Media Malpractice and the New GM Human

Ethan Huff
NaturalNews
July 20, 2011

Rupert Murdoch’s media empire News Corp., which represents the second largest media conglomerate in the world behind the Walt Disney Company, is taking a severe beating as Murdoch himself is having to address various criminal allegations, including that his News of the World tabloid illegally hacked private phone lines and committed various other crimes (http://www.naturalnews.com/033034_N…).

But Murdoch’s media malpractice runs even deeper as his strong connections to the pharmaceutical industry also fueled his media machine’s fabrication of lies against Dr. Andrew Wakefield, as well as hid from the public the true dangers of DNA vaccines that permanently corrupt human genes and cause autism.

Murdoch has built quite a reputation for himself as a scoundrel of sorts, as many Americans who identify with the “left” side of the political spectrum have accused him of pandering to the “right” by skewing the news to appeal to “conservatives” (Murdoch owns FOX News, after all).

But what Murdoch’s organization is actually doing on all fronts with its various media outlets, including FOX, is pushing much bigger agendas that supersede any alleged “right vs. left” paradigm. One such agenda is News Corp.’s routine censorship of the dangerous truth about drugs and vaccines, which include smear campaigns like those levied against Dr. Wakefield who conduct legitimate research that contradicts mainstream medical thought.

News Corp. systematically destroyed the reputation of Dr. Wakefield, lied about his work

If you are unfamiliar with the Dr. Wakefield story, you can read more about it in previous NaturalNews articles (http://www.naturalnews.com/Andrew_W…). But as a quick recap, Dr. Wakefield basically discovered through credible research that the combination measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine was linked to mental and physiological health problems, and that the individual measles vaccine should be given to children instead until further research on the safety of MMR could be conducted.

The findings were credible, responsibly-derived, and honest in their assessment — but they resulted in a tirade of lies and slander against Dr. Wakefield.

The statements included false accusations that he is opposed to all vaccinations, that he had manipulated his data, and that he is basically unfit to be a doctor, despite the fact that he is arguably one of the most well-respected and highly-educated gastroenterologists in the world. In the end, though, Dr. Wakefield ended up having his study pulled from the esteemed UK journal Lancet, and his UK medical license was revoked.

And just who was responsible for the annihilation campaign against Dr. Wakefield? None other than Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp., which literally fabricated lies about Dr. Wakefield and disseminated them around the world via its multinational media network. News Corp.’s London Times, for instance, falsely accused Dr. Wakefield of being “callous, unethical and dishonest,” and published numerous articles saying he was a fraud, and that he “abused his position of trust.”

And why, exactly, did News Corp. feel the need to destroy the life and reputation of a man that had done so much to help children with autism and other neurological disorders?

Because Dr. Wakefield’s findings were incongruent with the multi-billion-dollar profit ring of multinational pharmaceutical companies like GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and Merck Inc., both of which produce and market MMR vaccines.

Murdoch media empire, judicial system closely knit with drug companies

Did you know that Rupert Murdoch’s son James Murdoch, who manages the UK paper Sunday Times, is on the board of GSK? Or how about Sir Nigel Davis, the High Court judge that denied parents of children treated by Dr. Wakefield the right to have their claims against vaccine manufacturers heard in a real court? Davis’ brother, who is an executive board member of Elsevier, the group that publishes the Lancet, is also on the board of GSK.An article in the COTO Report also explains that the head of the popular Reuters news service serves on the board of Merck, while a prominent writer at the UK’s Daily Mirroris married to the former chairman of GSK. And the list goes on and on.With all of these strong connections to drug companies, it is no wonder that the media at large wholly participated in the Dr. Wakefield slander campaign — after all, Dr. Wakefield’s work caused millions of people to wake up and begin questioning the safety not only of the MMR vaccine, but also of vaccines in general. And this continued awakening is taking its toll on Big Pharma’s profits.

MMR and dozens of other DNA’ vaccines essentially create genetically-modified humans

Dr. Wakefield’s work uncovered a crucial detail about certain vaccines that ultimately exposes those in this particular category as highly-dangerous, life-altering poisons. Third-generation DNA vaccines like MMR contain genetically-engineered (GE) materials that are injected directly into the body, sort of like how genetically-modified (GM) crop seeds have been injected with altered DNA that changes their genetic makeup — and these GE traits can permanently alter proper human development.

As far as DNA vaccines are concerned, the GE material they contain is included as part of an overall effort to induce “DNA uptake,” a term that is very vaguely defined, but one that appears to infer a literal adoption of altered DNA into the human genetic structure. If this is the case, then DNA vaccines like MMR are overriding normal DNA with altered DNA, which causes the untold changes in human development and health that have been observed.

Based on Dr. Wakefield’s findings, this is exactly what appears to occur with MMR vaccines in particular, and it is why he urged the public to skip the MMR vaccine and get the individual vaccines instead. His findings showed that the MMR vaccine is linked to mitochondria dysfunction caused by DNA mutations. And since no proper review of MMR has ever taken place to prove its safety, his professional conclusion was that it was best to stop using it for childrens safety.

Mitochondria, of course, are what power cells and convert energy into forms that are usable by the body. When these do not work properly, the entire human body becomes compromised. Individuals with autism demonstrate mitochondria dysfunction as well as various other problems, which may or may not be possible to cure — and this, again, is precisely why Dr. Wakefield urged the public to beware of the MMR vaccine.

According to the same COTO Report article mentioned earlier, DNA vaccines like MMR were actually derived from failed gene therapy experiments. In other words, they appear to be a type of genetic experiment that is permanently altering human gene expression and proper DNA development, which in turn lands its victims with permanent, life-altering developmental disorders like autism.

But none of this will ever be addressed by the likes of Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp., or by most other mainstream news outlets for that matter, because of their close alliance with the drug industry. It is in their best interests to hide the truth from the public, and to continue pushing the lie that all vaccines are safe, and have never been implicated in causing any long-term health problems.

CBS News, however, did recently report on a new review published in the Journal of Immunotoxicology that addresses the issue of third-generation DNA vaccines and autism. That review, entitled Theoretical aspects of autism: Causes — A review, admits that “[d]ocumented causes of autism include genetic mutations and/or deletions, viral infections, and encephalitis [brain damage] following vaccination.”

Mental Illness is ‘impossible to define’

Failure to disclose business relationships, badly performed tests and invented illness carried psychiatry to the edge of the cliff.

By Gary Greenberg
Wired.com

Every so often Al Frances says something that seems to surprise even him. Just now, for instance, in the predawn darkness of his comfortable, rambling home in Carmel, California, he has broken off his exercise routine to declare that “there is no definition of a mental disorder. It’s bullshit. I mean, you just can’t define it.” Then an odd, reflective look crosses his face, as if he’s taking in the strangeness of this scene: Allen Frances, lead editor of the fourth edition of the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (universally known as the DSM-IV), the guy who wrote the book on mental illness, confessing that “these concepts are virtually impossible to define precisely with bright lines at the boundaries.” For the first time in two days, the conversation comes to an awkward halt.

Allen Frances, lead editor of the fourth edition of the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

 

But he recovers quickly, and back in the living room he finishes explaining why he came out of a seemingly contented retirement to launch a bitter and protracted battle with the people, some of them friends, who are creating the next edition of the DSM. And to criticize them not just once, and not in professional mumbo jumbo that would keep the fight inside the professional family, but repeatedly and in plain English, in newspapers and magazines and blogs. And to accuse his colleagues not just of bad science but of bad faith, hubris, and blindness, of making diseases out of everyday suffering and, as a result, padding the bottom lines of drug companies. These aren’t new accusations to level at psychiatry, but Frances used to be their target, not their source. He’s hurling grenades into the bunker where he spent his entire career.

As a practicing psychotherapist myself, I can attest that this is a startling turn. But when Frances tries to explain it, he resists the kinds of reasons that mental health professionals usually give each other, the ones about character traits or personality quirks formed in childhood. He says he doesn’t want to give ammunition to his enemies, who have already shown their willingness to “shoot the messenger.” It’s not an unfounded concern. In its first official response to Frances, the APA diagnosed him with “pride of authorship” and pointed out that his royalty payments would end once the new edition was published—a fact that “should be considered when evaluating his critique and its timing.”

Frances, who claims he doesn’t care about the royalties (which amount, he says, to just 10 grand a year), also claims not to mind if the APA cites his faults. He just wishes they’d go after the right ones—the serious errors in the DSM-IV. “We made mistakes that had terrible consequences,” he says. Diagnoses of autism, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, and bipolar disorder skyrocketed, and Frances thinks his manual inadvertently facilitated these epidemics—and, in the bargain, fostered an increasing tendency to chalk up life’s difficulties to mental illness and then treat them with psychiatric drugs.

The insurgency against the DSM-5 (the APA has decided to shed the Roman numerals) has now spread far beyond just Allen Frances. Psychiatrists at the top of their specialties, clinicians at prominent hospitals, and even some contributors to the new edition have expressed deep reservations about it. Dissidents complain that the revision process is in disarray and that the preliminary results, made public for the first time in February 2010, are filled with potential clinical and public relations nightmares. Although most of the dissenters are squeamish about making their concerns public—especially because of a surprisingly restrictive nondisclosure agreement that all insiders were required to sign—they are becoming increasingly restive, and some are beginning to agree with Frances that public pressure may be the only way to derail a train that he fears will “take psychiatry off a cliff.”

At stake in the fight between Frances and the APA is more than professional turf, more than careers and reputations, more than the $6.5 million in sales that the DSM averages each year. The book is the basis of psychiatrists’ authority to pronounce upon our mental health, to command health care dollars from insurance companies for treatment and from government agencies for research. It is as important to psychiatrists as the Constitution is to the US government or the Bible is to Christians. Outside the profession, too, the DSM rules, serving as the authoritative text for psychologists, social workers, and other mental health workers; it is invoked by lawyers in arguing over the culpability of criminal defendants and by parents seeking school services for their children.

If, as Frances warns, the new volume is an “absolute disaster,” it could cause a seismic shift in the way mental health care is practiced in this country. It could cause the APA to lose its franchise on our psychic suffering, the naming rights to our pain.

Read Full Article

Psychiatric Meds 101: A Surprising Discovery

Shane Ellison M. Sc.

I ask questions with period marks to shorten conversations. I avoid eye contact with strangers in fear (maybe it’s anxiety) that I might learn too much about them. I secretly think that Metallica would be making better music if they went back to bludgeoning themselves with party drugs and alcohol, instead of “therapy.” I’m trying to master the Law of Un-attraction to shield myself from a “real job,” small homes and junky cars. And, I’m constantly giving my children advice, only to give it to myself.

Psychiatry, can your drugs help me?

Perhaps these questions are what motivated me to pursue a career as a drug design chemist, winning multiple awards for my work. Nothing gets me more excited than drugs and how they affect the body (except my wife’s abs). I’ve studied their molecular anatomy, risked life and limb to mix and match explosive chemicals in a round bottom flask, and even sold my soul to Big Pharma in exchange for a lab bench and chemical hood.

During this time, I’ve made some surprising discoveries about psychiatric meds, which include antidepressants, antipsychotics, stimulants, and anti-anxiety drugs. Understanding what I’ve learned will protect you from the flood of side effects that are now being discovered at breakneck speeds, courtesy of the myriad of patients taking them in the name of mental health.

Your Own Personal Hell

Antidepressants strive to increase the levels of a “coping” molecule known as serotonin in the brain. It supposedly helps us find happiness when it’s covered in an avalanche of nastiness. But, it’s never been proven. Still, the drugs attempt to boost serotonin by “selectively” stopping the “reuptake” among brain cells. This is where the whole SSRI acronym came from – “selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor.” It’s a slick name, but a stupid idea. Nothing is selective in the body.

While trying to block the reuptake of serotonin, antidepressants can also prevent its release and that of another brain compound known as dopamine. The areas of the brain responsible for release and reuptake of these neurotransmitters are so damn similar (after all, they work on the same molecule) that an antidepressant drug isn’t smart enough to understand which one it is supposed to work on. So it does what any dumb drug would do, it blocks both. That’s why users usually carry a glassy stare in their eye. Fully under the psychiatric spell, they’ve tuned out.

Deep sadness, fear, anger and aggression can set in over time. By removing serotonin and dopamine from the brain, long-term antidepressant users can’t find or feel happiness. Instead, they may become buried in the avalanche of nastiness. And if you can’t find or feel happiness in life, what’s the point? What’s going to stop you from snapping your own neck or spraying bullets on your classmates? Not much when you live in your own personal antidepressant hell.

Think this is all opinion?

According to the FDA, antidepressants can cause suicidal thoughts and behavior, worsening depression, anxiety, panic attacks, insomnia, irritability, hostility, impulsivity, aggression, psychotic episodes and violence. Some even cause homicidal ideation according to the manufacturers. Many long-term antidepressant users will tell you they no longer feel normal emotions—they’re numb, like zombies.

But the side effects of these drugs aren’t limited to hijacking your feelings and emotional state, causing violent and psychotic states. Physical side effects occur too and include abnormal bleeding, birth defects, heart attack, seizures and sudden death. Over one hundred and seventy drug regulatory warnings and studies have been issued on antidepressants, to sound the alarm on these side effects.

For Elephant Use Only

Psychiatrists prescribe antipsychotic meds such as Zyprexa and Seroquel, for anything from schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, delusional disorder, psychotic depression, autism or anything else they can think of, even “pervasive developmental disorder,” which is perfect for boosting sales because it targets children who suffer from irritability, aggression, and agitation. It’s a shame ‘cause these drugs are good for nothing but sedating irate elephants, not curing psychiatric disease.

According to a study published in Psychological Medicine, antipsychotic drugs cause brains to shrink – they lessen brain matter and volume. Originally designed for those deemed “schizophrenic,” the drug companies came up with a brilliant marketing campaign to sell these drugs to a much wider market—unsatisfied antidepressant users. You’ve probably seen the ads—if your “depression medication” isn’t working, then don’t blame the drug; you may just have bipolar disorder!”

Once swallowed, antipsychotics sail through the blood stream where they’re carried to the brain. Like a giant oil spill, antipsychotics cover the brain in a medicinal slick, where brain wave transmission is blocked. Users become devoid of normal brain activity. Motivation, drive and feelings of reward are shunted. If psychiatry considers this a “treatment,” they’re the crazy ones.

If you’ve ever seen someone who has suffered from the “spill” courtesy of following doctor’s orders, you can’t mistake one of the most common side effects, it’s called Akathisia. Involuntary movements, tics, jerks in the face and the entire body can become permanent side effects for antipsychotic users.

Antipsychotics also cause obesity, diabetes, stroke, cardiac events, respiratory problems, delusional thinking and psychosis. Drug regulators from the U.S., Canada, United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa warn that they can also lead to death. I wouldn’t be surprised if psychiatrists considered this a cure…

Use This to Jump The Grand Canyon

If you’re going to attempt to jump your scooter over the Grand Canyon, or ride your snowboard off Kilimanjaro, stimulants are great. They flood the brain with dopamine and trigger an inhuman surge of adrenaline, responsible for making you believe life is grand, despite eminent death. Outside of that, you’re either a speed freak, a college student trying to learn an entire semester of Biology 101 in 4 hours, or a fifth grader “following doctor’s orders.”

Top stimulants being prescribed today are nothing more than a mix of amphetamines packaged into trade names like Adderall, Dexedrine and Ritalin. Street thugs sell it as meth, poor man’s cocaine, crystal, ice, glass and speed. It’s no wonder kids are now abusing Ritalin, Adderall and these drugs more than street drugs, they’re cheaper to get and they’re “legal,” hence the term kiddie cocaine.

Even the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) categorizes Ritalin in the Schedule ll category, meaning a high potential for abuse—just like cocaine and morphine. All of them have the same effects regardless of how they’re named: Central nervous system overload leading to heart attack and/or heart failure. And kids are dropping faster than Meth Heads at Raves…

I’m not exaggerating.

Eleven international drug regulatory agencies and our own FDA has issued warnings that stimulants like Ritalin cause addiction, depression, insomnia, drug dependence, mania, psychosis, heart problems, stroke and sudden death.

Bash Your Head in with Anti-Anxiety Drugs

If you’re not man enough for a drug that could sedate an elephant like antipsychotics, then psychiatrists will prescribe anti-anxiety meds, particularly benzodiazepines. Choosing between the two is akin to deciding whether or not you should be hit in the head with an aluminum bat or a wooden one; anti-anxiety meds being the latter.

Discovered in the stinky chemistry labs of Hoffman La Roche in 1955, anti-anxiety meds aim to trigger sleep receptors in the brain, just slightly. So, rather than being riddled with anxiety, you are put to sleep, halfway. It’s “treatment,” and psychiatrists have been “practicing it for decades.” But, it has yet to work, because drugging your problems away is more dangerous than anxiety. The use of anti-anxiety meds is coupled with a host of nasty side effects such as seizures, aggression and violence once the drug wears off. Hallucinations, delusional thinking, confusion, abnormal behavior, hostility, agitation, irritability, depression and suicidal thinking are all possible outcomes according to Big Pharma’s heavily guarded research papers.

Getting off the drugs could be harder than abandoning a heroin addiction. Some have described withdrawal from “benzos” being akin to pulling hundreds of fish hooks out of their skin, without anesthesia. If you doubt their addictive nature, go to Google search and type in a few of the leading anti-anxiety drugs like Klonopin or Xanax and here is what you’ll find:

“Klonopin withdrawal” 1,860,000 results
“Xanax withdrawal” 1,980,000 results
Exposing Psychiatry: How to Get The Truth

In total, the side effects of psychiatric meds spread far and wide. And most are hidden from patients and doctors alike. Fortunately, Citizens Commission on Human Rights has solved this problem with a state-of-the-art database that allows people to search through the adverse reaction reports sent to the FDA on psychiatric drugs. It also provides international drug regulatory agency warnings and studies published on the side effects of the drugs.

So, can psychiatry help me? No. And that’s surprising because psychiatric meds are some of the biggest selling drugs, poised to seal the hopes and dreams of millions. Regardless of what mental state I might be in (or anyone else for that matter), there is not a single drug that cures, treats or solves the perceived problems of mental health.

While people can suffer miserably from emotional or mental duress that can hinder their lifestyle, the pseudo-science of psychiatry has yet to solve any of these problems, and in fact only contributes to poor health as seen by the wide array of side effects. Marketing campaigns and ghostwritten medical journals are designed to obscure these facts. But the psychiatric drug side effect database courtesy of CCHR ensures that all patients have access to the truth, to the documented facts, which could save their life or that of a loved one.

Why Medical Authorities Went to Such Extreme to Silence Dr. Andrew Wakefield?

The smearing campaign against doctor Andrew Wakefield has resulted in two events.  One, he received great exposure on the alternative and main stream media, which in turn allowed for more people to learn about his important work and how vaccines poison people, especially children.  Two, it replicates the effect main stream media smearing campaigns have when an honest, professional does his job.  So instead of bringing him down, it builds him up.  Although Dr. Wakefield’s job has been found to be true by other independent studies, the corporate corrupt media and medical establishment dismiss his work as lunacy.  Below there is a fair and balanced interview with Dr. Mercola.  Dr. Wakefield explains in detail what does the MMR vaccine, among others, do to children.  Do your own research and spread the knowledge.

How Mercury Kills The Brain: Vaccines & Autism