable data. I think it’s an evolutionary product of the ability to Cut and Paste. All this information obviously hasn’t made us smarter, and it sure as hell hasn’t made us healthier or happier. This is a giant Glass Bead Game, a giant Gameboy, an immense Barnum & Bailey smoke and mirrors production designed to steal our money, steal our time, burn away our precious life, and give us unnatural values.

Our only hope for escape is independent study, boring as that may sound. We are losing the ability to formulate ideas – 5 minutes of listening to any radio station pretty much clinches that idea. That’s just it – we have to tune out – we have to stop listening to the Matrix. It’s all the same and it’s everywhere – you know what I’m talking about. We have to find ways to tune back into the universal, and steal our time back for ourselves. Time is our total capital; why waste it being told what to think or how to act by some mass panderers?

Our original blood was good enough. What a thing to say about one of the most sublime substances in the universe. Our original professional philosophy was also good enough. What a thing to say about the most evolved healing concept since we crawled out of the ocean. Perhaps we can arrive at a position of profound gratitude if we could finally appreciate the identity, the oneness, the nobility of an uncontaminated unrestricted nervous system and an inviolate bloodstream. In such a place, is not the chiropractic position on vaccines self-evident, crystal clear, and as plain as the sun in the sky?


Dr. Tim O’Shea is the author of the book The Sanctity of Human Blood: Vaccination is Not Immunization. The book is a must-read for any parents who are beginning to wonder about the safety of childhood vaccines, and even more important for those who aren’t.