The Alliance for Human Research Protection speaks out against a US government-proposed anthrax vaccine experiment on children. Such an experiment would sacrifice children’s welfare, much as canaries sent into the coal mines were sacrificed.
To date, the available evidence about the safety and efficacy of the anthrax vaccine is resoundingly negative. Three US government anthrax vaccine initiatives represent a reckless deviation from the precautionary principle of medical ethics and fiscal responsibility.
One has been criminally indicted on 13 counts of fraud, 9 counts of money laundering , and theft of $1 million. The other was found to have made a series of "unsubstantiated and/or false" statements and slanderous accusations.
Whose children will be sacrificed in an illegal and unethical experiment in the name of Biodefense Preparedness?
"When my brother went into the hospital with pneumonia, he quickly contracted four other infections in the intensive care unit…Michael died in the ICU." Maureen Dowd, NYT Columnist.
A meta- analysis of 61 studies in PLoS ONE found an increased risk of breast cancer for women taking an antidepressant.
"The world depends on 35% of those who are defiers–those who clearly see what is right and what is wrong. But they need to speak up, to protest, and to stand up for their ethical values. The future depends on you."
Vaccines are legally classified as "unavoidably unsafe"–an indication that they pose an inherent risk. Vaccines have not been subjected to scientifically rigorous placebo controlled safety trials before they have been approved for use in children. The public debate over vaccine safety has intensified as a continuing stream of news reports…
On March 22, 2010 the FDA recommended suspension in the use of GlaxoSMithKline’s Rotarix vaccine–to prevent rotavirus (diarrhea)–due to contamination with pig virus. Rotarix, one of two vaccines licensed in the U.S , has already been given to about 1 million U.S. children along with 30 million worldwide.
"Among all the problematic suggestions for DSM5, the proposal for a "Psychosis Risk Syndrome" stands out as the most ill–conceived and potentially harmful." Allen Frances, MD
Given multiple prior investigations of Dr. Wakefied’s 1998 paper, why did it take the Lancet editors 12 years to discover a lack of proper IRB approval?
The comments below expand upon an Infomail about the recently published JAMA meta-analysis.
