This is a continuation of the history of Bayer and Exxon and all the other big chem, big pharma, big fuel companies, their business relationships and the various conflicts of interest they are implicated in.

Here's a link to a handy collection of stories of one of their nightmares - biowarfare:


http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/index.shtml#drugs

BIOWARFARE     



3/16/04
VACCINE EPIDEMIC
- The Biowar Boondoggle Continues as VaxGen and DynPort are Among Companies Receiving Lucrative Contracts for Dangerous Vaccines Untested for Efficacy. Nanotechnology, Covert Operations, Questionable FDA Approvals Abound as Aerosol Vaccination is Promoted, Possibly from Aircraft. As the Government Solicits Bids for 25 Million Anthrax Vaccines and Retains the Right Granted by the Homeland Security Bill to Forcibly Vaccinate Americans, Something Really Sick is Happening ? by Michael Kane
Read Now



12/9/03
DAVID KELLY AND VICTORIA'S SECRET
by Jim Rarey. Even darker connections to the set up and betrayal of one of Britain's top biowar experts.  Rarey's investigation indicates that a man who had conducted Biowar liaison with Russian, South African and Israeli scientists was about to spill the beans.
Read Now



11/12/03
THE MURDER OF DAVID KELLY - Part 2
Investigative journalist Jim Rarey blows the lid of the suicide of the British bioweapons expert who helped exposed Tony Blair's falsified Iraqi intelligence. Throughout, there are more very alarming ties to the continuing epidemic of deaths among bioweapons experts and microbiologists capable of producing gene-specific bioweapons.
Read Now



10/14/03
THE MURDER OF DAVID KELLY - Part 1
Journalist Jim Rarey confirms the suspicions held by many that British Microbiologist David Kelly ? at the center of Britain's intelligence scandal ? was murdered. Rarey has done the hard methodical work of deconstructing the official version. Not only is the Blair government teetering as a domino that may fall towards Washington, another world-class microbiologist has died under mysterious circumstances. Part I
Read Now



5/09/03
A SPECIAL FTW INVESTIGATION:
SARS: Combining Biological and Economic Warfare
- by Michael Ruppert and Wayne Madsen. This 21-page report indicates that SARS is likely manmade and definitely man-manipulated for political purposes like the containment of China and the implementation of social control in America. But there are also SARS links to the deaths of as many as 10 world-class microbiologists since 9/11. These scientists specialized in techniques necessary for the creation of a hybrid coronavirus. The evidence suggests that the evolution of the disease, how it mutates, and how it is handled warrant very close attention. It would not be the first time America has used bioeconomic warfare.
Read Now



4/6/03
SARS: A GREAT GLOBAL SCAM
by Dr. Len Horowitz, who warned of the anthrax attacks before they happened and then forced the government to admit the anthrax came from CIA programs, blows the lid on SARS. It?s economic warfare and a preparation for when the real bio killers are unleashed. More people die of the flu and malaria each year. But now your brain will be prepared for the emergency quarantine orders and suspension of civil liberties that are coming. Incredible documentation!
Read Now



3/11/03
SPECIAL REPORT: UNHOLY GRAIL (Part II): Do Gene Specific Bioweapons Exist?
In the conclusion of this unnerving series, Kellia Ramares reveals that gene-specific bioweapons may have already been used against the easiest targets of all. And she then takes a look at how the scientifc community is avoiding the issue along with the deeper ethical issues these weapons raise for all of mankind.
Read Now



3/04/03
SPECIAL REPORT: UNHOLY GRAIL (Part I): Do Gene Specific Bioweapons Exist?
FTW asked Public Affairs producer and investigative reporter Kellia Ramares to take a hard and thorough look through the scientific community to see if weapons that would harm only organisms possessing a specific gene characteristic actually existed. Since 9-11 the possibility of such weapons as a tool of war or an instrument of population reduction has remained an unspoken major question. What Ramares found will shock you. If they existed, these most devastating weapons would be classified above Top Secret. But what is provable is that there is a list of countries which have been pursuing them and that the technology has been perfected to the point where they are within reach. (Part II will be published on March 11).
Read Now



1/15/03
US RAMPS UP BIOWEAPONS RESEARCH
The U.S. is accelerating its bioweapons research and putting containment labs in some very strange places. Kellia Ramares discloses ominous new details about what Uncle Sam is doing with deadly germ programs and why.
Read Now



1/07/03
VACCINES AND MORE VACCINES
The encouraging signs seen as health care pros from the US to Israel refuse smallpox vaccinations don?t seem to bother market forecasts that vaccine revenues will double by 2006. Following the money?
Read Now



12/16/02
SMALLPOX, MEHPA UPDATES:
While the CIA balks at stating that Saddam has vaccine resistant strains of smallpox, the New York Times is now suggesting that he does. As President Bush orders vaccinations of the military, and while HHS Secretary Tommy Thompson publicly acknowledges the dangers of vaccines, the legislation that enables compulsory vaccination of the American people continues to make progress through state legislatures.
Read Now



12/3/02
Urgent Alert - Stories Breaking That Saddam Has Rare Weaponized Smallpox From Russia
Read Now



9/24/02
Biowarfare: CDC Issues Plan for Mass Smallpox Vaccinations.
Questions raised on MEHPA and Microbiologist deaths.
Read Now



1/17/02
Bush Signs $4.6 Billion Bioterror Bill
MEHPA Now Passed in 11 States; New Vaccines OK'd Without Testing for Efficacy, Courts Uphold Forced Vaccinations.
Read Now



4/4/02
Support for MEHPA Fades
as More Microbiologists Continue to Die Under Mysterious Circumstances by Michael Davidson
Read Now



3/3/02
Post 9-11 Microbiologist Fatalities Now as High as 14.
New and Ominous Connections to DynCorp and Promis Software Connections Emerging. A Career In Microbiology Can Be Harmful To Your Health (Revised - updated)
Read Now



2/14/02
As Many as 12 Dead Microbiologists Since 9-11 and Many Connections To Biowarfare, the CIA and Deadly Plagues.
The Murders, The Cover Ups and the Lies Don't Mesh With the US Government's Request for 300 Million Smallpox Vaccines and DynCorp's Contract To Develop Vaccines for the Army. What's Going On?
Read Now



11/5/02
Len Horowitz, Harvard trained medical researcher, best-selling author, and biowarfare expert writes a letter to the FBI on anthrax.
Is Bayer - a company connected to WWII Nazis behind the infections? Are Christian militias being set up top take a fall for a major company that's making millions from the scares?
Read Now



10/26/02
Anthrax: Keystone Cops or Deniability. Bioport and Defense Contractors Making a Killing.
An investigation by Jim Rarey.
Read Now



 



DRUGS     



11/16/03
Cynthia McKinney: "We Need Narco News, and It Needs Us"
A Letter from Georgia's Congresswoman-Elect on the Need for Authentic Media
Read Now

Hey DML there is a good BioWarfare radioshow on black op radio show #207

http://ga4.org/campaign/boycott

I'm planning to organize a consumer boycott of any oil company that decides to drill in this pristine Alaskan wilderness area.  If, through our pocketbooks, we can convince these companies to do the right thing, we can still save the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge from the destruction that would be wrought by the oil drilling rigs.

Send an email to the CEOs of ExxonMobil, BP, ConocoPhillips, Royal Dutch/Shell, and ChevronTexaco now and tell them to stay out of ANWR!
____________________________________________________________________________

Dirty Footprints

We must write letters of outrage to the senators who voted to drill in ANWR, says our columnist. But maybe all there is left to do is weep.



Arctic National Wildlife Refuge-AP
Pristine place: A herd of musk oxen graze inside Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge

WEB-EXCLUSIVE COMMENTARY
By Patti Davis
Newsweek
Updated: 2:26 p.m. ET March 17, 2005

March 17 - President Bush must be feeling so victorious. The Senate has now said yes to drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge?the pristine place President Eisenhower took measures to protect in 1960.

Environmental groups have said the fight isn?t over, and I want to believe there is still something we can do?write letters, e-mails, rise up en masse and say no. But I don?t know if anything will help at this point. It?s possible that the only thing we will be able to do is weep?at the devastation of wild, untamed land where caribou are free to breed and give birth far away from the harm that humans bring. Where polar bear are a common sight and where cars and trucks and engines are never heard. Where people are outnumbered by the vast numbers of birds and animals?safe for the moment, but soon to be doomed.

The absurd statements made by politicians and oil companies that the environment can be protected while drilling for oil are just that?absurd. It assumes that we are ignorant. Roads will be carved, trucks will rumble through, drills will be stabbed into the earth. Oil companies don?t care about nature, the environment or the animals that will be terrified and traumatized. They don?t care, and neither does the Bush administration.

It is possible that the senators who voted for this measure care about re-election, so that?s where the letters and outrage should be directed.

In 2001, when my sister Maureen died, Sen. John McCain came to her memorial service. I spoke with him for quite a while that day and, because the effort to drill in the Arctic was in the news at that time, we spoke about it.
?It will never get through the Senate,? he said to me. ?It won?t happen.?

I?ve held onto his words since then. I believed him ? mostly because I so desperately wanted to. When I saw the news today, I sat down and wept.

We have an administration in Washington that cares nothing for this planet, for beauty, for pristine places, for innocent animals with soft brown eyes. Everything is a war to this president, and he is determined to win.



advertisement


If this actually happens?if 1.2 million acres of this exquisite land is given over to oil companies?the area will never be the same. Ever. George W. Bush will leave office and if we are very lucky someone who cares about the future of the planet will be elected. But the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge will forever be scarred by what this president set into motion.


I don?t believe this is even about oil; after all, we won?t see any of it for another decade. This is about another victory for the Bush administration. This is about Bush leaving his footprint on yet another corner of the earth and then walking away and not looking back at the damage he has left behind.

It?s how he has lived his life?failing to acknowledge the consequences of his actions. From 1979 to 1990, when he was in the Texas oil industry, investors lost millions of dollars after three of his companies went bankrupt?but Bush walked away with a profit and has never even commented on his sloppy business sense. His military record has never been adequately explained. CBS took the hit for shoddy journalism when it raised questions about his Air National Guard service, but Bush continues to deflect inquiries about the real issues. Nor has he ever owned up to the false information about WMDs in Iraq; meanwhile people are dying every day over there.


When his last term as president is over, he will walk away from a war that he got us into based on lies, from a gutted environmental policy and possibly from the destruction of a fragile, beautiful place called the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve. We will be left with the damage this administration has caused, with scars on the earth and memories of wildlife that used to roam and fly over vast acres ? before they started dying.


True to his nature, this president will walk away and not look back.


Davis, the daughter of Nancy and Ronald Reagan, is a writer based in Los Angeles

© 2005 Newsweek, Inc.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7221052/site/newsweek/



Polluting paradise

Leader
Friday March 18, 2005
The Guardian

Alaska's wilderness is a place of frozen tundra, calving caribou, wolves, polar bears, millions of migrating birds and stunning natural beauty. But that has not prevented the US Senate from preparing to open it up for oil and gas exploration that environmentalists warn will have disastrous results. Wednesday's 51-49 vote, on an obscure budget amendment that prevented a democratic filibuster, ended a long struggle with big oil companies and has fuelled concerns that other unspoilt corners of America will be blighted by drilling rigs, pipelines and the ugly infrastructure that goes with them. It was, protested John Kerry, "a Republican sneak attack on one of our most treasured natural wonders". Legal barriers remain, but this is the first time in two decades that the White House and Congress have agreed that US national energy needs justify touching what had hitherto, rightly, been untouchable.

The 19m-acre Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, nestling between the Yukon and the Beaufort Sea, is the last place in North America where the full fragile spectrum of arctic life is protected in one expanse. Intense lobbying has been complicated by contradictory messages: some oil companies say damage will be minimal while others are not convinced of the area's economic potential. Crucially, though, Republicans see the plan as paving the way for other environmentally controversial projects such as drilling off Florida or California.

The threat to the Alaskan paradise known as America's Serengeti is a direct result of George Bush's campaign promise, in 2000 and again last year to reduce US reliance on energy imports, especially from the Middle East: currently 58% of the 21m barrels a day used by Americans comes from overseas. With China's boom fuelling world demand - and sending US crude to a record $56 high on Wednesday - drilling in Alaska, as Mr Bush put it, "is a way to get some additional reserves here at home on the books". But oil experts say that even at peak production, new fields in the refuge could produce just 1m barrels of oil a day, or 5% of current US consumption. It is absurd to imagine that America, with just 3% of the world's oil reserves and consumption of a quarter of all oil production, can achieve energy independence. This crisis can only be solved by guzzling less gas and searching harder for alternative and renewable supplies. That would in turn allow the US to play a greater part inefforts to combat global warming. Nature, in all its American glory, should be left in pristine peace.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/oil/story/0,11319,1440706,00.html

But maybe all there is left to do is weep.


The oil is the drive to die and what happens after the oil is gone .A cadastric death will spread from one end to the other.
The oil is in the earth to keep it cool and grease the shift of gears ,so we shall expect lots more disaters.

WEEP WE SHALL DO

In 1989 I stopped buying gas from Exxon because of the Exxon Valdez and what it did to prince William sound, well at least what the main stream media told me it did to prince William sound. The news (peter jerk-off Jennings) said that Exxon was trying to do the clean-up on the cheap and it would have devastating consequences on the environment .And if you ever spilled oil on your grass or driveway you didn’t have a hard time believing what he said since that shit is near impossible to get up. In 1995 I was in prince William sound and I knew I would be horrified when I left my hotel for some site-seeing before I continued on my journey. Well after a half day of looking around and talking to a couple of fisherman who had just come in with there catch I came to the conclusion that the sound was in pretty good shape, in fact one of the fish dudes told me “if I hadn’t lived threw the spill I would not have know that there was a spill”
I guess this is why the people opposed to drilling don’t use the Valdez disaster as an example of what happens when evil Americans drill for oil. Now I only buy gas from Exxon.
In 1978 these same pin-heads said the Alaskan pipeline was going to eradicate the caribou by cutting off there path to there mating grounds. And why wouldn’t we believe this? After all the most trusted man in America (walter clondike) was feeding us this crap every night at six. He’s fighting against environmentally friendly wind powered electricity in his backyard but I bet he’s more than happy to see it in yours.
And the fact is that the caribou mate any place they like and there population went up after the killer pipeline was up and running. At the time it was believed that the heat from the road and the pipeline itself was making it easier for old caribou to survive the harsh conditions, go figure.
Now I wonder why these pin-heads don’t use the pipeline for an example of what happens when evil Americans try to transport 50 million gallons of oil a day 800 miles threw the wilderness, never mind nothing bad has happened so that wouldn’t be a good example.
I really like the picture of the buffalo and the rolling grass lands with the mountains in the back ground with no snow on them, I think there like that for about 3 days a year.
Talk about using scare tactics, it’s a good thing there doom and gloom predictions of the past are never used to judge there credibility.

Just had to get that out
Peace my brothers, I’m back to the grow forums where I belong.

http://NYtimes.com/2005/03/24/international/asia/24aids.html

India Alters Law on Drug Patents
By DONALD G. McNEIL Jr.

Published: March 24, 2005

India, a major source of inexpensive AIDS drugs, passed a new patent law
yesterday that groups providing drugs to the world's poorest patients fear
will choke off their supply of new treatments.

The new law, amending India's 1970 Patent Act, affects everything from
electronics to software to medicines, and has been expected for years as a
condition for India to join the World Trade Organization.
Advertisement
 

But because millions of poor people in India and elsewhere - including by
some estimates half the AIDS patients in the Third World - rely on India's
generic drug industry, lobbyists for multinational drug companies as well as
activists fighting for cheap drugs had descended on New Delhi to try to
influence the outcome.

The law, which passed by a voice vote in Parliament's upper house yesterday
after days of wrangling over amendments in the lower house, was in the end
not as restrictive as the drug activists had feared.

"It's very disappointing, but it could have been worse," said Daniel Berman,
a coordinator of the global access campaign for the medical charity Doctors
Without Borders. "All generics could have been removed from the market."

Instead, all the generic drugs already approved in India can still be sold,
though sellers must now pay licensing fees. There are also provisions
allowing companies that make generics to copy drugs in the future.

But there are relatively tough criteria for such copying, and activists
predicted that prices for newly invented drugs will be much higher, because
drug makers will have the same 20-year patent monopolies as they have in the
West. As AIDS patients develop resistance to old drugs, new treatments will
become less affordable, they said.

In addition, it is unclear whether makers of generic drugs in other
countries, like Brazil, China and Thailand, will fill any increasing demand
for cheaper medicines.

But India's governing Congress Party, which sponsored the bill, disputed the
contention that prices would soar. "The government will have enormous powers
to deal with any unusual price rise," said Commerce Minister Kamal Nath.

All Western countries grant "product patents" on new inventions. Since 1970,
India has granted "process patents," which allow another inventor to patent
the same product as long as it was created by a novel process. In
pharmaceuticals, that has meant that a tiny tweak in the synthesis of a
molecule yields a new patent. Several companies can produce the same drug,
creating competition that drives down prices.

Before 1970, India's patent laws came from its colonial days, and it had
some of the world's highest drug prices. Process patents on drugs,
fertilizers and pesticides have extended life expectancy and ended regular
famines.

In Africa, exports by Indian companies, especially Cipla and Ranbaxy
Laboratories, helped drive the annual price of antiretroviral treatment down
from $15,000 per patient a decade ago to about $200 now. They also
simplified therapy by putting three AIDS drugs in one pill. Dr. Yusuf
Hamied, Cipla's chairman, called the new law "a very sad day for India."

But some other Indian drug makers, along with multinational companies,
praised it. The International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and
Associations, a Geneva-based lobbying group, called the law "a significant
step" that would let India "take a leading role in global pharmaceutical
research and development."

S. Ramakrishna, chief lobbyist for Pfizer India, a subsidiary of the world's
largest drug maker, said the bill's passage abandoned "the utopian concept
that every invention should be as free as air or water," according to The
International Herald Tribune.

In the United States, Billy Tauzin, president of the Pharmaceutical Research
and Manufacturers of America, the lobbying organization for the American
drug industry, said the new law would be "good for India and good for Indian
patients," but cautioned that his group was "still measuring the impact on
the overall bill of several last-minute amendments."

Some multinationals had refused to invest in India without stronger patent
protection, and Indian companies that do original research were also eager
for it.

(Page 2 of 2)
http://NYtimes.com/2005/03/24/international/asia/24aids.html?pagewanted=2



But Mr. Berman said a "mailbox" created by the government two years ago in
which drug makers could deposit patents they hoped to file when the law was
amended had 1,500 proposals from Indian companies - and 7,000 from foreign
ones, suggesting the new law would benefit foreign companies more.

Under the new law, a maker of generics can apply to copy a patented drug,
but only after it has been marketed for three years. In addition, the patent
owner can object.

Also, the generic's maker must pay a "reasonable" royalty, although the law
does not define reasonable. Two years ago, Mr. Berman noted, the
London-based company GlaxoSmithKline demanded 40 percent of the sales
proceeds of an AIDS drug it licensed to a South African company. (Under
pressure from South African regulators and activists, it later licensed it
to three rival companies for only 5 percent.)

In 2003, the Swiss drug maker Novartis forced Indian competitors to stop
making generic versions of its leukemia drug Glivec, which the Indian
companies sold for $2,700 a year. Novartis then priced its version at
$27,000 a year, while giving free treatment to a few poor patients.


If a drug is desperately needed, the new law allows the government to
declare an emergency and cancel its patent. But Mr. Berman said India had
never declared such an emergency, and for years resisted admitting that it
had an AIDS problem.

Most governments, including the United States, have such patent powers,
though they use them sparingly. When the Bush administration thought it
needed huge supplies of the expensive antibiotic Cipro during the 2001
anthrax scare, it threatened to cancel Bayer's patent if the company did not
cut its price. Other countries permit generic versions of AIDS drugs, but
none have been as aggressive as Indian companies about getting them approved
by the World Health Organization and exporting them. Generics made by
companies in Brazil go mostly to Brazilians. China makes generics, but also
has problems with counterfeiting and, like India, is under pressure to
comply with W.T.O. rules.

The Indian bill was amended to prevent "evergreening," in which patent
owners try to get a new 20-year monopoly by patenting a variant on the same
molecule. To win a new patent, the applicant will have to prove the variant
works better.

An editorial in The Business Standard of India said the law is "better put
together than seemed possible a month or two ago."

But Loon Gangte, who runs a program in India for people with AIDS,
criticized the new law, saying: "I am using generic AIDS drugs because I can
afford the price. Since the bill has passed, when I need new drugs, I won't
be able to afford them. I could become one of the casualties."

http://www.pharmamanufacturing.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=news&mod=News&mid=9A02E3B96F2A415
ABC72CB5F516B4C10&tier=3&nid=1A366F86F0DF481E85F177E15A884B4F

Cannibis-based Therapy Approved

(1/20/2005)

PharmaManufacturing.com



Part of GW Pharmaceuticals' healthy cannibis crop.


Somewhere in the south of England lie orderly rows of climate-controlled greenhouses within which cannabis plants grow fast and free, under the full consent of British authorities. The greenhouses are the property of GW Pharmaceuticals (Wiltshire, U.K.), the plants the raw material for the firmâ??s Sativex, a pain relief drug for multiple sclerosis sufferers.

An oral spray form of Sativex received a Qualifying Notice from Health Canada in December, with regulatory approval expected in early 2005. This will mark the first time a cannabis-based drug has received regulatory approval. The firm has partnered with the pharmaceutical division of Bayer Healthcare to market the product.

Sativex is a whole plant extract, with Tetranabinex (tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC) and Nabidiolex (cannabidiol, or CBD) as its active ingredients. These and other cannabinoids have been known to have myriad medicinal effects: analgesic, antispasmodic, anti-inflammatory and antiemetic, to name just a few. Cannabis, of course, is also known for its ability to stimulate the appetite. The firm has several drugs in the pipeline it hopes will follow Sativex.

GW Pharma spokesperson Mark Rogerson says that each and every plant grown is painstakingly numbered and logged in order to satisfy regulators and maintain consistency in the plantsâ?? cannabinoid ratios. Like prize roses or tulips, varieties of the cannabis plants are carefully bred to protect their lineage and purity â?"ensuring quality and predictable potency.

The Sativex manufacturing process begins as leaves and buds, which contain most of the cannabinoids, are stripped and hung to dry. They are heated, coated in liquid nitrogen for improved yields, and heated further until drying is complete. The dry material is reduced to a coarse powder, then blended with liquid carbon dioxide for a syrupy cannabinoid extract â?" â??like treacle,â?� Rogerson says â?" which is then diluted and mixed with a carrier.

Sativex will initially be administered using a simple oral vapor spray device, though capsules and tablets, and an inhalable, are in the works. Buccal tissue allows for fast delivery of the THC and CBD to the bloodstream. Due to concerns regarding diversion or abuse of the product, GW has developed a more sophisticated spray device with a microchip lock on it, programmable by the physician.

Rogerson says safety and abuse concerns have proven unfounded. A typical dosage allows patients to gain relief of symptoms without experiencing a â??high.â?� â??Experience shows that MS sufferers want to take their medicine and get on with their lives,â?� he says.

GW expected the drug to be approved first in the U.K. Regulators there, however, have asked the firm to conduct further trials to prove the drugâ??s clinical benefits. This came eighteen months after the firm first submitted a new drug application. The Canadian approval process, in contrast, took nine months. Rogerson says GW is just beginning to think about seeking approval in the U.S.






YOU DON'T WANT SATIVEX?
      #1064937 - Fri Mar 25 2005 01:30 PM

Edit  
Reply  
Quote  





YOU DON'T WANT SATIVEX?

Dear Friends

I'm suppose to rest for a while, but I just had to tell you about my "Sativex" story when I saw my doctor on March 22nd.

My doctor told me that he had the "good news" that he could prescribe me some "Sativex" soon.

I told him that I wasn't interested at all!

Then he asked me.."WHY?"

I told him that I found out that "Sativex" didn't offer fast pain relief compared with smoking marijuana, as it takes 3-6 minutes to feel it's effects for pain relief.

Then he said: "Well, 3-6 minutes is still fast!"

I replied: "It's not fast enough for sudden muscle spasms" compared to smoking marijuana, as I will feel my muscle(s) untangle and the pain relief within 30-40 seconds, and FAST pain relief is important when your'e the one suffering.

Then my doctor finally said: "Then I now understand WHY it's important for you to keep smoking marijuana and WHY Sativex wouldn't be good for you".

Fast pain relief is important for many patients my doctor said.

Have a nice day!

MedPotMarc

P.S. Fast relief is also important for an epileptic which is about to have a possible fatal seizure isn't it?

U.N.: Angolan children dying
from Ebola-like illness


CNN
Friday, March 18, 2005
http://www.cnn.com/2005/HEALTH/conditions/03/18/angola.illness.ap/index.html


In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.


GENEVA, Switzerland (AP) -- The Ebola-like mystery ailment that has killed at least 39 people in Angola over the past three months is targeting primarily children under 5, the U.N. health agency said Friday.


While the disease in Angola's northern province of Uige has still not been identified, health officials believe the illness is an acute hemorrhagic fever related to the Ebola virus, said Dick Thompson, spokesman for the World Health Organization.


But unlike Ebola, which tends to predominantly affect the adult population, four out of five cases of this new ailment have been children, Thompson said.


"With Ebola, the age distribution is generally quite different than what we are seeing here," he said. "But we are not ruling Ebola out. We are not ruling anything out."


The symptoms of the virus -- including vomiting, bloody discharge and high fever -- are similar to those for Ebola and other hemorrhagic fevers, including dengue fever, according to WHO.


Angolan officials have put the death toll at 64, but Thompson said the number is probably lower because deaths from other diseases may been included in the Angolan figure.


WHO has no estimates on how deadly the disease might be or how many cases already exist, he said.


"It is really impossible to know right now -- we are collecting information and waiting for lab tests to come back," Thompson said.


If the disease is a known substance, lab tests could provide conclusive data within a week, Thompson said, but warned that if it is unknown the results would take longer.


"With SARS it took three weeks to get results back, but that was a massive international collaboration," he said, in reference to the previously unknown disease that killed nearly 800 people worldwide in 2003.


Ebola causes death in 50-90 percent of clinically ill cases. It is transmitted by direct contact with the blood, secretions, organs or bodily fluids of infected persons.


Outbreaks of the disease are rare because the virus is usually so deadly it kills its victims before they can pass it on. WHO says it has documented more than 1,200 deaths in about 1,850 cases since the first recognized epidemic in 1976.


More than 100,000 Angolans were due to return this month via Uige from Congo, where Ebola still exists in nature.


Dengue fever is common in tropical areas and endemic to parts of Asia and the Caribbean. No vaccine or cure is currently available for the disease.

http://www.copvcia.com/free/ww3/032405_world_stories.shtml#0

Dr. Horowitz,



Thank you for your incredible book Emerging Viruses. Here's the review of it we've posted on our website http://www.wanttoknow.info/:


Book - Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola, Nature, Accident, or Intentional - Leonard Horowitz, D.M.D., M.A., M.P.H. Rating-Interest 8 out of 10, Reliability 8.5 out of 10 $20.97 + shipping


Powerful book! Dr. Horowitz courageously exposes the inner workings of the military-medical-industrial complex. Providing the most well-documented assembly of evidence ever published on this subject, this book presents stunning evidence that both AIDS and Ebola were manufactured as biological weapons and then accidentally or purposefully released into the world. Chapters 11 and 12 on Kissinger's rise to supreme power in the early 70s give by far the best information we've seen on this important subject and rate a solid 10. Includes over 40 pages of detailed, scientific references. It can be pretty dry reading, particularly in the first half, but skim through to get the amazing facts.


Thank you so much, Dr. Horowitz, for your thorough research on this vital topic. If we may make one suggestion, a much shorter summary of the topic listing essential points with references would likely reach a much wider audience if you were to chose publish it. Unfortunately few of us have time to plow through 500 pages of technical text to get to the kernels of powerful information you present. We'd love to see this information get out to huge amounts of people.



We at wanttoknow.info are researchers of all kinds of huge cover-ups. We specialize in providing short, verifiable summaries which are easily accessible to the average American. You might enjoy taking a look at our site. Immediately after this, we will send you our standard email introducing the 9/11 cover-up and our site. Though you likely know some of this information, we invite you to consider spreading the word so that we might reach great numbers of people. Thanks again for your incredible work in the world!



With love and best wishes,
Fred Burks for the wanttoknow.info team



"Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola-Nature, Accident or Intentional? is unquestionably an excellent book. It reads itself; and presents a complex topic-the origin or AIDS and Ebola-as concise and authoritative as an executive decision paper. But, it is much more than mere grammatically arranged words and ink consigned to paper. . . . [it] is a life's work that would do honor to its author as literature, as research, as scientific analysis, as medical philosophy, as government oversight, as criminal detective investigation, or as a spell-binding (covert/political agency run-amok in medical-science) genre novel.
In my estimation Dr. Horowitz has unearthed a covert operation run amok, that is bigger than any secret operation in U.S. history, and more momentous in its implications to humanity than the atomic weapons "Manhattan Project" of World War II. . . . MANDATORY READING.


-JACK A. KINGSTON, CHAIRMAN
NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISORY BOARD
WASHINGTON, DC



" Health professional, scientist or lay citizen, one cannot fail to grasp the explosive significance of this book and its main thesis-that biological weapons programs developed and field tested immune-system-destroying agents now cannot be contained. . . . A cogent and readable yet carefully documented book."


-GARTH L. NICOLSON, PH.D.
PROFESSOR AND CHAIR IN CANCER RESEARCH, UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS



"Thoroughly researched . . . Horowitz vividly portrays the inept, dishonest and secretive science found in our country's national laboratories and in international organizations such as the World Health Organization. . . . I suggest you read this brilliantly idiosyncratic volume."


-ED GEHRMAN
BOOK REVIEW-SONOMA COUNTY BAY PRESS



" Emerging Viruses : AIDS & Ebola is one of the most fascinating books I have ever read. Each chapter is a learning experience. I have had goose bumps and chills repeatedly as I continued to read this amazing work in which the documentation is overwealming."


-ROBERT COHEN
MEDICAL JOURNALIST AND AUTHOR OF THE POISON IN MILK



"An explosive book exposing the madness of modern medicine and a
powerhouse of evidence to show why AIDS is a man-made disease."


-ALAN CANTWELL, JR., M.D.
AUTHOR OF AIDS & THE DOCTORS OF DEATH



"Horowitz's theories help explain the sudden emergence of several novel viral epidemics since 1970. . . . [He] heavily documents that, in the late 1960s and early 1970s, cancer virus and bioweapons researchers were developing HIV-like viruses in their labs. Horowitz persuasively shows that there was strong motive to produce AIDS-like weapons. . . .."


- STEVEN KAUFFMAN, M.D.
BOOK REVIEW, MEDICAL RESEARCH MODERNIZATION COMMITTEE REPORT



"A well documented chronology of the AIDS virus research effort supporting the author's hypothesis that AIDS was the result of a manufactured virus created for military/population control objectives. Fascinating, well researched, referenced and written. Four stars out of five. "


- BOOK REVIEW
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF FORENSIC DENTISTS



" Presents alarming documents, all for the first time in once compendium, that causes us to pause, ask questions, and challenges the scientific community for a fair-minded critical reevaluation of the causes of AIDS and its origin. These questions are long overdue.. "


- GARY NULL, PH.D.
AUTHOR AND HOST OF THE NATIONALLY SYNDICATED "GARY NULL SHOW."



" Shocking . . . The boldest of the new books of alternative medicine "


- BOOK REVIEW
ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE DIGEST



"Horowitz has performed the miracle of summarizing a century of intrigue, fraud and deceit in one cohesive story. We move from the filthy labs where contaminated vaccines are produced, to the polished executive offices of biowarfare contractors. . . This book is the most breathtaking thriller of the last millennium. "


- EVA LEE SNEAD, M.D.
AUTHOR OF SOME CALL IT AIDS-I CALL IT MURDER



http://www.tetrahedron.org/ev_reviews.html

http://www.beyondfactoryfarming.org/

Stop Bill C-27, the CFIA Enforcement Act

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) is facilitating amendments
to the  Plant Breeders Rights Act which helps multinational seed
companies and hurts family farmers by placing restrictions on
farmers' traditional right to save seed.

According to the Auditor General the CFIA is one of the most
secretive agencies in the government of Canada. All of its
surveillance and inspection work is hidden from the Canadian public.
Yet Bill C-27 would give the CFIA authority to disclose, share and
make available ANY information to foreign governments!

If passed, Bill C-27, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA)
Enforcement Act, will give the CFIA new powers to make regulations
that will:

     * lock us into the US regulatory system,
     * increase privatization of the regulatory system,
     * cripple our ability to protect our food system and diversify
our trading relationships,
     * make it even harder for the family farm and the small food
processor to survive because of the CFIA's track record of regulating
in the interests of export, trade and promotion of the corporate
agri-food sector.

Protect Canada's food system - tell your Member of Parliament to vote
against Bill C-27!

Enter your postal code to display the appropriate action letter.
http://www.actionworks.ca/clientfiles/council/actioncentres/beyondfactoryfarming/takeaction.jsp




For more on the "Plant Breeders Rights Act", check out this article:

http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/2780.html

CANADIAN INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH INFORMATION <http://www.cihi.ca>


Transmitted by CNW Group on : April 5, 2005 08:30


Drug Spending to Reach Almost $22 Billion in 2004, Reports CIHI


Prescribed drugs expected to reach 82.5% of total drug spending in Canada

OTTAWA, April 5 /CNW Telbec/ - A new report released today by the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) shows that total spending on
drugs in Canada is expected to have reached $21.8 billion in 2004, an
increase of 8.8% over the previous year and five times the amount spent on drugs in 1985. Total drug expenditure per person in Canada is forecast to have
reached $632 in 2003 and $681 in 2004, representing annual increases of 7.7% and 7.8%, respectively.
            
Drugs continue to be the fastest-growing category of health care spending, with the proportion of drug spending forecast to have reached 16.7%
in 2004, compared to 9.5% in 1985. Since 1997, the second-largest category of
health care spending has been drugs, after hospitals. Physician spending, now
ranked third, is forecasted to be $16.8 billion, or 12.9% of total health
expenditure in 2004.

The Drug Expenditure in Canada, 1985-2004 report shows that prescribed
drugs continue to be the main source of drug spending and that the amount
spent on prescribed drugs is expected to have reached $18.0 billion in 2004,
representing a growth rate of 10.2% from the previous year. Prescribed drug
expenditure is expected to account for 82.5% of total drug spending in
Canada, up from 80.5% in 2002 and 67.5% in 1985. Comparatively, expenditure on non- prescribed drugs is forecast to have reached $3.8 billion in 2004,
representing an increase of 2.7%.
            
"Increased utilization, ongoing substitution of newer for older drugs and
changes in the way health care is delivered-these are all factors that
influence the annual increase in the national drug bill," says Steve Morgan,
assistant professor at the University of British Columbia and a CIHI
advisor. "When examining this increase in drug spending, it becomes quite clear that we have a need to know more about the consequences of our national
investment in this form of health care delivery."
        
Considerable variation in drug spending across provinces
        
In 2004, total drug expenditure per person was expected to range from
highs of $732 in Ontario and $718 in New Brunswick to lows of $615 in
Saskatchewan and $542 in British Columbia. These variations are
influenced by a number of factors, including differences in provincial drug subsidy programs, variations in the age and sex distribution across the
populations of provinces and territories, the health needs of targeted populations and the manner in which health care is delivered.
            
Similarly, spending on prescribed drugs was also expected to vary among
provinces. In 2004, Quebec was forecasted to spend the most, with prescribed
drug costs of $626 per person, followed by Ontario with costs of $599 per
person. By comparison, Prince Edward Island ($477) and British Columbia
($421) were expected to spend the least.
            
"Across the country, you can see that public drug coverage for
Canadians varies," says Michael Hunt, Manager of Pharmaceutical Programs at CIHI. "To better understand what is driving the variation in drug expenditure, CIHI is building a system to collect prescribed drug claim information. This
information will assist in understanding the factors that influence drug use
and, ultimately, drug expenditure."
      
In-hospital drug spending adds over $1.3 billion to drug tab
        
In 2002, the last year for which actual data are available, provincial
drug expenditure in hospitals was over $1.3 billion, accounting for 4.1% of
total hospital expenditure. This is in addition to the amount reported
in the drugs category of total health expenditure. Drug spending in hospitals is included in the hospital spending category. Among the provinces, drug
expenditure in hospitals, as a proportion of total hospital expenditure,
ranged from a high of 4.9% in Alberta to a low of 3.1% in Newfoundland and
Labrador. Between 2001 and 2002, in-hospital drug spending per person
escalated the most in New Brunswick, with an increase of 14.5%, and the
least in Nova Scotia, with an increase of 1.5%. The average provincial growth rate of per capita spending was 9.3%.
        
Canada now fifth in total drug expenditure as a percentage of total health expenditure among international community
        
Among 11 countries ranked by the OECD (Organization for Economic Co-
operation and Development), Canada was fifth in 2002 in drug spending as a
percentage of total health expenditure (16.6%). Hungary ranked first
(27.6%), followed by Korea (25.6%), France (20.8%) and Japan (18.8%).
            
In Canada, public funding reached 37.6% of total drug expenditure. This
proportion was the second lowest among OECD countries, above the United
States (19.5%) and just below Korea at 49.4%. Germany had the highest share of public drug expenditure in total drug spending, at 74.8%.
        
Drug Expenditure In Canada, 1985-2004
        
            Drug Expenditure in Canada, 1985-2004 provides a descriptive
overview of
Canadian drug expenditure trends from 1985 to 2002 and includes
forecasts for
2003 and 2004. The report draws upon data compiled from CIHI's National
Health
Expenditure Database, Canada's most comprehensive source of information on
health care financing and spending.
        
            Canadian Institute for Health Information
        
            The Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) is an independent,
pan-Canadian, not-for-profit organization working to improve the health of
Canadians and the health care system by providing quality health
information.
CIHI's mandate, as established by Canada's health ministers, is to
coordinate
the development and maintenance of a common approach to health
information for
Canada. To this end, CIHI is responsible for providing accurate and timely
information that is needed to establish sound health policies, manage the
Canadian health system effectively and create public awareness of factors
affecting good health.
        
        
The report, as well as the following figures and tables, is available
from CIHI's Web site, at www.cihi.ca <http://www.cihi.ca> .
        
Figure 1.   Total Drug Expenditure, Canada, 1985 to 2004
        
Figure 2.   Total Drug Expenditure per Capita, Current and Constant*
                        Dollars, Canada, 1985 to 2004
        
Figure 3.   Total Health Expenditure, by Use of Funds, Canada, 2004
        
Figure 4.   Prescribed Drugs by Source of Finance, Canada, 1985 to 2004
        
Table 1.    Drug Expenditure Summary, by Province/Territory and Canada,
                        2004
        
Table 2.    Drug Expenditure in Hospitals per Capita, by Province, 2000
                        to 2002
        
Table 3.    Public Expenditure on Pharmaceutical Goods per Capita
and as a Percentage of Public Health Expenditure, Reporting OECD
                        Comparator Countries, 2002
        
Table 4.    Total Expenditure on Pharmaceutical Goods per Capita
and as a Percentage of Total Health Expenditure, Reporting OECD
                        Comparator Countries, 2002
        
Table 5.    Public Expenditure on Pharmaceutical Goods per Capita
and as a Percentage of Total  Expenditure on Pharmaceutical Goods,
                        Reporting OECD Comparator Countries, 2002
        
* Figures are deflated using Consumer Price Index (CPI) to reflect 1985
                dollars.

        

-30-

/For further information: Jill Oviatt, (613) 241-7860, ext. 4310, Cell:
(613) 612-3914; Leona Hollingsworth, (613) 241-7860, ext. 4140, Cell:
(613) 612-3915/


CANADIAN INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH INFORMATION - More on this organization

News Releases
News Releases </en/releases/orgDisplay.cgi?okey=88017>
(46)