The number of available drug preparations is
now well in excess of 200,000. In 1980, the
World Health organisation advised that a
mere 240 drugs are necessary in order to
provide good health care in the Third World
(which should be more than adequate for
First World needs considering we are a
significantly healthier proportion of the
population) whilst in 1981 the United
Nations Industrial Development Organisation
stated that a mere 26 of these are
considered 'indispensables'. Most of the
many drugs which are now available are known
as 'me-too' drugs, i.e. recombinations and
exact reproductions of drugs already
available but which are irresistible to
other companies who wish to share in their
market. For example, the standard analgesics
Paracetamol and Aspirin come in a multitude
of forms under a variety of different brand
names and yet these products can vary in
price to a factor of ten or more times for
the exact same formula depending on brand
type chosen. Often the consumer erroneously
presumes that increased price is equivalent
to increased quality in this case and are
entirely unaware that the drugs they are
buying and those which they are rejecting
are identical. Doctors are also often guilty
of prescribing drugs by trade name and thus
netting greater profits for the favoured
company whilst cheaper versions are
available to the unwary consumer/patient.
Usually, before handing in a prescription it
pays to consult the attending pharmacist if
there is an equivalent and cheaper drug
available. This can save some chronic drug
users hundreds of pounds per year.
Pharmaceutical companies rely upon ill
health in the population to survive and reap
their profits. No drug company has a vested
interest in curing disease. They do,
however, have a massive vested interest in
maintaining ill-health, creating disease and
manufacturing chemicals which will promote
this under the guise of 'therapy' for the
symptoms rarely ever the cause of
disease. Dr John Braithwaite, now a Trade
Practices Commissioner, in his expose,
Corporate Crime in the Pharmaceutical
Industry, states:
'International bribery and corruption,
fraud in the testing of drugs, criminal
negligence in the unsafe manufacturing
of drugs the pharmaceutical industry
has a worse record of law-breaking than
any other industry.'
In the US in 1978 1.5 million people were
hospitalised because of medication
side-effects alone. In 1991 in the US,
72,000 people were killed due to iatrogenic
that is doctor-induced causes whilst
24,073 died of victims of firearms
shootings, which makes doctors nearly three
times more lethal than guns! This has
serious implications for other countries
including Britain because the US are the
foremost pioneers in the health care field
and what occurs in health care in the US is
usually implemented in Britain a decade
later.
The drugs industry has managed to sell to
the majority of the world the idea that
disease is largely an inevitable part of
life, especially during the later years.
Through its front-line representatives the
medical system it has effectively reduced
the range of choices of health care to which
the public has access. Through funding and
educational control it has seen to it that
natural forms of treatment are largely
ignored and grossly under-researched. Those
organisations which do reveal the true
causes of disease and promote effective
forms of disease prevention, such as
nutritional medicine, healing and
naturopathy are regularly attacked in the
mass media and publicly labelled as quacks
by pharmaceutically-sponsored de-bunking
organisations such as the Campaign Against
Health Fraud, now called Healthwatch.
They have also sold to us the idea that
natural remedies and cures which have been
successfully employed for centuries are
'alternatives' and to be treated with great
scepticism and caution. Frequently, we are
told of how one or two people have been
injured or killed through the misapplication
of a herbal remedy by dubious alternative
practitioners but are not told at the same
time of the thousands who are damaged by the
conventional drugs which are handed out like
sweets by our doctors.
During their initiation into the Western
medical tradition most of our young doctors
are repeatedly informed by their superiors
that therapies which are alternative to
classic western medicine are fraudulent and
quackish. They are told that there is no
scientific evidence to support any of the
claims of psychic healing, crystal therapy,
colour therapy and the like and the whole
area is dismissed with a superior grin and a
wave of the hand. A mountain of study is
then hurled at the junior doctors, on top of
an already inhumane workload of practical
hours, to be spent absorbing the biased
views of their forebears. A junior doctor
has not even enough time to explore the
realms of stress-free relaxation never mind
alternative thought and therapies. Much the
same methods are used by certain religious
organisations to indoctrinate the minds of
their followers into a single belief system.
The key tactics, to which most doctors will
relate, are: maintenance of sleep
deprivation so as to minimise resistance to
teachings, isolation from the outside world
until one is literally eating, breathing and
sleeping the set doctrine of the cult, and
maintenance of a fear of failure to conform
through almost unachievably high level goal
setting; often via frequent examinations.
I believe that western medicine is as much a
dogmatic cult as popular Christianity or the
Moonies. It breeds its young on dogma to the
exclusion of free will and reasoned thought
in order to perpetuate itself. It is
controlled by instilling into its members
the fear of failure and it thrives by
exploiting the initial motivation of its
members, which is love and a desire to help
and heal others.
At the apex of the pyramid of medicine lie
the controllers; not doctors, but the
multinational pharmaceutical companies who
exist, not for the benefit of others, but
for the desire for money and power. And
behind them lies the sinister organisation
of global secret societies headed by the
Illuminati.
It is through this subtle mind control that
the System maintains itself. Veiled in
secrecy and fuelled by fear, the monster
machine controls every aspect of our lives.
The medical system is an integral part, but
nevertheless only one aspect, of the overall
design which seeks power and neither cares
how this power is achieved, nor how many
individuals are destroyed in the process.
As an example of the fraud perpetuated by
the pharmaceutical companies, the next
section will take a close look at the AIDS
scandal, which illuminates how these
companies have infiltrated every area of the
healthcare system are willing to endanger
people, allowing them to be killed, for
profit via the industry's tool of corruption
and front organisation, our own medical
system:
What is AIDS?
AIDS is defined as any one of twenty five
unrelated diseases plus a positive test for
the presence of antibodies to the Human
Immuno-deficiency Virus (HIV). It is said to
be transferred through intimate sexual
contact via the transfer of bodily fluids
such as semen and blood. It is also said to
be passed on through intravenous means by
needle-sharing drug users and infected blood
transfusions.
Nearly five hundred scientists world-wide,
including eminent doctors such as leading
University of California Professor of
Molecular Biology, Peter Duesberg, and
Australian biophysicist Eleni
Papadopoulous-Eleopoulos, Dr Charles Thomas
(former Harvard Professor of Biochemistry),
Dr Kary Mullis (1993 Nobel Prize-winner for
Chemistry), Dr Hank Loman (Professor of
Biophysical Chemistry, Free University of
Amsterdam), and Dr Steven Lomas (Professor
of Preventative Medicine, State University
of New York) are now convinced that AIDS is
not caused by HIV.
In simple terms, the facts just do not add
up. For example, there are many people with
AIDS but without HIV and vast numbers of
people who are HIV positive are not
developing AIDS. The tests for the presence
of retrovirus HIV the Western Blot Test
and the ELISA Test which show up HIV
positive status, are so inaccurate that
false positive tests can occur due to many
diseases such as malnutrition, multiple
infections, multiple sclerosis,
tuberculosis, leprosy, having once had the
'flu' or measles and the bodies natural
response to anal semen.
Once diagnosed as HIV positive, patients are
given regular blood tests to monitor their
immunological responses, particularly for a
drop in T-cell count. T-cells are released
in the immune response to disease to attack
invading antigens. A significant T-cell
drop, in many clinics, is the indicator that
active drug therapy should be commenced.
However, using T-cell counts as an indicator
of disease is entirely useless as the
average T-cell count for a healthy person
can range from 200 to 2000 over the course
of a normal day. Professor Ian Weller, who
co-ordinated the British arm of the Concorde
AZT trial testing the drug on healthy
HIV-positive volunteers, commented:
'The thing we have to remember about
CD4 (T-cell) counts is they are very
variable. They can vary in an individual
over the time of day... lower in the morning
and higher in the evening. They can be
affected by things that you do such as
walking to the clinic, as opposed to riding
a bike... the amount of sunshine can affect
them. Smoking as well.'
This whole area of inaccurate testing in the
area of AIDS and AIDS Related Conditions
(ARC) has accounted for many people being
incorrectly diagnosed as HIV positive, such
as in Africa where there is a supposed
epidemic; there is also a massive amount of
otherwise unrelated disease there too and it
is this factor which is causing the false
positives.
Once diagnosed, patients are then initiated
onto courses of highly toxic drugs such as
AZT, DDI and Septrin, many of the side
effects of which are the self same symptoms
as those of AIDS.
None of these AIDS defining diseases are
new. What is new, however, is the HIV test.
All research into this syndrome has been
based upon the findings of Robert Gallo, the
co-founder and patent holder of the test,
which have since been found to be
fraudulent. Gallo's partner and co-founder
of the HIV theory, Luc Montagnier, declared
in 1989:
'HIV is not capable of causing the
destruction to the immune system which is
seen in people with AIDS'.
One medical doctor who has practised and
lectured on medicine world-wide for over
thirty five years, Dr. Robert E. Wilner has
even publicly demonstrated that HIV does not
cause disease by injecting himself with the
blood of an HIV positive patient on Spain's
most popular television show; yet this never
made it to the press outside of Spain! In
his book 'Deadly Deception: The Proof
That Sex And HIV Absolutely Do Not Cause
AIDS', Dr. Wilner cites AZT as one of
the major causes of AIDS, he also insists
that 'HIV is simply a harmless piece of
tissue, not unlike numerous other
retroviruses that exist in our body' and
that 'AIDS is not transmitted sexually nor
is it contagious by any method!'
Dr Duesberg, recognised as one of, if not
the foremost retrovirus expert in the world,
points out:
'AZT is A Random Killer Of Infected And
Non-Infected Cells. AZT cannot discriminate
among them. It kills T-cells, B-cells, red
cells, it kills all cells. AZT is a chain
terminator of DNA synthesis of all cells
no exceptions. It wipes out everything. In
the long run it can only lead to death of
the organism and the cemetery. AZT is a
certain killer! Who will be responsible for
the death of patients (some 200,000 now
being treated with AZT and countless
thousands who have already died from it in
the past decade) that results from AZT
therapy pharmacological homicide?'
And furthermore, that:
'HIV does not cause AIDS... The point
that everyone is missing is that all of
those original papers, Gallo wrote on HIV
have been found fraudulent... The HIV
hypothesis was based on those papers.'
It is my opinion that these scientists are
correct and that HIV is not the cause of
AIDS. AIDS is not a single viral disease but
a collection of, in part, unrelated diseases
which are caused by disharmonious energies
in the fields of the holistic body, brought
about by all sorts of reasons. Undoubtedly
one of the major causes of death by
AIDS-related diseases is the inability of
the body to fight off the manifested disease
because the body has been weakened by the
very drugs given to suppress the disease.
Tests have shown that the only effective
treatments for AIDS are those which involve
the cessation of conventional drugs in
favour of unconventional natural therapies
such as Essiac, Oxygen/Ozone Therapy and
CanCell. However, these natural therapies
share a common theme in that they have all
been suppressed or withdrawn by governmental
agencies and those with vested interests in
the
pharmaceutical industry.
(To further support the fact that HIV is not
transferred sexually, Cathy O'Brien in her
book Trance Formation Of America,
points out that, despite being prostituted
to men in areas supposedly rife with AIDS,
none of her political abusers ever wore
protection during sex with her.)
Wellcome to Hell (compiled from Dirty
Medicine by Martin J Walker see
reference below)
Wellcome (Wellcome Burroughs in the US)
began as a pharmaceutical company set up in
1880 by Henry Wellcome and Silas Burroughs.
Its links to the Rockefeller Empire were
apparent in Henry Wellcome's appointing of
John and Allen Dulles of the Sullivan and
Cromwell law firm as those responsible for
any legal matters relating to the company
and his own will. With Henry Wellcome's
death in 1936, the Wellcome Trust was set up
in conjunction with the company (now the
Wellcome Foundation) and this has now become
one of the largest funders of medical
research in Europe. The Rockefeller
connection was also strengthened in the late
50's when Wellcome took over the running of
aspects of the Rockefeller funded London
University College Hospital Medical School
and their joint interests in tropical
illness research via the London School of
Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.
Over the following decades, Wellcome pursued
several aspects of pharmaceutical healthcare
with interests in general over-the-counter
remedies, anti-virals, animal healthcare,
genetic engineering and biotechnology. It
strengthened its connections within the
government, the media, medical academia and
the various committees, societies and
associations that were continuously being
set up to review, regulate and control all
aspects of scientific medical research and
education. It did this by making donations
to many of these organisations, such as the
British Association for the Advancement of
Science, the Parliamentary Science and
Technology Foundation, the Parliamentary
Office of Science and Technology, and the
British Medical Association's Foundation for
AIDS (to which it gave ฃ144,000 between 1988
and 1992), and by placing its own trustees,
researchers and 'experts' in prominent
positions within them. For example: Sir
Alastair Pilkington one time vice president
of the Foundation for Science and Technology
was a research scientist for Wellcome;
Professor C. Gordon Smith, Dean of the
London School of Hygiene and Tropical
Medicine was a Wellcome trustee; Lord Swann,
Director of the BBC in the 1980's was a
Wellcome trustee; Sir Alfred Shepperd, a
member of the Advisory Council on Science
and Technology(ACST) was Chairman of
Burroughs Wellcome and the Wellcome
Foundation until 1985; Professor Roy
Anderson, Head of Pure and Applied Biology
at London Imperial College of Science,
Technology and medicine and a member of ACST
was also a Wellcome trustee.
In the 1980's however, the company went
through some major rationalisations. In 1986
the decision was made to sell shares in the
Welcome drug company which had previously
been owned in its entirety by the Wellcome
Trust. In the following six years it also
sold off several areas of business including
Cooper Animal Healthcare a joint venture
with ICI producing organo-phosphate sheep
dip and its interests in vaccine
production. Production of general cough and
cold remedies was also reduced to a mere 14%
of sales while it began concentrating its
funds in the more profitable areas of
genetics, biotechnology and anti-virals.
AZT, marketed by Wellcome as Retrovir, had
been developed in the 60s as a drug to treat
cancer but it had proved to be highly toxic
as well as ineffective as it appeared unable
to distinguish between cancerous and healthy
cells. However, tests in vitro appeared to
show some anti-viral properties which was
why, after being shelved in the 60s, AZT was
re-tested for use in the treatment of AIDS
in the 1980s.
Human clinical drug trials, following
extensive (though useless) animal testing,
usually take place in two parts. Phase I
tests for toxicity; Phase II concentrates on
the long-term side-effects and efficacy, all
of which can take several years. In the case
of AZT the Phase II trials in America were
halted after 4 months when only 1 of the AZT
users as opposed to 19 of the control group
had died and the drug was granted a license
despite the fact that the patients in the
trial were given regular blood transfusions
to alleviate the possible side-effects (this
should, under usual circumstances, have
negated the results of the trial). This
licensing of AZT so quickly was
unprecedented and made Wellcome's profits
double to ฃ1132 million in the space of 4
years! As if this wasn't enough, subsequent
licenses for other AIDS drugs were issued
subject to the condition that they would
have to be tested against AZT and then only
prescribed in conjunction with it.
Incredibly, AZT was licensed in the UK
without any clinical trials four weeks
before it was licensed in the US. This,
perhaps, may have been due to the fact that,
of the 25 members of the Medicines
Commission who are parliamentary advisers on
medicine, 5 had interests in Wellcome; one
prominent member being Professor Trevor M.
Jones, Director of Research and Development
at Wellcome. And of the 21 members of the
Committee on the Safety of Medicines who
grant the licenses, two had interests in the
Welcome Foundation.
Within a short space of time, AZT was
licensed in 35 countries around the world
and Wellcome were promoting it with media
advertising, press releases and
all-expenses-paid conferences to which they
regularly invited the world's top scientists
and physicians, all the while denying any
suggestions that it caused harmful
side-effects.
Wellcome's influence on the media and the
government continued with its donation of
ฃ10,000 to the All Party Parliamentary Group
on AIDS (APOGA) as, with the Medical
Research Council, Wellcome began the trials
of AZT on asymptomatic HIV positive patients
the Concorde trials in October 1988.
From that point onwards most of the doctors
presenting information and writing for APGOA
were also involved in these trials. Not
content with promoting their own research in
the area of AIDS they also began to attack
any alternative treatments or anyone who
challenged the HIV=AIDS hypothesis.
Wellcome had also cornered the British
market in AIDS testing kits. With the help
of Dr. Robin Weiss and Angus Dalgleish from
the Institute of Cancer Research, a second
generation kit was marketed based on the
research by Campaign Against Health Fraud
(now Healthwatch) member, Professor Vincent
Marks, head of the Biochemistry Department
of Surrey University a department which
has received over half a million pounds from
Wellcome since 1985. In order to ensure that
anyone found to be HIV positive was
immediately directed towards 'help' from
AZT-promoting doctors, GP's were given very
limited access to the testing kits. They had
no choice but to send their patients to
Wellcome-infiltrated teaching hospitals and
STD clinics in London while the promotion
and sale of home testing kits was banned in
the UK (in 1992), thereby ensuring
Wellcome's complete monopoly in all aspects
of AIDS treatment and diagnosis.
Education about HIV and AIDS could also not
be overlooked and Wellcome donated
substantial funds to pay for a ฃ150,000
package for GPs, produced by the British
Medical Association.
The Concorde trials themselves, instead of
being independent, were almost totally under
Wellcome's influence. The initial reason for
the trials was to prove that AZT would be
effective in preventing the development of
ARC and AIDS in otherwise healthy HIV+
patients. Going against all established
regulations for the independence of such
trials, which in the past had the drug
companies supplying the drug and paying the
hospitals to do the trials, the Concorde
trial was set up jointly between Wellcome,
the Medical Research Council (MRC) and the
Department of Health. The MRC paid for the
treatment and the Department of Health
granted the use of six London hospitals, NHS
staff and facilities. Anyone with an HIV
positive test was encouraged to join the
trial without discussion of any alternative
treatments whilst being promised up to 3
years of free healthcare despite the fact
that the AZT drug was to be administered at
1000mg per day twice the dose recommended
by the US Food and Drug Administration and
the recent reports of serious side-effects
such as muscle wasting, anaemia and
impotence. Wellcome's crowning glory in this
deal, though, was to also insist that the
contract gave them complete control over the
writing of any reports about the trial. The
only report which had to be agreed between
all parties was the one for general
publication, if indeed any published report
was even deemed necessary.
Just to make absolutely sure of obtaining
the desired outcome, Wellcome had the help
of several 'friends' in the MRC who had just
as many, if not more, commitments to
industry and business matters than they did
to the medical establishment or the
government. Lord Jellicoe, Chairman of the
MRC's AIDS committee, was a director of the
Rockefeller company Morgan Crucible as well
as the sugar company Tate and Lyle and was
later chairman of Booker Tate confectionery;
Sir Donald Acheson worked for the Department
of Health but left in 1991 to work in the
Rockefeller funded School of Hygiene and
Tropical Medicine; Sir Austin Bide was Chief
Executive of Glaxo (now in partnership with
Wellcome) and had been a director of J.
Lyons & Co confectionery in the 70's. Sir
David Crouch, MP for Canterbury until 1987,
was director of Pfizer Ltd., a
pharmaceutical company which was the only
manufacturer of a synthesised ingredient of
AZT at that time and also ran several public
relations companies one of which, Kingsway
Rowland, handled Wellcome's AZT account; Dr
J. W. G. Smith, director of the Public
Health Laboratory Service since 1985 used to
be a Senior Lecturer at the School of
Hygiene and Tropical Medicine before going
to work for Wellcome as head of Bacteriology
in 1969; Professor D. A. Warrell was a
director of the Wellcome Tropical Research
Unit and has also done malaria research
funded by Wellcome and the Rockefeller
Foundation; Professor C. N. Hales is a
specialist in diabetes whose research is
often funded by pharmaceutical companies
including Wellcome.
With the above as the only 8 members of the
MRC Committee on AIDS and their Chairman
Lord Jellicoe, it is not surprising that a
drug once deemed to be too toxic, which has
never been properly tested and whose
side-effects, according to the British
National Formulary, bear s striking
resemblance to the symptoms of AIDS itself,
has been allowed to become the AIDS drug of
the 90's and has kept the profits rolling in
for Wellcome to the tune of an estimated
ฃ400 million a year.
Walker, Martin J.; Dirty Medicine:
Science, big business and the assault on
natural health care, (Slingshot
Publications, London, 1994).
AIDS Care and Treatment
'I will give no deadly
medicine to any one if asked.'
(from the Hippocratic Oath)
Walter's position as a staff nurse at
Newcastle General Hospital's Infectious
Disease Unit (ward 25), which is affiliated
with the London School of Tropical Medicine,
has given me an insight into the world of
AIDS treatment which is rarely seen and it
only serves to corroborate the research of
the aforementioned enlightened scientists,
whose numbers are ever increasing. The world
of AIDS care and treatment at the NGH has
some very sinister elements and I have no
reason to suspect that it is isolated to
this regional unit alone. Here is an outline
of some of the information which Walter has
provided:
According to the code of conduct
provided by the United Kingdom Central
Council for nursing and midwifery, the
nurse's role is to be the patient's advocate
and is, therefore, entrusted to provide care
in the best interest of the patient and to
decline from doing anything which is
detrimental to their well being. One of the
major areas covered by this is in the
administration of drugs; the nurse is
responsible for ensuring the correct dosage
of drug is given and is responsible also for
being aware of the effects and possible side
effects of the medication.
However, in the NGH unit, nurses are
expected to give all drugs prescribed by the
doctor whether or not any information on the
effects of the drug are available.
Frequently the prescribing doctor is unaware
of the true nature of the drugs and thus
unable to inform the nursing staff of the
effects and side effects of the drugs they
are using. Many and varied substances appear
and disappear periodically from the drugs
cupboard, often named only as a series of
numbers or letters. When challenged as to
the reason why they have prescribed such
unknown entities, the doctors usually reply
that their consultant has ordered it to be
given. The consultant is usually unavailable
for comment.
The side effects of the drugs have been
seen to be potentially harmful. For example,
one commonly used drug, Foscarnet, which is
given directly into the heart or eyes of a
patient, when dropped on a nurse's tights
dissolved them on contact. Common side
effects of this drug include epilepsy,
blindness and dementia. Many patients have
entered the unit with minor symptoms such as
weight loss and have, in a short space of
time, become blind and epileptic through
using it. Walter has frequently said to me,
'I'm poisoning people for a living', but if
he refused to give the drugs as prescribed
he would lose his job and someone would be
found who would administer them. The same is
true of the junior doctors who are afraid of
the vengeance from above if they were to
challenge the status quo. No challenge has
yet been made, even after I presented the
unit with detailed papers outlining the
research which has negated the 'HIV equals
AIDS' myth.
Once diagnosed as HIV positive, many
patients are then informed that the only
chance they have for extended survival is to
use the drugs provided. Obviously the
majority of patients, many of whom show very
few symptoms, are too afraid not to
co-operate with the regime. They then suffer
terribly and die a lingering and undignified
death.
As a response to many challenges Walter
has made to the medical staff to justify
their drugs regime, he has been branded
cynical and defeatist; as not wishing to
give the patients a chance for survival. In
reply to this he has asked on many occasions
for the doctors to give him even just one
example of anyone whom they have cured of
AIDS or significantly improved the quality
of life. Not one of them has been able to
give such an example.
Even if we were extending people lives,
in doing so we also inflict upon them such
diseases as makes for little or no quality
of life. What is the point of an extra year
of life if that year is spent as a living
vegetable? If we do have a prognosis of
death, then surely it is better to live that
remaining life to the full with our eventual
demise being as gentle and as dignified as
possible.
On one occasion, the unit exceeded its
drugs budget and feared a crisis in care. At
this point Wellcome stepped in and offered
its services for free on the condition that
they would supply the drugs as long as all
research notes were given directly to them
in return. It appears that the only figures
who were aware of anything like the full
picture were the consultants in charge and
the research nurse appointed by the company,
none of whom were willing to reveal anything
of the results of these apparently blind
drugs trials.
In effect, this means that the patients
on this unit are being treated by the
pharmaceutical scientists as human guinea
pigs, in order to test the various drugs
supplied. How are we to know that these
drugs are genuinely safe for the purpose of
therapy? Might they simply be poisons or
ineffectual chemicals thrown onto the
research pot in a vain attempt to happen
across some element of cure? Are they even
actively seeking a cure, knowing what we do
of their motivation?
Some of the drugs which have been
identified and are in regular use have long
since been discontinued in other areas of
medicine because they are ineffective and/or
dangerous. For example, A.Z.T. was once
considered too toxic to be given to
terminally ill cancer patients!
Interestingly, the official patient
leaflet, 'HIV and AZT, the choices', as
supplied to AIDS departments by
Wellcome, gives merely three examples of
side effects of the drug, i.e. anaemia,
which they say effects up to 40% of users;
headaches in 1-10% of users; and sickness in
25% of users which: 'almost always
disappear after a few weeks of treatment'.
The leaflet also states:
Most people do not suffer side
effects when they take AZT early. If they do
occur, there are ways of coping with them.
They may be reversed, if necessary by
stopping treatment.
If you thought that you may be facing
death through an incurable disease would you
stop taking the drug that has been hyped as
giving an extension of lifespan, I wonder?
Septrin is a combination of two
antibiotics and has been shown to be far
less effective and far more liable to
dramatic side effects than either of the
components when used individually
(interestingly, it is also nearly three
times more expensive than the more effective
and less harmful constituent ingredient
Trimethorprim).
Even Thalidomide is now being used on
Ward 25 for its anti-emetic properties.
Many patients diagnosed as terminally
ill have drawn up living wills in which they
often request a cessation of active
treatment in the end stages of disease.
These are frequently ignored by the doctors
who continue to pump toxins into dying
patients and claim to be simply following
orders from above. The point of which
escapes myself and Walter and quite often
the doctors themselves.
When a patient dies, relatives are
officially informed that their loved ones
are deemed as
dangerous waste and must, therefore, be
sealed and cremated for hygiene reasons. No
mention
is made of autopsy or further
experimentation and yet Walter has witnessed
conversations
amongst doctors regarding autopsy
findings on such people who were supposed to
have gone to
cremation unmolested. Is this further
pharmaceutical research?
One evening, in the absence of an
available doctor from the unit, Walter had
to call upon a
consultant from another area to advise
upon a matter. Whilst this covering doctor
was attending to
the issue Walter made known his
concerns about the dangerous amounts of
drugs a patient was
prescribed. This consultant agreed with
Walter that it was excessive and dangerous
and complied
with his request to discontinue the
majority of the drugs. He also admitted to
Walter that there
was definitely something extraordinary
and far reaching going on in this area which
was beyond
his jurisdiction. Furthermore, if he
had his way, the majority of the drugs given
on the unit would
never have been prescribed in the first
place. However, 'see no evil, hear no evil,
speak no evil'
seemed to be the order of the day and
that was the end of the matter.
All of this information is deeply
disturbing. As more and more evidence mounts
against the HIV theory, it
seems that the only way to survive AIDS is
to steer clear of the medical profession and
its terrible
drugs. If it is true of this one syndrome
then how true is it of other areas of
disease? Just how
manipulated are we by these companies? And
how much wheeling and dealing is going on
behind the
scenes between consultants and
pharmaceutical companies which directly
effects our well-being?
AIDS is a huge money spinner providing
millions of pounds of profit per day in
drugs sales and its
offshoot market of condom sales (Wellcome
also has links with the London Rubber
Company). It has
instilled a fear in the heart of our society
of free sexual expression and has given rise
to much bigotry
from the poorly educated who see AIDS as a
judgement from God or a punishment for
active
homosexuality. It has created a huge charity
industry, netting millions of pounds from
the world
population to fund further research to rid
the world of this affliction. And how much
misery and negativity
has it generated? Further research means
more experiments on both animals and humans.
And the
figures for economic growth just rise and
rise.
Truth A Cure For All Disease
As another example of the medical
conspiracy; would it shock you to find out
that there are, in use today, several
medically proven cures for cancer? One such
cure is Essiac and has been in use since at
least 1922; it has no known adverse side
effects. It is made from four common herbs
and elevates the
immune system. In 1937 it came within three
votes of being legalised as a cancer
treatment in Canada and was passed on to the
British Cancer Campaign by its founder, Rene
Caisse, via the Prince of Wales. And yet
today, it is still only available through
selected, virtually underground, outlets
world-wide.
I have many dozens of case studies which
testify to the efficacy of this treatment
(see Appendix IV).
Furthermore, in the 1930s a man named Royal
Raymond Rife developed a very high powered
microscope, almost seven times more powerful
than those in use at the time, which could
detect organisms which cause diseases such
as infections and cancers. He did this by
illuminating these organisms at their own
specific frequency of light and could,
therefore, examine them and their effects
whilst they remained alive as opposed to
killing them first using dye stains or high
powered electron microscopy as was the norm.
He then discovered that, by altering the
frequency of their environment microbes
could mutate and change their size and shape
to resemble viruses and bacteria alike,
thereby enabling the same microbe to cause
many diverse diseases. For example, the same
germs which cause pus streptococci could
also become the germs which cause pneumonia
pneumococci in response to an alteration
in their environment. Rife also discovered
that by bombarding these organisms with
higher frequencies of light, he could
destroy them. He demonstrated that it was
possible to create and destroy cancers at
will and succeeded in curing otherwise
terminal patients of this disease, as well
as others such as polio and typhus, in
almost 100% of cases.
Today, it is conventionally accepted that
single specific germs are responsible for
single specific forms of infection. This
theory was advanced by the French scientist
Pasteur but was disputed by his rival
Bechamp who was in favour of the mutation
theory known as pleomorphism. We are rarely
informed in text books that, according to
his co-worker, Dr Duclaux, Pasteur himself
changed his mind and revoked his 'germ
theory' in favour of one closer to that of
pleomorphism. However, over 100 years later,
Pasteur's original germ theory is still the
standard working model for the understanding
of the action of microbes in the body.
Many types of bacteria exist in a symbiotic
relationship with our bodies all of the time
and only become symptomatic once the
physical body begins to deteriorate due to
an unhealthy lifestyle. Bacteria are then
free to scavenge the 'soil' produced in the
disease process, i.e. when the tissues
degenerate to a similar frequency as the
microbes, releasing dead organic matter
similar to viruses upon which these microbes
feed (remember Wilner's definition of the
HIV retrovirus?). They then excrete this
dead matter as waste products via the
bloodstream, faeces or other exudates such
as mucous. The extent to which the bacteria
can multiply is limited to the amount of
soil upon which they have to feed and could
not be capable of invading the body to the
extent to which science would have us
believe unless there was already an adequate
food supply. Furthermore, as has been
demonstrated in Rife's vibratory work, it is
possible for these microbes to mutate into
other forms and even to cancer-causing
agents according to their environmental
conditions, defined by the degree of
concentration of waste products and the
vibratory rate. The subsequent systemic and
metabolic reaction to these toxic excreted
waste products, such as sore throat and high
temperature (the body's natural way of
eradicating the bacteria), are generally the
symptoms of diseases which are given
priority in day to day general medical
practice, whereupon drugs are usually given
to suppress them. In giving antibiotics we
often succeed in killing the very microbes
which are removing the diseased body's dead
matter during the natural healing process.
In doing so we also open up our bodies to
other forms of disease such as fungal
infections which are usually kept at bay by
the natural presence of bacteria.
Another effective cure for AIDS and cancer
has been successfully employed in clinical
practise all over the world for at least
fifty years and is a cure for virtually all
germ diseases. This is Oxygen/Ozone therapy.
The principle behind it is simplicity itself
and is the reason why the pharmaceutical
companies and drug agencies are so afraid of
it that they have conspired to suppress it
also. It is conventionally accepted that the
majority of germs are anaerobic, which means
that they survive without oxygen. Therefore,
if one floods the bloodstream with oxygen,
these organisms cannot survive. Oxygen is
one of the fundamental and most necessary
elements to human survival. It exists as
air, water and most of our food sources such
as carbohydrates. The human race has evolved
in levels of oxygen far higher than exist in
today's polluted and tree-depleted world and
we are all running on less than is desirable
for optimum health; especially the
city-dwellers. Foods and food supplements
which release high levels of oxygen such as
in the form of Hydrogen Peroxide are
beneficial to our well-being. Indeed,
Hydrogen peroxide itself, when taken in
dilute form or applied directly to wounds is
one of the most effective antiseptics and
healing compounds there is.
I believe disease is the result of
disharmonious energy fields which can be
caused by both physical and non-physical
disharmony. Thus, dis-ease can be eradicated
by oxygen therapy because it boosts the
immune system by raising our vibratory rate,
thereby making our bodies healthy. It is a
simple fact that disease cannot exist in a
healthy body.
According to the testimonies of
international MD's assembled at the May 1983
Sixth World Ozone (a concentrated form of
Oxygen Therapy) Conference in Washington,
D.C.:
Ozone eliminates... viruses and
bacteria from blood, human and stored...
Medical ozone is successfully used on AIDS,
Herpes, Hepatitis, Mononucleosis, Cirrhosis
of the liver, Gangrene, Cardiovascular
Disease, Arteriosclerosis, High Cholesterol,
Cancerous Tumours, Lymphomas, Leukaemia...
Highly effective on Rheumatoid and other
Arthritis, Allergies of all types...
Improves Multiple Sclerosis, ameliorate
Alzheimer's Disease, Senility and
Parkinson's... Effective on Proctitis,
Colitis, Prostate, Candidiasis,
Trichomoniasis, Cystitis; Externally, ozone
is effective in treating Acne, burns, leg
ulcers, open sores and wounds, Eczema and
fungus.
In 1976, the US FDA hindered the progress of
this form of therapy by stating: "Ozone is a
toxic gas with no known medical uses".
And yet, one doctor using ozone in his work
with colonic cancer patients, Dr Hans Neiper,
from Hanover, despite refusing to divulge
the names of his cancer patients, stated in
1987:
'President Reagan is a very nice man.'
And, 'You wouldn't believe how many FDA
officials or relatives or acquaintances of
FDA officials come to see me in Hanover. You
wouldn't believe this, or directors of the
American Medical Association (AMA), or
American Cancer Association, or the
residents of orthodox cancer institutes.
That's the fact.'
Oxygen/Ozone therapy researcher and
ambassador, Ed McCabe states:
Let's compare medical ozone therapy
with prescription drugs. In 1978 the FDA
reported 1.5 million were hospitalised in
the USA due to the side-effects of
medication. On the other hand, medical ozone
has been legally used in clinics world-wide
on a daily basis since the forties, and in
Germany 644 ozone therapists were surveyed,
and they reported 384,775 patients had
received 5,579,238 ozone treatments. The
side-effect rate was only 0.0007% during
5.5 million dosages! Yet, each year
approximately 140,000 people in the US die
from prescription drug usage.
To this day researchers maintain that the
exact causes of and cures for cancer are
unknown whilst many others who claim that
they do know are frequently the victims of a
conspiracy of suppression by governmental
agencies and corporate business interests.
It is vital that we understand the true
nature of disease if we are to be effective
in its eradication. It is imperative that we
use the total sum of our knowledge to combat
disease and work together as a
multi-disciplinarian society, not in
isolated, self-interested units. We must
open our eyes to the realities and seek the
best of conventional and unconventional
medicine. We must concentrate on why we are
ill and not simply seek to eradicate
symptoms of disorders which we often see as
inevitable. Disease is not our natural
state, it is not inevitable. It is an
outward physical display of disharmony whose
cause is far more significant than its
symptoms. The responsibility for health lies
with all of us, not only with doctors or
governments.
How many millions flock to the doctor and
expect some treatment for a symptom, caring
not for the cause but seeking only the
relief of discomfort? And who is to blame
them? They are victims of the pharmaceutical
conspiracy too. According to these
scientists, and medical practitioners who
find employment within the System, there is
little evidence to give credence to any form
of medicine other than their own. Or so they
and we are told.
They seem deaf to the testimonies of the
healers and the healed who stand before them
as living proof of the power of mind over
matter, homeopathy and herbalism etc. It is
healthy to be sceptical but there is a
danger of sceptic thought becoming septic
thought if it fails to reason with an open
mind and allow for progress. Any doctor who
fails to open their mind to the information
such as is presented in this book is missing
the opportunity to fulfil their true role as
healers of the sick. There is without doubt
a conspiracy of wilful ignorance amongst the
cult of western medicine, as even
scientifically verified proof of the healing
power of channelled energy has been ignored
by the majority of practitioners.
One smoke-screen which is constantly
employed by the major drug companies is the
regular promise that they are 'currently
working on a new form of treatment which
could soon revolutionise the treatment of
'.
Such stories are picked up by the press and
t.v science programmes with great fervour.
They are nearly always described in terms of
'miracle cure' and point out that adequate
funding is necessary for the fulfilment of
the prophecy in another 2 or 3 years time.
However, when 2 or 3 years time finally
arrives we have all conveniently forgotten
about the promised miracle drug whilst
anxiously awaiting the fulfilment of yet
further promises of drugs which are 'hoped'
will one day prove to be the end of yet
another terrible disease.
And this is the industry which denigrates
the field of natural health for taking
advantage of the sick and for so cruelly
promising fake cures and providing false
hope! The obvious lesson here is that to
disguise your own sins you must accuse your
enemies of them and to always do it before
your enemy has a
chance to formulate their defence. Mud
usually sticks to the one it first lands
upon. This a political trick which has been
used to devastating effect by the key
manipulators of this century in all areas
and has been used to shift public opinion in
favour of some of the greatest atrocities
ever committed.
The Elite via chemo-pharmaceutical companies
and food and water production services
penetrate all areas of health care and use
it to promote and execute their policies of
population control, mind control and 'divide
and rule', whilst making vast sums of money
into the bargain.
Vivisection far more than an animal rights
issue!
This section is intended to be read in order
that the sinister implications of animal
experiments upon the whole of mankind are
thoroughly understood. I am aware, from
personal experience of street campaigning
for animal rights issues, that many people
who care passionately about animals find it
simply too distressing to see or read any
form of evidence to this effect.
Consequently, I have chosen not to give
practical details about individual animal
experiments in the coming discourse
Instead I will focus upon the scientific
fraud perpetrated by vivisectors and how
their warped ethos that vivisection is a
valuable scientific tool has corrupted the
progress of medicine and upset the delicate
balance of the minds of millions world-wide.
I seek to show how vivisection is an
integral part of the manipulation of society
(the vivisectors themselves being amongst
the most completely manipulated of all) by
the very same consciousness and indeed the
very same people I have already discussed.
Nothing is worse than vivisection! No other
single factor causes more pain, distress and
death to humans and animals.
Nor is there any less scientific or ethical
method of research currently being employed
in industry or educational establishments
anywhere in the world.
Unless you have read the books and seen the
video footage which I and thousands of other
anti-vivisection campaigners have been
required to endure, nothing in your
imagination can paint for you anything like
the true picture of the hell of animal
experiments. In fact, if you can conjure up
the most heinous spectacle of abuse within
your mind, be assured that this is precisely
what is being done today, but probably much
worse, around the world in schools,
universities and research labs owned by
private companies and then some. It is
being done with our money, and in order to
provide huge mega-wealthy pharmaceutical
companies with staggering profit and as an
excuse to provide jobs for vivisectors. It
is also perpetuated to ensure that mankind
never becomes learned about the true nature,
cause and cure of disease.
Two thousand animals per minute die as a
result of gruesome experiments; that is 250
million per year; approximately 3.5 million
per year in Great Britain alone. Over 75% of
these experiments are done without
anaesthetics, and when they are, they are
often inadequately applied. Most experiments
are done with public money. 0.2% of the
animals used are for the testing of
cosmetics. In Britain there are merely 19
Home Office inspectors to cover 20,000
licensed vivisectors.
The practise of animal experimentation has
been the mainstay of medical and biological
research since the early 1800s even though
it has brought about not one major
breakthrough in medical science. And yet,
every medical student, in order to pass his
or her exam and advance in their chosen
career must quote the results of animal
experiments.
How can respect for life, compassion and
empathy be taught to and nurtured in our
doctors through a practise which
necessitates the ignorance of pain,
suffering, anxiety terror and death, as is
the case with the training process of US
doctors who regularly dissect live animals
as part of their training? The answer is
simple: It can't.
The animal experimenters are the cornerstone
of the highly corrupt and manipulative
pharmaceutical industry. These are a
pseudo-scientific fraternity who earn vast
amounts of money for their employers by
performing unbelievably barbaric experiments
which can be used to (falsely) substantiate
claims that their drugs are safe for human
use. Dr. James D. Gallagher, Director of
Research of Lederle Laboratories in the
Journal of the American Medical Association,
March 14, 1964 stated:
'Animal studies are done for legal
reasons and not for scientific reasons. The
predictive value for such studies for man is
meaningless which means our research may
be meaningless.'
There is no British or European law which
states that new drugs, chemicals or
cosmetics must be tested on animals.
However, animal testing ensures that
vivisectors get the results they want in
order to sell their dangerous chemicals to
an unwary public. In numerous legal trials
of drug companies who have caused fatalities
and injuries, the most effective defence
which has been used time and again is that:
'All of the usual and required testing had
been done to establish the safety of the
drug in question'. A standpoint which most
legal authorities are not qualified to
dispute. Indeed, the 'experts' upon whom
they call for advice in such matters are
invariably members of other drug companies
or drug sponsored agencies and therefore the
animal testing fraternity.
Animal experiments have been cited in many
court battles over drugs damages claims and
have been used both to defend the idea that
such disasters were unforeseen because
adequate testing had been employed, but have
also been successfully used, as in the
Thalidomide case in December 1970, to
admonish the drug company (in this case
Chemie Grunenthal) who testified that animal
tests could never be conclusive for humans.
The very idea that a test or operation done
on an animal will show results which are
directly translatable to humans is plainly
ridiculous. As has been stated by some of
the greatest and most influential physicians
in medical history: the anatomy, physiology
and psychology of animals is entirely
different to our own in many ways, and this
difference is further exaggerated in the
case of animals bred for and/or housed in
laboratories. This can be plainly
illustrated in many ways; here are just a
few:
The LD 50 (Lethal Dose 50%) test, which
is the standard toxicity technique used to
establish how much of a chemical toxin
is required to kill half of a number of
animals. These animals are specifically
bred to be exactly identical in every way,
i.e. genetically and physically they are the
same size and weight. And yet, an
equivalent dose of a toxin, in equal
quantity and strength will succeed in
killing merely half of the batch whilst
leaving half to suffer varying degrees of
disablement. These results are then
haphazardly translated to give the figure
for safe and fatal levels for humans.
There are 12 different methods which
determine statistically the safety of
chemicals for humans from animal
experiments. These may disagree by up to a
factor of four. It is accepted that
animal tests are successful in identifying
cancer-causing agents in only 37% of
cases. This means, in effect, that the
results of the tests are more times wrong
than right and are significantly
statistically worse than tossing a coin.
As stated by Hans Ruesch in The Naked
Empress or the Great Medical Fraud:
'Two grams of scopolamine kill a
human being, but dogs and cats can stand
hundred times higher dosages. A
single Aminata phalloides mushroom can wipe
out a whole human family, but is
health food for the rabbit, one of the
favourite laboratory animals. A
porcupine can eat one lump without
discomfort as much opium as a
human addict smokes in two weeks, and wash
it down with as much prussic acid
to poison a regiment of soldiers. The sheep
can swallow enormous quantities of
arsenic, once the murderer's favourite
poison. Morphine, which calms and
anaesthetises man, causes maniacal
excitement in cats and mice. On the
other hand our sweet almond can
kill foxes, our common parsley is poisonous
to parrots, and our revered
penicillin strikes another favourite
laboratory animal dead the
guinea pig.'
It is fortunate for many that penicillin was
never tested on guinea pigs at the outset
where it would have immediately been
discarded as dangerous. And if you want to
prove that vitamin C is useless, withhold it
from the diet of dogs which produce
vitamin C in the gut. Moreover, the whole
discipline of surgery and post surgical
recovery was hindered for hundreds of years
after the Greek Galen (Second Century AD)
showed through animal experimentation that
the principle laid down by Hippocrates
(Fifth century BC) was incorrect that
hygiene and a good diet (as well as
establishing the simple fact that nature
heals) was essential to good health and
medicine. Galen maintained this standpoint,
which seems bizarre by today's standards,
because animals did not readily succumb to
infections following childbirth and surgical
procedures. Galen's animal experiments
caused a rejection of Hippocratic values and
a reduction in surgical asepsis. This
destructive attitude was supported by the
Catholic Church and was
only substantially reversed in the 1800s
following the discovery of the germ and how
cleanliness and
sterilisation could prevent bacterial
infection.
The following is a list of drugs which were
passed as safe for human consumption on the
back of animal
tests and the damage which they subsequently
caused:
Eraldin (for heart disease) Corneal
damage including blindness.
Paracetamol (painkiller) 1,500 people
had to be hospitalised in Great Britain in
1971.
Orabilex caused kidney damages with
fatal outcome.
MEL/29 (anti-hypertensive) caused
cataracts.
Methaqualone (hypnotic) caused severe
psychic disturbances leading to at least 366
deaths,
mainly through murder or suicide.
Thalidomide (tranquilliser) caused
10,000 malformed children.
Isoproterenol (asthma) caused 3,500
deaths in the sixties.
Stilboestrol (prostate cancer) caused
cancer in young women.
Trilergan (anti-allergic) caused
viral hepatitis.
Flamamil (rheumatism) caused loss of
consciousness.
Phenformin (diabetes) caused 1,000
deaths annually until withdrawn.
Atromid S (cholesterol) caused deaths
from cancer, liver, gallbladder and
intestinal disease.
Valium (tranquilliser) addictive in
moderate doses.
Preludin & Maxiton (diet pills)
caused serious damage to the heart and the
nervous system.
Nembutal (insomnia) caused insomnia.
Pronap & Plaxin (tranquilliser)
killed many babies.
Phenacetin (painkiller) caused severe
damages to kidneys and red blood corpuscles.
Amydopyrine (painkiller) caused blood
disease.
Marzine (nausea) damaged children.
Reserpine (anti-hypertensive)
increased risks of cancer of the brain,
pancreas, uterus, ovaries,
skin and women's breasts.
Methotrexate (leukaemia) caused
intestinal haemorrhage, severe anaemia and
rumours.
Urethane (leukaemia) caused cancer of
liver, lungs and bone marrow.
Mitotane (leukaemia) caused kidney
damage.
Cyclophosphamide (cancer) caused
liver and lung damage.
Isoniazid (tuberculosis) caused liver
destruction.
Kanamycin (tuberculosis) caused
deafness and kidney destruction.
Chloromycetin (typhoid) caused
leukaemia, cardiovascular collapse and
death.
Phenolphthalein (laxative) caused
kidney damage, delirium and death.
Clioquinol (diarrhoea) caused
blindness, paralysis and death.
DES (prevent miscarriage) caused
birth defects and cancer.
Debendox (nausea) caused birth
defects.
Accutane (acne) caused deafness and
kidney destruction.
(Taken from Vivisection: Science or Sham by
Dr. Roy Kupsinel, and Naked Empress by Hans
Ruesch)
Vivisectors often claim credit for many
advances in medicine which have been brought
about by
non-vivisection methods. Frequently, they
will quote animal experiments which show the
same results
without also disclosing the pioneering
previous non-animal discovery. One example
of this is the case of
vaccinations. Whilst it is certainly true
that many diseases which have decimated
mankind for centuries,
such as polio, smallpox, whooping cough,
tuberculosis, diphtheria and tetanus have
seen a dramatic
decline over the last century or so, it is
not because of the introduction of
vaccinations. Figures show
that such diseases were long in decline
before the introduction of vaccinations and
that the rate of fall
was severely impeded once they were
introduced. Advances in hygiene, sanitation,
nutrition and wealth
status are the obvious reasons for the
improvement of the world's health overall.
Vaccinations are
responsible for causing many of the diseases
they are supposed to cure as well as
compromising the
immune systems of the vulnerable, especially
babies who are statistically more likely to
suffer Sudden
Infant Death Syndrome within weeks of having
their initial standard vaccinations.
The vivisectionists are master manipulators.
They invest huge amounts of money in massive
PR
organisations such as the Research Defence
Society in the UK. Furthermore, they have
infiltrated many
areas of the Anti-Vivisection (AV) movement
and have created much confusion in the minds
of the public
as to the truth behind this barbaric trade
in misery. An example of this was
highlighted in possibly the
greatest expose of vivisection industry ever
written, The Slaughter of the Innocent by
Hans Ruesch:
An interesting case was the Animal
Protection league of Basel. Its president,
Dr Rudolph
Schenkel, professor of ethology,
criticised the revival of antivivisectionist
feeling in
Switzerland. Thereafter, the
establishment press could write that 'even
the animal
defenders disapprove of the
antivivisectionists' views.' A closer look
at Schenkel revealed
that:
1.His league had received a donation
of 200,000 Swiss francs (about $100,000)
from
Hoffman-La Roche, 'for its animal
shelter' with no questions asked.
2.His own wife was experimenting on
animals in the endocrinology department of
Ceiba-Geigy.
When my CIVIS organisation brought
about these facts, Schenkel dropped all
pretence of
being an animal protectionist: at the
next convention of Swiss animal protection
groups
(SPCAs), he argued that 'since
laboratory animals are a product of human
enterprise, we
can do with them as we please.' (My
highlight added.)
(This infiltration tactic is not solely
within the realms of the AV movement but is
widespread throughout
the animal rights movement. This is
exemplified at present by the large scale
enrolment of blood-sports
practitioners [fox and stag hunters etc.]
with the RSPCA whereby they are steadily
creating a significant
policy influencing force by taking advantage
of the apathy of many members who do not
turn out to vote
upon Society matters. The RSPCA also has
financial investments in companies that
support vivisection.)
The smoke-screen perpetuated by vivisectors
that it is preferable to test drugs on
animals than on
humans, and the emotive stance that 'it's
your child or an animal', is probably the
most effective way that
they ensure public support for their
industry. What they always fail to say is
that all drugs are tested on
humans immediately after the animal trials
and often without the patient's knowledge or
consent. Those
that are informed of the trial are usually
reassured to know that 'animal studies have
shown the drug to
be safe'.
AV supporters are simply people who have
come to realise the truth about this
situation and have
committed themselves to being a part of the
process of change and reformation to abolish
this massive
and system of cruel fraud, both for the sake
of the animals and humans. However, they are
usually
portrayed in the media as extremists; an
inevitable side-effect of a necessary evil.
Ordinary people who
are deemed responsible enough to bear and
raise children, minister to the sick, save
lives, handle the
nation's wealth, run for political seats
etc., once they have made an AV stance, are
immediately
demoted to, at best 'irrational' and
'oversensitive', or, at worst,
'people-hating terrorists' with no right to
express an opinion about such matters. Once
branded as such they are given about as much
regard as
are the animals in the laboratory cages and
are made largely impotent on the political
scene because
MPs do not consider it a wise career move or
vote winner to consort with anyone
considered to be
extremist.
In the case of vivisection, the public is
all too willing to accept that it is a
necessary part of modern
progress and not really cruel at all. One
reason for this is because the alternative,
i.e. the truth, is almost
too great a burden to accept. Such a stance
is often taken in defence of one's own
sanity as a mental
survival technique in order that one does
not go mad with the anger, sorrow,
frustration and terrible
empathy which the idea of vivisection evokes
in us. Therefore, the vivisectors have yet
another advantage
over the masses in the battle to keep them
convinced of the verity of their cause,
whilst the AV
organisations have to face a perpetual
uphill struggle against the tide of wealth,
mind control, tradition
and human apathy which is forever on the
side of the manipulators.
As George Bernard Shaw once stated, 'Whoever
doesn't hesitate to vivisect will hardly
hesitate to lie
about it'.
By creating a 'healthcare' (more accurately
termed 'ill-healthcare') system which relies
upon the
misleading results of animal experiments,
the manipulators of this century have
ensured that, within the
system, the true causes and cures for
disease will never be revealed. This in turn
creates a
self-perpetuating industry for the
multinationals who, by creating disease via
their drugs, can be assured
of massive funding in order to discover a)
the reason for the drug error, which is
guaranteed to involve
further animal studies, and b) further drugs
to treat the results of the initial drug
error. In the, by now, all
too familiar pattern: the manipulators
perpetuate the problem of a state of global
ill health and therefore
the need for the solution which is offered
in the form of more and more pharmaceutical
involvement.
For the sake of your selves, your children
and the animals: WAKE UP PEOPLE! Take back
your power
over your own health and stop supporting
these barbaric and sick individuals. Only
you can do this. The
time to do this is now.
