Thursday, January 31, 2013

Beware: First Genetically Engineered Flu Vaccine Now on the Market

Story at-a-glance
  • To speed up flu vaccine production, the US FDA has approved a new insect-based, genetically engineered flu vaccine, as well as vaccines grown in cultures of dog kidney cells rather than eggs
  • This year’s flu vaccine contains a very good match to the circulating strains, yet the reported efficacy of the vaccine is still only slightly over 60 percent
  • In a wholly irresponsible move, some “health experts” are now proclaiming the conventional egg-based flu vaccine safe for those with severe egg allergies, and that the benefit of the flu vaccine (which this year has an official efficacy rating of about 60 percent) outweighs the potential risk of lethal anaphylaxis
  • According to a recent review of published research, flu vaccines are ineffective at best, and produce neurological complications at worst, while having no effect at all on hospitalizations or working days lost. For infants, inactivated flu vaccine was found to have the same effectiveness as a placebo

Video:  First Genetically Engineered Flu Vaccine Now on the Market

By Dr. Mercola:

As recently reported, a hardier than normal type of flu has spread around the US, and much earlier than normal, causing some states to declare public health emergencies.

To speed up flu vaccine production, the US FDA has approved a new insect-based, genetically engineered flu vaccine, as well as vaccines grown in cultures of dog kidney cells rather than eggs.

And while mainstream media claims the flu vaccine is working well this year, a recent review of published research shows flu vaccines are ineffective at best, and produce neurological complications at worst, while having no effect at all on hospitalizations or working days lost.

Flu Outbreak Showing Signs of Waning

In response to the flu outbreak, New York State Governor Andrew M. Cuomo issued an executive order allowing pharmacists to give flu vaccine injections to minors. If you believe this is a good thing, you’re still in the dark about the side effects of flu vaccines — some of which can be fatal — which makes getting it at a neighborhood pharmacy risky business.
Besides, all vaccinations should be carefully recorded in your child’s medical file, which will not happen when you pop into a pharmacy. They’re also unlikely to be properly trained to ascertain and/or address any acute side effects that may occur.

On January 11, media outlets such as ABC News1 reported the outbreak was waning in some parts of the nation, claiming the flu shots appeared to be doing a good job in curbing the outbreak. However, in the same article, CDC Director Dr. Thomas Frieden points out that the flu tends to ebb and flow throughout the season.
Furthermore, this year’s flu vaccine contains a very good match to the circulating strains, yet the reported efficacy of the vaccine is still only slightly over 60 percent — a point made by Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota2. According to Osterholm:

"A match doesn't tell us how well a vaccine is going to work. It's almost meaningless."

Perhaps the headlines are best explained as counter-propaganda to the latest scientific review that, yet again, found that the flu vaccine offers minimal, if any, protection against the flu, and that it comes at some risk. One of the most recent examples is the devastating side effects of the 2009-2010 flu vaccine, which caused some 800+ cases of narcolepsy in Sweden and other European countries3.

Flu Vaccine Doesn’t Work, According to Recent Research Review

If you’re thinking about vaccinating yourself or your infant against the flu, I highly recommend reading the independent study review from the Cochrane Collaboration first. As Tom Jefferson, a researcher with the Cochrane Collaboration, recently told Northwestern.edu4:

“The [Center for Disease Control] is making policy based on weak evidence and it is refusing to answer questions. There is no evidence that vaccines can prevent deaths or prevent person-to-person spread of infection.”

According to these independent research reviewers5:

“At best, vaccines might be effective against only influenza A and B, which represent about 10 percent of all circulating viruses. Authors of this review assessed all trials that compared vaccinated people with unvaccinated people. The combined results of these trials showed that under ideal conditions (vaccine completely matching circulating viral configuration) 33 healthy adults need to be vaccinated to avoid one set of influenza symptoms. In average conditions (partially matching vaccine) 100 people need to be vaccinated to avoid one set of influenza symptoms.

Vaccine use did not affect the number of people hospitalized or working days lost but caused one case of Guillian-Barré syndrome (a major neurological condition leading to paralysis) for every one million vaccinations.

Fifteen of the 36 trials were funded by vaccine companies and four had no funding declaration. Our results may be an optimistic estimate because company-sponsored influenza vaccines trials tend to produce results favorable to their products and some of the evidence comes from trials carried out in ideal viral circulation and matching conditions and because the harms evidence base is limited.”

As you may recall, Piers Morgan recently got the flu vaccine on the air on the Dr. Oz show, "and within 10 days I've been struck down," he now reports. "Don't ever take a flu shot again," Yoakam tells him, in this January 23 interview. Good advice, I'd say. While health agencies deny the possibility of getting the flu from the flu vaccine, many still do experience flu-like symptoms and/or get ill to some degree or another after getting the vaccine.

Regulators Approve New Genetically Engineered Insect-Based Flu Vaccine

This is a Flash-based video and may not be viewable on mobile devices.

Despite evidence to the contrary, the conventional view is that getting inoculated is the best way to protect yourself against the flu, and to make more flu vaccines available faster, the FDA recently approved a number of novel flu vaccines.

The first, Flublok, is produced by programming insect cells to produce hemagglutinin, a flu virus protein essential for entry of the virus into your body’s cells. Flublok is “the first the first trivalent influenza vaccine made using an insect virus (baculovirus) expression system and recombinant DNA technology6,” and is approved for use in adults only, ages 18-49. This kind of genetically engineered vaccine technology, while you may never have heard of it before, has already been used in the production of vaccines against other infectious diseases. According to CNN7:

“This method allows for more rapid production, making more of the vaccine available more quickly in the event of a pandemic... Flublok will be available in limited supply this winter and widely available during the next flu season, said Protein Sciences, which is based in Meriden, Connecticut.

Flublok contains the elements necessary to help fend off three different flu strains, including H1N1 and H3N2, the regulator said. And it proved 44.6% effective against all influenza strains in circulation, not just those that matched the strains included in the vaccine, according to the FDA.”

Other Novel Flu Vaccines Being Unleashed

Last November, the FDA also approved a new flu vaccine by Novartis called Flucelvax, which is grown in cultures of dog kidney cells rather than chicken eggs8 . This too allows for speedier vaccine production, should another pandemic erupt. But does speedier production equate to safer products? If history offers any clues, the answer is no. But, as demand for vaccines of all kinds increases, the relationship between the US government and Big Pharma keeps getting cozier. As reported by Reuters9:

“In 2006, HHS [US Department of Health and Human Services] provided more than $1 billion in contracts to six manufacturers to develop cell-based flu vaccine technology in the United States... In 2009, spurred by difficulties in growing vaccine for the H1N1 swine flu pandemic, HHS provided Novartis with nearly $500 million to build the first U.S. facility capable of producing cell-based vaccine for seasonal and pandemic flu in the United States.”

The newly approved Flublok vaccine also received financial backing from the US government. The HHS bailed out the small manufacturer, Protein Sciences, with a $147million investment, allowing it to create the first gene-based flu vaccine to win FDA approval. It certainly won’t be the last however. Two other genetically engineered flu vaccines are under development. According to Reuters, one of them, created by Novavax, will use “bits of genetic material grown in caterpillar cells called "virus-like particles" that mimic a flu virus.”

I for one am not looking forward to finding out what the side effects might be from this new generation of genetically engineered flu vaccines... Even worse, the HHS also has its eye on a “universal” flu vaccine that would cover any and all flu strains, and only require one dose every five to 10 years. As reported by Reuters:

“Work by Fauci and Dr. Gary Nabel, former head of NIH's Vaccine Research Center who just joined Sanofi as chief science officer, showed that a portion of the flu virus that is usually hidden from the immune system may be the key.

Fauci describes the hemagluttinin part of the flu virus as bulb-shaped with a stem on one end, sort of like a dandelion that has gone to seed or a lollipop on a stick. Most vaccines target proteins on the bulb portion of the virus, which mutates from year to year, but Fauci says the stem contains proteins that don't change much from virus to virus. The problem is that when the flu virus is presented to the body, these stem proteins are structurally hidden from the immune system. A genetically engineered vaccine could overcome that by only presenting these stem proteins to the immune system.”

According to Robin Robinson, director of the U.S. Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), a part of the HHS, it’s “a good hypothesis” that will hopefully work. The HHS is “keeping fingers crossed.” What could possibly go wrong by making your body attack genetically engineered virus structures that are normally hidden from immune system detection, right?

Irresponsible Flu Vaccine Recommendations Reach a New Low

In related news, while a new breed of genetically engineered flu vaccines are hitting the market, some experts are now actually proclaiming the conventional egg-based flu vaccine safe for those with severe egg allergies. According to a recent article in the New York Times10:

Amid an unusually widespread outbreak of the flu, a medical association of allergy specialists said Friday that even children with severe egg allergies should get flu shots. Because the vaccine is grown in chicken eggs, manufacturers recommend that the roughly 2 percent of all children who have egg allergies not get them. But flu hospitalizes 21,000 young children a year, said Dr. James L. Sublett, chair of the public relations committee of the American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology.

Because only trace amounts of egg protein remain in the vaccine, “we now know administration is safe,” he said. “'The benefits of the flu vaccination far outweigh the risks.” Even children who have gone into anaphylactic shock from eating eggs should get flu shots, but from an allergist trained to handle emergencies, the association recommended.”

I really cannot believe how far they will go to endanger your health — especially when you consider that, for an industry that claims to be science-based, flu vaccine recommendations go AGAINST the hard evidence. Worse yet, while studies show flu vaccination is ineffective, when it comes to safety, which is the other and more important factor (especially for infants), the evidence is basically non-existent! According to an independent study review from the Cochrane Collaboration11 published August 15, 2012, the efficacy of inactivated vaccine is similar to placebo in children under the age of two. Furthermore:

“Influenza vaccines were associated with serious harms such as narcolepsy and febrile convulsions [in children]. It was surprising to find only one study of inactivated vaccine in children under two years, given current recommendations to vaccinate healthy children from six months of age.”

Vaccine Damaged Child Awarded $1 Million

A lot of people still believe vaccines are safe, not realizing that children are being permanently harmed each and every day by mandated childhood vaccinations. Sadly, once that happens, the family is left ‘holding the bag,’ with no recourse.

In December last year, a family won a nearly $1 million settlement12 from the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, but this is a rarity. Severe flaws in the system results in the majority of vaccine injured children not receiving any compensation at all for the harm inflicted on them. According to the court’s decision13:

“Petitioners alleged that as a result of “all the vaccinations administered to [Ryan] from March 25, 2003, through February 22, 2005, and more specifically, measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccinations administered to him on December 19, 2003 and May 10, 2004,” Ryan suffered “a severe and debilitating injury to his brain, described as Autism Spectrum Disorder (‘ASD’)...

Petitioners specifically asserted that Ryan “suffered a Vaccine Table Injury, namely, an encephalopathy” as a result of his receipt of the MMR vaccination on December 19, 2003. Id. In the alternative, petitioners asserted that “as a cumulative result of his receipt of each and every vaccination between March 25, 2003 and February 22, 2005, Ryan has suffered . . . neuroimmunologically mediated dysfunctions in the form of asthma and ASD.”

In this case, while the MMR vaccine was indicated as a possible culprit, the primary cause was believed to be the sheer number of vaccinations. The cumulative effect of multiple vaccinations simply cannot be underestimated, and now they’re asking you to vaccinate your children against the seasonal flu, each and every year, starting from the age of six months! And they’re recommending this without ANY proof whatsoever that this is indeed safe. Safety is “assumed.” Not tested and verified. Please do remember this.

One way to evaluate your child’s potential for vaccine damage is to get his or her gut flora checked prior to getting any vaccine. For more information about this novel but promising way to prevent vaccine damage, please see my interview with Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride.

How to Protect Yourself During the Flu Season

Avoiding a serious case of influenza is not about vaccination but more about maintaining a healthy, well functioning immune system. By following these simple guidelines, you can help keep your immune system in optimal working order so that you're far less likely to acquire the infection to begin with or, if you do get sick with the flu, you are better prepared to move through it without complications and soon return to good health.

  • Optimize Your Gut Flora. This may be the single most important strategy you can implement as the bacteria in your gut have enormous control of your immune response. The best way to improve your beneficial bacteria ratio is avoid apply avoid sugars as they will feed the pathogenic bacteria. Additionally,, processed foods and most grains should be limited and replacing with healthy fats like coconut oil, avocados, olives, olive oil, butter, eggs and nuts. Once you change your diet than regular use of fermented foods can radically optimize the function of your immune response.
  • Optimize your vitamin D levels. As I've previously reported, optimizing your vitamin D levels is one of the absolute best strategies for avoiding infections of ALL kinds, and vitamin D deficiency may actually be the true culprit behind the seasonality of the flu – not the flu virus itself. This is probably the single most important and least expensive action you can take. Regularly monitor your vitamin D levels to confirm your levels are within the therapeutic range of 50-70 ng/ml.

    Ideally, you'll want to get all your vitamin D from sun exposure or a safe tanning bed, but as a last resort you can take an oral vitamin D3 supplement. According to the latest review by Carole Baggerly (, adults need about 8,000 IU's a day. Be sure to take vitamin K2 if you are taking high dose oral vitamin D as it has a powerful synergy and will help prevent any D toxicity.

  • Avoid Sugar and Processed Foods. Sugar impairs the quality of your immune response almost immediately, and as you likely know, a healthy immune system is one of the most important keys to fighting off viruses and other illness. It also can decimate your beneficial bacteria and feed the pathogenic yeast and viruses. Be aware that sugar (typically in the form of high fructose corn syrup) is present in foods you may not suspect, like ketchup and fruit juice. If you are healthy than sugar can be consumed but the LAST thing you should be eating when you are sick is sugar. Avoid it like poison while you are sick.
  • Get Plenty of Rest. Just like it becomes harder for you to get your daily tasks done if you're tired, if your body is overly fatigued it will be harder for it to fight the flu. Be sure to check out my article Guide to a Good Night's Sleep for some great tips to help you get quality rest.
  • Have Effective Tools to Address Stress. We all face some stress every day, but if stress becomes overwhelming then your body will be less able to fight off the flu and other illness. If you feel that stress is taking a toll on your health, consider using an energy psychology tool such as the Emotional Freedom Technique, which is remarkably effective in relieving stress associated with all kinds of events, from work to family to trauma.
  • Get Regular Exercise. When you exercise, you increase your circulation and your blood flow throughout your body. The components of your immune system are also better circulated, which means your immune system has a better chance of finding an illness before it spreads. Be sure to stay hydrated – drink plenty of fluids, especially water. However, it would be wise to radically reduce the intensity of your workouts while you are sick. No Peak 8s until you are better.
  • Take a High Quality Source of Animal-Based Omega-3 Fats. Increase your intake of healthy and essential fats like the omega-3 found in krill oil, which is crucial for maintaining health. It is also vitally important to avoid damaged omega-6 oils that are trans fats and in processed foods as it will seriously damage your immune response.
  • Wash Your Hands. Washing your hands will decrease your likelihood of spreading a virus to your nose, mouth or other people. Be sure you don't use antibacterial soap for this – antibacterial soaps are completely unnecessary, and they cause far more harm than good. Instead, identify a simple chemical-free soap that you can switch your family to.
  • Tried and True Hygiene Measures. In addition to washing your hands regularly, cover your mouth and nose when you cough or sneeze. If possible, avoid close contact with those, who are sick and, if you are sick, avoid close contact with those who are well.
  • Use Natural Antibiotics. Examples include oil of oregano and garlic. These work like broad-spectrum antibiotics against bacteria, viruses, and protozoa in your body. And unlike pharmaceutical antibiotics, they do not appear to lead to resistance.
  • Avoid Hospitals. I'd recommend you stay away from hospitals unless you're having an emergency and need expert medical care, as hospitals are prime breeding grounds for infections of all kinds. The best place to get plenty of rest and recover from illness that is not life-threatening is usually in the comfort of your own home.

Protect Your Right to Informed Consent and Vaccine Exemptions

With all the uncertainty surrounding the safety and efficacy of vaccines, it's critical to protect your right to informed consent to vaccination and fight to protect and expand vaccine exemptions in state public health laws. The best way to do this is to get personally involved with your state legislators and the leaders in your community.

Vaccine Awareness Week


Mass vaccination policies are made at the federal level but vaccine laws are made at the state level. It is at the state level where your action to protect your vaccine choice rights can have the greatest impact. It is critical for EVERYONE to get involved now in standing up for the legal right to make vaccine choices in America because those choices are being threatened by lobbyists representing drug companies, medical trade associations and public health officials, who are trying to persuade legislators to strip all vaccine exemptions from public health laws.

Signing up for NVIC's free Advocacy Portal at gives you immediate, easy access to your own state legislators on your Smart Phone or computer so you can make your voice heard. You will be kept up-to-date on the latest state bills threatening your vaccine choices and get practical, useful information to help you become an effective vaccine choice advocate in your own community. Also, when national vaccine issues come up, you will have the up-to-date information and call to action items you need at your fingertips..

So please, as your first step, sign up for the NVIC Advocacy Portal.

Share Your Story with the Media and People You Know

If you or a family member has suffered a serious vaccine reaction, injury or death, please talk about it. If we don't share information and experiences with each other, everybody feels alone and afraid to speak up. Write a letter to the editor if you have a different perspective on a vaccine story that appears in your local newspaper. Make a call in to a radio talk show that is only presenting one side of the vaccine story.

I must be frank with you; you have to be brave because you might be strongly criticized for daring to talk about the "other side" of the vaccine story. Be prepared for it and have the courage to not back down. Only by sharing our perspective and what we know to be true about vaccination will the public conversation about vaccination open up so people are not afraid to talk about it.

We cannot allow the drug companies and medical trade associations funded by drug companies or public health officials promoting forced use of a growing list of vaccines to dominate the conversation about vaccination. The vaccine injured cannot be swept under the carpet and treated like nothing more than "statistically acceptable collateral damage" of national one-size-fits-all mandatory vaccination policies that put way too many people at risk for injury and death. We shouldn't be treating people like guinea pigs instead of human beings.

Internet Resources Where You Can Learn More

I encourage you to visit the following web pages on the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) website at

  • NVIC Memorial for Vaccine Victims: View descriptions and photos of children and adults, who have suffered vaccine reactions, injuries and deaths. If you or your child experiences an adverse vaccine event, please consider posting and sharing your story here.
  • If You Vaccinate, Ask 8 Questions: Learn how to recognize vaccine reaction symptoms and prevent vaccine injuries.
  • Vaccine Freedom Wall: View or post descriptions of harassment and sanctions by doctors, employers, school and health officials for making independent vaccine choices.

Connect with Your Doctor or Find a New One that Will Listen and Care

If your pediatrician or doctor refuses to provide medical care to you or your child unless you agree to get vaccines you don't want, I strongly encourage you to have the courage to find another doctor. Harassment, intimidation, and refusal of medical care is becoming the modus operandi of the medical establishment in an effort to stop the change in attitude of many parents about vaccinations after they become truly educated about health and vaccination.

However, there is hope.

At least 15 percent of young doctors recently polled admit that they're starting to adopt a more individualized approach to vaccinations in direct response to the vaccine safety concerns of parents. It is good news that there is a growing number of smart young doctors, who prefer to work as partners with parents in making personalized vaccine decisions for children, including delaying vaccinations or giving children fewer vaccines on the same day or continuing to provide medical care for those families, who decline use of one or more vaccines.

So take the time to locate a doctor, who treats you with compassion and respect and is willing to work with you to do what is right for your child.

Monday, January 28, 2013

Hundreds of Thousands Marched for Life… Mainstream Media Ignored

Hundreds of thousands of pro-life Americans marched for life last Week and the mainstream media (MSM) virtually ignored it, but what did make their coverage was Hillary’s new glasses.

March for Life Washington D.C. Photo courtesy TelecareTV.
In Washington D.C., a crowd that has been estimated as numbering between 100,000 and 400,000 people marched down Constitution Avenue to protest abortion. The New York Times did not report on it. They did, however, include in their “Happenings in Washington” section a White House visit by NHL Stanley Cup champions and the signing of an Environmental Cooperation Agreement with the South Korean ambassador to the U.S.

Hot Air:  The media’s silence on the March for Life

My hopes for a Time magazine spread about the March for Life protesters are fading fast. For the fifth year in a row, The New York Times ignored the March for Life, which drew at least a hundred thousand participants in D.C. alone. NewsBusters reports:

For the fifth year in a row, there was no story in the Times print edition on the annual March for Life against abortion in Washington, D.C., which every year draws massive crowds in unpromising weather on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court’s decision legalizing abortion. …

As Times Watch reported last January, the 2011 print edition of the Times did not feature an actual news story of the thousands who marched in frigid weather, just two photos with the caption “Abortion Opponents Rally On the National Mall,” above a three-sentence description that led to a link to photographs online. That was actually a vast improvement; the Times in print absolutely ignored the March for Life in 2010, 2009, and 2008 (a 300-word story marked the 2007 March for Life on January 23 of that year).

The Times is far more eager to publicize protests in support of liberal causes, no matter how puny. When four protesters marched in support of the doomed Dream Act to grant amnesty to illegal immigrant students, the Times marked the occasion with a 780-word story.

Believe it or not, it gets worse. The NYT has a special standing feature on its blog, The Caucus, to document “Happenings in Washington” and not even that included a reference to the March. It did, however, mention that the N.H.L. Stanley Cup Champions, the Boston Bruins, would be honored by the president at the White House. Important stuff.

Meanwhile, about 50,000 people participated in the West Coast March for Life and, according to a tweet from Michelle Malkin, not even the local media turned out to cover it.

As a reminder to journalists who’ve forgotten, in general, the bigger the size and scope of the event, the more newsworthy it is. That means a protest of 100,000 is generally more newsworthy than a protest of 10.

As always, I’m less troubled by media bias than I am by the media pretense of objectivity. Even if “objectivity” refers more to “a unity of method … than aim,” as the authors of The Elements of Journalism suggest, the NYT clearly lacks it. A “unity of method” would require that reporters go about determining newsworthiness using the same standards every time. Unless one such standard at The Times is “Is this a liberal event?” then the NYT reporters clearly don’t reliably follow the same method in their selection of stories.

Then again, if NYT editors are willing to admit that the political ideology behind an event does partly determine the amount of coverage they give an event, then I’d be more willing to admit they’re objective in the sense of using a uniform method.

ThinkProgress, for example, uniformly and reliably covers news of interest to a left-leaning readership — and ignores news that runs contrary to the political principles its editors espouse. That, in a way, is both more transparent and more objective than purporting to be a paper of national record that only haphazardly records events according to the whims of reporters and editors.


Why The Mainstream Media Ignores Or Distorts The March For Life 

Media Working Overtime Getting Ready to Ignore the March for Life ...

Forty Years of Murder in the Womb

As We Face 40th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade Justin Bieber’s Mom Hopes to ‘Encourage Young Women All Over the World’ Wi New Anti-Abortion Film

Abortion Survivor Blasts Obama

Saturday, January 26, 2013

Obama concedes: Obamacare didn’t do anything for rising health care costs

HotAir: It started out with such high hopes:

“I will sign a universal health care bill into law by the end of my first term as president that will cover every American and cut the cost of a typical family’s premium by up to $2,500 a year.”

That was on the trail in 2008, an audacious promise Politifact ruled flatly “Broken.” Obama repeated the promises of lower premiums and bent cost curves as a central part of his pitch in passing the health care law. It is called “The Affordable Care Act.” But most supporters of Obamacare have stopped talking about cost savings and started focusing on increased benefits, acknowledging (sometimes explicitly and sometimes implicitly) that expanded coverage and more benefits will actually cost more money, not less, but that the trade-off is worth it.

President Obama joined that crowd in his second Inaugural address Monday. It came as Obama just barely grazed two issues rather important to the American people at the end of this paragraph:

We understand that outworn programs are inadequate to the needs of our time. So we must harness new ideas and technology to remake our government, revamp our tax code, reform our schools, and empower our citizens with the skills they need to work hard or learn more, reach higher. But while the means will change, our purpose endures. A nation that rewards the effort and determination of every single American, that is what this moment requires. That is what will give real meaning to our creed. We, the people, still believe that every citizen deserves a basic measure of security and dignity. We must make the hard choices to reduce the cost of health care and the size of our deficit.

And, now for the “but,” clause, which includes all the reasons he can’t actually ever make hard choices:

But we reject the belief that America must choose between caring for the generation that built this country and investing in the generation that will build its future.

President Obama spent two years of his first term passing a giant health care bill that was supposed to address rising costs. This claim was front and center in his appeal to a joint session of Congress on the matter in 2009:

Then there’s the problem of rising costs. We spend one-and-a-half times more per person on health care than any other country, but we aren’t any healthier for it. This is one of the reasons that insurance premiums have gone up three times faster than wages. It’s why so many employers – especially small businesses – are forcing their employees to pay more for insurance, or are dropping their coverage entirely. It’s why so many aspiring entrepreneurs cannot afford to open a business in the first place, and why American businesses that compete internationally – like our automakers – are at a huge disadvantage. And it’s why those of us with health insurance are also paying a hidden and growing tax for those without it – about $1000 per year that pays for somebody else’s emergency room and charitable care.

Finally, our health care system is placing an unsustainable burden on taxpayers. When health care costs grow at the rate they have, it puts greater pressure on programs like Medicare and Medicaid. If we do nothing to slow these skyrocketing costs, we will eventually be spending more on Medicare and Medicaid than every other government program combined. Put simply, our health care problem is our deficit problem. Nothing else even comes close.

These are the facts. Nobody disputes them. We know we must reform this system.

And, so we did, allegedly with an eye toward “bending the cost curve down” and lowering premiums for families. It has been more than two years since the law passed. Critics of the law have been proven right again and again in their skepticism that it could do those things.

HHS, 2010:

President Obama’s health care overhaul law will increase the nation’s health care tab instead of bringing costs down, government economic forecasters concluded Thursday in a sobering assessment of the sweeping legislation.

A report by economic experts at the Health and Human Services Department said the health care remake will achieve Obama’s aim of expanding health insurance — adding 34 million Americans to the coverage rolls.

But the analysis also found that the law falls short of the president’s twin goal of controlling runaway costs. It also warned that Medicare cuts may be unrealistic and unsustainable, driving about 15% of hospitals into the red and “possibly jeopardizing access” to care for seniors.

The mixed verdict for Obama’s signature issue is the first comprehensive look by neutral experts.

Kaiser, 2011:

The Kaiser Family Foundation shows family premiums topped $15,000 a year for the first time in 2011, increasing a whopping 9% this year, three times more than the increase the year before. The study says that up to 2% of that increase is because of the health care law’s provisions, such as allowing families to add grown children up to 26 years old to their policies.

CLASS Act turns out to be fiction, not revenue, 2011:

How did a program so obviously unsustainable that the White House had no choice but to shut it down produce an $80 billion surplus for ObamaCare accounting purposes? Very simply, actually. The Democrats designed the first five years of CLASS to be a “vesting period” in which enrollees would pay into the program but receive no benefits yet. In other words, for the first five years, the program would have been pure profit for the government — and then, when benefits finally kicked in, the hemorrhaging would begin. The reason they did it that way is the same reason they delayed the start of ObamaCare until 2014: They knew that CBO “scores” new legislation based on its first 10 years of operation, so the more they could game the numbers during those first 10 years, the better the “score” for ObamaCare would look while Democrats were trying to sell it to the public. It was a massive accounting fraud designed to make health-care reform seem much less expensive than it really was. According to Klein, CLASS’s phony “savings” accounted for fully $70 billion of ObamaCare’s supposed $143 billion in deficit reduction.

The 1099 reporting rule turns out to be overburdensome regulation, not revenue, 2011:

The very first part of ObamaCare to get the knife was the 1099 reporting requirement. That extremist bit of legislation passed the Senate 87-12 and the House, 314-112, and landed on the President’s desk for signing on April 14. The 1099 reporting requirement was one of the funding fictions ObamaCare supporters used to make it look as if the President’s plan would fulfill his promise not to “add a dime to the deficit.” Post-passage it was almost universally recognized as unworkable. It would have required businesses to fill out an IRS form (1099) for every $600 of staples and printer paper they bought at Target within a calendar year. It closed a loophole, and that loophole was shopping.

When it was repealed, Obama called it “a big win for small business.”

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, 2012:

When President Obama began pushing national health care legislation in 2009, he argued that reform was needed to rein in the unsustainable growth in health care spending that was crippling the budgets of businesses, states and the federal government. But a new government actuarial study finds that as a result of the law, health care spending will be $478 billion higher over the next decade than it would have otherwise been had no law been passed.

Furthermore, as a result of the health care law, about 50 cents of every dollar of health care spending in the United States will be financed by government by 2021, according to the report from the actuary’s office at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, unveiled today in the journal Health Affairs.

Then there’s the $63 Obamacare’s newly written regulations added to everyone’s premium in December, which even if it were the only increase for which Obamacare was responsible, would still put Obama $2,563 off his promise.

The charge, buried in a recent regulation, works out to tens of millions of dollars for the largest companies, employers say. Most of that is likely to be passed on to workers.

Oops, electronic records raise costs instead of lowering them, 2013:

The report predicted that widespread use of electronic records could save the United States health care system at least $81 billion a year, a figure RAND now says was overstated. The study was widely praised within the technology industry and helped persuade Congress and the Obama administration to authorize billions of dollars in federal stimulus money in 2009 to help hospitals and doctors pay for the installation of electronic records systems.

“RAND got a lot of attention and a lot of buzz with the original analysis,” said Dr. Kellermann, who was not involved in the 2005 study. “The industry quickly embraced it.”

But evidence of significant savings is scant, and there is increasing concern that electronic records have actually added to costs by making it easier to bill more for some services.

Politico discovers mandates of more benefits and more coverage paid for with more taxes might hike premium costs, 2013:

If you work for a small business, your next health insurance premium may give you sticker shock.
Many of the small-business and individual insurance policies are working the health reform law’s 2014 fees into their 2013 bills, contributing to double-digit premium increases for some people.

All those new consumer benefits packed into the health reform law — birth control without a co-pay, free preventive care and limits on when insurers can turn down a customer — had to be paid for somehow.

So the law’s drafters included a new tax on health insurers, starting at $8 billion in 2014 and increasing to $14 billion within four years, to help meet the new expenses. And insurers in 2014 will also have to pay a “reinsurance contribution” to cushion health plans that end up with a lot of sick customers under new rules requiring them to cover people with pre-existing conditions.

The Government Accountability Office, 2013:

The Government Accountability Office (GAO)’s annual audit of the government, released Thursday, raises serious concerns about the federal government’s long-term financial stability and the effectiveness of the Affordable Care Act’s cost-curbing measures.

The report found “that—absent policy changes—the federal government continues to face an unsustainable fiscal path.”

Obamacare has already failed in its promises. Our president spent two years, during the worst economic downturn since the Depression, passing a law more than 50 percent of the public still hates because 85 percent of them were satisfied with their current coverage, imperfect though it was. He turned the crayon box upside down to draw a picture no one wanted and we all must now pay more money to enjoy his vision. The only spending problem he’ll concede we have has been exacerbated by his own signature “achievement.”

These are the facts. Nobody disputes them. Not even Obama.

Wednesday, January 23, 2013

Is This Why the Europeans Don't Get Sick Like Americans Do?

US Health System

Story at-a-glance
  • Despite spending twice the amount per capita on health care, the United States ranks last in health and mortality analysis of 17 developed nations
  • Americans are near the bottom in nine key areas of health, including low birth weight; injuries and homicides; teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections; HIV and AIDS; drug-related deaths; obesity and diabetes; heart disease; chronic lung disease; and general disability
  • At 75.6 years, American men have the lowest life expectancy among the countries reviewed, and American women ranked second-to-last at 80.7 years. The infant mortality rate in the US is equally abysmal, with 32.7 deaths per 100,000, while most others range between 15 and 25 deaths per 100,000
  • The authors of the report "GMO Myths and Truths" took a science-based approach to evaluating the available research, arriving at the conclusion that most of the scientific evidence regarding safety and increased yield potential do not at all support the claims. The evidence demonstrates the claims for genetically engineered foods are not just wildly overblown – they simply aren't true. GE foods have been shown to be less nutritious than non-GE foods, and pose distinct health risks and are inadequately regulated
  • While failing to pin-point the source(s) of Americans’ failure to thrive, the answers are not hard to deduce: adhering to government-sponsored health- and dietary guidance has led Americans astray

By Dr. Mercola

According to a new health analysis bearing the revealing title: US Health in International Perspective: Shorter Lives, Poorer Health1, Americans come in dead last in a comparison of 17 affluent nations.

The research was unable to uncover any single cause or “rallying point for action.” Instead, it calls for more research to “ferret out the effects of our current policies.”

C’mon! You’ve got to be kidding me.

Considering the fact that human health tends to be primarily affected by a) nutrition, b) exercise, and c) toxic exposures, do they seriously believe that we can improve public health while ignoring these three basic areas?

What Does the Human Body Require to Be Healthy?

A staggering two-thirds of American adults are overweight, and more than one-quarter of adults fall into the obese category. One in four Americans is pre-diabetic or diabetic. It should be obvious that diet and exercise are critical factors here. The National Institutes of Health even states that four of the six leading causes of death in the United States are linked to unhealthy diets.

The question is why are so many people unable to regulate their weight and insulin sensitivity? The following points are well worthy of careful consideration when pondering this issue:

  • One of the first five ingredients in most prepackaged, processed foods (which account for about 90 percent of most people’s food bill2) is high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), which has repeatedly been shown to be a driving factor behind being overweight and having poor health outcomes. HFCS is pervasive and in many processed food items some individuals would never expect, including so called diet foods and 'enhanced' water products. Even most infant formulas contain the sugar equivalent of one can of Coca-Cola.

    Furthermore, soy is another common ingredient on all processed foods and soybeans can be severely and systemically contaminated with high amounts of the potent herbicide glyphosate. Additionally, over 85 percent of all corn grown in the US is genetically engineered (GE)3, which further increases the risk of high glyphosate contamination.The safety of either of these items has never been proven. According to a recent report by the Environmental Working Group (EWG)4, Americans are eating their weight and more in GE foods each and every year.

  • Thirty-three percent of American adults are also completely sedentary, and more than half of adults over the age of 18 never engage in any vigorous leisure-time physical activity lasting 10 minutes or more per week.
  • According to a study by the EWG5, blood samples from newborns contained an average of 287 toxins, including mercury, fire retardants, pesticides, and chemicals from non stick products. Of the 287 chemicals EWG detected in umbilical cord blood, it’s known that 180 cause cancer in humans or animals; 217 are toxic to your brain and nervous system; and 208 cause birth defects or abnormal development in animal tests. Clearly, when babies are born loaded with toxic chemicals, it’s a sign that toxic exposure is too high.
  • While there are many types and routes of toxic exposure, one would be remiss to overlook Americans use of pharmaceutical drugs, as drugs have, on average, 70 different potential side effects, and are responsible for the premature death of at least 106,000 Americans per year, when taken as prescribed. Americans pop the most pills of any other nation, and that includes children. Americans also receive the most amount of vaccinations.

So.... let’s think... What could possibly be the root of Americans’ failure to thrive? The Atlantic6, reporting on the findings writes:

“In presenting their findings... the authors seemed to be urging the U.S. to do some soul searching. Our culture 'cherishes independence' and 'wants to limit the intrusion of government in our personal lives,' said Steven Woolf, director of the Center for Human Needs at Virginia Commonwealth University, the panel chairman.
While those values serve us in some ways, he said, our resistance to regulation 'may work against our ability to achieve optimal health outcomes.'"

Aha! So it’s Americans’ striving for independence and freedom of choice that is to blame for such poor dietary choices and health outcomes?! They mean to tell us that we’re all so inept at making healthy choices, we need to abandon our independent spirits and embrace more nanny state regulations that might finally whip us into shape. Honestly, I feel like I’m reading something out of The Onion... It’s all so backwards.

Why Do Americans Consume Such a Bad Diet?

For the sake of brevity, I will limit my comments to the issue of diet here. But first, let’s consider a few of the questions we need to ask:

  • Do Americans purposefully consume excessive amounts of fat-promoting, health-harming HFCS because they love it and refuse to eat foods that don’t contain it, or are there other reasons why Americans can’t seem to control their waistlines?

    And do they really intentionally consume far too many carbohydrates, sugar and processed foods in place of healthy fats like avocados, olives, coconut oil, butter, nuts, eggs and olive oil, which cause them to be adapted to burning carbs as their primary fuel rather than fat, or is this type of diet a more or less inevitable side effect of NOT thinking independently and seeking out real nutritional facts, but rather mindlessly buying what’s available in the store and advertised as healthy on TV?

  • Do Americans really want to consume more genetically engineered foods than any other country?
  • Do freedom-loving Americans who “cherish independence” seek to buy more or less whole, unadulterated, unprocessed foods that might help improve their health and, at the very least, reduce toxic exposure?

I propose considering the following facts before blaming America’s failing health on the average shopper’s pesky determination to make independent, foolhardy choices:

  • The US government subsidizes the very crops identified as being the most harmful to human health and the environment; the top three being corn, wheat, and soybeans. And nearly all of the corn and soybeans grown are genetically engineered varieties.

    By subsidizing these, the US government is actively supporting a diet that consists of these grains in their processed form, namely high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), hydrogenated soybean oil, and meats loaded with antibiotics – all of which are now well-known contributors to obesity and chronic disease. These junk-food subsidies make it much cheaper to buy a burger, fries and soda from a fast-food restaurant than it is to buy grass-fed beef and veggies. It's not that these foods necessarily cost more to grow or produce; rather the prices for the junk foods are being artificially reduced by the government.

  • The US further promotes use of HFCS in food manufacturing by imposing import tariffs on foreign sugar, raising the price of sucrose above those in other countries.
  • When the dangers of HFCS finally began to seep into the American consciousness, consumer demand forced many companies to reformulate their processed foods using other types of sweeteners, or ditching sweetening agents altogether. Today, you can find a number of food products marked “No HFCS” and government intervention had nothing to do with this beneficial change.
  • The US government has repeatedly refused to take any action to label genetically engineered foods, despite overwhelming public support and demand for labeling.
  • The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has repeatedly harassed, raided, and shut down small farms producing healthful organic and raw foods, such as raw dairy and cheese, along with private co-ops procuring and delivering such foods to health-conscious customers.

Americans Die Earlier and Live in Poorer Health

These are examples of Big Government making health decisions for you. How have they been working out so far? The proof is in the pudding, and the featured report7 tells us that what we’ve been doing so far is NOT working.

According to the report, Americans die earlier and live in poorer health than people in other developed nations, which included Australia, Austria, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the Netherlands and the U.K.

Of these 17 affluent countries, the US ranks last overall, and near the bottom in nine key areas of health, including low birth weight; injuries and homicides; teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections; HIV and AIDS; drug-related deaths; obesity and diabetes; heart disease; chronic lung disease; and general disability. At 75.6 years, American men have the lowest life expectancy among the countries reviewed, and American women ranked second-to-last at 80.7 years. The infant mortality rate in the US is equally abysmal, with 32.7 deaths per 100,000, while most others range between 15 and 25 deaths per 100,000.

Interestingly, the US lags behind all these nations even though smoking rates in the US are far lower than many of the other nations, indicating that, apparently, there’s more to good health than quitting smoking. Or, alternatively, that even smokers can enjoy a modicum of health IF they’re able to compensate with other healthy lifestyle strategies. So, again, how are more nanny state regulations going to improve the situation when they clearly are not willing to accept the sources of the problem in the first place?

The truth is, in order to regulate away this problem, the US government would have to cut all ties with industry and eliminate its conflicts of interest and massive revolving doors with the very industry it is mandated to regulate.

The likelihood of that happening appears slim to none, considering that Big Ag and Big Pharma are two of the biggest and strongest lobbying groups of all business sectors vying for favors from our legislators8. And they’re getting them—which is how we got into this abhorrent mess in the first place, where what is good is portrayed as bad, and that which is bad is ignored. The answer is to promote more independence of choice, and limiting the intrusion of government in our food choices—the very things these reviewers claim are part of the problem... The report also found that Americans:

  • Have a long-standing pattern of poorer health that is strikingly consistent and pervasive over the course of their lifetimes. Overall, Americans die and suffer from illness and injury at rates that are unnecessary
  • Even affluent Americans with higher education and insurance who engage in healthy behaviors (such as not smoking and maintaining a healthy weight) are in worse health than similar people in other nations
  • Consume the most calories among peer countries
  • Have more alcohol-related accidents
  • Spend more than $8,600 per person per year on health care, which is more than twice the amount spent by the UK, France, and Sweden

How Can the Wealthiest Industrialized Nation be the Sickest?

Since the mid-1990s, the number of Americans suffering from at least three chronic illnesses nearly doubled. Life expectancy has decreased and infant mortality has increased. Illnesses once rare are now common, with some approaching epidemic levels. For example:

  • Autism now affects one in 88 children (CDC), compared to one in 25,000 in the mid-1970s
  • Type 2 diabetes rates in the U.S. increased by 176 percent between 1980 and 2010
  • Celiac disease is four times more common now than 60 years ago
  • Alzheimer's disease is rising at alarming rates. It's estimated that 5.4 million Americans (one in eight older Americans) now has Alzheimer's disease, and nearly half of those age 85 and older have it; AD rates have doubled since 1980
  • New infectious diseases are increasing in number, according to a 2008 study

In his documentary, Jeffrey Smith makes a convincing argument that one of the primary forces driving these illnesses is America's changing food supply. And one of the most profound changes is genetically engineered food. Proving GE food is causing Americans to be sick is a tall order, but the evidence presented in this film is very compelling and should not be ignored.

GMO Report Disproves FDA's Safety Claims

There is a significant compilation of scientific evidence that casts serious doubt on the claims made by industry and government officials about the safety of GE foods. Consider this report by The Atlantic9 The authors of the report "GMO Myths and Truths"10 took a science-based approach to evaluating the available research, arriving at the conclusion that most of the scientific evidence regarding safety and increased yield potential do not at all support the claims.

In fact, the evidence demonstrates the claims for genetically engineered foods are not just wildly overblown – they simply aren't true. Not only are GE foods less nutritious than non-GE foods, they pose distinct health risks, are inadequately regulated, harm the environment and farmers, and are a poor solution to world hunger.

The authors of this critical report include Michael Antoniou, PhD, who heads the Gene Expression and Therapy Group at King's College at London School of Medicine in the UK. He's a 28-year veteran of genetic engineering technology who has himself invented a number of gene expression biotechnologies; and John Fagan, PhD, a leading authority on food sustainability, biosafety, and GE testing. If you want to get a comprehensive understanding of genetically engineered foods, I strongly recommend reading this report.

11 Basic Guidelines for General Health and Longevity

Leading a common sense, healthy lifestyle is your best bet to produce a healthy body and mind, and increase your longevity. Unfortunately, the pharmaceutical industry, the food industry, and even government itself sure won't make it easy for you to avoid the garbage that ruins your health. The following guidelines form the basic tenets of optimal health and healthy weight—foundational strategies that will not change, regardless of what marvels modern science comes up with next. For more comprehensive guidance, please see my fully updated nutritional plan, which takes you from beginner’s stage to advanced:

  1. Eat a healthy diet, paying very careful attention to keeping your insulin levels down (my free nutritional plan will help guide you through your dietary changes with minimal effort)
  2. Replace sweetened drinks (whether they’re sweetened with sugar, HFCS, or artificial sweeteners) with plenty of pure, clean water
  3. Avoid all genetically engineered foods. There are nine primary GE food crops, but their derivatives are in over 70 percent of supermarket foods, particularly processed foods. GE ingredients can hide. For example, every can of soda containing high fructose corn syrup most likely contains GE corn. Make sure none of the following are on your grocery list, unless they are USDA certified organic:


    Canola Oil
    Hawaiian papaya

    Sugar from sugar beets
    Some varieties of zucchini
    Crookneck squash

    Avoid any product containing aspartame, which is derived from a GE organism. And avoid any milk products that may have rBGH. I recommend consuming only raw, organic milk products you've obtained from a trustworthy local dairy farmer. The Institute for Responsible Technology has put together a helpful Non-GMO Shopping Guide you can download and print. They even have an iPhone app.

  4. Optimize your gut flora with fermented foods, such as fermented vegetables, which you can easily and inexpensively make at home
  5. Consume healthy fats, like butter, eggs, avocados, coconut oil, olive oil, and nuts, especially macadamia nuts which are higher in fat and lower in protein
  6. Eat plenty of raw food
  7. Exercise regularly. Make sure to incorporate high intensity interval training at least once or twice a week
  8. Get an appropriate amount of sunlight to optimize your vitamin D levels
  9. Limit toxin exposure
  10. Get plenty of sleep
  11. Manage your stress

Let’s face it, government health recommendations and regulations relating to diet and health have failed miserably, and the featured report delivers the somber statistics of where we’re at on the global scene. While spending twice as much on health care per capita, we’re not getting results. I believe we’ll keep seeing more of the same until or unless we change our stance on what a healthy diet is, and what constitutes a healthy lifestyle. We need to move away from the idea that being on a dozen medications means you’re doing something right for your health... This is NOT health care. This is disease management, and it comes at a very steep price, namely your longevity.

Until or unless the US government takes industry to task, our regulators and legislators cannot be trusted to usher Americans toward better health. In the meantime, it is up to YOU to take control of your health, and do what is right for you, to live a healthier, longer, drug- and disease-free life. Proper nutrition, exercise, and avoidance of toxins are three critical factors to address in this process, and this website contains literally tens of thousands of freely available articles to help you do just that.

By buying organic, you will dramatically reduce your exposure to pesticides, hormones and antibiotics, as those are used on nearly all GE crops. When shopping locally, know your local farmers. Many are too small to afford official certification, but many still adhere to organic, sustainable practices. The only way to determine how your food is raised is to check them out, meeting the farmer face to face if possible. Yes, it does take time but is worth it if you are really concerned about your family's health.

Tuesday, January 22, 2013

Forty Years of Murder in the Womb

By: Arlen Williams - Gulag Bound

Forty years of Roe/Doe and millions and millions of government condoned murders in the womb, bought in part by your money and mine, confiscated by the taxes of tyranny. In the Bible and ancient traditions, forty is the number signifying suffering unto death. People who were scourged were whipped thirty-nine times. Now, it is forty.

Video:Reclaiming the Human Center of the Abortion Debate,”
SBA List

17 weeks, sucking thumb, ultrasound

17 weeks, sucking thumb, ultrasound

This is your country, sovereign Americans. You are our principle leaders. You are accountable to God, for how you participate in our nation of self governance. What are you doing about it?

Alveda King & Frank Pavone: On the 40th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

The year 2013 marks the 40th year since Roe v. Wade (January 22) and the 50th year since the “I Have a Dream Speech” of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (August 28). These two moments in American history have something to say to one another, from completely opposite perspectives.

Roe, inaugurating a sweeping policy about which most Americans are still unaware, declared that “the word ‘person,’ as used in the Fourteenth Amendment, does not include the unborn” [410 U.S. 113, 158]. Dr. King, inaugurating a new season of hope for those fighting for justice, declared, “I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal.’” Fifty years after that speech, and 40 years after that decision, a great chasm remains between the dream and its fulfillment in relation to the unborn child. The dream calls for equality, and Roe denies it. As Alveda has asked many times, “How can the dream survive if we murder the children?”

Shortly after we (Fr. Frank and Alveda) began working together full-time at Priests for Life, we were walking together at the annual March for Life in Washington. I (Fr. Frank) turned to Alveda and asked, “Does this remind you of the marches with your Dad and Uncle in the civil rights movement?” Alveda replied, “Fr. Frank, this is the civil rights movement.”

Forty years after Roe, this is a key point to reaffirm. Pro-life progress is slowed when the movement is identified with only one segment of the population, whether that be religiously defined (“It’s a Catholic movement!”), politically defined (“It’s an arm of the Republican party!”), or defined in some other limited way.
But the cause of life is too big for that, too fundamental. The cause of life is so basic, so intrinsically and simply human, that it calls for expression within every sector of society. Protestants and Catholics, Christians and Jews, liberals and conservatives, blacks and whites, should all have their pro-life movements, together creating a harmonious advocacy for the most fundamental human right.

For decades, many leaders and activists have asked, “How do we get the black community more involved in the pro-life movement?” But that is the wrong question. The right question is, “How do we encourage the black community to take ownership of the cause of the unborn?” Such ownership occurs when leaders of the black community itself are the ones calling for pro-life involvement.

That is why Alveda became a full-time Pastoral Associate of Priests for Life (see By combining the influence she has in the black community with the outreach of Priests for Life, she has been able to raise awareness about abortion among black leaders and grassroots activists. She has assisted the formation and growth of the National Black Pro-life Coalition (see, comprising many leaders who plan and carry out projects aimed at making the black response to abortion what it should be.

A turning point in this effort was the Pro-life Freedom Rides in 2010. Alveda led the way with this Priests-for-Life project, modeled on the Freedom Rides of the Civil Rights movement. From Birmingham to Atlanta, and from Knoxville to the Memorial for the Unborn in Chattanooga, these rides were relatively short in distance but powerful in impact, as they took away from the abortion-rights movement the ability to claim that their movement was fueled by the ideals of freedom and equality that Dr. King articulated. And the rides helped to solidify the ongoing collaboration of black leaders in the cause of life.

Out of the Freedom Rides was also born the statement called “The Beloved Community and the Unborn,” a declaration calling for equality and non-violence for the unborn. This declaration was signed and read by Alveda’s mother, Mrs. Naomi Ruth Barber King, on the day of the annual March for Life in January of 2011 in Washington, DC, inside the Capitol building. The statement was also signed by Rev. Derek King (Alveda’s brother), by Gloria Y. Jackson, Esq., great-granddaughter of Booker T. Washington, by Lynne M. Jackson, great-great-granddaughter of Dred Scott, and by other black leaders. Moreover, this declaration was placed in the time capsule underneath the new monument to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. that was dedicated in Washington, DC on October 16, 2011.

In part, the statement, which you can read in its entirety at, declares,

The work of building the Beloved Community is far from finished. . . . In our day, we cannot ignore the discrimination, injustice, and violence that are being inflicted on the youngest and smallest members of the human family, the children in the womb. . . . We declare today that these children too are members of the Beloved Community, that our destiny is linked with theirs, and that therefore they deserve justice, equality, and protection.

Forty years after Roe, therefore, the increasing activism of the black community on behalf of the unborn, with the understanding that this movement is made from the same fabric as the civil rights movement, is one of the most consequential developments. Intimately connected with this development is the increasing chorus of voices of those who have had abortions and testify openly that it did not solve their problems, but only created new ones. Alveda King herself is among those voices who have coalesced into the Silent No More Awareness Campaign (see Alveda explains,

God intervened in my life when I was in my mother’s womb. She desired an abortion and was persuaded to keep me after her mother insisted that they seek counsel from their pastor, Dr. Martin Luther King, Sr. My Granddaddy told my mother that God had shown him in a dream three years prior that I was “a bright skinned baby girl with bright red hair,” and that I would “be a blessing to many.” Granddaddy King’s prophetic insight saved my life.

On the first anniversary of Roe v. Wade I celebrated my 22nd birthday. I experienced a legal abortion later that same year. I was already post-abortive because a trusted and respected African-American doctor had “played God” in my life in 1970, performing a D&C procedure in his office with only the explanation, “You don’t need another baby. Let’s see.” He made this decision, without my understanding or consent.

The doctor is long since deceased. I wrote him a letter of forgiveness in my life-changing Rachel’s Vineyard healing encounter. My role as a national spokesperson for the Priests for Life-sponsored Silent No More Awareness Campaign is very liberating in that I can turn my tests and abortion trials into a prolife testimony that allows the truth about the harmful impact of abortion and contraceptives on babies, women, fathers, families, and society.

Forty years have passed (see www.Roe Dr. King asked, “How long?” and answered his own question by declaring, “Not long!” And so must we. No lie can live forever, neither the lie that abortion helps women nor the lie that some human beings are less equal than others. Above all, let this 40th year since Roe renew our confidence in the victory of life!

Dr. Alveda King is Director of African-American Outreach for Priests for Life. Fr. Frank Pavone is that organization’s National Director - the Human Life Review

Martin Luther King, Jr. opposed abortion (by Alveda King, by Derrick Evenson).


Doctors Quitting Over ObamaCare - Lindsey Williams –> Socialized Medicine… the Jewel of Socialism

Video: Lindsey Williams - Doctors Quitting Over ObamaCare

Obamacare Set To Crash Entire Private Healthcare System – Force State-Run Coverage

The Ulsterman:  Lost in the myriad of reviews on Barack Obama’s second inauguration was this very interesting (and depressing) column clearly outlining the looming danger that Obamacare now poses for the entire healthcare system in the United States. And make no mistake – this result was INTENDED to usher in the era of total government control of how you will be born, how you will live, and how you will die…

(Remember the media ignoring when Barack Obama said at some point a dying patient needs to just “take a pill” and prepare for death? Well America…that time is now.)


We Told You So…

As the Affordable Care Act–otherwise known as ObamaCare–begins to be implemented, we are seeing its first big consequence: it is making care less affordable.

…Lo and behold, we see reports today that insurance premiums are going up partly because of “new federal rules that increase the services that health insurers are required to include in the health plans they sell.”

…The rising premiums are bad enough in themselves, but they raise the prospect of crashing the whole structure of the health insurance system created by ObamaCare.

…But I don’t think that’s any kind of mystery. The consequences of ObamaCare – particularly the built-in “death spiral”– are so predictable that I don’t think the legislation’s architects can profess innocence. From the beginning, I have had suspicions, so to speak, that a stable health insurance industry was not the goal of ObamaCare. Rather, I warned: “It is an attempt to turn health insurance into what the left really wants: another welfare program in which everyone is entitled to free benefits, mandated by the government.”

…It smashes private health care–then leaves us stranded in the rubble, at which point we will be expected to come crawling back to the same people who caused the disaster and ask them to save us.”

The first half of our predictions from 2009 are already coming true. I am afraid that we’re going to have to come back in another few years, after the second half has come to fruition, and say once again: we told you so.

As the Affordable Care Act--otherwise known as ObamaCare--begins to be implemented, we are seeing its first big consequence: it is making care less affordable.

The New York Times reports that "Health insurance companies across the country are seeking and winning double-digit increases in premiums for some customers, even though one of the biggest objectives of the Obama administration's health care law was to stem the rapid rise in insurance costs for consumers."

"Even though"? In fact, Obamacare is simply doing what a lot of people predicted it would. Critics of ObamaCare warned that it would produce precisely the kind of premium increases we are now seeing, for precisely the reasons that new reports are now citing.

I was one of those critics, and I take no joy in pointing out that we told you so.

In 2009, as ObamaCare was being crammed through Congress, I gave three reasons for predicting disaster.

The first is "guaranteed issue," which requires insurance companies to cover you for a pre-existing condition. This forces insurance companies to take on extra costs, while reducing the incentive for healthy people to pay their insurance premiums. Why pay premiums for years, if you can just wait until you're already sick to buy coverage? So insurers are mandated to take on extra costs while losing revenues. As I wrote back in 2009, "Rather than increasing the number of insured by making health insurance more affordable, this bill makes health insurance more expensive and increases the incentive to simply drop your insurance until you need someone to pay for your medical bills."

And so we see today a report that as this takes effect and people who are already sick demand insurance, "paying for their care could add massive costs to the system."

"For one thing, they'll have no waiting period to get insurance. Someone who just got bad news from the heart doctor can walk into an insurance office and order a policy, Davis said. 'It's as if could you go home, see your house on fire, call Allstate and say, "Cover my home,"' Davis said.

"With medical bills easily reaching into the millions of dollars, a few of those cases could quickly add up, significantly boosting overall rates."

That leads to the second provision we warned about, the individual mandate. This is supposed to prevent free riders from waiting until they are sick by forcing them to buy insurance. But the penalty for refusing to buy insurance was set at $750, which is far lower than the cost of insurance. As I wrote back then, "we end up getting the worst of both worlds. This provision won't actually drive anyone to buy health insurance and prop up the risk pools for those who are insured. All it will accomplish is to create a brand new form of tax."

Finally, there are the federally mandated health-insurance exchanges, in which the federal government dictates what insurers are required to pay for, banning less expensive bare bones coverage and requiring insurance policies that cover more procedures and "preventative" tests. As I warned, "under the guise of making health insurance more affordable, this bill will restrict your menu of choices to include only the most expensive options."

Lo and behold, we see reports today that insurance premiums are going up partly because of "new federal rules that increase the services that health insurers are required to include in the health plans they sell."

There are also a couple of new reasons why rates are going up. We couldn't predict every negative effect of ObamaCare, because as Nancy Pelosi told us, Democrats had to pass the bill so we could find out what was in it. Thus, Peter Suderman points to a rule that requires insurance companies to refund part of their premiums if they don't spend enough on patient care in a particularly year. Suderman explains the results.

"If claims are low in a given year, they end up rebating the difference to the customer because of the MLR rule. If claims are unexpectedly high, however, they end up eating the difference. Insurers thus have an incentive to protect themselves by charging high premiums at the outset, and then paying those premiums back in rebates should claims come in at low or expected levels."

And then there is the extra cost passed on from new taxes on health insurance. Imagine that: when you tax something it becomes more expensive.

We can look to the consequences of RomneyCare in Massachusetts--the model for ObamaCare--as a preview of the near future. Massachusetts now has the highest insurance premiums in the country. The figures are quite staggering. A new study finds that "the average Massachusetts family health plan had a premium of $16,953 in 2011." One small business owner reports that "health-care benefits account for a quarter of the cost of hiring a new person." Even more startling is that this is an increase of 72% from 2003--nearly a doubling of insurance premiums in ten years.

As one expert explains, "Massachusetts is a state with a lot of mandates for coverage which other states may not have," and the report concludes that "The discrepancy will decrease once the Affordable Care Act is implemented." The discrepancy will decrease, not because Massachusetts premiums will go down, but because premiums for everyone else will go up to match them.

The rising premiums are bad enough in themselves, but they raise the prospect of crashing the whole structure of the health insurance system created by ObamaCare. Philip Klein explains:

"Should premiums continue to rise, more and more uninsured Americans are going to choose to pay the penalty rather than purchase expensive insurance. And those who go without insurance are more likely to be the ones who can afford to do so--young and healthy Americans with limited medical expenses. Should this occur, insurers would have to raise premiums even more to subsidize the expenses of the sicker beneficiaries they must cover under the law. This, in turn, would cause additional people to forgo insurance and pay the fine. And so on. This is known in the health care policy community as the 'death spiral' and it's one of the biggest threats to the structure of Obamacare."

Another article which cites many of the same problems I have just described marvels that "The congressional Democrats who crafted the legislation ignored virtually every actuarial principle governing rational insurance pricing."

But I don't think that's any kind of mystery. The consequences of ObamaCare--particularly the built-in "death spiral"--are so predictable that I don't think the legislation's architects can profess innocence. From the beginning, I have had suspicions, so to speak, that a stable health insurance industry was not the goal of ObamaCare. Rather, I warned: "It is an attempt to turn health insurance into what the left really wants: another welfare program in which everyone is entitled to free benefits, mandated by the government."

"But this would wreck private health insurance, making the whole industry financially unsustainable....

"This bill so comprehensively wrecks private health insurance that pretty soon a 'public option' will seem like the only alternative, and they will already have put into place one of the new taxes needed to pay for it. If the left's goal is to impose socialized medicine in America, this bill does it in the most callous and destructive way possible. It smashes private health care--then leaves us stranded in the rubble, at which point we will be expected to come crawling back to the same people who caused the disaster and ask them to save us."

The first half of our predictions from 2009 are already coming true. I am afraid that we're going to have to come back in another few years, after the second half has come to fruition, and say once again: we told you so.

Socialized medicine in the crown jewel of socialism… giving government control of every aspect of our lives, and ObamaCare is socialized medicine and Obama and his team are Progressives!  And remember: Progressivism = Socialism = Fascism = Marxism = Communism.  ObamaCare, like gun control, is not about healthcare (or safety), its all about control… The Obama agenda is all about control… controlling us, the masses and their minds. And when you watch the worship going on… by the entertainment, advertising and news media) and then talk to people who depend on them for all their information, you can see it is working!

The passing of ObamaCare was one of our major liberty or tyranny choice moments. And although much of the truth about ObamaCare surfaced and was available for those who did their homework, the powers that be forced this on the American people without even giving Congress the opportunity to adequately read the bill. Rationing, mandate committees & rationing panels, death panels (primarily for seniors and special needs children and adults) and the Complete Lives System are all part of this bill as well as higher taxes and fees, less healthcare and treatment choices, less freedom, and the control of at least 1/6 of the American economy by the U.S. government (and look whole they have done with our Social Security money) are all part of this bill plus a lot of surprises related to the IRS, guns and taking your freedom.  The warnings from people like Betsy McCaughey, Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, Mark Levin, Michele Bachmann, Sean Hannity, Rick Santorum, Alex Jones, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Mark Steyn, Judge David Kithil of Marble Falls Texas, scores of doctors, and the list goes on were 100% right on the mark.


States’ refusal to establish exchanges could undo Obamacare

Republican governors decide against setting up ObamaCare insurance markets

Top Five Worst Obamacare Taxes Coming in 2013

ObamaCare Disarray as 2013 Nears… Beware!

ObamaCare Summed Up in One Sentence

Denny’s to charge 5% ‘Obamacare surcharge’ and cut employee hours to deal with cost of legislation

Will Sick Babies Be Starved to Death Under Obamacare?

GAO Report: White House Intentionally Delayed Obamacare’s Cuts To Medicaid Until After 2012 Election…

Strassel: Axelrod’s ObamaCare Dollars

All Americans Will Receive a Microchip Implant in 2013 Per ObamaCare – Updated

RFID Chip for all Americans in 2013 as Part of ObamaCare… See Biden Telling Fed Judge He Will Have to Rule on Implanted Microchips

Obamacare Has Literally Replaced the Constitution