AHRP has;
Wednesday, 23 January 2013
Contrast the government's humane consideration for chimpanzees
with an unconscionable disregard for children's human rights!
"Use of Chimpanzees in
NIH-Supported Research," a report issued by the National Institutes of
Health recommends permanently retiring all 451 chimpanzees owned or supported
by the NIH from further research. The chimps are to be moved to
retirement sanctuaries.
Contrast the government's
humane consideration for chimpanzees with an unconscionable disregard for
children's human rights.
A morally indefensible
proposal by Kathleen Sibelius, the Secretary of the Department of Health
and Human Services--to Test the SAFETY and EFFICACY of the ANTHRAX VACCINE IN
CHILDREN exposing them to unnecessary risks of harm, pain and suffering!!
In
2000, The WASHINGTON POST reported about previously unreported
evidence from military trials testing the anthrax vaccine's efficacy in
monkeys:
"The controversial anthrax vaccine that the Pentagon is
trying to inject into 2.4 million troops does not provide complete immunity to
an anthrax attack, according to an outside expert who has examined Defense
Department records of laboratory tests. Soldiers who are exposed to
anthrax may become quite sick and be incapacitated for up to two weeks, even if
they have received the full set of six inoculations, said George A. Robertson,
a molecular biologist specializing in pharmaceuticals. "
"After being fully vaccinated, the monkeys were exposed to
a highly lethal dose of aerosol spray of anthrax on June 13, 1991. "Although
all vaccinated monkeys survived, they appeared to be sick over the course of
two weeks," the lab report states.
"Robertson noted that the monkeys sickened even though they
had been given significantly larger doses of vaccine than humans receive,
relative to their weight."
Col. Arthur Friedlander, a senior scientist at the institute,
rejected Robertson's interpretation of the data.
"It would be a misstatement to take away from the lab
notebook that immunized animals when challenged with anthrax are uniformly
incapacitated," Friedlander said. "That is a gross
overstatement."
He and other officials at the institute said they don't know for
sure whether every animal in the 1991 test fell ill and don't think any were
sick for two full weeks. In another test last year, they said, 18 of 20
immunized monkeys survived exposure, and none were
sickened." http://www.thepowerhour.com/news/anthrax_challenged.htm
Twelve years later, the controversies about the existing
anthrax vaccine's safety and efficacy remain unresolved.
The 2012 FDA-approved label states:"Vaccination with
BioThrax may not protect all individuals." And,
“The safety and efficacy of BioThrax in a post-exposure setting
have not been established.”
The ANTHRAX VACCINE is not
safe:
The 2002 FDA label states: "Approximately 6% of the
reported events were listed as serious. Serious adverse events include those
that result in death, hospitalization, permanent disability or are
life-threatening."
FDA's 2005 review of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reports found
that 9.5% of the reports were designated by the FDA as serious.
The stated rationale for the proposed
unconcionable experiment is TO GAIN DATA prior to--an admittedly unlikely, but
conceivable--threat of an anthrax attack. .
The Commission is chaired by Dr. Amy Gutmann, President of the University of Pennsylvania.
The Commission did not invite any independent anthrax vaccine
experts, nor were they briefed about the safety / efficacy facts.Most of the
invited presentations were by biodefense stakeholders in government and
academia who sought to twist and redefine federal statutory prohibitions
against exposing children to experiments involving greater than minimal risks
when there is no potential benefit for the children involved.
Such an
experiment is a throwback to long list of US government-sponsored
non-therapeutic medical experiments that have brought shame to our nation.
The
Commission's decision will draw a moral line in the sand--that could be used to
justify a government decree that circumvents regulatory safeguards for children
that have been established during the past 35 years.
Vera Sharav
THE NEW YORK TIMES
Almost all of the 451 chimpanzees
owned or supported by the National Institutes of Health that are now at research
facilities should be permanently retired from research and moved to sanctuaries,
with planning for the move to start immediately, a report from an N.I.H.
council unanimously recommended Tuesday.
The report, approved by the N.I.H. Council of Councils,
is the latest step in a process that began more than two years ago when the
agency began to review its use of chimpanzees in research. Its recommendations
will be open to public comment for 60 days, and in late March, Dr. Francis S. Collins, the N.I.H. director, will decide
whether to put them into effect.
He already accepted guidelines for
reducing the use of chimpanzees that formed the basis of the current
recommendations.
Kathleen Conlee, vice president for
animal research of the Humane Society of the United States, said: “We are very
pleased with these recommendations. Importantly, they did not recommend future
breeding.”
The report says that for the future,
only a small colony of about 50 chimps should be kept for the possibility of
new research, which would have to be approved by an independent committee,
including representation from the public.
Of the 451 N.I.H. chimps, 282 are
available for research and 169 are considered inactive but are not permanently
retired. An additional 219 chimpanzees owned or supported by the agency are
already retired and are either at a sanctuary or headed for one. About 350 more
chimps at research laboratories are owned by universities or private companies,
according to the Humane Society.
The report also proposes standards
for the social and physical welfare of N.I.H. chimps, including requirements
that they live in groups of at least seven, have a minimum of 1,000 square feet
per chimp, room to climb, access to the outdoors in all weather and
opportunities to forage for food. “Not a single laboratory in the United States
meets these recommendations,” Ms. Conlee said.
Within five years, at the latest, any
N.I.H. chimpanzees that are approved for use in research will need to have
housing that meets the new criteria.
Justin Goodman, the laboratory
investigations department director of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, issued a
statement supporting the recommendations, saying, in part, “At last, our
federal government understands: a chimpanzee should no more live in a
laboratory than a human should live in a phone booth.”
Dr. K. C. Kent Lloyd of the
University of California, Davis, a co-chairman of the working group that
prepared the report, said in a hearing Tuesday that was streamed online that
his group made field trips to seven chimpanzee facilities, including laboratories
and sanctuaries.
He said the group was asked to
consider what living conditions were appropriate for chimpanzees, the species
closest to humans and highly intelligent and social. Even if experiments are
approved in the future as being necessary for human health and undoable in any
other way than using chimps, he said the animals must have “environments that
not only allow but promote the full range of natural chimp behavior.”
That means room for social groups,
and, Dr. Lloyd added, “No chimp should live alone for an extended period of
time.”
The report recommends canceling six
of nine current biomedical research projects that involve immunology and
infectious agents. The report does not specify the nature of the research, but
one of the few areas where some scientists consider chimp use important is in
work on hepatitis C because no other animals provide a useful model for
research, which involves infecting the chimps with the virus.
In less invasive research on behavior
and genetics, 15 projects were approved or conditionally approved to continue
and six projects ended.
The report also offers a plan for the
independent committee to evaluate future research proposals, based on the
guidelines proposed in December 2011 by the Institute of Medicine, which emphasized that human
health must be at issue and that there must be no other way to do the research.
Tuesday’s recommendations come in the
midst of efforts on several fronts to end experiments on chimpanzees, including
a bill to stop experimentation on all great apes, which did not pass in the
last Congress, but which proponents hope to reintroduce, and a pending decision
by the Fish and Wildlife Service on whether captive chimps should be considered
endangered, as wild chimps are.
The process that led to the
recommendations began in December 2010, when the N.I.H. decided to rethink its use of chimps in medical
experiments and asked for a report from the Institute of Medicine. That group
concluded that most current research on chimpanzees was not necessary and that
chimps should be used only when public health is on the line, no other animals are
appropriate and ethical experiments on humans are not possible.
Dr. Collins suspended new grants for
medical research on chimpanzees and sought further guidance on how to implement
the recommendations. For that he turned to the N.I.H. Council of Councils,
which set up the working group, which delivered its report on Tuesday.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Anthrax
Shots' Effect Challenged
Army
Disputes Expert Who Reviewed Vaccine Tests
By Thomas E.
Ricks
Tuesday, July 18, 2000; Page A21
The controversial anthrax vaccine that the Pentagon is trying to
inject into 2.4 million troops does not provide complete immunity to an anthrax
attack, according to an outside expert who has examined Defense Department
records of laboratory tests.
Soldiers who are exposed to anthrax may become quite sick and be
incapacitated for up to two weeks, even if they have received the full set of
six inoculations, said George A. Robertson, a molecular biologist specializing
in pharmaceuticals.
But officials at the Army's Medical Research Institute of
Infectious Diseases at Fort Detrick, near Frederick, disagreed with Robertson's
interpretation of the data. They said he was exaggerating the extent of illness
in monkeys that were vaccinated and then exposed to anthrax under laboratory conditions.
The dispute over the degree of immunity conferred by the anthrax
vaccine is just the latest in a heap of problems encountered by the 2
1/2-year-old inoculation program.
Last week, the Pentagon announced that a looming shortage of the
vaccine will force the military to cut the number of doses it administers from
75,000 to 14,000 a month. Blaming production problems at the sole maker of the
vaccine, Bioport Corp. of Lansing, Mich., the Defense Department said that for
the remainder of the year it will give up trying to vaccinate all troops and
focus on those serving in Korea and the Persian Gulf, where the military sees
the highest risk of germ warfare.
The Pentagon has expended millions of dollars and a huge amount
of energy on the mass inoculations, which defense officials portray as an
unfortunate but necessary response to a rising threat. The program was spurred
by U.N. weapons inspectors' discovery in the mid-1990s that Iraq had tried to
develop germ weapons and had stockpiled 8,000 liters of anthrax spores before
the 1991 Gulf War.
So far, 450,000 members of the U.S. military have received a
total of about 1.8 million anthrax vaccinations. But the program has provoked
controversy within the armed forces, with about 350 service members refusing to
take the vaccine out of concern about its possible side effects. Several dozen
have been court-martialed, and others have been allowed to leave the military.
Robertson, an expert in biological warfare, has been analyzing
Defense Department test records obtained by Mark Zaid, executive director of
the James Madison Project, which seeks to reduce government secrecy. Zaid is
also an attorney representing several service members who are resisting the
anthrax vaccinations.
Zaid and Robertson conceded that being ill for as long as two
weeks is better than dying, the likely fate of those who aren't inoculated or
treated quickly with antibiotics after exposure to anthrax. But they said the
Pentagon has failed to disclose publicly that the vaccine doesn't confer full
immunity to the disease.
"The Defense Department is telling people that anthrax
vaccination will protect them 99 percent," said Robertson, a retired Army
Reserve colonel who formerly worked at the Army's Infectious Diseases Institute
and is now an executive at BioReliance Corp. in Rockville. "It doesn't
tell them they will be incapacitated for two weeks."
Anthrax is an acute infectious disease carried by spore-forming
bacteria. It usually occurs in farm animals but can be contracted by humans through
tainted meat or, more rarely, inhalation of the spores. When inhaled, it first
causes cold-like symptoms and is almost always fatal within a week unless
treated immediately by antibiotics.
The Pentagon's main Web site on anthrax (www.anthrax.osd.mil)
seeks to reassure service members about the safety of the vaccinations but does
not provide many details about the vaccine's effectiveness.
Tests on monkeys "lead us to expect that anthrax vaccine
would be quite effective in preventing inhaled anthrax," it says. What it
doesn't say is that some of the monkeys became very ill.
Zaid and Robertson analyzed the laboratory notebooks from one of
the tests conducted on 10 immunized rhesus monkeys and a control group of five
animals at the Army's infectious diseases institute. After being fully
vaccinated, the monkeys were exposed to a highly lethal dose of aerosol spray
of anthrax on June 13, 1991.
"Although all vaccinated monkeys survived, they appeared to
be sick over the course of two weeks," the lab report states.
Robertson noted that the monkeys sickened even though they had
been given significantly larger doses of vaccine than humans receive, relative
to their weight.
Col. Arthur Friedlander, a senior scientist at the institute,
rejected Robertson's interpretation of the data.
"It would be a misstatement to take away from the lab
notebook that immunized animals when challenged with anthrax are uniformly
incapacitated," Friedlander said. "That is a gross
overstatement."
He and other officials at the institute said they don't know for
sure whether every animal in the 1991 test fell ill and don't think any were
sick for two full weeks. In another test last year, they said, 18 of 20
immunized monkeys survived exposure, and none were sickened.
"We don't think that incapacitation of large numbers of
troops would occur," said Col. Edward Eitzen, the institute's commander.
But if it turns out that even fully inoculated soldiers would be
unable to fight after exposure to anthrax, the implications for U.S. military
operations are enormous, said Chris Seiple, a former Marine officer who serves
on a panel studying chemical and biological warfare issues at the Center for
Strategic and International Studies.
In addition to the military issues of how to protect troops and
respond to such an attack, Seiple said he worries about the effect on public
opinion. "People have been led to believe that you can be hit with this
stuff and still be mission-ready," he said. "If you had a bunch of
people taken prisoner because they were sick, you'd have a loss of public
confidence."
© 2000 The Washington Post Company
Review:
The monkeys were vaccinated, were given time to develop
immunity, then were exposed to anthrax in an efficacy trial.
With normal vaccines, you then have enough immunity that you do
not get sick at all.
However, these monkeys got the disease, got sick (meaning the
vaccine was NOT highly effective) and furthermore, they got anthrax by
inhalation. What do we know about anthrax by inhalation? Of the seven people
who survived it in 2001, only one has ever been able to go back to work. So if
humans act like monkeys, then the vaccine might save us from death after an
anthrax exposure but turn us into physical wrecks, forever.
That is very important. Because right now the millitary says
that unvaccinated, sick soldiers would put their buddies at risk to get them
evacuated, etc.
DOD knows the vaccine will not work like vaccines should (no
illnesses at all) after an exposure--that is why DOD policy requires that vaccinated
soldiers be given antibiotics immediately following exposure.
By the way, Friedlander is the person who conducted the 1991
experiment.
Thank You AHRP and Ms Sharav
And in Related, Constantly Progressing and Ever Evolving Current Truth, Collectivist news:
The Peoples Cube has;
Obama Signs Executive Order Moving Center to the Left
by Opiate of the People
Putting an end to the spate of recent unexpected discoveries by otherwise loyal journalists that he may be to the left of the county's political center, President Obama today signed an executive order moving the country's political center to the left, approximately two feet away from where he was sitting.Many political commentators praised this as a "brilliant move," which promises to bring them back right into the mainstream. In addition, in the words of a newly centrist pundit Ed Shultz of the suddenly middle-of-the-road MSNBC network," this decision cements Obama's position as president of all the people, at least all the ones that count anyway."
Democratic Senator John Kerry thanked the President for giving him the opportunity, for the first time in his life, to experience being a centrist politician. In an interview aboard his yacht, "Tax Escapist," soon-to-be-Secretary-of-State explained that he was thrilled his ideas would finally fit the definition of sober and moderate policies instead of wild fantasies out of left field. "My dreams have come true!" he admitted over a tray of truffles.
The unilateral decision to move the center leftwards followed two years of frustrating lack of compromise between the President and the now reclassified ultra-radical far-right-wing Republicans in Congress.
"With the center moved to its proper position, the public can fully appreciate the President's earlier assertions that his opponents are way outside the mainstream," said senior presidential advisor Valerie Jarret. "From the new vantage point, the Republicans appear so far to the right, they're practically invisible."
In addition to marginalizing the GOP, the move allows the President more elbow room in settling many of the currently divisive, hot-button issues. According to inside sources, the President is now ready to compromise on gun control with a new bill that will keep so-called "assault weapons" legal as long as they are only used to perform third-trimester abortions.
"This plan will please everyone within the redefined coordinates," stated presidential Press Secretary Jay Carney. "All sides - far left, moderate left, center-left-left, center-center-left, center-left center, and moderate center-right will get something out of it. The only ones complaining will be those on the extreme-ultra-far-right fringe."
"This glorious compromise will give us a five-year quota of political progress ahead of schedule," said a spokesman for the newly redefined center-right Communist Party.
In yet another far-reaching compromise, the President is expected to approve the controversial Keystone XL pipeline on condition that, instead of oil, it would transport non-polluting solar panels from China.
"It's a great bargain for everybody except Big Oil", noted environmental activist Al Gore, who recently sold his non-polluting Current TV network to Al Jazeera - a channel that will bring us the current truth from the peaceful producers of environmentally friendly fuels in the Middle East. "President Obama's political shift reveals many previously unacceptable common points that all sides can now accept, while rejecting the divisive partisan trivia that the broad center of the country doesn't care about."
Scientists believe that the long-term implications of the President's executive order go far beyond politics. If Obama can just as easily move any other center, this could make cosmology a lot more interesting, not to mention easier for the scientific community to control in the interests of the common good.
Thank You Opiate of the People, and thepeoplescube.com
Chimpanzees are now more important than Children. And we've spent How much to buy into this New Age Psych Job?
No comments:
Post a Comment