Four-month-old Gianna DiFiglia died only two days after being injected with four different vaccines at a routine doctor visit.
Thursday, her mother, Patricia DiFiglia of Hackettstown, stood on the State House steps with a picture of her daughter in the air, underlined by the words "Murder," protesting mandatory children vaccinations.
The issue has come to a head since New Jersey became the first in the nation to require annual flu shots for preschoolers last month. DiFiglia said she is scared to let her two other children get the mandatory shots, but the decision is difficult because schools mandate the vaccinations.
"I really want the choice without fail to be able to say no, especially with the flu shot," said DiFiglia, 41. "It's just ludicrous that they are mandating it in New Jersey."
DiFiglia was one parent in a passionate crowd of 200 adults and children rallying for the passage of a bill allowing for conscientious objection exemptions to mandatory vaccinations. Many in the crowd held up signs saying "Our Kids, Our Choice," or "Mother Knows Best."
Those opposing the mandatory vaccinations say parents should have ultimate say on what shots their children get and that chemicals in the vaccines can cause serious neurological disorders, such as autism.
Health officials strongly oppose such exemptions, saying they would open the door for widespread disease. They view vaccines as a great advancement in medicine that has eliminated diseases such as polio.
"Vaccines have really changed the face of medicine," said Lawrence Frenkel, a physician at the Children's Hospital at St. Peter's University Hospital in New Brunswick. "It has saved millions of lives and prevented countless epidemics of horrible, deadly disease."
New Jersey last month became the first state to require annual flu shots for preschoolers and approved three additional required vaccinations. All told, children need 11 disease-related vaccinations, some requiring multiple doses, to enter day care or preschool in the state, state Department of Health and Senior Services spokeswoman Marilyn Riley said.
While 19 states have conscientious-objection laws on the books, New Jersey currently allows for exemptions only for medical or religious reasons. A hearing on the proposal was held in June, but the bill still has not been acted upon.
Friday, October 17, 2008
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Object to Forced Injection of Toxins in your Baby??
Here it is, folks!!
The first attempt to allow you freedom of choice in NJ-THE MOST HEAVILY VACCINATED SPOT ON THE PLANET!
Call the legislators and voice your support!
ASSEMBLY, No. 260
STATE OF NEW JERSEY
213th LEGISLATURE
PRE-FILED FOR INTRODUCTION IN THE 2008 SESSION
Sponsored by:
Assemblywoman CHARLOTTE VANDERVALK
District 39 (Bergen)
Assemblyman PETER J. BIONDI
District 16 (Morris and Somerset)
Assemblyman GARY S. SCHAER
District 36 (Bergen, Essex and Passaic)
Assemblyman PATRICK J. DIEGNAN, JR.
District 18 (Middlesex)
Assemblyman JON M. BRAMNICK
District 21 (Essex, Morris, Somerset and Union)
Co-Sponsored by:
Assemblyman McKeon, Assemblywomen Oliver, Voss, Wagner, Assemblyman Rooney, Assemblywoman Stender, Assemblymen Doherty, Vas, Chiappone, Greenwald, Merkt, Assemblywoman Cruz-Perez, Assemblyman Rudder, Assemblywoman Handlin, Assemblymen Prieto, Rumana, Chiusano and Assemblywoman McHose
SYNOPSIS
Provides for conscientious exemption to mandatory immunizations.
CURRENT VERSION OF TEXT
Introduced Pending Technical Review by Legislative Counsel
The first attempt to allow you freedom of choice in NJ-THE MOST HEAVILY VACCINATED SPOT ON THE PLANET!
Call the legislators and voice your support!
ASSEMBLY, No. 260
STATE OF NEW JERSEY
213th LEGISLATURE
PRE-FILED FOR INTRODUCTION IN THE 2008 SESSION
Sponsored by:
Assemblywoman CHARLOTTE VANDERVALK
District 39 (Bergen)
Assemblyman PETER J. BIONDI
District 16 (Morris and Somerset)
Assemblyman GARY S. SCHAER
District 36 (Bergen, Essex and Passaic)
Assemblyman PATRICK J. DIEGNAN, JR.
District 18 (Middlesex)
Assemblyman JON M. BRAMNICK
District 21 (Essex, Morris, Somerset and Union)
Co-Sponsored by:
Assemblyman McKeon, Assemblywomen Oliver, Voss, Wagner, Assemblyman Rooney, Assemblywoman Stender, Assemblymen Doherty, Vas, Chiappone, Greenwald, Merkt, Assemblywoman Cruz-Perez, Assemblyman Rudder, Assemblywoman Handlin, Assemblymen Prieto, Rumana, Chiusano and Assemblywoman McHose
SYNOPSIS
Provides for conscientious exemption to mandatory immunizations.
CURRENT VERSION OF TEXT
Introduced Pending Technical Review by Legislative Counsel
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
HAND-TO-MOUTH DISEASE: The True Cause of Fatness
Yes, there is a direct correlation between putting food in your mouth and gaining weight!
No, folks, it's not an old wives's tale. There is an honest to God connection with eating and weight gain. If you go back a few posts and read my rant about people beginning to photosynthesize like plants, you'll understand my frustration and, thus, this current rant.
As a card carrying member of the National Weight Loss Registry , a food scientist, Nutrition Professor, and overall food expert, I feel comfortable with my analysis that eating too much contributes to fatness.
In my Weight Loss Classes at the Adult Schools in Summit, Chatham, Florham Park and Madison, (see my web site to register), I am constantly challenged by seemingly intelligent people that simply do not understand the "Hand-To-Mouth" theory of fatness. They seem to want a more complex reason as to why they simply can not maintain normal weight. "There must be some hormonal imbalance..."; "I am big-boned......"; "I eat too many carbs..."; "Dr. Phil said to love myself more...";
No, folks, the answer is simple: You suffer from "Hand-to-Mouth Disease". There is hope!! Try one of the following:
1. Close the mouth more often.
2. Restrict your hand to within 1 foot of the mouth.
3. Avoid bending the elbow.
4. Buy only the food that you dislike, and keep plenty of it around.
5. Only go to terrible restaurants with bad food.
If all else fails, hire a personal trainer and nutritionist. Then, join an expensive gym; join Jenny Craig; Zone Chefs, and buy all the hokey diet books you can carry.
Perhaps then you will not have enough money to buy too much food .
HEALTHANGEL
No, folks, it's not an old wives's tale. There is an honest to God connection with eating and weight gain. If you go back a few posts and read my rant about people beginning to photosynthesize like plants, you'll understand my frustration and, thus, this current rant.
As a card carrying member of the National Weight Loss Registry , a food scientist, Nutrition Professor, and overall food expert, I feel comfortable with my analysis that eating too much contributes to fatness.
In my Weight Loss Classes at the Adult Schools in Summit, Chatham, Florham Park and Madison, (see my web site to register), I am constantly challenged by seemingly intelligent people that simply do not understand the "Hand-To-Mouth" theory of fatness. They seem to want a more complex reason as to why they simply can not maintain normal weight. "There must be some hormonal imbalance..."; "I am big-boned......"; "I eat too many carbs..."; "Dr. Phil said to love myself more...";
No, folks, the answer is simple: You suffer from "Hand-to-Mouth Disease". There is hope!! Try one of the following:
1. Close the mouth more often.
2. Restrict your hand to within 1 foot of the mouth.
3. Avoid bending the elbow.
4. Buy only the food that you dislike, and keep plenty of it around.
5. Only go to terrible restaurants with bad food.
If all else fails, hire a personal trainer and nutritionist. Then, join an expensive gym; join Jenny Craig; Zone Chefs, and buy all the hokey diet books you can carry.
Perhaps then you will not have enough money to buy too much food .
HEALTHANGEL
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Why Teach Our Kids to Eat Right When We Can DRUG THEM INSTEAD!!
Putting Fat Children On Lipitor...
What follows is an excerpt from an article from the NY Times about the new drug induced threat to our children and our lives!
Even though I, (and other intellligent doctors), have been screaming for years that statins are unnecessary, even possibly harmful for all other than a select few adults. That they DO NOT prevent heart attacks directly, and even if they do lower your serum cholesterol, other genetic and environmental health factors are more important in cutting heart disease risk....
Now, we get THIS: Why not teach our very, very young toddlers and children that it's OK to be overweight; eat poorly, and don't do any exercise or physical activity. Just get obese and we can put you on these nice cholesterol drugs, along with your Ritalin, Prednisone for your slight cold, etc. THEN FOR THE REST OF YOUR YOUNG LIFE WE WILL TRY AND CONVINCE YOU NOT TO TAKE RECREATIONAL DRUGS!!
For a full excerpt of the article, go to:http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/08/health/08well.html?ref=science
8-Year-Olds on Statins? A New Plan Quickly Bites Back
This aggressive new recommendation for warding off heart disease in some children has stirred a furious debate among pediatricians since the American Academy of Pediatrics issued it on Monday.
While some doctors applauded the idea, others were incredulous. In particular, these doctors called attention to a lack of evidence that the use of the cholesterol-lowering drugs, called statins, in children would prevent heart attacks later in life.
“What are the data that show this is helpful preventing heart attacks?” asked Dr. Darshak Sanghavi, a pediatric cardiologist and assistant professor at the University of Massachusetts Medical School. “How many heart attacks do we hope to prevent this way? There’s no data regarding that.”
Nor, Dr. Sanghavi added, are there data on the possible side effects of taking statins for 40 or 50 years.
Other doctors said the recommendation would distract from common-sense changes in diet and exercise, which are also part of the new guidelines.
What follows is an excerpt from an article from the NY Times about the new drug induced threat to our children and our lives!
Even though I, (and other intellligent doctors), have been screaming for years that statins are unnecessary, even possibly harmful for all other than a select few adults. That they DO NOT prevent heart attacks directly, and even if they do lower your serum cholesterol, other genetic and environmental health factors are more important in cutting heart disease risk....
Now, we get THIS: Why not teach our very, very young toddlers and children that it's OK to be overweight; eat poorly, and don't do any exercise or physical activity. Just get obese and we can put you on these nice cholesterol drugs, along with your Ritalin, Prednisone for your slight cold, etc. THEN FOR THE REST OF YOUR YOUNG LIFE WE WILL TRY AND CONVINCE YOU NOT TO TAKE RECREATIONAL DRUGS!!
For a full excerpt of the article, go to:http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/08/health/08well.html?ref=science
8-Year-Olds on Statins? A New Plan Quickly Bites Back
This aggressive new recommendation for warding off heart disease in some children has stirred a furious debate among pediatricians since the American Academy of Pediatrics issued it on Monday.
While some doctors applauded the idea, others were incredulous. In particular, these doctors called attention to a lack of evidence that the use of the cholesterol-lowering drugs, called statins, in children would prevent heart attacks later in life.
“What are the data that show this is helpful preventing heart attacks?” asked Dr. Darshak Sanghavi, a pediatric cardiologist and assistant professor at the University of Massachusetts Medical School. “How many heart attacks do we hope to prevent this way? There’s no data regarding that.”
Nor, Dr. Sanghavi added, are there data on the possible side effects of taking statins for 40 or 50 years.
Other doctors said the recommendation would distract from common-sense changes in diet and exercise, which are also part of the new guidelines.
Friday, June 20, 2008
The Fatal Senior Moment...
Just another case where the side effects are worse than what is being treated!
The Food and Drug Administration warned doctors Monday that prescribing a certain group of psychiatric drugs to seniors suffering from dementia can increase their risk of death.
Antipsychotic drugs are approved to treat schizophrenia and bipolar disease, but doctors frequently prescribe them to treat elderly patients with dementia. FDA's announcement was an update to a 2005 action, when regulators added warnings about increased heart attacks and pneumonia to drugs called atypical antipsychotics.
The medicines include blockbusters like Eli Lilly & Co.'s Zyprexa and Johnson & Johnson's Risperdal. FDA said Monday those same risks apply to 11 older drugs known as typical antipsychotics, including Pfizer's Navane and Endo Pharmaceutical's Moban. The drugs were developed in the 1950s and have largely been replaced by the newer medications, which are believed to have fewer side effects, such as tremors.
Under FDA's orders, both drug types will now carry boxed warnings — the most serious a drug can carry — describing their risks to dementia patients. Analysts did not expect the announcement to negatively impact drug company earnings because the original antipsychotics are available as low-cost generics.
Federal officials have repeatedly urged doctors not to medicate seniors unnecessarily. Despite such warnings, health professionals continue to prescribe psychiatric drugs "off-label," or for uses that have not been approved by FDA. About 20 percent of seniors in nursing homes who receive antipsychotics have not been diagnosed with psychiatric problems, according to data released by Medicare earlier this year.
While FDA regulates the approval and marketing of drugs, doctors are free to use their judgment when prescribing drugs. The agency based its decision on two studies of a combined 65,000 seniors which showed those taking antipsychotics were more likely to die than those not on the drugs. Agency officials said it's not clear why antipsychotics hasten death. Scientists also could not determine from the data whether one group carries greater dangers than the other."We've struggled with this decision but we ultimately decided the data are strong enough to expand this label to drugs in both classes," said Thomas Laughren, director of FDA's psychiatric drug division.
The agency stressed there is "no approved drug for the treatment of dementia-related psychosis," and recommended doctors consider other treatment options." A lot of the things can be done to help change one's environment so elderly patients can be more oriented and engaged," said Dr. Eric Hollander, a professor at the Mt. Sinai School of Medicine.
Many of the behavioral problems seen in seniors can be improved with simple, daily routines that patients can follow, Hollander said.
(Yes-like eating right, exercising...that stuff)
The Food and Drug Administration warned doctors Monday that prescribing a certain group of psychiatric drugs to seniors suffering from dementia can increase their risk of death.
Antipsychotic drugs are approved to treat schizophrenia and bipolar disease, but doctors frequently prescribe them to treat elderly patients with dementia. FDA's announcement was an update to a 2005 action, when regulators added warnings about increased heart attacks and pneumonia to drugs called atypical antipsychotics.
The medicines include blockbusters like Eli Lilly & Co.'s Zyprexa and Johnson & Johnson's Risperdal. FDA said Monday those same risks apply to 11 older drugs known as typical antipsychotics, including Pfizer's Navane and Endo Pharmaceutical's Moban. The drugs were developed in the 1950s and have largely been replaced by the newer medications, which are believed to have fewer side effects, such as tremors.
Under FDA's orders, both drug types will now carry boxed warnings — the most serious a drug can carry — describing their risks to dementia patients. Analysts did not expect the announcement to negatively impact drug company earnings because the original antipsychotics are available as low-cost generics.
Federal officials have repeatedly urged doctors not to medicate seniors unnecessarily. Despite such warnings, health professionals continue to prescribe psychiatric drugs "off-label," or for uses that have not been approved by FDA. About 20 percent of seniors in nursing homes who receive antipsychotics have not been diagnosed with psychiatric problems, according to data released by Medicare earlier this year.
While FDA regulates the approval and marketing of drugs, doctors are free to use their judgment when prescribing drugs. The agency based its decision on two studies of a combined 65,000 seniors which showed those taking antipsychotics were more likely to die than those not on the drugs. Agency officials said it's not clear why antipsychotics hasten death. Scientists also could not determine from the data whether one group carries greater dangers than the other."We've struggled with this decision but we ultimately decided the data are strong enough to expand this label to drugs in both classes," said Thomas Laughren, director of FDA's psychiatric drug division.
The agency stressed there is "no approved drug for the treatment of dementia-related psychosis," and recommended doctors consider other treatment options." A lot of the things can be done to help change one's environment so elderly patients can be more oriented and engaged," said Dr. Eric Hollander, a professor at the Mt. Sinai School of Medicine.
Many of the behavioral problems seen in seniors can be improved with simple, daily routines that patients can follow, Hollander said.
(Yes-like eating right, exercising...that stuff)
Saturday, June 7, 2008
MILK: Breakfast of Chumpians
Don't Be Misled By Dairy Ads
According to a review of the published scientific literature, claims that low-fat dairy products or calcium can help people lose weight are untrue. Neither dairy products in general nor calcium intake promote weight loss.
Out of 49 clinical trials, 41 showed no effects of diary or calcium on weight, two showed an increase in body weight with a dairy regimen, and one showed a lower rate of weight gain. Only five showed weight loss.
An association between calcium or dairy intake and weight loss has been seen in some "observational" studies, possibly due to other factors such as increased exercise, cutting out high-calorie foods with little nutritional value, or other diet changes.
The key here: Milk is a human allergy producing breast milk for baby cows. You are being sold a total bill of goods if you believe that you either need or benefit from dairy products. To learn more, visit Dr. Sally Rockwell's website and order her book: "Calcium witout the Cow"
HealthAngel
According to a review of the published scientific literature, claims that low-fat dairy products or calcium can help people lose weight are untrue. Neither dairy products in general nor calcium intake promote weight loss.
Out of 49 clinical trials, 41 showed no effects of diary or calcium on weight, two showed an increase in body weight with a dairy regimen, and one showed a lower rate of weight gain. Only five showed weight loss.
An association between calcium or dairy intake and weight loss has been seen in some "observational" studies, possibly due to other factors such as increased exercise, cutting out high-calorie foods with little nutritional value, or other diet changes.
The key here: Milk is a human allergy producing breast milk for baby cows. You are being sold a total bill of goods if you believe that you either need or benefit from dairy products. To learn more, visit Dr. Sally Rockwell's website and order her book: "Calcium witout the Cow"
HealthAngel
Monday, May 5, 2008
Where's the TOXIC MERCURY today?
MERCURY INJECTIONS FOR CHILDREN TO CONTINUE !!
Efforts on the political level to remove mercury from flu vaccinations for children are apparently again going by the wayside. Even though the US Senate and House of Representatives have passed a measure to remove this substance from vaccines, President Bush says the Bill removing it will receive his veto.
The item in question is the mercury-based preservative known as Thimerosal. This is drawing concern from groups involved in the protection of children who point to growing evidence that this element is a leading cause of autism and other severe neurological problems.
The flu vaccination continues to be manufactured with mercury and is recommended for all pregnant women, infants and children despite warnings dating back to 2001. At that time the Institute of Medicine recommended against exposing these same sensitive groups to vaccines containing Thimerosal.
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, one in every six women of childbearing age in the United States already has blood levels of mercury high enough to cause neurological damage to their unborn children due to environmental factors alone.
The child protection group known as SafeMinds and members of the Autism community are outraged by the President’s announced intention to veto the bill, calling his decision both “irresponsible and dangerous.” (The Coalition for SafeMinds is a nonprofit group working to investigate and raise awareness of risks to infants and children from mercury injections.)
“Injecting even more mercury into the bodies of pregnant women, infants and children when it is not a necessary component of vaccines is just bad medicine,” said Lyn Redwood, president of SafeMinds. Redwood is the parent of a mercury-injected child.
“It defies logic that a flu vaccine must be disposed of as hazardous waste if it is not used, but somehow injecting the same mercury-containing vaccine into a baby is safe.”
Efforts on the political level to remove mercury from flu vaccinations for children are apparently again going by the wayside. Even though the US Senate and House of Representatives have passed a measure to remove this substance from vaccines, President Bush says the Bill removing it will receive his veto.
The item in question is the mercury-based preservative known as Thimerosal. This is drawing concern from groups involved in the protection of children who point to growing evidence that this element is a leading cause of autism and other severe neurological problems.
The flu vaccination continues to be manufactured with mercury and is recommended for all pregnant women, infants and children despite warnings dating back to 2001. At that time the Institute of Medicine recommended against exposing these same sensitive groups to vaccines containing Thimerosal.
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, one in every six women of childbearing age in the United States already has blood levels of mercury high enough to cause neurological damage to their unborn children due to environmental factors alone.
The child protection group known as SafeMinds and members of the Autism community are outraged by the President’s announced intention to veto the bill, calling his decision both “irresponsible and dangerous.” (The Coalition for SafeMinds is a nonprofit group working to investigate and raise awareness of risks to infants and children from mercury injections.)
“Injecting even more mercury into the bodies of pregnant women, infants and children when it is not a necessary component of vaccines is just bad medicine,” said Lyn Redwood, president of SafeMinds. Redwood is the parent of a mercury-injected child.
“It defies logic that a flu vaccine must be disposed of as hazardous waste if it is not used, but somehow injecting the same mercury-containing vaccine into a baby is safe.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
