31 August 2009


The most recent issue of Formula AS, a popular Romanian magazine, carried an interview on the subject of Codex Alimentarius with the Rath Foundation's External Relations Director, Paul Anthony Taylor. Paul is an internationally-known writer, researcher and lecturer on the subject of Codex, and, during the past six years, courtesy of the National Health Federation, has been an official observer delegate at Codex meetings.

I can also attest to Paul's integrity and his commitment to truth.

For those of you still unaware, The activities of Codex are increasingly perceived by natural health advocates as one of the biggest global threats to the future availability of therapeutic vitamin supplements and other micronutrient-based natural health therapies. Sponsored by the World Health Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, I unveiled this threat in my film We Become Silent, which was narrated by the great Dame Judi Dench.

Explaining how Codex is not about health, and describing how the 27 European Union member states are increasingly using it as a vehicle for shaping global food and nutrient regulations to reflect EU law, Paul's insights are essential reading for everybody who is interested in understanding this important issue.

The full, unabridged version of the Formula AS interview with Paul follows below.

What is Codex Alimentarius?

The Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex) is a United Nations organization that receives its funding from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations. Established in 1963, its main activities centre around the drafting of global standards for all food products, including food supplements. The "Codex Alimentarius" is the collective name for these standards. Working as a coordinated bloc, the 27 European Union (EU) member countries – including Romania – are increasingly using Codex as a vehicle for shaping global food regulations to reflect EU law.

The World Trade Organization uses Codex Guidelines and Standards as the benchmark in the adjudication of international trade disputes involving foods. It's headquarters, above, are located in Geneva, Switzerland.
Will Codex be mandatory after 31 December 2009? Could the Romanian Parliament reject it, even though Romania is an EU member?

All of the global food standards produced by Codex are already effectively mandatory, due to the fact they are used by the World Trade Organization (WTO) as the benchmark in its adjudication of international trade disputes involving foods. The trade sanctions and huge financial costs that can result from losing such a dispute basically leave all WTO member countries with little or no option but to implement Codex standards into their national laws.

As such, the claim by some that "Codex will go into global effect on December 31, 2009" is not only untrue, but also somewhat absurd. The Codex Alimentarius already consists of over 300 official global food standards, some of which originate from as long ago as 1966.

Romania is represented at Codex meetings by officials from its National Sanitary, Veterinary and Food Safety Authority and Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. To all intents and purposes, these officials essentially take their orders from the Romanian government and the European Commission. As such, and as I will describe below, Romania and the governments of the other 26 EU countries are actively participating in the drawing up of global food standards that threaten the health and lives of the entire planet. In the vast majority of cases, however, even if they wanted to reject it, ordinary elected members of the Romanian Parliament get no significant input into this process.

How will Codex affect our health? Is it an instrument of the globalization forces? Is it a sort of vanguard of the global government? Do they intend to govern the World by controlling our food and medicines?

To all intents and purposes, Codex is now the primary political battlefield where the war is being waged over who will regulate and control the global food supply from farm to fork.

However, in addition to dealing with ordinary foods, Codex also sets global standards for: vitamin and mineral food supplements; health claims; organic foods; genetically modified (GM) foods; food labeling; advertising; food additives and residues of pesticides and veterinary drugs in foods. In all of these areas, the evidence is now inescapable that Codex is increasingly putting economic interests – and particularly those of the pharmaceutical, chemical and GM industries – before human health.

Without doubt, therefore, Codex is indeed an instrument of the forces that are promoting so-called "globalization" and a corporate-controlled global government. By controlling our access to healthy foods and safe, natural medicines, the forces behind Codex intend to control our lives.

The office of the Codex Secretariat is located in the headquarters of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, in Rome, Italy, above.

Where are the headquarters of Codex?

The office of the Codex Secretariat is located in the headquarters of the FAO, in Rome, Italy.

Will Codex protect the health of consumers and the international food trade, like it claims? Should we stay silent, because Big Brother is looking after us? How? Is Big Brother a good guy this time?

The Codex Alimentarius Commission sees the interests of the international food trade as being far more important than protecting the health of consumers. This is amply illustrated by the fact that the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations provides almost 86 percent (US$7.2 million) of the annual funding of Codex, with the World Health Organization contributing a mere 14 percent (US$1.2 million).

More importantly, however, by controlling and limiting your access to safe, healthy nutritious foods and food supplements, it can be seen that ultimately Codex is primarily promoting the interests of the multi-billion euro pharmaceutical industry. To this industry, anything that promotes optimum health rather than sickness is a direct threat to its sales of patented synthetic chemical drugs.

Romanian citizens should therefore not be fooled into thinking that Codex is their friend.

We have here, nearby, a market. In this market there is a plaphar store (the old Romanian word for the stores which sell natural oils, herbs and vitamins). Even though their floorspace is small, they keep there hundreds of natural products, from FLAVIN7 (the Hungarian pure flavonoides) to Siberian Ginseng, from CoQ10 to Indian Momordica powder. Will this store be closed after December 31? What will happen then?

So long as its owners pay their taxes and continue to comply with Romanian law, this store will not be closed after December 31. As described above, this date is of no practical significance to Codex whatsoever.

In the longer term, I should stress that natural products and food supplements will not be banned completely. But certainly, without any doubt, some products will be at threat. The key danger at present is that the potencies (i.e. amounts) of vitamins and minerals in the EU could potentially be limited to very low, ineffective dosages. However, if this were to happen, many people will still probably take the same dosages that they had previously been taking by consuming a larger number of tablets/capsules. In such a situation, of course, the financial costs – to consumers who choose to do this – will be higher than previously.

But I'm not a fortune teller, and nobody – including Codex itself – knows for sure what will happen in the future. More importantly, what will almost certainly determine the outcome will be the extent to which consumers are prepared to stand up and fight to protect their right to freedom of choice. If people choose to do nothing, for example, and hope that the hard work will be done for them by others, then they can't complain if at some point in the future their favourite supplements are banned from sale.

Even if Codex will be mandatory for all of us, do you think that it will have a powerful enough control system to check every store in the world? How will this control work?

Powerful systems of governmental control can only retain their power so long as people sit back and do nothing. In other words, unless you want to live under a global dictatorship, you must do something to help bring about change.

To continue controlling our health, Codex and the EU depend upon the world's people remaining in ignorance about basic functions of the human body and natural approaches to maintaining and improving health. Realising this, I and my colleagues have recently developed an online World Health Alphabetization (WHA) course. By directing people to the WHA website www.wha-www.org you can help to end health illiteracy for yourself, your family, friends, colleagues and your community.

Of course they will force Romania (for example) to comply with their regulations, like they did with biometric passports. But what about civil society? What about the hundreds of doctors dedicated to alternative medicine, the local traditions, the remote villages, the ancient experience? Could they ignore all these?

The EU and Codex can and will ignore all of these things unless enough people act now and help to protect natural forms of medicine. Over the past decades, health care systems around the world have been taken hostage by interests that have defined human diseases as multi-billion dollar markets for their patented synthetic chemical drugs. Doctors who have dedicated themselves to practising alternative forms of medicine must therefore educate their patients not only about health, but also about the ways in which people have been misled by orthodox medicine and the things they need to do to bring about change.

To enable this to happen, I and my colleagues have developed several important websites:

www.arv-facts.com "ARV" is short for antiretroviral drugs. This class of highly toxic chemicals is promoted by the drug industry to patients with HIV-infections as "life saving." In this effort, the drug industry is using an army of lobbyists, including celebrities and even politicians, some of whom may not be aware of the scientific facts: none of these drugs has ever been shown to cure either HIV or AIDS and they are not allowed to be sold as a cure. Moreover, these toxic drugs are known to attack the immune system of patients and eventually destroy it. The ARV Facts website contains extracts from the "patient information leaflets" of these dangerous drugs, as published by the drug manufacturers themselves.

www.chemo-facts.com Cancer is a multi-billion dollar business. The drugs used in chemotherapy kill cancer cells – but they also kill healthy cells too. That fact alone is bad enough, but it doesn't stop there. The drugs used in chemotherapy also have side-effects and many cause new cancers and new diseases, leading to the use of yet more drugs which in turn have new side effects. It’s a vicious circle and a license to print money for the pharmaceutical industry. The Chemo Facts website contains extracts from the "patient information leaflets" of these chemotherapy drugs, as published by the drug manufacturers themselves.

www.cholesterol-fact.org Cholesterol-lowering drugs are the single largest business segment of the global pharmaceutical drug business. The global sales of the leading drug category – statins – have surpassed 200 billion dollars per year. This entire business is built on fear – the fear that cholesterol actually causes heart attacks. While this "cholesterol-scare" has become a gold mine for the drug companies – the economic burden of this business is ultimately carried by us, the people. Health professionals, political decision takers and hundreds of millions of patients worldwide have the right to know: What are the proven facts – and what is the fiction promoted by the multi-billion dollar investment business with patented cholesterol-lowering drugs. All of this information, and more, can be found on the Cholesterol Facts website.

www.pharma-fact.org The pharmaceutical industry portrays itself as an industry fighting to prevent and eliminate diseases but, behind the pretext of this noble cause, it is extorting billions of dollars in subsidies from dozens of governments and is demanding blind obedience from hundreds of millions of patients. As such, the Pharma Facts website describes how the pharmaceutical drug industry is not a health industry at all, but an investment business. While pretending to deliver health to the world, its entire existence is based on promoting diseases as multi-billion dollar markets for patented drugs.
Do you think that our magazine will be put in danger? What do you suggest to us to do in order to circumvent this situation? What should we tell our readers?

Nobody knows for sure what will happen in the future. That said, freedom of speech is already at threat in the EU. As with natural products and food supplements, therefore, the survival of your magazine may well be determined by the extent to which consumers are prepared to stand up and fight to protect the right to free speech. The right to free speech is one of most the important rights of all and should be protected with great care. Without free speech you cannot have democracy – and without democracy what you get is tyranny.

Fortunately, however, there are two very important things that you can do to help bring about change.

Our European Referendum Initiative (www.eu-referendum.org) is a campaign for citizens to have the right to vote in a referendum whenever significant changes to laws affecting them are made at either national or European level. Currently, its campaigns include a petition for a Europe for the People, by the People; a petition to reject the EU's so-called Lisbon Treaty; and a petition for a referendum on natural remedies. Thus far, over a quarter of a million people across Europe have signed these petitions and we now have supporters in all 27 EU countries.

The historical documents published on our EU Facts website (www.eu-facts.org) prove that the blueprint for the undemocratic "Brussels EU" originated on the drawing boards of Nazi leaders during WWII. The publication of this information marks the beginning of the end of the undemocratic experiment of the "Brussels EU." In addition, however, the EU Facts website also gives people the opportunity to participate in an online referendum against the EU's Lisbon Treaty, the aim of which is to deliver Europe once and for all into the hands of corporate interests. Under this treaty, the so-called EU Commission would be elevated to the status of a de facto European Government – without ever having been democratically elected and with no fear of ever being voted out of office. And, unlike in a democracy, the EU Parliament would have no powers to control this form of "government of commissioners". By downloading our special software program from the EU Facts website, you can email your clear No! to this undemocratic treaty to the political decision-makers of Europe.

The Codex General Guidelines on Claims prohibits claims implying that a balanced diet or ordinary foods cannot supply adequate amounts of all nutrients. However, independent studies conducted in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and many other countries show that the nutrient content of our food has fallen substantially over the past few decades.

Does Codex contravene the right to freedom of opinion and expression? Our current advertising is dedicated 95% to natural treatments. What does Codex say about advertising?

Article 19 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights states the following: Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

However, through placing unwarranted restrictions upon health claims in relation to labelling and advertising, Codex standards clearly contravene these rights.

For example, there are already several Codex texts in existence that place restrictions upon the health benefits that can be attributed to foods and food supplements. Perhaps the most significant of these is the Codex General Guidelines on Claims. Adopted in 1979, and revised in 1991, these guidelines are in some senses the very root of the Codex problem – in terms of placing severe restrictions upon natural forms of healthcare – in that they effectively seek to ensure that the only products that can make claims relating to the prevention, alleviation, treatment, and cure of disease are pharmaceutical drugs.

Specifically, and amongst other things, the Codex General Guidelines on Claims prohibits the following:

Claims implying that a balanced diet or ordinary foods cannot supply adequate amounts of all nutrients.
Claims that food products (including food supplements) are suitable for use in the prevention, alleviation, treatment or cure of diseases.

These prohibitions are demonstrably unwarranted and openly disingenuous for two reasons. Firstly, independent studies conducted in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and many other countries show that the nutrient content of our food has fallen substantially over the past few decades. Secondly, there is abundant scientific evidence that micronutrients can prevent, alleviate, treat and cure disease.

As such, nobody should be in any doubt that Codex is knowingly attempting to prevent people from accessing crucial health information that could help to save millions of lives.

Codex now permits ethylene to be used for ripening organic kiwifruit and bananas. Whilst fruits do produce their own ethylene as a part of their ripening process, most consumers would consider it a monstrous lie to label food as "organic" when it has been plucked before ripe, transported thousands of miles across the world in cold storage containers filled with carbon dioxide (CO2), and then artificially treated with ethylene for ripening.

What about organic food, additive-free foods and non-GM foods?

The key danger here is that Codex has gradually been weakening the definition of the word "organic." As a result, substances now permitted for use under the Codex 'Guidelines for the Production, Processing, Marketing and Labelling of Organically Produced Foods' include sulphur dioxide, which is known to cause allergic reactions in some people; carrageenan, which has been linked with the formation of ulcers in the intestines and cancerous tumors in the gut; and ethylene, which is now permitted to be used for ripening kiwifruit and bananas. Clearly, whilst it is true that fruits do produce their own ethylene as a part of their ripening process, most consumers would consider it a monstrous lie to label food as "organic" when it has been plucked before ripe, transported thousands of miles across the world in cold storage containers filled with carbon dioxide (CO2), and then artificially treated with ethylene for ripening.

On a simple level, of course, what is happening here is that the large multinational food producers want to benefit from the higher prices that organically-labelled food fetches, but without having to go to the same trouble in producing it as do the the smaller, specialist organic farms.

On a deeper level, however, the reality is that the producers of patented GM foods see organic foods as a threat to their business model because they can't be patented. As such, there is an important parallel here with the producers of synthetic chemical drugs, who likewise see vitamins and other non-patentable natural therapies as a threat.

Significantly, therefore, some of the major players in the pharmaceutical industry are also now becoming major players in the production of GM seeds. Given that in many cases these same companies also produce artificial food additives and synthetic chemical pesticides – both of which, because they don't exist in nature, are patentable – it can be seen that the pharmaceutical and chemical industries' control over our health is now deeper than most people would ever have considered imaginable.

Paul Anthony Taylor was interviewed by Ion Longin Popescu.

Labels: , , , ,

19 August 2009


I was a bit stunned when noted UK author Karen Sawyer (Soul Companions, et al) approached me about appearing in her new book The Dangerous Man, which will be released in February 2010. Stunned because I already owned a copy of her stellar book,Soul Companions, a book that impressed me deeply.

The Dangerous Man title is inspired by Thomas Merton, who wrote "The most dangerous man in the world is the contemplative who is guided by nobody. He trusts his own visions." I will be appearing at Karen's "Gathering of Dangerous Men" next February in the UK.

The Dangerous Man: Conversations with Free-Thinkers and Truth-Seekers – A Collection of Alternative Research
by Karen Sawyer
To be published in 2010 by O Books
ISBN: 978-1-84694-345-4

On this planet, there exists a diverse range of individuals – of all ages, cultures and beliefs – who have the potential to transform ‘life as we know it’ for the better. It is time for us to make informed decisions not only for ourselves, but for the future generations that follow. The informed spiritual individual is a powerful force to be reckoned with indeed…
On a quest for truth, Karen Sawyer interviewed 32 of the most brilliant and controversial minds of our time, including; David Icke, Michael Tsarion, Bruce Lipton, Cleve Backster, Ralph Ellis, Jerry E Smith, Mary Croft, Kevin P. Miller, John Perkins, Peter Taylor, Ian R Crane, Winston Shrout, Michael Cremo, Ellis C Taylor, Jonathan Goldman, and Alan Wilson.

The result is a curious combination of mystery, anomaly, and occult secrets among fascinating research and insights within history, science, commerce and law, the environment and much more.

“A potpouri of hope for all our futures. Please read this and sense the wonders of freedom.”
- David Bellamy

“The most dangerous mind is one that thinks for itself. This is a book to inspire the type of bravery needed to do just that.”
- David Southwell, author of Secrets & Lies and Conspiracy Files

“The most complete guide to what free-thinking is all about. A true ‘red pill’, which only looks like a book.”
- Paul Bondarovski, The Dot Connector magazine.

“What is genuine, what is a lie? What is real and what is false? In this remarkably incisive and honest work, the author, Karen Sawyer, in a series of fascinating interviews peels away the choking layers of disinformation, half truths and downright lies that have, almost since time began, been presented as absolute truth by those who choose to retain their grasp on power, and in some cases the nature of reality itself, by any means at their disposal. What is written here will entertain, shock, enrage and amaze in equal part, but ultimately it is a source of hope and I thoroughly recommend it to all who seek the truth.”
- Brian J Allan, paranormal investigator, researcher, and author of The Heretics, Can We Now Explain The Unexplainable

To pre-order the book e-mail: dangerousman@arcconvention.org. For information about the forthcoming ARC Convention on 20th - 21st February 2010, which will bring together some of the most brilliant and controversial minds of our time, contact: info@arcconvention.org. The website for both the book and ARC conventions is at: www.arcconvention.org.

Labels: ,

18 August 2009


A warning that the new swine flu jab is linked to a deadly nerve disease has been sent by the Government to senior neurologists in a confidential letter.

The letter from the Health Protection Agency, the official body that oversees public health, has been leaked to The Mail on Sunday, leading to demands to know why the information has not been given to the public before the vaccination of millions of people, including children, begins.

It tells the neurologists that they must be alert for an increase in a brain disorder called Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS), which could be triggered by the vaccine.

GBS attacks the lining of the nerves, causing paralysis and inability to breathe, and can be fatal.

The letter, sent to about 600 neurologists on July 29, is the first sign that there is concern at the highest levels that the vaccine itself could cause serious complications.

It refers to the use of a similar swine flu vaccine in the United States in 1976 when:

More people died from the vaccination than from swine flu.
500 cases of GBS were detected.
The vaccine may have increased the risk of contracting GBS by eight times.
The vaccine was withdrawn after just ten weeks when the link with GBS became clear.
The US Government was forced to pay out millions of dollars to those affected.
Concerns have already been raised that the new vaccine has not been sufficiently tested and that the effects, especially on children, are unknown.

It is being developed by pharmaceutical companies and will be given to about 13million people during the first wave of immunisation, expected to start in October.

Top priority will be given to everyone aged six months to 65 with an underlying health problem, pregnant women and health professionals.

The British Neurological Surveillance Unit (BNSU), part of the British Association of Neurologists, has been asked to monitor closely any cases of GBS as the vaccine is rolled out.

One senior neurologist said last night: ‘I would not have the swine flu jab because of the GBS risk.’

There are concerns that there could be a repeat of what became known as the ‘1976 debacle’ in the US, where a swine flu vaccine killed 25 people – more than the virus itself.

A mass vaccination was given the go-ahead by President Gerald Ford because scientists believed that the swine flu strain was similar to the one responsible for the 1918-19 pandemic, which killed half a million Americans and 20million people worldwide.

The swine flu vaccine being offered to children has not been tested on infants

Within days, symptoms of GBS were reported among those who had been immunised and 25 people died from respiratory failure after severe paralysis. One in 80,000 people came down with the condition. In contrast, just one person died of swine flu.

More than 40million Americans had received the vaccine by the time the programme was stopped after ten weeks. The US Government paid out millions of dollars in compensation to those affected.

The swine flu virus in the new vaccine is a slightly different strain from the 1976 virus, but the possibility of an increased incidence of GBS remains a concern.

Shadow health spokesman Mike Penning said last night: ‘The last thing we want is secret letters handed around experts within the NHS. We need a vaccine but we also need to know about potential risks.

‘Our job is to make sure that the public knows what’s going on. Why
is the Government not being open about this? It’s also very worrying if GPs, who will be administering the vaccine, aren’t being warned.’

Two letters were posted together to neurologists advising them of the concerns. The first, dated July 29, was written by Professor Elizabeth Miller, head of the HPA’s Immunisation Department.

It says: ‘The vaccines used to combat an expected swine influenza pandemic in 1976 were shown to be associated with GBS and were withdrawn from use.

‘GBS has been identified as a condition needing enhanced surveillance when the swine flu vaccines are rolled out.

‘Reporting every case of GBS irrespective of vaccination or disease history is essential for conducting robust epidemiological analyses capable of identifying whether there is an increased risk of GBS in defined time periods after vaccination, or after influenza itself, compared with the background risk.’

The second letter, dated July 27, is from the Association of British Neurologists and is written by Dr Rustam Al-Shahi Salman, chair of its surveillance unit, and Professor Patrick Chinnery, chair of its clinical research committee.

Halted: The 1976 US swine flu campaign

It says: ‘Traditionally, the BNSU has monitored rare diseases for long periods of time. However, the swine influenza (H1N1) pandemic has overtaken us and we need every member’s involvement with a new BNSU survey of Guillain-Barre Syndrome that will start on August 1 and run for approximately nine months.

‘Following the 1976 programme of vaccination against swine influenza in the US, a retrospective study found a possible eight-fold increase in the incidence of GBS.

‘Active prospective ascertainment of every case of GBS in the UK is required. Please tell BNSU about every case.

‘You will have seen Press coverage describing the Government’s concern about releasing a vaccine of unknown safety.’

If there are signs of a rise in GBS after the vaccination programme begins, the Government could decide to halt it.

GBS attacks the lining of the nerves, leaving them unable to transmit signals to muscles effectively.

It can cause partial paralysis and mostly affects the hands and feet. In serious cases, patients need to be kept on a ventilator, but it can be fatal.

Death is caused by paralysis of the respiratory system, causing the victim to suffocate. It is not known exactly what causes GBS and research on the subject has been inconclusive.

However, it is thought that one in a million people who have a seasonal flu vaccination could be at risk and it has also been linked to people recovering from a bout of flu of any sort.

The HPA said it was part of the Government’s pandemic plan to monitor GBS cases in the event of a mass vaccination campaign, regardless of the strain of flu involved.
But vaccine experts warned that the letters proved the programme was a ‘guinea-pig trial’.

Dr Tom Jefferson, co-ordinator of the vaccines section of the influential Cochrane Collaboration, an independent group that reviews research, said: ‘New vaccines never behave in the way you expect them to. It may be that there is a link to GBS, which is certainly not something I would wish on anybody.

‘But it could end up being anything because one of the additives in one of the vaccines is a substance called squalene, and none of the studies we’ve extracted have any research on it at all.’

He said squalene, a naturally occurring enzyme, could potentially cause so-far-undiscovered side effects.

Jackie Fletcher, founder of vaccine support group Jabs, said: ‘The Government would not be anticipating this if they didn’t think there was a connection. What we’ve got is a massive guinea-pig trial.’

Professor Chinnery said: ‘During the last swine flu pandemic, it was observed that there was an increased frequency of cases of GBS. No one knows whether it was the virus or the vaccine that caused this.

‘The purpose of the survey is for us to assess rapidly whether there is an increase in the frequency of GBS when the vaccine is released in the UK. It also increases consultants’ awareness of the condition.

Panic over? The number of swine flu cases has fallen sharply in the past few weeks

‘This is a belt-and-braces approach to safety and is not something people should be substantially worried about as it’s a rare condition.’

If neurologists do identify a case of GBS, it will be logged on a central database.

Details about patients, including blood samples, will be collected and monitored by the HPA.

It is hoped this will help scientists establish why some people develop the condition and whether it is directly related to the vaccine.

But some question why there needs to be a vaccine, given the risks. Dr Richard Halvorsen, author of The Truth About Vaccines, said: ‘For people with serious underlying health problems, the risk of dying from swine flu is probably greater than the risk of side effects from the vaccine.

‘But it would be tragic if we repeated the US example and ended up with more casualties from the jabs.

‘I applaud the Government for recognising the risk but in most cases this is a mild virus which needs a few days in bed. I’d question why we need a vaccine at all.’

Professor Miller at the HPA said: ‘This monitoring system activates pandemic plans that have been in place for a number of years. We’ll be able to get information on whether a patient has had a prior influenza illness and will look at whether influenza itself is linked to GBS.

‘We are not expecting a link to the vaccine but a link to disease, which would make having the vaccine even more important.’

The UK’s medicines watchdog, the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, is already monitoring reported side effects from Tamiflu and Relenza and it is set to extend that surveillance to the vaccine.

A Department of Health spokesperson said: ‘The European Medicines Agency has strict processes in place for licensing pandemic vaccines.

‘In preparing for a pandemic, appropriate trials to assess safety and the immune responses have been carried out on vaccines very similar to the swine flu vaccine. The vaccines have been shown to have a good safety profile.

‘It is extremely irresponsible to suggest that the UK would use a vaccine without careful consideration of safety issues. The UK has one of the most successful immunisation programmes in the world.’


Victim: Hilary Wilkinson spent three months in hospital after she was diagnosed with Guillain-Barre Syndrome
When Hilary Wilkinson woke up with muscle weakness in her left arm and difficulty breathing, doctors initially put it down to a stroke.

But within hours, she was on a ventilator in intensive care after being diagnosed with Guillain-Barre Syndrome.

She spent three months in hospital and had to learn how to talk and walk again. But at times, when she was being fed through a drip and needed a tracheotomy just to breathe, she doubted whether she would survive.

The mother of two, 57, from Maryport, Cumbria, had been in good health until she developed a chest infection in March 2006. She gradually became so weak she could not walk downstairs.

Doctors did not diagnose Guillain-Barre until her condition worsened in hospital and tests showed her reflexes slowing down. It is impossible for doctors to know how she contracted the disorder, although it is thought to be linked to some infections.

Mrs Wilkinson said: ‘It was very scary. I couldn’t eat and I couldn’t speak. My arms and feet had no strength and breathing was hard.

I was treated with immunoglobulin, which are proteins found in blood, to stop damage to my nerves. After ten days, I still couldn’t speak and had to mime to nurses or my family.

‘It was absolutely horrendous and I had no idea whether I would get through it. You reach very dark moments at such times and wonder how long it can last.

But I’m a very determined person and I had lots of support.’

After three weeks, she was transferred to a neurological ward, where she had an MRI scan and nerve tests to assess the extent of the damage.

Still unable to speak and in a wheelchair, Mrs Wilkinson eventually began gruelling physiotherapy to improve her muscle strength and movement but it was exhausting and painful.

Three years later, she is almost fully recovered. She can now walk for several miles at a time, has been abroad and carries out voluntary work for a GBS Support Group helpline.

She said: ‘It makes me feel wary that the Government is rolling out this vaccine without any clear idea of the GBS risk, if any. I wouldn’t wish it on anyone and it certainly changed my life.

‘I’m frightened to have the swine flu vaccine if this might happen again – it’s a frightening illness and I think more research needs to be done on the effect of the vaccine.’

Hotline staff given access to confidential records

Confidential NHS staff records and disciplinary complaints could be accessed by hundreds of workers manning the Government’s special swine flu hotline.

They were able to browse through a database of emails containing doctors’ and nurses’ National Insurance numbers, home addresses, dates of birth, mobile phone numbers and scanned passport pages – all details that could be used fraudulently.

And private and confidential complaints sent by hospitals about temporary medical staff – some of whom were named – were also made available to the call-centre workers, who were given a special password to log in to an internal NHS website.

It could be a breach of the Data Protection Act.

The hotline staff work for NHS Professionals, which was set up using taxpayers’ money to employ temporary medical and administrative staff for the health service.

The not-for-profit company runs two of the Government’s swine flu call centres – with 300 staff in Farnborough, Hampshire, and 900 in Watford, Hertfordshire.

Shadow Health Secretary Andrew Lansley described the revelations as ‘disturbing’.

Anne Mitchell, a spokeswoman for Unison, said: ‘There’s no excuse for such a fundamental breach of personal security. Action needs to be taken as soon as possible to make sure this does not happen again.’

A spokeswoman for NHS Professionals would not confirm whether access to the confidential files had been granted.

Daily Maily Online-UK

Labels: , ,

16 August 2009

Generation RX Trailer 'Facts'

While I am away researching and preparing for a new film...here are some 'Trailer Facts.'

09 August 2009

GREIDER: President Makes 'Outrageous Concession' in $80 Billion Deal With Big Pharma

By William Greider
The Nation

So now we know why the president wants everyone to make nice in the healthcare debate. His White House has cut a deal with Big Pharma that smells like the same old rotten politics that candidate Obama regularly denounced and promised to end. The drug industry agrees to deliver $80 billion in future savings and the president promises the government will not use its awesome purchasing power to negotiate lower drug prices.

Wow. This is roughly the same deal that George W. Bush cut with the drug makers when he was legislating Medicare's new coverage of drug purchases. It is the same bargain that Democrats in Congress universally condemned as wasteful and corrupt. The deal does not smell any better now that a Democratic president is embracing it.

In effect, Obama wants to give away one of the principal objectives of strong reform. The details were spelled out in today's New York Times and revealed by Big Pharma's top-dog lobbyist, Billy Tauzin, a former Republican congressman who leads the industry association. Tauzin called it a "rock-solid deal," and the White House did not dispute as much. But that is not the last word.

People who believe in real healthcare reform should not be nice about this. They must rise up and rebel against our popular new president's outrageous concession. They must demand that Congress declare the private deal-making null and void. If Congress lacks the nerve to do this, then this exercise in reform begins to look more and more like previous attempts that were eviscerated by the clout of the corporate interests.

The fate of healthcare reform may depend not on the Senate or the White House but on Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic majority in the House of Representatives. What prompted Billy Tauzin to spill the beans on his deal-making with White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel was the House measure that specifies government's right to bargain for lower prices. No, no, no! Tauzin said. We've got a deal with the president, who says that won't be allowed.

But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi simply responds that the House is not bound by any deals made with the Senate or the White House. Her caucus must back up her words. They should pass the House bill, which will allow the government to do what any major customer would do in the same circumstances -- use its leverage to demand lower prices.

If House Democrats stand their ground, then they will force a debate they can win with the American public. President Obama will have to choose between standing with the drug manufacturers or defending the original purpose of healthcare reform.

William Greider is the author of, most recently, "Come Home, America: The Rise and Fall (and Redeeming Promise) of Our Country (Rodale Books, 2009)."

© 2009 The Nation All rights reserved.