GAY/LIBERAL MYTH MURDERS MILLIONS OF CHILDREN

'AIDS' attributed deaths (the majority from the 'side effects' of 'meds') from CDC estimated at 16,371 in 2002

Cardiovascular Disease kills 950,000 every year, yet receives over 1/2 Billion less than AIDS

Diabetes kills more Americans than 'AIDS' and breast cancer combined, yet the NIH spends only $80 on each diabetic

Alzheimer's Disease kills 3.3 times more than 'AIDS', yet the NIH spends only $155 on each patient with Alzheimer's Disease

Prostate cancer kills 2 times more than 'AIDS', yet the NIH spends only $150 on each patient with prostate disease

Hepatitis C (HCV) kills 12,000, yet the NIH spends only $25 on each hepatitis C patient

Parkinson's Disease death rate similar to 'AIDS' yet the NIH spends $162 on each patient

West Nile Virus cases in 2003: 9,858 with 262 deaths. West Nile Virus research allocation is $4,361 per patient. 406 cases and 7 deaths in 2004

Total USA HIV/AIDS budget for 2005 totals 20 Billion. 13.4 Billion for care, cash & housing assistance for patients. (From Henry J Kaiser Foundation)

The infection rate for 'AIDS' throughout the entire world is 1 percent or less except in two countries, Sub-Saharan Africa and the Caribbean

Monkeypox cases confirmed in the USA: 37. SARS confirmed cases: 8. Deaths: 0 Research monies unknown. Press coverage: disproportionate.

Diarrhoea: kills over 2m Pneumonia: kills over 2m Malaria: kills about 1m (So called) Aids: kills about 0.3m Measles: kills 0.1m

Funny how you never hear about Diarrohea or see glossy TV commercials about the deaths it causes.

'AIDS' in Africa is based on the useless Bengui Definition that fits EVERY epidemic disease in the Third World (not even tests) and accounts for a mere 3% (WHO figure) of mortalities (even if you are fool enought to still believe in it) and yet commands 80%+ of ALL funding.

AIDS is AID$ - Tell your State representitive - NO MORE WASTE - NO MORE FUNDING.

Millions of children die needlessly (Liberals and gays responsible for 11 million children dying a year)

Nearly 11 million under age 5 succumb each year, largely to easily preventable illnesses, health experts say.

By EMMA ROSS The Associated Press

LONDON – The lives of 6 million children under 5 could be saved every year if flu shots and other low-cost measures to prevent or treat disease were more widely used, global health experts say.

Every year, nearly 11 million children worldwide die before their fifth birthdays, most from preventable causes such as diarrhea, pneumonia, neonatal problems and malaria.

Malnutrition is a major factor in more than half those deaths, researchers estimate. In a series of articles this week in The Lancet medical journal, experts say inexpensive lifesaving measures - such as breast feeding, insecticide-treated bed nets, flu shots, antibiotics, newborn resuscitation and clean childbirth - are not reaching the mothers and children who need them most.

Scaling up those interventions to a level that would save 6 million lives a year would cost about $7.5 billion annually, the experts say.

In the 1980s, the world made great progress in reducing unnecessary child deaths through a UNICEF campaign called the child-survival revolution.

But the momentum was lost in the 1990s. "We have dropped the ball," said one of the experts, Cesar Victora, professor of epidemiology at the Federal University of Pelotas in Brazil. "Child survival has fallen off the international agenda. We need now a second revolution to finish this job."

The number of deaths among children under 5 fell from 117 per 1,000 live births in 1980 to 93 per 1,000 in 1990. Today, the death rate is still declining but not as quickly - in 2000, it was 83 per 1,000.

Experts stressed two main reasons why progress appears to have stalled.

In the 1990s that HIV/AIDS (myth) shifted the world's attention and resources toward fighting that specific 'diseases'. "I'm not saying that it was wrong (well, I am), but child health lost out in that," said Hans Troedsson, director of child and adolescent health and development at the World Health Organization.

The experts noted that the total number of child deaths each year is greater than deaths due to HIV, malaria and tuberculosis combined.

The other major factor was complacency, experts say. "We were doing really well," Troedsson said. "There was a kind of attitude that the job was more or less finished. That kind of perception meant that a lot of investments and commitments to keep the steam in child survival was actually lost."

Other experts said the death of former UNICEF leader Jim Grant, who spearheaded the child-survival revolution of the 1980s, left a void in global leadership as UNICEF's focus shifted toward children's rights and education. The U.N. children's agency said it still spends most of its money on child-survival programs and that many of its newer strategies addressing children's rights and education translate in the long term to better child survival.

"The easy gains have been made," said UNICEF spokeswoman Marjorie Newman-Williams. "We have now plateaued because the strategies we have to put in place are more difficult."

Whereas earlier strategies were focused on delivering vaccines and medicines to clinics, future progress does not necessarily depend on that, she said. The benefits of that approach have been mostly mined, she said.

Many of the actions that will reduce the deaths now are those that have to be taken into the home, such as breast-feeding, bed nets and proper infant nutrition after weaning. "Those three heavily depend on women's time, women's knowledge and availability," Newman-Williams said. "And to reduce neonatal mortality, you have to focus on women's health. This is not a child health intervention."

Moderate Malnutrition Kills Millions Of Children Needlessly

ITHACA, N.Y. -- About 90 percent of child deaths worldwide occur in just 42 countries -- and about one-fourth of these deaths occur before age 5 in the poorest countries, such as Angola and Niger.
Yet, 8 million of the 11 million childhood deaths worldwide each year could easily be prevented, says a Cornell University expert, writing in the authoritative medical journal The Lancet . That's because almost 60 percent of deaths of children under 5 in the developing world are due to malnutrition and its interactive effects on preventable diseases.

"Every single day -- 365 days a year -- an attack against children occurs that is 10 times greater than the death toll from the World Trade Center," says Jean-Pierre Habicht, professor of epidemiology and nutritional sciences at Cornell. "We know how to prevent these deaths -- we have the biological knowledge and tools to stop this public health travesty, but we're not yet doing it."

Habicht is a member of the Bellagio Child Survival Study Group, made up of leading child-health researchers, that has authored a series of five articles in The Lancet on how to prevent the global toll on young children. The first article is published in the June 28 issue; the other four will follow in the next four consecutive issues.

Only 10 years ago, child-health experts believed that malnutrition played only a negligible role in child mortality in the developing world. Then, Habicht and his colleagues at Cornell published a study showing that the majority of these childhood deaths were due to the interactive effect of malnutrition on disease. They also reported that more than 80 percent of malnutrition-related deaths were due to mild-to-moderate malnutrition rather than severe malnutrition.

The Cornell nutritionists had already shown that malnutrition worsens with illness in malnourished children. This compares with the effects of the same illnesses on well-nourished children, who do not become malnourished. Researchers report that malnourished children are up to 12 times more likely to die from easily preventable and treatable diseases than are well-nourished children."Malnutrition kills in two strokes -- it makes children more vulnerable to severe malnutrition if they fall ill, and this, in turn, contributes substantially to the global level of malnutrition that kills if a child is ill," says Habicht.

"Thus the first step in preventing child death is to make sure that every child is well nourished, which is both scientifically and economically feasible."
Habicht points out that both malnourished and better nourished children are killed by a few preventable diseases, such as measles, malaria, diarrhea and pneumonia, which can be prevented or managed effectively to prevent death. "These are also the diseases that kill malnourished children, so that dealing with these diseases is a first step for well-fed children and a fall-back step for malnourished children. Preventing deaths from these diseases costs only pennies per year," Habicht says.

Sadly, the childhood death toll remains high despite effective and inexpensive preventions because of problems at upper levels of organizations, Habicht and the Bellagio Group assert. Either families don't get the information they need to seek medical care or help is not available because the organization of services is inadequate. "These issues turn out to be more difficult to resolve than the biological challenge was," Habicht says. "Remarkably little research is devoted to developing, testing and implementing strategies for care compared to the amount of research that goes into improving the biological effectiveness of care."

The series of papers in The Lancet calls for a strategy to make health care more equitable, preventing one-third to one-half of childhood deaths without an increase in resources.

"It is, however, naive to think that the research, development and implementation of new strategies can be undertaken without more resources devoted to health care, even if in the long run they will become less expensive as efficiency improves," Habicht says. Unfortunately, international funding for health care in developing countries is flagging. Washington is proposing to spend one-third less on international maternal and child health in the next federal budget, he says.

"We know how to prevent the deaths of millions of children," Habicht concludes. "Now we just have to do it."

This story has been adapted from a news release issued by Cornell University.

http://wid.ap.org/science/royalties.html
Two top scientists - Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and his deputy, H. Clifford Lane - are among 916 government researchers who have been receiving royalties on experimental drug treatments without disclosing those royalties on their annual ethics forms or on experimental patient consent forms.

The practice is legal, though NIH says it has now
drafted a policy to require disclosure.

Health officials say the current and former employees are collecting royalties on drugs or medical inventions they developed while working for the government. The royalties are paid by drugmakers licensed to
produce the drugs. Some $8.9 million in royalties was paid to government-employed drug inventors in 2004; the average royalty per inventor was $9,700.

Below is an example of royalties received by Fauci and Lane on the interleukin-2 AIDS regimen, an experimental treatment for patients with HIV that they invented. Fauci has said he donates all his royalties to
charity, while Lane has opted to keep his.
Royalties Paid on Interleukin-2 AIDS Regimen Since 1997

Fauci Lane

1997 $23,606.13 $23,606.13
1998 $3,066.67 $3,066.67
1999 $3,066.67 $3,066.67
2000 $3,066.67 $3,066.67
2001 $3,066.67 $3,066.66
2002 $3,066.67 $3,066.66
2003 $3,066.67 $3,066.66
2004 $3,066.67 $3,066.66
Source: National Institutes of Health

Feds Failed to Disclose Financial Interest

JOHN SOLOMON
Associated Press
WASHINGTON - Government scientists have collected millions of dollars in royalties for experimental treatments without having to tell patients testing the treatments that the researchers' had a financial
connection, according to documents and interviews.

The personal royalties are legal, though the researchers developed the treatments at government expense. But the Health and Human Services
Department promised in May 2000 that scientists' financial stakes would be disclosed to patients, a pledge that followed an uproar over
conflicts of interest and mistakes in federal experiments.

The National Institutes of Health says it didn't implement a policy to order the disclosure until last week, shortly after The Associated
Press filed a Freedom of Information Act request.
"Quite frankly, we should have done it more quickly. But as soon as Director (Elias A.) Zerhouni found out about it, he ordered it done immediately," NIH spokesman John Burklow said.

The nearly five-year delay means hundreds, perhaps thousands, of patients in NIH experiments made decisions to participate in experiments that often carry risks without full knowledge about the researchers' financial interests.

"It's hard for patients to make an informed decision when they don't have all the information," said Bill Allison of the Center for Public Integrity, which monitors the ethics of government employees.

"When a doctor says, 'Here, try this experiment, it is safe, or it will help,' and the patient isn't aware he has a financial interest in the outcome of that treatment, it in essence is taking advantage of someone
by not letting them have all the information," Allison said.

In all, 916 current and former NIH researchers are receiving royalty payments for drugs and other inventions they developed while working
for the government, according to information obtained by AP. They can collect up to $150,000 each a year, but the average is about $9,700, officials said.
In 2004, these researchers collected a total of $8.9 million. Only a dozen received the legal maximum.

The government owns the patents and the scientists are listed as inventors so they can share in licensing deals struck with private manufacturers. In addition to the inventors' take, the government received $55.9 million in royalties for the same inventions and put
that money back into research.

The arrangements can create concerns about conflicts.
For instance, two top managers in NIH's infectious disease division have received tens of thousands of dollars in royalties for an experimental AIDS treatment they invented. At the same time, their office has spent millions in tax dollars to test the treatment on
patients across the globe, the records show.

Such research helps bring the treatment closer to possible commercial use, which could in turn bring the researchers and NIH higher royalties.

Except for patent records and scientific journals, the patients have had no easy way of learning about the researchers' financial stakes.

That's because NIH told doctors not to report royalties on their government ethics disclosure forms and did not require the royalties listed on patient consent forms until last week's policy.

Fifty-one NIH royalty recipients are currently involved in clinical research involving the inventions for which they are being paid, meaning they'll be affected by the new policy, according to the information obtained by AP.
Among them are National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Anthony Fauci and his deputy, H. Clifford Lane.

The two managers have received $45,072.82 each in royalties since 1997 for an experimental AIDS treatment known as interleukin-2 that they invented with a third NIH doctor, Joseph Kovacs, the records show.
The government has licensed the commercial rights to that treatment to drug maker Chiron Corp., and Fauci's division subsequently has spent $36 million in taxpayer money testing the treatment on patients in one
experiment alone.

Known as the Esprit experiment, it is one of the largest AIDS research projects in NIH history, testing interleukin-2 on patients at more than
200 sites in 18 countries over the last five years.

Both doctors said they were extremely sensitive about the possibility of an appearance of a conflict of interest and took steps on their own to address it even as they waited for their agency to do what they believed should have been done all along - fully disclose the payments
to patients.

A panel of peers from the National Cancer Institute was brought in to approve the Esprit project because Fauci and Lane were in a position to profit.

Fauci, an internationally known expert on illnesses from the flu to AIDS, said he originally refused to take the royalties but was told he legally had to accept them. So he has donated all the money to charity.

"I'm going to give every penny of it to charity ... no matter what the yearly amount is," he said.
Fauci also said he once tried to report his payments on his federal financial disclosure report, which is available to the public, but was told to remove them because NIH considers the money federal
compensation, not outside income.

Lane keeps his royalties but said he occasionally gave patients scientific journal articles that noted he was listed on the patent for interleukin-2. "I believe patients should know everything that might influence their desire to be participants in research," Lane said.

Both acknowledged they were unwilling to tell interleukin-2 patients about the royalties on consent forms until NIH developed its policy.
Both will do so from now on.

"We were reluctant to make a formal policy until the broad policy came down from the department and NIH," Fauci explained.
Their case illustrates the gulf between what the government promised nearly five years ago in the midst of controversy and what actually has been done.
Then-Health and Human Services Secretary Donna Shalala pledged in May 2000 that the government would develop policies to require "that any
researchers' financial interest in a clinical trial be disclosed to potential participants."
Congress, concerned by reports of conflicts of interest and researchers' conduct in several high profile experiments, was told the changes would happen. The government first published guidance for the
disclosure in January 2001.
Current HHS Secretary Tommy G. Thompson issued new guidance this May that again clearly cited "compensation that may be affected by the study outcome" and "proprietary interests in the products, including patents, trademarks, copyrights or licensing arrangements."
NIH, however, didn't order the disclosure until last week's policy.

ON THE NET
Documents: http://wid.ap.org/science/royalties.html
National Institutes of Health: http://www.nih.gov

Pharma myths about AIDS/HIV
author: mary moth

Propaganda from pharma corporations like Glaxo-Wellcome perpetuate the AIDS is a virus myth while suppressing important info about poverty, chemical addictions and malnutritional as cause of immune suppresion..

Research into the pharmaceutical corporation's AIDS story is resulting in findings that death from AIDS is not from the virus HIV, instead a combination of factors such as poverty, malnutrition, chemical addictions and other immune suppressing agents..

Here are some points brought up by Christine Maggiore in "What if everything you knew about AIDS was wrong?"

If HIV is the virus responsible for AIDS, then why is viral load in HIV + people with compromised health in low numbers?

Viral load data from PCR (polymerase chain reaction) tests assumes "fragments of genetic material PCR finds corresponds to viral load counts". PCR cannot test for viral load directly..

HIV is a retrovirus and non-cytotoxic (non cell killing), yet is claimed to be responsible for killing T cells, the lymphocytes responsible for maintaining a functional immune system..

Glaxo-Wellcome's pharmacocktail AZT is a thirty year old chemotherapy drug that was used unsuccessfully against cancer. Chemotherapy is cytotoxic, and after initially beginning to take AZT, HIV + people show a short term rise in T cells. However, this short term rise in T cells can be attributed to AZT destroying the bone marrow (source of T cells). When AZT attacks the bone marrow, the blood system responds to this destruction by producing more T cells. After long term use of AZT, the bone marrow cannot produce T cells and after the emergency short term rise in T cell count, there is a long term and permanent decline in T cells, usually attributed to "AIDS". If people discovered that the AZT was the actual cause of T cell decline, how would they react?

AIDS in Africa

Here is some info on "AIDS in Africa"..

Four symptoms required for AIDS diagnosis;
persistant cough
weight loss (10% or consistent over 2 months)
fever
diarrhea

These symptoms are often a result of malnutrition, tuberculosis, unsanitary water and malaria, all problems resulting from poverty and living conditions..

AIDS in gay men

Use of nitrites by gay men during the peak "SF AIDS epidemic" and and ongoing combination of malnutrition, alcoholism, depression and other factors, though very different from Africa, these also contribute to immune suppression. The gay community may need to be open and honest about the focus on materialism and excess drug use when dealing with homophobia and community acceptance. Psychological factors when dealing with right wing homophobia from family or former friends, stress of coming out and immigration to the "gay mecca SF" without dealing with emotional baggage from their point of origin. Being ostracized by family is a serious stress that can impact health and well being, covering up with alcohol or drug use only magnifies the problem..

Neither of the above situations will gain any profit for pharmaceutical corporations if people just live healthier. happier lives and poverty is alleviated. Naturopathy, homeopathy, detox and cleansing, ayurvedic medicine are also other options for restoring the immune system to a functional level..

This book is available from the ACT-UP co-op on 1886 Market Street in SF, or by visiting the virusmyth website;

http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/index.htm

AIDS Funding: 'An Epidemic of Waste?'
By Matt Pyeatt
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
February 15, 2002

Washington (CNSNews.com) - AIDS activists will converge on Washington Friday, demanding more tax dollars for various prevention and treatment programs, but one government watchdog group says about $1 billion in federal AIDS money has already been wasted.

What's needed is wiser spending of AIDS-related money, not an increase in spending, according to the group, Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW).
CAGW Thursday released its special report, "AIDS Programs: An Epidemic Of Waste," which systematically shows how federal funds meant for AIDS programs have allegedly been misallocated, mismanaged and wasted.

"Overall, we found about $1 billion, about 7.7 percent of the $13 billion in total federal AIDS funding, that is being mismanaged and wasted," Thomas A. Schatz, president of CAGW, said. "We believe that it would be more compassionate to take the money that is being wasted and provide it to the people who truly need it."
The CAGW report offers a detailed look at the history of AIDS in the United States, but it is the scathing assessment of the taxpayer-funded AIDS programs that stands out.

Included in the report are several examples of the misuse of federal funds. For example, Positive Force, a San Francisco AIDS prevention group, receives $1 million annually from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC).

According to CAGW, Positive Force offers flirting classes and, last July, hosted a workshop on how to have anal intercourse even while suffering from diarrhea. Diarrhea is a common side effect of the AIDS virus, according to the report.

On February 28, the Stop AIDS Project of San Francisco, which received nearly $700,000 from the CDC, will host "GUYWATCH: Blow by Blow," the CAGW report stated. The advertisement for the seminar reads, "What tricks do you want to share to make your man tremble with delight?"

Another alleged misuse of federal funding in the fight to stop AIDS occurred in Tampa Bay, Fla., where the non-profit Tampa Hillsborough Action Plan (THAP) "rang up nearly $1,000 in meal charges in a three-week period and were also afforded the use of sport utility vehicles," the CAGW said.

THAP's top executives also received four season tickets for Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Tampa Bay Devil Rays and Tampa Bay Lightning professional sporting events, according to the report, at a time when "THAP owed nearly $25,000 in delinquent payroll taxes." THAP receives $450,000 a year from the federal government to provide housing to people with AIDS, the CAGW report shows.

Aids activist Wayne Turner, the co-founder of ACTUP DC! joined Schatz at Thursday's news conference and agreed it's necessary to stop the abuse of federal funds earmarked for AIDS programs.

"As an AIDS activist, someone who has lost a partner to AIDS, I can say that it is so important that people living with and dying from this disease have access to the services necessary to keep them alive," Turner said.
"We've been on the forefront of fighting for more money for AIDS and fighting for these programs and demanding passionate and humane treatment for those who suffer from this disease," Turner said. "But, there is another part of that coin when you ask for more money, which has been poorly addressed in the twenty years of the AIDS epidemic."

Turner said it was important to make sure the money was efficiently used.

"This is a federal problem. There is a federal responsibility to insure that AIDS money is spent appropriately and helps people," Turner said.
Turner brought along a tote bag, from which he pulled a water bottle, key chain and other trinkets that he said were paid for with AIDS funding. He called on AIDS programs to quit wasting money on such items and to start helping people.

"There are real people who are falling through the cracks in the system," Turner said.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.