Nexium, Prilosec Lawsuits Filed

(June 18, 2018)  Nexium, Prilosec, Prevacid and Protonix lawsuits are being filed in federal and state courts across the country. More than 4,250 proton pump inhibitor lawsuits have been filed in federal court as of June 2018.  The multidistrict litigation (MDL) court for PPI drugs was set up in August 2017 to help move similar cases through the legal process.

Nexium and Prilosec lawsuits lead by the numbers, though the MDL also includes Prevacid and Protonix lawsuits.  PPI lawsuits in the MDL claim these drugs used for stomach acid control have caused serious kidney problems, including chronic kidney disease (CKD).

PPI lawsuits were spurred in part by a study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) on February 1, 2016.  That study concluded:   “PPI use is associated with a 20%–50% higher risk of incident CKD. Future research should evaluate whether limiting PPI use reduces the incidence of CKD.”

Proton Pump Inhibitor Trials
There have been no proton pump inhibitor court trials as of June 18, 2018.  These PPI lawsuits are in the very early stages of planning.  They will likely culminate in bellwether trials.  The first trial in these PPI cases is slated to begin in May 2020.

Bellwether Trials
Bellwether trials are informally considered “test cases” for MDLs.  They can measure jury responses to arguments from both sides.  The results of bellwether trials can typically affect any eventual settlements.

PPI Lawsuit Timeline
May 2016:  The first Nexium kidney damage lawsuits were filed against AstraZeneca.

February 2017:  The federal MDL panel denied a motion to combine 39 PPI lawsuits into an MDL. Those lawsuits concerned several different PPI makers and named different drugs.

July 2017:  The federal panel reconsidered requests to create an MDL.

August 2017:  The MDL panel centralized 161 PPI lawsuits into one action in a New Jersey federal court. Five PPI makers were named in that action.

May 2018:  The total number of PPI lawsuits filed in the MDL grew to exceed 4,200.

May 2020:  Both plaintiff and defense sides requested that the first bellwether trial open in May 2020.

Because these drugs have been popular for a long time, plaintiffs’ attorneys expect the MDL could include several thousand more PPI lawsuits.

PPI Side Effects trigger Lawsuits
PPI lawsuits claim Prilosec, Nexium, Prevacid and Protonix cause kidney-related complications, including full-blown kidney failure.  Some people who have developed kidney complications have filed many of the lawsuits, but some have been filed by those who have lost a loved one to fatal kidney complications.

PPI Lawsuits claim the drugs caused:
•  Acute interstitial nephritis (AIN)
•  Kidney disease
•  Kidney failure
•  Kidney injury

Accusations Against Makers of Nexium, Prilosec, Prevacid, Protonix:

•  Negligence
•  Misbranding
•  Deceptive Advertising
•  Negligent Misrepresentation
•  Fraud
•  Failure to Warn
•  Accepting Kickbacks
•  Designing, Manufacturing, Selling Defective Products

PPI Brands and Manufacturers
The proton pump inhibitor MDL involves four different PPI brands and their manufacturers.

•  Nexium (esomeprazole) AstraZeneca
•  Prilosec (omeprazole) AstraZeneca
•  Prilosec OTC (omeprazole) Proctor & Gamble
•  Prevacid (lansoprazole) Takeda Pharmaceuticals
•  Protonix (pantoprazole) Pfizer

Proton Pump Inhibitor Lawsuit Help

If you or a loved one suffered kidney problems, including kidney disease, interstitial nephritis, kidney failure or other kidney injury after taking a PPI drug, contact an experienced drug injury lawyer for a free legal consultation regarding a potential Proton Pump Inhibitor Lawsuit.



Parkinson’s Drug Death Reports should alarm FDA

Parkinson’s drug death reports should alarm the FDA.  At a time when Congress and the FDA are besieged by Big Pharma lobbying money to fast track “miracle” drugs to market, the story of Nuplazid shows what can happen when government regulators lower the bar too fast. A Nuplazid Lawsuit may be on the horizon.

People who see their loved ones stricken with Parkinson’s disease can be driven to desperate measures. They can become easy targets for a drug maker’s promises.  They might even be driven to try a drug that has not been proven safe or effective.

While San Diego-based Acadia Pharmaceutical company defends its Parkinson’s drug (see below), many red flags appear to be flying around Nuplazid.

Nuplazid Fast Tracked to Market
Nuplazid’s safety review process was expedited by the FDA because Nuplazid had been designated as a “breakthrough therapy.”  That meant Nuplazid demonstrated “substantial improvement” in patients with serious or life-threatening diseases compared to other treatments already on the legal drug market.  Spurred by Big Pharma lobbying money, the U.S. Congress created the breakthrough designation in 2012 to speed the FDA’s approval process.  Drug makers and their political friends in government have long criticized the FDA for being too slow in granting new drug approvals, though the agency is now, and has been for a long while, the fastest of its kind in the world.  The FDA has granted some 200 drugs this new designation since 2012.

To recommend approval, an advisory committee first has to find a drug’s potential benefits outweigh its risks.  Remember that word “potential,” which can be stretched an awful long way.

Since several people had said that their loved ones had been helped by Nuplazid, some FDA officials concluded Nuplazid’s public health benefit was enough to merit the drug’s approval.  But others in the test trials said there was no way for them to know whether they were on Nuplazid or a placebo.

Dr. Paul Andreason, who led the FDA’s medical review, warned that patients taking Nuplazid during the company’s clinical trials suffered serious outcomes, including death, at more than double the rate of those taking the placebo.   Dr. Andreason said the company’s limited testing had not convinced him Nuplazid’s benefits outweighed its risks.

The advisory committee voted 12-2 to recommend FDA approve Nuplazid for the treatment of Parkinson’s disease psychosis.  The majority based their approval vote on a six-week study of about 200 patients.  Dr. Andreason said three previous studies of Nuplazid had not shown it was effective, though they did show similar risk.  The hearing transcript also showed that some committee members who voted for Nuplazid did so with reservations.

CNN noted that one physician stated he thought the risks were “going to be small” (and) “the benefits for some of these people who are very sick and whose families are affected by this, I think they’re probably willing to take that risk.”

Another committee member said she wouldn’t have voted for Nuprazid’s FDA approval if there had been a safe and effective alternative on the market.  A third pleaded to the FDA to “consider a large observational study” to ensure benefits would outweigh risks.

Nuplazid hit the open market in June 2016, and sales reached roughly $125 million in 2017.

Nuplazid Adverse Events Reports
Shortly after Nuplazid’s release, patients’ family members, doctors, and other healthcare workers began reporting “adverse events” possibly linked to the drug.  Those “events” included deaths, life-threatening incidents, falls, insomnia, nausea, fatigue.   In more than 1,000 reports, patients continued to experience hallucinations while on Nuplazid.

In November 2017, the Institute for Safe Medication Practices warned that 244 Nuplazid-linked deaths had been reported to the FDA between the drug’s launch and March 2017.  ISMP also noted hundreds of reports suggested Nuplazid was “not providing the expected benefit” or was even potentially worsening the condition.

Tracked by the FDA, these so-called “adverse event reports” document deaths, side effects, and other issues.  These reports can be made directly by consumers, caregivers and other medical professionals.  Reports are submitted to either the FDA or to the drug maker, which is required to pass along any it receives to the federal government.  Sometimes the person filing the report is convinced the side effects were caused by the drug.  Sometimes the reporter ascribes no cause, but notes the patient was taking the drug.

An adverse event report does not mean the medication in question has been ruled as the cause of harm.  The FDA uses the information to monitor potential issues with a drug and can take action as needed.  The agency may update a drug’s label, restrict its use, pull it from the market, or suggest or demand some other action from the drug maker.

Nuplazid: More Harm than Good?
The ISMP concluded that Nuplazid reports “reinforces the concerns of those who warned that (Nuplazid) might do more harm than good.”  A senior scientist for drug safety and policy for the nonprofit ISMP, Thomas Moore, said the deaths are an “important warning signal” that warrants further FDA review, and possible action.

Since ISMP released its analysis, FDA data shows reported deaths have risen to more than 700. As of June 2017, Nuplazid was the only medication listed as “suspect” in at least 500 of the death reports. Keep in mind that it’s also well known by drug and medical device safety experts that only 1-10 percent of actual adverse events are ever reported.

That’s a lot of potential Nuplazid-related deaths. Hindsight does tend to be 20-20, but physicians, medical researchers and other experts told CNN they worried that Nuplazid had been approved too quickly, based on too little evidence that it was safe or effective.  Based on these mounting reports of deaths, they say more must be done to assess Nuplazid’s true risks.

Acadia’s Response
Nuplazid’s maker, Acadia, has responded by saying, in part, that its “benefit/risk assessment of Nuplazid remains unchanged.”  Acadia says it carefully monitors and regularly analyzes safety reports from both ongoing studies and adverse event reports.  Acadia noted, for example, that since Nuplazid’s approval, two studies totaling more than 300 Alzheimer’s disease patients found no difference in the death numbers reported between Nuplazid and a placebo.

FDA commissioner Scott Gottlieb was asked by CNN’s Dr. Sanjay Gupta to give his thoughts on drugs that receive expedited reviews and then prompt concerns about safety once they become available.  While Mr. Gottlieb refused to comment on a specific drug, he said he is “familiar with the circumstances” and that it’s important for FDA to balance safety with medical need.  He also admitted this was a flexible standard and there may be more tolerance for risk when there is a significant need and patients don’t have an alternative.

Mr. Gottlieb may sound “reasonable,” but who is he kidding?  There are always alternatives, unless one lives in a world where doing nothing at all – or simply praying– is not an alternative.  Or one lives in a world where taking any path or action whatsoever that doesn’t involve swallowing a Big Pharma drug cannot be seen as an alternative.

Parkinson’s Drug Death Reports should alarm FDA

Time will tell, hopefully, and the truth will come out about whether or not any benefits Nuplazid may offer are worth its risks. We sincerely hope the FDA is paying attention for the sake of Nuplazid’s potential future victims, but also for the sake of the next 500 or more people who may be given a drug which has also not been sufficiently tested for safety and efficacy before being unleashed “on the market.”  One can only wonder how many of the 200 drugs the FDA has granted “breakthrough therapy” status to since 2012 has been worthy of that designation. One thing seems certain right now:  Whether Nuplazid is worthy of that status it was granted is highly debatable.



Chuck Norris fights MRI Dye Gadolinium Makers

Chuck Norris fights bad guys in fictional dramas, but there’s nothing fictional about his fighting MRI dye gadolinium makers. After the action-star’s wife became stricken with mysterious mental confusion, deep muscle and bone pain, and strangely hardening skin, Mr. Norris and his wife Gena O’Kelley put two and two together. Gena had recently submitted to several injections of gadolinium prior to MRIs.

What is Gadolinium?
A chemical element and a heavy metal, gadolinium can be found on the periodic table as “Gd,” but most of us associate it with medical scans. It is often used as a contrast agent to make MRI or some MRA scans sharper. Some 30 million people are exposed to gadolinium every year, according to the American College of Radiology.

What’s the Problem with Gadolinium?
Most people are lucky and see no side effects after being injected with gadolinium dye. They apparently pass most of the gadolinium dye through urination. Others are not so lucky.

Gadolinium Deposition Disease
Sometimes the gadolinium dye does not exit the body quickly enough. Gena O’Kelley had apparently received more gadolinium than her body could abide. She and Chuck Norris consequently filed a lawsuit against several gadolinium-dye making companies. According to their lawsuit petition, Gena was stricken with gadolinium deposition disease. A law firm is representing Mr. Norris and his wife in a suit against three different companies for $10 million in damages. The two are suing MRI dye maker Bracco. Other MRI dye makers include General Electric (Omniscan) and Bayer (Magnevist).

FDA on Gadolinium MRI Dye
The FDA announced Dec. 19, 2017 that it was requiring a “new class warning and other safety measures for all gadolinium-based contrast agents (GBCAs) for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) concerning gadolinium remaining in patients’ bodies, including the brain, for months to years after receiving these drugs.”

The agency was quick to add gadolinium retention has not been “directly linked to adverse health effects in patients with normal kidney function.” FDA also “concluded that the benefit of all approved GBCAs continues to outweigh any potential risks.” (In every case? Apparently, for that agency.)

The FDA did, however, also throw patients a bone, stating that it was requiring “several actions to alert health care professionals and patients about gadolinium retention after an MRI using a GBCA, and actions that can help minimize problems. These include requiring a new patient Medication Guide, providing educational information that every patient will be asked to read before receiving a GBCA. FDA is also requiring manufacturers of GBCAs to conduct human and animal studies to further assess the safety of these contrast agents.”

Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF)
The FDA also claims the only known adverse health effect related to gadolinium retention is nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF), which the agency says occurs only in people with pre-existing kidney failure.”

The FDA does, however, also admit on its gadolinium “safety alert” that it has “received reports of adverse events involving multiple organ systems in patients with normal kidney function. A causal association between these adverse events and gadolinium retention could not be established.”

Did you catch that? FDA admits seeing adverse events reports but sees no causality. So we are all to simply just accept the overarching announcement that the benefits of gadolinium injection outweigh the risks if we have “normal” kidney function?

Chuck Norris fights MRI Dye Gadolinium Makers
Chuck Norris doesn’t like it, and neither do we. Our law firm handled several NSF cases for people who died of that terrible disease, their bodies and their organs slowly shutting down until their lungs no longer worked. We saw the terrible results of gadolinium poisoning firsthand. But because gadolinium deposition disease shy of NSF is not yet recognized by the FDA, the fight Chuck Norris is taking on could be hard to win, but we sure hope he and his wife do win it. We’ve spoken to too many people in similar circumstances to theirs, people who also say they’ve developed a host of maladies following one or several MRIs’ with gadolinium dye.

Free Legal Consultation
If you or someone you love is suffering from the ill effects of gadolinium dye, contact our law offices for a free legal consultation regarding a potential MRI Dye Lawsuit.



Vaccine Researchers raided, robbed by “Authorities”

Two vaccine researchers were raided and robbed of their research materials and computers by “authorities” in Italy this month. The targets of the raid were two world-renowned scientists who had recently found undeclared cancer-causing toxins in virtually every vaccine they studied. The two scientists published a peer-reviewed scientific paper last year which offered a shocking look at all the cancer-causing toxins, including nano particles which are forbidden to be contained in vaccines.

Related:  Shingles Vaccine?  Really?

The two scientists – Dr. Antonietta Gatti and her husband, Dr. Stefano Montanari – were raided and robbed of their research materials in their home offices.  If the vaccine police in Italy are anything like they are in the US, the couple might want to pay for protection from local mafiosi or purchase some guns themselves for their safety.  In America, more than one vaccine researcher has wound up dead shortly after an FDA raid.

Nanoparticles polluting Vaccines

Vaccine Researcher Murdered after FDA Raid
The American version of these Italian “authorities,” the FDA, raided a prominent vaccine researcher’s office in Florida and stole all of his research work, including his computers, thumb drives, everything – decades of research.  Three days later, the target of that raid and robbery, Dr. Jeffrey Bradstreet, was found floating in a river with a gunshot wound through the chest.  The date was June 19, 2015.  Local “authorities” where Dr. Bradstreet’s body was found quickly claimed it was death by suicide.  But Dr. Bradstreet’s family hired an investigator who proved that the doctor had been murdered.  For what purpose?  Who benefits?  In Italiano: “Chi ne beneficia?”

Like the Italians, Dr. Bradstreet had found undeclared toxins in vaccines, including nagalese, which stops vitamin D from binding to the Gc protein. That strips the body of its natural ability to kill cancer cells. A protein that’s also created by all cancer cells, nagalese is also found in very high concentrations in autistic children. Dr. Bradstreet and other murdered or “suicided” holistic doctors are suspected of finding that nagalese is being put in vaccines (whether deliberately or “accidentally”), effectively creating Big Pharma customers for life.  The chronic illnesses now plaguing nearly half the children in our country would seem to lend some credence to the idea, considering the greatly increased vaccine schedule. More and more children are becoming chronically ill in direct proportion to the increased vaccination schedules. In addition, several studies have shown that unvaccinated children are far healthier than vaccinated ones.

You do the math, while every talking head on the TV and web repeats the big vaccine-autism lie.  Billions of dollars are invested in that lie, and drug companies rely on vaccines to keep them afloat while they try to create more worthless and unnecessary drugs for us all.

Investigation shows Dr. Bradstreet was Murdered
Imagine, if you will, the shock of believing that your job as a scientist doctor is to use science to find the truth, and when you find it, you are treated as a criminal in your own country.  Authorities arrive unannounced to your home or office, treat you like a criminal, and then steal all the work you’ve done.  Do you think this might have a chilling effect on others researching the truth about vaccination?

Vaccine Researchers raided, robbed by “Authorities”

If the Italian government wanted to see the actual proof of the scientists’ experiments, let them ask for it through proper civilized channels, and give the scientists a chance to present it. As it now stands, the Italian scientists have had their ability to defend themselves and their work removed by government fiat, the same way it was removed from Dr. Jeff Bradstreet in the US. before he was murdered.

The hysterical violence of this raid and the one on Dr. Bradstreet shows just how desperate the pro-vaccine forces have become.  They cannot handle or abide the clear unvarnished truth reaching the public, so they attack real scientists and disappear their work. It’s much like the Soviets or Nazis would have done back when those terrible tyrants terrorized their own people.

Newsflash! This is what we all face now. If you look up Dr. Bradstreet’s murder on the web you will find an endless disinformation list censored by google to prominently display all the usual suspects – CBS, Snopes, Forbes, all of them trying to dismiss Dr. Bradstreet as a quack and adding insult to murder by calling him a “dangerous autism doctor,” which is doubly absurd given that he was only helping autistic children and their parents. He was dangerous all right, but not to the people he helped.  He was dangerous to the rotten vaccine industry that will resort to anything, including murder, to keep their profits coming in.

Dr. Bradstreet had helped hundreds of autistic children and their parents, which is why he was so dangerous to the vaccine industry that lies in a whorish bed with the US government, the CDC and all the major media beholden to Big Pharma advertising money for their daily bread.

See the rest of the story on the Italian researchers here.



Flu Vaccine Scandal Ignored by Press

A major flu vaccine scandal is being ignored by the mainstream press.  Here’s a story you won’t see properly covered in the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, or in what passes for news on CNN, MSNBC or Fox: The flu vaccine did not work in 2017-18 more than 10 percent of the time. Worse, the flu vaccine has quite likely never worked because of the way it is made.  This is a scandal of unspeakable proportions, which is why the mainstream won’t speak of it.   To air this story would make intelligent people question the whole vaccine paradigm.  It would also make smart people ask many difficult questions that the CDC and the wildly profitable Western medical establishment does not want them asking.

But since we know the truth, these questions must now be answered:

•  If they’ve got the flu vaccine wrong, what other vaccines have they gotten wrong?

•  Why has my doctor and every newscaster I know been telling me to get a flu shot every year if the flu shot doesn’t work?

•  Why is the CDC always telling us all to get a flu shot if they know it is, for all intents and purposes, worthless, or perhaps even dangerous? (Some people die of the flu after getting the flu shot; and there’s no proof the shot didn’t kill them, because they may have evaded the flu altogether if they hadn’t taken the shot.)

•  If the first tenet of Western medicine is that vaccines are the greatest medical invention of our time, and that tenet is proven wrong by empirical science, then what does that say about the entire paradigm of ALL of Western medicine?

•  If this story does not appear on page one in every paper in America, and doesn’t appear as the lead story on every major television news network, then something is most decidedly wrong with what we’ve come to call “news” in our country.

Related:  Scientific Proof for Why Flu Shot Doesn’t Work

Jon Rappoport in his “No More Fake News” web site reports that the CDC and other “experts” have admitted the flu vaccine (so-called) has a very low effectiveness rate.

The mainstream press quietly mentions this scandal here and there, but in such a subdued manner that it fails to raise alarms, or challenge smart people to investigate

Why the Flu Vaccine Fails
The problem is that the influenza vaccine is produced using chicken eggs.  In that medium, the flu virus – which is intentionally placed in the eggs – mutates, so that it is not the same virus that causes the flu this year.  That’s how it offers little to no protection against the flu.

10% Effective – Ten Percent Effective!
No matter how you write it, the lowly number is absurd, given the endless hype of flu shot pushers promoting the vaccine. Fierce Pharma says: “Based on data from Australia, which already had its flu season, scientists warn that this season’s flu shot might be only 10% effective.”’

Related:  Shingles Vaccine?  Really?

The reason why likely lies in the method by which the majority of flu vaccines are made, in eggs, says FiercePharma and other vaccine researchers.

Flu Vaccine Scandal Ignored by Press

And even that absurdly low ten percent effectiveness assumes that you accept the whole model of how vaccines work.  It assumes that vaccines safely protect against disease, rather than, at best, repressing the visible symptoms of a disease, or harming the immune system in ways that leave a person more vulnerable to other types of diseases, such as cancer.  There is much, much to question about any assumption regarding any vaccination (including those for your pets), though you will neither read nor hear these life and death issues discussed in the mainstream media.

Mr. Rappoport points out that on top of the scant or nearly non-existent coverage of the flu vaccine scandal, the press also fails to mention an even larger one: the flu vaccine of 2017-2018 isn’t the only one worthless or fatally flawed. Chicken eggs have been used to make flu vaccines for decades. reports: “The majority of flu vaccines are grown in chicken eggs, a method of vaccine development that’s been used for 70 years.”

So the flu vaccine has likely not worked well, if it has worked at all, for most of our lifetimes.  The same low effectiveness problem has occurred for 70 years!

So where are the page-one stories with 20-point bold headlines? Where’s Sixty Minutes? Where is the lead item story on the nightly news telling us the truth about the flu vaccine? Where’s the investigative series or the HBO Special on the failure of the flu vaccine?

All we get instead are mindless promotions of a shockingly ineffective flu vaccine.

Mr. Rappo0port also reports on another vaccine scandal unfolding in the Philippines. And one should also study the vaccine scandal connect to Bill Gates’ foundation in India. Or the Gardasil scandal. Or the shingles vaccine scandal over Merck’s Zostovax vaccine. Or the MMR vaccine scandal pointed out by Merck whistleblowers who formerly developed vaccines. Or the Chinese-made vaccine scandal. Do you know where your vaccines are made? Do you trust the Chinese to manufacture a vaccine going directly into your own bloodstream?  If so, do you want to buy some beachfront property in Florida?  Give us a call.

As Lily Tomlin said, “No matter how cynical you get, it’s just impossible to keep up.”

One may not need cynicism, but one does need science she can trust. We’re not getting that science from the mainstream media, or from the CDC. We’re on our own. And we would do well to pay attention, because the vaccines the California state government now forces on the state’s schoolchildren are coming to a school near you.  The end game for Big Pharma and the CDC is to eventually force us all to vaccinate for whatever disease du jour they claim they want to “protect us from.”

May God protect us all from them.



Vaccine Maker makes US Vaccine Policy

Just as “defense” contractors spend millions of dollars urging political hacks (and “journalists” – Read: stenographers) to gin up threats, drop more bombs and build more airplanes in order to sell more weapons – and oh, just incidentally kill more people) – pharmaceutical companies spend millions of dollars to gin up disease threats and pay off legislators in order to sell more vaccines.

Even Government Tells Truth sometimes
Government agencies like the CDC usually work hand in fist with vaccine makers to make vaccine policy and bury vaccine injuries.  But sometimes even a government agency acts in the best interests of citizens.  The National Institutes of Health, for one, has blown the whistle on how at least one drug company has worked to manipulate vaccine policy in order to promote profits over health.

Related:  Merck Role in Vaccination Policymaking – NIH

The NIH has wisely questioned the blatant conflicts of interest that lie at the vaccine-damaged heart of America’s vaccination policies.  It has also outed them.

HPV Vaccine’s Dark Promotion
In May 2012, the NIH sought to investigate the roles that Merck & Co played in state human papillomavirus (HPV) immunization policy making.  The agency wrote that it wanted “to elicit key stakeholders’ perceptions of the appropriateness of these activities, and to explore implications for relationships between health policymakers and industry.”

Merck has a lot of horses running in the lucrative vaccine profit races.  Merck makes the insidious Gardasil vaccine, as well as the mostly worthless but always potentially dangerous shingles vaccine.  Merck also makes the ill-fated MMR vaccine, the subject of a recent  vaccine injury lawsuit that charges the company with fraud, deceit, and negligence.

NIH used a series of state case studies combining data from key informant interviews with analysis of media reports and archival materials.  NIH interviewed 73 key informants in six states that were actively engaged in HPV vaccine policy deliberations.

The agency found that Merck promoted forced vaccination for schoolchildren, though the euphemism is “mandatory.”   NIH found that Merck served as an information resource.  Merck lobbied legislators, drafted legislation, mobilized female legislators and doctor organizations.  Merck conducted consumer marketing campaigns.  Merck filled gaps in “vaccine access.” (A real public service, that.)

Merck Controls Vaccine Science for Legislators
Worse yet, the NIH found that legislators relied heavily on Merck for scientific information. The NIH wrote: “Most stakeholders found lobbying by vaccine manufacturers acceptable in principle, but perceived that Merck had acted too aggressively and non-transparently in this case.”

The NIH concluded: “Although policymakers acknowledge the utility of manufacturers’ involvement in vaccination policy making, industry lobbying that is overly aggressive, not fully transparent, or not divorced from financial contributions to lawmakers risks undermining the prospects for legislation to foster uptake of new vaccines.”

Money Trumps Science
And there you have it.  Another clear case where money blinds, or at least trumps, science. Merck worked to avoid transparency, because anyone with a level of intelligence higher than a tape worm can see that its financial stake in the great vaccine game renders it unreliable in questions of science.  Merck makes a billion dollars a year on the flu vaccine alone, which is always loaded with aluminum, a touch of mercury, and virtually never works.

Former Merck Scientists sue Merck
At least two former Merck scientists have blown the whistle on Merck’s junk science which overstates the safety of vaccination as well as every vaccine’s alleged effectiveness.  Another former Merck scientist, Dr. William Thompson, has also blown the whistle on Merck’s coverup of an MMR vaccine-Autism Link.  Hundreds of studies have shown or suggested a vaccine link to autism, in spite of the mainstream media’s steady drumbeat to repeat the big lie ad infinitum that there is no vaccine link to autism.

Merck’s ill-fated Gardasil vaccine, meanwhile, continues to sterilize some girls and kill or sicken many others.  Despite a total mainstream media blackout of Gardasil’s problems, a recent court ruling shows that Gardasil can and does kill some people who submit to it. Others may only be made very sick.

The U.S. Supreme Court has called vaccines “unavoidably unsafe,” yet political whores like California senator Richard Pan and others have moved to remove informed consent and force vaccination on all schoolchildren, despite their wishes or their parents’ wishes to control what goes into their bodies, directly into their bloodstream.

Shame on Big Pharma whores like Richard Pan and the awful Dr. Paul Offit (appropriately named).  Vaccines can “offit’ all right.  Vaccines can and do kill people, and there is not one iota of scientific evidence that one single vaccine has ever worked to stop the disease for which it was allegedly invented.  And every vaccine produces harm, as Dr. Andrew Moulden made clear in his research and in many presentations before he was neutralized by the mainstream media.  He then died mysteriously at age 49, along with the heroic Dr. Jeffrey Bradstreet and nearly 80 other holistic or alternative doctors, or those researching links between vaccination and cancer, or those researching cancer cures.

Curious Doctor Deaths – Erin Elizabeth 
Robert De Niro and Robert Kennedy, Jr. have offered a $100,000 reward to anyone who can prove that one vaccine is safe and effective.  The reward has gone unclaimed for more than two years.  If there were such a vaccine, that would be easy money which we would love to put in our own pocket.  Who wouldn’t?

Not one single vaccine has ever been proven safe or effective. Anybody who thinks so is scientifically illiterate, period, or simply not paying attention, or watching too much mainstream news.  Fake news is a much bigger problem than most Smart-phone-addicted Americans have ever imagined.



Roundup Poison gets a Free Press Pass

Roundup poison gets a free press pass, but another scientist has blown the whistle on Monsanto’s endless ploy to discredit any organization, person, or persons who dare to call Roundup what it is: a human carcinogen.  A specialist in toxic chemical regulation consistent with science, health policy, and environmental law, Jennifer Sass testified before Congress earlier this year over Monsanto’s ongoing campaign to attack, discredit, or “neutralize” any critics of Monsanto and/or its best-selling poison, Roundup.

Roundup Poison gets a Free Press Pass
It is a measure of Monsanto’s ability to control the argument that merely naming Roundup a poison, which it is, instead of an herbicide – which is merely a euphemism for a poison or a pesticide – can, in any way, be construed as an outright attack on the chemical giant.  Though every mainstream news and television outlet will refer to Roundup with the euphemism of herbicide, Roundup is a poison; and Monsanto is a poison company.  Monsanto makes things that kill, and it promotes – at an enormous profit – chemical farming methods that are slowly (though at a faster and faster rate) killing everything that lives on the earth: bees, birds, plants, people – the lattermost with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and some other types of potentially-deadly leukemias.

Related:  Roundup, non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma Link

Monsanto’s Full Spectrum Dominance Plan
Monsanto has been moving for years to monopolize the seed industry as well as all farming throughout the world, often with the help of the U.S. military, which has literally helped force Monsanto’s poison products down the throats of conquered peoples like the poor bastards of Iraq after we “liberated” it.

This is not theory. This is fact. Monsanto, with the help of millions of dollars it has spent “lobbying” (some would say “bribing”) members of congress as well as U.S. presidents and presidential candidates.  George Bush I, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton were all enormous Monsanto backers.  Yes, perhaps the silver lining is that Monsanto is an equal-opportunity political pig (favoring neither demrats nor repugnants) when it comes to greasing palms for sweetheart deals.

Monsanto needs political and military muscle in order to force its poison edicts on the hapless peoples of the world who would otherwise refuse to poison their own food, water, air, bodies. Monsanto’s goal is nothing less than to patent every living thing that it can. Its well-paid scientists work everyday to further monopolize seed and farming industries in the U.S. and across the world. Monsanto’s end game – which we know sounds like hyperbole, and we really wish it were – is to control the market on everything that grows, to completely control anything that can be grown. Sadly, the monster from Missouri is edging closer each day to its final dream of full spectrum dominance.

Glyphosate Poison for Everyone
The U.S. FDA has found glyphosate in virtually every food in which it has bothered to look for it, yet the agency has covered up this damning information.  Glyphosate is the main active ingredient that Monsanto lists in its Roundup poison.  This is not a subject that anyone who eats anything in this country can avoid.

Glyphosate is in everything, but that doesn’t mean it has to be this way. That doesn’t mean we can’t stop Monsanto from continuing to poison us all, as the monster from the midway continues to sell more and more of this poison, and spray more and more of it onto our food, into the air, into our water, into us.

Jennifer Sass – based in Washington, D.C. – brings a highly specialized expertise in U.S. chemicals policy.  She focuses much of her work on understanding and explaining the science behind toxic chemical regulation and on advocating for regulations that are consistent with science, health policy, and environmental law.  Ms. Sass frequently provides testimony and scientific briefings for members of Congress and federal advisory committees.  A lecturer at George Washington University’s department of environmental and occupational health, she has a master’s degree and a PhD in anatomy and cell biology from the University of Saskatchewan.  She has performed postdoctoral work in toxicology at the University of Maryland.

Please read her presentation to Congress here, and write your chemical-loving representatives and tell them that if they want glyphosate, they can buy Roundup themselves and drink it right from the bottle.  Tell them to let the rest of us choose what we want to put into our bodies, and into our air, water, our soil.  Tell them we need Roundup like we need a hole in the head.

Sane people don’t poison their own land, their own water, their own food, their own bodies. Chemical farming must be stopped before it is too late.  All the phony talk of chemical farming’s feeding the planet and being necessary is a pack of wild lies put together by chemical companies with lunatics in charge that see only money.  Please contact your U.S. representatives today and tell them you are watching how they vote, and watching how much money Monsanto is contributing to their campaign coffers in order to continue poisoning us all with impunity.



Neurosurgeon explains Chemtrail Brain Effects

(May 2, 2018)  Why is the earth being  poisoned daily with unmeasured amounts of aluminum and other toxic substances?  While disinformation dominates the internet regarding chemtrails that have been unleashed across the US (and the world) for more than 20 years, neurosurgeon Dr. Russell Blaylock and several other doctors and scientists have examined the materials in the secret aerial spraying.

The evidence for chemtrails is too overwhelming to bother with a retort to the CIA’s “conspiracy theory” ruse meant to silence any meaningful research or discussion.  It’s a simple fact that we and God’s living earth and sentient creatures have all been suffering the effects of a criminal enterprise for more than two decades.  Chemtrails are real.   The time has come for people to voice their concerns while they can still think for themselves and exercise their God-given right to reason.

Why in the World are they Spraying?

Watch this award-winning documentary:

Anyone too lazy or too willfully ignorant to look up into the skies and see for himself exactly what is happening, can find hundreds of YouTube videos, as well as dozens if not hundreds of personal and professionally-researched stories which detail the enormous extent of the ongoing poisoning of our atmosphere.  Entire areas of the pacific northwest are dying from heavy concentrations of aluminum being sprayed from the high-flying planes, along with barium, mysterious blood plasma concoctions, several unknown substances, and nanobots too small to be filtered out by our lungs.

Educate yourself if you want to save the earth.  Watch these videos and decide for yourself what the truth is.

Discovery Channel explains Chemtrails Experiment

Meanwhile, nanoparticles being sprayed on us daily are a trillion-dollar industry with absolutely no government oversight or regulation.   Most people spend most of their time with their heads buried in their cell phones, apparently too busy to look up and see what kind of air they are being forced to breathe.  Elsewhere, at least one doctor has warned about chemtrail lung.

Doctor Warns about Chemtrail Lung



IVC Filters Overused, Unproven

(April 26, 2018)  PulmCC, a trade publication for pulmonary and critical care, published an article on Dec. 16, 2016 titled, “Inferior vena cava filters are overused.  What’s the harm?”  The piece details the puzzling acceptance of IVC filters despite a decided lack of evidence proving their efficacy.  It asks several pertinent questions about whether inferior vena cava filters are being used in safe or necessary ways.

The PulmCC piece also asks why patients with IVC filters aren’t receiving notices to have them removed.  Evidence shows that the longer a temporary IVCF remains in a person’s vena cava, the more likely it is to cause problems.  Shouldn’t IVCF makers and the parties that implant them be under some obligation to patients to keep them informed until the filters are safely removed?

Some people, such as trauma victims, might receive an IVC filter and never even know they have one, until, perhaps, it is too late to have it safely removed.

Inferior vena cava filters are placed in the vena cava, the vein returning blood to the heart from the legs, to prevent deep venous thromboses (DVT) – blood clots in the legs – from traveling to the heart and lungs, causing pulmonary embolism (PE).  PulmCC notes that, “[D]espite their wide use, the benefits and risks of IVCF remain unclear. With about 50,000 IVC filters placed annually in the U.S., that’s a lot of unclarity.”

A Lack of Clarity
“Unclarity” is a charitable way to put it.  The publication also notes that IVCF are often used in conjunction with anti-coagulation therapy, and it asks whether this is good medicine. It’s a fair question, especially as studies have shown that adding an IVCF to go with anticoagulation therapy gives no mortality benefit to the patient.

IVC filters are the standard of care for people with acute pulmonary embolism or proximal DVT who cannot receive anticoagulation because of bleeding risk. But IVCF are used more often as an additional preventive therapy along with anticoagulation in an attempt to further reduce PE risk.

Scant Evidence for IVC Filter Benefits
Evidence supporting IVCF for any indication is scant, at best. Two large randomized trials have failed to show any mortality benefit from IVC filters.

Two IVC Filter Studies show no IVCF Benefits
PREPIC (1998) study participants with either DVT or PE who received IVCF, had fewer recurrent PEs, but suffered more DVTs, and had no mortality reduction. PREPIC studied non-retrievable filters. Half its patients had routine DVTs without PE. PREPIC confirmed that routine placement of permanent IVC filters in DVT and PE is not a good idea. After PREPIC, nearly all IVCF placed in the U.S. today are retrievable.

PREPIC2’s (2015) updated design tested retrievable IVCF (with anticoagulation, vs anticoagulation alone) enrolling ~400 ‘high risk’ patients with acute PE. There was no difference in death or recurrent PE between groups at 3 or 6 months. Although closer to real-world practice today, ‘high risk’ in PREPIC2 included anyone over 75, or with any active cancer diagnosis, which are not widely accepted indications for IVCF. Fewer than 18% of patients in PREPIC2 had any hypotension during their hospitalization.

Some Benefit for Elderly
A retrospective review of a large inpatient database, however, did show IVC to be associated with improved survival in elderly patients with massive PE (i.e., with hypotension). But no randomized trial testing this IVCF indication has been performed, probably because this is a small subset of patients.

Professional Society Disagreements on IVC Filters
Only two indications for IVCF are generally accepted by all major professional societies:

1.  Acute PE or proximal DVT with inability to provide anticoagulation;
2.  Patients with hemodynamically unstable PE, for whom another PE might be fatal.

Professional societies mostly disagree on appropriate indications for IVC filters. For example, the American College of Radiology (ACR) supports prophylactic placement of IVCF in patients with severe trauma or spinal injury without DVT, but the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) advises against it. Similarly, ACCP endorses IVCF placement as an adjunctive measure for massive PE treated with thrombolysis*, but American Heart Association (AHA) disagrees.

Radiology professional societies, whose members commonly place IVC filters – for a price, of course – endorse more IVCF indications than do ACCP and AHA. (Medicare pays roughly $3,800 to install an IVCF, another $2,250 to remove it.)

*ACCP advises against the routine use of IVCF in PE and DVT but adds “our recommendation against insertion of an IVC filter in patients with acute PE who are anticoagulated may not apply to [patients with hypotension].”

Temporary IVC Filters not removed
Most “retrievable” IVC filters become permanent. Less than a third of them are ever removed. “Patient lost to follow-up” is the oft-cited reason, but PulmCC says, “[F]ailure to remove an IVCF is more likely due to inadequate communication and care coordination by physicians between the inpatient and outpatient settings.”

IVC Filter Risks Unknown
IVC filter risks are largely unknown, because no IVCF maker or medical entity has set up a comprehensive public repository for adverse events from IVCF. Complications of IVCF placement frequently occur, according to PulmCC; but the rate of real harm is unknown. IVC filters have been generally considered reasonably safe mainly because hundreds of thousands have been placed without large safety signals emerging, says PulmCC; but that may be changing.

IVC Filters Overused, Unproven

A retrospective review of 952 patients after IVCF placement suggested a 1% rate of serious complications from IVCF. After receiving thousands of adverse event reports, the FDA advised physicians to remove IVC filters as soon as feasible – ideally within two months – and demanded additional longitudinal product safety data from IVCF makers. The PRESERVE trial is ongoing in response. IVC filter lawsuits asserting negligence and product defects are pending against at least three IVC filter manufacturer: Cook Medical, C.R. Bard, and Rex Cordis.

IVC Filters are Big Business
IVC filters are a roughly $200 million business. Hospitals split the profits with the interventional physician (radiologist, surgeon, cardiologist).

PulmCC asks, “With all that money sloshing around, and the payment on the table for IVC filter removal, why can’t doctors, hospitals and industry at least get organized enough to take them out?”

The publication suggests that a hospital could schedule a removal for a time after the patient leaves the hospital. IVCF makers could maintain a registry, pay call center reps or robots to reach IVCF recipients by phone, mail, and email until the filter is removed They could add follow-up money to the device cost, and have FedEx deliver a package to the patient’s home as a reminder to remove the filter.

PulmCC closes by saying that, “Blaming the patient and primary physician for IVC filters left in place won’t cut it anymore.”

The publication takes doctors to task for not promptly removing the filters, but don’t the IVCF manufacturers have a greater responsibility? How clear have they made it to doctors that the longer a filter stays in place, the more likely it is to cause problems?

An upcoming IVC filter trial in Houston, Texas, beginning May 15, 2018, will attempt to answer this question and many more regarding the safety and efficacy of IVC filters. The trial specifically concerns the Cook Celect IVC filter made by Cook Medical of Indianapolis, Indiana.




Merck accused of Fraud, Deceit, Negligence in Vaccine Injury Case

It is extremelyFormer Merck Employee speaks against Vaccination difficult to hold a drug company accountable in a vaccine injury case, but a Gardasil vaccine lawsuit filed in 2016 in California could change the whole game.

California is a fitting venue for a real vaccine safety challenge.  In 2015 it earned the right to bear the black badge of shame by becoming the first state to remove informed consent from schoolchildren and their parents.  Thanks largely to a Merck Pharmaceutical darling working in the government, a state Senator named Richard Pan, and a blitzkrieg fear campaign that muddied the waters of vaccine reality, California’s politicians happily voted away their citizen’s rights. Under the guise of doing it for their constituents own good, of course.

Related: Five Industry Shills to Watch out for

Other states have also taken their marching orders from Merck and the drug-company-compromised CDC, which also owns more than 50 vaccine patents in a grotesque conflict of interest. Many states are now promoting similar mandatory vaccination bills to remove informed consent and force all of their school children (and adults next; that’s in the works) into taking however many vaccines Merck and the CDC decide they “need.”  But there is still hope that sanity and democracy and all that is holy will prevail.

The recent Gardasil vaccine lawsuit filed in California may alter the vaccine-tilted field of play, and give the public a chance to regain vaccine choice and health freedom.   The lawsuit demands that Merck reveal the “science” behind vaccination, and specifically behind the Gardasil vaccine, which has injured more than 85,000 children – and by turns, of course, their families – since it was foisted on the public.

Merck accused of Fraud, Deceit, Negligence
Merck stands accused of fraud, deceit and negligence in a lawsuit concerning its controversial Gardasil vaccine.

Documented evidence suggests the HPV vaccine has caused more injuries than any other vaccination in history, including sterility and death in dozens of young girls. But despite that documented evidence, which the mainstream media continues to cover up (because pharmaceutical advertising pays the bills of most mainstream media outlets), Merck’s HPV vaccination continues to be trumpeted as a success. Besides the money it pumps into advertising, which in turn controls editorial copy, the pharmaceutical industry also exhibits an extraordinary amount of control over the “watchdogs” of government, such as the FDA and CDC.  This is not conspiracy theory; it is well-documented by dozens of researchers, and it is an open secret in Washington D.C.

But while the general look is grim for health freedom in the money-mad U.S., this recent vaccine injury court case is offering hope that Merck will finally need to explain and defend the science behind the Gardasil vaccine.

*** Related***

* US Court pays $6 Million to Gardasil Victims –

* Judge finds Merck lied in Patent Trial –

* Merck Whistleblowers out Mumps Vaccine Fraud –

* Death and Disability follow HPV Vaccination –

* Shingles Vaccine Lawsuit

* Shingles Vaccine Eye Damage

* How Big Pharma buries Vaccine Problems

Merck and the MSM will tell you Gardasil is 100% safe and effective and you will never hear the truth there, but here is some truth to contemplate one more reason why one cannot trust mainstream news today. Gardasil has some problems.

85,000 Gardasil Adverse Event Reports
The World Health Organization’s (WHO) VigiAccess database – as of April 09, 2018 – records a total of 85,329 filed reports of adverse reactions over the HPV vaccination.  These reports include:

* 389 deaths
* 37,699 reports of nervous system disorders
* 2450 cardiac disorders, (including 38 cardiac arrests)
* 533 Postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS)
* 3200+ reports of seizures or epilepsy, 8453 syncope.

Please read about the California case filing here at and see that there is hope for vaccine truth to emerge from the darkness which all the vaccine money blots out: – Merck accused of fraud, deceit, negligence over Gardasil